

The twentieth century could be explained in many different ways.  The entire world went through many events that has shaped the relationship of all the world powers today.  Like almost every time period in history, the twentieth century also saw its fair share of war.  Specifically during this time there were two world wars involving several countries around the world.  Warfare during this time was some of the most brutal and dangerous fighting that the world has ever seen.  As does any conflict, these times of conflict also inspired people to write.  "The Soldier" by Rupert Brooke was written as a pro war piece supporting the efforts of his country.  This is in contrast to Siegfried Sassoon's poem "A Soldier's Declaration".  This poem is not the total opposite position of anti-war but he is arguing the purpose of World War 1 and if they are fighting for the right reasons.  These poems seem to have two different messages when they are read separately.  These poems however have a different meaning when put together.  These poems show even though war can be gruesome and scary act, it sometimes is a necessary evil needed to resolve some conflicts.  

The two poems on the surface seem to very clearly support two different sides.  Brooke's poem seems to undoubtedly support the war effort.  Even if he dies, he knows it was for the good of his country.  Brooke says in his poem that "If I should die, think only this of me: / That there's some corner of a foreign field / That is forever England" (1-3).  Here is saying that he himself is an embodiment of his country and if he dies, the very spot he falls is England.  This passion and nationalism was a normal thing for many soldiers during this time.  American soldier especially had this sense of nationalism because they weren't even supposed to be in the war.  Woodrow Wilson got involved in the war and was fueled by nationalism and the idea of American exceptionalism.  It was believed by Wilson "that the United States had a destiny to establish a global code of conduct" and "that the United States would lead a way toward such a new world order" (Tierney Jr.).  This idea of nationalism is not matched in Siegfried Sassoon's poem.  Sassoon argues that "the War is being deliberately prolonged by those who have the power to end it".  He isn't arguing against the war itself, but is angered by the amount of time they are fighting.  He feels that the war should be over and is being dragged out by the government.  Sassoon also feels the country is acting out of greed and aggression instead of defense and liberation.  This accusation against his own government is a very different approach than Brooke.  We also see other differences with the attitudes of the speakers in each text.  Brooke's poem has a very optimistic feeling towards the war.  Through thick and thin he is supporting his country.  He almost has no cognitive thoughts of his own.  Sassoon however is tired of his country's behavior and wants change.  Sassoon however does think that war is acceptable if it is fought for the right reasons.  His poem seems to be supporting an anti-war campaign, especially when compared to Brooke's poem, but he is not.  Sassoon like Brooke sees war as a viable option as long as it is fought with a purpose.  In the beginning of the war it was necessary to fight.  Both authors would prefer no fighting and love their country.  But they see that war is sometimes a necessary and viable option when a peaceful solution cannot be found.  

The similarities between the two poems are easier to identify in the basic setting of them.  Both are about war during the time period of But the similarities in meaning might be a little harder to see.  It can be seen that both poems support their country.  Sassoon might not be in favor of them fighting but he is not a supporter of his country or he would not be fighting in the first place.  He believes they had a cause for being there and supports that.  Brooke is more obvious with his passion for his country even goes as far as calling it an "English Heaven" (14).  Also both poems convey a message that they just want what is best for their country.  Sassoon does not agree with the reason they are fighting.  But overall he wants what is best for everyone.  He says things like "I am acting on behalf of soldiers" and "on behalf of those who are suffering" showing that he is only looking out for what is best for everyone.  Brooke also has this same message but goes as far as saying he is willing and prepared to die for his country.  Another thing these poems share is the reality of what could happen in war.  Both have accepted the reality that fighting for their country could result in their downfall.  Brooke's opening words which sets the setting of the whole poem are "If I should die, think only this of me:" (1).  Had you read this poem without that first line it was have a very different tone to it.  Sassoon also the same realization of the danger of war but uses it as inspiration to try and stop the fighting.  He accepts his duty as a soldier but does not want his efforts or his death to be for nothing.  Even though both authors may be handling these realities in a different way, they both understand the danger of situation they are in.  These similarities show that they are both accepting the premise of war.  It might not be their first choice, but as long as it is for the right reasons they show that war is an alright option if there is no other options for resolving a problem.  

War is never an easy thing for any country.  This was especially true regarding the things seen in both world wars.  The type of warfare used was brutal and destructive killing many soldiers and civilians in awful ways.  The hardship of war of course is a last resort for almost any country today.  But as seen in "The Soldier" and "A Soldier's Declaration" sometimes war is a necessary thing when there are no other tangible solutions.  Brooke's poem shows us just how passionate soldiers can be about fighting for one's own country that they love.  And Sassoon shows us that war is a viable option to a problem as long as it is fought for the right reasons.  These poems together however show us the theme of war being a necessary evil in times of conflict like these.  It is not definitely no one's first choice, but if it is needed to be implemented is a viable option.  

