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 from 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 war inspired people to write. "The Soldier" by Rupert Brooke was written as a pro war piece supporting the efforts of his country in the First World War.  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 I and questioning whether they are fighting for the right reasons.  These poems appear to have two different messages when they are read separately.  When read together however they have a different message.  These poems combined show even though war can be brutal and violent, it 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 is 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 soldiers 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.  Whether what they are doing is right or wrong he is supporting his country.  He almost has no cognitive thoughts of his own and would blindingly follow his country in the war until his death.  We know Brooke actually felt this way because a short three weeks after writing "The Soldier" Brooke was killed in the line of duty.  His death was mourned by Great Britain. Brooke was even recognized by Winston Churchill who said he was "all that one would wish England's noblest sons to be" ("Rupert Brooke).  Sassoon on the other hand 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 it 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 not to fight and love their country.  But they see that war is sometimes a necessary and viable option when a peaceful solution cannot be reached.  

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 Word War 1. But the similarities in the meaning of the two poems might be a little harder to see.  It can be seen that both poems support their country.  Sassoon might not be in favor of the reasons his country is fighting but he is definitely 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.  We see this when Sassoon says things such as "I am acting on behalf of soldiers" and "on behalf of those who are suffering" showing that he is only trying to do 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 authors have accepted the reality that fighting for their country could result in their own downfall.  Brooke's opening words in his poem "If I should die, think only this of me:" (1) sets the tone of the whole poem.  Had you read his poem without that first line it would have a very different tone to it.  You might interpret this poem as someone who loves his country and is bragging about its beauty.  With that first line however it is seen that he loves his country and uses its beauty as an inspiration to keep fighting and to keep living.  Sassoon also has 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.  They agree war might not be the best solution but it is a necessary evil that must exist when peaceful solutions cannot be found.  

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 millions of soldiers and civilians in awful ways.  The hardship of war of course is a last resort for almost any country today.  However 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.  Sassoon's poem 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 definitely not anyone's first choice, but if it needs to be implemented it is a useful and viable option.  

