The Only Side

The Only Side

                One of the countless downsides of war is the emotional baggage thrust upon the soldiers involved in the war. This baggage has been the topic of many literary works, for example: Tim O’Brien’s “The Things They Carried” and Thomas Harding’s “The Man He Killed.” In “The Things They Carried”, O’Brien uses the literal items that soldiers bring to war as metaphors for the negative impact that war has on the war-fighters. He uses these metaphors as windows into the minds of the soldiers in his story. Similarly, Harding explores a soldier’s psyche in “The Man He Killed.” Harding uses this poem to give the reader a glimpse into the mind of a soldier, and to let the world know how killing a man can have long lasting effects on that soldier’s mind. Both of these works address how mentally challenging it is to go to war and have to kill people in the name of your country. When these two works are read together, they create a chilling feeling for the reader who now has a slight understanding of the minds of the warriors, and an ever so slight understanding of the emotional baggage that our service members must carry with them.

                “The Things They Carried” lists off the physical objects that soldiers “humped” through Vietnam. These physical things that they carry are certainly metaphors for the emotional things that they are forced to heave through this foreign land. The items they carry represent emotions that they also carry, and the emotions are always heavier than the physical weight of the item. A perfect example of this is the character Henry Dobbins. Dobbins carries his girlfriend’s pantyhose, but with them he also carries the want for affection, compassion and comfort. This longing for love is much heavier than the twenty-three pound machine gun and the ten to fifteen pounds of ammunition that he carries. It is the same for every character in this story: Cross, who carries the maps and a compass, which are symbolic of his desire for order as well as a general longing for an understanding of the mission in Vietnam, has to carry the responsibility of the lives of the rest of the soldiers in the Alpha Company. There is no burden heavier than this. Through these items, O’Brien opens up the characters in his story. The reader is now able to (begin to) understand what’s going on in the soldier’s minds.

                “The Man He Killed” makes similar claims, though does it in an entirely different way. Hardy supplies the reader with an unsettling monologue that gives a unique view into the mind of a soldier. This poem tackles the nature of war—that war is dirty and makes men do things that they wouldn’t do in any other circumstance. Hardy uses that realization to open up the mindset of a soldier and really shows how harsh the reality of war is on the psych. Take “I shot him dead because— / Because he was my foe.” (Hardy 9-10) for example. The dramatic pause, then the repetition of “because” is as if the speaker is trying to convince himself that he did nothing wrong. He goes on to say “Just so: my foe of course he was; / That's clear enough; although” (Hardy 11-12), in a further attempt to convince himself, albeit unsuccessfully. The speaker’s inability to convince himself that he did nothing wrong is evident by ending the stanza with the word “although” then going on to say “Off-hand like—just as I— / Was out of work—Had sold his traps / —No other reason why” (Hardy 14-16) he basically means “well, he was only there because he was out of work, same as me” in more poetic words. This questioning of his actions, however long after-the-fact shows that the speaker has deep psychological issues due to the emotional baggage of war.

               Thomas Hardy and Tim O’Brien would definitely agree that the emotional cost on the soldiers is one of the most tragic parts of war. When O’Brien defines “hump” as “walk[ing] or march[ing], but [with] implied burdens far beyond the intransitive” (O’Brien) he’s not just talking about the just physical weight, but also the emotional weight, that the items that the soldiers have to carry. Similarly the speaker in “The Man He Killed” expresses that war is “quaint and curious” (Hardy 7) meaning that there really isn’t anything quite like it—and that if the speaker had met the man that he killed in a bar, he’d treat him to a drink, or at least help him to “half-a-crown.” This shooting of someone that he had nothing against seems to haunt the speaker, and one can only imagine how burdening that must be.  

               While the two authors may agree in message, their eye opening tales use different styles to allow the reader to understand just how destructive and overbearing emotions of war can be on the psyche of a soldier. For example, in “The Things They Carried” O’Brien uses a wide array of literary devices. The most powerful device is easily the metaphors that he uses throughout the story. He also uses the repetition of the word carried to drive those metaphors home, as evident:

“Dave Jensen carried three pairs of socks and a can of Dr. Scholl's foot powder as a precaution against trench foot. Until he was shot, Ted Lavender carried six or seven ounces of premium dope, which for him was 2 necessity. Mitchell Sanders, the RT0, carried condoms. Norman Bowker carried a diary. Rat Kiley carried comic books. Kiowa, a devout Baptist, carried an illustrated New Testament that had been presented to him by his father” (O’Brien)

The repetition throughout the story serves as the hammer that drives O’Brien’s point home. “The Man He Killed” uses a bit of jargon, when the speaker says “but ranged as infantry” (Hardy 5) it doesn’t flow nearly as well as the rest of the poem, because they’re not really words that the speaker fully understands. This fact alone is very important, because the speaker does not care to understand exactly what the words mean, just as he never wanted to kill anybody. It also uses an alternating rhyme scheme, to help the poem flow, and to make the pauses that much more dramatic.

                “The Things They Carried” and “The Man He Killed” are two different works, by two different authors, but share a very similar view of war. Be it through the use of metaphors or dramatic pauses, these works allow readers to look into the minds of soldiers, and see how they’re emotionally affected by war, and the act of killing. These works share the theme: emotional baggage caused by war is overwhelming and forever damaging.

 

War: Countless Downsides.

                One of the countless downsides of war is the emotional baggage thrust upon the soldiers involved in the war. “The Things They Carried” exemplifies the emotional luggage by using literal items that soldiers bring to war as metaphors for harsh emotions. “The Man He Killed” uses a monologue to give the reader a glimpse into the mind of a soldier, to let the world know how distraught he is over the killing of a man he may have been friends with otherwise.  It’s chilling to read “The Things They Carried” and “The Man He Killed” together because they give the reader a feeling of overwhelming pity for the soldiers who now must lug around more than their fair share of burden.

                “The Things They Carried” lists off the physical objects that soldiers “humped” through Vietnam. These physical things that they carry are certainly metaphors for the emotional things that they are forced to heave through this foreign land, and the theme is that the emotional sides of the items they carry are much heavier than the physical weight of the item. A perfect example of this is the character Henry Dobbins. Dobbins carries his girlfriend’s pantyhose, but with them he also carries the want for affection, compassion and comfort. This longing for love is much heavier than the twenty-three pound machine gun and the ten to fifteen pounds of ammunition that he carries. It is the same for every character in this story: Cross, who carries the maps and a compass, which are symbolic of his desire for order, has to carry the responsibility of the lives of the rest of the soldiers in the Alpha Company. There is no burden heavier than this.

                “The Man He Killed” makes similar claims, though does it in an entirely different way. Hardy supplies the reader with an unsettling monologue that gives a unique view into the mind of a soldier. This poem tackles the nature of war—that war is dirty and makes men do things that they aren’t interested in doing, and through that confrontation it opens up the mindset of a soldier and really shows how harsh the reality of war is on the psyche of a soldier. Take “I shot him dead because—Because he was my foe.” for example. The dramatic pause, then the repetition of “because” is as if the speaker is trying to convince himself that he did nothing wrong. He goes on to say that of course the guy he shot was a foe, and the speaker expresses real doubt that this is the case by ending the stanza with the word “although” then going on to say that “Off-hand like—just as I—Was out of work—Had sold his traps—No other reason why” he basically means “well, he was only there because he was out of work, same as me” in more poetic words. This questioning of his actions, however long after-the-fact shows that the speaker may very well have deep psychological issues due to the emotional baggage of war.

                Thomas Hardy and Tim O’Brien would definitely agree that the emotional cost on the soldiers is one of the most tragic parts of war. When O’Brien defines “hump” on page 1173 as “walk[ing] or march[ing], but [with] implied burdens far beyond the intransitive” he’s not just talking about the just physical weight, but also the emotional weight, that the items that the soldiers have to carry. Similarly the speaker in “The Man He Killed” expresses that war is “quaint and curious” meaning that there really isn’t anything quite like it—and that if the speaker had met the man that he killed in a bar, he’d treat him to a drink, or at least help him to “half-a-crown.” This shooting of someone that he had nothing against seems to haunt the speaker, and one can only imagine how burdening that must be.  

                These eye opening tales use different styles to allow the reader to get the reader to understand just how destructive the overbearing emotions of war can be on the psyche of a soldier. Some of the literary elements used in “The Things They Carried” are metaphors, flashbacks, repetition and imagery. These elements used together are very effective, especially since the narrator is third-person omnipotent. “The Man He Killed” uses a bit of jargon, when the speaker says “but ranged as infantry” it doesn’t flow nearly as well as the rest of the poem, because they’re not really words that the speaker fully understands. It also uses an alternating rhyme scheme, to help the poem flow, and to make the pauses that much more dramatic.

                “The Things They Carried” and “The Man He Killed” are two different works, by two different authors, but share a very similar view of war. Be it through the use of metaphors or dramatic pauses, these works allow readers to look into the minds of soldiers, and see how they’re emotionally affected by war, and the act of killing. These works share the theme: emotional baggage caused by war is overwhelming and forever damaging.

The Emotional Baggage of War

One of the countless downsides of war is the emotional baggage thrust upon the soldiers involved in the war. “The Things They Carried” exemplifies the emotional luggage by using literal items that soldiers bring to war as metaphors for harsh emotions. “The Man He Killed” uses a monologue to give the reader a glimpse into the mind of a soldier, to let the world know how distraught he is over the killing of a man he may have been friends with otherwise. It’s chilling to read “The Things They Carried” and “The Man He Killed” together because they give the reader a feeling of overwhelming pity for the soldiers who now must lug around more than their fair share of burden.

“The Things They Carried” lists off the physical objects that soldiers “humped” through Vietnam. These physical things that they carry are certainly metaphors for the emotional things that they are forced to heave through this foreign land, and the theme is that the emotional sides of the items they carry are much heavier than the physical weight of the item. A perfect example of this is the character Henry Dobbins. Dobbins carries his girlfriend’s pantyhose, but with them he also carries the want for affection, compassion and comfort. This longing for love is much heavier than the twenty-three pound machine gun and the ten to fifteen pounds of ammunition that he carries. It is the same for every character in this story: Cross, who carries the maps and a compass, has to carry the responsibility of the lives of the rest of the soldiers in the Alpha Company. There is no burden heavier than this.

“The Man He Killed” makes similar claims, though does it in an entirely different way. Hardy supplies the reader with an unsettling monologue that gives a unique view into the mind of a soldier. This poem tackles the nature of war, and through that confrontation it opens up the mindset of a soldier and really shows how harsh the reality of war is on the psyche of a soldier. The dramatic pause in line 9, then the repetition of because is as if the speaker is trying to convince himself that he did nothing wrong. He goes on to say that of course the guy he shot was a foe, and the speaker expresses real doubt that this is the case by ending the stanza with the word “although” then going on to say that “well, he was only there because he was out of work, same as me” in more poetic words. This questioning of his actions, however long after-the-fact shows that the speaker may very well have deep psychological issues due to the emotional baggage of war.

Thomas Hardy and Tim O’Brien would definitely agree that the emotional cost on the soldiers is one of the most tragic parts of war. When O’Brien defines “hump” on page 1173 as “walk[ing] or march[ing], but [with] implied burdens far beyond the intransitive” he’s not just talking about the just physical weight, but also the emotional weight, that the items that the soldiers have to carry. Similarly the speaker in “The Man He Killed” expresses that war is “quaint and curious” and that if the speaker had met the man that he killed in a bar, he’d treat him to a drink, or at least help him to “half-a-crown.” This shooting of someone that he had nothing against seems to haunt the speaker, and one can only imagine how burdening that must be.

These eye opening tales use different styles to allow the reader to get the reader to understand just how destructive the overbearing emotions of war can be on the psyche of a soldier. Some of the literary elements used in “The Things They Carried” are metaphors, flashbacks, repetition and imagery. These elements used together are very effective, especially since the narrator is third-person omnipotent. “The Man He Killed” uses a bit of jargon, when the speaker says “but ranged as infantry” it doesn’t flow nearly as well as the rest of the poem, because they’re not really words that the speaker fully understands. It also uses an alternating rhyme scheme, to help the poem flow, and to make the pauses that much more dramatic.

“The Things They Carried” and “The Man He Killed” are two different works, by two different authors, but share a very similar view of war. Be it through the use of metaphors or dramatic pauses, these works allow readers to look into the minds of soldiers, and see how they’re emotionally affected by war, and the act of killing. These works share the theme: emotional baggage caused by war is overwhelming and forever damaging.