|
READ THIS
An Irish airman during World War I contemplates the fact that he will most probably die in aerial battle.
The poem is a philosophical one which contemplates why the airman has chosen to fight. It is certainly
not because he hates the enemy, nor is he interested in protecting his own people. Indeed, his
participation in the war will achieve almost nothing that is either good or bad.
On the contrary, his decision is based solely on the ecstasy of flying and the adrenaline rush of
participating in aerial dogfights.
A NOTE ON THE POEM
The Irish airman is certainly not the poet himself. Indeed, the poem is probably a celebration of the death
of Major Robert Gregory, a personal friend of the poet and the only child of Yeats's patron, Lady Augusta
Gregory.
All in all, Yeats wrote no less than four poems to commemorate Major Gregory's death, two of them being
published in his anthology The Wild Swans at Coole -- "Irish airman forsees his death"
being one of them.
Because the poet is not talking about himself, he is able to ponder the death of his friend and the reasons
for his joining the air force in the first place. This also enables him to speak about the very nature of
warfare itself.
His conclusion is that war achieves nothing that is useful. The poor -- encapsulated by "Kiltartan's
poor" -- neither gain nor lose by warfare. War is therefore purely a thing of the state.
Accepting that his friend had that same belief, why then would he have enlisted to fight? The answer
would appear to have been the personal excitement of it all, the exhilaration of flying high up in the clouds
and the adrenaline rush of participating in aerial dogfights.
Your attention should focus on the final four lines of this poem containing a chiasmus which
clearly explains the intellectual decision for the pilot's decision.
Have you looked at the questions
in the right column?
|
TEST YOURSELF!
Read the left column and then answer
the following questions:
"Nor law, nor duty bade me fight,
Nor public man, nor cheering crowds."
- What does one call the law which compels people to join the army and fight? (1)
[Need help?]
It's called "conscription", isn't it?
|
- Contrast the "law" with the "duty" which might have made the airman join the air-
force. (4)
[Need help?]
England did not have conscription during the Great War -- what we now call World War I -- but there
was immense social pressure on people to join the army. People regarded it as a duty to fight and anyone
who failed to respond to this so-called "duty" was often sent a white feather, a symbol of cowardice.
Many therefore enlisted simply to avoid the accusation of cowardice.
|
- How could the "public man" or the "cheering crowds" have forced the airman to
fight? (4)
[Need help?]
This is all linked to the question of cowardice. The "public man" would stand up on his soapbox
and proclaim the honour of dying for one's country and the cowardice of those who failed to enlist.
The "cheering crowds" re-enforced this idea. When the "public man" tub-thumped about
enlistment, the "cheering crowds" supported his argument with a great "ra-ra!".
It is very difficult for any but the very strong to withstand such social pressure.
|
"A lonely impulse of delight
Drove to this tumult in the clouds."
- What is an "impulse"? (2)
[Need help?]
An "impulse" can be defined as "a sudden wish or urge that prompts an unpremeditated act or
feeling". These is no logic to impulses. They are purely involuntary feelings or urges.
|
- Why should this impulse have been "lonely"? (4)
[Need help?]
There are at least two possible meanings to the word "lonely".
First, the poet is possibly using a transferred epithet. It is not the impulse itself which is lonely but
rather the act of flying alone and in isolation so high up amongst the clouds. In other words, it is the pilot
who is lonely.
On the other hand, impulses by their very nature happen just to one person. One does not find a group
of people having the same impulse. The impulse could therefore be described as "lonely".
|
- Explain how it was possible that this "impulse" could have been one of
"delight". (4)
[Need help?]
Pilots -- especially glider pilots who are absolutely alone and in silence so high in the sky -- often speak
of the "delight" or ecstasy of being up there in the clouds. The world becomes so vast and so
silent. Even another aeroplane would appear as being some distance away and would be silent. Truly
magnificent.
|
The poet speaks only of the "tumult in the clouds" but makes no mention of the great tumult on the
land, something that has definitely been remembered as a feature of this particular war.
- Why does he refer only to this "tumult in the clouds" while completely ignoring the other side
of the war? (4)
[Need help?]
The poet's focus in this poem is to explain why his friend chose to fly. His friend was not really concerned
with the war as such except that an aerial battle amongst the clouds could lead to his death. No, indeed.
The focus here is on the ecstasy of flying.
The other battles on land -- perhaps in the trenches of northern France -- are therefore of no importance
whatsoever. The poet is interested in one aspect of the war, i.e. the "tumult in the clouds" which
causes exhilaration and excitement to his friend the pilot.
|
"I balanced all, brought all to mind,
The years to come seemed waste of breath,
A waste of breath the years behind
In balance with this life, this death."
[Need help?]
A chiasmus has been described as an inversion of the relationship between the elements of a
phrase or clause where the order of words in one phrase or clause is inverted in the other.
Examples of a chiasmus are:
- "Pleasure's a sin, and sometimes sin's a pleasure";
- "He is the cook of kings and the king of cooks".
|
- Explain the chiasmus in these four lines. (4)
[Need help?]
The reversal of the thought is this:
- "I balanced all . . . The years to come . . . waste of breath";
- "A waste of breath . . . the years behind . . . In balance".
|
- How does this use of a chiasmus reinforce the idea that the airman had joined the air-force
for purely intellectual reasons? (4)
[Need help?]
The perfect logic of the chiasmus indicates a very clear and logical argument on the part of the pilot.
There is no fatalistic pressure here, or pressure from politicians or crowds of people. The pilot has been
motivated simply by the logic of thought. The use of the chiasmus proves this.
|
|
