The Man He Killed by Thomas Hardy. Updated Tips!

Analysis 4

The word that reechoes most often in criticism of Hardy's work is pessimism. There are no happy endings. Hardy countered that he was a meliorist - a compromise between an optimist and a pessimist. Meliorists believe the world tends to get better and the future may be brighter if everyone works toward such improvement. "My pessimism, if pessimism it be, does not involve the assumption that the world is going to the dogs. . . What are my books but one long plea against man's inhumanity to man - to woman - and to the lower animals?" The Man He Killed is a powerful illustration of this plea couched in the simplest language. The senselessness of war is a subject often treated in prose and poetry, but rarely do such treatments employ understatement to dramatize their common theme. In The Man He Killed, we hear no gunfire, no wailing from the wounded; there are no graphic images of terror, suffering and death of. The speaker of Hardy's poem is a simple fellow who will not be quoting a Horatian ode to make his point about the irrationality of warfare.

Written in 1902, the poem may be referring to the Boer War. The poet's focus is on war in general rather than a specific conflict. Using the technique of a dramatic monologue, the poem's speaker reveals himself and his confusion by diction and slang he uses to convey his perplexity.

He is not gifted with language. We see this in line 2 in the common conversational redundancy "old ancient" that he uses to describe a hypothetical inn where he and his victim might have run into one another and socialized. He has to grope for words and repeats himself. He enlisted in the army "off-hand-like" rather than out of some patriotic spirit. He had not been able to find work and had sold the tools of his trade in order to scrape by.

In some battle he killed a man - a mirror image of himself only with a poorer aim or slower trigger finger. Had there been no war, the two might have met at a tavern and gotten acquainted over flagons of ale or, as the speaker puts it, "Wet right many a nipperkin!" (A "nipperkin,"as you probably guessed, is a liquor container of a half-pint or so.) An affable and friendly sort who enjoys a spot of ale or liquor, the speaker can't believe that he has taken the life of an alter ego.

In stanza two we hear language that sounds not like his own but perhaps that of his military instructors or officers. "Ranged as infantry" was not a familiar situation in which to find himself, but he does as instructed. "I shot at him as he at me,/ And killed him in his place." Now, having taken another man's life, he struggles to explain why he did so.

The answer comes after hesitation and puzzlement that is communicated dramatically. "I shot him dead because - / Because he was my foe." Like "ranged" and "infantry," "foe" is not a word that comes naturally to him. His dissatisfaction with that answer can be heard in his repetitions and pauses.

Just so: my foe of course he was; /That's clear enough; although

That "although" dangling at the end of the line and stanza resonates with his confusion. Why was his victim a foe? To that question he can come up with no answer. Instead he attributes to the fallen man the same motivations he himself had for joining the opposite warring faction.

The final stanza is made powerful by drastic understatement.

Yes, quaint and curious war is!

Two very odd and unforgettable adjectives to describe the senseless murder of a fellow human who, in ordinary circumstances, he would treat with generosity and camaraderie. Never before nor since have the words "quaint" and "curious" conveyed horror and irrationality as they do when delivered by Hardy's quizzical, non-intellectual speaker.

In the aforementioned interview with William Archer, Hardy was asked if he thought that war was one of mankind's "remediable ills" that could be eradicated. His optimistic, meliorist response was: "Oh, yes, war is doomed. It is doomed by the gradual growth of the introspective faculty in mankind of their power of putting themselves in another's place, and taking a point of view that is not their own. In another aspect, this may be called the growth of a sense of humor. Not to-day, nor to-morrow, but in the fullness of time, war will come to an end, not for moral reasons, but because of its absurdity."

And still we wait.

Analysis | Critique | Overview Below

The poem The Man He Killed by Thomas Hardy was written during the Boer War.

STANZA 1-
It means that IF the soldier and his \"enemy\" had met at an inn or a bar, than they COULD have been friends and even shared a drink. The poet uses \'but\' and \'should\' as the fighting has already been done.

STANZA 2-
It means that the soldier and his enemy were both firing at each other and soldier manages to kill the enemy.

STANZA 3-
The soldier falters while trying to justify his actions. He says that he had to kill him as he was his \"enemy\". He is not convinces that he is his enemy as he was forced to kill him or he would have been killed.

STANZA 4-
The soldier wonder if his enemy had joined the army for the same reason, that is he was unemployed and joined the army for money.

STANZA 5-
The poet states that was is strange as a man is forced to kill another man, but if they had met somewhere else at a peaceful time, they could have been friends

Theme

Love for the other individuals."Love the neighbor as you love thyself"

The Man He Killed, was written in 1902 by Thomas Hardy. This poem describes the sadness of war and how it affects the soldiers. This poem was written from the point of view of a soldier who was expressing his feelings at how war made him kill this man. This poem is spoken in first person. “Had he and I but met by some old ancient inn, we should have set us down to wet right many a nipper kin!” here I think this paragraph explains how if the soldier telling the story had met the soldier he killed in some hotel or something they could have gone out and had a drink and become friends or something. “I shot him dead because, because he was my foe, just so my foe of course he was that's clear enough although.” To me this paragraph means that he had to shoot this man because he was staring him down in the face pointing his weapon at him. The language is very straightforward and easy to read and understand with exception of some few words. It uses and informal way to show it, so that might seen more just like the soldier who killed that man is talking on his own. The point of this poem is to prove that war has no point at all, no country wins in the end.

See I think Thomas Hardy’s poem “The Man He Killed” is about killing your enemies in war. At first I thought the poem was about WWI but then I realized he written this poem twelve years before. Then doing some research in this book I read that this poem was written because of the Boer War in South Africa. Also I think it describes the sadness of war and how it affects soldiers who are people with feelings. This poem was written from the point of view of a soldier who was expressing his feelings at how war made him kill this man. This poem is spoken in first person. Thomas Hardy would always get depressed during wars. And in this poem I see that he’s just expressing how stupid it is to be in a war. “Had he and I but met by some old ancient inn, we should have set us down to wet right many a nipperkin!” here I think this paragraph explains how if the soldier telling the story had met the soldier he killed in some hotel or something they could have gone out and had a drink and become friends or something. “But ranged as infantry, and staring face to face, I shot at him as he at me, and killed him in his place.” I think this paragraph explains how all of the soldiers are in combat with their guns firing at each other face to face. Then the soldier telling the story has to shoot the person staring at him. “I shot him dead because, because he was my foe, just so my foe of course he was that's clear enough although.” To me this paragraph means that he had to shoot this man because he was staring him down in the face pointing his weapon at him. “He thought he'd 'list, perhaps, Off-hand like just as I Was out of work had sold his traps No other reason why.” I think this paragraph means that this soldiers enemy just enlisted in the army just as he did and not expecting to get shot. He thought he’d sell all of his things and enlist just to make some money. “Yes quaint and curious war is! You shoot a fellow down you'd treat, if met where any bar is, 0r help to half a crown.” To me this paragraph means that war is kind of weird because your killing people just like yourself. And if you had met them in a bar you’d probably give them a bit of money to help them buy a drink.

The poem deals with the issue of how war is able to change the relationship between people. War can sever and dissolve friendship and there seems to be a thin line between friend and foe.
There seems to be a lack of respect for human life. It seems alright to kill because in War you are either friend or foe. It makes us wonder what happened to humanity. There is a lack of compassion over the death of a fellow human being. War is definitely strange to me.
You kill when in other circumstances you could have been good drinking buddies, or even have shared to buy drinks. Also this poem sends out a message that during the war you have the license to kill.

In the poem Hardy shows that the man is regretful paragraph 4