Context.
This poem evolved from a series of interviews conducted by the current Poet Laureate, Simon Armitage, who listened to Army veterans of the Gulf War discussing their harrowing experiences.
Analysis.
Armitage uses the form of the dramatic monologue, in media res, to explore the mental conflicts suffered by soldiers during the war: on another occasion, we get sent out.’ Here, the poet captures the reimagined voice of a veteran now suffering from PTSD after a traumatic decision involving a supposedly armed looter.’Possibly armed, probably not.’ Notice how the revised reflection on the ‘armed’ status of the looter uses adverbs to a devastating and highly realistic effect.
As we read the poem the initial conviction of the speaker steadily unravels and the reader is made aware of the speaker’s progressive feelings of remorse and guilt.
This guilt is initially veiled behind the macho bravado of the killing: ‘ three of a kind letting fly.‘ individual responsibility is submerged behind the safety of the ‘three’ and the power associated with a group underlying their shared belief system as well as some sort of elation in the expression of violence.
As the speaker describes the graphic injuries inflicted on the looter by the trio, we wonder if the vivid visceral details have come to haunt him despite the seeming absence of compassion. ‘ ‘sort of inside out.‘ The misshapen ‘remains‘ of the dead man are treated with no respect and another soldier, ‘tosses his guts back into his body’ before the ‘body’ is ‘carted off’ in this dehumanised way. Perhaps this grotquese practicality is the result of the dehumanising effects of war and it is only when the Volta declares’ end of story’ that the speaker starts to explicitly admit his faltering conviction. ‘Except not really.’ Bravado has given way to a creeping sense of disquiet which follows the speaker to his ‘home’ where his expected sanctuary and escape from the horrors of the conflict is now haunted by his misgivings.
‘Then I’m home on leave.‘ The full stop after leave acts as a caesura and undermines the safety of the supposed break from war and conflict. Then the enjambment conveys the inescapable mental replaying of the killing in the mind of the speaker. Ironically it doesn’t matter if the narrator is enjoying a ‘sleep’ or a ‘dream’ there is no peace or respite available from the torment of his realisation that he killed an unarmed man in cold blood.
The poem ends with the terrifying epiphany that in the nightmarish ‘here and now’ he feels ‘his bloody life in my bloody hands’ emphasising the parallel between his guilty criminality and that of Macbeth and his infamous wife both of whom were haunted literally and metaphorically to death by their murderous actions. This final identification of the speaker with Shakespeare’s notorious villain reminds the reader of the morally compromised nature of war and the savagery of the mental conflicts wrought by decisions that cannot be reversed.
