Youth

Both Komenyakaa and Turner make use of an image of childhood in their poems Facing It and The Al Harishma Weapons Market respectively.  In both cases, the presumed innocence of youth is used in the context of something terrible, war or death.  In Facing It, the author sees the reflection of a woman brushing a child's hair superimposed on the names of the dead on the Vietnam War Memorial Wall.  Yosef describes the image as looking like the woman is trying to erase the names.  The meaning of this parallel is not explicitly clear; perhaps her nurturing the child and sheltering it from horrible memories of war is somehow likened to erasing the atrocities of history.  Turner describes the son of an underground arms dealer in Iraq being afraid of the noise and lights of the bullets outside, and writes that his father is equally afraid.  The innate fear of the child who does not understand the context of war remains, even in the adult who is presumably mature enough to choose sides in the matter.

Turner and Martin

Beauty can be found in both Turner and Martin’s poetry, despite the subject being war. Similarly to Tim O’Brien, Turner and Martin are able to find moments of peace and magnificence in contrast to the ugly death and destruction caused by war.  In Observation Post #71, Turner describes birds, flowers and fruit in an almost pastoral setting, “eucalyptus trees shimmer” and “the sunflowers/ lift their faces toward dawn”. This personification demonstrates the liveliness of the place, which opposes the feeling of doom. In the final stanza there is a volta, “I have seen him in the shadows” darkness suddenly enters and the speaker is drawn to this unnamed man, presumably the enemy, by his rifle. In Martin’s The Burn Pit Detail at FOB Cobra, the reader can also observe beauty contrasted with the grim reality of war. At the volta, Martin describes a fight between dogs, “they seem to be/ in a dance, a moment/ before a kiss”. Although this appears to be a romantic moment, it is broken with the mention of shadows, much like Turner’s poem. It seems that beauty, real or imagined, is not sustainable in war. 

Comparision Blog

Every one of Turner’s poems evoked such a sense of sadness. Every poem dealt with loss and the realities of war. One poem that struck me the hardest was The Al Harishma Weapons Market. This humanized the “enemies” of the war so much that it was disheartening. The image of the father wrapping up his gun, and then tending to his child was on of the most moving lines of poetry I’ve read in such a long time.

Yusef’s poems also tie in with with Turner & Martin since they all deal with the harsh realities of war. Yusef’s poems deal more with atmosphere with comes with war. All three authors embody the harsh realities and treat their subjects with the appropriate amount of stoicism they deserve.

Hugh Martin & Brian Turner

After reading some poems by each author, they both paint a very clear picture of what they've witnessed while serving overseas. Their imagery in their poems are very direct. Both of their poems also deal with how their experiences in Iraq have affected them. A lot of their poems do deal with the theme of death. Perhaps what is different with this war compared to Vietnam is that these soldiers are witnessing death in a much more brutal way than Vietnam, if that is possible, because of the advancement in technology and weaponry that's used in modern warfare. These poems definitely get into the mind of the American soldier in a very tricky war. After reading these authors, each piece of work clearly shows what the modern day war does to these soldiers. With the advanced weaponry in these wars, this not only makes the technology more violent, but the people as well which causes a lot more trauma and stress to the soldiers.

Comparing Authors

Both writers describe the stealthy/violent nature of war incredibly passionately.  After reading both Authors, a reader can feel the sense of fear and restlessness.  Each describe their memories with paranoid and hopelessness. War has changed since Vietnam in numerous ways.  Modern war is more dangerous because of how much smarter the technology has become.   Missiles can be shot farther and more accurately.  PEDs can be stronger and hidden easier, as they have become smaller.  In general soldiers are better trained on both sides, become more malicious, with the ability to kill easier.  Nowadays gross amounts of money are generated in order upgrade weapons and war vehicles. 

Turner vs Martin

Brian Turner and Hugh Martin use very similar methods of describing modern warfare in their poems. Turner uses a very blunt approach to describing different situations he encountered. For example, he describes escaped zoo animals attacking people and horses in a direct and vividly descriptive manner. Turner examines the enemy and the conflicts they face. He talks about the high money rewards they receive for killing and attacking Americans.

Hugh Martin is a master of suspense. He accomplishes this by telling two stories simultaneously throughout the same poem. Right when a crucial moment is occurring in one story, he switches back to the other.  Like Turner, Martin is also able to show the enemy through his lenses. This allows the reader to feel the emotions of a soldier in combat.

Modern warfare contains a lot of the same conflicts seen in the Vietnam War. In both, soldiers are fearful of the unknown because they do not know where the enemy threat will come from. In both wars, American soldiers were fighting rebel civilians, as opposed to a uniformed army. This anonymity of the enemy is what causes soldiers to have to take extreme precautions at all times. The biggest difference between fighting in Vietnam and fighting in the Middle East now is probably the technology differences. Rather than worrying about booby traps in the jungle, soldiers must now be fearful of IEDs in the desert and cities.

Comparing War Literature

Compared to Komenyaka's poems, Hugh Martin and Brian Turner's work both reflect a distinct change in the way wars are fought. In Vietnam literature, stealth and having balance with the landscape which conceals and protects seem to have a special importance for the soldiers. However, much of Martin and Brian's poems tell of insurgent and IED patrols where the Americans are helplessly out in the open, knowing they are being watched by the enemy, an indication that nature assumes the role of exposure rather than concealment . While the killer in the Vietnam war might have been a camouflaged Viet Cong sniper or booby trap, the dangers for American troops in the Middle Eastern wars seem far more inanimate: dead animal carcases, old tires, water bottles, etc.- all potentially carrying explosives and shrapnel.

While the enemy and settings change between the wars, the poems tend to all share a dreamlike quality about them. Komenyaka's poems for instance, elicit the atmosphere of nature and as such his poems tend to have a romantic quality about them:

wrestling iron through grass.

We weren’t there. The river ran

through our bones. Small animals took refuge

against our bodies; we held our breath,

ready to spring the L-shaped

ambush, as a world revolved 

under each man’s eyelid

 -Komenyaka, Camouflaging the Chimera

     Similarly, Turner's work often has a romantic tone despite the reality of the story he's telling:

   We share a long night

of breathing. And when the dead

speak to us, we must be patient,

for the night is still ours

on the rooftops of Al Ma'badi,

with a tracery of lights

falling all around us.

-Tuner, Where the Telemetries End

Gott Ist Tott

Poets Yusef Komenyaka, Hugh Martin, and Brian Turner all compare to each other through their ability to capture the uncertainty of war. In Komenyaka's "Camouflaging the Chimera," he is successful at describing a scene where soldiers, camouflaged by the natural elements of Vietnam, are awaiting an ambush. In this scene, the reader can feel the uncertainty for what is about to happen. Through Koemyaka's descriptive nature, one can place themselves in the Vietnam bush, with his/her heart pumping and adrenaline flowing.

I also think this is something that Brian Turner is successful at doing in the majority of his poems in Here, Bullet. As this book is a collection of poems, the general flow from one poem of the next provides an element of uncertainty that most single, stand-alone, poems cannot achieve. More specifically, in Turner's poem What Every Soldier Should Know, he highlights the uncertainty be describing the different places soldiers would encounter IED's, or improvised explosive devices. Furthermore, at the end of the poem Turner says,
"Small children who will play with you,
 old men with their talk, women who offer chai--
any any one of them
may dance over your body tomorrow"

I found this line very powerful as it outlines the ultimate feeling of uncertainty and not knowing who the enemy is.


I don't think war has changed that much since Vietnam. Besides the advances in technology and the changes in battle tactics, war is much of the same. It still boils down to geo-politics, and men/women fighting for something they misunderstand, and a country backing their soldiers up for something the people misunderstand.

Love and Loss

Robert Lalani

Blog 9

　

　

Tim O’Brien stated in "How to Tell a True War Story" that a true war story is never really about war; rather it is about emotions like love, sorrow and regret. Brain and Komenyaka’s poetry reflects that same notion. "The desert wind blowing trash down the narrow alley as a voice sounds from the minaret, a soulful call reminding them how alone they are, how lost"(18 Turner). Both authors use their time at war as the subject of their poems yet their writing reflects ideals of love, loss, and morning. I think they are trying to communicate their experience of war however; they fall short in explaining just how they felt. When trying to describe an emotion like sadness or loneliness using words falls short. The audience is left with a brief glimpse of what it might be like to lose a friend in war. "I touch the name Andrew Johnson; I see the booby trap's white flash. Names shimmer on a woman's blouse but when she walks away the names stay on the wall." (Yusef Komenyaka). I think of author’s who go to war and write about their experience describe an element of loneliness that only veterans can understand. For most that go to the Vietnam Memorial they see names and are moved however, they are able to walk away and move on with their lives. For a veteran, their experiences are branded into them making it harder for them to shift back into society.

Death

Every poem I have read thus far has been about death.  It makes me wonder if Brian Turner has an obsession with it, or if the only thing for Americans in Iran is fighting and death.  He mentions nothing of what the soldiers do in their free time, or the locals.  Every poem has to do with a different person, and is always associated in some way with death.  It's very unsettling to me.  There has to be some good in Iran.  Turner makes it seem as though that is the only thing in Iran.
There is also a lot of hate in this book.  Turner writes of civilians getting paid off to attack or kill American soldiers.  I wonder if the civilians do it because they hate Americans, or if they are desperate to support themselves and their families.  It seems as though Turner believes as though everyone is out to get the American soldiers, but I feel as though that is not true, especially after reading Riverbend.  However, every side has their opinion, and the truth usually lies in the middle.  It is always hard to determine the reality when youre on a side.

What Every Soldier Should Know

Before I begin, I would like to make this disclaimer: poetry is not my forte.

I really  enjoyed the way Brian Turners poem , “What Every Soldier Should Know” is broken up into complete thoughts. It isn’t just some run-on sentence with a bunch of different interpretive meanings. It’s simple, and I can appreciate that.

The first line reads, “If you  hear gunfire on a Thursday afternoon, it could be for a wedding, or it could be for you”. Initially I wondered why Turner chose to use a specific day, Thursday to be exact. Thursday is the day before Friday, and people nationwide usually celebrate Friday’s because it represents the end of the week and a chance to rest. Using Thursday specifically presents added depth to what he is saying. Not only is he making a drastic contrast between marriage and death but he is also claiming that if it is indeed “for you” then you will be dead before you have the opportunity to rest, before you make it to the weekend. Also, the poem is definitely effective in expression the sense of hatred that the Iraqi people have for American soldiers. He claims that there is graffiti reading, “I will kell you American” and that men wore explosive vests and would sacrifice their lives for the murder of Americans. He also writes that the locals are being paid to kill you and that even though they may act nice with you, they would actually prefer you dead. I find it interesting that Iraqi people are drawn to be villainous in Brian Turner’s poem, yet Riverbend made it clear that the Iraqi people do not actually hate the Americans, they would just prefer them not to invade their space. The poem fails to describe the tragedies Americans cause and instead focus on the maliciousness of the Iraqi people. Typical for America…

Same effects across time

Yusef Komenyaka and Brian Turner both have very similar topics in which they write about. Both poets write of an eeriness. There is a paranoia, a feeling that death could happen at any moment and that the enemy be anywhere. A difference would be the setting and time that the poets write about. Komenyaka wrote about Vietnam which was in jungle setting and Turner wrote about Iraq which was a more recent war in a very different setting. Martin Hugh's writing is much more ambiguous where as both Komenyaka and Turner are a bit more direct in the story that they are writing. Hugh leaves much to the imagination. Hugh and turner are both writers of a more recent war.

Iraq Vs. Vietnam

One of the most Obvious differences between Vietnam and Iraq were the landscapes. You go from a Jungle area to a more urban, desert like area. Conditions were different and so was the battle field. Rather than fighting in a jungle in Vietnam, troops in Iraq were basically fighting in the towns. Medicine and ways of treating wounds on the spot have improved over time so there would of been a better chance of surviving an injury in Iraq than in Vietnam. Although Vietnam and Iraq are very different they are also similar. Both landscapes offered valuable hiding positions such as in the forest or hiding in the buildings and the types of booby traps were comparable as well and had the same purpose.

Different Wars, Same Effects

I think a major similarity between Yusef Komunyakaa's poems and Brian Turner's poems is that they both seem very dark with their writing. For example they both refer to ghosts frequently--in Turner's "Ashbah" he talks about, "The ghosts of American soldiers...", and Komunyakaa's "Camouflaging the Chimera" he refers to "...a breeze off the river, slow-dragging with ghosts". They both just seem to be coming from very dark, sinister, sad, frightening places. The experience of two different wars in two different places--Vietnam or Iraq--may have been different in some respects, but the effects war has on the soldier seems to be the same. There seems to be a lot of fear and nervousness in both poet's writing. "What Every Solider Should Know" basically says how everyone, men, women and children could be trying to kill you; everyone is a threat. I think Komunyakaa portrays the same fear even when he talks about how "apes tried to blow our cover throwing stones at the sunset". Both poets have this feeling that everything and everyone is out to get them--war has put them on high alert.

As far as Hugh Martin goes, I find his writing to be a little different in the way he closes his poems. I think Martin leaves more unresolved endings that leave it open to interpretation by the reader. Komunyakaa and Turner tell a story in most of their poetry that has an ending.

Wonderings

Reading Here, Bullet is a bit confusing at times for me because I don’t always understand what’s happening in the poem. That may be because like Tim O’Brien says, we as civilians can never fully know or understand what life was like during war. No amount of listening to stories being told can give us the full comprehension or meaning or emotions that are intended for the listener to absorb. Reading this collection of poems is also disturbing. The tragedy of what becomes daily life for the Iraqi civilians and American soldiers alike moves my soul to a place of compassion and wonderment. Why is physical war waged? Why does it last for so long? Are the solutions to the problems so deeply hidden that it takes years to fully unearth? Why is it that the innocent always seem to suffer most? I don’t understand. Everyone has learned from the past that war is nasty, ugly, devastating and brings out the worst types of evil, so why engage in it? The book’s namesake poem really spoke volumes to me. The graphic and anatomically correct description of what happens when a bullet reaches its target is, for me, cringe worthy. The bullet is like Hannibal Lector; its path is violent, it’s sadistic, and has no remorse. It’s like the author has no control over the actions of the bullet. He is a puppet being strung along by the puppet master. The author does not enjoy his work, but only does as he is commanded. There is a death inside of him for every round of bullets he releases. He is still human. His heart is still intact. He has had enough, and yet he continues on because the master is pulling on his strings. 

What Every Soldier Know

What Every Soldier Should Know points out the little cultural differences while in Iraq as to not offend the Iraqi people but also to be aware of the various sayings that could result in harm and/or death. "Inshallah el khair means Allah be willing. Listen well when it is spoken," insists that it is of importance to remember and be aware of this saying but does not explain why. "Men wearing vests rigged with explosives walk up, raise their arms and say Inshallah" explains why one should be aware of the saying as it is usually followed by an explosion. What Every Soldier Should Know is a guideline for soldiers to follow. It reminds them that although the people may be friendly ("small children who will play with you, old men with their talk, women who offer chai") they could still be wish death upon you and/or celebrate it.
It reminds of the stories my mother would tell me of her tour overseas and how they would have to be careful even if they were seeming to be surrounded by nothing but innocent children and pregnant women, they could still be a threat. For any of the people in the crowd no matter how trusting they appear, could turn around and just as easily end your life with an explosive vest.

Vivid Detail

While analyzing the poems I marveled at the author's ability to create a physical and emotional state within a few stanzas of writing. The descriptions in Here, Bullet are akin to O'Brien's in the obsession of the different landscape and people. Here, Bullet emphasizes the difference between Afghanistan and the United States in the smell, feel and experience. Turner description of the difference in languages and landscape speaks volumes to the confusion and ostracization one could feel when thrown into an entirely new culture, language and people. In his poem, What Every Soldier Should Know, he describes the usefulness of speaking the native Arabic and cultural differences. "When you hear gunfire on a Thursday afternoon, it could be for a wedding, or could be for you." Understanding the enemy is the main way to defeating them. To analyze and comprehend the difference in origin can be a great asset to any soldier in the field.

Shukran, Sadiq, Shukran

I read "Two Stories Down" a couple of times because I didn't understand what happened with the knife in the end. I wasn't sure if "the bloodgroove sunk deep" into Hasan or the American soldier (17). I guess it was meant to go either way. But what I got from this poem is that an American soldier tried to help save the life of a wounded Iraqi man but failed. This failure, though, came from his lack of understanding of what Hasan really wanted, which was death. And in the very last line, did he call the soldier friend or the knife? Hasan was grateful to have found death, and the soldier only (unknowingly) provided the means. This is perhaps a simile to the entire war. Americans want to help but they cannot provide what Iraqis need. They cannot protect everyone from death.