In "The Man Who Killed," the speaker uses the third-person pronoun, "he," to hide the fact that he was him to kill “the man who killed “man” mentioned in the title. This shift suggests that the writer feels guilty because he cannot confidently admit that he has killed someone, so he tries to hide it instead. It can subsequently be inferred that the speaker was never prepared for the weight of guilt he would face as a soldier who killed his “enemy” and therefore did not refer to himself in the title, veiling the crime committed. On the other hand, some may argue that he did not specify any name in the title so that other soldiers who read the poem will relate, since every soldier who has to kill someone from the opposite side has the same feelings as the speaker in this. poetry- that is guilt. From this we can deduce that the speaker may want to help others in the same position; this can console him since he is doing a good thing after having done something bad. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The first stanza has a systematic rhyme scheme, and the iambic rhythm in the stanza suggests that the speaker is controlled by his emotions and feelings. It begins with “had he” alliteration that immediately suggests that the speaker feels guilty while providing a hypothetical scenario so that readers understand that things would have been different if they hadn't fought against each other in the war. This allows the reader to infer that the speaker has some sort of humanity, however due to the situation he was in (war) he had to put his humanity aside. By creating a hypothesis, the speaker is diverting the blame for his enemy's death onto the war itself. Some may say he did this to free himself from overwhelming guilt, however others may argue that Hardy created a hypothetical to show readers and other soldiers how desensitized war makes you and how it forces you to become a person's enemy stranger with whom, in another place and time, you would be friends. This could be a direct message to other soldiers who are in the same boat as the speaker, assuring them that shooting someone in this situation does not define who you are, since in this scenario you have to choose between killing someone you barely know or sacrificing. yourself in the blink of an eye. Hardy also presents his feelings about the conflict using the oxymoron of "quaint war." This could be interpreted in many ways, one of which is that the speaker is glamorizing war since the adjective "characteristic" is usually used to describe something that is unusually attractive. This might suggest that the speaker has become satisfied with the thought of killing someone, even though he knows it is morally wrong. This idea juxtaposes the previous stanzas which imply that war makes you inhuman. On the other hand, some may see this description of the war as a sense of sarcasm as "quaint" is how the war is advertised to potential soldiers, as the soldiers are told that they will be satisfied once the war is over since they have defeated and killed. their enemies. Instead, Hardy reveals the truth about how war feels: defeating your enemies doesn't bring you satisfaction, instead it leaves you wishing things had been different. The adjective “picturesque” is also used to show that you do not approve of something. This could imply that the speaker wishes he had never signed up for the war as he never imagined it would haunt his thoughts in the aftermath.