The Poetry of War (review)

James Anderson Winn's heroes are those poets who "have grasped and made real the rich, contradictory emotions that war calls forth in all of us," not those poets who have "misused their gifts to sustain false versions of honor and chivalry, or to celebrate the creation of empires" (p. 219). The Poetry of War, which discusses both sorts of poets, is organized around six broad themes: honor, shame, empire, chivalry, camaraderie, and liberty. Each of these themes is explored through wide-ranging examples from both classical poets (such as Homer and Virgil) and more modern poets (such as Walt Whitman and Wilfred Owen). Winn's explications of these poets are models of the literary critic's craft: sensitive, intelligent, and historically informed.

Winn values most highly not poetic brilliance but poetic truth—which, for him, may be the same thing. The Poetry of War does not discuss art for the sake of discussing art. Rather, Winn wants to show what poetry has to teach us about war, the motivations behind war, and the experiences of men in battle. As well, Winn brings a clear political point of view to The Poetry of War: He is openly critical of the Second Gulf War, openly skeptical of the idea of a "good war," and openly embarrassed that "The Star-Spangled Banner" is his nation's anthem. At its core, then, The Poetry of War is a fiercely moral book. Winn is not a literary critic cloistered in his library but a humanist deeply engaged in the real world around him, a writer who argues passionately that poetry has made a difference in the history of the world—both for good and for ill.

While The Poetry of War offers compelling evidence that poetry has played an important role in shaping how both soldiers and civilians have viewed war for thousands of years, another issue remains less clear: Will the poetry of Vietnam or any later war ever play this role again? Poetry, Winn argues, highlights and preserves truths about war that journalists and politicians may ignore or forget. But who in the twenty-first century spends free time reading poetry—contem porary or otherwise? With this problem apparently in mind, Winn takes pains to make his discussions of poetry accessible to as many readers as possible. He will not use a term such as personification without giving a brief definition (which is the literary equivalent of pausing to remind readers that Gettysburg was a battle in the Civil War). This is as it should be, for Winn is writing not only for his fellow literary scholars but also for anyone who cares about war and truth.