For a young child amidst war, Son demonstrates a high level of maturity in his understanding of the domineering, depersonalized nature of war. While people of different nationalities are not inherently good or evil, the structure of war dehumanizes soldiers. In a quest for victory and dominance, measured by bloodshed and body count, humans take on a new form as relentless soldiers. Although Son brings to light discussions regarding humanity and war, he maintains his semblance as a young teenager in Vietnam with his euphemistic understanding regarding American “flying machines [and] dragonflies” (11). While he is not well-versed in war rhetoric, he understands the possibilities of their atrocities, like how they “drop death on people and animals/and make trees bare of their leaves” (12-13). Even this small gesture in the poem demonstrates the difference in rhetoric between disassociated politicians and actual victims. While President Johnson avoided the harsh realities of war, people like King, Kerry, and Son talk about death and violence directly. Instead of ignoring these atrocities, and thereby allowing for it to continue, antiwar demonstrators and war victims highlight the effects of …show more content…
The tone of the poem is sarcastic, drawing on some parallels to King’s idea of “strange liberators” (King 1967). In the same vein, the poem sarcastically characterizes the United States as “kind” (1) and “generous” (4) by offering the “gifts of bright shiny bullets!” (2). In particular, the form of the poem makes the reader feel as though they are also under siege. The third stanza stands out in particular because it uses various prepositional phrases -- “under the flying bullets” (11), “under the whizzing cannonshells” (13), “in the square/under the gunfire (15-16) -- to situate the reader in the violence that civilians face through directive imagery. It is particularly heartbreaking because the subjects of these prepositional phrases include family and neighbors reconvening amidst the chaos of war -- “Fathers and sons rendez-vouz” (10), “Brothers re-united” (12), “Neighbors meet” (14). In addition when read aloud, the prepositional phrases that discuss violence are read at a faster pace, demonstrative of how violence can be sudden, unexpected, and yet, all-consuming during war. Therefore, the act of excluding violence from the narrative, when it is so salient in the experience of Vietnamese civilians, effectively distorts the war narrative. In doing so, American politicians and media strategically