”Guns” and the Exploration of Guilt and Innocence Weapons destroy not only the lives of those directly affected but also those who use them, as explored by W. D. Ehrhart’s poem “Guns”. A father suffering from his traumatic war experience id faced with the internal dilemma of whether to shelter his young daughter’s innocence or to shatter her incorruptibility by retelling his experiences of destruction, death, and war. Ehrhart uses juxtaposition to starkly contrast the recurring theme of war and innocence, splitting the poem into three sections, mirroring war itself: one of peace, one of tension, and one of memorial. The first section of the poem is the metaphorical calm before the storm; the speaker and his daughter are driving to her school,…show more content… His attention turned towards war, the speaker questions about how he should break his daughter’s innocence, wondering how he tells her “what steel can do to flesh” (Ehrhart 16). His sanity is juxtaposed to what happens when his memories of war are triggered, and he begins to forget the differences between himself and his daughter. He questions his actions and his ability to be a true father to his daughter, or if he will make her discover “what [her] father never told” her (Ehrhart 35). He decides that whether he has to tell her, believing he has “no choice except to tell her” (Ehrhart 27). The juxtaposition between the speaker’s previous actions and his new personality accentuate the effects of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and, indirectly, the effect of war on the psyche and the mental ability of soldiers and others who fought in war; the degradation of his mind into something less, filled with confusion and despair. Another juxtaposition that contributes to a theme of the costs of war is the boy and the speaker’s daughter. The daughter, if never told of what her father has done, will be “wide-eyed and ignorant” (Ehrhart 29). This can be compared to the boy the speaker killed, who had “shattered […] eyes” (Ehrhart 24). The eyes are the organ made for sight, connecting to the idea of foresight in regard to both the idea of telling his daughter and the universal idea that investments into knowledge will reduce the probability of war. The difference between the children highlights the difference in cultures, and therefore, the difference between the effects of war and destruction. The juxtaposition of these children also serves to add to the idea of survivor’s guilt and hints that the speaker believes that more education would have prevented the death of the boy, that the speaker is above the act
