Famous poet /1877 - 1938

Ian Colvin

• Adult

The Answer

When Honour on her silver bugle blows a point of war
Then Englishmen arise
With battle in their eyes,
They can only give one answer, as their fathers answered, for
The choice that they are making
Is fighting or forsaking,
And a false, fair-weather friendship is a lie that they abhor.

O'er the narrow seas the Gallic cock was crowing shrill alarms,
He saw them coming forth,
The War Lords of the North,
He said -- "My little soldiers, it is time to fall to arms;
But our coasts are lying bare,
Will England do her share?
A friendship that is fickle is the worst of Fortune's harms.

"Through Luxemburg and Belgium they are marching in their might,
They trample on the weak,
Our overthrow to seek;
They tear up every treaty, and they laugh at every right;
Will England see her name
Put thus to open shame?
Will she see her Royal pledges torn in pieces in her sight?"

But the Germans in their arrogance our Minister addressed,
Half-wheedling, half-commanding --
"Let us make an understanding,
Her coasts we will not batter nor her ports will we invest;
If you will stand apart
While we pierce her to the heart,
We will let you show your friendship by a bargain for the rest."

Then Sir Edward Grey replied, to the honour of his race --
To what England puts her hand,
Upon that she takes her stand,
She will not barter treaties in your German market-place,
Nor will she condescend
To pledge away a friend,
Such contracting out of danger were for ever her disgrace."

So o'er the perilous seas to Death or Victory we go,
Our sailors rushing forth,
To give battle in the North;
There as it was aforetime our ships will meet the foe;
And our brave soldiers too --
The Baltic, Waterloo
As then so now, twice armed are we since Honour backs the blow!

. ["...It would be a disgrace for us to make this bargain with Germany at the expense of France, a disgrace from which the good name of this country would never recover." -- Sir Edward Grey to Sir E. Goschen.] © by owner. provided at no charge for educational purposes

Analysis (ai): The poem reflects the patriotic rhetoric dominant in British World War I literature, aligning with early 20th-century nationalist sentiments common in wartime verse, yet diverges by dramatizing diplomatic exchange rather than battlefield heroics.
It mirrors the jingoistic tone of contemporaries like Rupert Brooke but lacks their lyrical idealism, instead emphasizing legalistic principles like treaty obligation.
Political Discourse as Poetic Structure: The poem frames national decision-making through dialogue, particularly Sir Edward Grey’s rebuttal, treating diplomacy as a moral battleground comparable to military conflict.
This focus on political integrity over valor positions it closer to documentary poetry than romanticized war narratives, a less common approach in 1914-era verse.
Form and Rhythm: The consistent ABABCC rhyme and iambic lines create a marching cadence, evoking military precision while reinforcing collective resolve.
Though formally traditional, the structure serves ideological rigidity, mirroring the inflexibility of national stance, which contrasts with the experimental fragmentation seen in later war poets like Owen or Sassoon.
Treatment of Honor and Duty: Honor is personified not as emotion but as contractual fidelity, emphasizing legal and historical continuity over personal courage.
This legalistic conception of honor distinguishes the poem from more emotive wartime works and reflects Edwardian preoccupations with imperial responsibility and gentlemanly conduct.
Place in Author’s Oeuvre: Lesser-known than Colvin’s biographical works, this poem stands out for its immediacy and rhetorical clarity, reflecting his background in historical and diplomatic writing.
Its emphasis on statecraft over individual experience aligns with his nonfiction focus on institutional integrity, making it a bridge between reportage and verse.
Engagement with Contemporary Norms: Unlike later disillusioned war poetry, it upholds collective duty without irony, fitting early-war orthodoxy but becoming anomalous as WWI literature evolved toward skepticism.
Its unwavering stance contrasts with the era’s eventual shift toward ambiguity, placing it historically as a marker of pre-modernist certainty. (hide)