What Were They Like? (Edexcel GCSE English Literature)

Each poetry anthology in the GCSE contains 15 poems, and in the poetry question in the exam you will be given one poem on the paper – printed in full – and asked to compare this given poem to one other from the anthology. As this is a “closed book” exam, you will not have access to the other poems, so you will have to know them very well from memory. Fifteen poems is a lot to learn. However, understanding four things about each poem will enable you to produce a top-mark response:

• The meaning of the poem and the story it tells 
• The ideas and messages the poet wanted to convey
• How the poet uses poetic techniques to convey their ideas and messages
• How these ideas compare and contrast with the ideas and themes of other poems in the anthology

Below is a guide to Denise Levertov’s 'What Were They Like?', from the Conflict anthology. It includes:

• Overview: a breakdown of the poem, including its possible meanings and interpretations
• Writer’s methods: an exploration of the poet’s techniques and methods
• Context: an exploration of the context of the poem, relevant to its themes
• What to compare it to: ideas about which poems to compare it to in the exam

The poem has been taken from Pearson Edexcel’s poetry anthology, the full version of which can be found here.

In order to answer an essay question on any poem, it is essential that you understand what it is about. This section includes:

• The poem in a nutshell
• An explanation of the poem, line-by-line
• A commentary of each of these lines, outlining Levertov's intention and message

'What Were They Like?' in a nutshell

'What Were They Like?' is about the aftermath of a war and its effects on the people who experienced it. The poem is split into two stanzas; the first lists six questions and the second provides responses to them. This question-and-answer structure conveys the impression of a fact-finding interview conducted by a historian or a journalist. Although Levertov wrote the poem when the Vietnam War was still in progress, it is set in a future when the war has ended. The poem portrays the complete destruction of the Vietnamese people and their culture to emphasise Levertov’s clear anti-war message. The war has devastated Vietnam to such an extent that the second speaker, who tries to provide answers to the first speaker’s questions, can’t offer any solid information. Instead, a series of metaphors and repetitions evoke the terrible losses suffered by the Vietnamese people, who are “silent now”. 

'What Were They Like?' breakdown

Lines 1–9

“1) Did the people of Viet Nam 

use lanterns of stone? 

2) Did they hold ceremonies 

to reverence the opening of buds? 

3) Were they inclined to quiet laughter? 

4) Did they use bone and ivory, 

jade and silver, for ornament? 

5) Had they an epic poem? 

6) Did they distinguish between speech and singing?”

Explanation

• The first speaker asks a series of questions about the Vietnamese people, their culture and their beliefs 
• The questions focus on different aspects of Vietnamese people’s lives:
• Practical: did they use stone lanterns, or items (“ornament”) made of bone, ivory, jade and silver?
• Cultural: did they celebrate (“reverence”) the opening of buds in spring with ceremonies, or have an epic poem?
• Personal: did they have the habit (“were they inclined”) of laughing quietly, and did they recognise the difference (“distinguish”) between speaking and singing?
  
  

Levertov's intention

• Levertov mixes questions about objects, beliefs and behaviours to demonstrate that all these aspects of pre-war Vietnamese life have been lost:
• If they hadn’t been lost, the speaker would not need to ask the questions
• The information about the people and their society has also been lost
• The first speaker’s tone is objective and their questions are like a series of research proposals:
• The numbering of the list supports this impression
• The speaker refers to “Viet Nam”, an old name for the people of South Vietnam, showing that their knowledge of the country comes from books rather than direct experience
• Many of the speaker’s questions suggest that they regard Vietnam as an alien culture:
• The stone lanterns convey their perception of Vietnamese culture as undeveloped and superstitious
• The question about distinguishing between speech and singing demonstrates their perception of Vietnamese people as being strange and odd 
• The focus on their verbal habits, such as laughter, singing and speaking, emphasises the silence that has replaced these habits
• However, the first stanza also contains imagery evoking a gentle, beautiful, rich culture:
• The “quiet laughter” and the song-like speech suggest gentleness 
• Bone, ivory, jade and silver are precious materials, suggesting beauty and cultural richness
• The stone lanterns, the spring celebrations and the epic poem suggest ancient customs and cultural traditions 
• This makes the devastation depicted in the second stanza even more heart-breaking

Lines 10–12

“1) Sir, their light hearts turned to stone. 

It is not remembered whether in gardens 

stone lanterns illumined pleasant ways.” 

Explanation

• The second speaker’s response to the first question turns the word “stone” into a metaphor: 
• It uses the heaviness of stone to represent the way that the war has made people’s “light hearts”, or carefree happiness, turn into emotional suffering that is metaphorically heavy
• The first use of the phrase “It is not remembered” emphasises something that been destroyed and therefore forgotten:
• The speaker cannot say whether stone lanterns lit up (“illumined”) pleasant paths through gardens, because these things are all lost
  
  

Levertov's intention

• The speaker addresses the questioner as “Sir”, implying the questioner’s authority over them:
• “Sir” can also be read as sarcastic, as many of the first speaker’s questions are inappropriate 
• This is especially true of the question about laughter, which the second speaker refers to indirectly by describing the “light hearts” of the Vietnamese people
• This first thing that is “not remembered” begins a list of what has been lost:
• Levertov’s listing technique creates a cumulative sense of an entire society’s destruction
• Levertov draws attention to a lack of light to convey the metaphorical darkness of lost knowledge:
• The speaker can’t illuminate, or shed light on, the subject for the questioner, who remains “in the dark”
• Everything “pleasant” about pre-war Vietnamese society – gardens, lovely walks – has been destroyed along with any knowledge about it

Lines 13–15

“2) Perhaps they gathered once to delight in blossom, 

but after their children were killed 

there were no more buds”

Explanation

• In response to the second question, the speaker speculates that people used to get together to celebrate the blossom, which showed that spring was starting: 
• “Perhaps” signifies that this information is not certain
• Spring buds, which symbolise new life, are used as a metaphor to represent the children killed in the war

Levertov's intention

• This response demonstrates uncertainty about what Vietnamese customs might have been like:
• This shows that seasonal celebrations are another thing that has been lost
• Levertov combines the very direct, shocking description of the children being killed with a metaphor representing them as “buds”:
• The natural imagery used in this metaphor promotes a sense of seasonal cycles and new growth
• The fact that there are “no more buds” indicates the way that the war has destroyed the children, but also natural cycles
• This depicts the war as unnatural as well as heartbreaking for the parents who have lost their children  

Lines 16–18

“3) Sir, laughter is bitter to the burned mouth. 

4) A dream ago, perhaps. Ornament is for joy. 

All the bones were charred.”

Explanation

• The metaphor of laughter having a “bitter” taste represents the bitterness of emotions in the aftermath of war:
• The “burned mouth” evokes the horrific injuries inflicted on the Vietnamese people by the US Army’s practice of using napalm bombs
• The speaker can’t be certain about the materials used to decorate the environment: 
• The repetition of “perhaps” shows that certainty isn’t possible
• The speaker uses the metaphor of a dream to represent what life was like before the war:
• Things before the war feel so unreal that they might as well be a dream
• Ornament, or decoration, is for happy times, which no longer exist
• Referring to the first speaker’s question about bone (from animals) as a material, the second speaker presents a horrific image of charred human bones:
• This is the second reference to the burned bodies of the Vietnamese people

Levertov's intention

• The terrible suffering of the Vietnamese people is conveyed physically and emotionally:
• The references to burned mouths and charred bones evoke the physical injuries inflicted by napalm
• The emotional bitterness reflects back onto the poem’s tone, making it increasingly bitter in its portrayal of the effects of the war
• The caesura after “perhaps” creates a break that reflects the disconnection between the pre-war past and the the post-war present:
• The two short statements that follow juxtapose decorative objects with charred human bones

Lines 19–26

“5) It is not remembered. Remember,

most were peasants; their life 

was in rice and bamboo. 

When peaceful clouds were reflected in the paddies

and the water buffalo stepped surely along terraces, 

maybe fathers told their sons old tales. 

When bombs smashed those mirrors 

there was time only to scream.”

Explanation

• The speaker repeats the phrase “It is not remembered” in response to the question about an epic poem
• They evoke the gentle, rural life of the pre-war Vietnamese people: 
• The description of “most” of the people as “peasants” isn’t meant to be insulting; it just means their way of life wasn’t technologically sophisticated
• This is emphasised by reference to their lives, which revolved around growing rice and bamboo 
• The speaker evokes this way of life with natural imagery conveying peace and calm:
• The calm water of the rice paddies (fields) reflects the “peaceful clouds”
• The water buffalo walk slowly and with certainty (“surely”) along the rice terraces
• Again, the speaker signals uncertainty by saying that “maybe” fathers told their sons old stories like epic poems in these pre-war days
• The peaceful imagery of pre-war life is then contrasted with the image of bombs, which “smashed those mirrors”:
• This refers to the bombing of the rice paddies, which had acted as mirrors to the sky
• When this happened, there wasn’t any time to tell stories, only to scream

Levertov's intention

• The repetition of “Remember” as a figure of speech, rather than a description of memory, creates an oxymoron: “not remembered. Remember”:
• This emphasises the loss of memories associated with pre-war culture in Vietnam by focusing on the act of remembering
• The description of the peaceful lives of the Vietnamese emphasises their simplicity:
• It makes them seem childlike and vulnerable, especially compared with the military power of the American forces
• This conveys Levertov’s implicit criticism of America as a global bully, which has “smashed” an entire nation of defenceless people

Lines 27–31

“6) There is an echo yet

of their speech which was like a song. 

It was reported that their singing resembled 

the flight of moths in moonlight. 

Who can say? It is silent now.”

Explanation

• In response to the final question, the second speaker replies that there is a still “echo” of their speech:
• This description evokes something which is far away and not clear
• Their speech sounded like singing:
• This may explain the first speaker’s question about whether the Vietnamese people recognised a difference between speaking and singing
• A further metaphor employing natural imagery is used to represent their singing: 
• The “flight of moths in moonlight” is an image of softness, gentleness and fragility; moonlight also represents purity
• The speaker is conveying the qualities of their peaceful way of life once again
• However, even this comparison is uncertain, as it is merely “reported”
• The final line reinforces the lack of certainty:
• The singing is silent now, either because the singers are dead, or because the survivors do not sing

Levertov’s intention

• The speaker’s response to the final question reinforces the sense of loss that runs through the poem:
• The echo shows how distant and faint the sounds of Vietnamese speech are now that the war has destroyed them
• It also reveals how ridiculous the question is; the first speaker asks it because they can’t distinguish between Vietnamese speech and song, not because the Vietnamese didn’t do so
• The second speaker corrects the questioner by saying that their speech was “like a song”
• The fact that this correction is indirect reinforces the sense of a power imbalance between the two speakers
• The metaphor of moths flying in the moonlight conveys the defencelessness and vulnerability of the Vietnamese against the American bombs
• The caesura that splits the final line gives greater emphasis to both sentences:
• The first sentence, a question, is a final expression of uncertainty, while the second is a final, poignant declaration of loss
• Levertov ultimately presents the Vietnamese people as silenced by oppression: 
• Their losses, and the injuries inflicted on them, have left them “silent”

This section is split into three areas: form, structure and language. Instead of treating these technical areas as separate, you should demonstrate your understanding of the poem by linking them together. Think about how Levertov combines her language, structure and form to get her ideas and message across in 'What Were They Like?'. 

You will gain far more marks by focusing on Levertov's themes than on individual poetic techniques. Therefore, the analysis in the following sections is arranged by theme, and explores Levertov's use of:

• Form
• Structure
• Language

Form

'What Were They Like?' employs a very unusual form, in which the first stanza is presented as a series of spoken questions and the second presents the responses to them. The free verse form of the poem makes the speech sound natural and direct. The first speaker, who asks the questions, demonstrates their ignorance of the Vietnamese people and their lives; the second speaker describes the terrible losses suffered by Vietnam as a consequence of the war. The questions themselves illustrate the devastation of the war; the first speaker wouldn’t need to ask them if any evidence was available. 

Theme	Evidence	Poet’s intention
Conflict and loss	The title of the poem sets up the theme of loss due to conflict: The title ‘What Were They Like?’ also locates the Vietnamese people in the past	Asking “what were they like?” demonstrates the absence of knowledge about the people and their way of life: This is because they have been destroyed by the war
	The question and answer form of the poem demonstrates the totality of the loss: The first speaker asks questions about many different aspects of the Vietnamese people	The questions themselves demonstrate the absence of knowledge about the pre-war Vietnamese people: The lack of definite answers about what they were like emphasises what has been lost

Structure

Levertov uses enjambment extensively in the poem, as each question and response is usually presented as a single sentence that runs over two or more lines. When she uses caesuras to create pauses or breaks in these sentences, she draws attention to certain words or phrases for dramatic or thematic effect. The poem also employs repetition and metaphors to unify the poem around the themes of loss and the horror of war.

Theme	Evidence	Poet’s intention
Conflict and loss	The poem uses repetition to emphasise the theme of loss: The second speaker’s repetition of “It is not remembered” and “Remember” draws attention to the act of remembering Speculative language such as “perhaps”, “maybe” and “It was reported” is also repeated	This emphasises the loss of memories associated with pre-war culture in Vietnam: By focusing on the act of remembering, the second speaker demonstrates the absences where there should be something The repetition of speculative language contributes to the tone of uncertainty and loss
	The second speaker employs a series of metaphors using natural imagery to describe the effects of the Vietnamese people’s losses: For example, “there were no more buds” describes the loss of the children who were killed in the war	Using natural imagery in this way emphasises the way the pre-war Vietnamese people lived in harmony with nature: The metaphors also highlight how unnatural the destruction and loss of the conflict has been
The horror of war	Levertov uses enjambment in sentences that often run across the ends of lines:  For example, the response “Perhaps they gathered once to delight in blossom,/but after their children were killed/there were no more buds” continues over three lines The harmony created by images of nature is transformed into horror at the killing of children	The enjambment of long sentences enables Levertov to change the focus and tone of the statement: In this example, the connective “but” alters the focus from beautiful images of the natural world to horrific images of dead children and the tone moves from speculation to horror This contrast gives the horror of the latter images greater impact
	Caesuras are employed to break up some lines: For example, the phrase “A dream ago, perhaps.” ends with a full stop, separating it from the rest of the line The following line, “All the bones were charred”, is short and blunt, ending with a full stop	The effect of short, sharp phrases appearing in the context of long, descriptive sentences draws attention to them: In this example, the caesura creates a break that represents the break between the past and the present The pre-war past now seems so distant that it is like a dream  Short, end-stopped phrases change the rhythm of the poem to reflect the ugliness of war and the way it intruded into people’s lives

Language

The vivid, often shocking imagery in the poem is both visual and metaphorical. Levertov’s imagery often blends gentle, allusive descriptions with graphic representations of injury and loss. The language of conjecture is woven through the poem, emphasising the speakers’ uncertainty about pre-war Vietnamese life, while patterns of individual words are employed for emphasis and contrast. 

Theme	Evidence	Poet's intention
Conflict and loss	The second speaker takes the “stone” of the first speaker’s question and turns it into a metaphor:  They state: “Sir, their light hearts turned to stone” This technique transforms a physical object into a symbol	The metaphor transforms the “stone” lanterns into hearts that are as heavy as stone to emphasise the grief and loss of the Vietnamese people:  The fact that the stone lanterns are “not remembered” also illustrates the metaphorical darkness of lost knowledge
	Patterns of language evoke the pre-war life of the Vietnamese people: Words like “light”, “illumine”, “delight”, “dream”, “joy” and “peaceful” combine to produce a sense of happier times	These language patterns create a tone and atmosphere that evokes the peaceful life before the war: This produces a sense of keen regret for everything that has been lost
The horror of war	The second speaker’s responses often juxtapose beautiful images with horrific ones: For example, the sentence describing a quiet life ends: “When bombs smashed those mirrors/there was time only to scream.”	The contrast produced by juxtaposing images of peace and happiness with images of war and destruction emphasises the shock and horror: Levertov increases the emphasis by using jarring language like “smashed” and “scream”
	As with descriptions of the pre-war life of the Vietnamese people, Levertov uses language to create patterns evoking violence and conflict:  Words like “killed”, “burned”, “charred”, “smashed” and “scream” convey the physical realities of the war	This language is woven through the poem to illustrate the real, physical injuries inflicted on the Vietnamese people:  The fact that such descriptive words often appear alongside calm, happy imagery demonstrates the “before” and “after” of the war very directly

Context is important, but examiners don’t want to see random chunks of information about Levertov's life or the historical context of the Vietnam War, because those don’t demonstrate your understanding of the poem itself. Instead, aim to use contextual information in combination with your analysis of Levertov’s message and ideas. In 'What Were They Like?' Levertov focuses on the loss and horror of war; therefore, the following section is bullet-pointed under these themes: 

• Conflict and loss
• The horror of war

Conflict and loss

• Denise Levertov (1923–1997) was born in England and moved to America in 1946:
• In the 1960s and 70s she was active in the protest movement against America’s involvement in the Vietnam War
• She jointly formed the Writers and Artists Protest against the War in Vietnam group, which staged protests and exhibitions against American involvement in the war
• Her anti-war activism led to her publishing poetry that focused on war and its effects, including ‘What Were They Like?’ in 1967
• More than two million people died in the Vietnam War:
• When Levertov writes that “their children were killed”, she is simply reflecting the facts about what was happening to the Vietnamese people when she wrote ‘What Were They Like?’
• Levertov’s poem imagines a post-war Vietnam that has been completely destroyed by American bombs:
• In reality, American troops were eventually withdrawn from Vietnam in 1975, leaving behind a country devastated by the war
• Vietnam has since recovered 

The horror of war

• During the Vietnam War, Vietnam became the most heavily bombed country in history:
• In 1972, a massive “carpet bombing” campaign in Northern Vietnam lasted for eleven days 
• More than 20,000 tons of explosives were dropped on military targets and civilians alike
• The American Army and Airforce used napalm bombs against the Vietnamese:
• Napalm, a jellied gas, has become a symbol of the Vietnam War
• Napalm burns at immensely high temperatures and is designed to stick to anything it touches, including skin 
• The effects of napalm were psychological as well as physical, because the horror of its effects created terror and panic
• This contextualises the statement in ‘What Were They Like?’ that “Laughter is bitter to the burned mouth”
• US forces also used chemical weapons in Vietnam:
• Agent Orange, a powerful herbicide, was sprayed over the rural landscape in Vietnam from 1961 to 1971
• It killed off trees, shrubs and food crops that were providing cover and food to the opposing army, caused horrific diseases in survivors who lived in contaminated areas, and resulted in massive displacement of people who could no longer provide for themselves
• The bombing of the rice paddies in ‘What Were They Like?’ is a reflection of this large-scale destruction

In your exam, you will be asked to compare the ideas and themes explored in two of your anthology poems. That means it’s a good idea to revise pairs of poems together, in order to understand how each poet presents their ideas about conflict. This will enable you to write a thorough analysis of their similarities and differences. In 'What Were They Like?', the writer's main themes are conflict and loss and the horror of war, so the following comparisons would be a good starting point:

• 'What Were They Like?' and 'The Destruction of Sennacherib’
• 'What Were They Like?' and 'Exposure’ 

For each pair of poems, you will find:

• The comparison in a nutshell
• Similarities between the ideas presented in each poem
• Differences between the ideas presented in each poem
• Evidence and analysis of these similarities and differences

'What Were They Like?' and 'The Destruction of Sennacherib'

Comparison in a nutshell:

Both poems address the devastating impact of an armed conflict using direct and indirect descriptions to evoke pity and regret. In both poems, the scale of destruction is total. However, Levertov’s poem is anti-war, while Byron celebrates the victory over the Assyrian army.  

Similarities:

Topic sentence	Both poems illustrate the impact and scale of the conflicts, and the resulting suffering and loss of life
Evidence and analysis	'What Were They Like?'	'The Destruction of Sennacherib'
	Levertov shows the impact of war in her descriptions of the devastation of Vietnam and its people	Byron also shows the impact of war in his descriptions of the devastation of the Assyrian army
	The tragic scale of the destruction is conveyed by the fact that all the people have gone: The knowledge of what the Vietnamese culture was like has been completely lost	The massive scale of the destruction is conveyed in the poem’s initial focus on the huge size and power of the Assyrian army:  Byron compares its spears to “leaves in the forest”, making the loss of such a massive army more dramatic
	The poem provides direct, emotive details of death, suffering and loss:  Descriptions of the “burned mouth”, “charred bones” and “smashed mirrors” evoke pity and regret	The poem also provides direct details of death, suffering and loss:  His “distorted and pale” face, and the “foam” from his horse’s mouth, as well as the description of the “widows” who “wail” for the dead evoke pity and regret
	Levertov demonstrates sympathy for the lost Vietnamese culture and people:  The Americans are presented as an unstoppable destructive force	Byron demonstrates sympathy for the people of Jerusalem: The Angel of Death is a similarly unstoppable destructive force
	The aftermath of the war is presented in terms of its stillness and silence:  There is only an “echo” of Vietnamese speech  The losses caused by the war have rendered the people “silent”	Byron also focuses on the stillness and extreme silence in the aftermath of the battle: The dead soldiers’ eyes are “deadly and chill” and their hearts are “still”, while the Assyrian camp is “all silent”
	Levertov and Byron both present the way in which an overwhelming force can create destruction, suffering and, ultimately, silence

Differences:

Topic sentence	Levertov uses delicate, indirect imagery to allude to loss, while Byron employs powerful imagery to evoke the scale of Jerusalem’s victory
Evidence and analysis	'What Were They Like?'	'The Destruction of Sennacherib'
	Levertov employs a free verse form that allows her to alter the tone and rhythm of the poem to reflect its focus:  Descriptions of what life might have been like are presented in long, meandering lines, while lines depicting death and loss are short and blunt, reflecting the trauma of the events Levertov’s allusive, indirect style does not follow any clear storyline	Byron uses a strict rhyming scheme that employs rhyming couplets in equal quatrains:  This technique makes the tone of his poem lively and dramatic, with a celebratory tone in the final two lines Byron relates the events in chronological order in a straightforward narrative poem
	The poem’s imagery is either natural or direct:  However, in both cases, it uses allusion rather than detailed description For example, “laughter is bitter to the burned mouth” and “bombs smashed those mirrors”	The poem’s imagery is elaborate and vivid: Direct descriptions are richly detailed and colourful, such as the “gleaming” army with their “purple and gold” armour and banners
	Levertov’s use of metaphor is indirect and suggestive: For example, she uses “stone” to represent emotions, “buds” to represent children and “dream” to represent the past	Byron uses the extended metaphor of the sea in a more direct and focused way:  The “blue wave” represents the Assyrian army and the foam from the dead horse’s mouth is represented by the “spray of the rock-beating surf”
	The poem focuses on a real conflict: The outcome and loss of the war is imagined, but not unrealistic given the devastation caused by the real-life Vietnam War	The poem focuses on a Biblical account of a conflict:  The outcome is a supernatural, one, and the Angel of Death is a character in a Biblical story, rather than a real-life historical event
	Levertov’s poem is anti-war and mourns the losses of the Vietnamese people	Byron’s poem is partisan and celebrates the victory of Jerusalem over the Assyrians
	Levertov portrays a real war and its effects, and her tone is sad and reflective, while Byron depicts a supernatural victory and celebrates the destruction of the invading army

'What Were They Like?' and ‘Exposure’

Comparison in a nutshell:

Levertov and Owen both address the horror of war and its physical and psychological effects on those who experience it. Both poems use direct description and juxtaposition to convey the suffering caused by warfare. However, Owen’s graphic descriptions of conflict are the result of his direct experience, while Levertov’s speculative poem draws on her anti-war feelings and indirect exposure to the Vietnam War.

Similarities:

Topic sentence	The horror of war is the focus in both poems, and Levertov and Owen use similar techniques to present their subjects
Evidence and analysis	'What Were They Like?'	'Exposure'
	Levertov explores the horror of war and its effects on the people who have been destroyed	Owen explores the horror of war and its effects on the soldiers who are fighting in it
	The poem uses direct, emotive description to convey the horror of war: For example: “all the bones were charred”, “burned mouth”, “smashed” and “scream”	The poem also uses direct, emotive description to convey the horror of trench warfare:  For example: “twitching agonies”, “shrivelling” hands, “puckering” foreheads and “cringe”
	Levertov juxtaposes peaceful, natural imagery with horrific, violent images:  For example, “pleasant ways”, “blossom”, “peaceful clouds” and “flight of moths in moonlight” are juxtaposed with physical descriptions of injury and death This makes the horrific images more shocking	Owen also juxtaposes peaceful, natural imagery with horrific, violent images:  For example, “sun-dozed”, “blossoms”, “crickets” that “jingle” and “innocent mice” are juxtaposed with gruesome descriptions of dead soldiers whose “eyes are ice” and the extreme physical suffering of the soldiers left alive
	The poem addresses the psychological effects of the horror of war as well as its physical effects:  The survivors’ laughter is “bitter” demonstrating the absence of any pleasure in life, which is reinforced by the statement that, “Ornament is for joy” which is no longer possible The shock and after-effects of the war has robbed the people of self-expression: “They are silent now”	The poem also presents the psychological effects of the horror of war:  The soldiers are “Wearied” and “Worried by silence”  Their sense of despair is conveyed by lines like “We turn back to our dying”  The sense of hopelessness and futility is conveyed by the repetition of, “But nothing happens”
	Levertov and Owen both juxtapose emotive description with peaceful imagery to emphasise the physical and psychological effects of war

Differences:

Topic sentence	While both poems depict the horror of war, Levertov’s approach is speculative, while Owen’s presents the real experiences of the soldiers
Evidence and analysis	'What Were They Like?'	'Exposure'
	Levertov employs a free verse form to create tone and tension in the poem:  Long lines depicting life in peacetime are juxtaposed with short lines describing injury, death or despair	Owen uses a regular form and structure to create the effect of continuous horror:  He also employs half-rhymes, such as “knive us/nervous” and “silent/salient” to sustain a tone of unease
	The poem presents an imagined future in which the Vietnamese civilisation has been wiped out:  The poem’s perspective looks back to the past to explore what has been lost	The poem is set in the present, where a group of soldiers are experiencing the horror of war close up: The poem’s perspective describes what is happening to them moment by moment
	Levertov uses a tone of conjecture to convey the loss of knowledge in the war’s aftermath: Her speaker repeats “It is not remembered” and “perhaps” The speculative tone may be the result of Levertov’s lack of direct experience of the war	Owen conveys uncertainty about the  outcome of the war, but the poem’s tone is direct and factual: The soldiers’ horror and suffering is conveyed explicitly  Owen’s presentation of the horror of war is based on his direct experience of the trenches
	The form and voice of Levertov’s poem create a sense of uncertainty to emphasise what has been lost, while Owen uses form and structure to convey the reality of the soldiers’ continuing suffering