A.P. Herbert
They used to laugh
At the General Staff:
What ass will bray
At the Staff to-day?
© by owner. provided at no charge for educational purposes
Analysis (AI Assisted)
This brief but sharp poem is a wry commentary on the ever-changing perceptions of military authority, particularly regarding the competence and credibility of a general staff during times of war. With just four lines, the poet uses irony and contrast to highlight how the perception of military leadership shifts, depending on circumstances. The underlying question — “What ass will bray / At the Staff to-day?” — suggests that those who once criticized the general staff now have little room for criticism, likely due to the success or necessity of their actions in wartime.
The first two lines, “They used to laugh / At the General Staff,” introduce a past scenario where military leadership was mocked or underestimated. This sets up an image of a general staff that was perhaps perceived as ineffective, out of touch, or overly cautious. The ridicule directed at them could be seen as a reflection of public frustration or a broader discontent with the progress or outcome of a conflict.
However, the final two lines quickly subvert this initial judgment, with the question “What ass will bray / At the Staff to-day?” The phrasing implies that the same individuals or groups who once criticized the staff have now fallen silent or been forced into a more subdued position. The word “bray” — which refers to the harsh, loud call of an ass or donkey — paints those who would now criticize the staff as fools. The shift in tone indicates that the general staff’s decisions have proven successful or justified, rendering any former mockery irrelevant in light of current events.
The poem’s brevity and simple structure lend it a punchy, almost sardonic tone. It doesn’t provide specifics about the conflict in question but instead invites the reader to consider the broader theme of shifting opinions during times of war. It’s a commentary on how, in the heat of a crisis, those who were once the object of scorn can suddenly be elevated, their actions now seen as wise or necessary in hindsight.
In this sense, the poem speaks to the fickle nature of public opinion and the way military leadership is often judged harshly in peacetime, only to be vindicated during the realities of conflict. It highlights the irony of how individuals or institutions that were once mocked for their decisions are later revered for their effectiveness, depending on how events unfold.