A.P. Herbert
I see it coming — the Fund to feed the Huns:
We shall go short of bread to give them buns.
No, thank you, boys. We cannot do too much
For French or Dane, the Belgians or the Dutch:
But did we store the honey in our hive
To keep the killing Herrenvolk alive?
And did our sailors brave the U-boats then
To fill a larder for the S.S. men?
To all such questions —I’ve a guess to give—
The answer is in the affirmative.
© by owner. provided at no charge for educational purposes
Analysis (AI Assisted)
This poem presents a sarcastic commentary on the paradoxes and frustrations of wartime policy, particularly around the idea of providing aid to former enemies — in this case, the Germans. The speaker is clearly disillusioned with the idea of offering assistance to those who were once the enemy, especially after enduring the destruction and suffering caused by their actions during the war. Through sharp and cynical imagery, the poem criticizes the notion of prioritizing humanitarian aid for the Germans when there are other nations that also need help but are not being treated with the same attention.
The first two lines — *”I see it coming — the Fund to feed the Huns: / We shall go short of bread to give them buns”* — introduce the poem’s main theme: the ironic idea of providing aid to the Germans, whom the speaker refers to as “the Huns.” The word “Huns” is historically associated with the Germanic peoples during the First World War, and its use here serves to emphasize the speaker’s resentment. The suggestion that the British will go “short of bread” to “give them buns” paints a picture of a nation sacrificing its own needs to benefit its former enemy. The choice of “buns” adds a touch of humor, implying that the Germans would be receiving luxury items, rather than basic necessities, while the British suffer.
The poem then moves into the speaker’s rhetorical questioning: *”No, thank you, boys. We cannot do too much / For French or Dane, the Belgians or the Dutch.”* Here, the speaker implies that there are many other countries that also suffered greatly under the Germans — countries like France, Denmark, Belgium, and the Netherlands — yet their suffering seems to be overshadowed by the need to help Germany. The casual dismissal of these nations — “We cannot do too much” — is a critique of the perceived priorities of wartime policy that appears to be more focused on reconciliation with Germany than on assisting the countries that bore the brunt of the German invasion.
The next lines — *”But did we store the honey in our hive / To keep the killing Herrenvolk alive?”* — continue the rhetorical questions, presenting the Germans as the “Herrenvolk” (master race), a term used by the Nazis to describe their supposed racial superiority. The speaker sarcastically questions whether the sacrifices made by the British were intended to nourish and preserve the lives of the “killing Herrenvolk,” implying that the British are now expected to support those who once sought to destroy them.
The line *”And did our sailors brave the U-boats then / To fill a larder for the S.S. men?”* adds another layer of sarcasm, questioning whether the British, who risked their lives during the Battle of the Atlantic to prevent German supply ships from reaching their targets, now face the possibility of providing food to the very soldiers who fought against them. This is a sharp rebuke to the idea of post-war generosity toward Germany, suggesting that the sacrifices of the British people were made for a much different cause, and that supporting the enemy is a betrayal of those sacrifices.
Finally, the speaker concludes with a grim and cynical answer: *”To all such questions — I’ve a guess to give — / The answer is in the affirmative.”* The sarcastic tone here is evident — the speaker is not really saying that the British would be willing to support the Germans, but rather pointing out the absurdity of the situation, where it seems that political or humanitarian considerations may require such actions, even if it feels like a betrayal of those who fought and died in the war.
The poem, overall, captures a deep sense of frustration and disillusionment with the post-war politics of reconciliation. The speaker’s questions, presented with biting irony, highlight the absurdity of providing aid to the Germans while ignoring the needs of other nations that suffered in the war. By questioning whether such actions are justifiable, the speaker critiques the way that wartime sacrifices can be manipulated and how the needs of the enemy can be prioritized over the real victims of the conflict.