A.P. Herbert
1.—For Downing Street
We do not think that everything is well,
But we do know the obstacles are large;
So we are worried by the men who yell,
But follow quietly the men in charge.
December 24, 1944
2.—For a Man in Trafalgar Square
‘Hands off Greece!’ The British must get out.
Oh, yes? And Hands off Belgium, too, no doubt.
We shall, of course, be better for your sermons:
But why not save some censure for the Germans?
December 24, 1944
3.—For Whom it May Concern
Cheer up. We never thought that Peace
Would all be song and dance.
And what is happening in Greece
Might have occurred in France.
December 24, 1944
© by owner. provided at no charge for educational purposes
Analysis (AI Assisted)
This trio of short poems, written during the Second World War, is a biting commentary on the political and social frustrations of the time. The poems, though brief, pack a sharp punch as they examine the complexity of wartime decisions, national responsibility, and the delicate balance between public outcry and government action. Each poem, dated December 24, 1944, is succinct but laced with irony, frustration, and a subtle critique of those who would point fingers without understanding the broader picture.
### 1. **For Downing Street**
The first poem is a reflection on the difficulties faced by those in power during the war, particularly the British government. The speaker acknowledges that “everything is not well,” but suggests that the scale of the challenges faced by the government cannot be overlooked. The line *”But we do know the obstacles are large”* indicates an understanding of the gravity of wartime leadership and decision-making. The speaker admits dissatisfaction with the situation but expresses a sense of resignation and pragmatic support for the leaders in charge.
The second half, *”So we are worried by the men who yell, / But follow quietly the men in charge,”* delivers a critical note about public dissent. The “men who yell” could be seen as a metaphor for public protests or vocal critics of the government’s wartime decisions. While the speaker is “worried” by these dissenting voices, they acknowledge the need to trust and follow those who are in charge, regardless of the criticisms they may face. The tone here is both resigned and realistic, acknowledging the tough position of the government while subtly questioning whether those who oppose are truly offering solutions.
### 2. **For a Man in Trafalgar Square**
In the second poem, the speaker addresses a protestor, likely referring to one of the many demonstrations that took place during the war. The protestor’s call—“*Hands off Greece!*”—is a reference to the Greek Civil War, which erupted after the German occupation ended and Allied forces became involved. The speaker sarcastically asks if the protestor would also call for “*Hands off Belgium, too,*” suggesting the inconsistency in the protestor’s stance.
The line *“We shall, of course, be better for your sermons,”* implies that the speaker sees the protestor’s opinions as idealistic and disconnected from the reality of global politics. The final line, *“But why not save some censure for the Germans?”* cleverly flips the argument, pointing out that while the protestor criticizes British actions, they fail to direct their anger at the root cause of much of Europe’s suffering—the German forces. The critique here is pointed: while protesting might feel like an easy way to stand up for a cause, it fails to address the larger, more urgent issues at play. The British actions in Greece, though controversial, are not as easily simplified as the protestor might suggest.
### 3. **For Whom It May Concern**
The third poem delivers a more resigned, almost pragmatic response to the ongoing conflict, especially in light of the challenges in Greece. The speaker advises a hopeful attitude, suggesting *“Cheer up. We never thought that Peace / Would all be song and dance.”* This is a stark reminder that peace, even after the end of war, does not come easily or without its own struggles. The reference to Greece, specifically, implies that the troubles in post-war Europe were expected to be complex and difficult, much like the earlier struggles in France. The suggestion that *“What is happening in Greece / Might have occurred in France”* is a reminder that, while wartime chaos might be ending, the political and civil unrest that follows can be just as devastating.
### Overall Impressions
Collectively, the poems reveal a sense of war-weary pragmatism. The speaker does not deny the suffering or mistakes of wartime decisions, but there is an underlying message that the broader context must be understood. While public dissent is not outright rejected, there is an emphasis on the importance of seeing the bigger picture and understanding the complexities involved in wartime governance. These poems also highlight the tension between idealism and realpolitik, calling out those who protest without offering solutions or recognizing the full scope of the situation.
The tone across all three poems is skeptical and reflective, suggesting a deep fatigue with the challenges of war and the difficulties of reconciling public opinion with the messy reality of international conflict. In their brevity, the poems provide sharp, clear critiques without becoming overly preachy or ideological, pointing to the internal contradictions of wartime Britain and the war’s legacy in postwar Europe.
By focusing on the juxtaposition of public sentiment, the harshness of political realities, and the complexity of foreign intervention, these poems invite readers to reflect on the costs of war—not just in terms of lives lost, but in the way it shapes our understanding of justice, power, and responsibility.