Remains Flashcards
Summary of Remains
This poem was written by poet laureate Simon Armitage as part of a collection of poems inspired by a Channel 4 documentary called “The Not Dead”, shown in 2007. The documentary was about the impact of war on soldiers returning home and the poem was created in order to raise awareness of PTSD and encourage better recognition of the condition in society.
The first person narrator is a soldier fighting during the Iraq war, who is haunted – even after he returns home – by his involvement in the shooting of a bank looter. Armitage uses a conversational style and vivid imagery to offer a realistic portrait of a person hugely affected by grief, guilt and trauma. The poem, therefore, explores the effects of trauma both during and after active duty and suggests that the effects of war linger long after the soldiers leave the battlefield, leading to inner conflict and turmoil.
Lines 1-4
“On another occasion, we get sent out
to tackle looters raiding a bank.
And one of them legs it up the road,
probably armed, possibly not.”
Translation
The poem starts with the speaker in the middle of a conversation, implying that he has been talking about his experiences for quite a long time
The phrase “we get sent out” indicates that the speaker is working as part of a team or unit, acting under somebody else’s orders
The term “looters” is normally given to thieves raiding buildings during war time
The speaker uses the slang term “legs it”, indicating that they run away quickly
The speaker is unsure whether the man is carrying a weapon or not
Armitage’s intention
The poet uses a colloquial opening to the poem, as if the soldier is speaking to an unknown third party
This suggests the soldier has to deal with things like this on a regular basis and the speaker’s tone implies an element of weariness
Armitage does not believe there is glory or honour in war, so this is a very human poem focusing on the realities of conflict
The use of slang could imply the speaker is quite young and not emotionally prepared for what will come next
This may be the poet making a social comment that soldiers are launched into situations that they don’t fully understand, but they just have to get on with it
The final line of the stanza is important, as it becomes clear later in the poem that the speaker is overwhelmed by the guilt of potentially killing an unarmed man
Lines 5-8
“Well myself and somebody else and somebody else
are all of the same mind,
so all three of us open fire.
Three of a kind all letting fly, and I swear”
Translation
The speaker cannot remember who was with him at the time, but there were three of them
Their training and instinct means that they all think the same thing at the same time – that the looter is a threat
The simple but brutal statement that “all three of us open fire” demonstrates that the soldiers have stopped being individual, free-thinking beings, but rather a entity that reacts on instinct and training
This is reinforced by the description of them as “three of a kind”
“All letting fly” tells us that all three soldiers open fire on the looter simultaneously
Armitage’s intention
Hazy recollection as a result of a traumatic event is commonly reported, so it is not unusual for the soldier to not remember the details of who was with him at the time
It is probably not really significant anyway – the soldiers have all blurred into one
This is emphasised by the fact they are “all of the same mind”, suggesting they are somehow joined together by war
This strips them of their individuality and suggests they are cogs in the larger mechanism of an army
The horror of the final two lines in this stanza is deliberately understated, as though it were an everyday occurrence
The stanza finishes with an enjambed line, returning the focus to the speaker, re-humanising him
Lines 9-12
“I see every round as it rips through his life –
I see broad daylight on the other side.
So we’ve hit this looter a dozen times
and he’s there on the ground, sort of inside out,”
Translation
Now the soldier focuses on every individual bullet hitting the man, tearing him to pieces
They hit the looter 12 times
He falls to the ground, with parts of his internal organs spilling out
Armitage’s intention
The poet suggests that now the soldier alone seems to understand the consequences of their actions
The continued colloquial tone helps to give more of an impression of the speaker being young and inexperienced at life
This could be taken as the moment the soldier loses his innocence, as the gruesome imagery transitions from the colloquial to the emotional
Lines 13-16
“pain itself, the image of agony.
One of my mates goes by
and tosses his guts back into his body.
Then he’s carted off in the back of a lorry.”
Translation
The poem continues with the vivid image of the looter in extreme pain
We are introduced to a second person, the soldier’s “mate”, who casually walks by and “tosses” his internal organs back into his body
The use of the verb “tosses” denotes a lack of care or respect
The looter is then placed in the back of a lorry and driven away
It is unclear whether he is still alive or dead at this point
Armitage’s intention
This stanza reflects the way that soldiers often have to disengage with what is happening in order to cope with it
It also dehumanises the looter, who remains nameless and who gets “carted off” in the back of a lorry as though he were an object
On a wider scale, Armitage is commenting on how conflict causes the devaluation of human life, where gruesome death can be seen as an everyday occurrence
Lines 17-20
“End of story, except not really.
His blood-shadow stays on the street, and out on patrol
I walk right over it week after week.
Then I’m home on leave. But I blink”
Translation
Although that should be the end of that story, it isn’t, as the soldier is haunted by the memory of the event
The looter’s blood stain remains on the street where the soldier has to walk
It is an imprint of his existence which the soldier cannot escape from
Then the soldier is sent home for a break
Armitage’s intention
Armitage implies that death stains a person’s conscience and memory just as blood stains the ground
The “blood-shadow” is indicating to the soldier that there will be no real way to forget or move on from the event
The use of caesura in the final line suggests that going home should be the end of things, but is followed by “but” which tells us it isn’t
The use of the word “blink” has connotations of waking up, as though from a dream or a daydream
The use of enjambment suggests the merging of reality and memory
Lines 21-24
“and he bursts again through the doors of the bank.
Sleep, and he’s probably armed, possibly not.
Dream, and he’s torn apart by a dozen rounds.
And the drink and the drugs won’t flush him out – ”
Translation
The poem breaks down into a more stream of consciousness form, as the speaker recalls what he sees every time he blinks
He relives the looter bursting through the doors of the bank again
While sleeping, the speaker wonders if the man was armed or not
His dreams are filled with the image of the looter’s body being ripped apart by bullets
The speaker has turned to drink and drugs, but even these don’t stop the flashbacks
Armitage’s intention
The poet tells us that the speaker cannot find any peace
He continues to be haunted by what happened and the flashbacks of it
It is as though the speaker is reliving the event over and over, hence the repetition of previously used lines
The speaker is clearly suffering from PTSD and does not seem to be receiving any support for it
He just has to live with the memories
Armitage uses a military term in “flush him out” to describe the soldier’s efforts in trying to dislodge the memory of the dead looter
To “flush out” means to try to get the enemy to break cover, suggesting that the memory is an enemy in itself
Lines 25-28
“he’s here in my head when I close my eyes,
dug in behind enemy lines,
not left for dead in some distant, sun-stunned, sand-smothered land
or six-feet under in desert sand,”
Translation
The use of military terms continues, as the looter is a constant presence in the speaker’s head
He has “dug in”, meaning the memory of the looter is determined never to leave the speaker
The looter is not lying half-dead in some far off hot land, or buried in a grave in a desert
Armitage’s intention
The poet shows us that the memory isentrenchedin the mind of the speaker,metaphoricallyforever stuck behind enemy lines
The use of the term “left for dead” also implies doubt as to whether the looter was actually dead when he was thrown into the back of the lorry
This also seems to haunt the narrator
The hazy, almost dream-like description of “some distant, sun-stunned, sand-smothered land” implies that if something has happened so far away, it should not still be having an impact
The fact that Iraq itself is not specifically mentioned means that this could be applied to any conflict
Lines 29-30
“but near to the knuckle, here and now,
his bloody life in my bloody hands.”
Translation
The narrator then reveals the memory is “near to the knuckle”, meaning that it is not a distant memory, but it is immediate and risky
The memory is causing him pain and making it impossible for the speaker to move on
The reference to “bloody” could mean literal blood, or a curse, suggesting that this event has cursed him
The speaker’s hands are metaphorically stained with the looter’s blood
Armitage’s intention
Armitage intentionally ends the poem without resolution
This mirrors the lack of escape, respite or resolution the soldiers affected by PTSD experience for years, or even over their entire lifetime, after the event
The title of the poem, “Remains”, can mean the physical remains of the murdered looter, and also the stubborn determination of the memories that refuse to leave the narrator alone
Form of Remains
Remains is written in the form of a dramatic monologue in the present tense, made up primarily of regular four-line stanzas. However, despite this regularity, there is nothing normal about the rhythm, rhyme or content. The use of a very regular, ordinary form makes the content of the poem seem mundane, like a normal occurrence. The lack of rhyme, along with structural elements such as enjambment, imply the chaos and turmoil underneath. Herein lies the conflict in the poem: an extraordinary event which has such lasting implications on the individual, discussed in such a normal, conversational way.
Structure of Remains
Armitage uses enjambment and caesura to add to the conversational style of the poem, but also to fragment it. This sense of confusion is further emphasised by the fact that the poem starts with the connective “another”, as if the reader is entering part way through a longer story-telling. The speaker is unnamed, meaning this could be about any soldier in any conflict. The narrator’s thoughts and feelings unravel further as the poem progresses, reflecting his inner conflict and turmoil.
Language of Remains
Language
Armitage not only contrasts colloquial language with gruesome imagery, but uses language to demonstrate the loss of individuality and humanity in war, and the lasting psychological impact war can have on individuals.
Similarities:
Remains and Bayonet Charge
Both poems explore the psychological impact of being an active soldier in war
Differences:
Remains and Bayonet Charge
Whilst both poems explore the horrific reality of war, Remains is focused on the lasting impact on the individual, whereas Bayonet Charge also explores the impact on nature
Similarities:
Remains and WP
In both poems, the psychological impact of war has lasting effects
