The poems I connected with the most are I Sit and Sew by Alice Dunbar Nelson and Dulce et Decorum Est by Wilfred Owen. I chose these works because each uniquely challenges the dominant cultural narratives that shape personal identity-I Sit and Sew transforms a simple domestic act into a powerful symbol of self-creation and resistance against oppressive social expectations, while Dulce et Decorum Est shatters the glorification of patriotic duty by exposing the brutal realities of war. Both poems resonate with me personally, as I’ve often felt torn between internal creative impulses and external pressures to conform to societal ideals. In these texts, culture is not a static backdrop but an active force that molds and sometimes distorts who we are. Nelson’s use of evocative imagery and symbolism in depicting the quiet yet defiant act of sewing, alongside Owen’s stark, ironic portrayal of war through vivid visual details, demonstrates that cultural identity is continuously constructed-both celebrated and compromised-by the narratives imposed on us. Thus, my thesis argues that by comparing the domestic symbolism in I Sit and Sew with the cutting irony in Dulce et Decorum Est, we uncover how both authors reveal the tension between authentic self-expression and the destructive cultural myths that dictate conventional notions of identity.
The domestic act in I Sit and Sew serves as a powerful emblem of self-creation and resistance. Nelson’s choice to center her poem on the everyday ritual of sewing-symbolized by the recurring image of “I sit and sew”-reinforces the idea that creativity can be both a meditative escape and a subtle act of defiance. In the poem, the simple act of mending or crafting becomes an allegory for reconstructing one’s identity in a society that seeks to confine and define the individual. The careful placement of this domestic image early in the poem establishes a pattern that contrasts domesticity with the broader
themes of social expectation and cultural imposition. By emphasizing the ritualistic nature of sewing, Nelson transforms a humble activity into a metaphor for personal autonomy, inviting readers to see everyday life as a canvas for self-expression. To further strengthen this section, the poet might consider weaving in additional sensory details that heighten the immediacy of the domestic experience, thus deepening the connection between the act and its resistance to conformity.
In stark contrast, Dulce et Decorum Est employs visceral imagery to dismantle the glorified image of war. Owen’s portrayal of a gas attack, captured in harrowing images such as “bent double, like old beggars under sacks,” forces readers to confront the physical and emotional toll of conflict. This technique directly counters the sanitized cultural narrative of war as noble, instead revealing the raw brutality and profound disillusionment that lies at its core. The poem’s structure-shifting abruptly from a calm recollection of marching to the sudden outbreak of horror-mirrors the unpredictability and chaos inherent in war, thereby enhancing the reader’s understanding of the disconnect between patriotic rhetoric and lived reality. By integrating these stark visual details, Owen not only challenges the myth of noble sacrifice but also underscores the dehumanizing impact of cultural narratives that valorize war. One suggestion for deepening this analysis might be to explore how the poem’s ironic tone further subverts traditional expectations of heroism, inviting a more nuanced discussion of identity formation in the face of societal myths.
A comparative reading of both poems reveals a pervasive tension between individual authenticity and the cultural myths that seek to define it. In I Sit and Sew, the act of sewing becomes a metaphor for the reconstruction of identity amid oppressive societal norms, while in Dulce et Decorum Est, the brutal imagery of warfare exposes the cost of subscribing to inherited cultural ideals. The juxtaposition of a domestic, life-affirming act with the horrific realities of war invites readers to question the reliability of cultural narratives that promise honor and unity but often deliver exclusion and destruction. Here, the integration of vivid symbolism-from the needle and thread to gas mask and
dying soldiers-operates as a vehicle for revealing how the personal is invariably political. This intertextual dialogue between the two poems not only deepens the thematic exploration of identity but also encourages a broader reflection on how cultural forces can both construct and compromise our sense of self.
In contrasting the forms of these two poems, we see how the structure itself becomes a vehicle for their core messages of resistance and vulnerability. In I Sit and Sew, the free verse form liberates the poet from traditional constraints, much like the act of sewing transforms from a mere domestic chore into a deliberate, creative act of self-affirmation. This unstructured format mirrors the organic, often unpredictable nature of resistance; each line break and pause invites the reader to linger on the intimacy of the domestic ritual and the personal resolve it embodies. Conversely, Dulce et Decorum Est uses a more structured, ironic narrative that sharpens its critical edge. The regimented form, with its deliberate pacing and vivid, jarring imagery, heightens the disconnect between the glorified myth of war and its brutal reality. Owen’s choice to adhere to a formal cadence, with calculated shifts in tone, not only amplifies the harshness of his observations but also underscores the vulnerability inherent in the human experience of combat. Together, these differing forms highlight that structure itself can evoke powerful responses—free verse allowing a reflective, almost meditative exploration of personal resistance, while structured irony forces the reader to confront societal narratives and the stark vulnerabilities they often hide.
In I Sit and Sew, Alice Dunbar Nelson’s use of free verse allows for fluid, introspective contemplation that mirrors the speaker’s frustration and quiet defiance. The absence of a strict rhyme scheme or meter reflects the speaker’s emotional turmoil, as seen in the line “Why should I sit and sew?” The direct, almost abrupt nature of this question disrupts any sense of rhythm, reinforcing the speaker’s resistance to the passive role imposed on her. Additionally, the free-flowing structure enables Nelson to weave between contrasting images—domesticity versus war—without being bound by
conventional poetic constraints, making the reader feel the unstructured push and pull between societal expectation and personal conviction. On the other hand, Wilfred Owen’s Dulce et Decorum Est employs a highly structured form that starkly contrasts with the chaotic subject matter. The poem follows a pattern of alternating pentameter lines, drawing readers into a rhythmic march that suddenly collapses during the gas attack scene: “Gas! Gas! Quick, boys!—An ecstasy of fumbling.” Here, the frantic exclamation and sudden rupture in cadence break the regimented structure, plunging the reader into the visceral horror of war. Owen’s calculated shifts in rhythm and tone heighten the irony of the poem’s closing Latin phrase, Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori (“It is sweet and proper to die for one's country”), ultimately exposing the cruel deception behind patriotic rhetoric. Together, the forms of these poems serve their themes well—Nelson’s free verse echoes an individual’s evolving resistance, while Owen’s structured narrative amplifies the irony and tragedy of war.
In reexamining I Sit and Sew and Dulce et Decorum Est, it becomes evident that both works disrupt dominant cultural narratives by revealing the complex interplay between individual creativity and societal expectations. Nelson’s domestic symbolism and Owen’s cutting irony jointly demonstrate that self-identity is a continuously negotiated territory—one where everyday acts and historical horrors intersect to form the mosaic of who we are. Restating the thesis, the essays’ exploration shows that these texts engage with the tension between authentic self-expression and destructive cultural myths in ways that resonate far beyond the page. On a broader level, the analysis prompts us to consider literature as a means of critiquing accepted truths and reimagining identity—a process that is both deeply personal and culturally significant. In a time when external pressures often threaten our individuality, these poems serve as enduring reminders of the power inherent in both resistance and creative reinvention.
Works Cited
Nelson, Alice Dunbar.
“I Sit and Sew.” The Norton Introduction to Literature, edited by Kelly J. Mays, 15th ed., W. W. Norton & Company, 2018, pp. 830-831
Owen, Wilfred.
“Dulce et Decorum Est.” The Norton Introduction to Literature, edited by Kelly J. Mays, 15th ed., W. W. Norton & Company, 2018, pp. 961-962