A.
It is a first-person voice, which can be seen on the use of first-person pronouns from the beginning through the end.
B.
The speaker presents as civillian and the poem adresses a soldier. This can be seen both in the poem and in the title of it.
C.
Not only tries to conserve the same rhythm and meter by linking the end of a verse with the following, it also emphasizes a phrase or word and shows the relation of the phrase or word to what has gone before (almost like sentence diagramming). This adds richness to the poem and its images, like in the first indentation between ‘quarrel’ and ‘stood still’.
D.
That image of shooting but shooting ‘goods’, food and comfort, produces an effect of surprise, of slight shock due to the inversion: in this case, the civillian does the shooting, not the soldier. The image is unexpected, but it also further describes this civillian by describing the items that are going to be shot: items that are tied to life, they can prolonge life (it’s food) and not end it, like bullets.
E.
The question poised at the end can be read as being ‘shot’ by the civillian to both the soldier and also the reader. The question proposes a reflection about war, about what is the purpose or intent of it, what is the ulterior meaning behind it. Can a soldier find meaning on it? Can a civillian do it? The decision of ending with a question ties to this idea of keeping the poem open and alive in the memory of its readers, instead of a firm or concrete affimartion.
F.
The poet finds war to be something incomprehensible, something that doesn’t make sense or have a real meaning behind it. It’s senseless, it is “impartial death”, “confusion” and incomprehensible to both the civillians and the soldiers. While the poet has this attitude about war, it shows empathy and consideration for the soldier, for its “plight”, as one can see at the end. The poet has hope and wants the soldier (and the reader by extent) to reflect on war, to form a sort of empathy link with the civillian(s).
