The Spanish Civil War was a conflict that had a profound influence on many artists of the 1930s, especially poets, such as Stephen Spender. This article analyzes Spender’s ‘Ultima Ratio Regum’, a poem written about the conflict, looking in particular at the structural form Spender selected for this work, and highlighting some of the literary devices he employed, as well as evaluating the effect these have on the happy one with the poem.
In terms of form and structure, ‘Ultima Ratio Regum’ is quite conventional. It consists of several stanzas, each of which contains the same number of lines. The language used is relatively direct, since it does not employ a formidable vocabulary or abound in syntactic trickery, features that are characteristic of WH Auden’s contemporary work. Its core message is probably understandable to most readers on first reading. In tone, the poem is comparatively serious, articulating heartfelt and sincere points of view directly and immediately.
Clearly an understanding of Latin is required to understand the title of Spender’s poem, as translated into English, ‘Ultima Ratio Regum’ reads: ‘The last argument of kings’. This gives an idea of the concerns of the poem. The title refers to war as the final measure by which monarchies, unlike democracies, settle their differences. This serves to strengthen Spender’s credentials as a pacifist, as he is clearly referring to the horrors of all wars rather than just the Spanish Civil War.
‘Ultima Ratio Regum’ consists of four stanzas, each containing six lines of varying length. It is told in the third person by an anonymous narrator who describes the death of a young man who is killed in action in an unspecified conflict. The events described are somewhat vague and not arranged in a sequential order, for example the first stanza informs us that “the boy who lay dead under the olive trees / was too young and too foolish”, while the third stanza opens with the line “Or too lightly threw off his cap”, as if he were still alive.
The protagonist of the poem is presented as an alienated and anonymous young man with no particular role in society. This impression is created mainly in the first three lines of the second stanza. We learn that he was “never summoned by the factory hooters”, indicating that he was either too young to work or was of a class that would not be expected to work in factories. However, we also learn that “Nor did the glass doors of the restaurant turn to indicate him to come in,” a line that reflects that upper-class society was less than welcoming to him. We deduced that he was not famous from the line “His name never appeared in the newspapers.” The line “The world kept its traditional wall” indicates that he was something of an outcast. The repetition of the word “wall” in the third stanza is illuminating, especially since it is now described as “non-blooming”, rather than “traditional”, possibly meaning that it never produced anything for the young man. He is now “sprouted with guns”, and it seems somewhat inevitable that the following lines represent the death of the protagonist, as if he had finally been shot to death by the society that had previously rejected him.
Spender does not portray the boy’s brutal death in graphically realistic detail, instead taking a remarkably figurative approach. This is achieved primarily through imagery and symbolism. The “olive trees”, mentioned in the first and last stanza, are symbolic in the way the olive branch is used to convey the idea of peace. There is a touch of irony in that the child’s body lies “dead” beneath them. In the last stanza, Spender addresses the reader directly. The use of the caesura, a prominent point in the third and fourth lines, demands that the reader “Consider” and “Ask” why so much money was spent on the young man’s death.
