Since the war broke out, World War I has been a topic of major controversy. Not only were millions of lives lost, but the war led to new laws against specific types of unethical warfare. During the war, Siegfried Sassoon was one of many that wrote with hopes to bring an end to the entire conflict. In his poem “’They,’” Sassoon uses satire to effectively express his frustrations with the aimless deaths in the wars. It is important to first look back at Sassoon’s life in order to get a better sense of what motivated him to write this piece. He was born to a “wealthy Jewish family” where “he lived a life of ease before the war” (Damrosch 1166). He wrote regularly, but these writings are only really known due to the recognition of his war poetry written later in life. He enlisted in late 1915, ready to do his part in working to protect his country, however, this outlook would soon change. Just before his regiment shipped out, he got news that his brother, who was also enlisted, died in combat. This was the first of many things that would shape Sasoon’s view of the war. Despite this setback, Sassoon still served as a Commander and displayed extreme bravery on the battlefield, earning a Military …show more content…
He wrote a letter stating, “I have seen and endured the suffering of the troops, and I can no longer be a party to prolonging those sufferings for ends which I believe to be evil and unjust” (24). He used his influence as a soldier and a poet to write so that others may know the atrocities that took place on the battlefront. Hoping that by doing so, he could help bring an end to a war that he believed was “being deliberately prolonged by those who have the power to end it” (Bienen). It was in early 1917, while Sassoon was in London recovering, that he heard a Bishop giving a speech “on the transformative effects of war” (Quinn 24). It was in reaction to this speech that the poem “’They’” was
For many soldiers and volunteers, life on the fronts during the war means danger, and there are few if any distractions from its horrors. Each comradeship serves as a divergence from the daily atrocities and makes life tolerable. Yet, the same bonds that most World War literature romantically portrays can be equally negative. James Hanley’s “The German Prisoner”, shows the horrifying results of such alliances, while “Farewell to Arms” by Ernest Hemmingway reveal that occasionally, some individuals like Lieutenant Henri seek solidarity outside the combat zone. Smithy of “Not So Quiet” and Paul Baumer in “All Quiet on the Western Front” demonstrate the importance and advantages of comradeship while giving credence to the romance of these connections. Pat Barker’s “Regeneration” depicts Siegfried Sassoon, as an officer who places comradeship and honor above his own personal anti war convictions. Regardless of the consequences, each demonstrates not only the different results of comradeship but also its power and level of importance to each character in the abovementioned writings.
Between the years of 1914 to 1918, the whole of Europe was locked in arms, not only for pride but mostly for survival. The years of war brought devastation upon all societies. Men were massacred in droves, food stuff dwindled, and at times an end seemed non-existent. The foundation of the first Great War, one can muse, began as a nationalistic race between rival nations. By the onset of 1914, once the Archduke Frendinad had been assassinated in Saravejo, the march for war became not just a nationalistic opinion, but now a frenzy to fight. In battle, unlike previous wars, new weaponry caused drastic alterations in strategy. No longer will armies stand to face their rivals on the plains. Now the war will be fought in trenches, hidden underground from the new, highly accurate artillery. In many respects, World War I was a war of artillery, gas, and mechanization. Except as new weapons were becoming essential for battle, the leaders, on all sides, appeared too inept to fight this new style of warfare. Generals, or any leader for that matter higher in the chain of command, sent their troops in massive assaults. Regardless of their losses there were no deviations from the main ideology of sending massive waves of men and shells to take a position. On an individual level, the scene of repeated assaults and mayhem of the front line did little to foster hope for their superiors or even for the naiveté of their fellow countrymen who were not fighting. I submit that in times of sheer madness and destitution, as during World War I, men banded together to form make-shift families for support and companionship when all seemed lost; as exemplified in the novel All Quiet on the Western Front.
Everyone knows what war is. It's a nation taking all of its men, resources, weapons and most of its money and bearing all malignantly towards another nation. War is about death, destruction, disease, loss, pain, suffering and hate. I often think to myself why grown and intelligent individuals cannot resolve matters any better than to take up arms and crawl around, wrestle and fight like animals. In All Quiet on the Western Front, Erich Maria Remarque puts all of these aspects of war into a vivid story which tells the horrors of World War 1 through a soldier's eyes. The idea that he conveys most throughout this book is the idea of destruction, the destruction of bodies, minds and innocence.
Many soldiers who come back from the war need to express how they feel. Many do it in the way of writing. Many soldiers die in war, but the ones who come back are just as “dead.” Many cadets come back with shell shock, amputated arms and legs, and sometimes even their friends aren’t there with them. So during World War I, there was a burst of new art and writings come from the soldiers. Many express in the way of books, poems, short stories and art itself. Most soldiers are just trying to escape. A lot of these soldiers are trying to show what war is really like, and people respond. They finally might think war might not be the answer. This is why writers use imagery, irony and structure to protest war.
In the history of modern western civilization, there have been few incidents of war, famine, and other calamities that severely affected the modern European society. The First World War was one such incident which served as a reflection of modern European society in its industrial age, altering mankind’s perception of war into catastrophic levels of carnage and violence. As a transition to modern warfare, the experiences of the Great War were entirely new and unfamiliar. In this anomalous environment, a range of first hand accounts have emerged, detailing the events and experiences of the authors. For instance, both the works of Ernst Junger and Erich Maria Remarque emphasize the frightening and inhumane nature of war to some degree – more explicit in Jünger’s than in Remarque’s – but the sense of glorification, heroism, and nationalism in Jünger’s The Storm of Steel is absent in Remarque’s All Quiet on the Western Front. Instead, they are replaced by psychological damage caused by the war – the internalization of loss and pain, coupled with a sense of helplessness and disconnectedness with the past and the future. As such, the accounts of Jünger and Remarque reveal the similar experiences of extreme violence and danger of World War I shared by soldiers but draw from their experiences differing ideologies and perception of war.
Tim O’Brien states in his novel The Things They Carried, “The truths are contradictory. It can be argued, for instance, that war is grotesque. But in truth war is also beauty. For all its horror, you can’t help but gape at the awful majesty of combat” (77). This profound statement captures not only his perspective of war from his experience in Vietnam but a collective truth about war across the ages. It is not called the art of combat without reason: this truth transcends time and can be found in the art produced and poetry written during the years of World War I. George Trakl creates beautiful images of the war in his poem “Grodek” but juxtaposes them with the harsh realities of war. Paul Nash, a World War I artist, invokes similar images in his paintings We are Making a New World and The Ypres Salient at Night. Guilaume Apollinaire’s writes about the beautiful atrocity that is war in his poem “Gala.”
In All Quiet on the Western Front, it becomes very apparent that some of the soldiers do not feel as if World War I was their fight, when comrades begin discussing the origin of war. One comrade, Albert states that a war is initiated by “one country badly offending the other” (204). This lead to a discussion over why the soldiers are fighting when truly it is one person or a small group of people that are directly offended by an opposing group in a similar position of power. Therefore, why must they discover the true horrors of war while simultaneously putting their lives on the line, when the ones who began the predicament, propelled false advertisement with propagandas that romanticized and glorified war don’t have to live as if the next second may be their
War is a brutal, bloody battlefield from which no one returns unscathed. Nonetheless, there are those who believe war to be a glorious honor, a bedtime story filled with gallant heroes, a scuffle fought an ocean and several countries away. In “An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge” by Ambrose Bierce and “August 2026: There Will Come Soft Rains” by Ray Bradbury, the authors seek to convey the devastation that comes from romanticizing war by using impersonal and ironic diction.
The three powerful stories including Saki’s “The Interlopers”, Erich Maria Remarque’s, All Quiet on the Western Front, and John Steinbeck’s, Of Mice and Men, portray the impact that friendship and companionship, or the absence of it, can have. Hector Hugh Munro, better known as Saki, was born in Burma while it was under the control of the British Empire. Near the beginning of World War I, Munro was enlisted into the 2nd King Edward’s Horse as a trooper at the age of 43. He soon rose to higher ranks and fought for many years. Unfortunately on November 1916, Munro was shot by a German sniper and died near France. His struggle has not only been through the physical tribulations of war, but also through the social stigma of being a homosexual during the times of World War I. Tragically, at this time, it was an unacceptable way of life and was looked down upon by society. Similarly to the adversity of war, Remarque also fought in World War I, but on the German side. He enlisted at the age of 18 and later was injured by a shrapnel wound to the leg, arm and neck. His struggles did not stop there as he was faced the immense heartbreak of losing his sister. Her death was a punishment to Remarque because of the portrayal of the Germans in his literature. Though Steinbeck did not go through the same experiences of war and loss as the other two authors have, he has experienced a fair share of struggle. Steinbeck won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1962 but was highly criticized as many people believed that he did not deserve the award, regardless of his many accomplishments such as “The Grapes of Wrath”. All of revered and respected men have shared a common theme throughout their lives, one being the impact of the ...
...s, demonstrated through the author's talent, are denouncing the authority figures who were supposed to guide his generation into adulthood but instead turned the youth against each other in the pursuit of superficial ideals. The soldiers were simply the victims of a meaningless war.
From sunrise to sunset, day after day, war demolishes men, cities, and hope. War has an effect on soldiers like nothing else, and sticks with them for life. The damage to a generation of men on both sides of the war was inestimable. Both the novel All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Maria Remarque, and the poem “I Have a Rendezvous with Death,” by Alan Seeger, demonstrate the theme of a lost generation of men, mentally and physically, in war through diction, repetition, and personification.
Sassoon’s poem “The Poet As Hero” describes the minds of the soldiers and what their opinion was on the war and the casualties. He states “But now I have said good-bye to Galahad, and am no more the knight of dreams and show: for lust and senseless hatred make me glad, and my killed friends are with me where I go” In other words before he experienced all of the tragedies, he was a pure and loving individual. However, after he has gone through all of the sorrow and grief that resulted from the war, he has left as a hateful and pessimistic person.
Both poems used different techniques to stimulate the readers’ evaluation and realisation of the adverse outcomes of war, especially its effects on the soldiers. Sassoon’s poem title gave the reader an immediate conclusion about the contents of the poem of the hardship that the soldier faced, which brought upon his suicide. Whereas Owen’s gave the opposite impression at first, as the Latin saying translates into “it is fitting and honourable to die for your country.”
World War One had an inevitable effect on the lives of many young and naive individuals, including Wilfred Owen, who, like many others, joined the military effort with the belief that he would find honour, wealth and adventure. The optimism which Owen initially had toward the conflict is emphasised in the excerpt, in which he is described as “a young poet…with a romantic view of war common among the young” (narrator), a view which rapidly changed upon reaching the front. Owen presents responders with an overwhelming exploration of human cruelty on other individuals through acts of war and the clash of individual’s opposed feelings influenced by the experiences of human cruelty. This is presented through the horrific nature of war which the
'Attack ', by Siegfried Sassoon, written on the First World War, is a poem considered by many to make a lasting impression of the brutality and chaos of war. Sassoon was a strong opposer of the war; after its completion, he went on to lecture on pacifism, and to become involved in the politics linked to that topic. Writing at a time when much of the poetry being written of the war was heavily romanticised, his poetry was criticised by some as "unpatriotic" or found his graphic depictions of war too extreme. His work still sold well, despite this. These graphic depictions are one of the many things that make this poem have such an impact; the imagery is extremely vivid throughout, and everything, down to the structure of the poem itself create