War can wound and burn, but it can also heal. In the book, All Quiet on the Western Front, Erich Maria Remarque presents this, and then some--a thoroughly unsightly image of war-guttural, jagged landscapes of emotion, meandering rivers of humanity, and acrid pictures of the soldier's experience. Set starkly in WWI, it focuses on the brutality and senselessness of war, even going so far as to vividly depict scenes of viscera, gore, and trench warfare (however synonymous those 3 may be). It has no intended political connotation, and stands solely to vocalize the scarring experience that soldiers went through. Paul Baumer and company, the main characters of our book, serve as the medium through which the loss (or the contrary, perseverance) of
…show more content…
This diction is a nod to Paul’s view of his situation, and thus the mentality he carries with him. Not “I” as he stands alone, but “we”, because he weathers the wind with his brothers; they are the family he has found(ed) to be able to bear the war. Or how equally interwoven the humanization of the Russian prisoners is, when not looked at from 2 narrow slits of quotes. For further rebuttal, see the following, “---What great misery can be in two such small spots, no bigger than a man’s thumb---in their eyes! (Remarque 193)” Again, to add, “.A word of command has made these silent figures our enemies; a word of command might transform them into our friends(Remarque 193).” Though they have been reduced to the status of beasts, they are still characterized as people. Dehumanization in war is oftentimes portrayed as a dichotomy, when in reality it is not. Many things represented as two extremes are in reality a spectrum, and humanity is not forsaken so easily. Men cling to their identity. This was touched on a tad in the previous paragraph, but not nearly sufficiently. This is to cover in further depth, War is a losing
This diction is a nod to Paul’s view of his situation, and thus the mentality he carries with him. Not “I” as he stands alone, but “we”, because he weathers the wind with his brothers; they are the family he has found(ed) to be able to bear the war. Or how equally interwoven the humanization of the Russian prisoners is, when not looked at from 2 narrow slits of quotes. For further rebuttal, see the following, “---What great misery can be in two such small spots, no bigger than a man’s thumb---in their eyes! (Remarque 193)” Again, to add, “.A word of command has made these silent figures our enemies; a word of command might transform them into our friends(Remarque 193).” Though they have been reduced to the status of beasts, they are still characterized as people. Dehumanization in war is oftentimes portrayed as a dichotomy, when in reality it is not. Many things represented as two extremes are in reality a spectrum, and humanity is not forsaken so easily. Men cling to their identity. This was touched on a tad in the previous paragraph, but not nearly sufficiently. This is to cover in further depth, War is a losing