Henry becomes wounded when he sees soldiers retreating, and tries to stop one to ask what’s going on. Because the soldier only wants to leave he hits Henry over the head with his rifle. Next he’s befriended by a cheery solider who will return him to his regiment. Of course Henry is worried about what his comrades will say when he returns. However, because of his injury they assume Henry was hurt in battle, and start taking care of him.
Now that we’ve been given a brief summary of The Red Badge of Courage, we will go into further detail on a few elements. The first element I’ve chosen is the progress of Henry’s character. To be specific the character of Henry. Henry is a young solider, part of the “youth”. Who at first saw heroes, and a sense of glory that came with war. That is until he became one of those men, he then questioned it all. He asked the ultimate question “how do you know you won’t run when the time comes?” (Crane 15). In my opinion this is where Henry truly starts to question his decision, and himself. Henry’s character changes from a gleeful young boy, ready to join the union, to a scared solider. Henry comes to the conclusion that he had not joined the war on his own free will. I think …show more content…
Mitchell, from The Progress of Henry Fleming: Stephen Crane’s The Red Badge of Courage. I feel this quote from Mr. Mitchell sums up his feelings toward Henry “Henry Fleming 's motives, as often noted, are flawed from the very beginning. He enlists because of a selfish desire for newspaper glory and romantic adulation. He is not interested in patriotism or civil rights. In his reflections, he apologizes for the war 's lack of tales that are "distinctly Homeric" but still yearns to enlist because "there seemed to be much glory in them." He has read newspaper stories of the war, and his "busy mind ha[s] drawn for him large pictures extravagant in color, lurid with breathless deeds" (Mitchell). I personally feel this entire analysis has a negative attitude toward Henry. He’s being faulted because he ran, and lied. Mitchell even goes on to fault him for his glorification of death. He talks about in the last chapter, Crane says that Fleming “Had been to touch the great death. And found that, after all, it was but the great death” Mitchell goes on to say that the comment seems absurd. That “Neither a naive and freshly declared hero enjoying sudden maturation nor a fool suffering from new-found illusions would face his unmistakable demise and say, never mind; it’s only death” (Mitchell). I have to say I don’t necessarily agree with Mitchell’s analysis, he appears to be overly harsh on Henry, without good explanations. Yes, Henry ran,