Humans are the only species to fight in wars, yet war is infamous for dehumanizing its participants. Many authors throughout ages and wars have attempted to make readers question the human condition and human nature through a variety of formats: novels, short stories, poems, and more. Literature written during and after World War I shows how comparison to savage animals, insensitive parts of a larger machine, nameless beings, and insubstantial idols during wartime dehumanizes soldiers and citizens alike. Even with modern technology such as effective guns and bombs, animal instinct was present in the men who fought in World War I. In fact, advanced weaponry only made wars more lethal. In “Anthem for Doomed Youth”, Wilfred Owen writes, “What
…show more content…
Through these orders, other people with similar lives and motivations become enemies because of their nationality. The soldiers in Paul’s company consider this while they contemplate the causes of war and Paul asks himself, “Now why would a French blacksmith or a French shoemaker want to attack us? No, it is merely the rulers” (Remarque 205). It is easier to think about the French soldiers in this way: as mere parts of an impersonal and demonized French army led by a hated leader, not a collection of people each with families and interests of their own. Paul compares the soldiers of his own army to “coins of different provinces; and now we are melted down and all bearing the same stamp” (Remarque 272). While this comparison shows the unity that the soldiers have, it also shows how the soldiers have traded their individualism for uniformity and conformity. They are no longer humans with free will but small parts that history books overlook when recounting the facts about World War I. Even those who died became part of an even larger group that transcends even nationality: the dreaded death count. The members of this group died without the dignity of a human life and are just one insignificant number in a group so large that the names of individual members are …show more content…
Many are guilty of doing such things to objects of their brief infatuations or to celebrities, to the point where they find it shocking that celebrities have the same basic needs as all other humans. In “War”, one man is guilty of dehumanizing his own son in this manner. He spends so much time emphasizing the version of his son who “had fallen as a hero, for his Kind and his Country, happy and without regrets” (Pirandello) that he does not see the human version of his son, whom he raised and loved. When the woman asks if his son is dead, the man finally realizes that he has kept the idea of his son alive, while his son, the man, has died. In All Quiet on the Western Front, the soldiers venerate the image they have of the Kaiser based upon reputation and propaganda. Later, his actual appearance disappoints them because it cannot compare to the idealized version. The soldiers see the beautiful girl on a movie poster as an immaculate symbol of the innocence of their lives before the war or an object of lust instead of a person. Alexander Pope, a poet who lived and died long before World War I, wrote “To err is human…” (Pope). Flaws and mistakes are a defining aspect of humanity, so removing these flaws is a form of
Through these orders, other people with similar lives and motivations become enemies because of their nationality. The soldiers in Paul’s company consider this while they contemplate the causes of war and Paul asks himself, “Now why would a French blacksmith or a French shoemaker want to attack us? No, it is merely the rulers” (Remarque 205). It is easier to think about the French soldiers in this way: as mere parts of an impersonal and demonized French army led by a hated leader, not a collection of people each with families and interests of their own. Paul compares the soldiers of his own army to “coins of different provinces; and now we are melted down and all bearing the same stamp” (Remarque 272). While this comparison shows the unity that the soldiers have, it also shows how the soldiers have traded their individualism for uniformity and conformity. They are no longer humans with free will but small parts that history books overlook when recounting the facts about World War I. Even those who died became part of an even larger group that transcends even nationality: the dreaded death count. The members of this group died without the dignity of a human life and are just one insignificant number in a group so large that the names of individual members are …show more content…
Many are guilty of doing such things to objects of their brief infatuations or to celebrities, to the point where they find it shocking that celebrities have the same basic needs as all other humans. In “War”, one man is guilty of dehumanizing his own son in this manner. He spends so much time emphasizing the version of his son who “had fallen as a hero, for his Kind and his Country, happy and without regrets” (Pirandello) that he does not see the human version of his son, whom he raised and loved. When the woman asks if his son is dead, the man finally realizes that he has kept the idea of his son alive, while his son, the man, has died. In All Quiet on the Western Front, the soldiers venerate the image they have of the Kaiser based upon reputation and propaganda. Later, his actual appearance disappoints them because it cannot compare to the idealized version. The soldiers see the beautiful girl on a movie poster as an immaculate symbol of the innocence of their lives before the war or an object of lust instead of a person. Alexander Pope, a poet who lived and died long before World War I, wrote “To err is human…” (Pope). Flaws and mistakes are a defining aspect of humanity, so removing these flaws is a form of