Reflective Question 4

Now that you have completed the book, I would like you to tell me in specific detail what you have ACTUALLY LEARNED (or not learned) ABOUT WORLD WAR ONE as a result. Could any of this information be scrutinized for its accuracy or validity?  Explain your responses.

Although All Quiet on the Western Front is not a factual novel, it expresses clearly the emotions a soldier would feel during World War I. The author himself was a World War I veteran, and that is why I think it dramatically conveys the scene and general atmosphere felt during those years of massive poverty, violence, and death.

I have learned in great length what it must feel like to be a soldier during that time period. I have learned how they fought, what weapons they used, how hungry they were, how poorly equipped they were, how terrible the hygiene was, and most of all how easily it was to die. I guess these are things we all previously knew about, but after reading the book, I feel like I have a better and personal understanding of it.

I find that all wars are devastating, regardless of which one cost the most lives. My grandfather used to tell me stories of World War II, and I recall having a much less depressing image in my mind. I thought of them as heroes, who barely got hurt and destroyed all the bad guys. Yet in this book, the “bad guys” are the ones we read about; and I learned that they were just like my grandfather and not “bad guys” at all. 

So in reality, I haven’t learnt anything factual like who, what, when, or where; instead throughout the 296 pages of this book, I momentarily got a glimpse of the horror and almost felt I could relate to the soldiers. It is as if you were transported through the pages and had to live in the trenches with them. Although I doubt I could ever completely understand how horrific their experience was, I feel like I have caught a glimpse of it, enough to make me realize that war is not a battle of heroes vs. bad guys where the heroes come out unharmed and the bad guys “pouf!” into clouds of smoke; instead it is a bloody mess where very few are lucky to survive and continue on with life normally.

For me the best part of this book was that it was not factual at all. It focused on the emotions and experiences only, and that is what makes it so different form other war novels. As for accuracy and validity, the fact that it is not a factual novel and that the author was a WWI veteran, proves to me that this is as close to experiencing World War I as I will ever be. I’m sure that throughout this book are the author’s personal experiences, which makes it so much more realistic and thus so much more shocking.

When we read of World War I in history books, we never learn of what it actually felt like to be there, to fight and die at the trenches. Instead we get the same detail we just read in this book without the emotional ties. The fact that there are no emotional ties is what makes it hard to relate to; something I have learned after reading this book. All Quiet on the Western Front truly is “The greatest war novel of all time”, for it has taught me what no other book had: what it really felt like to be there during the WWI. 

Reflective Question 3

History is generally taught through the consideration of two opposing forces; black and white sides. What are the possible impacts and implications of this process of teaching and study history?

 In a war, there are two opposing sides: the good/white side and the bad/black side. Yet what makes one side black and the other white? Are they not both fighting to defend their beliefs? Are they both not killing thousands of people? Then what is it that decides which side is good and which one is bad? Although they are the same, why do we consider one “good” and one “bad”?

It all depends on the winner. While a war rages on, both sides will criticize each other and refer to them as the bad ones; yet this does not matter, for once the war is over the winner will be the “good” and the losers will be the “bad”.

 Yet can a whole country bad? We see in All Quiet on the Western Front that not even the German soldiers quite understand why they must hate their enemy, for as Kropp says, “…we are here to protect our fatherland. And the French are over there to protect their fatherland. Now who is in the right?” (Remarque, p.203). 

The ideas they are fighting for might be different, but when it comes down to the soldiers, the ones who are actually fighting, they are all the same. It is like when Paul stabs the French Soldier, Gérard Duval: “… you were only an idea to me before, an abstraction that lived in my mind and called forth its appropriate response. It was that abstraction I stabbed. But now, for the first time, I see you are a man like me.” (Remarque, p.223). Paul realizes here that the men he is fighting are simple men like him; who suffer, fear and die just like they do. In reality, they just fight because they must; and so the Germans fight the “bad side” that shoots and attacks their country; and so do the French. Even if at some point Paul and his comrades realize that in reality they are fighting the idea that the other side is the “bad” side and that the people are not actually “bad”, “...their riffles and guns are aimed against us, and if we don’t destroy them, they will destroy us.” (Remarque, p.115).

When the winner calls themselves the good side, it is to excuse themselves from wasting the lives of so many people. It is a way for them to feel better about the fact that they have killed so many (often times these people being innocent) to defend an ideal. Then is it fair to learn only form one side? For if what we now consider the “bad” side had won the war, would we not consider them the “good” side and despise the ideals that the other side fought for?

Thus, I don’t believe there is a clear white side and a clear black side; I believe it to be more of a collective gray side. Each force had their reasons to fight, and we should learn from both sides; because in the same way one side committed atrocities, so did the other. If we study only from the victorious side, we are missing out on a lot of information, and learning only what the winning side wants us to. To truly understand what happened and what the people felt during the war, we should learn from both sides; because in a war there are two stories, and if one is being omitted we only get a biased picture of what really happened. 

Remarque, Erich Maria. All Quiet On The Western Front. US, New York. Ballantine Books, 1957-58

Reflective Question 2

History is generally taught through the eyes and experiences of “Great Men” and “Leaders” as opposed to considering the average citizen’s experiences.  What are the possible impacts and implications of this process of teaching and study history?

What we learn from these “Great Men” and “Leaders” is mostly a bunch of battle plans, statistics, and ideals thought up by angry men in their magnificent looking offices. Yet it is the thousands of soldiers who fight and die for the ideals of these grumpy men. And these grumpy men in turn receive reports, where these soldiers are no longer individuals, but instead they become another statistic to the casualties of war. All the while, these “Leaders” and “Great Men” not once standing to fight beside those men who are giving up their lives to maintain the ideals of these “Leaders”.

By learning from the “Great Men”, we are only listening to the opinions of a handful of people who sit behind desks, while the vast majority of civilians might not agree with what their “Leaders” are saying. In a war, there are multiple points of view, and by limiting the information we learn to the words of a few “Leaders”, the idea we get of the time is vastly different than what it probably was.

During wartime, a leader might make things not seem as bad by giving out different statistics about the causalities, print false stories about how cheerful everyone is at the fronts, or by simply exaggerating their victories and making their losses seem much less than reality. By doing this, the civilians might not be as depressed about the war, and some might even be encouraged to enlist.

Yet the war’s source is a conflict between a few men; the civilians have nothing to do with it. As Albert says, “We didn’t want the war, the others say the same thing – and yet half the world is in it all the same.” (Remarque, p.206). Then why do we learn from those who started the war yet didn’t actually fight for it? It makes more sense to learn from those who actually experienced the horrors of war, does it not? From their office desks, they can’t truly express the sentiment, death, and chaos that a war brings to a country; they can only imagine that all of those who fight are fighting for the same beliefs that they so strongly support.

It is like Paul’s school professor, Kantorek. He encouraged his young classmates to fight for a cause that he so strongly believed in, and giving in to the beliefs of their teacher, the students agree. Yet what did Kantorek know of the war? Had he ever fought in one himself? Because of he had, he would most likely want to spare the lives of such young men, rather than waste it on the bickering of some “Leaders”. Would you read the book of a man who believes in the war yet has not fought for the cause? Yet that is what we do when we learn from these “Leaders” and “Great Men”, for most of the time they have not once hold a gun and fought for their cause; they let others do it for them. And it is these others, the soldiers, who die for their cause.

Remarque, Erich Maria. All Quiet on the Western Front. US, New York. Ballantine Books, 1957-58. 

Reflective Question 1

Given that this is a work of historical fiction, is there any piece of it that can be considered factual?  Can it be used in any way to study history?

All Quiet on the Western Front is a historical fiction, yet when we read it, it feels terribly real. That is because although the characters are fictional, what they experience is what many young soldiers truly go through.

This book is an account of a young man and his experiences during World War I. Although at no point in time does the author explain this, we can infer from Paul Baümer’s experiences and references to trenches, the weapons they use, and the people they fight, that it is indeed during that time period. The book doesn’t focus on the history of the war, like specific battles, weapons, the strategies they used, or the leaders of the war; it focuses on the experience as a soldier, who in history books is often forgotten.

If we were to read a history book or paper about World War I, we would most likely read about the causes that started the war, the leaders, important battles, and the victory of one of the warring sides. The point that makes All Quiet on the Western Front different from a history book or paper, is that it doesn’t care about hard historical facts, it wants to show us the emotions and the suffering of the war on a civilian level. In this book the leaders aren’t the important characters, it is the soldier, the ones who actually do the fighting.

We learn how scarce food was, how obtaining a good meal often depended on your own skills. We see that death becomes so common, one gets used to it; and that when one was injured and about to die, all that doctors care for is if you will die soon and be able to place some other wounded soldier in your bed. We also learn how little their training is actually worth, for once at the front, all you can do is fight and hope to live. We witness the cruelty and injustice of superior ranking officials, and the hard jobs that one is given. From the book we also witness how friendship forms, and how easily it is lost. And more than anything, we learn that the war turns young and innocent boys into men who no longer believe in the glories and beauty of life, but who instead “believe in the war” (Remarque, p.88).

Such details about the life of a soldier and the difficulties they face are never shown in books; in books they are reduced to mere statistics. All Quiet on the Western Front can’t be used to reference historical facts like when, where, who, or why; but from it we learn about the actual emotions and struggles of the soldiers during wartime. We get a glimpse of the horrors of war, and how when it comes to soldiers, living is the most important thing; and as Paul Baümer says, “We do not fight, we defend ourselves against annihilation.” (Remarque, p.113). What we most witness throughout this book, is that if it were up to the soldiers, they wouldn’t be at the front, for when it comes to wars, it is always “the wrong people who do the fighting” (Remarque, p.41)

Remarque, Erich Maria. All Quiet on the Western Front. US, New York. Ballantine Books, 1957-58.