Category: All Quiet on The Western Front

Erich Remarque’s All Quiet on the Western Front is a profound proclamation against war, highlighting its significance in the annihilating impacts on humans. The people of war gave hints of romanticized ideas of being in the front throughout the story for its benefits of obtaining rations of food, and that the conditions were “… excellent”(Remarque, 167). The novel portrays the fact about nationalism and honor, disregarding the real horror of the front by the people; though, it also considers the power given to soldiers. The war was illustrated as an act of sacrifice of the old people of the younger generation; whereas, the young joined the war due to pressure from individuals whom they consider as the respective authority. These youth trusted these individuals to be their superior, and light and guide them to maturity rather than giving them up for their hypocritical beliefs towards their fatherland. The Irony of war reveals that people do not see the truth of war as they claim it to be; whereas, the war is far from what the soldiers experienced.

Kropp received a letter from their old teacher, Kantorek proudly calls them “Iron Youth”, but the men had been exposed to the reality of the front, “Yes, that’s the way they think, these hundred thousand Kantoreks! Iron Youth! Youth! We are none of us more than twenty years old. But young? Youth? That is long ago. We are old folk”(Remarque 18).

The men took cover in a graveyard, “A wounded man? I yell to him— no answer— a dead man…”, and Paul “merely crawls still farther under the coffin” to be protected “though Death himself lies in it”(67).

Paul’s German master stopped him as he was out and spoke, “So you come from the front? What is the spirit like out there? Excellent, eh? Excellent?”, as the German master proceeded to put cigarettes in his pocket, “Now, shove ahead a bit out there with your everlasting trench warfare— Smash through the johnnies and then there will be peace”(Remarque 167).

Detering packed his bags and went back home, “Anyone might have known that his flight was only homesickness and a momentary aberration. But what does a court-martial a hundred miles behind the front line know about it?”, yet he was caught, “We have heard nothing more of Detering”(277).

The ideology of war had been romanticized and glorified by people, but Remarque’s All Quiet on the Western Front portrays a different point of view of the people in the front. Remarque’s book tells tragedies that were overlooked by many. Many glorified war as it is a way to defend and bring “peace” to their country. Similarly, Germany, whose people were blinded by propaganda, fought a war that devastated millions of people. This is the risk that people, those who were pressured or blinded by lies, took to serve their country.

In the novel, All Quiet on the Western Fronts, by Erich Maria Remarque, Paul, a German soldier, is drafted into the war and witnesses many traumatic instances of war. Throughout the book, Remarque demonstrates the mental trauma and emotional stress involved in warfare that Paul experiences to convey the significant impact of war on the mental stability of soldiers. Remarque utilizes similes in his writing to express the stressful effects of war on the mental conditions of soldiers introduced in All Quiet on the Western Front.

The mental effects on a WWI soldier can be devastating, as seen in All Quiet on the Western Front, which portrays the war with emphasis on the overwhelming fear, violence, and stress a soldier faces, sometimes completely ruining his sanity and leaving lasting effects on his mental health. After enduring a violent, traumatic encounter in the front lines, Paul highlights how mental damage is permanent and devastating. He explains that soldiers “forget nothing really” and that “when they are past, sink in us like a stone, they are too grievous for us to be able to reflect on them

at once,” further analyzing that if they’d had reflected on the traumas of war, they “should have been destroyed ages ago.” Paul also states that “terror can be endured so long as a man simply ducks–but it kills if a man thinks about it.” This quote uses multiple analogies to compare the stressful, traumatic experiences of war to those of a stone sinking. Additionally, the quote shows Paul’s realization of the inevitability of mental trauma. Paul notices that the emotional damage of war can be suppressed and ignored but never completely forgotten since it causes permanent pain. However, his understanding that such realization can be dreadful and even more stressful makes him wonder when his horrors of war will finally overwhelm him and reveal the reality of war, during which soldiers are subject to intense physical pain and primal, instinctive fear at every moment of the war. The traumatic thoughts of death and witnessing brutal murders of comrades and enemies instill intense fear into all soldiers, inevitably creating excessive stress and anxiety. (Page 138)

In another instance in All Quiet on the Western Front, Remarque is seen using a simile as he describes the inevitable mental stress and trauma that the soldiers endured as a result of the fear and pain involved in the reality of war. In a quote, Paul describes the many conflicting emotions that he develops from the war. He feels “forlorn like children,” but also “experienced like old men.” He describes himself as “crude and sorrowful and superficial” believing he is “lost” (Page 123). As well as containing two different similes, the quote strongly portrays Paul’s suffering as he compares his feelings of pitiful sadness and loneliness to that of a child and his experience in the war to that of an old man. This comparison demonstrates Paul’s unstable mental condition and reveals the many negative, conflicting emotions that he feels as a result of stress from the war. Furthermore, the quote displays Paul’s realization as he accepts the mental toll that has been put on him from the stress of the war.

At the beginning of the 20th century, European countries suffered a great loss of their population and wealth as well as the breakdown of the government and economy for years. The book All Quiet on the Western Front, written by Erich Maria Remarque is a collection of tragic stories of the German soldiers who faced the harsh battle fronts and life during the First World War. Throughout the novel, the author records the harsh experiences the soldiers underwent on the battlefield, especially the PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) that affected most of the returning veterans of the war. Along with the stress and trauma from the battles, soldiers who were once guaranteed promising futures were too far from being able to adapt to society along with other citizens. Not only that, they were disillusioned by the horrors of the war and overwhelmed by propaganda and censorship. Given such financial and human costs of the battles, the detriments of World War I outweigh its benefits; the PTSD spread among soldiers, while misleading propaganda and censorship of the public gave the government power to unify society’s support towards war.

Propaganda and censorship were used to spread biased and incomplete information about enemy countries to eliminate dissent in the public and to recruit many young soldiers, eager to fight for their country. Once the war was over; however, disillusionment that war was not the heroic or victorious experience they were promised hit them hard. Remarque writes, “The idea of authority, which they represented, was associated in our minds with a greater insight and a more humane wisdom. But the first death we saw shattered this belief” (Remarque 12). The soldiers believed the country that they were fighting for would support and save them, but when unable to save their comrade, the soldiers realized the likelihood of their not being saved was high. When they saw their first death, that fear that their lives were in danger took over as they came to understand that the “greater insight and [a] more humane wisdom” they believed in and followed would not be able to ensure everyone’s lives. Remarque addresses the disillusionment soldiers felt during battles when their lives were at stake. To their dismay, the wartime propaganda was full of half-truths or lies and demonized enemy countries to recruit more soldiers and eliminate dissent. Eventually, soldiers began to recognize the ones they were fighting against were the same as them. In one paragraph, Remarque writes a soldier realizing, as he lies next to the man he stabbed, that he is simply another man reeled in by his country’s propaganda for recruitment. “… for the first time, I see you are a man like me… Forgive me, comrade… Why do they never tell us that you are poor devils like us, that your mothers are just as anxious as ours, and that we have the same fear of death, and the same dying and the same agony… If we threw away these rifles and this uniform you could be my brother…” (Remarque 223) The French man shows companionship to Paul while discussing the costs of the war. As both of them joined the war through enlistment, they suffered the traumatic experiences of the war they were fighting, contrary to what the government and country leaders had promised through war propaganda. Because of these experiences, the soldiers have come to fear death, fear for their futures, and worry for their families and no longer see importance or honor in dying for their country. They both come to see that they are not enemies but rather comrades, forced to do as their country wills them, which in most cases is biased and heavily disadvantaged the people who were fighting in the wars. Without their title of “soldier” or their obligation to fight for their country, the two men are more alike than different, and their similarities bring them together. An example of censorship and propaganda seen in history is Joseph Stalin’s control over the Soviet Union. People under the rule of the tyrannical leader, Stalin, were restricted from thinking for themselves, defining what held importance to them, interacting with people, not of the USSR, and carrying beliefs contrary to that of the government despite whatever disillusioned society Stalin claimed. The society was blindsided by these false hopes that Stalin had created. One of the great changes he proposed to achieve during his regime was to better the government, but he did so through brutal force and economic seizure. The Soviet government wished for its people to believe that they were doing everything in their power to improve working and living conditions while rebuilding the tarnished image of Russia as a country that backed out of the Great War. To achieve this goal, Stalin seized total control of all governmental and economic aspects of Russian society. He created and slathered a benevolent image of his ruling all over society, standing up for those people who can not act upon their wishes to better the country. Using means of terror and brainwashing to rid of any biases against him, he exploited his power to censor everything he saw as a threat. After seeing the countless horrors in battles, the soldiers coming home to their families broke the false realities of war, but even after the war ended, soldiers faced many challenges in adjusting to society due to PTSD.

After the war had ended, the veterans of the war who returned home to their families were unable to readjust and adapt to daily life due often to PTSD. “‘The war has ruined us for everything.’ [Kropp] is right. We are not youth any longer… We are fleeing… From our life. We … had begun to love life and the world, and we had to shoot it to pieces… We believe in such things no longer, we believe in the war.” (Remarque 87-88) Being able to proudly fight for their country, the soldiers went into war, considering it as a way of “giving back,” but as time went on, the war became a grim and dire existence not only to the people fighting, but also to the whole country. The war had “ruined us for everything,” and the soldiers knew and dreaded the fact that they could not go back to their lives before the war, and despite that they were “fleeing…from [our] their life. The “love life and [the] world” they knew of before no longer exist in their minds, and they came to think “We believe in such things no longer, we believe in the war.” From the exhaustion and pain they experienced in fighting battles, the war gave them such a transformative experience both mentally and physically. Wilfred Owen addresses the horrors soldiers felt while fighting the war in his poem “Dulce Et Decorum Est.” This kind of revelation of war conditions was not understood by the general public until years after the wars and was a shock to people who weren’t originally aware of all the suffrage. Owen states, “If, in some smothering dreams, you too could pace… And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,/His hanging face, like a devil’s sick of sin;…” Agonizing dreams suffocate the soldiers post battles and Owen interprets the trauma of seeing the passing of fellow soldiers as he “watch(es) the white eyes writhing in his face… like a devil’s sick of sin…” Creating vivid sensory through sibilance and diction such as “sick of sin” and describing the soldier’s faces as having “white… writhing” eyes emphasizes the PTSD soldiers experience from witnessing hundreds of deaths every passing day. Later in the stanza, Owen writes, “Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud/Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues… you would not tell with such high zest/To children ardent for some desperate glory…” This juxtaposes someone believing in “glory” and “victory” versus the true “vile incurable sores” that come to the soldiers. Owen’s use of figurative language to exemplify the trauma and stress caused by the war shows just how heavy and agonizing the war experiences were. From these stanzas, Owen denounces the evils of the war which conclusively reveals the true weight of PTSD on the veterans of the war.

Along with the mental toll the war had on the soldiers fighting, there was just as much physical toll on them. From the trenches to the no man’s land, soldiers were in constant exposure to dangerous weaponry. Some people support and claim that the war led to many revolutionary technological and industrial developments after the war, as it paved the way for newer technological innovations. Though the technology created during the WWI was indeed much more advanced and useful on the battlefield than the traditional horse and sword, they were, in another sense, killing machines. While admittedly, the technology introduced during WWI proved to be useful as some of the machinery and transportation across no man’s land, with it has come mass terror, the ability to kill mercilessly within minutes, and the exploitation of the public money to create such technologies. In a quote by Elliot White Spring, a British soldier describing his view of tanks after the war in “Fed Up” in Great Stories of War. (pg. 28) “Now that awesome roar was all around them and dark, ghostly shapes seemed to be moving through the foggy mantle shrouding… huge, terrible, dark monsters, sprouting flame and smoke, were upon them… blasting machine gun positions into cratered ruins draped with mangled bodies of German soldiers.” Tanks are strong and effective in overrunning the German trenches and are overwhelming giants. They caused mass destruction, obliterating and bogging down the battlefield. Also, not only was it costly to produce, it destroyed everything it went over, which led to “cratered ruins draped with mangled bodies of German soldiers.” Another innovation used to terrorize soldiers during the war was poison gas, and in the poem “Dulce Et Decorum Est,” Wilfred Owen addresses the horrors soldiers felt while amidst poisonous gas. Owen states, “Gas! Gas! Quick boys! -An ecstasy of fumbling/Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time; But someone still was yelling out and stumbling/And floundering like a man in fire or lime…/…As under a green sea, I saw him drowning. This stanza conveys the frenzy, delusional experience of asphyxiation by describing the nightmarish poisonous gas that deprived them of air whenever one bomb was thrown into the field. Most used as a weapon of terror, Owen describes the effects of poison gas, which strangled and suffocated the soldier who wasn’t quick to put on his gas mask. Though poison gas took only around 4% of the casualties, it was most effective in contributing to severe PTSD and asphyxiation. Because it was often subject to changing wind patterns, the poisonous gas used in battlefields often spread further/away from the intended area, causing death to those without protection. As much as the technology of WWI provided soldiers with protection and weapons to attack successfully, the drawbacks that came along with it were far more severe and significant than its benefits.

Detriments such as PTSD tyrannical government through propaganda and censorship, and disillusionment outweigh the benefits of WWI as they were much more significant and impactful to the countries both during the war and postwar. Through the use of propaganda/censorship governments and leaders effectively brought their countries to war, thus creating a lost generation of veterans suffering from great shell-shock and PTSD. Subsequently, the war costs not only taken a toll on the economy but he t also caused discrepancies between the government and the general public.

In the Myth of Sisyphus, Camus argues that “one must imagine Sisyphus happy” (123), who is condemned by the gods to repeatedly roll a boulder up and down a hill for eternity. Camus uses the Greek legend as a metaphor for the individual’s continuous struggle against the absurdity of life. According to Camus, one must accept the absurdity and in doing so will gain individual clarity and happiness. However, as Remarque presents it, happiness cannot possibly be achieved in this way. Erich Maria Remarque’s All Quiet on the Western Front depicts the young German soldier Paul Baumer’s endless struggles in World War I, from his training to his death on the battlefield. Despite Baumer, acknowledging his new reality of war on the front, he does not gain the same clarity or happiness Camus speaks of. But instead concludes that life is meaningless. Remarque attributes this to the romanticized picture of war in society back home, the dehumanization the soldiers undergo, and the destructive mindset taught during training. One could argue that soldiers can retain happiness through the intense bonds of loyalty and friendship. However, apart from these relationships, there is still evidence of unhappiness in the soldier’s lives due to the lack of mental separation from the war.

The soldier’s experience upon returning home from World War I, specifically Baumer’s, highlights the repercussions of romanticizing war for not only the citizens but also the soldiers within the society. Baumer experiences the misconceptions firsthand when running into his German master along the street; “You look well, Paul, and fit. Naturally it’s worse here. Naturally. The best for our soldiers every time” (Remarque 166). Even though Baumer’s view of the war has changed since enlisting, he soon realizes the rest of society still has the notion of nationalism and glory when it comes to the war. This misconception that soldiers are being fed the best and the war experience is nothing but empowering, sets the standards for all soldiers. However, these standards set in place only prevent soldiers like Baumer from connecting with their families and society. Even within his own home Baumer expresses to his family that “a sense of strangeness will not leave” and there “is a distance, a veil between us” (Remarque 160). For soldiers, it is nearly impossible to leave the war behind, but now due to the romanticization, it becomes harder than ever for the soldiers to assimilate back into society. Baumer argues that he “would like to be here too and forget the war; but also it repels me, it is so narrow, how can that fill a man’s life” (Remarque 169). Baumer’s disconnect from his society and confusion as to what could give him purpose further illustrate the soldier’s unhappiness and inability to obtain clarity.

All Quiet on the Western Front is set among soldiers fighting on the front, one of Remarque’s main points is how the dehumanization of war can cause soldiers to discount the simplicities of life including happiness. As opposed to heroes, the soldiers are described and treated as nothing more than replaceable and generic. While at the hospital “The doctor passes by Kemmerich’s bed without once looking at him” (Remarque 27). Being treated with care and precision is thought to be a basic human right among many. However, in this instance, Kemmerich is not even given the bare minimum of treatment since he is considered no longer useful in the war. This further continues with Baumer confronting the doctor; “How should I know anything about it, I’ve amputated five legs today” (Remarque 32). To the doctor, death has become normalized in a way that he is unable to express any emotions towards Kemmerich or Baumer, who is experiencing this grief for the first time. As Kemmerich begins to die, the argument of who will get his boots arises and without hesitation Muller claims them. Baumer states that the men “have lost all sense of other considerations because they are artificial. Only the facts are real and important for us” (Remarque 21). Like other soldiers, the war has shaped these men’s perspectives from valuing emotions to completely disregarding them. Unfortunately, Remarque illustrates that nearly all soldiers undergo this dehumanization. After years of being in the war, Baumer claims that “It has transformed us into unthinking animals to give us the weapon of instinct- it has reinforced us with dullness” (Remarque 273-274). Remarque emphasizes how the only way for soldiers to survive is to detach themselves from their minds and humanity. However, without these how are soldiers supposed to come by emotions let alone happiness?

Towards the beginning of the novel, Remarque introduces the idea that the mindset taught during the war contributes just as much to the soldier’s inability to obtain happiness. The front line is depicted by Baumer as “a matter of habit” (Remarque 138) which is defined as a settled tendency or practice, especially one that is hard to give up. Remarque chooses this description to highlight the relationship between the soldiers and the front line. Apart from the soldier’s instinct, the relationship was based on the information passed down from previous soldiers and higher commands. To survive soldiers are instructed to suppress their emotions and accept the conditions of their lives. In doing so, the front line becomes a “matter of habit”. One in which soldiers find it nearly impossible to forget and separate from. This relationship of habit also prevents the soldiers from progressing. Baumer illustrates this when stating “We had no definite plans for our future. Our thoughts of a career and occupation were as yet of too unpractical a character to furnish any scheme of life” (Remarque 21). By only focusing on the war, the soldiers are unable to move forward with their lives and obtain happiness apart from their traumatic experiences. In addition to suppressing emotions, the soldiers became “hard, suspicious, pitiless, vicious, tough- and that was good; for these attributes were just what we lacked” (Remarque 26). This made killing easier and more impersonal, but it also came with a price. Soldiers had to change their personalities to fit the custom and in doing so also lost a part of their identity. Not only was this form of thinking destructive but it also caused a lot of mental unhappiness for the soldiers.

One could argue that the soldiers obtain happiness through the intense bonds of loyalty and friendship that form as a result of the shared experience of war. Baumer elaborates on his experience with Kat stating, “We don’t talk much, but I believe we have a more complete communion with one another than even lovers have” (Remarque 94). Unlike the other people back home, Kat has gone through the same devastating dehumanization and traumatic experiences Baumer has. Thus, he does not feel the pressure to maintain the standards of a soldier, nor does he have to control his emotions. With soldiers, Baumer does not have to discuss the front. However, people in the rest of the society such as Baumer’s father are “curious in a way” (Remarque 165) that he finds “stupid and distressing” (Remarque 165). Unable to discuss his war experiences, Baumer soon discovers a disconnect with both his family members and society. But it is within this soldier-to-soldier relationship that men such as Baumer and Kat can find happiness and clarity. On the other hand, one could conclude that apart from these moments of communion with fellow soldiers, there is still evidence of unhappiness in the soldiers’ lives due to the lack of mental separation from the war. After returning to his hometown, Baumer depicts the front as a curse that “reaches so far that we never pass beyond it” (Remarque 121). The word curse implies that the soldiers are bound to the war experience and thus never able to separate from it. Remarque further conveys this idea with reoccurring flashbacks from the front. When walking the streets in his hometown Baumer recalls “the muffled noise of shelling” (Remarque 121). The place that once provided him with familiarity and security is now a reminder of his past and a place filled with uncertainty.

According to Camus, one must accept the absurdity and in doing so will gain individual clarity and happiness. On the other hand, Remarque argues happiness cannot possibly be achieved in this way. Despite Baumer, acknowledging his new reality of war on the front, he does not gain the same clarity or happiness Camus speaks of. But instead concludes that life is meaningless. Remarque attributes this unhappiness to the romanticized picture of war in society back home, the dehumanization the soldiers undergo, and the destructive mindset taught during training. Some may argue that soldiers obtain happiness through the intense bonds of loyalty and friendship. However, Remarque makes it clear that apart from these moments of communion with fellow soldiers, there is still evidence of unhappiness in the soldiers’ lives due to the lack of mental separation from the war.

How does the extreme hardship and conflict of war affect an individual? War always takes a toll on the individual and leaves drastic changes to the human soul; this loss of innocence is a recurring motif and major theme throughout the novel. Erich Remarque’s All Quiet on the Western Front is one of the greatest war novels of all time. The story follows the protagonist, Paul Baumer, a young, artistic boy who enlists in the German army in World War I and challenges the false glorification of war. Throughout the story, Paul repeatedly faces horrifying experiences and by the end of the novel, he is left both physically and mentally broken without the identity of his former self To convey this, Remarque — a war veteran himself– highlights how Paul has been stripped of his not only his innocence, but humanity, purpose, creative spirit, and ability to relate to society. Remarque is also able to convey the loss of innocence theme by showing the newfound disconnect between Paul and society. Paul, who has seen the death and depravity of the front, has become completely unable to relate to civilian society. Before the war, Paul was a civilian who connected well with his family and society. Now that Paul has experienced the horrors of the battlefield, he has lost the ability to make connections and can no longer integrate into nonmilitary lifestyles. “I breathe deeply and say to myself: ‘You are at home; you are at home. ‘ But a sense of strangeness will not leave me, I can find nothing of myself in all these things. There is my mother, there is my sister, there is my case of butterflies, and there is the mahogany piano – but I am not myself there. There is a distance, a veil between us” (99).

Remarque uses a unique diction with the word “veil”. He chose the word veil because it perfectly symbolizes his disconnect from society and his inability to verbalize the hardships he has endured — even to his family. It’s not just that he doesn’t fit, he can’t even explain how he doesn’t fit. Similarly, this same message can be found in the following quote: “It is I of course that has changed in the interval. There lies a gulf between that time and today. At that time I still knew nothing about the war, we had only been in quiet sectors. But now I see that I have been crushed without knowing it. I find that I do not belong here anymore, it is a foreign world” (168). Here, Paul recognizes the dramatic transformation that he has undergone in his war experience. He no longer connects with his family and friends at home, but can only understand the fear and violence of war. Remarque chooses the diction “crushed” to show the extent of Paul’s loss of connection with society. Paul has, in essence, become isolated by his experience of the brutality of war from the foreign world that is civilian society. His inability to connect with his friends at home shows a loss of connection with society itself.

In addition, to society, Paul can no longer connect with himself. Remarque can convey the loss of innocence theme by revealing Paul’s newfound inner struggles. Due to the brutality of war, Paul has lost his purpose. Originally an artistic, intelligent, engaging, and creative boy, upon returning home on leave it is discovered just how much he has changed. “I stand there dumb. As before a judge. Dejected. Words, words, words —they do not reach me” (173). With a unique diction and the use of words such as “dejected”, Remarque can show how foreign Paul’s former self has become. Paul is suddenly unable to feel the passion for his books he felt before. This quote also happens to be the only part of the story where Remarque changes his syntax. Breaking into poetry, he creates a new line for almost every word. His purpose behind this was to show how shocking this discovery was to Paul and represent how chaotic Paul’s thoughts have become. able to co-lose the innocence theme by exemplifying Paul’s newfound lack of humanity. When Paul’s commander orders his regiment to charge, he describes the experience as a brutal one: “We have become wild beasts. We do not fight, we defend ourselves against annihilation.

It is not against men that we fling our bombs, what do we know of men at this moment when death is hunting us down” (113). Two messages are being transmitted here. Firstly, Remarque uses a unique poetic device known as Reverse Anthropomorphism to compare the men to “wild beasts”. He does this to show that war will strip you of your consciousness, force you to become lax towards horrific things, and revert you to your primal instincts. Secondly, Remarque personifies death to “hunt them down”. This is used both as Paul’s justification for their behavior and for the readers to understand just how cutthroat war is. It’s kill or be killed. Overall, this quote reveals the disintegration of Paul’s humanity. Humanity is what defines him, so remarque taking it away shows that was will turn you into mindless and heartless slaves. Remarque can convey the loss of innocence theme by displaying the disintegration of Paul’s hope and his lack of will to live. Halfway through the novel, Paul makes a revelation. It becomes clear to him that the war has turned him and his comrades into the lost generation and that all hope is lost for them. “We are forlorn like children and experienced like old men, we are crude and sorrowful and superficial and believe we are lost Because Paul and other soldiers of his generation have matured in the war before they were ready, they have become hopeless. At a young age, Paul and the so-called “lost generation” have seen men with their limbs blown off, and had their innocence taken from them too early. This is what Remarque means when he juxtaposes “children” with “old men”. Paul and his comrades are unable to move past the war, and therefore, are no longer driven by their life of purpose before the war. Paul, as part of this uncertain generation, can no longer hope for his life’s purposes before the war, and therefore, has lost his identity. This was an important scene because once Paul lost hope, he lost his will to live. Remarque can convey the loss of innocence theme through Paul’s death. “He had fallen forward and lay on the earth as though sleeping. Turning him over one saw that he could not have suffered long; his face had an expression of calm, as though almost glad the end had come” (296). Everything about this quote was different. For starters, this excerpt was on its page and the POV was switched from 1st to 3rd person in contrast to Remarque’s brutal, gruesome imagery used throughout his book, readers see a change in Remarque’s diction.

The imagery here is eerily peaceful. Paul was glad that he died, that the turmoil of war had ended war caused him to lose everyone he ever cared about including himself. Readers would expect a chapter dedicated to Paul’s death, but instead, receive one line “All Quiet on the Western Front”. Remarque chooses to end the story this way to dehumanize Paul as he dehumanizes others and to show that he is just one dead soldier out of millions. With this evidence, it can be concluded that the horrors of war shatter an individual, leaving the self and the soul disfigured.

The trauma of warfare entails a loss of purpose, humanity, emotion, and connection to society, all of which lead to a loss of identity. The brutality of war robbed Paul Bommer of all these essential connections, to his own identity, the artistic, innocent youth. By destroying the basic elements of Paul’s self, war has obliterated his innocence. This is war and turmoil. So long as war suppresses these basic elements of the self, the affected individuals remain shells of their former selves. The bottom line that Remarque wanted to convey with this writing is that war wreaks havoc and causes irreparable damage to one’s innocence.

In the novel All Quiet on the Western Front, the author portrays the true horrors and fragility of war through the experiences of young soldiers. The boys are all fighting for one country, and the novel completely shows the differences between the perceived image of war versus the true image of war. In the novel All Quiet on the Western Front, the novel critiques nationalism by demonstrating it to be an empty, two-faced philosophy device used to paint war as a glorious event and thus distracting the population from the true experience of war the unromantic vision of fear, meaninglessness, and butchery.

Nationalist propaganda is filled with hollow ideals that completely mislead the boys into the war. When Paul and the boys learn that a war is going to start, they all enroll quickly because of the nationalist fervor around them. Around them was a fever of nationalism that romanticized war. Nationalism made war look like an event where soldiers could go and come back as heroes. But soon after the real military life started, Paul’s opinion about war quickly changed. Paul thinks, “It’s all rot that they put in the war news about the good humor of the troops, how they are arranging dances almost before they are out of the front line. We don’t act like that because we are in good humor: we are in good humor because otherwise, we should go to pieces.’ To everyone who is not directly in the war,, the life of soldiers during the war is like a party, where every day they would be “dancing before the frontline.” The media even more romanticizes war by making it seem like the soldiers are happy to be there. A key word here is “rot: – rot here means that everything is spoiled’ indicating how the news about war and soldiers is false and spoiled, or “rot.” Everything is falsified and war is shown as cheerful which is far from the truth. The public’s separation from the reality of war makes the nationalist lie of the glorification of war possible and the leaders of nations use that as an advantage. The newspapers make it seem like the soldiers are in “good humor,” meaning cheerful, but the only reason the soldiers at least act like they are in “good humor” is that without at least trying to put a smile on their faces, they would be broken and “to pieces” because of the horrors of war. The boys were sure that their lives would never be the same. “With our young awakened eyes, we saw that the classical conception of the Fatherland held by our teachers resolved itself here into a renunciation of personality such as one would not ask of the meanest servants…We had fancied our task would be different, only to find we were to be trained for heroism as though we were circus ponies.” The “classical conception of the Fatherland” was the romanticized version of war and the true experience of war was something completely contrary to what everyone thought of it to be. When entering the war, everyone thought the soldiers were “to be trained for heroism”, and thus come back as trained “heroes.” But when reality set in, all the soldiers had to realize that each one of them was just as much as a “circus-pony,” merely a toy. Paul finds that the very nature of war is disrespectful to soldiers because it requires them to debase themselves completely. He feels that he and his comrades are not gloried defenders of their birthplace, but rather slaves to the political whims of their superiors, thus being “circus ponies”

Nationalism masks the only truth underlying war enemies and allies are all the same people, not unknown animals and the glorified idea of war and respect are demonstrated to be false – alongside the idea of a foe itself. In a war, foes are created because of nationalism, not because of true conflicts. “A word of command has made these silent figures our enemies; a word of command might transform them into our friends.” When Paul comes face-to-face with captured enemy prisoners, he fully realizes the arbitrary nature of war. These people are “silent figures” who have done nothing to him. When no one fighting has been wronged, then whether someone is your enemy depends on nothing more than a technicality. This is the lie of nationalism: two strangers killing each other over a plot of land is an expression of pride. In reality, their imminent deaths could be prevented with the shake of a stroke of a pen, or a “word of command” might switch around the whole situation and instead make the former enemies into “our friends.” Paul says, “A mountain in Germany cannot offend a mountain in France. Or a river, or a wood, or a field of wheat.” Here, Tjaden ridicules the idea that countries going to war with each other. When Tjaden questions how a war is started, Kropp explains that it is usually by one country offending the other. Tjaden retorts: “Then I haven’t any business here at all… I don’t feel myself offended.” The only people who have been offended are one or two politicians. The citizens weren’t involved in the dispute. A country is not a single entity with a single mind, but rather a collection of people doing their best to coexist, a fact which blind nationalism ignores. Due to the simple disputes of 2 politicians, an entire population goes against one another, and makes themselves enemies due to nationalism, when in reality, they have no reason to be mad at one another.

In conclusion, the novel All Quiet on the Western Front, the novel criticizes nationalism by demonstrating it to be an empty, two-faced philosophy device used to paint war as a glorious event and distract the population from the true experience of war. Though nationalism fuels an individual countryman’s pride and will to fight, it can falsify the harsh realities of war and romanticize a soldier’s gruel lifestyle.

War is an experience that has physical and psychological damage on its victims. Many soldiers who have fought in war often become disconnected from their past lives and their loved ones. They may act in ways that may not seem appropriate or normal to people who have not experienced war but these actions are just the ramifications of the horrors of the war. In chapter ten of All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Maria Remarque, Remarque shows how war makes soldiers act in extreme ways and how war can only be understood among the soldiers themselves, both of which convey Remarque’s theme that war dehumanizes soldiers so much that they become alienated from the rest of society.

In chapter ten, Remarque shows how the actions and decisions the soldiers make are difficult for civilians to understand which supports his argument that war dehumanizes soldiers and isolates them from society. At the beginning of chapter ten, Paul and his friends experience luxury for the first time in a long time. They have a shelter with mattresses and find fresh meat and vegetables. For once, they feel like regular people and feel a small semblance of humanity. While they are preparing the feast, Paul and his friends become in danger when the enemy sees the smoke from the chimney and starts firing shells. The shells “ke[pt] dropping closer and closer … around [them], [but they] still … cannot leave the grub in the lurch” (Remarque 235). Paul should be concerned about his safety but instead, he complains that “frying the pancakes is getting difficult” (Remarque 235). Regular civilians would have run away at the sound of a bomb since it is our human nature to flee from danger, but for soldiers, it is part of their daily lives. Remarque’s description of the war scene seems casual and normal since it is from Paul’s perspective. The tone suggests the shellings are just a mere interruption of the soldiers’ daily lives and they feel annoyed that the bombing is ruining their feast. Remarque shows that Paul and his friends have become so used to the bombing and danger that they would rather risk their lives to have real food for once. It may be difficult for normal people to understand why Paul chooses to risk his life for food, but for Paul and his comrades, real food reminds them of their humanity. They are determined to enjoy a meal that reminds them of their lives before the war. Later in the chapter, when Paul and Kropp are on the hospital train, Paul becomes too embarrassed to lie on the bed. The bed is covered with clean linen and Paul does not feel worthy to lay in it because he has lice. Paul asks the nurse to remove the bed covers because his “shirt has gone six weeks without being washed and is muddy” which makes him “feel like a pig” (Remarque 246). The nurse laughs at Paul and says that the least she could do for him is to wash the sheets after he uses them and jokes that even the lice can have a good day. In this scene, Remarque shows how war has dehumanized Paul so much that he feels he does not deserve a basic, clean bed. Remarque also shows how the nurse does not understand Paul’s reluctance to get in bed to show how people who do not experience war can not understand a soldier’s decisions. The nurse’s joking manner contrasts how ashamed Paul is, and shows how Paul feels isolated from society because she does not understand him. A similar instance occurs when Paul needs to use the bathroom. He feels embarrassed again to tell the nurse he needs to use the restroom. The nurse has to help Paul articulate his needs by asking him, “[l]ittle or big” (Remarque 249). Remarque shows again how Paul feels uncomfortable asking for the bathroom to demonstrate how war has impacted Paul to feel like he should not ask someone as “wonderful and sweet” (Remarque 248) as the nurse to use the bathroom because he is a lowly soldier. Again, the nurse does not understand Paul’s hesitance to ask for the bathroom as she simply asks “Little or big?” This scene is another example of how soldiers and civilians are separated because civilians have been psychologically impacted by war. In these scenes, Remarque uses Paul’s actions to show that soldiers may act in questionable ways, but that is only because war has dehumanized them.

Remarque further demonstrates how war dehumanizes soldiers leaving them isolated from society when he shows the comradeship between the soldiers. When Paul is in the hospital, he is placed in a room with Josef Hamacher. Josef covers for Paul when the hospital inspector asked who threw the bottle. Paul does not know Josef and is curious as to why he covered for him. When Josef says that he has a shooting license, they “all understand. Whoever has the shooting license can do whatever he pleases” (Remarque 253). Remarque shows a bond the soldiers have when they understand Josef’s reasoning immediately. Josef covering for a stranger is also an example of how soldiers are bonded together. Remarque also shows the importance of comradery when Albert’s leg is amputated. He becomes depressed and would rather shoot himself than live without a leg. Paul believes that “[i]f [Kropp] were not here with [them] he would have shot himself long ago” (Remarque 268). In the doctor’s eyes, he has just saved a life, but Kropp feels the opposite. Remarque shows how Albert feels worthless because, without his leg, he can no longer fight in war. Remarque also shows how if Paul had not been there for Kropp, Kropp may have not survived. The comradeship between the soldiers is all Kropp has left since the war has changed him forever. In both of these scenes, only the soldiers understand each other. The nuns do not understand why the soldiers do not want their prayers and would rather sleep, but among themselves, the soldiers do. Albert relies on the soldiers in the room after his amputation because no matter how clean and safe the hospital is, it would be a foreign environment without his friends. The war experienced has created a distance between the soldiers and society.

Remarque uses Paul, Kropp, and the other soldiers to “tell of a generation of men, who even though they may have escaped shells, were destroyed by war” (Remarque). The war has destroyed an entire generation of young men like Paul, leaving them “lost”—physically and psychologically damaged and unable to return to their past lives or society. Remarque writes that even if they manage to escape the shells, the experiences they have had permanently transformed them, leaving an unbridgeable divide between the young men who fight and the communities they have left behind.

Chapter 1: Why is it Ironic that Kantorek refers to the men as the “Iron Youth”?

The Irony in “Iron Youth”

Kantorek refers to the men as “Iron Youth” because they are willing to do anything for their country. The “Iron Youth” describes a strong German man, who will fight to protect his country. When the men have read what Kantorek wrote to them, they think, “ Youth! We are none of us more than twenty years old. But young? Youth? That is long ago. We are old folk” (Remarque 18). The men are bitter about the term that Kantorek refers them to because the term does not accurately describe what their experiences were in the war. The men discover quite quickly that they are no longer children and must mature because they have faced the hardships of defending their country, and they no longer believe that they are “iron youth”.

Chapter 2: Why are Kemmerich’s boots significant?

The significance of Kemmerich’s boots

Kemmerich’s boots have an extremely significant value because the boots represent the insignificance in human life when it comes to survival during the war. After Kemmerich dies, Paul “…give[s] [Müller] the boots…[and] they fit well they fit well” (Remarque 33). Paul collected all of Kemmerich’s belongings and gave the boots to Müller because he had asked for them. Müller had been asking for the boots ever since Kemmerich was admitted into the infirmary, and when Müller got them, he had forgotten that they had belonged to someone else. No one spent any time grieving their friend’s passing. Immediately after Kemmerich’s death, Müller wears the boots as if nothing happened, which shows that human life has no value during the war, but a pair of boots does.

Chapter 3: Why is it ironic that Paul and his friends refer to themselves as “stone-age veterans” when they compare themselves to the recruits?

The irony in “stone-age veterans”

It is ironic when Paul and his friends refer to themselves as “stone-age veterans” because they are only ages 19 through 20, and the reinforcements are the same age or older. As the recruits walk in, “Kropp nudges [Paul]: ‘Seen the infants?’”(Remarque 35). The men watch the recruits walk in, and they try to show off their masculinity and maturity towards them. Paul and his friends refer to themselves as the “stone-age veterans” because even though they are similar in age, the recruits have not seen what Paul and they have seen before. They haven’t seen the horrors of the war but Paul and his friends have suffered through all of it and have witnessed many horrifying things.

Chapter 4: How does the scene with the horses move beyond the mere death of an animal? Is there something symbolic or representative of a larger idea in this scene?

The Symbolism of Horses to Death

The death of the horses symbolizes the death of innocence in mankind. One comrade believes that horses have a soul of innocence and are beautiful creatures. A young comrade had been severely injured and couldn’t survive, he was just “‘Young [and] innocent——’”( Remarque 73). During an attack, a young comrade had been injured so badly, they needed to put him out of his misery. The horses symbolize all the young men fighting for their country. Most of them are 20 years old or younger and are full of innocence. They have barely experienced what life has to offer and will not be able to anymore.

Chapter 5: What dreams do the various members of the group have about going home? What do these dreams tell you about their characters? 2 chunks

The Dreams of the Comrades

The members talk about what dreams they have for their lives outside of the war. Detering dreams about “‘…harvesting’” when he gets home (Remarque 80). He is worried about his farm back home because his wife is the only one looking out for it. Detering dreams about going back to his old life, working and doing something he enjoys at the same time. His dreams show us that he is human and has the same desires as anyone else fighting in the war.

Unlike Detering’s dream to go back home and work, Kropp dreams about going back home and doing nothing but getting drunk. The men tell him to respond seriously, but Kropp says “What else should a man do?” (Remarque 77). Kropp has no hope for when he returns home, he believes that he should just do nothing because he’s going to die anyway. Some of the other members have hope for when they go home, but Kropp thinks that he should drink and do nothing worth his time because everyone dies one way or another.

Chapter 6: To what level are the men reduced during an attack?

Wild Beasts during an Attack

The men stoop down to a level of greed when it comes to life because, on the war front, the goal is who can survive. The men “…have become wild beasts. [They] do not fight, [they] defend [themselves] against annihilation” (Remarque 113). Paul says that they have become wild beasts now because they no longer sit and wait helplessly, they attack and kill if it means they will make it out alive. The men have never been greedy during the war; they share food, and supplies, and give each other support. Now they are defending themselves against death and have become greedy with life because they want to survive.

Chapter 7: Why does Paul say he should never have gone on leave?

Paul’s Regret Going on Leave

Paul’s coming home had brought all these feelings and memories back to him, making him feel emotionally unstable. Paul is finally at home with his family, “But a sense of strangeness will not leave [him]” (Remarque 160). He feels strange being back at home because now he faces reality, with his mom being ill and his family not being able to make enough. Coming back home put a pause in his life on the front. At home, he feels a rush of emotions coming to him because on the front they turned their emotions off to focus on fighting but now at home his mother’s illness makes him sad, and speaking with Kemmerich’s mother as well.

Chapter 8: What is wrong with Paul’s mother? What is the author’s purpose in including his mother’s condition?

Paul’s Mother’s Condition

Paul’s mother was diagnosed with cancer and the doctors are unsure if it can be cured. Paul’s father doesn’t want to ask how much surgery would cost because then “‘— the surgeon might take it amiss and that would not do; he must operate on Mother”(Remarque 197). They are unsure of the cost of surgery but could not even think to ask the doctor because he might back out of doing it. Paul’s father works so hard, even when he is tired and overworked, but he doesn’t know if they have enough money to pay for the surgery, and that makes them feel bitter. Paul wishes he could help them, but there is nothing he can do because people look down on poor people.

Chapter 9: Why is Paul so affected by Duval’s death?

Duval’s effect on Paul

Paul kills an enemy man, Gérard Duval, for the first time and is overwhelmed with guilt. Paul repeated over and over again “‘I want to help you, Comrade…’” to Duval (Remarque 220). Paul brutally stabbed an enemy man, who fell into a pit that Paul was hiding in and was guilt-ridden about what he had just done. Paul had never felt this way before. He kept trying to keep Duval alive and begged for forgiveness. This guilt changed the way Paul feels about killing; he never wanted to kill him, and he never wanted to be enemies either, he just wants everything to be over.

Chapter 10: What role does God/Religion play in this novel?

Religion to the Comrades

God and religion were played by an absence of faith within the soldiers. At the Catholic Hospital, the sisters were saying prayers for the men but the men kept telling them to “‘Shut the door’”(Remarque 251). The sisters say prayers every morning, with all the doors open, so everyone can get their share of prayers. The men have faced the deaths of their friends and comrades, and there has never been a God to save them. They had never said prayers to God because such horrific things were happening, how did they even know he existed or was helping them?

Chapter 11: How and why does Kat’s death impact Paul so greatly? What larger ideas does Kat’s death help the reader better understand about war?

Kat’s Death

The death of Kat impacted Paul so greatly because they were the last two men to survive everything they had been through together. Kat was one of Paul’s only remaining friends, so “When Kat is taken away [he] will not have one friend left”(Remarque 288). Kat was always there for Paul; when Paul was a young recruit, he looked out for him and gave him extra food so Paul could not bear to see his close friend go too easily. In a way, dying seems to be an upgrade rather than living during the war because now Paul has no one and he feels he doesn’t have anything to live for in his life.

Stanislaus Katczinsky

He is resourceful (can scrounge up sustenance in remote places), efficient, smart, and reliable, the boys listen/look up to him and trust his judgment.

“I’m sure that if he were planted down in the middle of the desert, in half an hour he would have gathered together a supper of roast meat, dates, and wine.” (Remarque, {33})

[His words] cut clean through the thought. (page 54)

We see how in different situations, the boys look at him to see how things might go. He has been in the front far longer than them, they notice his mood changes while they are at the front and are usually accurate.

He hates the fact that they are making kids fight and lose their lives in a war they have no business in. He sees no use in it. “Give them the same grub and equal pay, the war would be over in a day(page 41)

Very smart, and says intellectual things for just a shoemaker. (page 43)

He likes to talk.

He and Paul are very close despite the age gap. The war doesn’t care about age. “A glance at Kat – a glance from him to me; understand one another.

He would let a solider of his pain but not a horse(63)

He still gets nervous (65)

Such a kid, young innocence (pg 73)

He cares for these boys as they are his. Paul has a son-like devotion to Kat

Towards the end, he becomes a bit more morbid.

We do not hear much from him until he dies. He loses his love of talking perhaps.

He changes because he thinks too much. He thinks more deeply about the war and what it means and that makes him sad.

I connect to Kat in the sense that I too stop and think (too much) he detests the war and hates that young lives are being lost.

If he hadn’t been made a nice officer, the theme of comradeship would have held less water. He is there to show an old person’s view of things, that they aren’t all bad. It could have been a very old vs young theme. If he wasn’t smart or resourceful, he wouldn’t have held much respect from the boys, and wouldn’t have been close with Paul. Only after his death do we see that Paul really mourns, with out his character, we might have seen Paul as very indifferent to death, but he isn’t, he has to be so he doesn’t go indane but he lets himself break for Kat.

Contributes to the theme of a senseless war and comradeship. The ideals of war, he fights with a heart like any of them, he has a great comfort with the ideals of war.

With his difference in age and maturity. the war has made them equals, brothers almost. He was some influence on there thoughts whenever whenever they talked about the war.

Character development and analysis

Chapters discussed: Chapters 1-11

Stanislaus ‘Kat’ Katczinsky is known for his intelligent mind and the father-like relationship he cultivates with the boys. He is respected as a leader among the men in his squad due to his height in age, maturity, and knowledge of the front. He is resourceful and reliable, hence why Paul acknowledges how lucky he is to have him at his back. Kat is very well-spoken as “[his words] cut clean through the thought.” (Remarque, 54), and his take on the war greatly influences what the other men think as they respect and trust his instincts. Kat is a scavenger; he can find food, clothes, and other necessary supplies in places others can’t. He has a sixth sense about the outcome of a battle, making him a treasured asset to Paul and the other boys. They follow his lead, like in the case of Ginger the cook. It took him challenging the cook to serve them their meal before the other men began to back him up in getting their fair share of rations.

Kat valued life and although he fought as was his duty, didn’t agree with the ideals of war. We see this within the conversation amongst the men about the senselessness of the war, and those who gain from the bloodshed. He says with contempt that “there must be some people to whom the war is useful.” (205). Having taken on a similar role of a guardian to the boys, it pained him to watch them lose their innocence and to see the war tear them apart inside out. As Paul said “[they] no longer young men…[they] were eighteen years old, and [they] had just begun to love the world and to love being in it, but we had to shoot at it. The first shell to land went straight for [their] hearts.” (88) We can tell how much Kat loves them, as he doesn’t refer to them as boys, but as comrades.

Kat’s character is developed throughout the book as his love of talking is seen less. It seems like the ‘kat’ got his tongue as the book progressed as there are fewer conversations he speaks in. This happened because he let the war and the hostility of it all get to him. They could cope with all the horror as long as they didn’t think about it much and relive the scenes in their heads. He got too deep in his thoughts, let them consume him and he lost his way a bit at the end. Seeing the boys die one by one throughout the war took a toll on him and he began to lose hope. His words become a lot more morbid towards the end.

Readers can easily connect with this character in the sense that sometimes when experiencing traumatic events, people tend to get in over their heads and start to brew hate from within, comparable to how Kat held the higher officials in great contempt. It could turn into an unhealthy spiral. Another factor in this character that makes him relatable is the way he takes Paul and the other boys under his wing. People have that hero instinct in them and always want to help the helpless. When they were first sent to the front, they must have been just like the recruits; clueless. Yet, Kat takes them not as subordinates but as equals and teaches them all they need to know to survive. Most readers, just like Kat, are against the ideals of having a war and wasting young lives.

Kat plays a huge influence on the novel’s theme. If he hadn’t been very dependable and helpful, Paul would have never made such a tight bond with him, weakening the story’s theme of the trenches bringing everyone down as equals. With all the time they spent together, Kat and Paul were able to form this unique bond that they wouldn’t have had otherwise if they had met outside of the war due to their age gap. Their unique friendship is obvious when Paul mentions “a glance at Kat – a glance from him to me; understand one another” (51). Another reason for his character was to contribute to the motif of a senseless war. He fights with heart and bravery just like the rest of them but is in great contempt for the people who started this war but are making the wrong people fight. He wished they weren’t forced to kill and die and thought if “[given] the same grub and equal pay, the war would be over in a day (41). He just wanted peace to reign over all the bloodshed and it is a shame he didn’t live to see it happen. Any difference in character could have had a different effect on the book. If he hadn’t been written to be kind of heart, the theme of comradeship would have held less water because he shows that friendship can be bred anywhere and among any type of person. Kat is there to show an old person’s view of the war, and that they aren’t all bad. It could have been a very ‘old vs young’ theme if he didn’t become close to Paul and his fellow soldiers. If he wasn’t smart or resourceful, he wouldn’t have held much respect from the boys, and wouldn’t have been close with Paul.

His death is an abrupt end to an already depressing chapter. By then, he seems to know he is dying as when Paul speaks of meeting again once the war is over, he doesn’t attempt to give an address or number. He makes no big profession of wisdom and his last words are just words. At war, the soldiers are left to leave their lives in the hands of Chance so they can’t prepare for their death, they don’t know their last words will be their last. With his sixth sense, he sensed his time had come and wanted to go in peace in a place where there was none. Paul might have learned to guard himself against his emotions, but it is obvious that Kat had left a mark in his life and he would do anything to get his friend back.

“War is the greatest plague that can afflict humanity, it destroys religion, it destroys states, it destroys families” (Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr). During World War I many people joined the war to have money to provide for their family, not knowing what they were getting themselves into. The “Lost Generation” was what people called those who grew up during the war, which played a vital role in not just the ways that they were viewed by others, but the way they thought of themselves. In the novel All Quiet on the Western Front, by Erich Maria Remarque, war degraded the innocence of youth into animal-like beings. Paul, the main character, sacrifices everything in his life, for nothing in return, except a life of horror and misery. Throughout the war Paul and his comrades lose their sense of hope, their sense of humanity, and sense of purpose in the world.

Initially, before Paul and his friends joined the war, they wanted to get out of school as fast as possible and longed for the respect associated with being older. To their schoolmaster, they are considered “Iron Youth”, but they don’t like that association. During their first few weeks in the war, Paul and his friend realize that joining the war may not have been the smartest choice after all. Trying to cope with their longing for home and their innocent childhood, Paul exclaims “Our early life is cut off from the moment we came here, and that without our lifting a hand. We often try to look back on it and to find an explanation, but never quite succeed” (Remarque 19). What might sound like a good experience at first, undoubtedly negatively affected them in return. When Paul and his friends joined the military, without doing a thing, they were stripped of their identity and connection to the things that they loved. That has always been the notion of the military, but when trapped by blind nationalism from their schoolmaster, there was no turning back. Joining the war is not an easy choice to make and the fact that Paul didn’t realize how he was tricked by false information, truly takes a toll on him throughout the war. Paul struggles to find the sole reason why he joined the military, cutting himself off from his past and trying to cope with his life choices. This is the reason why nationalism played a key role in the increase of military enlistment during World War I people didn’t realize the truth about what others were telling them regarding the war and joining the military. The people whom Paul once considered to be his friends are now his comrades in war. When Paul and his comrades are reflecting on their time in the military, Paul says, “We are not youth any longer. We don’t want to take the world by storm. We are fleeing. We fly from ourselves. From our life…We are cut off from activity, from striving, from progress. We believe in such things no longer, we believe in war” (87). At this very moment, Paul and his comrades realize that they are not youth anymore. Growing up as an innocent child is about striving and dreaming about the future. Now in war, the only future that they can think about is surviving another day. That sense of hope for Paul and his comrades is no longer, only thinking about the ideals of survival. As Paul said, “We don’t want to take the world by storm”(87), rather one day at a time. This idea of not thinking about the future truly holds Paul and his comrades back from any sense of hope. This causes them to fall into a hopeless daily cycle and experience the horrific ideas and philosophies of war. Before enlisting in the war, they were just starting to love their lives and had hopes and dreams for the future, but once they got their guns, they had no choice, but to shoot their hopes and dreams into pieces. Now, all comrades are the same, with little that sets them apart, constantly trying to grasp and cherish the last bit of their identity that they still have. This is what keeps these comrades from emotionally surviving the war every day. Without one spark to fuel their hope, they cannot hold up during the war, nor maintain their sanity.

After being sucked into the horrors of war, Paul and his comrades lose their attachment to their family and their grasp of humanity. Sitting in the trenches when no shots are ordered to be fired, all they can do is sit still and grapple with their emotions, attempting to cope with the horrors that fester their inner spirit. This moment of silence is especially hard for Paul because he constantly recollects life’s hardships, which takes an enormous toll on Paul’s inner self because this is something that he doesn’t usually do often. Reflecting on the past and trying to accept what he can’t recover from his once innocent self. Paul acknowledges the truth about himself and his comrades “We are forlorn like children, and experienced like old men, we are crude and sorrowful and superficial – I believe we are lost” (123). At this point in Paul’s life in the war, he feels that he no longer has a sense of purpose. After being heavily tormented by the war, Paul and his comrades are completely worn out and they believe that there is nothing that they haven’t seen before. Paul and his comrades have experienced more death in one day, than others not in the war experience in a lifetime. Though these boys are young, they feel old, due to all that they have gone through and the intense strength and wisdom that is needed to survive the war. To Paul, his conglomeration of experiences can only be described as “lost”, which ironically directly correlates with the term that others called these types of comrades during the war, “The Lost Generation”. Although it is a simple term, Paul and his comrades truly feel that they are lost and are incapable of breaking free from the horrors of war, which masks their identity, the only thing that encourages them to fight one more day. By now, Paul and his comrades do not care about the life stories that they have stripped from their enemies and no longer see their enemies as human. Paul recognizes that “We have become wild beasts…we can destroy and kill, to save ourselves, and be revenged…If your father came over with them you would not hesitate to fling a bomb into him” (Pn). Paul and his comrades now are no longer truly immersed in the idea of war, but rather in the ideals of survival. To them, survival is greater than the idea of family or anything else that they used to cherish and love. They are in the mindset that they can’t properly distinguish between another being and their own family or comrade. It has come to the point when this blindness is affecting not just the way that they look at the war, but the way that they view their purpose in the world.

After “living the war” for a great deal of time, Paul and his surviving comrades feel as if they know nothing except for war. This prevents them from continuing their life from before the war, as they are constantly trying to find a motive and a purpose for continuing to live. By the time Paul returns home on leave during the war, he feels no connection to the things that he previously loved. Paul currently is unable to physically recognize a place that he can call “home” and feel that he is safe and at ease. Paul time and time again tries to convince himself that he is not currently at war and that everything is okay when Paul “say[s] over to [him]self: ‘You are at home; you are at home.’ But a sense of strangeness will not leave me, I can find nothing of myself in all these things. There is a distance, a veil between us” (pn). Although coming home for a break from war might sound like a good thing to most, it feels like torture to Paul. Coming back to what Paul once called home is harder for Paul than actually staying in the dreadful trenches. Coming “home” and distancing himself from his family of comrades that he feels a true connection to, is the hardest for Paul because in war he and his childhood friend all are experiencing the same thing. Coming home, no one can understand or even imagine what Paul went through. This left Paul sitting alone and attempting to cope with his overflowing emotions and experiences, having no one to empathize with or support him. What Paul once considered a safe space, now feels no different than the dreadful and mellow atmosphere in the trenches. Paul cannot recognize that he is currently not in the war and feels a disconnect from his earlier life before the war. The feeling of not belonging results in a feeling of no purpose in the world and no desire to live life. Having this stranger-like perception, constantly diminishes and corrodes Paul’s connection to his family, distancing himself from what he felt used to matter most. By the time Paul is the last one left from his comrades whom he felt a true connection with, Paul is left with mountains on his shoulders trying to find one little spark of hope. At this point, Paul is helpless and feels that he has no meaning or purpose to live. Paul would much rather die than live with these horrors that are engraved into the roots of his identity. This scar is one that he will have to live with every day, a tragic experience that can never be undone. Paul lies down and says “Let the months and years come, they can take nothing from me, they can take nothing more. I am so alone, and so without hope that I can confront them without fear” (295). At this point, when Paul lost everything and has hit rock bottom point in his life, he demonstrates that he doesn’t even have a spark of hope inside him, due to giving his life and inner spirit solely to the war. Paul feels that nothing more can be taken from him because he has nothing left to give. Paul has lost everything and at this very moment, he realizes that his hopes for his future before the war, can now never be truly fulfilled. Whatever motivation to push forward he ever had, has now been drained, never to be regained again. Paul no longer fears war because the enemy cannot take anything else from him, a horror he once dreaded.

From the whole spirited “iron youth” to the embittered “stone-age-veterans” of the lost generation, Paul has lost everything in life and all he got in return was living in his misery. “It can take years to mold a dream. It takes only a fraction of a second for it to be shattered” (Mary E. Pearson). Every dream Paul had ever had, had been taken away from him the moment he stepped on the front. War has stripped Paul and his comrades of their humanity, transforming them into animal-like beings, willing to kill their friend for survival. War changes people and that is a fact. Paul and his comrades no longer can live their lives without a struggle, due to their forever-taken innocence, hope, and feeling of purpose in the world.

Work Cited

1. “War, What Is It Good For? – How Should Christians Deal With War?” Hope 103.2, 19 Dec. 2018, hope1032.com.au/stories/open-house/2018/war-what-is-it-good-for-how-should-christians-deal-with-war/.
2. Forman, Gayle. If I Stay. Penguin Random House LLC, 2019.
3. Pearson, Mary. The Kiss of Deception: the Remnant Chronicles; Book 1. Square Fish, Henry Holt, and Company, 2015.