In the first eight chapters of the book All Quiet on the Western Front, there is a noted demonstration of apathy towards death and gore from our main character as well as his comrades that almost borders on disinterest. This is shown especially in Chapter 6, where Paul’s company is absolutely surrounded by violence, death, and gore, of which they treat with a degree of mundanity that, today, would be incredibly concerning.
Is this a conscious decision from the soldiers at the forefront of the war? How has this sort of desensitization happened, and who is to blame? Will this ultimately harm them, or is this protective measure beneficial towards them?
Madi, thank you for creating these questions for All Quiet on the Western Front chapters 6-8. I wanted to respond to one of your questions with my thoughts before we all come together to discuss in class:
Is [apathy towards death] a conscious decision from the soldiers at the forefront of the war?
Paul and the other soldiers certainly demonstrate a disinterest in the death of their comrades, as well as in death itself, and while I do not believe this to be a conscious decision, I believe he is conscious of when this apathy is turned on/off. Paul, the narrator himself, reflects, “We are insensible, dead men, who through some trick, some dreadful magic, are still able to run and to kill” (Remarque 116). Almost as if he is being involuntarily controlled, he is aware of his mundane attitude toward the death and destruction, however, he runs, hides, ducks, and kills at a machine-like frequency that is rather incomprehensible to those of us that have never been involved in such violence. He operates like this, not because he consciously wants to, but because he has already booted up a stark indifference, which he did do, consciously. He even expresses, after the fact, a wariness at being alone with his thoughts, because he knows that apathy-mode is engaged, and could be disengaged by conscious reflection (Remarque 119). The obvious apathy carried out by Paul, is therefore, what seems to me to be, a survival mechanism that is dependent upon the time and place in which he finds himself.
I think these are not only good questions to keep in mind while reading but to think about in real life. I, and likely many of us, are fortunate to have never experienced the horrors of war. Obviously, all trauma can coexist and one doesn’t lessen the impacts of another individual’s but some of the descriptions in the story are truly horrifying even with less detailed descriptions.
It is hard to say how it will affect the characters over the course of the story (and beyond, as I really hope they survive) as each person’s response to trauma can appear differently. When Paul is at home in Chapter 7, we see how he has been changed not only by the war but his repression of emotions. It definently is seen by him, at least how I interpreted it, as a protective measure simply to help him cope and return to the war without completely breaking down.
All in all, I really feel bad for all the characters and it brings to mind the lasting effects of the horrors of war.
Hi Madi,
Thank you for your questions. I often wonder the the same things as I continue to read the text. I think that Paul is making a conscious decision to look at the dead and think of death with such mundanity. I believe he does to keep him from going mad, as he claims him and the troops are in good humor because they do not have another choice (Remarque 140). From the September 3rd period of reading, Paul definitely had the most vivid accounts of the death within battle. He heard a man yelling for ways on end, one of the new recruits attempt to flee (or commit suicide, and there are piles on unburied bodies everywhere. Haie also suffers a major injury to his bag, and is also presumed to die. This likely had a major affect on Paul’s mental state while he was in battle.
Paul tends to internalize all these feelings, but he takes it out on people like Kantorek in the chapter. His feelings spur resentment, anger, and inability to connect with those in his family sector when he since returned home. I believe that Paul is attempting to protect himself from the thoughts of the dead, but knows he may never be able to process this war. Truthfully, and from a mental health perspective, Paul talking to a professional seems the surest way to rehabilitate his condition.
Best,
SS
I don’t believe that the soldier’s “disinterest” towards death is a conscious decision. I think that this lack of feeling has almost become a necessity in order for survival. Not only are the soldier’s lives at risk on the front, but their minds are at risk as well. Paul noted several times throughout the novel that many of his peers, especially new recruits, tended to go mad after just a few short weeks. The level of death and gore they were surrounded by is quite literally unimaginable in modern day. Their disassociation from the grim parts of the war allowed them to maintain their focus on literally the one thing they had: rations. I think the easiest answer to the question ‘who is to blame’ would be the people that sent/encouraged them to go off to war. Honestly, I believe anyone would turn to this mentality after just a short time at the front.
Hey Madi!
I want to start off by saying that I don’t think the disinterest is a conscious thought. It is definitely something that unknowingly has been engraved and trained into them. It’s something we see in society today, more specifically what it means to be a man, and what factor does emotion play into that, and how emotions are a sign of weakness. I honestly do not know who to blame other than society and societal standards. I feel as if the blame can be put on those in charge but the argument can be made that someone has to defend Germany and someone has to defend France. But even tho that is a conscious decision, it all falls back on how the world as a whole treats emotions in men. Lastly, I definitely believe this will and has harmed them. If you as an individual have to get to the point of desensitizing your emotions to do work, or to function that is already harm in itself.