Literature,
War and Peace
By Rocio
Campos,
TFF Peace Antenna
Introduction
All of us who share an interest in peace almost
instinctively turn to study war in the search for answers
that may open our ways to find alternatives, solutions
and lessons that may be translated into nonviolence,
absence of war and justice. But from where is it that we
obtain, construct and weave our images of war? The use of
history textbooks, television broadcasts and newspaper
articles may be useful to a certain extent, but if our
expectations and views ought to be challenged and
enriched we should also consider the images of war and
peace offered by literature.
The Bhagavad-Gita, the exquisite text of
Hindu culture, has endured for centuries communicating a
deep understanding of mortality through the dialogue
between Krishna and Arjuna. The profound and manifold
teachings of the Gita can be taken to other cultures and
contexts and can certainly be brought to assist our
present concern for war and peace. As we explore the
causes, values, logic and rewards of war, the Gita
exquisitely suggests that war reside in the triad of
greed, anger and desire, whereas in the triad of peace
charity takes the place of greed, lucidity of anger and
faith of desire.
If these are the values of war and peace how can we
reconcile them? When does human imagination becomes
corrupt?
Virginia Woolf would argue that this happens when we
sell our brains for the sake of money, fame and praise.
In Three Guineas she turns to chastity,
poverty, derision and freedom as the values that can
enable an individual to "join the professions and yet
remain uncontaminated by them; rid them of their
possessiveness, their jealousy, their pugnacity, their
greed. You can use them to have a mind of your own and a
will of your own. And you can use that mind and will to
abolish the inhumanity, the beastliness, the horror, the
folly of war"(Woolf, 83).
In the book Abolishing Wars, Elmer N.
Engstrom addresses the question of whether the society's
acceptance level of violence at the interpersonal or
intergroup level is rising, falling, or unchanging
(Engstrom, 101). This question reveals not only a
contemporary concern for violence but for human
responsibility toward violence, which may be helpfully
assisted by the questions, reflections, and impressions
derived from poems, stories or novels related to war.
According to Simone Weil in the use of violence there
is no room for thinking. The conditions created in a
violent setting inhibit lucidity. She establishes a
connection between the act of killing and the fear of
dying. Every individual knows the feeling of fear, which
is usually linked to the fear for the future and more
precisely to the fear to die. "The future may bring with
it the realization of our desires, hopes, and dreams. But
it also inspires us with terror. We are tortured with
anxiety about the unknown future [...] The future
may or may not bring with it disappointment, suffering
and misfortune. But certainly, and to everyone, it brings
death. And fear of the future, natural to everyone, is,
in the first place, fear of impending death. Death is
determined for everyone in this world, it is our
fate"(Berdayaev, 422, 423).
Those who kill do it because they do not want to be
killed and also because they do not want to die. To kill
is more than an act to survive but a desire to anticipate
the future through the defeat of death. Contrary to this,
nonviolence offers the willingness to suffer or even to
die without posing the threat to kill. "Nonviolence is
based on the refusal to do harm. It is renunciation of
the will to kill or to damage so that the only test of
truth is action based on the refusal to do
harm"(King, 246). Gandhi's satyagraha distinguishes
and empowers the nonviolent willingness to suffer above
the violent willingness to kill.
This paper will examine the forces that determine war,
in general, and gender violence, in particular, as
opposed to those that determine nonviolence and peace
through the creative and revealing formulations,
interpretations and questions drawn from literature.
Hence the hypothesis to be proved and discussed here are
as follows:
i) The private origin of literature bounds the
imagination with the public world through the reader's
introspection, thinking and analysis of the mental
barriers and social restraints that may blind us to
comprehend reality.
ii) The symbols and language found in literature offer
valuable elements that engage the reader to learn about
the values, causes and rewards of war, the appeal of
violence, the psychology of enemy-making and the meaning
of death and suffering in war.
iii) The triad of anger greed and desire motivates war
whereas peace moves in the triad of lucidity, faith and
charity.
Accountability of
an audience
Literature engages the reader with responsibility. As
we follow the mental war films as described by Bao Ninh,
they no longer belong solely to the writers. The reader
becomes witness of another testimony and therefore
responsible to make questions, to find answers and do
whatever is in his/her power not to contribute to the
reproduction of such mental war films. Readers are not
passive spectators, but active participants of the
reality that is conveyed through the literary
revelations, which exist not only to carry a message, but
also to encourage critical thinking and
introspection.
Joe Boham is the main character of the novel
Johnny Lost His Gun by Dalton Trumbo
published in 1939. "Minus four limbs and his face blown
away by a shell, Joe is deaf, dumb, and blind, and must
lift and drop his head against a hospital pillow to tap
out (in Morse code) his scathing message to all of
mankind. He asks that the wretched trunk of his body be
placed in a glass case and taken around the world on
display" (Hallock, 51).
He wants to exhibit his mutilated body as a symbol and
testimony of the fate of war, and build guilt and remorse
in the minds and speeches of the leaders who declare and
justify war. The case of Joe Bohman leads us to believe
that in modern times there needs to be more moral
justification of war than in ancient times. Probably,
because modern societies are better equipped to be aware
of the effects of war even if they take place in the
antipodes.
Moreover, twentieth century societies are also
increasingly affected by wars even if they take place in
the antipodes. Bohman is also responding with the image
of his body to the images and rhetoric used by
governments or political leaders who abuse the resource
of dehumanizing the faces of the enemies in order to
fight them. Cartoonists play an important part in this
practice as they show countries, ethnic groups and/or
heads of states as monsters or animals. The use of
dehumanizing images is part of the elaborate process of
constructing enemies and therefore justifies war through
the destruction or subordination of the enemy.
The Nazis compared the Jews with rats and the diseases
spread by rats. The horrific use of hate-propaganda makes
it easier to fight someone that is considered or viewed
below the human condition. Hence, Bohman is dehumanizing
war, as he alerts the reader of the nonviolent means to
protest against the causes and effects of war.
This dilemma was also crucial for Siegfried Sassoon
(1886-1967), a poet and soldier during World War I who
protested against war in his Declaration.
Pat Barker's novel Regeneration deals with
the time Sassoon spend at Craiglockhart War Hospital,
where we read his protest against war showing his
position against the governments that impose them without
explaining the goals. Sassoon like Arjuna in the Gita,
individually refuses their duty to kill and as they do,
they encounter the contradictory power and presence of
the institutions or belief-systems that ratify the duty
to fight.
To face a personal anti-war neurosis or protest poses
a series of difficulties when one belongs to larger
community or society engaged in war. Death and suffering
attached to violence in general and to war in particular
have always accompanied humankind. How to deal with this
at individual and collective levels poses different
challenges. Keeping in mind Engstrom's concern we can say
that to deny violence at an interpersonal level usually
demands greater courage since it usually challenges the
values of a greater system where enemies are legitimate
and the triad of war is purposeful.
For the individual soldiers who suffer the violence of
war in the trenches or civilians who meet violence in the
streets, death and suffering acquire very concrete
dimensions. The effect of these experiences at an
intergroup level may result in rising, falling, or
unchanging acceptance of violence depending on the
collective values that influence the individuals who form
the collectivities.
The following poem entitled Despair was written in
1966 by a Duc Thanh, a Vietnamese soldier who describes
his gloom before the destructive power of violence that
has wrapped him in the collective failure of war, while
he remains against the unchanging acceptance of
violence.
"Unbearable heat this
afternoon.
The wind blows dry and hot.
The trees are withered,
Their branches dry,
their leaves yellow
I grieve for the roses that blossom only to die.
I blame the universe that revolves.
The wheel of life that turns so skillfully
And dazes me with longing.
If spring would come to stay,
The bees and flowers would never part
Who could be so unfaithful
To keep the bees from their flower?
Only those who believe money and power
Determine our fate
Never think of me in this unjust way"
(Nguyen, 33).
In the Enormous Room E. E. Cummings
takes the reader to a co-educational station in France
during the First World War, where he faces the
bureaucracy of war and challenges his views and
stereotypes as he meets prisoners from different
countries.
"Up to the time of my little visit to La Fert, I had
innocently supposed that in referring to women as the
weaker sex a man was strictly within his rights. La Fert,
if it did nothing else for my intelligence, rid it of
this overpowering error" (Cummings, 120,121).
To examine the origin of our stereotypes and
prejudices related to nationalities and gender represents
a challenge to understand others and see the humanity and
potentiality of charity, lucidity and faith within the
human condition. The experiences of Cummings in France
and of Sassoon in Craiglockhart expose the
importance of renovation, rehabilitation and
reconstruction of communication, sexuality and
stereotypes in order to understand war and consequently
find peace.
Literature can assist us in this path as the bridge
that connects our images of war with renovating meanings,
rehabilitating alternatives and reconstructing skills.
Creative writers and creative audiences can use
literature to prevent war by protecting culture and
intellectual liberty.
Why do we need
enemies?
In the Homer's Iliad we can find the
undisguised brutality of war where, "neither victors nor
vanquished are admired, scorned, or hated. Almost always,
fate and the gods decide the changing lot of battle.
Within the limits fixed by fate, the gods determine with
sovereign authority victory and defeat. It is always they
who provoke those fits of madness, those treacheries,
which are forever blocking peace; war in their true
business, their only motives, caprice and malice"(Weil,
32).
In the Iliad, the gods kindle human imagination to
conquer and defeat the enemy and the calamities of
destruction blind the combatants with the desire of
annihilating the enemy. The psychology of enemy-making is
one of the guiding principles of war. "Rigidly organized
struggle groups may actually search for enemies with the
deliberate purpose or the unwitting result of maintaining
unity and internal cohesion. Such groups may actually
perceive an outside threat although no threat is present.
Under conditions yet to be discovered, imaginary threats
have the same group-integrating function as real
threats"(Coser, 110).
The necessity to have enemies evokes the capacity to
replace or invent them. Here human imagination can be
manipulated toward the search and materialization of
threats in the form of enemies that consequently need to
be destroyed.
Hence the correlation of threats to identifiable
enemies in the form of nations, communities, or groups
explains the nuances between the exaggeration of a real
danger, the attraction of a particular enemy and the
capacity to invent a threatening entity. During the Cold
War, for example, the world was clearly divided into the
capitalist and the communist blocs. The enemies were
clearly identifiable and with them the economic interests
and political rivalries. The guerrillas that were fought
during these years were to a great extent supported by
the United States in order to boycott socialist movements
in Latin America and to allow conservative dictatorships
to rule under the capitalist umbrella.
After the Berlin Wall came down, there was uncertainty
about who would be the new enemy. The economic resources
and political power of the United States turned to
drug-dealing and migration as the new 'evils' to fight.
What to say about Milosevic in ex-Yugoslavia and the
extraterritorial, military interventions in the name of
democracy that have not ceased?
These questions gain a larger meaning if we bring to
the surface Thich Nhat Hanh's Being Peace
and reflect upon the effect ideologies have in our daily
actions. As we follow an ideology we are taking sides and
directly or indirectly assume that other individuals,
communities or nations do not belong to us and may
deserve death, threat or brutal minimization. To what
extent are the words, attitudes or messages that we
convey to our immediate others a result of larger
paradigms or ideologies?
A contemporary of Confucius, Lao-tzu originally wrote
the Tao Te Ching or The Book of the
Immanence of the Way. It is extremely useful to
clarify the interconnectedness of events. In the
translation by Stephen Mitchell we find that war is an
imposition that goes against the given nature of things,
one that burdens an arbitrary and destructive division
between those who deserve to live and those who deserve
to die. "When man interferes with the Tao, the sky
becomes filthy, the earth becomes depleted, the
equilibrium crumbles, creatures become extinct"
(Mitchell, 39).
Weapons as tools of fear are also vehicles of
destruction that embrace the potentiality of having
someone to destroy. The willingness to kill is a violent
imposition to the willingness to die. War is where the
harmony of the circulatory system is chaotically
aggressed as blood scatters in the battlefields,
reminding of the brutality of the chaos. To impose fear
and violence over other human beings - individually or
collectively - by the use of arms is to alter the
equilibrium of life.
However, how many times have countries not invaded,
fought and destroyed the equilibrium of others' lives for
the greed of their natural resources and territories? How
aware are we of the fact that in destroying the other we
are also destroying a part of ourselves? It is almost
evident to assume that such greed sooner or later
transforms into anger and then into desire to annihilate
those that violated, invaded and depleted a society of
their soil, people and dignity. Thus, the effects of
preparing to defend and attack 'the other' are seen in
the misfortune of having an enemy.
Nevertheless, to have an enemy is not seen as a
misfortune by those with political leadership
responsibility. Enemies are carefully designed as
doorways to blame others for our own mistakes, as escape
valves to spill our own faults on others and even to
justify power. The victimization of the enemy behaves as
a reward to the confusion of war.
Womanizing the
enemy
In periods of political violence, war, or revolution,
some women who have not been directly involved in the
struggle are imprisoned and tortured only because they
are wives, mothers, daughters, or sisters of the
combatants. Moreover, sexual abuse in the form of rape
dramatically increases in times of war. The psychological
trauma of war, that victimizes men as soldiers, often
leads them to victimize women sexually.
One of the effects of war in soldiers is the fear to
loose connection with all sensual being in the world.
This fear in turn translates into a desire to dominate or
possess women as a symbol of the missing sensuality of
the world. As women become the escape valve to release
the fear to loose contact with the beauty of the world
they are sexually abused, tortured and their images
translate into sex symbols at the service of the
soldiers, whose sexuality and maleness is also threatened
by the castrating war environment. Women becomes a kind
of vulnerable fuel to keep the fighting impetus moving
until the enemy is defeated or the war is over.
One may also argue that as soldiers are deprived of
their own freedom when they are sent to the battlefields,
they in turn need to find their own enemies and deprive
them of their freedom, which is closely related to the
normal course of sexuality that is destroyed by war. The
anger caused by the annihilation of the soldier's freedom
becomes the bridge between fantasizing with women and
dominating women in the most brutal ways.
In the novel The Sorrow of War, Bao Ninh
portrays the struggles of a North Vietnamese soldier
during the Vietnam War where the reader can elaborate
about how the lost of youth is related to the abrupt
interruption of the normal course of sexual life. The
aching memories and 'burden' of feminine sensuality, rape
and the incapability of reconstructing love are not
accidents but direct consequences of war. "You will be
unhappy. Most unhappy. These are perilous times for free
spirits. Your beauty one day will cost you dearly" (Ninh,
129).
The sorrow of war lives long after war ends. The
ghosts and images of death haunt the efforts to live a
normal life. The duty to kill, the most horrific
imposition of war is a duty melded with overpowering
anger that eclipses lucidity, charity and faith. "But
the big soldier, embarrassed, got up and kicked at the
body angrily, screaming at the dead girl: You fucking
prostitute, lying there showing it for everyone to see.
Dare trip me up, damn your ancestors! To hell with
you!"(Ninh, 102).
According to Ruth Seifert, rape is part of the rules
of war. To rape even becomes a right that is legitimized
by the confusion of war. In military conflicts the abuse
of women is part of male communication, resulting in
massive rapes. She observes that rapes committed in war
are aimed at destroying the adversary's moral and
culture. "Maybe, for men, hating the woman makes sex more
exciting. You are a man, you ought to know. When you have
sex with someone strange -when you trap her, hold her
down, get her under you, put all your weight on her -
isn't it a bit like killing?
Pushing the knife in; exiting afterwards, leaving the
body behind covered in blood - doesn't it feel like
murder, like getting away with murder?"(Coetzee,
158).
J.M. Coetzee's treatment of gender violence in his
novel Disgrace is highly provocative. It
encourages the reader to question the following: Is rape
a private or a public matter? Is the interdependence
between the public and the private spheres so great that
the events that take place in either of them always
impact the other? What are the consequences of using
sexuality as a vehicle to expose our inhibitions and
rebel against social practices and taboos? What are the
sacrifices of a nation, in general, and of women, in
particular, throughout a peace and reconciliation
process? "Sexual violence against women is likely to
destroy a nation's culture. In times of war, the women
are those who hold the families and the community
together. Their physical and emotional destruction aims
at destroying cultural and social stability"(Seifert,
38).
In many countries female representations or symbols
embody the nation as a whole such as the French
"Marianne", the United States' "Statue of Liberty" and
the Bavarian national statue "Bavaria". Hence, rape of
women can be regarded as the rape of an entire community,
culture or nation, as an assault to the healing and
forgiveness of a peace process. In words of Vlasta
Jalusic from Slovenia, women represent the "blood and
soil" of the public sphere.
Conclusions
Do we have to immerse ourselves in an enormous room
filled with disgrace and despair to understand the sorrow
of war? Are enemy-making and rape rituals that mark or
delineate ownership or property? Can we say that the
assault of a female body is similar or equal to the
alienation of the human mind? The logic of war, founded
in the psychology of enemy-making, attacks public issues
through the devastation of the private realm. Therefore,
private issues become public and representative of a
larger event or reality.
Johan Galtung, who introduced the concept of
'structural violence', says that 'when one husband beats
his wife, there is a clear case of personal violence, but
when one million husbands keep one million wives in
ignorance, there is structural violence'. The message
underlying this example can also be applied to gender
violence in times of war, where rape is not incidental..
Its ephemeral privacy disappears as it operates routinely
as a weapon with organized, horrific variations that
exemplify the dehumanizing weapons of war. In the absence
of lucidity brutal action, violence or anger substitutes
the human capacity of thinking. In the absence of
charity, greed emerges as the force capable of taking
human intimacy and life as property.
In the absence of faith the meaning of suffering
transforms into a desire to kill. As long as the full
meaning of death and suffering in relation to war is not
assimilated, there is little chance that the level of
acceptance of violence will decrease. The triad of
charity, lucidity and faith are whispers of evaporating
dew to the ears of the terrifying confusion of pain,
disease, fear and death. Hence, violence echoes from the
cries of the battlefields to the women and children
missing a brother, a father, or a husband.
The hatred, resentment and tortuous memories left
behind struggle to heal, as a new motif for war erupts.
New causes and interests refresh old grudges or
regenerate the reasons to ensure the existence of an
enemy and therefore the 'need' to fight and destroy it.
The confusion associated with violence camouflages the
deeper meanings that have caused humankind to kill from
ancient to modern times. The human fear of the future
incarnated in the curiosity of death fuels the engine
that creates war. Thus, imagination can become a macabre
vehicle at the service of the reproduction of death as an
attempt to understand and face it.
Paradoxically, death and suffering, as the appeals of
violence, may unconsciously serve to satisfy this fear
and curiosity. In addition to sensible fact-finding
reports, articles and studies, literature offers images
and episodes of reality directly drawn from the private
world of experience and imagination. The uncensored, free
flow of ideas poured into the mind of the reader foments
creative thinking.
In addition, the reader enriches his/her own privacy
and gains genuine expressions product of inner needs of
expression symptomatic of the fears, hopes and struggles
of a particular culture, community or group. At the same
time, this input can translate into questioning the
accountability of the audiences that receive these fears,
hopes and struggles and may transform into nonviolent
protests and resistance. Examples of the lessons drawn
from imagination are present in this literary journey to
disentangle important aspects of war. The endeavor has
been highly inspiring and serves as a contribution to
preserve culture and intellectual liberty. It represents
an effort toward peaceful thinking and acting.
References
Engstrom, Elmer N. (1999) "Asking Tough Questions" in:
Abolishing War Dialogue with peace scholars, Boulding
Elise and Forsberg Randall (Eds), Boston Research Center
for the 21st Century: Boston, p. 124
Barker, Pat (1991) Regeneration, Penguin: New York,
pp.252
Berdayaev, Nikolay Aleksandrovich (1937) "The Part of
Imagination in the Moral Life" in: The Destiny of Man,
pp. 419-427.
Coetzee, J.M. (1999) Disgrace, Viking: New York,
pp.220
Coser, Lewis A. (1956) The Functions of Social
Conflict, The Free Press: New York, pp.188 Cummings, E.E.
(1978) The Enormous Room, Liveright: New York, pp.
275
Hallock, Daniel (1994) "Bloody Century" in: Hell,
Healing and Resistance, Plough Publishing House: Sussex,
pp.44-91
King, Mary (1999) Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther
King Jr.: The Power of Nonviolent Action. Paris: UNESCO
Publishing, pp.361
Mitchell, Stephen (1988) Tao Te Ching, Harper
Perennial: New York, pp.111
Muller, Jean-Marie (1991) Simone Weil L'exigence de
non-violence, Editions du Toinage Chrien Paris, pp.
205
Ninh, Bao (1995) The Sorrow of War. A Novel of North
Vietnam, Riverhead Books: New York, pp. 233
Nguyen Thanh T., and Bruce Weigle (translators) (1994)
Poems from Captured Documents, The University of
Massachusetts Press: Boston, pp. 64
Seifert, Ruth (1996) "The Second Front. The Logic of
Sexual Violence in Wars" in: Women's Studies
International Forum, Vol.19, Nos. 1/ 2, pp. 35-43
Stoler Miller, Barbara (1986) The Bhagavad-Gita,
Bantam Books, New York, pp..168
Weil, Simone (1993) The Iliad or the Poem of Force, A
Pendle Hill Pamphlet, No. 91, Pendle Hill: Wallingford,
pp.41.
Wobbe, Theresa (1993) "Die Grenzen des Geschlechts
Konstruktionen von Gemeinschaft und Rassismus"in:
Mittelungen des Instituts f? Socialforschung Frankfurt,
2, 98-108.
Woolf, Virginia (1966) Three Guineas, Harcourt
Brace&Company: New York, pp.188
©
TFF & the author 2001
Tell a friend about this article
Send to:
From:
Message and your name
|