IS WAR HEROIC OR HEINOUS?
DULCE ET DECORUM EST PRO PATRIA MORI - It is sweet and right to die for one's country .
Patriotism is the lifeblood, the raison d'etre of soldiers, wars, sovereignty and tribal pride. Like motherhood, it is a sweet narrative and it is politically incorrect to slander its noble ideals.
Yet War as an arm of patriotic fervour and the consequences of war with its Pyrrhic spoils need to be reflected upon with greater objectivity. The human mind is intellectually lazy and emotionally insecure or uncomfortable about turning conventional concepts around on their heads. So money, sex, technology are frowned upon and love, duty, God, humility are extolled, often without challenge.
To die in defence of one’s country and for one’s fellow soldiers is regarded as the greatest of sacrifices in most cultures, and such individuals are accorded great status by virtue of their actions. This spirit is integral to the warrior ethos of every culture worldwide and is probably best exemplified by the line from Horace: Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori - it is sweet and right to die for one’s country.
Horace wrote in his Odes: "It is sweet and proper to die for one’s country / and death pursues even the man who flees/ Nor spares the hamstrings or cowardly / backs of battle-shy youths."
Horace in the political milieu of 35 BC was not free to express his pleasure or displeasure as he would have liked to, so one can only speculate on the satirist's intentions here ' whether it be propaganda for his regal patrons or parody of the consequences of their actions.
“Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori, sed dulcius pro patria vivere, et dulcissimum pro patria bibere. Ergo, bibamus pro salute patriae” in Latin means " It is sweet to die for the homeland, but it is sweeter to live for the homeland, and the sweetest to drink for it. Therefore, let us drink to the health of the homeland" This was a frequent 19th century students’ toast.
“Dulce Et Decorum Est ” poem written by British poet Wilfred Owen during World War I described the patriotic song as “the old Lie.” It was written in direct response to a poem written by Jessie Pope, a pro-war propagandist, also entitled “Dulce Et Decorum Est Pro Patria Mori” about the glory of dying for one’s country. Pope had published numerous ‘jingoistic’ poems in such newspapers as the Daily Mail and the Daily Express urging young men to enlist. Owen’s poem is based on a gas attack during World War I, is one of his many anti-war poems that was not published until after the war had ended
Ironically ‘pro patria mori’ is also one of the mottos on the Menin Gate (Memorial to the Missing ) at
Dulce does not bring to mind Horace, it is Owen who our memories first evoke much in the manner in which the words 'Brave New World' draws us to Huxley and not to its original wordsmith Shakespeare. Therefore to hark back to the connotations of its original creators in order to understand the works that borrowed these lines mainly as symbols for larger messages, would be to misunderstand them. With Horace's intentions being nebulous this becomes a greater playground for speculation.
Therefore, what we can to do is to see how they serve as idioms for contemporary times and issues. First we need to clear some cobwebs.
Is the whole romantic martyrdom narrative of war, a means to make sure that men enlist or are legitimately made to do mandatory military service? Is it a way to make the womenfolk stoic and prepare to be orphaned? Is it a device to make men in uniform beckon forth their highest emotions of sacrifice and pride in the nation to counter the ugly realities of inevitable trauma and violence? Is it a way for manipulating leaders to use these men like pawns to be discarded to the hounds of war by giving them opium dreams of valour? Who shall judge? Who pays?
Or are we saying War like weather and pain and death is a constant, a reality from which we cannot escape? War is the nature of Mankind. Therefore to assume in fond hope that war can be avoided, evaded, extinguished from our psyche and our lives is but a pipedream of idealists and thus holds no truth? Defending the possibility of a world without war is therefore like hoping that we could obliterate jealousy or greed from the human heart. War is an accumulation of such negatives, ergo it is indelible and permanent?
The whole debate on Dulce depends on the perspective one takes on War. Are we saying war is evil and therefore deplore it as evil because it kills our young for no cause or gain? And therefore War is Ugly. Or are we saying human beings are evil and will constantly be on the case of needing to usurp one another's sovereignty? And therefore War is Peace.
Are we saying then that the criticism of War is a whine? Are we calling men who are decrying war sissies? Or are we saying they have the courage to call for an end to the waste of farcical wars and face up to the truth, unveiling the lie on wars and martyrdom?
Owen who died young in the War raised a voice against a popular narrative giving it the lie. It was an act of courage and one which strengthened and popularized a cache of war poetry on protest lines. Seigfred Sasson, Rupert Brooke, Stephen Rosenberg and others formed a part of this formidable genre at a time when most of
Is Owen relevant in a world where the methods employed by militant groups to recruit suicide bombers is reminiscent of the methods used, since time immemorial by every nation state and political body ever to have existed, when trying to raise an army? Substitute ideology for country and you are essentially describing the belief system of suicide bombing. The recent Bush wars are testimony of the wanton nature of War be it political skirmishes or machinations of economic deviousness. This is the aggression of the state as opposed to the maverick destruction of fundamentalist anger, and yet, the two are so easily interchangeable.
Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori is ironically a "war cry" that allows the oppressor to feel no guilt, especially when the oppressor and the victim merge and you can't tell who is who like the Orwellian pig and man.
This blog is an extended response to Turbojet San whose comments evoked these thoughts and reflections. Do jump in and comment.
THE POEM
Dulce Et Decorum Est by Wilfred Owen
Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of disappointed shells that dropped behind.
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.–
Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.
In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.
If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil’s sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,–
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.
Dulce et Decorum Est (written in 1917 and published posthumously in 1921)
Owen died in service at the age of 25
Haven”t read the full post but only replying to the title question…both! in different perspectives
will come back some other time and read the full post later.
Cooooool Post
…I Like It!
treatacidrefluxnow
I liked your defense of armchair intellectualism too ;D
Yeah Lissome, more power to you! I sincerely hope that you hang on to this theme like a pit-bull terrier, even if you are considered a pest and a bore by some. I don”t mean the theme of feeding people to the war-machine in the name of patriotism and national pride; I mean the theme of DEVIOUSNESS & HYPOCRISY in the everyday working of our society. One needs to expose it again and again and again… like attacking the many heads of a hydra. That this barely-visible hydra-headed monster will probably win is a foregone conclusion, but that should not deter one. (In fact, freed of the responsibility of winning, one has no reason to hold back, and every reason to fight it to the bitter end.)
Therefore if one were to pick up any of these strands at random one can build a terrific argument in that strand. When one argues against another of these strands, one can also pick up bits and pieces from here and there and never be noticed as all the strands are so inextricably wound together. As a purely rational exercise it is a great one for ”understanding” the problem. Once understood as FG rightly says one can begin to make changes in mindsets of people. It is the job of armchair intellectual however maligned he/she is to sort out the complexities of issues and lay them bare for those who cannot see them. That is why Knowledge is Power. It is on armchairs that humans discovered the earth is round and the sun is a star so vive la armchair …hehehe
aah now that I have fg’’s ear I shall talk of the second strand. This is the PATRIOTISM AGENDA - which packs in nobilty, self sacrifice, courage, dying for the mother/father/sister land… that allows the ” do u want chakka men as your hubby/bro/lover arguments, it is the Man is natural War mongerer and therefore Man must be Protector angle. So we have one Business/Economic angle - be it the vily politician or the mercernary/occupation solider AND then we have the Nobility angle - patriotism protection sacrifice et al… What I am talking about is the first angle - which also has the betrayal angle.. its dirty business of wasteful death BUT done in the name of the second angle which is Nobility. It is the deviousness that I have sought to expose where the two strands blend so cleverly that it is difficult to find the truth. When aggressor and victim - be it Bush or Osama - merge there is more complexity in making a judgement.
This blog was a good brain work out.
Turbo, I do see what you mean in that angry rejoinder — believe me I do. I see the indignance you feel because an armchair-type guy like myself seems to MOCK the a soldier who dies in the battlefield with VALOUR, defending a cause that is much greater than himself. Fair enough, I see the dichotomy here. I see the cruel irony… and yet… and yet… and yet I hold to my point because the TRUTH that Lissome points to is an essential one. It is a truth that needs to seep really deep into the general consciousness of people if our society is ever to cease to send numerous young people to a brutish grave. Otherwise, in the shadow of these very valiant acts whose righteousness you correctly uphold, a number of heinous crimes against humanity will continue to be perpetrated by so-called leaders (who are really parasites on the goodness of society, propagandists and manipulators of public opinion.) I wonder if I”m getting through to you here. Warm Regards, Krish
Oui, si, ja, haan,….. the argument is now in a repetitive loop…. and so we shall gracefully agree to disagree
nope, Turbs has no AK 47 that he knows about … only a few soft fingers … that he uses from time to time … to feel the contours of a softer female face … and wonder, this must be the heaven the rishis spoke of …
No, saar, Turbs doesn”t agree … you seem to be harping on the same thing always … the politicians make war … sure, they do … but we too do … remember the three fingers? … if you cannot acknowledge that, don”t bother …
Ok there are two strands here that are getting confused and that has Turbs come out with his AK 47 all blazing and screaming tora tora tora… sigh.. 1) The cause of war - that’’s where the vily politician comes in, the one who directs the war with no personal stake… the war is begun BECAUSE OF his policies, insensitivities, selfish shortsightedness whatever in which the common man has no say … 2) The soldiers go willingly, happily if u like, even if not conscripted, in keeping with the romance of war tradition they are brought up with 3) War happens and death is inevitable.. society decides to eulogise and keep the narrative ”true” 4) future genertations are enrolled into ”the lie” So the vicious saga continues ad infinitum. LETS CALL THIS SCENARIO THE POLITICIAN”S AGENDA
This is the natural sequence of this scenario. Do you agree with this Turbs? I am not even going into the other scenario without your agreement. no tiffs pls …we are still in honeymoon period 
hehehe
The poor gawaar from Bihar dies in the wheatfields of Chhamb … by the banks of a river, a cold river called, ironically, Ravi … round rocks on the riverbed … the gawaar lies dead over there, a big hole where his eyes should have been … his frns from the regiment gather up the body, take it to the base, a few simple ceremonies, and then the coffin is sent to Bihar by train … he died, so that we may live. And for this great sacrifice, we honour him. Those who laff at this fallen soldier … go hump.
Are you suggesting that when foreign armies wade into our nation … killing, raping, pillaging, annexing … we should all line up and offer mithaai to the invaders? … Yeah right, you are Mother Teresa … me, I will fight, for me and my own. Curse me if you can, with a straight face … hehehe … if you want a hijra for a husband, let us know, we”ll find you one.
Am rather bamboozled by this debate … a much of a muchness, been there, done that … no one loves war, war is visited on us, we gotta fight back … simple equation, really … where’’s the fuss, Lizzie?
“the mental state of society that allows dying in war to be seen as a noble, heroic deed, instead of merely a foolish one” … this erom FG. Ours is not a conscript army, people join for their own reasons … and when they fall dead, we honour them … you, who sits safely on an armchair may find this death to be a foolish one … fair enough, these armchair types usually are the best experts available, if one can believe their own words
The men who DECIDE to wage war — politicians etc — are not those who actually go to the battlefield and face the bullets and bombs, the sleepless nights and frayed nerves. The generals who DECIDE strategy and decide which battalion goes where are also not those who go out into the cold night to do or die. Nor are the citizenry who STAY HOME and sing jingoistic songs in praise of their nation’’s superiourity and righteousness. This in itself is heinous & exploitative. Let them who praise the war at least saw off a finger with a rusty knife before they join their voices to collude with the forces that send deluded men to kill other delude men, or to die in the effort. Warm Regards, Krish
”Is the whole romantic martyrdom narrative of war, a means to make sure that men enlist or are legitimately made to do mandatory military service? Is it a way to make the womenfolk stoic and prepare to be orphaned? Is it a device to make men in uniform beckon forth their highest emotions of sacrifice and pride in the nation to counter the ugly realities of inevitable trauma and violence? Is it a way for manipulating leaders to use these men like pawns to be discarded to the hounds of war by giving them opium dreams of valour?” BINGO!!! All the right questions! I hope my fellow-citizens learn to ask these questions before being led by patriotic/sentimental propaganda that robs them of the power to choose over life and death. Eternal vigilance is indeed the price that we pay for being truly free!
LL, This is one of your most brilliant and incisive posts yet. It’’s something I”ve myself wanted to say, but did not, as the context did not arise. You have asked all the right questions, and have put your finger on the mental state of society that allows dying in war to be seen as a noble, heroic deed, instead of merely a foolish one. They who enlist in the army are drawn in with a number of temptations, illusions and false assumptions. It is good to see that you have listed them all. It does my heart good to see that our society consists of people like you who are wide-awake and vigilant, and resistant to cant andpropaganda.
Aaila, PGR … “Hate–racial, tribal, religious, ancestral, national, social, ethical, political, economic, ideological”? … bas karo, itna analyse na karna … hate is hate … alu tomatar jaisa … hum bhi khaate, aap bhi … woh tribal, religious, ityadi, rehne dijiye, baad mein muqabla hoga oon logo se …