Author: Sophie

I wouldn’t consider myself to be someone internally inflicted by a written historical account. The novel ‘All Quiet on the Western Front’, written by German author Erich Maria Remarque, demonstrated otherwise. The novel voices the account of protagonist Paul Baumer’s experiences in battle as a soldier. It was captivating how the novel depicted the disillusionment of the early 1900s while engaging the reader with the reality of the effect of war on young men. The title alone is phrased in a nonchalant terse style, which graphically portrays the horrors of war in a laconic understatement. The word ‘quiet’ is conspicuous, stating the exact opposite of the novel’s depiction of war. Remarque often referenced the term ‘quiet’ to juxtapose the sounds of peacetime and war, associating it with everything the war is not. The word ‘quiet’ sounds alive, rather than ‘silence’, capable of erupting into an endless stream of sound at any moment, representing war, until it becomes a quiet memory.

The novel was repulsive yet indispensable, not clouding the reader’s interpretation with a romanticized version of the war. The overwhelming graphic depictions of war demonstrated the belligerent manipulative influence clouding the soldier’s rationality. Remarque expresses sediments about the contemporary nature of war itself. Throughout the novel, the reader becomes engulfed in Paul’s self-reflection, sharing accounts of atrocities and the ghastly truths about how the war destroyed the young soldiers. Soldiers’ mindsets could be described as hypnotized by patriotic propaganda. Paul describes the trance as becoming wild beasts, turning them into murderers, representing automata. These young boys were compelled by the idea to destroy the enemy, or they would destroy them, facing death, not other men. They were taught to become stolid animals, disregarding one’s moral identity.

As the novel progresses, Paul begins to recognize the reality of the war. “It’s the rulers who want to attack us, not the simple folk. Yet, the word of a command made them our enemies, making me perceive them as the melancholy of life” (Remarque, 1928, pg. 193). Paul acknowledges the inhumane actions of war, realizing the enemy are men just like himself, yet continues to feel obliged to fight, knowing nothing but death and fear. This notation of the segregation between those who declare war and those who fight it is portrayed throughout ‘All Quiet on the Western Front’. However, Paul doesn’t entirely accept this concept until he experiences the delusional guilt he receives after witnessing a French soldier slowly die from his hand. This scene introduces a cumulating transition where Paul begins to view the enemy as people rather than faceless targets. This guilt consuming him could be argued as inevitable, allowing Paul, and other soldiers alike, to omit the cloud of the ferocity of war, and recognize the reality.

This transition emphasizes the disconnect in Paul’s experiences. After suffering the guilt of ending one’s life, Paul’s demeanor shifts. He begins to describe the carnage of war in a laconic manner as if attempting to distance himself from the horrors. After accepting the truth about war, he avoids speaking about it, feeling isolated from anyone who isn’t a soldier. He refuses a sense of belonging. A distinctive factor of the novel was its refusal to take an explicit stance on war, acting as an unexpected contrast to the typical patriotic rhetoric accounts. This allowed the reader to perceive the war with logical representation, rather than through a biased account. The novel’s disclaimer insists that the account is not an accusation to any nation or individual involved in the war. Rather, the novel accuses war as an institution of stealing young boys’ lives, regardless of whether they died on the battlefield or survived, with their lives lost to the horrors of war. One can not decide which is worse.

When this assignment was initially introduced, my immediate thought went to the 2010 Sci-fi movie Inception, directed by Christopher Nolan. To provide a brief synopsis, the movie demonstrates the manipulation of the subconsciousness. The protagonist, Cobb, constructs a team with the objection of implementing an idea into someone else’s mind while overcoming his personal subconscious issues.

Although the movie is undeniably impressive; with engaging scenarios, an unpredictable narrative, and depth and maturity in the acting, I never acquired the same passion and enthusiasm that I kept hearing about. It’s the type of movie where you won’t and can’t understand and capture all the meanings and details the first time you watch it. I arguably found the plot of Inception overly complicated and somewhat confusing. This response may simply be because of the complex concept the plot attempted to communicate; however, I could almost say that I was dissatisfied with the ending, feeling as though I was left yearning for answers. As if a primary aspect was left missing. I realized this response was derived from the continuous transition between the settings of limbo and reality.

I imagine that the universal word to describe the concept of a dream is otherworldly. A place where logic, normalcies, and motion are defied and your mind is consumed by unstructured perceptions. I felt this stereotype was almost opposed, with Nolan implementing an entirely altered approach. Their dream world, known as limbo, appeared quite constricted and systematic. Rather than exploring the numerous different ways their dream world could’ve been expressed, it represented a structured and almost identical setting to the real world, other than the defiance of physics and gravity. The concept of limbo wasn’t properly channeled and expanded, almost eliminating the purpose of manipulating this context. The result was almost disappointing, as if minimal imagination and phenomena were included to create a supernatural environment.

Although I felt the subconsciousness concept wasn’t capitalized, it did encourage me to explore an alternative theory. Everything in life begins with an idea. As expressed in the movie, Cobb explains that “once an idea is planted into a person’s mind, it’ll change the person’s reality – forever.” It’s incomprehensible to think that everything in the physical world emerged from an idea and was originally created mentally. Everything must start from ideas in our minds, from the creation of computers to simply a pair of scissors. This brings forth the inquiry: Should humanity pay more attention to mental reality rather than physical reality? Instead of creating boundaries on what we view as doable, we should be more concerned about what we want and their possibilities. The strongest motivation for creation is inspiration, suggesting that to be successful in your physical reality, you must listen and acknowledge your mental reality first.