The History Book Club discussion
THE FIRST WORLD WAR
>
BOOK AS A WHOLE - FINAL THOUGHTS -ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT
Oddly, I thought that we "knew" that they were all dead... I thought at some point that Paul mentioned this, but he might have just noted that he was the only one left in active duty, and I made the assumption that they had died. Unfortunately, I had to return my copy to the library. But as I type this, I am reminded that Paul leaves Kropp at the hospital and IIRC, we don't hear anything about him again.
Final comments from me I think.First I think that Paul's input was very generous and insightful. I think the biggest difference between most Americans who went to Vietnam and Baumer and his school buddies (the majority of the characters) went directly from school (did not pass Go - did not collect $200 or any non-schoolboy life experiences as a civilian) and together and so, in a way, their entire adulthood was passed in the army/ in the war. Beyond school and what they had learned at home, some of Baumer's sensitivity I assume, this was finally their entire life.
Also I would note that comparisons to the books of Teddy Roosevelt or Winston Churchill,
and I have not read their books, are comparisons of a real enlisted man to two wealthy men raised to power and position and would call for a lot of adjustments/evaluations to finally compare.
Unfortunately I had never in my life used a set of study notes before and it was suggested to me, while I was reading another book to try one and I did try Cliff’s Notes here (got a used one inexpensively from Amazon to meet the dollars for prepaid shipping) and learned immediately that Baumer would die - so no suspense - and I stopped using the guide immediately although I read it after I finished the book and I can see why the sell for so much as one can use this I am sure for much of school, except maybe a dissertation, to do reports etc. on books.
So there was no shock but Baumer's friends had been slowly taken from him. I think this ending in part showed the loneliness of wars in those times at the end. Very different from Paul who had an exit horizon from the day he started in Vietnam.
It is so grim that this was the final effort/ work that all the effort of his parents/ his family/ his teachers put into the raising of this child/person was used up in a war whose reason for existence is still partly a mystery to me. This book was a very good choice from my perspective and I thank all of you for your commentaries and support in reading/understanding it.
Thank you for all your comments, Vince. I always enjoy reading your perspective.So many people I know would agree that WWI was/is a mystery. It kinda... happened. And it took a lot of time to un-happen it. I remember when the group read Keagan's First World War last year. The biggest thing I hoped to get from it was "Why did WWI start?" It is amazing that every country involved could feel that they were getting bullied by their neighbors.
by
John Keegan
I agree, Elizabeth, that Keegan's book was revelatory. I was drawn to it because WWI is the only modern conflict to which I have a direct family connection (grandfather & great-uncle), and also because I had begun reading a couple of series of mysteries set in between-the-wars England that show the lasting impact of WWI's horrors. (Very different from the "Golden Age" mysteries -- one would never know that WWI happened, or that there was a world-wide depression, by reading them!) I've noted the series authors below, in case anyone wants to dip into some fictional WWI-ish reading that, in a way, begins where All's Quiet ends.The First World War
John Keegan
Charles Todd Ian Rutledge series
Jacqueline Winspear Maisie Dodd series
Barbara Cleverly Joe Sandilands series
Baseni wrote: "Here is a detective novel series from England.
Angels in the Gloom: A Novel
Anne Perry
"
Comment from Mary Ellen, originally a response to Comment #44 by Baseni in the Week 9 (i.e. Chapter 8) thread:"So it seems Remarque was vague so that he could craft the events to suit his artistic purpose. This is certainly a valid approach. If he had promoted Paul and his (surviving) friends after their first year, I guess they would have been separated, right? This would have drained some of the book's impact -- the gradual loss of every single one of the boys who signed on with Paul and their companions in their company."
My response to Baseni's Comment #44 in the Week 9 thread:Good point about Baumer remaining a private, I hadn't thought about that. Remarque did have to bend things a bit, didn't he. The vagueness of the specific locations not only makes it easier to blend the various real experiences, but also keeps the book from being more of a history book.
Good historical fiction and mystery suggestions. I've read the Anne Perry series (5 books) and it does relate some of what happens at the front, mostly from the British perspective. I haven't read any of the ones you mentioned, Mary Ellen, although I've heard good things about the Maisie Dobbs and have it on my to-read list sometime.To add to the list, Justice Hall by Laurie King contains some accounts of the WWI front lines. It is in the middle of the series, though, so it may be worth it to start at the beginning with The Beekeepers Apprentice (which also takes place during WWI, but deals more with the home front).
Anne Perry
by
Jacqueline Winspear
and
by
Laurie R. King
Thanks, Elizabeth! I haven't read any of Laurie King's books. Not a big fan of Anne Perry, but I know so many people love her books, and specifically the WWI series. I read the first of the series, and may go back to try another.No Graves As Yet
Anne Perry
It is funny. I enjoyed Anne Perry's Pitt series for a while, but then it stagnated and got repetitiously boring. I discovered her Monk series, which I enjoyed for a while, then I reached a book where I knew right from the beginning what the Big Reveal at the end would be. Kinda ruined it. I wasn't planning to try the WWI series, but a friend I trusted sent me the first one. So I gave it a shot. After the first book I thought, wow! A great new series! Luckily the series ended with 5 books because it seemed to stagnate like her other series. A pity.Pitt series begins with:
Monk series begins with:
WWI series:
all by
Anne Perry
I have been reading through these comments and have to say that they have offered interesting insights into the book and it really is a pleasure to get different peoples perspectives on what I thought was a thought provoking and gripping book especially at the time it was written and the fact that it showed the darker side to war that very few people were willing to admit or realise publically.I have to agree with Derek on the ending,I think it was a masterclass and fitting way to end the book. First person just would not have worked with one of the essential messages of the book,and third person provided a way to get across the idea that there is no warmth,emotion or character in death in war. Hence why I think the characters were not developed more,it was not essential to the meaning of the book, we knew what we knew about the characters because that served a purpose to the narrative of the book i.e. to show us the general reader the horrors of war.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------*****************************************************************************
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We've already been having a great conversation in this Book as a Whole thread for those who've read the book before or finished early. But for those who were keeping pace or who may be catching up, please don't be intimidated by the number of comments already there! I added the above lines to somewhat separate the discussion. If you haven't been keeping up with this thread, you aren't required to read all the comments before this one. Feel free to just jump in. Any repetition will be excused.
I've been looking forward to asking these questions when we finished the book. In my copy, there is a paragraph on the page before Chapter 1 that says this:"This book is to be neither an accusation nor a confession, and least of all an adventure, for death is not an adventure to those who stand face to face with it. It will try simply to tell of a generation of men who, even though they may have escaped shells, were destroyed by the war."
We could spend hours discussing this paragraph after reading the book. In what ways do you agree or disagree with Remarque? Does he achieve his goal with the book? Does he do more? If any of you have faced death, would you agree that "death is not an adventure?"
In some ways, I thought the book was an accusation ("the old men start the wars & send the young men out to fight them"). And none of the characters we met escaped the shells, apparently. But I think the book succeeds brilliantly at its object: to tell of the generation destroyed by WWI, to bear witness to who they were and what they became, what they suffered, what they sacrificed without fanfare. In that way, it reminds me of Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan, which also had as primary object to grab our attention and bear witness to the experience of the men who took part in the D-Day invasion (in a Hollywood way, of course).
Mary Ellen wrote: "In some ways, I thought the book was an accusation ("the old men start the wars & send the young men out to fight them"). And none of the characters we met escaped the shells, apparently. But I t..."Just a comment from me that in my view "saving Private Ryan" was a movie version of D-Day by Stephen Ambrose
Stephen E. Ambrosetry it if you want
Vince, ever since I read an Ambrose book, that D-Day has been on my list. Eventually it'll get read! 
Stephen E. Ambrose
Mary Ellen, I agree with you. I kinda think there were some passive-aggressive-type accusations going on throughout the book. Remarque says he isn't making accusations. But I think one of the big messages of the book is that SOMETHING is wrong, very wrong, extremely wrong. Remarque doesn't name any names-- even saying "the old men" is somewhat vague-- yet he seems to be pointing a finger at everyone. And maybe he is accusing the world as a whole for what happened.
I need to sit down with my book and make a list of all the named characters. Some of them, I think, we don't really know their fate. Like Tjaden. I don't remember him getting injured or anything. Has anyone been making a list as we go?Wikipedia includes a one paragraph summary of the major and minor characters: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Quie...
In the German Wikipedia is to classify the book in the literature as follows:"Like Hemingway, Remarque uses the term "lost generation" of young men, because of their war trauma experienced in early years after the war have great difficulty in civilian life to regain a foothold. It stands in contrast to the fairly conservative, war apologetic literature during the Weimar Republic, which tried to justify the lost war or heroize the war experiences of frontline soldiers. His work is considered - along with the Glaeser, Renn and Koppen -often deliberately as one of the first anti-war literature, sometimes even conceived as a pacifist anti-war literature and fictional autobiographical narrative works on World War I. The following sentence leads into the work: "This book is neither an accusation nor a confession. It will only make the attempt to report on a generation that was destroyed by the war -. Even if they escaped his shell "
Remarque's novel was not written explicitly oppose the war because he thought such a book to be superfluous, because eventually everyone was against the war. In an interview with Friedrich Luft, he said in 1963, however: "I always thought everyone was against the war, until I found out that there are those who are for it, especially those who do not have to go."
Mod
No worries, Bentley. At least you've been able to follow along a little!Baseni, as always, thanks for your perspective. I'm probably not the only one who reads All Quiet and thinks it is really about the horrors of the front-line in modern war. I guess there is reason to think that. After all, so much of the book is about a soldier at war, not about a soldier after the war. Plus, Remarque was one of the first to describe so vividly what it was like.
I would have thought that if Remarque's real goal was to raise awareness of the "lost generation" who technically survived the war--I would think he would spend at least some time with a veteran after the war.
Now after reading your comment, I'm thinking of it differently. If I had read the chapter about Baumer being home on leave without the earlier chapters, I would not have understood Baumer nearly as well. To know and understand that "lost generation," there needs to be some vision of what they went through, doesn't there. And that is what Remarque gives us in the book.
Here's another question for those who have read the book:Did "All Quiet on the Western Front" change you? Are you different after having read it?
Elizabeth S wrote: "Here's another question for those who have read the book:Did "All Quiet on the Western Front" change you? Are you different after having read it?"
Good question.
It made my views a bit more knowledgable or I think that way.
It did not change me I think. This is maybe a much more difficutl thing, to change me, than to change a younger person. It altered my perspective is the best way to say it, and it did strongly, but not a structural change.
I first read it when I was in my mid/late 20s (now 54). I think it confirmed my view that war is an utter waste of human life. I am a child of the Vietnam War era...I used to use this book to give my 8th graders a view of war "on the ground," the suffering and arbitrary loss of life.
I like how you describe it as an altered perspective rather than a structural change, Vince. And I agree, Mary Ellen, that this is a good book to help others understand suffering, pain, and loss.I first read it when I was 13-14ish. I don't remember being overwhelmingly shocked, but I do remember great sorrow. I think perhaps it was because I didn't yet have any picture of what war was like. There were no idealized impressions to rewrite. There have been many times when I've read fiction books that take place during WWI and it seems one of the author's goals was to help people understand what the front was really like. But for me, it was no great revelation. Rather than changing me, perhaps it affected the direction of my opinions.
Mod
Hi FolksI think I may have found a WWII supplement to All Quiet which I am still reading but will - based upon about 25% recommend - It is "with the old breed...._
Eugene B. SledgeIs is a modified diary as I read it - parts published elsewhere beforehand.
If you have the time give it a try.
An interesting supplement following also Unbroken
Laura Hillenbrandwhich I just finished early this year.
Mod
Thanks for the suggestions, Vince. Those both look like good books for anyone who wants to read more about WWI and battle fronts.
Elizabeth S wrote: "Thanks for the suggestions, Vince. Those both look like good books for anyone who wants to read more about WWI and battle fronts."Thanks Elizabeth - both these books are WWII books however - "Unbroken" has no real battlefronts -
"With the old breed" however goes into experiences and emotions in the war but in a non-fictional presentation - now 44% thru and it is getting stronger (I think that is the best word)
Mod
by
Laura Hillenbrand
Bentley wrote: "Vince, whenever mentioning a book which is not under discussion, please cite the book even if you have done it previously (goodreads will then be able to track all posts and discussions regarding b..."OK
as I had just cited it three messages or so before I thought it was not necessary.
I didn't know that Goodreads tracked these
thanks
Mod
Yes Vince, it does and it helps cross populate our site correctly when the citations are added.
Well I just finished "with the old Breed"
Eugene B. SledgeAll Quiet on the Western Front
Erich Maria Remarquewas published in 1929 - just ten years after the end of WWI. This book - much more graphically illustraiting the grim reality of WWII in the Pacific was published in 1981 - 36 years after the end of the war and after many other war stories had been published. I did not read (as yet?) The Naked and the Dead
Norman Maileror The Thin Red Line
James Jonesbut they were published sooner and the WWII was far furhter away from 1981 than WWI from 1929. This book does a much better job explaining the feelings and misery/fighting of a group. This book however is a non fiction biography. It also takes place without reprise to western villages or leaves home - it also takes place over a much shorter time frame.
I knew one fellow who actually was fought in the Pacific - not these campaigns - and he never talked about the actgual fighting - and never bought anything Japanese.
This book only gets four stars because of some effect on my of the style in the last third of the book - but it is a really must read if one wants to understand so much better.
Read this book and identify with it at all and it is OK (acceptable and understandable) that Truman dropped the bomb.
Thanks for you perspectives on those books, Vince. It is a good thing that some people, at least, are able to share their experiences with war. Given what we read in All Quiet, sharing must be hard.
Mod
You are very welcome. It was fun.
Thank you Elizabeth S for a great book club reading experience. And thank you to all the moderators that help make this book club what it is. I thoroughly enjoyed this book and the discussion.
Did reading this book change me? I read it many years ago after seeing the film (the pre-WW2 version) while I was serving as a young soldier in Germany. It was interesting to watch an English-language film in a German cinema with German subtitles. I think by then (I was 21) I had figured out that war was nasty and dirty and painful and ultimately fatal. I had been reading some Sven Hassel Sven Hassel books prior to that (I was young, OK?) and was struck by how much Hassel plagiarized Remarque in his books. What struck me even more was the differing reactions from the German audience after the film was over. Some wept, some were plainly angry and some looked baffled.The book has the distinction of being one of those burned by the Nazis in the 1930s and although Remarque was able to escape persecution, his sister, Elfriede Scholz was guillotined for 'undermining the war effort'. I think that the reason the Nazis hated the book so much was that it detracted from their view that everything had been going quite nicely thank you with the war, and that they had been winning before being betrayed by a bunch of Jews and Communists. Rather than Remarque's view that Germany was doomed from the start and that it was just a matter of attrition, viz. the slow but inevitable dimunition of Baumer's circle of friends.
I remember on first reading this book feeling for the first time a sort of felllowship with the German soldiers of both wars (I mean the Werhmacht, not the SS). They were just like me, boys barely out of their teens, just doing what they were paid to do and indoctrinated to hate the enemy (mine was the Warsaw Pact). The last time I read it was about six months ago. I cried that time.
Thank you, Tim, for your reflections.
Autumn wrote: "Thank you Elizabeth S for a great book club reading experience. And thank you to all the moderators that help make this book club what it is. I thoroughly enjoyed this book and the discussion."You are welcome, Autumn. And thank you for all your comments and thoughts. A book club works best with not just great leadership (i.e. Bentley), but also great readers who enthusiastically and thoughtfully participate.
Tim wrote: "Did reading this book change me? I read it many years ago after seeing the film (the pre-WW2 version) while I was serving as a young soldier in Germany. It was interesting to watch an English-lang..."What a great perspective, Tim. Thanks for sharing. I think part of what appealed to people in the US was that feeling of camaraderie with the regular German soldier. (As you said, the Werhmacht, not the SS.) I don't know if that was part of Remarque's intention.
I think that the reason the Nazis hated the book so much was that it detracted from their view that everything had been going quite nicely thank you with the war, and that they had been winning before being betrayed by a bunch of Jews and Communists. Rather than Remarque's view that Germany was doomed from the start and that it was just a matter of attrition, viz. the slow but inevitable dimunition of Baumer's circle of friends.
Very insightful and well put.
message 95:
by
André, Honorary Contributor - EMERITUS - Music
(last edited Sep 03, 2011 05:44AM)
(new)
Mod
Hi Tim,
I once did a story on the pensioners living in the Royal Hospital in London, talking long hours with veterans of both wars. Many shared your views on the Wehrmacht (they also always excluded the SS and the Japanese).
Whereas the SS, SA, Gestapo and what else the Nazis came up with to terrorize Europe were of course despicable (I picked this word but to be honest I do not think there is one describing my utter repulsion of these organizations), the Wehrmacht also did its share.
Of course you cannot put the entire army into one box but lately even the Germans have come to realize that large parts of the Wehrmacht were also responsible for many war crimes and crimes against humanity all across Europe, like f.e. the burning down of entire villages including the inhabitants, "avenging" killed soldiers by executing randomly picked innocent civilians as retaliation etc.etc. - atrocities the SS "usually" was known and feared for.
You make some good points, Andre. Really, what we need is some term to differentiate between the kid-next-door soldiers (who are hopefully the majority) and the monsters who commit war crimes. Although drawing the line seems obvious from the safety of our peaceful homes, at the front there is much less difference between the two.I think of Baumer and Kat, back in Chapter Four, who decide to commit a mercy killing of a seriously injured comrade. I think of the sniper at the end of Chapter Nine who scored hits rather callously. In some ways, there isn't much distance between the average soldier and the war crimes.
I agree with you totally Andre and I was not trying to excuse any of the war crimes committed by the Wehrmacht (or by the Allies themselves; only the defeated get to go to the war crimes trial). I am also reminded of the landlord of my local pub in Germany at that time. He was a veteran of the 21st Panzer Division, intensely proud of his old division, had names for Hitler that I don't think translated very well into English and said that everybody did things in war that they were not proud of but the SS and the Gestapo just made a career out of doing it.
Thanks to Tim and Andre for your inputTim do you know were the Sven Hassel
.
Sven Hasselbooks published in German and was his primary audience German? - Just a question - I had never heard of him and just looked at his page on Goodreads
And again big thanks to Elizabeth
You are welcome, Vince. It was a fun one, wasn't it?That Sven Hassel looks like he has an interesting story, Tim. What are his books like?
Sven Hassel
The History Book Club
Books mentioned in this topic
Legion of the Damned (other topics)The Thin Red Line (other topics)
With the Old Breed: At Peleliu and Okinawa (other topics)
The Naked and the Dead (other topics)
All Quiet on the Western Front (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Sven Hassel (other topics)Sven Hassel (other topics)
Sven Hassel (other topics)
Sven Hassel (other topics)
James Jones (other topics)
More...
I agree with you that it hurts to not even know how Paul died. It did make his death more meaningless, which was the effect I think Remarque wanted.
More than that, though, it bothers me that we don't know even if so many others died. We can just assume they did. Like Leer, who bleeds quickly and then collapses. Or Berger who is carried off on a stretcher with a pelvis wound. Or even Kropp, who lost a leg and was suicidal. I want a little summary at the end of where everyone ended up. But I think that would give us some vision of a future, which is not what Remarque wanted.