One more book checked off my list of things to read before I die. And I can see why it’s a classic instantly. It’s broken up into several sections each of which presents an important scene. It starts off quite simply with a love affair between a married woman and an English gentleman. It’s a tumultuous encounter. But that is merely the backdrop for the true story. The critical analysis of the book is the horrors of war – especially the first world war that employed a particular style of fighting known as trench warfare.
For me, the hallmark of a great book is its ability to tell a story and educating us at the same time. At the end of it, you feel you understand things that you didn’t before. In the case of Birdsong, Sebastian Faulks makes you feel as if you’re in the trenches with the soldiers. No words can describe the horror of what the soldiers went through during that time. We can talk about the lice, the constant shelling, and the persistent fear of death. But you won’t understand what it’s like until you read this book. The hopelessness of it, the inhumanity of it, and the sheer waste of the entire exercise.
And yet the focus is not just on the action of war but on the continuing effects that war has on people well after the time of hostilities has passed. Sebastian Faulks shows how those who’ve been exposed to war for a long time find it impossible to go back to living regular lives. They have lived in a nightmare for so long that it has become their reality. They’re unable to adjust back to peacetime. Most of them die early or end up insane.
What’s worst is that after living on the front lines for a long time, you begin to experience a feeling of deadness. As if nothing really matters. You see your friends die one by one in front of you – or they get horribly mutilated and you just don’t care. Most shocking of all is the complacency of those who live in towns and cities far away from the action. They have simply no comprehension of the horrors that their governments are putting people through for their own facile purposes. No rational person would ever choose to engage in warfare. They are forced into it by their superior officers.
I got a similar feeling when I watched the series called Blackadder. In fact, I found many common references such as the officers boastfully joking that they will have breakfast in the German headquarters by the end of the day – only to have their men cut to pieces in mass numbers. The sheer waste and arrogance of it is shocking.
I guess trench warfare is a thing of the past now that we have planes and tanks. But it’s instructive to know just how much a human being can take. The answer is that there is no limit. No limit at all. And this is the critical analysis of Birdsong. Human beings can be pushed to any extent and can get used to anything no matter how horrible. Everything comes at a price of course. It’s a price that I personally would never be willing to pay. Which is why I never get taken in by the bravado and patriotism that some people show in times of war. It’s all a lie. A trap whose only purpose is to send millions of people to their deaths willingly under the guise of nationalism.
What is also startling is the amount that future generations of forgotten. We so easily gloss over the terror of war. Each generation seems to acquire a new taste for it not heeding the lessons of the past. This is a book that I would recommend to anyone. Anyone who lives in modern times. We need to be constantly reminded of the brutality that our species is capable of – even towards ourselves.
I’ve some free time now finally, and was wondering if there’s something I could read. No, I’m unlikely to read Birdsong; might stick to something or the other related to my field of science, but what made me comment on this post is your lucid description of how any war is such a collosal waste of just about everything. It’s for the same reason I just so hate any kind of ‘groupism’ – whether based on one’s country of birth/residence or religion or region or gender or profession, etc. More than cohesion among ‘intra-group’ members, all this serves to drive a wedge between various ‘extra-group’ members. I hate to admit this, but I just can’t stomach any kind of violence (especially, the physical kind). It’s just so unacceptable to me that any one person or group could have so much power over an individual as to make the latter feel helpless, frightened & distracted from their desire to live a happy life. I don’t even like trivial arguments that occur in Mumbai’s local trains. I feel very restless even if two people totally unknown to me would be arguing and I’d sense that they’d be angry and would be losing their composure shortly. A war does that and much more at an unimaginably massive scale. I find the very concept of ‘courage’ so scary. It baffles me: should it be coveted simply cuz its existence and manifestations are perceived to be rare? Why should display of courage become an end in itself. It might seem unrelated here, but you’ll understand what I mean, it’s for the same reason I don’t like stunts where people risk their lives or risk injuries. I can’t accept people cheering on such acts, and actually enjoy that. I wonder would those cheering feel guilty if the stuntsperson would die or hurt themselves?
Anyway, I gather my comment’s not been too coherent, but that’s simply cuz I feel so strongly about violence, and that’s the reason I won’t ‘enjoy’ reading this book. :)
In reply to Ketan
We have the same views on violence :)
As for something to read, I saw your comment on my other blog post about dying for your country and I mentioned that some people like to be pawns cause they don’t have to take responsibility.
A psychiatrist Erich Fromm wrote some books which were truly amazing. “Man for himself” and “Escape from freedom” being two of them. You’ll really like them if you get your hands on them. They’re medium heavy so you have to really work at what the material :) Taught me a lot. Escape from freedom is closer to the theme of what we were discussing.
the book demonstarted the strong nihilistic nature of Stephen and the lost of belief and faith, such as when Horrocks tore his cross off and Jack realised what had died in him. what had died is the belief of a superior being, namely God. the huge number of deaths has been devastating and so surreal that changed many of the christian views of england into views of atheist, because if god did exist he would not let this all happen.
the book really signifies a dilemma and interpretation that most readers find exciting and humorous; however, NOT ME!!!!! I find it unhumerous and to me the humorous is a bone in the arm. furthermore, like yao says “jack realized what had died”. I find this very judgmental as I didn’t know what had died. however I haven’t read the book so cant comment atm.
In reply to jack
Don’t ever change.