The First World War was for its contemporaries and for all humanity more than a global war; it turned into a monumental catastrophe. Works of fiction, written by contemporaries and participants in the First World War, allow the reader to immerse themselves in the atmosphere of the life of the people of the time. Such is the case with the novel by E.M. Remarque, “All Quiet on the Western Front”. The story by Remarque provides an opportunity to find out how individuals themselves thought in that war, and the film also demonstrates the ideology, history, and art of conflict. An analysis of the movie enables an appreciation of the factors affecting young men before the war and the change in their opinions during the fighting of the war.
Analysis of the Film and its Influence on the Formation of Historical Representation
The film focuses on a group of young Germans who entered World War I after being enthused by slogans of patriotism and honor. “All Quiet on the Western Front” also deals with the disillusionment of the public, including German citizens. It is significant to note that Paul and his classmates decided to participate in the war effort through school teacher narratives. That is, the propaganda conducted in school classes demonstrated the benefits of showing patriotism and participating in the war. This led to the fact that children enlisted as volunteers in whole classes and wished to become heroes, while their mothers feared for their sons’ lives (Milestone, 1930).
At the same time, the formation of young people’s initial thoughts about military action was also founded by newspapers. They portrayed the carefree front-line life of soldiers and pointed out that the troops were in good spirits and held dances before combat missions. Thus, future soldiers admired this propaganda and immediately wished to become national heroes.
At the same time, after such joyous first scenes, the film further demonstrates plausible events. The novel’s protagonist and his friends, classmates, and fellow troops are forced to fight not only with their enemies but also with the inhuman conditions in which they find themselves. The film illustrates how Paul moves with his unit through positions, drives home on leave, returns to the front, receives an injury, appears in the hospital, and returns to the front. It appears that there is no end to war, to death, to suffering; no wonder that Paul was murdered in October 1918, and the young man has not lived a whole life but has experienced much suffering (Chambers, 1994). Hence, the movie demonstrates that, despite the optimistic propaganda, war does not bring positives to the lives of soldiers.
Remarque’s characters were probably not based on real-life examples, and indeed, neither Kemmerich nor Paul himself existed in life. However, these images provide readers with a sense of the heroes of a senseless, horrible war; they were men who wanted peace and defended their country. Heroism in this conflict was apparently measured not by the number of successful battles and victories won but by the extent to which a soldier could remain human (Jeansonne & Luhrssen, 2014). For Paul and his colleagues, all their life before the war was like paradise, especially since human memory tends to remember only the good, extracting the positive even from the darkest moments of their past lives. Bored with the lost paradise in the hell of war, the heroes of the film are alive only with the hope of regaining that paradise by returning home.
There is a subtle psychological moment in the movie, which shows that the protagonists are disappointed not only in the army and the war, but they are dissatisfied with nationalist and chauvinist ideas, with their teachers. That is why Remarque pitied his heroes most of them, including Paul Baumer, died with the hope of returning home. The movie emphasizes the senselessness of war at the moment when Paul’s body is overturned, and there is an expression of peace on his face as if he was glad that his suffering was finally ended (Milestone, 1930). Therefore, viewing this picture in the 1930 interwar period, audiences formed a harsh and negative attitude toward the war. Moreover, they were frightened by these events and sympathized with the characters.
It is essential to mention that the film changes the historical perception of the image of the enemy during World War I. It is generally accepted that there should be an idea of the enemy for every person at war. However, in this film about the war, about the soldiers, there is no creation of an image of the enemy. On the contrary, the movie demonstrates the Russian enemy as weak, pathetic, miserable, and not at all the kind of person one should defend oneself against. As for the English troops, they are a serious adversary whose fire is undoubtedly dangerous, but English soft-skin boots will still remain the German soldier’s dream goal.
As for the French, Remarque first proclaims them to be as right in the conduct of this war as the Germans (Chambers, 1994). Then the protagonist spends twenty-four hours in a crater with a dying French soldier, where he realizes that the rival is just as human as any soldier; he fulfills his duties to the homeland.
Hence, the film demonstrates that people are forced to fight against each other with weapons in their hands. Accordingly, viewers in the interwar period did not find a clear image of the opponent but were only convinced that the enemy was some abstract substance. Consequently, there was no reason to wage war against him; this forms pacifism in human perceptions. It is interesting for the formation of ideas about World War I that Milestone also pointed out in the film the sharp distinction between civilian and military society (Jeansonne & Luhrssen, 2014). Thus, ordinary life does not value such help and care as at the front, when soldiers become a real family for each other.
Accordingly, viewers in the film observe flashes of artillery on the horizon, smoke, gas, soldiers climbing out of trenches, and machine-gun fire, which can kill them. At the same time, they can watch the troops become true friends and are willing to protect each other. Consequently, once again, this contributes to the viewers’ perception that declaring and waging war requires unjustifiable casualties. This is because the troops suffer and die senselessly for an idea imposed on them.
Conclusion
Therefore, the film had an extremely powerful impact on the formation of viewers’ opinions after watching it. In this way, historical perceptions were generated during the interwar period that World War I contributed to many soldiers dying in agony. In addition, there was a negative impression of propaganda that simulated young and inexperienced young men to fight through false narratives. At the same time, independent of the state for which they fought, their deaths were not justified because there was insufficient justification for full-scale military action. Thus, in the interwar period, people realized the terrible consequences of a war that deformed and destroyed the lives of young people. Moreover, World War I did not have an idea to die for. It failed to fulfill the hopes of politicians for a quick outcome but was only a wreck of all humanity.
References
Chambers, J. W. (1994). “All Quiet on the Western Front” (1930): The antiwar film and the image of the first world war. Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, 14(4), 377-411.
Jeansonne, G., & Luhrssen, D. (2014). War on the Silver Screen: Shaping America’s Perception of History. Potomac Books, Inc.
Milestone, L. (1930). All quiet on the Western Front [Film]. Universal Studios. Web.