I thought the Modris Eckstein excerpt was especially interesting because it addresses the new atrocities of modern warfare that were introduced during the first stage of the war. Eckstein then further proposes that these "advancements" (for lack of a better term) were the product of the "revolutionary" ideology prevalent in Germany prior to and during the war.
According to Eckstein, Germany was the first to make effective use of trench warfare, gaseous warfare, the flamethrower, its infamous U-boat warfare, and the concept of Schreklichkeit (though it could be argued that the British were just as inhumane towards civilians during the Boer War), and, in so doing, drastically elevated modern warfare into what many critics claimed to be an inhumane level. By 1916, British and French troops were also utilizing gases and flamethrowers (though the latter was not used to the extent) and had successfully adopted strategies of defense (which appeared to be, for obvious reasons, more successful then attempting to storm across "no man's land" to break enemy lines).
However, it is important to note that these strategies that revolutionized the way future conflicts would be fought also appeared to have had negative effects on the German war effort. On the international level, many denounced the use of the unnecessarily viscious flamethrowers, and opposed the notion that gases were more humane than traditional weapons, but, more importantly, the "Rape of Belgium" was a rallying cry for the British, as was the Lusitania for the United States. It could be argued that Germany's "total war" tactics were most effective in losing Germany the war.
The vivid decriptions in this excerpt also jolted my memory to the many artists who were influenced by the atrocities of trench warfare. T.S. Eliot, Ernest Hemingway, Pablo Picasso, Henry James, and others are going to be greatly affected by the experiences and descriptions of World War I. T.S. Eliot's "The Hollow Men" is going to directly pertain to the Great War, but all of these individuals are going to deal with a question that begins to develop prior to the war, but rises to its zenith after conflict has ended and the barbarities have been observed: where is man's place in the modern world? This "modern dillemma" is going to greatly influence the arts, and go so far as to force many citizens (the Lost Generation) to become willing expatriates. Though World War I inspired many of these thinkers and artists in future endeavors, I would like to hear opinions on to what extent the war influenced the modern movement in the arts.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Matt I agree with you on the basis that Germany hurt its own war effort with atrocities like "The Rape of Belgium" I struggle to understand how the military leaders of Germany could not see the problems this would cause for them later down the road. It leads me to wonder whether the military leaders were that confident in Germany's ability to win the war, or whether they were just ignorant and overlooked the problems that this would obviously cause. I think you make a good point in wondering what effect this war had on the arts, because I'm sure it make a great impact.
ReplyDeleteMatt- I wish I had a more definitive answer to the impact of the war on art. Certainly the embracing of modernity could be one key impact on the arts. Artists attempted to come to terms with what it meant to be modern and to live in the world created by the war. So, for example, you get movements like the Bauhaus that focus on making art fit with functionality and efficiency.
ReplyDeleteAs far as your points about the negative effects of Germany's war-time decisions, I think you are right on. Essentially it seems that German high command believed in the possibility of a knock-out blow that would end the war before significant American troop strength arrived in Europe. But, as you point out, the policies the Germans adopted to 'win' the war seemed only to strengthen Allied resolve and to ensure their eventual defeat.