Susan Crile; Depicting Violence “America has been at war ninety percent of the time since 1776; 22 out of 239 years. We have an image of ourselves as out of touch with the reality of our military history, and we are on denial that we are waring nations. Gore Vidal said it well; we are on perpetual war for perpetual peace.” These were the first words said by Susan Crile during the discussion moderated by Harold Holzer, Director of the Roosevelt House Public Policy Institute at Hunter College. During these discussion, Susan talked about her paintings regarding the war and its outcomes where she tries to make the viewer feel and be aware of the pain and danger that a war represents to the humanity. (Crile) The twice awarded “National Endowment for the Arts Fellowships” Susan Crile, has been creating art to depict events such as the 1992 War in Iraq, the 9/11, Guantanamo, and the Abu Ghraib scandal. Although all these events are already covered on the media, she expressed that …show more content…
In order to accomplish her purpose, she made the paintings in large scale and some of them in multiple panels, she dominated the viewers’ space and prompted the ashes and tar by using materials such as charcoal, pastel, oil paint, and pumice. The artist tried to create images and abstractions that made the viewer feel involved in the image with close up views and simple details as tire tracks; she made the fire look so real, that the viewer can actually feel and see the fire burning around him or her. After four years of hard work, Susan finished her series “The Fires of War” and were first showed in April of 1994 at The St. Louis Art Museum.
In conclusion, while books, photos, movies and other historical documentation can portray information or a message about wartime events, they will never be able to produce the feelings of those that were personally involved in wars have experienced. Yet, it is incorrect to criticize these writers. The information they reveal is still very important historical information. Even if a reader or viewer of this media cannot feel exactly the same emotions as those involved, they still often experience an emotional connection to the events being depicted. This is important, not only for the historical knowledge gained about wars, but also to understand the nature and futility of their occurrence.
An image has the explicit power of telling a story without saying any words, that’s the power behind a photo. A photo tends to comes with many sides to a story, it has the ability to manipulate and tell something differently. There is a tendency in America, where explicit photos of war or anything gruesome occurring in the world are censored for the public view. This censorship hides the reality of our world. In “The War Photo No One Would Publish” Torie DeGhett centers her argument on censorship, detailing the account of graphic Gulf War photo the American press refused to publish. (73) DeGhett argues that the American public shouldn’t be restrained from viewing graphic content of the war occurring around the world. She believes that incomplete
For the great lesson which history imprints on the mind…is the tragic certainty that all wars gain their ultimate ends, whether great or petty, by the violation of personality, by the destruction of homes, by the paralysis of art and industry and letters…even wars entered on from high motives must rouse greed, cupidity, and blind hatred; that even in defensive warfare a people can defend its rights only by inflicting new wrongs; and that chivalrous no less than self-seeking war entails relentless destruction.
Anderson believes that Americans are good at remembering our wars, but we only remember the major wars that threatened our liberty, our freedom, or our values. Anderson says this is because we use them to remind ourselves of what sacrifice is. ...
Jones, Peter G, War and the Novelist: Appraising the American war Novel. University of Missouri Press, 1976. 5-6. Rpt. in Literary Themes for Students, War and Peace. Ed. Anne Marie Hacht. Vol. 2. Detroit: Gale, 2006. 449-450. Print.
...ness and emotional destructiveness of war. War is an unnatural thing, so The Thin Red Line, consequently, does not portray war in the “normal” fashion.
"The historian Will Durant calculated that there have been twenty nine years in all of human history during which a war was not underway somewhere." (Hedges, 2003). In fact more than half of my lifetime has consisted of the United States, my country, being at war. It is sad to know that I have no experienced peace. It is also alarming because I, like my peers, have become somewhat immune and numb to war. We have come to think of it as just another issue going on, and do not really see it as the drastic event that it really is. It is something that is just there; just in the background.
Kenneth Burke’s War, Response, and Contradiction focusses on the link between art, contradictions, and society. In this article, the different interpretations of stimuli from the members of the same society reveals the contradictory nature of humans. Two main examples are the anticipated reactions to the ways war is represented and the comparison of a lamp and literature. Individuals within society will interpret war differently when exposed to human and inhuman images of war, revealing the contradictory nature of humans. Comparing a lamp to literature assists in showing contradictory nature of humans as the audience realizes that individuals within the same society have different interpretations of the same stimulus.
Going to War The arrival of winter is well on its way. Colorful leaves had turned to brown and fallen from the branches of the trees. The sky opened to a new brightness with the disappearance of the leaves. As John drove down the country road, he was much more aware of all his surroundings.
The three narratives “Home Soil” by Irene Zabytko, “Song of Napalm” by Bruce Weigl, and “Dulce et Decorum Est” by Wilfred Owen all have the same feelings of war and memory, although not everyone experiences the same war. Zabytko, Weigl, and Owen used shifting beats, dramatic descriptions, and intense, painful images, to convince us that the horror of war far outweighs the devoted awareness of those who fantasize war and the memories that support it.
War has always been inevitable throughout the history of the world. The outcomes can differ greatly; it’s usually either a win or a loss. Wins or losses are just definite statements, but photos can represent these statements. Alfred Eisenstaedt’s “V-J Day in Times Square” shows an American sailor kissing a young woman right in the middle of Times Square, despite their surroundings. This iconic photo was taken after the U.S. declared victory over Japan in World War II, and was published in Life magazine a week later. John Gap’s (III) photo shows a young girl being consoled at a soldier’s funeral in a local high school gymnasium, later to be buried at Arlington National Cemetery. This humble photo was taken during the war still raging in Afghanistan, showing that these types of losses happen quite often, as there are no iconic photos for Afghanistan compared to the photo shot after the win over World War II. Unlike its counterpart, this photo was published only at a local level on a website. Both these photos show a soldier being dismissed to go home from war. Although the two photos share that common factor, the scenario in which the soldier comes home differs greatly. Through these photos, Albert Eisenstaedt and John Gaps III help evoke pathos and give the observer a sense of the pride and the devastation felt of a home coming from war using photographic elements such as framing, focus, and angles.
One of most anti-war paintings in the world is “Guernica” by Pablo Picasso, which illustrates scenes of horror during the bombing of Guernica, a village in the north of Spain during the Spanish Civil war. The painting itself is a montage of grotesque figures screaming in agony while being stabbed, holding their dead child, or their limbs being severed from their bodies. Since its first exhibition, “Guernica” has gained status as a symbol of peace and the tragedy of war. People elevated this painting to world-wide popularity because they “witnessed” how ugly and terrible war can be even if they never heard of Guernica, Spain. For most centuries, war was something that happened, but always seemingly removed from the “innocents”. War was a game for powerful leaders and men to play out on their battlefields far from their homes (though of course, many civilians were usually caught up in these spats). Guernica challenged the popular “distancing” attitude of the majority of the world who had never personally been in a war. People saw themselves in the “innocents” being slaughtered in the painting by outlandish animal figures and spears. They realized that war is a nightmare that could become a reality to anyone of them. Their empathic need to elevate “Guernica” into fame to gain more public awareness for the cause is a prime example of social justice’s role in
Ginzburg insists that time cannot heal the wounds of war and that her generation, tied to war by its suffering and by its destiny, uncompromisingly carries the truth. She effectively uses all her rhetorical tools: repetitive imagery, fatalistic tone, and purposeful lack of organization, to show how war makes people lose their world forever.
America has a long history of glorifying war. Many of America's early presidents were war heroes, a tradition that started with America's first president, George Washington, who was a soldier in the American Revolution. Being a war hero was sometimes all that was needed for a candidate to be successful in his bid for the presidency. Zachary Taylor, for instance, had never even voted in a national election prior to his becoming president, but he was a war hero (Tindall 513). This exalted view of war filtered into American literature. American literature portrays war as the true test of manhood. Any "real" man should be more than willing to d...
War is defined differently from different perspectives, some may viewed it positively and some may not. Cochrane, 2008 in his book defined war as being a period of organized violence between at least two parties, who may come from transnational, state or sub-state sources. On the other hand, “war” can also be defined as a patriotic act where one seeks the determination to lead their country as well as a sweet act that willing to sacrifice for their country. It can be viewed cruel, inhumane, and at the same time, noble. Ironically, war can make an individual a hero or a criminal.