Issue of War in Regeneration Novel - Book Report/Review Example

War is an international issue, or better yet, it can be seen as an international conflict. One of the most devastating results of the war is the number of deaths on both sides, and wouldn’t it be more justifiable to be against the war for this reason? However, war is not so much about winning battles or subverting the initiators or attackers, it is more about the pride of either sides on proclaiming their perspectives using this violent method. The violence of war does not only affect international relations, but it also significantly affects the lives of those involved in it. Regeneration explores the effects of war in personal lives. Developing the storyline along the real-life Sassoon’s declaration against the World War I, it tells the experience of the men on the lines right after their exposure to traumatic experiences. The novel does not only give a glimpse of what has become of the unfortunate soldiers but it also looks deep into their perspectives and opinions of the war that they served in. It does not only tell the story of the soldiers but also of the other people that have been, in one way or another, directly affected by the war. Barker mainly presented the idea of war as something that brings inner conflicts within the individuals affected and how these inner conflicts affect their view on war and their relationship with other people, those who have been in the war and those who are not directly involved in it. Regeneration is far from being a historical book. It is still a fictional novel, though based on real life characters. It presents the historical events of the war through a different perspective, not of heroism but of tragedy. Using a clinical setting sets the tone of the novel as something relevant and factual. Barker patterned his novel’s characters with real life characters prominent in the war, like Sassoon. She waded through the stories of veterans by interpreting each soldiers’ physical disability from the war with the turmoil inside them. Although patterned on real life characters, Barker created fictional conversations and assumptions on what has happened between the characters. She also inserted several totally fictional characters that will further serve the purpose of the triumph and failure of the inner conflicts of the people affected by the war. The novel focuses on contrasting notions of gallantry and embarrassment, but not of cowardice. Inner conflicts plague the soldiers and other people who serve in the war. This is clearly shown in River’s inner conflict. As a doctor, his job is to save lives but his responsibility during the war is to make sure that the soldiers are well enough to be sent back to the front lines, something that is contrasting with his profession. Although he is treating the patients, he will send them back to the dangerous fronts that sent the soldiers to him in the first place. Treating the soldiers’ incapacities, disabilities and ailments for them to be sent back to the war is totally opposite from saving the life of his patient, it is like treating them to be sent to their graves. Another point wherein Regeneration is far from being a historical book is its narrative point. Although straight to the point, factual and determined to show the truth behind the doors, it has the sound of subjectivity to it. This can be seen in several lines, wherein the narrator shifts from being a monotone storyteller to someone who seems to see through the character’s eyes. Although the narrator does not spill any of his personal views on the matter, he seems to spill little bits of subjective compliments using his character’s voice. His shift from a third person voice to someone who speaks for the character also indicates that this is not a historical novel, although it is based on historical facts. Barker used the facts to create a more real narrative of what has happened to the soldiers of the war, not during their gallant and brave acts during the battles but their struggle on facing the trauma of their personal experiences from the war. It is more individualistic in that sense, and it allows the readers to see the direct impact of war on individual’s, not just merely showing how the war affected the society in general. It seems like Barker wants her readers to know that the war is not all heroic acts of patriotism but is also a horrible and gruesome experience that the soldiers do not want to experience anymore. In fact, some soldiers wished to experience some kind of disability, sickness or ailment that will cause them to be sent home. This is shown in Willard’s case. As River’s diagnosed him, “there was no injury to the spine” (Barker 112). And Willard obviously manifested physical ailment because “(he doesn’t) want to go back” (Barker, 112). This even more indicates the desire of the affected ones to be far and away from the action itself. This notion sends envious thoughts in the soldier’s mind towards those people who can just escape the war, as what Prior felt when he saw people walking on the beach when he was with Sarah. The novel details various traumatic experiences of the soldiers through the psychiatric evaluation of Rivers, the main protagonist in the story. However, aside from this, the main line of the novel runs through the conflicts and changes in opinions and perspectives of Rivers. His exposure to the horrors of war evident upon the physical and psychological manifestations of his patients leads him to question the war itself. This indicates one of the main themes of the novel, that of madness. Rivers is a doctor by profession, someone who vowed to uphold the sacredness of life by preserving life. Because of his role in the war, wherein he serves to cure and to treat his patients in order for them to serve the war again, is something opposite of his doctoral virtues. This leads him to wonder if the physical and psychological madness of his patients are the effects of something worth it, or if it is the war itself that is the madness and that it is a social disability that leads to these patients being caught in suffering and pain. His inner struggle was suppressed for so long but when Sassoon came in as his patient, his inner conflict even more took shape as he found Sassoon to be free from all mental instability (Westman, 28). His struggles are also defined when he encountered Prior, especially when Prior declared that he believes that Rivers is one of them, the people who are pro-war or those who accept war as a needed violence to resolve conflicts (Barker, 80). The same inner conflict is also evident in Sassoon’s case, wherein he rejects the war but he feels the need to go back to the war because of his duty over his men. In the end, though, Sassoon accepts the war, or rather his duty to go back to his men (Barker, 246). The inner struggles that are depicted by both characters indicate the struggles of those who are involved in the war. Although they find it difficult to maintain loyalty over their duties, they find themselves bound to it because of an altruistic need to fulfill something that they believe will not make them feel guilty or will not make them regret not doing. This further proves how their inner conflict gives them the feeling of guilt regardless of their position or their actions. Whether they remain as patients, be healed and walk away from the war or go back to the lines, these soldiers will always be plagued by guilt. Guilt for the fact that they could have changed their reasons, perspectives and decisions but still face the same reality that the war have changed their lives and how they think about people, themselves and the war itself. However, this is something that readers can find hard to understand, especially when one thinks about the need to stand by what one believes in. Why do these two characters have to still go through the same ordeals that split their mind in half when they can in fact stand for just one position? For Sassoon, that is to go back to the war zone mainly because of his duty over his men, something that opposes his personal beliefs, or to stay away from it and try to convince the powerful men up in the position, those who control and commands those below, that the war is senseless and not beneficial for the men. For Rivers, that is to continue treating the patient soldiers in order for them to resume their duties as soldiers, something that contradicts his personal and doctoral virtue of preservation of life, or to prevent them from ever going back to the front lines. Rivers encourages his patients “to acknowledge their fears, their horror of the war – but they were expected to do their duty and return to France” (Barker, 48). This further emphasizes how Rivers maintains his duty, encourages his patients to maintain their duties, but he questions it. What can bring more peace in one’s mind? To go through something because of duty, though it is devoid of one’s personal beliefs, or to reject something entirely as to turn around full circle in order to preserve one’s personal beliefs? In such cases, as Sassoon’s and Rivers, there is no definite answer. One way may be the same as the other, any decision will make them question the what if in their later life. As what the conversation of Rivers and Graves in Part 1, Chapter 3 indicates duty and personal beliefs may be in conflict with each other, but one does not and should not turn away from duty, more of a binding contract, just because one changed his mind about it in the middle of the duty. As Barker professed in her novel, one can argue about the principles but still “you do the job”. This serves as the focal conflict in the novel, and one that drives the plot leading not to a conclusion but to more questions. Inner struggles and conflicts are things that have been masked by heroism and gallantry during war. Soldiers are pictured as bastions of honor and glory. They are praised, given medals. For those who died in battle, they are promoted to higher ranks, they are glorified. But behind this, as what Sarah experienced during her visit in the hospital, when she discovered the ward that is filled with the horrors of war, the room which is strategically hidden away from the public eye. This part in the novel is an eye-opener as it allows the reader even more to see that serving the war is not all glory. It might be for the nation or nations that have won the war, but for the individuals who were on the front lines of the battles, or for the medical practitioners who served to care for the wounded, it is not all success and glory. For these people, war is horrifying, war is destruction of personal lives. Though some may agree that is destroys life because of the physical disabilities of the soldiers but moreso it destroys lives because of the inner struggles that they experience after serving the war. Regeneration is a novel full of conflicting ideas. Whether one finds understanding in the personal struggles of the characters in the story because of one’s own real life struggles, it is hard to say. Regeneration questions own personal ideals and beliefs in contrast with the changes that one experiences through his decisions. As Rivers suggested, it is rather artificial to accept one’s views but not one’s actions. The novel greatly indicates that one’s actions may not always signify what is in his mind. Works Cited Barker, Pat. Regeneration. NY: Plume Publishing, 2003. Westman, K. Regeneration: A Reader’s Guide. NY: The Continuum International Publishing Group, Inc., 2001. Read More