In Part 5 of The Wars, there is controversy over the topic of the freeing of the horses in Chapter 8, and if Robert freed these horses out of good morals for the love of animals or from pure insanity of disobeying his Captains orders. This is a long argued discussion topic throughout this book that leads to Robert’s death because of this poor decision.
In one hand, many readers believe that Robert saved the horses out of good morals and his overall love of animals. Reading the novel, the reader gets to know Robert Ross and sees his character develop throughout the many events that take place. Robert grows up with good morals and always had a love of all things living. It is argued that Robert freed the horses out of good will and love for these defenseless animals. Many people agree with this statement, as do I, but the overall thought of did the war end up making Robert go mad, which would thrive him to do this action?
On the other hand, seeing Robert’s character develop before, during and after the war shows the reasoning to why people believe that Robert went insane and led him to this disobedience of his Captain. Before the war, Robert wouldn’t have killed anything living. Compare this to during the war and to what took place in Part 5, shows that the war changed Robert mentally to the point of insanity. Robert would have never killed an animal, and now after Robert has been through the war, he ended up killing over 150 horses and his Captain. He disobeyed his Captains orders and ended up killing him because of this. The fact that Robert has changed because of the war, shows that he went mad from the war, and leads to the overall argument that Robert went insane and led to his death.Many readers believe that Robert killed the animals out of an act of mercy because they were suffering, but to say this was the reasoning for killing Captain Leather and Private Cassles, that excuse doesn’t seem to work. As much as the reader may like to think that Robert didn’t go mad, you have to realize that Robert wouldn’t have done these actions if it wasn’t for the war changing him mentally. Although this argument may be discussed throughout generations if Robert actually went insane, the facts lead to one answer that Robert did in fact go mad because of the war, that later led to his death.
I disagree whole heartedly. just because a character does something they wouldn't have done years before does not make them insane. Findley is trying to show that war confuses everything. we describe animals as savage, but during war humans are savage. Thousands of men are lost without gaining an inch of ground. Animals are tortured and made to participate. Men rape men. It is the war that is insane- not Robert. His experiences in the war are what make him capable of killing the two officers - but what they represent is insanity- the insanity of war. "If an animal did this we would call it mad and shoot it." Robert is calling the war mad and shooting it. War makes people do unthinkable things- like having to shoot 150 horses to put them out of the misery created by man. In the end Robert is smiling in the picture with Juliet- he smiles because he in the end was able to claim back who he was and act according to his own values. he is not insane- in fact his is possibly to most sane thing about war.
ReplyDelete