“For
days he made ceaseless calculations, but they were all wondrously unsatisfactory.
He found that he could establish nothing. He finally
concluded that the only way to prove himself was to go into the blaze, and
figuratively to watch his legs to discover their merits and faults. He
reluctantly admitted that he could not sit still and with a mental slate and
pencil derive an answer. To gain it, he must have blaze, blood, and danger,
even as a chemist requires this, that, and the other.”
That quote is the
theme of Stephen Crane’s novel.
What might we do when
the chips are down?
What might we do when
the heat turns up?
Do we possess the heroic
qualities that we would like to think we possess?
Do we possess more cowardly
attributes than we would like to admit?
Crane’s brief novel is
often inflicted on middle and high-school students, I wager, because of it’s
very briefness. I also say “inflict” as the novel, as taught [I suffered
through three classes that included it as required reading myself] often is viewed
as an anti-war tract.
It is anti-war in the same
vein that Robert Leckie’s true account of his experiences Helmet for My Pillow: From Parris Island to the Pacific is
anti-war.
Both Leckie’s memoir
of true events and Crane’s fictional depiction dwell on an un-romanticized
blood and grue version of armed conflict where the “glory” is stripped off the
top of the narrative and what valor or courage that claws its way through the mud
and blood is all the more valorous all the more marrow-bone inspiring as it
comes from a place of truth rather than one pre-packaged as heroism wrapped in flag-draped
heroics.
Both books are
anti-war in the sense that any human with a compassionate commiserating soul would
read of such misery and never wish it inflicted upon another human being. And
if such armed action is required, to sit idly by and provide nary a hand in support,
be that one’s own skin-in-the-game service or at the very least a return to the
days of Victory Gardens where sacrifices were made and bumper sticker phrases
of “I Support the Troops” would have been viewed as the weak-sauce that it is.
The true theme of
Crane’s novel is: Does our protagonist have what it takes to face what is to
come?
In turn, the
thoughtful reader is left to ask him or herself: Do YOU have what it takes?
Have a read of that opening
quote again, the crux and truth is here: He
finally concluded that the only way to prove himself was to go into the blaze,
and figuratively to watch his legs to discover their merits and faults. He
reluctantly admitted that he could not sit still and with a mental slate and
pencil derive an answer. To gain it, he must have blaze, blood, and danger,
even as a chemist requires this, that, and the other.”
The proof of life is always
in the doing. You find your character, your strengths, your weaknesses when under
fire figuratively or literally.
You discover your true
self when you do something, anything risky. However, you define risk, whether you
are willing to face it or not answers your own question of what you are.
Crane did not write a “war
novel” [anti or otherwise.] He asked a universal question of all humans and
merely framed it in a brief Civil War tale.
What are the merits of
your own legs in the face of risk?
We will only know if
we test them.
All the guesses and
surmises in the world regarding your bravery, your cowardice are mere suppositions
until we test ourselves.
In short Crane’s theme
is “Deeds not words define us.”
May we all test our
legs often and discover what we are. Until then, all else is a guess.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.