Similarities Between All Quiet On The Western Front And In Flanders Fields

“In Flanders Fields” by John McCrae, “All Quiet on the Western Front” produced by Carl Laemmle, and Storm of Steel by Ernest Junger all describe the gruesome setting and effects that were a reality for soldiers fighting in World War I. Each piece presents this information through different medias: “In Flander’s Fields” through poetry, “All Quiet on the Western Front” through film, and Storm of Steel through prose. Although they are all of different medias, they evoke a similar sense of pathos in the audience through their use of similar rhetorical strategies. Each work compels the reader to realize how fragile life really is through its employment of diction and imagery. The second stanza of McCrae’s “In Flanders Fields” reminds the reader

“All Quiet on the Western Front” depicts the horrors of war graphically using actors and dramatic lines to portray the horrors of war in a way that evokes a strong emotional response in the audience. In contrast, Storm of Steel merely gives an account of the events of World War I, dictating what went on impersonally and embellishing little. Though it may seem as though Storm of Steel is devoid of any emotion and therefore devoid of pathos, it is precisely this lack of embellishment that highlights the reality of the horrors of war and draws out an emotional response from the

Junger’s clear diction and imagery are primary components that contribute to his pragmatic tone. Junger evokes emotion in the audience through his portrayal of simple and direct facts which is reflected in his simple and direct diction. This is evident when he says, “I heard a stifled, unpleasant sound; with a degree of calm that astonished me, I registered that it came from a bloated disintegrating corpse,” (Junger 97) Junger simply and directly describes his personal experience, giving the audience a clear picture of his unpleasant surroundings. Junger’s simple diction and clear imagery and forces the reader to acknowledge what he describes for what it is-fact. Only after recognizing Junger’s work as fact and not fantasy can the reader formulate a realistic image of World War I without consciously or subconsciously dismissing the image as an embellishment of the truth. This harsh portrayal reminds the audience that life is not always pleasant, and it evokes a sense of gratefulness as well as awareness that misfortune may happen to anyone at any