A study of the social representation of war Essay

War, a reportage of the crude reality of the Afghanistan conflict started in 2001. Junger, the author and also protagonist, consent to us have it away as a US army soldier in the terriblegeologyoftheKorengal Valley. Even the soilappears to be the perfect place to host something as horrible as the Afghanistan warfare. Jungersfirst accomplishment is surely the terriblemasterpiecerepresentation of the US soldiers lives in Afghanistan. The combination of descriptive sequences and metonymic language throws the reader into the cruel battlefield whereTaliban and Americans play a slowgamethat everyone was enjoying too much to possibly bring to an end. Junger, however, doesnt sterilisehimself to the plainreportageof hisfive journeys. Hisbook succeedsat representing the sociological inter bringions that originate withinthe platoon. The men, livingin a hostileenvironmentwith passing poor living conditions, seemed to have established higher social moral values than our fraternity. The cour age, the love they feel for apiece other brings about the collective confession, described by Junger, as an addictive feature of the society of this platoon. Through the dialogues, I felt extremely surprised in noticing that those men essentially were happier than us, because, in their societalreality, the core systemwas taking care of each other. The social institutionsof the platoons imposed brotherhood andknowing that you had a family, your platoon, soldiers need wereaccomplished.I was then allowed to sympathize why the return to the normality is neer aneasy process for veterans.Given the sociological representation of war, I could not avoid the comparison betweenthe society of the platoon with our Westernised reality.Isnt it crazy in our civilized Western society, that all we seem to lack, is care for each other? Our modern society focused on our declare self-fulfillment, allows to ignore the moral calling,to withdraw from moral engagement however, in war, as Junger made me notice, nothing is taken for granted, everything is shared and everyone represents your family. If you save someone, its your duty, and accomplishing this duty takes you off from the psychological trauma of the daily atrocities of war allowing you to return to a familiar environment.I found Junger explanation of veterans traumatic return to reality very insightful.As he suggests, once you experience the caring society of the platoon, real-world seems even more hostile than war. Perhaps it is, perhaps the real battlefieldis our 21st-century society. Junger made me reflect and honor whether a hostile external environment is the only criteria where Marxscommunism principleshypothetically could work within a society as the company of each others is all military personnel have got, the creation of a reality where equality and common goals would establish the social institutions, could in turn act as a defending barrier from the external hostile environment, allowing the shared commit ment to a communist system.Junger in hisanalytical reflection(220-260) attempts to explain humanslove of war.As mentioned above, the returnto normalityseems to scare soldiers more thanthe combat itself,because there is no combat in the society. Throughouthis travels, the journalist never questions who gives us the right to be God. And if somehow we are allowed to fight for God position, as we accept that God was long gone from that Valley and the God position is vacant, are the soldiers trulyfightingonlybecause they are told to do so? Fighting means killing. Every day, it meanstaking over human lives. Junger never explores this topic in depth. He superficially justifies mens engagement intoconflict due to a physiological adrenaline addiction. bushellyI control that human nature is three-dimensional, and the analytical chapters neverexploredwhether the combat was addictive becausekilling is a joyful slaughter (Bourke, 1999). I felt that thisrelevant aspectof conflictswas creatio n avoided and it seemed like Junger maybe could not acceptour terrible human nature, our terrible love for war (Hillman, 2004). Personally, I believe that war is part of human beings and cannot be avoided, as neglecting itwould imply neglecting the human nature itself. Why do soldiers miss the good stuff?Junger superficialargumentation of addictionto adrenaline seems too weakly to support this argument. It is indeed scary, alone war is natural, and I feel confident in claiming this as empirical history shows us war constancy.Another face of this book review focuses on the consequences that I noticed on my emotional spectrum throughout the reading. My judgment vacillates betweenthe ability of Junger as a great writer and the negative implications of his writing abilityonmy emotional reaction.War further explores how easy it is to go from living to the dead (p. 85), the transcendentcondition of being on the real battleship the Koregan Valley. Jungers writing stylus leaves its mark , his climax, the vast use of short sentences to finish paragraphs and peculiarity to leave white empty space. It is here in these white wherehe allows me, the reader, to feel and imagine, and thusbring my persona intothose empty spaces this writing whattook me back into my past. Passing from one paragraph to the other, carrying a heavy shoot down of sadness, I started remembering.Anxiety made me overthinkingrendering the reading experiencenot pleasurable anymore. Junger was able to make me so engaged that I could not withdraw emotionallyanymore. Jungers great ability to describe the soldier life conditions triggered the reminiscence of my past, whereI could, to a much lesser extent, resemblethe soldiersanxious life situationwith my past 13-year-oldself. Alone in my own land, now as well, governed by war my parents, respectively the Taliban and the Americans. The gunfire, in my reality, pictured bythe lawyers, and as much as Junger, Im unable to move, sometimes unable to remember. Until now. My gear, my responsibilities, and as much as the men felt too hot, I felt too young.I al styles thought that a good book is like a good soundtrack that accompanies an as well good movie. But would the good movie create the same effect on the audience without the musical notes? The movie would still be good, but emotionally steady. What Junger is able to do in his book is allowing a natural larnment of this soundtrack throughout the entire duration of the reading travel. For me, the soundtrack were the emotions, I could feel the pain and the emotional dimension of the platoon and colligate it back to my personal experience. Could Junger have triggered a better emotional engagement, be it negative or positive?Another proof of the great ability of Junger in letting the reader assimilating the images of Afghanistan in war through his simple, emotionally detached writing style occurred when suddenly I found myself thrown into a distorted view of what we would recall as real ity. Everything, from the soil, the muffled noises, to the deprivation of light. It was a hostile environment. Chaos dominated the scene. Despair could be felt and seen by glancing at other living beings eyes. The concept of life was no longer alive. I saw myself running, without a purpose, without a destination, without knowing. I was perhaps running for not dying, maybe because fear impregnated the odor of the air. I was not running to survive. I remember falling, and there I clearly felt a fleece trespassing my climb and hitting my lung. Breathing became an unbearable painful experience. And I was lying there, alone, on that desolated land where God had possibly forgotten to visit for a long time.When the cockcrow shone my room, Iwas recollected into this world that we consider real. It took me a while to remove that negativity from my being. I remember hoping for someone to explain to me what had happened but no one of my war dream comrades was there. I could only grasp the gh ost of a memory dissolving without leaving a trace. Indeed, I had a negative emotional reaction, but this doesnt want to diminish Jungers skills.However, his emotionaldetachment,I could say, made mefeelsometimes frustrated.As the reporter, it is essential to remain detached as the sole and unique task is to report. However, I, as a reader, was looking for an emotional judgment from the author. I feltlike I couldreadthe mind of a unvoiced child, victimof an abuse,who,due to the trauma, has lost the capability of communication. And the more I was reading, the more the misunderstand was growing. Couldnt Junger express something, just a small confirmation that what was fortuity was wrong? It took me a while before understating. Only by reading chapter after chapter I was able torealize that the emotionally detached writing style adopted by Junger, was, in reality, an emotional response to the atrocities that he was subject to witness in his travels. The detachment was maybe the only w ay to survive, the only way to remind himself that the War was not his reality, that his permanence in Afghanistan was just temporary, unlike reality for the Platoon. Perhaps he also wanted to let the reader develop acritical judgment without intervening.Overall, the representation of the US soldiers life condition in Afghanistan, under a sociological and psychological viewpoint, represents the best outcome of this book. Junger proves to be able to communicate clearly what he went through and he doesnt stop here his skills overcome the simple flat reading experience and allow the reading audience to develop an emotional engagement, be this emotional reaction positive or negative. Considering what happened in Afghanistan roughly 10 years ago, and how men had to live daily, I feel grateful and lucky to have had the possibility to read this book, as the probability of a bullet hitting Jungers hypothalamus seems to have been somehow high.BibliographyBourke, J. (1999). An Intimate Histor y of Killing Face-to-face Killing in Twentieth-century Warfare. Hillman, J. (2004). A terrible love for war. New York The penguin press.