War Now and Then

I know this post is a little bit belated but I thought this poem was interesting and worth sharing because it questions what is justifiable in times of war and poses some interesting issues that I feel like Whitman could really speak to.

Bagram, Afghanistan, 2002 By: Marvin Bell

The interrogation celebrated spikes and cuffs,
the inky blue that invades a blackened eye,
the eyeball that bulges like a radish,
that incarnadine only blood can create.
They asked the young taxi driver questions
he could not answer, and they beat his legs
until he could no longer kneel on their command.
They chained him by the wrists to the ceiling.
They may have admired the human form then,
stretched out, for the soldiers were also athletes
trained to shout in unison and be buddies.
By the time his legs had stiffened, a blood clot
was already tracing a vein into his heart.
They said he was dead when they cut him down,
but he was dead the day they arrested him.
Are they feeding the prisoners gravel now?
To make them skillful orators as they confess?
Here stands Demosthenes in the military court,
unable to form the words “my country.” What
shall we do, we who are at war but are asked
to pretend we are not? Do we need another
naive apologist to crown us with clichés
that would turn the grass brown above a grave?
They called the carcass Mr. Dilawar. They
believed he was innocent. Their orders were
to step on the necks of the prisoners, to
break their will, to make them say something
in a sleep-deprived delirium of fractures,
rising to the occasion, or, like Mr. Dilawar,
leaving his few possessions and his body.

 

There are so many themes being spoken to that reminded me of Whitman; the admiration of the body even in its’ grotesque and injured state, the comradery of soldiers at war, the conflict of soldiers’ will against duty, and the burden of nationalism at a time of war.

Torture was never something Whitman saw or discussed. Placing myself in the mind of Whitman, he would probably see it as an honorless slaughter of man or horrible necessary evil of war. I believe he would have many of the same questions of the soldier. What do you think? I say this because I view the act of torture akin to slavery. Something that has been institutionalized but lacks proper justification. Whitman was an observer of slavery and its’ victims, he sympathized for them but could not/did not change the system. The soldier (possibly Bell himself) is a witness and participant in the torture of prisoners but cannot defend his actions or the country, cannot justify the acts of violence with nationalism or duty. Would Whitman see things similarly? Or would he take a strong stance in opposition?

Back to the similarity of voice, I love the first description of the body at hand. “inky blue that invades a blackened eye, eyeball that bulges like a radish, that incarnadine that only blood can create.” Simultaneously grotesque and horrific and beautiful, all painted as Whitman would see it. In The Wound-Dresser we see him caring for boys that he know will soon die and in the same way we see the impending death for ‘Mr. Delwar’ as “a blood clot was already tracing a vein to his heart.”

Further on we are reminded that the men torturing Mr. Delwar are just boys, “athletes trained to shout in unison and be buddies.” But that line does not make them innocent because they are trained to be buddies. It is as if Bell doesn’t believe they have any agency or thought of their own. I feel that Whitman saw the soldiers in his poems far differently. He saw boys performing their duty to country and home, not violent machines. I believe Bell had Whitman’s sympathy for the victim of torture but struggled with how to feel toward the soldiers certainly felt little nationalism or pride.

I could go on much farther in the ways I feel that these two poets speak to each other and grapple with the same issues surrounding war but I want to hear your opinions. We say Whitman is a poet of all ages, nations, and people but what would he say of this kind of war and this kind of America? A country where even our wars are clothed in secrecy and covering up of actions. Are there other similarities between the two that I missed or was perhaps was misguided in my reading?

One Response to War Now and Then

  1. Prof VZ March 12, 2016 at 5:18 pm #

    I really like the connections you draw here between these two poets. It’s interesting to think of both of these poets as witnesses to wars. Whitman never disavowed his patriotic commitment–he never stumbled over the words “my country.” He seemed intent on keeping the grass above the grave as green as it could be. In that sense, I think Bell would see in Whitman, at times, a “naive apologist,” a poet too ready to add a cliche to cover up war’s excesses. At the same time, especially in his notebooks, Whitman was very clear about the ravages and excesses of war. One could do much with this connection!

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes

Skip to toolbar