Search Views


Browse Archives

Views

The Old Lie: Dulce et Decorum Est

November 10, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Cane. Short haircut. Young. Here in a community college, that means “Veteran. Wounded.” I always introduce myself to see what help they need at school. Or perhaps what help I need, because I am so ashamed of what I, the people, have put these veterans through with little result or purpose.

One cane I’ll call Tony I’ve lost altogether. He wasn’t thirty years old. An improvised explosive devise, an IED, in Iraq had caused his wounds, he told me. Brain trauma, which showed in his speech and thinking. The limp was because the IED had broken his neck. In the fog of war, no one had discovered the fracture until he was in a hospital in Germany. Just the effort of walking left him sweating in the lobby. He had his veterans benefits paperwork. A colleague and I made sure he had what he needed and knew the right lines to register. I looked two days later. Tony wasn’t registered. I telephoned. He’d been mugged on the subway. I talked with his father. I offered to drive over and pick Tony up. We couldn’t get Tony back to school. He only wanted to go to community college for job training. Another cane is still in school.

For the sake of these canes, and the coffins, too, how about an assignment for us all this week? Let’s distribute at every meeting and every class we attend this week copies of Wilfred Owen’s World War I poem, “Dulce et Decorum Est.” (Click to download, or see below.) Ask two questions. Did Owen write this to train English majors? How can we prevent these scenes from ever happening again?

What is war but the petulant refusal to solve a problem by other means? Who’s accountable for a citizenry able to solve impossible problems? Colleges and universities? My teaching self keeps asking. Any gathering of one or more U.S. academic leaders is quick to proclaim that the U.S. has the finest higher education system in the world. Are we failing in classrooms if our graduates create a world of so many canes and coffins?

Fine to stop here if you’ll agree to read and assign to every student and friend in sight either Odysseus in America: Combat Trauma and the Trials of Homecoming or Achilles in Vietnam: Combat Trauma and the Undoing of Character, both by Jonathan Shay. A MacArthur Prize winner, Shay is a psychiatrist who works with combat veterans. My clumsy paraphrase of Shay’s argument: Combat is exponentially worse than anyone who hasn’t been there can imagine. We’d have to be crazy to think a society can train and send young people to kill and then expect those same young people to return to civilian life and live happily ever after.

With a trivial yet-4F childhood injury in my already charmed life, I absolved myself of any thought of war or military service when my turn came, in Vietnam. Through circumstance in recent years, I’ve met these Iraq and Afghanistan veterans in my classes and my office every day. Three friends have been at war. Two in Iraq. One in Afghanistan. I just never knew if the three would reply to the next e-mail. Those were friends. I cannot imagine what a family endures.

What little I really know of war I’ve learned over the past three years. Each semester, I’ve had at least one Iraq or Afghanistan veteran in a class or looking for help to apply to a four-year college. I wish, I wish Tony’s story were the exception. Twice I’ve been to events where the Kennedy School and Harvard Business School honor students who are veterans or in uniform. Sitting with these students, twice, I could only wonder why we, the people, were sending these thoughtful, intelligent and dedicated human beings to war. Ever. As a group, these were finer people than I’ve ever encountered in any job I’ve ever had. I can’t imagine any of them making the mistakes that are routine on Wall Street.

I’ve tried asking veterans if they feel that we, the people, truly understand our role in sending troops to war. The soldiers are not the ones to ask. They went because, in the U.S. system of government, we sent them through our representatives in Congress. Those against a war are as responsible as those in favor.

I turned instead to two friends in higher education, Jim Wright, a Marine who just retired as president of Dartmouth, and Linda Bilmes, a Kennedy School professor who is co-author of The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict. Wright and James Selbe of the American Council on Education have for years been visiting military hospitals, to help wounded troops go on to college.

“We need to recognize the full costs of war when we agree to take on a war. And caring for the men and women who have served is a part of the cost,” Wright said. He was back from his 19th visit to Walter Reed Army Medical Center. “This is our legacy and our responsibility.”

The Devil's Workshop
Highly Selective
Veterans Day Survey

Institution Current Undergraduate Veteran Enrollment
Yale 0
Princeton 0
Williams 0
Harvard 4
Dartmouth 16
Stanford 30
Bunker Hill
Community College
285

(c)Inside Higher Ed

Bilmes focused on where colleges and universities may have succeeded in research but failed in education, in teaching future leaders to analyze and to think through a problem. “Before the Iraq war we were told that it could cost $60 billion. The economics adviser, Lawrence Lindsay, was fired for suggesting that the cost could be as high as $200 billion,” Bilmes said. “We now know the war has already cost us $1 trillion and the long-term costs -- once you take veterans health care and disability compensation and economic costs into account -- will exceed $3 trillion. Why wasn't there any discussion of this beforehand?” As reported here in 2007, Bilmes herself suffered for trying to discuss the true costs ahead.

Back to Owen and the “blood shod,” the lame and the blind, “Drunk with fatigue” and the “the blood come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs.” The traditional press may agonize over publishing images of the dead and wounded we, the people, sent to war. The Web is ahead of traditional media. In Google Images search “Iraq, wounded” to see the people Wright and Selbe champion. Wilfred Owen would recognize the scenes.

Even with the generous new (It’s about time) G.I. Bill, veterans struggle. I know the enlisted men and women, not the officers from the Kennedy School and HBS, whose readjustment is difficult enough. I wrote here about a former sniper, struggling to stay in school. He is okay for now. Barely. Enrollment in a third-tier state university by a veteran with Ivy League ability is survival, not victory.

IHE has also written about John Around Him, an Oglala Sioux who drove a tank in the Iraq war. John is beginning his second year at Dartmouth. With what I know now about enlisted veterans and the obstacles they face, a miracle is the only explanation I have for John’s success.

Another, wounded in Iraq but no cane, has vanished. He writes better than I do. Juggling school and family and work and slim finances was too much. Something always disrupted our agreement to visit the (heroic) Boston Veterans Center Friday afternoons. Part of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Vet Centers, championed by Garry Trudeau in Doonesbury, focus on combat veterans. (See Trudeau’s citations here.) Remember that most enlisted men and women started out in poverty and then return, carrying the trauma of war, to that same struggle. Poverty is difficult enough without PTSD.

Let’s hand out Owen’s poem this week and see what we can discover.

DULCE ET DECORUM EST

Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of tired, outstripped Five-Nines that dropped behind.
Gas! Gas! Quick, boys! – An ecstasy of fumbling,
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling,
And flound'ring like a man in fire or lime ...
Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light,
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.
In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.
If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie; Dulce et Decorum est
Pro patria mori.

Wick Sloane writes The Devil’s Workshop for Inside Higher Ed. He teaches at Bunker Hill Community College and is the author of “Common Sense,” a pamphlet asking if the bachelor’s degree is obsolete. Download the pamphlet free here.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on The Old Lie: Dulce et Decorum Est

  • Posted by Judith on November 10, 2009 at 8:00am EST
  • Every year I lecture my students on the origin of what is now called "Veterans' Day." This year I scheduled "Dulce et Decorum Est" deliberately for 11/11. I tell them something about the history of the war and that it was "the war to end all wars." I tell them that I was born during the Truman administration and that every president in my lifetime has sent American soldiers overseas to fight and die, and I ask them to take some time to think what the 11/11 day is really for.
    I also teach in community college; I also teach vets, and students whose brothers, sisters, friends, lovers are serving in Iraq.

  • Posted by Old Veteran on November 10, 2009 at 9:45am EST
  • Nice piece, but there was no mention of the harm done to so many veterans by affirmative action. White men are a substantial part of our military but higher education has been eagerly complicit in discriminating against them because of their race and sex. Indeed the Supreme Court ruling allowing such discrimination until those now-young veterans are middle-aged includes the name of a university president. Read poems, but at the same time please fight for equal treatment for all veterans.

  • The "Poor" Soldier
  • Posted by Don Inbody , Lecturer, Political Science at Texas State University on November 10, 2009 at 11:00am EST
  • The author writes a powerful article - one that I am generally in line with. I hesitate to bring this up, because I agree with the overall tone of his article. However, he passes along an old, inaccurate line - "Remember that most enlisted men and women started out in poverty and then return, carrying the trauma of war, to that same struggle."

    The volunteer military of today does not pull "most" of its personnel from poverty. While it is true that we do not tend to draw our recruits from the highest SES quintile of homes, we also do not tend to draw them from the lowest quintile of homes. The young people who come from those homes tend to not graduate from high school (another social problem that certainly needs to be addresses.) Only a small percentage of recruits have not graduated from high school. The recruit of today is more highly educated than the general population of the United States. While only about 80 percent of civilians ages 18-24 have high school diplomas, over 98 percent of recruits do.

    Still, the author has it exactly correct when he talks about the wasting of our veterans. These young men and women come back from situations that most of us cannot imagine. And, as the author repeatedly reminded us, we asked them to do this for us. I am reminded of a conversation reported in Time magazine in the waning years of the Vietnam war. A soldier in uniform was approached by a citizen of his home town and was asked, "What on earth are you guys doing over there?" The soldier just looked back and replied, "Don't you know? You sent me."

  • It's not either/or
  • Posted by Phil on November 10, 2009 at 11:00am EST
  • It's wrong to pit the interests of veterans in opposition to affirmative action programs. First, veterans were among the initial beneficiaries of affirmative action with the GI Bill after WW2, and continue to benefit from programs and policies that don't apply to non-veterans. More needs to be done, but not at the expense of other forms of injustice. Second, Blacks, American Indians, Pacific Islanders and member of various other minority groups serve disproportionately in the military. (Hispanics serve at about their ratio in the population. Only Asians serve at a rate lower than their percentage in the population, and they are rarely the beneficiaries of affirmative action programs in college admissions.) Finally, we continue to live in a society in which members of many minority racial and ethnic groups, as well as many women, are routinely denied equal treatment and equal opportunity, a fact that ought to trouble all of us. Affirmative action programs which address those inequalities are a small but important step towards creating a more just society, something which is ultimately in all of our interests, veterans and non-veterans alike.

  • What is war?
  • Posted by grammaticus ordinarius on November 10, 2009 at 11:00am EST
  • "What is war but the petulant refusal to solve a problem by other means?" Well, it can also be a self-sacrificial, last-ditch, desperate, emergency effort to limit the wickedness being done to others and to eliminate the threat of the spread of that wickedness.

    Want to eliminate war? Convert individuals on all sides. How? Bona fide, sustained, searching humanistic reflection is one very promising path. Start with the Iliad.

    The humanities "correctly done" could be the best "Peace Studies" and "Hate Studies" program we could ever hope for. Who will lead us there?

  • Please...
  • Posted by senex scholasticus on November 10, 2009 at 11:00am EST
  • Old Veteran, have some decency. Do not perpetuate this nonsense.

  • Families at war/Anarchism revisited
  • Posted by James L. Ward , Landscape Architect/Assistant Professor at College of Charleston on November 10, 2009 at 12:15pm EST
  • The canes and coffins of war are bad enough. We should also consider the families destroyed by prolonged deployments, estranged family members, and the everyday and mundane stress of coping with it all. It took my family decades to finally unravel after my father spent six years deployed in Viet Nam and Korea. He died recently and with his passing, there is no more reason for pretending that we care for each other any more. There has been nothing solved, nothing learned, no love left.

    The heart wrenching stories are simply a cynical game played by both the liberal and conservative middle classes who are simply out of touch. Is it any coincidence that contrary to popular belief, the working classes tend to oppose the war while the middle educated classes either are unengaged or find some rationale for justifying it all. At what point are our academic institutions going to engage the issues meaningfully? If the past is any indication, never. A cynical nihilism, perhaps a political anarchistic movement seems the only effective counter. Has anyone recently seriously evaluated this approach?

  • romanticism supreme
  • Posted by grammaticus ordinarius on November 10, 2009 at 1:15pm EST
  • James Ward says, "A cynical nihilism, perhaps a political anarchistic movement seems the only effective counter." This is the ultimate romantic, out-of-touch approach. Take this path and be ready to say hello to warlords and orcs. Or even become an orc yourself.

    Many of the people praising the sacrifices of soldiers on tv seem to be very "working class" to me. Do not rob veterans of the meaning of their sacrifices. That is wrong-headed, short-sighted, and downright cruel.

  • Our honored dead
  • Posted by Catullus , Visiting Lecturer/Sociology at Bridgewater State College on November 10, 2009 at 1:45pm EST
  • Or worse. I had the opportunity to have a talent and capable student who had committed to military service in a class at state college up the road from you. Last year, I'd read that he'd died in an automobile accident while serving. If there is anything this country needs to do right, amongst the many problems that exist, it's that we honor these who have served. Our society owes them a great deal, and that still won't be enough to offset their sacrifice.

  • Blinded by the tears
  • Posted by Amy De Rosa on November 10, 2009 at 2:45pm EST
  • The author writes:'What is war but the petulant refusal to solve a problem by other means?'

    We should ask, 'What is this article but the petulant whining of another academic who has no understanding of why people join the military?' Here's a couple books to add to your reading list, Mr. Sloane.

    AWOL by Kathy Roth-Douquet and Frank Schaeffer
    Soldier's Heart by Elizabeth Samet

  • Posted by Mike Burke on November 10, 2009 at 4:00pm EST
  • I think Amy DeRosa's comments are a bit harsh; Wick Sloan doesn't deserve such calumny. He tackled a tough topic, and he did as well as anyone could who's not had the chance to be a veteran. Veterans are pretty complex--we're all very different in terms of status, motivation, experience, etc., but one thing that we do have in common is a distrust or wariness of nonveterans who want to "help" us, or claim us as their own--or using us as cudgels to beat up other people. We've had enough of that already, thanks very much.

    I thought the most interesting item in his article was the chart showing the distribution of veterans in Boston-area colleges. My Harvard alum dad who spent 30+ years in the Navy would be very sad. Some argue that the Ivies produce the graduates who send the graduates of the service academies to war, and that maybe they could repay the debt by granting access to more veterans. My old friend and mentor Pat Hoy wrote about this issue in a 1996 Harvard Magazine article: http://harvardmagazine.com/1996/05/soldiers.html

    Finally, I would suggest that readers follow Sloan's advice and read either of Jonathan Shay's remarkable books. Elizabeth Samet's book is quite nice (I'm in it), but it represents just one small aspect of military service. AWOL is a bit of a polemic, isn't it, written by a woman who was (gasp!) surprised to find how few "elite" folks had actually served? Shay is about the best there is on the difficulties veterans have readjusting to civilian life.

  • Posted by Wick Sloane , To Amy DeRosa on November 10, 2009 at 4:28pm EST
  • Amy --

    We are accountable for our outcomes, and I'm sorry that's how the column struck you. I accept your calumny, as I must. I have talked with scores of people serving and also veterans. My father was in the Battle of the Bulge. My uncle, his brother, flew 26 combat missions as a U.S. Marine in World War II. My grandfathers on both sides served in World War I. A brother in law was a pilot in Vietnam. Several other friends served in Vietnam. I have read Elizabeth Samet's book and corresponded with her. I shall go find the other book you recommend.

    The Iraq and Afghanistan troops and veterans, officers and enlisted, I've spoken with serve with a pride and a dedication and, certainly, a willingness to make sacrifices beyond any I know of in any other profession. That's precisely why this situation concerns me. Why do we, the people, create a world where people of the quality and dedication of the men and women in the armed forces have to risk their lives?

    I'm sure you won't be the last to call me "petulant." Out of concern for those who truly are academics, note that I am not an academic. Or even close. Please come by Bunker Hill Community College anytime.

    Wick Sloane

  • To Mr. Burke
  • Posted by Amy De Rosa on November 11, 2009 at 5:15am EST
  • A charge of calumny? Now that's harsh---such an accusation! I thought my remarks were actually very tame and wonderfully to the point.

    Seriously, though,no, the book AWOL is not accurately characterized as 'a polemic' and, no, Roth-Douqet was not surprised by how few elites serve in the military. You are ill-informed. Rather, she and her co-author decry the current state of affairs as regards who chooses to serve and not to serve in our military in addition to exploring the attitude that many in our society have toward military service and why.

  • Posted by Mike Burke on November 11, 2009 at 8:30am EST
  • Ms. DeRosa--I've read AWOL. I don't agree with your characterization of its tone or content, but certainly understand how you would arrive at it. Best wishes.

  • Why, indeed, Mr. Sloane?
  • Posted by Rod Bell , Adjunct Prof - Politial Science at College of DuPage on November 11, 2009 at 2:15pm EST
  • The author assures us that, at the heart of the matter, is this question: "Why do we, the people, create a world where people of the quality and dedication of the men and women in the armed forces have to risk their lives?" Good question, if it's not treated as a rhetorical one. In that sense, it means something like "What the hell? Is this deplorable, or what?" But, like the economy that Mr. Sloane also takes a swipe at (his "canes" would never make the terrible decisions the denizens of Wall Street did), there are better questions about war than the moral condemnations masquerading as questions about how we can commit such outrages. (Cue Peter, Paul, & Mary: "When will they e-e-ever learn?") How do economies work, anyhow? Every day I walk around in a world I could never have constructed, nor could anyone I know of, yet there it is in its impossibly complex, coordinated reality. How did that come about, and how does it work? Same for governments, with their armies and war machines: How does that work, how did it get started, how do they (whoever "they" are) get rational people to risk death? I don't mean "how could they?" like "they" were either terribly naughty or recklessly indifferent; I mean, really, how?

    Now, for a rhetorical question that may rub the other way a bit: How can so many people talk this way and still be paid to teach college?