Cawthon On War
Compare and contrast the experiences of the men who wrote these two accounts about World War II.
The author of the article 'When I Arrived The War Was Over' is a young pilot during World War II. This is one of the major differences between him and the author of 'St. Lo', who is a foot soldier in the war. They each play very different wars in the same war, and their stories reflect that. Their different positions during affect the amount of danger they experience, the amount and type of violence they witnessed, and their view of the war. Cawthon (the author of 'St.Lo') and his unit saw a lot of action, making him cognizant of horrific effects of the war from the start: 'in 3 weeks nearly 40k Americans killed' (Cawthon 2). His company saw …show more content…
Unlike Rudd, he had no literal or metaphorical distance from the war; he saw friends killed and injured in front of him, and so saw the war not as an opportunity to gain acclaim or as an adventure, but as a brutal and unpredictable fight to be survived. On this he says 'this is not a drama of machines, but of ordinary men who have achieved and extraordinary triumph over their fears and vulnerable flesh (Cawthon 22), demonstrating his understanding of the war and it's atrocities. On the other hand, heading into the war, Rudd sees it as an adventure - 'hoping, like all nineteen year old American male movie fans, to be a fighter pilot' (Rudd 1). During the war, he sees awful things, but he saw most of them from hundreds of feet above; though he lost friends, he lost them from afar. Because of his distance and relative lack of involvement in the war, he was able to feel disappointed when the war ended - 'I discovered that the war was over- it was a terrible letdown' (Rudd 16). He goes on to say that nothing has been 'so important or exciting since' (Rudd 16). Because he had little directly negative experience with the war, he wasn't glad when the war ended, and feels nostalgic for it later in
The author of the article 'When I Arrived The War Was Over' is a young pilot during World War II. This is one of the major differences between him and the author of 'St. Lo', who is a foot soldier in the war. They each play very different wars in the same war, and their stories reflect that. Their different positions during affect the amount of danger they experience, the amount and type of violence they witnessed, and their view of the war. Cawthon (the author of 'St.Lo') and his unit saw a lot of action, making him cognizant of horrific effects of the war from the start: 'in 3 weeks nearly 40k Americans killed' (Cawthon 2). His company saw …show more content…
Unlike Rudd, he had no literal or metaphorical distance from the war; he saw friends killed and injured in front of him, and so saw the war not as an opportunity to gain acclaim or as an adventure, but as a brutal and unpredictable fight to be survived. On this he says 'this is not a drama of machines, but of ordinary men who have achieved and extraordinary triumph over their fears and vulnerable flesh (Cawthon 22), demonstrating his understanding of the war and it's atrocities. On the other hand, heading into the war, Rudd sees it as an adventure - 'hoping, like all nineteen year old American male movie fans, to be a fighter pilot' (Rudd 1). During the war, he sees awful things, but he saw most of them from hundreds of feet above; though he lost friends, he lost them from afar. Because of his distance and relative lack of involvement in the war, he was able to feel disappointed when the war ended - 'I discovered that the war was over- it was a terrible letdown' (Rudd 16). He goes on to say that nothing has been 'so important or exciting since' (Rudd 16). Because he had little directly negative experience with the war, he wasn't glad when the war ended, and feels nostalgic for it later in