Written by Maxime Masson

for Prof. Christine Southmayd

Throughout history, armed conflicts have arisen between individuals and countries, in some cases for political and economic power. During the nineteenth century, authors and artists attempted to describe the consequences of the Napoleonic Wars through print and art. In his famous novel War and Peace, the Russian writer, Tolstoy, evaluates the pros and cons of battle while giving a novelistic account of the effect of war on the lives of various Russian characters during the time period surrounding the French invasion of Russia. The Spanish Romantic painter, Francisco Goya, demonstrates, in his 1814 oil painting The Third of May 1808, the horror and brutality of battle. And finally, the English artist, Ernest Crofts, in his 1895 oil masterpiece Napoleon’s Last Grand Attack: Waterloo, exposes the double-edged sword of war. Although Tolstoy’s War and Peace and Crofts’ majestic painting contain elements of glorification, they both remarkably support the general idea conveyed by Goya’s The Third of May 1808 that war is morally wrong and ought to be condemned.

In Tolstoy’s War and Peace, a powerful juxtaposition is formed between the conceptions of battle of Prince Andrei and Count Nikolai Rostov, and their opinions on war following their experience on the battlefield. Initially, Andrei joins the military to escape his unhappy and unsatisfactory matrimonial life. As an adjutant to the commander in chief, he enjoys the feeling of adrenaline rushing through his veins as “bullets are whistling merrily around him” (Tolstoy 158). Seeking promotion, Andrei admits that he lives only for glory and that he would cruelly exchange his loved ones for a moment of “triumph over people” (265). His only interest is distinction. Similarly, Nikolai, a young student who quits university to join a hussar regiment, is very excited to fight and test his abilities against French troops, especially since those who served were viewed as heroes by fellow members of Russian society. He originally has an idealistic idea of war; he perceives solely the glory and honor of defending his country. At the battle of Schöngraben, Nikolai is eager to “experience the delight of an attack” and slash the enemy (188). As Bonaparte once stated, “A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon.” Nevertheless, both characters are disappointed by the war as they witness the horrifying truth. While the wounded Nikolai remembers his calm pleasant life and “all the love and care of a family” and wonders why he enlisted in the military, Andrei, while bleeding profusely on the field of honor, comprehends that living peacefully with family is infinitely more desirable than living for glory and renown on the battlefield, as he finally perceives the insignificance of the great Napoleon and war in general when compared to the “distant, lofty, and eternal sky,” which represents a state of freedom and mutual harmony (200, 291). The reader understands that what begins as a battle is always rapidly transformed into a quest for survival. The fear, anxiety, and distress caused by the terrifying hostile engagement scenes are enough to condemn unethical armed conflicts. Consequently, Tolstoy, through these two characters, expresses his strong disapproval of war.

Goya’s oil painting entitled The Third of May 1808, which was completed in 1814 and presents the French invasion of Spain leading to the Peninsular War, reflects the gloominess and horror of war as Spanish peasants are being inhumanely executed by Napoleon’s barbarous troops in the darkness of the night. Since Goya is of Spanish descent, glorification of war is impossible as a mass of enemy soldiers are tormenting and firing at vulnerable fellow civilians. The man in the white shirt represents the Christ both by his stance, which reminds the viewer of the Crucifixion, and by his martyr-like behavior. He suffers, at gunpoint, for the rest of the villagers knowing that the soldiers will kill him, either by pulling the trigger or by using their bayonets. While the positioning of the man’s arms demonstrates his complete surrender, his fearful facial expression exhibits courage to face adversity. He is anxiously pleading the heavily armed, robotic soldiers to spare the lives of the citizens. The whiteness of his shirt, which emphasizes purity, goodness, and peace, is on the verge of being stained due to the firing of the merciless troops, who probably consider their vicious attack collateral damage as their main goal consisted in taking the town. Goya effectively delineates the immorality and disgust associated with injuring human beings during times of conflict. The dead Spaniards, whose garments are besmirched with blood, are carelessly flung aside to allow the angels of evil and death to continue their genocidal activity. Although the viewers cannot see the physiognomies of the emotionless soldiers, they can imagine the fierce expression which translates into terror in the eyes of the remaining villagers. Soldiers on mission do not value human life and, with a weapon in their hands, are instantly transformed into cruel murdering machines. Individuals should help each other on the path to success—instead of killing to gain power and wealth. Life is extremely precious, and the fate of a human being should not rely upon the simple decision of another imperfect individual. Goya effectively demonstrates the agony his country went through during the impetuous French invasion and condemns armed conflicts as a result of their immorality.

An interesting contrast is developed in Crofts’s 1895 canvas entitled Napoleon’s Last Grand Attack: Waterloo, which is one painting of a series of twelve illustrating military events that occurred near Waterloo. The viewer may initially discern elements of glorification of war as Napoleon sends his Old Guard, his elite veteran soldiers, off to battle on a suicide mission against the Anglo-allied forces in an  attempt to avoid defeat. Surrounded by his horsed suite, Napoleon imposingly lifts his hat and addresses one of the commanders of the clean, colorful elite group while watching the experienced fighters march confidently with the French standard towards opposition. However, the reputation of war is tarnished since the unscrupulous big wig knows that his fate will be decided shortly as surrender is the only option left. Furthermore, the painter’s British nationality implies that glorifying war, and especially Napoleon, was not part of his intentions as his country was fighting to free Europe from the hands of the immoral emperor. Napoleon, to the contrary, may be perceived as an analogue to Hitler during the Second World War. Both historical figures have cruelly decided the fates of countless individuals to gain unnecessary power. Additionally, the viewer notices the bodies of dead and wounded soldiers lying on the ground. Napoleon is not paying any attention or respect to those who have fallen in battle. The prisoner of war standing beside a member of the emperor’s suite on horseback is objectified as he is perceived as a trophy of military victory; the enemy soldier was viciously captured during hostilities. This thought demonstrates the ruthlessness of war and the cruelty of those participating in such operations. Also figuring in this painting is the potent French artillery which is annihilating nearby towns and causing substantial chaos on the opposite side of the picket line. Fires are rapidly consuming entire villages, completely destroying local economy and material goods. Innocent individuals are losing everything they have, their life accomplishments, to the selfish, thoughtless actions of the emotionless; the aftermath of war is horrible for everyone involved. The resulting thick smoke masks confusion, massive disorder, and utter despair. Crofts’ canvas efficaciously depicts how war can be both glorified and condemned in one same painting. Fortunately, there exist numerous peaceful alternatives to solve conflicts between nations. Despite Tolstoy’s ironic depiction of diplomacy and its failure in War and Peace, conducting equitable negotiations ought to be favored over violent bloodshed.

Even though Tolstoy’s book War and Peace and Crofts’s oil painting Napoleon’s Last Grand Attack: Waterloo initially glorify armed conflicts, they both remarkably develop and support the theme conveyed by Goya’s The Third of May 1808 that war is immoral and ought to be condemned. Tolstoy demonstrates the evolution of the thought processes of two Russian characters who are involved in the Napoleonic Wars. Belonging to the Romantic era, Goya’s canvas depicts the authentic violent nature of war through a scene of the genocidal invasion of Spain by the French troops. Crofts, in his painting, juxtaposes the glorification and his strong disapproval of armed conflicts by integrating elements related to both ideas. War, the principal reason for innumerable casualties and by far the favorite excuse for collateral damage, violates basic moral principles. Chaotically eliminating life and harming humans to gain political strength is unethical. Instead of attempting to solve problems using violence, we should find solutions to conflicts through diplomatic relations and strive for peace on an international level. Bloodless victories for all parties involved are possible. As John F. Kennedy, the thirty-fifth President of the United States, once stated, “Mankind must put an end to war before war puts an end to mankind.”

 

Works Cited

Crofts, Ernest. Napoleon’s Last Grand Attack: Waterloo. Painting. 1895. Napoleon’s

Last Grand Attack by Ernest Crofts. Cranston Fine Arts. Web. 5 October 2013.

Goya, Francisco. The Third of May 1808. Painting. 1814. The Third of May 1808: The Execution of the Defenders of Madrid by Francisco Goya, 1814. Back to Classics.  Web. 5 October 2013.

Tolstoy, Leo. War and Peace. Trans. Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky. Toronto: Random House of Canada Limited, 2007.