Boxall's 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die discussion

They say war is the scourge of mankind. Man had always dreamed of peace.

In my opinion, however, there's one good thing about war: it helps create great literature. My guess is that if, by some magic, we didn't have history's past wars, and if mankind did not have any concept of war, at least HALF of the 1001 books we have now will disappear, or at least will become completely unrecognizable.

July's People, by Nadine Gordimer, for example will disappear because the civil war brought about by apartheid is central to the story (that was why the white family there was fleeing and seeking safety).

All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Maria Remarke, Birdsong by Sebastian Faulks and Regeneration by Pat Barker, etc. will also disappear since they are both World War 1 novels.

Can anyone contribute here? I'd like to find out how many of the 1001 books will disappear from the list if all of the past wars and battles did not happen at all.

The things they carried - Tim O'Brien

This way for the gas, ladies and gentlemen - Tadeusz Borowski

They Shoot Horses, don't they? - Horace Maccoy

Catch 22 - Joseph Heller

Half of a Yellow Sun is about the Nigerian revolutionary war.

The Kindly Ones is about a WWII survivor

Atonement takes place partly during WWII England

Soldiers of Salamis: A Novel: end of Spanish Civil War

Dispatches - Micheal Herr

The Spy who came in from the cold - John Le Carre'

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy - John Le Carre'
(Deals with the conflict in Northern Ireland)

The Bridge on the Drina - Ivo Andric

Not so Quiet - Helen Zenna Smith
We That Were Young - Irene Rathbone

Austerlitz (WWII)
Suite Française (WWII)
The English Patient (WWII)
Cider House Rules (is it WWII that Wally gets shot down in - or Vietnam/Korea?)
Schindler's Ark [aka Schindler's List:] (WWII)
Farewell to Arms (WWI)
Sun Also Rises (Barnes is a WWI survivor)
Les Mis (French Revolution)
Last of the Mohicans (7 Years War)
Tender is the Night (one of the character's is a war vet - Tommy Barbaran I think?)
Fugitive Pieces (WWII)
Slaughter House 5 (WWII)

Really interesting topic KD. I suppose if you were to count political unrest/upheaval - though not necessarily "war" - you could add several more - i.e. Inheritance of Loss, 100 Years of Solitude, etc. Then you could always through in the "future/fantasy war" literature - i.e. LOTR or war "triggers" ie - Uncle Tom's Cabin.

Sissy wrote: "Austerlitz (WWII)
Suite Française (WWII)
The English Patient (WWII)
Cider House Rules (is it WWII that Wally gets shot down in - or Vietnam/Korea?)
Schindler's Ark [aka Schindler's List:] (WWI..."

Future wars could also also include iRobot.

Hey, I have one. THE UNDERDOGS by Mariano Azuela, Mexican civil war!

And maybe let's add a cliche. Whenever we make speeches about war veterans/dead, we say they fought and died so that others may live in freedom.

If it is true that HALF of the great literature we have now would not have existed without war, then we can also say that the war vets/dead fought and died so that others may READ.

The DANGLING MAN also by Saul Bellow! It's not a war story, but the principal protagonist here was waiting to be called for active duty during WW 2.

Same with BILLIARDS AT HALF PAST NINE by Heinrich Boll. Principal character was a WW 2 veteran and his past experiences during the war play an important part in the story.

FALLING MAN also by Don DeLillo, as in the "war against terror"?

Joselito wrote: "And maybe let's add a cliche. Whenever we make speeches about war veterans/dead, we say they fought and died so that others may live in freedom.

If it is true that HALF of the great literature w..."

Nice thinking, Joselito. So, the soldiers fought so that readers would enjoy their stories!

Sissy wrote: "Austerlitz (WWII)
Suite Française (WWII)
The English Patient (WWII)
Cider House Rules (is it WWII that Wally gets shot down in - or Vietnam/Korea?)
Schindler's Ark [aka Schindler's List:] (WWI..."

Thank you for liking the topic, Sissy. War stories are really sad but the world of literature will be totally different if those wars did not happen.

I reviewed my list again and based on the responses, I think we can also include:

THINGS FALL APART by Chinua Achebe (British colonizers in Nigeria)
HITCHHIKER'S GUIDE TO THE GALAXY by Douglas Adams (if we include futuristic wars as suggested by Paul -thanks!)
LITTLE WOMEN by Louisa May Alcott (with their father in Civil War)
SILK by Alessandro Barrico (Menji Restoration)
OROONOKO by Aphra Behn (Royal Dutch War)
THE LIFE AND TIMES OF MICHAEL K by J. M. Coetzee (South Africa civil war 70s-80s)
HEART OF DARKNESS by Joseph Conrad (British traders and Belgian colonists in Congo)
THE LITTLE PRINCE by Antoine de Saint-Exupery (the pilot's plane was gunned down by enemy forces in the desert probably during WWII)

A PASSAGE TO INDIA by E. M. Forster (India Independence Movement against British colonizers)
ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SOLITUDE by Gabriel Garcia Marquez (Civil War in Columbia)
THE TIN DRUM by Gunter Grass (Nazi invasion of Poland WWII)
THE POWER AND THE GLORY by Graham Greene (The Mexican Government trying to suppress Catholics in Mexico during the 30's)
GOODBYE TO BERLIN and THE LAST OF MR. NORRIS by Christopher Isherwood (Germany WWII)
THE GOLDEN NOTEBOOK by Doris Lessing (Communists in England, WWII Africa)
LADY CHATTERLY'S LOVER by D. H. Lawrence (Clifford Chatterly was paralyzed from waist down because of WWI)
MAGIC MOUNTAIN by Thomas Mann (setting is in a sanitarium but there are references to the ongoing WWI down the mountain)
KAFKA ON THE SHORE by Haruki Murakami (Satoru Nakata survived the bombing on top of the mountain during the school field trip towards the end of WWII)
A BEND IN THE RIVER by V. S. Naipaul (they say that the setting seems to be similar to Zanzibar Revolution)
GOOD MORNING MIDNIGHT by Jean Rhys (loneliness of a woman during WWI and WWII)
THE READER by Bernhard Schlink (WWII)
QUO VADIS by Henryk Sienkiewicz (Romans killing the Catholics)
THE PRIME OF MISS JEAN BRODIE by Muriel Spark (WWII)
BRIDESHEAD REVISITED by Evelyn Waugh (WWII)
TO THE LIGHTHOUSE by Virginia Woolf (Parts I & III are separated by Part II that happened during WWI)

so many! Maybe "WAR-LESS" novels are the exceptions rather than the rule?

EMPIRE OF THE SUN by J. G. Ballard (WWII in Shanghai)
SOLDIERS OF SALAMIS by Javier Cercas (Spanish Civil War 1936-39)
CAPTAIN CORELLI'S MANDOLIN by Louis de Bernieres (WWII in Greece)
THE LOVER by Marguerite Duras (French colonizers in Vietnam)
THE SINGAPORE GRIP by J. G. Farrell (WWII in Singapore)
THE WARS by Timothy Findley (Canada WWI)
THE GOOD SOLDIER by Ford Maddox Ford (WWI)
DOCTOR ZHIVAGO by Boris Pasternak (Russian Revolution of 1910)

I've only read 124 books out of 1001 and we could come up with this long list already. My estimate is that they should be around 30-50% of the 1001 books to disappear if there were no wars, political unrest/upheaval as suggested by Sissy (thanks, Sissy!)

The Human Stain by Philip Roth (enlistment during WWII figures into the big secret)

Plot Against America by Philip Roth (WWII)

Everything is Illuminated by Jonathon Safron Foer (WWII)

Joselito wrote: "And maybe let's add a cliche. Whenever we make speeches about war veterans/dead, we say they fought and died so that others may live in freedom.

If it is true that HALF of the great literature w..."

Joselito - I absolutely agree. Many great stories are centered around war and those who fought....without them many of our great books (and movies) would not be "alive" today!

So Jennifer, is it possible that our literature which somehow glorifies war (even if, on the surface, it writes about its horrors) somehow contribute to the furtherance of more wars? Like, for example, a muslim extremist would read about some heroism of soldiers during the past wars and would get inspired doing the same by blowing himself up?

Excuse me, K.D., but I've read Jean Rhys' Good Morning Midnight and I don't remember the principal female character's sadness there as being attributable to any war.

Joselito - Well, yes I guess books about wars could possibly "encourage" extremists to contribute their "work" of war by exposing some of the soldiers to a glorified point of view.
But I think the same is also true for the reverse...."war stories" can absolutely bring "real" soldiers to the point of heroism. They can want to exude a hero's mentality and hopefully save the day (or end the war)....some may even want to step up to the plate so to speak, but not even want the acknowledgment of their good deeds (for lack of a better term) or whatever you want to call it. Maybe the war stories can be a sign of encouragement for a call of duty or such.

Thanks Jennifer. But here's what bugs me. Do these "war literature" help prevent war or do they somehow help create war? When world war 2 started in the Pacific (immediately after Pearl Harbor) there were a lot of young men who EAGERLY enlisted for the army in my country, most of them confessing they felt the EXCITEMENT of going to war. Is literature responsible for this kind of predisposition, like Bush's gung-ho attitude immediately after 9-11?

I think war is as much a part of human nature as anything else. Looking back through history can anyone name a period of time when war hasn’t raged somewhere?

Soldiering or fighting for your tribe or country is seen as a manly thing to do – always has been. Books and films no doubt fuel the fire, making young men into wannaby heroes and patriots. Is this a bad thing? Is fighting for your country in a time of need not a noble thing to aspire to?

More accurate information is available to our young people today than ever before. With embedded reporters on the news and the vast number of accounts of war as-it-really-is available in any bookshelf or library. I don’t think there is an excuse today to go to war expecting a Hollywood experience.

I don’t know of any war that was “created” by war literature. I do know that in order to secure peace it is necessary to prepare for war; to defend ourselves against those who would still wish to do us harm.

The Night Watch - Sarah Waters

If we are considering violent political upheavals as well as wars, we could also add:

"Disgrace"
"The Feast of the Goat"
"The Last September" (lead up to War)
"A Dance to the Music of Time"
"War of the Worlds"
"Parade's End"

And even "Life of Pi" if you consider the only reason Pi was on the ship was a family retreat from political upheaval and unrest in India.

Perhaps a sub-category of stories that would not have happened had it not been for war and other violent political conflicts(real or imagined) would also include:
(Forgive me if I re-name one that has already been mentioned --- I've tried not to!)

The Poisonwood Bible
Henderson the Rain King
The End of the Affair
The Secret Agent
Out of Africa
The Thirty-nine Steps
The Cider House Rules (boyfriend paralyzed in the War)
The Kiss of the Spiderwoman
The Book of Daniel (background of execution of accused Russian Spies)
The Red and the Black
Candide
Rob Roy
A Handmaid's Tale
The Leopard
The House of the Spirits
Lord of the Flies

and I could go on!

Has literature caused war?
Paul:

Didn't Abraham Lincoln supposedly say to Harriet Beecher Stowe something like, So you are the little woman who started this war?
And then there are the "Common Sense" and other publications that spread the rebellion against the British leading up to the American Revolution!

They weren't causes; but they were factors or, at least influences!

Still, if the works on the 1001 lists are a good representation, I think literature has done more to spread the horrors and stupidity of war than it has to start them.

One more thought....

Good literature is always about change/conflict. Something significant and/or someone goes through change. What forces more change in people's lives than war and the impact of war? Nothing other than large national disasters I should think. Simply speaking, war is just good fodder for stories...and we can only imagine how many are created each time there is another one!

Add The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao by Junot Díaz to your 'violent political upheavals' list. Good stuff. :)

How could I forget to list one I am reading now:
"The Good Soldier Svejk"

I found a copy of this in a second hand bookshop but it's not in english. The title is DIE ABENTEUER DES BRAVEN SOLDATEN SCHWEIK. I suppose that's German?

Judith wrote: "One more thought....

Good literature is always about change/conflict. Something significant and/or someone goes through change. What forces more change in people's lives than war and the impact ..."

Let us not forget an important distinction here.

We KNOW the horrors of war. But when war becomes literature, the horrors become pleasant ones.

Like a horror film. With your popcorn and drinks you shout in terror while watching the scary scenes. But this is a pleasant terror. Not similar to when you live on Elm Street and you and your neighbors are being hacked to death by a murderer one-by-one for real.

When a horror is transformed into the collective consciousness as something pleasant, like what literature does, I believe it makes the real horror (war in this case) EASIER.

So we have a vicious cycle here. More wars means more great literature about wars, and more war literature means more wars in the future.

Joselito wrote: "Judith wrote: "One more thought....

Good literature is always about change/conflict. Something significant and/or someone goes through change. What forces more change in people's lives than wa..."

I disagree! How many of us have cried or cringed while reading/viewing one of these war stories? "Pleasant"? You can't be serious!

.....And so if we don't write about something terrible, it goes away?

Pleasant in the sense that even if you cry, or is horrified, or cringes, YOU WANT TO DO IT AGAIN. Oftentimes, a book that makes you cry, etc. you even recommend to others.

A lot of those who survived the Nazi concentration camps do not want at all to recall or talk about their experiences there. Contrast this with those who just READ about these experiences. They often reread the books and even tell others to read them. Why? Because in the former, the horror was real. In the latter, the "horror" was a pleasant one.

You make the horror a pleasant one and you make it attractive.

All of us were born without any real experiences of war. Yet when any oppotunity for war comes, majority of us react as if there is no real horror about it. Why? Because what we know of war comes from literature. And literature never can convey the REAL horrors of war.

I don't think you could support your statement that the majority of us react to war as if there is no real horror in it, Joselito.

Joselito wrote: "I found a copy of this in a second hand bookshop but it's not in english. The title is DIE ABENTEUER DES BRAVEN SOLDATEN SCHWEIK. I suppose that's German?"

Hmm..It's the GOOD Soldier, not Brave one; and the spelling of Svejk is different....but there were quite a few stories written by Hasek about Svejk (though the one I'm reading is the only novel)...I guess that one could be a translation of one of the stories.

Jaroslav Hasek (the author) is Czechoslovakian, not German.

Speak for yourself Joselito. I grew up in Northern Ireland and come from an Army family. Of course you cant get a real appreciation of what war is from a book. To really know the horrors of war you have to experience it first hand or be personally affected by it.

I think the argument that more books about war means that we now have more wars is a bit ridiculous.

If anything the horrors of war are more widely known than ever before due to vast quantity of soldier’s accounts and TV news reporters that are embedded with infantry units. Etc.

I think the British (and hopefully the American) public are a lot better informed about what’s happening in Afghanistan at the moment than our grandparents ever were about WWII as it was happening. We live in an information age after all.

There is no excuse today for a British or American soldier to go to war expecting a Hollywood experience! They only have to pick up a newspaper, turn on the telly or pop into their local library or bookshop to learn (to an extent) of how terrible war can be.

But there are still more and more wars and conflicts despite the proliferation of soldiers' accounts, tv war news, etc. which are supposed to tell us how terrible wars can be. How else can this be explained other than these being really ineffective--if not deceptive--ways of bringing the true lessons of war?

Literature affects people's minds. It can't be said, therefore, that literature has absolutely nothing to do with the creation of wars because wars start with peoples' minds. It's therefore either one of two things: literature helps promote war or it helps prevents war. For me, and I am speaking for myself, the preponderance of evidence is on the former.

Books can be used as a medium for forwarding ideas. In this respect they can reach large numbers of people and may have an influence on the way they think about a certain topic.

Books convey information / thoughts / feelings / views – simple as that. Just as there are books that contain propaganda that sway people towards violence, there are books that have lead millions of people to a life of peace. Ghandi springs to mind.

I think to narrow this debate down we will have to define what kind of books we are talking about. Are we talking about the books as listed below, novels that deal with the theme of war in some way eg. All quiet on the western front – Or are we talking about political propaganda like “Common Sense.”

Wars are not caused because people don’t comprehend the horror of war. Wars happen because countries or individuals in powerful places get the hump with each other! Or feel that the other country is doing something that affects their interests enough that it should be stopped by force.

Countries don’t go to war and think… well if I knew all of this killing was going to happen I don’t think I’d have bothered!!

Which Gandhi? I think Mahatma Gandhi's "Satyagraha" was brought to the Indian people through his speeches and example (fasting, peaceful marches, etc.) not by any influential book he wrote. Moreover, I don't think the movement had any lasting success. India was later partitioned and now it continuously bickers with Pakistan.

Even if we take books like that of Remarque, what can it show it contributed towards fostering peace? People were "horrified" by the story here, bought copies of the book, made Remarque rich, the book was even made into a movie and then what? World war 2.

And I'm not saying wars happen because of literature. What I am saying that those war literature which supposedly dramatize the horrors of war do not actually do that. They actually make the horrors of war PLEASANT and this contributes to the sanitization of the real horrors of war and helps make the next wars possible.

Joslito wrote: It's therefore either one of two things: literature helps promote war or it helps prevents war. For me, and I am speaking for myself, the preponderance of evidence is on the former.

It's a false premise that literature either does one or the other.

It's true that many of the books that focus on war were written to show the senselessness and horror of it and how it affects individuals and societies - Remarque's book being a perfect example. It's not so much about the war but about how the individuals are affected by it. So then why are we "entertained" by such books and even "enjoy" reading them over? The same question could be made about war movies, where we are even shown graphically the violence and effects of war.

But maybe what we really enjoy about war stories is seeing a hero overcome a terrible ordeal. Don't we often cheer for the underdog? As someone mentioned earlier, there has to be conflict in order for there not only to be a good story, but for there to be a hero or a victor. Of all types of conflict, I think human conflict is the most emotional, and of all types of human conflict, war has to be the most severe. Also, perhaps reading about someone facing such violence and pain (physically and emotionally) may help to make our own troubles and sorrows seem less horrible. In other words, if that person can face that, surely I can deal with my problems and survive.

Out of curiosity, I just did a count, and out of the 101 books that I've read from the 2010 list, 23 books had a connection with war.

I included Pride and Prejudice because of the Bennetts' connection with the British regiment. Also included Ivanhoe, which I don't think has been mentioned, because of the ongoing conflict between the Normans and Saxons. Also included Animal Farm, as it is about a revolution.

Someone mentioned They Shoot Horses, Don't They?, but I can't recall anything related to a war in that story (?). Anyone?

I think so too, Linda. And if there is any reason for romanticizing war it is the hope of becoming a hero,to give great meaning to your life or gain others' respect. The drive for those accomplishments comes from deep within us, not from the books that we read or movies that we see. Are you familiar with Joseph Campbell's work on mythology? The Hero's Journey is one we all have to take in our own way to have a fulfilled life. Some do choose war for this purpose.

Linda wrote: "Out of curiosity, I just did a count, and out of the 101 books that I've read from the 2010 list, 23 books had a connection with war.

I included Pride and Prejudice because of the Bennetts' connec..."

Could you post your list, Linda? I have quite a few to add also and am trying not to duplicate.

And isn't there vampire warring in "Interview With A Vampire"? Can hardly remember it I read it so long ago....