Mara 1

Arlind Mara

Joseph Darda

English 2203W

4 December 2014

Politics and the War Novel

When it comes to defining the word literature, there is a particular difficulty in

determining a set definition which will satisfy everyone’s perception of literature. The difficulty

increases when one tries to define a particular literary genre. When it comes to defining the genre

of war literature, one is faced with the complication of defining both war and literature, while

also defining the link between the two. In his essay US Novels and US Wars John Carlos Rowe

argues that defining war novels purely on political terms, or as a work of fiction about military

servicemen results in “[ignoring] the consequences [of war] for noncombatants” (813). Rowe

views this traditional definition of war novels as dangerously narrow sighted and thus proposes a

more broad definition of war literature which he states to be “the expression of deep internal

divisions”(814). In doing so, Rowe hopes to move away from the purely political perspective of

war, and moving it toward a more inclusive notion which classifies any conflict between two

dissimilar populations rather than strictly a war declared by the government involving pure

military action, thus ensuring the inclusion of the consequences of war in noncombatants.

While I agree with Rowe’s broadening of the definition of politics in literature, which is

practically what he is referring to by “deep internal divisions”, I would argue that the only

purpose his statement serves is in broadening what we perceive to be war, while completely

disregarding the literature part of the genre. Even though broadening the definition of war and

Mara 2

politics ensures the portrayal of noncombatants in war literature, it leaves the definition of

literature too open to interpretation, thus resulting in the false classification of completely

irrelevant works as war literature. The aim of this essay, therefore, is to redefine war literature,

by specifying that in addition to being political in the sense of conflict, it must also be political in

the way it induces empathy. While political conflict makes satisfies the war section of a war

novel, in order for it to be classified as a work of fiction, it must induce strategic empathy. Going

along with Howell’s concept of realistic fiction, in which he claims that in order for a written

work to have literary merit it must remain true to principles of human nature, I would define a

war novel as a work of realistic fiction which is political in the aspect of conflict, and political in

the empathy it induces.

Before moving on to the actual analysis of two war novels however, I must take some

time to remove any ambiguities instilled in the perceptions of the words politics While the word

politics has come to be associated mainly with established political parties and forms of

government, I will not limit the term to that definition. For all intents and purposes of this essay

the definition of the word politics will be inclusive of the above mentioned definition, as well as

what Rowe meant by “the expression of internal divisions”. In other words, the definition of the

word politics as used in this essay will be as Jean-Jacques Rousseau would define it: the practice

and theory of influencing other people on a global, civic or individual level. In war literature, this

influence is done through persuasion of the audience to empathize with the represented group,

while instilling apathy for the opposing party.

In order to elaborate on the politics component of a war novel I would like to start by

analyzing John Okada’s No-No Boy, a novel which indirectly deals with World War II and the

Japanese Internment. No-No Boy follows the life of Ichiro Yamada, a 25 year old man who had

Mara 3

just been released from two years of prison for refusing to pledge loyalty to the United States by

both swearing allegiance to the States, and signing up for duty in the Armed Forces. While the

novel does not directly deal with war in the traditional sense (i.e. it neither follows the life of a

serviceman during an armed conflict, nor does it directly deal with the battles in World War

Two). Despite the fact that No-No Boy does not fit the traditional definition war literature, it is a

perfect example of a war novel. Although that statement may sound self-contradictory at first,

when considering Rowe’s definition, and my newly synthesized definition of a war novel, it

makes sense that No-No Boy be considered the epitome of war novels as it is political in the

broad sense of the world, and it takes into consideration the “consequences [of war on]

noncombatants” as Rowe feels they should (813).

Apart from the apparent politics implied by the ongoing war described in the novel, No-

No Boy contains many more instances of political conflicts, or war. In his essay The Origin of

Civil Society, Rousseau defines politics as a “social contract” or an agreement with which a

person enters into civil society (241). The contract essentially binds people into a community

that exists for mutual preservation. In entering into civil society, people sacrifice the physical

freedom of being able to act as they please, but they gain civil freedom. This definition goes well

along the lines of governmental politics and what Rowe refers to when he defines war novels as

“the expression of internal divisions” (813). In No-No Boy, this first type of political conflict is

found within the violation of this social contract made between Ichiro and the United States

government as it pertains to the loyalty questions in the US DSS Statement. The violation is

implied by Ichiro being imprisoned for simply refusing to serve in the United States’ Armed

forces. This violation also conveys the unfair treatment of the Japanese-Americans during the

Mara 4

early 1940s as an act of undeclared, internal war which Rowe would argue must be portrayed in

war novels. It goes without saying that this conflict is in fact, political in nature given a set

The second type of political conflict or war found in Okada’s novel is found in Ichiro’s

interaction with his family. Recalling the definition of politics as I described it earlier in this

essay, politics is not necessarily restricted to governmental interaction, but is instead the act of

influencing other people on a global, civic or individual level. In The Origins of Civil Society

Rousseau argues that the most basic and “oldest form” of politics in the sense of a social contract

is the family. In No-No Boy, there are multiple instances in which we see this kind of political

conflict; mainly between Ichiro and his mother, and then Ichiro and his younger brother.

“Ma, I’m not going to Japan. Nobody is going to Japan. The war is over. Japan lost. Do

you hear? Japan lost.”(Okada 13-14).

The quotation above perfectly summarizes the political differences between Ichiro and his

mother. As this conflict eventually leads to Ichiro’s mother’s suicide, it perfectly captures the

consequences of war in noncombatants which Rowe argues a war novel must entail.

Similarly to No-No Boy, Art Spiegelman’s two-part graphic narrative Maus: A

Survivor’s Tale is political in the broad sense of the word. As a story about the Holocaust in

comic form, Art Spiegelman’s Maus accomplishes the seemingly impossible. This Graphic

Narrative tells the story of Spiegelman’s father, Vladek, and his experience as a Jewish person

during the Holocaust. Running parallel to the story is the story of Art’s interactions with his

father as the latter recollects his memories of his life during the World War II era.

The political aspect of the majority of the first book focuses mostly on the war, or

political conflict between Nazi Germany and the Jewish people during world war two. The issue

Mara 5

of politics becomes more and more governmental with the passage of anti-Semitic Legislature or

the Nurmeberg laws. While the graphic narrative fits the traditional definition of war literature as

it briefly covers actual combat scenes of WWII, and it is based on the narrative of an actual

serviceman, the full potential of this graphic narrative can be only covered in the definition

suggested in this essay. Most specifically, seeing as most of the Jewish people involved in the

story were never involved in armed conflict against Germany, it is important that we attribute the

consideration of the consequences of war on noncombatants to the novel seeing as Rowe would

not consider it a war novel, had it not possessed that quality.

Moving away from the traditional definition of war novels and more toward the one

defined in this paper, we see that Art Spiegelman’s Maus also contains political conflict within

the family, much like Okada’s No-No Boy did. At the end of the first book, and for the

continuation of the second, we see the focus of political conflict shift from Nazi Germany vs.

Jewish people, to Art vs. his father, Vladek. The conflict between Art and Vladek reaches its

peak at the end of the first book where Art finds out that his father had burned Anja’s diaries,

thus destroying the only chance Art had to really get to know his mother who had committed

suicide. Art is particularly hurt by this, and proceeds to feel betrayed by his father which he now

seems to think of as a murderer, having ‘killed’ Anja’s identity, and a piece of Art’s along with

it.

Mara 6

This scene is particularly important in defining Maus as a war novel as it depicts that war can

have consequences not only on those directly involved in it as represented by Anja’s death, but

also second generation noncombatants as depicted by Art’s reaction. It therefore serves as a

beautiful reminder that Rowe is right in wanting to expand the definition of the war novel so that

it portrays the consequences of war of everyone involved despite their classifications as

combatants or noncombatants.

When considering the writing style of Maus however, issues arise in classifying this

graphic narrative as a piece of literature, as many consider comics to be a different medium

rather than a genre of literature. Even more complications arise in classifying Maus as a war

novel, seeing as the term novel is usually used to describe works of fiction, and Art Spiegelman

did not consider Maus as such. Unfortunately, Rowe’s US Novels and US Wars does not address

this issue. Hillary Chute’s Comics as Literature? Reading Graphic Narrative however

Mara 7

addresses the aforementioned issue by coining the term “Graphic Narrative” for non-fictional

comics such as Maus as she claims the term retains “the substantial length implied by novel”

while shifting the term “to accommodate modes other than fiction”(453). Chute also emphasizes

the distinction of purely fictional comics and what she calls graphic narratives by focusing the

attention of her paper on factual and historical comics alone. By this she hopes to recognize that

some comics are purely for entertainment alone, and are by no means works with literary merit.

What I find disagreeable about this distinction however, is that Maus may very well be

considered a fictional work, despite having a very historical story line. The fact that the

characters are depicted as animals however, despite being done purely for figurative speech,

necessarily classifies Spiegelman’s Maus as a work of fiction. Unlike Chute’s paper implies

however, the classification of Maus as fiction rather than fact does not undermine its literary

merit. Thinking of it in terms of what Howells would define as “realistic fiction” in his Editor’s

Study, Maus is indeed a deserving piece of literature. This is due to having a historically factual

connection to the human world. In considering realistic fiction, or what I like to call informed

fiction as a work with literary merit, we still distinguish between graphic novels deserving of

literary merit, and those which do not. As Howell’s puts it, “fiction that aims merely to entertain

… will not be gay or trivial to any reader’s hurt, and criticism will hold it to account if it passes

from painting to teaching folly” (824). Staying true to this definition, one can easily distinguish

between non-literary comics such Superhero comics, and literary graphic narratives such as

Maus. the latter has a connection to an historical occurrence, enabling its target audience to

empathize with the characters whereas the former does not. This brings us to a third necessary

criterion in defining a war novel.

Mara 8

When taking into consideration the goal of war novels, which is ultimately to raise

awareness of the particular political conflict entailed within its storyline and encouraging that

action be taken to prevent similar conflicts from arising in the future, gaining the empathy of the

reader is very important. Thus for a war novel to be distinguished from a documentary, it needs

to induce empathy forthe group the author is representing in the novel and apathy for the

opposing party. In her work entitled Hiearchies of Horror, Srikanth discusses the concept of

empathy and antipathy and how they are not pure emotional responses, but instead largely

influenced by politics. In her essay Empathy and the Critic, Ann Jurecic also supports Srikanth

argument in saying that empathy is “a cultural tool for reinforcing existing structures of power”

(11). Therefore the way a certain group is portrayed to the society will affect the degree to which

society will show empathy or antipathy toward that group.

While Rowe than advocates that war novels show both sides of the story from both

parties in conflict, it would destroy the political function of the war novel. As I implied above, a

war novel is practically a piece of propaganda designed to persuade the audience to empathize

with the group the author is a part of. For example MAUS I & II are novels which aim to show

the horrors of the Holocaust, designed with the intention of influencing society to take action

against anti-Semitic organizations. It would make no sense therefore for Art Spiegelman to

describe how tragic the deaths of the anti-Semitic persons were during WWII as that would be

counterintuitive to the influence MAUS was designed to have on the audience. A war novel is a

piece of propaganda which aims to “construct the enemy”, as Srikanth would put it. They are

designed to persuade the reader to show empathy toward one group, and antipathy, or dislike

toward the opposing one.

Mara 9

This is most clearly represented in MAUS in which empathy toward the Jewish people is

induced not only through statistical and verbal representation of the injustices they faced during

the Holocaust, but also through ingenious visual analogies which can only be efficiently

conveyed by a graphic narrative. Art Spiegleman conveys the Jewish people as mice,

representing that they were thought of as vermin, pests and prey by the Nazis. The Nazi Germans

are portrayed as cats, representing the predator, and the Americans as dogs representing the

saviors. This exquisite analogy of the dog saving the mouse from the cat is not only made to

convey historical accuracy, with America saving the Jews from the Nazis, but also as a way to

construct the Nazis as the evil villain, while conveying America as the hero and the Jewish

people as the damsel in distress. This visual analogy further influences the audience to empathize

for the Jewish while instilling apathy and hate toward the Nazis. Similarly, a war novel written

by a Nazi would aim to do the opposite. Therefore a war novel is also political in the way it

which influences people through empathy/apathy.

Conclusively, for a piece of literature to be considered a war novel it must be political in

three sense of the word. Firstly, it must deal with some sort of political conflict, or war.

Secondly, it must not be limited to the narrow definition of politics, and not limit the discussion

of consequences of war to combatants exclusively. Finally, to distinguish a novel from a

documentary, it must be constructed so as to persuade the audience to the benefit of the author’s

political interest. This is different from what Rowe argues a war novel should be in that Rowe

advocates that a war novel accurately and equally portray the consequences of war from both

points of view. As a novel is bound to be subjective to the author’s perspective, unlike a

documentary, Rowe’s definition of a war novel, although a noble one, proves to be too ambitious

Mara 10

and ideal to be practical, seeing as egocentrism is an unavoidable and intrinsic quality of human

nature.

References and Works Cited

(Need to alphabetize)

Chute, Hillary. “Comics as Literature? Reading Graphic Narrative.” PMLA 123.2 (2008): 452–

65

Howells, William Dean. “Editor’s Study.” Harper’s New Monthly Magazine 74 (Apr. 1887):

824-29.

Jurecic, Ann. "Empathy and the Critic." College English 1st ser. 74 (2011): 10-27. National

Council of Teachers of English, Sept. 2011. Web. 7 Nov. 2014.

<http://annjurecic.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/CE0741Empathy.pdf>.

Okada, John. No-No Boy. 1957. Seattle: U of Washington P, 2001.

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. “The Origin of Civil Society” A World of Ideas. 9th Edition. Ed. Lee A.

Jacobus. Boston: Bedford/St.Martin’s Press, 2013. 240-255. Print.

Rowe, John Carlos. “US Novels and US Wars.” The Cambridge History of the American Novel.

Ed. Leonard Cassuto, Clare Virginia Eby, and Benjamin Reiss. Cambridge: Cambridge

UP, 2011. 813-31.

Mara 11

Spiegelman, Art. Maus I: A Survivor’s Tale: My Father Bleeds History. New York: Pantheon,

1986. ---. Maus II: A Survivor’s Tale: And Here My Troubles Began. New York:

Pantheon, 1991.

Srikanth, Rajini. “Hierarchies of Horror, Levels of Abuse: Empathy for the Internees.”

Constructing the Enemy: Empathy/Antipathy in U.S. Literature and Law. Philadelphia:

Temple UP, 2011. 104–34.

US Defense Security Service. “Statement of United States Citizen of Japanese Ancestry” (Form

304A). Washington: Government Printing Office, 1943