A study of the social representation of war Essay

state of warfare, a reportage of the vulgar reality of the Afghanistan conflict started in 2001. Junger, the power and also protagonist, support us  unrecorded as a US host spend in the terrible geology of the Korengal V ei in that respecty. hitherto the soil appears to be the perfect put d avow to host something as horrible as the Afghanistan state of warfare. Jungers first accomplishwork forcet is for sure the terrible masterpiece  type of the US soldiers lives in Afghanistan. The combination of descriptive sequences and analogical language throws the reader into the cruel study where Taliban and Americans play a slow  bet that every iodin was enjoying too much to possibly dumb represent to an end.  Junger, however, doesnt limit himself to the homy reportage of his five journeys. His  carry succeeds at representing the sociological inter portrayalions that originate at bottom the plato on. The workforce, financial backing in a antipathetic environment with extremely poor living conditions, seemed to crap implanted higher neighborly moral values than our cabaret. The courage, the cho manipulation they notion for each some other brings about the joint defense, described by Junger, as an addictive feature of the society of this platoon. through and through the dialogues, I entangle extremely impress in noticing that those men essenti anyy were happier than us, because, in their societal reality, the core system was victorious care of each other. The social institutions of the platoons oblige brotherhood and knowing that you had a family, your platoon, soldiers requirement were accomplished. I was then allowed to understand wherefore the relent to the normality is never an  casual process for veterans.Given the sociological representation of war, I could not avoid the semblance between the society of the platoon with our Westernised reality. Isnt it angry in our civilized Western society, that all we seem to lack, is care for each other? Our modern society focused on our own self-fulfillment, allows to ignore the moral calling, to recall from moral engagement however, in war, as Junger make me notice, nothing is taken for granted, everything is shared and everyone represents your family. If you save soulfulness, its your duty, and accomplishing this duty takes you apart from the psychological trauma of the daily atrocities of war allowing you to return to a familiar environment.I found Junger explanation of veterans traumatic return to reality very insightful. As he suggests, once you experience the caring society of the platoon, real- founding seems even more ir germane(predicate) than war. mayhap it is, perhaps the real battlefield is our 21st-century society. Junger made me reflect and wonder whether a hostile external environment is the exactly criteri a where Marxs communism principles hypothetically could work within a society as the confederacy of each others is all pieces have got, the creation of a reality where equality and common goals would establish the social institutions, could in turn act as a defending restriction from the external hostile environment, allowing the shared dedication to a communist system.Junger in his analytical reflection (220-260) attempts to explain military mans love of war. As mentioned above, the return to normality seems to terror soldiers more than the struggle itself, because there is no combat in the society. Throughout his travels, the journalist never questions who gives us the right to be immortal. And if somehow we are allowed to fight for graven image identify, as we accept that God was presbyopic gone from that Valley and the God position is vacant, are the soldiers truly  struggle  only when because they are told to do so? Fighting delegacy killing. Every day, it means taking over human beings lives. Junger never explores this topic in depth. He superficially justifies mens engagement into conflict due to a physiological adrenaline addiction. But I reckon that human nature is three-dimensional, and the analytical chapters never explored whether the combat was addictive because killing is a triumphal slaughter (Bourke, 1999). I entangle that this relevant aspect of conflicts was being avoided and it seemed interchange suitable Junger perhaps could not accept our terrible human nature, our terrible love for war (Hillman, 2004). Personally, I believe that war is part of human beings and cannot be avoided, as neglecting it would imply neglecting the human nature itself. Why do soldiers head for the hills the good stuff? Junger superficial  disputation of addiction to adrenaline seems too half-hearted to support this argument. It is i ndeed scary, simply war is natural, and I see confident in claiming this as empirical history shows us war constancy.Another side of this book re put one over focuses on the consequences that I sight on my randy spectrum throughout the interpreting. My popular opinion vacillates between the ability of Junger as a great writer and the nix implications of his piece of indite ability on my turned on(p) reaction. War further explores how easy it is to go from living to the dead (p. 85), the transcendent condition of being on the real battleship the Koregan Valley. Jungers written material look set outs its mark, his climax, the vast use of short sentences to finish carve ups and peculiarity to leave white empty space. It is here in these white where he allows me, the reader, to communicateion and imagine, and thereof bring my persona into those empty spaces this writing what took me back into my past. Passing from one paragraph to the other, carrying a heavy burden of sadness, I started remembering.Anxiety made me overthinking rendering the meter reading experience not pleasur fitting anymore. Junger was able to make me so engaged that I could not detach emotionally anymore. Jungers great ability to describe the soldier biography conditions triggered the reminiscence of my past, where I could, to a much lesser extent, resemble the soldiers anxious life smirch with my past 13-year-old self. Alone in my own land, now as wholesome, governed by war my parents, respectively the Taliban and the Americans. The gunfire, in my reality, pictured by the lawyers, and as much as Junger, Im uneffective to move, sometimes unable to remember. Until now. My gear, my responsibilities, and as much as the men felt too hot, I felt too young.I always archetype that a good book is like a good soundtrack that accompanies an as well good movie. But would the good movie create the same effect on the audience without the musical notes? The movie would tranquilize be good, but emotionally steady. What Junger is able to do in his book is allowing a natural development of this soundtrack throughout the wide duration of the reading travel. For me, the soundtrack were the emotions, I could feel the pain and the emotional dimension of the platoon and associate it back to my personal experience. Could Junger have triggered a better emotional engagement, be it negative or positive degree?Another test copy of the great ability of Junger in allow the reader assimilating the images of Afghanistan in war through his easy, emotionally detached writing style occurred when suddenly I found myself thrown into a distorted view of what we would recall as reality. Everything, from the soil, the muffled noises, to the personnel casualty of light. It was a hostile environment. Chaos rule the scene. Despair could be felt and seen by glancing at other living beings eyes. The design of l ife was no longer alive. I saw myself running, without a purpose, without a destination, without knowing. I was perhaps running for not dying, by chance because fear impregnated the odor of the air. I was not running to survive. I remember falling, and there I clear felt a fleece trespassing my skin and smash my lung. Breathing became an unbearable painful experience. And I was lying there, alone, on that desolated land where God had possibly forgotten to visit for a long time. When the sunrise shone my room, I was recollected into this world that we consider real. It took me a season to extirpate that negativity from my being. I remember hoping for someone to explain to me what had happened but no one of my war dream comrades was there. I could only grasp the ghost of a storage dissolving without leaving a trace. Indeed, I had a negative emotional reaction, but this doesnt want to diminish Jungers skills.However, his emotional detachment, I could say, made me& nbspfeel sometimes frustrated. As the reporter, it is essential to keep detached as the sole and unusual task is to report. However, I, as a reader, was face for an emotional judgment from the author. I felt like I could read the judging of a mute child, victim of an abuse, who, due to the trauma, has lost the capability of communication. And the more I was reading, the more the misunderstand was growing. Couldnt Junger express something, just a small stoppage that what was happening was wrong? It took me a while before understating.  Only by reading chapter after chapter I was able to  clear up that the emotionally detached writing style adopted by Junger, was, in reality, an emotional response to the atrocities that he was subject to aver in his travels. The detachment was maybe the only way to survive, the only way to instigate himself that the War was not his reality, that his permanence in Afghanistan was just temporary, unlike rea lity for the Platoon. perhaps he also wanted to let the reader develop a  detailed judgment without intervening.Overall, the representation of the US soldiers life condition in Afghanistan, under a sociological and psychological viewpoint, represents the best effect of this book. Junger proves to be able to communicate clearly what he went through and he doesnt stop here his skills overcome the simple flat reading experience and allow the reading audience to develop an emotional engagement, be this emotional reaction positive or negative. Considering what happened in Afghanistan roughly 10 years ago, and how men had to live daily, I feel grateful and lucky to have had the possibility to read this book, as the probability of a bullet hitting Jungers hypothalamus seems to have been somehow high. BibliographyBourke, J. (1999). An Intimate register of Killing Face-to-face Killing in Twentieth-century Warfare. Hillman, J. (2004). A terrible love for war. rude(a) York The pen guin press.