|
Web Exclusives:
Under the Ivy December
17, 2003: The War Cry Its allure and its perilIn the winter of 1941, America entered World War II. PAW went with her. Certainly, hockey and basketball prospects still find their pages, along with Class Notes ("With the Alumni," as it was called) and a wonderful ad from Princeton University Press ("To Princeton Wives: We're not interested in your husbands now, except indirectly ... It's Christmas time again, and we'd like to suggest that you give your husband a PUP book. There's a book for every kind of man, even the novel reader!") But there's no escaping the war. Covers show alumni in training at their bases. Ads flaunt companies' contributions to the war effort. An editorial describes "What the Declaration of Hostilities with Japan Means to the University." In early 1942, PAW ran two articles, one by a young alumnus and draftee, the other by an undergraduate struggling with the decision whether to enlist. The undergraduate's concerns are unsurprising. "We know that the sanest thing to do is to remain in college, to continue on our present job...Yet balanced against this is the insistent desire for action." He concludes that the best course is to complete his studies in an accelerated fashion, after which he can join up with a better idea of where his talents will be put to best use. The young alum's thoughts are more enlightening, and so well written I wish the piece was signed. "Everyone thinks he knows what's wrong with the Army," he begins. He goes on to list the many complaints "everyone" has, saying "there is not one man in a thousand who doesn't feel that there is something wrong, and that if They Would Only Listen to Him, everything could be set to rights with a minimum of effort and a maximum of splendid results. That, I submit, is what is wrong with the Army, and it is also what is wrong with the nation as a whole." His point is that Americans — government officials as well as ordinary citizens — had been deluding themselves, trying to ignore the fact that a full-fledged war was coming. "I am not concerned with the pros and cons of our actions; I am very much concerned with our ostrich-like attitude toward them. ... We didn't want war, and we hated to do anything which would have convinced us that we were going to have to fight one," he writes. "We have a cause now; we could never have hoped for a better one. I think it will be seen that it makes a difference." It's impossible to read his words without comparing his time to
ours. The attitudes of Americans are much the same; we would all
prefer to stay comfortable and avoid war at all costs. Today, of
course, the feeling that we are striking back at a different enemy
than the one who attacked us doesn't help us rally round "the
cause." Still, it does raise the question: In our society is
there a cause that could compel Americans solidly to support a war?
Would a 21st-century undergraduate ever write, as did PAW's 1941
student, "I want to fight against a movement which I know is
evil and wrong. I want to fight for the cause that I believe to
be right, and moral, and just"? What would that cause be?
Jane Martin ’89 is PAW's former editor-in-chief. You can reach her at paw@princeton.edu
|
