See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/348909605

War-love Dichotomy in A Farewell to Arms and Arms and the Man: a

Comparative Study

Article · December 2020

CITATIONS READS

2 2,692

2 authors:

Md Azim Uddin Kamol Karmakar

University of Science and Technology Chittagong University of Science and Technology Chittagong
3 PUBLICATIONS 2 CITATIONS 5 PUBLICATIONS 5 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Kamol Karmakar on 30 January 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Noakhali Science and Technology University (JNSTU), 4(1&2): 49-57 (2020)

War-love Dichotomy in A Farewell to Arms and Arms and the Man: a

Comparative Study

Md. Azim Uddin and Kamol Karmakar *

Department of English Language and Literature (DELL), University of Science and Technology Chittagong
(USTC), Zakir Hossain Road, Foy’s Lake, Khulshi, Chattogram-4202
*
Correspondence: kamol.karmakar@ustc.ac.bd

ABSTRACT
This article aims at analyzing the differences and similarities in the ways Ernest Miller Hemingway and
George Bernard Shaw present war vis-à-vis love in A Farewell to Arms (1929) and Arms and the Man (1894)
respectively. Exploring how Hemingway pictured a lachrymose love tale of a war-worn lovebird couple, it
moves on to examine how Shaw derided impracticable notions of love and war prevalent in his society as a
social ailment. Both the writers are of the view that, once a nation ensures freedom from control by another
country, fighting becomes justifiable for it in defense of its identity. On the contrary, to show muscle power
or to fight for combat-make-you-a-hero sort of idealism is only a frivolous reason for wars. War is fine not in
reality but in fiction where it is nothing earth-shattering even if thousands of innocent people die or go
through traumatic experiences that scar them physically and/or emotionally. As for love itself, the writers
show the values of standing by the loved ones in a period of upheaval and abandoning fantasies to embrace
true love. This study puts into perspective the philosophy behind the theme of love and that of war in both the
works.
Keywords: Philosophy of Love, War Philosophy, A Farewell to Arms, Arms and the Man, War-love
Dichotomy, Drama of Ideas, Love vs. War

INTRODUCTION false idealism he saw everywhere around

Set in the backdrop of the Italian campaign
in the First World War, A Farewell to Arms,
which Vita Sackville-West called “a most
beautiful, moving and human book” by 1954
Nobel Prize winner in Literature Ernest
Hemingway, is a wartime love story of an
American-born Frederick Henry who enlists
in the Italian army as an ambulance driver.
“No subject is terrible if the story is true, if
the prose is clean and honest, and if it
affirms courage and grace under pressure”
(“The Importance of Being Ernest
Hemingway,” 00:00:33 - 00:00:41).
Again, the Fabian socialist thinker and 1925
Nobel Prize winner in Literature George
Bernard Shaw in his anti-romantic comedy
Arms and the Man exposes the futility of
conventional romantic ideals of love and
warfare. George Orwell called it “the
wittiest play” Shaw ever wrote. Shaw takes
up the “cudgels against the hypocrisy and
him, but here he sticks to lighter weapons: a
fencing foil, say, not a sledgehammer”
(Kennedy). The historic Battle of Slivnitza
in the Serbo-Bulgarian war of 1885 won by
the Bulgarians is the back-story of this play.
The Terrible Tale in A Farewell to Arms:
Henry meets Catherine Barkley, an English
VAD (Voluntary Aid Detachment) nurse in
Gorizia, and instantly falls in love with her.
Barkley is at first skeptical of his flirtations
and does not seem to be encouraging him
much. However, she gradually
acknowledges his advances and tries to
forget the memory of her lost fiancé who
was killed in a battle in France. Henry
realizes that she is way different from other
girls he met in the past. This relationship
with Barkley helps him heal from the
dreadfulness of the war.
After Henry gets wounded in the knee by a
mortar shell, he was sent to a hospital in

49
Uddin and Karmakar
Milan to have his leg operated on. Barkley
moves into that hospital as a nurse to take
care of her lover. Their love intensifies
during his stay at the hospital and Barkley
gets pregnant before Henry is recalled to the
front.
By some strange turn of events, a corrupt
lieutenant in the army blames Henry for the
Italians‟ defeat and accuses him of treason.
Seeing no other way of escaping a death
penalty, he deserts the war. For the couple
thenceforth it becomes just a matter of time
to reunite with each other to escape to a
neutral country – Switzerland – to live
peacefully.
The couple spends some quality time in and
around the Swiss city of Lausanne until
Barkley‟s prolonged labor starts. A mood of
melancholy grasps the readers as Barkley
gives birth to a stillborn male child after
hours of painful labor. Immediately
afterwards she dies from the complications
of C-section and haemorrhage. “The
ultimate catastrophe of A Farewell to Arms
consists of (1) Catherine Barkley‟s death
and loss of her child, and (2) Frederic
Henry‟s loss of Catherine Barkley and their
child” (Hemlin 4). With Barkley's demise,
Henry hits the rock bottom of despondence.
Thus, his severe suffering from never-
healing wounds starts from that time and
place onward.
A Never-seen-before Approach to Love in
Arms and the Man: Sentimental about both
love and war, a bourgeois young Bulgarian
lady Raina Petkoff and her mother Catherine
Petkoff are full of praise for a young
Bulgarian soldier named Sergius Saranoff
because he led a victorious cavalry charge
against the Serbian forces. Raina is about to
sleep and that is exactly when a war
absconder bursts into her room through the
window to save his skin. “He knows that a
dead professional soldier has no value for
people, therefore; he saved himself by
hiding in a lady's bedchamber”
(Azizmohammadi and Tayari 7).
The man threatens Raina with his gun to
keep her from disclosing his whereabouts to
50
the search party. She complies, feeds him
chocolates, lets him kiss her hand, remains
positive even when he passes out on her bed,
and finally helps him get out of the house to
safety. But before leaving, the man gives
Raina a prosaic description of the battle
between Serbia and Bulgaria. Unbeknownst
to the man, Raina is disillusioned about her
fiancé Sergius‟ victory as it turns out to be
nothing other than mere serendipity. The
confronting truth disturbs her.
Nicola, a servant in the Petkoff household, is
about to marry Louka, another female
servant at the house. But to enter the elite
society, over-ambitious Louka has a
grandiose plan which does not include her
marriage with Nicola.
Meanwhile, noble Sergius is keen on flirting
with Louka behind Raina's back. The war
deserter Captain Bluntschli comes back to
return a borrowed coat that the lady Petkoffs
gave him. Major Paul Petkoff and Sergius
already know him from the battleground.
Bluntschli discovers Raina's fetish for heroic
idealism; still, there builds up a candid
relationship between the two. “Bluntschli
conquers Raina's heart by words and not by
actions” (Siddiqui and Raza 48).
Mr Petkoff finally finds out about
Bluntschli-Raina relationship and Sergius‟
pursuit of Louka. Realizing where this is
going, Nicola starts to lie about his
engagement with Louka. The money-
grubbing Petkoffs seem to be in a rush to get
their daughter married off to Bluntschli once
they know about his great wealth and
status.
Provenance of the Names: “I never have
any names for anything that I publish until it
is time to publish it as I select a great many
names and then reject those which are
worthless” (“Interviewed Ernest
Hemingway,” 00:01:27 - 00:01:42). The title
A Farewell to Arms has been taken from a
16th-century English poem “A Farewell to
Arms (To Queen Elizabeth)” by the English
poet, George Peele. It was written to Queen
Elizabeth from the perspective of an elderly
knight who wanted to retire from the
War-love Dichotomy in A Farewell to Arms and Arms and the Man: a Comparative Study
battlefield. The word „arms‟ carries a dual
meaning in the novel: Henry says farewell to
„arms‟ meaning war and then „arms‟ again
meaning the embrace of his beloved as she
dies an unfortunate death. Thus, Henry parts
with what he loves most and what he hates
most. On the other hand, in the preface to
Plays Pleasant, Shaw says that he has taken
the title Arms and the Man from the first line
of the translation of ancient Roman poet
Virgil‟s 29-19 BC epic The Aeneid by John
Dryden. “Arms, and the man I sing, who,
forc'd by fate” (Virgil 75). In this poem,
Virgil seeks to glorify the warriors. But, the
title for Shaw‟s play Arms and the Man is a
sarcastic reference to Virgil. Shaw scoffs at
the concept of taking up arms in war and
tells his readers to obviate romantic illusions
about love.
Love in A Farewell to Arms: The four-
letter-word „love‟ is so powerful that it can
heal the world as it is the best medicine we
have ever known. There are many
dimensions to love in a relationship. No
matter which way we look at the Henry-
Barkley relationship, we see it as one of
care, respect, love, happiness, and
sacrifice.
The couple proves that a relationship
without lies is possible. Before meeting
Henry, Barkley was in another relationship.
She tells Henry about her former lover, “He
was a very nice boy. He was going to marry
me and he was killed in the Somme” (18).
She could hide this from Henry but she does
not. Unlike the characters in Arms and the
Man, she is true to herself. Her
straightforwardness is evident as she says,
“I'm not unfaithful, darling. I've plenty of
faults but I'm very faithful. You'll be sick of
me I'll be so faithful” (104).
Henry played around with many girls he
never felt anything for. But, after meeting
Barkley he starts to have a lasting change
from within. “His reactions to Catherine at
first were physical. He would prefer to sleep
with her than go to house of prostitution.
But he becomes more and more involved
with Catherine” (Kumar 133). Rinaldi, a
51
lieutenant, surgeon, and friend of Henry,
tells him about Barkley, “My God what
would a man do with a woman like that
except worship her” (61)? Armstrong has
commented, “Although Henry and Barkley
eventually come to forge a loving human
attachment, their early interactions also play
out according to the conventional and
studiously disinterested brothel narrative …”
(84).
Barkley at first has doubts as to whether
Henry is sincere in their relationship.
Fearing if she was entertaining a false
relationship, or dating the wrong guy, on
their second meeting, she slaps him on the
face when he wants to kiss her without even
knowing her properly. All her confusion
clears up when she comes to know that he
got orders to go back to the front
immediately.
Henry, despite being surrounded by many
nurses at the hospital, shows no inclination
towards womanizing. Barkley‟s love
changes him into a conscientious man. He
wants to marry her because he intends to
have children with her. Barkley does not
want to marry him since, under Italian law,
the formalities are terrible. She wants to
remain unmarried fearing imminent
separation from him. She confesses, “What
good would it do to marry now? We're
really married. I couldn't be any more
married” (103). He is not any more one of
those wartime boys who leave their
girlfriends after having physical intercourse.
He wants to be with her regardless of the
price to be paid.
Fleeing the war, he joins Barkley at a
maternity waiting home at the hotel Valeria.
His return puts Barkley in trouble. But what
is more troublesome is being a single mother
or being pregnant in a war-torn territory. He
was living in fear because there was a shoot-
on-sight order against him. The sight of him
feeling upset, and not the fact that he fled a
war, makes Barkley even more upset.
Barkley does not hesitate to risk her life only
to ensure Henry‟s safety despite knowing
that making the boat journey to Switzerland
Uddin and Karmakar

while pregnant could be fatal. Rowing where love is destroyed by war” (Chelihi et
halfway through the river, Henry fears that al., 9).
he will fail to reach the Swiss shore before Love in Arms and the Man: Through a
he loses all his strength fighting the bunch of cookie-cutter characters, Shaw
inclement weather. Barkley hated the rain. exposes the fallacy of love in Arms and the
She says, “I‟m afraid of the rain because Man. Love and its intricacies make the story
sometimes I see me dead in it” (114). Henry quite contrastive to the one we see in A
thinks he had better turn the boat back to Farewell to Arms.
Italy and take Barkley to a safer place. A
Sergius and Raina both believe in the so-
pained Barkley does not want to entertain
called „higher love‟ in which there is no
the thought as it would jeopardize his life
carnal desire. They promise each other that
and, in spite of herself, tells him to keep on
they will never do a base thing in each
rowing. Sacrifice is thus the mainstay of this
other‟s absence. Yet, they are quite
love relationship. Henry becomes the be-all
irresponsible when it comes to keeping their
and end-all of her existence. She says to
words. So to speak, their higher love is a
him, “You‟re my religion. You‟re all I‟ve
mere hoax. She gives shelter to Bluntschli,
got” (104). Just to see each other happy,
the Swiss-born Serbian fugitive, in her room
they could endure pain like no other.
at night because his life was at stake. This
Henry never prayed to God but seeing
clearly shows how humane and kind Raina
Barkley suffering during her childbirth, he
is to a random person whom she never met
falls back on prayer. “Oh, God, please don‟t
before. However, letting the man kiss her
let her die. I‟ll do anything for you if you
hand and allowing him to sleep on her bed
won‟t let her die. Please, please, please, dear
creates a bit of confusion because she is
God, don‟t let her die” (292). As for his
about to marry Sergius in no time. “Lovely
anxieties and fear, love and its labor
Raina is first appalled by his cowardice, then
dissolves all – death warrant, indignation,
charmed and sympathetic, and then . . . well,
weariness, and trauma from war – that he
that's the play” (Kennedy). What makes the
has hitherto been beset with.
whole episode so dramatic is when she calls
Some intern nurses ask Henry if he was him “a chocolate cream soldier” (Act I, 27).
proud of his son. He replies, “No. he nearly Bluntschli has major trust issues with her as
killed his mother” (287). He did not like the he says, “I admire you; but I find it
pleasure of being a father at the expense of impossible to believe a single word you say”
his beloved‟s life. The stillborn child (Act III, 69).
signifies that soldiers cannot give birth to
On the other hand, Sergius, without Raina's
life but death. She asks Henry if he will see
knowledge, indulges in even more
other girls after she is gone. He says he will
loathsome behaviour. He looks happy with
never see anyone. Even in the last moments
Raina in their „Platonic love‟ relationship.
of her life, she cannot imagine Henry loving
But at the very sight of Louka, he lets loose
someone else. She is the last person we
his libido without any qualms of conscience.
would expect to die but she dies in his arms.
This is the same Sergius who says to Raina,
Barkley-Henry affair is thus diametrically
“If you are away five minutes, it will seem
opposite when we match it with Raina-
five hours” (Act II, 48). Surely lies and
Sergius‟.
sham intertwine with love in a chimerical
Henry is glued to her till the moment she shape.
breathes her last. “Unlike Aristotelian tragic
In a humbler stratum of society, Nicola
hero who gets our sympathy because he
helps Louka get a job at the Petkoff house
unknowingly commits a fatal error,
and makes her what she is today – an
Hemingway‟s hero does not commit a fatal
ambitious and smart woman. He dreams of
error except that he is a citizen of this world
marrying her one day and having his own

52
War-love Dichotomy in A Farewell to Arms and Arms and the Man: a Comparative Study
shop in the town. Ironically, Louka never
cares about what Nicola has to say as she
believes that she was not even born to live a
low and rustic lifestyle. She says, “Sell your
manhood for 30 levas …You shall never be
master in mine” (Act III, 74). She, who
believes that “Service degrades the
employer as much as the employed, is one
of those fiercely independent spirits so
beloved by Shaw” (Billington).
Sergius thinks he can easily have a touchy-
feely affair with Louka behind Raina‟s back.
But Louka apparently does not approve of it
not because she is engaged with Nicola
but because she thinks of convincing him
that she is much better than Raina in a bid to
tempt him to marry her. What factors most
here is that marrying Nicola will shatter her
dreams to be elite. She deliberately calls
Raina a liar, cheat, and says she is worth six
of her. Besides, she tells Sergius that
Bluntschli is worth ten of him (Act III, 79).
She turns out to be the most calculative
lover in the story.
Louka thinks she knows many secrets about
the house, particularly about Raina. Nicola
astonishes her saying, “Do you think I know
no secrets? I know things about the mistress
that she wouldn't have the master know for a
thousand levas” (Act II, 36). It's a house full
of secrets and almost all the characters in it
have got a double standard of morality.
They always wait to find and grab the best
options when they have choices – be it in
their love affairs or in other aspects of life.
Until Raina meets Bluntschli, she is
seemingly happy being betrothed to that
blowhard of a Bulgarian. Stumbling upon
Bluntschli makes her realize that he is a
better option than Sergius.
The Bulgarians were deeply aggrieved by
the Serbo-Bulgarian war of 1885 started by
Serbian king Milan. “Before the end of
1885, however, Milan himself set in motion
the greatest disaster of his reign by
launching his ill-fated invasion of Bulgaria”
(Armour 224). Calling the war „fratricidal,‟
the Bulgarians thought Serbia did not have
any true reason to attack them.
53
Being a Swiss, Bluntschli fights for the
Serbians in the war. He soldiers because
soldiering is his profession; for money he
will fight for or against any country. When it
comes to money, his “rank is the highest
known in Switzerland” (Act III, 95). But he
wanted to be independent, disregarding his
father‟s help. His logical ways of speaking
and good manners bear testimony to his
good upbringing. In choosing sides in the
war, he could have easily been on the
Bulgarian side. Interestingly he says, “I
joined the Serbs because they came first on
the road from Switzerland” (Act I, 21). Even
if the Bulgarians approached him first, in all
likelihood, he would not join them unless
they gave him more money than the Serbs.
For a long time, Nicola thinks Louka is the
girl for him. But Louka prefers Sergius over
him however unrealistic it might seem.
Encouraging Sergius‟ every suggestive
move in what can be called the honeymoon
phase of their relationship, she says “then
stand back where we can't be seen” (Act II,
49). Nicola might have given her up for
profit because he once said she would make
a better customer than a wife. “George
Bernard Shaw believes Nicola used Louka
as an object for gaining his wish as
Bluntschli used Raina as an object to save
himself” (Azizmohammadi and Tayari 8).
The older Petkoffs think Sergius is the best
option for Raina only because he is rich.
Despite knowing that Raina and Bluntschli
both love each other, they do not support the
idea of their marriage until they find out that
he is much richer than Sergius. Typically,
this is how socialites create smoke and
mirrors to double-cross others in the name
of love.
War in A Farewell to Arms: The horror of
the war is palpable on the very first few
pages of the novel. “Troops went by the
house and down the road and the dust they
raised powdered the leaves of the trees” (3).
No matter how people meet death – be it by
bombs, arms, mortars, from deadly diseases
– wartime fatalities are a minutely affair. A
Uddin and Karmakar
putrid smell fills the air. The soldiers
experienced a cholera-ridden world in the
First World War, which we now call the
sixth pandemic. The pandemic that killed
millions was dealt with total human
callousness. The monsoon began and “with
the rain came the cholera. But it was
checked and in the end only seven thousand
died of it in the army” (4). The use of the
word „only‟ to depict seven thousand dead
shows how stoically people dealt with mass
deaths. If seven thousand deaths are called
„only,‟ then we can guess how many in total
must have died in the war. Armstrong has
again commented, “War is like the meat-
markets of Chicago, except the “meat” of
war is simply buried: the soldiers‟ deaths
serve no purpose and have no (re-)
generative value” (82).
Calling the enemy‟s battery firing simply „a
nuisance‟ (15), and the war „rotten‟ (32),
Henry shows us how he loathed the war. His
fellow ambulance driver Bonello says, “If I
had brains I wouldn't be here” (187). Henry
thinks “there is a class that controls a
country that is stupid and does not realize
anything and never can. This is why we
have this war” (47). He feels very little
loyalty to the Italian army. It's not like the
Italian army spent money by the bucketful to
recruit him as a soldier. He did not join this
war out of some patriotic zeal or monetary
needs rather for humanitarian reasons.
Lying in the hospital bed, Henry
understands that the Italian army was using
him when Rinaldi said that the army was
going to give him “medaglia d‟argento,”
(58) the silver medal of military valor.
Henry thinks he has not done anything
noteworthy to deserve the medal. He says to
Rinaldi, “I was blown up while we were
eating cheese. … I didn't carry anybody. I
couldn't move” (59). He understands that the
army is doing so to keep its young men
coming to join and fight for the country.
What‟s more, his fellow ambulance driver
Passini‟s tragic demise makes him baulk at
the idea of rejoining the war.
54
Henry‟s reluctant return to the front leaving
behind pregnant Barkley betrays the dire
consequences of shirking military duty.
Seeing his friends and other soldiers die in
vain, Henry loses all interest in this
internecine war. Optimism, glory, and
sacrifice in war meant absolutely nothing to
him at that point. Fleeing from the war is
the only option he is left with because the
army for which he gave up everything was
planning to take his life. He was so horrified
by the absolute illusion of heroics in the
front that he deserted the war.
In the two works we have two war deserters:
Captain Bluntschli and Frederic Henry.
Bluntschli is a practical realist to quit the
battlefield. He views heroism and glory
associated with soldering as illusions.
Soldiering to death in the name of patriotism
means nothing to him in comparison to
living an exuberant life. On the other hand,
Henry cannot imagine deserting the army
until he finds his life in danger. He would
most probably continue his fight for Italy
provided he was not accused of spying.
Henry and Barkley fled to the Swiss
territory; not only did Switzerland play a
neutral role in World War Ⅰ, it was the
nearest place for them to safely hide from
the atrocities of the Italian army. They seem
to have escaped successfully but inevitably
fail to evade the harsh aftermath of the war
that gets enmeshed with other realities of
their lives. The events in the war make
Henry realize “in a hard way that there are
indeed forces against which he cannot fight”
(Tsavmbu et al., 168).
War in Arms and the Man: Shaw has
shown the contrast between romanticism
and realism of war. In a letter to William
Archer on 23 April 1894, Shaw writes
criticizing wars, “I do not accept the
conventional ideals, to them I oppose in the
play the practical life and morals of the
efficient, realist man, unaffectedly ready to
face what risks must be faced, considerate
but not chivalrous, patient and practical”
(Laurence, Bernard Shaw Collected 427).
War-love Dichotomy in A Farewell to Arms and Arms and the Man: a Comparative Study
Raina and her mother‟s romantic notions of
war, resulting from their reading of Byron
and Pushkin and their visits to the opera, are
shattered when they get acquainted with
Bluntschli‟s views of war. They learn from
this career soldier that the truth about
Sergius‟ cavalry charge is: it‟s just “sheer
ignorance of the art of war” (Act I, 24). The
cavalry charge could turn fatal if the
Serbians had the right ammunition.
Bluntschli‟s words “work more than a
weapon” (Siddiqui and Raza48).
According to Bluntschli, Sergius deserves to
be brought to book for his unwise cavalry
charge which risks his soldiers‟ lives. He
goes on saying about Sergius, “And there
was Don Quixote flourishing like a drum
major, thinking he'd done the cleverest thing
ever known … He and his regiment simply
committed suicide; only the pistol missed
fire: that's all” (Act I, 25). Purdom says, “He
goes on to describe the magnificent cavalry
charge and how the officer at the head of it
was carried away by his horse. Thus
Bluntschli attacks, unconsciously but
devastatingly, the heroine's cherished ideals”
(Purdom, Guide to plays 159).
Catherine has no clear concept of what it
takes to fight a war. She does not like it
when Mr Petkoff informs her that a treaty
declared peace in the war. She rants, “You
could have annexed Serbia and made
Alexander Emperor of the Balkans. That's
what I would have done” (Act II, 38). Not
realizing the possible untoward
ramifications of the cavalry charge,
Catherine becomes elated just because a
victory was won by Sergius in the battle at
Slivnitza. Defying the Russian commanders
and acting without their orders, Sergius
leads the charge against the Serbian artillery.
This makes Raina happy albeit for the
wrong reasons.
Bluntschli when hiding in Raina's
bedchamber makes Raina realize that blood
and war at your doorstep is never desirable.
She observes that some soldiers are afraid to
die. He disagrees and says not some but in
fact, all the soldiers are afraid to die. In his
55
own words, “It is our duty to live as long as
we can” (Act I, 17). To him, the very cause
– the victory over the Serbs – for which
Sergius calls himself a warrior or wants
promotion, is no cause at all. If Sergius has
any achievement, it is showing everyone
how unprofessional, unsoldierly, foolish,
and reckless he is in his military endeavours.
Bluntschli aptly comments, “Nine soldiers
out of ten are born fools” (Act I, 19).
Bluntschli is a realistic man who, when in
the front, does not indulge in idealism. To
him, it's wiser to keep enough food in war
than grenades and that “... it is better to be
fortified with chocolates than with
ammunition in the battlefield” (Singh and
Dubey 6).
Shaw presents the character of Bluntschli in
such a way that a soldier fights when he has
to and is fine to desert the war if need be.
The fact of the matter is – hunting, attacking
or killing, and not soldiering, is at times
plain nonsense because in most cases even
the very soldiers do not know what they are
fighting for. Their „just following orders‟
defence involves god-awful suffering in and
after the war. In the second act of the play,
Sergius says to Catherine, “soldering, my
dear madam, is the coward‟s art of attacking
mercilessly when you are strong, and
keeping out of harm's way when you are
weak. … and never, on any account, fight
him on equal terms” (Act II, 43-44).
Climactic Differences in the Works:
Hemingway comes up with “The Iceberg
Theory,” a writing technique where without
describing everything that happens in a story
a writer can get the readers to visualize the
progress of the story on their own. “If a
writer of prose knows enough about what he
is writing about, he may omit things that he
knows and the reader, if the writer is writing
truly enough, will have a feeling of those
things as strongly as though the writer had
stated them. (Hemingway, Death in the
Afternoon, 169). In A Farewell to Arms he
uses the concept of zero ending; one of the
main features of the theory which is
different from Shaw's carefully handled
Uddin and Karmakar

Arms and the Man. The ending of A Armour, Ian D. “Put Not Your Trust in
Farewell to Arms is tragic, abrupt, weird, Princes”: The Habsburg
and deliberately so. Monarchy and Milan Obrenović
On the other hand, Arms and the Man has a of Serbia 1881–1885.” Canadian
happy ending. It fits into the category of Slavonic Papers: Revue
„Shavian Drama of Ideas‟ as all the Canadienne des Slavistes, vol. 56,
characters with opposing ideas engage in no. 3-4, Apr. 2015, pp. 201-37.
little action but lengthy discussions only to Armstrong, Joel. “A powerful beacon”:
reconcile at the end. The manifestations of Love Illuminating Human
which can be seen in that they finally get Attachment in Hemingway‟s A
their desired love. That is to say, a craftily Farewell to Arms.” The
designed didacticism marks the ending of Hemingway Review, vol. 35, no. 1,
the play. Fall 2015, pp. 78-96.
Azizmohammadi, Fatemeh, and Zohreh
CONCLUSION Tayari. “Sexism or Gender
Differentiation and Class
Hemingway presents war in A Farewell to
Differentiation in George Bernard
Arms as a meaningless waste of life. It puts
Shaw‟s Arms and the Man.”
many people‟s lives at stake. Henry deserts
International Journal of
the war, not his love, Barkley. They do well
Literature and Arts, vol. 2, no. 1,
amid war but it is the curse of the war that
2014, pp. 6-9.
makes them wither even in peace. Even
though finding themselves in utter misery, Billington, Michael. “Arms and the Man
they do not budge an inch when it comes to review – a fresh take on Shaw's
love. This headlong plunge into the sea of anti-romcom.” The Guardian, 6
love apparently has a cleansing effect on Oct. 2016,
him as it obliterates his memory of the war www.theguardian.com/stage/2016
at least when he is around Barkley. Then, /oct/06/arms-and-the-man-review-
highlighting the conflict between knowledge shaw-watford-palace-theatre.
and ignorance, Shaw scoffs at the unrealistic Accessed 25 July 2020.
ideals of love and war in his social satire. He Chelihi, Rania Khelifa, et al. “Tragedy and
demonstrates that war and idealistic love the Tragic: A Study of Ernest
involve sheer stupidity, pretension, and Hemingway‟s A Farewell to Arms
hypocrisy. Before sharing his message, he and Naguib Mahfouz‟s The
brings the biggest flaws of his society to Beginning and the End.”
light. In dealing with the subject of war, International Journal of English
both Hemingway and Shaw emphasize that Linguistics, vol. 8, no. 7, Nov.
it is people, not weapons that win wars. The 2018, pp. 7-12.
theme of love, however, has been put Hemingway, Ernest. A Farewell to Arms.
differently in the two works. Not a particular Arrow Books, 2004.
individual from Arms and the Man matches
Hemingway, Ernest. Death in the Afternoon.
the single-minded and till-death-us-do-part
Vintage, 2000.
attitude of the Henry-Barkley couple. The
two extreme views of love can encourage Hemlin, Klas. “Hemingway‟s Honesty and
readers to approach love not with abandon the Tragedy of A Farewell to
but with moderation. Arms.” Gothenburg University,
Department of Languages &
Literatures Website, Autumn
REFERENCES
2015,https://core.ac.uk/reader/435
61585. Accessed 22 August 2020.

56
 War-love Dichotomy in A Farewell to Arms and Arms and the Man: a Comparative Study

“Interviewed Ernest Hemingway” YouTube, Farewell to Arms and The Old Man
uploaded by atelierdesarchives and the Sea.” Advances in Language
History, 16 Feb. and Literary Studies, vol. 5, no. 2,
2017,www.youtube.com/watch?v Apr. 2014, pp. 166–170.
=Nsv63C9tDJE Virgil, Aeneid, Translated by John Dryden,
Kennedy, Louise. “A witty take on love and P. F. Collier & Son, 1969.
war.” The Boston Globe, 8 May
2007,http://archive.boston.com/ae/
theater_arts/articles/2007/05/08/a_
witty_take_on_love_and_war/.
Accessed 28 July 2020. Note:
Kumar, Rajender. “Amorous Love in the There are two characters named Catherine in
Novels of Ernest Hemingway: A the two works: one being Catherine Barkley
Romantic Study of A Farewell to in A Farewell to Arms, and the other,
Arms.” The Criterion: An Catherine Petkoff in Arms and the Man. For
International Journal in English, the readers to avoid confusion, Catherine
vol. 4, no. 6, Dec. 2013, pp. 131- Barkley has been mentioned as Barkley and
35. Catherine Petkoff as Catherine throughout
the article.
Laurence, Dan H. Bernard Shaw Collected
Letters 1874-1897. Dodd, Mead &
Co., 1965.
Purdom, C.B. A Guide to the Plays of
Bernard Shaw. MethuenLife,
1963.
Shaw, George Bernard. Arms and the Man.
Maple Press, 2018.
Siddiqui, Shahzad Ahmad and Syed
AsadRaza. “Realism in Arms and
the Man: A Comparative Study –
Realism and Idealism.”
International Journal of
Humanities and Social Science,
vol. 2, no. 12, 2012, pp. 44-49.
Singh, Renu, and Arjun Dubey. “Treatment
of Love and War as a hollow sham
in Arms and the Man by G.B.
Shaw.” Lapis Lazuli -An
International Literary Journal, vol.
3, no. 1, Spring 2013, pp. 01-10.
“The Importance of Being Ernest
Hemingway” YouTube, uploaded by
The New York Times, 14 Jan.
2012,www.youtube.com/watch?v=L
2BY-DVPYs0
Tsavmbu, Aondover Alexis, et al.
“Overcoming the Biological Trap: A
Study of Ernest Hemingway‟s A

57

View publication stats