De Pizan And Brecht example essay topic
The first step in the evaluation of these views is to understand the author's ties to the material. Brecht was a German exile who wrote this play in the early twentieth century about a war which occurred hundreds of years before, during the seventeenth century. Perhaps he found interest in the Thirty Years War because of its religious concerns, and because of the prospect of war during his era. His own mother was a Protestant, while his father was a Catholic, which may not have been as much a problem during his lifetime, but was of definite importance in Europe during Mother Courage's time (Int'l Brecht Society). Quite different than Brecht's situation was de Pizan's connection with her war manual. Her purpose for writing was not for pleasure, or for audience entertainment, but rather as an informational reference for royalty and aristocrats involved in a presently occurring war.
The Great Western Schism and the 100 Years War were important and destructive issues in Europe during de Pizan's life in the fifteenth century (Patrouch, 1/23). So the differences between the authors and their work are the time period, the purpose, and the relationship, even though the main subject is similar. With de Pizan's war manual, she was able to express her opinions on war basically through first-person narrative. She also uses a dream sequence with Honore Bouvet, to express his and her ideas in a way which would give the information more credibility (because he is a man). Her main belief is that war is "just", and that peace is related to war (de Pizan, 14). She quotes the Roman writer, Vegetius Rena tus, as saying, "He who desires peace, let him prepare for war" (footnote #23, pg. 27).
To de Pizan and her cited authors, a war is just when it has a reasonable cause. God will support the "just" side, and Fortune will help them in their endeavors. All of the wrongs of war will in the end be made right by God, according to Bouvet, as quoted by de Pizan (152). This is an optimistic view on the idea of war and the hope for eventual peace. Brecht also believes that war amounts to peace.
He employs this idea through the story of Anna Fi erling (Mother Courage) and her three children. The play takes place amidst the Thirty Years War, and shows how they struggled to survive the many obstacles of war time. The first scene begins with a sergeant complaining that they needed a war, because "with peace running wild all over the place" there is no order. People honestly believed that there was more organization with a war (Brecht, 23). This order is what they considered a type of peace. Brecht may have personally felt this way about orderliness because of his Communistic values.
Both authors also saw the business aspects in war. During these two phases in European history, plagues and poverty greatly effected society. Most people did not necessarily volunteer for war, regardless of their religious convictions. The increase in unemployment led them to find stability in the occupational options of the army (Patrouch, lecture 2/27).
De Pizan found the necessity in meeting the needs of their soldiers, because it would make them happier, and in effect make them a stronger force (de Pizan, 38-39). She felt that better pay would be an incentive for better performance. France needed all the help they could get because of their lost initial efforts in the fight against England. In Brecht's play, the main character, Mother Courage, focuses on the necessity of war for her business.
She says that. ".. both defeat and victory are a costly business for us that haven't got much. The best thing is for politics to get stuck in the mud" (Brecht, 52). In other words, war time is the best time to make money. Supplies were cheap, people relied on certain items, and they believed that "war feeds its people better" (Brecht, 82). It seems as though there were selfish reasons behind war because of the change from religious conflicts to personal gain. One of Brecht's characters, the Chaplain, even wonders why the war should ever end.
He claims that "the war satisfies all needs" (76). Although the two works tend to agree on many terms, there are noticeable differences in the attitudes and certain points that were made. De Pizan describes the qualities of good leaders and proper conditions of the soldiers' lodgings. Such things as sufficient food, water, pay, and space were addressed as important considerations of a general (de Pizan, chats. XII-XIV). She makes constructive criticism to improve the situations and better their chances for victory.
Perhaps she feels that her positive and factual attitude will strike courage into those who may read her words. Through the voices of his characters, Brecht mostly portrays the civilian life. He shows how men are lured into the war with the promise of fame and money (28). However, the people found that war, organization or no organization, has its definite downside. Even when they think of war in terms of profit, they don't want to lose those who are closest to them.
They apparently don't believe in the idea of giving some and taking some. Mother Courage's life is centered around her wagon (her business), and believes in the war- but not in involving her sons in it (29). For them, war also means rape (Katrin, the daughter, is threatened by this), pillaging, famine, and death. The only positives they mention have to do with money. Their so-called "organization" is based on economical value and not necessarily societal issues.
Another aspect which differs is the idea of virtues during war. De Pizan writes of the honor a soldier deserves for having been well-trained to bear arms (78). She even points out that in ancient times, nobles with no war training were on the same level as the peasants (33). De Pizan and Brecht both agree that fighting for a just cause is honorable in the eyes of God. The Chaplain attempted to justify fighting for the war when he said "to fall in this war is not a misfortune, it's a blessing. This is a war of religion... therefore pleasing unto God" (46).
However, Brecht differentiates from de Pizan because he does not believe in virtues. Mother Courage said that brave soldiers most likely signify that they have a weak commander, because a stupid general needs good support behind him. A good leader can direct any group of men to perform well. "In a good country virtues wouldn't be necessary.
Everybody could be quite ordinary, middling, and, for all I care, cowards", says Mother Courage (39). Virtues were not looked highly upon because they seemed to represent the opposite of their intentions, causing negative results. Towards the end of the play, she complains of the devastating effects of war, perhaps slightly exaggerated, saying "Nothing grows anymore... I hear the villagers have been eating their younger children.
Nuns have been committing robbery" (96). This comment reveals the negativity that the people felt towards the results of wartime, regardless of how they depended on it. So the attitudes which are reflected amongst the two selections can be seen comparatively and dissimilarly. Although Brecht and de Pizan focus on similar subjects of war, the way in which they reveal their attitudes are not the same.
De Pizan is more factual, while Brecht is based on facts. They mutually agree on the righteousness of warfare, the honor associated with it, and the business profits that it can incur. Brecht points out the struggles of the civilian life through a fictional play, and de Pizan's war manual concentrates on the men at arms and how they can improve their performance.