Nicholson Bakers Human Smoke - Book Report/Review Example

An Essay on Nicholson Baker’s Human Smoke: the Beginnings of the World War-II, the End of the Civilization Introduction   Nicholson Baker, the contemporary writer of the American society has succeeded in capturing the minute details of life in his works. In his most debated work, Human Smoke: The Beginnings of the World War -II, the End of the Civilization, he has questioned the authenticity of the Nazi Germany forcing the Allied powers to participate in the Second World War. In this book, he attempts to trace the origins of the Second World War, the cruelty of the war participants, the mistakes of the world leaders particularly of Winston Churchill. Baker locates the evidence of Winston Churchill’s penchant for the revelries of the night and his share in instigating the Nazi Germany to war. Baker does not employ the straightforward narration as a polemicist. The entire book is a set of vignettes from the magazine articles, newspapers, diaries and memoirs. In other words, “Human Smoke” is a reception of the Second World War. However, history is always tainted by the perception of the individuals. Baker has aimed at showing the numerous perceptions of the people in respect to the Second World War. It also analyzes the war strategies adopted by the world leaders. The work is Baker’s documentary on the political leaders of Britain and the United States and the adoption of corrupt measures taken by them to provoke of Germany to the Second World War. The Second World War scenario was devastating as the technological development increased the use of arms and ammunitions. Baker in this book makes a record of the bombings of the superior powers on the villages and has penned down the quotations of the various war victims and of those who has viewed the war from a different perspective. He quotes the sayings of a person named Chamier. According to him, ‘The attacks with bombs and machine guns must be relentless and unremitting’ in the eyes of the power holders. (Baker, 8) In other words, the rustic life should be ravaged by continuous bombardments. Baker considers “The NewYork Times” as a valuable source of information and refers to the article by Frederick Birchall, a news correspondent of “The NewYork Times”. Birchell reads a book by Ewald Banse, a teacher from Germany who speaks about the horror and squalor involved in the war. Banse has said in his “Wehrwissenschaft” that war is ‘gas and plague. It is tank and aircraft horror’. (Baker, 44) The emergence of a new kind of science has changed the ethics of war.  An individual readiness must be there to sacrifice for the sake of nation.  Baker has tried to negate the romantic glorification of war. Baker in this book is totally against the measures of Winston Churchill. According to Neville Chamberlain’s report, Winston Churchill was in a joyous mood hearing the news regarding the outbreak of the Second World War. Churchill’s spirit was marked by’ a sense of uplifted serenity and detachment from human affairs’ at the ‘call of honour’. (Baker, 138) The nations of the modern world are raising wars in the name of religions and civilizations. It should be remembered that no religion could ever allow bloodshed for its propagation. To support his viewpoint, Baker takes into account the idea of Dorothy Day, the editor of the “Catholic Worker”. According to her, to save Christianity we cannot resort to war. War for the survival of Christianity is the ‘Folly of the Cross’. (Baker, 192)  The people must adhere to nonviolent means to oppose injustice and corruption. In Britain there are books condemning Winston Churchill’s policies to a fight a war against the Nazi Germany that caused disruption in the nation and created havoc among the other nations that participated in the war.  It could be that Baker is trying to carry out a research work on the origin of the Second World War. If the answer is, ‘yes’ then Baker must depend on all the more valid books and historical documents. No doubt, the subject matter of the book is grand but the sources of information are not substantiating to debate on the history of the Second World War. Baker’s selection of the material is subjective and is reformed by his assumptions and prejudices. He is a pacifist and so, he believes that war begets war. His accounts in the book are subject to biasness. As a result, he cannot present multi-dimensional aspects in shaping the Second World War. He presents his own notion of the First World War leading to the Second World War. His depiction of Winston Churchill has always been on the negative side. He is portrayed as a man who detests the Huns and the Jews. He is also held responsible for the Great Depression ultimately making the path for Hitler to come to power. Baker has also accused Churchill for negotiating with the ICI. The ICI is the bearer of the arms and poisonous gases. These kinds of chemical weapons had never been used in Britain. Baker has therefore presented a paranoid version of history. It is true that Britain employed airpower to maintain its rule over the restive colonies and the mandates between the wars. Baker tries to establish a connection between this policy and air war against Germany from 1939. It was actually the reverse case. The RAF was trained to adopt colonial measures but not equipped for a real war. Franklin Roosevelt is also shown as a man in favor of war. It is alleged that he was responsible for provoking the Japanese into war. This policy would keep a door open for them to attack the Pearl Harbour. This would definitely excite the citizens of the United Nations and they would become ready to rage war against Germany. Roosevelt said that if he hated the Jewish people then why he was not in favorable terms with Hitler. Roosevelt never answered the question. Fascism was opposed to democracy. On the other hand, Jeanette Rankin, the first woman to be elected to the House of Representatives selected against declaring war on Germany. In Baker’s book, there is a comment given by her, ‘you cannot have war and democracy’. (Baker, 3) Baker’s effort to show futility of war must be appreciated but in that process he has shaped history based on his personal understanding of the events. He has resorted to mere paperwork done by others.  This has led to the tainting of the historical facts. Conclusion Nicholson Baker may give efforts in writing this book but the historical evidences do not support his viewpoints. It is better to read this book as a literary work than to take it as a record of many unsaid or unexplored historical phenomena. It is not acceptable to denigrate historical figures just because of certain assumptions. As we find in Baker that the figures of Winston Churchill, Franklin Roosevelt and Adolf Hitler emerge as villains. The book may show the madness of war but here the demarcation between facts and fiction is blurred. In this retrospective journey to visualize the Second World War scenario, various myths have been picked up by Baker. This has made “Human Smoke” a controversial issue of Baker. However, if we simply read this book as a literary creation then it is not worthwhile to analyze it on critical grounds. The concept of war is always associated with the firings and bombardments, killing multitudes of soldiers and civilians and the author rightly depicts that. However, the problem with Baker is that he has countered the generally acknowledged myth of the good war with his personal myth about bad war. Reference Baker, Nicholson, Human Smoke: The Beginnings of the World War-II, the End of the Civilization, New York: Simon and Schuster, 2009. Read More