EISENHOWER AND TOLSTOY

New Zealand Listener, Volume 14, Issue 351, 15 March 1946, Page 5

EISENHOWER AND TOLSTOY

Sir,-As one who has also "just accomplished the not-inconsiderable feat of reading Tolstoy’s War and Peace, might I be permitted to say a few words in reply to G.M.’s interesting and provocative article on. Eisenhower and Tolstoy? First point: Although Tolstoy appears to put the "ultimate responsibility for military success or failure squarely on the man behind the gun," one cannot help but feel that, in the last analysis, he comes to the conclusion (implied rather than expressed) that there is no responsibility at all-unless we trace the "ultimate responsibility" to Tolstoy’s "one cause of all causes" which he places outside of history. Take these quotations for example: "Every human being is inevitably conditioned by what surrounds him and by his own body." "The responsibility appears greater or lesser ac~cording to our knowledge of the circumstances." "Man lives consciously for ‘himself, but is an unconscious instrument in the attainment of the historic universal aims of humanity." And finally: "It is necessary to renounce a freedom which does not exist and to recognise a dependence of which we are

not conscious." (G.M. will recall that these are the culminating ideas of War and Peace). Where is the "man behind the gun" now? Second point: A large number of historians still believe that generalship is a vital factor in warfare, and that "the absence of a general plan of concerted action can be made good by no compensating advantages" (Egerton). While we do not expect G.M. to defend Tolstoy’s philosophy of» history in toto (however interesting and romantic and perhaps convincing may be its applications), I think that we should expect him to tetl us how The True Glory (which apparently disregards these factors of generalship and planning) can be regarded as anything but a falsification of history-that is to say, in so far

as it claims to give a comprehensive pic-

ture of the war. —

HISTORY

STUDENT

(Victoria College),

(G.M. replies: The points raised are interesting, but if this correspondent has seen the film, or even had read the review carefully, I doubt if he would have bothered to raise them, for he would know that the film does mot "apparently disregard" the factors mentioned. )