War

John Ruskin
BS III AND M.A PREV.
War
 War is the foundation of all arts.
 It is the foundation of all the high virtues and faculties of men.
 It is a practical fact that peace and vices of civil life flourish together. All nations realized the
truth that war nourishes and invigorates them whereas peace wastes and debilitates them.
 But he is not referring to the wars of barbarians or the Scotch border feuds or the Napoleonic war,
because such wars build nothing except tombs.
 Rather he refers to creative or ‘noble war’ which disciplines love and ambition and kills evil.
 In such wars the natural instincts of self-defence are sanctified by the nobleness of the institutions
and purity of the households which they are called upon to defend.
Three Kinds of Noble War
(1) War for Exercise or Play

 Ruskin condemns war for the sake of war. He justifies that war which is undertaken more as a play
or exercise of the personal power of human creatures than a tool of vengeance upon innocent people.
 In the past war used to be more an exercise than any thing else among the classes who caused and
proclaimed it. To the governor and the soldier, it had always been a grand pastime. No king whose
mind was fully occupied with the development of the inner resources of his kingdom, ever entered
into war except under compulsion. No youth who was sincerely busy with any peaceful subject of
study ever became a soldier.
 Fighting is implanted in human nature and hence for all healthy men, fair fight is the best play and
that a tournament was a better game than a steeple-chase. Only that game of war is justifiable in
which the full personal power of the human creature is brought out in management of its weapons.
There are three reasons for this. First, the great justification of this game is that when well played, it
determines, who is the best man, who is the most fearless, the swiftest of eye and hand. The issue of
the battle must not depend on the longest gun or the best gun-power but on the firmness of frame and
fairness of hand. The other two reasons for this mode of decision are the lessening of material
destructiveness or cost and the physical distress of war.
(ii) War of Dominion

 This is the commonest type of war. The real motive for such wars is not unholy because
human nature is essentially noble. But when this nobility is forgotten, man begins to
commit follies and sins. Ruskin says that the kings and princes are free to extend their
domin­ion, but they should be gentlest and the most generous of all nobles. If the rulers
had any idea of welfare for their subjects, the wars for the increase of power would not
have taken place. .If the ruler neglects his subjects and revels only in extending his
territory, he is failing in his duty. To hear the complaints of numerous people, to make
laws for them and lead them to purer life is a big work for the king and he should
concentrate on this.
 In this connection, Ruskin defines true power. He says that it does not depend either on
multitude of men or on extent of territory. It is wrong to suppose that nations become
strong according to their numbers. They become strong only if these numbers are one
mind. But mere number is not sufficient. A little group of wise hearts is better than a
wilderness full of fools. Only that nation gains true territory which gains itself.
(iii) War for Defence

 The third kind of war that Ruskin calls a ‘noble deed’ is the war for defence. It is
the war waged simply for the defence of the country in which we were born and
for the maintenance and execution of her laws by whomsoever threatened or
defied. Most men joining the army consider themselves bound to duty. These
persons should act as sentimental beings, because it is on the whole, the love of
adventure, love of fine dress, love of the pride of fame which chiefly make a boy
like going into the Guards better than into a counting house. Therefore, for their
honour and that of their familities, they should choose brave death in a red coat in
preference to brave life in a black coat.
 The soldiers who dedicate their lives to the cause of their country, feel that the
wars fought by them are always for the cause of the good. But Ruskin feels that
the soldiers, who have to fight at the orders of others, have to labour under a form
of slavery. The ruler, and administrators, the persons who govern, are not always
the best men, and it is they who decide where the soldiers have to fight.
Therefore, the guides and leaders of the soldiers need to be noble and righteous
people. Passive obedience is not the ideal of soldiership. A separation between
civil and military duties— brave men fighting and cowards thinking and directing
—is not a happy state of things. To ennoble their country, the soldiers should be
industrious they should think and feel as well as fight for their country.