Final answer:
WWI is depicted in poetry and art as a time of inhumanity and suffering, eschewing romantic views of war. Nationalism and patriotism played significant roles but do not entirely justify the human costs. The war's legacy is one of profound global impact and a reassessment of societal norms.
Step-by-step explanation:
The opinions of WWI are deeply woven into the fabric of the time's poetry and academic articles, providing us with a raw and emotional view of the war's impact. Poets like Wilfred Owen and Siegfried Sassoon eschewed romanticized visions of warfare, instead showcasing the grim realities of conflict. Their work, along with the visual art of Kathe Kollwitz, who depicted the profound personal loss and suffering caused by the war, helped fuel a broader critical discourse on the nature of the conflict.
WWI was seen by many as the first global war, reshaping not just international dynamics but also influencing societal structures and gender roles on the home front. The legacy of WWI, a complex intertwine of technological advancement, deep sorrow, and powerful nationalistic tendencies, has been debated throughout history. Nationalism, indeed a driving force then, also raises questions as to whether soldier's involvement, often draped in patriotic zeal, was truly justified or overshadowed by the sheer magnitude of human cost.
From a personal standpoint, reflecting on these historical documents and creative works, I am led to believe that while patriotism may have played a role in rallying troops and maintaining morale, the broader question of whether it justified the war is more complex. The sacrifice of soldiers cannot be understated, but the societal and geopolitical consequences of the war suggest that patriotism alone cannot justify the profound human suffering it entailed.