Final answer:
Mary O'Hare criticized war's glorification in the media, which resonates with historical uses of propaganda to gain civilian support. Sassoon's works act as a counter, showing the grim reality of war, unlike sanitized portrayals. Debates surrounding the suspension of civil liberties during wartime continue, with arguments for and against based on national security and individual rights.
Step-by-step explanation:
Mary O'Hare's view of war is shaped by her belief that glorification of war in books and movies contributes to its perpetuation. While she does not express this sentiment in a uniform way, her viewpoint is reflected in various critiques of war's portrayal in media as something to be romanticized or heroic, rather than the brutal reality it often is. This perspective resonates with the idea that such portrayals can alter public perception and potentially influence a society's willingness to engage in or support war.
In considering whether books and movies encourage war, it is essential to examine the content and the messages they are sending. Propaganda during wartime, particularly through posters and films, has historically been used to mobilize civilian support and foster a sense of patriotism. In analysis, one should ask if these portrayals offer a realistic assessment of war or if they gloss over the true horrors and consequences of conflict in favor of a more sanitized, appealing image.
The poet Siegfried Sassoon provides a stark contrast to the often glorified image of war. Sassoon perceived war not as heroic, but as a horrific experience that inflicted tremendous suffering on soldiers, characterized by his vivid descriptions of the brutal conditions and treatment of soldiers during World War I. His writings aim to convey the stark reality of war, in contrast to the glorified narratives that can be found in other media.
The question of whether it is acceptable for governments to suspend civil liberties during wartime is complex and contentious. The suspension of civil liberties, such as those during World War I by the United States, raises crucial debates about the balance between national security and individual rights. While some argue that extraordinary measures are necessary to protect a nation during times of crisis, others warn of the risks to democracy and human rights that such actions can entail.