All over his career, Shaw waged a war against romantic and idealistic notions of life, against shams and hypocrisy, and this war began with “Arms and the Man”. He has aptly called “Arms and the Man” an anti-romantic comedy in which he has exposed the hollowness of the romantic ideas of love and war. The play is anti-romantic because in it Shaw has attacked the romantic idealization of life; and it is a comedy because in it he has exposed and ridiculed the hollowness of romantic love and the heroic ideals of war. By Romanticism Shaw means all that is not based on fact and reality; all shams and false conventions are romantic for they are not based on facts. Their futility and absurd nature can be easily confirmed. Shaw laughs but his laughter has a serious intention. He is both witty and thought-provoking.

The play opens on a note of romance. Raina is a romantic girl who stands on her balcony enjoying the beauty of the night and the snowy Balkans. She is betrothed to Sergius a, “Byronic hero”, who has gone to war like knights of the Middle Ages. He makes a heroic cavalry charge and wins a splendid victory. He becomes the hero and is adored and worshipped by Raina. On his return home, we get a scene of higher and romantic love with Raina calling him her “hero” and her “king” and he addressing her as his “Queen” and saying that he could win the heroic victory only because she inspired him.

Both Raina and Sergius live in a world of romance. In the beginning of the play Shaw shows how Raina doubt their romantic ideas. They are derived from the reading of Byron and Pushkin and the seeing of romantic play. That is why their romance is soon shattered through its very first contact with reality. Bluntschli represents solid reality. Through him Shaw places the relevant facts and arguments before Raina and her idealistic notions of war are soon shattered. Firstly, she is bluntly told that Sergius is a fool and block head, that he and his regiment nearly committed suicide, only the pistol miss fire.


Secondly, she is told that food is more important in war than ammunition, that it is the duty of a soldier to live as long as he can.


He also tells her that with their end in view a soldier should run away from the field, and that:


Gradually, Raina is made to see the facts of the case, and her romantic ideals of war are demolished. Similarly, Sergius is disillusioned by war, and realizes that soldering is a trade like any other trade.


It is not heroism, but the, “coward’s art”, of mercilessly attacking when you are strong and having your enemy at a disadvantage.



Similarly, both Raina and Sergius are disillusioned in their romantic ideals of love. Sergius finds to his great disappointment that behind his back Raina made love to Bluntschli, and Raina discovers that her hero is made of clay and can flirt with her maid at her back. Instinctively, she turns to Bluntschli not because he faces bullets, but because he faces facts. He helps her to find herself, to understand reality about life. He breaks the web of illusion woven around her, and makes her see the light of day. The hero of Slivnitza appears in a comic light; the absurdity of his ‘heroics’ is exposed and ridiculed.

Thus Shaw is a realist who places before his readers the facts of life, the truth about love and war to make people think and understand. He spreads truth, and demolishes all that is false and irrational by focusing on it the searchlight of logic and reason. But it must be remembered that Shaw is not merely a realist but also an anti-romantic. His realism is not mere photographic realism; there is also much heightening of reality. In order to achieve his anti-romantic purpose, the dramatist resorts to exaggeration of reality which often results in distortion and falsification of reality. His anti-romantic intentions militate against absolute fidelity to fact, and the dramatist often becomes unconvincing and incredible. A fugitive soldier may demand food when he is hungry, but we hardly believe that he would demand chocolates. Sex may be an impersonal instinct, but in real life Sergiuses are usually married to Rainas and not to Loukas. Soldiers may be born fools, but it does not seem credible that they will not observe a pistol lying in their very eye, even after a thorough search, while an ignorant maid-servant, Louka, notices it as soon as she enters the room.

The play is anti-romantic and Shaw succeeded fully in exposing the romantic ideas of life, specially the romantic attitude towards love and war. But this does not mean that there is no romance in the play. In fact, there is enough romance. The play opens in an atmosphere of romantic melodrama. There are thrills and sensations, shootings, fugitives and pursuers. There are news of a heroic knight and his heroic cavalry charge. There is a beautiful, romantic girl enjoying the beauty of nature and dreaming for her knight gone to the front and inspired by the thought of her love. There is also the love at first sight between Raina and Sergius. Such things do happen but in a romantic fairytale. Bluntschli himself, despite all his realism is “a romantic idiot” who comes sneaking to have a look at the pretty lady, considers her to be a schoolgirl of seventeen, while she is twenty-three, and ultimately turns out to be “The Emperor of Switzerland” in a manner of a fairy tale. Louka may be a realist as far as Sergius is concerned, but she is a romantic in relation to Nicola, dreaming of becoming a rich lady and ignoring his practical advice. Louka is romantic in her ambition to cut through barriers of birth and rank. Her love-affair with Sergius is the result of her romantic dreams and she succeeds again in the manner of a fairy tale.

Shaw’s views on love and war are characterized by strict realism and are clearly brought out if we compare them with that of Tolstoy. Like Tolstoy he tells that romantic war is only butchery and romantic love is only lust. Shaw only objects to them in so far as they are ideal. He objects not so much to war as to the praise of war. He does not so much dislike love as the love of love. Shaw is quite content to say:


Tolstoy seems really to propose that high passion and patriotic valour should be destroyed. Shaw is more moderate and only asks that they should not be desecrated.