the wind up any time--there's not many like that though, generally it's
the old soldiers what's the worst o' the lot for wanglin' out o' risky
jobs."

"Napoleon was right," observed a small, red-haired lance-corporal, whose
remarks generally had a sardonic touch, "when he said the worse the man
the better the soldier. It's only people who have no imagination and no
intelligence who are courageous in modern war. Nobody with any sense
would expose himself unnecessarily and rush a machine-gun position or do
the sort of thing they give you a V.C. for. Of course, there are a few
cases where it's deserved, and it isn't always the one who deserves it
that gets it. I'm quite certain the refined, sensitive, imaginative kind
of man is no good as a soldier. He may be able to control himself better
than the others at first--educated people are used to self-control--but
in the long run his nerves will give way sooner. Moral courage is a
thing I admire more than anything, but there's no use for it in the
army, in fact it's worse than useless in the army. The man who's too
servile to be capable of feeling humiliation and too stupid to
understand what danger is--that's the man who makes a good, steady
soldier. We've seen men so horribly smashed up by bombs that it makes
you sick to look at them, and then people expect us not to be afraid of
air-raids. The civvies haven't seen that sort of thing, so they may well
show plenty of pluck, although I believe there are a good many with
enough imagination to have the wind up when there's an air-raid on."

"Bloody true. You know, if there was a lot o' civvies an' a lot of
Tommies in a Blighty air-raid, I reckon the civvies'd show more pluck
than the Tommies. My mate who's workin' on munitions told me 'e saw
'underds o' soldiers rushin' to take shelter in the last raid on London.
O' course there was crowds o' civvies doin' the same, but 'e says there