The Mystery of Courage

Originally conceived as a meditation on cowardice in an extension of his ""misanthropic series"" (The Anatomy of Disgust; Humiliation), Miller's volume eventually gave way to the more compelling qualities of that ""glorious phantom,"" courage. Unfortunately, fear remains the heart of the work. Miller seems unable to see courage positively; rather he views it as a negative state in which people merely lack a motivating fear. His language repeatedly plays on self-doubt. Discussing military duty, he confesses, as though driven by personal demons, ""those who were given these orders and duties, with very few exceptions did not refuse them. The rate of compliance flabbergasts us, because we cannot quite trust that we would not have collapsed sniveling or cowering."" The emphasis on fear, especially physical fear of death or injury in combat, leaves Miller nonplussed by non-martial forms of courage that have less to do with fear than sacrifice, determination and will: nurses in war zones and women on the frontier are dispensed with in two sentences. The convoluted structure also leads to some strange definitions of courage: ""among the Cossacks... courage's substance may have been nine parts pitilessness and cruelty."" As a law professor, Miller is well positioned to discuss social contracts and how people resolve conflicts between the good of society and self-preservation. Instead, he explores such trivial (or uncontroversial) issues as whether a man suffering a heart attack in a cafe should bother other patrons to get medical help. Miller admits at the outset that he cannot pin down the nature of courage; his failure to explore its deep moral and ethical issues will disappoint serious readers. (Sept.)