This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
I do not wish to rewrite this article, but I would point out that the three figures that are described as 'officers' are not officers at all. They are 'men'. There is an officer in the painting: a small figure directing the party carrying a wounded man towards a dugout. The misreading of the larger figures as 'officers' has dogged this painting for years, and led to its being taken as an expression of aristocratism. In truth it is nothing of the kind. See P. Edwards, Wyndham Lewis: Art and War (London: Lund Humphries, 1992), p. 41. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:EE05:8501:B8B1:DC7F:4D99:D84D (talk) 14:57, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the correction. I have edited the article accordingly. NotVorticist (talk) 16:31, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
