Reply #37: Bizarre: from Spanish bizarro “brave” [View All]

[panzerfaust]

”Moreover, the same picture during a different war (say, World War II) could inflame hatred for the enemy rather than the war. What's to say that wasn't its effect in 1966? Your ahistorical opinion? Your atemporal view of human nature?”

Observation. Simple observation.

As I’ve mentioned before, I arrived in Vietnam just after Tet in 1968. I was a medic. It took little time to realize that most of what was written about Vietnam was untrue: even at that young age I soon realized that, whatever we were doing there, it was not “preserving democracy” for the South Vietnamese. It made little difference to the VN if their village was flattened by a 155 or by a VC rocket – or simply burned by frightened teenagers (of whatever nationality) carrying automatic weapons.

An aside. Why do you think the troops busted caps on the Iraqi police? It was because they were scared. Scared and trigger happy – just as most troops are most of the time in most wars. Once a firefight starts, it is very hard to stop. Especially in RVN, where the only hope of surviving an ambush was to instantly suppress the fire of the ambushers. You think WW2 different: try reading ”Goodbye Darkness” by William Manchester – which will take you as close to war as you can get without being in one.

Anyhow, until then, I was as ignorant as most Americans about the war. For years it was served up by Walter Cronkite at dinner time. The images, the ‘story’, was there, then it was gone. And yes, there were other newsmagazines (even Time, in those days, actually reported some of the news – it has not always been the pathetic People-Lite that it is now). There were even other photojournals – but; it was LIFE that was always there. LIFE with its usually amazing, arresting covers. I never subscribed to it, many issues were worthless, much of the writing inane. LIFE was about pictures.

When I returned it was to San Diego. After leaving the base on my first liberty, I found myself unable to do so again for over a month. The “normality” of San Diego almost unhinged me. Half a world away was an incredible nightmare. Many Americans were trapped in it, many Vietnamese knew nothing else. But it was INVISIBLE to the people at home. When people asked me what RVN was like – words failed me: but I could often find an issue of LIFE floating around. I could show it to them, could try to explain how the REALLY bad things were not shown. Most found what was presented bad enough.

The war was only briefly visible on the TV. I do not mean that there was little coverage, I mean that TV is a very ephemeral medium. RVN would be there, then the CRT swirled to lawn care advertisements. As the years went by, as the War wore on, there were more and more pictures from the war. I well remember people standing in checkout lines, looking at the heart-rending, ghastly pictures in LIFE. The magazines did not go away, they piled up in America's livingrooms, year after year. The war was not often on the cover - but could usually be found lurking inside.

I do not credit LIFE with ending the war. But I do credit it with being the most consistent window on the war that most Americans had – and virtually the only window that showed the torn bodies and mangled lives. The view through that window, on any war, will eventually lead to disgust.



There are many Tron's in the Brave New American Middle East. Sadly, there will be many more before the people awaken

And, I say again, Where is our window on this war? Where is LIFE?

As an aside, I have no idea what an “atemporal view of human nature” might be: though human nature seems to have changed little over recorded history – this being why the works of Euripides, for example, still speak to us (spare me the pedantry of saying that written works do not ‘speak’). I certainly doubt that it has changed much in the last 40 years.

A good source for old magazines is http://www.millionmagazines.com