Bio
I'm a single black woman living in the NYC area. I work in the media and love tennis, movies, television and pop culture. I get fired up about poli...
 
 
 
 

Most Popular

War Is Hell: HBO's "The Pacific" Draws Fire for Producer Tom Hanks

  • Share This Post
  • Pin It
  • 4
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Hbo-the-pacific-ee8fbc0ccb374520_large

Photo courtesy HBO


Actors like Tom Hanks need to be really careful when it comes to commenting on weighty subjects like war and peace. That's because Hanks is not only very talented but also well liked, and why throw away all that goodwill on a few loose comments?

First some background. HBO's "The Pacific" is a WWII mini-series produced by Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg that acts as a companion piece to their critically acclaimed HBO series "Band of Brothers." Just as "Band of Brothers" dealt with the war in Europe, "The Pacific," as you can probably tell from the title, deals with the horrors of the war in the Pacific.

It stars James Badge Dale, Jon Seda, Joe Mazzello and Ashton Holmes as four real young men who shipped out to tiny islands in the Pacific in the aftermath of the bombing of Pearl Harbor.

The first three episodes have been gritty and compelling, and during all those flying bullets, I kept being reminded of two things:

1) That, as I said when I wrote about "Saving Private Ryan" in a Memorial Day post two years ago, it's impossible for me to imagine how you go back to a "normal" life after experiencing the unspeakable destruction on the battlefield

2) That so much of war in those days was a uniquely male experience that women couldn't fully understand.

I like what I've seen of "The Pacific" so far, and if you want to gain a small understanding of what it's like to be in battle, I highly recommend it.

Now, back to Tom Hanks. He got himself into trouble a couple of weeks ago when in a Time Magazine cover story he seemingly implied that WWII, and today's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, had more to do with racism than they had to do with:

  • The Japanese and the Nazis wanting to conquer the world and kill anyone who didn't go along with that, in addition to Jews, blacks, gays and anyone else they didn't like.
  • Islamic extremists wanting to conquer the world and kill anyone who doesn't go along with that, in addition to Jews, blacks, gays, and anyone else, especially women, who don't follow their interpretation of Islam.

This is how Hanks was quoted in Time:

"From the outset, we wanted to make people wonder how our troops can re-enter society in the first place," Hanks says. "How could they just pick up their lives and get on with the rest of us? Back in World War II, we viewed the Japanese as 'yellow, slant-eyed dogs' that believed in different gods. They were out to kill us because our way of living was different. We, in turn, wanted to annihilate them because they were different. Does that sound familiar, by any chance, to what's going on today?"

Conservatives got into a tizzy and weren't thrilled with Hanks' comments or his clarifications. God forbid I should agree with people who wanted Sarah Palin to be a heartbeat away from the presidency, but I kind of -- um, er...gulp, gulp -- agree with them. A little.

Just a little.

Here's the thing: Hanks' comments got me thinking about several issues. They appeared to imply that if we just understood each other better and celebrated our differences, there would have been no World War II and no war on terrorism.

But see, if that were the case, it would mean that all war was just one big misunderstanding, and that with a little give on both sides, we could all live comfortably in a peaceful world.

When it came to the Nazis, that wasn't the case. When it came to the Japanese in WWII, that wasn't the case. When it comes to Islamic extremists who fly planes into skyscrapers full of innocent people, that isn't the case. When it comes to Islamic extremists who strap on explosive vests and explode them in subways, that isn't the case. When it comes to American fanatics who blow up federal buildings, that isn't the case. When it comes to American Christian militias who train to kill cops, that isn't the case.

See, that's 'cause these are fanatics. There's no negotiating with fanatics. There's no discussing an understanding of our differences.

They want to kill us.

So unfortunately, kind of like in the jungles of the Pacific, with a Japanese soldier pointing a gun at you, it's kill or be killed. Once you're

  • 4
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Comments

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Megan Smith 5 pts

Hi Melissa,

Thanks for adding some historical perspective. I agree with you that there's a level of tribalism and racism that significantly contributes to many conflicts. And as you say, especially with the Japanese in WWII.

Then there's the fanaticism when any one of the the following ways of thinking is taken to the extreme:

1. Not only do I believe this (insert religion, ideology or whatever), but you must believe it too, and believe it exactly the way I do.
2. Because I believe this, you must be annihilated.
3. God promised me this piece of property, so I have to kill you to get it.

However, "The Pacific" is specifically about the lives of several soldiers in the midst of that aspect of WWII. My point is once the conflict is started and individual men and women are fighting, the racial and tribal contributions to the origin of the conflict are pretty much irrelevant to those soldiers.

At that point, bottom line, it's about staying alive and "winning"--whatever that may mean in political terms.

I think Hanks was trying to make a broad statement about the origins of war, when he was supposed to be discussing this particular project that was about individuals already in war.

And I don't feel I've studied nearly enough about what went on in the Pacific during WWII to speak too knowledgeably about it--time for some remedial history reading--but at the same time I do know that if we had lost WWII, we wouldn't be able to be having this discussion right now.

Thanks for making me think and for your insightful comments.

Megan

TV/Online Video Contributing Editor ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/megan-smith )

Megan's Minute ( http://www.megansminute.com/ )

Meg's Rad Reviews ( http://www.megsradreviews.com )

Megan Smith 5 pts

Like you I can't begin to imagine what it must have been like to be a young man under such harrowing circumstances.

Good for him that he was able to survive it when so many others didn't.

Megan

TV/Online Video Contributing Editor ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/megan-smith )

Megan's Minute ( http://www.megansminute.com/ )

Meg's Rad Reviews ( http://www.megsradreviews.com )

redheadedjen 5 pts

My grandfather was a POW taken prisoner or fought in the jungle for 4 years in the Philippines after Japan invaded. He died when I was very young so I could not talk to him about it but I am told he never talked about it. At all. My grandmother and mother never talked about it and both are not really around to talk about it.

My family believes he was a POW. As a recent Italian immigrant to America pre-war, it must have been hard. I can't imagine what he went through.

MLOKnitting 5 pts

Fanaticism is rooted in the tribalism that makes up human beings. Racism is used very effectively by those in power to divide peoples and compel the masses.

The Japanese, once they left isolationism behind, were heavily influenced by militaristic rhetoric from the Germans which dovetailed nicely with their own inherent mythos of being superior to other Asians - including the minority group who live in Northern Japan. They truly believed that because they were the superior "race" they should be the masters of all of Asia. Ask the Koreans about the Japanese rhetoric and attitudes. There are deep racial divisions that are still left unaddressed.

One thing many people do not realize is how heavily the Filipino Insurrection - and the racist attitudes of the Americans towards the indigenous Philippine population - influenced the handling of the Pacific theatre in WW2. The Pacific theatre is incredibly under studied in the US. Most of the vets who went through the Pacific absolutely refuse to speak of it due to how horrible it truly was.

Some of the experimentation of the Japanese on POWs and indigenous populations made the Nazis look merciful. Outside of university studies you will rarely come across this information.

As to today's problems in the Middle East? Well, they do have roots in racism, or extreme tribalism. It comes from othering. It also comes from mismanagement of the entire Central Asian and Middle Eastern areas, but that is actually too shallow an understanding. You have three main groups who all believe they are "chosen of God" at odds with one another. Add to that radicalism that is inflammed by being used for proxy wars between superpowers and you are going to have something incredibly incendiary.

Most people do not have any understanding of how tribal those who inhabit Central Asia are. The last person to TRULY rule there was Genghis Khan. He was vicious - something that no modern nation has the stomach to be.

Tribalism / Racism is essential for those who wish to wage war as a tool.

MLO / Melissa

Books, Movies, Games, Ovarian Cancer, and Life in General at http://www.mloknitting.com/