PBS "The War" Series

[Doctor Strange]

You're right, of course.

But politics aside, it was a *new* thing for the entire country to be listening to the same radio comedians and big bands, watching the same movies, reading the same magazines: the first instance of a (in some ways) unified mass culture that wasn't based on religion or nationalism. It's this shared cultural heritage that I believe helped people to pull together, despite their many differences.

(Of course, in subsequent decades, TV, radio, and rock'n'roll music would produce "teenagers", and ultimately the 1960s youth culture, where a generational divide was defined by different tastes and beliefs, not shared ones.)

 

[Vladimir Berkov]

(Of course, in subsequent decades, TV, radio, and rock'n'roll music would produce "teenagers", and ultimately the 1960s youth culture, where a generational divide was defined by different tastes and beliefs, not shared ones.)

The youth culture may have come of age (excuse the pun) in the 1960s, but it was born in the 1920s. The population during WW2 already had generational divides. WW1 already created an enormous divide between those who served in/experienced the war, and those who came of age afterwards in the post-war boom or the Great Depression.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

... I wonder if WWII touched Americans more personally because more of them had personal ties to their European relatives?

The short answer? Yes. But it touched them in different ways.


For instance, some immigrants had embraced America fully and rejected their countries of origin. They had little sympathy for places they'd willingly left behind because of lack of opportunity, freedom, etc.

However, most of these 'Americanized' immigrants had still kept ties to their relatives in the Old Country. And when the Axis powers began to march, immigrants here urged their relatives to try to flee to the United States. Some did come, some chose not to, and some weren't allowed out --or in.

.

 

[Doctor Strange]

To Vladimir Berkov

That's true, but it didn't really split the country to the same extent. And it was based more on personal experience than generational identification via mass media.

 

[imoldfashioned]

My great uncle Witold served with the Free Polish army at Monte Casino. And after watching part 2, I had the same revelation as you did imoldfashioned. My uncle was sent to a gulag in Siberia, escaped from the gulag and joined the Free Polish Army only to be captured by the Germans at Monte Casino and sent to a concentration camp that he also escaped from. Most of his family disappeared during WWII and he came to the U.S. after the war because he had nothing left...

Another thing that struck me was how WWII almost seemed to be one of the catalysts for the future civil rights movement. I had never thought of it in that context before. I'm looking forward to watching Part 3 tonight.

You know, I hear stories like your uncle's and I think, my God, how did these people go back to "civilian" life after the war? So often they never spoke about their experiences too. Not to minimize the damage their experiences may have caused but human resilience is truly amazing.

The civil rights tie is very interesting. That part about the Japanese American being confused about whether he was "White" or "Colored" in Mobile was so absurdist. Hard to believe that was law not long ago at all.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

That part about the Japanese American being confused about whether he was "White" or "Colored" in Mobile was so absurdist.

Hard to believe that was law not long ago at all.

Did you know that today, in 2007, all Hispanics (except for those with recent Asian or African ancestry) are officially and automatically classed as "white" by the U.S. government? This includes Hispanics whose ancestry is largely indigenous, and whose dark-skinned, dark-haired, and dark-eyed features reflect it. Ours is still a culture obsessed with classification by race, and it leads to ridiculous results.


Sorry for the brief fftopic:. I'll now stick to the subject at hand.

.

 

[imoldfashioned]

Did you know that today, in 2007, all Hispanics (except for those with recent Asian or African ancestry) are officially and automatically classed as "white" by the U.S. government? This includes Hispanics whose ancestry is largely indigenous, and whose dark-skinned, dark-haired, and dark-eyed features reflect it. Ours is still a culture obsessed with classification by race, and it leads to ridiculous results.


Sorry for the brief fftopic:. I'll now stick to the subject at hand.

.

My reaction to this (which I didn't know) is not permissible on the Lounge.

 

[BeBopBaby]

You know, I hear stories like your uncle's and I think, my God, how did these people go back to "civilian" life after the war? So often they never spoke about their experiences too. Not to minimize the damage their experiences may have caused but human resilience is truly amazing.

The civil rights tie is very interesting. That part about the Japanese American being confused about whether he was "White" or "Colored" in Mobile was so absurdist. Hard to believe that was law not long ago at all.

My uncle never spoke about what happened to him during WWII, I only found out about it from other family members after he had passed away. I really don't know how people returned to civilian life either. Then people were just sent you home once you were done serving - no de-programming, no help. I think the men who came home after the war that did well were able to do so by blocking it out and not discussing the war. Although a lot of men weren't so lucky, my other great uncle was turned into a life long alcoholic because he was so haunted by his experiences serving during WWII.

Criticisms aside, the thing I will give Ken Burns is that he is able to take a topic and really humanize it so you are able to relate to the topic at hand and not feel so removed from it.

 

[poetman]

I can't help but consider Burns' film in light of America's current military crisis. I found two ideas striking: 1) He titles the film, "The War," as if to suggest it is a definitive war in American history, perhaps global history. Furthermore, to name WWII "The War" is to--by effect--diminish the importance of WWI (in comparison) Why do you think Burns sees WWII as "The War" as opposed to an important war, or the last real war, or a slew of other titles. I would really like to know how Burns views WWII in the sense of military history. I think he sees WWII as definitive--perhaps his conclusion will answer this question. 2) It's very interesting to note how different America approached WWII and the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. In the former, the entire country involved itself: factories stopped their normal productions to assist with the war effort, and people rationed goods to assist the military. I can't help but wonder how the modern world would respond if similar sanctions were enacted for our present wars. I feel like Americans are far more spoiled in 2007 than they were in 1941--if for no other reason than they have more things they don't want to give up (technology, etc.). As a result, I tend to think Americans would simply disobey and complain--many would fail to see the connection. Perhaps instead of furthering our national debt, our chief military commander could request the help of the citizenry? It strikes me that if perhaps Americans at home were more involved in the war overseas, they would feel a greater sense of responsibility and implicate themselves with the activities--and consequences--occurring in the East. I'd love some ideas exchanged.
Thanks.

Why is this too political? Is this type of discourse actually "banned," like another member observed, or is it that people simply don't want to discuss it? These observations don't strike me as political in nature, but rather they seek to understand the development of a society as it reacts to military conflict. Why is such discourse disallowed?

Thanks

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Is this type of discourse actually "banned," ...

Yes, it really is.

Why is such discourse disallowed?

It used to be allowed; but a recurring sequence of mudslinging wordfights led the Lounge to reexamine its core values. Since this forum places a high priority on maintaining a civil atmosphere, a decision was made (after much introspection) to disallow political discussions.


The 'danger' here is not in discussing World War II, but in bringing the subject of the Iraq War to this thread. Now that would be inviting a brawl.

.

 

[52Styleline]

Did you know that today, in 2007, all Hispanics (except for those with recent Asian or African ancestry) are officially and automatically classed as "white" by the U.S. government? This includes Hispanics whose ancestry is largely indigenous, and whose dark-skinned, dark-haired, and dark-eyed features reflect it. Ours is still a culture obsessed with classification by race, and it leads to ridiculous results.
Sorry for the brief fftopic:. I'll now stick to the subject at hand.
.

Not exactly correct. The current Federal classifications are
Hispanic or Latino

Non Hispanic or Latino under which fall
White
Black or African American
Native Hawiian or Pacific Islander
Asian
American Indian or Alaskan Native

and new in 2007
Two or more races.

This is straight from the current US Equal Opportunity Commission instructions for their EEO1 Report.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Not exactly correct.

I have news for you, too.


When Hispanic (or just about any) legal permanent residents apply for U.S. citizenship, they have to fill out a form called the N-400. On that document, Hispanics are required to state that their ethnicity is Hispanic or Latino, and that their race is White. In other words, they are categorized by both ethnicity and race. I can't imagine why.


It's interesting to note that "Native Americans" (or rather, indigenous North Americans) are explicitly recognized on the N-400, but Native Latin Americans (in other words, indigenous Central and South Americans) are not. Rather, they are simply considered as
"White Hispanics/Latinos."


Now, about the documentary ...

.

 

[imoldfashioned]

I had to go to a condo meeting tonight so I'm going to have to catch the rerun--worth staying up late for though.

 

[scotrace]

The immediacy of tonight's episode is remarkable. There really are no words to express the wonder and admiration for those who lived through it.

 

[Sylvester D]

When where the interviews conducted? Some of the people interviewed should be at least 80 or close to it, but look in their 50s.

Anyone get this impression?

 

[imoldfashioned]

You know, I'm not a Ken Burns fan. I really disliked The Civil War (heresy, I know), I thought Baseball dragged, but this is one of the best things I've seen on television. I'm glad the next episode isn't until Sunday though--I've ended up crying at some point in every part of this series and I could use a rest. I thought tonight's offering was the strongest in an amazingly strong series. The sentence that stuck with me the most tonight was "You can’t be careful, you can only be lucky".

Maybe more comments later when I've had some time to absorb.

 

[Tony in Tarzana]

Watching last week's episode on my DVR, and it seems like a large part of the episode used a lot of footage from the William Wyler movie "Memphis Belle." They used the clip of the airman in a litter, looking at the camera. Amazingly, they cut it before (as all of us who have seen it remember) he was given a cigarette. It just makes me shake my head.

Otherwise, I'm enjoying the show.

 

[Haversack]

A major factor to bear in mind about how Americans approached WWII was the transition that took place from a peace-time economy to mobilized war-time production. This is not something we have really seen since.

In 1941, the US military was quite small and the defense industry as we know it today was largely non-existent. From the Revolution up until the end of WWII it had pretty much been policy to heavily prune the War Department back to a cadre and frontier force at the conclusion of any war. Consequently in both the First and Second World Wars there was a significant delay between the declaration of war and effective deployment due to the need to train and equip a significant military force. (In the case of WWII, the US military had begun to expand its numbers after 1939 but it was faced with severe equipment shortages. The Army's big war game held in Louisiana in 1940 saw troops carrying broomsticks for rifles and artillery constructed of 2x4s.) It was this need for the US military to grow, train and equip itself which led to major effects on the American populace.

Shortly following the formal declaration of war came an entire range of economic measures designed to shift America's industrial production from peace-time civilian goods to war-time military hardware and ensure that industry had access to both the human and material resources it needed. These measures saw not only the rationing of meat, petroleum, and clothing which have been written about here before, but also the virtual unavailability of goods such as rubber, automobiles, and metal construction materials. There were large demographic shifts in population as war industries were built and demanded labour. Wages and prices were also set and fixed. The upshot of these measures and the resulting rationing and shortages was that the adversity they caused was broadly felt by nearly everyone living in the US. And as anyone who has been through bootcamp can tell you, shared adversity is a bonding experience. Additionally, the popular culture reinforced this bonding by heavily playing up the "sharedness" of the shortages: Bond drives, scrap drives, fat drives. The wealthy putting their Packards up on blocks and riding the trolley. Governor Olson removing the cast iron cresting from the California Governors' Mansion, "Is this trip really necessary?", etc. I think Burns is correct about the war in that the social cement created by the effects of this mobilization is one of the definitive features of 20th C. America. In US history, it is probably only matched by the bonding created among the veterans of the American Civil War. Consider that the influence of the GAR lasted up until the 1920s.

Haversack.

 

[K.D. Lightner]

My mother and I are enjoying the series, if "enjoy" is the right word. It is certainly good and interesting -- and sad and tragic and noble. I am glad Burns put it together before everyone of "the greatest generation" has passed on.

It is interesting to watch it with my 88-year-old mother, who was in her early 20's during that time. She lived it -- had a spouse, several brothers and friends who were in the service, worked in a factory making boxes that would hold ammunition (no Rosie was she), she remembers the rationing, and ration stamps (coupons) for sugar, coffee, milk, etc., the lines people stood in, the sharing of food and resources, the fears, the political players. Mother lived it, so I am hearing it on TV and in person. An interesting experience.

Burns does dwell on corpses and the horrors of war. I think he was criticized for not following any Hispanic family through the war. Mother also asked why the WACs were not covered (Ft. Des Moines had a WAC base during the war). I haven't seen much about them, mostly about nurses and the women working in factories. Maybe the nurses were WACs.

As romantic and dashing as those WW II flyers were (FL folks devote lots of space to them), they had awfully scary jobs and they were very aware of what their bombings did to people, their homes, livestock, their sacred places (remember that 6th century monastery we bombed to rubble thinking Nazis were holed up inside when they weren't).

The racism in and out of the armed services was disgusting, but did not surprize me. I am perhaps beyond surprize.

A good series, though, and I am looking forward to the last Episode on Sunday, which I assume will cover the march to Berlin, Iwo Jima, the preparation for invasion and then -- the bomb.

karol

 

[Weston]

This series has been quite good so far. I'm not quite sure what has changed about me in recent years...used to find WWII stuff "entertaining"...but maybe its just old age (ha!) or having joined the military (Air Force) but these stories just make me very sad to think of all those killed, the time apart, and being able to imagine what these guys thought.