ChiTownScion
Call Me a Cab
- Messages
- 2,245
- Location
- The Great Pacific Northwest
I consider that a very sad analyalization [sic] of recent history and am disappointed that you see it that way...FWIW
Somehow, I'll survive...
I consider that a very sad analyalization [sic] of recent history and am disappointed that you see it that way...FWIW
The more that one studies history, the more one realizes that "moral clarity," at least in a societal sense, never existed. Improved communication has forced more honesty, and the more knowledgeable one becomes, the more one realizes that past which we are inclined to view through rose colored glasses, never existed either.
The last episode of "MASH"? I saw the original film in 1970 and I watched it while sitting on the mud at an outdoor GI theater in a place called Long Binh in what was then still the Republic of South Vietnam. It was very controversial at the time because the Army thought it was anti-military and at first weren't going to allow it in military theaters, but there was a big fuss in Congress and they relented. We loved it. The "theater"only had a single projector so after each reel we had to wait a few minutes while the new reel was loaded.
I always recommend the work of Stephanie Coontz, who's devoted a great deal of research to the social history of American family life, and has documented that a lot of what people commonly believe about the Era, especially, was in fact quite different than it's remembered. Popular culture tends to depict such things in one way because it reflects the view of what Americans liked to think they were, not what they actually were. Especially good is her 1992 book, "The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap," which came out at the height of the debate over "family values" in American life. Coontz demonstrated, convincingly, and with full historical documentation, that much of what we think of as the "traditional way of life" of the postwar years was very much a historical aberration.
The Army was not inaccurate in its belief -- MASH was, of course, always specifically intended as a cynical parable about Vietnam, to the point where the studio demanded that several specific references be added to the script to emphasize that it was "no, not about Vietnam at all, it's really about KOREA, see?" But all you had to do was look at the poster for the film to understand otherwise.
Note the use of the Vietnam-era fifty-star flag on the helmet instead of the period-correct 48-star era version. And nobody in 1970 interpreted that as a "V-for-Victory" sign.
I agree, though I'd describe it in a slightly different manner. Society in general is the same as it ever was. There are, and always have been, those individuals and groups who do their best to live by some form of moral compass, and there are those who don't.The more that one studies history, the more one realizes that "moral clarity," at least in a societal sense, never existed. Improved communication has forced more honesty, and the more knowledgeable one becomes, the more one realizes that past which we are inclined to view through rose colored glasses, never existed either.
I was going through school during the first six to seven years that M*A*S*H was on television, and I lost count of the number of co-students who were convinced it was set in Vietnam until I informed them otherwise. Of course, the series really was a running commentary on the war in Vietnam (and on war in general) thinly veiled under the veneer of Korea, but still...The Army was not inaccurate in its belief -- MASH was, of course, always specifically intended as a cynical parable about Vietnam, to the point where the studio demanded that several specific references be added to the script to emphasize that it was "no, not about Vietnam at all, it's really about KOREA, see?" But all you had to do was look at the poster for the film to understand otherwise...
Have to agree with this. In the age of innocence, Catholic priests were doing unspeakable things to alter boys, as were their Anglian counterparts and many celebrities too. The difference back then was, nobody knew, or would ever believe the child. Poor kid knew he would get a beating for telling lies. Politicians were on the take and business leaders were as avaricious as they are today. It was always there, but without the level of communication or the advances in criminal science, who would ever know?The more that one studies history, the more one realizes that "moral clarity," at least in a societal sense, never existed. Improved communication has forced more honesty, and the more knowledgeable one becomes, the more one realizes that past which we are inclined to view through rose colored glasses, never existed either.
One thing people forget about media in the Era is that it wasn't as slow or non-comprehensive as they think. Most daily newspapers published multiple editions, updated constantly as new stories broke. I own a number of bound volumes of urban papers of the thirties and early forties which include *all* the editions of each day for the period covered by the volume. A paper like the New York Daily News or the Boston Record published as many as nine editions a day, from the "bulldog" or "Pink Edition," which hit the streets around 9 pm the day before the issue date to the "Sports Final," which hit the streets around 530pm the next day in order to include that afternoon's baseball scores and horse racing results. The content of each edition could change dramatically over the course of the day, and you were never more than a few hours from the next edition hitting the street. That's not the split-second release of news people get today from the internet, but neither is it the "waiting around twenty-four hours for the latest news" situation that most people today believe that people of that time experienced.
One of the volumes, of Hearst's Boston Record, covers the Morro Castle maritime disaster in 1934, and each succeeding edition from that day is more sensational than the next in the way it plays the story, complete with wirephotos, interviews with survivors, speculation on the cause of the accident, and huge, screaming headlines. In looking at it I'm struck by how similar it is to watching a news story develop on CNN.com, Fox News, or any of the other tabloidy news webites.
As for playing up "bad" news, I need only point to the content of the mass-appeal daily papers of the Era. The highest-circulation paper in the country thruout the Era was the tabloid New York Daily News, which was never known for its restraint. Other tabs, like the New York Daily Mirror, the Boston Record, the Chicago Times, and the Los Angeles Mirror, were among the higher-circulation papers as well, and maintained a similar focus on crime, sex, gossip, and scandal in their news columns. The broadsheet Hearst papers, which blanketed the country, were little better.
The more that one studies history, the more one realizes that "moral clarity," at least in a societal sense, never existed. Improved communication has forced more honesty, and the more knowledgeable one becomes, the more one realizes that past which we are inclined to view through rose colored glasses, never existed either.
The last episode of "MASH"? I saw the original film in 1970 and I watched it while sitting on the mud at an outdoor GI theater in a place called Long Binh in what was then still the Republic of South Vietnam. ...
And then there's the Chicago Tribune, which, thruout the Era, was possibly the worst daily newspaper in the country, known for its flagrant suppression and fabrication of news when it suited Colonel McCormick's purposes and its verging-on-pro-Nazi editorial columns. The Daily Worker had a better journalistic reputation than the Tribune in those days.
Have to agree with this. In the age of innocence, Catholic priests were doing unspeakable things to alter boys, as were their Anglian counterparts and many celebrities too. The difference back then was, nobody knew, or would ever believe the child. Poor kid knew he would get a beating for telling lies. Politicians were on the take and business leaders were as avaricious as they are today. It was always there, but without the level of communication or the advances in criminal science, who would ever know?
Great movie. I'm a big Altman fan, and "MASH" is among his best.
He despised the TV series, by the way. I believe that time will bear him out.