[August 6th
marks the 75th anniversary of the bombing
of Hiroshima. So this week I’ll AmericanStudy that fraught moment and four
other histories of U.S. military massacres.]
On three
complex, flawed, and powerful engagements with one of our more recent and more
troubling dark histories.
Among our
nation’s darkest histories, only the Japanese internment has produced an
official governmental apology (and accompanying financial settlement). Yet it’s
fair to say that remorse and regret are two of the central emotions which all
such dark memories elicit (or would elicit if they were better remembered) from
most Americans. It’s still pretty rare, however, for one of the principal
actors in a dark and destructive event to offer his own public apology for that
history, and thus to force us to engage communally with such emotions and
perspectives. And that’s exactly what Lieutenant
William Calley did in August of 2009, during a speech at a Columbus, GA Kiwanis
club: apologize for his role more than forty-one years earlier in the Vietnam War’s
controversial and infamous My Lai Massacre. The apology, which seems
(particularly given the setting) to have been impromptu and thus entirely
genuine, no more erases the massacre than the reparations did the Japanese
internment—as the My Lai
prosecutor put it upon hearing the news, “It’s hard to apologize for murdering
so many people”—but it does provide a belated yet still meaningful model
for an open engagement with the worst of what American history includes.
For the last few
decades, long before Calley’s apology, prominent American artists have created
their own such engagements with My Lai, or at least with fictionalized versions
of such massacres. Two very different 1980s films offer interestingly parallel
portrayals: Oliver Stone’s
Platoon (1986) makes a My Lai-like village massacre
the center of the conflict between its pair of deeply symbolic leaders,
Willem Defoe’s angelic Elias and Tom Berenger’s devilish Barnes, with Charlie
Sheen’s Chris Taylor nearly giving into Berenger’s demands to participate in
the massacre but ultimately siding with Elias’s resistance to it; while Brian DePalma’s Casualties of War (1989) focuses on a much more intimate yet similar moral
conflict, between Michael J. Fox’s idealistic Eriksson and Sean Penn’s
cynical Meserve over whether they should rape and murder a captured Vietnamese
woman. There’s at least one significant difference, however: in Stone’s film
the massacre becomes one scene among many charting the men’s conflict and
Taylor’s trajectory, and could thus be forgotten or minimized by an audience;
whereas in DePalma’s film the debate over the Vietnamese prisoners forms the
movie’s heart, and lingers into and beyond the complex final homecoming scene.
Given the controversial and uncertain nature of both My Lai itself and the
Vietnam War in general, it’s fair to say that each effect has its place in our
engagement with them.
And then there’s
Tim O’Brien. The Vietnam War’s undisputed chief literary chronicler literature
locates a My Lai-like massacre, or rather his protagonist’s post-war
relationship to and memories of that event, at the ambiguous center of his most
mysterious (in every sense) novel, In
the Lake of the Woods (1994). It’s possible to argue that those
ambiguities and mysteries make the massacre similarly uncertain, reflecting
that side of My Lai’s presence in our national narratives; it’s also possible
to argue that the massacre represents the novel’s sole and central certainty,
reflecting how much My Lai has come to define Vietnam and its aftermath. The
strongest analysis of O’Brien’s novel would probably argue for both sides—his
book, after all, is both a mystery novel (which demands a certain answer to key
questions of death, causation, and so on) and a postmodern novel (which resists
any such certainty and portrays the many sides and versions of any story and
history). And so it is with our darkest histories as well, of course—their
existence and presence and role are unquestionable and vital; but how we
remember them, what stories we tell of them, what they continue to mean for our
future identity and community, are open and evolving and contested and crucial
questions.
Special birthday
week series starts this weekend,
Ben
PS. What do you
think? Other histories you’d highlight?
No comments:
Post a Comment