The Pacific: the Crossroad Between Generation Gaps and Political Correctness

By Kevin | Wednesday, March 17, 2010 | 1 Comment

Thanks for visiting 8Asians, a blog about Asian American issues. If you find this interesting, subscribe to the RSS feed, visit our Facebook Page or add us on Twitter!

A couple of years ago, I was introduced to Band of Brothers, the hugely successful HBO miniseries about the 101st Airborne and their accomplishments in the European theater in World War II, and was instantly hooked. The miniseries focused more on individual American soldiers and their subsequent achievements and flaws and kept, save for a few instances, the Nazi’s in a faceless shroud. It was effective one-sided, dehumanization that made you cheer for the soldiers of Easy Company even more.

Yet very rarely did you ever consider the Nazi’s to be “evil”. In one episode, the viewer discovers that an American had answered the call to return to the Fatherland, and that one Easy Company trooper lived just miles away from his Nazi enemy. The exception does come from the episode highlighting the Holocaust, but the drama focused primarily on the characters; mostly because most Americans live and feed off the stories from the European Theater — we see them so often that we do not even need to hear them anymore — and we know that the Nazis were, as an organization, evil (and that’s why Inglorious Basterds doesn’t need a narrative preface).

The spiritual successor of Band of Brothers, The Pacific, which aired its first episode this past Sunday, is different. Besides Pearl Harbor, the nuclear bombings, and maybe the Battle of Midway; the stories of the Pacific Theater need to be introduced through a historical lens and can not lend itself on characters alone (which is why we hear the series producer Tom Hanks in the beginning of the episode introducing Guadalcanal). Understudied history SHOULD quickly become gray history, in which there should be no black and white of good and evil. But it doesn’t. Because we are Americans, and we won. Unlike the war in Europe, good and evil carries implications of racial politics and that’s where America finds itself at a crossroad.

The argument suddenly boils down between racial lines. Tom Hanks caught himself in controversy with a cover story in Time Magazine, and attracted mindless dribble (mostly conservatives bashing Hollywood for being unpatriotic), but I link to a more elegant response by Victor Davis Hanson, that states that combat was motivated and fought on racial tensions, but only as a result of war. More simply put, it was what was accepted at the time, and appears to justify “racism”. His points address his thesis well; war was fought and atrocities were committed on both sides, “racial animosity” was not one-sided; that I accept, but the argument blatantly disregards Japanese American Internment, which I consider racist. I also have a problem with him justifying such atrocities as a result of war and justifying the use of the Atomic Bomb as a “last resort”. That, in my eyes, is unacceptable, but I’m probably just as “uneducated” as Tom Hanks… I digress.

My point is this, the first episode of the The Pacific was historically accurate in its usage of derogatory terms (IE. Japs, yellow bastards… so on). It ended by juxtaposing a Japanese atrocity with an American one, enlisting faceless soldiers to do wicked things until one of the show’s stars put an end to it, an overly blatant attempt to be political correct. Now, I’m to assume that the process of dehumanization affected everyone except for our heroic protagonists; it tried so hard to be not politically correct that I almost found it offensive (racist is too strong of a term). The authors of the memoirs the miniseries was based upon mostly likely weren’t racist, but that’s probably because they wrote their memoirs after they regained their humanity, after the war was over. I’m sure even the most honorable crossed acceptable racial lines (and moral lines), even with the standards of the 40′s, but at what point do we allow modern views of political correctness alter the realism of popular media based on history (say Mad Men and its misogyny) and at what point does it become offensive? Is it wrong to accept different standards because the times were different?

IMDB lists a Frank Lee to portray Chuck “Cho” Yang on the castlist, I assume that’s when the series will seriously delve into issues of Asian American racial politics, but if you gave me a realistic, albeit offensive portrayal of the War fought in the Pacific Theater, I’d accept it more than the facade of political correctness given to me by this episode. Nonetheless, the show has been just as thrilling and enjoyable as its spiritual predecessor; and I look forward to more episodes.

Categories:

EntertainmentHistoryTV

NOTE: 8Asians.com is a community, and we thank you for being a part of it. While we welcome and appreciate differences in opinion, if you're rude or you're promoting spam, we have a right to edit or delete your comment. Read our comment policy for more information.

If you see a comment that violates the 8Asians.com comment policy, you may flag the comment by mousing over the comment and clicking "FLAG."

1 comment 1 person listening

Comment help
Get Livefyre

Sort: Newest | Oldest

Confuse_Us

As much as people want to try, the Pacific war can never really be simplified into good guy, bad guy narratives. The elephant in the room as always is completely ignored. Why exactly were there British, French, Dutch and American soldiers in Asia to begin with? That's right, to do exactly what the Imperial Japanese wanted to do and build and maintain empires.

The European war is simple - totalitarian Nazis invade their sovereign neighbours, and subjugate them. In Asia, the indigenous populations were subjugated by both the "Allies" and the Axis. Who has the moral superiority in such a scenario? At times, European and American imperialism in Asia was just as brutal as that of the Japanese. At the end of the day, the reality is that the war in Europe was fought to free those subjugated by the Nazis. The war in asia and the Pacific was fought to assert the right of European powers to subjugate those in Asia.

If the Allies had been fighting for the freedom of Asia, then why did France, Holland and the UK return to their Asian colonies after the war and wage sometimes brutal wars against the indigenous peoples?

share flag