No it isn’t. Catch 22 is not merely being a situation where you have only unpleasant options to choose between. That is common and mundane.
That is not the meaning, the more general term is double bind, where at least one statement negates the other. Catch-22 is a special case of this.
If one person says no? They call him a deserter and shoot him.
If two people say no? They think they’re both queer deserters, and shoot them both.
But if fifty crew a day (I say fifty crew a day!) said no? They’d call it a movement! An anti-German masscre movement.
There was an episode of 12 O’Clock High where a bomber pilot wanted to quit bombing after he’d been the victim of a German air raid on London. He didn’t think he could drop bombs any more. He used to think of it in the abstract, just targets on the ground, but then he realized his targets were just like him. (Unfortunately, for this discussion, I don’t remember what the commander was going to do to him. I think the pilot was requesting a transfer to the infantry, where I guess he thought the killing was more “moral”.)
I’m afraid you missed the point/reference. On reading OP I first thought of what he has in mind: the extended scene in the film Catch-22 where the protagonist Yossarian has almost an epiphany (or final straw) that the target has no military value and he releases the bombs harmlessly, prematurely. Of course the film is satiric and previously shows the officer briefing the pilots rhapsodize on the beauty of the city and, IIRC, use the words “no military value whatsoever,” while still emerged in his vision of the beautiful city.
Neat. Thanks.
Interesting how this one situation, one of many discussed formally and analytically, is now generally known because of the book/movie, and it has received a far more popular name.
FWIW, a similar example may be the 4-3 suspension to a major chord, whose name makes analytical sense, but is easily recognized as the Pinball Wizard progression, which is how I taught it at first so the analysis would make intuitive sense.
As Leo Bloom notes, just a little nod to Cpt. Yossarian.
Wow, good find. It’ll take me some time to digest the info.
‘Lack of Moral Fibre’, they sure didn’t mess about with PC language back then. Is there a modern equivalent? I imagine there is a lot more tolerance in giving soldiers, sailors or airmen ‘wiggle room’ when it comes to negating collateral damage.
Rather hard to keep this from being detected by the other members of your aircrew.