McClellan is a good choice, although Benjamin Butler’s landing at Bermuda Hundred was the first example to come to mind for me.
There’s the aforementioned The World at War, and also the BBC History of World War II which includes testimony from the German side. There have been innumerable others over the years focussing on individual facets of the War, but those are the two with the largest scope.
Britain was fighting in North Africa from 1940. There was a great debate about the invasion of Italy though, perhaps that is what the program meant?
62 years, actually. :eek: Burns has probably been working on it for five or six years.
I found my husband’s ration book a few months ago. He was born in January 1945. None of the stamps had been used.
Well… not necessarily. The Luverne newspaper editor, whose writings are being read by Tom Hanks, died in 1979. There were troops enlisting throughout 1943-45, as they age-qualified for the draft. It’s possible the show will still feature a soldier who survived the war but has since died.
Dozed off again last night while watching, dammit. I think this says more about my level of fatigue and the comfort of my chair than it does about the show.
Anzio! What a nightmare. Wasn’t Bob Dole wounded at Anzio?
That was an Obligatory Latino Moment™ tacked on to the end of the episode after complaints from the Latino community. There’s apparently another one in a future episode, as well as a story from a Native American Burns himself wanted to be put in.
I’m usually a few minutes behind on the DVR when watching The War. I’ve started fast forwarding whenever this woman comes on. Her voice is extremely nasal, screechy, and annoying, and she never seems to have much of a point. (Her voice is just like the teacher from Jimmy Neutron.)
Her brother seems pretty sharp, though.
But wasn’t he a civilian during the war? I was talking about soldiers (although I should have said “anyone in the military” since “soldier” technically refers to only the Army).
I don’t know that MacArthur left voluntarily. I thought I remembered reading somewhere that he was ordered off the island to Australia for a couple of reasons…
-
To prevent the capture of a high profile American General
-
To prepare and plan to retake the south pacific following the take down of Europe.
From Wikipedia
In addition, I believe the troops on Mindanao were surrendered, after MacA had been ordered off, by General Wainwright. (There was much bad blood between MacA and Wainwright)
I don’t hold MacA up as a great person, but at the same time, I don’t know if he deserves to be called a coward.
oh, HER. :rolleyes: We now call the series, The Wawh* because of her. I was ok with her lil spiel (all the while thinking exactly what you state above) until she came to the Rosie the riveter part. And she just couldn’t imagine a woman leaving her babies thataways! I think they could have found a better spokewoman.
MsWhatsIt–as soon as the sister got that quavery voice, I knew… I felt so bad for her-to never be able to play the piano again. Her mother must have had a terrible time with Babe’s death.
I once took care of a Tuskegee airman (he was my patient). He told me all about his service and some of the places he went during the war. Great guy (this was about 15 years ago). I liked that one general(?) who treated the black soldiers as the professional fighting men they were-that one major (?) who called them “you people” --I know it was the times and all, but jesus. Ugh.
Would like to see some USO and some medics/nurses etc.
*token mocking-means nothing. 
You’re right, of course. There was a mention in the first episode that MacArthur was asked by Roosevelt to leave Bataan. So perhaps it is wrong to call him a coward. Whether or not the Americans could continue to fight on Bataan if MacArthur stayed is one of those controversial questions that can never be answered- simply because it didn’t happen. But that’s what makes history so great- the “what ifs.”
I don’t know who exactly you’re talking about, but now I’m imagining her giving her reminicses while squawking at inopportune times.
eleanorigby, I don’t know if I’ll ever be able to say the word “war” correctly again, after hearing her. Also, Nancy Franklin of The New Yorker characterized her as being pretty shallow and sheltered, which I agree with.
The series is pretty draggy but, not being up on the history of the war, I find myself saying “Wow!” so many times when I learn of facts or perspectives or anomalies that I had not thought about before and may not ever get around to picking up a book to read about (though I’m now encouraged tol try).
For instance, when the Japanese regiment was sent to Mississippi and, even as Japanese non-citizens were being held in internment camps, the regiment members were elevated above existing citizens (Blacks). It was very telling that, in the anecdote of one Japanese soldier, when he went to the back of a city bus by choice (out of confusion), he was told to move back up front.
I’d like to see more of the female military perspective also.
Kee-rist, people, the lady’s in her 80’s and you guys are ragging on her because she didn’t, what, knock the door down in a rush to volunteer for the WAVs or become a pilot or whatnot? If she represents anyone, it’s the ordinary middle-class (or in her case, maybe upper-middle?) civilian on the homefront whose personal war experiences were perfectly ordinary and mundane – like most Americans’… from small towns… like those that are the focus of this whole program, remember?
And that write-off by Nancy Franklin is rather blinkered, given that “pretty shallow and sheltered” describes a lot of people associated with The New Yorker.
No, I’m agreeing with that assessment because a lot of her commentary, while true to who she is, didn’t accurately reflect what was going on outside her door, in her town and culturally all over the country. Also, the way she says “war” seems so exaggerated and grating – and I’m from Mississippi.
I made no mention of whether I thought she should or should not have volunteered.
And I believe Nancy Franklin’s review was about Ken Burns’ film, not the people around her at the New Yorker, so not sure what this comment contributes here.
I never said Franklin’s review wasn’t about the documentary, but you attributed the quote you lifted from it as applying to the woman from Mobile, and then you agreed with it.
My aside on Franklin’s cheap shot was to note the irony that her tone could just as well apply to many contributors to the New Yorker – and was meant to be a barbed, and hopefully wryly amusing, reminder of some of the shortcomings of that often exemplary magazine – namely, a signature brand of cloyingness, insularity, smugness, and let’s face it, a *Manhattan-uber-alles *, and paradoxically provincial, snobbishness.
I don’t know if Ken Burns foresaw that any of his still-living documentary subjects would necessarily catch a drubbing from the nation’s TV critics and bloggers, and I trust it wasn’t his intention that it be so. Regardless, his using the perspective of such a white, economically secure, stereotypically Southern lady (like a figure out of Central Casting to fill a “Southern Magnolia” role) in contrast to his presentation of the full spectrum of racial tensions in Mobile and elsewhere was bound to prove an irresistable lure – akin to a wriggler dangled in front of a largemouth bass – to the unreflective bashers eager to show off their politically correctness.
Well, if you haven’t the lady from Dubuque for your magazine not to be for, I guess one from Mobile will have to do.
I was taken aback on the congratulatory description of Operation Cobra, which was corroborated by what I could find on Wiki-p. Previoulsly, I’d read it described as a friendly fire massacre in the memoirs of both Paul Fussell (who appears in the documentary), and David Brinkley, who was spared when he was moved out of his outfit because of his education level while the dockworkers from his hometown of Wilmington NC were blown to bits.
Re. Operation Cobra – apparently it was both a success on the macro level, but with tragic friendly fire mishaps too. The Wiki article on friendly fire (USA) fails to peg its role in overall US casualties to a specific consensus figure, offering instead an undocumented high figure backed by a wildly varying range, but it’s apparent it accounted for many thousands of deaths. It includes a link for Lt. Gen. Mc Nair, the highest-ranked loss in the war, who was killed by f.f. in Operation Cobra.
Re. Fussell’s recollections – from which book?
[QUOTE=The Scrivener]
>snip< …many young Japanese-American men volunteered to fight and did so for various reasons: to prove their patriotism and gung-ho Americanism (and shame the government and American society for interning them and their families); to defend their country (and the USA was the only country most young Japanese Americans knew); to get out of the godforsaken camps; to prove their manhood to themselves and others; to make decent pay; to have an adventure and see the world; etc. etc. And for its part, the government came around to accepting these volunteers, but organized them in ethnically segregated units and didn’t feel it was a good idea to send them to the Pacific theater (with the well-known exceptions of some translators and such)… >snip< /QUOTE]
the all-Japanese 100th Infantry Battalion, or 442nd Regimental Combat Team, was among the most highly decorated units of WW2. there is a huge display devoted to their exploits in a military museum in honolulu, hawai’i. both long-time students of ww2, the divemaster and i spent quite some time in there.
the unit actually originated in hawai’i and is revered by the hawai’ian people to this day for its exploits. the unit’s motto was: ‘go for broke!’
here’s an old article about the unit you might find of interest:
Perhaps it is better to say that the Auburn “wawh” lady exemplifies a sheltering and narcissistic view that we are uncomfortable with now? And she hasn’t mentioned one volunteer thing that she did–that alone is interesting. IMS, my southern great aunts were all involved in something-knitting, selling war bonds, and other stuff I can’t recall (will ask my mother later). I hope Auburn lady was involved in something.
Here is why I think the whole series is “worth” it(aside from a documentary of a key part of human history): I had never heard of Japanese-American soldiers, period. I’ve visited the Pear Harbor Memorial in Hawaii, but never heard of the war museum in Honolulu–but I was there in the late 70s. I also like the way it’s true to its time–the segregation and treatment of black soldiers and the Japanese Americans is laid out, matter of factedly. My 9 year old son is asking all sorts of questions re this–it’s stimulated a number of discussions already.
Alll that is good and I’ll stick it until the end. But I must say, it is getting hard to take. The woman from Luverne who, while she was off dropping one son into the Navy’s hands, gets a telegram telling of her other son’s death. I teared up at that. So much loss. And we Americans got off “easy” compared to Russia, Britain etc. Not to mention that the German soldiers, the Italian, the Japanese-all of them were mourned by their loved ones, too. It’s overwhelming.
I had a feeling I’d open up this thread and hear something negative about the Mobile, Alabama lady. Living where I do (20 minutes from southern Georgia) some people really do speak that way around here–and they are actually very nice folks.
I can’t dislike her. Maybe she did volunteer, maybe that will come up in later interviews. She doesn’t seem to be all that self-referential, or when she is, it’s sort of in generalities.
I knew about the Japanese-American unit, but we never visited the museum in Honolulu, either.
I sort of wish the program was in one hour increments.
It’s a lot to take in night after night.