One of those
favorite movie moments is when Jimmy Stewart punches John Wayne in the 1962
western, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. John Wayne played the straight
shooting, larger than life, all-American hero as Jimmy Stewart played an inept
easterner looking to tame the west with justice under the law.
These two
characters in the movie are opposites of each other but they both play the
hero. Each represents a different kind of heroism. Once I sat in on a lecture
on how they represent the liberal / conservative divide in American politics and
by the end of the lecture it didn't sound like too much of a stretch. The real moral of the movie is at the end
when a newspaper reporter decides not to print the true story of who shot the
outlaw Liberty Valance. On one level is the cynical view point of when the true
isn't as cool as the legend, keep the
legend alive and ignore the truth. The other less sardonic understanding is
people like a simple story but behind
every legend is a more complex story filled with contradicting facts .
The movie
careers of Jimmy Stewart and John Wayne had a similar compare and contrast
quality. I saw The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance after the 1968 release of The
Green Berets. This might have been John Wayne's most ill advised script choice
since playing Ganges Khan in The Conqueror. You would think no one would be a
better choice than John Wayne to play a Green Beret Colonel. It was the times that
was against the Legend of the Duke.
In 1968 the
public opinion had turned against the war in Vietnam. The Green Beret movie was
in many was an old fashioned propaganda film that came off as heavy handed and
misguided. The ending seem to symbolize the lack of understanding by having
John Wayne along the beach into the sunset -despite the fact the coast of
Vietnam is on the east. To compound John
Wayne's image problems, he voiced his opinion about a growing number of young
people resisting the draft. John Wayne
was staunch anti-communist and social conservative but he might have also been a draft dodger
during World War 2. It sounded like the
worse kind of hypocrisy at a time when the emotions were running high.
In all
fairness John Wayne was 34 when Pearl Harbor was attacked. His first hit movie Stagecoach was released in
1939, which made him a bankable actor but he was far from being rich and
famous. His marriage was tanking and he had young kids to support.
During the
war John Wayne made 13 feature films to help support the war effort. He became
rich and famous from the image he created. He had told friends he planned to
enlist after he made another film or two. Near the end of the war he did make
an attempt to join a Naval intelligence unit set up by his friend and director
John Ford. The paperwork was never followed up by Wayne .
On the
surface being a Hollywood hero has to be more appealing that actually fighting
in a brutal war. Though not even
nominally participating had to look weak and selfish, it probably weighed heavy
on his conscious. And maybe he was over
compensating with his overt patriotism
later on in life. I've seen that with
many guys who had dodged the draft during Vietnam or came to age during peace
time. They are super patriotic at public
events commemorating combat veterans and troops overseas -but oddly don't know any veterans personally
or are too busy to volunteer time.
Many
Hollywood actors did enlist during World War 2. Most notably was Henry Fonda,
Clark Gable and Jimmy Stewart. Jimmy
Steward was an established actor and probably already a millionaire in 1941, a
time when that much money had ten to twenty times the value it has today. Jimmy
Steward had everything to live for but he came from the philosophy that "
to those much is given, much is expected".
An idea that's seen as much too liberal in the shadow of the Ayn Rand
neo-conservatism, where the mindset is "you earned, it's yours".
Jimmy
Stewart is rarely if ever remembered for his political viewpoints. A lifelong
Republican he was an active member and supporter of the party. He was also a live and let live person, who
stood by his principals and respected
others for theirs.
As note
worth mentioning James Stewart served four years in the Army Air Corps. Part of
that time he was a bomber pilot over Nazi Germany and flew 20 combat missions.
Nixon had
set himself up as the conservative,
hawkish, law and order, and must stay the course in Vietnam candidate. George McGovern was portrayed as all the
opposite of what Nixon was. Both men served in World War 2.
No one ever
recalls that McGovern was the decorated war veteran. Up until when the Watergate Scandal broke most
people thought it was Nixon who was the true blue all American. McGovern was reluctant to talk about his
military service because he understood first hand that war was ugly and brutal.
Nixon was only too happy to mention his service to his country.
This kind of
pattern continues on, such as the 2002 Senatorial election between Max Cleland
and Saxby Chambliss. Max Cleland was a
decorated combat veteran of the Vietnam War, he also lost the lower halves of
both legs and part of one arm in battle. As the incumbent Cleland served as a
very middle of the road moderate.
The
Chambliss campaign ran a series successful last minute smear ads that portrayed
Cleland as weak on military defense and seriously questioned his patriotism. As though three lost limbs wasn't enough
sacrifice.
Election champions
are not for the thin skinned and have
always been known for being ruthlessly nasty -but many political scientist note
that campaign was a particularly low moment in American history. Just in case you were interested Chambliss
did not serve in Vietnam, he was exempt from the draft because a football knee
injury.
But like in the end of the Who Shot Liberty Valance the real story is a bit more complex.
No comments:
Post a Comment