[Update: We’ll be seeing a lot of comment traffic from Kevin Drum’s site where he’s posted an puzzling and inaccurate precis of our talk. Developing, as they say…]
I was scanning the paper on my way out to door for a ride, and d**n if I didn’t see something that made me stop and boot up the laptop.
It was today’s “Current” (the old Opinion section – editorials, commentary, and opeds).
The lead article was headlined “Draft Hollywood,” and is by detective novelist Andrew Klavan (don’t know his work, sorry) in response to ‘United 93’.
… “It is hard for those who live near a Police Station to believe in the triumph of violence,” as T.S. Eliot wrote. That’s us — we Americans, protected by a mighty military that by and large obeys the rules of our republic — safe enough, and keeping much of the world safe enough, so that we find it hard to believe in what would happen if that protection failed.
But these fighters do keep us safe. And because keeping us safe is harsh, dangerous work, we should glorify them, exalt them in story and song by way of appreciation.“United 93” — the film celebrating the heroic civilian attempt to retake a hijacked plane on 9/11 — opened last week. That’s great. Well done and about time. But now, let’s have some war movies.
We need some films celebrating the war against Islamo-fascism in Afghanistan and Iraq — and in Iran as well, if and when that becomes necessary. We need films like those that were made during World War II, films such as 1943’s “Sahara” and “Action in the North Atlantic,” or “The Fighting Seabees” and “Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo,” which were released in 1944.
Not all of these were great films, or even good ones, but their patriotic tributes to our fighting forces inspired the nation.
Go read the whole thing.
Now this is an issue that’s near and dear to me – I’ve blogged about it more than a bit.
But more important to me, it’s the beginning of a change in our regional paper of record. Now, I’m no Patterico – I’m not focused with Ahab-like intensity on the problems that the Times seems to flaunt. And, unlike Patterico, I’m not a conservative who wants my team to get a fair shake from the press. (Note that I do come down firmly on the side of the press being liberal – but establishment liberal)
I’m a liberal Democrat (Kevin Drum, at dinner, expressed shock at the kinds of policy proposals I thought the Democratic Party should be making) – and I think the paper needs to be balanced so that the liberal Establishment can stop deluding itself and start dealing with reality.
Reality abroad, and at home.
The title of this post? Well, I’m immature enough to enjoy the vein-popping rage that many Times loyalists must be feeling this morning. (there was also a pro-Lieberman oped by Jonathan Chait)
UPDATE: So, what exactly did I say during our dinner talk? Read “A Response to Kevin Drum” for my thoughts re: a working-class liberal alternative. My key question:
bq. What benefits does the Democratic Party bring to a 35-year old single mom, who’s trying to raise her two kids as best she can while living three paychecks from homelessness? Or a working couple who collectively make $70k year, and are officially ‘middle class’ but can’t afford decent childcare, health care, or to live anywhere near where they work? Or an immigrant family, trying to live on $40K year?
AL,
Unlike many who proclaim to be a liberal Democrat it seems you truly are. I am trying to get my fellow conservatives and conservative bloggers to replace _liberal_ with _leftist_. Nothing liberal about many who almost actively cheer for Al-Qaida and the Baathists in Iraq. Nothing liberal about supporting Castro or THugo Chavez.
I have a friend like you. He voted for W in at least the last election because he can not stand the left’s drift toward illiberalism. However, when we talk about economics and the like it is clear my buddy and myself are on different sides.
What you describe is a refreshing wind ablowing. We need all of our society working together and that Hollywood may be pulling back from its veiled support of kooky conspiracy theories is a good sign. Lets hope it continues.
Great post, and great underlying essay. I couldn’t agree more. Bravo!
Ditto TigerHawk!
I think you should check your brain, you seem to have your chambers empty again.
“I’m a liberal Democrat”
…and you are positioned between Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman, right?
Liberal. Democrat. My. A**.
Marc,
You should invite Kevin to dinner with some of the Moscone folks?
Do you think Flap would be restrained?
Kevin Drum came to the Bear Flag League summer conference last year and a bunch of us BFL’s almost puked over the prospect.
He is OK in person without his Kos minions in tow.
Flap
I see that the retrograde Democrats (from the soi-disant love and compassion wing) have once again showed up just to stage drive-by shootings with blank ammunition. Not surprising for people whose idea of sustained intellectual discourse is heckling Donald Rumsfeld at a charity banquet.
Now that pleasantries have been exchanged, I’d like to disagree with Andrew Klavan. I don’t want to see Hollywood do for patriotism what they’ve already done for peace, sex, and civilization. I’d prefer them to keep their greasy paw-prints off as many things as possible, thanks very much.
Granted, there were some great propaganda movies in the 1940s: Casablanca, Mrs. Miniver, Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo, The Best Years of Our Lives. But they were made by people who understood something about war, the countries they lived in, and life in general. Frank Capra is long dead.
“Not surprising for people whose idea of sustained intellectual discourse is heckling Donald Rumsfeld at a charity banquet.”
Bla. How did you treat Bill Clinton and his team? You changed the rules, we are just retaliating. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.
Me thinks one fears competition in the clap louder, we’ve won.. again genre.
The author of that piece in the LA Times has a good point. But his list of wartime movies leaves a great deal to be desired. It is well to recall that Hollywood didn’t confine itself to merely making movies during the war, but also made exceptional documentaries about the war, perhaps the best of which was the feature length FIGHTING LADY, about life on a U.S. Navy Carrier.
Some of the movies made during the war, which carried a message about the war, the stakes, the nature of our enemies, were also classics in their own right. Such as: CASABLANCA, starring the lovely Ingrid Bergman, THE GREAT DICTATORS, Charlie Chaplin, BUCK PRIVATES, Abbott & Costello, ROAD TO MOROCCO, Hope & Crosby, THIS IS THE ARMY, GUADALCANAL DIARY, THIRTY SECONDS OVER TOKYO, THE SULLIVANS, BACK TO BATAAN, OBJECTIVE BURMA.
But of the best of that genre, one would have to note MRS. MINIVER, starring the very lovely Greer Garson, and WHITE CLIFFS OF DOVER, starring Irene Dunne, also THE LIFE AND TIMES OF COLONEL BLIMP, starring young Deborah Kerr. Each of those three movies makes a statement about Britain, and also about Germany.
Places like the STAGE DOOR CANTEEN, in The Big Apple, was staffed exclusively by Broadway theatre people. And Hollywood had their own Canteen, the name of which escapes me, where beautiful Hollywood starlets such as Lana Turner, Ava Gardner and Rita Hayworth would frequently stop by.
Hollywood went ALL out for the war effort, before and after December 7th.
That’s why I don’t concur with Laura Ingraham’s motto that “Hollywood should just shut up and sing.” The problem isn’t that Hollywood is speaking out, the problem is that they are sorely versed on the nature of the problem, and the nature of the war. But Hollywood has a massive contribution to make, and I look forward to the day and the hour when they begin to make their presence known in this civilizational contest.
The fact that Hollywood has been making movies the past 5 to 10 years that no one wants to see might have something to do with this about-face, too. Compare the reviews — and the receipts — of Flight 93 with those of Spielberg’s last blockbuster Munich, which not even the Hollywood glitterati could bring themselves to reward with an Academy Award.
Hollywood and its denizens may all be flaming lefties, BUT if their product doesn’t make any money they are very quickly ex-denizens, and given their skill level to do anything else in life, that is something that is devoutly to be avoided.
Oh, and ditto the LA Times. The LA Times has a new editor, and you know damned well it must also have a new mandate to stop its death spiral into bankruptcy. Printing something actually *positive* like this editorial might be a pre-meditated money-making attempt, designed to lure back paying customers, no?
Consider the following proposition: Hollywood has been in the process of making war movies. They’ve just been making war movies advocating defeat for the United States.
Farenheit 9/11 advocates defeat for the United States. Its central proposition is that the entire War on Terror is a lie designed to enrich BushCo. Moore doesn’t simply stop at Iraq; he assumes the the Bushisti are in cahoots with the Bin Laden family, the Carlisle group, and other members of the Jewish Bankers Cabal to rip off the working class. It’s as if every conspiracy theory about 9/11 that made it to Usenet was thrown against the tent wall. The Left loves Michael Moore. Hollywood helped finance his movie and distribute it. It was a movie about the war.
And now, we hear that Susan Sarandon is starring as Cindy Sheehan in a biopic about Ma Sheehan. Here is a woman who has accused the President of the United States of criminal conduct in nearly bloodthirsty language in regard to the war. In addition, she has been caught using that old standby of blaming Israel for the war, which she tried to deny once her handlers go to her. Again, the central thrust of the film will be antiwar-that the war in Iraq is a lie and that we deserve to lose.
Hollywood is making war movies-for the other side. They will also continue to give generously to the Democratic Party. Some Democrats, such as AL, have taken note of the fact that up to now Hollywood has yet to take part in the war. Most National Democrats ignore this trend towards ambivalence, at best, towards our troops. Why? Hollywood gives generously to the DNC and to Hillary. You don’t bite the hand that feeds you. Hollywood has chosen sides and does not believe in the cause of this war against Islamic Fascism, simply because of who is President.
It may change for the better, but up to now, Hollywood’s actions in regard to the troops in the field has been unforgivable.
If you had smarter commentators you would also get a better variety of trolls.
Oh dear. Folks. Take a deep breath. “Hollywood” isn’t a single entity whose sole interest is advocating the destruction of the United States. Citing “Fahrenheit 9/11” as a euphanism for “Hollywood” is disingenuous, of course.
The major studio producers are in the business of making money. That’s it. If right-wing ideas suddenly became more popular, then you’d probably see a corresponding rise in right-wing themed political movies. No major studio would willingly go bankrupt for political reasons.
If you dislike the message of a particular film, don’t see it.
You’re not a liberal. You’re a conservative using an increasingly favored taking of pretending to be a liberal while taking conservative positions, so as to make it all the more easier to express shock and nausea over the valid opinions of valid liberals.
This is an oh-so-airy blog post claiming that Kevin Drum is being dishonest, without a shred of flesh as to what your liberal quote unqupte positions actually are.
Consider your bluff called. PLease, Mr. warmongering, “why can’t we win the war-on-“islamo-fascism” “liberal”, let’s hear some policy positions considered liberal by some actual liberal, somewhere.”
“glasnost”… erm, it pays to read the site before jumping to these conclusions. You can find Marc’s “working class liberalism” position set right over here, in the post post called (unsurprisingly) “A Response to Kevin Drum.”:http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/008582.php
Whatever they may be, the set of policy prescription Marc puts forth would NOT be recognized by conservatives. Or, I might add, by people relying on Kevin Drum’s description of them.
Read for yourself.
(A.L…. this is why it’s a really good idea put addenda on the bottoms of posts like this, linking off to items that continue the discussion….)
hmmm,
Black Hawk Down
Jarhead
I don’t know if I’d call The Best Years of Our Lives propaganda.
It painted returning vets in a very human light, and the reactions towards vets by America tired of war and trying to readjust to peace was very human too.
From’President’Ralph’Wheeler LT.Governor’Ralph’Wheeler sheriff’Ralph’Wheeler’ of polk county’ Fla’ thanck you for looking at LA’POLICE’ RQUEST YOU HAVE REPORTER’investigate’ polkcounty sheriff’of Fla’and a investigation’ on lawer dan ackes of polk county fla’ thanck you”you see LT.Governor’ Lawton’Chiles’RETURNED” LT.Governor’Ralph Wheeler’of Fla’ pistole’back toLT.Governor’Ralph Wheeler’ after lawton chiles was dead they came into LT.Governor’Ralph’Wheeler’house and took LT.Governor’Ralph’ 38’colt six’from the trunck of his car it was under lock and key’ in a box’ wraped withtape around the barrel’ and hamer and triger’when lt.governor’Ralph Wheeler’ went bartow. ask do they have it. in the storage oom’ they said they don’t know were it’is”it’is in LT.Governor’Ralph Wheeler’name’thanck you you should have reporter’s in each county’ and are very good on election coverage to’ thanck you for your service to the people”of the LA.