In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Paris I Democracy Goes to War: Air Force (1943) Michael Paris University of Central Lancashire Democracy Goes to War: AirForce (1943) / 'r Force (Dir. Howard Hawks) is the story of an Army Air Force B-17 Flying Fortress, "The Mary Ann," and her crew in the Pacific theatre at the time of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. While the feature has subsequently been hailed as one of the director's greatest works, bearing all the hallmarks of Hawk's concept of the group built on "shared values, common purpose, intuitive sympathy, and mutual independence,"1 the film was subjected to some criticism at its time of release. The Office of War Information, for example, fearing it would reflect badly on the precarious position of loyal Japanese-Americans, complained of its stereotypical portrayal of all people of Japanese descent as treacherous, blood-thirsty savages. On its release, in March 1943, the Columbia University sociologist R.M. Maclver also protested at its"unfair and inaccurate" portrayal of Japanese-Americans.2 However, the negative anti-Japanese bias ofAirForce is only part of the story: a device to intensify the real focus of the film-a demonstration of the very positive image of the cohesive, civilized, and democratic nature of the crew of the "Mary Ann." As Thomas Doherty has pointed out, a persistent theme of World War Two combat films has been the notion of the group-the squad, platoon or company-as a "melting pot," a homogenized ethnic and religious mix of individuals united in the struggle against totalitarian regimes.11 From Gung Ho! (1942), in which a Marine Colonel (played by Randolph Scott) orders his racially mixed unit to "cast out prejudice, racial, religious, and every other kind," to Pride of the Marines and A Walk in the Sun, (both 1945), the combat group has stood as a metaphor for a democratic society. Somewhat less attention has been focused on the manner in which air force films reflected the same democratic ideals. However, examination of such a feature as Air Force clearly reveals that the bomber crew-a tightly-knit, sympathetic group totally dependent upon each other's skills-was indeed a perfect symbol for a democratic society at war. 48 I Film & History World War II in Film | Special In-Depth Section The pre-war public perception of the airman, created in no small measure by the air force itself, was of a carefully selected, intellectual and physical elite.4 Thus, when war came, it was essential that the service was seen as just as democratized as any other branch of the armed forces: perhaps more so in the light of USAAF selection policies which prohibited Blacks and Hispanics from aircrew training. It was also essential that, for the serious business of total war, Hollywood cast out the individualistic aces and "lone eagle" misfits that had been the stereotypical central focus of 1930s aviation movies and adopt new role models that fitted more comfortably into the conception ofa democracy at war. Thus, the "organization man"—the team player—was adopted and nowhere were communitarian values more needed than among the bomber crew—and such examples provided a valuable object lesson for the nation. While these pictures helped prepare the public for "total" war, they also answered Mr. and Mrs. Joe Public's question, "exactly what had the expensive and much-vaunted air force actually been doing since Pearl Harbor?" And this helps to explain General H.H. "Hap" Arnold's interest and support for the film. It seems possible, according to Hawks' somewhat confused recollections, that the original idea for the film came from Arnold5. Certainly the General ensured that the air force provided every facility for Hawks and on occasions soothed the ruffled feathers of senior officers when the filmmakers were too demanding. Arnold also authorized Hawks to interview air force personnel and the final script, written by Dudley Nicholls, was an imaginative composite of individual experiences. Part of Hawks' strategy to achieve a documentary feel to the picture was to use actors who were relatively unknown (Only John Garfield had "star" status and he had specifically requested a role in the film6). Filmed in Hollywood with some...

pdf

Share