Dear Miss Em: General Eichelberger’s War in the Pacific, 1942–1945 ed. by Jay Luvaas (review)

228 THE CANADIAN HISTORICAL REVIEW with somanyof hiscontemporaries andsomanyhistorians, couldhavebeenso blindto themeaning of mechanization. In a neglected book,Voicesin the Valley: Myth-Making andFolk Belie[in theShapingo[ theMiddle West(•964) FrankR. Kramerarguedthat many farmers in themiddleof thenineteenth-century weredefining theirrelationship to the land in mechanical metaphors. They had no sense of rootedness and, therefore,a homestead in Ohio, definedasa productive machine,easilycould beexchanged for a homestead in Illinoisor Iowa. If Kramerisright,histheory provides an answer to theparadoxof whysomanyAmericans havetalkedlike Jeffersonians and actedlike Hamiltonians.His theorymay alsoprovidethe answer whichProfessor Wik doesnot giveof why Fordwassopopularin the •92os.JohnWilliam Ward, in hisessay 'The Meaningof Lindbergh's Flight' (American Quarterly, •958), suggested that the great public response to the flight wasbecause Lindberghsymbolized a synthesis of the rural pastand the mechanicalfuture. Cultural historians, however,mustconsider the possibility that for mostAmericans the mechanical futurealwayshasbeena part of the rural pastand that the rural pastalwayshasbeenpart of the mechanical future . Indeed,giventhe commitment to the logicof continualeconomic growth that sets moderncivilization apartfrommediaeval civilization, canmodemmen express a philosophy of rural rootedness in anyotherwaythan Ford'spassionatepreservation of antiques in a museum? DAVID W. NOBLE Universityo[ Minnesota Dear MissEm: GeneralEichelberger's War in the Pacific,•94••945. Edited by JAYLUVAAS. Westport,Conn.,Greenwood Publishing, •972. Pp. xiv, 32•, maps,illus.$••.5o. In World War • the war in the PacificwasverylargelyunderAmericancontrol . Shortlyafter Pearl Harbor the area wasdividedinto two theaters:one, primarilynaval,underAdmiralNimitz; the otherunderGeneralMacArthurbothreporting to the us JointChiefsof Staff.Based initiallyin Australia, MacArthur 's Southwest Pacific Area extended northward to include most of the Solomons, New Guinea,theBismarck Archipelago, theNetherlands Indies,and the Philippines. In additionto us forces, MacArthur had underhiscommand an AustralianarmyaswellasDutchandotherforces, but ranhistheatre,much to the resentment of the Australians, as thoughit waspurelyAmerican.His staffwasalmostentirelyAmericanand thoughhe namedan Australian,General Sir ThomasBlamey,as commander of allied land forces,he managedby variousdevices to keepcontrolof all majoroperations in Americanhands. The Australians were not the onlyonesto resentMacArthur'shandlingof his theatre.Many of MacArthur'sseniorAmericancommanders alsoresented MacArthur's dictatorialmanagement of affairs.Few in the theatrewere ever namedin the communiques and,astheyviewedit, received anycreditfor their accomplishments. Their names werevirtuallyunknownto theAmericanpublic thoughtheycommanded armies andair forces andtheywerealways comparing REV1EWS 229 themselves to officers of equalresponsibility in the Europeantheatrewhowere fastbecoming nationalheroes. Moreover,MacArthur'sheadquarters wasfilled with jealousyand intrigue,with officersvying for the favour of their chief, whose portalswereguarded jealously by hishardbittenchiefof staff,Richard Sutherland. One of theseofficers wasGeneralRobertL. Eichelberger, commander of the I Corpsand later the EighthArmy. Eichelberger's careerbeforeWorld War n had sethim apart asonedestined for high command. A graduateof the military academy in •9o9, the sameclass asPattonand Devers,Eichelberger held a series of importantpositions beforeWorld War n. When MacArthur called for him in AugustI942 he sawtheassignment asan opportunity of a lifetime to achievedistinctionand lastingfame. In thishe wasdisappointed, not becausehe had failed, he felt, but becausehe was denied the credit for his achievement by MacArthur'stightcontrolof publicrelations. Thushe had returned home after the war not to a hero's welcome like that accorded to those who had served'underEisenhower,but to an anonymous retirementin Asheville , North Carolina.Eichelberger's bitterness overthe.failure to receivecredit for his achievement, his relationswith other officers, his view of MacArthur, and of the intriguesat his headquarters-alltheseand more come. through clearlyin thisvolumewhichconsists of hiswartimelettersto hiswife, 'Miss Em,' noteshe dictatedafter the war, a narrativeconnecting the letters,documentation ,and an introduction by the editor.It is an effortto setthe records straight,as Eichelberger seesthe record,and to give to the troopshe commandedthecredithefeelstheydeserve . Eichelberger's version of thewar in the southwest Pacific,it mustbe pointed out, is no moreobjectivethan MacArthur'sversion.In fact, onewonderswhy theseletterswerepublished at all. Eichelberger hasalreadytold hisstoryin an earlierwork (Our JungleRoadto Tokyo[New York, Viking Press, I95O]), 2o percentofwhichisduplicated here.Nor does thisvolumeaddto thegeneral's reputation. Hisconcern withpublicity, hisinvolvement in headquarters intrigue, hisjealousy ofotherofficers, andthegossip thathepasses onin these letters may beof interestto somebut reflectno crediton their author.GeneralEichelberger wouldhavebeenbetterserved had thisbooknot beenpublished. LOUIS MORTON Dartmouth College EUROPE A Survey o[ the VaticanArchives ando[ itsMedievalHoldings. LEONAI•r) E. BOYLE, OP.SubsidiaMedievalia,•. Toronto, PontificalInstitute of Medieval Studies, I972. Pp.iv, 25o.$8.oo. 'Buthowever well-prepared, a beginner mayfeelbewildered duringhisfirstdays in the Archives.'Few of his readerswill wishto deny the truth of Professor ...