-
2. Setting Out in September
- University of Washington Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
2 Setling outinSeptember M y COPIES OF MY GRANDFATHER'S OBITUARIES from national publi, cations had long remained buried in a folder marked "SLAM." I seldom removed the folder from my file cabinet over the years; there seemed no point in dredging up such bad memories. But now, in the wake of the controversy about my grandfather's life and work, I retrieved the obituaries, searching for any hint of fraud, things that might be suspect. There did not seem to be much, other than the notation he was "the youngest officer in the United States Army in World War 1," the sort of sweeping claim that the controversy is calling into ques, tion. Otherwise, the obituaries were prominently displayed, lengthy and full of praise. S. L. A. Marshall, who stood 5 feet five, was described by Time magazine as "a towering military historian who analyzed all the wars of modem America." It noted that he was "seldom far from the sound of gunfire," then continued, "Out of his experiences in the Korean War came his most esteemed books, The River and the Gaunt, let and Pork Chop Hill. His writing was distinguished by narrative drive, a gritty attention to the details of combat and a plain,spoken sympathy for the men who suffered and triumphed on the front lines. He could not agree with people, he said, who thought that 'war is a game in which the soul of man no longer counts.'"I Could this be the same man who was now being accused of "maligning American infantrymen with 'Men Against Fire?'" Could 16 SETTING OUT IN SEPTEMBER 17 this be the same man who was even being castigated by his harshest critic, Leinbaugh, for "knowing nothing about combat?" The Washington Post used "noted military historian" to describe Marshall in its headline. "As a lieutenant colonel assigned to the Pacific in World War II," the Post said, "he developed the technique of doing battlefield history by assembling survivors soon after an encounter and interviewing the group about its operations. He used this method later with American troops in Europe, Korea and Vietnam , and with the Israeli army after the Sinai War of 1956." The Army's then-chief of military history was quoted next: "Marshall specialized in small unit type of action where he would talk to the people involved and elicit the details of what had happened. He was very good at putting it down in a vivid way, and he made people read things that professional historians might make dry as dust. U2 The New Yark Times' obituary on Marshall started on the front page, that sign of a person's national importance. Marshall was described as "one of the nation's best-known military historians and a prominent figure on American and other war fronts for half a century ." Again, his books were saluted for their "critical acclaim" and their "visceral" realism. A cited review of The River and the Gauntlet described it as "by far the finest book that has come out of the Korean War." But the Times also said, "Though his detailed reporting of World War II and the Korean conflict won praise, similar efforts in five books on the war in Vietnam encountered some criticism from writers who said he had lost the larger meanings of the war in a concentration on the minutiae of it. Some critics, moreover, called him a hawk."3 Now, twelve years later, Marshall was being called much worse. "A liar." "A fraud." An instigator of a "peculiar hoax." I try to investigate these allegations while researching a three-part series about the Marshall controversy for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, where I have worked for years as a columnist. I hear "genius" used to describe my grandfather by both friends and historians. I hear "charlatan" used to describe my grandfather by his critics. I hear very few descriptions in between. The only way to sort this out, I finally conclude, is to take to the road around the United States. I must complete much more re- 18 RECONCILlAnON ROAD search, conduct face-to-face interviews with those involved in the controversy, as well as those who knew Marshall best-family members , fellow historians, compatriots, people like Gen. William C. Westmoreland and Mike Wallace, if they will see me. Because I have begun to discover that my grandfather was a far more intriguing figure than I ever suspected. My opinion of him had been colored for years...