User:Chelsey.brantley/sandbox: Difference between revisions
m Corrected type in first line |
m Corrected typos; replaced dashes with em dashes in citation page numbers |
||
| Line 91: | Line 91: | ||
of the soldiers in the front line at the Pentagon and goaded them with the most vicious personal slander. . . . [M]any officials here are surprised that | of the soldiers in the front line at the Pentagon and goaded them with the most vicious personal slander. . . . [M]any officials here are surprised that | ||
there was not much more violence."{{sfn|Mailer|1988|p=313}} Notice that the ''Times'' does not mention any specific violence of the MPs. Numerous commentators condemned ''not'' the beatings meted out to the demonstrators, but the protest | there was not much more violence."{{sfn|Mailer|1988|p=313}} Notice that the ''Times'' does not mention any specific violence of the MPs. Numerous commentators condemned ''not'' the beatings meted out to the demonstrators, but the protest | ||
itself; David Brinkley called it a “coarse, vulgar episode."{{sfn|Wells|1994|p= | itself; David Brinkley called it a “coarse, vulgar episode."{{sfn|Wells|1994|p=202–3}} However, | ||
Maurice Isserman, one marcher, remembers the marchers for the most part as peaceful, remaining “pretty true to Gandhian principles."{{sfn|Isserman|2007|p=B15}} | Maurice Isserman, one marcher, remembers the marchers for the most part as peaceful, remaining “pretty true to Gandhian principles."{{sfn|Isserman|2007|p=B15}} | ||
| Line 102: | Line 102: | ||
night before the police began employing more militant tactics. But on Monday in another story of the march the ''New York Times'' still ignored “the bloody military sweep of early Sunday morning;” the ''Washington Post''’s Monday coverage was similar in that it “continued to emphasize the violence | night before the police began employing more militant tactics. But on Monday in another story of the march the ''New York Times'' still ignored “the bloody military sweep of early Sunday morning;” the ''Washington Post''’s Monday coverage was similar in that it “continued to emphasize the violence | ||
of the protestors, not the defenders of the Pentagon."{{sfn|Small|1994|p=76, 78}} ''Time'' came out with its story a few days after the march on October 27 in which they marginalized the protestors as “left-wing radicals, hippies, acid | of the protestors, not the defenders of the Pentagon."{{sfn|Small|1994|p=76, 78}} ''Time'' came out with its story a few days after the march on October 27 in which they marginalized the protestors as “left-wing radicals, hippies, acid | ||
heads, and people with painted faces in bizarre costumes” while at the same time “applaud[ing] the government for its restraint."{{sfn|Small|1994|p= | heads, and people with painted faces in bizarre costumes” while at the same time “applaud[ing] the government for its restraint."{{sfn|Small|1994|p=79–80}} | ||
Mailer is unwilling to let the picture that the mainstream press drew of demonstrators become the only permanent record, and“he scolded the press for their lies, and their misrepresentation, for their guilt in creating a psychology over the last twenty years in the average American which made wars like Vietnam possible."{{sfn|Mailer|1988|p=93}} Mailer understands that the press is pivotal in a nation’s critique of its culture and policies, and he takes the press to task for their failure to cultivate an informed public. Eventually, Mailer’s ''Armies'' would stand with media accounts as a record of the event. Before ''Armies'' was published as a book in 1968, it appeared in periodicals (almost the entire issues of ''Harper’s'' and ''Commentary'' were given to this story). So | Mailer is unwilling to let the picture that the mainstream press drew of demonstrators become the only permanent record, and“he scolded the press for their lies, and their misrepresentation, for their guilt in creating a psychology over the last twenty years in the average American which made wars like Vietnam possible."{{sfn|Mailer|1988|p=93}} Mailer understands that the press is pivotal in a nation’s critique of its culture and policies, and he takes the press to task for their failure to cultivate an informed public. Eventually, Mailer’s ''Armies'' would stand with media accounts as a record of the event. Before ''Armies'' was published as a book in 1968, it appeared in periodicals (almost the entire issues of ''Harper’s'' and ''Commentary'' were given to this story). So | ||
| Line 124: | Line 124: | ||
Even if his readers were persuaded to believe in a peaceful resolution to the Vietnam War, what would these readers do with this new consciousness, | Even if his readers were persuaded to believe in a peaceful resolution to the Vietnam War, what would these readers do with this new consciousness, | ||
a consciousness which was “itself a central ingredient in power”{{sfn|Miller|year|p=394}}? It is difficult to measure how readers enact their power, but we can watch how Mailer enacts his own. He undertakes his own civil disobedience, getting arrested in hopes of gaining publicity and offering credence to the | a consciousness which was “itself a central ingredient in power”{{sfn|Miller|year|p=394}}? It is difficult to measure how readers enact their power, but we can watch how Mailer enacts his own. He undertakes his own civil disobedience, getting arrested in hopes of gaining publicity and offering credence to the | ||
cause of the march, and he understands that his symbolic action must be captured by the press to multiply its effect. When writing the story of ''Armies'', | cause of the march, and he understands that his symbolic action must be captured by the press to multiply its effect. When writing the story of ''Armies'', Mailer tracks his own movement from critic to supporter to war protester to{{pg|488|489}} | ||
Mailer tracks his own movement from critic to supporter to war protester to{{pg|488|489}} | |||
prisoner of conscience, and we see that he “feels the claims of imagination | prisoner of conscience, and we see that he “feels the claims of imagination | ||
| Line 135: | Line 134: | ||
Mailer admits early in the story his growing belief that his own writing about the Vietnam War is not enough, that “no project had seemed to cost | Mailer admits early in the story his growing belief that his own writing about the Vietnam War is not enough, that “no project had seemed to cost | ||
him enough,” for his writing was one thing, but action was another. And by simply writing about the Vietnam War “he had been suffering more and more in the past few years from the private conviction that he was getting a | him enough,” for his writing was one thing, but action was another. And by simply writing about the Vietnam War “he had been suffering more and more in the past few years from the private conviction that he was getting a | ||
little soft, a hint curdled."{{sfn|Mailer|1988|p= | little soft, a hint curdled."{{sfn|Mailer|1988|p=70–1}} This may have served as a barb at | ||
his audience of readers, among whom surely numbered many armchair revolutionaries. | his audience of readers, among whom surely numbered many armchair revolutionaries. | ||
To keep from getting soft and to resist being contented with a | To keep from getting soft and to resist being contented with a | ||
| Line 145: | Line 144: | ||
aware, but not yet ''involved'' in a cause. Readers might appreciate that having their consciousness raised was not the same as protesting the war in | aware, but not yet ''involved'' in a cause. Readers might appreciate that having their consciousness raised was not the same as protesting the war in | ||
their own communities, not at all the same as stepping out into the streets | their own communities, not at all the same as stepping out into the streets | ||
to form a human protest. One had to move from words to action, from page | to form a human protest. One had to move from words to action, from page to protest. | ||
to protest. | |||
Mailer asks serious questions of his readers, as Alfred Kazin points out, | Mailer asks serious questions of his readers, as Alfred Kazin points out, describing him as the first “leading American peacenik and resister addressing urgent questions to his ‘army’—Are we good enough? How can we overcome | ||
describing him as the first “leading American peacenik and resister addressing urgent questions to his ‘army’—Are we good enough? How can we overcome | |||
the ‘mediocrity of the middle-class middle-aged masses of the Left?’ | the ‘mediocrity of the middle-class middle-aged masses of the Left?’ | ||
The general shoddiness of American standards just now? The tendency of authorities to lie?”{{sfn|Kazin|1968|p=BR 1}} Mailer artfully places such questions within the | The general shoddiness of American standards just now? The tendency of authorities to lie?”{{sfn|Kazin|1968|p=BR 1}} Mailer artfully places such questions within the | ||