Stand by Your Man by Monica Henry

Stand By Your Man By Monica Henry

Abstract: American war movies have a tendency to slip themselves into time­honored gender role clichés ­ women the comforters, women the patient, women the whores. In doing this, they not only ignore the rich, and varied roles that women have played in times of conflict, but they reinforce certain stereotypes that are best either broken down or left out. In some cases, lessons can be drawn from examples of African film and literature.

The vast majority of war-related films have been produced in America and, as a result, are dominated by Western concepts of masculinity and femininity. The lack of African films in this genre is noticeable and may be explained by the lack of a strong African film industry. This has led to a dependence upon foreign funding which has produced a large number of development-related films focusing on issues such as education and HIV/AIDS (Hungwe, 2000). Perhaps as the film industry in Africa grows, the number of war-films will increase and we can then gain a better understanding of the perceived role of women during war. Based on Western war-films and novels, as well as African post-conflict films and novels, it would appear that the dominant role of women in this genre is that of caretaker, peacemaker, victim or whore. There are very few films that depict women as warriors and films that do so generally relegate these women to minor characters or background action. While this is a misrepresentation of women during conflict throughout history and the world, these films are simply reflecting the masculine and feminine stereotypes that dominate our societies.

Women and men are socialized from childhood on to adopt specific gender roles – man as warrior, woman as caretaker. These gendered roles, strongly influenced by cultural

1 expectations, are reflected in both film and novel. In so doing, they are presented as “natural” and thus reinforced. Femininity is often associated with such traits as emotionality, prudence, co-cooperativeness, compliance, affection, gentleness, sympathy, dependence, support and nurturing. In contrast, masculinity tends to be linked with rationality, power, strength, competitiveness, ruthlessness, aggression, assertiveness, independence, risk-taking behavior, courageousness, and adventurousness. Based on these cultural stereotypes, in both film and novels, male characters are predominantly depicted as being more dominant, violent and powerful than their female counterparts (Chandler, 2002). While this is largely a white, middle-class heterosexual, “Western” concept of masculinity, it spans across a variety of cultures including many of those in Africa as depicted in both The Lord of War (Niccol, 2005) and Black Hawk Down (Scott, 2001) in which arms dealers or American soldiers encounter the hyper-masculine militias of Liberia, Sierra Leone and Sudan. This type of masculinity often devalues characteristics associated with the feminine and opens the door for hero worship and the glorification of war.

Cynthia Enloe, an expert in feminist international relations, asserts that the international political system is dependent upon “patriotic wives” to play a specific role, and that power relations would be jeopardized should they refuse to conform (Enloe, 2000). Whether consciously or not, at some level policy makers and military officials are aware of this and encourage stereotypes that will allow for them to carry out foreign policy, including military action. This is evident in war films whether made for overt propaganda purposes, such as the 1942 award-winning Mrs. Miniver, Francis Ford Coppola’s 1979 anti-war film Apocalypse Now (Coppola, 1979), or the hyper-masculine entertainment oriented Rambo (Kotcheff, 1982) films, all of which embrace traditional gender stereotypes and honor the “heroic” masculine.

Challenging gender roles

Because films and novels are both reflectors and shapers of society, the lack of diversity and depth of roles for females in traditional war films is hardly surprising. According to prescribed gender roles, war is highly inappropriate for women and their “place” during an

2 armed conflict is not on the battlefield alongside men but at home, taking care of the children. The most common depiction of women in war films relegates them to simple victim status or that of a man’s mother, wife, fiancé, girlfriend, or whore. This is a gross misrepresentation of the numerous roles that women have played in war and also deprives the audience of an understanding of the true impact of a given armed conflict. Although war is a predominantly male enterprise, throughout history women have been far more involved than war films would leave us to believe. Guy Hamilton’s 1969 Battle of Britain (Hamilton, 1969) is a notable exception to this general rule and illustrates the significant assistance that Women’s Auxiliary Air Force (WAF) members provided during World War II (WWII). Unlike many war films, the women are portrayed as calm and collected during air raids and one is left with the sense that these women were quite capable of taking care of themselves. As was the case in WWII, the women in Battle of Britain are not engaged in combat, a role that in both war films and reality is still reserved for men. After all, if women are officially allowed to serve in combat, the domain of true warriors and protectors, then who will serve as the caretaker?

The struggle between the military’s need for women to satisfy the demand for soldiers during WWII and the desire for cultural ideas of masculinity and femininity to remain in place is also depicted in Battle of Britain. The composed demeanor of the enlisted women and female officers heading to the trenches during an air raid contrasted with the treatment of female Section Officer Harvey by a male colleague, who is oblivious to the fact that the air raid is not a drill, produces a rather comical effect. However, his lecture concerning the “girls” using the men’s trenches during air raid “practice” and his “understanding” of “feminine requirements” for handbags exemplify the gender-based assumptions held by many male military personnel.

The tension between Officer Harvey and her husband illustrates the change in power relations between men and women during the WWII era as women gained a greater sense of independence after leaving the house and entering careers and jobs traditionally reserved for men. If both husband and wife held their own career goals, who would take on the role of

3 the caregiver? Inevitably, when these careers were incompatible, it was the woman who was expected to compromise. In Battle of Britain, it is suggested that, despite the success of her military career, Officer Harvey’s fighter pilot husband expected her to give up a prestigious post in London and take a lesser position in Scotland – or better yet, give up the WAF all together - because he had been transferred. Despite all the advances made in the women’s liberation moment, the expectation that women should sacrifice their careers for their husbands has changed very little over the past fifty years. The American military wives of today find it quite difficult to develop or maintain any sort of a career due to the frequent moves (at least one every three years) and the lengthy deployments of their husbands during which they must “man the home front.”

Ousmane Sembene’s post-independence Sengalese novel and film, Xala (Sembene,1973), illustrates that although Senegal achieved independence from France, the Sengalese women were still under the control of the men. A member of the “Businessmen’s Group” states that, “Although we are anxious to belong to the modern world we haven’t abandoned our African customs,” (Sembene, 1975) which includes the virtual ownership of women. The 19-year-old third wife of a fifty-something-year-old Hadji is told by her aunt that it is a wife’s duty to serve and obey her husband while the first wife strives to follow the teachings of Islam and give complete obedience to the “master of the house.” When these beliefs and practices are challenged by the daughter of Hadji, he yells that she can “be a revolutionary at the university or in the street” but never in his house. (Sembene, 1975).

“Good” girls and “Bad” girls

Nancy Hollander, a historian who teaches classes on ideology and film, explained the resurgence in popularity of films with war themes as a desire to “go back to an era when men were men and women were women” (Hollander, 2002). The anxiety over the changing family structure and societal values are addressed in war films, such as Mrs. Miniver (Wyler, 1942) and The Best Years of Our Lives (Wyler, 1946). These films exemplify women who support the war effort by keeping the home fires burning, faithfully waiting for their men to

4 return, and acting as caregivers when the soldier comes home. These “good women” are held up as models to emulate and women are made to feel inferior or guilty if they are unable to meet these standards. The character of Mrs. Miniver was highly praised by film reviewers as being “lovely and gentle” and someone who “glows with compassion and womanly strength” (Crowther, 1945). Her strength, of course, rests in her ability to fulfill her role as mother and wife during the war by creating some sense or normalcy for her family. Her confrontation with the lost German pilot isn’t a scene in which she “saves the day” but rather one to demonstrate the humanity of the soldier and the compassion that this invokes in Mrs. Miniver. It is her husband Clem who joins other civilian male boatmen to rescue allied soldiers on the French shore while his wife remains at home, tending to her garden. When he returns five-days later looking disheveled from battle, his wife greets him with a bathrobe in hand, ready to fulfill her role as a “good” girl - a proper caretaker and supporter of her husband and country. In contrast to characters such as Mrs. Miniver, the “bad women” of war films are presented as rebellious, independent, materialistic, promiscuous and selfish. It is suggested that these “bad women” are not only detrimental to the family but, by extension, the war effort. The Best Year of Our Lives presents a clear contrast between “good” women like Wilma, Millie and Peggy and “bad” women like Marie. Wilma is the fiancée of Homer, a sailor whose hands have been replaced with hooks due to injuries incurred during the war. Despite his initial ill-treatment of Wilma upon his return to civilian life, she refuses to abandon Homer. It is her acceptance of him that allows this wounded soldier to “heal” and she is rewarded for her devotion a long-awaited wedding. Millie faithfully waited three years for her husband and made every effort upon his return to help him find his place in the family (including tolerating his drinking problem) and her daughter, Peggy, cares for Fred, a recently returned WWII pilot, when he drinks too much and comforts him when he has nightmares. These three women are contrasted with Marie, Fred’s wife, who is materialistic, vain, promiscuous, and impatient with Fred’s nightmares and his difficulty in adjusting to civilian life. The film ends with Wilma, Millie and Peggy all supposedly happy in their relationships while Marie is presumably destined for a life filled with nightclubs and meaningless relationships. The message for women in this movie is very clear – be a “good” girl and take care of “your man.”

5 Misrepresentation of women in Western war films

Laura Duhan Kaplan views caretaking as a gendered feminine role in which women are expected to defer their own needs to those of others (Kaplan, 1994). This is obvious when examining the life of a military wife. Throughout history these women have been expected to provide their unquestioning support for their warrior husbands so that their government is able to carry out its foreign policy objectives. However, the emotional, physical and financial sacrifices of these women have been long ignored in war films as they have been deemed unimportant or uninteresting. What does a woman responsible for running the household, taking care of the children and perhaps holding down a job while going through extreme emotional trauma have to do with war? Everything. The very fact that the Vietnam film, We Were Soldiers (Wallace, 2002), devotes a significant amount of time to showing the relationships between soldiers and their wives, home-front activities of military wives and the impact that the fear and loss of life has on the women suggests that their contribution and role in the overall war effort is beginning to be acknowledged by the public. At least part of their story is finally being told and viewers are forced to think about the continuing costs of war beyond the immediate ones on the battlefield.

That being said, providing unquestioning support for their soldier husbands was not the only contribution of women to the war, and We Were Soldiers only provides fleeting glances of army nurses treating the wounded and female war correspondents while ignoring the many other women who served. Approximately 265,000 military women and a countless number of female civilian volunteers served the United States during the Vietnam war in a variety of occupations and locations. Out of these, 11,000 American military women were stationed in Vietnam and worked in dangerous environments, received injuries, and were killed or taken as prisoners of war. Around 90 percent of these women served as nurses in the Army, Navy and Air Force, but they were also found in the Medical Service Corps, as air traffic controllers, communications specialists, intelligence officers, clerks and in other capacities in different branches of the armed services. Unlike many of the men that were drafted in

6 Vietnam, nearly all of these women volunteered for in-country service and thousands more were turned down due to the non-combatant status imposed upon women in the American military. (Vietnam Women’s Memorial Project, 2006).

A similar phenomenon has occurred in American Civil War films which often show “women prettifying themselves for the ball and countless soldiers becoming instant heroes” (Frank, 2001). Women served in combat during the American Civil War in far greater numbers and in more significant roles than is generally acknowledged. It is unlikely that during the entire battle presented in the 1951 film The Red Badge of Courage (Huston, 1951) the soldiers would not have encountered at least one of the thousands of camp followers and nurses that accompanied both armies. These women marched and camped with the soldiers, staying on or near the battlefield to provide assistance when battles broke out. Many of these women were caught in the cross fire while aiding fallen soldiers on the battlefield, bandaging their wounds, giving them water, or sheltering them from harm. Despite restrictions concerning female soldiers, hundreds served disguised as men, worked as spies, or carried out the dangerous work of the artillery service, cannoneers or cavalry directly on the battlefield (Hall, 1994). The fact that none of these women are even mentioned in Red Badge of Courage suggests that, despite evidence to the contrary, both the author Stephen Crane and film makers perceived the American Civil War as a time when “boys became men.” If the criteria for becoming a man rests upon performing heroic acts and showing courage in the face of adversity then including females braving similar conditions complicates matters. It is far easier to leave women out and treat them as subordinate if they are even mentioned. One of the very few statements made about women during the film takes place when soldiers are proudly displaying their “badges of courage” (war wounds) and discussing how well their regiment performed in battle. Suddenly, a soldier shouts out, "A dog, a woman, an' a walnut tree Th' more yeh beat 'em, th' better they be!”

Devaluation of women in war films and novels

7 The devaluation of women has long been used as a tactic to glorify the masculine and force men to fight. This method is reflected in virtually every war related film or novel. In Paths of Glory (Kubrick, 1957), General Mireau raucously declares, “If a man’s a ninny, let him put on a dress and hide under the bed.” This statement, suggesting that men who refuse to fight are like weak, fearful women, was clearly made in order to shame the French soldiers into fighting the Germans. American soldiers fighting in Vietnam chide one another in Oliver Stone’s Platoon (Stone, 1986) during battle with degrading terms like “fucking pussy,” implying that a “real man” would stay and fight. The military does not limit itself to using this devaluation technique only in times of battle but, as Anthony Swofford shows in his novel Jarhead (Swofford, 2003), it is also a popular technique for training soldiers. Swofford recalls a disturbing scene between his training sergeant and a new recruit which encompasses several expressions of female degradation:

He yelled to a recruit, “I can’t believe my fucking eyes! Did you piss your trousers, boy? Did you piss your trousers like a little girl?” “Sir, no, sir!” “You had an orgasm, is that it? You think I’m so sexy you jazzed in your trousers? Where are you from, boy?” “Sir, Olympia, Washington, sir.” “Fuck me standing! My mother lives in Olympia. She don’t piss her pants. Where’d you learn to piss your pants, boy? From your mama?” “Sir, the recruit’s mother is dead, sir.” “One less bitch I got to worry about calling her senator because her cunt son can’t handle my Marine Corps! (Swofford, 2003)

The devaluing of the feminine also involves objectifying women which is perhaps why “women as whores” seems to be as popular as the caregiver role most often assigned to women in war films and novels. Virtually every female character in both the novel and film Catch – 22 (Nichols, 1970) is a professional prostitute or promiscuous. It is widely acknowledged that prostitution and soldiers tend to go “hand in hand” as brothels and red light districts surround military bases, prostitutes servicing soldiers are often required by militaries to provide proof that they are STD free (sexually transmitted disease), and

8 American military recruiters entice potential soldiers with stories of cheap prostitutes all over Asia (Swofford, 2003). However, novels and films like Catch – 22 emphasize the importance of prostitutes during times of war at the expense of ignoring the many valuable contributions that women make to the overall war effort whether it be as a soldier, nurse, reporter or volunteer. They also portray these women as being morally deficient without examining the reasons behind their profession or behavior.

Xala paints a slightly different picture of prostitutes and ‘whores” than those found in American war films and novels. Rather than objectifying these women as pure entertainment for the soldiers, Ousmane humanizes these women by alluding to the motives behind their behavior. The daughter of Habji, the novel and film’s protagonist, claims that her father’s third wife is “nothing but a whore.” Her mother, Habji’s first wife, reprimands her daughter and explains that that the young third wife is “nothing but a victim” of a system that they did not design (Sembene, 1975). Along those same lines, Kenyan writer, Ngugi wa Thiong'o, explores the reasons behind the increase of prostitution in Africa. His novel, “The Devil’s Feast,” set in post-colonial Kenya, suggests structural violence takes many shapes and forms and that tourism in Africa promotes prostitution due to the disparity between a typically white, “western,” male tourist and the impoverished Kenyan woman (Tsabedze, 1994).

Over and over again, women are objectified and treated as sex objects in war films. Women are shown as scantily dressed bar girls and “entertainers” in Das Boot (Petersen, 1981) and Playboy Bunnies entertaining the troops and trading sex for fuel in the middle of the Vietnam jungle in Apocalypse Now. The fact that women are shown in this manner is not completely disturbing as these depictions are based on reality. However, what is disconcerting is the fact that the “whore” role dominates these films and women that do not fall in this category are hardly mentioned, let alone serve as main characters. Even in films that allow for more in-depth females, the problem of objectification remains. The two main female characters in From Here To Eternity (Zinnemann, 1953) are a “recreation club girl” that acknowledges her status as such as “about two steps up from the pavement” and the nymphomaniac wife of the base commander who is widely known to “play around” with her

9 husband’s soldiers. These two images do not fill one with a great respect for women during war when contrasted with the heroic actions of soldiers defending America during the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Glaringly absent are the many nurses and female soldiers and civilian volunteers serving during this time. Even when nurses are referenced in war films, it is often on the basis of sex rather than their professional ability and dedication to country and troops. A prime example of this occurs in Platoon when a soldier waiting to be medically evacuated tells his badly injured companion that there will be “nurses and blow jobs” at the hospital. In “Devil on the Cross,” Ngugi depicts a similar situation occurring in post-colonial Kenya in which women are more or less “reduced to sex toys” for their bosses as a condition for gaining employment (Tsabedze, 1994).

Along those same lines, women are either used or representative of alliances formed between countries or groups both historically and in war films. The only females shown in Shakespeare’s Henry V (Branagh, 1989), are Queen Isabella and her daughter Katherine whose sole purpose is to marry King Henry whether she wants to or not in order to establish peace between England and France. Although the relationship between Vin and Carol in Mrs. Miniver is one based on love and choice, it also serves to form a bridge between social classes and represents the unity of the British people during times of war. In Malian writer Yambo Ouologuem’s Bound To Violence (Ouloguem, 1968), two slaves are allowed to marry simply because of the benefits that their union will incur to their owner including additional slaves (children), placating the slave community, and his (the owner’s) “right” to sleep with the bride on her wedding night.

However, the ultimate objectification of women in war films and novels are acts of rape and female genital mutilation (FGM). It is well-known that incidents of rape during wartime dramatically increase and the American military’s tolerance, if not support, of prostitution during the Vietnam war was an attempt to reduce incidents such as portrayed in Platoon when the protagonist saves two young Vietnamese girls from being gang-raped by members of his platoon. One of the most disturbing rape scenes in a war film takes place in Two Women (Sica, 1960) when a 13-year old Italian girl and her mother are gang-raped by allied

10 Moroccan soldiers in a bombed out church. Consistent with the “loss of innocence” theme in many war films, the rape of the little girl illustrates the often hidden costs of war and the diversity of its victims. Ngugi’s 1989 novel Matigari expands upon this to show that although an armed struggle or revolution may have come to an end, the sexual abuse and exploitation of women continues (Tsabedze, 1994). For women, there are many war zones. An increasing number of African novelists and film makers are bringing the previously taboo topic of FGM out into the open. Ouologuem describes an act of FGM carried out on a female adult slave before her wedding night in Bound To Violence. The description of this act suggests that Ouologuem not only disapproves of the practice but also finds it to be senseless. Women are treated as sexual objects throughout the world but unlike Platoon and various other western war films, when African novelists and filmmakers depict women as sex objects, for many, it is a form of criticism, not veneration of the machismo.

Women of the revolution and status in post-independence societies

Although men and women are both depicted as being victims of war, there are very few war films that show women in combat roles and those that do often paint them in a negative light. For example, Captain Kilgore of Apocalypse Now calls two Vietnamese women “fucking savages” and “dink bitches” after they use a grenade to blow up an American helicopter when their village came under attack. An exception to this general rule is Gillo Pontecorvo’s 1965 The Battle of Algiers (Pontecorvo, 1965) which is famous for a scene in which three Algerian women hide bombs in bread baskets in order to carry out attacks on French civilian targets – a restaurant, juke joint and airport. These women are portrayed as mentally strong and fully capable of any task assigned to them by the National Liberation Front (NLF) in the name of independence. Despite the acknowledgement of the role that Vietnamese and Algerian women played during these wars, the films are concerned with the battle at hand and so neglect to show that the second-class status of these women did not change as the result of their participation once the war was over. The 1996 Zimbabwean film Flame (Sinclair, 1996) is one of the few to tell the story of women combatants both during the struggle for independence and post-revolution. Although Flame faced harsh criticism from

11 sections of the War Veterans Association for being inaccurate, it is based on accounts of women who joined the liberation movement. Ingrid Sinclair, the film’s director, claims that “not long ago women were fighting, commanding men and other women: carrying dangerous war materials on their heads across wild bush filled with mines – and no-one wants to know.” According to Sinclair, he made this film as a tribute to their bravery during the struggle and acknowledgement of the “isolation and disregard and suppression” that followed. (Zimmedia) Despite the portrayal of these women as strong and courageous fighters, 15-year old Florence joins the revolution after falling in love with “Comrade Danger” and decides to excel at military training in order to earn Danger’s praise and fight along side him. As the film progresses, the love that Flame has for Danger becomes second to the rage that she feels at the death of her father and son which leads to her promotion to the position of commander. Unlike The Battle for Algiers, the story in Flame continues into post-independence and shows that, despite their participation in the revolution and promises made by its leaders, the status of Zimbabwean women did not change. (Zimmedia, 2000) This film depicts a trend within revolutionary movements throughout the world which rely on the support of women to achieve their objectives but fail to address “the woman question” once the war has been won.

Although the 1992 Sarafina! (Roodt, 1992) is not classified as a “war film,” it can be argued that the story of a young female student caught up in the struggle for freedom in South Africa just before the release of Nelson Mandela and the end of apartheid, is just that – albeit unconventional. Sarafina! depicts the numerous violent confrontations between students and police that took place as part of the larger armed struggle and resulted in the imprisonment and torture of thousands of school children. Sarafinia faces an inner-conflict throughout this film with competing desires of remaining non-violent but also wanting to take part in the struggle. Initially she feels that, as a female, she can not join her male classmates in the struggle and asks, “what can I do?” At one point she tells Sabela, a black police chief guilty of using unnecessary violence and torture against the children, that if she “were a man” she’d kill him. Despite her female status, near the end of the film she joins the mob of students in the murder of Sabela, claiming that, “…they stopped treating us like

12 humans and we have to take a stand somewhere.” While in prison, she prays to Nelson Mandela to make her “numb” so that she can hate and is capable of killing without feeling remorse. She is more or less asking for the ability to dehumanize the “enemy,” a “skill” that many male soldiers seem to possess– at least while engaged in combat – and is reflected in virtually every war film. As acknowledged by Ngugi in Matigari, it is this ability to dehumanize or living in dehumanizing conditions that creates and perpetuates a viciousness that often leads to violence and, perhaps, armed conflict (Tsabedze, 1994).

Women as Peacemakers

While combat films dehumanize the enemy and promote an “us vs. them” or “good vs. evil” dichotomy, the South African post-conflict films seek to humanize the “other” and focus on the connection that we all share through the African philosophy of “ubunto” (African Justice – interconnectedness, honesty and forgiveness). In My Country (Boorman, 2004), a post apartheid film based on the South African poet and broadcaster Antjie Krog’s memoir, Country of My Skull (2004), is categorized as a “drama,” but deals with the aftermath of war and the need for reconciliation in order to leave the atrocities of the apartheid in the past and build a new, unified society. There are very few Western films that deal with post- conflict situations and it is for this reason that films like In My Country and another Truth and Reconciliation Commission-focused film, Red Dust (Hooper, 2004) are important to include if film and novels are to teach us anything about addressing the horrors of war and breaking the cycle of violence. The Afrikaner character of Anna Malan, who represents Krog, has been raised in a world of South African privilege and conservatism but is an outspoken liberal in her family who truly believes in the tradition of ubunto, the basis of the TRCs. However, despite Anna’s open support of ubunto, she has failed to be honest with herself concerning her own role in the apartheid on the basis of complicity and willful ignorance of the atrocities that were carried out. It is only once she confronts this truth that she is able to understand the principles behind ubunto and its potential for promoting reconciliation and peace in war-torn communities. Throughout the film she struggles to hold onto her belief in the power of ubunto as she listens to one horror story after another at the South African

13 TRC. In an attempt to explain the atmosphere, process, and difficulties of the TRC to her radio audience she maintains that, “truth has become a woman. Everyone recognizes her yet no one knows her.” This statement fits with the gendered concepts of masculinity and femininity as war is considered to be a “man’s world” while reconciliation is considered the domain of the woman. Based on feminine stereotypes and beliefs in the supposed “peaceful nature” of women, females have long been seen as the peace builders in any given conflict (Yesufu, 2000).

Red Dust, a feature made mostly by South Africans, is an adaptation of a novel of the same name written by Gillian Slovo. Red Dust the novel helps Slovo confront her own apartheid demons including the anger and grief she experienced when she interviewed the man responsible for her radical anti-apartheid mother’s assassination (Patten, 2006). The main female character of the film, Sara Barcant, is portrayed as a strong, outspoken, successful Afrikaner lawyer who has been living in New York. As the film progresses , it becomes clear that Sara chose to leave South Africa rather than deal with the “truth” of her emotions and her experience as a teenage girl being thrown into prison as punishment for dating a black man. Despite the “Hollywood” style of these films (In my Country includes a romance between the two main characters, both of whom are married and Red Dust places quite a focus on the mystery surrounding the torture and disappearance of one man), they both explain the philosophy behind umbunto and the methodology of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. It is for these reasons that these films have the potential to serve as a valuable tool in educating the public in alternative models of “justice” that focus more on reconciliation than on the western tradition of vengeance.

Women have long been depicted as the “weaker” of the sexes in war-films and novels whose main purpose during armed conflict is to “stand by her man” and support the war effort from the home-front or carry out the orders of the male revolutionary leaders without asking questions concerning their own status and rights. This stereotype ignores the fact that women are adversely affected by war whether they serve in the front lines of combat or remain at home to run the household and earn a living. Post-conflict films and novels seem to provide a more accurate picture of the challenges and horrors faced by women as both

14 soldiers and civilians by allowing for the “truth” to emerge. However, until all war-related films and novels, whether they are concerned with combat or post-combat situations, acknowledge the true roles played by men and women, they will simply serve to reinforce stereotypes and concepts of masculinity and femininity that are used to glorify the masculine (war) and devalue the feminine (peace). If, as former marine and Gulf War Veteran Anthony Swofford believes, both anti-war and pro-war combat films are like pornography for the “military man” – pumping him up and getting him ready for war (Swofford, 2003); then perhaps post-war films focusing on rehabilitation and reconciliation, supposedly the domain of the feminine, can serve an inspiration for peace workers – filling him or her with a sense of hope for the future despite the war-filled past from which they originate.

15 Bibliography

Apocalypse Now. Dir. Francis Ford Coppola. Perf. Marlon Brando, Martin Sheen, Robert Duvall. Screen play by John Milius and Francis Ford Coppola. Prod. Francis Ford Coppola. Zoetrope Studios 1979. Dvd. Cited in text as Coppola.

Battle of Algiers, The. Dir. Gillo Pontecorvo. Perf. Brahim Hadjadj, Jean Martin, Yacef Saadi, Ugo Paletti. Screen play by Gillo Pontecorvo and Franco Solinas. Prod. Antonio Musu and Yacef Saadi. Casbah Film and Igor Film 1965. Dvd. Cited in text as Pontecorvo.

Battle of Britain. Dir. Guy Hamilton. Perf. Harry Andrews, Michael Caine, Trevor Howard, Curd Jurgens, Susannah York. Screen play by Wilfred Greatorex and James Kennaway. Prod. S. Benjamin Fisz and Harry Saltzman. Spitfire 1969. Dvd. Cited in text as Hamilton.

Best Years of Our Lives, The. By MacKinlay Kantor. Dir. William Wyler. Perf. Myrna Loy, Fredric March, Dana Anderews, Teresa Wright, Virginia Mayo, Cathy O’Donnell. Screen play by Robert E. Sherwood. Prod. Samuel Goldwyn. Samuel Goldwyn Company 1946. Dvd. Cited in text as Wyler.

Black Hawk Down. By Mark Bowden. Dir. Ridley Scott. Perf. Josh Harnett, Ewan McGregor, Jason Isaacs, Tom Sizemore. Screen play Ken Nolan. Prod. Jerry Bruckheimer. Revolution Studios 2001. Dvd. Cited in text as Scott.

Catch-22. By Joseph Heller. Dir. Mike Nichols. Perf. Alan Arkin, Martin Balsam, Richard Benjamin, Art Garfunkel, Jack Gilford. Screen play by Buck Henry. Prod. John Calley and Martin Ransohoff. Filmways Productions and Paramount Pictures 1970. Dvd. Cited in text as Nichols.

Chandler, Daniel. “Television and Gender Roles.” 2002. http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Modules/TF33120/gendertv.html

Crowther, Bosley. “Mrs. Miniver. Excellent Picture of England at War, Opens at the Music Hall.” The New York Times. June 5t h , 1945. Reel Classics. http://www.reelclassics.com/Movies/Miniver/miniver-article2.htm

Das Boot. By Lothar G. Buchheim. Dir. Wolfgang Petersen. Perf. Jurgen Prochnow, Herbert Gronemeyer, Klaus Wennemann, Hubertus Bengsch. Screen play by Wolfgang Petersen. Prod. Gunter Rohrbach. Bavaria Film, Radiant Film GmbH, SDR and WDR 1981. Dvd. Cited in text as Petersen.

Enloe, Cynthia. Maneuvers: The International Politics of Militarizing Women’s Lives. University of California Press, Berkeley. 2000.

16 Flame. Dir. Ingrid Sinclair. Perf. Marian Kunonga, Ulla Mahaka, Norman Madawo. Screen play by Barbara Jago, Philip Roberts and Ingrid Sinclair. Prod. Simon Bright and Joel Phiri. California Newsreel 1996. Dvd. Cited in text as Sinclair.

Frank, Douglas. “Southern Comfort: Hollywood remakes the War Between the States.” Rutgers Focus. November 2nd, 2001. http://ur.rutgers.edu/focus/article/link/836/

From Here to Eternity. By James Jones. Dir. Fred Zinnemann. Perf. Burt Lancaster, Montogmery Clift, Deborah Kerr, Donna Reed, Frank Sinatra. Screen play by Daniel Taradash. Prod. Buddy Adler. Columbia Pictures Corporation 1953. Dvd. Cited in text as Zinnemann.

Hall, Richard. “Known But To God: Female Soldiers in the Civil War” 1994. http://www.hallrichard.com/civilwomen.htm

Henry V. By William Shakespeare. Dir. Kenneth Branagh. Perf. Derek Jacobi, Kenneth Branagh, Simon Shepherd, James Larkin. Screen play by Kenneth Branagh. Prod. Bruce Sharman. British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) and Renaissance Films 1989. Dvd. Cited in text as Branagh.

Hollander, Nancy Caro, Ph.D. “War is Hell….Pass the Popcorn.” 2002. http://www.medialit.org/reading_room/article246.html

Hungwe, Kedmon Nyasha. “Fifty Years of Film-Making in Zimbabwe.” Department of Education Michigan Technological University. http://www.szs.net/kedmon- hungwe/film-making-in-zimbabwe.html#Agenda. 2003.

Hungwe, Kedmon Nyasha. “Interview with Ben Zulu: Harare, July 6, 2000.” Department of Education Michigan Technological University. http://www.szs.net/kedmon-hungwe/african-movies-and-global-mainstream.html

In My Country. By Antjie Krog. Dir. John Boorman. Perf. Samuel L. Jackson and Juliette Binoche. Screen play by Ann Peacock. Prod. John Boorman, Robert Chartoff, and Kieran Corrigan. Chartoff Productions, Film Afrika Worldwide CC and Film Consortium 2004. Dvd. Cited in text as Boorman.

Kaplan, Laura Duhan. “Woman as Caretaker: An Archetype That Supports Patriarchal Militarism.” Hypatia. Volume: 9. Issue: 2. Publication Year: 1994.

Lord of War. Dir. Andrew Niccol. Perf. Nicolas Cage, Bridget Moynaham, Jaret Leto, Ethan Hawk, Ian Holm. Screenplay by Andrew Niccol. Prod. Lions Gate Films/Entertainment Manufacturing 2005. Dvd. Cited in text as Niccol.

17 Mrs. Miniver. By Jan Struther. Dir. William Wyler. Perf. Greer Garson, Walter Pidgeon, Teresa Wright, Dame May Whitty. Screen play by George Froeschel and James Hamilton. Prod. Sidney Franklin. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) 1942. Dvd. Cited in text as Wyler.

Ouloguem, Yambo. Bound to Violence. Heinemann International, New Hampshire. 1968.

Paths of Glory. By Humphrey Cobb. Dir. Stanley Kubrick. Perf. Kirck Douglas, Ralph Meeker, Adolphe Menjou, George Macready, Wayne Morris. Screen play by Stanley Kubrick. Prod. Kirk Douglas, James B. Harris, Stanley Kubrick. Bryna Productions and Harris-Kubrick Productions 1957. Dvd. Cited in text as Kubrick.

Patten, Eve. “Gillian Slovo.” British Council Arts. 2006. http://www.contemporarywriters.com/authors/?p=auth235

Platoon. Dir. Oliver Stone. Perf. Tom Berenger, Willem Dafoe, Charlie Sheen, Forest Whitaker. Screen play by Oliver Stone. Prod. Arnold Kopelson. Cinema 86 and Hemdale Film Corporation 1986. Dvd. Cited in text as Stone.

Rambo: First Blood. By David Morrell. Dir. Ted Kotcheff. Perf. Sylvester Stallone, Richard Crenna, Brian Dennehy, Bill McKinney. Screen play by Michael Kozoll. Prod. Buzz Feitshans. Anabasis N.V. and Carolco Pictures, Inc. 1982. Dvd. Cited in text as Kotcheff.

Red Badge of Courage, The. By Stephen Crane. Dir. John Huston. Perf. Andy Devine, Robert Easont, Douglas Dick, Audie Murphy. Screen play by Albert Band. Prod. Gottfried Reinhardt. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) 1951. Dvd. Cited in text as Huston.

Red Dust. By Gillian Slovo. Dir. Tom Hooper. Perf. Hilary Swank, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Jamie Bartlett, Ian Roberts. Screen play by Troy Kennedy-Martin. Prod. Ruth Caleb and Anant Singh. British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), Distant Horizon, Videovision Entertainment and Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa 2004. Dvd. Cited in text as Hooper.

Sarafina! By Mbongeni Ngema. Dir. Darrell Roodt. Perf. Leleti Khumalo, Whoopi Goldberg, Miriam Makeba, John Kani. Screen play by William Nicholson. Prod. Anant Singh and David M. Thompson. British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), Distant Horizons and Hollywood Pictures 1992. Dvd. Cited in text as Roodt.

18 Sembene, Ousmane. Xala. Translated by Clive Wake. Lawerence Hill Books, Chicago. 1973.

Swofford, Anthony. Jarhead: A Marine’s chronicle of the Gulf War and other battles. Scribner, New York. 2003.

Tsabedze, Clara. African Independence from Francophone and Anglophone Voices. Peter Lang Publishing, New York. 1994.

Two Women. By Alberto Moravia. Dir. Vittorio De Sica. Perf. Sophia Loren, Jean-Paul Belmondo, Eleonora Brown, Carlo Ninchi. Screen play by Vittorio De Sica and Cesare Zavattini. Prod. Carlo Ponti. Compagnia Cinematografica Champion, Les Films Marceau-Cocinor and Societe Generale de Cinematographie 1960. Dvd. Cited in text as Sica.

Vietnam Women’s Memorial Project. 2006. http://www.vietnamwomensmemorial.org/pages/framesets/setvwmp.html

We Were Soldiers. By Harold G. Moore and Joseph L. Galloway. Dir. Randall Wallace. Perf. Mel Gibson, Madeleine Stowe, Greg Kinnear, Sam Elliott, Chris Klein. Screen play by Randall Wallace. Prod. Bruce Davey, Stephen McEveety and Randall Wallace. Icon Entertainment International, Motion Picture Production GmbH & Co. Erste KG, and Wheelhouse Entertainment 2002. Dvd. Cited in text as Wallace.

Xala. By Ousmane Sembene. Dir. Ousmane Sembene. Perf. Fatim Diagne, Makhouredia Gueye, Thierno Leye. Screen play by Ousmane Sembene. Prod. Paulin Soumanou Vieyra. Films Domireew and Ste. Me. Production du Senegal 1975. Dvd. Cited in text as Sembene.

Yesufu, Adenike. “Women and a Culture of Peace.” International Journal of Humanities and Peace. Volume: 16. Issue: 1. 2000. Page 19.

Zimmedia Online. Harare, Zimbabwe. 2000. www.zimmedia.com/flame/index.html

19