Department of English and American Studies Soldier Archetypes in the Second World War Films 2016

Masaryk University Faculty of Arts

Department of English and American Studies

English Language and Literature

Bc. Monika Křižánková

Soldier Archetypes in The Second World War Films Master’s Diploma Thesis

Supervisor: Jeffrey Alan Smith, M.A., Ph.D.

2016

I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography.

…………………………………………….. Author’s signature

I would like to thank my supervisor, Jeffrey Alan Smith, for his insightful comments, suggestions, and very positive encouragement of my specific field of study. But the greatest and the deepest gratitude is dedicated to my father who introduced me to these Second World War combat films.

Table of Contents

Introduction ...... 5

1 The Second World War Combat Genre ...... 9

2 Archetypal Theory ...... 16

3 Narrative Analysis ...... 19

4 “Group” Soldier Character ...... 21

5 “Leader” Soldier Character ...... 28

6 “Group” Soldier Archetypes ...... 33

6.1. The Knights of the Round Table ...... 34

6.2. The Band of Brothers ...... 40

7 “Leader” Soldier Archetypes ...... 49

7.1 “Father” Archetype ...... 50

7.2 “Cowboy” Archetype ...... 53

7.3 “Christ” Archetype ...... 56

7.4 Shapeshifters ...... 60

8 Idea Hidden Behind Archetypes ...... 64

Works Cited and Used ...... 71

Resumé ...... 79

Résumé ...... 81

Appendices ...... 83

Introduction

“American culture remembers past battles because the collective act of recalling a

national past of violent conflict has proved to be a particularly compelling way of

addressing and negotiating anxieties and desires besetting the current cultural moment”

(Bronfen 111)

The thesis focuses on the soldier characters in the Second World War combat motion pictures from the U.S. film production. A Second World War combat genre appeared in its basic structure immediately in the early 1940s and as a proper genre it was quickly and fully recognized before 1950. However, it was Jeanine Basinger who published complex analysis of that genre in her book The World War II Combat Film:

Anatomy of a Genre. Her research in filmography led to what is now a firmly established definition of the Second World War combat genre with a detailed list of generic requirements. Jeanine Basinger is a primary authority on this genre and other authors draw heavily on her work in their own research into the combat films.

Even though, Basinger´s work constitutes the very basis of the genre knowledge, the book was originally published in 1986 when an interest into war filmmaking was going through a steadily decline. The genre renaissance appeared later in 1998 with

Saving Private Ryan and The Thin Red Line. Basinger completed her original work with few of her essays about Saving Private Ryan, however, she has not written anything substantial about later films such as Band of Brothers or The Flags of Our Fathers.

More contemporary work is presented by Stuart Bender in his book Film Style and the World War II Combat Genre published in 2003. He also builds his research upon the

Basinger´s genre conventions but he goes further and completes her study with a stylistic view of the Second World War combat films. He discusses how style, camera and issues 5

raised in those films contribute to the established genre. Being one of the more recent works than Basinger´s, he includes post-Saving Private Ryan films but he still puts a lot of emphasis on issues introduced in this particular film.

Considering purely studies into soldier characters in films, Jeanine Basinger singled out soldier “types” within a specific group of soldiers that she understands to be a necessary element of the genre conventions. She recognizes in the Second World War combat films these “types” of soldier characters: “the father figure, the hero, the old man and the youth, the comedy relief, the peace lover and the minority representative”

(Basinger 51). As other authors and filmmakers use her study, they assume the “types” without questioning them.

The first study that attempted to describe soldier characters through archetypal theory is focused solely on defining them as hero archetype. In this field, Joseph Campbell in his book The Hero with a Thousand Faces deals with the hero archetype by applying his notion of hero´s journey and introduces a concept of the “descending hero”. Later

Gavin Davie in his thesis The Hero Soldier: Portrayals of Soldiers in War Films considers

Campbell concept of the “descending hero” and applies it onto the Second World War films. He then constitutes a “non-hero” or even an “anti-hero” archetype of soldier characters in the Second World War combat films.

Regarding other studies conducted in the field of the Second World War combat genre, they are mostly embedded in overall studies of filmography. Doherty in his book

Projections Of War: Hollywood, American Culture, And World War II considers a complex relationship of a film industry and the Second World War genre and it focuses on general ideas and themes that these genre films promote, also with a touch upon topical issues of women and black people in these films. Same can be said about Suid´s Guts and

Glory or Dick´s Star-Spangled Screen. All of these books mention soldier characters as

singled out examples, however, their purpose is limited to illustrating a restricted theme of the work. Especially with Saving Private Ryan and some later films, the scholarly discussion is focused on a question of accuracy and violence in them and how they contribute to an overall film´s message. So there is no study that would deal with soldier characters in the Second World War combat films in their complexity and that would define patterns of their representation on the screen.

Therefore, this thesis is trying to introduce and expend archetypes found in the soldier characters in the Second World War combat films. The archetype is a certain collective image. The standards and recurring depiction of the soldier characters is as the

“hero” archetype. Later the “hero” is also described in a dichotomous connection with a

“coward” figure. However, this work is set to identify other archetypes in the soldier characters´ representation on the screen. Moreover, the soldier character´s understanding here is not limited on individuals but it includes group of soldiers who constitute a certain close unit.

Therefore, the thesis deals with two kinds of characters. Firstly, it presents a

“group” soldier character as the meticulously composed male unit and secondly, there is a “leader” soldier character standing for individuals.

The first section of the thesis is devoted to already well-established theories used throughout this piece of work. First of all, the scope of American war films is restricted to the Second World War combat genre films. First chapter defines the genre and its conventions. Moreover, it explains the particular selection of films for this thesis. It also briefly mentions why some films fulfilling the genre conventions are excluded from the analysis.

The second chapter presents theory of archetypes as it was established by Carl

G. Jung. The next chapter deals with narrative analysis, a method which is used for the actual analysis of the films and their characters.

The main section is devoted to the actual analysis of the soldier characters. The first part introduces and defines the “group” soldier character and the “leader” soldier character. The second part is devoted solely to the “group”. It identifies the “group” soldier archetypes and their evolution and change through these various combat films.

The “group” characters appearing in the 1940s and 1950s combat films are defined as

“knights of the round table” archetype. Then 1990s films follow with them developing and establishing an archetype of their own, “band of brothers” archetype. The third part of the main section deals with the “leader” soldier archetype with its identification and evolution as well. These “leader” characters are defined through “the father”, “the cowboy” and “the Christ” archetype.

The final chapter is focused on an overall evolution of the soldier characters and their respective archetypes and how these changes translate into the entire representation of the Second World War on the screen.

1 The Second World War Combat Genre

“Peering into the animal memory of mankind,

Carl Jung saw myth as the history we already know.

Genre is the movie we´ve already seen”

(Doherty 86)

This chapter describes the Second World War combat genre as it was recognized in 1940s and later defined by Jeanine Basinger. The combat genre is defined through its conventional elements. These are diverse group, its military objective and its inner conflict resolved through combat experience. This part also presents the selection of particular films used in this thesis for the analysis of soldier characters. Subsequently, it explains reasons for this precise selection. Afterwards, it briefly mentions some films that fit the combat genre convention but they are excluded from this analysis due to their specific reasons.

It has to be noted that the thesis includes two Second World War combat TV series,

Band of Brothers and The Pacific. Despite the difference in a format, they are of the combat genre. They are very representative of contemporary tendencies in the genre and thus very important for the outcome of this analysis. For the smoothness of the thesis when referring to the Second World War combat films selected for the analysis these two series are included under that reference.

The Second World War combat genre is basically defined as a film containing “the hero, the group of mixed ethnic types who come from all over the United States, the objective they must accomplish, their little mascot, their mail call, their weapons and uniforms” (Basinger 15). This basic structure was established already in first combat films in the early 1940s such as Bataan and Wake Island. 9

A basic storyline is formed by “a group of men, led by a hero, that undertakes a mission which will accomplish an important military objective” (Basinger 68). The “group” is always present and to this day it keeps its same colorful composition, here the stress is put on the word “same”. Primarily, the Basinger´s definition and description of the

“group” suggests striving of the filmmakers to present the most diverse company.

However, in a long run the diversity has become quite stable. Therefore, the position in the “group” is permanently occupied by an Italian, soldier of some German origin, someone from the South as well as definitely someone from Brooklyn. There is also the oldest soldier mostly called Popeye having its counterpart in the youngest and the least experienced. The perfect example of a motley assortment “group” is Bataan which even stressed these differences by an order in which these characters die. The further and more detailed description of the “group” will be discussed in Chapter 4.

Moreover, it is typical for the “group” character that “conflict breaks out within the group itself and it is resolved through the external conflict brought down upon them”

(Basinger 69). The external conflict encompasses war itself and its respective combat situations. The conflict and its later resolution provides opportunities for the “group´s” collective evolution. These conflicts can range from single petty clashes of individuals through general dislike towards replacements to disagreeing about the whole purpose of the war itself. These inner conflicts can be between a CO, commanding officer, and its company as well as amongst men of the company themselves. There is also a third variation of the conflict between the CO and his superior officers. The 1940s combat films portrayed a clearly defined conflict between the CO and the company as in Sands of Iwo Jima where Serg. Stryker is constantly questioned and challenged by his men.

Later films show the conflict between the CO and his own superiors which constitutes the main theme in Attack where superior officers lead men to their death and ordinary COs

try to protect them. The combat film renaissance brought more of a conflict triangle and more complex situations than bilateral conflicts with it. In the 1990s, the conflict and its resolution are reflected in the episodic format of the film, as it will be discussed later as well as in other chapters. Thus the evolution of the characters through conflict has become more prominent.

As it was mentioned, a military objective is a necessary factor. In Bataan the group is ordered to hold a bridge or in Saving Private Ryan their mission is to find one soldier in the whole war. It should be also noted that the genre does not require the mission to be successful. Moreover, surviving and dying is not inherently connected to the genre, even though, it is implied by historical facts. Factors of “surviving” and “dying” are connected purely to the nature of the soldier character and they are significant when considering their archetypes. However, the journey towards it is episodic. There are episodes of fighting or as it is also called direct combat experience as well as periods of “rest”. Both are important for the plot but mostly for the development of the characters. Beach Red restricted the “rest” time to bare minimum and as a result the soldier characters are without evolvement and it is very difficult to assign them specific individual features or recognize any particular and considerable impact of the combat on them. On the other hand, Saving Private Ryan is very meticulous in one to one combat and “rest” ratio. The combat experience forms and defines the soldier characters. However, “rest” period shows to the audience how the soldier character is formed and what kind of impact the experience has had. The combat experience and the “rest” period have been lately also translated onto the whole war experience. Since Saving Private Ryan the war and the post-war periods have become two episodes themselves as well. Therefore, the war time is balanced by the importance of the aftermath, especially mental impact, memories of previous combat and soldier´s homecoming such as flashes of combat memories as in

Flags of Our Fathers and a whole episode devoted to various troubled returns in The

Pacific.

Establishing the genre as one criterion for the selection of films, the scope within the

Second World War combat genre is further limited to films portraying only infantry companies. Other branches of the genre such as navy and air force are excluded. Even though, basic generic characteristics apply to all these three branches they each possess some unique factors which differently influence their respective soldier characters.

Therefore, infantry combat film is “the truest and purest combat format” (Basinger 20).

Possible retreat from a skirmish back to a safe and close to home position constitutes the most prominent difference. The infantry combat situation lacks that possibility because

“on land, men occupy foxholes or tents, which are purely combat spaces” (Basinger 20).

Moreover, these particular spaces imply soldier characters´ constant ambiguous position between life and death because foxholes are not simply spaces to spend a night in or take cover from fire but they are also shown, sometimes very explicitly, as soldier´s graves.

So this implies the cliché of already having one foot in a grave. In Bataan the last remaining soldier makes his last stand in his own grave already marked with his name and in The Pacific foxholes are dug in places that are already graves of soldiers who have died there. This lasting feeling of uncertainty is an elementary feature to the infantry soldier character which navy and air force do not possess. The Great Escape expresses this idea very accurately by saying “the war is a policy” meaning that everything done to the smallest detail is influenced by the presence of the war. Therefore, the infantry soldier characters are in a constant state of war by being “in the midst of the war from both nature and the enemy” (Basinger 20).

The thesis ads to the combat genre selection also the Second World War films portraying prisoners of war (“POW”) camps. As it was mentioned above, one of the

crucial features of any soldier character is some combat experience. Here the combat experience is presumed, by the soldiers being captured after a battle. These POW films show mostly the “rest” period and so they are character-driven films and thus a great ground for a deep character study. The POW films most of all provide “leader” characters and their conflicts with other men, their inferior as well as their peers. Due to an unclosed camp environment, the “leader” character is clearly constructed and not influenced by any other superior officer.

The selection within the group of the Second World War films further excludes films that present additional features to the convention where these factors become very prominent and also do not constitute simple variations of the convention. These extra features use the genre as a basis for very individualistic purpose. As a result, these films would distort analysis with their specific view. One of the excluded films is Miracle at

St. Anne which follows a unit composed only with black soldiers. The portrayal is solely focused on a racial issue of the characters and also these characters are constructed within stereotype of general black characters. Also Guns of Navarone is excluded. Even though, it shows a group with a clear objective set during the war, the format relates too much to a secret spying mission. The soldier characters here are cut from the “real” combat experience within a large scope of war events. This is also suggested by them not wearing uniforms. Lastly, the films that portray a group but with a specific stress on their camp training period and state-side events are also not included. They contain only a very short combat sequence at the very end of the film that mostly becomes a sort of a side note do the main drama happening back home. These are for example Back to Bataan and From

Hell to Eternity.

The selection of films for the analysis is limited to the Second World War combat genre. Films analyzed in the thesis are those that in their basic structure include the

infantry “group” of soldiers with its “leader” character having been ordered a specific military objective and them trying to accomplish it under the constant presence of war conditions where the combat provides a resolution to their conflict. Moreover, the POW

Second World War films are included due to their well-crafted character development of the “leader” as opposed to the “group”.

List of the Second World War American combat films and series included into the analysis:

1942 Wake Island

1943 Bataan

1943 Guadalcanal Diary

1943 Gung Ho

1945 A Walk in the Sun

1945 Objective, Burma!

1949 Sands of Iwo Jima

1949 Battleground

1950 Halls of Montezuma

1955 To Hell and Back

1956 Attack

1962 The Longest Day

1965 Battle of the Bulge

1967 Beach Red

1969 The Bridge at Remagen

1970 Kelly´s Heroes

1977 A Bridge Too Far

1980 The Big Red One

1998 Saving Private Ryan

1998 The Thin Red Line

2001 Band of Brothers

2002 Windtalkers

2006 Flags of Our Fathers

2010 The Pacific

2016 Hacksaw Ridge

List of the Second World War POW films:

1953 Stalag 17

1957 The Bridge Over the River Kwai

1963 The Great Escape

2002 Hart´s War

2005 The Great Raid

2014 Unbroken

2 Archetypal Theory

“Formulas satisfy a need for comfort and reassurance;

archetypes are the very essence of art”

(Allen 111)

This chapter is focused on the concept of the archetype and its respective theory as it was introduced by Carl G. Jung. It also deals with the “hero” archetype which has been the only archetype so far assigned to the soldier characters.

“Art is a reflection of underlying structures of meaning, that it satisfies certain subconscious needs in both the artist and the audience” (Gianetti 362). The tendency of both these groups is to find something, a pattern, to which they have been introduced before. The word archetype can be translated literally as an original pattern. Jung believed that “the artist consciously or unconsciously draws on these archetypes as raw material, which must then be rendered into the generic forms favored by a given culture” (Gianetti

365). Jung defined the archetypes as fundamental human motifs portraying collective experiences. These motifs belong to collective unconscious.

This notion is the idea behind the shift between different archetypes within similar characters. Applying this onto soldier characters, their nature is portrayed through various archetypes in order to provide the audience with different interpretations within patterns that the audience is familiar with. By this very process, the filmmaker in these cases provides the audience with a certain pre-recognition: “in this way we can begin to approach some kind of sense of what lie beyond or behind story itself” (McConell 7).

This pre-recognition is possible through symbols that points to a familiar pattern behind the interpretation. Jung defines these symbols as “having the power to widen the field of the individual´s consciousness” (126) because they only “reflect the collective 16

experiences that humans had had in their evolutionary past” (74). Pfeifer further defines the archetype as “form without any content where we are the ones who fill it in” (39).

Here considering the format of the primary sources of this thesis analysis, the film

“effectively assists in discovering the material world with its psychophysical correspondences to redeem the world from its dormant itself” (Fredericksen 56). Also

Kabiling in her work based on her study of Saving Private Ryan explicitly points to

“Spielberg´s remarkable ability to ignite the collective memory” and to a fact that “it is collective memory that Spielberg relies on in the film´s first twenty-five minutes of war”

(25).

Jung also describes the archetype as “an unconscious content that is altered by becoming conscious and by being perceived” (5). And the unconscious content does not represent only one archetype. The content is filled with endless archetypal patterns, “there are as many archetypes as there are typical situations in life” (48).

As it has been briefly mentioned in the introduction, the soldier characters have been so far interpreted through “hero” archetype. Already Basinger pointed to a fact that “the implication is that members of this group, no matter what their varying skills and experiences, are equal heroes in the action” (25). It implies that all soldier characters can be designated as “heroes”. Also Jung says that the “myth of the hero is the most common and well known myth in the world” (101). However, it is later that Joseph Campbell includes soldier characters into his study of “hero” archetype. He defines the “hero” as someone who “has usually done something that goes beyond the normal range of human achievements and experience, someone who has given their life to something beyond the self” (28). However, he points out that despite these extraordinary achievements the

“hero” is still an ordinary human being, especially in nowadays interpretations of the

“hero”. As it will be discussed later, this applies to Capt. Miller in Saving Private Ryan with a combination of his heroic actions and his shaking hand.

Davie in his thesis goes even further by creating a counterpart archetype to the “hero”,

“anti-hero” or “non-hero”. He says that “the hero soldier has become more flawed over time descending from invincible demi-god to a fallible human” (Davie 5). By creating two contrasts, he then merges them in one which comprises the elements of both. Their combination should then result in a creation of a modern “hero”, someone who is capable of extraordinary action but still being of a very normal background and features. This is his concept of the “descending hero”.

3 Narrative Analysis

“The recurrence of a plot type and familiar plot situations

may well indicate the activation of archetypes.”

(Izod 49)

This chapter focuses on defining narrative analysis as a methodological approach to examine primary sources, the Second World War combat films.

Narrative analysis is characterized as the “analysis of a chronologically told story, with a focus on how elements are sequenced and why some elements are evaluated differently from others” (Garson 25). A narrative can assume different formats but “the fundamental processes and phenomena connected with narrative operate identically or similarly across literary and performative media” (Smith 2). The thesis subsumes films into the narrative category.

Riesmann says that “nature and the world do not tell stories, individuals do.

Interpretation is inevitable because narratives are representations” (2). Films can be understood as a certain kind of narrative. In this thesis, the films are analyzed from the point of view of the filmmakers as well as the audience. As it was mentioned in the previous chapter, the archetypal forms are filled by specific unconscious patterns of the filmmaker and then their representation is again interpreted through patterns of the audience itself: “the term narrative as method implies a general approach that views the individual within their social environments as actively conferring meaning onto objects in the world, including others and selves” (Bamberg 8). Izod therefore says that “it is the archetypal image that are observable in a study of screen narratives” (47).

Also narrative itself can be defined as follows: “When narrators tell a story, they give

‘narrative form’ to experience” (Bamberg 3). This dualism creates the needed division for the analysis of archetypes in the Second World War combat films. They maintain the consistency of a certain common experience which is the war. However, the form or otherwise their interpretation undergoes changes through time and through variety of society´s state of mind.

So here “studying narratives is additionally useful for what they reveal about social life

– culture speak itself through an individual´s story” (Riessman 5). Because these interpretations draw from established patterns, the archetypes.

The thesis also uses a great number of combat films in the narrative analysis to achieve definition of general tendencies within them. Therefore, it is not possible to provide precise analysis and detailed description of each of these films. Striving for a general pattern in them, the arguments are supported by a certain explicit scene or a character that in the best possible way represents or summarizes features also appearing in the other films.

4 “Group” Soldier Character

“In the fight you can trust yourself and the person next to you”

Band of Brothers, Currahee

This chapter is devoted to the “group” soldier character. The aim here is to define this phenomenon still appearing in the Second World War combat films. Firstly, the “group” character is described as a unit and later as a collection of typified individuals. It also mentions concept of “citizen” soldier and individuality that initially led to the “group´s” creation in the 1940s. Later, the chapter points to geographical, ethnic and religious categories and roles that a single soldier character assumes. This particular analysis uses mainly Bataan, Saving Private Ryan and Hacksaw Ridge due to their boarder positions in this character´s evolution. Bataan is the initial combat genre film from 1940s which establishes the “group”. Saving Private Ryan represents the genre renaissance and

Hacksaw Ridge is the last combat genre film produced to this date. Also decline in the use of the “group” on the screen from 1960s to 1990s will be mentioned.

“The combat film had always focused on the collective activities of a combat unit”

(Thanouli 18) which naturally and logically followed military structure. The unit mostly represents a certain military company or its specific platoon which consists of those who fight together as, for example, the most famous Easy company in Band of Brothers. This work uses the term “company” to reference a certain fellowship of men/soldiers not in a sense of military structure.

The portrayed company expresses a restricted focus that was needed to differentiate combat films from documentaries Thus, this restricted focus was necessary because panoramic scenes of large military bodies were traditionally used by war documentaries.

The documentary was introducing to the public facts about the war, basically when, where 21

and what happened. The combat films in the 1940s are designed to create the events of the war on the screen labelled with their original names and destinations to gain a certain credibility, however, in a manner that would have produce a requested interpretation of the events. So their primary purpose was to convey specific ideas and values to the audience. These messages are passed through utterances of heroic soldier characters in them who were icons of that war era.

Moreover, the tendency during the Second World War was to convince the public that military life was not that different from the civilian one. Therefore, the ideas that were to be spread were put into mouths of soldier characters who have already volunteered to become “citizen” soldiers. The public much more easily responded to this way of imposing ideas and values on them. Surprisingly enough, this precise construct of soldier characters conveying their ideas is still presently maintained only with a different and more personal message to be passed on.

Nowadays still the “group” soldier character as a unit is portrayed by a company.

However, its primary purpose is to show personal relationships developing between diverse individuals. “We see their attitudes toward combat, their relationships to one another. The camera´s final move draws them into a single character” (Basinger 126).

This expresses the idea that despite the presence of various individuals a shared and a common experience can create a very efficient unit working not that much for a higher cause but for each other´s well-being within the “group”.

The “group” is defined as a diverse group. It can be literally described as “an honest portrayal of America´s melting pot” (255). Melting pot firstly suggested that the “group” should be composed of men coming from different ethnic backgrounds. However, this simple key was further complicated by the need to promote “citizen” soldiers. Above all, the public fear of losing all individual traits when enlisting was enlarged by the newsreels

describing especially Nazi soldiers as one universal killing machine. Therefore, “marked by differences in mannerisms, accents, last names, and memories of home, the members of the multiethnic combat unit were in no danger of being reduced to identical automatons similar to the Nazi soldiers” (Alpers 65).

Firstly, the ethnic diversity constitutes the basic variety. Apart from white Americans, there are representatives of Italian, Polish, Latino, Irish, German and French origin. Black soldier characters appear very rarely. Moreover, if they do appear in these genre, their participation and belonging into the “group” is overshadowed by an issue of historical inaccuracy that is being caused by their sole presence. Geographically, a regular soldier character is someone from New York, especially Brooklyn, followed by any kind of

Southerner or Californian. Diversity of religions is not a stable feature. Most of soldier characters are presumed Christians such as Catholics and Protestans, and Jewish. These are the explicitly professed religious beliefs. The opposite category is of those who are obvious atheists. Then the rest of the soldier characters are portrayed also as believers but with a sense of a universal belief in any kind of higher power. Their specific religious groups are not mention or even implied.

Now, the mixture of ethnic, geographical and religious categories is shown on two

“groups”. In Bataan, soldiers from different branches of service volunteer to hold a bridge during a Japanese offensive. The “group” consists of two COs who are Sergeant Bill Dane and Captain Lassiter representing general white Americans without a specific geographical origin, Ramirez who is Latino from California, Matowski of Polish origin,

Feingold representing Jews, Malloy is of Irish origin, and Eeps being Black.

In Saving Private Ryan, after the D-day landing on the beaches some soldiers are selected for a special mission. The “group” consists of Capt. Miller, the general white

American from Pennsylvania, Caparzo of Italian origin, Reiben from Brooklyn, NY,

Jackson from Tennessee and Mellish as a Jew.

Furthermore, these individual soldier characters assume certain specific roles in the

“group”. There is no rigid rule according to which ethnicity or a soldier of specific geographical origin is assigned a role. However, some pattern has appeared for officers, military designated leader of the “group” and for those who create their opposition.

Therefore, mostly COs or leaders in general are white Americans. They are either without specific geographical origin or from states constituting the thirteen original colonies such as Capt. Miller is from Pennsylvania. Also “the hero´s adversary” (Basinger 49) who professes opposing ideas to those of a hero´s in the “group” is mostly a soldier from New

York.

Also, apart from the military leader, the “group” soldier character includes typically a

“hero”. Even though, mostly all the soldiers in the company are later called heroes just because of the service they have done, there is always one character that is the hero of the heroes. This soldier character is expected to do something heroically charged, in most of the films that means dying while protecting others as in Bataan or Saving Private Ryan where the COs are the heroes and they die trying to protect their men. The adversary is simply the company´s cynic who functions as “an important stand-in for audience doubts”

(Basinger 49). Most noticeably it is Reiben in Saving Private Ryan who openly questions the mission as well as Capt. Miller´s decisions. Another soldier who stands in for the experience of the audience is the youngest and unexperienced. These are mostly portrayed as replacements. For example, it is Upham in Saving Private Ryan. He did not go through landing on the beaches at all. Being sent on a mission with Capt. Miller´s company, he slowly learns about the combat reality. As an opposite to the youth comes the old man mostly called Popeye. It is either a veteran from the Great War or just generally more

experienced soldier. He serves as a teacher and protector to the newly arrived soldiers.

On top of that, the role of a hero can be assigned to any of these positions mentioned above, it can be the leader, the youth or else.

It should also be noted that Hacksaw Ridge, as the last combat film released to this date, stays true to this pattern. It presents a story of a very prominent hero, Desmond

Doss, who stays on a battlefield and saves wounded fellow soldiers on Okinawa. The hero here is a hillbilly youth with a strong Catholic faith. His company comprises of Smitty who is more military experienced and skillful. He also serves as a sort of a mentor and a protector to Doss. There are also Kazinski who is Polish and Rinnelli as an Italian representative. Finally, there is Serg. Howell, the leader, who is a white American of an unknown origin.

The “group” soldier character is now a conventional part of any Second World War combat film which contemporary filmmakers are aware of. However, there is no tendency to abandon this complex “group” but to build upon it. This occurs mostly in the practice of nicknames based on individual character´s abilities and actions which is very rarely seen in 1940s films. Also contemporary Native American or gender issues try to somehow get their reflections in the composition of the “group”. First of all, it is Windtalkers that based its story on Navajo soldiers participating in the war effort. Later Flags of Our

Fathers prominently portrayed Ira Hayes, one of the flag raisers on Iwo Jima. But more naturally it is Hacksaw Ridge that being aware of the well-established group setting aims to smuggle these characters into the “group” which is done openly on the screen. It is

Serg. Howell who labels and re-labels his men. To some he gives simple nicknames according to their initial appearance and abilities. However, he considers Kazinski´s looks more suited for being a Native American which is quite noticeable to the audience. So

Serg. Howell calls him “Chief”. Also Milt “Hollywood” Zane is an attempt of a first gay

soldier character in the Second World War combat film, even though, it is not openly mentioned or commented upon anywhere in the film. He considers himself the pretty boy who really cares about his appearance and who is greatly built which he shows to his fellow soldiers by exercising in barracks naked. “Hollywood”, a nickname given to him by his fellow soldiers, can be a very telling hint. Also later Serg. Howell calls him “Private

Parts”.

It should by also noted that the “group” character went through a period of a great decline on the screen. It started with The Longest Day in 1962 which describes many events during one particular day, D-day. This film mellowed down the individuals in the

“group” due to its efforts to portray war in a very epic way. As it was mentioned at the beginning of the chapter, the “group” was created by restriction of the scene to a specific company. However, The Longest Day turned the process and went with the panoramic picture of the war, especially the D-day landing in France.

The decline of the “group” lasted to 1990s, until Saving Private Ryan returned with the complex company. In this period, there are the Second World War combat films that can be very fittingly called “bridges” films meaning specifically The Bridge at Remagen or A Bridge Too Far. The bridge signifies the objective that soldier characters have to reach, protect or destroy. In reality, any bridge was considered by tactical teams as valuable military objective. This idea of tactical value translated itself into the films from

1960s to 1980s. The tactical matter gains the most prominent position in the films. It is shown immediately at the beginning of these films. They do not begin within the “group”, the company of men, but they open with scenes in tactical rooms with generals planning their war on a map. Therefore, the “group” gets the sense of being just a tool for fulfilling orders of remote leaders. Here the leaders in a way fight the war themselves, they are the main protagonists. The “leader” characters will be defined in the next chapter.

So the “group” character is presented as a unit, a company. The inner structure is diverse due criteria of ethnic origin, geographical origin and sometimes religion. The individual characters use certain roles within the “group” which are mostly hero and his adversary, the youth and the old. The concept of the “group” in its core is still being maintained in the combat genre.

5 “Leader” Soldier Character

“A schoolteacher who becomes a warrior of necessity not bloodlust.”

(Doherty 308)

This chapter focuses on identifying “leader” soldier characters in the Second World

War combat films. The aim here is to classify typical characters who are put into a position of a “leader”. Firstly, the “leader” character is defined as a military leader who either belongs to the “group” or can be separated as a very distant and prominent individual. Secondly, the chapter identifies moral or inspirational “leaders” who are positioned within the “group” itself.

As it has been described in previous chapters, the “group” immediately has become a standard part of the combat genre. Therefore, the unit is already determined by the filmmakers themselves on the screen. Then the “leader” is subsequently designed in two various ways according to his relationships towards the “group”. Either he can be a part of the “group” itself or put into a position of a distant individual.

Foremost, of course, the “leaders” are characters of commanding officers and other military leaders of the company. This type of a “leader” is within the multiethnic “group” mostly designed as “a white protestant or sometimes an Irish Catholic” (Haak 14). These types appeared immediately in the 1940s with the “group”. These “leaders” were derived from a pre-war film tradition of drill sergeants in the training camps. During the war then the drill sergeant was expected to prepare and accompany the men into the combat.

Therefore, his role was to provide the “group” with a necessary military training as well as ideals for which they were fighting. The “leader” was supposed to lead by an example in both of these areas. They were there to play a part of authoritative figures. So these

“leaders” provided father figures to these men which will be further discussed in Chapter

The best examples of fatherly “leaders” are serg. Stryker in Sands of Iwo Jima who ruled his men with tough love and his opposite Capt. Staros in The Thin Red Line who is very overprotective of his men directly saying to them “you´ve been like my sons”. While

Stryker is very uncompromising and guides his men with a strict discipline, Staros is very emotional and takes care of them by trying to keep them from a quite dangerous attack.

Naturally, the “leader” as a CO, due to his initial position as a kind of commander of the unit, keeps a certain distance between himself and his men. However, he is still considered a member of the “group”. This structure simulates a structure of a family. A father is a part of the family and at the same time his superior position inherently creates a certain distance.

But considering later films in 1950s to 1970s, the “leader” mostly assumed a very prominent separate position to the “group”. These films tend to begin with the “leaders” discussing a future mission or getting orders to fulfill these. So they are put into the position of those who should accomplish the mission just with a help of their company.

The prime role is played by the “leader”. In A Bridge Too Far a set of “leaders” of different companies where ordered to secure a bridge. Most of them received their order of this daring and dangerous mission as their personal challenge and without hesitation.

They understand themselves as being the only active doers. However, only one of the officers. Maj. Gen. Sosabowski voices a true and dangerous nature of the mission that would put his men in potentially very deadly situations. His remark is disregarded and

Sosabowski is not considered as a desired “leader”. As a result, the beginning of his part of the mission is postponed few times.

This shift from a “leader” within the “group” to a separate “leader” occurred due to an overall change of the format of the combat films. The representation of the war is no longer focused strictly on the “group” which fights individual battles to eventually win the whole just war. But the films of this era show war from the perspective of two equally capable enemy forces, equals in general sense even. So the screen time of the “group” is restricted in order to show the efforts of the opposing sides. The enemy is represented in the same way. Their “group” is restricted to lent more time to its “leader”.

Also in these films, “leader” is officially appointed with the leadership immediately at the beginning of the film. He is mostly introduced to the audience before his own men.

This happens due to the tactical nature of these films. They begin with operational teams and commanders deciding objective and mission and later appointing the “leader” who would just oversee that the objective is accomplished, as it was discussed.

Now the contemporary films have brought another change in the “leader” soldier character. It is no longer clear which character is considered being the “leader” because beside the military leader these films introduce moral or inspirational “leaders”. Of course, it does not mean that military leader cannot be put into the roles of moral or inspirational “leaders”. For example, Capt. Miller is their military “leader” by his highest rank but he is their moral “leader” as well. It happens that the moral or inspirational

“leader” can be found in one particular character or the character undergoes an evolution from one to the other. This shift from the clearly constructed and visible military “leader” has happened by “focusing on a new hero: a regular white Joe easy to identify with, personal sacrifice” (Haak 25).

The difference between the previous military “leader” and the military “leader” who also assumes the function of the moral or inspirational is in the way how they are being appointed into their command. As it says above, the military “leader” is officially

appointed at the beginning when the mission is being thought through. On the contrary, the other “leaders” mostly assume their leadership role already in the midst of an action out of necessity because the former CO died in the initial combat. Here the “leader” is

“made a servant of the situation rather than the person who defined what the situation should be to achieve the desired outcome” (Abramson 116). Thus, the becoming “leader” is put into the position very suddenly and has no time to adjust or device a certain strategy of his leadership. This is very shown in a typical scene where the “leader” to-be asks for orders during a combat and he gets a reply that he is the commanding officer by rank because the previous ones just have been killed. This scene can be seen in Saving Private

Ryan with Capt. Miller or Band of Brothers with Maj. Winters. So the stress here is put on natural abilities of the new “leader” to mostly inspire the men to follow him. Moreover, the “leader” is someone who “doesn´t like the war, but he´s equal to its task” (Basinger

123). Also this is another difference from the previous 1940s military “leaders” who from the beginning of those films fully believed in the war.

Moral or inspirational “leaders” are also those who cannot assume the position of the

CO because of the rank but they are capable to show to other men values that should be maintained even in the midst of the combat. Traditionally, they are in the very center of the “group”. They are put into the category of “leader” due to their ability to inspire others to follow. The most prominent inspirational “leader” is Desmond Doss in Hacksaw Ridge.

His belief and his actions that he does because of this belief resonates with others. Even though, they do not believe as much as he does, they believe in him. Capt. Glover expresses this by saying: “most men don´t believe the same way as you do but they believe so much in how much you believe”.

As a result, this chapter shows an evolution of the “leaders” in the combat genre.

Beginning with military leaders with a father figure function in the 1940s through stand-

alone even more professional commanders to 1990s leaders with natural sense of leadership where soldiers do not have to only follow an order but also a strong inspirational and moral figure.

6 “Group” Soldier Archetypes

This chapter follows the “group” soldier character as it was defined in Chapter 4 and assigns to it two archetypes. In the first part, the archetype of the “Knights of the Round

Table” is assigned to the “group” appearing on screens of 1940s films. In the second part, the “group” in 1990s and later films assume the “band of brothers” archetype. Also this chapter points out some specific instances in the representation of the “group” that brought the shift from the “knights” to the “band of brothers”

The “group” representing the “knights” is based on ideals and values that both are associated with. Because of their similar origin as warriors, they assumed roles of those who steadfastly protect others from pure evil on a battlefield and they are prepared in any moment die in the process. This notion culminates in their last stands. The 1940s “group” represents ideas of voluntarism and sacrifice for the nation. Therefore, they both created a very romantic notion of war and soldiers.

However, the “group” beginning from 1990s is presented as “band of brother” in order to portray interpersonal relationships created through a shared combat experience. It is focused on a bond that is based on a new ideal, protecting each other. Needed elements for the development of this archetype are shared combat experience which also showcases their personal abilities and qualities, mutual responsibility in protecting each other and personal responsibility for their own conduct in the midst of combats. Following these initial features, also loss is another factor which comes later in the development of each

“band of brothers” character and is defined as a consequence for a breach of the “band”.

6.1. The Knights of the Round Table

“Small groups of men fought savagely to the death

because in dying they gave eternal life to the ideas

for which they died.”

Wake Island

Davie in his thesis about heroes in the Second World War films says that the

“heroes do reflect society and the nature of the hero is wrapped in our cultural values and ideas” (12). The 1940s films gave to the audience a “group” of soldiers whose task was to represent and convey the values and ideas of the era. The “group” stopped being a simple bunch of men trying to imitate fights of real battles. On the other hand, it became a meticulously and individually organized fellowship of warriors that represented values of honor, bravery and sacrifice for their country. Coming back to the opening quote: “they gave eternal life to the ideas”. It shows that values and ideas were the prominent elements of the “group´s” representation.

By that characterization, the “group” soldier character resonates with the “Knights of the Round Table” archetype. Moskowitz describes a knight as “the figure that was shaped into a representation of qualities that were already priorities to certain cultural groups”.

McConnell begins his definition of the “knights” as a simple unit which “surrounding the king is a kind of military or paramilitary fellowship of warriors” (110). Translated into the Second World War combat films, it is the company of soldiers. The “knights” are also associated with “Christian values and those of heroism, loyalty and chivalry” (Pfanner 3).

Moreover, McConell goes even further with his description and argues that the

”knights” is not only a collection of individuals based on an military order and a loyalty to the leader or a nation. But their existence and representation is based on fealty. “Loyalty 34

may be pledged to a person, but fealty is sworn to an idea: the idea of the state, of the culture” (110). Therefore, they serve the purpose of an idea. The ideas imposed on the

“group” soldier character in 1940s films were about saving democracy and ideas of a just war. The interpretation of the “group” was constructed to show for what ideals and why the war was being fought. This message is put onto those who were at least representations of real life heroes and veterans.

First of those demanded ideas was a concept of good war. The public had to be explicitly shown the dichotomy of good and evil and that the U.S. soldiers only are the good doers. So what happened in 1940s films is that the “group” soldier character in its primary military understanding resonates the idea of the Round Table which was seen as

“a means of righting wrong and combating evil” (Pfeifer 16). In this sense, the “group”/

“knights are characterized as “representative of the ideal” (35). Pfeifer presents this argument very openly by saying that “the striving for a common good which is so often present in the Arthurian tales, can be seen in some events of recent history” (34).

Therefore, as the “knights” the “group” had two goals to achieve through its representation on the screen. Firstly, it presented the military efforts that are done in order to win the war. Secondly, they had to justify not much to themselves but to the public why the war is fought at all. Their aim was to create a message of the Second World War as “the Good War in the American mind, a just and necessary war” (Mork 1).

Also the idea of the “group” being an interpretation of actual “knight” archetype springs from the overall understanding of the portrayal of this collective character in the

1940s. “WWII films have been surprisingly non-violent, thereby enforcing the romantic view of the war” (15). The “knights” are mostly considered as a romantic notion especially because of the values that they are assigned to convey.

Therefore, as the “knights” are portrayed as “riding out to put down wrongdoers”

(Knight 121), the “group” here has a similar task, they have to stop the enemy, the Nazi

Germany or Japan. Beginning with the “knights”, this idea appeared out of a simple juxtaposition of good and evil which are also uphold by the “group”. So “American propaganda focused on the role of the United States and American soldiers as the depiction of good and the savior of freedom and democracy” (Haak 13).

The war was understood as “an assault on the integrity of the broader social body”

(Slocum 46). This makes the idea and values put into the propaganda more complex. The

Second World War brought not only enemies but also their menacing ideology that had to be opposed. Therefore, the “group” itself became the tool against totalitarian ideas and regimes with its notion of democracy and democratic unity. Only the American melting pot would win the war. This was the one of the reasons for the creation of the diverse

“group”.

Moreover, as it is well known, the “Knights of the Round Table” consists of singled out individuals with particular characteristics. Remembering the composition of the

“group” established in the 1940s, some roles of the soldiers in the unit can be found also amongst the “knights” themselves. Arthur can be put into the role of the COs or any company leader with a non-specific origin. Arthur is described as “stately, always withdrawn from the action, always the servant of higher laws and higher purpose than any of even his own knights can understand” (McConell 16). This resemblance is shown in the films in the characters of the COs who never doubted war and any of its reasons.

They appeared on screen with unwavering confidence of the state of things. Unlike his men who question the reasons for fighting. The character of King Arthur is therefore mostly understood as a “revered leader of men who excelled on the battlefield” (Pfanner

3). Mordred is “the perfect satirist: the mocker, the deformed and weak judge who reveals

by his bitter laughter the failure of the society” (16). He is translated into the combat films as the hero´s adversary who pessimistically judges all his decisions. Also Lancelot,

“always the man like us” (16), functions as the youth and substitutes the voice and the lack of experience in combat of the audience.

The aim here was to promote the best national identity based on unity out of diversity.

The question is how a combat surrounding can possibly show this idea. Wake Island is a perfect example of that kind of film because, even though, it shows mostly combat situations of a company protecting its positions against Japanese shelling, the underlying message shows what is to be an American. Here “national identity is defined in absence

… what American soldiers fight for is the exact opposite of the situation the soldiers currently face” (Allison 148).

Due to the fact that values of democracy received a prominent position in the representation of the “group” in the films, they implicitly acquired a specific format, the last stand format. The choice is made to strongly present the promoted ideals and the honor of mostly dying for the country, the “pride in the gallantry of the American soldiers as they faced certain death” (Suid 69). So famously Bataan gets together thirteen soldiers, who have not met each other before, just for a one heroic stand, protecting bridge against

Japanese soldiers. Wake Island again makes a company to protect an island as a one-time mission. In both films all of these soldiers die. Here the soldier excepts the sacrifice “as long as he dies for freedom”, a soldier in Bataan proclaims. Only this attitude would lead future soldiers to the victory: “Their spirit will lead us back to Bataan”. Also this last stand format should have connected then contemporary struggle and a vision of certain victory to already historically and nationally established events such as Alamo or the

Battle of Bunker Hill which is even directly mentioned on the screen in Wake Island.

These “represent great moments in American bravery or folly” (Basinger 31). Moreover,

the soldiers on the screen are made aware that they are going to die and the task for the representation is to let them proclaim that they do it with honor, for the cause and willingly with a certain enthusiasm. As in Bataan, the last man standing defend himself in his own grave already marked with his name saying “we´ll always be here”.

With this idea of a certain honorable death, a notion of voluntarism is closely connected to it. Alpers points to the fact that “it was more difficult still to represent in a military setting what was most crucial element of prewar and wartime notions of individual autonomy: voluntarism” (147). In the 1940s, it was unimaginable to show a soldier who was actually drafted. It was only in 2010 when The Pacific shows shortly a minor character who directly proclaims that he is an actual draftee. In 1949 Battleground nicely and more ironically portrayed the notion of constant volunteering. Here the company is to protect positions in Bastogne and the actions are mostly about them patrolling in the surrounding forest. The process by which the patrol is selected composed of CO asking for volunteers and immediately picking the individuals. They obediently go without any comment why it should be me. They only remark on many instances: “Why am I always volunteering?” which ironically points out the 1940s unwavering tradition that the soldiers are there always of their own will.

Regarding all it was mentioned, the 1940s films equipped the “group” with a set of values of democracy and honor in protecting the established social ideal. They put them into the roles of protectors against military and ideological enemy. They made them into

“knights”, “the idealists who still believe in their country and risk their lives for it” (Allen

111). The films coming afterwards were fully aware of this practice but either used it to express ideas of Vietnam or Korean war or erased it by reducing the importance of the

“group” soldier character. However, Beach Red in 1967 which shows a landing of a company on a Pacific island implicitly expresses that the role of a soldier as a “knight”

has been disappearing for some time. During one scene, a military filmmaker tries to get a shot of a soldier who sits with his head down, he has just killed one Japanese soldier. It appears that his action of killing affected him unexpectedly. When he notices the filmmaker filming him very closely, he wants him to stop. The cameraman, however, replies: “Do your job, sir Galahad, I do mine”. Galahad or in some legends Percival is one of the Arthur´s knights. It is quite important that this remark is made by a person whose task is to capture the soldiers in combat mostly for the propaganda purposes. The cameraman points out to the soldier that by contemplating over his own feelings resulting from the killing he lost the quality of the “knight” whose only aim is to honorably protect without any regard for his own opinions and outcomes. So if the protection of values means killing the enemy, the soldier character should do it without hesitation and any kind of noticeable remorse because he does it for his country and uncompromising ideals.

As a conclusion, Moskowitz states that “nationalism imposes homogeneity, in part to organize and structure culture; it therefore must be accompanied by hegemonic tools such as the iconic figure of the knight to symbolize and reinforce the dominant ideology”.

6.2. The Band of Brothers

“I won´t insist that he´ll read the Marine Corps Manual,

Instead I´ll get him a set of Shakespeare.”

Sands of Iwo Jima

The first conscious mention of “band of brothers” concept appeared in Henry V. by

William Shakespeare: “we few, we happy few, we band of brothers; for he to-day that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother" (167). This extract is a part of King Henry´s speech before a battle at Agincourt. He presents the notion of bond created on a battlefield. This is the core of the shift from the “knights”. The “group” is no longer concerned with upholding ideals of the society but with a creation of a specific relationship between each other. Thus, the “group” soldier character has become a collection of complex interpersonal relationships. By introducing English warriors as

“band of brothers” “Shakespeare has joined past to present, audience to soldiery, in an honorable fellowship transcending time and space” (Baldo 138). But it is true that only after two hundred years the concept of the company he presented has come fully into the consciousness of the public and even despite the time span between it still manages to uphold the core idea of blood brothers. Nowadays the “band of brothers” myth refers to

“all-male military unit, uniting to protect each other and defend their country”

(MacKenzie 10).

The key difference between the “group” as “knights” and as “band of brothers” can be seen in an answer to a question of the “group´s” believes: why do we have to depend on each other? The 1940s films reply in the sense of the honorable goal they have to achieve.

They have to rely on each other otherwise the mission would fail and there would be no

victory. The films beginning with Saving Private Ryan disregard the objective. They have to depend on each other otherwise you or your fellow would die.

This idea is shown in numerous scenes when the COs instruct their men in little things that can seriously endanger their fellows. In The Pacific Elmo “Pop” Haney, being the mentor to the unexperienced, gets quite angry when a soldier points his gun in a direction of his fellow just during an ordinary training. The character of Haney very strongly expressed the idea of brotherhood which primary task is to protect each other. He has got through many tough combat situations while still being able to hold his feelings about the loss of his fellows. However, his breaking point is when a soldier does not abide by the rule of protecting others and he kills his fellow soldier during the night. Only then Haney breaks and is not capable to continue fighting anymore because the primary task of the

“band” has been breached, the “band” has been broken.

Thus, the individuals have acquired a new objective, do things in order to protect your fellow soldiers because otherwise they die. This precise failure is portrayed in Fury which focuses on a tank squad. New replacement in the tank hesitates to shoot and soldiers accompanying the tank are killed due to his lack of action.

Surprisingly, this idea is voiced by one of the soldiers already in Gung Ho!. During questions selecting soldiers for a special company, one of them answers the question why would you like to be part of it with “there´ll be the men who need me the most”. However, this remark is immediately refused by the COs saying “all we want are killers”. The soldier does not abide to his convictions afterwards and quickly converts with “I´ll do my duty”, despite his initial idea. Coincidentally, he is a former minister of Gospel. Later, in

Hacksaw Ridge Desmond Doss comes back to the combat film with the same creed: “I´ll be a medic, I figure I´ll be saving people not killing them”. He is a strong believer being

the Seventh-Day Adventist. Contrary to Gung Ho!, Doss stays uncompromisingly true to his belief.

So the modern narrative in the combat films focuses “not on the obtainment of the intended goal, but rather upon the lessons learned upon the road” (Fitch). The Thin Red

Line openly asks these questions: “Who decides who is gonna live? Who decides who is gonna die? It is absurd!” So the overall idea of the “group” shifted to a very personal sphere. The idea behind the shift was to “reconceive war not only in terms of a systemic power struggle but also in relation to the psychic effects war calls forth in those killing and dying on the ground” (LaRocca 415).

With that understanding comes also a change of the format in which the “group” is presented. The previous last stand would not suffice for the development of the dynamic in the “group”. Modelled on the relationships of Roman soldiers in literature, Armstrong points out that the brotherhood “was something which involved action … it was not simply a state of being” (55). Therefore, Saving Private Ryan immediately introduces the episodic structure. These episodes consist of periods of combat and rest. As it was mentioned in Chapter 1, it has become a standard practice for the contemporary combat films. The “group”/”knights” are described as “a democratic amalgamation of people going off to fight” (Basinger 65). The stress here is on “going off to fight” meaning that intentions and objectives are the most important elements here. However, any afterward influence resulting from the combat is missing. This resonates with typical win or die situation.

On the other hand, the “group”/”band of brothers” is based on a shared combat experience and its evolution or transformation. Jung considers the experience of transformation as “identification with a group…the identification of an individual with a number of people who, as a group, have a collective experience of transformation” (68).

The collective experience is a needed feature for the “band of brothers” archetype creation. Most noticeably it is, of course, portrayed in Band of Brothers where Easy company goes in every episode through different combat situations. Here they “bonded to each other through training and combat, like millions of other men in uniform”

(Jeansonne 75). Armstrong points out that only this dynamic is able to create “something akin to the idea of sword-brothers” (66).

Moreover, the combat period “serves as the point of departure for a film´s narrative because it has raised personal issues or political conflicts that the hero and his combat unit must resolve” (Southard 107), unlike “group”/”knight” where the combat mostly presented the culmination of the characters´ limited development. Also the foxholes are no longer only shown as soldier´s graves but they have become the space for the evolution of the relationships between soldiers and also resolution of mutual conflicts after a shared experience. In Hacksaw Ridge, Desmond Doss insists on his religious belief that he would not kill a man or hold a gun. His conviction creates a distance between him and all other soldiers in his company. Only after shared combat experience, they are able to resolve the differences of opinion that each soldier in the “group” possesses. The adversary to Doss is Smitty and actually with him he has a very understanding conversation in a foxhole after the combat. They agree that they are different. However, the common feature that shows itself in the midst of the combat is that they both strive to protect the men next to them and so each of them can also rely on a protection of others, they reach the basic element of “band of brothers”. Armstrong describes it as a necessary feature and sees “the importance of conflict in defining the fraternal relationship” (55).

Relationship in the “band” is initially based on equality, “the sibling relationship is not dependency-based but is a relationship between equals” (Garry 349). This describes the first appearance of the “group” as a company of new privates all in green in the same

position of awaiting for a combat. However, “it is really the conflict, or warfare, which defined it ('band of brothers')” (Armstrong 64).

Immediately in Saving Private Ryan the need of a shared experience to form a brotherhood is shown. The “band of brothers” concept is openly presented to the audience through the youngest and unexperienced soldier, Upham, who intends to write a book about brotherhood, “he describes war as an initiation rite and as forging bonds of brotherhood” (Landon 61). Other soldiers in the company that he has just joined laugh at him because he lacks the experience that would qualify him to truly describe “band of brothers”. Another example of the need for shared combat experience to actually create

“band of brothers” is a replacement. Replacements are newly arrived men who fill the spot of those who have been killed or wounded in the previous combat. These are mostly welcomed with mistrust and unwillingness to form any kind of connection which changes after their first common combat experience. This is the relationship of Sledge and Snafu in The Pacific. Snafu as the experienced one hates Sledge, the replacement. However, the combat experience creates a bond when they are able to protect each other and later even they develop a very good friendship.

Sledge and Snafu provide a contrast to Upham´s lack of qualification to become a part of the “band of brothers”. He never really experienced any combat with Capt. Miller´s men. He does not land with the troops, he does not participate in their episodic attack on a German radar station. He does not belong to their “band of brothers” because his relationship to them has not evolved through any combat. As a result, at the end he is not able to help another soldier who is struggling in one on one combat with a German soldier and so dies in the end.

Moreover, by a behavior of soldier characters during the combat period others in the company are able to identify their qualities and capabilities. Before “knights” had to

conform to the collective ideas, however, now the soldiers are creating their own opinions and values through the action. The “band of brothers” recognizes that because the personal evolution is based on a shared experience and above all is evaluated by others.

It is shown in The Pacific where the relationship between Snafu and Sledge practically begins with the acknowledgement of their mutual actions in the combat. It translates itself into Sledge´s nickname, Sledgehammer. So in the “band of brothers” the “values and dispositions are consistently demonstrated through physical action” (Slocum 44).

This notion is most clearly portrayed in Hacksaw Ridge. Capt. Glover considers Doss either a coward that wants to get out of war easily or a crazy person. His opinion is only overturned after the combat when Glover honestly admits: “All I saw was a skinny kid, I didn´t know who you were. You´ve done more than any other men could have done in the service of his country.”. This idea of professed abilities in the combat characterizes

“psychological development as progress towards an individuation in which unity is achieved through the balancing out of opposites, it is the dominance in Western cultures of belief in the individual as a unique personality” (Izod 156). Therefore, it has to be said that how diverse “group” suited the idea of democracy, here the “band of brothers” becomes “the embodiment of the American ideal of a society based on meritocracy. In combat, it is not religion, ethnicity, or social standing that determines a soldier´s courage and ability to fight” (Mork 21).

That abilities are judged by the “band” during the combat is also seen in the fact that it is not significant what the person was before the war because the soldier is not that anymore. This is one of the reasons why the company in Saving Private Ryan is so surprised when Capt. Miller finally reveals that he is originally a high school teacher.

Also it should be noted that combat experience does not immediately imply active killing or any kind of active participation. Here “virtue is linked to what the soldiers

endure not what they accomplish” (Allison 173). Therefore, there is always the implication “that members of this group, no matter what their varying skills and experiences, are equal heroes in the action” (Basinger 25). Also Jung points out that to achieve the transformation one has to only be a witness to it.

The shift from the “knights” archetype is even literally shown on the screen. The contemporary films beginning with Saving Private Ryan feature specific scenes when one company is being withdrawn from a frontline and a new one which is still without any or little combat experience takes its place. The newcomers still residually represent in that particular moment the “knights” being full of ideals about the war. Their appearances are of these clean battle-ready warriors full with honorable notions to win a battle. However, the company coming back has gone through the combat experience and its following disillusionment. They are dirty, tired and having their personal indecent ideas why this war is being fought. Moreover, they do not even contemplate if the war is really worth it and just. The following puzzling is directed to the connections that they have created amongst the members of the “group” itself. The soldier is wondering about his dead fellows and why they died but he personally survived and if he could have done something differently that would have saved his fellow. In The Pacific, two companies are meeting and the newly arrived is heading to the frontline with only one optimistic and idealistic vision, they are marching for total victory saying that they are heading to Tokyo being still on Guadalcanal, though. This remark is also a remnant of the “knights”, especially from Guadalcanal Diary which expressed unescapable belief in victory by ending with a shot of a sign saying and pointing to Tokyo.

Previous to Saving Private Ryan only Battleground featured a scene of two companies passing each other. However, the battle-battered soldiers were not allowed to show any kind of loss of spirit. Their CO says: “Do you want these new guys to think you´re a

bunch of WACs?” for them to get straight and march vigorously as properly disciplined soldiers. So they suddenly begin marching with energy and even singing to it.

The “band of brothers” has brought to the films “the hell of war which is shown in all its fury and horror, striped of romance, nobility, and happy ending” (Doherty 303). This is mostly brought by the fact that the “group” is not anymore contemplating about why we fight while being replied with honorable ideals. The crucial idea is about the outcome of the combat: will we survive, who will survive and how will the war affect us.

Therefore, “the story is told from the point of view of the soldiers, and their focus was on day-to-day survival, not on the larger political reasons for war” (Mork 22).

Other elements of the “band of brothers” archetype are mutual and also personal responsibility. The mutual responsibility comes from the aim of the soldiers´ conduct, protecting each other. Doss in Hacksaw Ridge says “I can´t stay here while all of them go fight for me”. He abandons idea of fighting a just war and fighting for victory. His obligation is to his fellow soldiers.

Secondly, the personal responsibility is to uphold values of the society they come from. The “band” thus represents a larger group at home, whose way of life – social relations and standards for conduct – is being fought for” (Slocum 48). This basically means the responsibility to behave with usual decent standards and a certain normality as much as possible, as Capt. Miller puts it, “to earn the right to go home” because every indecent thing and killing makes more distanced from home.

Even though, the films are focused on a creation of “band of brothers” one of the basic features in its representation is loss, especially loss of fellow soldiers. So “instead of heroic triumphalism, the primary tone of these films is one of loss” (Allison 175). The loss is connected to the mutual responsibility. The loss here is portrayed as a failure of one soldier as well as, however, heroic triumph of the other. Bodnar expresses it very

accurately defining the soldier character as “the moral individual in heroism and in pain”

(807).

Therefore, the revival of the Second World War films has brought with it the “group” interpreted as “band of brothers” that is characterized as the company with its complex relationships that are created and developed through their shared combat experience.

James Ryan in Saving Private Ryan surpasses his military brothers over those he has lost saying that he will stay with “only brothers I have left”. Another element is the undertone of their regular military mission which is protecting each other: “in fight you can trust yourself and person next to you” Band of Brothers. MacKenzie thus sees the “band of brothers” as an archetype that casts the “nonsexual, brotherly love, male bonding, and feelings of trust, pride, honor, and loyalty between men as mysterious, indescribable, and exceptional” (3).

7 “Leader” Soldier Archetypes

This chapter follows the “leader” soldier characters and their development as it was presented in Chapter 5 and it tries to assign to them three archetypes: “father”, “cowboy” and “Christ” archetype. The archetypes here are also understood as evolutionary stages in the development of the “leader´s” representation on the screen through all the Second

World War combat films.

First and foremost, the “leaders” in the first combat films are represented through the

“father” figure because of the need to relate the military company to a civilian life.

Moreover, he is also supposed to lead the men´s mind and actions in the sense of the just war. Even despite his authoritative position, he is a validated member of the “group”.

Also when stressing his position within the “group” and his connection to it, he can be also interpreted as Arthur. He is referenced as their king and leader as well as one of the

“knights”. Therefore, the “father” figure corresponds to the “knights” representation of the 1940s “group.

However, in later films till the 1980s the “leader” character separated himself from the

“group” quite noticeably. On top of that, he even has much greater connection on the screen with the enemy than with his “group”. Here the “leader” is interpreted as the

“cowboy” figure representing the idea of a lone warrior.

Only with 1990s comes the “Christ” archetype as the “leader” interpretation and that is because the focus shifted, as it has been mentioned earlier, towards the personal narration. The issues of the just war fade. Moreover, questions of personal actions done on a battlefield and their subsequent effect resonated with the idea of being capable to sacrifice one´s own life for others. This evolution in the “leader” figures actually reflects the notion that the “heroes become more complicated in step with their societies” (Davie

16). 49

7.1 “Father” Archetype

“A father figure to the men and a hero in the romantic tradition.

He is noble, brave, optimistic.”

(Basinger 123)

The “leader´s” interpretation as the “father” figure in the 1940s simulated a military family unit. The “father” was to lead the men in combat as well as in their beliefs. Through his visible fatherly position, he later constitutes a certain connection with soldiers´ lives back home, especially in ideas of normality and decency of individual conducts in the war. Following that, nowadays the “father” has acquired another interpretation, a role of a mentor, some who sees the soldiers through the journey themselves not only passes onto them certain ideals.

The “father” can represent two possible ways in which he keeps his men in touch with their previous lives. First way is connected to the ideas behind the creation of the “group” in the 1940s. As it has been mentioned, the war military propaganda needed to introduce the notion of the “citizen” soldier for the military to be more relatable to the civilian lives of the public. It was done not only by maintaining individual traits through certain roles and various identities in the “group” but also with the idea of the unit as a military family.

Alpers points out that “other than in scale, according to the Soldier´s Handbook, life in the army is exactly like life in the family” (139). The Handbook directly expresses that idea to soldiers: “you have the same obligation in the Army but instead of the small family group you are one of a much larger group”. Therefore, the “father” assumes the patriarchal authoritative role over the young men joining the company. The notion of some connection in the army with the previous civilian life is expressed through the loss

of it, especially when the “father” is killed. Basinger remarks that here “the metaphoric meaning is obvious. In war, one will lose security, home, and comfort” (49).

The second way in which the “father” keeps the men connected to their civilian lives is by values he passes to the men through his leadership. Here he functions as a moral guide, looking after the men in order not to let them commit horrendous wartime deeds.

Naturally, the standard of professed values cannot be the same as in the peacetime civilian life, however, the “father” sets out some limits that should not be crossed. Capt. Miller in

Saving Private Ryan expresses this particular notion by saying that everything he does and every life that he takes makes him farther and farther from home.

Basinger interestingly describes the “leader” character as both “a father figure to the men and a hero in the romantic tradition” (123). This definition basically points back to the “knights of the Round Table”. Naturally, Arthur as a king is also one of the “knights” himself. In the 1940s films, the “father” can be also described in the term of Arthur himself as a leader of the “knights”. It is true especially about the “leaders” who are set to display to the soldier values of the just war. Also McConell defines Arthur as the knight´s “symbolic father” (111) and Pfanner considers Arthur “in his dual role as war leader and Christian icon, and his role as a family man” (123).

It has to be also noted that the “father” figure itself has gone through a certain development. The 1940s featured a very authoritative character but the contemporary films have brought a “father” more in sense of a mentor, someone who “freely offers advice and wants to be involved in the hero´s problems” (Schmidt 179). This new quality of a true mentor has been established also due to a change of the format from the last stand to more episodic, as it was already discussed in previous chapters. The episodic format allows the “leader” the time to actually pass certain lessons onto his charges. Also

he is able to see the soldiers through most of the combat and very actively help them.

There the mentor is like an “advanced helper” (179).

Jung says about the role of a mentor the following: “the leader must transform the follower from the immature and dependent child who may have potential, to the mature and capable hero who does have actual abilities desired by the leader”. This idea is demonstrated in The Pacific where Capt. Haldane functions both as a mentor as well as a moral connection to especially Sledge´s civilian life. Until Haldane´s death, Sledge judged his fellow soldier Snafu for his immorality and brutality. Sledge sees Snafu collecting gold teeth from dead Japanese soldiers. Firstly, Sledge is disgusted by this practice because this does not abide to any kind of decency. However, after Haldane is killed, Sledge loses his ties to any remnants to normality and decency within the reality of war. So he tries the same practice as Snafu, getting gold teeth from Japanese soldiers.

The most prominent “father” is Serg. Stryker in Sands of Iwo Jima who “transfers his feelings of love and loneliness for his son to his men and becomes a father and teacher whom they come to respect” (Suid 118). He represents the typical tough drill sergeant who leads by cruel but necessary examples and exercises. His “father” figure is even amplified by the general issues of father-son relationship showcased in the film as its another theme apart from the war itself.

7.2 “Cowboy” Archetype

“It will be like fighting with Indians”

The Bridge at Remagen

The “cowboy” was a “mercenary of sorts whose primary task was to protect the property of the rancher for whom he worked” (Moskowitz). Here the “leader”/”cowboy” assume a very individualistic position. He is the one who decides the tactics and leads others with a certain distance. His objective is a specific mission which he has to accomplish. Mostly it is a certain territory or landmark. Basically, he goes to a conquest a wilderness and take over the land for the use of his country. Some authors consider the

“cowboy” either a continuation or an American version of the “knight”. This connection resonates with the actual change of “father” archetype into the “cowboy” archetype in the combat films. However, the “cowboy” can be understood in more negative terms, especially when he no longer expresses ideals but is driven by his personal rivalry and conquest.

One of the differences between the “cowboy” and the “father” is that the former is described through his disconnection from the family. Silliman defines him as “the lone gunman, the cowboy just passing through”. Morris argues that the “individualism embraced by cowboy culture is an effort to overcome the wilderness without and within”

(137). The individuality suggests an ignition of the trend of the personalization of the whole war experience. Unfortunately, it remained for a certain period on a visual individualistic portrayal without specific intimate combat experience because this

“leader” retains a certain distance from the combat.

Moreover, Basinger refers to this figure as “the American pioneer spirit” (66). Her definition is derived from the format of these films which implicitly suggest the idea of a 53

certain conquest. Also Moskowitz, when suggesting “cowboy´s” connection to the

“knight”, he describes his first task like this: “he details the settlement pattern of the region in the West that he specifies as the frontier”. Here the “cowboy” is sent to wind and guard new wild territories. Moreover, by maintaining a certain connection to the

“knights”, the “cowboy” in a way still personifies a “national self-image – the conqueror of wilderness, savagery and villainy” (Morris 136).

The films´ tactical structures certainly implicate the notion of winning and occupying pieces of land. Sands of Iwo Jima opens that issue by proclaiming “what war, real estate for man”. This is later reminded by The Thin Red Line´s quote: “Property! The whole fucking thing is about property!”. Obviously, Kelly´s Heroes go even further in this allegory by composing a group of very individualistic personalities to break into a

German bank containing gold bricks, their personal Second World War gold fever. Also their CO leaves them because he is commandeering a very pricy German yacht. Remnants of these features can be seen in the modern era in those soldiers who collect enemy´s golden teeth.

Allison with her description of this particular period of the combat films goes even further by saying that some of these “leaders” represent “American soldiers as trigger- happy murderers” (135).

Interestingly, the “cowboy” is often described simply as an Americanized version of the “knight”. Basically, “the cowboy was a knight who had crossed the ocean and exchanged his sword and lance for a gun” (Moskowitz). Building upon this idea, it can be said that in these combat films the “knight” goes rogue by “falling away from the mythic legacies of national greatness” (Owen 264). Bender considers these films as

“satire to present an inverted and opposite reality” (6). This interpretation is understandably caused war disillusionment about values of the war brought by Vietnam

and Korean wars. Basinger points this out by saying that “Korean seems to inspire certain films to reflect a harsh new cynicism toward war and those who plan it and lead it” (170).

But even despite these little bit negative features, it is true that these “leaders” are actually “classic cowboys that rid the land of evil” (Izod 52). Here the lone gunman is put into a role of good doer in a clearly cut division of good and evil. The format of these films supports that division. Not only the good “leader” is represented here but also his bad rival appears equally on the screen. The rival assumes the role of a capable and worthy enemy. It is surprising for a combat genre, especially when compared to the other films, that both rivals are able to identify their opponent. In Battle of the Bulge the opposing

“leaders” find themselves at the beginning in almost a face to face situation and a bit later they able to learn their names and judge their leadership abilities. Therefore, the combat becomes their personal battle on screen. This is very specific for this period. Even in the

1940s and also in the contemporary films, the enemy is interpreted as a nameless force that just has to be reckoned with. This dichotomy of equal rivals corresponds with the view of the era where “the films looking back at the Second World War adopted a more moderate stance towards the enemy and tried to provide a less biased account of the war”

(Thanouli).

Also surprisingly even though, the group of individuals in Kelly´s Heroes journeys with only one purpose, they have to fight their way there. By doing that while still having their personal goals, they actually in the end liberated a town from Germans. The general not knowing their actual drive when he learns about them defeating Germans exclaims:

“that´s a kind of fighting spirit”. Therefore, even without meaning to they helped the general war effort.

7.3 “Christ” Archetype

“The soldier-saint was the answer of a static culture

to the moral problem of violence”

(Southard 39)

The “Christ” archetype in the representation of the “leader” only appears and fully develops in the modern combat films and corresponds with the “band of brothers” archetype. It was possible with the shift from the idealistic interpretation full of values to more personal interpretation of the experience. The “Christ” is mainly interpreted as a savior, someone who is willing to risk and sacrifice his life for others. However, even despite this very divine function, the “Christ”/”leader” character is not sacred but very human and possessing features of weakness. The “leader” reveals his mission during the combat experience and afterwards fully assumes his role through a baptism. His another feature is a certain power to physically and mentally help or even heal others.

The notion of protecting each other in the “group” resonates in this archetype which appears mainly in the form of a savior. It is Saving Private Ryan which openly introduced the very issue of a sacrifice: “Have we as a nation earned the sacrifices that were made for our freedom and way of life by the combat soldiers of the Second World War?”

(Basinger). This notion is in the film triggered by Capt. Miller saying before his death to

Ryan: “Earn it”. He expresses his desire that his personal sacrifice would not be wasted.

Also he tries to justify his sacrifice. Here again the overall personalization demonstrates itself by shift from the issues of just war to a very personal and just sacrifice.

Also it should be noted that with the personalization of the experience, the “Christ” archetype is not portrayed as an overall divine figure. The interpretation of the “leaders” as saviors is done mainly through their values, abilities and respective actions towards 56

others. Here there is a “representation or an incarnation of the god of the city, but also an irrevocably humanized, which is to say diminished, form of that godhead” (McConell

26). Famously, the diminishment or humanization is done by Capt. Miller´s shaking hand.

Miller is actually introduced through this, his first shot shows only his shaking hands trying to open a bottle. Therefore, the “Christ” representation embodies the idea of a physically frail “leader” who is “heroic in wit” (Davie 55).

A weakness in the either divine character is introduced to again make the personal experience of even the “leader” character more relatable. In this particular case, Capt.

Miller fits into a representation of Arthur: “Arthur has a certain everyman quality that draws people to him. His duality allows him to have both a perfect and imperfect self, existing as one” (Pfeifer 35). This feature actually constitutes the difference between the previous combat characters that have been labeled heroes. It also embodies the shift from the “knights” to the “band of brothers”. Ramsay says that “unlike John Wayne, Hanks embodies the everyday American rather than the all-American hero” (50). John Wayne apart from being the face of an ultimate cowboy figure, portrayed a well-known “father” leader/CO in Sands of Iwo Jima in 1949. The weakness creates characters that are just

“everyday people who momentarily do extraordinary things” (Davie 16). Capt. Miller embodies this idea because “rather than being a natural-born killer, he was a loving family man who abhorred the use of extreme force but could inflict it when necessary” (Bodnar

805).

“The title Christ – the Messiah or the Anointed One – is used for those who are seen to reflect his mission” (Kozlovic 2). This is true of the first film that pushes then established “father” archetype further into the “Christ” archetype. It is The Big Red One.

The CO Serg. Fuller is already a veteran from the Great War. His is in charge of four men to lead them in African and later in Europe. Because they are so isolated on the screen, it

appears that his only task is not to fight battle within the war but only to protect his men, this appears to be his mission. Firstly, he is portrayed as their “father” by just caring for them. However, he assumes the mission of a savior after he is wounded and wakes up in a hospital. He then on his own returns to his four soldiers in a very iconic scene. There he is not wearing his uniform but a brown robe with sandals. Thus, he comes back to his men attired as a typical Messiah. Moreover, the men are playing on a beach like children.

Also later Fuller is put into different Christ-like situations. He unexpectedly meets a pregnant lady and he delivers her baby. He takes care of a child from a German camp and brings back life that he has taken.

One of the very signifying moments in the “Christ” archetype story is the baptism.

“The baptism of Christ represents an initiation ordeal of solution, a death and rebirth drama in which the ego encounters its transpersonal destiny and commits itself to it”

(Edinger 47). The baptism usually occurs after a combat experience in the films which, as it has been said earlier, proves the abilities of the characters.

The most visual portrayal of the baptism happens in Hacksaw Ridge. After Doss saves countless lives, he is cleaned from the dirt and blood. Doss is “framed against the sun, pouring water over his half-naked figure to wash off the blood of other men. We are meant to imagine someone being baptized and born again” (Lane 82). As Edinger also points out “sometimes a watery baptism physically occurs to underscore the protagonist´s

Christic credentials” (14). Afterwards, from an insignificant or even cowardly position in the “group” he becomes a spiritual “leader” due to his actions which even his CO Capt.

Glover fully recognizes and makes space for Doss´ spiritual leadership. It is shown in a simple scene where Capt. Glover with men waits until Doss finishes his prayers.

Moreover, Capt. Glover gives the order to attack only after Doss nods that he finished his

prayers. Doss gains his followers after his baptism as well as only “after his baptism,

Jesus gathered followers” (Jongeneel 61).

Kozlovic defines the savior “Christ” figure as representing “Jesus´ rescuing, liberating, leading, transforming or saving functions in the spirit of Mark 12:31 – Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” (9). The best “leader” character is therefore Doss, he even based his spiritual mission on a higher purpose: Thou shalt not murder. By abiding very vigorously by this rule, he saves a lot of lives. Moreover, the savior also follows the spirit of John 15:13 – “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends”. This reflects the values on which the “band of brothers” stands, the strife for other´s protection. This is the initial idea on which the savior acts and which allows him to accomplish extraordinary actions through saving others.

Moreover, the “Christ” figure is connected with miraculous deeds, especially

“miraculous healing” (Kozlovic 18). In the combat genre, this feature is mostly attributed, in its general meaning of taking care of wounded, to medics such as Doss. However, the healing ability physical as well as mental is often signified by a symbolic scene of healing a blind soldier. These scenes are recreating an image portrayed in Christ Healing the

Blind, a painting done by El Greco. Both Maj. Winters in Band of Brothers and Doss are attributed this powers. Winters talks to a soldier who is very frightened by the combat experience and says that he cannot see. After the talk, he suddenly regains his sight. Doss also gives back sight to a soldier when his face is so dirty that he cannot see. He simply washes his face. Even though, it is a very simple concept, the actual Doss remembers this exact moment as the most rewarding of them all when the soldier opens his eyes and they are brightly shinning back at him. Jongeneel here points to words of Jesus´s disciples who said: “go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receives the sight” (61).

7.4 Shapeshifters

“Control over how a nation remembers a momentous event like a war is almost as

significant as the outcome of the war itself.”

(Baldo 133)

This subchapter is devoted to specific instances of shift between above mentioned archetypes. The shift can occur either in different films but also even within one character in a single film.

It has to be noted that the change of the “father” or “Christ” back into the primary

Arthur or “knight” figure results in the modern films in their negative outcome. The situation where the “leader” is interpreted in the light of especially Arthur the aim of the

“father”/”Christ” is lost. As it has been noted few times, their mission is to protect their men at all costs. Here the change results in the death of these men. The two most prominent situations occur in Saving Private Ryan and Fury. Basically, these “leaders” decide to put the war ideals of the 1940s forward over the lives of their men. Particularly,

Capt. Miller decides to attack a radar on their way to find Ryan, even though, they could have gone around the hill. However, Capt. Miller voiced the notion that they are in a war and they have to fight to reduce the enemy´s forces. Death of a medic is a consequence of this decision. Similar dilemma occurs at the end of the film when he is determined to stay and help Ryan´s company to defend a bridge. This results in his and many others dying.

In Fury the situation repeats itself. Even though, serg. Collier, else called “Wardaddy”, said “I promised them that I´ll keep them alive”, he decides to face an attack of a whole

Germany company with a single immovable tank on a crossroad. Again as an outcome he and his men die. 60

In these two instances, the “leader” is shown through Arthur´s duality: “He is seen, on one hand, as this perfect man and ruler, a leader who inspires love and devotion … on the other hand, with a complexly human man who, like all people, is fallible” (Pfeifer 35).

Similar trend is upheld with “leader” characters and their shift into the “cowboy” figure. Again the “cowboy” faces negative consequences because they also result in death. Here the examples happen in the POW camps. In Hart´s War the “leader” of the imprisoned soldiers devices a plan for his personal escape with some other men. His intentions are purely personal. He lets one soldier being killed to maintain the course of this escape. He sacrifices individuals for his cause. He acts as a lone “cowboy”. However, when he escapes and afterwards others are threatened to be killed because of that, he no longer sustains his lone position and returns. This action is symbolically shown by his clothes. While escaping he wears a German uniform, everything for the escape. But when he determines to return he sheds the uniform. By leaving his personal goal, he is killed but saves everyone else´s life.

Same situation but with a positive outcome occurs in The Great Escape where

Germans created a camp of those soldiers who tried to escape on their own numerous times. Basically, they created a camp full of “cowboys”. One of the most daring

“cowboys” regularly tries to escape and also succeeds: “in the beginning he is depicted as a bit of a loner and a hotshot trying to find a way to get out by himself” (Haak 45).

However, he voluntarily surrenders because he knows that information he has gathered outside would help all of them to escape. Here again the “leader” abandons his own personal gain in order to be a savior for others, he “gives up his freedom and individuality for the greater good” (Haak 45).

Also the iconic “father” figure of Maj. Winters in Band of Brothers breaks his character and for a while becomes the lonesome “cowboy” keen on obtain a certain

German position. Winters orders an attack on the position but does not wait for his men and gets to an attack the position first and alone. Here “Dike violates the most sacred of rules – he leaves his men in the mid of an attack” (Mork 21). The punishment for this violation is a death of a boyish looking German soldier. Even despite the fact that it is a death of the enemy, it still personally haunts Winters afterwards.

There are two sets of films from different periods of combat films production on which the shift between the archetypes can be nicely illustrated because their stories and soldier characters provide each other´s opposites.

The first pair consists of To Hell and Back and Hacksaw Ridge where Murphy in the former represents the “father” and “cowboy” figure and Doss the “Christ”. Both their stories are quite interchangeable. Both characters are based on actual soldiers in the

Second World War. Murphy character is even played by actual Murphy. They both come from a Southern family where they are overprotective of their mothers and have either absent or problematic father. They both are considered very weak for a proper service and any kind of help in the combat. However, their action proves others to be wrong. In the end, they are both wounded in the leg and sent hope. However, Murphy, even though he protects his men and cares for them, his attitude is very active and individualistic. Instead of sending his men, he goes himself and alone to obtain the objective. He keeps his distance from the men so he is the lone and active “cowboy”. On the contrary, Doss is the passive savior on the battlefield. This embodies the shift from doer to observer, from active to passive and from imposing violence and winning objectives to outcomes and effects of the violence.

The second pair of films is The Bridge over the River Kwai and Unbroken. Lieut. Col.

Nicholson in the former as an officer of newly arrived POWs is ordered by the Japanese to work with his men. He refuses to rules in Geneva convention. He goes through an

ordeal but he stands true to his conviction. He nevertheless compromises his ideal at the very end of the film. Here he can be interpreted as “cowboy” because of his personal goal of not working as an officer. On the contrary, in Unbroken Zamperini is imprisoned and physically and mentally tried by his Japanese adversary. However, he survives his ordeals and functions as an inspirational savior for other in the camp. At the very end, he is ordered after a very exhausting work in a mine, to hold a beam on his shoulder. This posture imitates a Christ on a cross. He endures this trial which shortly leads to them being freed by the US forces. Where Nicholson works for his personal conviction and use, Zamperini becomes a symbol of survival for all his fellow POWs.

8 Idea Hidden Behind Archetypes

“Society is shaped by the stories it tells itself,

so if it wants to change,

it must change the stories told”

(Hall 215)

“The Jungian textual analyst discovers that ancient myths, religious stories, folklore and artifacts can often illuminate both thematic and psychological meanings that may not otherwise be accessible through them” (Izod 35). This quote shows the reason behind the use of certain soldier archetypes and shift from one to another. The Second World War presents a breeding ground for unlimited readings and interpretations of events. The soldier archetypes described above provided some.

Now this chapter focuses on the specific instances of change between the archetypes and what this change means for the entire representation of the Second World War reality on the screen. Firstly, it deals with a change in authentication of the events in these films from the authenticity which only points to real events to the authenticity which is drawn from memories and personal experience of the actual Second World War veterans. Later, it also deals with an audience´s experience from these films as a part of a general trend of personalization of these films and their interpretation. Then, the chapter points to another significant trend in these films. This is a shift from a prominent position of active violence on the screen to issues of outcome of the violence. This notion also entails more screen time for certain “passive” characters within the “group”, medics.

First of all, regularly the combat films are judged according to the level of authenticity they present. In the 1940s, the films based this on authoritative placement where “the opening exposition scenes establish the time frame of the story” (Gianetti 335) but the 64

modern films measure authenticity according to a level of personal experience appearing on the screen. “An opening frame in which a printed set of words speaks to the audience of historical events and to the authenticity of the film” (Basinger 27) is therefore typical for 1940s films. “To the United States Marine Corps … most of all for its stalwart defense of all we hold dear to our lives”, this is an opening commemoration of Halls of

Montezuma. Bataan is dedicated to “those immortal dead, who heroically stayed the wave of barbaric conquest”. The films appearing through the whole 1940s offer similar idealistic remainders of bravery or dedication to the brave ones. It is also noticeable that the idea of bravery and spirit surpasses any possible personal view that could have been put into the characters because these opening slides are also shown with the emblem of

US Marines in the background with globe, eagle and an anchor. This symbol signifies unity over individuality.

Putting this into a contrast with nowadays practices, the films beginning with Saving

Private Ryan started the notion of combat films as legitimate memories. Therefore, “an important concept central in the revival was authenticity – to find the truth about the war by telling the veterans´ stories” (Mork 12). Firstly, the format of a memory is suggested by scenes improvising soldiers remembering their combat experience. Later, specifically

Band of Brothers have gone truly legitimate with real veterans sharing in their real life interviews their own stories. Hacksaw Ridge has gone really into the personal sphere by being based mainly on one personal experience of Desmond Doss and also ending the film with real Doss´ words.

This shows the overall tendency to personalize every aspect of experience represented on the screen which is done in two different ways. Firstly, the personalization of the experience applies to the soldier characters on the screen. So “we turn away from history and its numbers to seek the reality of war where the actual killing takes place, in the lives

of the men who did the fighting” (Hynes 395). This is the shift from the “knights” into the “band of brothers”. They are no longer idealistic warriors or soldiers fighting for ideals. There are ordinary people put into the midst of the war experience. Basinger labels the experience an “honest human event” (261). It signifies the “general tendency in the memorialization of the Second World War that claims the status of a definitive account of the war and of the wartime generation´s experiences and memories” (Ramsay 50).

Moreover, the personalization of the soldier characters is reflected in reasons why they fight. In the 1940s films, “not only are the Japanese referred to with insulting epithets, but screen time is devoted to discussions about why we are fighting.” (Basinger 55).

Consequent replies express values that the propaganda wanted to convey. Therefore, the soldiers proclaimed that they fight for the whole world and its democratic principles or they fight to defeat Japanese Fascism or German Nazism. In the initial scenes of Guns

Ho! in 1943, a special selective company is to be formed. There are so many volunteers that they have to question them about their drive to fight in order to choose. Their answers are: “we´re here to kill Japs” or “this fight is all the same, Fascism”. Therefore, it is a radical shift when Leckie in The Pacific says: “Do you want to know what I was fighting for? Television.”. The idea here is that they are fighting for their own private lives and imaginations of their possible future ahead.

First sparks of personalized combat experience on screen appeared in The Big Red One in 1980 which is based on a book of a veteran. It started the notion of “the need for a man to share his story” (Basinger 196). However, the film is a psychological representation of what the filmmaker thought is the real combat experience.

Secondly, the personalization is happening on the level of the experience of the audience. The stress is put on an idea that not only the soldier characters are in the middle of the battlefield but the viewer should be able to be right beside the soldier. Saving

Private Ryan tries to achieve this state by filming especially the beginning of the D-day landing from behind the soldier´s shoulder to get a certain feeling that the viewer is right behind him. This notion is missing in the 1940s where the shots of soldiers are made from their front to show them shooting the enemy. Here Hacksaw Ridge goes even further with a unique scene which does not appear in any other of the previous films. These shots show only hands holding a firing gun. The shot is made from the top, the camera shoots from the position of person´s eyes. This puts the person in the audience right into the soldier character on the screen.

Going even further with the shift from the general issue of the War to personal issues, contemporary soldier characters are presented as investigators of moral issues and their consequences. The moral issues are inherent to the interpretation itself, to the archetypes presented here, not to the original events. This is the matter of double-voice in these films.

The first voice or layer shows the events of the war, stories and experiences of the soldier characters as accurately as possible. The second voice presents the interpretation of the previous because “the stylized conventions and archetypal story patterns of genres encourage viewers to participate ritualistically in the basic beliefs, fears, and anxieties of their age” (Gianetti 356). Contemporary issues are therefore portrayed through the “band of brothers” archetype rather than through outdated “knights”, particularly for this combat genre. It means that “although the basic story format is always kept intact, its usage and purpose alter” (Basinger 261).

So the usage and purpose has got into the point where “war films recast into personalized stories of survival the ubiquity of destruction and with it the somber recognition that death cannot be denied, ultimately tipping the scales in favor of a protection of life” (LaRocca 416). This tendency firstly has unnoticeably crept into the modern combat films. It became more prominent with Band of Brothers and The Pacific

and really put into the forefront in Hacksaw Ridge. It is mostly done by introduction of main soldier character as a medic or even as a stretcher bearer because in these situations the soldier characters do not hold a gun and are put into the positions of simple observers.

Again this view allows the audience much closer experience of the combat reality. They are also tasked with care and protection of their fellow soldiers.

In Band of Brothers, one episode is done from a perspective of a medic, Eugene Roe.

Him being a mere observer of others fighting and being killed made much stronger impact on him. As a result, he tries to make a sense of wartime horror and how it can affect both body and mind. So “the purpose of his story is to illustrate that it is not necessarily the participation in combat, but just witnessing it, that can traumatize a soldier” (Mork 20).

In The Pacific, the main protagonist Eugene Sledge is sent to help as a stretcher bearer.

Nothing affected his illusions about the war more than this experience. This shows the trend that not only the violence is portrayed in its full horrific accuracy, however, the outcome of the violence has acquired quite an importance in the representation of the war as well. Meaning that “the things men do – that´s essential, of course, war is actions; but the being done to is also important, for war is a powerful transforming force in the lives of men who fight” (Hynes 398).

Ramsay sees a particular representation of this trend in Saving Private Ryan: “His face is dirty, and his eyes have a haunted expression. If all the images preceding the image of Hanks can be described as conjuring up a general impression of the Second World

War” (50). This copies again the idea expressed in the company meeting scenes. The soldier characters are not “knights” anymore but the worn out and battered “band of brothers”.

The last in the evolution of this trend is Hacksaw Ridge that focuses only on the medic without a gun. Although, the idea of a soldier going into a battle without any kind of

weapon is very impressive and judged as a ultimate heroism, it is not a brand new phenomenon. As it can be noticed, in his episode Eugene Roe is without a gun all the time, even though, he is on the frontline. However, it is true that Hacksaw Ridge pushed

Doss further into the extreme being in the attack without a gun. His only task here is to save people. He himself says “I´ll be a medic, I figure I´ll be saving people not killing them”.

This tendency of the portrayal promoting protection of life on the background of a total war is reflected in the shift of the “leader” soldier archetypes as well. Therefore, the modern combat films promote the “savior” archetype.

Thus, the overall change of interpretation means that the “war films shifted their attention from the politics of war, or the historical particularities of a battle, to stories of the bonds between male soldiers and the hero who fights them is the idealistic youth”

(MacKenzie 12). Surprisingly, MacKenzie´s definition which fully and accurately defines

Hacksaw Ridge comes a whole year before the film premiered. It nicely suggests that the tendency has been there, however, it reached its full potential right in Hacksaw Ridge.

It should be also shortly mentioned that the specific soldier archetypes are punctuated by the score that the films use. Gianetti remarks that “although the function of sound effects is primarily atmospheric, they can also be precise sources of meaning in film”

(200). This notion is very much used in the combat genre. In the 1940s the music scoring the films is very triumphant and in some films the theme is fully replaced by USMC

Hymn. In the modern films, the music points to a very personal and at the same time tragic experience happening on the screen. Basinger describes Saving Private Ryan´s score as “quietly martial, not bombastic, all gentle trumpets and mild percussion” (306).

However, the score to The Thin Red Line is the main thing that recreates the precise representation of the soldier characters, the representation of tragedy of the combat

experience and killing most of all. In the film, the company is attacking a small Japanese village that is defending itself with its last soldiers. The attack of the American soldiers is without mercy. The tragedy and pointlessness of the combat on both sides is expressed by the slow mournful violin tones of the score.

In conclusion, “war, as one of the most intensive experiences of passion, survives in our cultural memory, resiliently challenging us to revisit and reconceptualize its battle scenes in relation to our present” (Bronfen 114). The reconceptualization is done through the change in soldier archetypes. Propaganda in idealistic “knights” disappeared to make place for personalized experience and moral issues of “band of brothers”. Also tough

“father” figure and daring “cowboy” are pushed aside because of the “savior” who shifts the stress from the issue of killing to the overall outcome of the combat experience.

Huebner in his book The Warrior Image quite precisely captures the core of the shift amongst these archetypes: “if image makers of the Second World War had emphasized loyalty and toughness in the American soldier, later ones valorized his sensitivity and suffering” (279).

Works Cited and Used

Abramson, Neil Remington. "The Leadership Archetype: A Jungian Analysis of

Similarities between Modern Leadership Theory and the Abraham Myth in the

Judaic-Christian Tradition." Journal of Business Ethics 2.2 (2007): 115-29.

JSTOR. Web. July 2016.

A Bridge Too Far. Dir. Richard Attenborough. Perf. Dick Bogarde and James Caan.

Joseph E. Levine Productions, 1977. DVD.

Allen, Brooke. "Playing with Archetypes." The Hudson Review 65.1 (2012): 108-14.

JSTOR [JSTOR]. Web. Apr. 2016.

Allison, Tanine. Screen Combat: Recreating World War II in American Film and

Media. Diss. U of Pittsburgh, 2010. Pittsburgh: UP, 2010. Print.

Alpers, Benjamin L. "This Is the Army: Imagining a Democratic Military in World War

II." The Journal of American History 85.1 (1998): 129-63. JSTOR [JSTOR].

Web. May 2016.

Armstrong, Jeremy. ""Bands of Brothers": Warfare and Fraternity in Early Rome." De

Gruyter. 2013. Web. Apr. 2016.

Attack. Dir. Robert Aldrich. Perf. Jack Palance and Eddie Albert. United Artists, 1956.

DVD.

A Walk in the Sun. Dir. Lewis Milestone. Perf. Dana Adrews. 20th Century Fox, 1945.

DVD.

Baldo, Jonathan. "Wars of Memory in Henry V." Shakespeare Quarterly 47.2 (1996):

132-59. JSTOR [JSTOR]. Web. Aug. 2016.

Bamberg, Michael. "Narrative Analysis." APA Handbook of Reseach Methods in

Psychology. Vol. 3. Washington, DC: APE, 2012. 1-39. Print.

Band of Brothers. Dir. Phil Alden Robinson. Perf. Damian Lewis and Ron Livingston.

Playtone, 2001. DVD.

Basinger, Jeanine. The World War II Combat Film: Anatomy of a Genre. Middletown:

Wesleyan UP, 2003. PDF.

---., "Translating War: The Combat Film Genre and Saving Private Ryan." Perspectives

on History 36.7 (1998). American Historical Association.

Oct. 1998. Web. 21 May 2016.

Bataan. Dir. Tay Garnett. Perf. Robert Taylor and George Murphy. Metro-Goldwyn-

Mayer; United States Office of War Information, 1943. DVD.

Battleground. Dir. William Wellman. Perf. Van Johnson and John Hodiak. Metro-

Goldwyn-Mayer, 1949. DVD.

Battle of the Bulge. Dir. Ken Annakin. Perf. Henry Fonda and Robert Shaw. Warner

Bros. Cinerama Productions United States Pictures, 1965. DVD.

Beach Red. Dir. Cornel Wilde. Perf. Cornel Wilde and Rip Torn. United Artists, 1967.

DVD.

Bender, Stuart. Film Style and the World War II Combat Genre. Cambridge Scholars,

2013. Web. Mar. 2016.

Bodnar, John. "Saving Private Ryan and Postwar Memory in America." The American

Historical Review 106.3 (2001): 805-17. JSTOR [JSTOR]. Web. Apr. 2016.

Bronfen, Elisabeth. Specters of War: Hollywood's Engagement with Military Conflict.

New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers UP, 2012. EBSCO. Web. Aug. 2016.

Burns-Watson, Roger. "Co-Starring God: Religion, Film, and World War II." Diss. U of

Cincinnati, 2010. Web. Aug. 2016.

Campbell, Joseph. The Hero with a Thousand Faces. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2004.

PDF.

Davie, Gavin. The Hero Soldier: Portrayals of Soldiers in War Films. Thesis.

University of South Florida, 2011. Scholar Commons. Web. 12 Dec. 2015.

Doherty, Thomas Patrick. Projections Of War: Hollywood, American Culture, And

World War II. New York: Columbia University Press, 1999. Print.

Edinger, Edward F. Ego and Archetype. Boston and London: Shambhala, 1992. PDF.

---., The Christian Archetype: A Jungian Commentary On the Life of Christ. Toronto:

Inner City, 1987. PDF.

Fitch, John, III. "Archetypes on Screen: Odysseus, St. Paul, Christ and the American

Cinematic Hero and Anti-Hero." Journal of Religion and Film 9.1 (2005): Web.

Sept. 2016.

Flags of Our Fathers. Dir. Clint Eastwood. Perf. Ryan Phillippe and Jesse Bradford.

Paramount Pictures, 2006. DVD.

Fredericksen, Don. "Two Aspects of a Jungian Perspective Upon Film: Jung and Freud;

The Psychology of Types." Journal of the University Film Association 32.1/2

(1980): 49-57. JSTOR [JSTOR]. Web. Apr. 2016.Fury. Dir. David Ayer. Perf.

Fury. Dir. David Ayer. Perf. Brad Pitt and Logan Lerman. Columbia Pictures, 2014.

DVD.

Garry, Jane, and Hasan El-Shamy, eds. Archetypes and Myths in Folklore and

Literature. New York: M.E.Sharpe, 2004. PDF.

Garson, G. David. Narrative Analysis & NPF. Statistical Associates, 2013. EBSCO.

Web. June 2016.

Giannetti, Louis. Understanding Movies. 13th ed. USA: Pearson, 2013. PDF.

Guadalcanal Diary. Dir. Lewis Seiler. Perf. Preston Foster and Lloyd Nolan. 20th

Century Fox, 1943. DVD.

Gung Ho. Dir. Ray Enright. Perf. Randolph Scott and Joseph Hoffman. Universal

Pictures, 1943. DVD.

Haak, Karlien. The Good War Gone Bad. Thesis. Utrecht University, 2012. JSTOR

[JSTOR]. Web. Aug. 2016.

Hacksaw Ridge. Dir. Mel Gibson. Perf. Andrew Garfield and Sam Worthington.

Summit Entertainment, 2016. Film

Hall, Claudia. "The Group Hero: An Archetype Whose Time Has Come." Exploring the

Collective Unconscious in the Age of Digital Media. Hershey: IGI Global, 2016.

214-31. Print.

Halls of Montezuma. Dir. Lewis Milestone. Perf. Richard Widmark and Richard Boone.

20th Century Fox, 1951. DVD.

Hart's War. Dir. Gregory Hoblit. Perf. Bruce Willis and Colin Farrell. Paramount

Pictures, 2002. DVD.

Huebner, Andrew J. The Warrior Image: Soldiers in American Culture from the Second

World War to the Vietnam Era. Chapel Hill: U of North Carolina, 2008. Print.

Hynes, Samuel. "The Man Who Was There." The Sewanee Review 103.3 (1995): 394-

413. Web. 15 Mar. 2014.

Izod, John. Myth, Mind and the Screen. Cambridge UP, 2001. PDF.

Jeansonne, Glen, and David Luhrssen. War on the Silver Screen: Shaping America's

Perception of History. Nebraska: Potomac, 2014. Print.

Jongeneel, Jan A.B. Jesus Christ in World History. Germany: Peter Lang GmbH, 2009.

EBSCO. Web.

Jung, Carl G. Four Archetypes. London: Routledge, 1972. PDF.

---., The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious. Ed. Herbert Read. London:

Routledge, 1981. Print.

Kabiling, Maria Cristina Ana. "World War II in Popular American Visual Culture: Film

and Video Games after 9/11." Thesis. Georgetown University, 2010.Repository

Library Georgetown. 2010. Web. Apr. 2016.

Kelly's Heroes. Dir. Brian G. Hutton. Perf. Clint Eastwood and Telly Savalas. Avala

Film, 1970. DVD.

Knight, Stephen. "Arthurian Authorities." Words and Worlds: Studies in the Social Role

of Verbal Culture. Sydney. 1983. 117-29. Print.

Kozlovic, Anton Karl. "The Structural Characteristics of the Cinematic Christ-figure."

Journal of Religion and Popular Culture 8 (2004): 2-30. Flinders Academic

Commons. Web. Sept. 2016.

Landon, Phil. "Realism, Genre, and Saving Private Ryan." Film and History 2nd ser. 28

(1998): 58-62. EBSCO. Web. Aug. 2016.

Lane, Anthony. "Good Fights: Hacksaw Ridge and Loving." The New Yorker (2016):

82-83. EBSCO. Web. 7 Nov. 2016.

LaRocca, David. The Philosophy of War Films. Lexington: U of Kentucky, 2014.

EBSCO. Web. Aug. 2016.

MacKenzie, Megan. Beyond the Band of Brothers. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2015.

Google Books. Web. June 2016.

McConnell, Frank. Storytelling and Mythmaking: Images from Film and Literature.

Oxford: Oxford UP, 1982. PDF.

Mork, Anne. ""Will This Picture Help Win the War"?: Band of Brothers and the

Mythology of World War II." American Studies in Scandinavia 43.2 (2011):

45-70. JSTOR [JSTOR]. Web. Sept. 2016.

Morris, Robert B. "American Cultural Myth and the Orphan Archetype." European

Journal of American Culture 35.2 (2016): 127-45. EBSCO. Web. Sept. 2016.

Moskowitz, Jennifer. "The Cultural Myth of the Cowboy, Or, How the West Was

Won." Americana: The Journal of American Popular Culture, 1900 to Present

5.1 (2006). ProQuest. Web. Sept. 2016.

Objective, Burma! Dir. Raoul Walsh. Perf. Errol Flynn and James Brown. Warner

Bros., 1945. DVD.

Owen, A. Susan. "Memory, War and American Identity: Saving Private Ryan as

Cinematic Jeremiad." Critical Studies in Media Communication 19.2 (2002):

249-82. Print.

Pfanner, David E. The Millenium King Arthur: The Commodification of the Arthurian

Legend in the 20th Century. Thesis. The Australian National University, 2008.

Web. Sept. 2016.

Pfeifer, Catherine T. King Arthur: A Study of the Origins, Endurance, and Psychology

of a Legend. Thesis. Ball State University, 2003. Web. Sept. 2016.

Plesnar, Łukasz A. 100 Filmów Wojennych. Kraków: Rabid, 2002. Print.

Ramsay, Debra. American Media and the Memory of World War II. Abingdon-on-

Thames: Routledge, 2015. PDF.

Riessman, Catherine Kohler. Narrative Analysis. Boston UP, 1993. Print.

Sands of Iwo Jima. Dir. Allan Dwan. Perf. John Wayne and John Agar. Republic

Pictures, 1949. DVD.

Saving Private Ryan. Dir. Steven Spielberg. Perf. Tom Hanks and Edward Burns.

DreamWorks Pictures, 1998. DVD.

Schmidt, Victoria. 45 Master Characters: Mythic Models For Creating Original

Characters. 1st ed. Cincinnati: Writer's Digest Books, 2001. PDF.

Shakespeare, William. King Henry V. Bristol: Edward Arnold, 1966. Print.

Silliman, Barbara. "The John Wayne Syndrome: Jung, the Hero Archetype, and the

American Hero." Jungian Society for Scholarly Studies. 2003. Web. 5 Mar.

2016.

Slocum, J. David. "Cinema and the Civilizing Process: Rethinking Violence in the

World War II Combat Film." Cinema Journal 44.3 (2005): 35-63. JSTOR

[JSTOR]. Web. Apr. 2016.

Smith, Murray. "Double Trouble: On Film, Fiction, and Narrative." Storyworlds: A

Journal of Narrative Studies 1 (2009): 1-23. JSTOR [JSTOR]. Web. Mar. 2016.

Southard, Samuel. "The Southern Soldier-Saint." Journal for the Scientific Study of

Religion 8.1 (1969): 39-46. JSTOR. Web. Nov. 2016.

Stalag 17. Dir. Billy Wilder. Perf. William Holden and Don Taylor. Paramount

Pictures, 1953. DVD.

Suid, Lawrence H. Guts and Glory: The Making of the American Military Image in

Film. Lexington: UP Kentucky, 2002. PDF.

Thanouli, Eleftheria. "The Thin Red Line and the World War II Hollywood Tradition."

Kinema (200): n. pag. 2005. Web. Mar. 2016.

The Big Red One. Dir. Samuel Fuller. Perf. Lee Marvin and Mark Hamill. United

Artists, 1980. DVD.

The Bridge at Remagen. Dir. John Guillermin. Perf. George Segal and Robert Vaughn.

United Artists, 1969. DVD.

The Bridge on the River Kwai. Dir. David Lean. Perf. William Holden and Jack

Hawkins. Columbia Pictures, 1957. DVD.

The Great Escape. Dir. John Sturges. Perf. Steve McQueen and James Garner. United

Artists, 1963. DVD.

The Great Raid. Dir. John Dahl. Perf. Benjamin Bratt and James Franco. Paramount

Pictures, 2005. DVD.

The Longest Day. Dir. Ken Annakin. Perf. John Wayne and Henry Fonda. 20th Century

Fox, 1962. DVD.

The Pacific. Dir. Tim Van Patten. Perf. James Badge Dale, Jon Seda, and Joseph

Mazzello. Dreamworks Television, 2010. DVD.

The Thin Red Line. Dir. Terrence Malick. Perf. Sean Penn and Adrien Brody. 20th

Century Fox, 1998. DVD.

To Hell and Back. Dir. Jesse Hibbs. Perf. Audie Murphy and Marshall Thompson.

Universal-International, 1955. DVD.

Unbroken. Dir. Angelina Jolie. Perf. Jack O'Connell and Domhnall Gleeson. Universal

Pictures, 2014. DVD.

Wake Island. Dir. John Farrow. Perf. Brian Donlevy and Robert Preston. Paramount

Pictures, 1942. DVD.

Windtalkers. Dir. John Woo. Perf. Nicolas Cage and Adam Beach. Lion Rock

Productions, 2002. DVD.

Resumé

The purpose of this thesis is to introduce and expend archetypes that can be found in the Second World War combat films of the U.S. motion picture production. The concept of archetypes is based on them being defined as collective unconscious patterns. Through the approach of narrative analysis, the thesis studies variety of combat films ranging from the 1940s to 2016. The scope is limited to combat films composed of the prominent diverse “group”, military objective and their inner conflict resolved externally through the combat experience. The scope is further restricted to films portraying infantry soldier characters due to their uncertain and constant position between life and death and pure combat spaces they occupy through the course of these films.

The thesis characterizes the “group” soldier character and the “leader” soldier character. The former constitutes a genre convention and is defined as a compilation of multiethnic individuals with diverse geographical and religious origins. The “leader” is defined either as the military commander or the inspirational or moral “leader”.

Subsequently, they are assigned respective archetypes due to their filmmakers´ interpretation. The “group” can represent either “knights of the Round Table” archetype due to their shared romantic views and proclaimed values or “band of brothers” archetype that professes personal experience, mutual bond and responsibility to protect each other.

The “leader” can be characterized through the “father” archetype that upholds the idea of the “group” as a family where the “leader” trains and leads other in martial arts as well as war ideals. Later the “leader” assume a separate position of the “cowboy” representing the lone gunman directed to the purpose of a conquest. Nowadays, the common “leader” is interpreted through the “Christ” archetype who does not focus on killing but on his sacrifice to save others.

As a conclusion, the thesis presents certain trends in overall interpretation of these considered films. The thesis states that the films have shifted from representation of an active violence towards the prominent issues of the outcomes of the violence.

Résumé

Cílem této magisterské práce představit a rozšířit množství archetypů, které se nacházejí ve filmech americké produkce ztvárňující děje druhé světové války. Koncept archetypů je užit ve smyslu vzorů, které mohou být nalezeny v lidském tzv. kolektivním nevědomí. Práce rozebírá dané válečné filmy z období 1940 do 2016 pomocí metody, která analyzuje vyprávění. Okruh válečných filmů je dále omezen na filmy ztvárňující boj. Dále tento konkrétní žánr obsahuje typické znaky, kterými jsou čelná různorodá skupina vojáků, nějaký válečný cíl a konflikt uvnitř dané skupiny, který je následně vyřešen pomocí externích vlivů, což jsou hlavně sdílené bojové zkušenosti. Okruh filmů je dále omezen na ty, které znázorňují postavy vojáků pěchoty, kde se tito vojáci nacházejí ve velmi nejisté pozici mezi životem a smrtí. Také typické je jejich prostředí, které je výlučně tvořeno bojovými prostory a pozicemi, jako jsou např. zákopy, ve kterých zůstávají po celou dobu filmu.

Práce charakterizuje dva druhy postav, „skupinu“ vojáků a jejich „velitele“. „Skupina“ je typickým znakem bojového žánru a je definována jako souhrn jednotlivců s různorodým etnickým původem, rozličným místem původu a vírou. „Velitel“ je pak charakterizován buď jako vojevůdce nebo také jako velitel morální nebo schopný inspirovat ostatní.

Následně, k těmto postavám vojáků jsou přiřazeny archetypy, jak jsou interpretovány filmaři daných filmů. „Skupina“ může být reprezentována archetypem „rytířů kulatého stolu“, protože oba koncepty sdílejí romantickou ideu a hlásají určité absolutní společenské hodnoty a zásady. „Skupina“ může být dále pojata jako archetyp „bratrstva neohrožených“, který je založen na osobních bojových zkušenostech, vzájemném poutu mezi vojáky a na odpovědnost vůči sobě navzájem, že se budou ochraňovat.

Poté „velitel“ je interpretován pomocí archetypu „otce“, kterého úkolem je ztvárnění návaznosti vojenské skupiny na představu klasické rodiny. „Otec“ má dále vycvičit a vést muže v umění boje, tak i ve formování jejich válečných názorů a ideálů. Poté „velitel“ bere na sebe archetyp „kovboje“, který je definován jako osamělý střelec, jehož misí je dobytí určitého cíle. V současné době „velitel“ je interpretován pomocí archetypů

„Krista“, který se zaměřuje na oběti daných postav pro záchranu ostatních.

Závěrem, práce uvádí trendy, které se časem vytvořily v daných válečných filmech.

Závěr se zvláště zaměřuje na změnu významu ztvárnění násilí ve filmech, kdy zobrazování aktivního násilí jako vedoucí myšlenky je vystřídáno náměty, které se zaměřují na následky násilí.

Appendices

Fig. 1 and 2 Zamperini in Unbroken and it “Christ” archetype symbolism

Fig. 3 The Pacific 2010

Fig. 4 Hacksaw Ridge 2016

Both these suggest the idea that appeared in the recent combat films, that is the ideal of soldiers protecting each other in the combat experience and also the shift from active violence to passive observations of its effects.

Fig. 5 Battle of the Bulge 1965

Fig. 6 Band of Brothers 2001

These two pictures signify a shift from the individualistic “cowboys” in the 1970s to the

“group” defined through their unity and mutual bond. In the Fig. 5, the soldier characters are singled out, each of the individuals is advertised equally even the Germans. In the Fig.

6, the characters are anonymized to stress the concept of the unity of the “group”.

Fig. 7 The diverse multiethnic “group” in Bataan

Fig. 8 The “group” in Hacksaw Ridge

Fig. 9 The Battleground´s company marching properly while singing from the frontline

Fig. 10 The Pacific: meeting of two companies

Fig. 11 Baptism of Desmond Doss in Hacksaw Ridge after his combat experience and saving actions.