How Wartime Prisoners and Their Captors Function in Literature

Under the Wire: How Wartime Prisoners and Their Captors Function in Literature Philip Schmidt Prisoner of war historical fiction introduces incarcerated for crimes against their culture an overlooked facet to the theme of cultural and society; instead, their crime is that of identity in literature. Though many critics merely belonging to a different culture and ignore this important sub-genre of literature, society. Cross-cultural conflicts are the very prisoner of war novels provide a unique lens reason that these men have been caged like through which cross-cultural interactions can criminals, and the reconciliation with or be shown to illustrate defining aspects of domination of other cultures are the only humanity. In analyzing these works of methods by which they can hope to survive. literature, written by novelists who were once The perception that prisoners of war lose soldiers and prisoners of war themselves, one their sense of humanity when faced with may analyze the importance of cultural severe, prolonged duress is quite incorrect. identity and some of the implications arising Their humanity is often reconstructed as their from its endangerment. former cultural identities are deconstructed to Prisoner of war literature such as Pierre give way to new ones. The prisoners in the Boulle’s The Bridge Over The River Kwai, these novels choose whether to recreate their John Okada’s No-No Boy, and James former ethical and cultural standards or to Clavell’s King Rat reveal a microcosm of the seize the opportunity to transform them world and its cultural relations in the setting altogether. But regardless of their choice, of a prisoner of war camp. The term ethnocentrism on the part of their foreign microcosm is here used to describe a captors and their fellow prisoners arises to community that is representative of the challenge their new cultural identities. contemporary world of the literature’s time One of the most effective examples in period. Those who inhabit a prisoner of war illustrating the conflicts between cultures in camp, prisoners and captors alike, are the prisoner of war setting may be derived members of influential cultures, as it is those from their different conceptions of honor. cultures that battle one another for global World War II literature is especially authority and power and thus provide the applicable for these examples, as it involved inmates and captors their positions. These two highly honor-bound cultures that were global conflicts arise in no small part due to imperial in structure, the British and the misunderstandings between cultures that are Japanese. However great discrepancies are to fundamentally disparate. be found between these two cultures in how The prisoner of war setting embodies the they define honor itself. These differences elements of the institutional prison such as lead to loathing and violence primarily due to wardens, prisoners, a type of prison society ethnocentrism in such novels as The Bridge that grows up in isolation from the outside Over the River Kwai. Boulle’s novel world, and a social stratification of said personifies this battle in Colonel Saito and society’s members. The prisoner of war Colonel Nicholson, the ranking officers of the setting is unique, however, for its caging of Japanese and the British, respectively. very different cultures together under Both regard the other’s culture with the heightened, volatile circumstances. greatest disdain. Indeed, Saito’s opening Additionally, the prisoners are not remarks to newly arriving British prisoners 80 begin with, “’I hate the British.’ … which he The prisoner of war camp is found in a then inserted between every other sentence as different form in this work. Rather than the a sort of punctuation mark” (Boulle 12). other examples that will be discussed, No-No Nicholson in turn regards his captors with Boy involves a Japanese-American similar disgust: “These people, the Japanese, internment camp and, more precisely, its have only just emerged from a state of effects on its prisoners. The protagonist of barbarism, and prematurely at that” (33). The the novel, a young Japanese-American named ethnocentrism that permeates the speech and Ichiro Yamada, faces the consequences of actions of each man causes the already refusing the United States draft, choosing precarious situation in the prisoner of war prison instead of fighting for the country that camp to become extremely volatile. Each imprisons his people. Ichiro’s mother, the man fears the culture that the other embodies formidable Mrs. Yamada, considers Ichiro to so implicitly. The two are consequently be the epitome of traditional Japanese culture. thrust into a conflict of cultures, one that His cultural identity is thus displaced and he neither of them initiated but that each of them struggles throughout the novel to reconcile his is determined to win. own culture with that of its enemy and his Just as Saito’s sense of honor causes him new home, America. to regard with violent suspicion any who Ichiro’s emasculated father, for one, might challenge his authority, Nicholson’s realizes the futility of his family’s attempt to sense of honor places his men in great danger. keep their Japanese heritage untouched by the In one such instance, the British colonel so-called “melting pot” of American cultural declares that the officers in his command are, assimilation. A quiet drunkard who moves by reason of their higher class, exempt from about under the forceful direction of his wife, manual labor. In matching nerves with his Mr. Yamada is a failed guardian of his Eastern counterpart, Nicholson puts the lives culture’s ways. His own son considers him to of every prisoner at risk, as Saito nearly be “a goddamned, fat, grinning, spineless orders them all executed en masse. In efforts nobody” (Okada 12). The ineffectual to assert his nation’s cultural supremacy, patriarch realizes the implications of this Nicholson places his men at still greater risk situation, confiding to his son, “Your mama is in the construction of a bridge for their sick, Ichiro, and she has made you sick and I Japanese captors’ military transports. In a am sick because I cannot do anything for her tragicomic series of events, he actually and maybe it is I that is somehow responsible increases their workload and rejects their for her sickness in the first place” (37). Mrs. attempts at sabotage in order to demonstrate Yamada herself considers her son’s actions British supremacy by constructing the best entirely irreproachable. Her first words to her bridge possible for their captors. According newly released son are those of a proud to Nicholson, “this bridge represented the mother, a pride Ichiro attributes to the fact dauntless sort of spirit which never that “she had made him what he was and that acknowledges defeat but always has some the thing in him which made him say no to inner resource to draw on as proof of its the judge and go to prison for two years was invincibility” (Boulle 94). The “dauntless the growth of a seed planted by the mother spirit” he ascribes to his culture, and his tree…and that everything that had been done alone, is ironically that which destroys him. and said was exactly as it should have been” A paradoxical example of Japanese honor (11). For her, America’s tradition of cultural in light of World War II is found in John assimilation is a threat to her cultural heritage. Okada’s sole published novel, No-No Boy. To combat this threat, Mrs. Yamada makes 81 every effort to imbue her son with Japanese battles the very idea of honor, and of personal values, emulating the forceful masculine dignity, placing importance on “getting teacher her husband would have been. ahead” in the camp regardless of how it might Ichiro’s mother is responsible for placing alienate himself from others. His methods are him in a paradox of values; each ideal that is clever but immoral by the standards that his “correct” for a Japanese male contradicts fellow prisoners follow. The King’s itself in the current Japanese-American philosophy gains him prosperity and the culture. Daniel Kim illustrates this difficulty dependence of others upon him, though they in discussing how Ichiro might best have loathe him for it. As British prisoner fulfilled the Japanese masculine ideal: “to Lieutenant Grey angrily declares to another enact the samurai role celebrated in his prisoner, “You sold out everything. Honor— mother’s stories would have meant fighting integrity—pride—all for a handout from the for the United States; but since this would worst bastard in this stinkhole” (Clavell 350). have entailed combating the Japanese, it To Grey, then, a man such as the King is a would have meant violating the nationalistic greater enemy and threat than their own ideal his mother had held out for him. In captors. Again, the microcosm of the world choosing not to fight out of loyalty to his that the prisoner of war camp provides is mother, Ichiro cut himself off from the portrayed in how others perceive an American possibility of embodying the very ideal of who acts out a ruthless version of that most martial masculinity that she had raised him to American notion, the “American Dream.” identify with and emulate” (68). Throughout Many historical records exist that detail the novel, Ichiro must confront this the difficulties that arose from American- discrepancy, a Japanese American whose race Anglo relations. In his extensive biography denies him the rights of an American and who of Sir Stewart Menzies, the head of the British cannot hope to attain the cultural identity his secret service for twenty years, Anthony Cave family tries to force upon him.

Load more