denbeste@BBN.COM (Steven Den Beste) (12/12/89)
From: Steven Den Beste <denbeste@BBN.COM>
I suspect that most of the readers of this group have watched many movies about
major battles or wars, and we all grit our teeth when we see an American
Corsair used to depict a German fighter, or something equally stupid.
There are lots of flaws and lots of outright untruths in those films, and a
listing of them might go on forever. I am struck, however, by a few cases where
the films actually tell the truth, but distort it in such a way as to make it
an outright lie.
Here are a few of my favorite ones:
1. The movie "Zulu" correctly states that Commissary Dalton got a Victoria
Cross for his acts during that battle. Commissary Dalton is portrayed as a
prissy, overly civilized, almost fey sort of guy. At one point he sees a Zulu
coming over a wall and shouts "Somebody get that fellow!" - someone bayonets
the Zulu, and Dalton pats him on the shoulder and says "Good fellow!". He
spends most of his time going around putting piles of bullets on the wall for
the soldiers. For this, he apparently won a Victoria Cross.
Yech. Before going into officer rank in the quartermaster corps, Dalton was
a color sergeant in the regular infantry, with all that implies. During the
battle he was effectively third in command and moved around helping out where
needed. He apparently actually fought like a buzzsaw. (This is according to a
book about the Zulu war that I have read.) For the movie, they seem to have
invented someone named "Color Sergeant Bourne" to perform this function.
He really DID receive a VC, but he earned it, in spades.
[By the way, speaking as a professional engineer, I've always been kind of
pleased that the military of most countries consider engineers to be
line-officers, unlike quartermaster or medical officers. It's a damned good
thing in this case - without the "Leftenant" of Engineers, that company
would probably have been butchered to a man by the 40-to-1 odds they faced.]
2. Every historical account now available to me, movies or books, says that
Tony McAuliffe, ranking officer in the US 101st airborne division in Bastogne
during the battle of the Bulge, answered the surrender request with the
word "Nuts". I have read that he really answered with two much
stronger words (my suspicion being that it was "f**k off"), but that there
was a general agreement among the press and others to substitute "Nuts"
in all reports. (Sort of like the way that news photographers did their best
to not show Roosevelt's polio.)
Of course, the emotional impact of "Nuts" is more or less the same, but
weaker. It's just a damned shame that they can't be completely honest with us.
I mean, a brigadier deciding that a division and a half, with supplies running
out, are going to fight to the death against odds of 5 to 1 (and more like 20
to 1 in armor), completely surrounded and with no relief in sight, and
"Nuts" is all he can come up with to represent his defiance?
3. The movie "Midway" correctly begins with the codebreakers in Hawaii picking
the Japanese orders up and interpreting them, but early in the movie a
fictitious officer asks the head of the codebreakers what proportion of the
important messages they were deciphering, and he answers "15%" - but changes
that to "10%" when pressed. In fact they were decoding something like 80% of
the important messages, as indicated by the fact that they named nearly every
Japanese ship in every single naval group, precisely where and when each left,
and very accurately when and where they would arrive at Midway, not to mention
describing the assignments of the senior officers and their parts in the
battleplan.
Many battles have actually depended on such intelligence, but are told with
that part left out. (For instance, Rommel looked like a genius in North Africa
because his codebreakers were reading messages sent by an American observer
attached to the British headquarters.) But if you tell THIS one without the
codebreakers, it makes Nimitz look telepathic. But they still decided to
de-emphasize it as much as they could. I don't quite understand why this is.
Of course, Nimitz still deserves enormous credit for having the guts to
shove every chip he had onto the roulette table, even with this enormous
advantage in intelligence. And I'd like to take this opportunity to praise the
best single decision made by any officer on either side during this battle,
that being when Admiral Fletcher transferred command to Admiral Spruance after
Lexington was crippled.
4. The movie "Waterloo" was suitably heroic on both sides, and at one very
stirring moment Wellington says words to the effect "Bring in the soldiers from
the left flank, to here! Here is where we'll stand!" All well and good, but
what they DON'T tell you is that he could do this because a Prussian corps
showed up and relieved that part of the line. They also unlimbered about a
hundred guns, and brought in a hell of a lot of new cavalry - which was vital
in keeping the French from reforming after the defeat. Just once, JUST ONCE I'd
like to see a historical account of Waterloo which gives the Prussians some
credit. (Please understand: This is from someone who painted a heavy brigade of
1812 Prussians in 15 mm. 1/20 scale for "Fire and Steel".)
Can anyone else contribute any "untrue truths" to my list?
Steven C. Den Beste || denbeste@bbn.com (ARPA/CSNET)
BBN Communications Corp. || {apple, usc, husc6, csd4.milw.wisc.edu,
150 Cambridge Park Dr. || gatech, oliveb, mit-eddie,
Cambridge, MA 02140 || ulowell}!bbn.com!denbeste (USENET)denbeste@BBN.COM (Steven Den Beste) (12/13/89)
From: Steven Den Beste <denbeste@BBN.COM> In article <12215@cbnews.ATT.COM> denbeste@BBN.COM (*I*) wrote: >And I'd like to take this opportunity to praise the >best single decision made by any officer on either side during this battle, >that being when Admiral Fletcher transferred command to Admiral Spruance after >Lexington was crippled. > Oops. I guess I just got voted out of the club. Lexington was lost at the battle of Coral Sea. It was Yorktown which Fletcher was on at Midway. My apologies.
freeman@decwrl.dec.com (Jay R. Freeman) (12/14/89)
From: argosy!freeman@decwrl.dec.com (Jay R. Freeman)
For that matter, there were *two* US aircraft carriers named "Lexington"
in WWII -- I don't recall the numbers of either, but I think both were
CVs. The first was sunk at Coral Seal; I believe the second survived
the war and is still in use for training aviators in carrier operations.
-- Jay Freeman
[mod.note: the first Lexington was CV-2, of the Lexington class. The
second was CV-16, Essex class. - Bill ]