Why are the Pulitzer Prize books usually such a disappointment?
I had high hopes for Seymour M. Hersh's work because he was an experienced reporter, but he did not meet even my lowest expectations. With the familiar pathos of journalists, Hersh writes in a mysterious tone that promises the reader a big revelation of something that they had not known before. The tension builds, the reader turns the pages impatiently, and then – the book ends. The reader is left hanging, his curiosity unsatisfied, and they slowly realize that they have wasted the better part of a day, or several days, on a story that has not made them any wiser.
The author promises a thrilling account of how the My Lai massacre was deliberately covered up by the American Army from the lowest to the highest level. However, he does not deliver this story. Instead, he offers a mediocre account of the atrocities and those who participated in them. To me, his work resembled a collection of character introductions from a fictional novel. He indeed describes the members of Charlie Company, their commanders, and the high ranking military officials vividly, but these descriptions comprise the bulk of his narrative and make its focus narrow, leaving no room for an analysis of what actually happened during and after My Lai.
Like many other authors, Hersh is fascinated with Calley in the sense that he pays him more attention than he deserves. Calley was not any more important than his inferiors who committed the atrocities together with him or under his orders. The only reason for Calley's being better known than any other member of C Company, 11th Brigade was that he was the only one who got convicted for a war crime over one hundred soldiers, and the American government, were guilty of. The author's hyperfixation with the second lieutenant draws attention away from the important fact that Calley was not a lone man gone crazy. The military strategy of the American government made the massacres in Vietnam possible.
Furthermore, the author demonstrates a strong Communist bias by denying the fact that the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese troops have committed atrocities in South Vietnam. This was not correct. That Hanoi had developed a strategy of terror on purpose has been proven by captured and declassified Communist documents. For instance, General Tran Van Quong, who planned and comanded the Viet Minh siege of Dien Bien Phu that won Vietnam the freedom from French oppression that they craved, has written one such document to the Party headquarters. The battle of Hue, during which the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong men murdered civilians by the thousands so that the locals kept finding bodies until 1969, is no less horrible than My Lai. To deny Communist atrocities the way Hersh does is to distort the truth. I do not think that a convincing argument against the cover-up of war crimes by the American military leaders cannot be made without excusing the other side.
COVER-UP is a misleading work that does not provide the insight that Hersh promises. The author expressed biased views that contradict facts from credible sources. This book is not worth the time. I do not recommend it.