Images of war saturated American culture between the 1940s and the 1970s, as U.S. troops marched off to battle in World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. Exploring representations of servicemen in the popular press, government propaganda, museum exhibits, literature, film, and television, Andrew Huebner traces the evolution of a storied American icon--the combat soldier.
Huebner challenges the pervasive assumption that Vietnam brought drastic changes in portrayals of the American warrior, with the jaded serviceman of the 1960s and 1970s shown in stark contrast to the patriotic citizen-soldier of World War II. In fact, Huebner shows, cracks began to appear in sentimental images of the military late in World War II and were particularly apparent during the Korean conflict. Journalists, filmmakers, novelists, and poets increasingly portrayed the steep costs of combat, depicting soldiers who were harmed rather than hardened by war, isolated from rather than supported by their military leadership and American society. Across all three wars, Huebner argues, the warrior image conveyed a growing cynicism about armed conflict, the federal government, and Cold War militarization.
I wish I could give this book 3.5 stars. It really is better than 3 stars but I can't bring myself to give it 4-- make of that what you will.
Huebner traces the development of the soldier's image from WWII to Vietnam and hints at how that image has continued to change in the Gulf War(s). This book does an excellent job chipping away at the notion that WWII was a "good" war with vigorous young men going off to battle and coming home unscarred patriots. The most interesting points in this book are when he addresses the image of soldier's mental health in WWII and Korea. These passages underscore that PTSD is by no means unique to the current war but were a problem for a long time.
The book suffers from a problem of sourcing. Huebner only uses films and magazine articles (from Life, Time, etc) and does not augment these readings with letters or diaries from soldiers or the home front. Thus, the reader is left with a fairly one-dimensional understanding of the soldier image. There is little discussion about how the vets themselves reacted to these images.
I also think the book should have included information on the 1990s interventionist wars/peace keeping missions/etc (Balkans, Somalia, etc)