What do you think?
Rate this book
Brothers in Arms: A Journey from War to Peace
Reviews of the Knopf "A wonderful book—fresh and intelligent. Broyles's eye for Vietnam, then and now, is unerring." —Peter Jennings "[A] superbly written, often moving story of Broyles' journey back to the killing ground in Vietnam where he once served as a Marine lieutenant. A cool, clear meditation that stings the heart." —Kirkus Reviews "A first-rate piece of work, infused with an ideal American common decency and common sense." —Kurt Vonnegut "Exceptional and memorable." —Gay Talese
284 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1986
1 person is currently reading
52 people want to read
About the author
William Broyles Jr.
15 books16 followersWilliam Dodson Broyles, Jr. is an American screenwriter, who has worked on the television series China Beach (1988–1991), and the films Apollo 13 (1995), Cast Away (2000), Entrapment (1999), Planet of the Apes (2001), Unfaithful (2002), The Polar Express (2004), and Jarhead (2005).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
September 6, 2022
William Broyles Jr. fought in Vietnam. As a soldier, he was curious about the enemy, about those who killed his comrades and whom his comrades killed. He wondered how they saw the Vietnam conflict, how it impacted them and their close ones. He, like other infantrymen, wanted a definite confirmation that the enemy soldiers were not having it easier than he was. His curiosity also extended to the strategy and tactics of the war, as they were seen from the perspective of the high-ranking military officials. He does not dwell on this topic in his work, though. What he has written is much closer to a personal memoir than a study, and as most personal memoirs it is limited in scope and depth.
As becomes known from his account, the author was a volunteer in Vietnam. He served as a Marine infantry first lieutenant around Da Nang in 1969-1970. He does not state it explicitly, but it is suggested nevertheless that he has a mixed attitude toward the American involvement in the Vietnam conflict. On one hand, he believes that what the American government was doing was morally justifiable. On the other hand, he disapproves of the involvement because he considers it an operational mess.
The author returned to the battlefields of Vietnam in 1984 to retrospect about his experiences fighting there and to finally satisfy his curiosity about the people on the other side of the conflict. Although it does not become clear why, doing so must have been important to him – he quit his job as the editor of Newsweek to make that journey back in time. After I learned that I was reading the work of someone who took his mission seriously and wanted to write something more than an ordinary memoir, I set my expectations high. I was disappointed.
Although Broyles drew upon his interviews of the Vietnamese people whom he met, his work demonstrates that the insight their stories should have given him had no effect on his views of them. He continued to cling to his old beliefs that combine respect for the Vietnamese as fighters with a patronizing attitude toward them as people.
It is to his credit that he characterizes the Vietnamese fighters as steadfast, smart, and ingenious, and praises them for their tactics, endurance, and moral strength. Like many other American soldiers, he acknowledges that they were worthy opponents, whose strong patriotic spirit motivated them to fight with dedication and sacrifice themselves without hesitation. He notes that this patriotism should not have been underestimated by the Americans and ignored by the friends and allies of Third World countries like Vietnam. He underscores that the fact that the desire for independence that burned in the hearts of the Vietnamese people was abused by Communist leaders does not degrade the fighters' objectives.
However, the author fails to see beyond his belief that Marxist-Leninist propaganda was the only reason for the Vietnamese's resisting of the Americans. He does not recognize that the people of Vietnam, no matter if they were led by Communists, did not want another foreign power to indirectly govern them after less than two decades of freedom from the French colonialists. For him, they were brilliant fighters, but also poor, benighted heathens.
The perspective of the author is further narrowed by the nature of his trip. He was under Vietnamese official control, and his itinerary, interpreters, and, probably, interviewees were picked for him. It goes without saying that such conditions go against everything a researcher needs to gain an unbiased view of the situation in Vietnam. Broyles was not a naive person. He did his best through sift the information and deliver a well-written report of what he witnessed and learned: the tedious dogmatism of Communist officials, the depressingly dull life in the North, and the discontent in the South. However, this work lacks the depth that would have allowed it to actually reach the level of informativeness that the author seems to have been aiming for.
For instance, he touches on the problem of prisoners of war and raises questions that remain unanswered. He mentions that the members of the Swedish mission had the most freedom of action among foreigners in Vietnam, but he does not explain why. He reports seeing Americans in work gangs, but does not analyze the unconvincing claim of the Vietnamese official in charge of North American affairs that those Americans had all been released and that those who had chosen to stay were not held against their will.
BROTHERS IN ARMS would have been a great personal memoir. However, Broyles was trying to make something more than this out of his work without having the insight that he needed to do so. This book is not one that should be treated as serious history.
As becomes known from his account, the author was a volunteer in Vietnam. He served as a Marine infantry first lieutenant around Da Nang in 1969-1970. He does not state it explicitly, but it is suggested nevertheless that he has a mixed attitude toward the American involvement in the Vietnam conflict. On one hand, he believes that what the American government was doing was morally justifiable. On the other hand, he disapproves of the involvement because he considers it an operational mess.
The author returned to the battlefields of Vietnam in 1984 to retrospect about his experiences fighting there and to finally satisfy his curiosity about the people on the other side of the conflict. Although it does not become clear why, doing so must have been important to him – he quit his job as the editor of Newsweek to make that journey back in time. After I learned that I was reading the work of someone who took his mission seriously and wanted to write something more than an ordinary memoir, I set my expectations high. I was disappointed.
Although Broyles drew upon his interviews of the Vietnamese people whom he met, his work demonstrates that the insight their stories should have given him had no effect on his views of them. He continued to cling to his old beliefs that combine respect for the Vietnamese as fighters with a patronizing attitude toward them as people.
It is to his credit that he characterizes the Vietnamese fighters as steadfast, smart, and ingenious, and praises them for their tactics, endurance, and moral strength. Like many other American soldiers, he acknowledges that they were worthy opponents, whose strong patriotic spirit motivated them to fight with dedication and sacrifice themselves without hesitation. He notes that this patriotism should not have been underestimated by the Americans and ignored by the friends and allies of Third World countries like Vietnam. He underscores that the fact that the desire for independence that burned in the hearts of the Vietnamese people was abused by Communist leaders does not degrade the fighters' objectives.
However, the author fails to see beyond his belief that Marxist-Leninist propaganda was the only reason for the Vietnamese's resisting of the Americans. He does not recognize that the people of Vietnam, no matter if they were led by Communists, did not want another foreign power to indirectly govern them after less than two decades of freedom from the French colonialists. For him, they were brilliant fighters, but also poor, benighted heathens.
The perspective of the author is further narrowed by the nature of his trip. He was under Vietnamese official control, and his itinerary, interpreters, and, probably, interviewees were picked for him. It goes without saying that such conditions go against everything a researcher needs to gain an unbiased view of the situation in Vietnam. Broyles was not a naive person. He did his best through sift the information and deliver a well-written report of what he witnessed and learned: the tedious dogmatism of Communist officials, the depressingly dull life in the North, and the discontent in the South. However, this work lacks the depth that would have allowed it to actually reach the level of informativeness that the author seems to have been aiming for.
For instance, he touches on the problem of prisoners of war and raises questions that remain unanswered. He mentions that the members of the Swedish mission had the most freedom of action among foreigners in Vietnam, but he does not explain why. He reports seeing Americans in work gangs, but does not analyze the unconvincing claim of the Vietnamese official in charge of North American affairs that those Americans had all been released and that those who had chosen to stay were not held against their will.
BROTHERS IN ARMS would have been a great personal memoir. However, Broyles was trying to make something more than this out of his work without having the insight that he needed to do so. This book is not one that should be treated as serious history.
June 12, 2023
As I read this book, I thought often of the similarities between Broyles and my cousin John. Both Marines (John a captain), both from Texas. They were in Viet Nam a year apart (John was part of the Tet offensive). Both were college graduates when they went to Nam, and both continued their education at a high level when they returned to The World. Both were well read and well spoken. And both were deeply marked by their war experiences. I cant help but wonder how much the same—or how different—John’s book would have been.
With a mixture of history, war memoir, and modern analysis, Broyles put together one of the seminal book on Viet Nam. It’s 40 years old, which of course dates it somewhat, but everything he says rings true, especially the statement from an old NVA general he visited: “It’s easier to start a war than to end one.” A lesson that our country, sadly, has yet to learn.
With a mixture of history, war memoir, and modern analysis, Broyles put together one of the seminal book on Viet Nam. It’s 40 years old, which of course dates it somewhat, but everything he says rings true, especially the statement from an old NVA general he visited: “It’s easier to start a war than to end one.” A lesson that our country, sadly, has yet to learn.
June 23, 2011
In the early '90s there was a revisit Vietnam with documentaries and
movies and those inspired me to take a look at some of the books written about that
era. 'Brothers in Arms' is one of those standards of the time and the author
also worked on the TV show 'China Beach', a favorite show at the time.
One thing Broyles like to say is that if you weren't there, then you can't
understand it, then goes on to tell you about it.
I'd also suggest - 'Dispatches' Herr, 'Rumor of War' Caputo.
December 1, 2011
Great perspective. Being too young to know this war, I did not know where the listings were. I needed a map. It is great to help understand the personalities of the towns to know the conflict little better.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews