Film As Medium of Choice To Present War Information
After World War I the methods used to gain support from troops and civilians needed to change. Giving speeches to both soldier recruits and the American public was no longer effective. Film became the medium of choice to inform American soldiers and recruits about why fighting was necessary. As Kathleen German states, “this was the first massive attempt to influence opinion in the U.S. military” through film. Film was also chosen because it combined the senses of sight and hearing, giving it an advantage over radio or print. Capra, who had no experience in documentary films, was chosen because “of his commitment to American ideals” and because of the popularity of some of his earlier feature films. He was thought “to understand the heart and soul of American audiences.” Once the documentary series was completed, it was said to contain the “Capra touch.”
The series' appeal was furthered by how the film was edited. “Throughout his career Capra depended upon his skill as an editor to achieve the contrast of the individual and the group, critical in the success of his Hollywood movies.” Capra thought it would be most effective to use the enemy’s original film and propaganda in the series in order to expose the enemies with their own images. By taking pieces of the enemy material to edit together and placing his own narration over the results, Capra gave meaning and purpose to the war with added narrative. This “parallel editing” created an “us vs. them” image by reframing and showing clips out of their original order and context.
By such careful editing, the films compared and contrasted the forces of evil with America and its traditional values. Capra highlighted the differences between America and the enemy and showed how the enemy would attack these values if “we” did not fight. This worked to create a battle not only between Allies and the Axis Powers but between good and evil. Capra treated it as a matter of showing the enormity of the Axis cause and the justness of the Allied. In order to justify the Western Allies' alliance with the Soviet Union, the series misportrayed or simply omitted many facts, which could have cast doubts on the "good guy" status of the Soviets, such as the Nazi-Soviet alliance, Soviet invasion of Poland; Soviet occupation of the Baltic States, Winter War and others. Virtually in line with Soviet propaganda, the series was not only screened but widely acclaimed in the Soviet Union. To exonerate the Soviets, the series casts even less important Allies, like the Poles, in the bad light, even repeating Nazi propaganda claims such as the Tuchola Forest myth or false claims about the Polish Air Force being destroyed on the ground.
The Why We Fight series became a heavily used means of presenting information about Axis powers for the American government during World War II. General Surles, the director of the Department of War’s Bureau of Public Relations, had hoped that the series would be effective enough to allow similar kinds of army films to be shown to the general public. Surles saw this goal realized when Prelude to War, the most successful of the seven films, was shown to President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Roosevelt saw this film as so important that he ordered it to be distributed in civilian arenas for public viewing. However, some objections were raised against the Why We Fight series because it was so persuasive. Lowell Mellett, the coordinator of government films and aide to Roosevelt, saw the films as dangerous. He was most concerned with the effect the series would have after the war was over and the “hysteria” the films would create in their wake. At least 54 million Americans had seen the series by the end of the war, and studies were done to gauge the impact of the films. However, the results were inconclusive, and therefore the effectiveness of the series is still in question.
Read more about this topic: Why We Fight
Famous quotes containing the words film, medium, choice, present, war and/or information:
“Film is more than the twentieth-century art. It’s another part of the twentieth-century mind. It’s the world seen from inside. We’ve come to a certain point in the history of film. If a thing can be filmed, the film is implied in the thing itself. This is where we are. The twentieth century is on film.... You have to ask yourself if there’s anything about us more important than the fact that we’re constantly on film, constantly watching ourselves.”
—Don Delillo (b. 1926)
“A medium Vodka dry Martini—with a slice of lemon peel. Shaken and not stirred, please. I would prefer Russian or Polish vodka.”
—Ian Fleming (1908–1964)
“When there is a choice about it, a great sacrifice is preferable to a small sacrifice, because we compensate ourselves for a great one with self-admiration, which is not possible with a small one.”
—Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900)
“A book is not an autonomous entity: it is a relation, an axis of innumerable relations. One literature differs from another, be it earlier or later, not because of the texts but because of the way they are read: if I could read any page from the present time—this one, for instance—as it will be read in the year 2000, I would know what the literature of the year 2000 would be like.”
—Jorge Luis Borges (1899–1986)
“Of course in war all madnesses come out in a man, that is the fault of war not of a man or a nation.”
—Frieda Lawrence (1879–1956)
“In the information age, you don’t teach philosophy as they did after feudalism. You perform it. If Aristotle were alive today he’d have a talk show.”
—Timothy Leary (b. 1920)