World War II has been depicted in countless books, documentaries, and Hollywood movies. Some of these movies are basically action films of one sort or another. That is, they dramatize the contributions of those who fought for the various Allied nations. These films can take place on submarines and other warships, in bombers or fighter planes, or in various (often exotic) ground locations all over the world. Other films tell the stories of those who lived under Nazi or Japanese rule, with difficult decisions dropped on these unluckily-placed people. For example, some of them chose to escape, some of them chose to spy for the Allies, and others of them chose to collaborate with the Axis occupations of their own countries (sadly enough). Other films depict parts of the Holocaust, dramatizing the countless victims of the genocide. Other films (such as “Tora! Tora! Tora!”) ask big questions, like how we got involved in the war. I have even heard of a film about the efforts to prevent the Nazis from getting the atomic bomb. (More about that here.) Other films depict World War II code-crackers or spies, prisoners of war in Axis-controlled prison camps, or even the postwar Nuremberg trials. There are biographies of major leaders – such as FDR, Churchill, Patton, or Eisenhower. And there are countless stories about ordinary people doing extraordinary things. Why is this? What is it about World War II that continues to fascinate people, all of these decades after it tore the world apart – and then altered the very map of the world itself?
Firefighters tackling a blaze amongst ruined buildings after an air raid – London, 1941
World War II was the greatest war in history, and the most different from its predecessors
It might be impossible here to cover every aspect of the ongoing fascination with World War II. But one hint may come from the conflict’s name: World War II. There have been other wars in history that have been referred to as “world wars,” but I can think of no other shooting war that was more deserving of this title. (The Cold War comes close, but it is not a “shooting war,” even if it contained some shooting wars within it.) The name “Second World War” obviously recognizes that there was a “First World War” before it. And it’s true that World War One is also worthy of that weighty title. Some have referred to earlier conflicts as “world wars,” including the forgotten “Seven Years’ War” of the eighteenth century. But no other conflicts in history sucked in as many parts of the world as the First and Second World Wars. The first of those wars was originally called “the Great War,” in a clear recognition of its then-unparalleled (and certainly unprecedented) scale. But it would soon be followed by a Second World War, which would prove even more destructive than the first one. Some have argued that these two conflicts were really just two parts of the same war, with a 20-year hiatus in between them. There is certainly an argument to be made for this position. But this 20-year hiatus brought some great technological changes, which affected how the second of these two great rounds of the conflict was to be fought. I should nonetheless acknowledge that the First World War pioneered many of the technologies that would later be used in the Second World War. This includes things like machine-guns and tanks, as well as the more obvious technologies like military submarines and aircraft. Surprisingly to many people, even the aircraft carrier was actually pioneered in the First World War. These technologies all had an effect in World War One. But they would have an even greater effect in World War Two, since all of these technologies had become far more effective since the “Great War.” Indeed, no other conflict in history produced such rapid changes to military technology as World War Two. It was more different from its predecessors than any other war in history. It changed the very way that wars are fought. From radar and blitzkrieg to jet engines and atomic weapons, it introduced many major innovations to the manner of warfare. This, too, continues to fascinate people – and I cannot possibly do justice to all of these technological changes here. In both numbers and degree, these changes surpass even those of the “war to end all wars.” Obviously, the Great War didn’t really “end all wars” – nor has anything else since then done so. Thus, the Second World War sucked in one nation after another – adding to the sheer human drama of the conflict.
P-51 Mustangs, 1944 – the first fighter that could go far enough to escort bombers to Germany
The conflict is also relatively close to us in time and place, hitting home in many places
To be sure, that intense human drama explains much of the popular interest in the conflict. For many nations around the world, on both sides of the great chasm, these dramas would play out in one fashion or another. But many other subjects in history have an intense human drama, from the Roman Empire to the collapse of the Berlin Wall. What is it about World War II that invites such a degree of popular interest? To some degree, it also has something to do with its being closer to home for us. I was part of a generation that could meet the veterans of World War II, such as my own Marine grandfather – who fought in the Pacific. This is true in nations from Britain and France, to America and Canada, to Australia and New Zealand. It is also true in the former Soviet Union, and in many of the former Axis nations. So many of the world’s families were touched by World War II. Far before my birth, my grandma lost her uncle (my great-great-uncle) to the campaigns in Italy. And my family was far from the only family to lose someone special to them. This tragedy was played out in nation after nation, with the infamous telegrams that bore the bad tidings of death and loss. Thus, the war’s relative proximity to us in time and place … can explain some of the popular interest in World War II. But there are several other conflicts, even closer to the present, which would seldom excite the same interest. I’ve known a fair number of Vietnam veterans, for example, yet there are far fewer movies about the Vietnam War – and even fewer about the intervening Korean War. Indeed, Korea is often referred to as a “forgotten war” – as the title of a notable documentary about that conflict would seem to indicate. (It’s simply called “Korea: The Forgotten War” – more about that documentary here. But back to World War II.)
American troops landing at Anzio Beach, where my great-great-uncle was killed – Italy, 1944
World War II was mostly successful, because it finally led to the defeat of the Axis nations
Part of the answer may thus come from how World War II was much bigger than either Korea or Vietnam. But another part may come from the popular perceptions of what these wars ultimately accomplished. That is, the Korean War succeeded in protecting the freedom of South Korea, but still felt more incomplete – because the aggressors of the war remained unpunished. At the end of the war, North Korea remained communist, and the communist Chinese who had entered the war likewise continued in their communist ways. This, along with other things, probably made the war somewhat unsatisfying for many Americans. The end of the Vietnam War proved even more unsatisfying, as South Vietnam was absorbed into communist North Vietnam. Today, of course, we simply call this nation “Vietnam,” which remains communist to this day. The end of World War II was not without its own complexities, since the “Iron Curtain” divided Europe – just as Churchill was then saying. (See the most famous quote from his great “Iron Curtain” speech here.) Eventually, the complicated aftermath of the war would be expressed in a symbol that was even more infamous: the Berlin Wall of 1961. But the primary purpose of World War II had still been accomplished – namely, the defeat of the three major Axis nations. Fascist Italy had been knocked out of the fight relatively early in the war, to be followed soon afterward by its northern neighbor of Nazi Germany. Six months later, Imperial Japan also surrendered to the Allies in 1945. Thus, the bloodbath was finally over. For many decades, we would have to deal with the inroads of a new enemy – namely, our former allies in the Soviet Union. The battle lines of the coming Cold War had already been drawn. But Western Europe remained free, and a significant portion of East Asia was now being introduced to democracy for the first time – or having it restored to what it was before. Small wonder, then, that the contributions of the “greatest generation” are so often celebrated today. There were people in the Korea and Vietnam generations who had fought just as bravely as any in the “greatest generation,” I should reverently acknowledge here. But more of the “greatest generation” supported the war effort, because they were convinced of its ultimate necessity. This may help to explain why they are so often remembered with that ringing phrase: the “greatest generation.”
Nuremberg trials
World War II is widely recognized as a struggle of good against evil (as it should be)
And this brings us to yet another reason that World War II receives such popular interest. That is, there is popular recognition that it was a struggle of good against evil. Sadly, this is less true for the Pacific theater, because there are people today who suggest that Japan was “picked on” for not being Western enough. (I’m not sure how this can be reconciled with the Pearl Harbor attacks, or with the infamous atrocities in Nanking – but so goes the popular revisionist theory today.) But, even with this part of the war, there are many who recognize that the Axis nations still needed to be defeated. And, of course, the Nazis have been portrayed as bad guys in movie after movie – making the very terms “fascist” and “Nazi” into some of the most bitter insults of our generation – and there are many others, like “racist” and “sexist.” (But that’s a topic for another post.) There are other conflicts in history that were likewise in this good-and-evil vein – such as the earlier American Civil War, where the pro-Union forces of Abraham Lincoln fought against slavery and secession in the South. But fewer nations know much about this most massive war on the North American continent. And, although the American Civil War would bring the end of chattel slavery, further progress for those who had recently been freed would come somewhat slowly here – as many have acknowledged since then. Thus, in World War II, we may see a somewhat clearer end … to those evils against which the Allies had been fighting. The nations of Eastern Europe are still dealing with some of the complications from World War II, as are the various communist nations of East Asia mentioned earlier. But, to paraphrase Stephen Ambrose, “the good guys won, the bad guys lost, and justice has never been better served.” Thus, when we watch movies depicting the battles of World War II, we are left with the satisfying feeling that the Allies ultimately accomplished something, and that the sacrifices did indeed bring about some lasting changes in this regard. To be clear, this can be said of some other wars, but it cannot be said of all of them. To some degree, this would even be a very inappropriate description of World War Two’s “Russian front,” which was more like “evil against evil.”
Raising the American flag at Iwo Jima, 1945
Conclusion: There are good reasons for the ongoing public fascination with World War II
Thus, time and time again, popular historians keep coming back to World War II. It explains many things, such as the United States going from an economic depression into significant economic prosperity. It explains our map, and which flags fly over the soil of this or that part of the world. It explains who got the atomic bomb first, and who only got it in some later years or decades. It provides us with great action stories, of moving stories about being faced with tough decisions, and with complicated questions about the war’s origins – which still generate some debate today. And it provides us with an inspiring Homeric epic about good and evil. It shows us how liberty was able to triumph (at least partially) over the forces of tyranny and oppression. If that’s not relevant today, then I don’t know what is. These things all explain why people are still interested in, and even fascinated by, World War II. To be clear, there are many other important topics in history – and these likewise need to be remembered. But I hope that the interest in World War II always continues, and that the lessons of World War II will be taught to each succeeding generation. Perhaps, then, the legacy of the “greatest generation” will live on forever – and never die.
Footnote to this blog post:
I mentioned earlier that my maternal grandfather fought as a Marine in the Pacific. By contrast, my paternal grandfather was too young to fight in World War II. But he had a great interest in the war, and helped to introduce me to the subject. I credit him with igniting my lifelong interest in World War II.
Disclosure: I am an Amazon affiliate marketer, and can sometimes make money when you buy the product using the link(s) above.
If you liked this post, you might also like:
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment