Weekend meanderings: Veteran's Day, Ira Hayes, & Doonesbury [Updated]
Yesterday was Veteran's Day in the US. I'm not going to say much about it, since so much is written on the subject elsewhere. Besides, it's a pretty low-key affair around here, since I live in Germany and most of the 1st Armored Division is currently deployed in Iraq. So I celebrated by finally finishing the film "Flags of our Fathers", which was a hell of a great movie (and so was the sequel "Letters from Iwo Jima"). If you haven't seen them, go rent the movies now, or better yet, buy the book that inspired them, "Flags of Our Fathers", by James Bradley.
After the film, as I often do, I decided to research the events myself. One thing that really struck me was how much the Ira Hayes in the movie is a dead ringer for the man himself (picture above). Ira Hamilton Hayes, despite his thoroughly European-sounding name, was a Pima Indian, and born and died on the Gila River Indian reservation in Arizona. A true American, he was one of the marines who raised the flag on Iwo Jima in the most famous photo of the war, but never adjusted well to the celebrity status that this event brought him. Later in life, he continuously fought with his fame, PTSD, and alcoholism. A little bio and his tombstone can be viewed here.
One thing that struck me about the film was how different that era was. Cartoons like this "Doonesbury" strip (shown below) never would have made it into the press. But instead of being banned, it's run in the military newspaper the Stars & Stripes, right on the editorial page, across from another regular feature called "Prickly City" (which has a slightly right-wing slant to balance out Doonesbury, I suppose).
The cartoon inspired me to write the following letter to the paper. But first a little background; the paper is widely read by service members in the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, and Iraq. Recently there have been back and forth letters praising/criticising pundits like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, among others:
It's funny that the same people who complain about Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter don't say anything about Garry Trudeau.
Well, I often find his cartoons offensive. Last week, he crossed the line of decency when he depicted the vice-president as a wild, hooded, Satanic figure trying to leave the "Mideast in flames". This echoes the same propaganda by Osama Bin Laden and many Iranian officials, who regularly compare our leaders to Satan. On Sat, Nov 10, the comic says Cheney smelled like "sulphur", the same thing that Hugo Chavez said of Bush in an infamous speech.
Since it's a free country, I guess Trudeau can give aid and comfort to our enemies if he wants. Unlike those who complain about Rush or Coulter, I'm not advocating censorship. But can we at least move "Doonesbury" from the editorial page to the regular comic section where it belongs? Running it on the editorial page gives it an appearance of special importance, and it doesn't belong anyway since it's not considered to be a political cartoon per se, and it's only occasionally political (same goes for "Prickly City"). If you just need to fill the space, you could always sign on some regular political cartoonists.
UPDATE 15/11/2007 10:26:00 AM:
The Stars & Stripes printed my letter! I'll let you know if there is any interesting feedback from it.
Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my RSS Feed
2 comments:
I find it funny that Limbaugh and Coulter, who through their antics have become cartoonish parodies of themselves, are being discussed on the same page as Trudeau.
Doonesbury has always been political, and he does belong on the editorial page. You just don't like the sound of the truth coming off his pen.
Ian,
You wouldn't be trying to define truth in political discourse, now would you?
Post a Comment