Much of the criticism over sniper is coming because Kyle fought in a war that has seen itself mired in controversy. But also because in the book and the movie, Kyle says some controversial things. In the book and in the movie, Kyle calls the people he was fighting "savages," as he does in this interview on a late night talk show. Further, in the book he says he has a clean conscious in regards to the people he has killed and believes that he was justified in killing them, specifically because their death represented fewer Americans being killed. Not only did he believe he was justified, but in the book he says that he actually enjoyed his time there; he enjoyed killing people.
You can see why this is controversial I'm sure. But the purposes behind writing this is to unearth a hidden perspective that Hollywood cannot put into a movie, and that people cannot put into autobiographical books.
Speaking of this first scene in the movie, Michael Green of Arizona State University says:
"But the movie does not pause to register the tragedy of their deaths. The drama in the scene – and throughout the movie –- turns on the crisis for Kyle, of the moral and emotional consequences of the war for him. The woman and child, like all Iraqis in the film, are rendered as conspicuously “other”: distant, dangerous, unknowable and malevolent. In this scene, for example, Eastwood does not show us their fear or anguish. Filming the action from Kyle’s point of view keeps them at a remove from the viewers’ sympathies."
What Mr. Green fails to register is this is not a movie about the Iraq plight. This is not a movie about the political situation underpinning the war in Iraq. This is not a movie about the demonizing of Arabs. This is a movie about Chris Kyle. Part of being a Navy Seal, or any militaristic occupational force that has invaded another country, is the harsh reality of doing things that are morally questionable. The point of this scene is to provide an understanding to people who have, in most cases, never experienced war. Most people have not made life or death decisions that if they choose wrongly, could result in the death of even more people. These are the psychological battles that the warrior must consider when he is in battle. If someone is trying to kill you or people that you are entrusted to protect, is it lawful to kill them before they kill you (or worse, other people who you're providing watch for), even if said person is a woman or child?
As you progress along in the movie, you will see that Chris Kyle begins to experience post traumatic stress disorder, which is common for those who have seen as much bloodshed as Kyle did. This demonstrates that while he may have been off the battlefield thousands of miles from danger, he was still fighting battles with the demons that haunted him. Imagine living with the knowledge that it was because of you someone, or many someones, is eating alone tonight because you couldn't save their spouse? Living with the thought that some little girl or little boy is going to grow up never knowing his or her father?
In a different article entitled, "Killing Ragheads for Jesus," by Chris Hedges, Hedges quotes a retired Air Force Mikey Weinstein:
The problem with this statement is, again, this movie is not a political commentary on the war in Iraq. This movie is about Chris Kyle. The word "service" has many different meanings. In America, if someone asks you, "Are you in the service?", this connotation typically means the person is asking if you are in the military. We call it "service" because quite simply, one serves his country by volunteering to be in the military. In America, unlike some other places like the Republic of Korea, military service is not mandatory. It is an act of courage and heroism that young men and women volunteer to go to war on behalf of our country. Therefore, we have designated the term "service" to link this understanding that, under no obligation, one is willing to fight for America and her enemies. In this way, Kyle perhaps had a political opinion about the war in Iraq; I'm almost sure he did. But where we go wrong is to suggest that the war in Iraq defines these encounters. What I mean is these political commentators are looking at this movie not from the lens of an autobiographical account of Chris Kyle, but through a politically motivated attack on the idiocy of the Iraq War. Kyle didn't ask to go to war. Kyle didn't go into the President's office in Washington and say, "We should go kill some Iraqis sir." He was merely in the right place at the right time that when his country went to war, he went to war. This is important to keep in mind when looking at the story of Chris Kyle because people keep trying to say "We should never have been in Iraq in the first place." Well, this simply was the purpose of the movie. In any case, we were in Iraq (a fact that you can't change) and Kyle was merely following the orders of his superior officers. So Kyle isn't the one to blame here. If one wants to make a political statement about the Iraq War then by all means: but leave Chris Kyle, a "service" member who was fulfilling his own personal obligations to be a Navy Seal, out of it. He didn't ask for it and he didn't have much to do with the political aspects of the war.
In any case, many are also (as I pointed out with Mr. Green's article) trying to portray the Iraqis as innocent victims of the cruel ironies of war. In some cases, I would wholeheartedly agree. However, Kyle saw a lot of action in a place called Fallujah. In 2004, the Marines launched a campaign called "Operation Phantom Fury." The insurgents had basically taken over the city of Fallujah and the Americans came to stomp out their fire. Days before and leading up to the operation, calls for civilians were made to leave the city. Many did. But many also came in. In the book, Kyle talks about how there were insurgents who weren't even Iraqi that came into the city to fight alongside their brothers. This is an important point when commentators try to provide the innocence of the Iraqi people: not all the people that Kyle killed were necessarily Iraqi.
What the main issue here however, is worldview. A worldview is essentially the way we perceive the world. There divide is widened between American commentators because they lack the proper worldview to see the Iraqi people. But even a more concerning issue is the lack of perspective of a warrior culture. Hedges says this later in his article:
"The book is even more disturbing than the film. In the film Kyle is a reluctant warrior, one forced to do his duty. In the book he relishes killing and war. He is consumed by hatred of all Iraqis. He is intoxicated by violence. He is credited with 160 confirmed kills, but he notes that to be confirmed a kill had to be witnessed, “so if I shot someone in the stomach and he managed to crawl around where we couldn’t see him before he bled out he didn’t count.”
He goes on to discuss how much of a brute Chris Kyle was. But this isn't the full truth on the subject. Let me explain:
In every culture, some are politicians, some are farmers, some are workers, and some are warriors. This has been true nearly throughout all of human history. The ancient Romans had a warrior class, as did the Spartans. The warrior culture today is often misunderstood. Being a Marine, I have some firsthand experience with this. Here in America, you have 18-19 year old kids being shipped off to war only to come back and have to deal with the consequences of that war. This is a traumatic experience to say in the least, something that you cannot fully comprehend unless you've been to war. Even before they go off to war however, they are inculcated with the ideals of a warrior. From day one at boot camp until they graduate from the School of Infantry, Marine grunts are essentially learning how to be a warrior. The culture that goes along with this is not pleasant: if you were to spend one day as an invisible person with the grunts you might be horrified at some of the things they do and say. In a longer quotation, this is Hedges concluding thoughts on the film American Sniper:
"The culture of war banishes the capacity for pity. It glorifies self-sacrifice and death. It sees pain, ritual humiliation and violence as part of an initiation into manhood. Brutal hazing, as Kyle noted in his book, was an integral part of becoming a Navy SEAL. New SEALs would be held down and choked by senior members of the platoon until they passed out. The culture of war idealizes only the warrior. It belittles those who do not exhibit the warrior’s “manly” virtues. It places a premium on obedience and loyalty. It punishes those who engage in independent thought and demands total conformity. It elevates cruelty and killing to a virtue. This culture, once it infects wider society, destroys all that makes the heights of human civilization and democracy possible. The capacity for empathy, the cultivation of wisdom and understanding, the tolerance and respect for difference and even love are ruthlessly crushed. The innate barbarity that war and violence breed is justified by a saccharine sentimentality about the nation, the flag and a perverted Christianity that blesses its armed crusaders. This sentimentality, as Baldwin wrote, masks a terrifying numbness. It fosters an unchecked narcissism. Facts and historical truths, when they do not fit into the mythic vision of the nation and the tribe, are discarded. Dissent becomes treason. All opponents are godless and subhuman. “American Sniper” caters to a deep sickness rippling through our society. It holds up the dangerous belief that we can recover our equilibrium and our lost glory by embracing an American fascism."
I hope you are as disgusted with this as I am. Because Hedges misses the point of a warrior culture: these are the men and women that are learning how to kill people. I won't spruce it up, that is essentially what their whole job will be: To kill the bad guys and bring the good guys back home. Regardless of the political situation or intent of a war, this is what Marine grunts, Navy Seals, Army Soldiers etc. train to do. The culture that is built around this idea includes things that are not deemed acceptable to our politically correct culture like hazing. It also lacks the individuality of other careers because you work as a team: if the team loses a member everyone is affected.
This is one facet of the warrior culture. I'm not saying that is correct or that it should be praised, I'm saying that understanding the worldview of the warrior culture is essential to interpreting this movie. Chris Kyle's job was to kill people. Do you think that the psychological sociological implications of that may tend to warp the status quo on what is "accepted" in a culture? The answer is a most resounding yes! For example, Chris Kyle said that he enjoyed killing. Understanding the warrior culture, one would have no problem with this statement. But since people like Chris Hedges are examining Kyle's occupation without this fact aligned with his perspective, he casts Kyle in an incredibly negative light. This isn't without it's problems however. For example, a huge problem in the American military is sexual assault, i.e., non consensual sex in the last 10 years. This could be contributed to the pent up male aggression one see's in long deployments working with mostly all males. Other factors contribute but this is certainly a negative side to the warrior culture (one that I believe we need to expunge from our ranks). Another example is the tendency to get into fights at bars. Hedges criticizes Kyle for getting into bar fights while on leave from deployments. Do you think understanding the warrior culture could explain why instances like this happen? The man had just experienced six months of grueling combat. Not all aspects of the warrior culture are commendable, but understanding it gives light to these complex social situations Kyle is being hanged for.
The warrior culture is nothing new, as I have said. Every culture has given the responsibility of national defense and war to a group of individuals in this caste. Without warriors, empires fall and nations crumble. Is those who want to be a part of something bigger than themselves that willingly join the "service" in order to protect those whom they love. For this reason, I believe every service member is a hero. And they bear within themselves the horrors of war. This is the most tragic aspect of the warrior culture. When you cease to examine American Sniper for it's political message, you will see that the point I believe that is trying to be conveyed is the tragedy of American Service members trying to battle their own demons after the war. [Spoiler Alert[ You can see at the end of the movie Kyle dies trying to help a fellow service member who was dealing with his own inner battles. Not only this, but relationships are strained: throughout the movie there is a constant tension of trying to be a father and a husband to his dear wife and kids while at the same time fighting a war. These are the situations that American Sniper is trying to convey: not these stupid political messages the media is trying to shove down our throats to vindicate their outspoken beliefs when these events transpired.
In all, I believe that when seen through the correct lens, American Sniper is a really moving and beautiful movie. In November, I had the honor for playing for Mr. Clint Eastwood in California. He said that American Sniper was the best movie he has made. And I would agree with him.
No comments:
Post a Comment