History is But a Constant Stream of Ideas.

I got through the little bios of the six men in the epic flag photo before I had to put Flags of Our Fathers down. Really, James Bradley? You're going for the silent, stoic Indian, the hardworking loyal-to-adopted-homeland immigrant angle? Bradley skims through the first four guys because, let's face it, they were just regular ole small town white boys. There wasn't a whole lot to say about them. If he were a better, less painfully biased writer, perhaps he could have found a way to make me see the significance of such ordinary American boys becoming part of a legendary piece of history. Shit though, it's not that significant, if you think about it. Ordinary people are thrust into legend all the time. That's just how it works. You don't need to shove it up my butt. Jeez.

Anyway, the first four boys are pretty ordinary. It's not till Bradley gets to the last two that he really gets into it. Ira Hayes, the Pima Indian, the guy furthest to the left in the photo. Bradley writes that Hayes' hands are outstretched, unable to grasp the flagpole, when the sequence of photos on the inside of the front cover shows very clearly the progression of the pole as it's raised. As in, by the time of the infamous photo, the flag was well enough grounded and well enough on its way to going up, that Hayes had most likely just let go of it. Bradley's attempting to make a dramatic correlation between Hayes' place and attitude in the photo to his position in society, as a good ole American Injun, different and apart, though Hayes is right up there against the other guys. Bradley also says that Ira Hayes is silent in the photo. I'm not sure what this means. It sounds like he's really stretching it. He has almost no information on the man's character, other than that he was a very quiet person. Bradley takes this to mean that he was silent and stoical in the typical manner of all Indians, even while he quotes several people as saying that Hayes was particularly quiet.

Here's Bradley's words on Mike Strank: "He was the enigma: the immigrant who became the ultimate fighting Yank..." Talk about glorifying. Strank was out fighting battles, got promoted and stuck in charge of scared men even younger than him, so he told them he'd do his best to keep them alive. Sounds like a good guy, but jesus christ, the ultimate fighting Yank?? What's so enigmatic about him? Strank was the oldest brother in a coal-mining family. He was pretty smart and took care of his own. Bradley romanticizes and glorifies to no end. If the guy is really awesome, the reader will be able to pick that up. All the author needs to do is tell the damn story.

I think the problem is Bradley arranged his book like a really biased essay, when it's obvious he wants to write a novel.

Here is what annoys me about historical books and movies: they spend so much time setting everything up and showing supposedly necessary and factual clips and snippets that the whole point, the message, the ideals, get lost. What is your point? Your thesis? Why should I bother reading Flags of Our Fathers? Does the iconic image on its cover represent the indomitable spirit of America, as carried out by six seemingly unremarkable men? Is the meaning so blatantly obvious that I should feel mentally challenged for even having to ask? All this extra fluff is not necessary. Most often it obscures the true idea. Just like harlequin romance novels put a lot of bells and whistles on sex, most historical books and films cloud the real significance of events, the ideas that push history forward.