May 7, 2024: Beach Blogging: On the Beach

[Releasedon May 11, 1964, “IGet Around” would go on to become the first#1 hit for The Beach Boys. To celebrate that sunny anniversary, this week I’llAmericanStudy a handful of beachtastic texts, leading up to a repeat Guest Postfrom one of our up-and-coming BeachStudiers!]

On theintense and tragic film that couldn’t compete with historic fears.

1959, thesame year as the original Gidget movieabout which I blogged yesterday, also saw the release of a very, very differentbeach film: On the Beach. Based onBritish-Australian writer Nevil Shute’s 1957 novel, the filmfeatured an all-star cast (including Gregory Peck, Ava Gardner, and Fred Astaire) as thesailors, scientists, and their friends and loved ones dealing with apost-apocalyptic world. It’s 1964, World War III has taken place, and theresulting radiation is slowly taking over the world and destroying itsremaining inhabitants. Mostly set on or around Peck’s submarine, the film usesthat setting to create a broadly claustrophobic tone, portraying a world inwhich likely slow death by radiation poisoning or the humane but absolutealternative of suicide pills seem to be the only possible futures. It’sunrelenting and uncompromising, and deserves to be much better remembered thanit is.

Whilethat’s true of the film on its own artistic merits, it’s even more true interms of what the film reveals about the Cold War’s threats and fears. When Ithink of World War III scenarios in popular films, I tend to think ofover-the-top dramatics of one kind or another: the ridiculous satire of Dr.Strangelove (1964);the teenage humor and heroics of WarGames (1983) and TheManhattan Project (1986); the flag-waving jingoism of RedDawn (1984).All of those films can illustrate certain important aspects of the period, butall feel, again, exaggerated in one way or another, extreme in both their plotsand tones. Whereas On the Beach, tothis AmericanStudier at least, feels profoundly grounded, offers a socially andpsychologically realistic depiction not just of the potential aftermath of anuclear war, but also and even more tellingly of the period’s collective fearsabout what such a war would mean and do. Seeing [SPOILER ALERT] Fred Astairekill himself rather than face imminent radiation poisoning—well, that feelsdeeply representative of the moment’s worst fears.

You’dthink that such fears might have lead to more widespread opposition to the ColdWar’s arms race and militaryindustrial complex—and indeed the U.S. military must havethought so too, as they denied the filmmakers permission to use a submarine orany other official materials. But I would argue that whatever possibleinfluence such fears might have had was far outweighed by a different set offears, ones exemplified by October1962’s Cuban Missile Crisis: fears not of nuclear war and its aftermathper se, but rather of the Soviet Union’s nuclear arsenal, and what would happenif America’s did not match and even exceed that opposing threat. Whereas On the Beach portrayed the horrificresults of a nuclear war, the Missile Crisis reflected and amplified fears thatthe U.S. was potentially unprepared for such a war, one that our enemy waswilling and able to bring to our very doorstep. Perhaps no film, not even oneas compelling and convincing as On theBeach, could compete with such historic threats—and so the arms race andthe Cold War only deepened in the 1960s and beyond.

Next Beachtext tomorrow,

Ben

PS. Whatdo you think? Other beachtastic texts you’d highlight?