What do you think?
Rate this book
Echoes of War: A Thousand Years of Military History in Popular Culture
" A unique look at how a thousand years of military history are remembered in popular culture, through images ranging from the medieval knight to the horror of U.S. involvement in the My Lai massacre. Americans are often accused of not appreciating history, but this charge belies the real popular interest in the past. Historical reenactments draw thousands of spectators; popular histories fill the bestseller lists; PBS, A&E and The History Channel air a dizzying array of documentaries and historical dramas; and Hollywood war movies become blockbusters. Though historians worry that these popular representations sacrifice authenticity for broad appeal, Michael C.C. Adams argues that living history -- even if it is an incomplete depiction of the past -- plays a vital role in stimulating the historical imagination. In Echoes of War, he examines how one of the most popular fields of history is portrayed, embraced, and shaped by mainstream culture. Adams argues that symbols of war are of intrinsic military significance and help people to articulate ideas and values. We still return to the knight as a symbol of noble striving; the bowman appeals as a rebel against unjust privilege. Though Custer may not have been the Army's most accomplished fighter, he achieved the status of cultural icon. The public memory of the redcoated British regular soldier shaped American attitudes toward governments and gun laws. The 1863 attack on Fort Wagner by the black Fifty-fourth Massachusetts regiment was lost to public view until racial equality became important in the late twentieth century.
- GenresMilitary History
277 pages, Hardcover
First published September 30, 2002
14 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
March 1, 2017
The last chapter was heart-breaking, while the earlier ones built that hearty tension. Remarkable work!
January 23, 2015
I'll start with a brief disclaimer—I write this in haste because I'm juggling too many balls in grad. school right now. What follows is probably a mess, but hopefully will convey something of importance about Adams' book.
Michael C. C. Adams, a prolific author and military historian, argues that war shapes popular culture and that, in turn, popular culture can shape how nations practice subsequent wars. Adams describes how prominent war culture, for example the American fascination with the Alamo or the Boston Massacre, emerges because the actual event held intrinsic strategic value for the military or because the symbolic meaning of the event allows individuals to express core ideas about themselves or their national heritage. On the other hand, natural "media personalities" like George Armstrong Custer or Theodore Roosevelt could catapult an event like Little Big Horn or the Rough Riders into popular culture, but its staying power still relied upon Americans finding something valuable.
Before modernity, Adams suggests that English artists, poets, and writers created collective memory of military events such as the Bayeux Tapestry for the Battle of Hastings (1066) and William Shakespeare's Henry V for the Battle of Agincourt (1415). For Adams, modernity is a process that ends with the capability for mass production and popular culture to reach wide audiences and rapidly construct myths about the past. Whereas the collective memory of a Hastings or an Agincourt took decades or centuries to ferment, the "Good War" myth of World War II or the "spitting myth" of the Vietnam War took only months or years. The book's six chapters describe prominent symbols and motifs of war culture that include chivalry and knighthood, the archer, the "New Man," the Alamo and Battle of New Orleans during the War of 1812, Little Big Horn and the Charge of San Juan Hill, and finally a collection of salient cultural objects from twentieth century wars.
Adams develops a persuasive throw-away thesis about American "innocence" in the final chapter. He defines innocence as "a state of purity maintained by a lack of knowledge about matters deemed unseemly" (181). He describes a state of willing ignorance among Americans who avoid the gruesome realities of war. With the exception of media reports during the Vietnam War and the spate of PBS documentaries during the 1980s and 1990s, Adams accuses the media and Hollywood of sanitizing images, language, and ideas about war. To be fair, Adams acknowledges that these are for-profit enterprises that inevitably cater to viewer demands and wishes. Still, the end result being the same: American culture has decoupled war from its human cost as new technologies and an American reliance on air power has made late-twentieth century reportage of war more like video games than about carnage and destruction. I buy the argument primarily because Adams demonstrates how the entire span of American war culture has created a lexicon of symbols that obscure war's true nature and instead posit war as a regenerative for altruism or a space for individualistic glory. The most damning evidence for these patterns comes through in the chapter "New Men with Rifles." Common ideas and representations of militia units at Lexington and Concord, during the American Revolution, in the Battle of New Orleans, at the Alamo, and with iconic figures like Davy Crockett have cultivated a myth that the American fighting man was a "minuteman or frontier fighter, was an innocent, who knew nothing of killing until roused to righteous fury by aggression" (105). This myth translates into a grand narrative of the United States as a reluctant participant in conflict, a nation of innocent amateurs who, when called to arms in defense of grave injustice, can crush its opponents.
There are a number of other compelling ideas and interventions in this book that I cannot address thoroughly here. This is a great survey of popular war culture in the United States; its development, articulation, and change across time.
Michael C. C. Adams, a prolific author and military historian, argues that war shapes popular culture and that, in turn, popular culture can shape how nations practice subsequent wars. Adams describes how prominent war culture, for example the American fascination with the Alamo or the Boston Massacre, emerges because the actual event held intrinsic strategic value for the military or because the symbolic meaning of the event allows individuals to express core ideas about themselves or their national heritage. On the other hand, natural "media personalities" like George Armstrong Custer or Theodore Roosevelt could catapult an event like Little Big Horn or the Rough Riders into popular culture, but its staying power still relied upon Americans finding something valuable.
Before modernity, Adams suggests that English artists, poets, and writers created collective memory of military events such as the Bayeux Tapestry for the Battle of Hastings (1066) and William Shakespeare's Henry V for the Battle of Agincourt (1415). For Adams, modernity is a process that ends with the capability for mass production and popular culture to reach wide audiences and rapidly construct myths about the past. Whereas the collective memory of a Hastings or an Agincourt took decades or centuries to ferment, the "Good War" myth of World War II or the "spitting myth" of the Vietnam War took only months or years. The book's six chapters describe prominent symbols and motifs of war culture that include chivalry and knighthood, the archer, the "New Man," the Alamo and Battle of New Orleans during the War of 1812, Little Big Horn and the Charge of San Juan Hill, and finally a collection of salient cultural objects from twentieth century wars.
Adams develops a persuasive throw-away thesis about American "innocence" in the final chapter. He defines innocence as "a state of purity maintained by a lack of knowledge about matters deemed unseemly" (181). He describes a state of willing ignorance among Americans who avoid the gruesome realities of war. With the exception of media reports during the Vietnam War and the spate of PBS documentaries during the 1980s and 1990s, Adams accuses the media and Hollywood of sanitizing images, language, and ideas about war. To be fair, Adams acknowledges that these are for-profit enterprises that inevitably cater to viewer demands and wishes. Still, the end result being the same: American culture has decoupled war from its human cost as new technologies and an American reliance on air power has made late-twentieth century reportage of war more like video games than about carnage and destruction. I buy the argument primarily because Adams demonstrates how the entire span of American war culture has created a lexicon of symbols that obscure war's true nature and instead posit war as a regenerative for altruism or a space for individualistic glory. The most damning evidence for these patterns comes through in the chapter "New Men with Rifles." Common ideas and representations of militia units at Lexington and Concord, during the American Revolution, in the Battle of New Orleans, at the Alamo, and with iconic figures like Davy Crockett have cultivated a myth that the American fighting man was a "minuteman or frontier fighter, was an innocent, who knew nothing of killing until roused to righteous fury by aggression" (105). This myth translates into a grand narrative of the United States as a reluctant participant in conflict, a nation of innocent amateurs who, when called to arms in defense of grave injustice, can crush its opponents.
There are a number of other compelling ideas and interventions in this book that I cannot address thoroughly here. This is a great survey of popular war culture in the United States; its development, articulation, and change across time.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews