Book review: Dissenting POWs: From Vietnam Hoa Lo Prison to America Today

IF 2 2区 社会学 Q2 SOCIOLOGY
Lester Andrist
{"title":"Book review: Dissenting POWs: From Vietnam Hoa Lo Prison to America Today","authors":"Lester Andrist","doi":"10.1177/00207152231183522","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One challenge of research that attempts to reconstruct a war discourse is that certain spaces are typically inaccessible. While public discussions in the United States about the nature of an enemy or consternation about whether the state is engaged in a just war are pervasive and can be readily ascertained through a careful read of media archives, access to the discourses that occur inside war prisons are another matter. War prisons, concentration camps, and the like not only detain bodies but also information. As some scholars maintain, such camps are the paradigmatic storehouses of hidden transcripts, and indeed, knowledge about their very existence is often restricted. Tom Wilber and Jerry Lembcke have overcome this challenge in their book Dissenting POWs: From Vietnam’s Hoa Lo Prison to America Today by carefully reconstructing of the discourse surrounding the Vietnam War, as it happened for both American soldiers inside the prisoner-ofwar (POW) camps and average Americans on the homefront. In their own words, Wilber and Lembcke sought to develop “the history of attempts to repress that dissent and purge it from public memory” (p. 11). The project appears to have personal significance for Tom Wilber, whose father, Navy pilot Gene Wilber, was shot down in 1968 and captured in North Vietnam. Wilber was captured and while in captivity, he came out against the United States’ involvement in Vietnam. Then, after Wilber’s release in 1973, journalist Mike Wallace interviewed him for CBS’s “60 Minutes.” “Had Wilber succumbed to torture in his antiwar statements broadcast by Radio Hanoi?” Wallace asked. Without making an overt accusation, the introduction helped promote an emergent retort to the antiwar protests of POWs. By framing dissent as the tainted view of veterans who had been either broken or brainwashed, state and media agents were able to effectively contain the volatility of that dissent. Although they do not explicitly make the connection, Wilber and Lembcke’s analysis engages what political theorist James C. Scott (1990) usefully refers to as the public transcripts, or the official interpretations of events that typically serve the interests of state elites. Crucially, the authors also dive into what Scott refers to as the hidden transcripts, or those interpretations which are quickly scuttled to the far margins of the official narrative and enshrouded in a cloud of suspicion. Thus, in addition to the television interviews and popular books, such as John Hubbell’s widely read P.O.W.: A Definitive History of the American Prisoner-of-War Experience in Vietnam, they also track down more hidden unfurlings of the antiwar discourse through documentary evidence and untelevised interviews with former administrators, guards, and staff workers from a North Vietnam war prison, which American POWs famously dubbed the “Hanoi Hilton.” 1183522 COS0010.1177/00207152231183522International Journal of Comparative SociologyBook reviews book-review2023","PeriodicalId":51601,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Comparative Sociology","volume":"64 1","pages":"316 - 318"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Comparative Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207152231183522","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One challenge of research that attempts to reconstruct a war discourse is that certain spaces are typically inaccessible. While public discussions in the United States about the nature of an enemy or consternation about whether the state is engaged in a just war are pervasive and can be readily ascertained through a careful read of media archives, access to the discourses that occur inside war prisons are another matter. War prisons, concentration camps, and the like not only detain bodies but also information. As some scholars maintain, such camps are the paradigmatic storehouses of hidden transcripts, and indeed, knowledge about their very existence is often restricted. Tom Wilber and Jerry Lembcke have overcome this challenge in their book Dissenting POWs: From Vietnam’s Hoa Lo Prison to America Today by carefully reconstructing of the discourse surrounding the Vietnam War, as it happened for both American soldiers inside the prisoner-ofwar (POW) camps and average Americans on the homefront. In their own words, Wilber and Lembcke sought to develop “the history of attempts to repress that dissent and purge it from public memory” (p. 11). The project appears to have personal significance for Tom Wilber, whose father, Navy pilot Gene Wilber, was shot down in 1968 and captured in North Vietnam. Wilber was captured and while in captivity, he came out against the United States’ involvement in Vietnam. Then, after Wilber’s release in 1973, journalist Mike Wallace interviewed him for CBS’s “60 Minutes.” “Had Wilber succumbed to torture in his antiwar statements broadcast by Radio Hanoi?” Wallace asked. Without making an overt accusation, the introduction helped promote an emergent retort to the antiwar protests of POWs. By framing dissent as the tainted view of veterans who had been either broken or brainwashed, state and media agents were able to effectively contain the volatility of that dissent. Although they do not explicitly make the connection, Wilber and Lembcke’s analysis engages what political theorist James C. Scott (1990) usefully refers to as the public transcripts, or the official interpretations of events that typically serve the interests of state elites. Crucially, the authors also dive into what Scott refers to as the hidden transcripts, or those interpretations which are quickly scuttled to the far margins of the official narrative and enshrouded in a cloud of suspicion. Thus, in addition to the television interviews and popular books, such as John Hubbell’s widely read P.O.W.: A Definitive History of the American Prisoner-of-War Experience in Vietnam, they also track down more hidden unfurlings of the antiwar discourse through documentary evidence and untelevised interviews with former administrators, guards, and staff workers from a North Vietnam war prison, which American POWs famously dubbed the “Hanoi Hilton.” 1183522 COS0010.1177/00207152231183522International Journal of Comparative SociologyBook reviews book-review2023
书评:《异议战俘:从越南华洛监狱到今日美国》
试图重建战争话语的研究面临的一个挑战是,某些空间通常是无法进入的。在美国,公众对敌人的性质或对国家是否参与正义战争的恐慌的讨论是普遍存在的,通过仔细阅读媒体档案可以很容易地确定,但进入战争监狱内部的话语是另一回事。战争监狱、集中营等地方不仅关押尸体,而且关押情报。正如一些学者所坚持的那样,这些集中营是隐藏记录的典型仓库,事实上,关于它们存在的知识往往是有限的。汤姆·威尔伯(Tom Wilber)和杰里·伦布克(Jerry Lembcke)在他们的《异见战俘:从越南的华罗监狱到今日美国》(Dissenting POWs: From Vietnam 's Hoa Lo Prison to Today America)一书中克服了这一挑战,他们仔细地重构了围绕越南战争的话语,因为它发生在战俘营中的美国士兵和前线的普通美国人身上。用他们自己的话说,Wilber和Lembcke试图发展“试图压制这种异议并将其从公众记忆中清除的历史”(第11页)。这个项目似乎对汤姆·威尔伯(Tom Wilber)有个人意义,他的父亲、海军飞行员吉恩·威尔伯(Gene Wilber)于1968年被击落,并在北越被俘。威尔伯被俘,在囚禁期间,他站出来反对美国卷入越南战争。1973年,威尔伯获释后,记者迈克·华莱士在哥伦比亚广播公司的《60分钟》节目中采访了他。“威尔伯在河内广播电台播放的反战言论中屈服于酷刑吗?”华莱士问。在没有公开指责的情况下,这本书的介绍促进了对战俘反战抗议的紧急反驳。国家和媒体的代理人通过将异见人士塑造成残废或被洗脑的退伍军人的污点观点,有效地遏制了异见人士的波动。尽管Wilber和Lembcke没有明确指出两者之间的联系,但他们的分析涉及了政治理论家James C. Scott(1990)所说的公共文本,或者通常服务于国家精英利益的事件的官方解释。至关重要的是,作者们还深入研究了斯科特所说的“隐藏文本”,即那些迅速被官方叙述边缘化、笼罩在疑云中的解读。因此,除了电视采访和流行书籍,比如约翰·哈贝尔广为阅读的《战俘:美国越战战俘经历的权威历史》,他们还通过文献证据和对北越战争监狱的前行政人员、警卫和工作人员的非电视采访,追踪到更多隐藏的反战话语的展开,美国战俘把北越战争监狱称为“河内希尔顿”。[1183522 cos0010 .1177/00207152231183522 . international Journal of Comparative sociology .
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
49
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Comparative Sociology was established in 1960 to publish the highest quality peer reviewed research that is both international in scope and comparative in method. The journal draws articles from sociologists worldwide and encourages competing perspectives. IJCS recognizes that many significant research questions are inherently interdisciplinary, and therefore welcomes work from scholars in related disciplines, including political science, geography, economics, anthropology, and business sciences. The journal is published six times a year, including special issues on topics of special interest to the international social science community.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信