- Messages
- 6,365
- Rating
Guess what, lads. It's time for a Vietnam War marathon starting with a book and then three movies. And for our first entry, we have a fictional novel written by a green beret Vietnam War veteran by the name of Kent Anderson. (Full name, Calvin Kent Anderson. Goes by Kent for his casual name.) And I know what you're thinking. "What a load of shit." Did he actually see combat or was he just cleaning out latrines for the entirety of his service? Was he even in the Vietnam War? Well, as far as I can tell, yes. He is listed on that site in the A-101 detachment as rank SP5, was in service from 09/16/1969 to 09/15/1970 with an "INTEL/A" duty, has a YE (Year Ending) status, and was possibly in detachment A-100 as well.
Even if his name wasn't on that website though, I tell you hwat, he certainly SOUNDS like he knows exactly what the fuck he's talking about. Usually, when people have seen actual combat in their service, when they know how war gets done, I like to think that I can just... Tell. He seems to get a LOT of details right about general combat, military hardware, and violence. Again, I don't know for sure, but if I had to say one way or another, I would definitely vote in his favor. He definitely seems to have seen some shit. And knows how it's done. So either he was actually in it, or he was at least close with someone who was in it, or he did a shit-ton of homework.
Regardless, the result is this book. I actually discovered this book on paperback totally at random many, many moons ago in some random thrift store. Intrigued, I decided, "What the hell, why not," shelled out the two dollars to buy it, and started to read. And boy was I glad I did because this is probably one of the best books I've ever read. I have only one minor complaint with it. The book is split into three sections and starts sort of in media res with section two, and for this kind of story, this really is just not the way to go. Or at least, I thought so. But this is very easily remedied. Start with the first section in the middle of the book, then read the second section at the beginning of the book, then the third section located towards the end. Trust me, it'll flow better and be less confusing.
Now... Where to start with this book? Well, the author doesn't waste any time getting us into the action, even if you start with section one like I recommended. The book follows one Sgt. Hanson set in the 1960s with his entertainingly dry narration. We do get some initial foreplay first by going just a bit into Hanson's life before he signs up for military service. And what follows after that is a tour-de-force of Vietnam starting with a nice introduction via boot camp which really does a good job of slowly immersing you into this very intriguing hell. As we follow Hanson, it is really hard to not get a big case of second-hand nostalgia because Anderson is a master here with the details, pulling you into the atmosphere of the 60s so very effectively.
And then we get this banger of a quote as well.
Sgt. Hanson said:
There's actually a LOT of quotable lines in this book. Some because they're very intellectually interesting, and others because they're simply just damn funny. but I don't want to spoil the others at all and will let you discover them for yourself as you read.
Part of what makes this book so great is just how seductive it is for, like, three quarters of the book, as in, it slowly conditions you to think as Hanson's special forces group thinks, because Hanson himself is being unknowingly conditioned by the military and, by extension, that same special forces group. Those people in American cities aren't people anymore. They're just dumbass civilians who have no fucking clue. Those aren't the Vietnamese anymore fighting for their homeland. They're a bunch of midget "gooks". And standard service members? Naive cowards or rabid criminals who got caught in the draft.
And just when you think you got it all figured out, the book springs its trap on you. It later turns out at the end that Hanson's group pretty much all dies due, ironically, to the incompetent actions of the people in the same military he is in. Then, as they unknowingly leave Hanson for dead, Hanson plots and executes his revenge, killing those same soldiers who friendly fired on him and his team, which, ingeniously, basically mimics the entire Vietnam War to be honest. Through wild incompetence, we killed countless Vietnamese, and because of that, destruction was brought upon the U.S. of A. in like manner.
So what should we take from all this? Is Hanson and his team's general badassery and very condescending attitudes actually completely justified, or were him and his team all just fucking crazy and all of them needed to be put down? The answer (in my arrogant opinion) is that, yet again, the answer lies somewhere in the middle. The book shows very vividly very early on (in section one) what happens if you don't stand up for yourself. If you try to just run away from every conflict, you will be made into mincemeat. And the book shows us that through Riley, a very overweight draftee that fails bootcamp, has the shit kicked out of him constantly, and finally, even fails to commit suicide properly.
"Riley only showed the weakness and fear that all the other recruits felt but managed, most of the time, to hide. It was as if he was burdened with the weakness of the whole company. In a way, he was the most important person there. Just as a hero must live out other men's dreams of triumph, Riley lived out their failures."
But that's just one side of the coin. The other is when you carry it too far. When you let your own views, raw confidence, and hunger to dominate kill too much of your empathy, then you simply become just another thug. Sure, you can break stuff real good, but that's the end of your accomplishments, and what separates you from the common wild animal is merely the ability to speak.
And just when you think you got it all figured out, the book springs its trap on you. It later turns out at the end that Hanson's group pretty much all dies due, ironically, to the incompetent actions of the people in the same military he is in. Then, as they unknowingly leave Hanson for dead, Hanson plots and executes his revenge, killing those same soldiers who friendly fired on him and his team, which, ingeniously, basically mimics the entire Vietnam War to be honest. Through wild incompetence, we killed countless Vietnamese, and because of that, destruction was brought upon the U.S. of A. in like manner.
So what should we take from all this? Is Hanson and his team's general badassery and very condescending attitudes actually completely justified, or were him and his team all just fucking crazy and all of them needed to be put down? The answer (in my arrogant opinion) is that, yet again, the answer lies somewhere in the middle. The book shows very vividly very early on (in section one) what happens if you don't stand up for yourself. If you try to just run away from every conflict, you will be made into mincemeat. And the book shows us that through Riley, a very overweight draftee that fails bootcamp, has the shit kicked out of him constantly, and finally, even fails to commit suicide properly.
"Riley only showed the weakness and fear that all the other recruits felt but managed, most of the time, to hide. It was as if he was burdened with the weakness of the whole company. In a way, he was the most important person there. Just as a hero must live out other men's dreams of triumph, Riley lived out their failures."
But that's just one side of the coin. The other is when you carry it too far. When you let your own views, raw confidence, and hunger to dominate kill too much of your empathy, then you simply become just another thug. Sure, you can break stuff real good, but that's the end of your accomplishments, and what separates you from the common wild animal is merely the ability to speak.
Sometimes, you really wonder just how much this book is a "fictional" work. I feel like a lot of veterans write fictional works like this because there's some stuff that they went through and thought that, if put in the context of Non-Fiction, would draw a lot of negative attention. Couched in the Fiction genre, the author is free to express these "fictional" events that could otherwise draw legal ire and taboo thoughts that a lot of people would otherwise blush and get offended at. But in any case. with this entire marathon, if you take any recommendation away from it, let it be this book. Hang all the rest.
