Pork Chop Hill: A Socially Conscious Film.

3/7/2012 A little less than six years after the combat ceased, the battle of Pork Chop Hill became a feature film, based on the book of the same name by historian S.L.A. Marshall. Pork Chop Hill (1959) was made in a politically complex time. The civil rights movement was flourishing; McCarthyism was dying; the Cold War continued. It was a tumultuous time for film as well: Televisions were in the majority of homes and filmmakers were scrambling to get viewers back in the theater. Pork Chop Hill represents these turbulent times. It is a complex film that manages to deal with the major political currents of the time. Although it remains quite accurate to the historical truth, it has a propagandistic agenda: to show the futility of war and to emphasize the bond between soldiers, especially those formed when black soldiers were integrated into the US Army. Certainly, the film captures the same environment depicted in the book. Marshall describes the ringed entrenchments stoutly fortified with heavily timbered, thickly sandbagged, artillery-resistant bunkers that appear throughout the fighting in the movie.1 Details such as the staked and unbroken wire barricade pose problems for both real G.I.'s an d the movies characters.2 Just as with the book, the movie largely viewed the battle from the lens of low level tactical squad and soldier actions. While this is accurate, the film also noted the devastating effects of artillery in a fight that historian David Halberstam described as nothing less than a furious artillery battle.3

1 2 3

S.L.A. Marshall, Pork Chop Hill (New York: William Morrow and Company, 1956), 32. Ibid., 174. David .Halberstam, The Coldest Winter (New York: Hyperion, 2007), 629

There are details that Pork Chop Hill omitted, however. No Korean soldier made an appearance in the film despite the fact that [o]n all outgaurd posts it was the company cu stom to team GI's and Koreans.4 Marshall even indicates that Korean soldiers had a fairly sizable presence with 40 newly arrived Korean replacements out [o]f the 144 men under Lieut. Jack M. Patteson.5 But, in the book that the movie drew so heavily from, Marshall's treatment of Korean soldiers is hardly favorable. More often than not, the Korean soldiers act reluctantly and even cowardly. Marshall writes of one instance in which a group of ROK soldiers are eventually grenaded to death in the bunker because they were paralyzed by their own fear.6 In a film that seems to deeply sympathize with the soldiers, this exclusion may be intentional. Yet, cowardice also makes its appearance in Pork Chop Hill with an American G.I. named Franklin. Franklin's character is notable for two reasons: first, his reluctance highlights fears often felt by soldiers and, second, he is an African-American. He's not the only AfricanAmerican G.I. which indicates that the movie is making a conscious effort to acknowledge the integration of units. Furthermore, Franklin's interaction with another African-American soldier assigned to watch him are very telling as his comrade remarks I've got a special interest in everything you do. A Japanese-American officer, Lieutenant O'Hashi (based on Lieutenant Clemens actual 1st officer of the same name) is also portrayed in Pork Chop Hill.7 So while soldiers from other countries such as Thailand, Colombia, [and] the Republic of Korea who

4 5 6 7

Marshall, 121. Ibid., 53. Ibid., 69. James Marino. Meat grinder on Pork Chop Hill, Military History, Apr . 2003, 47.

fought alongside Americans at Pork Chop Hill are absent from the film, the diversity among the American G.I.'s is portrayed accurately.8 Comparatively, the enemy remains much more of an abstraction and is not treated on the same individual basis. A G.I. remarks Sounds like all of China's coming as the Chinese attempt to retake the hill. Of course, there is some historical accuracy in this depiction. The Chinese had numerical superiority and were often smart about exercising it. Marshall wrote that the assault broke like a flood and was made up of approximately two full companies of Chinese.9 Beyond sheer numbers, the tactics employed by the Chinese in the film are typical of their actual fighting style. They fought diligently, capturing the hill [b]y systematically killing the occupants and capturing the bunkers.10 Halberstam had described, the way they would move at night on foot and slip along the flanks of their enemies, looking for soft spots, while taking up positions behind them.11 Engagements in the movie occur twice at night and, at the end of the film, the G.I.'s are entrapped by the Chinese moving in from behind. One individual stands out on the Chinese side, however: the propagandist, who pleads with the American G.I.'s to cease the fighting. Propaganda itself plays a very prominent role in the movie and the content of the propagandist's speech does not appear completely contrived. On occasion, he appears to even be pleading out of his own accord, as though he empathizes with the G.I.'s caught in the same struggle. It seems unclear as to whether or not this was an accurate depiction of the sort of propaganda used by the Chinese in actuality. While the propagandist in the movie praises the American G.I.'s for fighting honorably, Marshall wrote that the 7 th division

8 9 10 11

Ibid., 43. Marshall, 120. Marino, 46. Halberstam, 403.

had been described as weary, slipshod, and demoralized troops... a caustic criticism that was repeated over Red Chinese loud-speakers as fighting at Pork Chop continued.12 The film contrasts the small scale fighting with the larger war and its associated command structure. Early in the film, prior to any depicted fighting, the soldiers expectantly await the end of the war. The message that eventually comes instead calls on the soldiers to continue the fight. In the words of Halberstam, The closer the people talking at Punmanjam came to some kind of settlement, the more the value of Pork Chop seemed to go up, and the bloodier the fighting for it became.13 Pork Chop Hill spares no mention of casualties as field officers openly lament their frequency. We have 25% casualties then and more now, O'Hashi reports to a runner. The battle, in reality, could be even less forgiving at times. Marshall writes of one unit that took the hardest hit having gone up there with 135 men in his command and came back with 14. 14 An officer in the movie similarly reports of Love Company:There's 12 men left out of the whole company. Even down to this detail, Pork Chop Hill remains accurate as the real Love Company had been reduced to 12 men during the battle.15 The film suggests that many of the casualties can be attributed to a dichotomy between the officers in the field and the officers higher up the chain of command. In the film, when Love Company fails to arrive, the soldiers are forced to hold the flank with a single squad. Lieutenant Clemens laments the fact that they're doing Love Company's job with only one machine gun. The reality is that the two platoons were given orders to attack up the rear slope of Pork Chop
12 13 14 15 Marshall, 15. Halberstam, 629. Ibid., 630. Marino, 46.

with the object of re-enforcing. Meanwhile, Fox platoon... never arrived at the fire and Love platoon... was not told that the Red Chinese had already swarmed over Pork Chop. 16 In fact, it seems that in one instance Love Company never learned that it was supposed to be part of a joint operation with King Company in a joint counterattack.17 This lack of communication all too often translated into tragedy, as the film shows. When the G.I.'s make their nighttime assault in the film, they are briefly caught in the open by their own lights, making them easy targets for the Chinese. A remarkably similar incident occurred in the real battle, described by Marshall, in which, a patrol was caught by 81mm mortar flares throwing its members sharply into silhouette before they could go flat.18 Later in the film, Lieutenant Clemens expresses his discontent to the men sent to photograph a successful American action, asking: Would you mind telling me: when I can't get anything that I need, just how you two just managed to get up here? Clemens sends him off with the rather desperate message: We must have help or we can't hold the hill. In turn, this dichotomy is the product of a much larger, misguided philosophy about the war. Very early on, General MacArthur had said, To give up any part of North Korea to the aggression of the Chinese Communists would be the greatest defeat of the free world in recent times.19 Using the same logic, Pork Chop Hill, an otherwise insignificant outpost, took on a political and propaganda significance far beyond it's military value. 20 MacArthur and officers around him had frequently furthered these political and propagandistic ends through the manipulation of intelligence. Halberstam wrote that minimized both the number and the
16 17 18 19 20 Marshall, 130. Marino, 46. Marshall, 135. Halberstam, 386. Marino, 44

intentions of the Chinese troops.21 These mistakes only worsened the problems experienced by the ground troops. Ultimately, Halberstam best describes it as a fault line that ran between senior officers in Division, trying however inadequately to represent the dangers to its men and Corps still responding to the hopes and vanities of commanders in Tokyo.22 The film draws many of the same conclusions that historians have. Marshall assigns some importance to Pork Chop, remarking,Tactically, the great value of the outposts came from the fact that they looked temptingly weak. They were the cheese in the trap.23 For the Chinese, comparatively, Pork Chop Hill itself was really of propaganda value at the talks with the Chinese political leadership want[ing] to show the U.N. that its cooperation did not reflect an unwillingness to fight.24 Similarly, Halberstam remarked that the fighting continued to provide just enough input to let the other side know that neither side, Western nor Eastern, was going to lose military face.25 Pork Chop Hill hints at the futility, both tactically and strategically, of the late war military actions. Perhaps Max Hastings best summarizes both the real battle and the movie, writing that Pork Chop Hill, reflected... the interminable conflict between military reason and political interest. (Hastings 282) Lewis Milestones directing filmography was extensive, but he is best known for his earlier work, All Quiet on the Western Front (1930), which won Best Director and Best Picture in the Academy Awards. All Quiet on the Western Front was based on the classic novel by the same name, and the film is relatively true to the book. It is one of the classic anti-war films. Young students are enthusiastic to join the war effort, but when they reach the front they are
21 22 23 24 25 Halberstam, 43. Halberstam, 424 Marshall, 33 Marino, 43, 45. Hastings, 282

harshly disillusioned. The film explores the horror that the soldiers on the front face, as well as the disconnect they feel when they return home. In some ways, Pork Chop Hill was a companion film to All Quiet on the Western Front. In Pork Chop Hill, the soldiers have already witnessed the horrors of war. They are tired, demoralized, and confused. Command was not giving them proper supplies or reinforcement and they were fighting over a hill with no strategic purpose so far as they understood. Indeed, back at the negotiating table the diplomats are asking the same question, "What are we talking about? What are we arguing about? You know that this insignificant little hill is of no importance to you and of no importance to us. If we can settle on the truce line to which I thought you had agreed, this hill is right in the middle of the neutral zone. So how can it be worth any man's life? When the U.N. diplomat realizes that the Chinese diplomat was ignoring him, he stormed outside. Why did they pick pork chop to attack? . . . I'm beginning to think they picked i t because it's worth nothing. Its value is that it has no value. That makes it a test of strength: pure and simple. They're willing to spend lives for nothing, or what seems nothing. That's what they want to know: are we as willing to do that as they are? Although Pork Chop Hill is not traditionally considered an anti-war film, the wanton waste of human life comes across strongly in this section. A number of propagandistic anti-communist films were made between 1948 and 1957: I Married a Communist (1949); I Was a Communist for the FBI (1951), which was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary; The Hoaxters (1952), which was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature; My Son John (1952) which was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Writing, Motion Picture Story; and Trial (1952).26,27 Each of these

26 27

http://www.lib.washington.edu/exhibits/allPowers/film.html, http://www.filmsite.org/50sintro6.html

films and many more depict a simple ideological war between the good (America and democracy) versus the bad (communism). These films are usually either documentaries or pseudo documentaries that attempt to educate the viewer about the evils of communism, or they are fictional tales that depict communism in a negative light through metaphor and allegory.28 Pork Chop Hill is not an anti-communist film. The Chinese are not depicted as mass waves of men, they are depicted very similarly to the American soldiers. In fact there are two back to back scenes where the Chinese are shown charging up the hill and the American reinforcements are shown charging down the hill, and the depiction is very similar. In fact, it is the Americans, not the Chinese, that are shouting primal war cries as they charge down the hill. Our representative voice for the Chinese is the man who does the Chinese propaganda, but he is not a negative character. This is most apparent in his final appearance in the film. He is shown wearing a pair of glasses with a card in his hand and a communist cadre standing behind him. He reads, Hello GIs. I hope you can hear me loud and clear because your very lives depend upon it. I have been ordered to tell you that you have just 45 minutes to surrender. That is the message" The announcer gives the cadre an almost dirty look, and he leaves. Now i'm talking to you on my own account. You are brave men. You have fought a good fight. I don't want you to die, any more than I want our own soldiers to die. You have earned the right to surrender with honor. And Im glad I've 45 minutes to persuade you, my way. You are young, and I am young. We should be thinking of long lives ahead of us. Listen. [An American song is played]. Doesn't that make you think of all the things you want to live for? Love, marriage. Why must you die before you have even begun to live? Think about it. Just think about it. 43 minutes left. All you have to do is start walking this way.
28

In fact, the genre of science fiction flourished in early 1950s with films that were anti-communist at heart.

You can hear the sympathy in the voice of the propaganda officer. That an ambiguous character is the main depiction of communism in the film suggests that Milestone did not intend to make this a film about how evil the communists were. There were no popular pro-communist films during this time, but there were anti-war films. The majority of these were, in the eyes of McCarthyism, avatars of appeasement (the Aword) and therefore pro-communist and un-American at heart. The House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC)a committee designed to investigate elements in American culture that undermine America and democracybecame a standing committee in 1945. In 1947, it created the infamous Hollywood blacklist by firing the Hollywood Ten, thereby terrorizing many in the film community into using anti-communism into a motif. Regardless, there were dissenters. The Men (1950) was a film where Marlin Brando debuts as a soldier who became a paraplegic in the war who had to deal with the psychological consequences. Fear and Desire (1953) was Stanley Kubricks first feature film, where soldiers in an unknown war fight an unknown enemy. In the end, they kill the opposing general and his men only to find that they look eerily like themselves. The Rack (1956) depicts a North Korean POW who is alleged to have betrayed his men. When his father heard of the charges, he turned to his son and asks, Why didnt you just die? There were a number of other anti-war films, but very few were profitable at the box office. None of the above three were commercially successful films. Pork Chop Hill strikes a balance between these two genres. Films that show the horror of war (like All Quiet on the Western Front) could no longer capture the attention of the audience, but Milestone did not want to produce another film like Halls of Montezuma (1951), where in order to avoid being blacklisted, Milestone created a jingoistic war film. Milestone instead

enters a developing genre of the 50s: the films with a social conscience. These were films that subtly dealt with sensitive topics. High Noon (1952), which was nominated for Best Picture in the Academy Awards, was a subtly disguised anti-McCarthyism film. Although it was written during a time where McCarthyism was in decline, Pork Chop Hill could not directly undermine the government. Instead, it was glancing blow, softened by Pork Chop Hills sympathy to the men on the field. However, its depiction of insignificance of the actual Pork Chop Hill begs the question: why were we there in the first place?

The political environment into which Pork Chop Hill entered was defined by the decline of McCarthyism, the ongoing Cold War (at this point manifested by the space race), and the flourishing civil rights movement. The fact that Pork Chop Hill manages to seamlessly comment on each of these
A Ku Klux Klan application form with the title "FIGHT COMMUNISM. Picture from http://www.lib.usm.edu/legacy/spcol/exhibitions/anticomm/civil_rights.html

political movements is a testament to the complexity of the Korean War, as well as to Milestones grasp of the political environment. It is also not unprecedented. As these were the three major issues of the day, it was not uncommon for politicians (from both the Right and the Left) to link them. In the South, the civil rights movement was frequently associated with communism. As early as the 1930s, the Southern Conference for Human Welfare (SCHW)a group that contested white supremacywas attacked as a Communist organization.29,30 Similar attacks on the Civil Rights Movement resumed with the end of WWII: Time magazine published a piece by the historian Arthur Schlesinger stating that the Communist Party was infiltrating the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).31,32 This is a clear example of McCarthyism. However, there was a political current running counter to these attacks on the Civil Rights Movement. Historians such as Mary Dudziak, Jeff Woods, and Jonathan Rosenberg argue
29

Robin Kelly, Hammer and Hoe: Alabama Communists during the Great Depression (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1990), 184-189 30 Robbie Lieberman and Clarence Lang: Anticommunism and the African American Freedom Movement: Another Side of the Story. (NYC: Palgrave Macmillan 2009), 1. 31 Doug Rossinow, Visions of Progress: The Left Liberal Tradition in America (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008), 214. 32 Lieberman, 1

that the Cold War also cultivated and strengthened the Civil Rights movement. Their arguments generally propose that civil rights reform was used to remedy the disconnect between the United States belief in freedom and democracy and the racism that was integrated into its government.33,34,35,36 In short, it was a propagandistic move. It is beyond the scope of this paper to argue whether the Cold War was, overall, a positive or negative influence on the Civil Rights Movement and civil rights reform, but it is clear that Pork Chop Hill takes place in this discussion. Pvt. Franklin is a propagandistic tool that simultaneously shows the human side of a black soldier, his potential bravery, and his seamless integration into the army. The desegregation of the army started in the Korean War, giving black soldiers the chance to prove themselves side by side with their fellow Americans. Milestone represents this pressure in an argument Franklin has with another black soldier set to watch over him. Franklin accosts the black soldier, Who you staring at? Im staring at you, who you think Im staring at? What for? Franklin asks desperately and angrily as he grabs the soldiers arm. Ive got a special interest in everything you do, the soldier replies. The black soldiers special interest is that if Franklin deserts, it will reflect poorly on the black community. The fact that it is a black soldier who wishes to desert and not a white soldier is not racist. This is a motif amongst war films (albeit usually displayed with white actors): the cowardly soldier has a change of heart and becomes heroic and patriotic. In what is easily the tensest moment in the film, Lt. Clemons confronts Pvt. Franklin who is hiding in a
33

Mary Dudziak, Cold War Civil Rights: Race and the Image of American Democracy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000), 12. 34 Jonathan Rosenberg, How Far the Promised Land? in World Affairs and the American Civil Rights Movement From the First World War to Vietnam (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006), 175. 35 Jeff, Woods, Black Struggle Red Scare: Segregation and Anti-Communism in the South, 1948-1968 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2004), 10. 36 Lieberman, 2-3.

bunker, and Franklin threatens to kill Clemons. Angrily he shouts, 10 years for what? Cause I dont wanna die for Korea? What do I care about this stinking hill? You wanna see where I live back home? I sure am sure I aint gonna die for that. So cinch Im not gonna die for Korea, serve 10 years for it neither. Clemons silently responds: Chances are youre gonna die whether you like it or not. So am I whether you shoot me or not. At least we got a chance to do it in pretty good company. . . . They dont care about Korea any more than you do. A lot of them have it just as rough at home as you do. They came up and fought. About 25 of them left. Thats a pretty exclusive club, but you can still join up, if you want to. Franklin silently walks out of the bunker and walks with Clemons to the front line. Later, he is seen carrying a wounded soldier to safety and he is shown attempting to fortify the defenses as the men hide in the bunker. Pork Chop Hill is clearly sympathetic to Franklin and his plight. He is depicted just as how the average soldier felt: not inherently evil or inferior, just confused and demoralized, like the majority of the soldiers in Korea. In addition, the government he is fighting for considers him an inherently inferior human being. Pork Chop Hill may be an anti-war film, but it also a film about the bonds between soldiers. In his speech, Clemons extends this bond to Franklin. In light of his role in Pork Chop Hill, it is quite fitting that Gregory Peck would play Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird three years later. Pork Chop Hill is evidence supporting the historians who believe that the Cold War was a positive influence for image of African Americans, but it only tells half the story. Racism in the army penetrated its highest ranks; General MacArthur and especially his aide, General Almond, were notoriously racist. Ned Almond was against the integration of black soldiers into the army.

A black soldier named Forest Walker led a successful charge against a North Korean position. For his efforts, General Ridgway attempted to get Walker awarded a Silver Star, but Ned Almond stopped the medal and removed Walker from command.37 The concluding moments of the film show weary troops walking back from the front lines to Gregory Peck explaining their legacy: Pork chop hill was held. Bought and paid for at the same price we commemorate in monuments at Bunker Hill and Gettysburg. Yet you will find no monuments on Pork Chop. Victory is a fragile thing and History does not linger long in our century. But those who fought there know what they did, and the meaning of it. Millions live in freedom today because of what they did. However, considering Milestones emphasis on the insignificance of the hill, this seems more like a bitter statement then a solemn recognition of the importance of what these soldiers have done. Regardless of whether it was important or not, men fought and died for this hill. However, their sacrifice was not honored by the American public. Pork Chop Hill will be their monument instead.

37

Halberstram, 547.

Bibliography

Halberstam, David. The Coldest Winter, (New York: Hyperion, 2007). Hastings, Max. The Korean War, (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1987). Marino, James. Meat grinder on Pork Chop Hill, Military History, Apr. 2003. Marshall, S.L.A. Pork Chop Hill (New York: William Morrow and Company, 1956). Kelly, Robin. Hammer and Hoe: Alabama Communists during the Great Depression (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1990), 184-189 Lieberman, Robbie and Lang, Clarence,: Anticommunism and the African American Freedom Movement: Another Side of the Story. (NYC: Palgrave Macmillan 2009), 1. Rossinow, Doug. Visions of Progress: The Left Liberal Tradition in America (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008), 214. Dudziak, Mary. Cold War Civil Rights: Race and the Image of American Democracy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000), 12. Rosenberg, Jonathan. How Far the Promised Land? in World Affairs and the American Civil Rights Movement From the First World War to Vietnam (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006), 175. Woods, Jeff. Black Struggle Red Scare: Segregation and Anti-Communism in the South, 19481968 (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2004), 10. Dirks, Tim. The History of Film: The 1950s. (http://www.filmsite.org/50sintro6.html, accessed 3/7/2012).