Page 189 - Cultural Theory and Popular Culture an Introduction

CULT_C08.qxd 10/24/08 17:24 Page 173

Orientalism 173

From the perspective of Orientalism it does not really matter whether Hollywood’s
representations are ‘true’ or ‘false’ (historically accurate or not); what matters is the
‘regime of truth’ (Michel Foucault; discussed in Chapter 6) they put into circulation.
From this perspective, Hollywood’s power is not a negative force, something that
denies, represses, negates. On the contrary, it is productive. Foucault’s general point
about power is also true with regard to Hollywood’s power:

We must cease once and for all to describe the effects of power in negative terms:
it ‘excludes’, it ‘represses’, it ‘censors’, it ‘abstracts’, it ‘masks’, it ‘conceals’. In fact,
power produces; it produces reality; it produces domains of objects and rituals of
truth (1979: 194).

Moreover, as he also points out, ‘Each society has its own regime of truth, its “general
politics” of truth – that is, the types of discourse it accepts and makes function as true’
(2002a: 131). On the basis of this, I want now to briefly describe three narrative
paradigms, models for understanding, or ‘regimes of truth’, which featured strongly in
Hollywood’s Vietnam in the 1980s. 39
The first narrative paradigm is ‘the war as betrayal’. This is first of all a discourse
about bad leaders. In Uncommon Valor, Missing in Action I, Missing in Action II: The
Beginning, Braddock: Missing in Action III and Rambo: First Blood Part II, for example,
politicians are blamed for America’s defeat in Vietnam. When John Rambo (Sylvester
Stallone) is asked to return to Vietnam in search of American soldiers missing in action,
he asks, with great bitterness: ‘Do we get to win this time?’ In other words, will the
politicians let them win? Second, it is a discourse about weak military leadership in the
field. In Platoon and Casualties of War, for example, defeat, it is suggested, is the result
of an incompetent military command. Third, it is also a discourse about civilian
betrayal. Both Cutter’s Way and First Blood suggest that the war effort was betrayed back
home in America. Again John Rambo’s comments are symptomatic. When he is told
by Colonel Trautman, ‘It’s over Johnny’, he responds,

Nothing is over. You don’t just turn it off. It wasn’t my war. You asked me, and I
did what I had to do to win, but somebody wouldn’t let us win. And I come back
to the world and see these maggots protesting at the airport, calling me baby-killer.
Who are they to protest me? I was there, they weren’t!

Interestingly, all the films in this category are structured around loss. In Uncommon
Valor, Missing in Action I, II, and III, Rambo: First Blood Part II, and POW: The Escape, it
is lost prisoners; in Cutter’s Way, First Blood, and Born on the Fourth of July, it is lost
pride; in Platoon and Casualties of War it is lost innocence. It seems clear that the dif-
ferent versions of what is lost are symptomatic of a displacement of a greater loss: the
displacement of that which can barely be named, America’s defeat in Vietnam. The use
of American POWs is undoubtedly the most ideologically charged of these displace-
ment strategies. It seems to offer the possibility of three powerful political effects. First,