Sep 13 2009
“THERE IS STILL TIME..BROTHER.”
The Duck and Cover film, though intended to be educational, was confusing. Who were they (the Federal Civil Defense Administration and the Safety Commission of the National Education Association) trying to fool? The kids? The adults, or “grown-ups” rather?
From the wiki article:
“Acting on the human body, the shock waves cause pressure waves through the tissues. These waves mostly damage junctions between tissues of different densities (bone and muscle) or the interface between tissue and air. Lungs and the abdominal cavity, which contain air, are particularly injured. The damage causes severe hemorrhaging or air embolisms, either of which can be rapidly fatal.”
Besides the force of the blast, the radiation was another deadly force – as we’ll see this Tuesday in On the Beach. The scientists knew from observational evidence that these were the effects of a nuclear blast, so why with the, “look at father shrewdly covering the skin of his neck with a newspaper! Oh my, he will be saved!”
Whether secular or religious, hope emerges minutes to midnight. Be it G-d’s benevolence or a picnic blanket, “THERE IS STILL TIME..BROTHER.” It was curious to read in Strozier’s essay how on one hand his interviewees were convinced of the inevitability of John’s Revelation yet they still hoped that G-d will save us all (page 71).
Another facet I found interesting was the notion of collective death, a recurring theme in the interviews with the fundamentalists. I think that’s because it’s comforting to know that you won’t be alone when the end comes. “But there might not be any grownups around when the bomb explodes,” the narrator says, wrapping it up, “then, you’re on your own.” That was the scariest line of the film.
Daniel, I gather from your comment that you see the film as entirely a governmental cover up. Even if that is the case (and I am not disagreeing with you about that), what psychological mechanisms of the sort that Strozier identifies in regard to the people he interviews are operating here? In other words, why were these duck and cover kinds of films not a laughing stock or a topic of widespread protest? What is it that allows people to contradict themselves, individually and collectively, without recognizing it? And how does collective death function in this psychological way?
It would be helpful for you to bring this into class discussion and tie the notion of collective death together with Strozier’s discussion on Endism.