Fidelis et Verax

Since the conversion of Constantine, though, this revolutionary fervor has been paradoxically counter-balanced by the acceptance and propagation of belief in the end of days on the part of the Church and the authorities that act in its name (and, oftentimes, by the secular ones that have succeeded them).  With that historic event, the Roman Empire that John referred to in no uncertain terms as “Babylon the Great, Mother of Harlots and Abomination of the Earth” was now the throne of a follower of Christ.  The power that John’s book possessed was not lost on the newly Christian empire – it became, as Kermode calls it in ‘The End’, “a potent imperial myth.”  Is there a better alibi for oppression in the present tense than holding to the myth of an immanent end?  If you want to be saved, obey.
Which brings me to the most affecting of this week’s coursework: “Duck and Cover”.  Propaganda has clearly reached its apex in modern America, for at long last the Powers-That-Be cannot merely cite the idea of annihilation but dangle it as a day-to-day possibility.  The cheerful, paternalistic tone of the narration of the video (presumably to be shown before schoolchildren) was, to me, far more frightening then Revelation’s most awful monstrosities.  The psychology has not changed: fear mongering has been alive and well for two millennia; the apocalypse is forever just around the corner, waiting to be divined by the knight faithful and true.

This entry was posted in Sam Barnes, September, September 28 and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Fidelis et Verax

  1. jonrossi says:

    I agree with you that the movie, and indeed pretty much anything having to do with that theme, have been used in American history as a doomsday warning, as it were. This is also true throughout the Western world, and having spoken to several men and women who grew up in the Soviet Union in the 70s and thereabouts, I can say with some reliability here that the same was true in the USSR – except the US and the rest of the West were the bad guys. I’m not sure I agree with you entirely about the modern manifestation of the “obey or perish” nature of such propaganda, though. To be sure, that was one definite use of such materials, but perhaps it was done not so much out of a strict desire to be obeyed and to create order, as it were, but out of fear in the various leaders’ hearts and minds. So yes, perhaps it was paternalistic (and some may have abused the trust that people put in such attitudes by the government or other official-sounding people), but maybe that was done for protection, and not for being obeyed.

  2. jonrossi says:

    One further thing – I’m rewatching the video now, and the school that those children are in – the closets at the back, specifically – look exactly like my old high school. I had to check and make sure that it wasn’t filmed there… but before I could find any proof I remembered that my school was built as a WPA project, so it doesn’t surprise me to see schools exactly like it all across the country. Anyway, that doesn’t really have anything to do with your entry – sorry! lol

  3. Mac Warren says:

    The juxtaposition of the the film’s tone and message is quite striking, and as you say, disturbing. It is difficult to imagine the mindset of Americans at the time, mostly because it seems unlikely that a similiar film would be shown to children today. I do think film’s explicit treatment of destruction (at least for children) is a reflection of the time’s naivete – children are exposed to far more disturbing material every day in our present culture.

  4. Sam Barnes says:

    Jon, I agree: the reality obviously is far more subtle than one of ‘simply propaganda’ or ‘simply security’ – we necessarily succumb in these brief posts to what Kermode calls “gossip.” But I was struck, especially by “Duck and Cover,” at the absurdity of this theoretically practical, applicable video. If the a-bomb did go off in East Nowhere, little Johnny should duck, cover, and kiss his ass goodbye — because nothing that the film proscribes will help him at all.
    Instead of just assuming that this ridiculous premise is just the misguided attempt of our caring, compassionate rulers at saving lives of schoolchildren, I am more intrigued by the psycho-social consequences of this (godlessly) apocalyptic hysteria that was seared into a generation from a very young age.

  5. Lee Quinby says:

    I think it would be fascinating to see a comparable “educational” video fashioned for this generation of elementary school children. Perhaps it would be focused on terrorism, the prevailing fear of today. How do you think it would unfold? Would there be a reassuring narrative voice? What mechanisms would be employed to show “the terrorist”? Creative Project, anyone?

  6. Hi!

    If you can’t go back and categorize this, please drop by my office hours before class, and I’ll show you how! I hang out in the reading room…

  7. Grecia H. says:

    This video is very disturbing to watch now. The narrator talks about the situation in a very composed voice as if this situation is nothing to scared at. Ducking and covering would make no difference in the case of a real bomb striking.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *