I am very interested in the retelling of stories of armed resistance against oppressors. This is partly because they inevitably also include a portrayal of collaboration, which is something I expect to be spending a lot of time studying.
I recently watched the TV dramatization of the 1943 Jewish ghetto uprising in Warsaw called Uprising.
The uprising gets brief mention in many movies about the Holocaust, most recently with a single scene in the movie The Pianist. In that movie, the hopelessness of the uprising is viewed from the window of the hiding musician. That scene is very reminiscent of a portrayal of Chinese resistance against Japanese troops entering Shanghai in an early scene of Empire of the Sun.
Uprising takes a very different look at the Jewish resistance, awarding it more honor, glory, and considerably more German casualties than earlier portrayals or the historical record suggests. It has all the limitations of a made for TV movie, but does a fair job, especially with its more complex and careful consideration of the Jewish Council and its collaboration with the Germans. A Danish review of the movie is less forgiving, concluding that in its own way it is a wonderful old fashioned movie but that it never quite convinced us of the need to tell the story of the uprising again (“Det er på sin vis en ganske glimrende, lidt gammeldags film, som aldrig helt får overbevist os om det nødvendige i at fortælle denne historie igen”). I agree wholeheartedly with the review when it complained that the “Allo Allo english” everyone spoke was taxing.
When I see movies like this I realize that the art of portraying the nobel resistance has been been perfected to a fine art. Not to detract from the horror that faced those living in the ghetto, or under any kind of oppression that has bred resistance and artistic narratives of that resistance, I’m interested in how consistent these portrayals all are. First you need to introduce a few humble figures who just don’t want to get into any trouble, and are just trying to survive. You subject them to a series of atrocities at the hand of their oppressors, and you need to include a few scenes with completely diabolical and laughing evil soldiers who have no respect for people or the value of their lives. The main characters then become hardened realists who will do anything to kill their enemy in armed resistance, portraying anyone who has not yet been converted as weak cowards. Overnight, collaborators go from figures who are negotiated with and reluctantly obeyed, to being the targets of assassination and torture. Once this polarization is complete, the movie stands on firm black and white moral ground and can proceed with uncontrolled violence…
What I liked about Uprising is that it gives a little more time to the period before this polarization takes place, and Donald Sutherland does well portraying a conflicted leader of the Judenrat, Adam Czerniakow (who eventually commits suicide). The time and effort spent looking at the complexity of the decisions that people faced at the time is well worth it, but dangerous for any of these artistic narratives to attempt. Show the audience hate, love, good, and bad, but for goodness sake keep it simple! Leave them with feelings of disgust, regret, anger, or an appreciation for their current lucky and peaceful lives. But don’t leave the audience confused and by all means don’t force them to think! I know there are lots of books and movies which ignore these principles but they are all too few.
Now I come to my most controversial point. All the while I was watching this movie I couldn’t help thinking about how the Iraqis will one day portray their resistance to American occupation. Ok, before I go any further, obviously the Americans are not shipping Iraqis out on trains for mass slaughter in death camps. Also, Iraqi stories of American oppression probably don’t have many cases of laughing diabolical maniacs among the US soldiers, or tales of resistance forces being lined up and summarily executed. I’m not trying to compare the the US with any historical oppressor, so let us not get distracted by this.
I am suggesting, however, that when you tell these stories, it doesn’t really matter how unfit such a comparison is. Keeping this on the general level of narratives of resistance, as I watched the movie, I thought of a dozen ways we could create an excellent, moving movie about Iraqi resistance to the US.
We have an invader, we have bombed out homes, massive post-invasion looting and local bandits lurking about. We have US soldiers who are ignorant of the language and customs. We have soldiers who have killed many people who have turned out to be completely innocent. The relatives and friends of those innocent who were killed will provide our movie with its hardened resistance fighters to serve as the main characters. We have soldiers who have subjected thousands of locals to countless insults in their attempt to find the resistance and maintain order. We have collaborators by the hundreds, and we have lots of informers who will turn in resistance fighters to the US. We have checkpoints and lots of asking for ID papers etc., and we have plenty of American propaganda floating about. We have images of poor Iraqis fighting to survive amid blackouts and other postwar chaos. I’m sure we can find lots of images of Americans dining on good food, enjoying good entertainment, and making racist and condescending comments about the locals (a necessary scene to provide a contrast to wretched poverty in any good resistance movie). We can have that important scene where the leading generals and politicians angrily criticize the officers in the field, yelling, “Why haven’t you found the leaders of the resistance? You must crack down on this filthy little rebellion or I’ll have you dismissed.” When the general gets off the phone he’ll gather his underlings and say, “Send out troops in the thousands, I want this resistance crushed now! Twist all our informers, interrogate all the prisoners again and sweep that ‘rat alley’ for those scum!” American troops will fan out anew and turn hundreds of home upside down. They will violate the sanctity of mosques, and hassle religious leaders. Hundreds of new fighters will flood the ranks of the resistance.
Our movie will, of course, leave out all mention of suicide bombings which involve massive civilian casualties. We will, however, include all those roadside bombs which have killed American soldiers. We will include the scene of the American soldiers being killed and then celebrating locals dragging out the bodies and doing all sorts of nasty things to the corpses. A young impoverished child will come forward and give the corpse a kick saying, “Here’s for what you did to daddy.” The audience will be moved and will applaud this act of vengeance. They will of course take the US high-tech weapons to add to the cache of our outmatched resistance forces. Resistance leaders will tell everyone to be really careful with ammunition, one bullet for one American. We’ll show triumphant resistance forces shooting down the helicopters of the evil Americans and we’ll show how a mother, who lost her young son to an American attack on a resistance holdout, attack a “collaborator” police station, blowing herself up and taking with her half a dozen traitorous police officers. This, of course, will have to come after the scene of the American trained police officers extorting bribes out of everyone who wants to get past. Or perhaps a scene of an evil collaborator giving up information to the Americans about a training camp outside the city. He will be visited by a resistance member the next day and be shot in the chest after being told, “The United Iraqi Resistance Committee has found you guilty of treason and of crimes against Islam and the people.” — BANG! Another traitor eliminated. The people nearby will cheer wildly. They’ll whisk the assassin to safety as American troops arrive on the scene. The evil Americans will be shown frustrated and will demand to know what transpired and where the assailant fled. The US vehicles will blast announcements saying, “You must give us information about the terrorists. Help us restore peace and order to Iraq and rid your society of terrorism.”
In the end, the resistance will be completely victorious (with about half of our main characters dying) or fail completely (with all but a few characters dying). It doesn’t matter. Iraqis who watch the movie will remember that there were a few brave souls who did the right thing and inspired a whole new generation. They asked the question (as is asked in “Uprising”), “Can we obey morals laws in a world that is immoral?” with a resounding “Yes!” and they will be moved deeply when they hear the phrase that is almost mandatory in some variation for all resistance movies, “We may not come out of this alive, but we can at least choose the means of our death! Better to die free than live like a slave!”
Americans who watch the movie will be disgusted, of course. How can they portray us like that? We aren’t all ignorant beasts who invaded their country for our own gain. Why can’t those Iraqis understand that we were just trying to help them? Why don’t they understand that we really believed, and had lots of evidence that they had big nasty weapons that could have destroyed us? Why don’t they understand that most of us thought they had something to do with 9/11? Why do they leave out everything about the evil regime we replaced or the fact that the resistance was really in bed with terrorists? Why don’t they see that those who worked together with us were just trying to build a new and better Iraq and don’t deserve to be executed or blown up for collaborating?
I strongly believe though, that asking these questions is missing the point. Unless the occupation is to continue indefinitely, official and personal memory of this period will not be ours to control. Their movie, should they like to shoot it in the manner I described above, already has more than enough scenes. And like all resistance movies, they could always fudge the details.