"Flyboys" By James Bradley
Sat Mar 04, 2006 5:32 pm
I'm probably a "Johnny-Come-Lately" with this but I'm just now getting around to reading (I'm half way through) on this account of WWII in the Pacific by James Bradley. Any comments by Wixers? I've heard fo a lot of first person horror stories for my now deceased uncles but this book open a lot of new ideas.
Tom
Tom
Sat Mar 04, 2006 6:34 pm
I thought the story was great but I really didn't like the "gimmick" of using the term "Flyboys" for the pilots. It seemed too forced, as though to try and make them all sound like a bunch of neighborhood kids off fighting a war together. I found it annoying, as though the editors told the author we need a short, catchy title to call these guys.
I liked "Flag of Our Fathers" much beter.
Blue skies,
Jerry.
I liked "Flag of Our Fathers" much beter.
Blue skies,
Jerry.
???
Sat Mar 04, 2006 7:40 pm
flyboys is really a flawed book.
Bradley loves Japan and it really shows in his writing even with
the subject matter. He's lack of lnowledge of carrier aviation also
rears its head. Flags of our Fathers was a much better (because he
knew the subject so well) and much better written (because he had
a ghost writer). Strangely he leaves out the sad tale of Ens Joe Kelly, a VF-19 Hellcat pilot of the Lexington, who also was shot down, captured and eaten by the Japanese. It angers me that many of the me who did this got off and became prominate in post war Japan.
Bradley loves Japan and it really shows in his writing even with
the subject matter. He's lack of lnowledge of carrier aviation also
rears its head. Flags of our Fathers was a much better (because he
knew the subject so well) and much better written (because he had
a ghost writer). Strangely he leaves out the sad tale of Ens Joe Kelly, a VF-19 Hellcat pilot of the Lexington, who also was shot down, captured and eaten by the Japanese. It angers me that many of the me who did this got off and became prominate in post war Japan.
Sat Mar 04, 2006 7:46 pm
I read it last year, and I think it's horrific.
I've read many accounts of Japanese atrocities, but this book really turned my stomach.
I've read many accounts of Japanese atrocities, but this book really turned my stomach.
O for # 2
Sat Mar 04, 2006 8:11 pm
Bradley hit a home run with Flags. He should have stopped there. I agree the term flyboy seemed inapropriate and dated. His research was sometimes shoddy. It was not th eenjoyable read that Flags was.
Sat Mar 04, 2006 9:18 pm
i'm going to read the book eventually, only because it has been trampled into the ground as a royal piece of doo doo umpteen times, starting with air & space smithsonian magazine's book review of it some time ago. it's got to be a true piece of crap after so much bad publicity, my curiosity is provoked!!!!
Sat Mar 04, 2006 9:23 pm
One of the paragraphs I have read that causes me, personally to reflect is the recollection of a "Movietone" type newsreel account of American "Flyboys" strafing Japanese survivors in life rafts and body parts flying in the air and other blood and guts with movie audiences cheering. I actually saw a lot of these "Movietone" strips and I can not recall ever seeing any of the blood and guts or theater audiences cheering. I was very young at the time, but if there was any of this it was pretty much censored out for general public consumption.
I don't know about other WIXERS who grew up during WWII but about the only person I remember seeing being shot in newsreel was the poor guy (whoever he was) getting hit while advancing on Omaha beach on D day.
We were privlaged to see a lot of our dead Marines floating in the surf in the aftermath of Tarawa, Peleliu and other Pacific atolls.
Tom
I don't know about other WIXERS who grew up during WWII but about the only person I remember seeing being shot in newsreel was the poor guy (whoever he was) getting hit while advancing on Omaha beach on D day.
We were privlaged to see a lot of our dead Marines floating in the surf in the aftermath of Tarawa, Peleliu and other Pacific atolls.
Tom
Sun Mar 05, 2006 1:36 am
Tom Crawford wrote:One of the paragraphs I have read that causes me, personally to reflect is the recollection of a "Movietone" type newsreel account of American "Flyboys" strafing Japanese survivors in life rafts and body parts flying in the air and other blood and guts with movie audiences cheering. I actually saw a lot of these "Movietone" strips and I can not recall ever seeing any of the blood and guts or theater audiences cheering. I was very young at the time, but if there was any of this it was pretty much censored out for general public consumption.
Sounds like bull to me. You can see the actual newsreels Pathe (the British equivalent) put out (www.britishpathe.com ) and any footage of body parts was a taboo for cinema release. Pathe leased a good number of US originated newsreels for UK showing too, and I've done a lot of trawling through, without coming across anything like that.
Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:15 pm
I also found the term "Flyboys" to be over used & forced. I also thought that he went to far back in digging up U.S. atrocities with Native Americans & in the P.I., & that those subjects had nothing to do with the subject of his book. I also felt that I really didn't get to know the men that he was writing about.
Mac
Mac
Mon Mar 06, 2006 10:10 am
I read the book a year or so ago, & found it to be an eye opener. I had heard bits & pieces of horrid things taking place on Japanese held islands, but I was shocked to learn the details. I found "Flyboys" to be very informative, however, I too thought the name should have been something else. Just my 47 cents. 
Robbie
Robbie
Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:58 pm
Well, I finished the book over the weekend and found it overall very informative. Like I said when I posted this originally, I had heard a lot of horror stories from my now late Uncles but never heard anything about the cannibalism by the Japanese that went on as a matter of survival and for "Spirit War" strength especially early on in China, Malaysia and New Guinea.
I can not believe Japan even entertained thoughts of victory when they could not even support or relieve their army in the field even resorting to abandoning them on islands and distant atolls to live off each other or starve.
But the ONE thing that came through again and again loud and clear was the total unselfish commitment to our nation's defence by our "Flyboys", Marines and Soldiers throughout the war. I am just glad Hirohito finally saw the light. I highly recommend the book to anyone who has not had a chance to read it because it is an eye opener.
Tom
I can not believe Japan even entertained thoughts of victory when they could not even support or relieve their army in the field even resorting to abandoning them on islands and distant atolls to live off each other or starve.
But the ONE thing that came through again and again loud and clear was the total unselfish commitment to our nation's defence by our "Flyboys", Marines and Soldiers throughout the war. I am just glad Hirohito finally saw the light. I highly recommend the book to anyone who has not had a chance to read it because it is an eye opener.
Tom
Mon Mar 13, 2006 11:36 pm
I am half-way through the book.
May I recommend that, if you liked this book, you may also would like to read "The Rape of Nanking" by Doris Chang? [not 100% sure about her first name, though]
Saludos,
Tulio
May I recommend that, if you liked this book, you may also would like to read "The Rape of Nanking" by Doris Chang? [not 100% sure about her first name, though]
Saludos,
Tulio
Flyboys- Good Title.
Tue Mar 14, 2006 1:59 pm
I don't know if the story about him having a ghost writer is true, but when I met Bradley, I was impressed. I was most impressed by the bevy of admirals standing around him and and looking at him with utter respect.
As for the book Flyboys, what is in a title? He chose it for a lot of right reasons- it was a very common word of the times about which he wrote and I think it reflected well the utter dedication to their craft (aviation) that the described persons had. My question to the WIX members here- after reading the book, would you consider yourself a "Flyboy?" Well, you didn't come through the depression, probably have more than a 3rd grade education, and aren't fighting for the very existence of your country by learning technology that is second generation, new and dangerous. Flyboys they were called at the time, and because they died in their times, they are always Flyboys, even though we no longer identify with the term.
As for the treatises on American Indians, James Bradley does a GREAT job of relating the backgrounds of American History in which lie the origins of American dehumanization committed on the Japanese. He does a great job of explaining to the Western mind how the Japanese came to similar thoughts of dehumanization, albeit with less social restraints than we had here in the US. His point was to have the reader look at both cultures and compare them. You can't fault a writer for being obviously biased (respecting Eastern Culture) and trying to get his mostly ignorant audience to identify with the people he wrote about in the book.
If anything, he opened a sore which was mostly unknown. When I was reading the book, I had the sudden though fleeting urge to throw out all my Japanese Aircraft relics. My reaction was that visceral to the terrible outrages perpetrated on Americans. But I've also been to a lot of Indian War Battlefields, slave auction houses and plantations. And I can't honestly say that I was as outraged as when I read the book. And if you think we as a culture are past that kind of existence, just think of a few choice words which I hear flying around nowadays, like sand nigger, cameljockey, or raghead.
It is easier to lump people together and deprecate their whole culture than to try to teach an army to fight individuals. The fact that the US and Japan did this in the context of their times resulted in the internments of Issei and Nissei, the cannibalism, and the unleashed butchery which happened in the island campaigns by both sides. Americans didn't just come together on the battlefield with Japanese and decide to kill each other with complete abandon- there were cultural and psychological backgrounds going on beforehand which led to this. For someone to tackle this subject
(albeit with a very disturbing footnote of history which was an anomaly nearly unknown) was a good thing. For myself, much as I am disturbed by the book- I finished it and don't think I will ever pick it up to read again- I think it is an important work in war literature and should be read by professional and amateur military people alike. If you haven't read it, do so but be prepared to be horrified.
As for the book Flyboys, what is in a title? He chose it for a lot of right reasons- it was a very common word of the times about which he wrote and I think it reflected well the utter dedication to their craft (aviation) that the described persons had. My question to the WIX members here- after reading the book, would you consider yourself a "Flyboy?" Well, you didn't come through the depression, probably have more than a 3rd grade education, and aren't fighting for the very existence of your country by learning technology that is second generation, new and dangerous. Flyboys they were called at the time, and because they died in their times, they are always Flyboys, even though we no longer identify with the term.
As for the treatises on American Indians, James Bradley does a GREAT job of relating the backgrounds of American History in which lie the origins of American dehumanization committed on the Japanese. He does a great job of explaining to the Western mind how the Japanese came to similar thoughts of dehumanization, albeit with less social restraints than we had here in the US. His point was to have the reader look at both cultures and compare them. You can't fault a writer for being obviously biased (respecting Eastern Culture) and trying to get his mostly ignorant audience to identify with the people he wrote about in the book.
If anything, he opened a sore which was mostly unknown. When I was reading the book, I had the sudden though fleeting urge to throw out all my Japanese Aircraft relics. My reaction was that visceral to the terrible outrages perpetrated on Americans. But I've also been to a lot of Indian War Battlefields, slave auction houses and plantations. And I can't honestly say that I was as outraged as when I read the book. And if you think we as a culture are past that kind of existence, just think of a few choice words which I hear flying around nowadays, like sand nigger, cameljockey, or raghead.
It is easier to lump people together and deprecate their whole culture than to try to teach an army to fight individuals. The fact that the US and Japan did this in the context of their times resulted in the internments of Issei and Nissei, the cannibalism, and the unleashed butchery which happened in the island campaigns by both sides. Americans didn't just come together on the battlefield with Japanese and decide to kill each other with complete abandon- there were cultural and psychological backgrounds going on beforehand which led to this. For someone to tackle this subject
(albeit with a very disturbing footnote of history which was an anomaly nearly unknown) was a good thing. For myself, much as I am disturbed by the book- I finished it and don't think I will ever pick it up to read again- I think it is an important work in war literature and should be read by professional and amateur military people alike. If you haven't read it, do so but be prepared to be horrified.
Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:53 pm
the name "flyboy" in the the minds of today's narrow minded kids is deemed a "gay" word..... i thought enough about the name nostalgically, & respectably to the extent that i named my sideline aviation antique business "flyboy aviation" back some years ago. the top 4 critics of the name of my sideline business are my own 4 narrow minded teenage kids!!!! i certainly won't let that intimidate me, or insult me. i thought it was cool, i thought it was a tribute to anybody that ever flew in harms way for our country, & that's about it.
Tue Mar 14, 2006 6:50 pm
Great responses! Thanks to everyone and especially to "Forgotten Field" for such a comprehensive review.
While reading about the TBM operations I was reminded of all the flack the media gave Defense Sec. Rumsfeld about the 'Up Armor" for the Humvees in Iraq when you consider the use of the TBM for glide bombing roll with the two guys in back. What was that about? When you have one guy taking care of business in a Corsair why do you need to waste the two in back if you take fire and have to bail out. The gunner wasn't doing anything and what was the radioman doing that the pilot couldn't do?
The way I see it the pilot could have left them two "BRAVE passengers" back at the carrier. But I guess the TBM was spec'd for three crewmen for the glide bombing roll and it couldn't be changed.
Tom
While reading about the TBM operations I was reminded of all the flack the media gave Defense Sec. Rumsfeld about the 'Up Armor" for the Humvees in Iraq when you consider the use of the TBM for glide bombing roll with the two guys in back. What was that about? When you have one guy taking care of business in a Corsair why do you need to waste the two in back if you take fire and have to bail out. The gunner wasn't doing anything and what was the radioman doing that the pilot couldn't do?
The way I see it the pilot could have left them two "BRAVE passengers" back at the carrier. But I guess the TBM was spec'd for three crewmen for the glide bombing roll and it couldn't be changed.
Tom