Our High Noon: …so that you and your descendants may live
by Noel AnenbergI call heaven and earth to witness against you today that I have set before you life and earth, blessings and curses. Choose life so that you and your descendants may live… — Deuteronomy 30:19
It’s 11:57 in Hadleyville. The movie is “High Noon.” Marshall Will Kane (Gary Cooper) seals an envelope containing his last will and testament. He writes, “To be opened in the event of my death,” on its front panel. A train carrying a freed murderer, Frank Miller, who wants to gun Kane down will arrive in just three minutes.
Marshall Kane has been abandoned by everyone. All that he believed is tarnished. He stands alone without a badge, with only his conscience. His new bride, the church, the state, old friends and allies have all turned their backs.
Suddenly, the train’s shrill whistle shrieks through Hadleyville’s deserted streets with the fury of a raging beast. Its engine passes the town’s church. Under its neat white steeple, the Parson and his flock sit in silent vigil, the congregation perched on their pews like black crows on telephone lines awaiting a hanging.
The engine passes the barbershop. A carpenter hammers a nail into a fresh cut coffin. Kane’s coffin. Next door, in the Ramirez Saloon, mud crusted cowboys, Miller’s boys, hear the whistle. They pine for the return to the lawless debauchery they enjoyed when Miller ran things.
Sam Fuller, an old friend Kane thought he could trust, cowers in his house in his wife’s shadow. When Fuller hears the whistle he casts his eyes down with shame.
Every man who capitulates to evil has a rationale. Each rationale is a response to a basic human instinct. In Hadleyville, for those who turned their backs and hid, that instinct was fear.
Winter, 2009, Washington, D.C. It is 11:57 once again. Our new President, Barack Obama, must now choose how he will lead us in our continued response to the menace of Islamic terror. Will he appease the pacifists who believe the road to peace is paved with inane bumper stickers, humane treatment of savage killers, and good intentions? Will we capitulate to a world view which celebrates terrorist regimes while demanding that our true democratic allies in the war on terror, who have defended themselves, be tried for war crimes? Or, will he lead us to choose darkness and evil? Will he allow his new attorney general, Eric Holder, a man who orchestrated the release of convicted Puerto Rican terrorists, to prosecute the very people who have risked their lives to successfully protect us these last eight years? Or will President Obama lead us to stand tall and fight, choose light and life?
Will we cower or will we fight? As Marshall Kane straps his holster and gun onto his hip a lonesome cowboy sings…
Do not forsake me,
Oh my darlin’
On this, our weddin’ day.
Do not forsake me,
Oh my darlin’
Wait,
Wait along.
The train arrives at the Hadleyville station. Marshall Kane’s new bride, Amy Fowler, a woman who turned pacifist and Quaker, who turned the other cheek after watching her father and brother gunned down by outlaws, boards the train as outlaw Frank Miller, the paroled murderer Kane arrested, steps onto the station’s platform and meets up with his brother and their men.
Will President Obama order the release of enemy combatants, who value death over life, to rejoin the fight to kill us and destroy our way of life?
Amy had pleaded with Kane to leave town with her, to run. She told him that he did not have to be a hero for her, told him that Miller and his outlaws were no longer his concern, and told him that they had time to get away, run, and move to a new town so that they could open a store and start a new life. She pleaded, “I don’t care who’s right or who’s wrong, there’s got to be a better way for people to live.” There is … if all humankind repudiates evil. However, inasmuch as the choice to do good or evil is the most definitive quality of a free human spirit, the choice will be ever-present, people will choose – freely – to do evil. They worship evil.
Will we allow our great tradition of choosing between right and wrong and fighting for what is right to be wasted by those who avoid evil by turning their backs to it?
The cowboy continues his lament…
The noon day train
Will bring Frank Miller.
If I’m a man
I must be brave
And I must face that deadly killer
Or lie a coward,
A craven coward
or lie a coward in my grave
In the bliss filled moments after their wedding ceremony, Will Kane promised Amy that he would try his best, that he would hang up his badge and his gun and live a life of peace. After hearing the news that Miller was coming back, Kane acknowledged her feelings and agreed to run. But on the road out of Hadleyville Kane’s conscience caught up with him. He turned their wagon around and headed back to town and his fate.
He would not betray himself.
We now face the deadly threat of modern Frank Millers, fiends and murderers who have and will – if given the opportunity by our foolishly relaxing the anti-terror network constructed over the last eight years – sacrifice our lives for their vision of a world dominated by a macabre faith that like a cancerous tumor destroys everything in its path.
After receiving the telegram announcing Miller’s arrival, Kane believed he could call upon his “friends” in Hadleyville, form a posse and run Miller and his gang out of town. As Kane could not depend on them we should not depend on our international “friends,” nor shape our national defense policy to placate any other nation on earth. Why? We have liberated peoples from every nation on earth!
Marshall Kane walks alone and shadowless down Main Street to Judge Merrick’s storefront courtroom. The Judge has ripped the Stars and Stripes from the wall and is packing his saddle bags when Kane strides in. Upon seeing that Kane is back, the judge says, “You shouldn’t have returned Will, it was stupid.”
Will answers, “I figured I had to, I had to stay.”
In First Samuels, Chapter 2 Verse 3, Hannah, mother of Samuel, prays for her son: “Talk no more so very proudly, let not arrogance come from your mouth for the Lord is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed.” Will Kane will be judged by his actions as we will be judged by ours. Evil feeds on equivocation, on appeasement, on the failure to recognize it and on the cowardice that prevents people of peace and goodwill from acting to swiftly destroy it. Will Kane was a man of action and not of words. Will President Obama’s actions speak louder than his words?
Now on his horse, Judge Merrick says, “I’ve been a judge many times in many towns and hope to be a judge again.” He then turns once more in the saddle and adds, “Look this is just a dirty little village in the middle of nowhere. Nothing that ever happens here is really important. Now get out…what a waste.” He rides away. By choosing to run from town to town the judge has chosen to live his life as a refugee. Will we stand and fight or will we become feckless refugees?
And the cowboy continues his song…
Oh, to be torn
betwixt love and duty.
Suposin’ I lose
My fair-haired beauty.
Look at that bid hand move along
Nearin’ high noon
We too are torn between our love of life and liberty, the selfish pursuit of pleasure and the personal sacrifices life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness require.
Some agonize over the perceived potential for the loss of liberty and will not set aside their selfish concerns in order that our freedom, the freedom so many have sacrificed so very much to secure, may be passed on to future generations. They demand protection from anonymous telephone taps while willingly allowing themselves to be searched every time they arrive at an airport to board a plane, go to a concert or court, or visit a sports arena.
In Hadleyville there are as many reasons for not standing and fighting as there are citizens.
Kane’s young deputy, Harvey Pell, arrives at the Sheriff’s office with an ultimatum, “You want me to stick, you put the word in like I said.” Pell is angry that Will Kane did not tap him to become Marshall and now will stand and fight only if Kane will tell the City Fathers, “The Board of Selectmen,” to anoint him the next Marshall.
Kane answers: “Sure I do [want you to stick], but I’m not buying it [your offer], it’s up to you.” Kane is duty bound – a hero relic of an old Hollywood that celebrated patriotism, the American spirit, and the precious artistic freedom Hollywood owes to it. Harv’ Pell is the French, the Germans, the Russians et al, who enjoy unparalleled freedom brought about by the United States but will join the posse only if their political and financial aspirations are met.
Kane’s next visitor is Deputy Sheriff Herb Baker who stops by to pick up his badge and tell Kane that he can be counted on. But when Baker discovers that he is the only deputy who has re-volunteered to stand and fight, he backs out saying, “This is plain just committing suicide. This town ain’t that low [that so many would refuse to fight]…I ain’t no lawman – I got no stake in this – if you get more let me know.”
And the cowboy’s lament continues…
He made a vow
While in state prison.
Vowed it would be
My life or his’n.
I’m not afraid of death but oh
What will I do
If you leave me?
Kane returns to the Ramirez Saloon, owned by Ellen Ramirez his former lover, where he overhears the bartender saying, “I’ll give you odds Will Kane will be dead five minutes after Frank gets off the train.” Kane dry gulches the bartender. As the bartender wipes the blood from his cut lip he looks up from the barroom floor and says, “You carry a badge and a gun Marshall, you ain’t got no call to do that.” Will Kane answers, “You’re right,” and then asks the men in the saloon to join his posse. They refuse.
Kane enters the church. The Parson greets Kane with a reprimand for his failure to attend regularly. The Parson is making Kane the enemy, the bad guy, just as many in our nation have made our intelligence and military services the enemy. When Kane announces that Frank Miller has returned the Parson steps aside and allows the Marshall to speak his piece. Marshall Kane asks the congregation for assistance, begs them, but the Sanctuary of the church becomes a chamber of detraction and finger pointing like the misguided, ineffectual and oft evil United Nations.
A man stands in his pew, grabs his lapel with one hand and gestures with the other as he argues in great oratorical style; “Let’s make sure we know what this is all about – he’s [Kane] not marshall any longer – and there are personal differences between them.” Another shouts, “We put him away once but who stopped him from hanging – the politicians up North. Let them take care of it.” This voice is not unlike those in our nation who demand we do nothing without the approval and consent of the United Nations, an organization with Syria, a known terror state, on its Security Council and Libya, a totalitarian dictatorship, on its Human Rights Commission.
One parishioner seems to take Kane’s side: “If we don’t do what’s right we’re goin’ to have plenty more trouble – there’s only one thing to do and you know what it is.” But this man’s call for action is nullified by the next speaker: “Why didn’t you arrest those three [Miller's sidekicks]? Then we’d only have Frank Miller to deal with?” Had Kane arrested the sidekicks would these same people have protested that their civil rights had been violated inasmuch as they had yet to commit a crime? If Kane had arrested them would they demand release as the demand has been made for the release of war prisoners from Guantanamo?
These protests echo today’s. There are those who claim we should not be the world’s policeman. But, if we do not act in our own self-interest, who will? Who will fill the void? The Germans? Syrians? Russians? Japanese? The cowardly and ignominious French?
A brave hearted woman in a back pew bolts up and protests, “Don’t you remember what this town was like? How can you sit there and talk and talk and talk.” But someone else stands and asks, “How do we know Miller is on that train anywise?” and the congregation erupts in a low grumble.
Kane looks to the Parson for help and guidance but religion in Hadleyville then was just as confused and misguided as religion is today. The Parson responds in pretzel logic, “Commandments say thou shalt not kill. The right and the wrong seem pretty clear here…If you’re asking me to tell my people to go out and kill or get themselves killed, I’m sorry I don’t know what to say.” In the ancient Hebrew text, the Talmud, it is written, “If your enemy comes to kill you then kill him first.” Of this there is no confusion.
Kane next visits his mentor, retired Marshall Howe. Howe’s response to Kane most illuminates the human condition both then and now. Howe’s a broken man who lives with a Mexican caretaker. On being a lawman he says, “You risk your skin catching killers and the juries turn them loose so that they can come back and shoot at you again. (NOTE: This is exactly what had been happening in Iraq until the surge) If you’re honest, you’re poor your whole life and in the end you wind up dying all alone on some dusty street for what? For nothing – for a tin star.” About Hadleyville’s citizens Howe says resignedly, “It [Miller's release and return] all happened so soon…people got to talk themselves into law and order before they do anything about it, maybe because down deep they don’t care, they just don’t care. Get out Will, get out. It’s all for nothin’ Will, all for nothing.”
Has anything changed? Since 9-11 have not multitudes of hysterical Americans identified with the enemy and attacked our lawmen.
As Will Kane walks out onto Howe’s “dusty street” the cowboy resumes his song…
I do not know
What fate awaits me
I only know
I must be brave
And I must face a man
Who hates me…
The Hadleyville clock strikes twelve, ours too will strike again soon. Will Kane stands alone, as we must. Kane relinquishes his badge and says that he is the same man with or without a badge. He must overcome his fears and harden his resolve. He must fight his enemy with or without allies, as we must now.
Don’t think of leaving
Now that I need you by my side
Wait along, wait along
Wait along
Wait along
Wait along, wait along, wait along.
Amy, seated on the train with Ellen Ramirez, hears gunshots, races into town, and finds a body in the middle of the street. It is not Will. She hears more shots and runs to the Marshall’s office but Will is not there. Amy runs to a window. Will’s holstered six shooter and badge hang next to it. More shots are fired. Amy looks across the street and sees that her husband is pinned down by Miller and his last man standing. Miller’s man runs to the side of the Marshall’s building, takes cover next to the window and continues firing but does not see Amy. Amy, now caught agonizingly between her vow of non-violence and her love for her husband chooses life, as Deuteronomy instructs. She removes Will’s revolver and shoots the outlaw in the back.
In our little corner of the universe, on our small planet, in our small nation, in our homes, and in our hearts we too are faced with a choice. Since time immemorial we have had to choose between light and darkness, life and death, good and evil.
In the above passage of Deuteronomy 30:19, God speaks through Moses to his people as they are about to enter Canaan: “I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life so that you and your descendants may live.”
Like Kane and Amy, we must now chose life.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
51 Comments
Wow! Just wow.
Wonderful!
Too many people in this country fear pain above all. They will do anything to avoid even slight discomfort. Even the discomfort of admitting that a Republican was right. Better for them that the nation collapse than face the pain of saying they were wrong.
Its like giving morphine alone for a broken leg. You feel better, but the leg heals wrong and you are crippled (and addicted to morphine.) By accepting the pain of setting the leg, and the hassle of the cast, you get truly healed. Going the first way means you have to go through Detox, get your leg re-broken so surgeons can set it again, and even then you end up only partially functional.
Our nation needs to grow up, realize that some things need done, and to do otherwise, while temporarily easier, just makes things worse in the end.
Whenever I watched High Noon over the past few years, I always thought of GW Bush.
We don’t have a lot of Marshall Kane’s in politics right now unfortunately.
Sojourner,
What on earth is moral about letting an outlaw kill your husband?
@ Concerned American: Of course it sucks to watch a man’s entire community let him down, but that’s not just the USA, it is part of the human experience. And I think the point of Marshall Kane is not that we should try to find one, but that we ourselves need to be him.
@ Sojourner: You really are a fool. The entire point of this movie is that the central character will not abandon his principals even though the entire town (including his new wife) tells him to. Try to overcome your hatred of people who don’t agree with your politics at least for enough time to think for a second about your comments.
Dan-O
you said “@ Sojourner: You really are a fool. The entire point of this movie is that the central character will not abandon his principals even though the entire town (including his new wife) tells him to.”
It’s been forever since I’ve seen High Noon, but I don’t remember Gary Cooper wrestling with the notion of abandoning his PRINCIPALS. As far as I know, it’s not really established that he even attended school in that town.
I just watched High Noon again on Monday. I agree with John Wayne and Howard Hawks, the movie was anti American, like so many movies that the left makes of our past, none of the Americans in the town were worth a damn except for the hero and possibly his wife.
Rio Bravo was much better.
Well played, Dr. Manhattan
Check out this gem I just found:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RSF0UMmka4
Pretty awesome.
[...] Good piece over at Big Hollywood comparing High Noon with our modern day situation. [...]
Sojourner,
It is very high minded of you to think that in this day and age of violence that simply standing up to a bully will all of a sudden imbibe your moral tenets into them, wether it be terrorist regimes, or East Los Angeles Gangs. Go cower in the corner if you must, but don’t get in the way of people who are trying to keep you safe.
THESE PEOPLE DON’T THINK LIKE YOU or I (politics aside). I have been there! I had to make that decision. The guy that tried to shoot me wanted my car. I gave it to him! WIthout reservation. That wasn’t enough. He was already being sought for another murder. One more didn’t make a difference to him. He didn’t want me to identify him later. I stopped him by shooting him with his own gun. In court he threatened me in front of the judge. Nothing stopped him. I told him he better be able to hold his breath a long time.
Friendly persuasion doesn’t work on these people, they see it as weakness, and turn it against people to manipulate them, or kill them. Time and time again. They want what they want, and nothing stands in their way. They learned this behavior as a small child, and it never changed. It just gets worse.
Terrorists don’t want to get to know us. We have nothing in common! We have everything, they have nothing crap is all they see. We wont bend to their religion.
Grow up — Go somewhere else besides Starbucks, or Trader Joe’s. Try driving down an alley in East LA, and see how fast you lock your doors. I know you wouldn’t volunteer to go to Iraq, or Afghanistan (the new liberal cause). It’s easy to sit in your comfy chair and tell the rest of the world how you should live.
Stop hating people who don’t agree with you politically and wake up. You don’t have to tell your friends.
“Friendly persuasion doesn’t work on these people, they see it as weakness, and turn it against people to manipulate them, or kill them. Time and time again. They want what they want, and nothing stands in their way. They learned this behavior as a small child, and it never changed. It just gets worse.
Terrorists don’t want to get to know us. We have nothing in common! We have everything, they have nothing crap is all they see. We wont bend to their religion.”
Did you ever wonder if the exact same things are ever said about us by them?
To “A Little Friendly Persuasion”,
I am glad that you survived your ordeal and are here to post your comments. I agree totally with your last statement.
Look forward to reading other posts you make.
The comments of Sojourner reveal – what must be for some – a painful struggle: How to define and recognize good and evil, danger and safety, and what to do about it. While to some the gray areas are innumberable and are often the subject of middle-school debate, to many those areas are clearly defined and obvious. And have little or nothing to do with the perception of safety but with it’s ensurance.
The moral issues are posed at the beginning of a struggle rather than the end. Do we suppose that facing the business end of an Arisaka and bayonette in 1942 we would ponder the higher meaning of self defense? No. That question would have come about, and then likely dismissed as irrelevant, prior to being shipped out with our unit. How about the civilian on the receiving end of an order to ‘board the train’ in Poland? Or the oppressed women silenced with a head shot in Iraq because she made some aggregious insult to the Hussein administration? Was it best for all if they laid their necks on the block with no struggle, or does complacency only make the tyrant stronger and extend the inevitable fight? It is no capitulation to circumstance to save someone’s life.
The message I took from the movie was that a peaceful life is easily ruined by unchecked aggression. Self-defense, and the active enforcement of law, is a slim boundry between civility and a riot; proficiency in both requires vigil and practice.
Was it Tex Ritter singing the theme?
Dan Patterson
Arrogant Infidel
I too see the relation between then and now, so stay right here while i pack the car cause the trains at the station and all we can do is let them shoot us, right?
what will you do?
Did you ever wonder if the exact same things are ever said about us by them?
No, I’m not so ethnocentric as to assume that all the “thems” think the same things as “us”.
We are in a debate as to whether waterboarding (something that special forces do to themselves for training) is ethical or not.
The terrorists send teenagers with down syndrome onto a schoolbus loaded up with bombs and then detonate them. And they behead innocent Polish geologists and put the video of it on youtube for all to see.
Call me crazy, but I sense slightly different thinking there.
Mr Anenberg: What a powerful comparison between “High Noon” (fictional) and our reality (non-fictional) today. Your article caused me to reflect upon which character I am playing in this real-life drama. I have selected that of Kane. Thank you for reminding me of who, what, and why I am.
I am literally speechless. That was the most amazing essay I have read yet. They just keep getting better and better here on Big Hollywood. Thank you so very much for your contribution!
I’m simply making my own comparison between Amy and conservatives who say they’re against torture, unless…
It always cracks me up when conservatives are accused of “looking at everything in black and white”. It is the Left that does this.
Conservatives are able to take a nuanced view of “torture” and understand it’s moral issues both positive and negative.
And conservatives are able to identify the fact that there is a gray area in the mere definition of the term “torture”. At what level of pressure during interrogation does it become “torture”? Yelling? Are there worse and less worse forms of “torture”?
Outstanding…very well stated…I think John Ford and the Duke didn’t like the movie as it reall wasn’t typical behavior for Western/Midwestern towns in that time period..citizens would and did often band together to defend their homes and each other…as in Coffeville KS and Northfield Mn..where in a matter of minutes , men of the towns pretty much wiped out two of the most famed of the outlaw bands ever seen in this county. If they had been given 20 – 30 mins they would have done so without as many towns folks getting hurt.Again great article..
Thank you for this excellent critique of “High Noon.” I, too, have noticed these same references to our day, but you have expressed them much better than I could. Keep the articles like this coming!
[...] Our High Noon, Big Hollywood-A very entertaining read comparing the struggle with Islamic Fascism to a movie… [...]
Dr. Manhattan.
“Did you ever wonder if the exact same things are ever said about us by them?”
Excellent Question. I know a family who lost everything to escape from Saddam, and I asked them that very question. Their uncle was killed by Saddam and his “Army”. They don’t see us as perfect, but they don’t see us anywhere near the enemy the liberals do. They want Iraq to be free.
By the way, I am out on those LA streets making sure people are safe, saving lives in distress, not recruiting people to blow themselves up in a crowd.
HOW2FISH — WIsh I thought up that name! That is the best one yet.
Wow..you guys missed the point. We’re technically in a war against an extremist ideology, however too often we frame our fight as being a war not against extremist Islam, but Islam itself.
I can’t help but think that the groups recruiting new members to their terror cells are saying the EXACT same things about us that we say about them. That doesn’t make it “moral equivalency”.
This isn’t anything new, study WWII propoganda against the Japanese that portrayed ALL Japanese people as buck toothed psychopaths who would stop at nothing to kill all of us. THEN, study some actual memoirs of Japanese people from WWII (I recommend Akira Kurosawa’s autobiography), and you find out that the Japanese people themselves didn’t necessarily agree with what Hirohito’s regime was doing.
But, by all means, frame the war against extremist religious groups as being one that is actually a war against all members of the religion. THAT mentality will really turn out well.
Persuasion,
Then your Iraqi friends are among the most forgiving people on the planet. Considering the US provided Saddam with millions of dollars in aid and support (including selling him the chemical weapons we purportedly invaded Iraq to stop him from using), considering we called for the people of Iraq to rebel against him in 1991 and then turned tail and ran away from the fight, it’s amazing that anyone in that country trusts us as far as they can throw us.
I definitely believe that the Iraqis want to be free, but I have my doubts that they really appreciated being used by the US as a means to an end.
A society SHOULDN’T cave to the demands of a religious group that seeks to impose their beliefs on a society that doesn’t necessarily agree with them. That’s why when radical Christians threaten to boycott stores that don’t adequately say “Merry Christmas” loud enough, demand that their religion be the dominant aspect of schools and government, and calls for boycotts of books and movies based on being religiously offended, American society should resist them with all of its might.
Then your Iraqi friends are among the most forgiving people on the planet… …I have my doubts that they really appreciated being used by the US as a means to an end.
Yes, I’m sure that is true. But they are likely capable of understanding the difference between (1) a country like the US that has its faults, but overall has a historically remarkable record of individual freedom and human rights and (2) the Hussein gov’t that exterminated hundreds of thousands of people and had rape rooms and torture rooms.
Dan-o, yes, again you’re right. I just wish that maybe American values would come more into play the next time we decide to prop up a dictator like Saddam Hussein. In the long run, playing footsie with him wasn’t particularly bright. Frankly, we looked like hypocrites repeating the “tortures his subjects, rape rooms” mantra when we had given him millions of dollars in the 1980’s.
Tell you what, I think to show that our intentions in Iraq was actually liberation and not some other ulterior motive, when our troops leave, they LEAVE. That means NO permanent military bases. It’s their country, not ours, and they should be free to run it as they fit without US guns trained on them.
Tell you what, I think to show that our intentions in Iraq was actually liberation and not some other ulterior motive, when our troops leave, they LEAVE. That means NO permanent military bases. It’s their country, not ours, and they should be free to run it as they fit without US guns trained on them.
The presumption here of course is that leaving a military base would serve the purpose of training our guns on them. Is this how you view Ramstein AFB in Germany? (This base would be the same thing; a plot of land we never gave back to Germany after WWII).
I would argue that the existence of bases like Ramstein have in the past proven to be great tools for deployment of humanitarian missions and missions that stopped the spread of totalitarianism. You might think it is presumptuous of me (as an American) to make that claim, but does history really show otherwise?
Frankly if keeping a small piece of land to serve as a military base would strategically help bring the values of Freedom and Liberalism to a region that has little of either, then I would not be against it.
Dan,
The very people fretting about Islamicists imposing Sharia law on the US are often the same ones who want the US government to be overtly a Protestant/Christian one. The irony isn’t lost on a lot of us.
As for the Prop 8 folks, that’s freedom of speech. The knuckleheads who attempted to vanadalize or threaten anyone have no place in that movement, much like the people who blew up abortion clinics or shot doctors in said clinics have no place in the pro-life movement.
Dan-o, I respectfully disagree with the notion that permanent military bases in Iraq would be akin to Rammstein. Frankly, I don’t think that US ought to have military bases all over the world. *Some* people might think that makes the US an imperialist power. (by the way, I’m not going to go that far). Of course, if we’re going to place our military all over the planet, the truly fair thing to do would be to let Germany, Iraq, South Korea, England, Poland, et. al establish military bases on our soil.
Let’s not be naive, a large permanent US military presence would only serve one of two purposes: 1. propping up a puppet government in Iraq, undercutting the whole “we freed them” meme or 2. Using Iraq as a launching point for an invasion of Iran.
Bravo! What a wonderful essay – filled with truth. It’s amazing how these universal themes continue to play out over and over. On this dark day, as our sorry set of spineless lawmakers has put us on a course toward Socialism, it is inspiring to read something like this. Thanks – Noel – for the beautiful writing and clear thinking!
Dr. M:
I don’t understand what your idea of “fair” has to do with anything. What I am saying is that if a military base would strategically help Freedom and Liberalism to other areas of the world, then I am for it. I want what is Good, not whatever it is that people may consider “fair” or unfair.
And is it naive of me to look at the current existing military bases in other nations? What current military base serves the purpose of controlling a puppet government? SKorea? Germany? Saudi Arabia?
And yes, perhaps one day we will need to take action against Iran. Or should we not take Achmedinejad’s constant threats to nuke Israel seriously? How is this naive?
Part of the problem with the Left that I see is that the policies and arguments of the “other side” are turned into mere caricatures and then can be simply dismissed as naive, or closed-minded, or whatever.
Sorry sojourner, I missed your response.
Yes, I can see how you would think my response was an Ad Hominem response, based on the tiny glimpse your post afforded me, as do all of the posts, mine included. I assure you, it was geared towards your comments only.
BTW, I can’t decide wether your “friends who are conservative” declarative was more an Appeal to Authority, Begging the question, or a Circumstantial Ad Hominem. There is so much subtlety there. People used to do the same thing when they said something derogatory about Blacks. It doesn’t give them any more credibility, its just a little bit of a “nah, nah – so there” mentality. Logical fallacies were one of my favorite classes in college.
Now seriously, and I know I am probably reading into this, but your post gives me the impression that you would let someone kill you or someone else, rather than fight to protect yourself. Now, as a former cop, I talked many people out of very serious situations. That is ALWYAS the first choice, but I have put myself in harms way many times for other people, and it pains me when I see people label in the way you did.
I am not a overly religious person, but the old adage has been true in my life: evil thrives when good men do nothing!
P.S. I have Liberal friends that make you look like Rush Limbaughs right hand man. We just agree not to talk politics.
To the appeasenik Dr. Manhattan
What he said —> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9dXGJ2rYdA
Bilwick: “But does anyone know if the judge’s parable is a real story from ancient history, or if the screenplay writer fabricated it to make a point?”
Maybe Pisistratus of Athens. Maybe Dionysius the Younger of Syracuse.
A good companion film to High Noon is High Plains Drifter. It’s the dystopic re-imagining of High Noon, substituting for Marshall Kane (a man willing to sacrifice himself to protect the sheep that won’t lift a finger to protect themselves, much less him) an avenging spirit who ensures that the town of cowards and miscreants endures a time in Purgatory themselves before transforming into Hell for the invading outlaws (who, in the story, have real grievances against the company that owns the town).
In my opinion, the most despicable character in High Noon is the Mayor, who purports to be Kane’s friend but provides the main political justification for the town withholding its assistance.
Sojourner:
The actual place of non-violence in Quaker beliefs is actually quite a matter of dispute dating back to the English Civil War. In short, nobody can really agree under what conditions- if any- it is permissable or even demanded that Quakers take up arms. George Fox- the founder- certainly believed there was a point in time for it, while some of his disciples certainly did not.
So, in other words, the Fiancée may not be betraying one of the central religious tenants- or, if she is, whether it would be a WORSE betrayal to NOT take up arms.
That is what a knowledge of obscure Renaissance conflicts brings you.
Go figure.
You use religion to justify torture, murder, and abandonment of the principles of freedom? You are a nut case. Little clue for you and your scared little weak minded religious fruitcake friends; there is no Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy or GOD!
Religion is worse than the opiate of the masses, it is the thief of intelligent thought and discourse of the masses.
I came in late to this one and boy am I sorry I did, as my post will be way down the list. But I want to commend 99.5% of the commentators on this issue on the reasoned and civil manner they have discussed and shared their views. Well done. If we can continue this practice in the future, we can make a great impact on public debate.
Regarding Mr. Anenberg’s piece, well done. I appreciate your work and look forward to seeing more contributions. I hope to be able to enjoy similar work from many other writers as a way to establish Big Hollywood in its position of influence on the internet.
As to the subject, I’ll attempt brevity as well. We live in a world where we are faced with moral decisions every day. We need to stand up one way or another and sometimes it isn’t so black and white. Films like this are a great tool to cause the viewer to ascertain their personal position in such a moral dilemma. If we have truthfully thought about what we would do in a fictional position such as this, then we will be much less conflicted when we are faced with an all too real situation that may turn out to be life and death. I wish for more of these kind of films to be made in a modern vein without the ability to label them conservatively or liberally biased.
>>My point wasn’t that Gary Cooper was wrong to shoot the bad guys. I was pointing out that many conservatives thought is more like Amy, dumping convictions when they suits them, than Gary Cooper.<<
Like most liberals Sojourner gives us a wholly inaccurate portrayal of events. It is just spin. Amy had to choose between a belief that would get her husband, a good man, killed by an evil one, or choose to violate those principles to save him and the town. Recall the scene where I think it was Lee Van Cleef busted a store widow and stole something. “Can’t you wait?” he was asked. They had more plans after killing Kane. Life doesn’t always present us with the simplistic choices of liberalism. Life isn’t a Saturday morning cartoon morality play. Principles aren’t scientific laws. Sometimes they are superceded by other, higher principles as in this case. Otherwise, Amy did the wrong thing, and should have been pleased with the death of her husband and the death of the town. She lived up to her principles. Just as liberals will be pleased with themselves when a former Gitmo detainee kills a bunch of innocent children.
Sojourner – Actually, your earlier comments were the inspiration for my post. You were speaking from a very deliberate place in your heart against some other very passionate posters that I tended to side with. But your thought was reasoned and without malice and I greatly appreciated reading everything you were bringing to the discussion.
I think your post was in moderation or something as mine went up. Even if I had read your “rant” before I posted, I would only have slapped your wrist regarding the generalizations I know you yourself recognized. But having said that, I have to look at myself and ask how do I side with the conservative issues you highlight, while seeing your position against that type of thought. I could argue those points here, but that would take this way off topic. So, thanks for your contribution.
Sojourner makes a case about Amy “dumping” her beliefs and I think he realy misses the point of being Quaker. The point where Amy dumps her Quakerism is when she argues to run rather stand beside a force that is willing to face a verified and inarguable Evil. The Abolishionist movement centered in Quakerism for the first 50 years of our Republic and Quakers risked life and limb to “rescue” slaves from the South. They did not advocate a “runaway” philosophy from danger but stood “athwart the road”. When Amy went so far as to buy a ticket and board a train to “runaway”, leaving her husband to his fate that was the true betrayal of her Faith.
To not engage Evil on Evil’s terms thereby ensuring the certain triumph of Evil is a moral dilemma that is encountered more often than the post-modern world would like to think. Amy was faced with the choice of being 1) Quaker, letting her husband die and Evil, that is Frank Miller, triumph for her “pride of conviction” which had already been demonstrated as hollow; or 2) Christian, and battle against Evil. Pride goeth before the fall and to defeat Evil is paramount. What is the point of being “Quaker” if Evil defeats Good. If Christianity is thrown down where will Quakerism find its validity. Amy made a deeper choice than Sojourner is willing to allow her. Perhaps she was no longer a Quaker, the movie doesn’t say and possibly she reaized that by boarding the train she didn’t have the fortitude to be a Quaker, but certainly she is a Christian.
Wayne and others considered this movie in a negative light because of the ideology of the segment of the population exampled by sojourner
this just confuses these types of people as to the black/white issue and makes the liberals feel good about their bias against the patriots, non-elitists and day to day Americans.
sojourner – go back to the way we were and work yourself to death on that with barbra and bob.
[...] action for the Arthur vs carter watch at the moment but at Big Hollywood there is an excellent article on the subject comparing the decisions the president will need to make with that of Marshall Will Kane in High [...]
I recall a piece similar to this post 9-11, and it ended with discussion of Will Kane dropping the badge in the dirt after the fight is over. That piece also drew the parallel to Europe and the rest of the free world, who owes its freedom and its enlightened social welfare states, hoping and praying that the US does not lay down its badge and retreat leaving them to face the Allah-akbhar screaming Frank Millers of the world alone.
One small nitpick. The correct spelling is MarshaL, with one L. The Marshals are the least known and most frequently misspelled branch of Federal law enforcment.
Oops, missed a key phrase in my reply: Here it is:
recall a piece similar to this post 9-11, and it ended with discussion of Will Kane dropping the badge in the dirt after the fight is over. That piece also drew the parallel to Europe and the rest of the free world, who owes its freedom and its enlightened social welfare states to the UD shouldering most of their national defense, hoping and praying that the US does not lay down its badge and retreat leaving them to face the Allah-akbhar screaming Frank Millers of the world alone.
One small nitpick. The correct spelling is MarshaL, with one L. The Marshals are the least known and most frequently misspelled branch of Federal law enforcment.
I used to love High Noon as a kid. Then about 25 years ago I read an article that said that the screenplay (written by the blacklisted former communist party member Carl Foreman) was really just an anti Joseph R. McCarthy screed. I've never been able to see the film in the same way since that time.
The Bible says that there's a time to cast stones and a time to gather them together. But, with regard to Hadleyville, the return of the Frank Miller gang was definitely not the latter time!
John Wayne's intense dislike for this film was based on his unshakable belief that the citizens of Hadleyville would not have been so cowardly. And, prior to the 1890's, that might have been true of such a frontier town in real life. But, by the 1890's, the Old West was no longer considered "wild." So, I find it all too _plausible_ that the citizens of such a frontier town might consider themselves too civilized to tolerate a gunfight between outlaws like the Miller gang and a real-life version of Marshal Kane.
The mayor of Hadleyville (J.C. Flippen) tries to persuade the marshal that his absence will discourage the Miller gang from doing anything. But, Miller survived his prison sentence by making Kane the object of his vengeful obsession! So, I think it much more likely that Miller would have vented any frustration of that vengeance on Hadleyville, as a whole. And, believe me, it would have been all too easy!
He and his men could have set the hay, at the local stable, on fire. The townsfolk, as a whole, would come to fight it. At which point, all the Miller gang would have to do is start firing indiscriminately. Probably from nearby rooftops, with Winchester rifles!
In short; Kane undeniably did the right thing, staying to face the Miller gang when no one else would. Because, "civilized" appeasement would have failed Hadleyville just as miserably as it failed to keep Europe out of World War II.
You must be logged in to post a comment.