Foyle’s War (a BBC film series) Part 1: a critical look
I’ve prepared a fresh cup of coffee (‘cuppa’ as I learned from watching Acorn and BritBox), a bowl of muesli and yogurt, and I will defend my admiration of the fictional British series, Foyle’s War. After watching all episodes several times over, without apology or shame for the time I spent in front of television, I declare it to be among the best of WWII period dramas. Here is why.
It is a genuine period drama. Unlike Hollywood’s farcical portrayals of our wild West days, this series is a realistic venture into 1939-1946 England, one that most of 2023 Brits are unlikely to recognize. Unless like myself, the children and grandchildren of 1942 British defenders listened to their grandparents, asked for stories, perused the pictures and memorabilia with humble curiosity, they know less about their own history than Texans knows about their state’s cruel, murderous history. But Texans do not want to know. And the British would be so proud of their ancestors’ heroic accomplishments.
Although the endless parade of whores, furry cowboy chaps, pointy bras, and Yeehaw tomfoolery that Hollywood inserted into dialogue, costume, and scenes are the epitome of oft-repeated cinematic hyperbole, they are not the worst of it. Americans and Europeans from at least 1920 on were fed nonsense of quick riches, humble settlers, white entitlement, and justifiable cruelty exercised by local law enforcement against whoever stood in their ‘rightful’ way. But who looks to film for truth? Only those naïve and uncurious enough to adore every ‘John Wayne’ hero who slapped water across his face after driving a herd to town, saving a damsel from a fate worse than death, and fighting outlaws hired by villainous bankers, then pleasured a grateful woman. Only those who want to believe it. The unquestioning. The True Believers of Western dominance.
Everyone else understands that heroes are rare, stories told for profit are replete with misinformation, religious beliefs do not justify sin, and all humans have great potential for savagery. Britain during WWII was the home of heroes. Its people were tested beyond our understanding, and they showed greatness. Before anyone cries ‘foul!’, I acknowledge America’s participation in WWII and the sacrifices made by the men and women who served. My dad was one of them. But the story of Great Britain’s lone stance against the Third Reich is little known or appreciated.
Foyle’s War shows that the very young hastily signed up for service and their parents reluctantly but willingly let them go. From the young men who went to Africa and Belgium in the early days to the young women who learned to use code and were dropped into France, Great Britain sacrificed many of its children to win an unwinnable war with Germany. There were Spitfire pilots who died before celebrating their twentieth birthdays. There were single women in Bletchley Hall decoding German communication or in France helping the Resistance who died before celebrating marriage or career or motherhood. And for years, they did this while knowing that they did it alone against great odds, that Germany could easily invade their islands and establish a fascist government.
They were reckless – signing up for duties that portended early death, giving up other ambitions for perilous adventures, actively pursuing sexual partners and dance crazes for diversion and affection, leaving wide-eyed youth behind to protect their homes and prove their value. Though a few elders criticized their free passion (so un-English), most elders made nearly equal sacrifices to support the empire’s children. They knew that Britain’s victory depended on its youngest citizens. They knew that a final loss to the fascists would be far worse for the young fighters than it would be for the old workers and retirees.
Foyle’s War shows the difference between misinformation and disinformation. The British were inundated with news and ideas, from radio and cinema news reels to neighbor and vicar or priest. And the British paid attention to most of it, feeling that some bit of news was less stressful than hearing none, believing that Churchill and government officials would be truthful, knowing that bad news was inevitable but hoping that good news would soon replace the bad, and finally realizing that the noise was often untrustworthy and harmful. Gossip and rumors were the kind of misinformation that wormed its way through neighborhoods and villages: “It will be over by Christmas.” “Conscientious objectors (conchies) are cowards and traitors.” “No German is a good person; lock up all of them.” “The rich do not have to make sacrifices in this war.” “I can loot empty buildings because everyone is doing it.” And these absurdities were mostly…absurd. Unsupported by evidence and (mostly) harmless. Though certainly, many people in England with German or Italian ancestry and genuine conscientious objectors were treated unfairly, some suffered greatly. But the BBC and good vicars, to maintain social order, often directly denounced the misinformation.
Far more difficult however, was their struggle with disinformation. These ideas were disseminated with ruthless vigor and smart propaganda strategies from several nefarious sources. “The Germans will win anyway, no matter what we are asked to do.” “Churchill and Whitehall are lying to us.” “The Jews wanted this war; they profit from this war.” “Germans had a right to defend their territories; this war began as a territorial dispute.” “The Jews dictate to Churchill and Roosevelt; they run the world and want a world order.” The disinformation came from Berlin, Nazi sympathizers in England, American Nazis (Yes, we had them – see Rachel Maddow’s podcast Ultra), and business associates who profited from doing business with all sides of the conflicts. The war against disinformation involved intensive censorship of newspaper and radio. That was the least effective way to fight the lies cloaked in racist and classist emotional appeals. Most people see through smoke and realize the distortions in mirrors, the shadows caused by gaslighting. But what percentage of a nation that buys into disinformation becomes a real liability to a nation’s progress?
As America is keenly aware because of recent events – Trump’s presidency, the 6 Jan 2021 insurrection, an increasingly extremist right wing Republican party – if only 1 in 3 of a nation’s citizenry believes the disinformation and is soaked in a daily bath of right-wing grievances and hysteria and hatred, then progress is obstructed, and national schism is achieved. As in 1942 Great Britain, the censorship of free speech is as ineffective a containment as closing the barn door after the horses run out. Why? Because a citizenry who has enjoyed free speech and a free press and the ability to access information hates government intrusion. A government that openly exercises censorship is begging for dissent. So, unless said government wants to also tackle an extensive campaign of locking up dissenters and executing the opposition leaders, it had better be more creative. Into this dilemma step the movie makers.
All the while that bombs fell on Londoners and English villagers, while people across the empire sacrificed to win the war, movie studios in Great Britain and America began a new era of cinema. They used propaganda techniques. But they also spread messages that contrasted and resisted the disinformation coming out of Germany and Russia. Many films of the era depicted the discrimination and atrocities committed against Jews and Slavs. Films tackled issues like working class versus aristocracy. They built sympathy for homosexuals, immigrants, and people of color. What radio speakers could not do, visual imagery could. The cinematic screen actually showed battles, devastation, hunger, disease, concentration camps, death, discrimination, and human horror caused by human indifference. Film found its courage and its value. The tides turned. Despite an onslaught of disinformation from propaganda officials in Berlin and conservative American pulpits, filmgoers throughout Great Britain and America could see for themselves that the biases feeding their resentments were built on lies.
Foyle’s War Part 2 (to be continued)