From symbol of fascism to symbol of hope?!

Agreed Gregor I am watching the movie for the first time and have paused to check what they are referring to there and I found it shocking that they used that example.

"It is an historical irony that Doctor Cochrane would use an instrument of mass-destruction to inaugurate an era of peace."

Lt. Commander Data's response to the Phoenix, Earth's first warp ship from Star Trek: First Contact.

I actually had similar thoughts on this when I watched it.

However, I think the real problem is how most nations rewrite history to suit themselves, and to ennoble their own side's cause.

There are a lot of things about war we have been taught which are hardly the honest truth.

We glorify our own dead, and so do the Japanese.

The glorification seen in SBY is only different because in the west we don't often see it expressed. In Japan, I do understand that schoolchildren are taught about the glory days of the Empire.

The wartime British Prime Minister Winston Churchill was quoted as saying that "History is written by the victors".

Just because the Allies wrote the history of WWII, does not mean they wrote the only history of it.

"Dave, stop. Stop, will you? Stop, Dave. Will you stop Dave? Stop, Dave."

The WW2 battleship Yamato was not a symbol of fascism. It was the flagship of the Imperial Japanese navy, an entirely different thing. The country was, rightly or wrongly, at war with the Allies. The Navy had to do its bit. The sacrifice of the Yamato was in the best naval tradition, and had nothing to do with fascism.

I have to agree, it seemed a bit odd to me also.

by gregor001 » Sun Oct 23 2011 04:58:19 Flag ▼ | Reply |
IMDb member since January 2004
I found the movie itself very well made especially for only 12 Mio Dollars but I found a little bit disturbing the part with the "history" of the Space Battleship Yamato because it looks like that the movie (I never saw the anime, so I presume that the origin of the name must be the same) wants to promote the transition of the "symbol of fascism" which the mighty imperial Japanese battleship Yamato represented to a "symbol of hope" for all the mankind. I understand this as an attempt of falsification of the history.

What do you think? Am I wrong? Perhaps I just don't the understand correctly the meaning behind all this e.g. because of lack my understanding of Japanese history and their society? Maybe was the Yamato ship more than just some tool of fascism and movies like this are putting those old symbols back where they belong?

By asking this I don't want that we open some hate thread against the Japan and Japanese people because most of the countries has problems with fully embracing their history, good and bad parts.

Thank you for your replies? And sorry for my bad English :)

The Yamato was a mega-battleship built at a time when battleships were already obsolete.

It's very convenient for Americans (and others) to demonize all the people of other nations. But most Japanese at the time were fighting for their nation, not because they were True Believers in fascism.

I'm not aware of the Yamato ever being presented as a "Symbol of Fascism". Since this is the OP's contention, isn't the burden of proof on him?

It's troubling when I Google "Yamato" + "Symbol of Fascism" the main hits lead back to this thread. That suggests that this argument is entirely a fabrication on the part of the original poster.

Looking through the history of the battleship Yamato, it was built as a warship, and served as the flagship of the Imperial Navy. But there is nothing in its history that suggests a particular symbolic relationship to fascism.

I fear that the OP is doing little more than stirring the pot.

The Yamato class - of which two were built, Yamato and Musashi - were the greatest battleships ever designed. Aircraft had already rendered battleships obsolete but that doesn't detract from the achievement itself. There's nothing wrong with taking pride in that. Or in honoring those who went into battle and made the ultimate sacrifice, for all the same reasons that the Allied soldiers did. In any war regardless of its cause or the true motives of the leaders involved, there are acts of valor on both sides worthy of respect. Why should the conduct of governments and the bravery of soldiers on the front line not be considered two separate things?