http://www.channel1.com/users/netnet/readme/grossman.html

On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

Reviewed by Caitlin Burke.

On Killing
David Grossman.
Little, Brown, and Co.

Buy the book


Lt. Col. David Grossman is a psychologist and a former Army Ranger who has
taught Psychology at West Point and now teaches Military Science at Arkansas
State University. His book is a collection of talks he has given, primarily
about ways to evaluate battle efficiency and training methods for soldiers
and the conditions and events that lead to post-traumatic stress disorder
(PTSD).

On Killing reads like a set of talks. Every chapter has an epigram,
quotations, and illustrations, and every point is made carefully and
recapitulated in related discussions. Grossman is still a loyal soldier, and
he is proud and slightly sentimental about the role of soldiers in society.
At the same time, he paints and vivid and uncompromising picture of the
development of the modern war machine, in which soldiers are merely parts.
And he manages to call for a "resensitization of America" without sounding
ironic.

Grossman covers the basics: it's easier to kill people you can't see, it's
easier to kill people you don't like, and for some reason Vietnam was
different. And then he offers some gripping analysis about why this is so.
Using information about firing ratios -- percentages of soldiers in the
field who actually fired their weapons -- inferred from two hundred years of
military history and gathered in several 20th Century wars, Grossman amply
supports his foundation thesis: Soldiers don't like to kill, and you can
make them fire, but you can't make them aim.

Firing ratio wasn't the only thing different about Vietnam. World War I gave
the entire Western World a case of shell shock, but Vietnam was different,
more somehow, more shells and more shock. What was different about these
firing machines? Grossman again uses military history, combined with his own
background as a clinical psychologist and counselor to soldiers, to form
some answers. He offers explanations both for improved firing efficiency
and, most importantly, for the effect of modern military training --
conditioning -- and modern war practice on the development of PTSD.

Grossman has several motives in On Killing. He wants to present a
sympathetic view of the soldier, and he wants to contribute his insights to
the field of military psychology. He also wants to assure his readers that
while the conditioning experienced by Vietnam soldiers was often
dehumanizing -- from the firing training to the overtly racist ideology that
was taught in boot camp -- this conditioning did not create psychopaths or
losers or misfits. Vietnam vets had a hard time keeping jobs and staying
married, but "going postal" was rare. Grossman contends that while killing
and hating behaviors were -- and are -- taught in the military, the military
environment also requires strict obedience to commanders. Sure, soldiers are
trained and ordered to shoot and kill, but only on orders, and punishments
for firing without orders are harsh and immediate.

Which brings us to Grossman's punch line: When kids play video games like
Doom or Mortal Kombat, they are learning the same hair-trigger behaviors and
us/them attitudes with none of the context of obedience to command and none
of the special circumstances that war creates. And when they watch
television and movies depicting lone psychopaths like Hannibal the Cannibal
and lone vigilantes like Rambo, they receive ideological "training" that can
help rationalize defensiveness and the appeal of violence as a
problem-solver.

Grossman points fingers in many directions -- at the lack of male role
models for the children of single mothers, at the hypnotic quality of
electronic media, and particularly at violent movies and games. And he's
correct, these are all potentially disorienting phenomena that offer many
anti-community images, images that can promote fear and help to rationalize
violence, particularly when experienced alone. On Killing is a compelling
and persuasive book, which manages to make its point intuitively while
making the reader understand that these ideas do, in fact, counter the
intuition and teaching of military institutions over centuries. But while
Grossman has made a fascinating contribution to military psychology and an
interesting suggestion about society in general, his comments about
America's children are not nearly as pointed or careful as his theses about
soldiers. It's one thing to suggest that teaching a man to kill is mediated
by teaching him to obey orders but quite another to suggest it takes a man
with authority to raise a woman's son.






Reply via email to