Tags
act of valor, blockbuster, ego, id, media, military movie, Navy SEAL, Osama Bin Laden, sheep to wolf, sigmund freud, society of sheep, Special Operator, super-ego, switching from husband and father to warrior, tame or wild, warrior ethos
We have had quite a number of high profile military related movies in the media lately. Of course they have been centered around the killing of Osama Bin Laden. And of course I fancy myself to watch these movies, namely “Zero Dark Thirty”, “The Hunt for Osama Bin Laden”, and of course the blockbuster movie overtly advertising the use of real U.S. Navy SEAL Operators as actors, “Act of Valor”.
If you have seen any of these movies, I want you to pause reading my text for a moment and think over your perceptions of these movies, and what really stands out to you.
While watching this movie alone in the theater the below images really stood out to me, and hit home hard for me. It clicked instantly, I recognized something and I felt it again.
I have provided a series of images of the same man, in the order of precedence as shown in the movie.
“Act of Valor” 2012 – Screen Shot
“Act of Valor” 2012 – Screen Shot
“Act of Valor” 2012 – Screen Shot
Now I want you to analyze the first image. To some it may seem like a simple image capture from a blockbuster movie (Act of Valor). To others it may look like a simple portrait of the difficulties of military life.
To me, it looks like the familiar change in a man morphing from a warm husband and father to the cold calculated master tactician switching from and burying his domestic ego. Morphing from a domestic dog into a wild wolf.
For those who may not already know, understand this was the blockbuster movie that marketed its use of 8 current Active-Duty United States Navy SEALS (along with actual Naval equipment and live munitions) in an attempt to validate the authenticity of the movie.
This man in each of these images, vividly portraying an internal change so fervent that its probably a chemical change, is not an actor. That is a real United States Special Operator. And although he may be in front of a camera and movie set, he is not acting, to this man, these feelings and movements and situations are real life.
In the third image the man is in full combat gear on a mission, thousands of miles away from his family.
Now keep this in your mind while I go on.
Sigmund Freud identified the three separate factors of the human psychic apparatus being the “id”, “ego” and “super-ego”.
Briefly, the “id” refers to the most carnal instincts in us, present from birth, that seek only instant gratification, pleasure, and reprise from discomfort, and deny all connections to reality or sensibility. It is purely animalistic, purely selfish, and has no care for ethics or pragmatisms in any way. Babies are thought to be purely “id” based.
The “super-ego” contributes by directly opposing the “id” in being critical and moralistic in nature. Where as the “ego” is based in reality and subsequently seeks to please the id through acceptable reality based means, essentially “bridging” or “mediating” between the “id” and the “super-ego”.
I would propose to you that this particular man, in this case a U.S. Naval Special Operator, has two main ego’s (or idenities) that matter to us in this situation: Husband and Warrior. Domestic and Wild. Provisioner and Protector. Safe and Dangerous.
It may be unclear exactly how much either of these overlap with each other. It is safe to say that there is some amount of overlapping of each ego, and arguably they rely on each other for sustainment and validation. But it is also safe to say that the extremes of either of this egos are solely isolated firmly inside of their respective egos. The most domesticated behaviors of the husband reside only in the ego of the husband, and do not reside anywhere inside of the Warrior’s ego. The same can be said for the most dangerous behaviors of the Warrior’s ego (having nothing to do with relevance or warrant – rather those dangerous actions are sanctioned in combat or reckless at home).
Take a brief moment and look over these three images again with Freud’s “id” “super-ego” and “ego” in mind, and also look at a fourth image of the SEAL Operators enjoying family time at a beach before being ordered on the mission this movie is based on.
As a society in the background dealing with the overwhelming complexities of waging war, including the re-adjustment of our warfighters, can we explain how this man can transform from husband and father of the year to Special Operator, back to husband and father of the year, back to Special Operator, and so on, for years, even decades?
I personally can only relate to the life of a Special Operator about as well as the average mother and wife can relate to me. But non-the-less, I do not have the answer. I do not know we actually ease the transition from puppy to wolf to puppy to wolf to puppy to wolf back to puppy.
Instead, I posit that there is in-fact no such transformation, not really. Instead, this Special Operator who is not an actor, but a real U.S. Navy SEAL is in fact more of an actor than the famous celebrities we gossip about each day on Twitter, Facebook, and Yahoo. Yes, this man who we know by his call sign Rourke Denver is a better and more experienced actor than Johnny Depp, or Meryl Streep (and I do not say those names lightly, inferring they are without merit, both extraordinary actors with a substantial pedigree).
I posit that the only transformation happens from tame to wild, and wild simply behaves tamely when needed, and it is in this perilous union that we see an exorbitant amount of problems from our Veterans.
Given my combat and military experiences, I am merely an amateur rookie compared to these men who serve our nation as Special Operators, and still these theories are true as applied directly to me. I battle daily with being wild or tame, and every day I sell myself that I must remain tame for the better interest of the people I love, even if it is not a true display of who I am, now.
But does that make me tame? No. This makes me a warrior trying to exist in a society of sheep. An actor.
Semper Fi.
Kristan M. Blanchard
Corporal, USMC.
This post was started on February 26, 2013. Revisions and final edits have been made up to and on January 29th, 2014.
"Warfighter" - A U.S. Marine Combat Vet Speaks Up 
robakers said:
Nice post,
I always used a different analogy. In the flying we call it compartmentalization. Using your analogy, I play different role on a daily basis. Husband/Father, Pilot and Writer to name a few. Maybe it is acting and I just slip in and out of a role as the situation presents itself.
I think of it as having several trunks of issues. I only let myself open one trunk at a time. When a single trunk is open, the others must close no matter what is happening with them. When I climb into the jet, I try to force home life and writing life from my mind. I focus only on safely flying an airplane from point A to B. After the flight is over, I can allow another box to open.
When I deployed, my wife and kids stayed home. We said our goodbyes before bedtime. When I left the house and headed to the airport, that life was over. The deployed life was starting and it reversed itself when I returned.
I never thought it as acting, but it works as well. I think you are right, the badass dudes are only acting like civilized humans. In reality they are always turned on, ready to rock and roll at the snap of a finger. I am glad that they are on our side, just as I am glad that you are on our side as well.
K. M. Blanchard said:
Robakers,
Thank you for your sentiment. I understand and agree with you entirely.
Perhaps what I am inferring by using such a strong word as actor is that the difference between old and new, or tame and wild is so severe and ingrained into our physiology that there is no turning it off. As you also said, we simply decide to act like we give a crap about the petty things, and even things that most people would argue are substantially important.
For me it has been a constant effort of trial and error, we get our buts handed to us by the people we interact with and often care about regarding what we “seem” to care or not care about, and we modify our language and actions from there to fill in the holes present, allowing us to look civilized and shinny.
This supports the concept I routinely talk about here have that its is actually more familiar to be in war, or conflict, or under duress (such as training) than it is to play husband and father.
The real deployment is in remembering to and catering to all the personality requirements mandated or expected by civilized society (and our loved ones) when we aren’t “boots on deck” – a situation where the true wings go the eagle scan spread far and wide with no concern for abrasion.
War is familiar. Peace is not. And so I ask is this PTSD as it relates to veterans. Or is PTSD simply a method for society to identify the ambiguous concepts we have discussed here. In which case, is PTSD truly a disease or disorder, or is it a catastrophically complicated misunderstanding (of warfighters)?