I thoroughly enjoyed reading "HomeFront" by Catherine Lutz. I moved to Fayetteville many years ago. I witnessed many of the things that Mrs. Lutz discusses in her book. I often wondered why Fayetteville developed as it did. Ms. Lutz does a great job of explaining the complex economic, racial and political dynamics that created Fayetteville, NC. As Ms. Lutz points out, the military has had a massive impact on America over the last 50 years. Perhaps the best example of the cost of the military in human and economic terms is Fayetteville, NC. I did take exception with some of her observations. I'm not sure Ft. Bragg is the largest military installation. I believe that distinction belongs to Ft. Hood. Additionally, it seemed that Ms. Lutz was at times overly harse about the military presence in Fayetteville. The information on the use of training areas also seemed inaccurate. The chapter that discusses the economic impact of the military on Fayetteville was especially well done. Her analysis of the economic impact was even handed and well-researched. Although the book is about Fayetteville, NC, her observations are really about America and the impact of the military over the last century. I'm amazed it's taken so long for some one to provide a unique and well-researched perspective on America's quintessential military town and how the military has changed America. The notes section of Homefront alone is worth reading. Ms. Lutz provides outstanding background information which attest to the great research that went into writing Homefront. As America fights another war, Ms. Lutz's book is extremely well timed.

This is an eye-opening, honest, and thoughtful examination of the role the military plays in our society. It is obvious that Lutz has thoroughly and carefully studied Fayetteville, NC, and she has delivered a powerfully written document of the effects an army base has had on the community. What makes this a brilliant work is that it invites the reader to consider the many arenas of our culture which have been influenced, even created, by the military complex we have embraced as our defense. Homefront is an extremely important book.

Residents of Fayetteville, North Carolina awoke one morning in April of 1954 to find the front page of their local paper carrying news of a nuclear attack downtown; they were informed that sixty-four thousand soldiers were being deployed to amend the situation, aided by six tons of maps and forty-six chaplains. The attack, of course, was a fiction, but the soldiers and their simulated nuclear reaction mission (Exercise Flash Burn) were very real. Catherine Lutz demonstrates in Homefront: A Military City that the life of Fayetteville cannot disentangle itself from the life of Fort Bragg, the nation's largest military base. This study by the renowned anthropologist from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is both as specific as a city history and as broad as a national story. Though Lutz uses Fayetteville as a zooming-in point, her argument-that the dichotomies of military and civilian, war-time and peace-time, are collapsing-is applicable to the country as a whole.
Fayetteville, a city of one hundred thousand semi-affectionately known as "Fayettenam," was chosen as the centerpiece for this project because of its long and bittersweet relationship with Fort Bragg. Lutz traces this history from 1918 (when the city's founding fathers first lured the lucrative industry to the collective pocketbook of the townsfolk), through the patriotism and turmoil of the World Wars and the bitter clashes of the Vietnam War, to the present-day Hot Peace. Relations between the base and the city are both interdependent and strained so that, upon the close inspection Lutz conducts, it becomes unclear where the line between the two is drawn, if indeed it can be drawn at all. Lutz describes Fayetteville's economy as engineered to serve the needs of soldiers on paydays. While other North Carolina cities chose technology industries as their major source of income, Fayetteville cast its lot with the base and the retail sales it would create. This plan has had the two-fold effect of making the few who own the businesses quite rich and the many who work in them, merely touching the money as it passes from soldier to civilian businessman, rather poor. The question of who is serving whom (soldiers training to protect the lives of civilians while civilians tend to soldiers' needs) becomes blurred, as does the question of whom is actually receiving the government paychecks. Further blurring the dichotomy between military and civilian are the many civilians whose presence in Fayetteville is attributable to the military-for instance, the refugees who have come from all over the world, and the "war brides" who moved to Fayetteville with their soldier husbands and settled down. Lutz posits that the draft further lessened the gap between military and civilian by presenting a difficulty in readily distinguishing between the two; the idea that soldiers were lower-class, uneducated, and crass was prominent prior to the World Wars, but suddenly college boys from good families were moving into the base, and some soldiers were the type of boys by whom local upper-middle-class families might want their daughters courted. Another assumed intrinsic difference between soldiers and civilians-that soldiers always see war as the right course of action whereas civilians are more peace-loving-fell during the Vietnam War, when thousands of soldiers protested the United States' involvement and eventually brought about the military's departure from Vietnam. As the differences between soldiers and civilians have become blurred, so have the differences between formerly binary options of war and peace.
Though hegemonic history usually describes time as a series of wars and their interstices, Lutz finds the concepts of war-time and peace-time becoming ever more complicated. While war was formerly viewed as an interference upon the normal state of peace, the periods between war are now filled with preparedness for war, making war the natural state. War games are one, often bizarre, aspect of this war readiness. Obscuring not only the distinctions between war and peace but also those between Fayetteville and Fort Bragg, homefront and battlefield, are the situations in which Fort Bragg's training missions take them into the city in the acting out of a war situation. Though Fayetteville's civilians are notified when the soldiers will be rehearsing for nuclear holocaust or an invasion of "Pineland" (the imaginary country in which Fayetteville lies during war games), such realm-blending upsets traditional ideas of what war is and where it takes place. The Cold War also called into question the nature of war, since only recently has it been true that one can exist in which no blood is shed. Lutz contrasts this state with the current one of Hot Peace-even when the United States is not technically at war, the military is active on peace-keeping missions internationally, assisting insurgents or established governments in the protection of America's best interests.
Homefront is meticulously researched in all manner of sources. Largely ethnographic, Lutz's research consists largely of interviews conducted with eighty residents of Fayetteville over a six year period. Lutz's interviewees include not only the traditional writers of history, but also those whose stories are often left to fall silent-the result is a less favorable military history than the red, white, and blue ones usually heard. The recounts of these interviews have an informal feel to them, occasionally interjected with questions from Lutz and usually accompanied by the interviewees' actual names and personal, unposed photographs. This very human approach should not be seen as a substitute for heavily researched scholarship-Lutz is adept at providing both. Also cited are records from Fort Bragg itself, as well as reports found in the National Archives, local newspaper accounts from the turn of the century, and history books of North Carolina. Lutz allows her subjectivity to shine through the text-though raised in a military family, her horror at the effects of war on all involved are apparent, and it is clear with whom her sympathies lie. With such a well-researched argument, however, Lutz's agenda is incapable of falling through the cracks of substantiation. In the end, Lutz presents a compelling picture of Fayetteville/Fort Bragg as one town, under a base, indivisible.

This book is great for those high school policy debaters looking for an affirmative case on the education reform topic. It has great solvency cards and much more info for refuting the generic negative position. 1AC options: Change all public schools to a full JROTC Curriculum. Good luck, it's a good book for debate info.

The title of this book grabbed me: READING NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC. I now wish I had not grabbed up the book. Doing what the title suggests is a fairly benign activity; the only danger you face in reading the magazine is falling asleep in an inappropriate place. Let's admit it, National Geographic articles are written in a very prosaic style. This however is not news. We have been reading the magazine long enough to know the truth behind what one of it's past editors is quoted as saying: "only what is is of a kindly nature is printed about any country or people, everything unpleasant or unduly critical being avoided". Most of us have been around long enough to know that such cultural relativism, homogenization, and plain-vanilla humanism makes for some very boring reading.

That however is probably the only thing that you really need to know about NG. I certainly didn't need to know - and now knowing, don't believe, - as the authors believe that in depicting the naked breasts of native women: "the magazine and its readers are caught between the desire to play out the cultural fantasy of the oversexed native woman and the social controls of sexual morality..." This fixation which makes up an entire chapter "Women and Their Breasts" only highlights the real difficulty with the book's analysis. It is shallow and leans heavily towards a feministic cultural critique; it's also narrow in that it mostly looks at how NG depicts cultures. What about the other subjects the magazine looks at?

Boring writing aside my continued enjoyment of National Geographic comes from its explorations of wild places and its emphasis on nature. I much prefer this to what READING NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC would have me do - ponder whether the magazine is a pernicious contributor to the spread of Western supremacy, colonialism, imperialism, and the homogenizing influences of a white middle class world view.

The book is about the "making and consuming of images of the non-western world." And images, after all, "have taken over from written texts the role of primary educator." The two look at a set of 600 photographs published in the magazine from 1950 to 1986 (roughly their NG -reading lifetimes). They argue the photos are selectively chosen to present a view that does not disturb middle-class American self-identities and connected views of the 3rd world. The photos usually show a gentle, peaceful, content, colorful exotic people who, though they might not be wealthy yet, are on the road to modern progress on the Western model. The non-Western world is appropriated, its description has helped maintain social hierarchies in the First World. Even worse, the NG's practice goes so far as to abet war-making on the people it purposefully misunderstands.

There three methodological steps are to look at the process of producing the images (a social endeavor over which no individuals have total say throughout the process), examine the structure and content of the images, and identify how readers view the photographs.

"We chart the tendency of the magazine to idealize and render exotic third-world peoples, with an accompanying tendency to downplay or erase evidence of poverty and violence. The photographs show these people as either cut off from the flow of world events or involved in a singular story of progress from tradition to modernity [ahem, two very different things unless you're not thinking hard about "modernity"], a story that changes with decolonization."

Their goal is make NG and other mass media "understand and historicize the differences that separate interconnected human beings," to heighten empathy without fostering stereotyping or paternalism.

Criticism: I can't deny that the writers made such a negative impression on me with their dogma and attacking hyperbole (and dripping class resentment) that their useful ideas are weakened in my view. I wouldn't assign this to students I hope will write well.

I found this book to be thorough in its research of the geographic as an American institution. It presupposes that the reader is well aquainted with Gramsci's notion of mass media and the Frankfurt school borne out of this belief of hegemony perpectuated by a controlling elite. The author also takes liberty that the reader is aquainted with research methods using coding to differentiate subjects responses to pictures portrayed. Lastly, the author's use of interviewing technics and the subsequent interpretation of those responses enables the reader the opportunity to realize how the geographic and social background of the readers influence the perceptions people have when encountering this quasi-scientific journal. As an anthropological study this book illuminates the ethnocentric idealations of the Geographic's demographic readership, that is upper middle and middle class white euroamericans.