Vol. 1, No. 1, Fall 2002

After the Major asks the soldiers to consider volunteering for the mission, the four men discuss their options. It is clear that they are all apprehensive about the risks involved. Coney moves to a position of whiteness, certainly in terms of a 1945 American audience, when he is the first to volunteer for the mission.

The tension on the island leads to an argument among the soldiers. Both Coney and Finch are relegated to an outsider's position. Their fellow soldier, T.J., accuses Finch of being a "kike lover." Other soldiers hurl numerous anti-Semitic comments at Coney, such as "Jew Boy" and "You lousy yellow Jew bastard".(19) Given that the soldiers are fighting the Japanese, the "yellow Jew" locates Coney outside of the majority position not merely as a coward, but also as a Jew, and, by implication, as an Asian. The sound of gunfire interrupts the conflict, and Mingo's line "Come on, break it up. Why don't you jerks save it for the Japs?" resituates the soldiers once again as white, at least in relation to the enemy.

In an extremely tense moment when the soldiers are under attack, Finch realizes he has misplaced the map case. Despite the approaching Japanese soldiers, Finch and Coney remain behind to look for the case. Their anxiety mounts, and Coney implicates his friend when he says,

[page 19] Coney admits during his therapy sessions with Captain Bitterger that he viewed Finch's comment "you lousy yellow --" as Finch revealing his true anti-Semitic feelings. Coney tells Bitterger that when he witnessed Finch death his first reaction was relief and joy. From Coney's point of view his physical paralysis stems from the guilt he feels about being glad that his friend was killed, because at the moment of the Fitch's death Coney suspected he was in fact anti-Semitic. In the final scenes playwright Laurents signals Coney's imminent physical and mental recovery when Captain Bitterger persuades Coney that his guilt is unwarranted. The initial reaction of all soldiers upon witnessing the death of a fellow soldier, Bitterger explains, is one of relief. Coney's paralyzing guilt lifts and he once again moves in the direction of whiteness and universality. In addition, the issue of Finch's anti-Semitism (true or imagined by Coney) evaporates.

Coney, in both his own eyes and the eyes of the soldiers around him, occupies the position of the Other in relation to his fellow white non-Jewish soldiers, and the position of the Not in relation to the Japanese enemy. The ebb and flow of Coney's movement in and out of the majority position duplicates the movement of the assimilating Jew, depending on the people with whom they interact and the degree to which they conceal their Jewish identity.

Somewhere on the Border (1982) by South African playwright, Anthony Akerman, describes the violence that takes place when a white South-African Army unit advances into Angola to halt the progress of what they believe to be Soviet-backed terrorist forces. Stephen Gray notes in his introduction that the play's inspiration was an attack in 1978 of a village by South African forces. The village was populated by Namibian refugees, and "160 men, 295 women, and 300 children were killed".(21) This is a complex play that highlights many issues including, race relations, colonialism, rebellion, and military aggression, and anti-Semitism. Like Coney in Home of the Brave, David Levitt, a Jewish soldier, encounters both anti-Semitism and an attack by the rebel forces. Levitt's position as white is in relation to the black actor onstage, and the black attacking forces offstage. His position as Other, as with Coney, is shown in relation to his fellow white South-African soldiers, most of whom at one time or another in the play, make blatant anti-Semitic comments to or about Levitt. However, Levitt is not the only soldier subjected to abusive treatment by the commanding officer Kotze and the other soldiers, Doug Campbell the [page 20] presumed communist/pacifist is likewise relegated to an inferior Othered position. Campbell, citing his pacifist beliefs, had "put in a no-show" when it was time for his obligatory military service.(22) He was subsequently caught and is now part of a white South African Army unit stationed somewhere on the southern border of Angola. In fact, due to the abusive treatment all the soldiers receive from Kotze, each of the soldiers occupy at one time or another a less than privileged position, a position that is defined as not white. For example, when Kotze enters the barracks and sees the soldiers' living quarters in a state of disarray, he proclaims "I try and treat you like white men and look what happens".(23)

The potential movement from Other to white for Levitt and Campbell differ significantly. Akerman hints at Campbell's movement to a solidified privileged position (in the eyes of his fellow soldiers) during the end of Scene Five when he is the only soldier that can successfully disembowel a sack used in bayonet practice. This admired act of violence begins his movement from pacifist to aggressor, from Other to Not. Levitt position however, is in almost constant flux. As the play opens, he is standing guard at night at the Army training camp where the soldiers are stationed. Mowbray, another soldier in the unit, physically and verbally attacks Levitt. The confrontation is initially rooted in Mowbray's anger over an earlier incident in which Levitt refused to give him a cigarette. The tension escalates quickly:

Certainly in Mowbray's eyes, Levitt's Othered status is secure. The commanding officer Kotze breaks up the fight and equalizes both Levitt's and Mowbray's location as white in relation to the African rebel forces the unit is preparing to attack. Kotze, looking out into the darkness warns his soldiers, "Watch it! It's black and dangerous".(25)

Levitt's fluctuating location persists into Scene One of Act Two when the unit is about to cross over into Angola and attack the rebel forces. Levitt reveals that he will not cross the border into Angola. Badenhorst, a fellow soldier, situates Levitt on the side of the enemy, as he views Levitt's refusal to fight with them as traitorous. Campbell as well, who has by now given up his pacifist beliefs, will not support Levitt,

Mowbray, sensing Levitt's uneasiness over the impending battle and the potential consequences of his decision, hurls an empty beer can as if it were a grenade against the wall, barely missing Levitt. Levitt "dives to the floor" and begins "sobbing hysterically" saying, "I won't die for those bastards. . . . This whole fucking war's fucking mad".(27) Ultimately Campbell and other soldiers come to Levitt's aid as they share and understand his anxiety. However, after Levitt is taken to the sick bay, Kotze deftly returns Levitt to the position of Other when he [page 22] says, "In Israel those Jewboys neuk up the Arab good and proper, but here they a dead loss".(28) As soldiers take Levitt to the sick bay, rebel forces attack the Army unit and Levitt is shot and killed off stage. His death signifies the degree to which his inability to assimilate to this South-African Army culture leads directly to his erasure.

The play ends as the Army unit has attacked what they thought was a rebel village and the soldiers realize that they had in fact murdered innocent families and children.

The Shifting Position of Anti-Semitism

Ben Halpern, in an article entitled "What is Anti-Semitism" defines the term as "a hostile attitude toward the Jew (regarded as a threat) that develops into a tradition and becomes institutionalized. Such threats can vary in terms of intensity and can be expressed by minor fringe groups or through major political forces".(29) Many writers, including Gary Tobin and Sharon Sassler, acknowledge that "overt discrimination has decreased dramatically in the past forty years. . . . [Nonetheless] anti-Semitic beliefs and attitudes remain quite strong and are expressed in a variety of ways".(30) Anti-Semitism can take the form of a mild facial expression, to the desecration of a synagogue. Tom W. Smith, director of the General Social Survey at the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago writes, "As with racial intolerance, anti-Semitism has decreased appreciably since World War II. . . . [But] Jews are still recognized as an ethnic and religious out-group and are evaluated and treated as such. While stereotypes have ebbed and social distance has narrowed, anti-Semitic prejudices still survive and anti-Semitic activities are all too common".(31) Smith's research indicates, "about one in every five Americans willingly expressed anti-Semitic sentiments".(32) In fact, in the United States between January and May of 2002, the Anti-Defamation League received 626 anti-Semitic incident reports, which is an 11% increase over the same five-month period in 2001.(33)