Well, this is isn't Michael Herr or Tim O'Brien, but it's a pretty good Vietnam War novel as far as VW novels go. It has some bits of less-than-good writing that expose Webb's self-aware tinkering as a writer in the background, especially in the characters' backstories and the chapters that take place Stateside, but the in-country, combat, and "boonies" parts, like the book itself generally, are much better: exciting, engaging, dramatic, often funny. Excluding the somewhat forgettable and therefore unnecessary prologue, "Fields of Fire" starts with looooong backstories of two of the central characters – Snake and Lt. Hodges – which I found rather tedious, cliché-ridden and poorly written, so that, knowing the book had a very high rating here on Goodreads, I was genuinely perplexed as to its popularity. But then the story really gets going once it moves to Vietnam, where it begins with a combat scene – the "Where's Baby Cakes?" one – that I actually believe to be the best I've ever read.
What follows is the story of a squad in a Marine platoon in Vietnam, and it is pure Vietnam stock: casualties and new arrivals, artillery barrages and ambushes, tracers in the night, booby traps and the sputtering of AK-47s, patrols and "sweeps," burning down villages and brutalizing the Vietnamese, the climate and the terrain, rice paddies and elephant grass, lots of marching and digging, brief respites "in the rear," bitching about lifers, getting stoned, "fraggings," racial tensions among the U.S. rank and file, forging friendships and cultivating animosities. I've always been tempted to craft a story about the Vietnam War that consisted of all the standard images, stereotypes, and the by-now familiar scenes and characters associated with the conflict, but I think Webb's already done it. It's all here. But it’s a-okay: “Fields of Fire” really holds up, it’s a page-turner, and its scope of Vietnam mainstays gives it an air of the war’s epic, if such thing is possible.
The characters are drawn boldly and engagingly, even though most reflect something of the stereotypes you'd expect in a pop-culture story about a squad of U.S. Marines. But distinctive, relatable characters are actually rare in Vietnam literature: in O'Brien’s books, for example, superior as his prose his, the characters are forgettable and replaceable, usually little more than carriers for what O'Brien wants to say. In Philip Caputo's "A Rumor of War," which is often touted as one of the absolute top best of the VW literature (but which I hate!), the only character you get to know in any depth is Caputo himself. Larry Heinemann's "Close Quarters" is so naturalistic and has characters so unlikable it's impossible to get close to and sympathize with them. So it's to Webb's credit that he's churned out a bunch of protagonists who, although not always sympathetic, are affective and likeable (the morality of their actions notwithstanding), even if he does occasionally deal in cringe-worthy, half-assed cliché. Senator, for instance, a (surprise surprise) Harvard philosophy student who'd joined the Corps to play the bugle and ended up in An Hoa instead, reads Schopenhauer in the bush and concludes to his less-than-interested buddies, concerning their experience in the war: “‘It makes me believe in the randomness of things. Like existentialism. Suffering without meaning, except in the suffering instead.’ Bagger nudged Ottenburger. ‘What the hell is Shit-head talking about?’ ‘School.’” But the stereotyping is only partial, and Webb does endow most of the primary characters with some nuance: most importantly, they’re believable.
In fact, “Fields of Fire” reminds me a bit of “Band of Brothers” the TV show, in its focus on one unit, the switching between different perspectives, and their ambiguity: while showing the horrors of the battlefield, the destruction of the human body, and (FoF more than BoB) the problematic morality of warfare, just as “Band of Brothers” wasn’t anti-war, so “Fields of Fire” isn’t anti-military (the latter is on the Marine Corps recommended reading list, while the first is screened to cadets at Sandhurst, for example). “Band of Brothers” was bound chronologically by its eponymous company's experience in WWII and their march through Europe, from boot camp through D-Day through Bastogne to Germany's surrender and the glory of Hitler's Eagle Nest, the war itself supplying the milestones toward eventual triumph. Vietnam, of course, could not offer a similar significant timeline, so the plot of "Fields of Fire" is instead limited to the typical thirteen months of a Marine's tour - specifically the tours of some of the central characters - and the march mostly consists of the unit's rotating in and out of the same barren areas to carry out minor patrols and ambushes that never add up to any kind of decisive victory, each man's war ending the moment his tour ends, either because he's done the time, or because he's been seriously wounded or killed; this comparison, I think, illustrates neatly the fundamental difference in experience of the U.S. soldiers fighting in Vietnam to their predecessors in Europe or the Pacific. I’ve read somewhere that in the ‘90s Webb tried to have his book turned into a film, but the project failed because the U.S. Department of Defense said no. Maybe this was a good thing, because if Webb ever wanted to revisit the idea, “Fields of Fire” would work brilliantly as a TV series in the “Band of Brothers”/“The Pacific” fashion. Tom Hanks, are you reading this? I’d totally buy a box-set.
About the different perspectives thing: some characters receive more prime time than others, but the narrative switches quite freely from one man's view to another's. Many are provided with chapters detailing their backgrounds. There's also Dan, a Vietnamese peasant-turned Viet Cong-turned deserter to the Marines, in equal measure worthy of pity and condemnation. His appearance is a very rare instance in U.S. literature, or cinema, of the VW, as they usually abstain from presenting seriously the Vietnamese point of view, besides showing packs of terrified, screaming, violated villagers. I’ve been interested in the American representations of the Vietnamese in the war for a while, and although Webb’s book is not un-problematic in this regard—especially in his treatment of “Oriental women,” but not only—“Fields of Fire” is at least more interesting, and clearly more invested, in this issue.
So, to sum up: if someone asked me for a recommendation in VW literature, I’d say Michael Herr and “Dispatches” first, if they wanted a heavy trip. Tim O’Brien – yes, always, but with the disclaimer that he’s at least as interested in the process of storytelling, in making the war into literature, as he is in the war itself, and so his work is not as “pure Vietnam” as other titles (with the exception of his memoir, “If I Die in a Combat Zone,” but this one is marred by other problems). If that someone wanted a straightforward, experience-based, highly readable work about the U.S. infantry soldiers in Vietnam and what they went through there, I’d say “Fields of Fire.”
I’m giving it 3,5 stars: three because I’m judging it as literature generally, not exclusively VW literature, and while “Fields of Fire” is indeed very good in its niche genre, it's still not as good as books can be. The half is solely for a sergeant whose buttocks are on more than one occasion described as “bulbous” :)