MATTERHORN Part II

Author Marlantes felt his story needed some focus on his own actions as a new member of the officer corps of marines. A new, inexperienced 2nd Lt is not much more than a college student who has been taught to shoot a few small arms, read a map, and follow orders of his superiors. He is also expected to listen lots and keep quiet.
The Malles character gets in the head of a few superiors and reflects his own lack of experience in the field and in life. Reading these parts made me think I was reading the diary of a young man who wants to grow up in a hurry. Of course, young men often choose to grow up by drinking a lot and often. Malles and his junior officers find a few times to get very drunk. It is during one of these episodes author Marlantes takes a huge leap of faith: a fragging incident kills a drunk Lt. who was the unintended victim of unidentified black Marines. Fragging, the attempt by individuals to silence(kill) other Marines, had become a factor in officer/enlisted relations before 1969. (The term relates to the act of throwing a M-26 fragmentation grenade into the sleeping quarters of the victim at night.) Fragging usually occurred in base camps, not in the field. It is not the fragging that defies belief, but the aftermath: Malles lets it slide because the investigation would be too disruptive, would lead to divisiveness among his Marines and bog down operations. The investigation would also taint the reputation of his unit.

Sorry Marlantes, a 22 year old Ivy Leaguer doesn't pass on murder wherever it occurs. If he sincerely felt this need to look the other way, he is a soulless, amoral individual worthy of contempt! Having walked in his shoes up to this point, I cannot accept the scene as anything more than a plot device to shock naive readers into believing that is how combat Marines behave under stress. It is an accepted truth that certain casualties in the field were suspicious, but the fragging incidents were investigated fully.
The post battle scene involving Malles' own actions seeking revenge against the Colonel, only to be thwarted by his peer lieutenant, is another plot device that leaves me scratching my head. Come on, are we that gullible?
The climatic battle scene, a singular event over a singular day has many elements that ring true for this reviewer: artillery support questionable, weather causing delays of helicopter resupply, weather causing delays of close air support(bomb laden F-4 Phantoms), difficult terrain features, and lack of coordination in the attack. Marlantes own citation for the Navy Cross highlights some of these same elements, testifying to the veracity of facts.
Marlantes survives and continues on in his roll as a Lt. platoon commander, albeit, now with a little seasoning. He stayed in the field for a few more months and then transferred to an aviation unit where he became an airborne artillery observer, flying in the backseat of an OV-10 Bronco, the Marine aircraft used in this era. This is not mentioned in his story.
This is not a book for combat veterans, it's a book that helps a combat veteran shed the burden of his experiences and put his demons to rest. It is a story told for civilians who desire to read historical novels set in the mid- 20th century. Perhaps Marlantes' editors cut the politics and training environment out for the sake of the reader. What a blessing!

Note: The reviewer served in an identical role as the author in the same setting described in the book a year earlier, 1968- the pivotal year of the war.