text:
Home Features Classic Problem, Classic Films
Counterproductive
Classic Problem, Classic Films
Alexander Boldizar September 19, 2011	 August 18, 2020 Leave a comment
The topic of this essay is a broad issue in moral philosophy: conflicts of loyalty, specifically, loyalty in war. My "texts" are four classic movies about World War II.
Let us start with some conceptual analysis of the central concept: loyalty. "Loyalty" means devotion to or consistent support of something. Loyalty is correlated with duty: to feel loyalty is to feel you have a duty to support something. But it connotes more than just adherence, it connotes the willingness to sacrifice one's own good for the sake of the other.
The things to which a person can be said to be loyal of course include other people, either singly or in groups (such as families, friendship circles, gangs, companies, clans, tribes, nations, or ethnic groups). A person can also be loyal to a belief system (such as an idea or concept, a theory, an ideology, a religion, or a cause). My hunch is that when one is loyal to a belief system, it is usually because it is derived from or associated with a person or group with whom he feels personal loyalty. For example, an Irishman's loyalty to the cause of Irish independence would, I suspect, derive from his strong identification with Irish family and friends. But I won't pursue that theory here.
W.D. Ross' view has the unwieldy moniker "Multiple-rule deontologism," though it is simply common sense put forward in a highly abstract way.
Because a person is typically related to a variety of other people and groups in a variety of ways, loyalties often conflict. My loyalty to my friend may conflict with self-interest (loyalty to oneself, so to speak), or my loyalty to other friends. My loyalty to my family may conflict with my loyalty to the country, or for that matter my loyalty to my lover. The permutations here are endless.
Now, different ethical theories analyze moral phenomena in different ways. Perhaps the best known ethical theories are utilitarianism, ethical egoism, and natural rights ethics.
Both egoism and utilitarianism tie the moral rightness of an act (or anything else, such as an institution or a rule) solely to whether it leads to the best results. They differ about whom those best consequences are intended for: is it just for the person acting (egoism), or for everyone affected (utilitarianism)?
Natural rights theory is one of a variety of theories that tie the rightness of acts to things other than consequences, such as the motives or character of the agent. Specifically, natural rights ethics holds that your act is right if it flows from your rights and doesn't violate the rights of others.
Each of these moral perspectives has its uses. For analyzing whether the country ought to enact a new law, say, utilitarianism is the obvious tool. For analyzing whether you ought to engage in a business, ethical egoism is a useful tool. To analyze whether a controversial business practice is just, natural rights ethics is probably the best instrument.
But for analyzing situations in which people act from conflicting loyalties, no better tool is at hand than an ethical theory put forward most clearly and compellingly by the subtle and sophisticated moral philosopher W.D. Ross. In the literature Ross' view has the unwieldy moniker "Multiple-rule deontologism," though I have always regarded it as simply common sense put forward in a highly abstract way.
In his view, in morally puzzling situations, we are faced with conflicting prima facie duties, and must determine from among them which one is our actual duty in the context. For example, suppose I am trying to decide whether to leave my wife after an unhappy marriage of many years. I have to sort through my obligations to my wife (whom I chose to marry and therefore to whom I have an obligation), to my children (whom we brought into the world and therefore to whom I owe something), and of course myself. In Ross' perspective, the exact nature of the relationships you have had (and their specific histories) is what is crucial in determining your actual duty, and not (as in egoism) just your duty to promote your own welfare or (as in utilitarianism) your duty to promote the welfare of the human race impartially considered.
An important feature of Ross' theory is that even when one prima facie duty overrides the others in a given situation, and hence constitutes the actual duty in that situation, the other duties are in truth none the less still duties, so as conditions change, one of them may override the others in turn. This gives his theory a dynamic aspect missing in many other ethical perspectives.
I think that Ross' theory is a sadly neglected tool in the philosophy of film. I want to use it to analyze conflicts of loyalty in war movies.
More than any other ethically challenging situation, war raises issues about loyalties to others in conflict with the basic human imperative of survival, as well as conflicts between the general obligation to others to do them no harm and the imperative to kill the enemy. I will examine World War II movies, because WWII is generally considered the 20th-century war in which American involvement was most morally justified. This enables us to focus more on the personal than on the political struggles of the characters involved.
Let's consider first a fine film starring two grossly underrated actors, The Enemy Below. This film tells the story of one particular small naval battle — a battle between an American destroyer and a German submarine — in the South Atlantic Ocean. The battle is shown as a kind of chess match between the two captains, both seasoned veterans. The US ship, the USS Haynes, discovers the U-boat as the sub is trying to make it to a rendezvous with a German merchant raider. The American commander, Capt. Murrell (Robert Mitchum) is trying to gain the full loyalty of his crew, who know about him only that his last ship was sunk. The German commander, Capt. Von Stolberg (Kurd or "Curt" Jurgens), has had his crew for a long time, and they are fully loyal to him.
An early part of the battle tips us off to Murrell's (and Von Stolberg's) capabilities. The American destroyer sights the German U-boat and closes in on it. But the U-boat escapes. Instead of pursuing it further, Murrell breaks off the attack and slows the movement of his own ship. His number one, Lt. Ware (David Hedison), asks him what he is doing. Murrell explains that he is trying to gauge his opponent. He explains that he gives the German captain so many minutes to reach a safe depth, level out and spot the destroyer, realize it is open to attack, and let loose a volley of torpedoes.
The crew watches in amazement as two torpedoes zip by harmlessly.
We cut to the sub, and see Von Stolberg, who after diving and leveling, does indeed realize the destroyer is open to attack, and remarks to his own number one, Schwaffer (Theodore Bikel) that the destroyer's captain is either clever or foolish. Just as Murrell anticipated, Von Stolberg decides to test Murrell, and fires the torpedoes. Up above, Murrell, after waiting an appropriate amount of time, barks out the order to turn the ship sharply and increase the engines to full. The crew watches in amazement as two torpedoes zip by harmlessly. Von Stolberg now realizes that Murrell is clever, as the destroyer goes on the attack. It is clear to both captains they are up against able opponents, and the battle is joined. As Von Stolberg remarks, "This American captain is no amateur. Well, neither am I."
In the end, after an extended battle of the ships' crews and the captains' wills, both captains make fatal errors and both errors are exploited by the opponent. The result is that both see their ships go down — a most un-Hollywood-like ending.
But as interesting as the naval chess match is to watch, the fascination of the movie comes in learning the personalities of the two warriors. In neither case is the motivation for such fierce fighting either some kind of extreme ideological commitment or exaggerated patriotism. In both cases the commitment is to their job and above all to their crews, whose deaths (should they occur) would be on their hands. In neither case do the other prima facie obligations — such as to friends, country, or humanity in general — disappear, and in another context, another prima facie duty will return as the actual one.
We see this repeatedly in various scenes and dialogical exchanges in the film. For instance, when asked by Ware what he thinks his foe is like, Murrell replies, "I have no idea what he is, what he thinks. I don't want to know the man I am trying to destroy." One is tempted to shout at the screen, "Just so!" When you are in the standard battle situation, you are under a general obligation to fight for your country. But your specific obligation, the first loyalty, is to those whom you command, and the foe — while understood to still be human — must only be the foe.
In a scene in the sub, after enduring an intense depth-charging run, one that makes the gung-ho and devout Nazi sailor Kunz want to surrender, there is this exchange:
Von Stolberg: "Mueller, what is the condition of the ship?"
Mueller: "We have not been hurt."
Kunz: "But we cannot escape!"
Von Stolberg: "It will be your privilege to die for the New Germany."
Von Stolberg's sarcasm makes it clear he has contempt for the kind of men who wanted the war but can't deal with what it entails. The loyalty is with those for whose lives you are responsible, not some abstract ideology.
Or consider the exchange between Doc and Murrell. The exchange occurs after Murrell has explained why he switched from the Merchant Marine to the Navy. In a powerful scene — one to which few actors besides the restrained Robert Mitchum could do justice — Murrell explains that he resolved to fight subs after the ship he was on was torpedoed by one, and he had to watch as the half of the ship — the half upon which was his newly-married wife! — sink rapidly to the bottom of the ocean.
Doctor: "Well, in time we'll all get back to our stuff again. The war will get swallowed up, and seem like it never happened."
Murrell: "Yes, but it won't be the same as it was. We won't have the feeling of permanency that we had before. We've learned a hard truth."
Doctor: "How do you mean?"
Murrell: "That there is no end to misery and destruction. You cut the head off a snake, and it grows another one. You cut that one off, and you find another. You can't kill it, because it's something within ourselves. You can call it the enemy if you want to, but it's part of us; we're all men.
This dialog, which Mitchum delivers in a manner-of-fact, unemotional way, is the sort of dialog that would tempt a lesser actor to chew the scenery. Not Mitchum.
This scene brings up an interesting question. The viewer may wonder about the role revenge may be playing in Murrell's actions. Now, it is one of the strengths of Rossian moral theory that it can explain a pervasive feature of our ordinary moral lives that is not easy to explain by other moral theories. I am referring here to loyalty toward the dead.
For example, let's suppose that my parents (while alive) treated me with just the normal care and concern that parents typically render towards their children. My loyalty would be expected, even though they are dead, in such matters as giving them an appropriate funeral and carrying out their final wishes as expressed in their wills. These obligations are not explained by future consequences (for me in particular or humanity in general), or by the "natural rights" of the deceased — they're dead! — but by our past mutual history as a family.
Von Stolberg's sarcasm makes it clear he has contempt for the kind of men who wanted the war but can't deal with what it entails.
But while seeing his wife die after a torpedo attack may explain Murrell's choice to seek duty on a destroyer, his demeanor and words make it clear that it is in no way impelling him to destroy this sub. He is no Ahab, for he has no history with that sub or its (at this point unknown) commander that would create such a desire for revenge.
It is clear in the film — from this and other scenes — where the loyalties of the protagonists lie. Von Stolberg makes clear his contempt for the Nazis and what they have wrought. He fights as a professional soldier for his country, but his first loyalty is to his crew. This Murrell understands, and respects, as shown in another scene. As the sub is being depth-charged savagely, and the crew is getting disheartened and beginning to panic, Von Stolberg puts a record on the PA system — a rousing song that the German U-boat cadets learn at their academy. He demands that the crew join him in singing it. They do, and begin to recover their courage. Up above, the destroyer's sonar picks up the sounds, and Ware expresses wonder (for in playing the music, the sub is making it easier for the destroyer to locate it). Murrell immediately understands what the other captain is doing, and expresses admiration even as he returns to the attack.
Another insight into how the key protagonists in the movies view their loyalties comes near the end. Von Stolberg has gotten most of his men off the doomed sub, as Murrell has his. Murrell spots the German captain for the first time, and wonders why he hasn't abandoned ship. Von Stolberg replies that his friend and number one is badly wounded. It is clear that the German's duty to his crew is discharged by having them abandon their ship, which will sink at any moment. But he feels he has to risk his life for this man, and doesn't expect his crew to do the same, precisely because the sailor was his long-time friend, not theirs. In this new context, Von Stolberg's prima facie loyalty to his friend has become his actual duty. This is a moral calculation that Murrell understands, and he helps in the rescue. In this contest, Murrell's prima facie duty to humanity has become his actual duty.
At the end of the movie, the two captains converse side by side. Their ending dialog is telling:
Von Stolberg: "I should have died many times, Captain, but I continue to survive somehow. This time it was your fault."
Captain Murrell: "I didn't know. Next time I won't throw you the rope."
Von Stolberg: "I think you will."
The Enemy Below is a superb action war movie. The director (and himself a fine actor) Dick Powell put in an enormous amount of effort on making it look realistic. It is filmed in color, and the display of naval action (such as the maneuvers of the ships, the depth charge firings, and so on) has a palpable realism. The film absolutely rightly won an Oscar for Best Effects. The support acting is excellent, especially David Hedison as Lt. Ware, as well as Theodore Bikel as Capt. Von Stolberg's number one and good friend Heinie Schwaffer. Also excellent is Russell Collins as Doc. But the two leads are just superb. Mitchum at his best (as he is here) was one of the best in film, despite his never having won an Oscar, and Jurgens (who was nominated for a Best Foreign Actor BAFTA award for his performance) was a renowned actor in both Germany and the United States.
The second film is a much-neglected gem, Decision Before Dawn. The movie is about the last phase of WWII, during which the Russian Army is about to enter Germany from the east, while the Allied Army is poised to attack across the Rhine. Germany by this time has had its major cities pulverized by Allied bombing, and the country faces massive shortages.
The American military command expects that the Germans will fight bitterly to defend their soil, and has set up an intelligence unit near the border to identify German POWs who are potentially willing to go back into Germany and spy for the Americans. The intelligence unit is headed by Colonel Devlin (Gary Merrill).
Devlin identifies two promising potential agents, given the code names "Tiger" (Hans Christian Blech) and "Happy" (Oskar Werner). We learn that these are quite different people with quite distinct motives.
Tiger is an outright egoist. Before the war he was a circus worker and a petty thief, and was drafted into combat. He is willing to go along with the Americans — or let them think he will — in exchange for better treatment. And, as all the other characters in the movie know, he returned from his last assignment alone — meaning that his partner was either captured or killed.
In contrast, Happy acts out of a sense that the war needs to be ended, for the good of all sides, not least of all for the good of the German people, who are suffering on a massive scale in what is clearly a losing cause — suffering for the stubborn pride of a few high military men. His resolve in this comes from seeing a fellow POW killed by other German prisoners for expressing the thought that Germany was losing the war.
Helping train Happy for his espionage work is a young Frenchwoman, Monique (Dominique Blanchar). Despite her understandable hatred of the Germans, she finds herself attracted to Happy.
The central drama of the film gets started when Devlin is told that a certain German general wants to negotiate the surrender of his entire command. Because of the high stakes in this operation, Devlin selects an American, Lieutenant Rennick (Richard Basehart) to accompany Tiger and Happy in the mission. Tiger is generally suspected by everyone (again because he returned from his last mission alone), but he is chosen because he knows the area. Happy is assigned the task of locating the 11th Panzer Corps, because it may block the defection.
One of the strengths of Rossian moral theory that it can explain our loyalty toward the dead.
Rennick, like most of the Americans, generally suspects all the Germans in the training facility, since they are all — let's be blunt — Germans. Worse yet, they are traitors. Even worse yet, they are traitorous German spies. As a narrator intones at the opening of the movie,
Of all the questions left unanswered by the last war, and probably any war, one comes back constantly to my mind. Why does a spy risk his life? For what possible reason . . . If the spy wins, he's ignored. If he loses, he's shot.
This brings up a fascinating feature of the flick: the viewer — no matter what his nationality — typically has a visceral, instinctive aversion to the traitor, no matter how well-motivated the treachery. We are instinctively revolted by treachery to the tribe, as we are to incest or touching the dead. This puts us in Rennick's position of distrusting the sincere Happy.
The three agents are dropped behind enemy lines into Germany, and split up, with Rennick and Tiger making their way to a safe house, while Happy goes in search of the Panzer unit. Along the way, Happy and the viewer meet a variety of Germans. Some are clearly weary of the war, but one — a superficially friendly Waffen SS courier who is still a devout Nazi — poses a major risk to him.
As luck would have it, Happy (who is posing as a medic trying to return to his unit) is commandeered to take care of the colonel who is in charge of the very Panzer unit Happy was assigned to locate.
After treating the colonel, Happy sets off with the information to the safe house. He is by now being sought by the Gestapo, and almost gets captured, but manages to join the others. During this time, Rennick and Tiger discover that the general who was thinking of surrendering is now in a hospital guarded by the SS, so the unit will not be surrendering after all.
The film moves to a tense denouement, as the German spies and their American control — with important information but an inoperable radio — have to try to swim across a river to the American-controlled side. Tiger attempts to flee, and Rennick shoots him. Happy and Rennick swim halfway across the river to an island, but as they move to swim to the other side, the Germans discover them and start shooting. Happy, unable to make the swim, creates a diversion and allows himself to be captured, ensuring that Rennick can swim across to safety.
Happy is shot as a deserter. Rennick is faced with a cognitive conflict, arising from his attitude towards the enemy: his life was saved by one of the very traitorous Germans he despised so profoundly.
A bigger conflict lies in the heart of Happy. In agreeing to spy on the Nazi army, he has to put aside loyalty to the government for which he fought, and embrace a higher loyalty to his country and what is truly good for its people. This seems clear to the viewer from the start, but not to the American soldiers in the film, who condemn the "turncoat" Germans uniformly, with a reflexive loathing of those who would work against their country's government (wrongly equating a country's government with the country itself).
In the end, in doing his true duty, Happy pays with his life. His act of self-sacrifice grows out of his feeling of loyalty to the American officer who risked his life to accompany him on his mission.
This film is outstanding on every level. Visually, it has an uncanny verisimilitude. It was filmed on location in Wurzburg, where rubble still clogged the streets at the time of filming. (The German audience must have been especially struck by this film.) The movie was nominated for a Golden Globe, for Best Cinematography (in Black and White).
The dialogue is no less gritty than the setting, and the characters are true to life — no comic-book heroes here. The fighting scenes are quite convincing as well. Indeed, the movie was based loosely on real life: the Allied intelligence services did in fact employ German POWs to re-enter Germany as Allied agents.
The direction by famed European director Anatole Litvak is spot on. He gets fine performances from all the cast. Litvak was nominated by the Directors' Guild of America for its Outstanding Directorial Achievement in Motion Pictures award, and the film was nominated for Oscars for Best Picture and Best Film Editing.
The viewer — no matter what his nationality — typically has a visceral, instinctive aversion to the traitor, no matter how well-motivated the treachery.
But the acting deserves special praise. Gary Merrill was always an outstanding actor — who can forget his superb support roles in the classic war film 12 O'clock High and the equally classic "woman's movie" (as the studio categorized it), All About Eve, both truly great films? He is excellent here as Col. Devlin, the commander in charge of the operation. Also worth noting was Hildegard Knef as Hilde, the desperate German bar girl, and Dominique Blanchar as Monique, the French aide to the intelligence unit who finds herself falling in love with Happy. Also worth noting is Wilfred Seyferth's performance as the Waffen SS courier Heinz Scholtz.
The three lead actors are especially fine. Richard Basehart played the American agent Lt. Dick Rennick, who accompanies the two German volunteer spies. Hans Christian Blech is perfect is perfect as the cynical Sgt. Rudolf Barth ("Tiger"). Most outstanding is the lead, a very young Oskar Werner as Cpl. Karl Maurer ("Happy"). Werner was an excellent visual actor, and his gift for conveying facially his character's thoughts and emotions was superbly used in this film.
The third film is the remarkable recent German movie, John Rabe. The movie is based on the amazing true story of the eponymous hero, a German businessman who was instrumental in saving over 200,000 Chinese civilians during the conquest and occupation of Nanking (now Nanjing) in 1937–38, often and rightly referred to as "The Rape of Nanking." (The reader may wish to read my earlier review of an outstanding documentary on the subject, Nanking, that appeared in the August 2008 Liberty, pp. 44-45.)
John Rabe was the head of the Nanking factory of the German multinational corporation Siemens'. (Siemens was a major player in providing pre-war China with electric power and telecom services). Rabe, we need to note well, was a committed Nazi. As the Japanese started their invasion of China in the 1937, he was of course sympathetic to them, since Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany had grown politically close, especially after von Ribbentrop became military attaché in 1934, and the Anti-Comintern Pact was signed in 1936. (When Japan invaded China — and China signed a military pact with the Soviet Union — in 1937, Hitler finally turned his back on China and sided with Japan completely.)
But as the actual Japanese military — as opposed to whatever idealized military Rabe envisioned — moved in, he saw how horrifyingly vicious they were. The Imperial Japanese Army at the time was governed by the Bushido code of warrior honor, which viewed it as the duty of a true warrior to die in combat rather than to surrender. That perspective had a dark side, however: it virtually guaranteed that whenever the Japanese Army won a battle, the victors would view surrendering soldiers (and the prostrate populace) with contempt, and consider them deserving of whatever cruelty the victors cared to inflict.
At the opening of the film, we meet John Rabe (Ulrich Tukur) and Dora (Dagmar Manzel), his beloved wife. They have lived in Nanking (then China's capital city) for about 30 years. Rabe has come to love the country, and is reluctant to leave, but retirement looms. However, during his farewell party, the Japanese begin their attack, with their planes indiscriminately bombing the city. Rabe opens the factory gates so the workers and their families can come in and get some protection. In a striking — not to say jarring — scene, the employees stop the Japanese air strikes by spreading a huge Nazi flag above their heads.
The next morning, the most important foreigners remaining in the city get together to discuss what can be done to help the hapless citizenry. Here we meet the other central figures in the story. Dr. Rosen (Daniel Bruhl), a German Jewish diplomat, points out that Shanghai, which faced a similar attack, set up a "safety zone." Valerie Dupres (Anne Consigny) — a fictional character loosely based on a real person — who is the head of a Chinese women's college in Nanking, proposes that Rabe lead the committee for setting up the zone, in large part because she sagely realizes that his affiliation with the Nazi party can be useful in dealing with the Japanese. Dr. Robert Wilson (Steve Buscemi), who doesn't like Rabe precisely because of his Nazi sympathies, is reluctant to agree.
In a striking — not to say jarring — scene, the employees stop the Japanese air strikes by spreading a huge Nazi flag above their heads.
The following day, Rabe is supposed to leave with his wife on the return trip to Germany. Nevertheless, he has decided to stay to help the Chinese, and watches his wife leave on the ship. As it leaves, however, it is attacked by Japanese planes, and Rabe fears that his wife is dead. In the face of his personal sorrow, he commits to setting up the safety zone.
In one key scene, we see the conflicts that Rabe feels mirrored in a Japanese officer. In this scene, the Japanese have captured a large number of Chinese soldiers defending Nanking. Prince Yasuhiko Asaka, the head of a lesser branch of Japanese nobility and a career military officer, orders the mass execution of the Chinese "captives" — a term covering not merely the POWs but any and all civilians. (In fact, it may have been his assistant, Lieutenant Colonel Cho, a political extremist, who actually gave the order, with Asaka only tacitly consenting).
A young Japanese major dissents timidly, but is immediately slapped down, and the massacre commences. (After the war, Asaka was lucky to escape prosecution for the war crimes committed under his command, when General MacArthur decided for political reasons to grant immunity to all of the Imperial family). It is obvious to the viewer that the young major is conflicted by his duty to follow orders (imperative in any military organization, but especially so in a viciously authoritarian one) and his more general duty to behave in a humane way toward POWs and non-combatants. There are universal rules that morally supersede military orders, some codified in the Geneva Conventions. I will return to this point shortly.
As the soldiers and then much of the general populace get murdered by a Japanese army driven mad by power and bloodlust, civilians pour into the safety zone that the Rabe-led committee had managed to set up.
The film vividly portrays a number of horrific events, including one in which Mme. Dupres refuses to allow the Japanese (who have found a group of Chinese soldiers hiding on the grounds of the Girl's College) to take 20 of the young women along for sexual exploitation, and subsequently has to endure the sound of POWs being machine-gunned in reprisal. In another scene, while Rabe is negotiating with the Japanese commanders, his driver is hauled off and decapitated as part of a killing contest between two Japanese officers.
As the brutal occupation grinds on, an improbable friendship forms between Wilson and Rabe, leading to some lighter scenes of their drinking and singing songs (one of which mocks Hitler). During the committee's Christmas celebration, Rabe faints — he has received an unmarked package containing his favorite cake, tipping him off to the fact that his wife is alive. Wilson discovers that Rabe is diabetic, and saves his life by procuring some insulin from the Japanese enemy he detests.
In the new year, the situation becomes grave. Rabe uses the last of his savings to help buy rice for the refugees, and discovers that the reason the supplies of rice are being used up so rapidly is that the Girl's College is hiding some Chinese soldiers. Rabe and the rest of the committee realize that if the Japanese discover this, they will close the zone and likely kill all the people protected there.
This leads to the denouement, in which the Japanese decide to march into the protected zone. But Rabe is tipped off by the young Japanese major, and the Japanese troops who march in find that the committee and the Chinese civilians have formed human shields to protect the POWs. Japanese tanks are brought in, but before shots are fired, the Japanese discover that international journalists and diplomats have just returned to the city, and the Japanese are forced to back down.
The film ironically ends more happily than its real-life hero. The film ends with Rabe being taken to the harbor for his return to Germany. He is cheered by the Chinese as he reunites with his wife. In actuality, Rabe did return to Germany with his wife but was immediately arrested by the Gestapo, precisely for bringing the Japanese atrocities to the world's attention. He was released after the war, but — unbelievably — his request for "de-Nazification" was initially denied by the British authorities. In 1950, he died poor and unremarked. Only in 1997 did he receive belated recognition for his humane and honorable work when the Chinese moved his remains to the Nanking Memorial Hall. And finally, in 1993, the German government got around to acknowledging his decency and bravery.
As the soldiers and then much of the general populace get murdered by a Japanese army driven mad by power and bloodlust, civilians pour into the safety zone.
Some have noted a resemblance between John Rabe and Oskar Schindler (the subject of Spielberg's Schindler's List). There are analogies, to be sure. Both Rabe and Schindler were real businessmen, both were initially drawn to the Nazi movement, and both in time became committed to saving the lives of at least some of the intended victims of the Axis war machine.
But there are some major relevant differences as well, the biggest being the presence of internal conflict of duties in the case of one character but not the other. Schindler was, from what I can tell, an opportunist who came to see the humanity of the victims of the Holocaust, and fought for some of them, but was never conflicted about it. In contrast, Rabe believed — yes, foolishly — that the Nazis were better than the viciously cruel Imperial Army. This absurd belief comes out in Rabe's letter to Adolf Hitler:
To the Fuehrer of the German people, Chancellor Adolf Hitler: My Fuehrer, as a loyal party member and upstanding German, I turn to you in a time of great need. The Japanese Imperial troops conquered the city of Nanking on December 12, 1937. Since then I have witnessed atrocious crimes against civilians. Please help to end this catastrophe and make an appeal to our Japanese allies in the name of humanity. With a German salute — John Rabe
Here we see the conflict between Rabe's commitment to his country and his allegiance to people who had worked for him and among whom he had lived. Parallel to this is the conflict faced by the young Japanese major who, in spite of tremendous pressure to carry out unquestioningly the war crimes demanded by his commanders, first risked the good opinion of his superior officers by questioning the order to summarily execute unarmed POWs, then risked his life by tipping off Rabe about the imminent Japanese incursion.
In facing their conflicts, both Rabe and the major are rather like Sophocles' Antigone. In the play, Antigone disobeys King Creon's order that her dead brother Polynices (who had fought against Creon's favorite, Eteocles and lost) be left unburied, for the animals to eat. Antigone buries her brother with her own hands, and when Creon demands an explanation for her breaking of the law, she replies that she is following a law older than that of kings. As she says, "Nor did I deem that thou, a mortal man, / Could'st by a breath annul and override the immutable, unwritten laws of Heaven."
In saving the Chinese, Rabe and the young Japanese officer were obeying a higher and older law, one that demands that we protect the innocent, no matter what state alliances apply, and no matter what prior personal allegiances have been established.
This film is a fine piece of cinematic art. It was highly acclaimed in Germany, garnering seven "Lola" (German Film Award) nominations, and winning Lolas for Best Film, Best Actor, Best Production Design, and Best Costume Design. Besides winning the Lola for Best Actor, Ulrich Tukur also won the Bavarian Film Award for Best Actor, for his very impressive performance. But as popular as it was in Germany, the movie was, alas, shunned in Japan. Not one Japanese distributor could be found to show it. The Japanese, it must be admitted, to this day still have not come to grips with their often atrocious behavior in WWII.
As the brutal occupation grinds on, an improbable friendship forms between Wilson and Rabe, leading to some lighter scenes of their drinking and singing a song that mocks Hitler.
Tukur well deserved his awards, giving a powerful performance, at once restrained but revealing. Steve Buscemi is excellent in support (he was nominated for a Lola for Best Supporting Actor, a rare nomination for an American), playing the more emotionally open American doctor who worked with Rabe to save the Chinese. Florian Gallenberger, who wrote the screenplay, also did a superb job in directing the movie. And Jurgen Jurges did an outstanding job on the cinematography. At the time of filming, a lot of 1930s-era housing stock in Shanghai was being demolished for new high-rise buildings, and he was able to use footage of it in portraying the damage done by the Japanese bombing.
The final movie I want to take up is rightly characterized as a classic. It is one of David Lean's many outstanding contributions to cinematic art: The Bridge on the River Kwai. Like John Rabe, Lean's movie is based on historical reality, though (as we shall see) it is not as faithful to history as the Rabe movie.
The Bridge on the River Kwai starts with a unit of British POWs captured at the fall of Singapore, marching into a Japanese work camp in western Thailand. They march in whistling the rousing "Colonel Bogey March," a popular British tune dating to the First World War. They are assembled in front of the camp's commander, Colonel Saito (Sessue Hayakawa).
As the British march, we meet another character, US Navy Commander Shears (William Holden), who is helping bury a dead POW. We get a sense of his egoism and general skepticism about the war when he bribes the Japanese captain supervising him and his fellow grave-digger (an Australian named Weaver) with a cigarette lighter taken from one of the corpses, and intones over the grave
Here lies Corporal Herbert Thompson, serial number 01234567, valiant member of the King's own, or Queen's own, or something, who died of beriberi in the year of our Lord 1943. For the greater glory of . . . [pause] what did he die for? . . . I don't mock the grave or the man. May he rest in peace. He got little enough of it while he was alive.
The British POWs are commanded by Colonel Nicholson (Alec Guinness). Saito informs the British that they are to work on a bridge over the River Kwai for a railway line. He tells them that he will require all POWs, even the officers, to start work in the morning, Nicholson tells Saito that the Geneva Conventions forbid compelling officers to work, but that only makes Saito repeat his orders furiously.
The next morning, when the POWs assemble, the officers refuse to work. Saito at first threatens to shoot them, then backs down, leaving them in the scorching sun, then putting them in a punishment hut. Saito orders Nicholson to be put in "the oven," a tiny iron hut that is exposed directly to the sun, where Nicholson stays without food or water, to break his will.
The British medical officer, Major Clipton (James Donald), an obviously reasonable, rational medical scientist, faced with two stubborn career military men following what they view as their military codes, attempts to negotiate — but Nicholson refuses all compromise. As all this is going on, the British soldiers are doing their best to passively resist — by feigning work and slyly sabotaging the project.
This leads to one of the great scenes in this great film. Saito, the Bushido-bound martinet, faces an even more code-bound martinet and the possible failure of his own project. He feels that such a failure would obligate him to commit actual suicide — Seppuku — in accord with Japanese tradition. At this point, Saito gives in, using the excuse of the anniversary of the 1905 Russo-Japanese War to release Nicholson and exempt the other officers from the actual construction work.
Nicholson reviews the status of the project, and finds it in shambles. To the surprise of his men, he says that he wants to build a "proper" bridge, i.e., one that will succeed in bearing the weight of railroad traffic. The officers and men clearly wonder aloud if this isn't outright collaboration. But Nicholson replies that only by working as real soldiers on a real bridge will he be able to restore his men's discipline, self-respect, and morale — all essential to surviving the harsh conditions imposed on them. He thus subordinates his loyalty toward military goals to loyalty toward his men.
At this point, three of the POWs — including Commander Shears — attempt an escape. Two are killed, but a wounded Shears manages to escape, and (with the help of some locals) manages to make it to safety. The movie focuses on Shears, who is recovering at a British Ceylonese hospital. Shears makes time with a gorgeous nurse and looks forward to shipping out to the US.
But Shears' plans are upset by the head of the British Special Forces in Ceylon, Major Warden (Jack Hawkins). Warden wants Shears to volunteer to accompany and guide a commando unit back to the POW camp to blow up the bridge. Shears, ever the egoist, informs Warden that in fact he (Shears) is not an officer, but an ordinary seaman who switched uniforms with the real Commander Shears after their ship had been sunk and Shears was killed — because the seaman knew that officers get better treatment in captivity. But Warden has already discovered this, and the US Navy has assigned the egoist to Warden's command. "Shears" has no choice, so he "volunteers."
One might suppose that Shears' agreeing to go on Warden's commando mission would be a case of conflict (between his innate egoism and his loyalty to his country's cause in the war), but it isn't, really. His decision is easily explicable on egoistic principles. He has been unmasked; thus he faces return to the States and a mandatory court martial. Depending on how the trial goes — would the judges view him as having deserted? or as having allowed the real Shears to die? or maybe even having killed the real officer? — the seaman faces a long time in military prison, and maybe even execution. So he decides to take his chances on going along with the mission, which may result in his being exonerated, receiving an award, and retaining the simulated rank of Commander that the Navy has allowed Warden to offer the egoist. No, his conflict comes later.
We return to the POW camp and reach another interesting plot twist. In order to get the bridge done on time, Nicholson offers Saito to allow the British officers to do physical labor along with the enlisted men, if Saito allows the Japanese officers to do the same. This immediately arouses the careful viewer's attention: wasn't the protection of his men, including making sure that they were all treated in accordance with the Geneva Conventions, exactly the matter over which he fought Saito so fiercely? What strange shift in loyalties is going on in the man?
We now rejoin the commando team as it parachutes in, near the POW camp. One of the commandos is killed in the jump, but the other three — Shears, Warden, and a Canadian Lieutenant Joyce (Geoffrey Horne) — with the help of Thai villagers (almost all women) make it to the bridge. Warden is wounded along the way, and wants the others to leave him, but Shears insists they all push forward. When we see Shears pushing the mission forward, insisting that Warden be carried, we begin to realize that the egoist is beginning to transcend his egoism and become committed to the mission.
The group arrives at the bridge, and Warden sets up a plan. Shears and Joyce plant the explosives at night, and are to set them off in the morning, when a Japanese troop train is scheduled to pass over it.
Here we reach yet another plot turn. In the morning, the wiring to the explosives is visible, because the river lever has dropped during the night. As Nicholson and Saito are giving the project its final inspection, Nicholson sees the wires ands alerts Saito. As the train approaches, they try to stop the pending explosion. Joyce jumps out and kills Saito, and Nicholson calls out for help, meanwhile trying to prevent Joyce from reaching the detonator. Shears rushes across the river to help Joyce, but Japanese soldiers shoot both of them. It is in these ending moments, as he faces death to complete what he has now accepted as his mission, not just the mission he went along with, that we realize his loyalty has shifted completely.
Rabe was released after the war, but — unbelievably — his request for "de-Nazification" was initially denied by the British authorities.
Nicholson, recognizing Shears ("You!" he gasps) — and being thus implicitly rebuked by the sight of an egoist now committed to doing the right thing and fighting for the correct cause — at last also recognizes his duty as a British soldier. He cries out "What have I done?" as he tries to reach the detonator. On the cliff above, Warden fires his mortar, killing the two commandos and mortally wounding Nicholson, who manages to stagger over to and collapse upon the detonator. The bridge blows, taking with it the train.
The final scenes are equally compelling. Warden, who has to escape with the only remaining help he has, the Thai women, shouts at them that he had to do what he did and kill the young commandos — presumably, so that they wouldn't be captured and forced to divulge information. The British doctor Clipton rushes out to see what has happened. As he surveys the carnage, he shakes his head and exclaims, in a voice choking with emotion, "Madness . . . Madness!" Madness, indeed — countless men were killed to build a "monument," and more were killed to destroy it.
Now, there was some controversy about the film concerning its historical accuracy. The movie follows the book (The Bridge over the River Kwai, by French novelist Pierre Boulle, who is probably best known for his script for The Planet of the Apes) rather closely, though with one important difference that I will explore shortly. Yet the book itself was only loosely based on the real story of the Japanese Imperial Army's construction of the Thailand-Burma Railway (also grimly named the Railway of Death) in 1942-43. The project — 260 miles of railway line connecting Bangkok and Rangoon, crossing the Mae Klong river — used primarily forced labor (called "Romusha" in Japanese). It cost the lives of upwards of 16,000 Allied POWs and 100,000 conscripted Indonesian and Malaysian laborers. The real bridge over the main river was first built out of wood, then out of steel, and was not destroyed until 1945, and then by Allied bombers, not commandos.
Moreover, there was a real British officer who worked to save the British POWs — Lieutenant Colonel Phillip Toosey. Toosey was a leader in the defense of Singapore, where he won the DSO for heroism. He refused an order to evacuate in order to remain with his men in captivity. By complaining against their mistreatment even at the cost of being beaten, and by negotiating cleverly, he was able to improve their living conditions. After the war he was a devoted exponent for helping the veteran far-eastern POWs.
Toosey was apparently little like the fictional Colonel Nicholson, and was certainly not a collaborator. In fact, he encouraged secret sabotage, such as deliberately mixing the cement improperly and infesting the wooden trestles with termites. The novelist Pierre Boulle, who had actually been a POW in Thailand, said that he based the character of Nicholson on his memories of a number of French officers who had collaborated with the Japanese.
Again, there really was a Saito. But the real Saito — Risaburo Saito — was a Sergeant-Major who was only second in command of a POW camp. More importantly, the real Saito was viewed by the POWs as relatively reasonable and humane. In a war crimes trial, Toosey spoke in Saito's defense, and the two formed a friendship.
However, while the film is not faithful to reality, I would contend that it is better off for not being that way. It is, after all, a fictional feature film, not a documentary. Specifically, the film departs from reality in a way that highlights the conflicts in the protagonist, helping us think about the source and nature of collaboration.
Normally, a person who collaborates in war does so out of simple egoism. By cooperating with the enemy, he typically furthers his self-interest: he gets better food, easier work, a place in the new power structure, or merely money (thirty pieces of silver, perhaps). But Nicholson clearly is not initially acting out of self-interest. His willingness to endure being boxed in "the oven" shows that.
No, Nicholson's loyalty to his troops and his military code of conduct are what make him want to build a "proper" bridge as a way to keep discipline and morale up, which would help the men survive in a harsh environment. Although some of his officers wonder whether this is collaboration, Nicholson's decision is reasonable.
Nevertheless, as the work progresses Nicholson loses his moral focus, as his loyalty shifts to the project itself, and his growing — what? friendship? mutual admiration? or simply partnership? — with Saito. The tip-off scene is when he and Saito are inspecting the completed project, and Nicholson starts musing about how one day the war will be over, and this project will be left as a kind of monument.
At this point, Nicholson's loyalty is shifting from his men to the man with whom he is collaborating, and possibly to himself — to concern for his later reputation, i.e., self-aggrandizement. The viewer sees this in the scene where Nicholson suddenly requires that his officers start working alongside the enlisted men — the very thing that, earlier, he had opposed so strongly that he was willing to be put in "the oven." This morally indefensible shift in perspective leads him to help, at first, to expose the plan to destroy the bridge. Only towards the end, when the sight of the egoist Shears fighting for the right military objective shakes him to his senses, does Nicholson recover the proper moral perspective.
This scene was not in the book, which ends with the commandos trying to blow up the bridge but only succeeding in derailing the train; Nicholson has no hand in any of it. Boulle was not in favor of the change in plot — though he liked the movie on the whole — but I am convinced that Lean's instinct was right. It creates two characters who are internally complex, with loyalties that shift subtly through the film, forcing us to try to understand their motives.
The critical acclaim for this film was unprecedented. It won Oscars for Best Picture (Sam Spiegel), Best Director (Lean), Best Actor (Guinness), Best Cinematography (Jack Hilyard), Best Music Score (Malcolm Arnold), Best Film Editing (Peter Taylor), and Best Writing/Screenplay (Pierre Boulle, with blacklisted writers Carl Foreman and Michael Wilson added in 1984). Sessue Hayakawa was nominated for a Best Supporting Actor Oscar.
Madness, indeed — countless men were killed to build a "monument," and more were killed to destroy it.
Additionally, the film won BAFTA awards for Best British Film, Best British Actor (Guinness), Best British Screenplay (Boulle), and Best Film from Any Source. The film won Golden Globes for Best Motion Picture (Drama), Best Motion Picture Director, and Best Motion Picture Actor (Drama) (Guinness). Again, Hayakawa was nominated for a Golden Globe for Best Supporting Actor. Lean won the Directors Guild of America award for Outstanding Directorial Achievement in Motion Pictures. And the film score copped a Grammy.
All this critical acclaim was well deserved, in my view. The movie was one of only a comparative handful of movies — several of which are works by David Lean — that I would point to as working on all three levels on which a film can work: the philosophic, the literary, and the aesthetic. (I discussed this terminology in my review of The Lost City, in the December 2006 Liberty.) At the philosophic level, the level of ideas, the film is an interesting exploration of codes of military honor and the nature of collaboration with the enemy. At the literary level, the level of plot and character, the movie gives us some unforgettable images of characters, such as an inwardly weak Japanese martinet, an egoist out for survival in a brutal environment, and a morally flawed though strong officer. And at the aesthetic level, the level of the sight and sound of the work, you have really masterful cinematography and an unforgettable score.
Moreover, the acting just couldn't get any better. Alec Guinness — always a favorite actor of Lean's and appearing in most of his flicks — is just perfect as the hidebound Nicholson. Although Guinness was troubled by the project — he thought that the movie had an anti-British flavor — he gave a fine performance. In fact, he thought that the scene in which his character is released from the oven and staggers forward was the best acting in his career (he had modeled the movements on those of his son who was afflicted by polio).
And William Holden, who could play the egoist and reluctant warrior well (as shown in his other fine war pictures, Stalag 17 and The Bridges at Toko-Ri) was perfect in this flick.
Also noteworthy is the performance of Jack Hawkins as Major Warden, the commando squad leader. Warden portrays a martinet, but bereft of any inner conflicts. When he is wounded, he doesn't want to be carried by the Thai women, because it endangers the mission. Ironically, it is the egoist Shears who forces him to accept help. At the end, he has no compunction about blowing up both Shears and Joyce, as the Thai women — who function in the scene as a kind of Greek chorus — stare at him in horror. He is totally focused on the mission, and feels no conflicts about anything he has to do to accomplish it.
But especially noteworthy in support is the performance by Sessue Hayakawa as the conflicted Saito, a character at once militaristic and vulnerable, even brittle.
A few comments about this historically fascinating actor are in order. Hayakawa was born Kintaro Hayakawa in Japan in 1889. He was the scion of a military man, and was groomed to become an officer in the Japanese Navy. But he ruptured his eardrum in a swimming dare as a teenager. This led his father to feel bitterly disappointed in him. He himself was led to feel a profound sense of shame before his father, and he attempted seppuku, stabbing himself in the abdomen 30 times. Had his father not broken down the door to the room in which he was attempting suicide and taken him to a hospital, he would have died. I suspect that this aspect of his personal background is what lends such credibility to Saito's contemplation of the act in the movie.
Hayakawa, as a young adult, made his way to America in 1911, studying economics at the University of Chicago, but then getting into acting. He rapidly became a silent screen star. His pictures between the mid-1910s and the late 1920s were hugely popular, both in the U.S. and Europe, putting him in the same class as Charlie Chaplin, Douglas Fairbanks, and Rudolf Valentino. (In fact, Hayakawa often played the exotic lover, a role he explored before Valentino arrived on the scene.) At his peak in the 1920s, Hayakawa was clearing $2 million a year from his film work (helped by the fact that he was one of the first actors who formed his own production company). This stellar background in silent cinema made him a fine visual actor, though a restrained one (he attributed his restraint to his Zen training), which talent he used to great effect in this movie.
Hayakawa's personal and professional life was full of conflict. After moving to America in disgrace, he made a brilliant early career in Hollywood, but with the rise of talkies (along with anti-Japanese sentiment in America) in the 1930s, he went abroad to work in theatre and film. Ironically, he was never really popular in Japan. His early performances as the exotic Asian lover didn't suit the Japanese audiences, which were very eager to embrace everything American. Later in his career, these audiences — at that point rejecting America — rejected him as too Americanized.
He was in France in the late 1930s, filming a movie, and when the Germans occupied the country in 1940, he was essentially trapped there. Hayakawa didn't just sit around and dream of past glories: he lived as a professional artist, selling his watercolor paintings, while also working with the Resistance, helping to save downed Allied airman. He proved his loyalty by his actions.
In the late 1940s, he was offered work again in Hollywood, starting with Humphrey Bogart's production Tokyo Joe, and then Three Came Home, a film based on the true story of a woman held in a Japanese POW camp (with Hayakawa playing the camp commander).
His performance in Bridge on the River Kwai well deserved an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor, and he considered it his best acting in a career spanning 80 movies.
Let's close by returning a comment I made earlier, when I said that the famous All About Eve was of a genre that Hollywood studios called "women's movies." But it was a great film — one that transcended a particular genre of entertainment to say things of great interest to people generally. War movies were (and are), like detective and action flicks, generally considered "Men's Movies." They are normally just a genre of entertaining movies aimed at a target audience. But when they work at their best, they too can transcend the genre to arrive at universal interest.
I contend that the four movies I have discussed are great and transcendent in this way. And at the core of them, what makes them fascinating is the way their protagonists sort through conflicting duties, of the kind that W.D. Ross well understood and analyzed. But in identifying these four films, I know I have only scratched the surface. The conflicts I have discussed are central to the storylines of many great films, and many great works of literature as well. This is, indeed, a very broad and deep subject.
#deontology #duty #egoism #ethics #film #philosophy #utilitarianism #w.d. ross #war
The Economics of Compassion
A Sincere Change of Heart?
Do We Lack Impartial Media?


text:
In-Depth: Houston's Asylum Seekers Face Difficult Legal Paths Ahead
Considering recent actions by the Trump administration, the process of seeking asylum has become even harder for victims of domestic and gang violence
Elizabeth Trovall
| Posted on July 18, 2018, 5:30 PM
In June, Attorney General Jeff Sessions overruled an asylum case in a decision called Matter of A-B-. In the case, a Salvadoran woman sought asylum because she feared returning to El Salvador after years of domestic violence.
When Sessions overruled the decision, he signaled to immigration courts that violence by a spouse, or gang member, no longer makes someone eligible for asylum, even if going back to their country is a death sentence.
<iframe src="https://embed.hpm.io/296128/296107" style="height: 115px; width: 100%;"></iframe>
Sessions' decision is also limiting who gets to stay in the country to plead their case before a judge. According to a new policy memo issued last week, immigration officers are being asked not to let domestic or gang violence victims go on to plead their case before a judge. They'll be removed from the country instead.
As these developments reverberate within Houston's immigration courts and offices, immigrants face an increasingly difficult path to asylum.
That's a path Hana knows well.
At 47, Hana currently teaches part-time at Houston Community College. Her career in academia started in her home country of Libya, where she's lived most of her life. She asked to use just her first name for privacy reasons.
Hana used to teach organic chemistry at a university in the city of Derna. There she had three children with her husband.
Hana reviews polynomials with her students at Houston Community College. (Photo: Elizabeth Trovall | Houston Public Media)
Hana said in Libya a husband has near total control of his wife's public and private life. She said marriage there was a "slavery contract".
"The husband has the right to kill you," said Hana, "By the law, no. By the traditions, yes. He can claim anything. He can find any reason."
But Hana's life changed when she won a scholarship from the Libyan government to pursue her masters in chemistry at the University of Houston. It would mean her whole family would have to move to Texas.
Her husband eventually agreed, Hana said.
So, Hana and her family moved to Houston. She was months into her studies when she said her husband changed his mind and ordered her and the kids back to Libya. Hana faced a tough decision.
"I decided I'm done," Hana said, "Enslaved women will raise enslaved children. Free woman will raise free children and ladies."
She stayed in Houston with her children. Then, she said her husband cut her scholarship and health insurance. With three kids to care for, Hana had to end her studies.
Hana lost her visa. She said she had no idea what she was going to do, until a friend gave her some advice to seek asylum.
It took a team of pro bono lawyers, a tall stack of documents and years of anxiously waiting, but, eventually, an immigration officer weighed the evidence and granted her asylum in 2015.
Though Hana's is a happy ending, her story isn't the status quo. Between 2012 and 2017, judges in Houston denied 87% of asylum petitions.
Outside detained courts at the ICE Houston Service Processing Center. (Photo: Elizabeth Trovall | Houston Public Media)
"These are very, very work-intensive, time-intensive, effort-intensive cases," said Geoffrey Hoffman, Director of the Immigration Clinic at the University of Houston Law Center.
"They're hard to win, but at the same time, they are very satisfying," said Hoffman.
He said while the burden of proof has always been high for asylum cases, Matter of A-B-, the decision by Sessions, makes it even higher.
"It shifts the legal landscape with regards to every single asylum adjudication related to private actors," said Hoffman.
"What that means is any case when the persecutor is a gang member, domestic abuser, family member, tribesman, militia, etcetera… if they're not a direct government employee, it could have very profound effects on the adjudication of your case," he said.
Anne Chandler, Director of the Tahirih Justice Center in Houston, said her organization, which offers legal services to women and children seeking asylum, will have to make changes.
"Every one of our briefs will be amended as one agency tries to redraft asylum," said Chandler.
And, according to a memo released in July, now Session's decision is being applied in credible fear interviews, the first step in the asylum process.
Immigration attorney Andrea Guttin said this move chips away at a migrant's right to a hearing before a judge.
"I fear a lot of people will be denied that could have won an asylum hearing," said Guttin.
Retired immigration judge William Zimmer also weighed in on the decision by Sessions.
He said he does think Matter of A-B- will make winning asylum more difficult for victims of domestic and gang violence.
"They might not qualify for asylum even if they might be killed under the standard," said Zimmer.
"That's just the way it is," he said.
Zimmer said asylum is more to protect someone from persecution, not domestic violence, so it's up to lawmakers to create new protections if they want to help the thousands of migrants seeking a safer life in the United States.
Border City of Houston Features Harris County Immigration Local News Texascourts houston immigration immigration court legal news
After Rescue Of 29 Migrants Held In A Houston Stash House, Many Face Detention And Deportation
Congressman Al Green Answers Your Questions (Dec. 22, 2020)
For Those With Eating Disorders, Holidays In A Pandemic Can Create Extra Anxiety
The World Is Shifting To Clean Fuels. Can Houston Still Be A Global Energy Leader?
Immigration Reporter
Elizabeth Trovall is an immigration reporter for Houston Public Media. She joined the News 88.7 team after several years abroad in Santiago, Chile, where she reported on business, energy, politics and culture. Trovall's work has been featured on NPR's Morning Edition and All Things Considered, Marketplace, Here and Now, Latino...
Report: ICE Fails To Comply With Its Own COVID-19 Safety Protocols
Coronavirus In Greater Houston: City Temporarily Moving Vaccine Clinic To Minute Maid Park
Texas Food Banks Could Be Short Millions Of Pounds Of Food In Early 2021 Thanks To Budget Cuts

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


This is the Orange Eyed Crocodile Skink, Tribolonotus gracilis. Found in Northern Papua New Guinea and it's off shore islands, this little skink rarely exceeds 10 inches. They are fairly secretive and prefer lush vegetation to hide in. There are several other related Tribolonotus species including the Red Eyed, Painted and a solid black/brown version but the jury is still out as to which of these are separate species, subspecies or simply variants. They are fast runners, good climbers and very efficient swimmers who are know to soak in water.
Females have two ovaries but only the right oviduct and produce only a single egg at a time.The egg is large and the young are comparatively large at hatching. In spite of the small number of offspring the skink is plentiful across much of it's range suggesting that it's quality over quantity reproductive approach has been successful. Females practice maternal care by curling around their egg or laying close to the nest. While there are other lizards which vocalize, the Crocodile Skink has the distinction of being the only species known to vocalize in defense of offspring. They will also repair the nest if it has been disturbed. Both males and females vocalize and their voices have been described as surprisingly loud. Offspring stay close to mom for several weeks and the lizards seem to be fairly gregarious with females and juveniles forming loose grouping and males defending territories.
Juveniles will play dead if captured. In captivity, they are sometimes such good actors that they have been put in the trash before handlers realize their mistake. The red or orange eye decorations are thought to play a role in species recognition but may also help deter predators by fooling them to think the skink is either larger than it appears or is a different, larger animal.


Minimum price for alcohol announced.
Sturgeon says 50p per unit preferred.
The preferred minimum price for alcohol will be 50p per unit, it was announced today.
Health Secretary Nicola Sturgeon said that setting the price at this level would have significant health and social benefits.
Ms Sturgeon made the announcement during a visit to a gastroenterology ward at Glasgow Royal Infirmary, where 80 per cent of patients are there because of alcohol misuse. She met with Dr Ewan Forrest, a consultant gastroenterologist who specialises in treating alcoholic liver disease.
Ms Sturgeon said: "Cheap alcohol comes at a price and now is the time to tackle the toll that Scotland's unhealthy relationship with alcohol is taking on our society.
"Too many Scots are drinking themselves to death. The problem affects people of all walks of life. It's no coincidence that as the price has plummeted, alcohol consumption, crime, disorder and violence have increased. It's time for this to stop.
"Introducing a minimum price per unit will enable us to tackle these problems, given the clear link between affordability and consumption.
"There is now a groundswell of support for the policy across the medical profession, police forces, alcohol charities and from significant parts of the drinks and licensed trade industry who recognise the benefits minimum pricing can bring - saving lives and reducing crime.
The Alcohol (Minimum Pricing) (Scotland) Bill is shortly to start the final stage of the parliamentary process.
The Bill looks to set a minimum price for a unit of alcohol as a condition of licence. It also sets the formula for calculating the minimum price (based on the strength of the alcohol, the volume of the alcohol and a price per unit of alcohol).
Chief Medical Officer Sir Harry Burns said: "For too long too many Scots have drunk too much and now it's time for tough action to address this.
"I strongly support minimum pricing, as part of a wider framework of action, as the best chance we have of reducing Scotland's harmful levels of alcohol consumption.
Support for minimum pricing has come from all quarters - the Welsh Government, Northern Ireland Executive, the majority of the health and sport committee, the Liberal Democrats, the Scottish Conservatives, the Scottish Green Party, the Scottish Licensed Trade Association, all 17 of Scotland's public health directors in NHS Scotland, the British Medical Association, the Royal Colleges, ACPOS, Scottish Licensed Trade Association, Church of Scotland, various children's charities, Tennents, and Greene King.
The Alcohol (Minimum Pricing) (Scotland) Bill is currently proceeding through the Scottish Parliament. It is expected to complete this process by the end of the month and to receive Royal Assent a few weeks later, with implementation in 2013.
The passing of the Bill will allow the Scottish Government to draft an order setting a minimum price for a unit of alcohol. This measure will be formally notified to the European Commission and other EU member states and after the notification period has expired, the order can be made and minimum pricing will then become an enforceable condition for the grant of an alcohol licence.
Thereafter, the Scottish Government will carry out a policy review of the minimum price on a regular basis in order to determine whether the price needs to be changed. We intend that the policy review would be carried out biennially.
A factsheet about alcohol and supportive quotes from a range of organisations are available from Communications Healthier.


text:
HomeIssuesLandscape ArchitectureNorthPark Center
Omniplan Architects
Interior Description:
The NorthPark Management team has worked with MESA for over thirty years, expanding its role on a recent $235 million expansion. In its expanded role, MESA has purposefully respected the clean-lined, modern design of the original landscape architect firm, Lawrence Halprin and Associates. Designed by Eero Saarinen and Omniplan, it is the first retail center in the United States to bring art by the likes of Andy Warhol, Joel Shapiro, and Jonathon Borofsky to the public in this setting. It is the only shopping venue to rotate sculpture from the Nasher collection on a regular basis and contains the only interior art installation by Mark di Suvero. NorthPark's owners, also the client, have long understood that aesthetics have monetary value, and that a landscape architect's design aesthetic and horticultural knowledge can bring an added level of texture, scale, and intellect to a project of this magnitude and use.
MESA worked closely with the owner, architect, mall-management, general contractor, civil engineer, existing tenants, and future retailers to design the interior expansion and renovation of existing mall. While working on the design plans for the interior and exterior plant selection, the landscape architect collaborated on a copyrighted series of museum-quality planters, benches, ash urns, and trash bins. The planters are minimalist in nature: circles, squares, and a series of rectangles. Each is planted with a modern floral display in a simple and unconventional palette that is changed seasonally—an assortment of unusual cacti, collection quality bromeliads, and orchids. Plants that are newly developed using tissue cloning give the shopper a view of first use cultivars. A lack of kiosks provides opportunity to carefully place planters and create a street atmosphere with café spaces along the mall corridors, making NorthPark Center one of the only shopping malls with this arrangement.
Exterior Project Narrative:
CenterPark, too expansive to be a true courtyard, is a new urban park within Dallas's iconic and culturally significant retail, restaurant, and entertainment environment, NorthPark Center. The landscape architect transformed a parking lot into a garden and programmed the space for public and private events.
MESA worked closely with the owner, architect, mall-management, general contractor, civil engineer, existing tenants, and future retailers to design a new garden and exterior event space. They also worked with the owner on the programming matrix for the outdoor space and served on the selection committee to choose many of the art pieces including Corridor Pin, Blue, a gigantic sculpture of a safety pin designed by Claes Oldenburg and Coosje van Bruggen, placed in the new two-acre garden.
MESA has also worked with NorthPark's owners to advance the idea of community outreach and education. The landscape architect has helped to program events and to design and oversee the installation of special horticultural displays for outdoor garden galas including Fashion in the Park, Dallas's version of the Bryant Park fashion shows, symphonies, and other art events. This outdoor programming is a continuation and expansion of NorthPark owner's commitment to community outreach and arts education prevalent in venues within the building including Canstruction, an exhibit of sculptures created from canned food to benefit the North Texas Food Bank; the American Institute of Architect's Retrospect, a public awareness exhibit about architecture and landscape architecture; the Trains at NorthPark exhibit with all proceeds donated to the Ronald McDonald House; and events that support the Salvation Army, the Junior League, and AFI Dallas International Film Festival.
Nancy Nasher
David Haemisegger
Client Team
NorthPark Management Company
Billy Hines
Alice Goss
Mark Dilworth
Pacheco Koch - Civil
MESA Design Group - Landscape Architect
Judy Cunningham - Landscape Designer
Susan Hubenthal - Landscape Designer
Kyle LaFerney - Landscape Designer
Billy Roberts - Landscape Designer
Tary Arterburn - Landscape Architect
Whiting-TurnerPhotographers - General Contractor
Tom Jenkins Photography
Apryl Marshall


I know what you're thinking: Ars Ludi is lovely. It's both peachy and keen. So why a second blog?
Good question. Ars Ludi is where I talk about assorted game ideas or really just whatever I want (you've probably picked up on that). On the other hand this blog is where I talk about actual projects that are in the works, projects that are being developed for release under the mighty Lame Mage aegis. Sneak peeks, development reflections and digressions, cries of existential pain and the periodic shout out — the whole nine yards.
And by I, I mean we. Because there are other secret collaborators joining in for the fun.
Introductions are in order but I'm not going to make them. Not quite yet.


text:
Understand Mosquitoes (Life Cycle, Behavior, and Biology)
Mosquitoes are one of the most adaptable insects on Earth and can be found almost anywhere else. They have been discovered in mines almost a mile below the surface and even on mountain peaks at 14,000 feet. Though not all mosquitoes can bring problems for people, there are certain species that could profoundly cause diseases.
Understanding the life cycle of mosquitoes will help you prevent mosquitoes around your home and help you choose the right pesticides.
Larval stage
Pupal stage
Adult mosquitoes
Morphology of different stages
Do they have teeth?
Why do mosquitoes buzzing?
Can mosquitoes see at night?
Why do mosquitoes fly up and down?
What do mosquitoes need to survive?
Are larval survive if the water is drying?
Do they die in freezing water?
What is the maximum temperature they can handle?
What attracts mosquitoes?
How do mosquitoes bite you without you knowing?
Where do they find blood?
Why do they need blood?
Do they die without a meal?
What happens to a mosquito after it bites you?
Are they useful?
Do they have a role in pollination?
What would happen if mosquitoes went extinct?
Mosquito Habitat
Laying eggs
Means of dispersal
Vector of disease
Is there some seasonality of the outbreak?
Mosquitoes VS Other Insects
How long is a mosquito life cycle?
How long does a mosquito live after biting someone?
Do mosquitoes die after laying eggs?
What stops mosquitoes from biting?
Do all mosquitoes bites?
What smell do mosquitoes hate the most?
Do mosquitoes die in air-conditioned rooms?
Source: https://eu.biogents.com/life-cycle-mosquitoes/
The mosquito life cycle has four stages. It begins with the laying of eggs, emerging of larvae, reaching the pupal stage, and turning into an adult mosquito.
Mosquito breeding usually starts when the weather is warming up as these insects prefer warmer and more humid climates. Mosquitoes can survive in temperatures between 50 and 95 degrees Fahrenheit.
The mosquito has more than 3,500 species. All these species lay their eggs in water. However, the type of water where species lay depends on the preferences of the species.
A mosquito can breed to any form of water in any form even those water in tin cans, barrels, horse troughs, ornamental ponds, swimming pools, puddles, creeks, ditches, catch basins, or marshy areas. They prefer water that is sheltered from the wind.
After obtaining a blood meal, a female mosquito lay her eggs in the water. Before laying her eggs, the female mosquito first tests the water and takes a drink to make sure it is suitable for her larvae. Habitats with acidic water are more favorable. When laying her eggs, a mosquito pushes the eggs out through her oviduct.
Some female mosquitoes lay eggs directly on the water, near the water, plant bases, and even outside of the water. Eggs can either be individual or attached in a group called rafts. A single raft of 200 to 300 eggs is about 1/4 inch long. Those eggs that are not yet exposed to the water can survive many years before hatching. Once the egg is exposed to the water, it will hatch within 24 to 72 hours.
How many eggs a mosquito can lay? The number of eggs a female mosquito can lay depends on the amount of blood she drinks. For every milligram of human blood, a female mosquito can lay an average of about 40 eggs. Since a milligram of blood is so tiny, a good bite of a mosquito from a human is enough to lay hundreds of eggs at once.
After the eggs are laid, mosquito larvae emerge within 24 to 48 hours. These larvae are commonly called "wigglers" and can live in water for 4 to 14 days. The larva looks like little wriggling worms swimming around the water.
From time to time, larvae must come to the water surface to obtain oxygen through the breathing tube called a siphon. Species of Coquillettidia and Mansonia uniquely draw their oxygen from plants. The growing larvae nourish themselves by filtering anything small enough to be eaten toward their mouths. They can feed on algae, plankton, fungi, bacteria, and other microorganisms.
Toxorhynchites and some Psorophora are some of the largest species of mosquitoes that are cannibalistic and can feed on the larvae of other mosquitoes.
During growth, a larva can shed its skin up to four times. This stage is known as "instars". When it reaches a length of almost 1/2 inch, it can become a pupa. The larvae development takes about 7 to 10 days to become a pupa.
Mosquito pupae are comma-shaped and are commonly called "tumblers". The head and thorax are fused and enlarged and the segmented abdomen attached to this region hangs down below it. Species have different feature in pupa stage such as the placement of small hairs in the abdomen.
Depending on the temperature and species, pupae can live in water for 1 to 4 days. They float at the surface and take oxygen through two breathing tubes called "trumpets". When disturbed, the pupae employ a rolling or tumbling action going to deeper water.
The pupa of mosquitoes more active compared to the other pupae of other insects. This is the stage of a mosquito when it does not feed, instead, taking in oxygen to survive.
The pupal stage lasts about 4 days and it is when the mosquito develops into a metamorphosis. It comes with a pupal case and develops the body organ of an adult mosquito. When a pupal case splits up, the adult mosquito emerges and rests at the water surface.
Adult mosquito is the final stage of the mosquito life cycle. Usually, the male mosquito lingers near the breeding site and waits for the female mosquitoes. Then, mating occurs quickly. After mating, the male mosquito typically dies.
For the female mosquito to develop her eggs, she needs a blood meal. After the blood meal, the female mosquito will oviposit or lay her eggs. The blood meals are the source of protein to mature her eggs. Some species only lay eggs once while several species may lay eggs many times over the course of their lives.
An average female mosquito can fly up to 10 miles but there are certain species that can travel up to 40 miles. Male mosquitoes can survive for about a week or two. On the other hand, the female mosquito has a longer lifespan and can live for several months.
The male mosquito does not feed on a blood meal, instead, feeds on the plant nectar. There are female mosquitoes that can also feed on plant nectar, however, they also need blood in order to reproduce. The species of Toxorhynchites are restricted to plant nectar diet and never obtain a blood meal. The mosquito blood-feeding is influenced by a combination of carbon dioxide, temperature, moisture, smell, color, and movement.
Mosquitoes do not have teeth, though they bite humans and animals. But, it is not the same way as the bite of mammals with teeth.
When a female mosquito finds her target, she has to find a suitable blood vessel to puncture. They will prefer a nice warm spot to bite. The bite of a mosquito is like a venipuncture which is the collection of blood from a vein.
In at least 3,500 species, there are only a fraction of mosquitoes that bite humans. Others take blood from animals such as mammals, birds, reptiles, and even some fish.
Mosquito buzzes to help them find suitable mates. Males would identify the buzz as female mosquitoes because they are larger and they flap the wings slower. This distinct pitch of the female buzz helps them recognize possible mates.
In a study conducted by Louis M. Roth, males would ignore resting females and would be attracted to mate with females who are flying around and buzzing.
Mosquitoes can not see in the dark. However, mosquitoes are attracted to the carbon dioxide exhaled by humans and other animals as far as 30 to 160 feet away. They even have receptors and vision to identify targets like body heat, perspiration, and skin odor.
Mosquitoes are nocturnal and bite more during at night because humans and animals who are resting release more carbon dioxide. During the daytime, mosquitoes prefer to rest in cool places such as those near water.
Mosquitoes flying behavior is different from other similar-sized insects like butterflies and bees. Mosquitoes combine short wing flaps with a swiveling motion. This rapid move creates pockets of air to launch them into flight and keep them afloat.
The mosquitoes flying behavior is associated with creating a buzz to find a suitable mate. A mosquito flies up and down to whine at a different frequency and to produce a sexually-sounding trait.
The mosquitoes' needs to survive depends on gender, life cycle stages, and species. Generally, males feed on the plant nectar while females would need both plant nectar and a blood meal. The blood meal for females is necessary to nourish the eggs.
To survive the different stages in the life cycle, mosquitoes have varying needs. During the larval stage, they need to feed on anything such as algae, plankton, fungi, and bacteria. They need oxygen as well and uses the breathing tube to breathe at the water surface. During the pupa stage, they would need more air. At the adult stage, mosquitoes need to take in plant nectar and blood meal. But in all life stages, mosquitoes have one thing in common- they need water.
The mosquito in its larval stage needs primarily water. This is where they get food such as plankton, algae, and bacteria. Without access to the water, the larva is likely to dry out and die eventually.
This is the reason why removing stagnant water where mosquitoes would likely live is the best way to get rid of mosquitoes.
During colder months, mosquitoes go into hibernation. They will find a hole to hide into and wait until warm weather comes. If some of them choose to lay an egg, the eggs will typically survive but the laying mosquito will then pass away shortly after. The eggs will be hatch when the water is warm enough.
In freezing water, mosquitoes will be killed virtually in a hard or killing frost which is two consecutive hours at a temperature below 28 degrees Fahrenheit.
During cold weather, mosquitoes will die at temperatures below 28 degrees Fahrenheit. They are cold-blooded insects and become lethargic in cold.
Mosquitoes prefer hot weather and is essential for survival. They are more active in temperatures above 80 degrees Fahrenheit. The heat can even lead to rising in their population. But, extreme heat with no humidity can dry them out and eventually kill them.
An approximate 104 degrees Fahrenheit is the maximum temperature that mosquitoes can handle. Mosquitoes have unique receptors that can identify the temperature of a certain thing and they will avoid touching its surface.
The feeding behavior of mosquitoes depends on the life stage of their life cycle.
During the larval stage, they would feed on anything that can fit on their mouth such as plankton, algae, and bacteria. During the pupa stage, they wont feed on anything. They would depend on air to survive.
At the adult stage, mosquitoes would feed on plant nectar or its honeydew to get sugar. However, female mosquitoes would need a blood meal as a source of protein to nourish the eggs.
Though most common mosquitoes would feed at dawn and dusk, some species are particularly aggressive and feed both day and night.
There are many factors that could attract mosquitoes. Initially, they are attracted by carbon dioxide exhaled by humans and animals. Body heat, bacteria, sweat, blood type, pregnancy, and alcohol intake are also some of the contributing factors. It is believed that 400 chemical compounds on human skin can attract or repel mosquitoes. Mosquitoes have the ability to smell their dinner from a long distance of 50 meters.
However, different species have also different preferences. For example, the Aedes aegypti species that spread Dengue Fever are particularly attracted to sweat that contains a substantial amount of lactic acid. On the other hand, the Anopheles gambiae species that spread Malaria are attracted to smelly feet as they are associated with the smell of Limburger cheese.
Generally, the mosquito bites are itchy and they can swell because of the mild reaction of the body to the mosquitoes' saliva. Then, the body will release histamine to combat the coagulant delivered by the mosquito's saliva.
There are some people that could not easily feel the mosquito bite. The mosquito senses the right spot to pierce the skin and access the blood. The mosquito injects saliva that could numb the area and prevent clotting. This way makes the mosquito feed undisturbed. As the mosquito fly away, the body of the host will then react to the saliva that was left behind, and feel itchy and swelling on the skin.
This reaction differs on the level of sensitivity of the person being bitten. Some even experience minor allergic reactions while few may suffer allergic reactions.
Mosquitoes have many methods to locate a potential host. Carbon dioxide, body heat, perspiration, and skin odor are being considered in finding a potential host. According to the study published in the journal Current Biology, the female mosquito has a certain olfactory receptor in its antennae to detect potential host. The receptor is attracted to human sweat and acid volatility.
Only the female mosquitoes need blood meal, though they can also feed on plant nectar. The blood meal is a source of protein and iron to make and nourish the eggs. She will need about three milligrams of blood per bite for reproduction.
Another reason for the mosquito's need for blood is being dehydrated. The blood meal is a source of beverage for them to quench the thirst, especially during warm weather. Mosquitoes would feel the dehydration only a few hours after the feeding.
Adult mosquitoes can go as long as six months without eating or drinking during the hibernation stage in cold weather. During warm weather, the adult mosquitoes need a regular meal such as plant nectar. Without a meal within four days, mosquitoes would likely die.
If a mosquito bites a human and avoids being squashed, it can live for as long as three weeks. The female mosquito may lay up to five clutches of more than a hundred eggs each.
The blood meal is necessary to produce eggs but it poses a huge metabolic process challenge. If the process is disrupted, the female mosquito will not complete the egg production cycle.
According to the study conducted by a team of biochemists at the University of Arizona, mosquitoes would likely die within 48 hours after a blood meal if the protein components are experimentally disrupted.
Mosquitoes may be associated with different life-threatening diseases such as Zika Virus, West Nile Virus, Dengue Fever, Malaria, and so on, but this insect has also a purpose in our ecosystem.
The larvae can also serve as the source of food for fish and other wildlife. The larvae themselves eat microscopic organic matter in the water that could help recycle it. If the mosquito would go extinct, some fishes would be affected and may also extinct. Thus, the food chain would be disrupted.
The adult mosquitoes also serve as the source of food for some insect-eating animals such as birds, bats, dragonflies, spiders, and frogs.
As they consume plant nectar, the adult mosquito may also help in pollination.
Generally, mosquitoes feed on the plant nectar. They can transfer pollen from flower to flower which is necessary for plant fertilization. This is turn would help the plant to form seeds and reproduce.
There are some plant species such as the blunt-leaf orchids that are totally dependent on mosquitoes for pollination.
The mosquito may have a negative impact on our health but this insect has also played an important role in the ecosystem. Just like any other creature, the extinction of this insect may disrupt the food chain and would impact everything from pollination to biomass transfer to food webs.
Fishes that may depend on the larvae as the sole source of food may also go into extinction. Fishes may also need to change the feeding system if they also feed on the larvae.
Moreover, plants that depend on the 3,500 mosquito species in their pollination may also be affected. Some of these plants are orchid species and are dependent on mosquitoes. In the Arctic, mosquitoes are important for pollination during the short growing season.
Mosquito habitat can be found almost every place with standing water. These places range from ponds, swamps, marshes, plants, trees, puddles, and artificial water containers such as abandoned tires, flower vases, buckets, and more. These forms of water are essential in breeding to becoming adult mosquitoes and as a source of food.
One of the unique and interesting habitats of mosquito larvae is found in the carnivorous pitcher plant or the Sarracenia purpurea. Both the plant and larvae benefit from the water and decomposing insects. Also, several mosquito species put their eggs in the water collected between the leaves of plants in the Brazilian Atlantic forest.
Mosquito prefers warm weather in breeding and living. They can survive extreme high temperature as they have the ability to identify hot surfaces.
During the colder climate, mosquitoes also find some hole to hibernate. If they choose to lay eggs in freezing water, the eggs will survive and will hatch when the water is warm enough.
Generally, a female mosquito will lay 50 to 500 eggs at a first time. These eggs are sticking together to form a raft which measures about 1/4 inch long and 1/8 inch wide. The subsequent eggs are typically fewer but she can lay up to 10 times throughout her life. Though eggs can survive in dry areas, eggs will hatch when submerged in water.
Generally, it takes 10 to 14 days to develop the eggs in standing water. Perhaps, this is the reason why it is recommended to dump any standing water at least once a week to get rid of mosquitoes.
Mosquitoes lay eggs in any container of water or in any form but salty water. She will first test the water to ensure that it is favorable for her eggs. She tastes the water by dipping in its legs and mouthparts.
Mosquitoes are very much active when the weather is warm and humid. For tropical regions, mosquitoes are active for the whole year because of the favorable weather. In cold regions, mosquitoes goes into hibernation.
Mosquitoes are dispersed worldwide through various methods such as sea transportation, personal vehicles, delivery trucks, trains, and aircraft. Primarily, they are being transported through containers inhabited by mosquito eggs, larvae, and pupae such as used tires. Mosquitoes can survive in stagnant water in any container. This means of dispersal make the mosquitoes reach large distances and become indigenous to a certain place.
Mosquitoes are associated with many life-threatening diseases. By nature, a mosquito doesn't cause any disease except for the itchy mosquito bite. However, this insect is considered a vector of various life-threatening mosquito-borne diseases such as Zika virus, West Nile virus, Chikungunya virus, Dengue, and Malaria. They can carry diseases and transmit them to humans. This ability is known as the vectorial capacity.
The vectorial capacity depends on many factors such as the geographic range, the preference of biting humans or animals, the timing of reproduction, and the resistance to insecticides. The Anopheles gambiae and Aedes aegypti are some of the most effective disease vector species that are constantly evolving. Vector-borne diseases occupy more than 17% of all infectious diseases that leads to 700,000 deaths annually.
One of these diseases is Malaria that is transmitted by the Anopheline mosquitoes. It leads to an average of 400,000 deaths annually and affected approximately 219 million cases globally and most of these are children under the age of 5 years.
The Aedes aegypti. Source: https://www.pexels.com/photo/black-white-mosquito-86722/
Another vector-borne disease is Dengue which became the most prevalent viral infection that is transmitted by Aedes mosquitoes. In over 129 countries, it is estimated that more than 3.9 billion people are at risk of Dengue fever and caused around 40,000 deaths every year.
In transmitting diseases, mosquitoes must bite a sick human first. Then, the mosquito becomes infected with the pathogen which will become infectious in usually around ten days. Then, the infected mosquito will bite another human and transmit through the blood the pathogen.
The mosquito that infects themselves through blood meal from a bird or a horse may also transmit the disease to a human. This is usually the case of West Nile fever in which mosquitoes become the bridge vectors. Culex is one of the mosquito species that are bridge vectors.
According to the World Health Organization, Dengue Fever outbreaks likely increase during rainy seasons. Dengue is one of the fastest-spreading diseases brought about by mosquitoes and became a major public health concern.
In a study conducted in the United Kingdom, the seasonality of the outbreak is being associated with the environmental variables, vector, and pathogen life cycles. The pattern of mosquito seasonal abundance due to high rainfall contributed largely to increasing the population in aquatic habitats.
Mosquitoes are among the winged insects in the Order Diptera such as bee fly, robber fly, horse fly, black flies, sand flies, and biting midges. This Order has more than 125,000 species that are relatively small and with soft bodies. Mosquito came also from the family Culicidae, which is considered the most prolific disease vector that can transmit a range of parasites, viruses, and flaviviruses. Among all other 3200 recognized species of the family Culicidae, the long proboscis of mosquito is distinctive and indicates a long and close association with vertebrate animals.
Source: https://cdn.britannica.com/45/102445-050-E3375B6D/Insect-diversity.jpg
Generally, adult mosquitoes are 0.15 to 0.4 inches long. But not all mosquitoes are similar in size because some species are less than 0.1 inches long.
The Psorophora ciliata mosquito is one of the largest species that measures about as long as the diameter of a quarter. The Australian elephant mosquito Toxorhynchites specious is also among the largest in the world, but fortunately, it is not a blood feeder.
Comparing with other insects, crane flies is one of the insects that are typically mistaken as mosquitoes. It has long legs and much larger than mosquitoes and commonly referred to as the "mosquito killers". But, crane flies are harmless insects that do not feed on mosquitoes or even bites humans, rather, feed on plant nectar.
Other insects that look like mosquitoes are midges. They are similar in size but the key difference is that midges do not bite. Midges are considered only as a nuisance as they are found swarming in areas with mud on bottoms of lakes, ponds, spreading basins, and flood control channels.
Another insect that is mistaken as the mosquito is the fungus gnat. Mosquito and fungus gnat is similar in size and range between 1/8 to 3/8 of an inch. Just like midges, fungus gnats do not bite but only swarm especially in moist decaying vegetation.
Insects have unique characteristics in their color. Some insects use flashing lights to attract the opposite sex. Many insects imitate other insect's colors and form to avoid their predators.
Mosquitoes vary in color and appearance depending on their species. They are mostly gray with white, silver, green or iridescent blue scales in color. They have white stripes across the abdomen.
The average life cycle of a mosquito from egg to adult stage take about 8 to 14 days. However, it may take longer or shorter depending on some conditions such as climate. It may even reach for about a month. Though the eggs will hatch within 24 to 72 hours, it may survive dry conditions for about a month and even during the hibernation stage in winter period. Larval stage may take up to few days depending on the specie and weather condition. The pupal stage may lasts up to 4 days before molting into the adult mosquito.
Unless the mosquito is being smashed while biting a person, mosquitoes will not die after feeding. They may even have a feast of bloodmeal in a night as they will keep going until they are full. The female mosquito may live for three weeks to a few months and may even lay up to five rafts of a hundred eggs each.
During the colder climate, some species of mosquito that lay her eggs may eventually die off. Others may still be alive but are hiding in some holes and protected areas to hibernate and shield themselves against the cold weather.
There are many natural repellent products that can stop mosquito from biting. As mosquitoes have preferences in scent, light, heat, and humidity of the potential host, you may use these to prevent mosquito bites. Using scents of lemon, eucalyptus, lavender, cinnamon, and citronella are few of the plants that has strong and pungent smell that could stop mosquito from biting you.
Not all mosquitoes are feeding on a bloodmeal. Only the female mosquitoes are biting human and animals to feed on blood. The bloodmeal is essential in egg reproduction's. It is the source of protein to develop the eggs. On the other hand, male mosquitoes do not bite humans and animals. Instead, they are feeding on plant nectar.
Mosquito hates the strong and pungent smell. Thus, mosquitoes avoid things or surfaces that smell like scents of lemon, eucalyptus, lavender, cinnamon, citronella, and more. These natural smells are used as the main ingredient in many mosquito-repellent products.
Mosquito hates cold places such as air-conditioned rooms. They are less likely to be found in these rooms but they won't die. Most air-conditioned rooms do not reach the extremely low temperature that can kill them. Most likely, mosquitoes will find a heat source to regulate the dropping temperature, and that is YOU.