Pyle poses a two-pronged threat to Fowler: Pyle’s physical threatens to steal away his love and his ideals threaten to burn down his home. With his imperialistic idealism, Pyle assumes that Vietnam needs change. That it needs a paternalistic Third Force “free from Communism and the taint of colonialism-national democracy” (157) to protect the land. Fowler loves things the way they are. War has driven him to Vietnam. War has given him a new home. War has become the status quo. War has provided him his career as a correspondent. He is nostalgic for “the gold and the young green and the bright dresses of the south” (27) and longs for “a day punctuated by those quick reports that might be car-exhausts or might be grenades” (27). The day things become boring in Vietnam is the day he gets shipped back to England. Still, Fowler fears Pyle’s restoration plans: bombs intended to mend and unite through violence. While Fowler is self-reportedly concerned with Vietminh and civilian death, he worries about his role in a post-bombing Vietnam once the landscape literally and metaphorically changes. What will become of his “room over the rue Catinat” (7) once Phuong has fled with Pyle? What will become of his home and career once the dust settles? He is in a perpetual state of anxiety, worrying about his inevitable return to England, “I shall be going home one day, won’t I?” (15). Vietnam represents security, and the present state of affairs allow him to delay his return to England and his wife, Helen. Pyle is threatening to shorten his stay. Fowler has a history of avoiding conflict; on several occasions, he has dodged confrontation with his wife, with Phuong, with his editor, and with Pyle.
…show more content…
However, as Phuong moves out and Pyle begins creating havoc, pressure starts to build up. A conversation that Fowler has with Captain Trouin proves prophetic: “One day something will happen. You will take a side” (192). When Pyle’s bombs are set off on a square in Saigon, Fowler is finally inspired to act. He leaves the scene with images of the “Third Force … all over [Pyle’s] right shoe” (208) and “the torso in the square, the baby on its mother’s lap” (209). The bombing elicits Fowler’s involvement in the conflict, and he approaches Mr. Heng to plan the final murderous deed. But the decision to get rid of Pyle was not a preventative measure, it was done out of fear of what Fowler might lose: Phuong and Vietnam had become his sanctuary. Fowler narrates, “I wanted him to go away quickly and die. Then I could start life again-at the point before he came in” (227). Fowler longs for a return to normalcy, and there is nothing noble about this desire. His interest is not the protection of Vietnam, it is the protection of his life. Pyle’s bombs are not Fowler’s primary motivator, they are his primary excuse. Fowler’s text is a long-form confession, all but admitting that it is Pyle’s affection for Phuong that gets him killed, not the bombs he sets off on Saigon. Any explanation that defends Fowler’s actions as moral struggles to hold water. If Fowler’s ultimate goal is to end the bombings in Vietnam, why does he decide to take action against Pyle (as opposed to General Thé) and why does he feel so much guilt during and after the event? How will killing a plastics supplier prevent (and not just delay) the threat of bombs in Vietnam? The efficacy of getting rid of Pyle is questionable, yet Fowler still sacrifices his innocence in the name of this shoddy plan. For a man who is averse to getting involved, Fowler is leaving a lot up to chance. Unless peace is not his main concern. Unless his involvement is primarily intended to elicit the death of the American. Assuming he is motivated to act because of Pyle’s relationship with Phuong, the aforementioned questions immediately become clarified. This interpretation of Fowler’s motivations is also more consistent with his self-narrated character. Fowler has only ever been moved to act when he himself is a benefactor. On his own admission, he leaves his religious wife in England and constantly requests a divorce, despite her wishes. He claims possession of Phuong,
However, as Phuong moves out and Pyle begins creating havoc, pressure starts to build up. A conversation that Fowler has with Captain Trouin proves prophetic: “One day something will happen. You will take a side” (192). When Pyle’s bombs are set off on a square in Saigon, Fowler is finally inspired to act. He leaves the scene with images of the “Third Force … all over [Pyle’s] right shoe” (208) and “the torso in the square, the baby on its mother’s lap” (209). The bombing elicits Fowler’s involvement in the conflict, and he approaches Mr. Heng to plan the final murderous deed. But the decision to get rid of Pyle was not a preventative measure, it was done out of fear of what Fowler might lose: Phuong and Vietnam had become his sanctuary. Fowler narrates, “I wanted him to go away quickly and die. Then I could start life again-at the point before he came in” (227). Fowler longs for a return to normalcy, and there is nothing noble about this desire. His interest is not the protection of Vietnam, it is the protection of his life. Pyle’s bombs are not Fowler’s primary motivator, they are his primary excuse. Fowler’s text is a long-form confession, all but admitting that it is Pyle’s affection for Phuong that gets him killed, not the bombs he sets off on Saigon. Any explanation that defends Fowler’s actions as moral struggles to hold water. If Fowler’s ultimate goal is to end the bombings in Vietnam, why does he decide to take action against Pyle (as opposed to General Thé) and why does he feel so much guilt during and after the event? How will killing a plastics supplier prevent (and not just delay) the threat of bombs in Vietnam? The efficacy of getting rid of Pyle is questionable, yet Fowler still sacrifices his innocence in the name of this shoddy plan. For a man who is averse to getting involved, Fowler is leaving a lot up to chance. Unless peace is not his main concern. Unless his involvement is primarily intended to elicit the death of the American. Assuming he is motivated to act because of Pyle’s relationship with Phuong, the aforementioned questions immediately become clarified. This interpretation of Fowler’s motivations is also more consistent with his self-narrated character. Fowler has only ever been moved to act when he himself is a benefactor. On his own admission, he leaves his religious wife in England and constantly requests a divorce, despite her wishes. He claims possession of Phuong,