Chon Noriega's Understanding of Godzilla

In the article “Godzilla and the Japanese Nightmare: When ‘Them!,” Chon Noriega suggests that there are two ways to analyze the film Godzilla: the critical approach (which focuses on the psychoanalysis of cultural changes and historical events) and the concept of Others. He defines the Other as an externalized dynamic to deal with oneself and points out that in the film “Godzilla,” the United States is seen as the Other. Noriega provides historical background about the change of the traditional Japanese society, H-bomb testing, and the mass popular concern about it. He explains that the film “Godzilla” is special not only because it provides an insight from an outside country during Cold War, but also reveals a culturally and politically different viewpoint on nuclear history and Others. The Japanese monster film differs from other monster films of the time in that it gives a name and a background to their monster. By doing so, although Godzilla is the Other, it still is (and has always been) incorporated in the culture, thereby showing how a “distant past confronts the present” (68). Noriega also introduces a psychoanalytic point, arguing how the search for a solution (represented by a search for the weapon against the monster) is equally fascinating as mass destruction. He then goes to show how Godzilla incorporates and shows a clear distinction between the United States (as Others) and Japan (as self).

Chon Noriega’s choice to provide insight to what was happening in the world during the time period of the release of the movie is a great strategy. Previously, I only thought that the nuclear attack on Japan was the main incentive. However, it was the events that followed the bombing that also played a crucial role in how the Japanese view the United States. The US military rebuilt and redefined the Japanese family, society, and education -- changing the traditional way it’s always been. Later, the testing of the H-bombs significantly affected the Japanese and caused another radiation exposure, which caused a mass protest against the testing. Finally, this was the time period of the Cold War and Japan was an outsider. Therefore, I agree with the author when he says that there is the Others analysis that can be applied to the movie because it’s the first monster film that views the US as an outside nation. Noriega also brings up an interesting point about the Japanese point of view on the monster by stating “And if Godzilla is so destructive, why do the Japanese sympathize with him as a tragic hero, while Americans see him as little more than a comic icon?” (64). This implies that the two nations reacted differently to the history surrounding the production of the movie. I was also surprised to find out that the US modified the original Japanese movie and “both history and Japan's own filmic rendition are re-textualized to erase the bomb and thereby relieve anxieties about the American occupation and H- bomb tests” (70). This shows that the US is trying to camouflage the disaster it caused in the Japanese nation and demonstrates the guilt brought upon by the production of the movie.