As a red-blooded American child of the 80’s and 90’s, I grew up watching Rambo and reading Amar Chitra Katha.
Rambo used blades and incredible archery skills to be an invincible god.
Siskel & Ebert called the Rambo sequels “Vietnam 2: This Time We Win.”
To them, the sequels:
“embodied the draft-dodging Republican mythology that the American war in Vietnam failed because of a failure of violence.”
The book which introduces the John Rambo character is very, very dark. In the book, he doesn’t even have a first name.
In the 1983 movie “First Blood”, the character Rambo is introduced as he is going around checking on war buddies. He discovers the last surviving member was killed by a rare cancer, likely caused by Agent Orange.
The idea was to make him more sympathetic.
I have never recommended reading the 1972 book “First Blood” to anyone, ever. There are reasons for this.
Sampath Panini
As a kid reading “First Blood”, I’m not sure that I completely processed the experience, even as a child who read a lot of fiction.
Rambo is depicted as a monster, not a virtuous combat veteran.
It was published in 1972, mixing experiences of many college student veterans and faded memories of a decorated WWII hero. The loss of blood and treasure in Vietnam deeply affected the psyche of the American book-reading public.
In the book, Rambo is total psychopath.
Rambo of the book finds purpose in killing. He is portrayed as a dark and deeply unsympathetic character.
He is clearly troubled and very willing to escalate conflicts into violence.
Colonel Trautman is called in to help the local police deal with the situation.
At the end of the book, Trautman shoots Rambo in the head to prevent further escalation of conflict.
I was 12.
Those are the reasons I never recommended it to anyone.
But maybe it will also help you to understand psychopaths.
