simply fulfilling his divinely sanctioned duty to till the soil and feed the hungry . The OWI ’ s myth of the Mennonite farmer-warrior was not Zimmerman ’ s reality , a fact not lost on at least one film viewer . In an April 1943 memo sent to the OWI shortly after the film ’ s completion , Naum Jasny of the federal government ’ s Office of Economic Warfare Analysis criticized Farmer at War , noting that he “ regretted that there was little connection with the war in it .”
Mr . Farmer starts his day by milking the cows , feeding the chickens and the hogs , and collecting the eggs . This is exactly what was done before the war . The big turkey served for a small family on Thanksgiving Day also does not remind one of big war sacrifices . 22
The only connection with the war , in fact , was the machinery discussion in the church and the vote to use the machinery collectively .
Jasny ’ s analysis was perceptive . In order for Zimmerman and his family to participate in Farmer at War , the film had to portray the pacifist farmer simply going about the daily tasks he performed whether or not the nation was at war . Zimmerman contributed to the war effort , whether or not he realized it , by living his daily life . For the Zimmermans , a commitment to farm productivity was a constant reality . For the OWI , however , it was a reality that could be spun into a “ good war ” myth promoted by wartime filmmaking . 22
Naum Jasny to Office of War Information , received 12 April 1943 , Farmer At War Folder , Box 1549 , Records of the Office of War Information , Record Group 208 , National Archives II , College Park , MD .
103