document_title: Consequences of the attack on Pearl Harbor

question_text: who declared war on us after pearl harbor

question_tokens: who declared war on us after pearl harbor

text: Consequences of the attack on Pearl Harbor

text: American public opinion prior to the attack[edit]

text: Prior to the attack, public opinion in the United States had not been unanimous. When polled in January 1940, 60% of Americans were in favor of helping the United Kingdom in the war.[1] A majority of Americans believed that the safety of the United States was contingent on the UK winning the war, and an even larger majority believed that the UK would lose the war if the United States stopped sending war materials to the United Kingdom.[1] Despite this, the same poll reported that 88% of Americans would not support entering the war against Germany and Italy.[1]

text: Americans were more unsure on the prospect of conflict with Japan around the same timeframe. In a February Gallup poll, a majority of Americans believed that the United States should intervene in Japan's conquest of the Dutch East Indies and Singapore.[1] However, in the same poll, only 39% supported going to war with Japan, while 46% opposed the prospect.[1]

text: Public support for assisting the United Kingdom rose through 1940, reaching about 65% by May 1941.[2] However, opinions on the prospect of becoming involved against Germany and Italy still remained quite high with 80% disapproval.[1]

text: American response[edit]

text: On December 7, 1941, the Japanese launched a surprise attack on the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor. After two hours of bombing, 18 U.S. ships were sunk or damaged, 188 U.S. aircraft were destroyed, and 2,403 men were killed.

text: The day after the attack, President Franklin D. Roosevelt addressed a joint session of the 77th United States Congress. Roosevelt called December 7 "a date which will live in infamy". Congress declared war on the Empire of Japan amid outrage at the attack, the deaths of thousands of Americans, and the late delivery of the note from the Japanese government breaking off relations with the U.S. government. Pacifist Representative Jeannette Rankin, a Republican from Montana, cast the only dissenting vote. Roosevelt signed the declaration of war later the same day. Continuing to intensify its military mobilization, the U.S. government finished converting to a war economy, a process begun by provision of weapons and supplies to the Soviet Union and the British Empire. Japanese Americans from the West Coast were sent to internment camps for the duration of the war.

text: The attack on Pearl Harbor immediately galvanized a divided nation into action. Public opinion had been moving towards support for entering the war during 1941, but considerable opposition remained until the attack. Overnight, Americans united against the Empire of Japan in response to calls to "Remember Pearl Harbor." A poll taken between December 12–17, 1941, showed that 97% of respondents supported a declaration of war against Japan.[3] Further polling showed a dramatic increase in support for every able-bodied man serving in the military, up to 70% in December 1941.[4] American solidarity in the war effort probably made possible the unconditional surrender position later taken by the Allied Powers. Some historians, among them Samuel Eliot Morison, believe the attack doomed Imperial Japan to defeat simply because it awakened the "sleeping giant", regardless of whether the fuel depots or machine shops had been destroyed or even if the carriers had been caught in port and sunk. U.S. industrial and military capacity, once mobilized, was able to pour overwhelming resources into both the Pacific and Atlantic theaters. Others, such as Clay Blair, Jr.,[5] and Mark Parillo[6] believe Japanese trade protection was so incompetent that American submarines alone might have strangled Japan into defeat.

text: The closest friend Roosevelt had in the developing Allied alliance, Sir Winston Churchill, stated that his first thought regarding American assistance to the United Kingdom was that "We have won the war"[7] very soon after Pearl Harbor had been attacked.

text: Perceptions of treachery in the attack before a declaration of war sparked fears of sabotage or espionage by Japanese sympathizers residing in the U.S., including citizens of Japanese descent and was a factor in the subsequent Japanese internment in the western United States. Other factors included misrepresentations of intelligence information suggesting sabotage, notably by General John DeWitt, commanding general of Western Defense Command on the Pacific Coast, who had personal feelings against Japanese Americans.[8] In February 1942, Roosevelt signed United States Executive Order 9066, requiring all Japanese Americans to submit themselves for internment.

text: Propaganda made repeated use of the attack, because its effect was enormous and impossible to counter.[9] "Remember Pearl Harbor!" became the watchwords of the war.[10]

text: The American government understated the damage inflicted, in hopes of preventing the Japanese from learning it, but the Japanese had, through surveillance, a good estimate.[11]

text: Japanese views[edit]

text: On December 8, 1941, Japan declared war on the United States and the British Empire. The Japanese document discussed world peace and the disruptive actions of the United States and the United Kingdom. The document claimed all avenues for averting war had been exhausted by the Government of Japan.

text: Although the Imperial Japanese government had made some effort to prepare their population for war via anti-U.S. propaganda, it appears most Japanese were surprised, apprehensive, and dismayed by the news they were now at war with the U.S., a country many of them admired. Nevertheless, the people at home and overseas thereafter generally accepted their government's account of the attack and supported the war effort until their nation's surrender in 1945.[12]

text: Japan's national leadership at the time appeared to have believed war between the U.S. and Japan had long been inevitable. In any case, Japanese-American relationships had already significantly deteriorated since Japan's invasion of China beginning in the early 1930s, of which the United States strongly disapproved. In 1942, Saburō Kurusu, former Japanese ambassador to the United States, gave an address in which he talked about the "historical inevitability of the war of Greater East Asia."[13] He said war had been a response to Washington's longstanding aggression toward Japan. For example, provocations against Japan included the San Francisco School incident, Naval Limitations Treaty, other unequal treaties, the Nine Power Pact, constant economic pressure against Japan, culminating in the "belligerent" scrap metal and oil embargo in 1941 by the United States and Allied countries to contain and/or reverse the actions of the Empire of Japan especially in Indochina during her expansion of influence and interests throughout Asia. In light of Japan's dependence on imported oil, the trade embargoes were especially significant. These pressures directly influenced Japan to go into alliance with Germany and Italy through the Tripartite Pact. According to Kurusu, because of these reasons, the Allies had already provoked war with Japan long before the attack at Pearl Harbor, and the United States was already preparing for war with Japan. Kurusu also states the United States was also looking for world domination, beyond just Asia, with "sinister designs".[13] Some of this view seems to have been shared by Adolf Hitler, when he called it one of the reasons Germany declared war on the United States. He also had mentioned European imperialism toward Japan many years before. Therefore, according to Kurusu, Japan had no choice but to defend itself and so should rapidly continue to militarize, bring Germany and Italy closer as allies and militarily combat the United States, Britain, and the Netherlands.

text: Japan's leaders also saw themselves as justified in their conduct, believing that they were building the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. They also explained Japan had done everything possible to alleviate tension between the two nations. The decision to attack, at least for public presentation, was reluctant and forced on Japan. Of the Pearl Harbor attack itself, Kurusu said it came in direct response to a virtual ultimatum from the U.S. government, the Hull note, and so the surprise attack was not treacherous. Since the Japanese-American relationship already had hit its lowest point, there was no alternative; in any case, had an acceptable settlement of differences been reached, the Carrier Striking Task Force could have been called back.

text: Germany and Italy declare war[edit]

text: On December 11, 1941, Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy declared war on the United States, and the United States reciprocated, formally entering the war in Europe.

text: German dictator Adolf Hitler and Italian dictator Benito Mussolini were under no obligation to declare war on the United States under the mutual defense terms of the Tripartite Pact until the US counterattacked Japan. However, relations between the European Axis Powers and the United States had deteriorated since 1937. On December 4, 1941, the Germans learned of the U.S. military's contingency planning to get troops in Continental Europe by 1943; this was Rainbow Five, made public by sources unsympathetic to Roosevelt's New Deal, and published by the Chicago Tribune on that date.[14] Moreover, with Roosevelt's initiation of a Neutrality Patrol, which in fact also escorted British ships, as well as orders to U.S. Navy destroyers first to actively report U-boats, then "shoot on sight", American neutrality was honored more in the breach than observance.[15]

text: Having been unaware of Japanese plans, Hitler was initially furious that the United States had been dragged into the war at a time when he had not yet acquired full control of continental Europe — on the very day of the Pearl Harbor attack, Hitler himself had issued his Nacht und Nebel decree, concerning the suppression of resistance activities within Nazi-occupied lands. Hitler, who had previously declared the Japanese "Honorary Aryans" claimed that "this is what happens when your allies are not Anglo-Saxons".[16][citation needed] However, he decided war with the United States was unavoidable, and the Pearl Harbor attack, the publication of Rainbow Five, and Roosevelt's post-Pearl Harbor address, which focused on European affairs as well as the situation with Japan, probably contributed to the declaration. Hitler expected the United States would soon declare war on Germany in any event.[17] He disastrously underestimated American military production capacity, the United States' own ability to fight on two fronts, and the time his own Operation Barbarossa would require. Similarly, the Nazis may have hoped the declaration of war, a showing of solidarity with Japan, would result in closer collaboration with the Japanese in Eurasia, particularly against the Soviet Union — something that would not materialize, due to existing relations between Moscow and Tokyo at that time, as well as information submitted in mid-September 1941 by the Soviets' top spy in Japan, Richard Sorge, that the Japanese armed forces were not likely to abrogate any treaties between Japan and the Soviets unless:

text:
Moscow had been captured by the Axis
The Kwantung Army was three times the size of the Soviets' Far Eastern forces
A civil war had started in Siberia.[18]

tag: ol

text: The decision to declare war on the United States allowed the United States to enter the European war in support of the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union without much public opposition.[19][20][21][22][23]

text: Even as early as mid-March 1941,[24] President Roosevelt was quite acutely aware of Hitler's hostility towards the United States, and the destructive potential it presented, in reference to Hitler's statement of a "new order in Europe" during the Führer's own Berlin Sportpalast speech of January 30, 1941, the eighth anniversary of the Nazis' Machtergreifung:[25]

text: ...Nazi forces are not seeking mere modifications in colonial maps or in minor European boundaries. They openly seek the destruction of all elective systems of government on every continent, including our own. They seek to establish systems of government based on the regimentation of all human beings by a handful of individual rulers who seize power by force.

text: Yes, these men and their hypnotized followers call this a "New Order." It is not new, and it is not order. For order among nations presupposes something enduring, some system of justice under which individuals over a long period of time are willing to live. Humanity will never permanently accept a system imposed by conquest, and based on slavery. These modern tyrants find it necessary to their plans to eliminate all democracies — eliminate them one by one. The nations of Europe, and indeed we, ourselves, did not appreciate that purpose. We do now.[26]

text: Author Ian Kershaw records Hitler's initial reaction to the attack, when he was first informed about it on the evening of 7 December at Führer Headquarters: "We can't lose the war at all. We now have an ally which has never been conquered in 3,000 years".[27] Well before the attack, in 1928 Hitler had confided in the text of his then-unpublished Zweites Buch that while the Soviet Union was the most important immediate foe that the Third Reich had to defeat, the United States was the most important long-term challenge to Nazi aims.[28]

text: Hitler awarded Imperial Japanese ambassador to Nazi Germany Hiroshi Ōshima the Grand Cross of the Order of the German Eagle in Gold (1st class) after the attack, praising Japan for striking hard and without first declaring war.[29]

text: Canadian response[edit]

text: As a result of the Japanese attack on the Americans, William Lyon Mackenzie King, the Prime Minister of the Dominion of Canada advised George VI, King of Canada, that a state of war should exist between Canada and Japan.

text: In the late evening of December 7, 1941, the Canadian Prime Minister, W. L. Mackenzie King, announced the Cabinet's decision to declare war on Japan. The King approved Canada's declaration of war in the following proclamation issued on December 8, 1941.

text: Whereas by and with the advice of our Privy Council for Canada we have signified our approval of the issue of a proclamation in the Canada Gazette declaring that a state of war with Japan exists and has existed in Canada as and from the 7th day of December 1941.

text: Now, therefore, we do hereby declare and proclaim that a state of war with Japan exists and has existed as and from the seventh day of December 1941.

text: Of all which our loving subjects and all others whom these presents may concern are hereby required to take notice and to govern themselves accordingly.[30]

text: Canada remained focused on the European theatre however, and following VE Day was still in the process of transitioning its military force for a campaign in east Asia and the western Pacific when VJ Day arrived.

text: Investigations and blame[edit]

text: President Roosevelt appointed the Roberts Commission, headed by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Owen Roberts, to investigate and report facts and findings with respect to the attack on Pearl Harbor. It was the first of many official investigations (nine in all). Both the Fleet commander, Rear Admiral Husband E. Kimmel, and the Army commander, Lieutenant General Walter Short (the Army had been responsible for air defense of Hawaii, including Pearl Harbor, and for general defense of the islands against hostile attack), were relieved of their commands shortly thereafter. They were accused of "dereliction of duty" by the Roberts Commission for not making reasonable defensive preparations. None of the investigations conducted during the War, nor the Congressional investigation afterward, provided enough reason to reverse those actions. The decisions of the Navy and War Departments to relieve both was controversial at the time and has remained so. However, neither was court-martialed as would normally have been the result of dereliction of duty. On May 25, 1999, the U.S. Senate voted to recommend both officers be exonerated on all charges, citing "denial to Hawaii commanders of vital intelligence available in Washington".

text: A Joint Congressional Committee was also appointed, on September 14, 1945, to investigate the causes of the attack and subsequent disaster, and was convened on November 15, 1945.[31]

text: Rise of anti-Japanese sentiment and historical significance[edit]

text: The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor coupled with their alliance with the Nazis and the ensuing war in the Pacific fueled anti-Japanese sentiment, racism, xenophobia, and anti-Axis sentiment in the Allied nations like never before. Japanese, Japanese-Americans and Asians having a similar physical appearance were regarded with deep seated suspicion, distrust and hostility. The attack was viewed as having been conducted in an extremely underhanded way and also as a very "treacherous" or "sneaky attack". Suspicions were further fueled by the Niihau Incident, as historian Gordon Prange stated "the rapidity with which the three resident Japanese went over to the pilot's cause" which troubled the Hawaiians. "The more pessimistic among them cited the Niihau Incident as proof that no one could trust any Japanese, even if an American citizen, not to go over to Japan if it appeared expedient."[32]

text: The attack, the subsequent declarations of war, and fear of "Fifth Columnists" resulted in internment of Japanese, German, and Italian populations in the United States and others, for instance the Japanese American internment, German American internment, Italian American internment, and Japanese Canadian internment. The attack resulted in the United States fighting the Germans and Italians among others in Europe and Japan in the Pacific.

text: The consequences were world-changing. Prime Minister Winston Churchill knew that the survival of the British Empire depended on American aid, and since 1940 had frequently asked Roosevelt to declare war. Churchill aide John Colville stated that the prime minister and American Ambassador John Gilbert Winant, who also supported the British, "sort of danced around the room together" as the United States would now enter the war, making a British victory likely.[33] Churchill later wrote, "Being saturated and satiated with emotion and sensation, I went to bed and slept the sleep of the saved and thankful."[34] By opening the Pacific War, which ended in the unconditional surrender of Japan, it broke the power of an Asian check on Soviet expansion. The Allied victory in this war and subsequent U.S. emergence as a dominant world power, eclipsing Britain, have shaped international politics ever since.

text: Pearl Harbor is generally regarded as an extraordinary event in American history, remembered as the first time since the War of 1812 that America was attacked in strength on its territory by another country – with only the September 11 attacks almost 60 years later being of a similarly catastrophic scale. It was the first decisive defeat for the United States in World War II. It has become synonymous with "surprise attack" ever since in American parlance. The U.S. mistakes of intelligence collection, sharing, and analysis leading to the Japanese success at Pearl Harbor did not, in the end, lead to lessons learned.[35]

text: Perception of the attack today[edit]

text: Some Japanese today feel they were compelled to fight because of threats to their national interests and an embargo imposed by the United States, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. The most important embargo was on oil on which its Navy and much of the economy was dependent.[36] For example, Japan Times, an English-language newspaper owned by one of the major news organizations in Japan (Asahi Shimbun), ran numerous columns in the early 2000s echoing Kurusu's comments in reference to the Pearl Harbor attack.[37]

text: In putting the Pearl Harbor attack into context, Japanese writers repeatedly contrast the thousands of U.S. non-combatants killed there with the hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians killed in U.S. air attacks on Japan later in the war, even without mentioning the 1945 atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the United States.

text: However, in spite of the perceived inevitability of the war by many Japanese, many also believe the Pearl Harbor attack, although a tactical victory, was actually part of a seriously flawed strategy for engaging in war with the U.S. As one columnist wrote, "The Pearl Harbor attack was a brilliant tactic, but part of a strategy based on the belief that a spirit as firm as iron and as beautiful as cherry blossoms could overcome the materially wealthy United States. That strategy was flawed, and Japan's total defeat would follow."[38] In 1991, the Japanese Foreign Ministry released a statement saying Japan had intended to make a formal declaration of war to the United States at 1 p.m. Washington time, 25 minutes before the attack at Pearl Harbor was scheduled to begin. This officially acknowledged something that had been publicly known for years. Diplomatic communications had been coordinated well in advance with the attack, but had failed delivery at the intended time. It appears the Japanese government was referring to the "14-part message", which did not actually break off negotiations, let alone declare war, but did officially raise the possibility of a break in relations. However, because of various delays, the Japanese ambassador was unable to deliver this message until well after the attack had begun.

text: Imperial Japanese military leaders appear to have had mixed feelings about the attack. Fleet Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto was unhappy about the botched timing of the breaking off of negotiations. He is on record as having said, in the previous year, "I can run wild for six months ... after that, I have no expectation of success."[39] The reports of American reactions, terming it a "sneak attack" and "infamous behavior", confirmed that the effect on American morale had been the opposite of intended.[40]

text: The Prime Minister of Japan during World War II, Hideki Tōjō later wrote, "When reflecting upon it today, that the Pearl Harbor attack should have succeeded in achieving surprise seems a blessing from Heaven."

text: Yamamoto had said, regarding the imminent war with the United States, "Should hostilities once break out between Japan and the United States, it is not enough that we take Guam and the Philippines, nor even Hawaii and San Francisco. We would have to march into Washington and sign the treaty in the White House. I wonder if our politicians (who speak so lightly of a Japanese-American war) have confidence as to the outcome and are prepared to make the necessary sacrifices?"[41]

text: Revisionism controversies[edit]

text: There are some revisionists in Japan who claim that the Attack on Pearl Harbor was a legitimate attack. These historical perspectives are often claimed by Japanese Shintoist and nationalists and have been criticized from both inside and outside Japan.

text:
An exhibit at the Yasukuni Shrine Museum (Yūshūkan) asserts that the attack on Pearl Harbor was a trick by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and denies that Japan committed any atrocities.[42][43][44]
In 2006, Henry Hyde, chairman of the United States House Committee on Foreign Affairs, sent a letter to House Speaker Dennis Hastert on April 26 to show concern about Junichiro Koizumi visits to Yasukuni Shrine. He pointed out that this Shrine honors Hideki Tōjō and other convicted Class-A war criminals who were involved in the Pearl Harbor attack.[45]
In May 2007, the Japan Ministry of Education distributed an animated DVD Hokori (Pride) which was created by Junior Chamber International Japan (JC). Japanese Communist Party Diet member Yuko Ishii introduced and criticized it to the House of Representatives of Japan in May 17, and revealed that its contents glamorized Class-A war criminals and had the main character Yuta tell his girlfriend Kokoro that the battle was a "self-defense attack" and "Asian colonial liberation" against American imperialism.[46]
On October 31, 2008, Toshio Tamogami, former chief of staff of Japan's Air Self-Defense Force, published an essay which argued that Franklin D. Roosevelt, who had allegedly been manipulated by the Comintern, drew Japan into the attack on Pearl Harbor. Following the essay's publication, Defense Minister Yasukazu Hamada removed Tamogami from his post and ordered him to retire, since the essay's viewpoint contradicted the government position.[47][48] Tamogami, on November 3, 2008, confirmed that the essay accurately expressed his views on the war and Japan's role in it.[49]

text: While not specifically directed at revisionism, but more as a likely result of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's controversial visits to the Yasukuni Shrine, where some 1,600 war criminals were enshrined after their executions, by February 2015 some concern within the Imperial House of Japan — which normally does not issue such statements — over the issue was voiced by Crown Prince Naruhito.[50] Naruhito stated on his 55th birthday (February 23, 2015) that it was "important to look back on the past humbly and correctly", in reference to Japan's role in World War II-era war crimes, and that he was concerned about the ongoing need to "correctly pass down tragic experiences and the history behind Japan to the generations who have no direct knowledge of the war, at the time memories of the war are about to fade".[51]

text: Analysis[edit]

text: Tactical implications[edit]

text: The attack was notable for its considerable destruction, as putting most of the U.S. battleships out of commission was regarded—in both navies and by most military observers worldwide—as a tremendous success for Japan. Influenced by the earlier Battle of Taranto, which pioneered the all-aircraft naval attack but resulted in far less damage and casualties, the Japanese struck against Pearl Harbor on a much larger scale than did the British at Taranto.[52]

text: The attack was a great shock to all the Allies in the Pacific Theater, and it was initially believed Pearl Harbor changed the balance of power, similar to how Taranto did the Mediterranean, both in the attackers' favor. Three days later, with the sinking of Prince of Wales and Repulse off the coast of Malaya, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill exclaimed, "In all the war I never received a more direct shock. As I turned and twisted in bed the full horror of the news sank in upon me. There were no British or American capital ships in the Indian Ocean or the Pacific except the American survivors of Pearl Harbor who were hastening back to California. Over this vast expanse of waters Japan was supreme and we everywhere were weak and naked."[53]

text: However, Pearl Harbor did not have as crippling an effect on American operations as initially thought. Unlike the close confines of the Mediterranean, the vast expanses of the Pacific limited the tactical value of battleships as a fleet in being. Furthermore, unlike new fast battleships such as the Iowa class, the slow battleships were incapable of operating with carrier task forces, so once repaired they were relegated to delivering pre-invasion bombardments during the island hopping offensive against Japanese-held islands. These Pearl Harbor veterans were later part of a force that defeated IJN battleships at the Battle of Surigao Strait, an engagement very lopsided in the USN's favor in any case.[54][55] A major flaw of Japanese strategic thinking was a belief that the ultimate Pacific battle would be between battleships of both sides, in keeping with the doctrine of Captain Alfred Mahan. Seeing the decimation of battleships at the hands of aircraft, Yamamoto (and his successors) hoarded his battleships for a "decisive battle" that never happened, only committing a handful to the forefront of the Battles of Midway and Guadalcanal.

text: One of the main Japanese objectives was to destroy the three American aircraft carriers stationed in the Pacific, but they were not present: Enterprise was returning from Wake, Lexington from Midway, and Saratoga was under refit at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. Had Japan sunk the American carriers, the U.S. would have sustained significant damage to the Pacific Fleet's ability to conduct offensive operations for a year or so (given no further diversions from the Atlantic Fleet). As it was, the elimination of the battleships left the U.S. Navy with no choice but to place its faith in aircraft carriers and submarines—particularly the large numbers under construction of the U.S. Navy's Essex-class aircraft carriers, eleven of which had been ordered before the attack—the very weapons with which the U.S. Navy halted and eventually reversed the Japanese advance.

text: Battleships[edit]

text: Despite the perception of this battle as a devastating blow to America, only three ships were permanently lost to the U.S. Navy. These were the battleships Arizona, Oklahoma, and the old battleship Utah (then used as a target ship); nevertheless, much usable material was salvaged from them, including the two aft main turrets from Arizona. The majority of each battleship's crews survived; there were exceptions as heavy casualties resulted from Arizona's magazine exploding and the Oklahoma capsizing. Four ships sunk during the attack were later raised and returned to duty, including the battleships California, West Virginia and Nevada. California and West Virginia had an effective torpedo-defense system which held up remarkably well, despite the weight of fire they had to endure, resulting in most of their crews being saved. Maryland and Tennessee suffered relatively light damage, as did Pennsylvania, which was in drydock at the time.

text: Chester Nimitz said later, "It was God's mercy that our fleet was in Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941." Nimitz believed if Kimmel had discovered the Japanese approach to Pearl Harbor, he would have sortied to meet them. With the American carriers absent and Kimmel's battleships at a severe disadvantage to the Japanese carriers, the likely result would have been the sinking of the American battleships at sea in deep water, where they would have been lost forever with tremendous casualties (up to twenty thousand dead), instead of in Pearl Harbor, where the crews could easily be rescued, and six battleships ultimately restored to duty.[56] This was also the reaction of Joseph Rochefort, head of HYPO, when he remarked the attack was cheap at the price.

text: Many of the surviving battleships were extensively refitted, including the replacement of their outdated secondary battery of anti-surface 5"/51 caliber guns with more useful turreted dual-purpose 5"/38 caliber guns, allowing them to better cope with the new tactical reality.[57] Addition of modern radar to the salvaged vessels would give them a marked qualitative advantage over those of the IJN.[54][55]

text: The repaired U.S. battleships primarily provided fire support for amphibious landings. Their low speed was a liability to their deployment in the vast expanses of the Pacific, for instance they could not accompany the fleet carriers that had become the dominant combatants. Six of the Standard Type vessels participated in the last battleship versus battleship engagement in naval history, the Battle of Surigao Strait, where none of them were hit. During active duty, being well protected by escorts and air cover, none of the Pearl Harbor battleships suffered serious damage save for Pennsylvania which was permanently crippled by a torpedo in the closing stages of the war; on September 2, 1945, West Virginia was among the Allied fleet in Tokyo Bay when the Japanese officially surrendered.

text: Carriers[edit]

text: The attack on Pearl Harbor failed to sight, or destroy, any of the Pacific Fleet's three aircraft carriers; they had been designated as primary targets along with the battleships.[58] The carriers Lexington and Enterprise were ferrying additional fighters to American bases on the islands of Wake and Midway while Saratoga was under refit at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard.[59] At the time of the Japanese attack, the US was expecting imminent war with Japan, beginning in any of several places, such as the Philippines or Allied bases in Borneo.[60] Nagumo's hesitation, and failure to find and destroy the American carriers, may have been a product of his lack of faith in the attack plan, and of the fact he was a gunnery officer, not an aviator. In addition, Yamamoto's targeting priorities, placing battleships first in importance, reflected an out-of-date Mahanian doctrine, and an inability to extrapolate from history, given the damage German submarines did to British trade in World War I. In the end, Japan achieved surprisingly little for all her daring and apparent success.[61] This all happened at a time when the first thirteen examples, CV-9 through CV-21, of the pivotal Essex-class aircraft carriers had been ordered by the United States Congress and were under construction — not one of the thirteen Essex-class carriers built and commissioned during the war years to serve with the U.S. Navy before August 1945 was sunk by the Axis forces in World War II.

text: Cruisers, essential to carrier task forces later in the war, had been considered tertiary targets and only three suffered damage. Of 27 destroyers present, only two were lost: Cassin and Downes were total losses as ships, but their machinery was salvaged and fitted into new hulls, retaining their original names, while Shaw was raised and returned to service.

text: Shore installations[edit]

text: Tank farms, containing 140 million U.S. gallons (530 million liters) of bunker oil, were unscathed, providing a ready source of fuel for American fleets at the submarine base. About this missed opportunity, Admiral Chester Nimitz would later say, "Had the Japanese destroyed the oil, it would have prolonged the war another two years."[62] These were vital to the initial phase of the war, and to commerce raiding throughout, and illustrate the deficiencies of Japanese planning for the attack. The Navy Yard, critical to ship maintenance, and repair of ships damaged in the attack was untouched. The engineering and initial repair shops, as well as the torpedo store, were intact. Other items of base infrastructure and operation, such as power generation, continued to operate normally. Also critical to the way the Pacific War was actually fought was the cryptanalysis unit, Station HYPO, located in the basement of the old Administration Building. It was undamaged and even benefited by gaining staff from unemployed ship's bands.[63]

text: The Army Air Force's loss of aircraft must be balanced against the fact that many of them were obsolete, such as the P-40's predecessor, the P-36. Japan might have achieved a good deal more with not much additional effort or loss.[64]

text: Charts[edit]

text:
Capital ships prior to attack[65]

Location
Battleships
Aircraft carriers

 United States

Atlantic
6 (+2*)
4 (+1*)

Pacific
9
3

 Empire of Japan

Pacific
10 (+1*)
10

*Plus ships completed but not yet commissioned.
US: North Carolina, Washington and Hornet
Japan: Yamato

Capital ships after attack

Location
Battleships
Aircraft carriers

 United States

Atlantic
6 (+2*)
4 (+1*)

Pacific
1 (+6**)
3

 Empire of Japan

Pacific
10 (+1*)
9

**Ships which can be repaired:
California,West Virginia, Nevada, Maryland, Tennessee, Pennsylvania.

Capital ships 12/1942

Location
Battleships
Aircraft carriers

 United States

Atlantic
4
1

Pacific
12 (+3**)
3

 Empire of Japan

Pacific
10
6

**Ships which can be repaired:
California,West Virginia, Nevada
US ships lost:
Lexington, Yorktown, Wasp, Hornet
US ships gained:
Essex, North Carolina, Washington, South Dakota, Indiana, Massachusetts, Alabama
Japanese ships lost:
Shoho, Akagi, Kaga, Soryu, Hiryu, Hiei, Kirishima
Japanese ships gained: Yamato, Musashi, Junyo, Hiyo.

text: Of the 22 Japanese ships that took part in the attack, only one survived the war. As of 2006, the only U.S. ships in Pearl Harbor during the attack still remaining afloat are the Coast Guard Cutter Taney and the yard tug Hoga. Both remained active over 50 years after the attack and have been designated museum ships.

text: Strategic implications[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: A common view is that the Japanese fell victim to victory disease because of the perceived ease of their first victories. It has also been stated by the Japanese military commanders and politicians who visited and lived in the United States, that their leadership (mostly military personnel) took the war with the United States relatively lightly, compared to them. For instance, Admiral Yamamoto and General Tadamichi Kuribayashi expressed concerns about the greater industrial power of the United States.

text: The politics of a "Europe First" strategy, loss of air cover over Pearl Harbor, and subsequent loss of the Philippines, meant the U.S. Army and Army Air Forces[66][unreliable source] were unable to play a significant role in the Pacific War for several months. Japan was temporarily free of worries about the major rival Pacific naval power, which was at least part of the intention for the attack. Because Australian, New Zealand, Dutch and most British forces were already in Europe, Japan conquered nearly all of Southeast Asia, the Southwest Pacific, and extended her reach far into the Indian Ocean, without significant interference. The various Japanese advances were a nearly complete tactical success.

text: In the long term, the attack on Pearl Harbor was a grand strategic blunder for Japan. Indeed, Admiral Yamamoto, who conceived it, predicted even success here could not win a war with the United States, because American productive capacity was too large. It spurred the United States into a determination to fight to complete victory. The war resulted in the destruction of the Japanese armed forces, the occupation of the home islands (a state never before achieved in Japan's history), and the occupation of Okinawa and the Ryukyu Islands by the United States until 1972, while the Soviet Russian re-annexation of the Kurile Islands and Sakhalin Island's southern part, and the restoration of Formosa (Taiwan) to China, and the loss of Korea have not been reversed to this day.


document_title: List of current champions in WWE

question_text: who won the smackdown women's championship at wrestlemania

question_tokens: who won the smackdown women 's championship at wrestlemania

root

text: List of current champions in WWE

text: Current champions[edit]

text: At the top of WWE's championship hierarchy are the WWE Universal Championship on Raw and the WWE Championship on SmackDown. The Universal Champion is Brock Lesnar, who is in his first reign. He defeated Goldberg at WrestleMania 33 on April 2, 2017. The WWE Champion is AJ Styles, who is in his second reign. He won the title on the November 7, 2017, edition of SmackDown Live  by defeating Jinder Mahal.

tag: p

text: Secondary titles in WWE include the WWE Intercontinental Championship for Raw and the WWE United States Championship for SmackDown. The Intercontinental Championship is held by Dolph Ziggler, who is in his sixth reign. He won the title by defeating Seth Rollins on the edition of June 18 of Raw. The United States Championship is held by Shinsuke Nakamura, who is in his first reign. He won the title by defeating Jeff Hardy on July 15, 2018, at Extreme Rules.

text: The WWE Cruiserweight Championship is part of the Raw brand and is for wrestlers 205 lb (93 kg) and under. It is defended on Raw and the cruiserweight-exclusive 205 Live.[1] The title is held by Cedric Alexander, who is in his first reign. He won the vacant title by defeating Mustafa Ali in the finals of a 16-man tournament on April 8, 2018, on the WrestleMania 34 pre-show.

text: The WWE Raw Women's Championship is held by Alexa Bliss, who is in her third reign. She defeated Nia Jax on June 17, 2018, at Money in the Bank by cashing in her Money in the Bank contract. The WWE SmackDown Women's Championship is held by first-time champion Carmella. She won the title by defeating Charlotte Flair on the April 10, 2018, edition of SmackDown Live after cashing in her Money in the Bank contract.

text: The WWE Raw Tag Team Championship is currently held by Curtis Axel and Bo Dallas, who are in their first reign. They won the titles by defeating former champions Matt Hardy and Bray Wyatt at Extreme Rules on July 15, 2018. The WWE SmackDown Tag Team Championship is held by The Bludgeon Brothers (Harper and Rowan), who are in their first reign as a team, and the second for Harper individually. They won the titles by defeating Big E and Kofi Kingston of The New Day and former champions The Usos (Jey and Jimmy Uso) in a triple threat tag team match on April 8, 2018, at WrestleMania 34.

text: The top title of NXT is the NXT Championship, which is held by Aleister Black, who is in his first reign. He won the title by defeating Andrade "Cien" Almas on April 7, 2018, at NXT TakeOver: New Orleans. The secondary title of NXT is the NXT North American Championship, which is held by Adam Cole, who defeated EC3, Killian Dain, Lars Sullivan, Ricochet, and Velveteen Dream in a six-way ladder match on April 7, 2018, at NXT TakeOver: New Orleans to become the inaugural champion. The NXT Women's Championship is held by first-time champion Shayna Baszler. She won the title by defeating Ember Moon at NXT TakeOver: New Orleans. The NXT Tag Team Championship is held by two-time title holders The Undisputed Era, They won the titles by defeating Moustache Mountain (Trent Seven and Tyler Bate) on the tapings of the July 11 episode of NXT.

text: The WWE United Kingdom Championship will be the top championship of WWE's U.K.-based brand set to debut in July 2018, but is currently being defended in NXT, as well as in U.K.-based independent promotions; the only active WWE championship to be defended outside of WWE. The current champion is Pete Dunne, who is in his first reign. He won the title by defeating inaugural champion Tyler Bate at NXT TakeOver: Chicago. Two new titles, the WWE United Kingdom Women's Championship as and WWE United Kingdom Tag Team Championship, will also debut along with the brand.[2][3]

text: Raw[edit]

text:
Championship

Current champion(s)

Reign

Date won

Daysheld

Location

Notes

WWE Universal Championship

Brock Lesnar

1

April 2, 2017

470

Orlando, Florida

Defeated Goldberg at WrestleMania 33

WWE Raw Women's Championship

Alexa Bliss

3

June 17, 2018

29

Rosemont, Illinois

Cashed in her Money in the Bank contract and defeated Nia Jax at Money in the Bank

WWE Intercontinental Championship

Dolph Ziggler

6

June 18, 2018

28

Grand Rapids, Michigan

Defeated Seth Rollins on Raw

WWE Cruiserweight Championship

Cedric Alexander

1

April 8, 2018

99

New Orleans, Louisiana

Defeated Mustafa Ali for the vacant title in the finals of a 16-man tournament on the WrestleMania 34 pre-show

WWE Raw Tag Team Championship

The B-Team (Curtis Axel and Bo Dallas)

1(2, 1)

July 15, 2018

1

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Defeated Matt Hardy and Bray Wyatt at Extreme Rules

tag: table

text: SmackDown[edit]

text:
Championship

Current champion(s)

Reign

Date won

Daysheld

Location

Notes

WWE Championship

A.J. Styles

2

November 7, 2017

251

Manchester, England

Defeated Jinder Mahal on SmackDown Live

WWE SmackDown Women's Championship

Carmella

1

April 10, 2018

97

New Orleans, Louisiana

Cashed in her Money in the Bank contract and defeated Charlotte Flair on SmackDown Live

WWE United States Championship

Shinsuke Nakamura

1

July 15, 2018

1

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Defeated Jeff Hardy at Extreme Rules

WWE SmackDown Tag Team Championship

The Bludgeon Brothers(Harper and Rowan)

1(2, 1)

April 8, 2018

99

New Orleans, Louisiana

Defeated previous champions The Usos and Big E and Kofi Kingston of The New Day at WrestleMania 34

text: NXT[edit]

text:
Championship

Current champion(s)

Reign

Date won

Daysheld

Location

Notes

NXT Championship

Aleister Black

1

April 7, 2018

100

New Orleans, Louisiana

Defeated Andrade "Cien" Almas at NXT TakeOver: New Orleans

NXT North American Championship

Adam Cole

1

April 7, 2018

100

New Orleans, Louisiana

Defeated EC3, Killian Dain, Lars Sullivan, Ricochet, and Velveteen Dream in a six-way ladder match at NXT TakeOver: New Orleans to become the inaugural champion

NXT Women's Championship

Shayna Baszler

1

April 7, 2018

100

New Orleans, Louisiana

Defeated Ember Moon at NXT TakeOver: New Orleans

NXT Tag Team Championship

The Undisputed Era(Kyle O'Reilly and Roderick Strong)

2

June 21, 2018

25

Winter Park, Florida

Defeated Moustache Mountain (Trent Seven and Tyler Bate) on NXT  Aired on tape delay on July 11.

text: NXT UK[edit]

text:
Championship

Current champion(s)

Reign

Date won

Daysheld

Location

Notes

WWE United Kingdom Championship

Pete Dunne

1

May 20, 2017

422

Rosemont, Illinois

Defeated Tyler Bate at NXT TakeOver: Chicago


document_title: Ohio-class submarine

question_text: how many nuclear armed submarines does the us have

text: Ohio-class submarine

text: Description[edit]

text: The Ohio-class submarines were designed specifically for extended war-deterrence patrols. Each of these submarines is provided with two complete crews, called the Blue crew and the Gold crew, with each crew serving typically on 70- to 90-day deterrent patrols. To decrease the time in port for crew turnover and replenishment, three large logistics hatches have been installed to provide large-diameter resupply and repair access. These hatches allow rapid transfer of supply pallets, equipment replacement modules, and machinery components, significantly reducing the time required for replenishment and maintenance of the submarines.

text: The class's design allows the boat to operate for about fifteen years between major overhauls. These submarines are reported to be as quiet at their cruising speed of 20 knots (37 km/h; 23 mph) or more than the previous Lafayette-class submarines at 6 knots (11 km/h; 6.9 mph), although exact information remains classified.[citation needed] Fire control for their Mark 48 torpedoes is carried out by Mark 118 Mod 2 system,[6] while the Missile Fire Control (MFC) system is a Mark 98.[6]

text: The Ohio-class submarines were constructed from sections of hull, with each four-deck section being 42 ft (13 m) in diameter.[5][6] The sections were produced at the General Dynamics Electric Boat facility, Quonset Point, Rhode Island, and then assembled at its shipyard at Groton, Connecticut.[5]

text: The US Navy has a total of 18 Ohio-class submarines which consist of 14 ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), and four cruise missile submarines (SSGNs). The SSBN submarines are also known as "Trident" submarines, and provide the sea-based leg of the U.S. nuclear triad. Each SSBN submarine is armed with up to 24 Trident II submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM). Each SSGN is capable of carrying 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles, plus a complement of Harpoon missiles to be fired through their torpedo tubes.

text: History[edit]

text: The first eight Ohio-class submarines were armed at first with 24 Trident I C4 SLBMs.[5] Beginning with the ninth Trident submarine, Tennessee, the remaining boats were equipped with the larger, three-stage Trident II D5 missile.[6] The Trident I missile carries eight multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRV), while the Trident II missile carries twelve, in total delivering more destructive power than the Trident I missile and with greater accuracy. Starting with Alaska in 2000, the Navy began converting its remaining ballistic missile submarines armed with C4 missiles to carry D5 missiles. This task was completed in mid-2008.

text: The first eight submarines had their home ports at Bangor, Washington, to replace the submarines carrying the Polaris A3 missile that were then being decommissioned. The remaining ten submarines originally had their home ports at Kings Bay, Georgia, replacing the Poseidon and Trident Backfit submarines of the Atlantic Fleet. During the conversion of the first four submarines to SSGNs (see below), five of the submarines, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Nebraska, Maine, and Louisiana, were transferred from Kings Bay to Bangor. Further transfers occur as the strategic weapons goals of the United States change.

text: In 2011, Ohio-class submarines carried out 28 deterrent patrols. Each patrol lasts around 70 days. Four boats are on station ("hard alert") in designated patrol areas at any given time.[7] From January to June 2014, Pennsylvania carried out a 140-day-long patrol, the longest to date.[8]

text: SSBN/SSGN conversions[edit]

text: After the end of the Cold War, plans called for Ohio to be retired in 2002, followed by three of her sister boats. However, Ohio, Michigan, Florida, and Georgia instead were slated for modification, to remain in service carrying conventionally armed guided missiles, and were redesignated as SSGNs.

text: The conversion modified 22 of the 24 88-inch (2.2 m) diameter Trident missile tubes to contain large vertical launch systems (VLS), one configuration of which may be a cluster of seven Tomahawk cruise missiles. In this configuration, the number of cruise missiles carried could be a maximum of 154, the equivalent of what is typically deployed in a surface battle group. Other payload possibilities include new generations of supersonic and hypersonic cruise missiles, and Submarine Launched Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles (SLIRBM),[9] unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), the ADM-160 MALD, sensors for anti-submarine warfare or intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions, countermine warfare payloads such as the AN/BLQ-11 Long Term Mine Reconnaissance System (LMRS), and the broaching universal buoyant launcher (BUBL) and stealthy affordable capsule system (SACS) specialized payload canisters.

text: The missile tubes also have room for stowage canisters that can extend the forward deployment time for special forces. The other two Trident tubes are converted to swimmer lockout chambers. For special operations, the Advanced SEAL Delivery System and the dry deck shelter can be mounted on the lockout chamber and the boat will be able to host up to 66 special operations sailors or Marines, such as Navy SEALs, or USMC MARSOC teams. Improved communications equipment installed during the upgrade allows the SSGNs to serve as a forward-deployed, clandestine Small Combatant Joint Command Center.[10]

text: On 26 September 2002, the Navy awarded General Dynamics Electric Boat a US$442.9 million contract to begin the first phase of the SSGN submarine conversion program. Those funds covered only the initial phase of conversion for the first two boats on the schedule. Advanced procurement was funded at $355 million in fiscal year 2002, $825 million in the FY 2003 budget and, through the five-year defense budget plan, at $936 million in FY 2004, $505 million in FY 2005, and $170 million in FY 2006. Thus, the total cost to refit the four boats is just under $700 million per vessel.

text: In November 2002, Ohio entered a drydock, beginning her 36-month refueling and missile conversion overhaul. Electric Boat announced on 9 January 2006 that the conversion had been completed. The converted Ohio rejoined the fleet in February 2006, followed by Florida in April 2006. The converted Michigan was delivered in November 2006. The converted Ohio went to sea for the first time in October 2007. Georgia returned to the fleet in March 2008 at Kings Bay.[11] These four SSGNs are expected to remain in service until about 2023–2026. At that point their capabilities will be replaced with Virginia Payload Module equipped Virginia-class submarines.[12]

text: Replacement[edit]

text: The U.S. Department of Defense anticipates a continued need for a sea-based strategic nuclear force.[13] The first of the current Ohio SSBNs are expected to be retired by 2029,[13] meaning that a platform must already be seaworthy by that time. A replacement may cost over $4 billion per unit compared to Ohio's $2 billion.[4] The U.S. Navy is exploring two options. The first is a variant of the Virginia-class nuclear-powered attack submarines. The second is a dedicated SSBN, either with a new hull or based on an overhaul of the current Ohio.[citation needed]

text: With the cooperation of both Electric Boat and Newport News Shipbuilding, in 2007, the U.S. Navy began a cost control study.[13] Then in December 2008 the U.S. Navy awarded Electric Boat a contract for the missile compartment design of the Ohio-class replacement, worth up to $592 million. Newport News is expected to receive close to 4% of that project. The U.S. Navy has yet to confirm an Ohio-class replacement program. However, in April 2009, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates confirmed that the U.S. Navy should begin such a program in 2010.[4][needs update] The new vessel is scheduled to enter the design phase by 2014. It is anticipated that, if a new hull design is used, the program must be initiated by 2016 in order to meet the 2029 deadline.[13]

text: In popular culture[edit]

text: As ballistic missile submarines, the Ohio class has occasionally been portrayed in fiction books and films.

text:
The fictional USS Montana is featured in the 1989 film The Abyss.[14]
USS Alabama is the setting for the 1995 submarine film, Crimson Tide.[15]
The fictional ballistic missile submarine, USS Colorado (SSBN-753), is the primary setting for the ABC television series Last Resort.[16][not in citation given][citation needed]

tag: ul


document_title: Proud Mary (film)

question_text: where did the movie proud mary take place

text: Proud Mary (film)

text: Plot[edit]

text: Mary is a successful hitwoman working for an organized crime family in Boston. However, her life is completely shifted when she meets a young boy whose path she crosses when a professional hit goes wrong and she leaves the boy orphaned.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Taraji P. Henson as Mary Goodwin
Jahi Di'Allo Winston as Danny
Billy Brown as Tom
Danny Glover as Benny
Xander Berkeley as Uncle
Neal McDonough as Walter
Margaret Avery as Mina
Rade Serbedzija as Luka

text: Production[edit]

text: In January 2017, Taraji P. Henson signed on to star in Proud Mary with Screen Gems still looking to secure a director for an April 2017 principal production start in Boston.[5] In February 2017, the film received a January 26, 2018, release date[6] and Babak Najafi signed on to direct.[7]

text: On April 5, 2017, the rest of the cast was announced as the film commenced principal production.[5][8] On July 20, 2017, the first official trailer for the film was released along with a teaser poster. A new release date of January 12, 2018, was also confirmed.[9]

text: Release[edit]

text: Proud Mary was released on Blu-Ray and DVD on April 10, 2018.[citation needed]

text: Box office[edit]

text: In the United States and Canada, Proud Mary was released on January 12, 2018, alongside The Commuter and Paddington 2, as well as the wide expansion of The Post, and was projected to gross around $20 million from 2,125 theaters in opening weekend.[10] It made $3.2 million on its first day and $10 million over the weekend, finishing 8th at the box office and last among the new releases.[3]

text: Critical response[edit]

text: On review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, the film holds an approval rating of 28% based on 53 reviews, and an average rating of 4.2/10. The website's critical consensus reads, "Proud Mary proves Taraji P. Henson has more than enough attitude and charisma to carry an action movie — just not, unfortunately, one this indifferently assembled."[11] On Metacritic, which assigns a normalized rating to reviews, the film has a weighted average score of 35 out of 100, based on 23 critics, indicating "generally unfavorable reviews".[12] Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of "B+" on an A+ to F scale.[3]


document_title: Last Tango in Halifax

question_text: who plays judith in last tango in halifax

text: Last Tango in Halifax

text: Overview[edit]

text: Celia Dawson and Alan Buttershaw are both widowed and in their seventies. They were attracted to each other in the 1950s, but never expressed their feelings, and Celia moved away with her parents. In the present day, they are reunited after being persuaded to join Facebook by their respective grandchildren.[9] Alan has loved Celia since he was 16 years old,[10] whilst Celia is described as a woman who is "unfulfilled" and was unhappily married to a man she grew to hate.[10] After their reunion, Alan and Celia discover that they still feel as passionately for each other as they did when they were teenagers. Their story is described as a "testament of the uplifting power of love at any age".[9]

text: Alan and Celia's romance is depicted alongside the troubles of their own grown-up daughters, and the series' official description says that its portrayal of family is "as dark as it is comic".[9] Alan's daughter Gillian and Celia's daughter Caroline are complete opposites: widowed Gillian runs a farm and works part-time in a supermarket,[10] whilst Oxford-educated[10] Caroline is the headmistress of a successful school.[9] Their parents' engagement affects both daughters' lives. Gillian wonders how she and her son will cope without her father around to help,[11] whilst Caroline, struggling with depression and her feelings for a female colleague, feels that her mother's unconventional romance gives her "permission to finally admit to being who she really is".[12]

text: Production[edit]

text: Concept and writing[edit]

text: The series is based on lead writer Sally Wainwright's personal experiences.[2] She described it as "the most personal thing I've ever written".[13] Her mother, Dorothy, lost contact with a childhood friend, Alec Walker,[2] when she was 15, but they reconnected on the social networking website Friends Reunited 60 years later[13] and within six months were married. Wainwright said the relationship between her mother and Alec "was so beautiful and uplifting that it inspired everyone around them".[14] When she told the story to her colleague Nicola Shindler, Shindler suggested she turn her experience into a television series. Shindler became the series' executive producer and according to Wainwright, the script was sold "instantly".[14]

text: The character of Celia is based on Dorothy; Wainwright has noted that her mother "became so passionate and emotional" after falling in love again.[14] Some scenes in the series are based on true events. In one episode Celia and Alan are shown laughing at an argument between Caroline and her husband in the next room; Wainwright recalls discovering her mother and stepfather in the same situation after Wainwright had had an argument with her husband Austin.[14] Caroline's discomfort with Celia's discussing her sex life is based on a conversation Wainwright had with her mother. Alec died three years into their marriage, but according to Wainwright she was "delighted" to have their relationship dramatised; Wainwright believes Last Tango in Halifax is "a celebration of how fantastic the whole thing was".[14]

text: Though largely biographical, the series does contain some invented story lines. In real life, Alec and Dorothy's families had a good relationship from the start; in the TV series, Caroline and Gillian initially have a feud.[14] Whilst Jacobi and Reid's storyline is predominantly uplifting, the actions of their onscreen families were intended to provide a contrast. With regard to Alan and Celia's dysfunctional families, Wainwright states that they "bring drama and chaos at every turn" and that the series aims to "get under the skin of these characters".[2]

text: Through Caroline, the series explores various LGBT themes. A source of contention for Celia is her daughter entering into a same sex relationship and later coming out to her. Anne Reid spoke positively of the storyline, stating that she believes a lot of people of her own generation are homophobic. She felt that her own character "might show them [and] might change them" just as Celia must become more accepting to avoid losing Alan. Jacobi concurred: Alan has "a streak of tolerance in him ... that perhaps Celia doesn't".[15] In series three, the division between Celia and Caroline widens after Celia refuses to attend Caroline's wedding to another woman. Wainwright felt that killing off Caroline's partner Kate would be the most effective way to propel the drama onwards and to develop the emotional lives of the remaining characters going forward. She was conflicted over this decision, having grown attached to the character of Kate, and actress Nina Sosanya, and wrote two versions of the fourth episode; the unaired one would have seen Kate survive.[16]

text: Characters and casting[edit]

text: Discussing the casting of Derek Jacobi and Anne Reid, Wainwright stated: "we went for the best and we got them".[2] The Guardian felt that one of the series' successes was the unlikely casting of a "theatrical knight" (Jacobi) and a "TV Stalwart" (Reid).[17]

text: Wainwright had not anticipated being able to secure an actor of Jacobi's calibre for the role of Alan, stating that she "never imagined getting someone like him in one of my dramas", believing him to be in "a different stratosphere".[14] Upon casting Jacobi, Wainright felt that in addition to looking similar to Alec Walker, Jacobi embodied his personality perfectly, particularly his sense of humour.[14]

text: Jacobi was surprised to be offered the role of Alan; as his reputation centred on parts that were either "posh", "classical" or "costume". He enjoyed having the chance to play someone who is "an ordinary fellow".[18] He also felt the series provided a chance to depict a "love story between two older characters that isn't patronising or stereotyped in any way".[10] Wainwright felt that the two lead actors had a palpable chemistry that reflected her mother's second marriage.[2][14]

text: Reid and Jacobi also influenced the creative process — after Reid discovered Jacobi could jive, they implored Wainright to include a dance scene in an episode.[2][19] Jacobi also inspired a scene in which two of Alan's friends (played by Roy Barraclough and Paul Copley)[20] vie to be his best man.[14] A teenage version of Alan is portrayed in flashback by Nico Mirallegro.[21]

text: Reid was Wainwright's personal choice for the role of Celia, describing the actress as "so down to earth and compelling to watch".[14] Reid had tired of playing older characters for whom their age was a defining characteristic, stating that she had been sent lots of scripts wherein "where the minute anyone's over 65, they turn into a doddering old idiot".[22] She hoped that Last Tango in Halifax would "give hope to older people",[23] opining that the relationship between Celia and Alan was free from ageism.[22]

text: Reid identified herself with Celia's personality — believing herself to be quite reckless and outgoing [19]— though stated that unlike her character she has no desire to enter another relationship.[23] She enjoyed working with her friend Sarah Lancashire, who previously played her onscreen daughter in Rose and Maloney, and suggested that the two share similar looks.[22] Reid described filming the series as "one of the best times in my career" and stated that she was proud of the work put in.[10] Amelia Young plays a teenage Celia during a flashback sequence in episode six.[21]

text: Lancashire discerned that the series was "very special" within reading two pages of the script. Other factors that persuaded her to commit to the series included the casting of Reid and Jacobi, and the series' juxtaposition of a heart-warming story with elements of humour.[10] In terms of her character, Lancashire identified with Caroline being "a working woman trying to keep everything under control".[10] She stated the series' ensemble cast was "the closest I’ve come to being in a theatre company on television" due to how well the actors worked together.[24]

text: The cast had all assumed that Last Tango in Halifax would only run for one series.[24] Filming of the second series clashed with filming of the second series of the BBC One period drama The Paradise, which also starred Sarah Lancashire. This necessitated her having to leave her role in The Paradise halfway through the second series in order to reprise her role as Caroline in Last Tango in Halifax.[25] In an interview in 2013 Lancashire stated that the decision to return to Last Tango in Halifax was the easiest she had made in her working life stating "as an actor you can wait an entire career to be involved in a project like this."[26]

text: The role resulted in her receiving the most fan mail of her career. Lancashire was surprised and humbled by the responses from women stating that Caroline's same sex relationship had personally inspired them.[26] She stated that in her approach to the character she did not focus on Caroline's sexuality, but the "humanity of her".[26] Due to the underrepresentation of gay characters on television, Lancashire felt it particularly important that Caroline's experience would not be portrayed inaccurately.[26] In 2014 Wainwright recalled being "blown away" by Lancashire's performances in the rushes for the series, which partly inspired her to script the series Happy Valley in which Lancashire plays the lead role.[27]

text: Nicola Walker completes the main cast as Gillian. She admired the character's honesty, bravery and lack of self-pity, and identified strongly with her tendency to speak before thinking things through and her deep love for her father.[10] In 2014 The Daily Telegraph described the role as a "game-changer" in the trajectory of Walker's career.[28] Though ultimately successful in winning the role Walker initially believed that she would not get the part due to a lack of confidence in her northern accent, and the presence of northern actresses in the audition.[28]

text: Her approach to the character saw her delve into Gillian's psychology with Walker particularly interested in the contradiction between Gillian's sexual confidence and her use of sex as a form of self-punishment.[28] She felt the series showed a very adult approach to storytelling, stating that she had "never come across a character like Gillian before" and praising the variety of strong female roles.[29]

text: The Independent noted the significance of the series having three female leads over the age of 40, stating that this, alongside Caroline's lesbian storyline and Gillian's attitude towards sex made the series "quietly subversive" when compared against primetime television as a whole.[29]

text: In addition to its main characters, Last Tango in Halifax features a regular supporting cast. Nina Sosanya plays Caroline's romantic partner Kate, who she decides to marry over the course of the series. Gerard Gilbert of The Independent describes the relationship between the couple as "one of the most normalised lesbian relationships ever shown on the small screen."[18] Nina Sosanya noted that she enjoyed filming with Sarah Lancashire and that the pair would "giggle a lot like completely juvenile idiots" whilst filming their love scenes.[18]

text: Other characters introduced in the first series include Caroline's husband John (Tony Gardner) and his lover Judith (Ronni Ancona), Gillian's brother-in-law, Robbie (Dean Andrews), and Paul (Sacha Dhawan), a youth with whom Gillian has a sexual relationship. Josh Bolt plays Gillian's son Raff, whilst Edward Ashley and Louis Greatorex play Caroline's teenage sons William and Lawrence.[20][21][30][31][32][33] The second series expanded the families of Alan and Celia. Timothy West appears as Alan's brother Ted whilst Gemma Jones plays Celia's sister Muriel.[34][35] The third series later introduces Rupert Graves as Gary, who is revealed to be Alan's illegitimate son,[36] and Michelle Hurst as Kate's mother Ginika.[18][37]

text: Filming[edit]

text: The first series was filmed in Yorkshire and in Altrincham between January and April 2012. Altrincham was used to represent scenes set in Harrogate, such as those set at Caroline's house.[38] The second series began filming in July 2013.[39] Filming took place at Holdsworth House in Halifax in August 2013[40] and also at Hoghton Tower, a fortified manor house in Lancashire, in August 2013. This resulted in the Tower's being closed to the public between 19 and 28 August.[41] In September the University of York supplied ten students from the Department of Theatre, Film and Television to work as extras on the series.[42] Filming for the third series began in Yorkshire and at Peover Hall, near Knutsford, Cheshire in July 2014.[43]

text: Episodes[edit]

text:
Series
Episodes
Originally aired

Series premiere
Series finale

1
6
20 November 2012
19 December 2012

2
6
19 November 2013
24 December 2013

3
6
28 December 2014[44]
1 February 2015

4
2
19 December 2016
20 December 2016

text: Broadcast and reception[edit]

text: The series premièred to overnight ratings of 6.160 million viewers, 25.6% of the available audience, as the highest rated show at 9 pm on 20 November.[45] The series finale, airing 19 December 2012, also won its time-slot, achieving an overnight series high of 6.290 million viewers, 26.6% of the available audience.[46] Consolidated figures released by the Broadcasters' Audience Research Board (BARB) revealed that the series première achieved a consolidated rating of 7.304 million viewers,[47] whilst the finale had 7.480 million.[47] The overall series average in terms of viewing figures was 7.316 million viewers.[nb 1] The Independent reported that the early consolidated ratings received by the programme made it the highest rated new mid-week television drama of 2012.[48] In September 2013, the series began airing on the American broadcast television network PBS.[49]

text: Critical reception[edit]

text: The series has attracted mostly positive reviews, largely focused on the depiction of its two septuagenarian lead characters. Jane Shilling of The Daily Telegraph labelled the series "a triumph against TV's ageism" in an examination of the portrayal of elderly people in the media.[50] Shilling singled out Jacobi and Reid's performances, stating that they provide a "mixture of gravity and levity" that "brings a transcendent quality to their characters' resolute ordinariness".

text: Lucy Harmer, an executive member of the charity Age UK, also praised the series for portraying two "normal, healthy and sane" older characters, citing the depiction of Internet use by the elderly as something ordinary. She compared the treatment of older characters in the series to Hilary Boyd's novel Thursdays in the Park and the film The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel (2012).[51]

text: The Huffington Post's Caroline Frost thought the series was reminiscent of the dialogue and sensibility of the playwright Alan Bennett. She wrote the story was poignant and praised a central theme underlining "how many people make do with their day-to-day business and responsibilities, while still holding on to their private dreams",[52]

text: Andrew Anthony of The Guardian had his "low expectations ... squarely confounded", giving particular praise to the dialogue and the central performances.[17] Jane Simon of the Daily Mirror felt that Last Tango in Halifax experienced a mid-series dip, though she praised what she felt was a triumphant finale. She also praised Wainwright's script and the lead quartet of Jacobi, Reid, Lancashire, and Walker for creating "characters you can believe in even when they're behaving appallingly".[53]

text: The series was reviewed favourably by the American website AfterEllen, which reports on the depiction of gay and bisexual women in the media. Correspondent Jill Guccini stated that she "started off watching this series thinking it was a cute little show about some oldies falling in love", but at the end of the series believed it was "some of the finest television I've seen, anywhere, ever".[54]

text: Critical reception in the United States was also largely positive following PBS' acquisition of the show. Mary McNamara of the Los Angeles Times labelled the series as "the best new show of the fall" describing it as "a rapturous mix of absurdly fairy-tale-romance and frantic modern complications, set in the picturesque drear of Yorkshire and brought to life by masterfully shaded performances." She opined that Reid and Jacobi "are capable of doing more with a startled look or careful smile ... than most actors can do in seven pages of dialogue".[55]

text: Matthew Gilbert of The Boston Globe acknowledged that the public might not find the series appealing based on its title and premise alone, stating that PBS' description of the programme made it sound "as saccharine and hackneyed as a Geritol commercial". Upon viewing the series however, he praised the added dimensions of the series and wrote that it was "so much more interesting" than the central premise suggested. He also felt that Walker and Lancashire played an important part; "both add[ing] a necessary amount of bitter to the sweet".[56]

text: Mike Hale of The New York Times was more cynical about the series, describing it as a "warm comforter of a series" and "treacle". However he felt that series also distinguished itself from this category of media by its "relatively dry style and careful modulation of tone and volume" in addition to "a crackerjack cast".[57]

text: Accolades[edit]

text: The first series of Last Tango in Halifax was nominated for four awards at the 2013 British Academy Television Awards, which took place on 12 May 2013. Actors Derek Jacobi, Anne Reid, and Sarah Lancashire earned respective nominations in the Best Actor, Best Actress, and Best Supporting Actress categories. The series itself was nominated for the British Academy Television Award for Best Drama Series, and ultimately won.[58] Additionally, Wainwright was named best Drama Writer at the 2013 British Academy Television Craft Awards for her writing of the series.[59] The series was nominated for Best Drama Series at the 2013 Broadcasting Press Guild Awards whilst Sally Wainwright was nominated for the writer's award for her contribution to both Last Tango in Halifax and Scott & Bailey.[60] In 2014, Sarah Lancashire and Nicola Walker were both nominated for a British Academy Television Award in the category for "Best Supporting Actress" for their roles in Last Tango in Halifax. Lancashire won the award for her role as Caroline.[61]

text: Possible adaptations[edit]

text: In October 2013, it was reported in news outlets that American actress, screenwriter, and producer Diane Keaton had acquired the rights to remake Last Tango in Halifax for American audiences on the subscription cable channel HBO.[62] Sally Wainwright mentioned this development at a Broadcasting Press Guild event and stated that though she did not expect to be closely involved in the remake, she would have an associate producer role.[62] However, the following day Red Production Company released a statement stating that a remake would likely be delayed since the original series was still airing on American channel PBS.[63] In April 2014, it was reported that the series would be remade for French television by BBC Worldwide France and the production company NEWEN.[64]

text: Notes[edit]

text: Jump up ^ Calculated by combining the individual viewing figures for each episode, sourced from the Broadcasters' Audience Research Board (7.304 million, 6.779 million, 7.508 million, 7.334 million, 7.492 million, 7.480 million)[47] and dividing by six.