Jeremy Paxman Radio interview

[robigunner88]

Afternoon all,

Jeremy Paxman will be on Radio Five Live today between 14:00 - 16:00 being interviewed about his new book on the Great War, which focuses on exposing the myths of the war as well as talking about his own family's Great War service.

Also here is a link to the Irish Times which has a piece on it as well:

http://www.irishtimes.com/culture/jeremy-paxman-s-great-war-the-unrevised-edition-1.1547762?page=1

Jamie

[keithmroberts]

Although it's unlikely that his book will hold anything new, this review is somewhat more helpful than that in the Graun, and maybe in due course we will get a fuller one elsewhere.

Keith

[WilliamRev]

I haven't read the book yet, but thought that the BBC Radio 5 Live interview with Paxman was excellent.

He blames the revisionism which started in the late 1920s, as Lloyd George rewrote history in his memoirs, and continued into the 1960s with "Oh What a Lovely War" and later "Blackadder Goes Forth", for the simplistic family myths and half-truths that most people think they know about the war. He says that he hopes his book will encourage people to try to understand what people at the time thought about the war, and how, in a time when the vast majority of the British population were christian, the concept of "sacrifice" was understood and held in high regard.

Whilst there may be little that is completely new for GW. Forumites, I am encouraged that such a well-known voice is urging people to take an educated and sophisticated view of the war, its' causes and its aftermath.

William

Later Edit: the interview is on Richard Bacon's daily podcast "Daily Bacon" which is available here and will remain online for a month (until 2nd November).

[StuartAB]

Heard a good chunk of it. Main thesis that we shouldn't let the 60's view of WW1 colour our judgment of it. I was quite impressed by the interview, but haven't seen the book.

Stuart

[stevem49]

I am running a book on the number of 'celebs' writing a book concerning WW1

[WilliamRev]

Sorry to be a bore, but it is veering into jokeland like this that admin's Alan C. ever so politely ticked us all off about a couple of months ago here. Perhaps the topic has run its course, in which case it doesn't matter too much I suppose, but with the thread only a few hours old it is a bit tiresome to see jokers moving in to hijack yet another thread - get ye to Skindles (and heaven have mercy on your souls).

William.

[AlanCurragh]

Indeed William - I've hidden a couple of posts

[David Filsell]

So far I've logged Malinson, Paxo, Falklands Max in the slebs race. S'now doubt others will follow.

[Moonraker]

If "slebs" have got experience of writing and researching military matters, fair enough. But if it's just for the sake of their name on the cover ...

With his various day jobs, I wonder how Paxman finds time to write a book - presumably he has a researcher or two to dig out facts. (Has he been seen much at the National Archives or Imperial War Museum?) Or are some "sleb" books based on a reading of a dozen or so recognised works, with the author then providing his own "take" on what happened?

Moonraker

[AlanCurragh]

S'now

[Andrew Hesketh]

: the interview is on Richard Bacon's daily podcast "Daily Bacon" which is available here and will remain online for a month (until 2nd November).

Thanks for that William. An interesting listen.

[Andrew Hesketh]

... presumably he has a researcher or two to dig out facts....

I would hope Paxman would have the ability to do a bit of his own thkinking, unlike another well-known ex-Newsnight journo whom I helped in the early 00''s to the extent that a large chunk of a chapter of his book was almost word for word what I wrote with zero acknowledgement.

Of course I carry no residual anger.....

[PhilB]

He says that he hopes his book will encourage people to try to understand what people at the time thought about the war,

William

As to the actual nuts and bolts of doing that - how exactly would a conscientious historian go about gauging, without preconceptions or overuse of secondary sources, what the majority "thought about the war" at that time?

[ianw]

I think he has a genuine interest.

For example, he spent a good deal of time at the funeral of Captain Pritchard at Arras earlier this year.

[David_Blanchard]

At Ilkley lit festival next week plugging his book, sadly sold out.

[AlanCurragh]

And at Cheltenham Literature Festival on Sunday evening

[rose of picardy]

Thanks for the radio podcast link and I like Jeremy Paxman ( I really enjoyed the series, Empire). I tend to cringe when people quibble here about departures from facts, but there are already a few missteps in the bit I've listened to thus far. Wilhelm I was the grandfather NOT the father of Wilhelm II and Jeremy thought that Wilhelm II's WIFE might have been the grandchild of Queen Victoria. Although, they are talking over each other and it's hard to distinguish the voices at times. No one corrected the information, at any rate.

I think I need to realize that this is for the general reader, not someone who has read about 19th-20th century royalty for years. Still, it grates...

As I said, I like him and I want to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I hope he wasn't just jumping on the centenary bandwagon here. Well, back to listening and I guess some of you will probably review the book before it appears over here.

[AlanCurragh]

A very interesting talk at Cheltenham last night - as others have said above, his main idea is that the Great War is mainly thought about now through the prism of "Oh What a Lovely War", "Blackadder" and the war poets, and this has led to the actual opinions and experiences of the men and women who served being sidelined. He castigated the idea that "Blackadder" is now taught in school as history (is this really true?)

I did have a couple of issues with his presentation - he illustrated trench warfare by showing a slide of soldier up to his knees in mud, and I suspect many in the audience would have taken away the impression that this was the experience of all British soldiers all of the time, regardless of where they served. But I think this is a serious project for him - he has been working on the book for three years, and answered some fairly random questions from the audience in a reasonably knowledgable way. He clearly has very little time for recent WW1 fiction.

Perhaps the highest praise I can give is that Mrs C is inspired to read his book - and I can't really say that about any other WW1-related volume!

Alan

[Fattyowls]

A very interesting talk at Cheltenham last night - as others have said above, his main idea is that the Great War is mainly thought about now through the prism of "Oh What a Lovely War", "Blackadder" and the war poets, and this has led to the actual opinions and experiences of the men and women who served being sidelined. He castigated the idea that "Blackadder" is now taught in school as history (is this really true?)

I did have a couple of issues with his presentation - he illustrated trench warfare by showing a slide of soldier up to his knees in mud, and I suspect many in the audience would have taken away the impression that this was the experience of all British soldiers all of the time, regardless of where they served. But I think this is a serious project for him - he has been working on the book for three years, and answered some fairly random questions from the audience in a reasonably knowledgable way. He clearly has very little time for recent WW1 fiction.

Perhaps the highest praise I can give is that Mrs C is inspired to read his book - and I can't really say that about any other WW1-related volume!

Alan

Alan, thanks for this. I've listened to most of the interview (about 2/3rds; I was interruped by having to do something with eggs in a Moroccan stew) and I was starting to form an impression which you have confirmed. I was particularly struck by the description of the doctor who rebuilt the faces of the wounded; I seem to remember Andrew Graham-Dixon doing a History of British Art and spending some time on paintings of soldiers with severe facial wounds so it struck a chord. It's a long time since I read Paul Fussell's 'The Great War and Modern Memory" but it sounds as this one will be an addition rather than a repetition. Ultimately Mrs C's enthusiasm is the clincher; Paxo's book is going on my list. I should get round to reading it in about 2019 at the present rate of progress.

[StuartAB]

Given Paxman's desire not to see WW1 through 1960s eyes, it's a shame that in the book he perpetuates the lie that effectively started in the 1960s that the Bishop of London told his hearers to "Kill Germans. . . .". Since so many secondary sources claim it, it's perhaps inevitable that Paxman or his researchers would repeat it. Since some professional historians have done likewise, I guess I shouldn't be too hard on him!

Stuart

[StuartAB]

Report on his Cheltenham appearance here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/10360069/Paxman-teaching-history-through-Blackadder-is-stupid.html

Stuart

[michaeldr]

Given Paxman's desire not to see WW1 through 1960s eyes, it's a shame that in the book he perpetuates the lie that effectively started in the 1960s that the Bishop of London told his hearers to "Kill Germans. . . .". Since so many secondary sources claim it, it's perhaps inevitable that Paxman or his researchers would repeat it. Since some professional historians have done likewise, I guess I shouldn't be too hard on him!

Stuart

Stuart,

I too have seen what are reported to have been the bishop's words quoted by various writers, including Louden, the Principal RC Chaplain of the British Army, in his 'Chaplains in Conflict'

If you are correct, then it would help if you can give here the true version of what Winnington Ingram said

regards

Michael

[seaJane]

And a newspaper interview with Mr Paxman - in the Independent

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/jeremy-paxman-blasts-david-cameron-over-wwi-centenary-comments-8866630.html

[Kath]

He castigated the idea that "Blackadder" is now taught in school as history (is this really true?)

Alan

Another Great War Myth in the making?

Kath.

[StuartAB]

Stuart,

I too have seen what are reported to have been the bishop's words quoted by various writers, including Louden, the Principal RC Chaplain of the British Army, in his 'Chaplains in Conflict'

If you are correct, then it would help if you can give here the true version of what Winnington Ingram said

regards

Michael

Message sent! Short version is that his words were destructively edited by anti-war campaigners in the 1930s, which then entered the literature as the verbatim words of W-I. A paper on the maligning of W-I has just been published in the Journal for the History of Modern Theology.

Stuart