Admin Michelle Young Posted 17 February , 2014 Admin Share Posted 17 February , 2014 Wasn't that a photo of Munro when it said Haig? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertDubrecht Posted 17 February , 2014 Share Posted 17 February , 2014 Clerical error methinks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seadog Posted 17 February , 2014 Share Posted 17 February , 2014 What an excellent series this was, if I see anything as good as this in the future not only will I be amazed but also delighted!. Norman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Mackenzie Posted 17 February , 2014 Share Posted 17 February , 2014 It definately wasn't DH!. That aside I thought this was a cracking episode and Jeremy Paxman is to be congratulated on delivering such a great series. Neil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertDubrecht Posted 17 February , 2014 Share Posted 17 February , 2014 Amazing program Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanA Posted 17 February , 2014 Share Posted 17 February , 2014 Wasn't that a photo of Munro when it said Haig? Well spotted. Take ten house points. You would have got fifty if you'd said 'Monro'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archangel9 Posted 17 February , 2014 Share Posted 17 February , 2014 Missed most of it but all episodes available on iPlayer until Monday 24th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moriaty Posted 17 February , 2014 Share Posted 17 February , 2014 In tonight's episode 4, did anyone else spot what looked like Larry the Downing Street cat when Jeremy Paxman was standing outside No 10? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anneca Posted 17 February , 2014 Share Posted 17 February , 2014 An excellent series, full marks for Paxman (and will certainly dismiss the few gaffs). Anne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedCoat Posted 17 February , 2014 Share Posted 17 February , 2014 Great series, apart from the couple of errors. If there are more programmes of this type to come then perhaps the centenary won't be as bad as we all think. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 17 February , 2014 Share Posted 17 February , 2014 Was Paxman well informed, well advised, or both? Here's to the result though. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartH Posted 17 February , 2014 Share Posted 17 February , 2014 I think Paul Reed was involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fattyowls Posted 17 February , 2014 Share Posted 17 February , 2014 I had a teensy weensy problemette with the assertion that the Spring Offensive in 1918 covered 40 miles in one day; or did I imagine that? However I am in complete accord with the above; an absolutely outstanding series which does justice to the contribution of the whole country. Pete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoshi1912 Posted 17 February , 2014 Share Posted 17 February , 2014 I concur with the above opinions and I am finding the book which accompanies the series most engaging too. It only arrived today and I have hardly put it down since it arrived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
washingline Posted 17 February , 2014 Share Posted 17 February , 2014 Definitely not Haig and the picture is credited as Munro on the web. I am not as enthused by this series as some commenters though. I think the 1960s series is the best there will ever be not least because it included the participants. In fact Paxman's series to me was simply a bit of a coffee table book commentary designed not to alienate the liberal left audience who would immediately switch off at any serious attempt to analyse the diplomacy and the military strategy. In this regard it told them what they wanted to know and it glossed over much else for the general audience. There were huge swathes of the program in which Paxo is wandering around some place in the UK concentrating on a human interest story and then cut to the Western Front - oh some trenches, lots of fighting and bingo it was all over, but cut back: look at the social changes, votes for women. the bolshies even played their part by not striking. Part 4 tonight for example - you'd have thought the Germans just gave up after April 1918. So no I am afraid this program was not what I was hoping for really. It was rather like Brian Cox's physics programs or Horizon in many ways. History is not social analysis, weaving legends to fit your pre-conceptions, it is events. One thing follows another. In a way the why doesn't matter so much as the what and the what next. (On the basis that why gives an interpretive speculative answer but what gives a factual one.) I appreciate you can't do much in a four part TV series aimed at a mass audience but I'm just explaining why it didnt do it for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ridgus Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 'History is not social analysis' Well it is for social historians! At the risk of labouring a point made many times already on this thread, Paxman's was not producing a military history of the Great War. Events in the war were only ever brought in where they illustrated points about changes in society. Of course this led to the odd gaffe such as Pete mentioned but because that was not the point of the programme it did not impact on its force or our enjoyment. I think you also misjudge 'the liberal left' who I suspect will be spitting tacks at his resolute defence of the upper classes' bravery and self sacrifice with his story about Robartes. A brilliant series. Now roll on next week's confrontation between Ferguson and Hastings. The Great War centre stage in the TV schedules: what's not to like? David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Hone Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 The series was excellent as a series of vignettes of different social consequences of the war. Much of it was new to me or illuminated some aspect I was only vaguely aware of-the suspension of strikes in the crisis of 1918 for example. Quite a few popular myths were tackled; I was relieved to see that it was pointed out that the vast majority of British servicemen survived the war. Admittedly, coverage of the fighting itself was sketchy and at times simplified to the point of obscurity or inaccuracy, as in the 'new' tanks at Cambrai or the 40 mile German advance in a day. However, as pointed out in various previous posts, a comprehensive military and political history of the war was not part of this programme's intention and it is therefore rather unfair to draw direct comparisons with 'The Great War' which set out to do exactly that and over many episodes. I have already used extracts from this new series to considerable effect to augment my teaching of the war. I'm afraid that I don't agree with the ' History is just one event after the other' idea. It has been the express purpose of the Historian, from Herodotus and Thucydides onwards, to explain the significance of events and try to fit them into their wider context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctord84 Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 Personally I really enjoyed it and learnt (or re-learnt) a number of things. Though I'd seen them before, I thought the plastic surgery photographs were particularly moving and the description of the efforts of the surgeon to rebuild the faces of those men and their struggles to cope with terrible injuries was almost unbearable to watch. The final sequence about remembrance also very good. For those requiring a mainly military account of the war, there are plenty of other places to go, This for me really put the war in context from a "home front" point of view. And was superbly presented too. Yes, there were some errors that the researchers should have ironed out - I too was wondering how the Germans advanced 40 miles in a day in 1918! - but overall very good indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 The series was excellent as a series of vignettes of different social consequences of the war. Much of it was new to me or illuminated some aspect I was only vaguely aware of-the suspension of strikes in the crisis of 1918 for example. Quite a few popular myths were tackled; I was relieved to see that it was pointed out that the vast majority of British servicemen survived the war. Admittedly, coverage of the fighting itself was sketchy and at times simplified to the point of obscurity or inaccuracy, as in the 'new' tanks at Cambrai or the 40 mile German advance in a day. However, as pointed out in various previous posts, a comprehensive military and political history of the war was not part of this programme's intention and it is therefore rather unfair to draw direct comparisons with 'The Great War' which set out to do exactly that and over many episodes. I have already used extracts from this new series to considerable effect to augment my teaching of the war. I'm afraid that I don't agree with the ' History is just one event after the other' idea. It has been the express purpose of the Historian, from Herodotus and Thucydides onwards, to explain the significance of events and try to fit them into their wider context. Spot on - I do find the odd "mistake" distracting though but then I appreciate that not all those viewing will have some knowledge of the War. Enjoyed the series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIFFO Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 All in all I thought it excellent, I must say as the series lent toward the home front I was surprised when in the final episode paxo stated that the men returned better fed and healthy the women’s movement heading for emancipation at a greater speed all of which im sure are true BUT no mention of the returning men who fought the war to end all wars who were seriously injured- blinded limbless who had to fight for a disability pension which when granted was for a limited period ,the widows with children who’s father/husband had gone to war and paid the ultimate price and again had to fight for a pittance of a pension again for a limited period of time, so maybe the post ww1 years were not so excellent. BTW any body know what is the location of the war memorial with the tommy leaning on his rifle shown in the final credits Biff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollytree Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 I have looked at conditions and attitudes to workhouse children in the late 1800s to the early 19c, and personally think that despite the dreadful individual hardships that families would have endured there was a start of a more caring attitude to the working classes despite the 'homes fit for heroes' did not materialise...... I have no doubt that Paxman was correct in his summary of the change in society post war. Women have never had a good time of it, seeing their men killed not only in war but accidents in mine and workplace. Change takes time and patience unfortunately...... How much of four years of war can a four programme summarise and cover correctly?.....at least they aren't ignoring it......... Anne the men returned better fed and healthy the women’s movement heading for emancipation at a greater speed all of which im sure are true BUT no mention of the returning men who fought the war to end all wars who were seriously injured- blinded limbless who had to fight for a disability pension which when granted was for a limited period ,the widows with children who’s father/husband had gone to war and paid the ultimate price and again had to fight for a pittance of a pension again for a limited period of time, so maybe the post ww1 years were not so excellent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NigelS Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 Enjoyed the series, and certainly picked up quite a bit - for example, never knew about the damage to Nelson's column caused by the celebrations, for one of the stranger facts - but, I think that there would have been more than enough material to have allowed at least another one, if not two, programmes to have been made without the content suffering. I think the final section over emphasized the positive social changes post war and didn't cover the negative aspects that many of the returning soldiers found, whatever their health, due to the state of the economy in the following years (I suppose that, although a result of the war, it can be argued that this aspect would have taken it outside of the 'Britain's Great War' brief). Also a little surprised that Spanish Flu didn't get a mention, perhaps it's covered in the book... Anybody any idea of what type of tank was briefly seen crawling from right to left in the final battlefield video compilation at about 30 mins - looks like a light tank but wrong for a Whippet - possibly French? NigelS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 I have looked at conditions and attitudes to workhouse children in the late 1800s to the early 19c, and personally think that despite the dreadful individual hardships that families would have endured there was a start of a more caring attitude to the working classes despite the 'homes fit for heroes' did not materialise...... I have no doubt that Paxman was correct in his summary of the change in society post war. Women have never had a good time of it, seeing their men killed not only in war but accidents in mine and workplace. Change takes time and patience unfortunately...... How much of four years of war can a four programme summarise and cover correctly?.....at least they aren't ignoring it......... Anne J M Winter has written about the tangible and measurable improvements in welfare through the years of the Great War thirty years ago. Published in 1985 his "The Great War and the British People" is a detailed study of this dynamic, supported with actuarial tables. Difficult to argue with. There is plenty of evidence to demonstrate real improvements in the health of the Nation despite the casualties. This is not new news. If there is any slight criticism of the programme it presents lots of known 'facts' as new news. It might be new to many (me included), but they really ought to credit people such as Winter and others and their groundbreaking research. Credit where credit is due, as he did with the pioneers of the treatment of mental health in relation to shell shock etc. The series is a great credit to the BBC and I suspect there is hardly anyone among us who failed to learn something. I found it very educational and if it inspires the next generation to look at the Great War with fresh eyes and new approaches to analysis, it is a very welcome addition. I would be fascinated to see the breakdown by age of the viewing stats. Nice to hear it is already being used in our schools too. Bravo. MG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Hone Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 It has been the fate of many Historians to see their work presented, usually uncredited, as 'startling new revelations' by TV documentaries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fattyowls Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 Anybody any idea of what type of tank was briefly seen crawling from right to left in the final battlefield video compilation at about 30 mins - looks like a light tank but wrong for a Whippet - possibly French? If it was the sequence I'm thinking of it looked like a Renault FT. It was used by the Americans too; George Patton cut his tank teeth on them. Pete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now