McCudden Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 It's easy for me to be critical of this and other popular TV documentaries (and I am!) but I'm not sure I could have done a better job of the content if I was the presenter or producer given the short time allocated for each episode. What's included or omitted is down to personal preference, exactly as it was for the people who lived through and remembered their war experiences. However, I believe that documentaries like this one intentionally or otherwise create and manipulate our national perception of history far more that they report it. I therefore think that the BBC has an absolute responsibility to get their facts right and report bias and opinion as just that. This is far more important then what is selected for inclusion in each episode. As a specific observation, I have long been concerned about the authenticity of 'original' film used to support these documentaries. Much of the 'action' footage of soldiers going over the top etc appears to be taken from Hollywood movies of the war made in the 1920's. Is this a responsible thing to do? Should we use these movies to depict historical events just because no genuine film is available? What damage are we doing to our understanding of war history when we sanitise it with Hollywood clips? Discuss... Alec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NigelS Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 As far as its possible to tell, as it was only a brief glimpse and not a brilliant bit of film, that looks likely to be the one. Thanks Pete NigelS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 The Great War centre stage in the TV schedules: what's not to like? David Quite so. Every dog has its centenary day. Enjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myrtle Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 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 I was wondering the same ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 Is this the one Click Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staffsyeoman Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 As a usual cynic regarding TV documentaries, I think the latter half of the programme last night summed it all up - and a slap in the face for the argument that the war was futile. Very well done; and even though I had seen those pictures (and heard the story) of the facial reconstructions done at Sidcup, this was done in such a way as to be very moving indeed. 1/2 a mark deleted for the Munro/Haig muck-up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anneca Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 Regarding the observations of the "40 mile German advance in a day" I'm afraid I didn't notice this one as I answered the phone briefly at that time. What I had read in the book was the reference to the Germans breaking through to within 40 miles of Paris: "But the Germans then followed up their offensive with further attacks designed to open the way to Paris. Again the assault began with an intense artillery bombardment, firing 2 million shells in just over four hours, and then sending in great waves of infantry. And again the Germans broke through, now to within 40 miles of Paris. As refugees streamed out of the city the British cabinet met to decide whether to evacuate the British Expeditionary Force altogether." I would be interested to know if the programme portrayed the break through to within 40 miles of Paris as the 40 mile German advance in a day? Anne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ridgus Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 I was wondering the same ? I think it might be the one at Heston in Middlesex and is by the sculptor George Arthur Walker. There is another one in memory of South Africans but I'm not sure where that one is David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 I think it might be the one at Heston in Middlesex and is by the sculptor George Arthur Walker. There is another one in memory of South Africans but I'm not sure where that one is David Is it not the one i linked to in post # 255? Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ridgus Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 Is this the one Click Mike I'll need to watch it again but I thought the soldier was in stone and the rifle reversed. Could be wrong though Mike, as you know from my current performance level on 'Who is this?'! David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 and Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ridgus Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 MikeAs I said....! What do you expect from a whipper snapperDavid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myrtle Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 Thanks Mike I thought it looked familiar. I photographed this memorial many years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoshi1912 Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 I would be interested to know if the programme portrayed the break through to within 40 miles of Paris as the 40 mile German advance in a day? Anne Hi Anneca The wording was that in a war where success was measured in yards, the German army advanced 40 miles in a single day. Thus claiming the whole of Operation Michael took place in one day. Good to know the book is more accurate. I haven't got that far yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 In my opinion, Paxman has a love for and a great respect and sincere interest in the period. He had the courage and originality to quietly say that the Great War was not futile. Almost heretical on popular television. He's alright in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ridgus Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 In my opinion, Paxman has a love for and a great respect and sincere interest in the period. He had the courage and originality to quietly say that the Great War was not futile. Almost heretical on popular television. He's alright in my book. I couldn't agree more. Some years ago he made a programme about Wilfrid Owen which was very 'Lions led by donkeys' and where he came at it very much from the Eng. Lit. side (I've used it lots in English lessons but never history!). However it's obvious that he has since then put in the time to look at the War in more depth and as you say, his impassioned speech on 'futility' was clearly heartfelt. I loved his previous history programmes on the Victorians, I always thought this would be good. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steandpaula Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 Shouldn't they have got the name of the cemetery right, HAC Cemetery, Ecoust-St.Mein ? Or is that not important to the majority of the viewers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ridgus Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 Shouldn't they have got the name of the cemetery right, HAC Cemetery, Ecoust-St.Mein ? Or is that not important to the majority of the viewers? It's not that it is not important, and there is no defence for making such careless mistakes, but the majority of viewers (and I'm one of them) simply didn't realise there had been a mistake made and so our reaction to the scene was unaffected. But the point still needs to be addressed and lets hope the slew of documentaries to follow will match this one for the power of its message and exceed its attention to detail David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 Shouldn't they have got the name of the cemetery right, HAC Cemetery, Ecoust-St.Mein ? Or is that not important to the majority of the viewers? Yes, I agree, sloppy. But important, IMO No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anneca Posted 18 February , 2014 Share Posted 18 February , 2014 Hi Anneca The wording was that in a war where success was measured in yards, the German army advanced 40 miles in a single day. Thus claiming the whole of Operation Michael took place in one day. Good to know the book is more accurate. I haven't got that far yet. Thank you for this Yoshi, I was a bit annoyed to be interrupted during the programme, hence my confusion. Anne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth505 Posted 19 February , 2014 Share Posted 19 February , 2014 He had the courage and originality to quietly say that the Great War was not futile. Almost heretical on popular television. I thought it noteworthy when Paxman asserted the acceptance of terms was in reality a stunning defeat for the Germans. Again not a popular current view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Phillips Posted 19 February , 2014 Share Posted 19 February , 2014 Interesting about the coverage of the myth of the 'Lost Generation'. I was always under the impression that it was more the 'Upper Class' generation that was 'lost', which is at first applied to all by the programme and then alluded to by Paxman later. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevmc Posted 19 February , 2014 Share Posted 19 February , 2014 Interesting about the coverage of the myth of the 'Lost Generation'. I was always under the impression that it was more the 'Upper Class' generation that was 'lost', which is at first applied to all by the programme and then alluded to by Paxman later. Dave Dave Recent discussion on this Forum clarified that the "Lost Generation", as referred to at the time, meant those who survived and felt they had no meaningful purpose (ie had no role to play) in the community they returned to. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Generation Kevin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 19 February , 2014 Share Posted 19 February , 2014 It was disappointing that Mr Paxman exemplified family loss by giving the example of Tommy Agar-Robartes. Far more typical would have been some woman and several children left without father and husband but without the cushion of huge wealth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 19 February , 2014 Share Posted 19 February , 2014 It was disappointing that Mr Paxman exemplified family loss by giving the example of Tommy Agar-Robartes. Far more typical would have been some woman and several children left without father and husband but without the cushion of huge wealth? Yes, but all those things he left behind were so televisual . The problem with/for the poor was that they didn't own anything. 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