David Filsell Posted 6 February , 2014 Share Posted 6 February , 2014 As I said, they just do what they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghazala Posted 7 February , 2014 Share Posted 7 February , 2014 I find most people fairly rational nowadays. Hazel Try living for a few months in Dorset Hazel, you might change your mind! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghazala Posted 7 February , 2014 Share Posted 7 February , 2014 This is in The Times today..... Victory in the First World War should not be celebrated, the Conservative minister in charge of marking the centenary has said. Helen Grants remarks were described by one of the countrys leading experts on the war as simplistic. Gary Sheffield, Professor of War Studies at the University of Wolverhampton, said that they missed a large part of the significance of the war and brushed aside the memory of Britains national effort. In the latest twist to a debate triggered by Michael Gove, the Education Secretary, the minister said that there would be no dancing in the street over Britains role in the conflict. We wont be shying away from the fact that, in the end, it was an absolutely vital victory for us that changed the course of world history in countless ways, but we wont be celebrating that fact or sounding triumphant fanfares, Ms Grant writes in an article published today in The Lady magazine. Dont forget that, as well as changing history, the conflict claimed the lives of around sixteen million people across the world, and injured a further twenty million. The tone has to be right, not four years of gloom and misery, but no dancing in the street either. Tristram Hunt, the Shadow Education Secretary and historian whose row with Mr Gove generated controversy over the wars anniversary, said that he was pleased that the Government had now adopted a more reflective and respectful tone However, others were not so impressed. Professor Sheffield said: What I think theyve got wrong, and its caused some concern among military historians for example, is that among the great set-piece commemorations they are not including the great victories of 1918 which actually ended the war. That shows a lack of understanding of the basic facets of the history of the First World War. I think avoiding triumphalism is absolutely correct. Nobody wants a triumphalist approach. But weve got to be aware that celebrating can mean different things. Celebrating in the sense of acknowledging the national effort made during the war is entirely appropriate. We must not lose sight of the fact that the war was fought by Britain to counter largely German aggression and involved a huge national effort on the battle front and home front. Matthew Lucas, of The Western Front Association, said that the centenary plans could preclude adult, sensible debate about the war and its clichés, including the allegations of incompetence levelled at Douglas Haig, the British commander during the Battle of the Somme in 1916. Other historians were more positive about Ms Grants call for restraint. Ned Lebow, Professor of International Political Theory at the Department of War Studies at Kings College London, said that it was a welcome change after a strident exchange of views between Mr Gove and Mr Hunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hazelclark Posted 7 February , 2014 Share Posted 7 February , 2014 Try living for a few months in Dorset Hazel, you might change your mind! Well, I was really referring to the Forum, but having experienced life in the village of Cromarty I can just imagine Dorset. Hazel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dust Jacket Collector Posted 7 February , 2014 Author Share Posted 7 February , 2014 When I started this topic it was to discuss whether the early rush of War books & general media coverage was too much too soon & risked alienating the public. It now seems to have become yet another forum for airing the Right v Left, History v Literature, Blackadder v Gove conflict. Enough already!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E Wilcock Posted 7 February , 2014 Share Posted 7 February , 2014 As a historian, I know that historical debate is always present and fiercely fought. Think of it like Wimbledon tennis. Highly competitive. Academic careers depend on it. But to return to the original question, there are things I regret. The first is timing. What bad timing by publicly funded organisations that that the BBC Paxman programmes and the press coverage, stimulated by the Public Record Office release of digitised diaries, went out before the other great public project, Lives of the Great War, was ready to receive contributions. Second is a personal regret. Supply outstripping demand. The great number of diaries, memoirs and histories being published well ahead of August 2014 as publishers vie for the same market, means that the significant artillery Memoir which OH and I transcribed and aimed to complete in time for the centenary may now well not find a publisher, and, if it is published, may prove commercially superfluous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 7 February , 2014 Share Posted 7 February , 2014 Second is a personal regret. Supply outstripping demand. The great number of diaries, memoirs and histories being published well ahead of August 2014 as publishers vie for the same market, means that the significant artillery Memoir which OH and I transcribed and aimed to complete in time for the centenary may now well not find a publisher, and, if it is published, may prove commercially superfluous. Better to lay low for a few years anyway and not get submerged. A quality work will stand the test of time while many of the first rush are littering the bargain bins and charity shops? Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 7 February , 2014 Share Posted 7 February , 2014 Is it me, or does "an historian" sound much easier off the tongue than "a historian"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 7 February , 2014 Share Posted 7 February , 2014 Is it me, or does "an historian" sound much easier off the tongue than "a historian"? It's not just you. Funny how an Hun doesn't sound quite right though? Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 7 February , 2014 Share Posted 7 February , 2014 I think I read somewhere that words derived from French (such as "hotel") use "an", whereas Germanic/Saxon words go for a harder H and accept "a". Could well be wrong, though. Wouldn't be unknown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 7 February , 2014 Share Posted 7 February , 2014 Ah, I see now. Thanks for that, it kind of makes sense. Hell must be German then? Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E Wilcock Posted 7 February , 2014 Share Posted 7 February , 2014 An is not used before an h that is sounded. There used to be a habit for some speakers to use an before a word that started with H where the first syllable was not stressed. Historian would fall into this category. So, if that is the way you talk, you are welcome. But it is optional. At our uni. anyone who read history was referred to as a historian. I know what I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ridgus Posted 7 February , 2014 Share Posted 7 February , 2014 I think I read somewhere that words derived from French (such as "hotel") use "an", whereas Germanic/Saxon words go for a harder H and accept "a". Could well be wrong, though. Wouldn't be unknown. I've heard that one too. I also think it is a matter of stressing the syllables. The H is lost in hotel and the stress is on the second syllable, hence 'an'. The example I was given was you read a history book but an historical novel. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 7 February , 2014 Share Posted 7 February , 2014 Tend to agree. I simply find "A historian" sounds ugly it's either "AI Historian" or "UH Historian". Either sounds wrong, somehow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanCurragh Posted 7 February , 2014 Share Posted 7 February , 2014 I could be wrong, but I suspect the aspirate "H" may be off topic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelPack Posted 7 February , 2014 Share Posted 7 February , 2014 I wondered, in that you are obviously a long time member, why I had never heard of you. Having read your post, I now know why. Hello Hazel Thank you for your curiosity. ...[Political comment removed]... Mel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonraker Posted 25 February , 2014 Share Posted 25 February , 2014 I'h already having trouble in keeping up with all the newspaper articles and TV programs and have all but given up posting about them here. Not that I'm complaining. Moonraker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LRJanzen Posted 26 March , 2014 Share Posted 26 March , 2014 It is interesting to read this thread from “across the pond”. To be honest I have heard Nothing, zip, zilch, nada here in the states about The Great War. I follow news pretty close and have seen nothing. I realize our part is a few years down the road, but still… This is one of the pivotal events of the 20th century. Americans have never really taken to WWI. Our “Great War” seems to be WW II. I don’t know how many of you have ever been to Washington DC, but if you do get there take a look at the WWI monument. It is somewhat… underwhelming. You may even have to ask a ranger to point it out to you. You will also be very lonely there. When I was an engineering officer in the Navy back in the 80’s I made several Med Cruises. When we were in port in France there would always be requests from French vets to have a US military presence at Bastille Day and Armistice Day ceremonies at the cemeteries. I always volunteered for these. You got to meet some great people and I thought it my duty to be there to honor those who had given so much. It was at a cemetery outside of Marseille somewhere that the care taker took me to the back of the British graves and showed me the graves of the Indian laborers who had died there. Sort of out of sight out of mind. But he said he took everyone he could back there, just to remind them that not only “Tommy” paid the price. It was when I went to Thiepval and Verdun that the scope of the war really hit home to me and got me very interested in the war. When I was there I knew very little of the war and much of what I did know I have come to find is not accurate. I hope to get over there for 2016 at least. Maybe in 2017 someone will to a 10 min story on the nightly news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Filsell Posted 26 March , 2014 Share Posted 26 March , 2014 Is Hazel a Hazel or an Hazel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry_Reeves Posted 26 March , 2014 Share Posted 26 March , 2014 LRJanzen Thank you for a thoughtful post. TR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 26 March , 2014 Share Posted 26 March , 2014 Agree with you Terry. There appears to be some interest? WWI Centennial Network Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ridgus Posted 26 March , 2014 Share Posted 26 March , 2014 It is interesting to read this thread from “across the pond”. To be honest I have heard Nothing, zip, zilch, nada here in the states about The Great War. I follow news pretty close and have seen nothing. I realize our part is a few years down the road, but still… This is one of the pivotal events of the 20th century. Americans have never really taken to WWI. Our “Great War” seems to be WW II. I don’t know how many of you have ever been to Washington DC, but if you do get there take a look at the WWI monument. It is somewhat… underwhelming. You may even have to ask a ranger to point it out to you. You will also be very lonely there. When I did go to Washington I did not see the Great War Memorial, which I am annoyed at. Of course I did see the Second World War memorial with its inscription "The Second World War 1941 - 1945" which perhaps suggests why little will be made of the Centenary until 1917. However as you rightly point out LR we Brits shouldn't try to sit too smugly on the moral high ground. When it comes to one eyed history we have done our share. I think it should also be noted at how surprised even a lot us on the Forum have been at the extent of the coverage this early in the year - hence this thread. It may well be that America will pick up on events come the time of "The Guns of August" (written of course by an American!). An interesting compare and contrast moment on proportionality may come in 2016 with the 75th anniversary of Pearl Harbour ranged against the centenary of the Somme - two events so seared into the national consciousness of the respective countries. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khaki Posted 28 March , 2014 Share Posted 28 March , 2014 There does seem to be a good supply of Great War books available here, at least I manage to do ok, and Great War militaria doesn't hang around very long so the collecting fraternity as well as reenactors seems quite healthy. khaki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NigelS Posted 23 June , 2014 Share Posted 23 June , 2014 Recent Daily Telegraph piece Click. Sad but, to a certain extent, understandable: You can take a horse to water etc; I feel much the same about the World Cup football TV coverage NigelS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelBully Posted 24 June , 2014 Share Posted 24 June , 2014 Well yes there is a risk of overkill but don't the kids have to study the Great War anyway? It's a difficult one- I've met people who avoid time periods of history that they were forced to study, whilst others will tell they were lucky enough to have a particularly inspiring teacher or perhaps a visit to a historical site which stuck in their mind whilst at school,and carried on with the subject. After the Centenary we'll probably find both examples. Thanks for the link Nigel S. interesting. 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