Centenary squandered

[MikB]

I don't think the Centenary has been squandered, but like The Somme, it depends on what you thought of its objectives and how useful its outcome!

 

Current general social view is that war is a Bad Thing, at least partly because its outcome with modern weapons could make the Western Front look like a limited local disaster. 

Even at the time, many realised that the expenditure of men and treasure would compromise the future pre-eminence of Britain, which indeed it did. Jutland and The Somme, separated by just a month, were the two major efforts where British strength was spent.

 

TV output like 'Blackadder Goes 4th' might attract criticism for perpetuating the lions/donkeys myth, but it's also possible to take the view that the comic exaggeration they very successfully put into it was so extreme as to undermine the credibility of that myth.

 

I think most people understand that those fighting the war came from backgrounds not prevalent today, and had only what they knew at the time to work with, not hindsight. They did the best they knew how, in a situation that was more intractable than most could risk admitting.

 

[Margosh]

1 hour ago, Howard said:

.... Rosling realised that approach does not work- when people "know" about a subject, they no longer listen and are ignorant of the fact that monkeys can then outperform them.

 

 

Howard

 

This.

When they "know" they "know". Further education not required.

 

 

[PhilB]

Does this apply to both sides of the WW1 debate or just the one disapproved of?

[MikB]

13 minutes ago, PhilB said:

Does this apply to both sides of the WW1 debate or just the one disapproved of?

 

Didja think there were only two? 

[Knotty]

3 hours ago, sassenach said:

I turned up on 30 July last year to be told that the hotel room I had booked a year earlier had been "requisitioned by the British Government last week." 

 

 sassenach you must know how I felt then, and why I’m not altogether enamoured with the whole thing.

 

 

[KONDOA]

I recall, when I was at school, the main thrust of history in the 20th Century was the causes of WW1, some brief bits about major batteles, a bit of poetry but then interestingly the Russian Revolution and Germany exiting stage left. We also did the Chinese situation under Chou En Lai etc and suchlike. Ours was a great school.

[Steven Broomfield]

Ref Post 19, Sir Menzies Campbell, MP, is now The Right Honourable the Lord Campbell of Pittenweem, CH, CBE, PC, QC (known to the BBC as 'Lord Menzies Campbell', of course)

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Steven Broomfield said:

Ref Post 19, Sir Menzies Campbell, MP, is now The Right Honourable the Lord Campbell of Pittenweem, CH, CBE, PC, QC (known to the BBC as 'Lord Menzies Campbell', of course)

 

      But best known-as my dad served at Arnhem- as the son-in-law of Roy Urquhart.

[sassenach]

2 hours ago, Steven Broomfield said:

Ref Post 19, Sir Menzies Campbell, MP, is now The Right Honourable the Lord Campbell of Pittenweem, CH, CBE, PC, QC (known to the BBC as 'Lord Menzies Campbell', of course)

Might the PC suffix be superfluous, given that he has Right Honourable as a prefix?

[Steven Broomfield]

1 hour ago, sassenach said:

Might the PC suffix be superfluous, given that he has Right Honourable as a prefix?

 

Belt and braces.

[hazelclark]

But my apologies to you  and to him- I zapped the wrong spelling of his name (one r).  I think the lack of reference to his official role stands correct-  Without straying into politics, he is also US at the Northern Ireland Office and Trade Envoy for Tunisia and Algeria, which suggests that the First World War is not over-burdening his time. Out of interest, the full advisory board  announced at the same time as Dr. Murrisson is below   I wonder how many times it has met- and whether the minutes of meetings are in the public domain 

I am not bothered with the politicking or  rights and wrongs of all of this- Now, the Great War centenary is pretty much an historical event in itself- so in years to come, we will be researching why and how the commemorations came out the way they did.

 

Members of the board

• Pat Barker, novelist and author of the Regeneration Trilogy
• Admiral Lord Boyce, former First Sea Lord, Chief of the Naval Staff and Chief of the Defence Staff
• Professor Michael Burleigh, academic, author and historian
• Sir Menzies Campbell MP
• General Lord Dannatt, former Chief of the General Staff
• Jeffrey Donaldson MP, Special representative for Northern Ireland
• Sebastian Faulks, broadcaster, novelist and author of Birdsong
• Field Marshal Lord Guthrie, former Chief of defence staff
• Sir Deian Hopkin, Special representative for Wales and President of the National Library of Wales
• David McDonough, Chairman of the PR consultancy The McDonough Partnership
• Dr Andrew Murrison MP, the Prime Minister’s special representative in the centenary planning
• The Very Reverend June Osborne, Dean of Salisbury
• Air Chief Marshall ‘Jock’ Stirrup, former Chief of Defence Staff
• Brigadier Professor Hew Strachan, the Scottish military historian
• Baron King of Bridgwater, former Defence Secretary
• Keith Simpson MP, Member of Parliament for Broadland

The only name I recognize is that of Hew Strachan. I live, however on the other side of the pond. Maybe that is simply a politically correct bunch of personalities?  On the surface, I wonder what Murrison or the Dean of Salisbury might offer the group to name but two.

Hazel C

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, hazelclark said:

I wonder what Murrison or the Dean of Salisbury might offer the group to name but two.

 

    They are both in Wiltshire- and,consequently, help  keep our splendid colleague Gareth Davies in line  

[hazelclark]

I went to school, admittedly in the dark ages, in both Scotland and the south of England.  I have absolutely no recollection of any history of either war being even mentioned except in passing, around Armistice Day.  Maybe it was too close to the Second World War and people just wanted to forget.  I learned lots about every other war prior to the 20 th century.

 

 There has been some passing interest generated in a very few friends with respect to relatives who served in WW1, but really it all comes down to having a sustained interest.  Members of this Forum have an on going interest in the war,( some would say unhealthy!!) but it is unfair to expect that level of interest in a public that, with few exceptions really do not have that same interest. Many of us grew up with relatives who served in one of the wars, and consequently, in some ways had first hand experience.  To us, it is almost like commemorating someone we knew even though many were already dead. 

 

When we are gone, the study of the wars will be entirely in the hands of academics.  Sad but true.

 

Hazel C.

Edited 3 July , 2018 by hazelclark

[loganshort]

12 hours ago, bruce said:

A study of the Great War is still taught in schools in England and Wales. It is part of Key Stage 3......that is the first three years of secondary school. It is also mentioned in KS2. As a result, nine year olds are to some extent aware of the war. Locally, the local committee of schools has applied for, and gained, four grants from the Heritage Lottery Fund, working with primary schools in Maghull, Lydiate, Melling and Aintree. Pamphlets about those who were lost have been written, printed and distributed (and are available, if you ask me for one!), and the schedule old involved now also have memorial tablets within their grounds. Each town also held an open night, visits to war memorials, and a Church memorial service, with pupils singing, dancing etc in uniforms which were in a large plastic box available in each school, with such other things as brassards, pigeon posts, hard tack biscuits, etc.

PRimary school children are too young for battlefield tours, but many schools organise an annual tour, for which I am delighted as a tour guide!

The RBL will mark the centenary of its first Pilgrimage to the Western Front in August, and it is anticipated that nearly 100 coaches will be taking at least two representatives of each branch.

Educating people about the Great War is ongoing!

Good to know it is still being taught. When I learnt about it many moons ago it was all dates and place names and if it wasnt for the poetry I would have given up as it didnt seem to have any meaning for me. I do talks on the soldier's equipment used by France, Germany and Britain (helmets/bayonets etc) and make it entertaining by quoting poems and songs and have always wanted to try it out on a school but am scared to face a bunch of 13 or 14 yr olds!  I think that they should be taught in a way that inspires them to find out more. Keep up the good work Bruce!

[hazelclark]

They are both in Wiltshire- and, consequently, help  keep our splendid colleague Gareth Davies in line  

I see.  That would certainly explain it.

 

H.C.

[loganshort]

" When we are gone, the study of the wars will be entirely in the hands of academics.  Sad but true." 

Yes Hazelclark. I hope that by bringing history to a more local and even personal level (eg examining relatives who fought in the war) we can keep it in people's minds and the memory of those who died will live on. Battles and dates are certainly important to the general history but the ordinary soldier's life during and after the war can help make history real.

[seaJane]

45 minutes ago, hazelclark said:

entirely in the hands of academics.  Sad but true.

And what's wrong with being an academic? Some of us very nearly are, and some of us have friends who are, and we don't all live in ivory towers, honestly.

[hazelclark]

22 minutes ago, seaJane said:

And what's wrong with being an academic? Some of us very nearly are, and some of us have friends who are, and we don't all live in ivory towers, honestly.

 Nothing!  Perhaps the wrong use of the word, but the fact remains that general interest in the wars will continue to subside as we, and possibly our children, snuff it. We wish it were otherwise but it isn’t.  

 

However, that really doesn’t address the original question about the one hundred year commemoration.  History and tradition hold a country together, but without getting into politics, I can see that the First World War may not be something to commemorate in the view of many 1st and 2nd generation Britons.  Our history and traditions may be different from theirs and there are an awful lot of them.

 

 

H. C.

Edited 3 July , 2018 by hazelclark
Possible politically incorrect statement erased

[Guest]

Hopefully, the Special Advisors should generate a report somewhere, sometime. Either by them (which I think unlikely)-or by the Department of Media.Culture and Bent Paperclips (or whatever it's called this week)- and the monitoring House of Commons Select Committee. This. of course, would be post-Armistice  centennial but I think might give some overview as to what actually happened as opposed to what was planned (In that respect, government runs pretty true to most military plans-ie goes pear-shaped after the first 15 minutes). I don't see any point in chasing internal plans or planning  documents. A sensible  review of what was spent and how  is, I think, the best I can hope for. Thanks to GD for flagging up the existence of this chap. Still haven't got a clue as to what he was/is supposed to do. Only hope he has.

[Willh1664]

A centenary squandered? Possibly, but for myself it raises the issue that as a society we have this awful tendancy to forget our veterans until they've passed on.

I feel like the potential for the centenary was squandered years before it arrived by the fact we didn't use those veterans to educate others in what really happened, not a historians version based on primary and secondary sources. 

[ShirlD]

On 02/07/2018 at 15:49, Chris_Baker said:

My question is this: if the money and effort that has been expended these last few years has had little effect, is it ever going to be possible (in the Western Front Association's words) to "educate the public"?

 

 

 

Thanks Chris, a very interesting and timely conversation.

It can be a bit depressing to see that all the effort taken doesn't seem to have shifted myths and inaccuracies much, and decision making continues to be about who has the political power rather than advice from those with academic and historical research strength.  However, I take comfort that in those hallowed halls and on the coalface we continue with what drives us.  I noticed much robust debate whenever documentaries are aired (mainly on social media for better or worse) , so that at least drives a few more to look a little further.  I have also noticed that  the stories of grandparents, great grandparents etc seem to be more openly shared, and family legends looked at a little more closely!  There is an interest to find out who your ancestors are and in most cases this inevitably takes you back to the Great War.  

Out of the blue, we have been asked to share our modest research at 2 local history societies, and the young people seem to continue to visit battlefields, and "take on" a soldier, nurse etc to research.

So I suppose in answer to your question, we just have to plod on!

cheers

Shirley

 

[Interested]

Here's what our local Town Council are doing, presumably with a grant to cover the cost of fireworks (and associated Health & Safety checklist!)

We no longer celebrate Waterloo Day, and I expect one day Armistice Day will just be "Remembrance Sunday".  Fortuitously, this year the both occur on Sunday 11th November.

 

[Medaler]

20 hours ago, Willh1664 said:

A centenary squandered? Possibly, but for myself it raises the issue that as a society we have this awful tendancy to forget our veterans until they've passed on.

I feel like the potential for the centenary was squandered years before it arrived by the fact we didn't use those veterans to educate others in what really happened, not a historians version based on primary and secondary sources. 

 

Sadly non of the veterans would have really been in any position to know what actually happened. Sure, they would have known what happened to them as individuals, but that is a very narrow viewpoint. Wellington was making exactly that point when he said something along the lines of.......

 

" The history of a battle, is not unlike the history of a ball. Some individuals may recollect all the little events of which the great result is the battle won or lost, but no individual can recollect the order in which, or the exact moment at which, they occurred, which makes all the difference as to their value or importance."

 

Mike

[Willh1664]

37 minutes ago, Medaler said:

 

Sadly non of the veterans would have really been in any position to know what actually happened. Sure, they would have known what happened to them as individuals, but that is a very narrow viewpoint. Wellington was making exactly that point when he said something along the lines of.......

 

" The history of a battle, is not unlike the history of a ball. Some individuals may recollect all the little events of which the great result is the battle won or lost, but no individual can recollect the order in which, or the exact moment at which, they occurred, which makes all the difference as to their value or importance."

 

Mike

 

The point you've made is completely true if the only goal of remembrance is to remember facts and figures, ground gained and ground lost. But war is a personal affair, a whole generation of young men walked blindly into hell and their experiences are to some extent what fuel all of our interest on this Forum, whether its the collection of medals or even postcards.

 

A personal attachment is one of, i would say,the major factors that drives our enthusiasm for the Great War and also our enthusiasm when it comes to its remembrance. Without those individuals stories the Great war would be resigned to the history books as though it happened 1000 years ago and not 100. Commercially, as we've seen with the explosion of ancestry in recent years, a personal connection to an event is key if we want the masses to take an active role in the events commemorations.

 

Finding out about Granddads medals seems to be the 'bread and butter' of this forum, if we had cultivated these first hand accounts during the 60's and 70's we would bring generations closer together and made the Great War a much less distant memory.

 

As Rudyard Kipling stated “If history were taught in the form of stories, it would never be forgotten.” 

[Medaler]

6 hours ago, Willh1664 said:

 

The point you've made is completely true if the only goal of remembrance is to remember facts and figures,

 

What is the point of remembering things that are not facts? Or should we just be remembering what some people think are facts? That is why we need historians. Their role is not one of inventing facts but interpreting the evidence in an unbiased way, so that we may all profit form a wider view and better understanding.

 

" a whole generation of young men walked blindly into hell " - There are two "facts" that I would take issue with straight away.

 

Firstly, it was not a whole generation. Of those who served (and that was not the entire eligible age group of the population by any stretch of the imagination) the overwhelming majority were not idiots. They fully understood that there were risks involved in going to war. They were the sons and daughters of Victorians who had been raised on tales of Empire that were steeped in blood. Though the Boer War had not resulted in Britain suffering anything like the rate of attrition that came from the Great War, the casualty rate had been sufficient to demonstrate the risks. The generation that spawned the largest volunteer army in our history largely flocked to enlist because they were men of courage and principle, not because they were fools. Part of what I see as remembrance involves looking back and acknowledging their courage, determination and sacrifice, not reveling in their supposed stupidity. Without either consulting the historians or becoming one ourselves we can not hope to see the wider picture, and can therefore have no understanding of why their sacrifices were made and why they were important. Where the picture becomes clouded however is that many British historians already have opinions that colour their interpretations of the evidence.

 

I would also take issue with the idea that "Finding out about Granddads medals seems to be the 'bread and butter' of this forum", though some of us are interested in that field, and I will admit to having been a collector for over 40 years. This Forum has far more depth and pith to it than that.

 

Like it or not, the Great War has gone beyond the stage of being a distant memory, because there is nobody around now who can actually remember it. If the human race had been blessed with the longevity to make that statement a falsehood, we would soon see that they all had different viewpoints and opinions anyway. It's just that non of them would be able to give us a balanced view because they never stood on the vantage point from which that could be seen.

 

Oh, and a personal connection to events is not a necessary requirement for studying and learning about the Great War. You don't have to be a Spaniard to learn Spanish.

 

Regards,

Mike

Edited 5 July , 2018 by Medaler