Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Great War Fiction: Yea or Nay?


Augustine

Recommended Posts

I noticed that fiction does not get nearly as much attention in this forum as non-fiction (rightfully, I would think), but I was curious about people's general views on fictional depictions of the Great War. I remember reading a topic a couple of months back where someone mentioned that they disliked the very idea of writing fiction about WWI...or something to that effect. This member did not explain why (s)he felt this way, but it had me curious.

So, I guess I'm asking to hear your thoughts on WWI fiction:

Do you enjoy reading it, or do you prefer to avoid it (and why)?

Do you think that the study of the Great War benefits from fiction, or do you think fictional accounts do the subject a disservice?

Finally, if you're in the "nay" camp, do you think that Great War fiction is simply lacking in quality or should not be written at all?

I'm interested to hear everyone's thoughts for several reasons: I recently purchased one of Pat Barker's novels (haven't read it yet) and know that she elicits mixed reactions among WWI scholars; I have read several other Great War-themed novels and short stories and have a few to recommend (or at least suggest) to those interested; and finally...least importantly!...I'm also a writer and am working on a novel that deals peripherally with the Great War.

I appreciate everyone's input. Thanks in advance!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm interested in fiction dealing with the First World War. "The Middle Parts of Fortune: Somme and Ancre, 1916," and "All's Quiet on the Western Front," are both classics. In the realm of newer fiction I enjoyed Mark Helprin's "A Soldier of the Great War."

Some of the most memorable depictions of war have come from fiction. I feel that people who declare that reading fiction to be a waste of time are short-changing themselves a bit. I like to listen to the news, but I like music as well. ;)

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a wonderful series of, I think, four books by a John Biggins, about an officer in the Austro-Hungarian Air Force and submarine service (odd career path!). I have one (The Emperor's Coloured Coat ?), and I think that I read another. Most are hard to find, and one is almost impossible, it goes for hundreds of dollars a copy. Members of a Brit literay forum that my wife is active on are nuts about them (most are not very military in bent), and sometimes they mutter about kidnapping Biggins' youngest child and threatening dismemberment unless he writes more volumes.

There is, of course, also the Czech classic The Good Soldier Svejk.

Bob Lembke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I noticed that fiction does not get nearly as much attention in this forum as non-fiction (rightfully, I would think), but I was curious about people's general views on fictional depictions of the Great War.

..................................

I have read a few of the classics. AQWF, " Verdun" by Jules Romain and several which are in the debatable land, Sassoon's " Memoirs of a Fox Hunting Man", Junger's " Storm of Steel", Graves "Goodbye to All That". These are great books and anyone who has not read them is the poorer for it. The reason I do not read much fiction is simply that I am too busy reading fact. There are just too many books, so little time. Most of us on the forum specialise. A given battle or regiment , equipment or artillery. It's just not possible to read every book out there , choices have to be made, and on a forum devoted to knowledge of the war, fiction is a very obvious candidate for the chop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sometimes they mutter about kidnapping Biggins' youngest child and threatening dismemberment unless he writes more volumes.

They must have read "Misery".

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I strongly recommend "The first casualty" by Ben Elton - it's a "must read", given that it is written by a known author with a social conscience

http://enjoyment.independent.co.uk/books/r...ticle326180.ece

My own view is that the title of the work neatly encapsulates the whole - it is a work of fiction; truth being the first casualty in its production.

Stephen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the main reason you will find so few mentions of Great War-related fiction is because so many Forum members are engaged on research, often for eventual publication. Factual accounts form the 95% of my own reading, Great War-related or not, because, apart from enjoying the occasional good yarn (Bleak House is my bedtime reading at present, and what a good yarn that is!) I find fact so much more entertaining than fiction.

I think it inevitable Great War fiction gets a hard time here, because, with a few notable exceptions, such as William Boyd, storytellers tend to latch onto rarities that lend themselves to dramatic treatment, rather than the day-to-day realities. I daresay that if this were, for example, a Napoleonic War Forum, the members would be equally dismissive of modern fiction set in those times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a wonderful series of, I think, four books by a John Biggins, about an officer in the Austro-Hungarian Air Force and submarine service (odd career path!).

Bob Lembke

I would echo Bob's sentiments about this series of books: I am fortunate to have read all 4 (by courtesy of Wolverhampton library). ISTR that it was intended to follow his career up to the end of WW2: regrettably, the author never lived up to his promise.

Prior to reading the series, my knowledge of the KuK military was zero: now, I find them fascinating!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Essentially this started as a 'p*ss take' - but there were bits of it which I was quite proud of .....

Les Slackbladder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It appears from Amazon that there are recent paperback editions of 3 of John Biggins' Otto Prohaska novels. Possibly the 4th will follow, as the publication date of the latest edition of the 3rd book is only last November.

John Biggins novels from Amazon.co.uk

I'm not sure if following my link & buying something will get this forum commission from Amazon or if you have to follow a link from elsewhere on this site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Augustine

I tend not to be that keen on fiction, expect for books like "The Middle Parts of Fortune: which are based on reality. I dislike stuff like Biggles but would not rule out reading a modern Great War fiction as long as it was well researched, if I found it full of rubbish then I would not finish reading it.

Annette

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Essentially this started as a 'p*ss take' - but there were bits of it which I was quite proud of .....

Les Slackbladder

As Mr Backslider's agent and one of his central characters, may I refer avid readers to his Great War novel

and livid readers to the ensuing court case

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it only natural that Great War fiction gets a hard time here, because, with a few notable exceptions, such as William Boyd, storytellers latch onto the unique moods and possiblities of the war, rather than immerse themselves to an extent which would please we addicts.

Hopefully I'm reading you right...that most folks here at the forums prefer in-depth factual studies of the war instead of the more emotional or speculative aspects that fiction tend to focus on? (Just making sure I get your meaning.) That makes sense. I guess I'm just a different kind of member. As far as research goes, I'm mainly here to ask questions to satisfy my own curiosity instead of building material for a scholarly endeavor.

As a writer, however, I've always thought of fiction as (if done skillfully enough) sort of a parallel reality where everything that "could have happened" can be freely explored. I'll get an idea in my head like "it would've been interesting if..." or "well, I might have reacted this way..." and then take off from there. I also see fiction as a means of understanding the subject matter by means of a character--if the reader is able to connect with a character, that character becomes a kind of surrogate for the reader, a vehicle through which the reader experiences the story.

I've no doubt read far more fiction than fact in my lifetime, but that mainly has to do with my course of study (I'm working on a Master's in Literature). But I also think I have a personality that draws me more to fiction than fact--toward possibilities beyond what really happened. It's probably difficult for some of our members to imagine having that kind of mindset, just as it's challenging for me to imagine being so fact-oriented. That being said, I think that the best fiction tends to be that which is deeply rooted in fact. The more believable, and the more grounded in reality, the more fascinating a fictional story tends to be...

Okay, forgive the ramblings. Thank you to all who have responded and recommended books. I look forward to reading more replies!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully I'm reading you right...that most folks here at the forums prefer in-depth factual studies of the war instead of the more emotional or speculative aspects that fiction tend to focus on? (Just making sure I get your meaning.) That makes sense. I guess I'm just a different kind of member. As far as research goes, I'm mainly here to ask questions to satisfy my own curiosity instead of building material for a scholarly endeavor.

Augustine,

Yes, that's exactly what I mean; but then, without fact there would be no fiction.

A problem that this fact-reader has with fiction is that authors often resort to the same old rare and contentious devices for Great War novels. My other bugbear is simple historical accuracy i.e. Ben Hur wearing a wristwatch in the famous film scene; or the American capture of the Enigma machine in WW2 (please forgive me for mentioning that one, but it is one of many examples of Hollywood trampling history underfoot, and the British are its favoured victims)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(please forgive me for mentioning that one, but it is one of many examples of Hollywood trampling history underfoot, and the British are its favoured victims)

Quote, Kate Wills

Yes Kate, I agree with you on this point, wholeheartedly!

Ivan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A problem that this fact-reader has with fiction is that authors often resort to the same old rare and contentious devices for Great War novels.

For the sake of my own writing (avoiding mistakes ahead of time), can you provide some examples of these devices you mention? Do you mean plot cliches, or just writers rehashing the same old tired issues?

Thanks!

Edited to add: I'm in total agreement about historical inaccuracies, as I can't stand when books/movies change the facts to suit their own agendas. That might fly in a genre like alternative history, but otherwise it seriously detracts from the work in question and insults the subject matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I strongly feel that those of us (including myself) who think that they generally avoid reading fiction, and restrict themselves to factual accounts, are really reading a lot more fiction than they realize.

Bob Lembke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well put, sir!

Actually, in addition (as Mr Rutherford pointed out) a reasonable amount of the fiction is what we would now call 'faction', based - as it is - on actual experience.

I must say I have a soft spot for "Covenant With death", but I've never managed Sebastain Faulk's stuff, or the Regeneration trilogy.

Oh, RH Motrram's "Spanish farm" trilogy, too, is good...but also 'faction'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob,

You mention a valid point which must not be overlooked; however failing memories and contrived experiences are often unmasked by good research. Taking innaccuracies at face value and assembling another fiction around them is much more dangerous, as such works appeal to a broader audience. It is no accident that the Long Long Trail will soon include a Myths section where, doubtless, the popular fact of generals sitting comfortably away from danger is at variance with the actual fact of over 200 general officer casualties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spanish Farm Trilogy is terrific , written by one who was there unlike trash like the Barker series. I do think historical fiction written by one not of the era written about should be avoided by students of history. A year from now you will not remember whether a historical figure said something or a fiction writer said he or she did.

The Arnold Zweig work is of the same quality as Mottram.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully I'm reading you right...that most folks here at the forums prefer in-depth factual studies of the war instead of the more emotional or speculative aspects that fiction tend to focus on?

..............................

Okay, forgive the ramblings. Thank you to all who have responded and recommended books. I look forward to reading more replies!

I think you might be unpleasantly surprised to see just how emotive fact based discussion can get. Do a forum search on Haig. Robert Burns said " facts are chiels that winna ding". He might well have added that they require interpretation. This sets us off on a Lobsters' Quadrille of books to elucidate this fact and to verify that theory while throwing up more facts that have to be checked. New research diplays ever different facets of known truths and even throws some into doubt. We have butchers and bunglers against revisionists and now a new wave of primary source miners threatens to overturn deeply cherished belief. This is much more exciting than anything a mere novelist could cook up. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully I'm reading you right...that most folks here at the forums prefer in-depth factual studies of the war instead of the more emotional or speculative aspects that fiction tend to focus on? (Just making sure I get your meaning.) That makes sense. I guess I'm just a different kind of member. As far as research goes, I'm mainly here to ask questions to satisfy my own curiosity instead of building material for a scholarly endeavor.

As a writer, however, I've always thought of fiction as (if done skillfully enough) sort of a parallel reality where everything that "could have happened" can be freely explored. I'll get an idea in my head like "it would've been interesting if..." or "well, I might have reacted this way..." and then take off from there. I also see fiction as a means of understanding the subject matter by means of a character--if the reader is able to connect with a character, that character becomes a kind of surrogate for the reader, a vehicle through which the reader experiences the story.

I've no doubt read far more fiction than fact in my lifetime, but that mainly has to do with my course of study (I'm working on a Master's in Literature). But I also think I have a personality that draws me more to fiction than fact--toward possibilities beyond what really happened. It's probably difficult for some of our members to imagine having that kind of mindset, just as it's challenging for me to imagine being so fact-oriented. That being said, I think that the best fiction tends to be that which is deeply rooted in fact. The more believable, and the more grounded in reality, the more fascinating a fictional story tends to be...

Okay, forgive the ramblings. Thank you to all who have responded and recommended books. I look forward to reading more replies!

For me personally I would say no to your first statement. I have read a great deal of fiction related to the war and will continue to do so as I (hopefully) unearth other nuggets. I also read a great deal of non-fiction in the realm of research, but for pleasure I love fiction--good fiction. I just finished Dr. Zhivago, which I would consider a war novel, and I'm glad I took the time to read it.

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think historical fiction written by one not of the era written about should be avoided by students of history. A year from now you will not remember whether a historical figure said something or a fiction writer said he or she did.

I'm not sure I agree completely, but then I am a student of literature and not of history. I think that historical accuracy greatly enhances literature; the tougher question (not one I'm prepared to tackle at the moment) is whether history benefits likewise from literature. I would like to believe that I can discern and recall what a historical figure said/did versus the product of a novelist. I would also like to believe that a skilled and dedicated scholar of history can turn out a highly accurate, thought-provoking, and valuable work of fiction even if (s)he did not personally experience the events in question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Augustine, you will struggle on this forum to make some people understand what fiction is all about. You actually had someone say, in effect, "I don't read fiction." OK, each to his own, it's not a crime, but that's a bit like saying, "I won't look at paintings - I only look at photographs." The root problem is that some folks, for whatever well-intentioned reason, cannot stomach the idea of the Great War becoming a subject of imagination and creativity by the author, painter, or musician. If you follow this idea through to the bitter end, then a universally regarded masterpiece like Britten's 'War Requiem' becomes invalidated because the words were written by Wilfred Owen, who was there, but set to music by a composer who wasn't.

Again, follow the idea through. I don't think many would argue that 'Saving Private Ryan' wasn't a powerful and gripping movie. It succeeded not because they'd got every cap-badge, gaiter, tyre-track and hedgerow historically accurate, but because it was a great story, brilliant screenplay and was convincingly acted. Look at novels and ask the parallel questions; is it well written? Are the characters credible? Does the plot work? Does the author make you believe you're actually there?

I wish you luck in your campaign my friend, but you are playing fast and loose with an event that some people believe is just too fragile to be delivered into the hands of mere novelists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven`t found a non-veteran yet who could write convincing WW1 fiction. As soon as I see reference to the Loamshire regiment, my eyes tend to glaze! I think it will be done, though, just as Cornwell manages it for the Napoleonic era (and the Dark Ages) and O`Brien for the times of Nelson. And it may well be a forum member who pulls it off! Phil B

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...