What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

I seek the opinions of the many historians who prowl this forum; quite literally, what IS the future of WW2 histories or biographies? It's been over 60 years & if memories aren't fading then the generation is passing on; however, lots of info has been declassified & is now researchable. Does one outweigh the other? I mean, Shores wrote "Fighters over the Desert' in the 1960s--many of the surviving participants were still alive to be interviewed and tell their stories but "Official" records were not always accessible to double check what was remembered vs what happened; Now Shores will be rewriting FOTD & sources like ULTRA, decrypts & other once classified intelligence sources & newly found Axis records & individual personal papers will be available but nothing new & 'first hand' from the now departed vets of the conflict...I'm just curious if WW2 historical writing will one day become like a form of 'archeological research', delving thru records & other people's writings...
Well...what do you say?

NickM

PS: Sad really as the WW2 generation passes; I get the feeling not everyone had a chance to tell their story, if only to the local library or even to their families;

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Historical writing IS archaeology, just in paper rather than dirt. And I've done both.............

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

It is perhaps sad that the individual man will be lost in time, but as time passes we gain the abibility of true objective analysis. You may loose some detail, but you'll see the wider picture more clearly.

Most of us are actually obsessed with insignificant detail.

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

I think the future of WWII history writing is to compare the sources and testimonies of the various sides and to try to combine them to have the whole picture.

It has been done in a great part for naval losses and actions. In the air it is more and more the case, so triggering the debate about overclaiming. There is still much to do about this point for the land side of WWII. Overclaiming of enemy KIA is much higher than in the air...

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

I am always fascinated to read first-hand accounts, and they provide many valuable nuggets of information which you will never find in official documentation. However, they also have to treated cautiously; partly because memories mutate over time, partly because they may still contain misinformation which was widespread during the war.

If you read personal accounts by RAF and USAAF fighter-bomber pilots of their attacks on armour in NW Europe you would believe that the battlefields were littered with blown-up Tiger tanks hit by Typhoons and P-47s. We know from objective evidence, however, that that simply didn't happen.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

It's bound to be different as the veterans pass on (four of those I'd interviewed died in 2004 for example). History based on personal accounts became "fashionable" in time for authors to use WW2 memories - Martin Middlebrook's books of the 1970/80s were among the first that I read - but don't overlook the number of such histories of the English Civil War, Napoleonic Wars etc. that still appear as letters and diaries are unearthed.

I'm sure that aviation archaeology will also play an increasing role and there are still some records that won't be declassified for many years (e.g. personal files on German Pows and the Luftwaffe personnel loss records in berlin which are protected by privacy laws until - I think - 100 years after the person's birth date).

THere's lots of work to be done but the approach will have to evolve.

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

World War II historical writing will continue as long as there are competent people willing to do the work. Based on what I've read, there seems to be no great financial incentive. Russian archives may help. And there are still classified documents that will not be released for a while.

The passing of the veterans will mean relying on official records, pilot log books, which are still turning up, photos and other contemporary bits of evidence. It is like detective work or solving a puzzle. All that is needed is a willingness to do so.



Ed

Re: Will be OK, :-)
 

When I have read edwest post it had surprised me for a while. In the past there were some guys interested in Roman or Napoleon age wars and also now and it has no matter that one history happend 2000 or 200 years ago. How much did they get back for their searches/hobby (invested time&money) not much I think.
Now we have on the world also so many " heavy idiots" who did almost the same digging out stories of WW II period. Invested time, enery, money for many could not be returned and they do not make it for pure money profits. Of coures some of them do it for money.

The fun of hitorical resarch it is sometimes like hunting, discovering new thing, looking for the true. Second when we are far from the history (events of war, the next generations) we can have better view/prespective to make much more balanced comments about the past events.

This specialy concern the WW II history when some subject (areas) could not be obiecivly presented for many, many years.
From about 20 years ago many historians can make much more obiektive searches, works then before 1989 or 1980.
Shortly after the end of WW II history was mostly a political matter. One could write exactly what he/she had a licence to do. History was a political tools. This was very obvious in occupited by Russian countries or in Soviet Union. Such a things were aslo on the othe side.

Second cruelty done by German, Russian (Gulags, invasion on Poland, Katyn) during WW II period was also so great that still many can not belive that one man (nation) could do so many eveil to other nation according national or class principles. Only after many years this true has surfeaced and it is a common knowledge. Now we can much more openly, with no fear and without strong prediduties talk and discuss wuthe the past enemy (for example Poles with German and Russians).

I only see such danger for the future - digitalisation. This means that in the computer you can create almost all and presents the new "pictures, documnets" of war "Tigers tanks on Moscow streets in 1945" or "B.29 pulveraising Berlin" or "Me 262 versus B.29". But such a thing can happen

Second is a lack of knowledge about WW II and not full presentation of the past. Some historians want to presnets only own vision aditionaly having not even rudimentary background/ "know how" to do it. Now we also can find such a thing. It was a case for example of my claims (war) agains Ch. Bergstrom who had made exacte Auchwitz liees by false presenting fact about this death camp in his book (in fact falsification the past and the true). Such a thing makes only futher falsification the past and they creating wrong opinion and meaning about WW II history.

Regards
Mirek Wawrzyński
PS
Without the true about the past (specialy about own) and reespect to the obiective history (not political vison about the past) any nation can makes no progress and achived respect among others.
90 years have passed after Ormian pruges (in 1915) made by Turkey. Surviviors all over the world still rememer this crime of killing about 1.000.000-1.500.000 civils. Probably if people had talked in the Europe in 20-30 ties and sentenced the killers, we did have so many criemes in WW II or later.
Adolf Hitler before invasion on Polad had said, when he was asked by the offciers about cruelty/killing towards civils, "Who just know still remeber and talk about Ormians pruges?"

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

I think rather poor as people are not reading as much as they did and other media do not care about quality at all.

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

because you mention the napoleonic wars .:)
even 190 years áfter the battle of waterloo( one of my all time favorite battles)
many historians are still in twist with each other about this battle.
was it a british victory, a german victory , a dutch or simple a allied victory, there is enough controversy between the historians.

but maybe in few 100 years, when "we" are all citizen of the world and there is no national proud left , maybe then it is possible to talk about history in a reasonable wise. ;) ( but of course ,in 100 years without us :D )

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

I think Franek has hit upon a key point: People aren't reading as much of these types of books as they used to. At least two authors have made this comment to me.

So, it is a bit ironic and sad, now that more and more records are becoming available and researchers are showing even greater diligence, that the market for their end product is shrinking.

I know that when I go to the bookstores, the shelf space devoted to WW II aviation is not near what it was a few years ago. Of course, I'm in the middle of an aviation history drought region - southern Delaware - but I still know that my forays to the more populated areas are yielding less results. Even a visit to the bookstore within the NASM last fall was quite disappointing versus my earlier visits.

And, the more we know, the more some of us want to focus even more narrowly. One has to ask the question as to whether a book like Günter Sengfelder's German aircraft landing gear books would really have a sufficient market today to sell, let alone actually make a profit for the author.

Thus, an Me 262 nuts and bolts book considered a year ago might not really have an adequate market. Oh, there will be the die hards who would buy it, but likely their number is diminishing yearly. Face it, WW II ended 60 years ago.

And, it may not be just WW II aviation, but aviation in general. Zenith books used to put out "THE CATALOG", chock full of offerings. Now their catalog is a mere shell of its former self, with very little new to be seen.

Tell me I'm wrong. I'd love to hear it.

Oh, I'll keep researching on my favorite topic, the Me 262. And, certainly, there is enough call upon me for help to keep me quite busy. But, whether a really detailed book would still possibly be of interest, I have my doubts.

Matter of fact, I just had an interesting phone conversation with a former well-known retired NASM curator. He works for one of the aviation history magazines - works or volunteers, I don't quite recall which. He said that authors really aren't paid to put their works in his magazine, that they do it for the pleasure of seeing their efforts in print and I guess the name recognition. So, guys, one can still publish, but it will be, in the main, a labor of love and not one of profit. On a brighter note, he did say that this and other magazines from this group are profitable. Heck, at the prices they are going for these days, they better be!!

Regards,
Richard

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Interesting, when I visit my local aviation book store (I'm lucky since one of Europe's biggest stores is basically around the corner - Luchtvaart Hobby Shop), I really get the feeling that there are more and more and more publications, too many to read, let alone buy!

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Yep - I can vouch for the fact that writing magazine articles and books is not financially rewarding. If I divided the amount I earn from these sources by the number of hours I spent on them, I would end up earning less than the legal minimum wage...however, the satisfaction of seeing new information in print is worthwhile.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Don't worry, Richard, there's still new stuff coming out. And from sources you, and others, would not believe...

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Dear Richard and fellow researchers,


I have been in the book publishing business for 25 years and have heard "there's no money in it" from many different sources and for many different genres and types of books, including fiction. Lately, my answer has been: "Then get out and start making the money you want."

Who finances those archaeologists who are digging for millenia old bones? There's is a glamorous and profitable vocation, eh?

Now we have the internet. Anyone care to use it? Much information is being published and distributed on these boards, daily! That's right: published and distributed---- free!

Earlier on, I suggested that someone write their book, advertise here, and in exchange for some money, provide a password to the purchaser so he could access and download the file. No physical printing or inventory.

And this is for everyone: if you are sitting on documented, verifiable information and photos, and none of it has seen the light of day, why not? I certainly hope you are not waiting for that mythical book publishing deal that will net you a lot of money. Clearly, such things do not happen :)

In any case, do what you want. Me, I would complete my book, go to a print on demand publisher, have a nice cover printed separately for them to bind on, and get 500 copies.

Gentlemen, stop vacilating. Make a choice. Frustration and indecision go hand in hand.




Regards,
Ed

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Ed, I did exactly what you suggest for my first novel, 'The Foresight War' - an alternative WW2 story.

My usual publisher (Crowood) doesn't handle fiction so after various fruitless efforts to interest fiction publishers and agents I located a publisher who, for a fee, designed, edited and produced my book as a good-quality Print on Demand paperback (no need to buy a stock of them), put it on Amazon.com and also sells it as an e-book for downloading. I went for the deluxe service which will take around 500-550 copies sold to break even; it is possible to do it more cheaply. Once past that point I will collect a much higher percentage of the sale price than with conventional publishing. And all I have to do is market it, which reminds me: details are on my website, and you can read the first chapter for free! :)

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Thank you, Tony. So, it can be done. Encouraging experiences like this need to be brought up. In publishing, as in much of life, there are no guarantees. However, I am mindful and respectful of those who look at the costs (time and money) and elect not to publish.


Regards,
Ed

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Dear Tony, Ed, and Ruy,

I think it's IBM that has put out that print on demand TV advertisement. How does one go about learning more? What's involved? Did you actually have to print off 500 copies, or are you able to do a few at a time? Doesn't the setup to do a few at a time add cost? Being rather finicky about the quality of photo reproduction, just how good is the final product?

Ed, I'm not so sure your "just do it" versus vacilation is good advice. On the other hand, if one is willing to sink into something funds without a concern as to cost, just to see something in print, then your advice is correct.

As for electronic versus hard copy, though, for me, a book, a hard copy book, is the ultimate in permanence. Yes, you could post it on the Internet or sell it as an e-book, but I'm a bit old school and that physical "thing" has just too much attraction. I don't have to worry that there won't be something to view it on because Bill Gates has come out with a completely different system, obsoleting all of today's software and data storage formats. All one has to do is think of all the changes in the audio recording industry. Care to go out and buy a state of the art LP player for all those vinyls collected over a lifetime? A physical book defies obsoleting. The one very important gain with having something in electronic form is searchability, which I'll readily admit.

I also feel a sense of loss of one's artistic control on information when it is just dropped into the Internet. Pirating is rampant. Heck, is there any one of us that hasn't copied a photo or document off of someone else's website, regardless of whether the site claims copyright???

Ruy, I sure hope that your experience with your local bookstore is more the norm than what I have seen here. The more titles - good research - the better.

But, if I am correct, then a shrinking market puts a distinct pressure on publishers to stay with the most popular subjects and keep the books short, so that breakpoints can come earlier. Economy should come in volume, but, if the average book run is shrinking, then it is going to get tougher and tougher to turn something out that actually makes any money. As much as we'd like to think publishers are altruistic, they are there to make money. Maybe authors do it for the love of the game, but don't count on the same thinking from publishers. If they don't watch the bottom line, they'll go out of business. There's enough of that that we've seen already.

Regards,
Richard

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

The e-book/POD publishers I use are a British outfit, Authors Online (but they work with foreign-based authors also). Their website is here: http://www.authorsonline.co.uk/default.aspAnother one I looked at is Writers Services here: http://www.writersservices.com/index.htm although I didn't follow that up as they didn't respond to my enquiry!

Both sites are a useful source of information and advice on self-publishing even if you don't use their services.

I have so far found Authors Online to be responsive and fast. My book was available on-line and in print about two months after I first contacted them, which is just incredible by the standards of conventional publishing. I only asked for a standard paperback, but the paper and print quality is very good - clearly above average. They will do illustrated hardbacks also. And you don't need to order any quantity of books. You get a few as a part of the package, then individual copies are printed as ordered.

The clear benefits of this approach IMO are:

1. Speed and certainty of publication.

2. Total control over the appearance, layout, content.

3. On payment of a small annual fee, the book will be kept available indefinitely.

4. On payment of another fee, you can amend it and produce another 'edition'.

5. You will never see it remaindered in cheap bookshops!

The disadvantages, apart from the need to find money up front, are:

1. You have to do your own marketing. The publishers advertise your book on their website, put it on Amazon and get it an ISBN number, but after that you're on your own.

2. You won't attract the 'casual bookshop browser' market as bookshops generally won't have it on their shelves (they normally work on a 'sale or return' basis which isn't compatible with POD).

If you're looking into self-publishing, you do need to watch out for 'vanity publishers'. I initially made inquiries about one which proposed to supply me with 500 glossy hardback copies of my book - for about $20,000!

Given the choice, I'd rather work with a good conventional publisher because of the disadvantages I list above. However, if you can't find one willing to publish your work, and you can afford some money upfront, a good self-publishing firm is well worth considering.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

In France, it seems to me that WW2 aviation is working well on the market. At least five magazines (monthly or one every two months) are published on aviation history, mostly on WW2.

As for bookstores, there is at least one specialized in Paris and you can find much 'die hard' books in some other bookstores in Paris and at least one in Lyon and two in Toulouse. My personnal impression is that in my country it is becoming easier to find 'rare' WWII aviation books. And Internet is also a possibility.

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Don't think there's much to worry about - do any of you guys do WWI stuff too?
Over the Front, Cross and Cockades, Windsock and other journals are still cranking out new stuff regularly. (See Albatros' 2-parter on Jasta 5-stunning!) Is there even a dedicated WWII-aviation journal? (other than the LW Verband)

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Albatros is always great, looks like I've got another expensive must have on my list with that Jaste 5 work!

But look at the Luftwaffe books that were published the last 10 or so years!

Look at books like Ullmann's and the new Merricks, I mean how many years did we have to wait in between?

Doesn't feel like WW2 is drying up to me.

Prien and his team is putting out an unprecedented line of books, which together with previous unit histories are about as good as it gets, all this last decade or so.

Should we look at trends of a year or so, or decades instead?

I've started "serious" collecting some 8-10 years ago, I haven't seen any worrying trends other than supply outlasting my ability to keep up. Of course there is the matter of quality versus quality, but hasn't that always been the case?

Really good technical books come in decades, not years.

Look at the benchmark (imho) D.520 by Danel & Cuny, or Spitfire by Morgan & Shacklady, and indeed more recent MB-152, by Joanne and Me262 by Smith & Creek.

Quality takes time.

I agree with Richard though, a book will always have a strong sense of permanence, which electronic media utterly lack. However as people change, so will that feeling.

We still buy our CDs, most kids however skip that and download their music (legally), without needing that sense of "physical" ownership a CD (or record) gives.

OTOH, I just love reading a book in bed (if I am not otherwise occupied :rolleyes: ).

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Dear Tony,

I appreciate the information on POD. In reading the authors' section of Authors OnLine, it looks like they really aren't much into photographs. In a nuts and bolts book, photographs and drawings, plus their proper layout, would be paramount. I do see that, for an additional fee for the effort, more than the standard 12 photos can be added, but at £35/hr. for the service, that could become prohibitive. On top of that, I still don't know whether these guys are any good at layout. An option offered is to submit the book already formatted with photos, meaning a new career for me in learning how to format a book for publishing. Frankly, I'd prefer to spend my time in research and writing, rather than taking on a new career. On top of that, I think I have a certificate stuck in my closet somewhere that says "Retired".

But, in case I really wanted to become masochistic, just how good a print job do these guys do compared to the regular press, say on a lower end scale being the S&C Me 262 set (sorry about that guys, but it was a weakness with this fine work) to Crowood's Hawker Hurricane: Inside and Out, by Melvyn Hiscock, perhaps one of the finest examples of printing out there?

The concept of publishing on demand does sound appealing, and it has the distinct plus of being able to update the book at will. Of course, it will and maybe currently does drive a buyer nuts, not knowing if his book is obsolete, he having issue 3 and someone issue 5 printed a month later. I can hear the groans coming from the Library of Congress now...

Regards,
Richard

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

edit ... on re-reading this ... YIKES! 1000 apologies for resurrecting an old thread ... I hadn't appreciated it wasn't current ... was searching for something else and got interested in this topic LOL

What a great topic. And no, I'm not a historian, well not a professional one anyway, but may I comment? As noted in various posts above, the early post-war publications, the likes of Brickhill on Bader and any number of other reminiscences, were coloured by the vagaries of memory and the needs of various parties to maintain certain fronts or positions. A worthwhile discussion on this took place on the Key Publishing (FlyPast) forum few months ago addressing the question of revisionism in history. It was a remarkably cogent and balanced discussion.

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=52333

IMHO for what it's worth, there is validity in later historians revisiting the source data of past events and endeavouring to present them in a neutral context. Of course we always present our findings or opinions with some bias or other (consider the massive debates of feminism and "political correctness") but that said I believe there is much to be gained from stripping away wartime and immediate post-war propaganda.

As to whether there's a market, I believe that there will be, but the medium may shift from the book and the written word to more interactive and visual forms. Look at the changing face of museums (embracing inter-active media) as a guide.

One then has to wonder how long the interest (in a given past event) remains. I assume it's a balance between connectedness (eg. family involvement) and the sheer importance or impact of the event. WWII still has both in spades. Today. And is there still interest in WWI? Yes. But how long is the tail?

Don

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Speaking for myself - I don't care about the financial aspects.

I will re-do Angels, Bulldogs and Dragons simply because a.) I made errors 20 years ago and b.) I have a lot more material and I know a lot more about sources and verification, and c.) forums like this one exist to enable detailed cross reference checking between Luftwaffe and 355th FG encounters.

At the end of the day all I care about is some future historian having confidence that I got it right (at least 99%) and that the memories of the guys that fought and died are remembered.

Regards,

Bill Marshall

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

I remember while writing a book in 1994 that "the word" in the publishing business was that after the 50th anniversary in '95, WW II topics would drop off. Of course, that has not happened, and I don't recall many authors who believed it. Consider the enormous number of Civil War books still published every year, many with original research.

We're not even close to the end of WW II history, and if the quantity is declining, the quality at least is being maintained.

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

There is still much to explore and resolve. The surface has been well scratched, but hardly penetrated.

My only concern is that as more emphasis in time is placed on primary documents (due both to ease of availability and new archival finds), and less on first hand accounts, there is the increased risk of historians writing about the War, and drawing conclusions, from the point of view of hindsight. It happens to a small degree now, and is likely to grow with time.

Battles, whether they be land, sea or air, are as oft confusing and bewildering to generals as much as the frontline man. Faulty or incomplete intelligence, poorly trained or equipped troops, inferior aircraft or tactics, weather, logistics, the list is limitless; all cloud and confuse the issue.

First hand accounts are by their very nature incomplete, incorrect and almost always misleading. But they capture the flavour of the airfight, land battle. They provide an immediacy and intimacy that primary documents can't have.

The best studies are those that combine the first-hand recollections with the reports that describe what actually happened. It's the best, most suitable, marriage of fact and percieved fact.

Sadly with the passing of the 'greatest' generation those first hand accounts are now reaching a finite level.

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Surely 'hindsight' is not the concern. Writing history by definition is to benefit from hindsight.

The concern, surely, is the increasing prevalence of anachronism.

For example in films; the GIs in 'Saving Private Ryan' behave like the potsmoking generation in Vietnam. In the film 'Atonement', a Lancaster flies overhead in 1935, while an infantry soldier kicks off his army boots and arrives in Dunkirk without his rifle. None of these could happen.

Anachronism occurs when historians fail to appreciate the values, knowledge and thinking of WWII participants. Reading their history is like watching Bing Crosby and Rhonda Fleming in a 'Connecticut Yankee in the Court of King Arthur.'

Tony

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

It's literature! Don't you think the Lancaster represented a premonition of war (and, as such, a recognisable symbol for UK audiences, which I doubt that a Whitley would have been)?

With 300,000+ on the beaches, I suspect that soldiers arrived there in all kinds of states of dress and equipment. Who can say for sure?

More to the point is a character's reference to the loss of the Lancastria which didn't happen at Dunkirk and not until after that operation had closed.

What the hell, it was a really good film.

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Well I didn't like it, Nick. Too contrived, and the inaccuracies got to me.
I went because of McEwan's reputation for writing literature based on literal accuracy achieved through thorough research. See: http://books.guardian.co.uk/comment/...957845,00.html .
In McEwan's words;
"The writer of a historical novel may resent his dependence on the written record, on memoirs and eyewitness accounts, in other words on other writers, but there is no escape: Dunkirk or a wartime hospital can be novelistically realised, but they cannot be re-invented. I was particularly fascinated by the telling detail, or the visually rich episode that projected unspoken emotion. In the Dunkirk histories I found an account of a French cavalry officer walking down a line of horses, shooting each one in turn through the head. The idea was to prevent anything useful falling into the hands of the advancing Germans. Strangely, and for exactly the same reason, near Dunkirk beach, a padre helped by a few soldiers burned a pile of King James bibles. I included my father's story of the near-lynching of an RAF clerk, blamed by furious soldiers for the lack of air support during the retreat. Though I placed my imagined characters in front of these scenes, it was enormously important to me that they actually happened."
"As with the Dunkirk section, I drew on the scenes she (Lucilla Andrews) described. Again, it was important to me that these events actually occurred."
The Lancaster was not seen until two years after the main characters were dead in 1942. British infantrymen throughout WWII were in love with their boots and their rifles; none would be seen dead without them. They also stood up when the National Anthem was played. These are facts.
Everybody has their pet hated anachronism; I just read about someone who looks out for steel helmets worn before 1916.
Knightley and McAvoy affected the clipped tones of the period. The film tried hard. The anachronisms were inexcusable.
Tony

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

I know when the Lancaster entered service, I simply questioned whether its presence in the film should be taken literally.

And I'm pretty sure that not all upper-crust women of the era looked like Keira Knightley...

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

I apologise for appearing to correct you. If I'd intended that then I would have mentioned that a Whitley would also have been anachronistic.

The date of the Lancaster's introduction dismissed premonition as a possible rationale, which thought actually occurred to me also in the cinema. But premonition required a Whitley, Blenheim, Battle or Wellington, all of which would have been seen by the two protagonists before they died. But not a Lancaster.

Tony

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

How odd...I would have thought Dale Dye (the Guy who trained them to 'act like proper soldiers' ) would have kicked the 'current attitude' out of them while he was still putting them through their basic training';

NM

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Dale Dye served in Vietnam. He trained the GIs in Saving Private Ryan to behave anachronistically like potheads.
Why did Spielberg choose Dale Dye?
Tony

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Spielberg chose Dye because all the WW2 vets were TOO old to train them young whippersnappers...

but seriously, it must be said that Dye joined the Marines in 1964--a time when the USMC was still populated by MANY NCOs & "Mustang Officers" who had served in Korea AND WW2;

In addition, in the Extras Dye & His training cadre took EXTRA Special pains to 'expunge' all current 'slang' from their vocabulary---and at least in SPR I didn't hear one: "Wazzup Dawg", "Far out", "Cool" or "Groovy"; :)

Now all that being said, how they sounded would depend on the script & who wrote it;


NM

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

There is a difference between drama and docudrama, the former is less bound by facts and realism. Atonement is a drama set in wartime, not a reenactment of the Dunkirk campaign. 99% of the audience won't give a damn if the bomber they see on the big screen actually flew in that exact time period, as long as it matches / represents the general era in the popular mind.

Of course there is the issue of availability of aicraft types, or the need to go CG.

PFC isn't only a war movie set during the Normandy campaign, it also reflects OUR perception, interpretation and even translation of the events that happened 60 years ago.

Movies reflect OUR current culture and interpret events that happened in a different (past) curture. The way 50-ies movies portrayed WW2 differs from the way 70-ies movies did etc. We change, our taste in drama changes with us.

Of course current politics and ideology plays a part.

Das Boot, Stalingrad and even the upcoming Red Baron all have one thing in common, incidentally you could call it atonement, that is the death of the hero in the end. Only Der Untergang gives a new beginning for the main protagonist - who as a secretary can still be considered an innocent bystander.

That thinking movies have an element of philosophy is something that I personally welcome.

Of course there are times when I enjoy a movie like 300, that is drama without deep thought and perhaps even more than a little propaganda. But at least now I am old enough to filter out the message that I don't need and enjoy what is left.

Looking forward to watching Atonement, not because of Dunkirk and WW2, but because I enjoyed the director's previous movie with Knightly: Pride and Pejudice! Call me a sissy...

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Surely 'Atonement' would be docudrama if McEwan suggested the protagonists were real people. He doesn't, but he does claim that its drama of a special kind in which the background events are historically accurate. This genre is typified by C.S. Forester's 'Hornblower', Bernard Cornwell's 'Sharpe' and Patrick O'Brien's 'Aubrey/Maturin' series. Here fictional protagonists, who are an amalgam of real people, operate in real or at least realistic events. Details are researched and historically accurate, including language and attitudes. Everything is historically kosha; except in 'Atonement' it isn't.

I also like Pride and Prejudice, and not least because it's historically accurate. But Keira Knightley is not in the same league as Jennifer Ehle, and the same goes for Matthew Macfadyen and Colin Firth!

Tony

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

In an article in December's History Today, Capt Crispin Swayne describes providing historical and military advice to Joe Wright, director of Atonement.
1. Swayne, like most advisers, was called in at the last moment before the cameras rolled. He does not explain why this is the custom or why advisers allow themselves to be used like that, but he asks us not to blame the adviser next time we spot inaccuracies in a film.
2. Swayne joined Wright on Redcar beach to comment on the set up. The two walked along the route the cameras would take during the shot. Swayne approved of the scenery. When they finished walking, Wright asked if there were any questions. Swayne asked; “Where are the Stukas?” Answer; “Too expensive”. Question; “Why no officers among the extras?” Answer; “To accentuate the lack of order”.
3. Swayne reckons the adviser has a limit of just six silver bullets per production. He let the Stukas and officers go (what else could he do?), but asked Wright to approve six additional actions for the extras to be shown doing; digging-in, praying, weapon cleaning, burning of equipment, card playing in shell holes, and restraint of deranged soldiers. Wright approved; “Great. One hour till the first run-through”. Then ten assistant directors followed by a thousand extras approached Swayne. The first assistant director handed the microphone to Swayne; “Good luck, mate”. Swayne and the assistant directors then distributed the extras around the beach and Swayne showed the extras what they had to do and rehearsed them in the allotted hour. The run-through was filmed and Swayne then ran around the beach making detailed corrections. The scene was finally filmed after a day of rehearsal and on the third 'shot'.
4. Swayne describes the extras as poorly paid civilians with no military training. “Too much stress on set and the shot will be filled with bored extras rather than exhausted Dunkirk evacuees. ... Make the action too difficult to sustain and performances will pall. Complicate the action with real Dunkirk tales.... and more likely the suggestion will be overruled for detracting from the main story”.
5. Swayne describes Atonement as “fictitious drama, but one that takes place in a true military setting....If the military and historical scenes look real, they add gravitas to the drama... Wright's knowledge and respect for history made my job easy, although I wish I'd more time to work with the cast and extras prior to shooting. In the army it takes six or more months to turn a civilian into a soldier, yet on many British TV or film productions I might not even have an hour...The cast of Band of Brothers attended a two-week 'boot-camp' before a camera was even out of its case. This is one of the reasons it looks and feels so real”.
6. Swayne argues that “British film-makers realise they have a large mine of history from which to dig gold, if historians and screenwriters can only strike up a more conscious dialogue.” He hopes that with some courageous funding and help from government he will get his boot-camp and Wright will get his Stukas.

So we now know why anachronism in film-making is systemic. Claims of realism for Atonement need interpreting with the information Swayne has provided. Wright believed Swayne had OK'd the film, while Swayne says he'd done what he could with his six silver bullets and let the rest through. And in any case Swayne was retained only for the Dunkirk beach scene. Apparently he was not shown the earlier part of the film with the anachronisms that irked me – the 1935 Lancaster and the un-military behaviour of regular infantry on the retreat to Dunkirk. Nor would he have known of the anachronistic mention of the sinking of the Lancastria. Wright had almost certainly seen Saving Private Ryan and believed that Dye's portrayal of WWII was accurate even though we can see Vietnam-war attitudes in it. There is a cinematic culture.
Also, why would directors ever be pressured (by ridicule) into making historically accurate films if the people who recognise anachronisms just shrug their shoulders and in effect say, "It's only a film".


Tony

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

I am new to this forum, and I am glad to be here. I am a refuge from the History
Channels forum on "Dogfights". The television program was a wonderful new and
exciting way of showing Air Combat.
Unfortunately the program has been canceled. And it seems the History Channel has become just another Reality based Channel, like so many other
cable channels before them.
My point , as is the theme of this post is that we are moving away from History.
Not just WWII, but all Historical venue`s.
There is no medium any more to get Children interested in the Past, and create
an interest in finding out about that History.
I think if History is treated like Archeology and there is no interest in reading
about it then we may be doomed to repeat it.

Re: What's the future of WW2 historical writing?
 

Gentlemen,

As an ex-publisher, ex-tv program maker, ex-radio program maker, eyewitness of a coup d'etat in Roemenia 1990, and ex-etcetera, and as a professional poet I think there's a world to be won for WW2 historical writing.

If all prime-source material is published online -which will happen in due time - then historians will have a tremendous treasure chest of material, from which they can produce books which will sell.

Regards,

Bart