Getting it right, but also across …
In July, with four others. I am scheduled to take part in an (unguided) WW2 battlefield tour of Normandy.
Actually in the interests of accuracy I ought perhaps to qualify the term ‘unguided’: one of our number is an officially-accredited WW1 tour guide and all us are veterans of numerous formal and informal WW1 battlefield trips, but this is to be our collective touring debut on the D-Day landing of 6th June 1944 and beyond and, so far as I am aware, WW2 generally.
All of us have been preparing for this arduous mission by doing our ‘homework’ in order both to arm ourselves with a general understanding of the Normandy campaign the better to appreciate the context of the places we shall be visiting but also to research the specific locations, incidents, actions or soldiers upon which each of us has agreed to be the proverbial ‘one chapter in the textbook ahead of the others’ as our individual contributions to the overall team effort.
Apart from reading a selection of the recommended books upon the overall Normandy campaign, in the 21st Century – courtesy of the Imperial War Museum and other sources of military history – one can turn one’s mind to the famous movie depictions of the D-Day landings themselves and/or battles such as Arnhem and, of course, portals such as YouTube upon which one can find all kinds of fascinating documentary sources if one takes care to search hard enough and filter out the dross.
Those who acquire an expert knowledge of a historical subject should all receive medals for the effort involved. However, when it comes to imparting their knowledge to others, they can range from the dry, dusty and wordy right through to to those whose command of the detail may not quite be equal to that of the former but whose ability to ‘arrange the facts’ and/or simply ‘tell the tale’ in a manner engaging to the masses is infinitely greater.
I must declare an interest here.
Antony Beevor is my kind of WW2 academic/historian. Not only does he command a vast bank of knowledge and background research but his ability to ‘tell the tale’ is remarkable.
He has written extensively upon both general and specific WW2 matters and – in my experience – has never written a book that I haven’t enjoyed reading simply for the pleasure of doing it – and I’d submit that there are few historians about whom one can say that.
His Stalingrad was a monumental achievement and (in the present context) his D-Day: The Battle For Normandy has been by some margin the best (most easily digestible) ‘overview’ I have come across.
Beevor has written an opinion piece upon some great and not so great war movies that I thought I’d share with Rust readers.
Having worked myself for a while upon what turned out to be an abortive attempt to write a movie script I know only too well the perils of both dramatic licence as well as the need for it. When you’re seeking to present an entertaining story – with a satisfying beginning, middle and end – sometimes the facts (often academically ‘in dispute’ anyway) can become irrelevant and or inconvenient when you have no more than 90 to 120 minutes to portray it. And when the subject at hand is war, of course, everyone knows that planning turns to chaos the moment the first shot is fired.
Here is Beevor’s article as appears today upon the website of – THE GUARDIAN
