Showing posts with label history for kids. Show all posts
Showing posts with label history for kids. Show all posts

Sunday, 15 March 2020

Reminiscing - by Rowena House


Between deadlines and family contingency planning for the covid-19 epidemic, my March blog about historical research is still languishing on the drawing board. Soz. Here instead is an article first published on March 18, 2018 on The History Girls’ blogsite just ahead of publication of my WW1 debut novel The Goose Road. It’s one that still means a lot me. Stay safe. 


At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them

At the start of the centenary of the 1914-18 war I had a notion that we would by now, as a nation, have found some sort of collective closure on the individual suffering of the dead of the Great War, and be ready to move on, to toss their bones in the air as it were, and free the spirits of the fallen to join with our distant ancestors.

As a writer, I agreed with Pat Barker’s comment that World War I had “come to stand in for other wars … it’s come to stand for the pain of all wars.” Our stories might be about that particular conflict, but the larger subject was war itself.

Researching and writing my own First World War novel, The Goose Road, dented that conviction. Wherever I looked, the power of individual suffering endured and the personal stories were endlessly shocking, intimate and enthralling.

I fell under their spell time and again while listening to the first-hand accounts of veterans of the Western Front, their scratchy voices forever locked in a sound archive, or when reading a collection of letters home, or interviews granted to earlier researchers. I’d suddenly be caught unawares by a moment of humanity or courage, or dark gallows’ humour.

Occasionally an old soldier would admit to cruelty. More often they shared memories of the drudgery of the trenches, punctuated by terror. To walk those trenches – or at least one of the few fragments that remain, in Beaumont Hamel, say, zig-zagging through a meadow – is to walk in a haunted place.
Near Verdun, there’s a hill called Mort Homme. The name isn’t connected to the 1914-18 war, although the WW1 artillery battles fought there between the French and the Germans were so fierce that engineers found afterward that meters of the entire hilltop had been blown off. Local farmers still aren’t allowed to plough its soil because of the human remains.


The French memorial to the fallen of Mort Homme: “They did not pass”
When researching closer to home I found that WW1 objects as well as places had the power to take my breath away. Once I was in the Royal Artillery Museum in Woolwich Arsenal, investigating a particular week in October 1916 and a specific section of the Western Front near the occupied French town of Peronne. The archivist bought me out a trolley laden with original material from that time and that place, on top of which was a small moleskin notebook, written in pencil by an English major, the pages still stained with the mud of the Somme. I sat and stared at it for ages, feeling as if the battle itself was within touching distance.
Just before I returned for the second of four research visits to France, my mother died unexpectedly. It was a release: she’d been ill for a long time. Among the heirlooms she left to me was a forget-me-not locket with a photograph of her father, Frederick Clarke, in his WW1 uniform. A stern old lady stares out of the locket’s other frame – my great-grandmother, Selena, I believe.


The memorial, cemetery and ossuary for the Battle of Verdun
Mum also left me a heart-shaped locket, which I think must have belonged to Selena as it contained the pictures of two uniformed soldiers, her sons. One is Frederick, who served in the 10th (Irish) Division as a medical clerk and stretcher bearer in the Dardanelles in 1916 and later in Salonika. The other is Frederick’s older brother, Thomas Clarke, a private in the 19th King’s Liverpool Regiment, killed in action on the Somme, on July 30th, 1916.


Private Thomas Clarke, 19th King’s Liverpool Regiment

I’d never seen Thomas Clarke’s picture before I inherited this locket. Mum thought he’d died near Ypres, and as far as I know, until my husband tracked down his regiment’s military records, no one in the family knew the details of his last day. The official War Diary and Intelligence Summary of that engagement is chilling:

“29/7/16 battle position in the MALTZ HORN TRENCH.
30/7/16 BATTLE began. Zero hour 4.45 am. The Battalion reached its objective, but suffered heavy losses, and had to evacuate its position owing to no reinforcements. At 12 noon the roll call was 7 officers and 43 men.
Total casualties were: Lieutenant-Colonel G. Rollo wounded.
KILLED. [Six officers named]
WOUNDED. [One officer named.]
WOUNDED AND MISSING. [Three officers named.]
Total casualties in Other Ranks: 425, of which 76 were killed, 172 wounded, 177 missing.”
Barry Cuttell’s account of that morning in 148 Days on the Somme is more detailed: “Morning mist prevented communication by visual signals, and almost all underground cables had been damaged. The only way of relaying messages to divisional headquarters was by runner, which would be a dangerous task once the fog had lifted as the runners had to cross the open ground between Guillemont and Trone’s Wood, over which German machine guns … enjoyed an excellent field of fire.
“While waiting for zero hour, 19/King’s Liverpool were subject to High Explosives and gas (shelling) … The 19/King’s in the centre was also badly hit by enemy fire, only a few men reaching the road. A little further north, a company of the 19/King’s succeeded in getting forward towards the south-eastern entry to Guillemont.” But later that morning, “Under the impression they were cut off, the 19/King’s withdrew from the edge of Guillemont.”
Thus out of 486 soldiers of the 19th King’s Liverpool Regiment who advanced at dawn on that summer’s morning, north and east from the Maltz Horn Trench towards the German artillery and machine guns, only fifty remained standing seven hours later. The rest were wounded, dead or “missing”, that is, their bodies were either too badly mutilated for individual identification or otherwise unrecoverable from the battlefield.
The rolling fields where Thomas Clarke fell were bronzed with ripening wheat when I saw them, flanked by the once devastated trees of Trone’s Wood. My husband, a former Royal Marine, returned there on July 30th, 2016, to pay our respects, both on the battlefield and at his graveside in the Bernafay Wood cemetery. Perhaps his locket – the brother to the forget-me-not one I inherited – is buried there with him.
Website: rowenahouse.com
Twitter @HouseRowena

                               

Tuesday, 4 February 2020

Censorship and Brexit - Ciaran Murtagh

On Friday the BBC re-released a sketch from Horrible Histories that apparently 'trashed Britain'.  You can watch the offending sketch here:


It was from a 2009 episode called Vile Victorians and it upset a lot of people including Piers Morgan, Andrew Neill and the Daily Mail, so it must be doing something right.

Caution - this link will take you to The Daily Mail

It piqued my interest because as a kids TV writer, it seemed strange for so many grown men - and it usually is men - to get enraged by an 11 year old sketch, which many children have enjoyed and - crucially - understood for years.

Link to some frankly ridiculous Twitter comments.

The reason for the outrage was the fact that it was unpatriotic. Factually and historically accurate, but unpatriotic because it pointed to aspects of British history, that while true, displayed Britain in an unfavourable light.

No matter that this sketch has been broadcast many times to zero protest. No matter that it's from a show called Horrible Histories -  the clue's in the name.   No matter that Horrible Histories also trashes the 'Vicious Vikings' and the 'Rotten Romans'- maybe other countries have thicker skin, or aren't in the middle of an identity crisis.



We now live in a country so past irony that The Sun can create a poster celebrating Brexit in which the fictional character Alan Partridge is apparently a Great Britain,  while his very real creator Steve Coogan is a shattered Remainer.



Also on the poster and in the Great British camp are Mr Blobby, Basil Brush and Mr Bean. As a writer for at least two of those characters - Mr Blobby writes his own material -  I think I can confidently say Mr Bean is apolitical at best and if I had to pin Basil down I'd have him a little 'Countryside Alliance-y', but then again - THEY'RE BOTH MADE UP, SO HOW WOULD I KNOW!?

Noted Great Briton and anti-EU advocate Mr Bean. Apparently.

Regardless it's obviously fine to give fictional kids TV characters British values and agendas to reinforce your political point, but don't you dare put actual facts in front of the kiddiwinks for fear of being labelled unpatriotic.  Or maybe The Sun poster is clearly a joke and I shouldn't take it so seriously, in which case... Horrible Histories! 

The only thing that's changed in the 11 years since this sketch was first broadcast is that we now live in age where we no longer have a need for experts and facts are apparently negotiable depending on your world view.  That and they got a British born Asian to introduce it. Can't have people with a darker skin tone telling us OUR - and their, but lets not worry about that -  history can we?


Another criticism levelled at the sketch is that is lacks perspective, it doesn't say anything about all the good things the Victorians and Britain did. Which is true, it doesn't, but then it's a comedy sketch for children, it makes one point and it makes it very well, it's how sketches work. You never hear of any of the perfectly healthy parrots the pet shop owner sold in the Dead Parrot sketch do you? Where's the perspective? Next you'll be telling me that 'Allo 'Allo isn't representative of life in German occupied France and not all Dublin matriarchs are men in drag.

Life in German occupied France not all bad. Apparently. 

In the scheme of things it's a silly thing to get annoyed about, but as a children's writer I find it very worrying. It points to an insidious trend. If the future of writing for children means passing some strange Daily Mail criteria for what is and isn't acceptable then we're all screwed.

Children are happy to be challenged, happy to be provoked, happy to question and happy to think for themselves. The evidence of the past few days seems to suggest that certain adults are not. We should always remind ourselves that we're writing for the children who are happy to explore different perspectives, not the grown ups who would rather we reinforce a particular world view.

On a wider note, for anybody who creates anything, if these angry, seemingly educated people feel so threatened by an 11 year old sketch about Queen Victoria on kids TV,  just imagine how they'll feel when faced with more grown up criticism on a news show. Or maybe they'll just select favourable journalists from now on.

Regardless, the shouting voices are getting louder. Post Brexit you're either with us or against us. In an age where a slightly peculiar decade old sketch in which Queen Victoria has sugar poured on her head can cause such indignant rage I worry for anybody who dares to create anything with a dissenting voice, no matter how light hearted it may be.

Ciaran Murtagh's work can currently be seen every Friday at 6pm on CBBC on Crackerjack.  Follow the link to see an unashamedly apolitical Basil Brush doing his thing.