Comments on: Acquisitions http://airminded.org/2006/01/27/acquisitions-15/ Airpower and British society, 1908-1941 Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:05:19 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Trench Fever » Blog Archive » New stuff http://airminded.org/2006/01/27/acquisitions-15/comment-page-1/#comment-406 Trench Fever » Blog Archive » New stuff Mon, 03 Apr 2006 10:26:22 +0000 http://airminded.org/2006/01/27/acquisitions-15/#comment-406 [...] Brett Holman asks what my book is actually called. [...] [...] Brett Holman asks what my book is actually called. [...]

]]> By: Chris Williams http://airminded.org/2006/01/27/acquisitions-15/comment-page-1/#comment-325 Chris Williams Wed, 01 Feb 2006 15:19:16 +0000 http://airminded.org/2006/01/27/acquisitions-15/#comment-325 Just as long as there's lots of copies of _The Great War_ in Queen Mary's library so my summer school can read it in July. Just as long as there’s lots of copies of _The Great War_ in Queen Mary’s library so my summer school can read it in July.

]]> By: Brett Holman http://airminded.org/2006/01/27/acquisitions-15/comment-page-1/#comment-323 Brett Holman Wed, 01 Feb 2006 04:40:32 +0000 http://airminded.org/2006/01/27/acquisitions-15/#comment-323 I thought the warfare state idea was very interesting after reading <em>England and the Aeroplane</em>, but wasn't entirely convinced, so I am glad he's expanded upon it. I think it would benefit from considering the pre-WWI period - I would have thought that if there was a warfare state it would have started with the Navy and associated industries/political lobbies/cultural support long before 1920. But I shall reserve judgement until I have read it more throroughly! Re your book, I was going to say I thought <em>The Great War</em> was a better title! Not least because the very name given to the war is suggestive of the "myth and memory" processes going on (though I suppose "The First World War" is evocative too, just evoking different associations). Sorry to hear that the stuff-up has hurt sales, I hope they pick up! I thought the warfare state idea was very interesting after reading England and the Aeroplane, but wasn’t entirely convinced, so I am glad he’s expanded upon it. I think it would benefit from considering the pre-WWI period – I would have thought that if there was a warfare state it would have started with the Navy and associated industries/political lobbies/cultural support long before 1920. But I shall reserve judgement until I have read it more throroughly!

Re your book, I was going to say I thought The Great War was a better title! Not least because the very name given to the war is suggestive of the “myth and memory” processes going on (though I suppose “The First World War” is evocative too, just evoking different associations). Sorry to hear that the stuff-up has hurt sales, I hope they pick up!

]]> By: Dan http://airminded.org/2006/01/27/acquisitions-15/comment-page-1/#comment-321 Dan Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:59:40 +0000 http://airminded.org/2006/01/27/acquisitions-15/#comment-321 No blogging for a bit whilst I'm in undergraduate application hell. But I've also been reading Edgerton. It's interesting, but I wonder whether (despite assertions to the contrary) he's set up some straw men (ie pointing out that Britain was militarily stronger than most people think in the 1930s without discussing the way that diplomacy/the world/commitments had shifted so that many policy makers _perceived_ her to be weak). Useful and provocative, which I think is what he wanted it to be. I _always_ wanted it to be called The Great War: Myth and Memory, partly at least because I wanted people to make the link with Fussell (aim high, Dan). The publishers advertised it in the pre-publication stuff as The First World War etc. They then realised that The Great War was a better title, so that's what it became. BUT they haven't bothered updating the website, so everybody else has followed suit. This has, of course, led to some confusion and to not enough copies being sold. I could be angry and frustrated about this if I had the time. No blogging for a bit whilst I’m in undergraduate application hell. But I’ve also been reading Edgerton. It’s interesting, but I wonder whether (despite assertions to the contrary) he’s set up some straw men (ie pointing out that Britain was militarily stronger than most people think in the 1930s without discussing the way that diplomacy/the world/commitments had shifted so that many policy makers _perceived_ her to be weak). Useful and provocative, which I think is what he wanted it to be.
I _always_ wanted it to be called The Great War: Myth and Memory, partly at least because I wanted people to make the link with Fussell (aim high, Dan). The publishers advertised it in the pre-publication stuff as The First World War etc. They then realised that The Great War was a better title, so that’s what it became. BUT they haven’t bothered updating the website, so everybody else has followed suit. This has, of course, led to some confusion and to not enough copies being sold. I could be angry and frustrated about this if I had the time.

]]> By: Brett Holman http://airminded.org/2006/01/27/acquisitions-15/comment-page-1/#comment-319 Brett Holman Sun, 29 Jan 2006 05:00:12 +0000 http://airminded.org/2006/01/27/acquisitions-15/#comment-319 Nice work if you can get it! Nice work if you can get it!

]]> By: Chris Williams http://airminded.org/2006/01/27/acquisitions-15/comment-page-1/#comment-316 Chris Williams Fri, 27 Jan 2006 10:04:34 +0000 http://airminded.org/2006/01/27/acquisitions-15/#comment-316 I've got a review copy of _Warfare State_ winging its way my way right now. Mmmmm.... I’ve got a review copy of _Warfare State_ winging its way my way right now. Mmmmm….

]]>