Comments on: Unwritten books

By: Airminded · On being a snob

Airminded · On being a snob — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 13:37:23 +0000

[...] see what’s so wrong with that! The reference is to my post on books which historians have neglected to write. Yes, I did say academic historians, but then I’m an academic in training (whether or not I [...]

By: Brett Holman

Brett Holman — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:01:44 +0000

Rotterdam’s an interesting one. It wasn’t reported much in the British press at the time (14 May 1940), but about week later reports appeared that thousands of people had been killed in the raid. It wasn’t until July that the claims of 30,000 dead were being circulated, coming via the Dutch government-in-exile. The true figure was something under a thousand, so whether the 30,000 number was propaganda from one side or the other (most likely the Germans I suppose, but could have been the Dutch themselves) or just a rumour, I don’t know.

By: Don Smith

Don Smith — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 01:08:52 +0000

This thought re-triggered by Brett’s post-blogging the Sudeten Crisis.

Will someone please write a “contemporary” account of the Western Front air-war in the ETO in WWII.

Rather than the now familiar hindsight-filled semi-objective analyses, I’d like to read a day-by-day (OK maybe month-by-month) book about that airwar from the POV of the protagonists. Nearest I’ve ever read is “The Other Battle” by Peter Hinchcliffe (recently deceased BTW) which is IMHO a fascinating objective presentation of the two battling sides in the Western Front night air war (Bomber Command vs Nachtjagd). But again that’s a post-war objective analysis.

I’d be fascinated to read a two-sided history containing the prejudices, opinions and “known facts” of the two opposing forces (at that time). For example, Rotterdam would be on the one hand a terrible example of odious terror bombing, and on the other hand an obvious and regrettable snafu (whatever the German is for that) that anyone in his right mind would acknowledge as such.

By: Brett Holman

Brett Holman — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 05:01:41 +0000

Jakob:

Thanks! Cold War stuff is just idle curiosity for me at the moment, so it’s all good.

Dan:

You’re right! O’Brien was the 5th author to try it: one died, one had to go back to the British Museum (Wormald), two didn’t even manage to produce a chapter draft. O’Brien himself wasn’t able to work at it full-time. It’s a big subject, true enough, but whether any more so than the other subjects of official histories, I couldn’t say.

I talk about voluntarism vs. compulsion in my current thesis draft but very superficially — like a page at most — there is much more that could be said!

Ian:

Thank you, I didn’t know of that.

By: Ian Brown

Ian Brown — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 10:27:43 +0000

Have you read “BENEATH THE CITY STREETS” by PETER LAURIE ?.
It was first published in the early 1970s,based on an interesting SUNDAY TIMES MAGAZINE article on British Civil Defence.
The book was republished in 1979 in an updated edition.
It covers how Britain planned and built to face the threat of the Zepplin,Bombers and ICBM.

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:38:54 +0000

Didn’t the Official History of Civil Defence go through several different authors? I don’t know whether that implies that it’s a tough subject to write about, or whether it tells us more about the inter-personal relations of the official historians. I agree that something that talked more about voluntarism versus compulsion in ARP and CD would be very useful: I also think that the post-41 culture of home defence, both civil and military, is worthy of an integrating study. Penny Summerfield and Corinna Peniston-Bird’s book on the Home Guard shows something of what’s out there, but there’s loads more to be done, particularly on the direct transition into the Cold War.

By: Jakob

Jakob — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:50:12 +0000

Dr Jeff Hughes at Manchester has done stuff on Cold War Culture and the bomb – I don’t know whether it’s the kind of stuff you’re looking for.

By: Brett Holman

Brett Holman — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:19:37 +0000

Dan:

Thanks, I look forward to reading his book when it comes out! Though, the literature on Cold War civil defence almost seems burgeoning compared with the WWI/WWII period — maybe due to the lack of the deadening presence of an official history? Or maybe because of the inspiration from studies of American civil defence in the same period?

George:

Well, some of those I might consider taking on one day, however in general the best plan is to 1. hatch chickens; 2. count chickens …

By: George Shaner

George Shaner — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:55:11 +0000

I think you just laid out your academic writing career.

I myself am still waiting for a good institutional history of the Imperial Japanese Army Air Force.

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:13:47 +0000

On both Civil Defence and the Bomb, former QM PhD student Dr Matt Grant is your best bet: http://www.shef.ac.uk/history/staff/matthew_grant.html