Product Description

During World War II, there seemed to be a gap between the reality and what could be called the "myth of the Blitz". The author shows that this myth was not purely propaganda but was a deep-rooted, common conception of pastoral England and the perfect gentleman. This book is the sequel to "The People's War". Angus Calder is the author of "Speak for Yourself: A Mass-Observation Anthology".

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #174595 in Books
• Published on: 1992-08-13
• Original language: English
• Binding: Paperback
• 302 pages

Customer Reviews

Who needs facts when bold assertions will do?
There may be an interesting theory to be investigated about the creation of the myths by which we recall history, but this book isn't it. It is undermined by at least three huge flaws.

Firstly, it makes several false and mendacious claims about the French campaign in 1940. For example, that the BEF had orders to take no prisoners or that it collapsed into a rabble at the first appearance of the Germans, deserting their French allies who were still full of fight. There is even a claim that the massacre of about 170 British soldiers by the 1st SS and 3rd SS was in revenge for the murder of 400 SS troops, a massacre I can find no description of anywhere else.

Secondly, the theory being proposed seems to be that propaganda and behaviour became a self supporting feedback loop to create the "myth". Although there is a lot to describe how the Blitz was reported and the various depictions in a range of media there is almost no evidence on how it affected behaviour or how the behaviour then affected the official depiction/reporting of events.

Finally, the prejudices of the author shine through. Every book will be influenced by the views of its author, but Mr Calder seems to have a certain animus against either Britain or just the English. This comes through in various ways, from minor affectations (mention of the 1982 war in the "Malvinas" or the use of Eire) to sweeping claims that in the event of an invasion there would have been large numbers of collaborators and wide spread support for the final solution, challanging anyone who disagrees to prove that the British would have acted differently to other occupied nations. A generalisation that ignores the differing experiences of invasion by the various countries and the fundamental differences in political and social life between countries.

So in summary, an interesting idea let down by poor research, a poor structure and a lack of evidence. Buy this if you want a fulsome guide to the Blitz related reporting/film making/novel writing of the time otherwise I would advise against.

Interesting but flawed
One of the now many books on Britain of the Blitz and one that thankfully dispenses with the sickening 'role out the barrels', 'business as ususal' stuff that we were all taught at school and which is enjoied so much by the armchair historian. Calder's theory is this - the 'business as usual' cheerful Cockney stuff of the Blitz was actually the product of propaganda. The government produced propaganda saying this was how people should andw ere acting and so people start do so.

As a student of war and someone who is currently writing his dissertation on this subject I would have to say that Calder is wrong. He is too keen to accept a tempting theory and places to much empahsis on the power of propaganda. It is certainly the case that propaganda had a role in shaping public opinion but the propaganda its self was not without basis in fact. So mayde the sickening stuff we were all taught at school is not so bad afterall.

In summary this is a well written and easy to read book. It provides an intersting perspective of a subject that has the tendancy to become repetative and boring, I do not think Calder is right and think that his book must be taken in the context of the plethora of other books written on this subject. However, it is worth reading by anyone interested on this topic.

A Flawed Sensationalist Work
As a history student with a keen interest in the subjects that this book covers I gladly greeted the opportunity to read this book as part of a module for my second year at University. However I found the way the author had written this book to be difficult to read despite my perseverance to the end. Furthermore his idea that the myth of the blitz was wholly a product of propaganda and that in fact Britain was made up of anti-Semitic collaborators who were one step away from crumbling and who relied almost totally on American support was deeply flawed. It seems a pity to me that the author missed the opportunity to write a genuinely interesting and different piece of work and instead produced a sensationalist piece that despite selling copies will soon end up in second hand shops.