On blogging (2)

To continue that point about warblogging – one of the other suggested criteria is that a blog is ‘pro-war’. I think I might at a stretch be described as ‘pro-military’ in the sense that I believe we need an army (and even a navy and, on particularly bad days, an air force) and that since we have to have one, it ought to be the best – not least intellectually – we can manage. I’ve taught and socialised with a few soldiers, and I’ve found some of them hugely impressive people.
With regard to the First World War, I think that I am now bracketted – whether I want to be or not – in the ranks of the ‘revisionist’ military historians . Simplistically, that means that I believe, on the basis of research and argument, that faced with a hugely difficult situation, the British army of the First World War didn’t do too bad a job.
Whether that’s what I’m actually interested in arguing about is another matter. How armies (indeed countries) respond to the demands – military, technological, cultural, social, political – of total war is much more interesting to me than the personality-bashing/defence which has dominated British military history of that war for so long.
At some point I want to write about my own definitions of self and subject here – but not the day after clearing!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: