Hear all about it on the BBC, and put in an order to Amazon – looks fascinating.
Tag: British
Categories
7 reasons to keep calm and carry on
1. Decorum. Because a hubbub or a brouhaha would be unseemly.
2. Because You’re British. It’s what’s expected of you. It’s what comes naturally. Your reaction to an unforeseen and potentially frightening event should be one of unflappable fortitude and apparent indifference. No flapping. Got that?
3. Consequences. If you should flap then someone with a plummy voice will be forced to administer a swift slap and command you to “pull yourself together”. That constitutes a scene. No one wants a scene.
4. Tradition. It’s what that formidable lady, Great Aunt Harriet, would have wanted. She kept calm, probably in a winceyette nightgown. I doubt there was much carrying on though.
5. Because It’s Relevant. It’s an iconic slogan that’s rooted deep in the past – though it was never actually used during World War II – but its message still holds good today. Why worry about that double-dip recession that you can’t do much to influence? Why worry about potential terrorist activity that you can’t stop? Why worry about the man peering over your shoulder as you read this? No, on second thoughts, do worry about him. He’s probably up to no good.
6. Because The French Do Neither. We keep calm and carry on. The French do not: They je ne sais quoi. On bicycles, probably.
7. Because You Are Told To. Your poster demands it of you; your greetings card demands it of you; your t-shirt demands it of you; your mug demands it of you; the coaster on which your mug sits demands it of you; your key ring demands it of you; your fridge magnet demands it of you; your shopping bag demands it of you; your deckchair demands it of you; your cuff-links demand it of you; your sticking-plasters demand it of you; your tea-towel demands it of you; your chocolate bar demands it of you; your flight-bag demands it of you; your apron demands it of you; your rug demands it of you. It’s bloody everywhere. Seriously, if one more person buys me anything else that says “Keep Calm And Carry On” on it, I won’t be held responsible for my actions. I will freak out and stop.
Taken from here.
A key work for this project which fully considers the administrative history of the Ministry of Information, the lead government department for propaganda. He argues that for two years, the measures taken by government propagandists were:
- Unnecessary and inept
- Based on misunderstanding and distrust of the British public
- Products of the class and background of the propagandists themselves.
- He feels that after two years:
- The Germans were still characterised as irretrievably wicked.
- Efforts were made to separate Communism from the ‘Russian’ (not Soviet) war effort.
- Propaganda was intermittently prompted by doubts about people’s martial stamina and devotion to Parliamentary democracy.
McLaine felt that the achievements of the Ministry of Information were that:
- The MOI realised importance of full and honest news as a factor
- They recognised that in the fight against totalitarianism, it was important not to disregard one of its main weapons, although within a democratic context.
- With benefit of Home Intelligence, the MOI came to regard the British people as sensible and tough, and so entitled to be taken into the government’s confidence
See if you can get hold of a copy on Amazon.}
S.F.Ryan: ‘British Perceptions of the Meaning of the War: The Government, the Public and the Fate of France: 1939-42’Ryan, S.F., ‘British perceptions of the meaning of the war: the government, the public and the fate of France: 1939-42’
M.Phil completed 1993. Salford University
No abstract available.
Kertesz, M.A. ‘The Enemy – British Images of the German people during the Second World War’
D.Phil completed, 1992, Sussex University
Abstract: The thesis examines the creation and development of enemy imagery in writing about the German people during the Second World War, tracing the gradual redefinition of the enemy from the Nazi elite to a wider hostility which, for some people, embraced the entire German population. The German role of enemy was established by the development of an imagery of the `other’, which placed the enemy outside the realms of Christianity, of culture, of civilisation, even of humanity. The German character was defined in opposition to British qualities; thus, the issue in wartime was as much about defining the British character as the condemnation of the German character. An introductory chapter outlines the history of Anglo-German relations from the mid-nineteenth century, tracing the growing hostility between the two cultures, noting the importance of the 1914-18 war in destroying the older, more favourable images of Germany, and discussing the war’s legacy and the British response to the rise of Nazism in the 1930s. The main body of the thesis consists of `slices’ of narrative – each chapter deals with a short, significant period of the war. These `slices’ are: the first week of the war, the period from Dunkirk to the fall of France (May-June 1940), the week after the German invasion of Russia (June 1941), the allied victory at El Alamein, which is often cited as the turning point of the war (first half of November 1942), the week following the D-Day landings (June 1944) and the last week of the war against Germany in May 1945. Each of these significant periods is approached from three different points of view – a general overview of `public opinion’, the press, and personal diaries written for Mass-Observation. The expression of private opinion in the diaries enters into dialogue with the published opinion of the press, challenging the accepted and establishment views expressed in newspapers, while dealing with the pressure to conform to this establishment view of the German people.