Shut Up Baldrick!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shut Up Baldrick!
I see Baldrick has put himself into the front line having a pop at the Education Secretary for his comments about teaching First World War history. This shouldn't be a surprise given Mr Robinson's background as a long-time Labour supporter but does this qualify him as a historical authority? Blackadder has long been one of my favourite tv series. But if it's allowed to become a historical reference that's surely a cause for concern?
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason that Black Adder was more than just another TV comedy was that it captured the black humor that was likely to have been the standard response to life in the trenches and the views was of those fighting under such appalling conditions.
It would have been very hard to maintain a wide historically and politically accurate view from a trench in Flanders.
Mr Grove is looking at the wider picture, Baldrick is firmly stuckin the trench ( as was my Grandad )
It would have been very hard to maintain a wide historically and politically accurate view from a trench in Flanders.
Mr Grove is looking at the wider picture, Baldrick is firmly stuckin the trench ( as was my Grandad )
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the record, it was Gove who fired the first shot, criticising teachers for being overly-accepting of a version of events peddled by loony lefties in such as Monocled Mutineer, Oh What a lovely War and Blackadder. Gove failed to note that one of these was based on The Donkeys by that well know loonie lefty Rt Hon Sir Alan Clarke MP (Conservative).
Sir Tony Robinson's response that Blackadder was not a rewriting of history but a satire on events did not impress Gove, whose office elected to ignore Sir Tony's honour in their response that "Tony is wrong"
I attended a school with a proud history of preparing young men for (among many other things) service in the armed forces. At school, I took pert in a production of Oh What a lovely War in the school's great hall - the walls of which were hung with literally hundreds of photographs of former pupils who had been killed in WW1 and WW2. And after rehearsals I went out on the parade square with the resty of the CCF unit.
My school did not share the Secreatary of State's paranoia about the discussion in school of varying perspectives on events - indeed it encouraged it. Study, analysis and discussion were among the things the school taught best. Maybe our education system would be better served if we had a Secretary of State who shared those priorities, rather than this one's obsession with (Tory-approved) 'facts, facts, facts'.
Sir Tony Robinson's response that Blackadder was not a rewriting of history but a satire on events did not impress Gove, whose office elected to ignore Sir Tony's honour in their response that "Tony is wrong"
I attended a school with a proud history of preparing young men for (among many other things) service in the armed forces. At school, I took pert in a production of Oh What a lovely War in the school's great hall - the walls of which were hung with literally hundreds of photographs of former pupils who had been killed in WW1 and WW2. And after rehearsals I went out on the parade square with the resty of the CCF unit.
My school did not share the Secreatary of State's paranoia about the discussion in school of varying perspectives on events - indeed it encouraged it. Study, analysis and discussion were among the things the school taught best. Maybe our education system would be better served if we had a Secretary of State who shared those priorities, rather than this one's obsession with (Tory-approved) 'facts, facts, facts'.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,921
Received 2,843 Likes
on
1,214 Posts
I'm just suprised we haven't rewritten the history of the First World War so that the Germans won, to prevent us offending them, such is the rush to be PC in this Country.
.
.
Last edited by NutLoose; 7th Jan 2014 at 11:49.
Gentleman Aviator
I'm just suprised we haven't rewritten the history of the First World War so that the Germans won,
Good piece by BoJo in yesterday's Torygraph refuting the (apparently!!) current view that the Hun didn't start WW1 (!!) and it was all the fault of Serbia and Turkey.
Don't think it was them that went into France through neutral Luxemburg and Belgium in accordance with the 1905 Schleiffen Plan - don't think Schlieffen was a Turk either ..........
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near the watter...
Age: 77
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In France, all the commemorative plaques which used to read "Fusillee par les Allemands" now read "Victimes de la barbarie Nazie"...so NutLoose isn't far from the truth.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
WW1 was such a huge canvas that the battles and loss of life on the Western front dominate most thinking of the conflict.
It is a while back since I studied it but I believe it was Austro-Hungaria that wanted to suppress the Serbs, they needed a guarantee that Germany would stop Russian interference. The Kaiser more or less turned a blind eye. The Russians began to mobilise which essentially was a mass troop movement from north to south.
Once fully mobilised the Russians could have turned west and using mass swept through Germany. The Schlieffen Plan required that Germany defeat France and then attack Russia thus avoiding a simultaneous war on two fronts.
The main premise was that Russia could not be allowed to mobilise with France as a potential aggressor in the west, the plan's main flaw was that it was an offensive plan rather than defensive.
Another factor was that France had just increased its conscription for 2 years to 3.
Equally the British had started in 1911 to increase its Army through recruitment of a Territorial Force. Remember also the naval arms race with Britain building battleships faster than Germany.
The world in the early part of the 20th Century was not the peaceful state we are led to believe.
It is a while back since I studied it but I believe it was Austro-Hungaria that wanted to suppress the Serbs, they needed a guarantee that Germany would stop Russian interference. The Kaiser more or less turned a blind eye. The Russians began to mobilise which essentially was a mass troop movement from north to south.
Once fully mobilised the Russians could have turned west and using mass swept through Germany. The Schlieffen Plan required that Germany defeat France and then attack Russia thus avoiding a simultaneous war on two fronts.
The main premise was that Russia could not be allowed to mobilise with France as a potential aggressor in the west, the plan's main flaw was that it was an offensive plan rather than defensive.
Another factor was that France had just increased its conscription for 2 years to 3.
Equally the British had started in 1911 to increase its Army through recruitment of a Territorial Force. Remember also the naval arms race with Britain building battleships faster than Germany.
The world in the early part of the 20th Century was not the peaceful state we are led to believe.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't give a stuff whether lefty Tony Robinson has been knighted. Such an honour is utterly devalued by giving it to sportspeople and others of equally no particular note.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
WW,
You get the honour because it goes with the promotion - either the job or the media.
The unknowns get a gong too because they were nominated.
Nice to look at the list but I agree, just because you can act, or have a good back-hand, does that merit a knighthood.
Roll on Jeeves. Wonder why that footballer hasn't got one. For sportsmen they should have an age limit, no K before 50-55. In fact give out the gongs at the same age (rank) level in the Services/CS. That Tennis player should only have had an MBE and got the O this year.
You get the honour because it goes with the promotion - either the job or the media.
The unknowns get a gong too because they were nominated.
Nice to look at the list but I agree, just because you can act, or have a good back-hand, does that merit a knighthood.
Roll on Jeeves. Wonder why that footballer hasn't got one. For sportsmen they should have an age limit, no K before 50-55. In fact give out the gongs at the same age (rank) level in the Services/CS. That Tennis player should only have had an MBE and got the O this year.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree, Pontius although the issue is less the detail of how it started, rather what happens to anyone who dares contradict the left-wing agenda that it was all pointless buffoonery
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Willard - who should knighthoods be restricted to then? Just corporate, governmental and military elite? Do tell.
Lots of complicating factors but I think Austro-Hungary felt that a brief suppression of the Serbs would be a quick slap on the wrist that would take no longer than the Balkan wars of the preceding two years. Didn't turn out that way though because of the LEAVE MY MATE ALONE aspect.
Gove really shouldn't have opened his mouth. Totally unnecessary and likely to lead to more bigoted anti-European sentiment that UKIP will just lap up.
Lots of complicating factors but I think Austro-Hungary felt that a brief suppression of the Serbs would be a quick slap on the wrist that would take no longer than the Balkan wars of the preceding two years. Didn't turn out that way though because of the LEAVE MY MATE ALONE aspect.
Gove really shouldn't have opened his mouth. Totally unnecessary and likely to lead to more bigoted anti-European sentiment that UKIP will just lap up.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Satsuma, points one and two, agree totally. Point three, Gove is the Education Secretary. He is absolutely entitled to voice an opinion on how history is taught. If you don't like his opinion, vote him out. Nobody voted for Baldrick!
When you look at the duties a Knight was traditionally expected to perform in deference to his liege lord and sovereign, the current lot of title holders cast a sorry shadow on those who were the original bearers of the rank.
Can you imagine, in the time of conflict, the likes of Beckham, McCartney, Elton John, Robinson et al, rising to the defence of their country? I bet most of them would scarper off to their tax exile homes until it had all blown over.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sitigeltfel - It's 2014. What are you on about?
ShotOne - he was trying to score unprovoked political points over subject matter so serious and tragic that it left a very sour taste in the mouth. Tristram Hunt rightly put him in his place although I doubt you'll have read that article.
ShotOne - he was trying to score unprovoked political points over subject matter so serious and tragic that it left a very sour taste in the mouth. Tristram Hunt rightly put him in his place although I doubt you'll have read that article.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Curiously, down in what was left of the weeds, the reality was often at odds with collective perception.
What of the Chinese trench and grave diggers?
Aside from the major battles, troops might spend only a week at a time in the trenches.
One relative (wife's grandfather) was requested to accept overseas service whilst in the Territorial Force. After his one year contract in France he was invited to extend his service - he declined.
It was not like WW2 where you signed up for the duration.
What of the Chinese trench and grave diggers?
Aside from the major battles, troops might spend only a week at a time in the trenches.
One relative (wife's grandfather) was requested to accept overseas service whilst in the Territorial Force. After his one year contract in France he was invited to extend his service - he declined.
It was not like WW2 where you signed up for the duration.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pontius - both my grandfather and Mrs Harry's served in WW1 and I have their signing on papers - they were open ended but you did have to sign that you would serve overseas in the first place
This was relic of the old Militia who wouldn't serve overseas during the Napoleonic Wars
This was relic of the old Militia who wouldn't serve overseas during the Napoleonic Wars
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
It is a while back since I studied it but I believe it was Austro-Hungaria that wanted to suppress the Serbs, they needed a guarantee that Germany would stop Russian interference. The Kaiser more or less turned a blind eye.
The German's were incredibly afraid of Russia and it's industrialisation, they had to go to war but their experts told them they only had a window between 1914-1917 before it would be too late. Their battle plan required they defeat France before turning on Russia - and also involved going through Belgium to do so.
They tried twice to instigate a war between 1910-1914, this was their third attempt. They effectively forced the Austrians into the war with Serbia by insisting of draconian conditions and guaranteeing full backing. Even at the last, when the Kaiser yet again had cold feet, the Chancellor changed the text of his cable to the Austrians to force the war. Upon the declaration the German foreign office celebrated.
The German's started the war, coldly and deliberately.
fritz Fischer - Germany’s Aims in the First World War
Its not satire presented as the truth. Its one view of the Great War thats used to encourage debate,as in "how truthful is the picture of the Great War as portrayed in Blackadder".
Gove is utterly wrong about this, as someone might well be who has never stood in front of a class, except for some PR stunt.
Someone who has never had to inspire or engage in the classroom. You use all the tools at your disposal,if watching Blackadder starts a debate,job done.
I suspect most of the comments are a 'kneejerk',because Lord Baldrick happens to be a lefty.
Gove is utterly wrong about this, as someone might well be who has never stood in front of a class, except for some PR stunt.
Someone who has never had to inspire or engage in the classroom. You use all the tools at your disposal,if watching Blackadder starts a debate,job done.
I suspect most of the comments are a 'kneejerk',because Lord Baldrick happens to be a lefty.