Jeremy Paxman is concerned.
 

Reported on the BBC, Jeremy Paxman states his reservations about the style of the UK government led "celebration of WW1". I presume that details of the planned events next year are starting to leak out? I wonder if there is a little party politics involved, in the form of jingoism and "celebration", rather than sad reflection?
Surely the commemorations should centre on a memorial day parade led by the Royal Family in July? Combined with the Rememberence Day in November, that would give two sombre days for reflection.

OAP

Jeremy Paxman is concerned. - Jeffrey Bernard is Unwell. Meh.


The foregoing is not intended in any way to be a comment upon Mr Paxman's state of health.

And people would complain if the Government did not take a lead. However, I would hope that thy would listen to, and heed, advice from RBL and other service charities and organisations.

But as we already said before, why celebrate (as quoted) the beginning of the war?

It just seems to be a 'good idea' to succeed the feel good effect of 2012, the Royal Birth of 2013, now 2014, and hallelujah an election in 2015.

Cynic, moi? Oui!

The centenary of the start of WW1 should not pass unmarked, but IMHO major ceremonies/commemorations would be more appropriate in 2018.

PS: What has it got to do with Paxman anyway - was he there? He is jus a "reporter", not maker of news, again IMHO

He has just released a book on the subject of World War 1 (Great Britain's Great War). No such thing as bad publicity!

We are going to 'celebrate' the slaughter of millions? I think Mr Cameron's use of the English language is a little unfortunate to say the least.

I'm inferring that he meant the following definition of 'celebrate':
<< to perform (a ritual, ceremony, etc.) publicly and formally: solemnize >>

Aah, enlightened self-interest, perhaps.............

Concerned about it becoming a Celebration huh, point out to him there is nothing Great about a War.. just misery


..

Having listened to the interview on Radio 2 Paxman related the events that had moved him to write the book and his interest in how the country marks the centenary. Essentially he was motivated by concerns that we are now moving from a period of personal first hand experience of the war to one of history. He was also concerned to address some of the misconceptions regarding WW 1 that have embed in popular culture. Given that he has taken an interest then I think it has everything to do with him and anyone else who takes an interest in how the event should be marked. Not a great fan of Paxman but good on him for getting involved.:D

Paxman's Great Uncle died in WW1.

I agree with him and have visited Flanders and Somme in last 2 Septembers and really believe that you need it to be a sombre reflection of WW1 not a hyped up XFactor style piece of crap.

A really good idea would be to ask every single school pupil to find a name of an individual who never came back and find a little bit of history about them as a way of remembering them.

I know my littlies are interested because I have pictures to show of the visits I made and we find a bit of history about random names whose graveyard photos I have taken.

There is no glory in war and CMD I don't think will understand that.

I believe some countries (like Germany) don't celebrate the war, as there see war as a bad thing not be be glorified.

Also, it's a naive British misconception that the French are a set of surrender monkeys. In reality the French had 1.69 million deaths and 4.26 million wounded during ww1 (much more than us, so much that I got confused thinking I had put the decimal point in the wrong place) and the French do not want another repeat. Therefore agreed to an armistice with the Germans in ww2 to protect their people.

Not quite.

We were invited to a memorial air show at Oldenberg one November. It was an 'at home' for the local townsfolk as well.

And of the French, they had an historically low birth rate approaching WW1 so their losses were proportionally worse as well.

'Jeremy Paxman is concerned' So he should be, that beard makes him look 10 years older!

gr4 true, and like so many of our national stereotypes, full of crap. Paxman discussed this as an example of the WW1 misconceptions he wanted to explore. I think I'll be placing an order for his book after all.

Agree with para 1 of your post.

Ref the PS: No he wasn't, were you?

Just a few observations.
Although I believe there is nothing great about a war, that does not mean that truly great things don't happen during wars. Conflict often shows not only the very worst of humanity, but also the vest best.

I know the phrase cheese eating surrender monkey very well, and also know the French people have fought on both sides in a world war, but I also know the French soldier to be as brave as any other. The French had some major successes in the Great War, and often out performed the Brits.

Also, I feel the French military has been shown to be a capable force in recent times, and has demonstrated a willingness to get involved where others have steared clear.

Many 'reporters' are also authors. The first man into Port Stanley was a journalist and author. Sandy Gaul was a reporter par excellence but made as much news reporting Afghanistan as anyone.

Why, one journalist reported even became Prime Minister, he certainly made news.

One has only to visit to the war graves at Ypres to realise what a dreadful waste of good men...from both sides, WW1 was. Nothing to celebrate next year but it should be an occasion for thoughtful reflection and remembrance.