Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Overlooking British Experiences

Electronic data

  • Overlooking British Experiences A Reply to Evershed

    Rights statement: © Matthew Johnson 2019. The definitive, peer reviewed and edited version of this article is published in Global Discourse: An interdisciplinary journal of current affairs, Volume 9, Number 3, September 2019, pp. 557-559

    Accepted author manuscript, 104 KB, PDF document

    Embargo ends: 23/03/21

    Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Overlooking British Experiences: a reply to Evershed

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Published
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>30/09/2019
<mark>Journal</mark>Global Discourse
Issue number3
Volume9
Number of pages3
Pages (from-to)557-559
Publication statusPublished
Original languageEnglish

Abstract

Jonathan Evershed presents a compelling account of the clear dangers that lie in forms of state-led remembrance. The danger is, of course, that, in commemorating, actual experience is lost. While I do not wish to challenge any of the core claims in the piece, I do think that there is one element that requires greater examination: Evershed’s claim that contemporary Irish conceptions of the First World War as ‘A war that stopped a war’ ‘contributes to a (post)colonial and militaristic nostalgia in British political culture’. While the dangers of that for Northern Ireland are clear, perhaps the greatest risks lie in England, since any such benign account of the conflict serves radically to distort the experience of those soldiers commonly regarded as identifying as British and painted as being motivated by patriotism. Drawing on experience from Tyneside, I argue that, in considering the nature of that conflict, we must remember the many diverse, and often banal, reasons for working class engagement in conflict.

Bibliographic note

© Matthew Johnson 2019. The definitive, peer reviewed and edited version of this article is published in Global Discourse: An interdisciplinary journal of current affairs, Volume 9, Number 3, September 2019, pp. 557-559