- This topic has 6 voices and 9 replies.
-
Posts
-
In doing some research on the historiography of the first world war – in particular the controversy caused by Fritz Fischer in the early 1960s regarding Germany's war aims and grab for world power, I came across a quote that I thought offered a pretty succinct and thought provoking insight not only to the historiography of the times, but also to the national and diplomatic moods in the post war years:"Defeat caused bitterness and victory disappointment."Having read some 12-1500 pages in the last two weeks, here I find it in six words.
In doing some research on the historiography of the first world war - in particular the controversy caused by Fritz Fischer in the early 1960s regarding Germany's war aims and grab for world power, I came across a quote that I thought offered a pretty succinct and thought provoking insight not only to the historiography of the times, but also to the national and diplomatic moods in the post war years:"Defeat caused bitterness and victory disappointment."Having read some 12-1500 pages in the last two weeks, here I find it in six words.
I read this book in graduate school and I recall that it was guaranteed to produce heated discussions as itdeviated from what was then the orthodox interpretation of the Versailles treaty. In your six words youdescribed the years between 1918 and 1939 perfectly and they are, as you suggested, apropos at othertimes. I trust that this sort of radical condensation will not become the standard text at schools--it would put the test makers out of business.
"Defeat caused bitterness and victory disappointment."
What do you mean by "...and victory disappointment"?
The original quote referenced the Pyrrhic nature of the Allied victory and the fact that the after the war Europe pretty much went back to the status quo Ante Bellum. If you were a Frenchmen in 1918 you would be disappointed with the results of a war that cost several million lives and resulted in the regaining of two culturally German provinces wouldn't you? Or how about Britain, they did not really see any material gain from the victory in the War did they? Both Britain and France went from creditor to debtor nations and furthermore lost the cream of a generation to the bloody fighting in the trenches and campaign diseases. All in all, I would agree that from certain perspectives it was a very disappointing victory.
I think Scout hit the nail on the head – although the allied nations were rejoicing that the war was over and that Germany was being punished under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, many of the war aims of the allied nations were not achieved. As for those that were attained, the cost was inordinately high. The European economy was in shambles, a generation was lost, and the League of Nations was born impotent. The great “War to End All Wars” only increased the horror of war and rather than stablizing the continent established a power vacuum.
I see. When I read the first post, I thought the quote referred only to Germany, and so I was wondering what kind of “victory” this was referring to (intangible or otherwise).
Can I insert a Pink Floyd quote here?From Goodbye Blue Sky:"the promise of a Brave New World unfurled beneath the clear blue sky"Wasn't the novel Brave New World about how what a wonderful utopia Europe will be like after WWI?The bombing of London (which is what Roger Waters was writiing about) kind of changed all that I'd say.
I think you are referencing Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, the Wikipedia summary is actually pretty good. An interesting, somewhat utopian, look at the future of Britain. It kind of has overtones of 1984 but actually has a very dystopian view once you read the whole thing.Incidentally, dystopian books ahve very much gained in popularity over the last few years. Some of them are actually pretty good, but depressing.
I don't want to go too far off topic, but from what I recall of reading Brave New World some years ago, it paints a kind of “utopia”, but one which is viewed by Huxley as a thinly-veiled nightmare. As Scout suggests, it is in the same vein as 1984 in this regard. I thought the book was written in the 1930s (could be wrong about that) so I'm not sure that its “prediction” of a post-World War I world would have been all that immediate since they were already living in the post-WWI world at the time. With this said, Brave New World is a very interesting read, and I think that it's more relevant now than ever. In fact, our society is eerily moving toward the vision of BNW. If anyone wants to discuss the book in more detail, we can start a thread and go over it.
