Shattered Glory The NZ Experience at Gallipoli and the Western Front

[Herekawe]

I got this new book out of the library.

This is a New Zealand book from one of our most prolific writers who has already touched on the Great War topic with "Western Front - The NZ Division in WW1. The book promises to "illuminate NZ's human experience during these two First World War campaigns, exploring the darker side of NZs iconic symbols of national identity and explaining some of the realities behind the twenty first century mythology".

As I don't go much for iconic symbols and mythology, I admit, I was prepared to dislike this book before even gettting it off the shelf. My reason is that when it comes to the Great War there is a tendency I believe among the majority of my fellow countrymen to wallow in extemis in the negative aspects of the whole conflict and completely ignore the bravey and accomplishments of the NZ Division in France and Flanders. Thus the war has come to be Gallipoli and 1st Passchendaele, two bloody defeats, the Somme, Flers, Messines, Broodsiende, Somme 1918 and the 100 days are basically forgotten.

Certainly this is the case in this book. From the start of the war to the Gallipoli evacuation takes half the book. However it is well written and highly readable, the descriptions of Chunuk Bair as always leave me wondering how the exhusted and disease ridden NZers got up that hill and hung on, and feeling sad for the English troops "boys and skinny young men" who were sent up there to help and replace the NZers and fought bravely and mostly to the death.

The Western Front section is also well written and easily red. However there is nothing new or engaging in Wrights treatment of these topics his treatment is conventional and when it comes to Haig and the general management of the war it is fair but possibly even slightly dated. As expected the Somme 1916 is covered in a couple of pages, as is Messines and Broodsiende, Passchendaele gets a chapter but the actions of the NZ Division in helping to stop the German advance in 1918 and then the part they played in capturing Bapaume and the advances toward Cambrai (March to November) are covered in 12 pages.

The points which Wright raises about the effects on NZ society are true to some extent and he may have a point but I think fails to develop it. I certainly think NZ fairly rapidly acquired a strangely negative attitude to the war, which persists until today. The years between the war were not kind to NZ, or really anyone else. I am not convinced NZ's experience was different to other countries. I think NZs negative attitude is demonstrated for example by our memorialisation on the battlefields which was very modest. Newfoundland made their Memorial Park, Carabou statues, Canada has Vimy and Sth Africa Deville Wood as their centre pieces, Australia over the years has built many memorials and is still at it - good on them all. NZ has our modest, but beautiful memorials at Longueval, Mesen and Gravenstafel (possibly could have done with two or three more) plus our memorials to the missing. Even today these are not well supported with explanatory material - just stuck onto the land scape. As well the government didn't permit private inscriptions on grave stones which I personally find weird, the personal inscriptions can be the most moving part of a cemetery visit. It almost as if it decided there was to be a minimalisation of personal input.

In conclusion I liked this book much better than I thought I would. It resists the temptation to really wallow in the negative. It is well written and easily read. It could be a useful book for someone wanting a broad overview of NZ participation in the Great War. Due to its broad but shallow coverage of the war it is unlikely to appeal to members of the GWF who probably would expect more meat. It is well referenced and has endnotes, bibliograhpy and index.

James

[JoMH]

Thanks for the summary, James.

JH

[Robert Dunlop]

Thanks, James. The 'negative' attitude is an interesting theme. When I grew up in Papatoetoe, there were many veterans still living. I never perceived a negative attitude. The veterans themselves were always held in respect but there was no fuss about it. People did not make a big thing about these issues, at least not openly. As to the memory of those who had died, I have two vivid recollections. One is the first visit to the Auckland War Memorial Museum some 45 years ago. The names of main battles feature around the outside of the building. Inside, there are the memorial walls, with all the names of the fallen. It was deeply impressive, and a very significant commemoration IMHO. The other recollection is the Anzac Day parades, which I attended as a cub scout. These were the instances when the veterans held centre stage.

Just some personal anecdotes, FWIIW.

Robert

[phil andrade]

Surprising to hear about the negativity of the Kiwi approach.....to my mind, New Zealanders never appeared to be afflicted with the same hyped up, resentful "anti Pom" syndrome that we see exemplifed by some Australian commentary. I always liked to think that Mel Gibson wouldn't cut the ice with the Kiwis ! Just to see those words " From the utmost end of the World/Earth" (?) - please correct me , I remember seeing words like that on their memorials - says it all. Good Kiwi understatement....less is more.

Phil (PJA)

[Herekawe]

Hi

I guess that is why I used the words "strangely negative" to try and express what I was saying. I remember walking around town with my Grandmother who would stop and chat to these men of about her age and after they had walked on she would sometimes say to us "Mr ... is a returned man". The way she said it was a term of respect and although we children weren't clear about what a "returned man" was it was plain she approved of them and she kept high standards.

I also remember her comment - not completely true of course - that the politicians who got in during the 30s with the Labour Govt were "conchies" in the Great War but quick enough to send everyone off to war in the WW2. Perhaps more of an indication that she was a bit cynical about the whole situation but perhaps it is also an indication that politically there wasn't the will to do much about remembering NZ's role overseas after the 1920s. No official history has ever been written for NZ in the Great War, no new memorials and so on. If I was a true cynic I would say we only got our unknown soldier back because Australia did - and we like to keep up with them.

I discussed this with my parents ( they were born in the 20s) years ago when I first got interested in the Great War. Their opinion was that there was and is a lot of individual respect for those men who went overseas; the 20s and 30s were not a great time for NZ as a whole, not really a land fit for heroes. Then with the depression and another war the Great War came to be seen as a waste of effort, perhaps even downgraded in peoples minds compared with WW2 which was far more sweeping with NZ directly threatened by the Japanese and so on. To cap it off WW2 was followed by general prosperity for NZ.

These are sort of the points I think Wright could have developed a bit more in depth, but I don't think that NZ's experience was that much different to other countries.

There are many war memorials in NZ and they provide a community focus for remembrance, but to have done more in France and Belgium would have required government action which just didn't happen.

Perhaps it is more of a case that NZ opinion about the Great War followed the rest of the world downwards after the 1950s but while everyone else's opinon has swung back to a more balanced view we remain stuck with a very negative interpretation of 1914-18.

James