Katie Elizabeth Stewart Posted 22 August , 2007 Share Posted 22 August , 2007 Having read one of the series, a book entitled 'A Test to Destruction', I heard something that made me feel a bit dubious about the author. He was Henry Williamson, who also wrote 'Tarkah the Otter'. My English teacher told me he was a fascist. I would be obliged to anyone who could tell me a bit more about the man, and also perhaps give me their opinion on the aforementioned chronicles. Thanks in advance, Katie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Reed Posted 22 August , 2007 Share Posted 22 August , 2007 Hi Katie - Henry Williamson was a member of the British Union of Fascists in the 1930s, as indeed were many Great War veterans of some note. You can read more about him here: http://www.henrywilliamson.co.uk/ Despite some aspects of his political beliefs and character, in my opinion his writing on the Great War are amongst the best there is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Procat Posted 22 August , 2007 Share Posted 22 August , 2007 Hi Katie, That ever present font of (sometimes misleading) knowledge has a page on the gent: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Williamson Doug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katie Elizabeth Stewart Posted 22 August , 2007 Author Share Posted 22 August , 2007 Thanks very much for the information. I'm afraid I would have to disagree that Williamson's works are among the finest that there are, or at least, on 'A Chronicle of Ancient Sunlight' - the impression I get is that he sometimes strains too hard to sound individual. I did, however, enjoy his 'Patriot's Progress' - it was more simple, and I thought more effective. I found the ending particularly poignant. With regards to H.W being a fascist, I can understand it to some extent. Perhaps he just took reconiciliation with his Great War enemies too far, and became overly partial to Germans, even Nazis! The Hitler Youth Movement would also have been extremely momentous, and I can imagine there were many who became caught up in it. As well, Henry William's story from a personal point of view was ulitmately very sad, and he never really reaped the rewards he deserved. I won't let the image of him as a Nazis sympathiser deter me from enjoying his work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Reed Posted 22 August , 2007 Share Posted 22 August , 2007 Hi Katie - I would try and read all 15 Chronicle novels from start to finish, rather than one in isolation. You might revise your opinion of his writings, and the whole story will make more sense. But of course, not everyone has time to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katie Elizabeth Stewart Posted 22 August , 2007 Author Share Posted 22 August , 2007 Hi Katie - I would try and read all 15 Chronicle novels from start to finish, rather than one in isolation. You might revise your opinion of his writings, and the whole story will make more sense. But of course, not everyone has time to do that. I would have to concede your point there, Paul - I've managed to get my hands on 'How dear is life', which I know is somewhere random in the middle of the Chronicles too, however if I get a moment this holiday I will at least read that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truthergw Posted 22 August , 2007 Share Posted 22 August , 2007 ................... With regards to H.W being a fascist, I can understand it to some extent. Perhaps he just took reconiciliation with his Great War enemies too far, and became overly partial to Germans, even Nazis! ...................... The political scene between the wars tended to be polarised between the extreme right and the extreme left. The first fascists in government incidentally, were Italian with Mussolini at their head and later Franco's Phalangists in Spain. Hitler and his National Socialists were part of a trend. Here in Britain we had Oswald Moseley who was interned during WW2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katie Elizabeth Stewart Posted 22 August , 2007 Author Share Posted 22 August , 2007 H.W enjoyed being controversial. He also comes across as too attached to the capital order of things (he makes frequent reference to 'toffs' as well as servants in their proper places) for Bolshevism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiegeGunner Posted 22 August , 2007 Share Posted 22 August , 2007 It's easy, with the benefit of hindsight, to make harsh judgements on people who were attracted by some aspects of the nationalist movements in Europe between the wars. The crunch came when the fascist regimes in Europe became more aggressive and turned from enhancing the life of their people at the expense of their own 'old order' to enriching and aggrandising their countries at the expense of other peoples. At that point, the majority of informed outside observers took off their rose-tinted spectacles and after a period of forlornly hoping/working for peace, accepted the inevitability of war and, when it came, gave their whole-hearted support to the Allied war effort. How many of us older members, who were leftish idealists in the 70s, initially supported the transfer of power in Zimbabwe to the ZANU/ZAPU coalition, and have since passed from bitter disillusionment to disgust (some of it at ourselves) and fury at the Mugabe regime? Reading the works of people we disagree with politically is one of the ways we test and re-affirm our own beliefs. Mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katie Elizabeth Stewart Posted 22 August , 2007 Author Share Posted 22 August , 2007 Mick, I couldn't agree with you more, and by no means was I censuring Williamson for his beliefs. As for his work thus far, I couldn't think of a single word in it that indicated his political stance - on the contrary, he shows himself in many ways to be open-minded, although of course his attitude towards the working classes was very much in keeping with the attitude of the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 22 August , 2007 Share Posted 22 August , 2007 I am currently on Volume 3 (1908 or so). I agree with KE that his politics are not obvious. His writing is a bit patchy - very good in parts but he is a bit 2nd Eleven. His portrait of his rather repellent and cold hearted father is very good. I will stick with it into the Great War. Some fascinating historical snippets - like the police speed trap for motors doing more than 20 mph in South Londom. Plus ca change. Alan Clark rated him as an historical source which I suppose is a recommendation of sorts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katie Elizabeth Stewart Posted 22 August , 2007 Author Share Posted 22 August , 2007 I have to say I never realised Philip Maddison's documented journey begun before 1914! Well, that just goes to show my ignorance... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian turner Posted 22 August , 2007 Share Posted 22 August , 2007 It is worth reading the Chronicles even if for just an idea of life in the first half of the 20th Century. I particularly enjoyed the Great War volumes. Maybe before that, have a read of 'The Wet Flanders Plain' - Williamson's account of a trip back to the battlefields. There are a few marvellous descriptions in there - I particularly remember the description of a troop train arriving at Pop, and the driver dashing through the station to avoid being shelled; the vivid description of the large shell passing overhead - like a diamond cutting a great arc in glass - well, anyway I won't spoil it with a misquote. Don't get bogged down in politics, enjoy the read. He was a thorough researcher when penning his novels. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanA Posted 22 August , 2007 Share Posted 22 August , 2007 very good in parts but he is a bit 2nd Eleven. His portrait of his rather repellent and cold hearted father is very good. Tsk! I would say he has flaws (he is inclined to self pity) but he is still a great writer. The monumental span of the Chronicle is breath-taking and anyone who has not read Tarka since their school days is in for a treat. Part of his genius is that he can portray an individual, like his father, as negative and yet do this sympathetically. I imagine Maddison's father to be very typical of his day. He went to great lengths to get details right too, he was not present at the Battle of Loos yet many people reading his account in the Chronicle believe he must have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 22 August , 2007 Share Posted 22 August , 2007 Ian - I am very much looking to the Great War volumes but over the first 2.5 volumes, CAS has not established his greatness with me . Perhaps I should delay judgement though. Yes there is a lot of it, but for me this is a source of trepidation rather than anticipation at the moment. There are just too many slabs of really average prose. "Never mind the quality feel the width". He ain't no Tolstoy or Proust. I am underwhelmed at the moment but sticking with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katie Elizabeth Stewart Posted 22 August , 2007 Author Share Posted 22 August , 2007 I'm probably more inclined to ianw's side of the fence at the moment, but I too shall not come down really firmly on either side until I have read more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
linden Posted 2 September , 2007 Share Posted 2 September , 2007 I'm probably more inclined to ianw's side of the fence at the moment, but I too shall not come down really firmly on either side until I have read more. Henry Williamson had German cousins and this experience is part of the novels . He appears in the 1964 BBC series "The Great War" , describing the 1914 Christmas truce . I found the books compelling when I read them years ago , because they attempted to portray and explain peoples feelings and behaviour without pulling any punches. In the WW1 books all the thoughts and feelings of the young man going into war seemed to be uncomfortably complex and honest. Linden Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katie Elizabeth Stewart Posted 3 September , 2007 Author Share Posted 3 September , 2007 Linden, I'd agree with you about the complexity of Philip Maddison's character. To me, the books are also very much concerned with social status, a topic that seems unavoidable when you consider the Great War, as I suppose in effect life on the Western Front was just a great melting pot of all the different levels of the hierarchy. On a personal level, Henry Williamson's account of the Christmas Day Truce is also convincing - I can't remember a lot of it, but I do remember being particularly entranced (and moved) by the ethereal vision he had of the Christmas tree lights hovering a few feet above the ground opposite, where the German lines were, and subsequently how the British soldiers, speculating about what they were, (wondering whether they were some kind of apallingly innovative new weapon!) felt so uneasy. In fact, I was so moved about Henry Williamson's experiences of the Christmas Day Truce 1914 that I once wrote a short children's story version of them for my mum to read out in her school assembally! Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the man, for all my English teacher tells me he was a fascist!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 4 September , 2007 Share Posted 4 September , 2007 Kate - Yes but a thinking man's fascist! Interesting how much we now drag in a man's beliefs , sexuality etc into an evaluation of his literary work. Owen springs to mind. We also have the current case of the child molesting teacher whose well-regarded music theory books are now threatened with removal from schools. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanA Posted 4 September , 2007 Share Posted 4 September , 2007 "Henry Williamson's account of the Christmas Day Truce is also convincing " Unlike Loos, HW was actually there. He was serving as a private with the London Rifle Brigade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted 4 September , 2007 Share Posted 4 September , 2007 Kate - Yes but a thinking man's fascist! Surely an oxymoron? I must admit to being put off the mans writings because of his political background....having said that being force fed Tarka the Otter at school didn't really endear me to him in the first place. Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katie Elizabeth Stewart Posted 4 September , 2007 Author Share Posted 4 September , 2007 I know he was there, I looked him up! As I have also explained in previous posts, I do not believe Henry Williamson's fascism stemmed from any personal failing of his, other than perhaps a desire to differ from the conventional and be perceived as a radical. However, I cannot agree with your comparison between Owen's sexuality and Williamson's beliefs. You are, by implication, denegrating homosexuals to the same villified status as fascists, and I would strongly advise against getting me started on gay rights!! Whereas fascism demonstrates ridiculous Nationalistic pride, xenophobia and racism, Owen's homosexuality only made him feel more acutely the sufferings of his brother soldiers. I know he was there Ian A, I looked him up! Ian w, As I have also explained in previous posts, I do not believe Henry Williamson's fascism stemmed from any personal failing of his, other than perhaps a desire to differ from the conventional and be perceived as a radical. However, I cannot agree with your comparison between Owen's sexuality and Williamson's beliefs. You are, by implication, denegrating homosexuals to the same villified status as fascists, and I would strongly advise against getting me started on gay rights!! Whereas fascism demonstrates ridiculous Nationalistic pride, xenophobia and racism, Owen's homosexuality only made him feel more acutely the sufferings of his brother soldiers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted 4 September , 2007 Share Posted 4 September , 2007 Owen's homosexuality only made him feel more acutely the sufferings of his brother soldiers. Not wanting to open up the Owen/homosexuality debate again but to say that Owen felt the suffering of his men more because he was gay is, in my opinion, complete and utter nonsense. Are you honestly saying that heterosexual males are not able to feel the same level of compassion for their fellow man as are gay men? Evidence please - empirical, not anecdotal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katie Elizabeth Stewart Posted 4 September , 2007 Author Share Posted 4 September , 2007 It's common sense, isn't it? And besides, I was not talking about compassion: I meant quite simply the actual physical pain of being wounded. Of course, when the body is one that you love, seeing it maimed hurts you in a manner different from the conventional: hence the sensuality of Owen's poetry, and the occasional almost masochistic element creeping in, you said empirical evidence Max, voila: Though from his throat The life-tide leaps There was no threat on his lips But with the bitter blood And the death-smell All his life's sweetness bled Into a smile If you really want me to analyse it I will, but I have to say it's totally irrelevant to the point I was trying to make. I did not seek to offend anyone (something I seem all too apt to do at the moment, quite simply by stating how I feel - what's wrong with that???) my only objection was the comparison between Owen's homosexuality and Williamson's fascism, quite frankly, there is no comparison. How can I say it without causing people to lay into me?? Well, I don't know, I'm only young not that that's any excuse at all of course, but what I meant to say... what I meant to say is, fascism is, well, you know, kind of wrong, and homosexuality...no, I'm afraid I can't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 4 September , 2007 Share Posted 4 September , 2007 Max asked Are you honestly saying that heterosexual males are not able to feel the same level of compassion for their fellow man as are gay men? Katie replied It's common sense, isn't it? John commented. "No. It's bullsh*t" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now