A small screen alternative to stone and bronze: The Great War series and British television

This article examines the first major British television series about the First World War, The Great War (BBC, 1964), in terms of its cultural, historical and aesthetic significance. As a central component of the BBC`s 50th anniversary commemorative programme to mark the outbreak of war, the series was a major media event -a small-screen memorial cast in sounds and images instead of stone and bronze. This article looks at how the British television audience responded to this form of on-screen commemoration. Material for this article was derived from the series' extensive production records housed in the BBC Written Archives Centre at Caversham, Berkshire. This was supplemented by, among other sources, material from interviews and correspondence with several surviving members of the production team. This allows a broader understanding of the motivations of those involved in the production of a groundbreaking historical series, while acknowledging the wide-ranging nature of its audience. [From the Publisher]

The Great War on the small screen: televisual narratives of the First World War.

In Britain since the 1960s television has been the site where the Western Front of popular culture has clashed with the Western Front of history. This talk will examine the ways in which those involved in the production of historical documentaries for this most influential media have struggled to communicate the stories of the First World War to British audiences. From the landmark epic series The Great War (BBC, 1964) up to more recent controversial productions such as The Trench (BBC, 2002) and Not Forgotten: The Men Who Wouldn't Fight (BBC, 2008), Emma Hanna will give an overview of the production, broadcast and reception of a number of British television documentaries to examine the difficult relationship between the war's history and its popular memory. [From the Author]

State power matters: power, the state and political struggle in the post-war American novel

This article is concerned with resituating the state at the centre of the analytical stage and, concomitantly, with drawing attention to the dangers of losing sight of the state as a locus of power. It seeks to uncover the relationship between two related lines of critical inquiry: Marxist and Foucauldian theories of the state; and the attempts by three postwar American novelist (Ken Kesey, William Burroughs and E.L. Doctorow) to determine the nature and extent of this power and to consider under what conditions political struggle might be possible. It argues that such a move is needed because recent critical analysis has been too preoccupied by corporeal micropolitics and global macropolitics, and that the postwar American novel can help us in this move because it is centrally concerned with the repressive potentiality of the US state. It maintains that the resuscitation of Marxist state theories in early 1970s and a debate between Poulantzas and Foucault is intriguingly foreshadowed and even critiqued by these novels. Consequently, it concludes that these novels constitute an unrecognized pre-history of what would become one of the key intellectual debates of the late twentieth century: an engagement between Marxist and post-structuralist conceptions of the power and resistance.

The origins of the control of information in war coverage

The conflict’s coverage, since its inception, has been closely linked to the relationship that both the military and the media have. The freedom they maintained during their first conflicts, although not without problems, though they suffered strict censorship suffered during World War I, and lastly the straitjacket treatment that they have endured during recent wars. The Vietnam War marked a turning point in this relationship, and after the invasion of Grenada, the military would launch new information guidelines, called Department of Defense National Media Pool. The lack of clear guidance of both control and space, has made for a complicated relationship between media and military, so the rules have evolved after every conflict shaping the future of press coverage and thus, war reporting.