• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Britain's view of its history 'dangerous' says former British Museum director

Status
Not open for further replies.
https://www.theguardian.com/culture...-says-former-museum-director?CMP=share_btn_tw

Neil MacGregor, the former director of the British Museum, has bemoaned Britain’s narrow view of its own history, calling it “dangerous and regrettable” for focusing almost exclusively on the “sunny side”.

Speaking before the Berlin opening of his highly popular exhibition Germany – Memories of a Nation, MacGregor expressed his admiration for Germany’s rigorous appraisal of its history which he said could not be more different to that of Britain.

“In Britain we use our history in order to comfort us to make us feel stronger, to remind ourselves that we were always, always deep down, good people,” he said. “Maybe we mention a little bit of slave trade here and there, a few wars here and there, but the chapters we insist on are the sunny ones,” he said.

MacGregor warned: “This sort of handling of history is dangerous as well as regrettable”.

Germany’s approach towards accounting for its Nazi past had been in contrast “rigorous and courageous”, and had earned it admiration around the world, he said, speaking in fluent German.

He said Germans had given expression to their the worst chapter of their history in extensive memorials and Mahnmale (‘monuments to national shame’). “It’s telling that in English we don’t even have a word like ‘Mahnmal’,” he said. “The term is just too alien to us.”

MacGregor said that an example of how Britain was selective with the truth was the defeat of Napoleon Bonaparte at the Battle of Waterloo. “We learn in school that it was the Britons who finally, finally beat Bonaparte in Waterloo and got rid of him,” he said. But it was often forgotten that it had been an Anglo-Prussian alliance that defeated him. “As Wellington himself said, without Blücher, (the commander of the Prussian army, Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher) we wouldn’t have managed to defeat him ... This was joint German-British effort, but we don’t learn it that way”.

Gereon Sievernich, director of the Martin Gropius Bau where the exhibition is due to open on Saturday, thanked MacGregor and the exhibition’s curator, Barrie Cook, for having “given the Britons another view of Germany, and for giving the Germans their Germany back.”

Memories of a Nation, which showed at the British Museum and was accompanied by a BBC Radio series, explores the memories of a united Germany through 200 diverse objects, including the first motor car, from the 1880s, the entry gate to the Buchenwald concentration camp, and a wet suit used by someone trying to escape communist East Germany via the Baltic Sea.

MacGregor said the exhibition was conceived some time before the EU referendum. But he said the exhibition’s glimpse at Germany’s long tradition of decentralisation of power – for hundreds of years it consisted of many kingdoms each with their own currency – highlighted one of the major differences between Britain and Germany. “If you’re looking for reasons for Brexit, just the idea there were no hard and fast borders in Germany explains ... how Europe is shaped today, but makes an island folk like ours panic,” he said.

MacGregor, who is also involved in creating the Humboldt Forum in Berlin, a new German equivalent to the British Museum, said he was curious to see how the British view of German history would be received by the public in Berlin, following the success of its London run. He said he would welcome a similar exhibition about British history from a German perspective, “precisely because it be helpful for us to have our own history explained to us from an outside perspective,” he said.

Interesting to note especially given Brexit and the 'special snowflake' insistence that Europe give in to UK demands because 'we're British and don't need Europe'. I'd say this whole Brexit bullshit has opened my eyes on how there is a sense of 'British exceptionalism' even though Americans take most of the flak for believing they're 'exceptional'.
 

PJV3

Member
I've felt it getting worse for a while, romanticising the war and wanking over anything related to it.
 

therealjay

Neo Member
You could replace the word British with American and it'd read pretty well.

I don't know much about Napoleon and I'm not downplaying America's role in both the Pacific and Euro theaters in WW2. Allies likely wouldn't have won without them.

BUT people here constantly forget that Germany invading Russia and Russia paying in as many lives as they did was just as big a contribution. If not bigger at least in the Euro theater.

I guess we are probably culturally more similar to England then anyone else so it makes sense. The bit about Napeleon just struct me though because it's so familiar.
 
“We learn in school that it was the Britons who finally, finally beat Bonaparte in Waterloo and got rid of him,” he said. But it was often forgotten that it had been an Anglo-Prussian alliance that defeated him. “

This is something I'd expect from like an American textbook. That's fucked.
 

gerg

Member
Interesting to note especially given Brexit and the 'special snowflake' insistence that Europe give in to UK demands because 'we're British and don't need Europe'. I'd say this whole Brexit bullshit has opened my eyes on how there is a sense of 'British exceptionalism' even though Americans take most of the flak for believing they're 'exceptional'.

This sense of British exceptionalism (for right or wrong) will always be somewhat within the British psyche if only for the geography of Britain being a small island adjacent to a much larger continent.

However, it is definitely exacerbated by a series of foundation myths (such as Britain's role in the Second World War) that are taken to highlight the capacity of Britain's independent power.
 

Switch Back 9

a lot of my threads involve me fucking up somehow. Perhaps I'm a moron?
You could replace the word British with American and it'd read pretty well.

I don't know much about Napoleon and I'm not downplaying America's role in both the Pacific and Euro theaters in WW2. Allies likely wouldn't have won without them.

BUT people here constantly forget that Germany invading Russia and Russia paying in as many lives as they did was just as big a contribution. If not bigger at least in the Euro theater.

I guess we are probably culturally more similar to England then anyone else so it makes sense. The bit about Napeleon just struct me though because it's so familiar.

WWII was basically Germany vs. Russia feat. The Allies. It's not even close.
 

sant

Member
Well if you had the largest empire in history and are now struggling for relevance in the current world order, no shit people are going to look at the past favourably
 

KonradLaw

Member
I think there should be some sort of sensible middle ground. Not ignore your past, but also don't be fully controlled by guilt, the way germans are now.
 

SuperHans

Member
I had a conversation with a guy in Belfast who praised all of the atrocities committed during Colonolialism. He said they were good tactics.

Felt ill as he justified genocide and war crimes.

I read this quote today made by Nassau William Senior a political advisor that the Great Irish Famine of 1845 "would not kill more than one million people, and that would scarcely be enough to do any good".
 

Pancake Mix

Copied someone else's pancake recipe
I think there should be some sort of sensible middle ground. Not ignore your past, but also don't be fully controlled by guilt, the way germans are now.

I don't know, I think the Germans are quite proud of how they bounced back after WWII, which is history. Also, the astounding efficiency with which they captured their worst moments and froze them in time is truly remarkable. Japan could learn a lot from Germany.

WWII was basically Germany vs. Russia feat. The Allies. It's not even close.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Without the British Empire and the U.S., the U.S.S.R. would have fallen. As it was, the Nazis got to the suburbs of Moscow and Leningrad.
 

Derwind

Member
You could replace the word British with American and it'd read pretty well.

I don't know much about Napoleon and I'm not downplaying America's role in both the Pacific and Euro theaters in WW2. Allies likely wouldn't have won without them.

BUT people here constantly forget that Germany invading Russia and Russia paying in as many lives as they did was just as big a contribution. If not bigger at least in the Euro theater.

I guess we are probably culturally more similar to England then anyone else so it makes sense. The bit about Napeleon just struct me though because it's so familiar.

Just by sheer numbers Russia had the most casualties of any nation in WW2. Not trying to defend Russia's role in WW2 either.
 

therealjay

Neo Member
It was basically Germany vs. Russian manpower & American industry power.

Well Yes. And the US in the pacific. People also often forget about America's involvement in the Pacific and this Germany was the only threat.

Despite that. Yes American's always forget about how much blood Russia spilled to topple the Nazis.
 

avaya

Member
WWII was basically Germany vs. Russia feat. The Allies. It's not even close.

Russian's lost the most lives but the American's supplied the industrial power that cemented victory across all theatres.

I know people try to downplay the US role because it's the in-thing to do but no one was going to win shit without the US.
 

Pancake Mix

Copied someone else's pancake recipe
While Switch Back 9 is objectively wrong, it's true that the U.S.S.R. lost more than anyone, ever, in a war, and still never fell.

and British spirit!!!!

You may be mocking, but it's pretty true. By the end of the war, Canada had the world's fifth largest navy, which is very disproportionate to population in 1945. The British Empire had its last moment of superpower status in WWII, along with the US and USSR.
 

Akiraptor

Member
WWII was basically Germany vs. Russia feat. The Allies. It's not even close.

This isn't completely accurate. Yes, the Soviets played a much larger role than the western allies, but they did next to nothing in defeating Japan (until the final days of the Pacific War) and the allies played a major role in North Africa and in the landings at Normandy.

The Soviets broke Nazi Germany, but had there not been a strong western alliance to take German troops off the eastern front (particularly the Luftwaffe), the war may have ended in more of a stalemate. While the eastern war is criminally understated in western education books, the allies weren't just a side show, and had they not been there the entirety of continental Europe might've been rolled over by the Soviets following their defeat of Germany.

I agree that the focus of WW2 needs to be on the eastern front, and the notion that WW2 was a "good vs. evil" conflict is ridiculous, but the allies' roles were important. There was a big reason why the German leaders (outside Hitler) wanted to avoid getting the US involved in the European theater.
 

Madness

Member
I don't know, I think the Germans are quite proud of how they bounced back after WWII, which is history. Also, the astounding efficiency with which they captured their worst moments and froze them in time is truly remarkable. Japan could learn a lot from Germany.

They bounced back because they were bent over and completely lost half their country to the communists and the other half the US/UK/France and were then effectively ruled by both sides. US and UK investment rebuilt West Germany and soviet militarization and ideology built up East Germany. Most of Nazi Germanys top researchers were also taken in by the US etc. You are romanticizing what really happened.

Almost all of Germany's knowhow was effectively seized, patents, industry etc. Then you had the forced labor of thousands of Germans rebuild up industry, and the infusion of billions of dollars under the Marshall plan to being Germany back.

Japan largely avoided the destruction Germany did, maintained most of it's land, and its industry was also built similary to Germany early on but rapidly surpassed them to where in the 1980's they were a technical and economic superpower. Had they not capitulated to US economic pressure they would have grown even stronger.
 

Switch Back 9

a lot of my threads involve me fucking up somehow. Perhaps I'm a moron?
I think that would be doing a disservice to the amount of long term damage the Japanese Empire did in the Pacific theatre.

I meant specifically the European theatre, should have qualified that.

This isn't completely accurate. Yes, the Soviets played a much larger role than the western allies, but they did next to nothing in defeating Japan (until the final days of the Pacific War) and the allies played a major role in North Africa and in the landings at Normandy.

The Soviets broke Nazi Germany, but had there not been a strong western alliance to take German troops off the eastern front (particularly the Luftwaffe), the war may have ended in more of a stalemate. While the eastern war is criminally understated in western education books, the allies weren't just a side show, and had they not been there the entirety of continental Europe might've been rolled over by the Soviets following their defeat of Germany.

I agree that the focus of WW2 needs to be on the eastern front, and the notion that WW2 was a "good vs. evil" conflict is ridiculous, but the allies' roles were important. There was a big reason why the German leaders (outside Hitler) wanted to avoid getting the US involved in the European theater.

Solid points, agreed.
 

jelly

Member
This is a weird love of the British Empire and along with the current climate, it seems to be the undercurrent. Quite unsettling and blinkered.
 
You may be mocking, but it's pretty true. By the end of the war, Canada had the world's fifth largest navy, which is very disproportionate to population in 1945. The British Empire had its last moment of superpower status in WWII, along with the US and USSR.

Well Britain arguably lost its super power status by the end of the war, being so exhausted and also bankrupt to fuck. It's mainly rhetoric that caused Britain's falling contribution to the war by 1945 to be seen as more than it was.

I think the best analogy I've heard for it is Russian blood, American dollars, and British brains won the war.

edit - Britain and the empire might have fought alone for a year, but that was also a year of mostly defeat after defeat, and no hope of overall victory in sight. Only Russian entry into the war opened up the distinct possibility of victory, and only huge American resources made it possible for Britain to overcome weakness from early in the war and begin rolling back the Axis in the Mediterranean and middle east.
 

Pancake Mix

Copied someone else's pancake recipe
They bounced back because they were bent over and completely lost half their country to the communists and the other half the US/UK/France and were then effectively ruled by both sides. US and UK investment rebuilt West Germany and soviet militarization and ideology built up East Germany. Most of Nazi Germanys top researchers were also taken in by the US etc. You are romanticizing what really happened.

Almost all of Germany's knowhow was effectively seized, patents, industry etc. Then you had the forced labor of thousands of Germans rebuild up industry, and the infusion of billions of dollars under the Marshall plan to being Germany back.

Japan largely avoided the destruction Germany did, maintained most of it's land, and its industry was also built similary to Germany early on but rapidly surpassed them to where in the 1989's they were a technical and economic superpower. Had they not capitulated to US economic pressure they would have grown even stronger.

Even East Germany was the best performing country in the East Bloc not long after the Soviets took most of its infrastructure as reparations. That's amazing.

But yes, Japan's state of growth to become the world's second largest economy in 1990 is something else. But a united Germany hit #3 in 1995. Lesser countries would have buckled after WWII, not thrived.

Well Britain arguably lost its super power status by the end of the war, being so exhausted and also bankrupt to fuck. It's mainly rhetoric that caused Britain's falling contribution to the war by 1945 to be seen as more than it was.

I think the best analogy I've heard for it is Russian blood, American dollars, and British brains won the war.

Britain did indeed lose its superpower status at the end of the war. I fully agree with you my friend. In fact, it was so bad that the Royal Mint abandoned silver for coinage (which had already been debased from Sterling or .925 fine to .500 fine in 1920) in 1947 and melted it down to pay back the Americans. There was a long period of austerity after WWII and it took everything out of the UK. Was worth it though!

Also got an amazing Iron Maiden song out of it:

1984 - Iron Maiden - Aces High (Live in Chicago)
 

Zaph

Member
So much truth.

American Exceptionalism gets referenced a lot, but I think our British exceptionalism is far worse. It's not as overt, but permeates every facet of our society.

People think they don't have to change, their kids don't have to change, and one day we'll go back to how it was for them and their parents. What they don't realise is, their parents lived in a world where half of it was recovering from severe economic ruin, so we could just coast to prosperity.

I think it's the only potential positive to a hard Brexit - one way or another this illusion needs to get shattered, realise we ain't shit, and actually start competing on a world stage.
 

therealjay

Neo Member
Well Britain arguably lost its super power status by the end of the war, being so exhausted and also bankrupt to fuck. It's mainly rhetoric that caused Britain's falling contribution to the war by 1945 to be seen as more than it was.

I think the best analogy I've heard for it is Russian blood, American dollars, and British brains won the war.

Analogy is ok but still ignores Japan.

That's my entire point with that post though. For whatever reason the United States and I'm guessing Britain (and probably a lot of the West) sort of have their own version of how they see history.

I mean shit look at southerners and the way they treat the confederacy.

I'm sympathetic in a sense because I have these urges myself. I'd like to feel like my country and my past family contributed in a good way overall to the world. Unfortunately up until about 60 years ago the earth was just being constantly soaked in blood throughout human history. There just aren't a lot of good guys when you really take a hard look.

That's why we as a modern society need to recognize this in ourselves and try and overcome our innate tribalism and fear of others. In a lot of ways we are making great progress.

Political movements like Trump and Brexit are unfortunately the darker sides of our psyche pushing back.
 

kmag

Member
The UK, the British Empire (particularly Canada, Australia, and India), and the Free French were alone for much of 1940 and 1941. Thankfully the US helped a lot too.

I recommend this documentary:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEvIOeELkBU

Which coincided with essentially at best the UK rearguarding itself and Germany into a stalemate*. It's a long way from there to the "WE won the war" jingoism we normally get. And even then the Battle of Britain wasn't going to be won without the Polish who half the current generation of Brits are currently demonising (although that shouldn't be much of a surprise given that during the battle of Britain a polish RAF airman was lynched to death in Wapping after ejecting) 303 "Kościuszko" Squadron scored the most kills of any RAF squadron in the battle. 302 "Poznański" Squadron had the 3rd most amount. The Polish pilots were by far the most experienced the RAF had.

*a stalemate it couldn't maintain without US logistical support.
 

Switch Back 9

a lot of my threads involve me fucking up somehow. Perhaps I'm a moron?
While Switch Back 9 is objectively wrong, it's true that the U.S.S.R. lost more than anyone, ever, in a war, and still never fell.



You may be mocking, but it's pretty true. By the end of the war, Canada had the world's fifth largest navy, which is very disproportionate to population in 1945. The British Empire had its last moment of superpower status in WWII, along with the US and USSR.

Okay I understand, given your avatar, this is a sensitive subject for you. I am not "objectively wrong". I never said Germany vs Russia was the ENTIRE war, only that the largest conflicts, the most firepower, the most manpower, the most lives lost etc...were between Germany and Russia. That is "objectively" correct. I'm not saying the US, and the Commonwealth did nothing (as both my Canadian grandparents fought in the war) only that their contributions and losses were, for the most part, shallow in comparison when compared to the size and scope of the Eastern Front. It was obviously a team effort, hence the "Feat."
 
Wait so they don't really talk about the slave trade and the messed up stuff? At least here in America it's hammered into your skill how we fucked over not 1, but 2 groups of people.
 

Madness

Member
The loss of India effectively ended the UK as a superpower. Not only did they lose their largest and richest and most prosperous colony but they lost all that manpower, agricultural and technical industry. They were again relegated to a small island with a small population as giants USA and Soviet Union seized all Nazi Germany knowhow, had populations double or triple that of Britain and industrialized quickly.

The very same way the US can no longer compete with China is what happened to the UK with the US. When you have a nation with a larger workforce, consumer and educated populace, you will always be behind.
 
Wait so they don't really talk about the slave trade and the messed up stuff? At least here in America it's hammered into your skill how we fucked over not 1, but 2 groups of people.

They do. In Liverpool there was an entire museum about the slave trade, now its part of a larger museum which also talks about how gross British imperialism was.

If the measure of a superpower is the ability to act unilaterally, then Britain lost it somewhere between 1940 and 1944. It just wasn't acknowledged properly till Suez in 1956.
 
Well sadly every country does this (well most countries) only want to put their history in a good light and don't show the bad parts because that is not good for the image + you might learn something and we can't have that.
 

Switch Back 9

a lot of my threads involve me fucking up somehow. Perhaps I'm a moron?
Wait so they don't really talk about the slave trade and the messed up stuff? At least here in America it's hammered into your skill how we fucked over not 1, but 2 groups of people.

Here in Canada we barely mention Residential Schools and all the other horrible shit we've done, and continue to do, to Native communities. It's hard to admit you've done awful things in the past and in some cases continue to do terrible things as a country.
 
For entirely the sake of its history, I'm not totally convinced that England deserves to exist.

I'm kind of joking and kind of not joking. Seems like you'd have to employ some powerful selective thinking to just keep in mind the sunny side of history.
 

Jisgsaw

Member
You could replace the word British with American and it'd read pretty well.

To be fair, you could replace the word British with literal every single country that ever was a major power at any point in history (and still exists). France is the same for example, Germany is the exception really (to what extend and up till when is another matter).
 
You could replace the word British with American and it'd read pretty well.

I don't know much about Napoleon and I'm not downplaying America's role in both the Pacific and Euro theaters in WW2. Allies likely wouldn't have won without them.

BUT people here constantly forget that Germany invading Russia and Russia paying in as many lives as they did was just as big a contribution. If not bigger at least in the Euro theater.

I guess we are probably culturally more similar to England then anyone else so it makes sense. The bit about Napeleon just struct me though because it's so familiar.

Was going to say the same thing. Especially with how Americans go on as if it wasn't for them, WW2 wouldn't have been won when I'd argue the British and Russians did far more to end the war on the Western Front. Either way, I'm also going to agree with this article. The lack of perspective most British people seem to have in the damage this country has done to the world is pretty astonishing. Japan is probably another example of this, and again it's due to the education system.
 

kmag

Member
Wait so they don't really talk about the slave trade and the messed up stuff? At least here in America it's hammered into your skill how we fucked over not 1, but 2 groups of people.

At most we are taught about the "Tobacco" and "Sugar" trade but not much about what powered both industries.

Glasgow and Liverpool being the two cities in the UK who prospered the most from the slave trade and the goods it furnished.
 

.JayZii

Banned
The fact that British people tend to go for, "But America...", is part of the problem.

I remember I was watching an episode of QI where they were talking about American race relations being terrible during World War II, and how they were so much better to black people in the UK at that time. From the way they were talking one would think Britain had solved racism years ago.

Interesting how that whole Imperialism thing is just something that's not to be talked about. It's in bad taste. The past tends to be romanticism and rose-tinted nostalgia, and negativity is met with deflection. I don't think they even realize they are doing it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom