The episode's title is taken from A. E. Houseman.
On the idle hill of summer,
Sleepy with the flow of streams,
Far I hear the steady drummer
Drumming like a noise in dreams.
It's both apt and unnecessary. This isn't going to be a business-like analysis of who's who and what's what, as is, say, the "Battlefield" series, which I greatly admire.
This series seems to be a bit more impressionistic. The fact are presented when the context demands them, but there are no graphics representing the growth of armies or the number of battleships produced. The narration by Michael Redgrave flows naturally, unimpeded by the special visual effects that have now come to dominate documentaries about war. The writing is literate. There's almost a poetic touch to it.
Sometimes the brief descriptions of national character may sound like stereotypes but they agree with most other judgments. The Prussians dominated the newly unified Germany. France ate well. Britain worried about the unrest in Ireland and the growth of the German navy. Austria-Hungary was a "decaying monarchy" that ruled too many diverse people, some of whom hated each other. The nobility of Russia were whooping it up while countless peasants suffered and threatened revolution -- DID revolt, in 1905, and were "ruthlessly crushed." And everywhere there was poverty and the rise of socialism. The Labor Party was founded in England. A suffragette threw herself in front of King Edward's horse and was killed.
All narratives have a built-in ambiguity. Their "terrorist" is our "freedom fighter." And this series doesn't seem entirely free of the bias that tainted earlier documentary series like "Crusade in Europe" and, most notably, "Victory at Sea." But bias is hard to define. You have to hear the narrator of "Victory at Sea" pronounce the word "JapaNESE" while embroidering it with contempt. But -- we shall see.
On the idle hill of summer,
Sleepy with the flow of streams,
Far I hear the steady drummer
Drumming like a noise in dreams.
It's both apt and unnecessary. This isn't going to be a business-like analysis of who's who and what's what, as is, say, the "Battlefield" series, which I greatly admire.
This series seems to be a bit more impressionistic. The fact are presented when the context demands them, but there are no graphics representing the growth of armies or the number of battleships produced. The narration by Michael Redgrave flows naturally, unimpeded by the special visual effects that have now come to dominate documentaries about war. The writing is literate. There's almost a poetic touch to it.
Sometimes the brief descriptions of national character may sound like stereotypes but they agree with most other judgments. The Prussians dominated the newly unified Germany. France ate well. Britain worried about the unrest in Ireland and the growth of the German navy. Austria-Hungary was a "decaying monarchy" that ruled too many diverse people, some of whom hated each other. The nobility of Russia were whooping it up while countless peasants suffered and threatened revolution -- DID revolt, in 1905, and were "ruthlessly crushed." And everywhere there was poverty and the rise of socialism. The Labor Party was founded in England. A suffragette threw herself in front of King Edward's horse and was killed.
All narratives have a built-in ambiguity. Their "terrorist" is our "freedom fighter." And this series doesn't seem entirely free of the bias that tainted earlier documentary series like "Crusade in Europe" and, most notably, "Victory at Sea." But bias is hard to define. You have to hear the narrator of "Victory at Sea" pronounce the word "JapaNESE" while embroidering it with contempt. But -- we shall see.