Military History Carnival?
I’m thinking about organising a military history themed blog carnival, because as far as I can tell there isn’t one. If there is one and I’ve missed it, please someone tell me! There are lots of bloggers writing about war, armed forces, and related topics, so it would be good to bring them all together and showcase the best posts. I can’t do it on my own though. Every carnival needs hosts, contributors, and readers. Leave a comment if you’re interested, if you have any suggestions, or even if you think it’s a bad idea.
[Obviously I'm only doing this now because I've just got feedback on an article and have to rewrite it. You're not alone Esther!]
If it goes ahead, I’ll host the first one myself but after that I’ll need a constant supply of hosts. Host blogs won’t have to be exclusively or mainly about military history. Anyone who’s interested can have a go.
Once a month is probably the optimum frequency. I’m thinking probably around the first weekend of each month but that could change.
I want to avoid polemic about current affairs, especially Iraq, so I’d like to arbitrarily define history as anything that happened more than 10 years ago. This might be contentious, so any counter arguments would be welcome.
Military will be defined as broadly as possible. It includes all levels of armed conflict — there will be no rigid definition of what is and isn’t a war. At the risk of offending latin purists, military will include navies and air forces as well as armies.
Within these limits anything goes. I don’t want any artificial division between academic and non-academic, amateur and professional, or traditional and new. Weapons, tactics, strategy, uniforms, insignia, equipment etc are all interesting and important, and so are relationships between war and society, culture, race, gender, sexuality, disability, and the non-human. Preparations for and aftermaths of wars are as significant as the wars themselves. Representations of war in literature, films, TV, games etc are just as valid objects of study as empirical evidence of reality.
The object is neither to glorify nor condemn war, but to see it as in integral part of history which needs to be better understood.
So, any comments, questions, suggestions, criticisms?
Pingback by Early Modern Notes » More History Carnival news — 6:08 pm, 10 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
[...] 2. Gavin Robinson is planning to set up a Military History Carnival and looking for feedback and suggestions: Military will be defined as broadly as possible. It includes all levels of armed conflict — there will be no rigid definition of what is and isn’t a war. At the risk of offending latin purists, military will include navies and air forces as well as armies. [...]
Comment by victor — 8:18 pm, 10 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
well I think its a great idea. I have some thoughts that would be nice to share. For instance at the battle of Salamis in 480 BC, the greek commanders were willing and prepared to board the persian ships, therefore by fighting in the narrow waters of the Strait of Salamis they got a great advantage over the enemy.
Well if you ever need a contributor for the carnival you can count me in
Comment by Battlefield Biker — 7:16 am, 11 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
Hi GR,
Great idea. I’m not aware of a Military History carnival. I’m with you.
Battlefield Biker
Comment by Gary Smailes — 8:15 am, 11 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
Great Idea.
Put me down as a potential host.
Gary Smailes
Comment by Brett — 8:38 am, 11 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
I’m up for it! I wonder whether monthly is too frequent, in terms of finding host volunteers. Still, there are 42 military history blogs listed in Cliopatria’s blogroll (and as you say hosts don’t have to specialise in military history), so I guess it shouldn’t be a problem.
I think it’s a good idea to make the remit as broad as possible. And to exclude recent events, but the definition of “recent” is very fuzzy and subjective. I don’t know if you read H-WAR but it sometimes seems like the Vietnam war still counts as current affairs for many of the posters there!
Comment by Brett — 9:04 am, 11 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
Oh, I meant to say that one danger might be that it turns into a de facto American Civil War carnival, given the huge numbers of ACW bloggers around. Of course, the selection of posts is ultimately up to the hosts, so hopefully they can ensure some diversity.
Comment by Gavin Robinson — 1:26 pm, 11 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
Yes, the ACW is a potential problem, but I’m hoping (perhaps naively) to pull together enough non-ACW posts to balance it out and show that military history blogging and ACW blogging aren’t synonymous. I want to show that writing about war isn’t exclusive to people who self-identify as military historians and who only write about military history, but you could argue that something called “Military History Carnival” might not be the best way to achieve that! There’s certainly a danger of it becoming an exclusive clique if it isn’t carefully managed.
Frequency is another thing that needs to be thought about carefully. An interval of one month is the absolute minimum and might well be too often, but two months might be too long and lead to a loss of momentum. It always seems like ages between early-modern Carnivalesques. Maybe 6 weeks? Or would an odd interval like that confuse people?
Comment by sharon — 7:51 pm, 11 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
I think there it’s possible that ‘Military History Carnival’ might put people off, but there’s no law that says it has to be called that (or even that it has to be called ‘Carnival’, and I have to say that doesn’t feel entirely appropriate for this particular topic - something more sombre might be more in keeping?). Some well known carnivals depart from the conventional model and have more imaginative names (eg Tangled Bank, Skeptics’ Circle, Grand Rounds). Or you could just use ‘history of war’ rather than ‘military history’.
And I’d recommend starting with monthly and see how it goes. It’s always hard to tell at first.
Comment by Brett — 8:56 pm, 11 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
Oh, I was going to suggest “War is Swell” until you said that …
War and society? War and/in history? War and peace?
Comment by Gavin Robinson — 9:07 pm, 11 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
It definitely needs a good name that isn’t exclusive or ideologically loaded or too specific to one war or country, isn’t a bad pun or a cliche, but which is memorable, gives a clear idea of what it’s about, and doesn’t infringe the trademarks of well-known academic journals (especially ones I want to get published in).
This is going to be harder than I thought…
Comment by Dan — 9:46 am, 12 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
Top idea Gavin: count me in. I was about to suggest ‘War, What is it good for?’, but perhaps that breaks your cliche bar. What about - to borrow from Trevor Wilson, Frederick Manning and Shakespeare - The Myriad Faces of War? That would get away from the offputtingness of ‘military’ and perhaps encourage a broad spectrum of contributors/readers. Do you think that monthly is too much? Given the competitions on all our time and the need to find hosts, perhaps bi-monthly might be better.
Comment by Gavin Robinson — 11:15 am, 12 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
Myriad is a bit pretentious and maybe too specific to the early-modern period, but I think “Faces of War” could be perfect. You’re a genius Dan! Someone should give you an award or something.
Timing is still a problem. One month, two months, or six weeks? All have disadvantages.
In the light of what Brett said about Vietnam, maybe the time limit should be 50 years. There’s also the approaching 25th anniversary of the Falklands War, which could easily spark off the mother of all flame wars. Then again, the ACW is still just as contentious and there’s no way we can exclude that.
Comment by Dan — 7:30 pm, 12 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
Pretentious, moi?
I think that flame wars should be avoided at any costs, but I wouldn’t agree with setting a chronological limit, except perhaps to state that _ongoing_ wars shouldn’t be discussed. It’s up to the organisers/hosts to set a broad agenda. On rereading the thread, I’m persuaded by Sharon’s expertise in such matters that maybe monthly is the way to go.
Pingback by Airminded · A military history carnival? — 11:38 pm, 12 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
[...] At Investigations of a Dog, Gavin Robinson has proposed organising a military history carnival, which I think is a great idea. It would aim to gather together the best posts on the history of war in all its facets — not just military operations (AKA “fighting”), but also how war intersects with social, cultural, political, gender, economic, diplomatic, local, public … (you get the idea) … histories. Representations, memories and forecasts of war are perfectly legitimate subjects too. Similarly, hosts and participants need not be specialists in military history: war affects us all, in one way or another. [...]
Comment by Brett — 1:07 am, 13 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
I kind of like Myriad Faces of War actually; I don’t think it’s too “early modern”, and there’s the Wilson book as a touchstone. And I don’t know that anyone who took the title of their blog from a Kafka story should go throwing the word “pretentious” around :P (Says the guy who didn’t even know it was from Kafka!) Faces of War loses something somehow, I think, it sounds like some generic museum exhibition. But then maybe Myriad Faces of War is a bit over the top for a carnival. Doesn’t really matter, I’ll still read it either way …
I don’t seriously think Vietnam would be a problem, the generation scarred by that experience largely does not blog (whereas they do listserv). It’s worth keeping some limit on the timeframe but 50 years is far too long, that takes us back to Korea and excludes most of the Cold War. I think Gavin’s original idea of 10 years works ok — it would exclude Iraq, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Kosovo, but includes Bosnia, Somalia, Desert Storm, Panama, etc … but Dan’s suggestion would probably serve just as well.
Comment by penny — 5:46 am, 13 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
I organize the Disability Blog Carnival, and edit H-Disability, so I’m thrilled to see disability among the topics you anticipate featuring in the Military History Carnival. I’d say monthly makes sense, and you may even find that it’s worth doing smaller carnival editions twice-a-month, at least for a while, to build momentum and a corps of experienced hosts. Suggested themes for each carnival can help keep the submissions diverse and the carnivals interesting. (Maybe generate a list of possible themes for hosts to use as an idea bank, for starters–technology, morale, training, beginnings and endings, myths and legends, health issues, veterans, the war at home, women’s roles, artifacts, commemoration, etc.)
About the name–minor quibble–I’d only worry that something like “Faces of War” would discourage submissions about military experiences during peacetime.
Comment by Gavin Robinson — 12:13 pm, 13 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
It seems like I always want to agree with the last person who commented. That’s a bad thing isn’t it?
Maybe Faces of War is a bit bland, and it doesn’t directly cover peacetime (although you could argue that even in peacetime armies are preparing to fight wars and/or trying to prevent wars). It’s still the best suggestion so far.
I think an arbitrary time limit would work better than trying to define what is and isn’t a current war (remember when Bush declared the Iraq war finished?) but probably no more than 10 years.
Maybe it should be left up to individual hosts to decide whether they want a theme or not. For the first one I’d probably cast the net as wide as possible to demonstrate the diversity of history blogging related to war.
As well as the obvious role of wars in creating disabilities, I’m quite aware of the need to consider the wartime experiences of people who are already disabled. My grandad lost one of his eyes in a childhood accident, so although he really wanted to fight in World War 2 he was rejected as unfit for combat. Eventually he was allowed to go to North Africa with the Pay Corps, where he did important and sometimes dangerous work, and rose to the rank of Captain.
Comment by Nabakov — 11:53 am, 14 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
This is a great idea! Military history has been central to history in general and to how much of how we got where we are now, technologically, culturally, socially and economically.
And I agree with everyone above who has pointed out you need to get the name right so that it does reflect the full spectrum of what you want to cover without turning off those that may otherwise get into what the concept can offer and without attracting roving bandits and sleazy militias. And without being sounding too bland or glorifying the worst and dismissing the best either. And remember, the one thing all soldiers have in common, everywhere and anywhere is a very black sense of humour.
In this spirit, I proffer a few title suggestions, some of them serious:
Up In Arms
Supply Lines
The Last Post
Blood, Sweat and Tears
A Darkling Plain
Mentioned In Dispatches
Fight Club
Military Musings
Present Arms
War and Pieces
Blogs Of War
Out of Uniform
Reconnaissance
Out On The Flanks
History Is Hell
The Military History Parade
Behind The Front
Outposts
The Lost Patrol
The Bloggers Legion
Reasoning Why
The Free Company
I don’t know what they do to the lurkers but by God they scare me.
It’s The Wrong Way To Tickle Mary
(OK, now the scotch is kicking in and I’m getting messy)
I reckon bimonthly is probably a better way to go as this is a subject where research and properly appreciating the situation should guide polemics and half-arsed opinions rather than vice versa. Also I think something like the ten-year rule is a good one too. Maybe 25 years? It usually takes a generation or so to dampen the real heat and smoke of personal experience, whether on the frontline or the home front.
But let’s face it, you’re gonna get some online punchups whether you like it or not. We’re talking about mainly male and rather focused people discussing fighting. But judging from the comments here, most would have too much respect for the subject to get really personal and nasty. ‘Cept when it comes to that bounder Haig though.
And yes I’d to like to contribute m’self but not having a blog of my own, I’ll just sign up for the duration as an irregular in someone else’s outfit.
Comment by Brian — 5:58 pm, 14 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
At the risk of fouling the pond as one of the “ACW Problem”, I’d be happy to host or otherwise pitch in. I vote for monthly. Hard to get up a head of steam if too far apart.
Comment by Grant Jones — 7:08 pm, 14 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
This is a great idea. I think you should just go with “Carnival of Military History.” I’m always in favor of KiSS. I don’t think military historians should use euphemisms to define or describe what they do, it sounds defensive. If some people are “put off” by military history, that’s their loss.
I would be willing to host sometime in the future.
Best of luck,
Grant Jones
Comment by Gavin Robinson — 8:56 pm, 14 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
Another thing to think about: whether it’s once a month or every two months, where in a month should it be - beginning, middle, or end?
Number of posts to include in each one: History Carnival recommends 20-40, which is probably about right. Maybe no more than a quarter on the same war.
It’s good that there are so many people blogging about the ACW. It would be nice to encourage similar numbers to blog on other wars rather than trying to keep down the number of ACW blogs.
Language is going to have to be mostly English, but individual hosts could include a few posts in different languages at their discretion.
I’ve also been thinking about representations of war in fiction. What about representations of fictional wars? In fictional universes? Where do you draw the line? It wouldn’t be good to have science fiction fans arguing about whether the Enterprise could beat the Executor, but it also wouldn’t be good to exclude stuff like Esther’s work on WoW. Maybe leave it up to hosts to use their “common sense”. I think quality is more important than rigid guidelines about subject matter.
Comment by Brett — 9:11 am, 16 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
Does Sharon’s announcement that the History Carnival will soon go monthly enter into the calculations? Eg perhaps the MHC should be monthly also and appear in the middle of the month, so as to complement the HC. And/or, given what Sharon says about “carnival fatigue”, maybe it should be every two months …
Comment by Brett — 9:18 am, 16 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
Oh, and FYI the Executor would TOTALLY pwn the Enterprise. I mean, just look at size of that thing!
Comment by Gavin Robinson — 10:44 am, 16 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
In the light of that it should definitely be middle of the month to avoid History Carnival. I still think I’ll try monthly and see how it goes, but reducing to two months might turn out to be necessary. It’s hard to judge the likely interest until you actually try it.
Comment by Mark Grimsley — 10:48 am, 17 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
I like the idea and concur with Grant Jones on the name: “Carnival of Military History” (or “Military History Carnival”) is straightforward.
Comment by Nonpartisan — 11:57 pm, 17 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
I’m in for this. An excellent idea.
Comment by Gavin Robinson — 11:18 am, 19 February 2007 [permanent link to this comment]
I think the first one will be in mid-April as starting it in March will clash with the 50th History Carnival. Also a longer build-up will allow more time to generate publicity.
I’ll probably be changing web hosts this week, so there might be some downtime here. Once that’s out of the way I’ll make a final decision on the name, put together a web page for the carnival and register it with Blog Carnival etc.