I've been watching through the documentary series The World at War lately, and figured it was worth talking about here. For those who don't know, it was aired in the early 70s, and is generally acclaimed as one of the greatest documentary series ever. I'm not much of one for documentaries in areas I'm familiar with, because they're frequently not particularly efficient and I often find myself frustrated by the editorial decisions made, but The World at War mostly manages to avoid these problems, and illustrates a conscious approach to doing history for the public that I really like.
The most obvious problem that any series like this is going to run into is simply how to divide up the war, because even with 26 episodes, a lot is going to be left out. TWAW handled this particularly well, abandoning any real pretense that it was going to be comprehensive and instead making each episode a self-contained story about a specific aspect of the war. This could be a battle or a campaign, the home-front experience of some nation or it could be something narrower like the Holocaust or the occupation of Holland. Particularly groundbreaking at the time was a significant focus on Russian experience during the war, and those portions were still some of the most interesting to me, as it's not an area I've studied extensively. But more importantly, each story generally does a really good job of balancing the human stories with the broad operational story of the war. Often history focuses either on "what happened and why?" or on "what was it like to be there?", and TWAW manages to balance both rather well. Read more...







Recent Comments