WWI Buffs--'The Trench' Reality Show Starts Tonight!

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
1

I’ve heard about this BBC show for a while now; should be very interesting: a group of young Brits spend 2 weeks living in a re-constructed First World War trench.

Obviously, they can’t fully capture the fear and danger of the original–no-one will be shooting at them with Jack Johnsons, Flying Pigs, etc., but apparently there are mock gas attacks (probably after the issue of boiled cabbage and bully beef), etc. to contend with.

The History Television (Canada) webpage says:

There are also interviews with some surviving WWI vets (most of whom are over 100 years old).

It begins tonight at 9 p.m. (ET/PT) on History Television (first of three parts). I’m guessing that the US History Channel will likely show it soon as well.

And a Happy Thanksgiving to all US Dopers, at home and abroad!

2

That’s sick.
Britain lost her future ruling class-fit to rule, smart, educated guys-charging machine guns with swords.

What next, Guadalcanal Reality?
:slight_smile:

3

This sounds awful to me too.

But I’m biased. I think all these new reality shows are crap.

4

Well, this isn’t a competition or anything; these guys don’t get paid or win money for surviving. It’s more of a “1940s House” approach–more educational than entertainment.

And, of course, you can never really duplicate the conditions of life at the front, with the always-present danger of death by sniper, or artillery barrage, much less an over-the-top attack. But living in the open in northern France for two weeks will give people (viewers included) a * very small* taste of what their great-grandfathers went through.

I agree if it was an eliminatory competition, that would be pretty awful.

I’m surprised that someone in the US hasn’t pitched a Civil War-based reality show, given the level of interest in re-enacting.

5

I find the concept of making money of our grand sires suffering to be in bad taste.

There was a Civil War battle, not Gettysburg, where more Americans died in any battle of any war since. That includes the landing at Normandy. We could re-enact/survive that, including people from countries not only of the Allies, but the Axis as well. :slight_smile:

6

There are thousands of Americans called re-enactors who restage Revolutionary and Civil War Battles. Sometimes they are out in the field several days to do this.

Putting it on TV would be the most boring programming since golf.

And I understand you meant something more like 1940’s House than Survivor. 1940’s House also sucks.

7

Oops, I meant Frontier House, which I’ve actually seen. I’m fairly confident 1940’s House sucks, but I can’t state that as a certainty.

8

There is a golf channel.
Snicker.

9

Hmmm, carnivorousplant, I wouldn’t agree with such a sweeping statement; sure, there are many exploitative books, movies, TV shows about the Civil War, but surely educative materials rate differently; it’s not fair to put Ken Burns’ work in the same hat as, for example, Shirley Temple’s “The Littlest Rebel.”

Done properly, with thought and research into the time period, and proper preparation of the audience (putting what they are seeing into some kind of context), it can be a valuable educational tool, especially when dealing with the young.

I haven’t seen “Frontier House,” so I’ll suspend judgement; the “1940s House,” however, was very well done. The Imperial War Museum was involved, and set up a panel of experts who gave some historic background to what was going on, as well as why certain things were done in the historic period being portrayed. I watched the show (on tape) with a large group of adults, almost none of whom had a specific interest in history, or even knew much about the period. They enjoyed it, and it sparked discussion afterwards. To my mind, that’s good TV history: even though the full range of events and experiences of a certain period couldn’t be included, it got the audience thinking and talking!

As for re-enacting the Civil War on TV, yojimbo, I think it’s a matter of approach. There was a famous BBC show nearly 30 years ago, re-enacting the bloody battle at Culloden, which used a “news-documentary” approach, as if cameras were at the scene. That’s hackneyed now, but then it was fresh, and sparked a lot of discussion in the UK about both the original battle and the TV re-enactment.

If you were to, for example, follow a “rookie” re-enactment platoon through their training, learning with them what was the day-to-day experience of the citizen soldier in the Civil War, interspersed with readings from period letters and photos (a la Ken Burns), putting what you are seeing into context, I think it might be quite entertaining and instructive.

But, I do agree with you both that done simply as spectacle for the sake of “entertainment,” or as a competition for prize money, or to boost ratings with gory battles, then, yes, that is in bad taste.

And there are a disturbing number of re-enactment groups (in the US and in Europe) doing things like Waffen-SS; now I find that creepy!

10

Are their Medieval re inactors in Europe?

11

Darn Tootin’:
http://steel.laiv.org/kjertesveinene/

http://www.igwolf.net/indexE.html

http://www.gaddgedlar.com/

And, I suspect, some of these people are really thorough about their research, and try to really present an idea of what the experience of life at the time was like; many probably just like dressing up and hitting each other with sticks. Not that there’s anything wrong with that…

12

Sounds like The History Channel’s The Ship. A reality show, but one with a really neat premise.

13

Speaking as someone who has seen The Trench, i can understand people’s worries - i hate reality tv. The Trench is classic BBC fare though - not over the top, not sensationalised etc. etc.

It can’t ever show what it was really like to be in a WW1 trench because, as was previously mentioned, real bombs aren’t really an option. The show acknowledges that.

It’s a good watch though - even without the bombs it is interesting to see the effects that the weather, events (such as mock attacks in the middle of the night) and living conditions have on the men. Especially when you realise that it must have been a thousand times worse for those who were actually there.

14

Yep, watched the first episode last night; as garius says, classic Beeb: very interesting without straying into sensationalism. Lots of background to the real history behind what the re-enactors were doing.

The interwoven clips from interviews with 100-year-old veterans of the actual regiment that was being portrayed were particularly moving. Lots of great Yorkshire accents, too!

Slight spoiler:

They even drummed one man out for malingering behind the line when his section went into the line. He was chewed out by the CO in no uncertain terms, who told him he was a disgrace to the memory of the regiment that they were portraying. The whinger was really upset and angered by this, and swore a blue streak as he was kicked out. Clearly real emotion and not acting.

Of course, he was lucky–over 300 young British soldiers were shot at dawn (often by a firing squad composed of men from their own unit) for exactly the same offence during the First World War.

15

Really?
The Germans weren’t killing enough of them, then?

16

CP- Antitum (or Sharpsburgh, of you prefer the Souther method of naming battles )

I saw a reenactment at Gettysburgh a few years back, and even though the spectators were far away, it was quite a sight to see. Just reflecting on how much more everything in a real battle would be- more noise, more confusion, more screaming, etc…can give one a small taste of history.

17

Thanks, Weirddave.
BTW, re-enactors provide a military funeral for David O. Dodd here on the anniversary of his death. :slight_smile:

18

I know, carnivorousplant–hard to fathom. Especially when you read some of the cases; a lot of really young soldiers (some 16!), often found wandering (possibly shellshocked) behind the lines, given a very quick Field General Court Martial (often with inadequate defence), and shot.

An excellent book, by a retired British judge, Anthony Babington, reviewed many of the sentences when the details were made public after 60 years. The book is “For the Sake of Example,” well worth looking out in a library.

I’m sorry to say that the Canadian Expeditionary Force followed suit (at the behest of British high command), and executed something like 35 of our own during the war. Only the Australians showed any spine, and returned convicted deserters home, refusing the British call to have them executed.