This essay will examine, analyze and evaluate the three provided representations relating to the impact of the Second World War on British society. The main and sole purpose of this essay is to identify the best representation for teaching us about World War Two, and the reason as to why this particular source surpasses the other two. To begin with, the evaluation of each representation’s objectivity will be provided. Representation one is an article which has been written for the sole purpose of persuading readers that the British morale during the Blitz was extremely low.
This is evident in the title of the article “Rethinking British Morale”. Because of this source’s main purpose, it results in the representation being extremely objective and one-sided. Representation one only mentions ideas and points that support the idea that morale was low and Britain had no spirit. This is made evident when the article states that the “high state of morale was in fact a myth” and “there was a growing disenchantment” amongst the civilians. These quotes clearly indicate that representation 1 is partial and bias towards the impression that British optimism was low.
On the other hand, representation 2 was produced to entertain readers whilst telling them the story of a boy’s life during the Blitz. Because of its purpose, the second representation has no reason to be bias and partial, therefore making it impartial and more useful than representation one in this particular category. Representation 2 shows both sides to the British morale. Within the source, we can see Arnold Tabbs crying. This supports the idea that morale may have been low for the British.
In contrast to this, we can also see wardens and civilians working together to clear the extensive debris caused by the bombs, which supports the idea that British morale was high. Both sides of the argument are exemplified within representation 2, which makes it impartial and much more reliable than source 1 in terms of objectivity. Finally, representation three’s main purpose was to educate and inform students about the Second World War (since the article was featured within a textbook). Because of its purpose, representation three does not take any sides and remains impartial for the entire duration of the text.
This makes the source extremely useful and reliable when teaching us about the Blitz, because it mentions that people felt “shock, discomfort and disruption” however the source also touches on the fact that there was some “bravery and defiance” amongst the nationals. After assessing the objectivity and impartialness of all three sources, I have come to the decision that representation three is the best in terms of neutrality since it gave clear and detailed information concerning the morale of citizens being high, as well as low.
Thus making it a completely rounded and reliable representation which manages to teach us about the past. Within this paragraph, I will be appraising the comprehensiveness and completeness of all three representations. Although representation two is only the cover of a comic book, it manages to provide viewers with a broad spectrum of valuable information which makes it quite a good representation for teaching us about the Blitz. Within the source we can see numerous beneficial details including ARP wardens, German bombing planes, search lights, destruction of major land masses/buildings and many more.
This representation succeeds in teaching us about the Second World War by visually representing several drawings and pictures of activities, objects and people that were present at the time of the Blitz, thus making it very comprehensive and complete. In comparison, representation one isn’t as inclusive and complete as source two as it was made to persuade its readers that there was low morale and national unity. Because of this purpose, the information within the text has been specifically chosen and censored to ensure only one side of the argument is presented.
For instance, the author of the article solely mentions that there was “an illusion of social unity” and “a growing disenchantment”. The opposite idea is never mentioned, and because of this matter, readers don’t get a comprehensive and broad idea of what the Second World War was like, consequently making it an inferior source in terms of its comprehensiveness. Lastly, representation 3 could be viewed as quite comprehensive and extensive, as it tell the whole and entire story about world war two.
Not only does the source mention the basics, such as “badly hit areas” and the “German bombing campaign”, however it also covers topics such as the “propaganda in the press” and “Mass Observation Agency”. In addition to the expansive range of topics covered, a large amount of detail is provided, as the representation gives us solid facts such as “44,000 people died in bombing raids”. All of these points come together to give me the ultimate judgment that representation three is the best source, in terms of comprehensiveness, extensiveness and completeness.
The reason being, it not only provides an ample list of major events and figures that took place or were present during the Second World War (like the second representation). The third source moves forward and even delivers readers with useful facts and statistics to further develop and extend its information; therefore making it the best representation (in terms of comprehensiveness). Finally, this paragraph will assess and judge the accuracy of each representation and how this affects the overall reliability and practicality of the sources.
To begin with, representation one could be perceived as accurate and inaccurate at the same time. For instance, we can see great accuracy through the statistic of “66,000 civilians” were killed during the raids. This fact improves the overall source and makes it much more valuable when learning about events that occurred during the Blitz. Conflictingly, the first representation only mentions that people felt “disenchantment” and “a state of low morale”, emphasizing that all civilians wanted to surrender to the Germans.
If this was accurate and true, surely Britain would’ve surrendered, and Germany would have won the Second World War. However, it was because of elements of high morale and patriotism that meant Britain continued fighting and eventually won. As I have closely analyzed, the first source isn’t entirely accurate and therefore isn’t the best representation to use (in terms of its accuracy and precision). Similarly, representation two was created in the hopes of entertaining its viewers and readers.
Due to its purpose, the accuracy of source two will be quite low since certain elements of the representation have been exaggerated or removed to ensure it is as engaging and fascinating as possible. For example, it is very unlikely that a boy would have been within the city at the time of mass destruction (where buildings are collapsing, there are substantial fires and bombs are being dropped) the majority of children were evacuated into the countryside. As well as this, the extensity to the fire is quite inflated and hyperbolic.
All of the attributes mentioned lead to representation two being considerably low in accuracy, hence making it an inadequate source (in terms of accuracy). Conversely, representation three was virtually faultless when it came to accuracy. For instance, numerous open-ended statements were made, such as there was “wholesale destruction” and “children were evacuated”. Although these statements could be deemed as precise, the author visibly supported them with hard-hitting evidence such as “44,000 people died in bombing raids” and “over one million children were evacuated”.
All of the facts mentioned were entirely truthful, thus making the third representation much better than the previous two for teaching us about World War Two, in terms of its accuracy (mainly due to its extensive use of accurate statistics to back up its points). The whole purpose of source three is to provide students with learning and education aid, so the information within the source is required to be entirely accurate and useful.