Reference no: EM131337805

Assignment

Sibleys thesis in "Connecting Culture and the Battlefield" explores "the connections between culture and the battlefield, examining how each influenced the other and suggesting that the social, national, and cultural contexts will inform us more deeply about each one". His main example in the discussion of his thesis is the Summer and Fall campaigns of 1918, specifically that of the British Expeditionary Force. Most of this chapter is spent discussing the effects that events on the battlefield had on the r nationalism of the countries within the BEF and in turn how this change within their cultures influenced the operational decisions in combat. Sibley explains to us that the countries within the BEF were segregated, partly because they were more effective tactically and their cultural similarities. Sibley goes on to tell us "World War I was the intersection of a growing national self-awareness with the demand for a great effort by the mother country. It was, in essence, a crossroads for those nationalism and thus particularly ripe for the development of national moments.".

It is these national moments mentioned by Sibley that I believe reinforces his theory of "Connecting Culture and the Battlefield". Throughout the chapter Sibley gives us examples of great moments in these campaigns for the Canadian, Australian, and New Zealand troops. These moments were then regarded as a win for the BEF, as well as allowing each specific country to create a "National Moment" for themselves, thus boosting the nationalistic culture. These national moments however played an important role on the battlefield. Sibley recounts the words of a Canadian Officer as he states that Canadian Soldiers being held in high regard of the Allied troops. These characteristics combined with the use of Canadians as shock troops witch led to German forces focusing on halting those formations. The result of the battle in this case is irrelevant, Sibley states this to make the point that the German front had been changed to deal with an enemy whose reputation had been shaped through its nationalism, which in turn was shaped through battle.

The abstract should be at the front of the paper, on a separate page. This page does not count as part of the 5-6 pages of your own analysis. The paper will cover the following areas of concerns:

1. Analyze the disciplinary content (history) in its own context and in relationship to the issues, questions, and positions of other disciplines (literature, psychology, sociology).

2. Analyze the Great War as watershed moments in regard to both war and culture (military history, literature, psychology, sociology).

3. Compare and contrast differences and similarities among the disciplines (history, literature, psychology, sociology) in terms of central concerns, values, methodologies, and relationships to public life.

4. Evaluate the Great War regarding military and political concerns, values, methodologies, and relationships to public life and cultural concerns, values, methodologies, and relationships to public life.

5. Synthesize diverse perspectives to achieve an interdisciplinary understanding. - Synthesize historical, literary, psychological, sociological, and political perspectives regarding war and culture, using the Great War as case studies. 6. Analyze the relationships among academic knowledge, professional work, and the responsibilities of local and global citizenship.

7. Analyze the relationships among historical, literary, psychological, sociological, and political knowledge, professional work and the responsibilities of local and global citizenship regarding war and culture.

8. Evaluate multiple perspectives, modes of inquiry and expression, and processes for decision-making in the disciplines.

9. Evaluate perspectives, modes of inquiry and expression, and processes for decision-making in history, literature, sociology, psychology, and politics regarding war and culture.