Joanna Bourke evaluation
- Created by: Bethany Ball
- Created on: 05-05-15 17:05
View mindmap
- Critically evaluate Joanna Bourkes book.
- Women
- She focusses on women as equally as men.
- Women are willing to join in with the thrill of destruction as men.
- She rejects the notion women are peaceful and shy away from killing.
- Claims women's engagement may have added to mans satisfaction in killing.
- Uses Flora Sandes - fulfilled as a soldier - misses it.
- No extended considerationa woman warrior emerges in her book. She is limited to Flora.
- Its the only account and it lacks detail. There are no other examples of a woman fierceness - instead the chapter focuses on desire, anti aircraft barriers and debates about arming women. - limited in her argument - more evidence required.
- No extended considerationa woman warrior emerges in her book. She is limited to Flora.
- She focusses on women as equally as men.
- Positives.
- Large number of personal accounts used, from different angles and lots of supporting evidence. Huge range of private memoirs, interviews.
- What extent were letters/ public documents unbiased - said things to make them appear braver?
- Revigorates historical debate - a fresh new look.
- Large number of personal accounts used, from different angles and lots of supporting evidence. Huge range of private memoirs, interviews.
- Weaknesses
- She distances herself away from the events she presents, fails to connect to the material weakening believability and the argument. Highly detailed but shallow observations.
- She describes herself as a social feminist (welfare of women), she was not bought up in the West, parents were christian missionaries, she's specialises in history of emotion, sexual violence - not war.
- A woman, can they truly understand a mans thinking? rebellion away from repressive Christian life.Can she understand Western thought?Is he argument skewed to her politics? A jab at men?
- Written hurriedly and rather glib.
- Weaker in the middle section about WW1/2, V. Lacks a non western perspective which looses the comparative discussion.
- Britain/ USA did not fight on their own soil - USSR and Italy did, bringing examples of them into the discussion would have weighted it.
- She judges the past on the emotional/physiological thoughts of the 1990s - in the past there were different social conditions.
- Does not grasp the fact that society changed drastically from 1914 - 1975 (sixties e.g.)
- She does not grasp why Vietnam literature is full of bitter disillusionment that was not found in records of WW2. - perhaps a greater consideration of media portals would be useful.
- Does not grasp the fact that society changed drastically from 1914 - 1975 (sixties e.g.)
- The LT Carly example is noted that it was not typical to Vietnam and normal circumstances - it is an anomile.
- Women
Comments
No comments have yet been made