finally found it
I finally found almost exactly what I need: a memoir of an Austrian soldier on the Eastern front in World War One. Better would have been a Russian soldier, but this fellow's memories are completely apposite. He talks about the actual daily work of a soldier in rapidly-moving trench warfare (unlike the Western front where nobody could budge for ages and the trenches were much better equipped anyway). Unlike war buff sites, which have been somewhat helpful when they have archives of photographs but the narrative is often at the war-game level. Honestly, I don't care which division went where unless you tell me what they did when they had to travel through twenty miles of forest, or how they got across the wetlands or that valley with all the creeks in it -- usually they don't even tell you what the landscape was like at all, so it really is like a board game. They think they're telling me about the "human" side of the war when they relay some hoary story about somebody's brave quips. Which, of course, I've already heard, thank you.
I'm relieved to find that I extrapolated pretty well on the information I already had. I only came across a few things that have story-altering implications. I think I have underemphasized some things, and maybe overemphasized some others, but I'll judge that in revision. Right now I'm resisting the rapid deployment of some Cool Bits that I may include in the revision after I have thought them over wth a cooler head, or I may leave by the wayside.
One thing I'm struck by is that this guy in no way demonizes the Russians. He's proud of the fact that while the Austrians he saw were patriotic and devoted to winning the war, they were not, in his words "jingoistic." I don't know if this is the last shreds of chjivalry persisting into the 20th century, or a bit of precocious post-nationalism, or just a different kind of war fever altogether. It seems to me that in the US today, the people who support the war are the other way around. They don't seem to really love their own country, or their own people (they do use some patriotic, country-loving language, but mostly they seem to despise most of the people in it and a large number of the institutions that are supposed to define it, and they certainly don't seem to have any great desire to preserve the land itself), but they believe the most hideous things about the people on the other side of the war. I think it's telling that ever since the (first? definitely the second) Bush presidency, we've been seeing a lot of use of the term "the bad guys" instead of the names of the people on the other side, or even "the enemy." And "the bad guys" is not being used ironically by these people. Now, I don't for a minute believe that my Austrian soldier speaks for all of Austria in World War One, and I can't say, because I've never examined it before, how much of Austria thought like him and how much of the country thought in more jingoistic ways. So I can't honestly say I have seen a way to contrast the state of my country now with the state of that country then. I guess I have to say I'm struck by the contrast between this guy in this memoir and some other fellows I have read about in my time and place and leave it at that, and not make generalizations like I just started to do.
Another thing I'm struck by is the terrible, terrible font this memoir is presented in. Why? It's small and muddy and dark and it takes way too much effort to read. I almost gave up. Instead I copied the text into my own word processor, and I'm really glad I did. I'm not generally a font snob -- I mean, I like Comic Sans -- but this was way too nasty and difficult.
Oh, yeah, it's the 30th so I have to account for the month, Really didn't nano, but oh my the research I have done. I only wish I knew over a year ago that I needed to research this stuff, but at that time I thought "I'll avoid most of the war -- knock out a couple battle scenes, and then get on with the real story." I understand, of course, that that is intolerably naive. I probably actually knew it at the time. I probably thought I was going to skate by with a little bit of skimming things for Cool Bits.
But Cool Bits only decorates a story. To actually drive a story you need to know what you're talking about.
I'm relieved to find that I extrapolated pretty well on the information I already had. I only came across a few things that have story-altering implications. I think I have underemphasized some things, and maybe overemphasized some others, but I'll judge that in revision. Right now I'm resisting the rapid deployment of some Cool Bits that I may include in the revision after I have thought them over wth a cooler head, or I may leave by the wayside.
One thing I'm struck by is that this guy in no way demonizes the Russians. He's proud of the fact that while the Austrians he saw were patriotic and devoted to winning the war, they were not, in his words "jingoistic." I don't know if this is the last shreds of chjivalry persisting into the 20th century, or a bit of precocious post-nationalism, or just a different kind of war fever altogether. It seems to me that in the US today, the people who support the war are the other way around. They don't seem to really love their own country, or their own people (they do use some patriotic, country-loving language, but mostly they seem to despise most of the people in it and a large number of the institutions that are supposed to define it, and they certainly don't seem to have any great desire to preserve the land itself), but they believe the most hideous things about the people on the other side of the war. I think it's telling that ever since the (first? definitely the second) Bush presidency, we've been seeing a lot of use of the term "the bad guys" instead of the names of the people on the other side, or even "the enemy." And "the bad guys" is not being used ironically by these people. Now, I don't for a minute believe that my Austrian soldier speaks for all of Austria in World War One, and I can't say, because I've never examined it before, how much of Austria thought like him and how much of the country thought in more jingoistic ways. So I can't honestly say I have seen a way to contrast the state of my country now with the state of that country then. I guess I have to say I'm struck by the contrast between this guy in this memoir and some other fellows I have read about in my time and place and leave it at that, and not make generalizations like I just started to do.
Another thing I'm struck by is the terrible, terrible font this memoir is presented in. Why? It's small and muddy and dark and it takes way too much effort to read. I almost gave up. Instead I copied the text into my own word processor, and I'm really glad I did. I'm not generally a font snob -- I mean, I like Comic Sans -- but this was way too nasty and difficult.
Oh, yeah, it's the 30th so I have to account for the month, Really didn't nano, but oh my the research I have done. I only wish I knew over a year ago that I needed to research this stuff, but at that time I thought "I'll avoid most of the war -- knock out a couple battle scenes, and then get on with the real story." I understand, of course, that that is intolerably naive. I probably actually knew it at the time. I probably thought I was going to skate by with a little bit of skimming things for Cool Bits.
But Cool Bits only decorates a story. To actually drive a story you need to know what you're talking about.