The above quotation taken directly from Source C is extremely useful as evidence of the children’s situation at the start of the evacuation. Not only is the account from a first hand witness but the witness is a teacher who is used to dealing with children. The quotation explains clearly how the children, who had been forced to leave their homes and more importantly families, felt about the evacuation. However source C, although a first hand account was written in 1988, and memories may not be correct, as the teacher may be speaking with hindsight, which would therefore give her a different view of events.
In conclusion source C appears to be more useful as evidence about the start of the children’s evacuation journey than source B as it is a primary source, and was written by a first hand witness. However source B was taken at the time, and so possibly has more truth to it. Therefore, both sources, although not wholly useful, have some usefulness in them.
QUESTION 2
Source G is an extract from a novel entitled ‘Carrie’s war’ by Nina Bowden from 1973. It is a novel for children set in the Second World War and tells the story of two evacuees who are brother and sister.
The extract given as source G cannot be taken as a factual account of evacuees as we have no knowledge of what Nina Bowden based her novel on. I.e. is her story based on her own first hand knowledge, is it based on actual interviews or is it taken from other people’s research no references being given or listed.
Source G does seem to have some reliability as it is similar to other accounts of evacuation, where host parents had a misconstrued view of city children, as being poor and uncivil. However without documented evidence, it cannot be taken as a total reliable account. It falls in line with how we believe country people thought of city children, but in a light hearted sort of way. Another reason why the extract can not be taken as fact is because it was taken from a fictional book, the book will have been written to entertain, and to sell copies, not to educate children about evacuation.
Therefore, although Source G has some reliability, the source can not be deemed wholly reliable as evidence about evacuees.
QUESTION 3
After looking through many different sources we are asked the question ‘was evacuation successful’?
Evacuation was a scheme created by the government at the time of the Second World War. In principle children who lived in city areas, that were considered to be at risk from German bombing, were relocated to rural areas to live with foster families.
We have looked through photographs, extracts from novels, newspapers, textbooks and interviews. Together all these sources give us a much more accurate insight into evacuation during the Second World War. These sources are varied some being primary and some secondary. While it cannot be doubted that the whole concept of evacuation was created to keep children alive and safe the facts seem to tell a different story. Indeed the primary sources show us that for many of the children and in some cases their parents evacuation was cruel. The children had many issues to deal with. Initially the trauma of leaving home and their families. This is clearly shown in detail in many places but no more so than in the extract from an interview with a teacher (source C). Having got over this initial traumatic experience for many of the children things seemed to go worse. There appeared to be a great mistrust between the evacuees and the host families. This is clearly shown in many of the interviews that are shown. This was also made worse by the huge cultural difference between the city children and the country people. Examples of this are clearly shown in the interview with an evacuee and the interview with the mother of a host family, (sources E and F). Even though these interviews took place many years after the event, there is no reason to disbelieve them.
There are also many secondary accounts of the evacuations; these were mainly given in the form of novels (such as Carrie’s war written by Nina Bowden). However these nearly always seem to represent the situation in a light hearted manner. Most of this seemed to stem from what seemed like government propaganda at the time. For example in order to raise general morale and in order to get parents to send their children to the countryside, the government painted a rosy picture to the public. This being expressed in newspaper articles and advertisements of the time.
Sources like these are inaccurate and limited whereas the primary sources are factual and are related by people we know who actually experienced evacuation. The stark reality of the situation was that many children were miserable and unhappy about leaving home to go live with a stranger and many parents missed their children terribly. The whole thing became so difficult that many children returned home to be with their parents before the bombs had been dropped this resulted in many children sadly dying when the blitz did eventually start.
It must, however, be said that evacuation did bring many children out of poverty and into a better standard of living. Also many of the children did enjoy the country lifestyle. This however was not a generalization and more children wished to return to the city than remain in the countryside. Many children said that it was not worth being put through such a terrible ordeal of loneliness and suffering.
In conclusion from reading the many sources and knowing the background of the Second World War it can be seen that although in some cases the evacuation was a success, and the children thoroughly enjoyed the country lifestyle, there were thousands more cases where the children hated their lives in the country, and in these cases, the evacuation was definitely not a success.
