Ananya Tiwari
Professor Shernaz Cama
III-A, 207
1 November 2014
CHILDREN’S BOOKS AND EVACUATION OF CHILDREN DURING WORLD WAR II
While the World Wars ravaged, directly and indirectly, most countries around the world, and destroyed hundreds of thousands of lives, one section of the British population suffered in a peculiar manner. The children from bigger cities like London, Leicester, Leeds and Manchester etc. were dispatched to live with complete strangers in the English countryside. Although these places were scenic and the cities were unsafe due to bombing, the separation from parents and forced living with unrelated persons was, if not always traumatic, certainly a life-altering experience for these children.
Even though the impact of the evacuation during 1939-40 on the psyche of the children was deep, it has not been seriously explored. The common perception is that the children had many adventures while away (supported by countless children’s books written about the evacuees), and they returned to their parents after the war without any emotional or psychological scars. This was not always true. The evacuation fractured deep familial bonds irrevocably and sometimes led to underlying psychological issues that cropped up later even though many chose to shy away from; and thus, they lingered, sometimes shaping their entire perceptions towards their lives. What the British government could not understand, or did not have the capacity or time to do so, was that though children are adaptable, they are also vulnerable, especially in the houses of strangers who do not want them. There were a fraction of unfortunate children who had to endure sexual abuse, starvation, abandonment, class discrimination, labour exploitation and theft, and no succour was available since their letters to their parents were censored.
While these issues are yet to be addressed formally, the evacuation of the children is best glimpsed through some of the children’s books written about the evacuation, even though they do not always provide an accurate picture. Why were they written, who wrote them, and how and what were written – answering these fundamental questions will get us closer to understanding the effects of the war on children, and the future generations, and also bring us closer to an understanding of the impact of war on children worldwide – today, and in the past. But since 300 books with war-related themes were published for children during World Wars I and II in England alone[1], only three famous and loved novels are form a part of this survey – Johanna Reiss’s The Upstairs Room (1972), Michelle Magorian’s Good Night, Mister Tom (1981), and Michael Morpurgo’s Friend or Foe (1977).
THE CLASS POLITICS INHERENT IN THE EVACUATION
The evacuation of children remains the largest movement of civilians that Britain ever experienced. The preparations for it began, astonishingly, as early as in 1924. Britain was acutely aware and cautious of the rise of Germany, and in the 1930’s, the magnetic pull and the power of Hitler. The First World War had seen the introduction of chemical weaponry, and air raids. Zeppelins, lumbering balloons, the bombing of London in 1917 by 14 twin-engined German Gothas, in which 160 people were killed and 400 injured—and by the time the war ended in 1918; 103 air raids, 300 tons of high explosives dropped, 5000 casualties and more than 1400 deaths were reported. These statistics were perhaps enough to send the government reeling and compelled it to formulate solutions to reduce the numbers during the looming next war. Because of the certainty air raids, the British government decided it was in their best interests to get the children evacuated from the major cities of England.
On 30 March 1925 the Subcommittee of ARP (Air Raid Protection) sat for its seventeenth meeting. It was chaired by John Anderson, M.G. Ashmore from the war office, I.G. Gibbon, an assistant secretary at the Ministry of Health, M.P.A. Hankey, Secretary of the CID and the Chief Inspector of Elementary Schools, H.M. Richards. The subjects covered were panic, war, the mobilization of school buildings and the funding, and all of them agreed to the evacuation of children.[2] Mr Richards explained that 1,200,000 public – and elementary – school pupils would be involved, together with a large number of teachers. He emphasised, initially, on evacuating ‘the very poor districts only’ since he believed that the wealthy would have means and measures to evacuate their own children if need arose.
The class politics of Britain was intense during the planning, execution and duration of the evacuation. The committee were far-sighted enough to harbour apprehensions as regards to the treatment the poor children may receive in their new country homes, which in many cases were justified. The conversation between Richards and Gibbon (1940) was prophetic: ‘Some of these small children who come from London would not be the kind of children that would be welcomed too ardently, even by patriotic householders.’
In the meetings the followed over the years, there was loud angst against the poor children. Many conservative members believed that those most likely to panic would be the less stable in character of foreign elements within London as well as the very poor in East and Southern London. The people living in these areas were identified as ‘foreign, Jewish and poor elements’.[3] They justified that ‘any discrimination against the foreign element or the poor was there for the sake of the whole.’[4] Speaking in support of the theory, Major Tomlin of the Metropolitan Police described people living in the East End of London during the First World War as having ‘flocked out of their homes before the sirens were heard’. He said this was the type of person who ‘would be driven mad with fright.’, and in the event of bombing ‘would flock into the wealthier areas where they would find prizes worth having.’[5] Thankfully, he was proven wrong.
After the evacuation had taken place, there was intense opposition in the Parliament towards the scheme. Sir Henry Fildes, the National Liberal MP for Dumfriesshire, spoke for the reception areas and attacked the Government for forcing British citizens to take into their homes ‘persons suffering from venereal disease, scabies and all sorts of infectious complaints.’[6] Major Owen, the Liberal MP for Caernarvonshire, said it was ‘ludicrous’ to send working classes to the beautiful Welsh countryside.[7] He then read a report about the dirty hygiene habits of the evacuees, referring to their having ‘different habits and different thoughts’.
The poor also expressed their resentment about the fact that they were forced to carry the burden of billeting while the wealthy avoided their homes to the newcomers, like a Duke who took in only a handful and put them in the basement. Many parish or private houses had several empty rooms, and not one of them had evacuees.
The class discrimination that was evident during the duration of the war was, ironically, partially subverted by the evacuation process. The selection procedure was random, and many upper class children found themselves in poorer homes, and there were a few fortunate ones who had the golden opportunity to stay in wealthy households. The experience might have been traumatic or delightful, but the exposure to different lifestyles was definitely educational. After the war was over, the working class fought to not be indoctrinated into the previous exploitative system. Many not belonging to the working class found their prejudices weakening after the experience. And since these children were the future of Britain of the times, the evacuation resulted in a mind altering experience that rendered their prejudices futile and baseless. Whether they chose to act upon their new ideals or beliefs is a different matter altogether, but the evacuation was part of a quiet revolution of the society. Britain would definitely not be the same again, despite the attempt to revive the old order.
Consider the following snippets whereby evacuees state the impact of evacuation on their lives[8]:
Doreen Dixon: ‘I went to Wales and saw worse poverty than my own. I think I became a socialist as a result of my experience.’
Patsy: ‘I think that none of us who were sent away from our homes as small children has been fully aware of the tremendous impact that it had upon us. I have a great deal of strength and independence which I have laid to that time of my life. What I have failed to come to grips with is my inability or unwillingness to form close ties with other human beings.’
Joan Porter: ‘I never really became part of the family again. I am now a social worker. A strong will and inner strength have helped me to become a survivor. My first instinct is to shield others from pain.’
Gloria McNeill: ‘Every time I hear Veera Lynn sing “Goodnight children everywhere” I see a forlorn 11-year-old curled up in a corner of a strange bedroom, hiding tears behind pages of The Blue Fairy Book. I don’t think I ever got over that unbelievable loneliness.’
PLANNING OF THE EVACUATION
In 1933 it was decided to make the news of the evacuation plans public knowledge and Baldwin’s national party decided to issue its first circular on air-raid precautions to Britain’s local authorities, and formally cement the evacuation plans, which was planned to start before the commencement of the war, with a fixed time-limit of 72 hours. It relied completely on rail transport. This brought up the subject of civilians leaving an area on their own accord. All agreed that it would be impossible to prevent this but that the Government should exercise a degree of control over any movement of the population.
The Munich Pact (1938), forwarded by Chamberlain gave false hope to the people of Britain. The two sides negotiated thus – Germany would be allowed to occupy Czechoslovakia in return for peace. The apparent success of the pact at that time was a cause of great jubilation, and heartbreak for the people. They truly believed that that war had been averted. Restaurants and pubs rang with the sounds of celebrating crowds. Leaving a hotel, Winston Churchill passed an open door leading to a dining-room packed with merrymakers. As he turned away he muttered to himself, ‘These poor people! Little do they know what they will have to face.’[9]
Those opposed to Chamberlain’s actions were in a minority. Most felt peace is more attractive than war. Many have also contended that the period of grace leading up to the war was the result of a deliberate delaying tactic planned to give Britain the opportunity to prepare for war. Factories that in 1936 were turning out aircraft at a rate of 240 a month had, by the outbreak of war, increased their output to 660 a month. The Munich Pact did little to alter this.
Schools continued with their rehearsals and did a thorough job of it. In fact, children used to go to school mainly to rehearse. Teachers of schools had prepared for months the evacuation exercises that they would have to carry out in case of war. Rehearsals were carried out in school and the children never used to take them seriously. Many schools had taken their children to the nearest railway station in an effort to perfect the scheme in preparation for the actual day.
As Britain celebrated during the grace period, Hitler, on 15 March in the palace of Prague declared that the rest of Czechoslovakia would henceforth enjoy the fruits of his occupation. Soon, British citizens flocked to join the Territorial Army. When Germany began to look towards Poland, Britain declared that it would side with the Eastern country in the event of a German attack.
From the end of June 1939 to the morning of their march more than 3,500,000 people had moved from the areas that were most likely to be bombed, including 825,000 schoolchildren, 624,000 mothers with children under school age, 13,000 expectant mothers, 7000 blind people and 113,000 school teachers.
On 1 September thousands of school children made their way to the 72 train stations involved. Over a four-day period, 4,000 trains were used to transport more than 1,300,000 evacuees, and yet not one casualty was reported. London’s famous red buses carried 200,000 passengers to the train stations or into the countryside.
John Aitchison was evacuated with the Kelvin Grove Boys’ Senior School:
‘A list of basic clothing had been issued, haversacks sold at a shilling, envelopes had been stamped and home-addressed and rehearsals of the yard assemble held. Mr Rollo, the headmaster, had instructed us to answer “Are we downhearted?” with a resounding “NO!” The fateful Friday arrived and we assembled in the school hall in a state of wild excitement for the great adventure, complete with haversacks, gas-masks and our sandwiches. We were issued with several tins of emergency rations and packets of biscuits to give to our hosts. We formed into marching groups in the school yard, our gas-masks were again inspected and after the “Are we downhearted?” question and the answer “NO!” we were off.’
And nobody knew where the children were going.
THE ARRIVAL
Many remember their arrival to the villages with distaste and unease, as the children were selected and scurried along like cattle, and were often forced to change residence if the foster parents did not warm up to them, or if they had ‘naughty’ habits. When some were not chosen, the billeting officer was forced to knock on each and every door in the hope that someone would be gracious enough to take them in. It was harassing for the children, and extremely tiresome for the officers. There were a few families who though they had signed up for the program, had the audacity to suddenly go in holiday or they simply refused to co-operate. The initial few days were painful for all.
Beryl Hweitson recalls the period when they reached their destination:
‘We were told to sit quietly on the floor while the villagers and farmers’ wives came to choose which children they wanted. I noticed boys of about 12 went very quickly – perhaps to help on the farm? Eventually my friend Nancy and I were left – two plain, straight-haired little girls wearing glasses, now rather tearful. A large, happy-looking, middle- aged lady rushed in asking, “Is that all you have left?” A sad, slow nod of the head from our teacher. “I’ll take the poor bairns.” We were led out of the hall with this stranger and taken to a farm where we spent two years.’
Siblings were usually separated from each other. Appearances played an important part. Young boys or pretty girls were always chosen over those, who say, wore glasses or had spots.
John Wills: ‘The local ladies would walk through the mob and make a selection. If you were similar to Shirley Temple you were grabbed right away. The little angelic girls all went first into the homes of who knows what or where. Perhaps some were chosen by the local child-molester. But most girls went into the best homes. In the event, if you were like me or my friend Alfie, who always looked filthier than I did, your chances were pretty bleak.’
Many children could not fit in, despite all efforts made by the foster parents. Some were shunned due to their class backgrounds, gender, behaviour or religious affiliations. The unfortunate few were used as free labour to help in the farms. There were ones who were left hungry, sometimes almost starved, and those who were sexually abused. Most were simply unhappy and homesick. Additionally, since no air raids occurred till 1940, the civilians felt duped. This period of the war is called the phony war. Due to all these reasons a huge wave of evacuees returned to their homes, or tried to run away.
Children from differing religions from their foster parents found it difficult to adjust to the new religious practises. Catholics children were sometimes billeted with Protestant families and vice-versa. It was especially difficult for the Jewish children. They were regarded as aliens. They also had to adapt to an entirely new lifestyle. Chief Rabbi grasped this problem, and relaxed the strict religious orders; for example, he said that it was not necessary to eat kosher food and that they should ‘worship where you can’.[10] These liberal suggestions would in time eat away at the religious culture of the children and steer many of them away from their more orthodox beginnings forever.
Allan Sanders: ‘My foster parents were firm but fair, but ways and culture were totally different from my previous upbringing. I had to go to church services and being of the Jewish religion it was totally alien to me and I was made to sing hymns and so forth, but I suppose they looked after me the best they could.’ One girl and her sister found themselves with a Jewish family who were kind enough to insist that they go to church each Sunday. When Rita Friede, a Jewish girl, arrived at her foster home the woman searched her scalp and hair for horns.
BOMBING OF CITIES
By August 1940, nearly 2,000 German aircrafts launched raids against Britain. On 24 August, the first daylight bombing of London took place. Bomber Command retaliated and on the nights of 25 and 26 August dropped bombs on Berlin. It was the beginning of all-out war on the capital cities of both countries. The Battle of London began on 7 September, when German bombers set the docks of London afire.
As the year ended, other cities were bombed, such as Birmingham, Southampton, Manchester, Sheffield, Portsmouth and Leicester. The parents who lived there only then truly believed that they had done the right thing in evacuating their children to the countryside.
On 7 May 1945 the German Supreme Command finally surrendered. By this time many evacuated children had already returned to their families, as the flow back to the cities had begun in September 1944.
THE LITERATURE THAT SPAWNED
The literature, art and movies that were inspired due to the World Wars, or were a product of its effect on the people, are innumerable, with new works emerging to this day. The children’s books that were written on the war came out mostly during the 60’s and 70’s, as most authors were either children during the Second World War, or were born just after it. Marcia Shutze and Dr. Jean Greenlaw (1975)[11] examine twenty-two books in their survey of the trends in juvenile books set during the war. They say that books with World War II settings have increased in number since the late 1950s, beginning then and increasing throughout the 1960s into the 1970s before waning.
There are novels that are based on first-hand accounts of their experiences, and ones that are fictional stories showcasing a realistic picture of the war. All of them are poignant, adventurous and heart-warming tales, and all of them stress on the futility and devastation of the war in their own unique ways.
Authors like Johanna Reiss adopted a more realistic approach[12]. Johanna Reiss – a Dutch-born American – was born, raised, and educated in Winterswijk, but she and her older sister survived the Holocaust hidden for almost three years in the rural village of Usselo in the attic of a farmer called Johan Oosterveld. She recounts this in her novel The Upstairs Room (1972), with a realism and grimness that is rare in children’s books. Since the story is auto-biographical, Reiss not only depicts the confusion and shock of a child that has seen cruelty at a tender age, but also brilliantly captures the palpable tensions, fear and reactions of the various members of her family as they slowly, but steadily, come to comprehend the utter horror that awaits the Jews. The novel begins with a six year old Annie, the protagonist, feeling rebuffed by her father’s lack of interest in her drawings, as he is busy listening to the news bulletin on the radio.
Annie is the observer, and keeps shuffling around rooms and in between conversations to report to the readers the historical events of the period, and the fear it caused. She recounts the behaviour of her elder sisters, her mother and her father with a child-like detachment and bewilderment, which though has limited understanding, does nonetheless possess the ability to relate the underlying grief and terror that the family goes through. This realism, the lack of any child-like gaiety or fun in the novel, gives the pre-teens a very deep, dark and pessimistic insight into the impact of war on the families destroyed by it.
In contrast is Michelle Magorian’s Good Night, Mister Tom (1981), which gives an account of the English countryside during the Second World War. (Michelle Magorian was born in 1947, and was dependent upon her mother’s memories of the war) The novel is about an impoverished eight year old boy William Beech, son of a mentally sick mother, who gets evacuated to the village called Little Weirwold. He gets billeted with a reclusive, taciturn and gruff sixty year old widow called Mister Tom Oakley, who soon realizes that the welts and bruises on William’s frail body are due to beatings by his Puritanical and overly religious mother. She was adamant to billet William in the home of God-fearing people, and Mister Tom fit the bill, as he was religious. Mister Tom is, surprisingly for him, generous to the boy, despite the fact that he was poor and filthy. In reality, poor children were ostracized and demeaned, and were shuffled from billet to billet because nobody wanted them.
However, Good Night, Mister Tom is a touching and tender tale of the deep friendship between a painfully timid boy and a withdrawn old man. They both grow; the boy learns his alphabets, discovers his talent for painting, and makes many new friends who love him – he finds a home. Mister Tom, widowed for forty years, matures too, when he surprisingly finds himself protecting and loving a lad so different from him.
The aspects of the evacuation, like the billeting troubles, the overflowing schools, the air raids and the radio telecasts by Chamberlain and Churchill figure in this novel too. What makes Magorian’s novel starkly different from Johanna Weiss’s is that it the book does not directly showcase the atrocities of war, and is written not to shock or horrify the reader, but to delight and comfort him or her – it is a warm tale, instead of a starkly realistic and gloomy one. The countryside of England, and its people and the evacuees, are depicted in a positive light, when this wasn’t the truth. Magorian treats the countryside as a pastoral idyllic abode, with delicious food (like in The Famous Five), lush greenery and crystal clear streams. The people are shown to be warm and hospitable, and full of community-feeling and camaraderie. The other evacuee children are happy in their billets, though Magorian does take care to mention, passingly, of a few evacuees who ran away back to their homes due to unhappiness and homesickness.
It is when William goes back to visit his mother in London that the happy cocoon that Magorian built in the countryside breaks down. Sturgeon-Clegg reports in her study[13] that a great many evacuees experienced changes in their personality while they lived in their new families. The reason was mainly that they were dependent on their host for food, shelter and acceptance. In order to better integrate into their host families, evacuees would hide parts of their personality and develop other tastes and even religious behaviour. These changes would later turn into problems when they were to resume their lives in their old environments. This is depicted in the novel as Will’s exceptional change creates tensions when he returns to his mother in London. William’s mother, being mentally sick, locks and abandons William and his new born sister in the basement, an act that results in the death of the sister. She does this because she cannot stand William’s transformation and fears the loss of her authority. Mrs Beech later commits suicide.
Thankfully Mister Tom, worried about the lack of correspondence from him, tracks William down in London and rescues him on time. Very few foster parents truly cared about their billeted children to lengths that Mister Tom did for William. The city comes as a shock to a country man like Mister Tom. The inhumane conditions many children lived under in the poor parts of the cities were discovered during the evacuation. The streets were bombed, and the people were impoverished and sick. The hospitals were overflowing and everyone was injured and unhappy. She paints a very bleak picture of London – and it was a sordid reality.
William and Mister Tom go back to the countryside, and resume their simple and fulfilling lives. The popularity of the novel is certainly due to the optimistic story and the growing relationship between Will and Mr Tom.
However, it is when William’s free-spirited and exuberant best friend, Zach, goes to visit his parents in London and dies due to the bombing that the readers get a true taste of the war. The passage that narrates William’s grief and shock provides the readers with an intimate and deeply personal account of the devastation of war. This part of the novel is truly poignant and heart-breaking, and Magorian skilfully and intricately weaves the vestiges and futility of the war with Zach’s death. It is then that William and the readers begin to feel angry.
Michael Morpurgo (author of War Horse, adapted into a film of the same name by Steven Spielberg), in his Friend or Foe (1977), is more rhetorical in his approach to the matter of war. In the novel, the two evacuees from London, David and Tucky, witness the crash of a German bomber plane while they are alone at the farm of their foster parents Mr and Mrs Reynolds.
The next day they tell Mr and Mrs Reynolds, who inform the search guards. Despite days of airplane surveillance over the moors the guards are unsuccessful in locating the bombers, and David and Tucky suffer great humiliation due to it. They are driven to prove themselves and thus embark upon another search together. David unfortunately falls into the river, and would have drowned if one of the German bombers hadn’t rescued him.
David and Tucky are ecstatic that they have discovered the two German bombers. They had been camping near the bog (which had swallowed their plane) and one of them was badly injured. The other German bomber persuades the two boys to pilfer food and blankets for them. David is furious with them, as they are German, and also because his father was killed during an attack. He wants to hand them over. But Tucky deliberates, and keeps reminding David that one does not betray someone who has saved one’s life, and finally David submits. The German bombers are shown to be ordinary human beings who just happen to be in the wrong side, in the wrong place. They are not depicted with malice or hatred, and David’s anger towards them, though justified, is ultimately shown to be prejudiced and narrow. Both the lads help the bombers twice, despite suffering pangs of guilt over stealing from their kind foster parents.
The injured German bomber decides to be taken as prisoner of war due to his lack of health. And the other one decides to rough it out and reach the sea. When the boys deliver the sick bomber to the authorities, they are hailed as heroes. In the newspaper the next day, they are astonished to find that the other German bomber was captured too.
The reason that this novel is important is because it centres upon the humanity of the Germans, and asks the reader whether they are truly foes, or simply humans fighting for the other side. Morpurgo makes it easier to digest since both the bombers are eventually captured, but he does also pose the ultimate reality of war – that war causes havoc and devastation on all sides fighting it, and is thus simply futile and unnecessary. It is a vision based on justice and humanity, and thus this children’s novel is so popular with both adults and children alike.
CONCLUSION
The authors of children’s books based on the World War, whether they were American, Japanese, Dutch, Austrian, French, German or English, all stress the same thing. They all lived through the war, or were born right after it, and thus provide an educational account of the horrors that it entails. Some, like Michelle Magorian, wrote escapist novels, whereas some like Johanna Reiss – directly tackled the ugliness and cruelty that they suffered. Others, like Michael Morpurgo, from a more detached and idealistic stance, showcase the destruction suffered and the humanity on both sides, and hence strove to endorse the ultimate justice and peace.
It would not be possible to conclude easily the impact of war on children by the literature survey alone of the children’s books alone however tragic it may intuitively sound. It is also not possible to assume the net effect of such writings on the future course of events. The wars, albeit on a less grand scale than World Wars, have continued, and perhaps would continue till such time as the world remains fractured on many fronts, caused by the colonial and post-colonial as well as real and imagined justices. So long wars occur, the children, women and the elderly would continue to suffer more than the rest of the population in societies.
However, the evacuation of children during the Second World War in England, and the emotions generated due to their dislocation as evidenced in the writing of children in English would serve as to remind the present and future generations of the perils on war and the trauma inflicted on young psyche. While the existence of such literature draws our curiosity, and enables us to relieve those moments, it would be incorrect to assume that such moments are peculiar to only England. As the wars recur in different geographies and time periods, it always evokes strong feelings that spur writings in different languages and locales. It is for the courageous to explore such outpouring of feelings fictional or near fictional. All such excursions, however, would conclude that causalities of war are not only the dead and wounded: it is those who remain alive, those young souls who have a whole life ahead of them, that suffer the most.
WORKS CITED
Wicks, Ben. No Time to Wave Goodbye (Bloomsbury: London, 2009). Web.
Reiss, Johanna. The Upstairs Room (Graymalkin Media: New York, 1972). Web.
Michael Morpurgo. Friend or Foe (Egmont: London, 1977). Web.
Magorian, Michelle. Good Night, Mister Tom (Penguin, 1981). Web.
Dolmark, Elisabeth. 2013. ‘Aspects of Evacuation in Good, Night Mister Tom’, degree essay in English Literature, (Spring 2013), Lund University. Web.
Pringleton, Laura. ‘World War II as Seen through Children’s Literature’, (http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1997/2/97.02.03.x.html, accessed on 15 Aug. 2014).
[1] Pringleton, Laura. ‘World War II as Seen through Children’s Literature’, (http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1997/2/97.02.03.x.html, accessed on 15 Aug. 2014).
[2] ‘Public warnings and air raid shelters’, 30 March 1925, Subcommittee on Air Raid Precautions, Vol. 46–1, Committee on Imperial Defence, Memo Papers 1926–8. (There are no references in Ben Wicks’ book, so I did not really know how to frame this citation. This is the written account of a defence meeting. I did the next best thing – google – https://books.google.co.in/books?id=jtMcRIjLo5AC&pg=PA225&lpg=PA225&dq=subcommittee+on+arp,+vol.+46-1&source=bl&ots=JZoESOmzQX&sig=-1vuwypGUc7N295RHjoIlhfp-eM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VOCrVJbEDYieugSY1IHYCQ&ved=0CB8Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=subcommittee%20on%20arp%2C%20vol.%2046-1&f=false
[3] ‘Public warnings and air raid shelters’, March 1931, Subcommittee on Air Raid Precautions, Committee on Imperial Defence. Again, in Ben Wicks’ book he hasn’t mentioned exactly which subcommittee meeting all these quotations are from. But he does mention that they occurred in March of 1931. So I just copied the earlier citation with a few obvious changes)
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] There are really no references for this as Ben Wicks has not provided the specific date of this debate. I can at the most just add : Wicks, Ben. No Time to Wave Goodbye (Bloomsbury: London, 2009). Web.
[7] Ibid.
[8] All subsequent first-person accounts are from: Wicks, Ben. No Time to Wave Goodbye (Bloomsbury: London, 2009). Web.
[9] Couldn’t find the exact reference on the net. It is in Wicks, Ben. No Time to Wave Goodbye (Bloomsbury: London, 2009). Web.
[10] Wicks, Ben. No Time to Wave Goodbye (Bloomsbury: London, 2009). Web.
[11] Pringleton, Laura. ‘World War II as Seen through Children’s Literature’, (http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1997/2/97.02.03.x.html, accessed on 15 Aug. 2014).
[12] Esther Hautzig was born in Wilno, Poland (present-day Vilnius, Lithuania). Her childhood was interrupted by the beginning of World War II and the conquest in 1941 of eastern Poland by Soviet troops. Her family was uprooted and deported to Rubtsovsk, Siberia, where Esther spent the next five years in harsh exile. Her award winning novel The Endless Steppe (1968) is an autobiographical account of those years in Siberia. After the war, she and her family moved back to Poland when she was 15.
[13] Dolmark, Elisabeth. 2013. ‘Aspects of Evacuation in Good, Night Mister Tom’, degree essay in English Literature, (Spring 2013), Lund University.
Ananya Tiwari 