AFTER GOYA - A quick flick review

Scott Pack, over at Me and My Big Mouth has very generously given my novel After Goya a positive mention.

You can read my comments on this over at the After Goya blog.

Of course, overall I'm pleased but feel in something of a quandary.

It's encouraging to receive such a positive public plug for the book but I feel a bit stupid because I am not able to follow through with sales.

Ah well, such is life.

The MINISTRY OF TRUTH: D.J. Taylor - Orwell -The Life: Assault Guards during the May, 1937 events.

ASSAULT GUARDS, CIVIL GUARDS & CARABINEROS
or the publicly funded, private rearguard armies of the Republic's Stalinist lackeys.

Part five of a series of six posts: Part One; Part Two; Part Three and Part Four.





On page 223 of Orwell - The Life D.J. Taylor writes:
Later that evening government troops from Valencia - crack assault guards, the pride of the Republican Army -

Incorrect. The Assault Guards, or Asaltos, or more popularly known as La Guardia de Asalto, were a public order force, under the control of the interior ministry, not an army unit under the control of the defence ministry.*

This is an important error which needs to be addressed because it undermines Orwell's point that police and public order units in the rearguard were better armed, equipped and provisioned than were frontline units.

Yes, the Asaltos did play an important role in the early streetfighting, especially in Barcelona, but they were a police and public order force who were later tasked with rounding up perceived dissidents. And yes, they were occasionally drafted into the frontline, but they could not, by any measure, be considered 'crack troops' nor 'the pride of the Republican Army'.

In Homage to Catalonia Orwell is very careful to (repeatedly) make the distinction that D.J. Taylor overlooks:

H.T.C. Chapter 10, page 137: "They were the Assault Guards, another formation similar to the Civil Guards and the Carabineros (i.e. a formation intended primarily for police work) ..."

H.T.C. Chapter 13, page 193: "The Assault Guards were a corps not intended primarily for the front, and many of them had not been under fire before. Down in Barcelona they were lords of the street, but up here [i.e. the frontline] they were quintos (rookies) ... "

H.T.C. Chapter 10, page 138: "They [the Assault Guards] were splendid troops, much the best I had seen in Spain, and, though I suppose they were in a sense 'the enemy', I could not help liking the look of them ... I had not known that the Republic possessed troops like these. It was not only that they were picked men physically, it was their weapons that most astonished me. All of them were armed with brand-new rifles ... vastly better than the dreadful old blunderbusses we had at the front. The Assault Guards had one sub-machine gun between ten men and an automatic pistol each; we at the front had approximately one machine-gun between fifty men, and as for pistols and revolvers, you could only procure them illegally. As a matter of fact, though I had not noticed it until now, it was the same everywhere. The Civil Guards and Carabineros, who were not intended for the front at all, were better armed and far better clad than ourselves. I suspect it is the same in all wars - always the same contrast between the sleek police in the rear and the ragged soldiers in the line."

The photo above shows members of the Security Corps, albeit in parade dress, and without their machine-guns and armoured cars, but gives an indication of the sight Orwell reported.

Orwell was correct to note " ... that they were picked men physically ... " The new formation had a minimum height requirement of 180 centimetres and an age requirement of between 22 and 32 years old, whereas the previous incarnation of the Assault Guard had a minimum height requirement of 170 centimetres.

Orwell's assessment can be backed up by the Republican commander General Vicente Rojo. Rojo bemoaned the fact that the Asaltos were much better equipped than the forces under his command, and noted that when called on to fight in the front line the Asaltos' incompetence and lack of experience had a disastrous impact on the morale of troops in the same sector. Hardly an endorsement for 'the pride of the Republican Army'.

Accurate, reliable, figures are impossible to obtain but it is generally agreed among Spanish historians that:

Between 50% and 55% of Civil Guards, 55% and 60% of Carabineros, and between 65% and 70% of Assault Guards remained loyal to the Popular Front government.

Technically, from early on in the war loyal elements of the Guardia Civil in the Republican zone were re-named The National Republican Guard (Guardia Nacional Republicana), but in practice people continued to call them the Guardia Civil. The conjuction of National and Republican in the title serves to confuse even more.

The Carabineros were what could be called frontier police - in effect armed customs men (what the Brits used to call the Reveners [corruption of revenue] or Duty Men.)
Here are two photos of Carabineros - the left in duty order, the right in ceremonial order:

The photos used for this post were taken from Sociedad Benéfica de Historiadores Aficionados y Creadores

The Assault Guards were first formed in 1932 by the Republican government of 1931.

The government did not wholly trust the loyalty of the Guardia Civil (for good reason given that Mola, codename: The Director, the co-ordinating conspirator behind the military rising, was Director-General of National Security during the final period of the Monarchy) and so created their own public order force, staffed by reliable elements. But, for fear of antagonising sections of the Right (as now) never got around to disbanding the Guardia Civil - a rallying call of Largo Caballero's Socialists.

It's important to bear in mind that the Civil Guard came under the Defence ministry, the Carabineros came under the control of the Treasury (Hacienda)**, while the Assault Guards came under the Interior Ministry.

So, in summary, at the outbreak of the uprising there were three distinct paramilitary formations each under the command of a different government department.***

When discussing the Assault Guards it's as well to have in mind that for Nationalist apologists it was a squad of Assault Guards who started the war - by assassinating right-winger Calvo Sotelo (in revenge for the murder of an Assault Guard officer by members of the Falange) on July 13th, 1936, four days before the uprising began.****

Of course the apologists would have it that the assassination was carried out on the orders of the Popular Front government.

In his Notes to the Text of Homage to Catalonia, in Orwell in Spain, Peter Davison makes an honest and sincere attempt to disentangle the confusion surrounding Orwell's uses of the terms Civil Guard and Assault Guard, but in doing so he confuses the issue even more by stating,
"... by the Spaniards referring indifferently to all these formations as 'la guardia' ..." [p.29].

Technically Peter Davison is wrong on this point, and the Spaniards he refers to were theoretically correct in referring to a singular formation.

At the time of the May events theoretically (as with the formation of the Popular Army) with the passing of a decree on December 27th, 1936, the Guardia Civil and the Guardia de Asaltos had been re-incorporated into a single entity -- the Security Corps, or, more accurately, Cuerpo de Seguridad y de Asalto.

This corps was divided into uniformed and plainclothes sections. Further, the uniformed section was divided into cavalry, motorized and infantry sections. This combined Civil Guard and Assault Guard formation had a unified command structure and a single uniform. The Security Corps came under the Interior ministry not the Defence ministry.

Interestingly, when the new formation was initially deployed theoretically the two former elements were mustered on the basis of two former Assault Guards to every one Civil Guard. This so the generally more loyal, and politically reliable, ex-Assault Guards could keep a close eye on the less trustworthy ex-Civil Guards. As with all decrees issued from central government implementation was patchy and depended on regional and local affiliations and local personalities.

I am only surmising, though my educated guess is based on thorough research, I contend that the formation Orwell refers to as "government troops from Valencia" were in fact members of the unified Security Corps, neither assault Guards nor Civil Guards but ex-Civil Guards and ex-Assault Guards all dandied up in brand new uniforms. SEE colour photo above.

Here's a photo of a squad of the Security Corps with their machine-guns:

As with the reformation of the armed forces the Soviet Union and Spanish Communists were very keen on pushing this reform through. The new formation gave their NKVD (secret police) operatives direct access to about 8000 plainsclothes agents - whom they quickly put to work as undercover informants and agent provocateurs.

It's a slippery analogy but the Security Corps could be likened to a hybrid formed of a full-time professional, fully armed, US National Guard and a section of the F.B.I. under the control of Homeland Security.

I can appreciate that the intricacies of rearguard formations mustered and deployed by the Republican government can confuse casual commentators, serious scholars and historians.
And, I can appreciate the temptation for scholars to shrug and say, "So what? What does it matter what these agencies of repression or public order were correctly called?"

Well, in response I would say that when considering the balance of power between competing statist factions, and when considering the Stalinists' objectives, as every serious scholar of the Civil War must, such knowledge does become important.

It is important to be aware that each of these well-funded, well-equipped, formations answered to a political boss - each of whom felt the need to defend their position, or advance their strategy, with the use of armed force as necessary.

The most sinister part of this jigsaw of Soviet consolidation was put in place on August 9th, 1937 with the integration of all intelligence and security services into the SIM - Servicio de Investigación Militar. This grouped all civil and military espionage and counter-espionage agencies under a single command - organised into six military and five civilian sections.

The task of Stalin's agents was to gain control of all three formations - Security Corps, SIM and the Carabineros - in order to confront those less well-armed, but much larger in number, proletarian elements which would deny them complete hegemony.

D.J. Taylor is the current Chair of the Orwell Trust

* The Assault Guards were commanded by Army officers, as were the Civil Guard. This was regular practice. Indeed, regular Army officers continued to command all police units (even traffic police) until reforms in the '80s.

** When Finance Minister Juan Negrín steadily reinforced the Carabineros during his term in office - ensuring he had a loyal armed cadre he could call on should he need it to counter resistance when, as per the Soviet plan, he was appointed Prime Minister. The Soviet Communists had approached him in December 1936 to obtain his agreement to be the next prime minister. This gave Negrín five months to build his army, with Soviet help obviously - being appointed Prime Minister on May, 17th, 1936, conveniently two weeks after the May streetfighting.

*** In Catalonia another paramilitary group, the Somatenes re-surfaced briefly. The Somatenes were an anti-organised labour protection force for landowners and factory owners - perhaps analogous to the notorious Pinkerton's Men in the United States. Also, I daresay former members of the Mossos d'Esquadra - a Catalan autonomous version of the Assault Guard, dissolved in 1934 - also dug out their old uniforms and weapons and joined the fray. And, there were likely similar Basque formations - though I have no information on this at the present time. And there were also the Militias of Rearguard Vigilance - an irregular force soon incorporated into the Assault Guard.

**** The assassins included a Captain of the Civil Guards.

Barcelona May Days, 1937. The Ministry of Truth: D.J.Taylor: Orwell - The Life

Part Four of a series of six posts. SEE previous posts here, here, and here.

OK, let's put Orwell's caveat in place first:

It will never be possible to get a completely accurate and unbiased account of the Barcelona fighting, because the necessary records do not exist. Future historians will have nothing to go upon except a mass of accusations and party propaganda. H.T.C. p.144.

What Orwell wrote remains true. However, historians now have access to the former Soviet Union's archives and material from the Salamanca papers.

On page 220 of Orwell – The Life D.J. Taylor writes:

It was an odd state of affairs, Orwell reflected, that Barcelona, of all places, should turn out to be probably the only major city in non-Fascist Europe not to celebrate the twentieth anniversary of the Soviet Revolution.

Orwell reflected no such thing.

What Orwell actually reflected is rendered thus:

It was a queer state of affairs. Barcelona, the so-called revolutionary city, was probably the only city in non-Fascist Europe that had no celebrations that day. H.T.C. Chapter 9, page 116.

No mention there of Soviet anniversaries!

The official anniversary of the Soviet Revolution is November 7^th , not May 1st.

In fact the Communists in Barcelona marked the birthday of the Soviet Union with three weeks of celebratory events in October and November, 1937! This is well documented; the Museum of the History of Catalonia in Barcelona has at least one copy of the official programme in its collection – I know because I've seen it and read it.

I consider this to be the most serious error in the text because D.J. Taylor ascribes an erroneous reflection to Orwell, i.e. puts thoughts into his head.

Orwell would most certainly have known that May 1st, International Workers' Day, has nothing at all to do with the founding of the former Soviet Union.

To interpolate Orwell's reflections in such a way shows a lack of judgement and a lack of knowledge, or perhaps belies a deliberate attempt to distort.

The May 1st International Workers' Day was called into being by anarchists in the American labour movement by way of commemorating the Haymarket (Chicago) Martyrs.

The May Day protest date was subsequently adopted and promoted by the International Working Mens Association (now the IWA or AIT), and the 1889 Paris meeting of the Second International, as an international day of workers' solidarity.

The show trial of eight anarchists, and the subsequent execution of four of them, and the suicide of another, which followed on from a police riot and disputed bombing of police, was a cause célèbre. At one stage of the international campaign even William Morris and George Bernard Shaw, among many other intellectuals and artists, publicly registered their protest. Check out A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn, HarperCollins, New York, 1995, pages 265-266.

The Soviet Union, having unilaterally positioned itself as leaders of the international workers' movement, certainly used the day to propagandise its success at founding a so-called workers' state, but it never proposed that May Day should be considered the official anniversary date of the State.

Given the pre-eminence of the anarchist movement in Barcelona at the outbreak of the Army Uprising in July 1936 Orwell noted "a queer state of affairs" [NOTE: Orwell uses the word 'queer' not 'odd' as paraphrased by D.J.Taylor] because it served as an indicator of the extent of how the anarchists (and radical socialists) had been undermined by an alliance of bourgeois Catalan, and Spanish and Soviet Communist interests.

D.J. Taylor studied Modern History at St. John's College, Oxford.

FRANCO & THE MOVIES

When noting that sign-language was proscribed by Franco during the early years of his dictatorship in this post I recalled the Carlos Saura movie ¡Ay, Carmela!.

The movie, set during the Civil War, features a mute performer among a troupe of travelling players who end up on the wrong side of the front line. It's an excellent movie and well worth watching. The slight, comic tone of the movie belies a very human dilemma and the deadly predicament faced by the players. Saura coaxes some wonderful, award winning performances from the cast (which features the excellent Carmen Maura - best known to UK and US cineastes for her collaborations with Pedro Almodóvar).

Anyway, the point is that the mute actor uses a chalkboard to communicate. (Though not because he is obliged to by martial law). There's a triple-edge being played here by the writer - José Sanchis Sinisterra. This referencing of non-verbal and non-visual language is an allusion to the voiceless masses, the brutal suppression of dissent, and the attack on Catalan.

And, when thinking about the above, my thoughts turned to Franco's fascination with the movies.

Franco feared that foreign language movies could be used to communicate coded messages to dissidents, or camouflage open exhortations to rise up against the state. Can you imagine it? Errol Flynn, mid-swashing his buckle, crying, "One for all, and all for one! No gods, no masters! Seize the day! Smash the State! Seize control!"

Conscious that his subjects needed cheer and distraction to prevent their dissatisfaction from fomenting dissent, and realising Spain's wrecked post-war economy could not support an indigeneous film industry which could compete with the US and UK film entertainment industries, Franco encouraged the importing of movies.

At first Franco insisted on watching every single imported movie in the private cinema he had built in his palace, El Pardo. A few of the big Hollywood studios offered to supply subtitled versions. Franco could not speak English. How could he then be sure the Spanish subtitles were an accurate translation of the US English dialogue?

Franco insisted on the films being dubbed, and dubbed by politically reliable producers. This spawned a huge, continuing, industry*. Today Spanish TV schedules are filled out with dubbed foreign programmes.

A similar phenomenon took place in Mussolini's Italy.

But Franco's fascination with movies extended beyond acting as chief censor - he wrote at least four screenplays. Well, in truth, he scribbled the storylines and a loyal hack wrote the scripts. Two were produced as movies: Raza (based on a novel supposedly by Franco) and another, whose title I can't recall at present, about an isolated troop of Foreign Legionnaires in the Moroccan rif who fight to the last man to defend the flag against a horde of natives.

Franco also wrote film reviews for the neswpaper ABC.

Winston Churchill knew of, and exploited Franco's almost childlike fondness for Hollywood glamour when, in 1943, he asked hearthrob Leslie Howard to undertake a secret mission. (Howard had had a passionate affair with Conchita Montenegro, a leading Spanish Hollywood star in the 30s. Montenegro was, at that time, before their marriage in 1944, having an affair with diplomat Ricardo Giménez Arnau, a senior member of the Falange and ambassador to the Holy See.)

Without advising the British Ambassador in Madrid Churchill asked Howard to arrange an audience with El Caudillo to remind him that should he (Franco) make any advance on Gibraltar, or assist any German attack on Gibraltar, then the Royal Navy would seize the Canaries and gift them to the US for use as a miltary base.

During the return flight to the UK Howards's plane was shot down by German aircraft over the Bay of Biscay. (According to Ronald Howard, Leslie Howard's son, on the orders of Goebbels, "who had been ridiculed in one of Howard's films and who believed Howard to be the most dangerous propagandist in the British service." (go here)

In 1950, during the prelude to negotiations with the US, Franco ordered the movie Raza, originally released in 1941, to be re-edited. So as not to upset his potential future supporters ("He may be a bastard, but he's one of our bastards now," Eisenhower.) Franco insisted all critical comments about the USA to be watered down and all mentions of the Falange to be excised. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer even organised an English dubbed version for distribution in the States.

And Franco's fascination with the movies, and movie glamour, went even further. As part of a strategy to end Spain's isolation, and domestically project an image of 'normality', Franco invited a string of well-known Hollywood celebrities to visit Madrid. Franco ordered that his Hollywood guests be treated almost like visiting royalty. Sinatra, Ava Gardner and may others duly took advantage and helped put Madrid on a glamour circuit along with Rome, Paris, the French Riviera and Venice. Over 50 years later and Madrid's La Gran Vía still retains an air of shabby, faded glamour.

*My partner's son has often stated he wants to be a voice dubber (or voiceover actor as they're called in the UK) when he needs to earn a living. He practices dubbing scenes from well-known movies on his laptop using a neat bit of software. He attends dubbing conferences, and has met the actress who gives Spanish voice to Lisa Simpson and the actor who voices Brian, the dog in Family Guy (Padre de Familia).

CATALAN: DIALECT or LANGUAGE? The Ministry of Truth: D.J. Taylor - Orwell - The Life

Part Three of a series of six posts.

See previous posts here and here. See next post here.





On page 207 of his book Orwell - The Life D.J.Taylor writes:

…whose Catalan dialect he [Orwell] still had great difficulty in comprehending…

Catalan is emphatically not a dialect. Catalan is very much a proud, living, thriving language; I hear it spoken, shouted and sung every single day. I read it everywhere, every day.

There are an estimated 16 million Catalan speakers worldwide - the population of Catalunya is 7.5 million - and a sizeable, mainly immigrant, proportion of those do not speak Catalan.

The celebrated author Patrick O’Brian understood this well, referring to Catalan as the lingua franca of Napoleonic seafarers in the western Mediterranean. Contemporary English born Catalan writer Matthew Tree also understands the sometimes fraught relationship between Catalan speakers, Spanish speakers and interlopers who insist on calling Catalan a dialect.

It is the kind of insensitive error which costs lost sales in Catalunya, needlessly raises hackles, and lends succour to unreformed franquistas and centralists.

I've searched Homage to Catalonia thoroughly and not found a single mention of the word 'dialect'.

I've read, and re-read, Orwell's letters and essays and have never once come across Orwell describing Catalan as a 'dialect'.

And, though Orwell reports, "having the usual struggles with the Spanish language" (H.T.C. page 14), I haven't been able to find any mention of Orwell's 'difficulty' with Catalan.
Orwell simply says: "Things were not made easier for me by the fact that when my companions spoke to one another they generally spoke in Catalan. The only way I could get along was to carry everywhere a small dictionary which I whipped out of my pocket in moments of crisis." H.T.C. page 15.

Here are Irish writer Colm Tóibin’s thoughts about Catalan from the opening chapter of his book Homage to Barcelona:

"Catalan, I discovered, isn’t a dialect of Spanish, nor of Provencal, although it has close connections with both. Some words (casa for ‘house’, for example) are the same as in Spanish; other words (mengar for ‘eat’) are close to French or Italian. Most of the words for fruit, vegetables and spices are completely different from the Spanish words. The way of forming the past simple is like no other language; the way of forming the past continuous is more or less the same as in Spanish; the way of forming the past subjunctive is the same as in Italian.

Catalan is a pure Latin language. There are no Arabic sounds. Thus the pronunciation of the word ‘Barcelona’ does not have the ‘th’ sound as used in the series Fawlty Towers. Catalan sounds are harsh and guttural. The language is full of short, sharp nouns such as cap for ‘head’, fill for ‘son’ and clau for ‘key’; and similar-sounding verbs: crec for ‘I believe’, vaig for ‘I go’ and vull for ‘I want’. "

Speaking and writing Catalan was illegal during the dictadura (dictatorship).* As was, for a while, sign-language. Deaf and/or mute persons were obliged to communicate through writing in castellano. Which is why you'll come across photos of deaf mutes wearing little chalkboards around their necks. Illiterate deaf mutes existed in a silent purgatory.

Many of Franco's followers referred to Catalan as the 'language of curs', and Catalans were often dismissively referred to as polacos (Poles)**. Which is why the most popular Catalan satirical TV shows are called Polònia and, the football spinoff, Crackovia.

Franco's followers referred to castellano as the 'Christian tongue' - ignorant of the irony that Spanish has absorbed more Arabic (i.e. non Judeo-Christian) words than any other modern language. Spanish is a mongrel language - not Catalan - just as is English.

But Franco did not just proscribe the use of Catalan (and the public demonstration of Catalan folkloric traditions) he wilfully tried, though failed, to eradicate it. He tried to dilute it through miscegnation - by encouraging inward migration from Spain, mainly Andalucia and Murcia, and using Catalunya as a sort of open prison for banished Spanish petty criminals***, while at the same time populating the territory with hardline priests, missionaries and teachers.

And he failed. One of the most inspirational elements of Spain's reconstruction since the dictatorship has been the magnificent re-flowering of the Catalan language.

"Catalan is a pure Latin language," says Colm Tóibin, and I agree.

"But I defy anyone to be thrown as I was among the Spanish working class — I ought perhaps to say the Catalan working class, for apart from a few Aragonese and Andalusians I mixed only with Catalans — and not be struck by their essential decency; above all, their straightforwardness and generosity." Orwell said (H.T.C. page 15), and I agree.

VISCA CATALUNYA!

*Some texts in Catalan were published during the dictatorship - but what could and couldn't be published was strictly regulated.

** Many Barcelonins at the time referred to the Communists and their Soviet advisors as the Chinese - so it was possible to hear conversations describing the conflict as one between Chinese and Poles!

** A popular character in our local bar was banished to Barcelona from a village near Jaén in Andalucia when he was 12 years old in the 1960s because he had taken a shot at the local latifundista (estate owner) with his catapult. His widower father, with four younger boys to care for, was given the choice: either spend six months in prison or your oldest son is banished to Cataluña. His son was put on the train the next morning with a cardboard suitcase and 30 pesetas in his pocket - he's lived here ever since.

STUKAS OVER GUERNICA? The Ministry of Truth: D.J. Taylor - Orwell - The Life

Part Two of a series of five posts. SEE previous post. SEE next post.

On page 149 of Orwell - The Life D.J. Taylor refers to: ….Stukas sweeping down over fleeing civilians at Guernica;



I'm aware that Piers Brendon picked up on this in his Guardian review, referring to it as a “significant mistake”:

"This is a more significant mistake than it seems since the fact that these planes, the most accurate bombers in the Condor Legion, did not take part indicates that the attack was directed against civilian not military targets, which the fascists always denied."

I can sense why D.J. Taylor referred to Stukas. With an unmistakeable gull-wing profile, a terrifying siren and whistling bombs, the Stuka gained a notoreity and a synonimity with the Blitzkreig. The Stuka was the Nazis most accurate dive-bomber, and was deployed very successfully during the invasions of Poland, France, Norway and the Soviet Union.

For many, including veterans of Dunkirk, the Stuka would have been their first, and unforgettable, contact with the enemy. (It was also equipped with state of the art bomb aiming and release technology supplied by the U.S. – who, incidentally, refused to share the same technology with the Brits and French.)

The aircraft used on the raid included Dornier 17, Junkers 52 (transports converted for bombing) Heinkel 111 bombers and Heinkel 51fighters. In addition, at various times during that dreadful day, Italian escorts played a role.

If the Condor Legion’s real target, as their pilots later insisted, was a bridge just 300 yards from the town, it would have made military sense to have deployed machines capable of delivering an accurate strike, i.e. Stukas (Junkers Ju87). Early versions of the Stuka were available to be deployed that day, but the Germans chose not to use them. Furthermore, if the bridge had been the true target then why were incendiary bombs used? You can't destroy a stone bridge with 1Kg incendiary devices, even if were possible to deliver them all on the target.

Reliable detailed accounts of the raid are still hard to come by, and, as Orwell said about the Barcelona May Days in 1937, “It will never be possible to get a completely accurate and unbiased account….” Most survivors of the terrible raid were not trained aircraft observers.

According to many records at the time of the Guernica raid, the Condor Legion had three type A Stukas in Spain. According to the following extract from Experimentation: Reality and the Lie by Robert Helms four Stukas could have been available that day:

"The Renteria Bridge was presented by the German pilots in later decades as the principal military target in Guernica. Supposedly it survived because the wind had blown their bombs off target. It's a small stone structure, held up by two small pillars. The question as to why anti-personnel and incendiary bombs would be used to destroy such a target remains outstanding. In fact, the mission's commander knew that the town was just 300 yards from the bridge. The small incendiaries were certain to scatter like leaves and land all over the area when dropped from the height of 6,000 feet. All this clearly establishes that the bridge was never the real target, and that the town was marked for total annihilation. There were four Stuka dive-bombers available to Von Richthofen that day, capable of carrying single 1,000-pound bombs. These could have been deployed to very precisely and easily destroy the bridge. Furthermore the Junkers came in flying abreast, and not single-file, as they would if they'd been targeting a single, small target."

The point is that the Stukas were not deployed in the Guernica raid. So, why state they were?

The MINISTRY OF TRUTH: D.J. Taylor - Orwell -The Life

A few years ago a very good friend bought me D.J. Taylor’s biography, Orwell: The Life. It's an entertaining and informative read. However, the book contains several important factual errors.

Mr Taylor is a respected academic, critic, essayist and novelist. Mr Taylor regularly writes comment pieces, essays and reviews for the Guardian, Observer, New Statesman and Spectator and is fairly visible on the UK literature festival circuit as a speaker, discussion panel chairman and as a literary award judge. Mr Taylor served on the Man-Booker Prize panel of judges in 2003.

I think it is important to address these errors as the biography will likely become a standard reference for future Orwell scholars. And, with so much disinformation, deliberate distortion and innaccurate information regarding key events during the Spanish Civil War [SEE: Burnett Bolloten’s excellent The Grand Camouflage: The Communist Conspiracy in the Spanish Civil War] I think it essential that errors are addressed and corrected.

My commentary on the errors is split over five posts and a summary.

In this post I note the minor errors, in the second post I discuss Stukas over Guernika, in the third post I discuss Catalan, in the fourth post I discuss May Day in Barcelona, 1937 and in the final post I again discuss the May, 1937 street fighting in Barcelona with reference to the Assault Guards.

Okay, let's get on with it.

Abbreviations:

OTL - Orwell - The Life

HTC - Homage to Catalonia

Page references:

Orwell - The Life - All page numbers pertain to the 2003 hardback edition.

Homage to Catalonia - All page numbers pertain to the 1982 Penguin edition, and cross-referenced when appropriate with the text as it appears in Orwell in Spain edited by Peter Davison, published by Penguin in 2001. This cross-referencing is important when considering my comments about the Asaltos (Assault Guards), as you'll see.

Citations from:

Orwell- The Life appear in italics.

Homage to Catalonia appear in standard font.

Other works cited appear in a different font.

My emphases in the cited passages appear in bold.

Okay, let's really get on with it.

On page 28 of OTL when describing the atmosphere of the weeks immediately preceding and following the outbreak of the Great War Taylor refers to Alec Waugh's The Early Years of Alec Waugh:

Evelyn Waugh's elder brother Alec remembered watching Kent play cricket at Blackheath, with a stream of telegraph boys arriving on bicycles to present the players with their summonses to call-up.

Alec Waugh may very well have thought he recalled such a sight, but he would have been mistaken. The call-up, or conscription, was not introduced until January 1916, i.e. eighteen months after the war started and the so-called events described.

OTL, page 135 (and Index, page 462):

Orwell's poem On a Ruined Farm near His Master's Voice Gramophone Factory is incorrectly titled as On a Ruined Farm near His Majesty's Voice Gramophone Factory.

OTL, page 205:

D.J. Taylor describes Las Ramblas in Barcelona as being: Barcelona's principal thoroughfare. The Ramblas (Las Ramblas is actually five connected ramblas) do not, have never, and will never, constitute Barcelona's principal thoroughfare Most illustrious, most celebrated, the best known, yes; but principal thoroughfare? No and never.

Why is this important? Well, during the May Day events of 1937, as described by Orwell in HTC, Orwell was positioned on the Ramblas. To read D.J. Taylor's description of the Ramblas as being the principal thoroughfare could lead readers to think that Orwell was therefore part of force attempting to control movements on what was considered a strategic highway. Not so, the Ramblas formed the boundary line between the Administration and the Raval (or Barrio Chino as it was then popularly called), the working-class, and predominantly anarchist barrio. After the successful insinuation of Communists into the local administration the Ramblas became a front line between political power and proletarian order.

Even today the authorities use the Ramblas to mark the boundary of acceptable public behaviour - it's a sort of unmarked threshold to the seat of power. So, for instance, if a group of prostitutes stray onto Carrer Ferran (the street leading from the Ramblas into Plaça de Sant Jaume) they won't be there long before the Mossos d'Esquadra or Guardia Urbana move them back to the other side of the Ramblas.[As at September 2009 this is currently the subject of much political debate.]

It's as well to know that Barcelona was once a gated city and the part of the city containing the cathedral, various palaces and what is now the Generalitat (regional autonomous government H.Q.) and the Ajuntament (City Hall) formed the inner city, entry to which was strictly controlled.

OTL, page 215:

Then they caught the early train at Barbastro and transferred to an express at Lerica.
I think this is a straightforward typo. The town is Lérida in castellano or Lleida in catalan.

SEE HTC, page 105: ... caught the five o'clock train at Barbastro, and - having the luck to connect with a fast train at Lerida [accent missing] - were in Barcelona by three o'clock in the afternoon of the 26th.

OTL, page 218:

Here Taylor refers to the Soviet Union inspired militarisation of the Republic's armed forces: ... into which all the armed forces had since February been theoretically incorporated.

SEE HTC, page 109: Since February the entire armed forces had theoretically been incorporated in the Popular Army ...

Both D.J. Taylor and Orwell are mistaken. Theoretically the armed forces had been incorporated into the Popular Army since the passing of a decree on October 9th, 1936. [Both Taylor and Orwell are referring to February, 1937] Which makes the POUM's, and other militias', resistance to militarisation even the more remarkable. The road to militarisation began with an appeal by Largo Caballero (for a time referred to as the Spanish Lenin until he fell out of favour with the Communists) in September, 1936.

And, finally, a quirky one; not so much an innaccuracy, more an omission:

On page 272 of Orwell - The Life D.J. Taylor writes:

... Reg Reynolds' wife Ethel Mannin, treasurer of the SIA ...

Ethel Mannin was a very well known, well published, and according to many, well regarded author and activist in her own right. I've read several of her novels and travel books. She did a lot of work to aid the Anarchist cause in Spain. To be simply labelled the wife of a Trotskyist activist I find a bit strange ... I wonder why?

SUBMISSION

Like many Brits of my generation when ever I hear the word 'submission' I immediately bring to mind Saturday afternoon TV wrestling. Remember commentator Kent Walton? "Two falls and one submission ..." All that dancing around - Mick McManus, Jackie Pallo, Big Daddy, and, of course, quintessentially British artist Peter Blake's muse, Kendo Nagasaki.

I digress. Submission used here refers to a proposal package for literary agents and publishers.

Sent a submission by email yesterday. The package totalled 32 pages. Not a bad length I thought, given that one page is the title page, one page is the cover blurb, two pages of synopsis and two pages of readers' comments. So, there's only 25 pages of double-spaced text. (No, my arithmetic is not at fault - among the pages of text is a separator between prologue and chapter one.) Twenty-five pages - shouldn't take that long to read and decide whether they'd like to see more. Six weeks they tell submitters, two months at the outside.

It is said that well-known agent Giles Gordon would decide a manuscript's fate after just fifteen seconds' perusal.

I've decided to give Goya one last fling on the agent/publisher roundabout.
I've only submitted various drafts of Goya to a total of 7 UK agents and 2 US agents.
The first UK agent I submitted to hung onto the full manuscript for 14 months on an exclusive basis. One of the US agents did not reply.

I've learned a hell of a lot since then. The 'script is a lot tighter. My expectations regarding agents are considerably lower. And, I think, I'm beginning to master the skill of synopses.

So, today, I've set myself the task of reducing what's currently a two-page synopsis to a single page. I'll let you know how I get on.

ARC: A Curve of Learning

I'm working my way through an ARC (Advanced Reader Copy) of my novel After Goya, highlighting typos.

Yes, after years in the making, After Goya is in the process of being made ready to be foisted onto an innocent public.

Another ARC is currently holidaying in Cyprus with its reader.


Another ARC is currently resting at my mother's house in Bishop's Cleeve, having been on tour of the Post Office, Library, Doctors' surgery and the British Legion.

Everyone, thus far, is impressed with the cover -- designed by the talented Catalan book designer Xavier Peralta -- but have yet to comment on the text.

Mr Scott Pack over at The Friday Project very generously commented on the cover, providing a very perceptive and useful list of recommendations which will be actioned at the end of the ARC process.

All I've to do now is order a few more copies and wing them off to test readers, known writers, potential distributors and retailers. But therein lies the rub. Do I distribute the ARCs as the text exists now, with all the stray dashes and interrogatives? Or, do I tidy up the text, pay 50 quid, wait another three or four weeks, and miss the holiday reading window?

Of course I'm wincing as I go through the text hunting typos, itching to re-phrase, cut and re-jig. Well, part of me is wincing, another part of me is thinking, 'This isn't really so bad, in fact, some of it is pretty damn good.'

But, what to do? I envision the very well-known, yea, eminent writers whom I have on my list to ask for endorsements thinking, 'Who is this upstart who has the temerity to style a fiction on my specialist area of non-fiction?' But then, to present them with a less than perfect version ... am I setting myself up for a huge pratfall?

What would you do? I would very much appreciate any advice you may be able to offer.