The war myth that made us
Robert Manne
April 25, 2007/the AGE
Mystery surrounds Anzac Day. Why have Australians, despite the passage of the years, increasingly come to regard the beginning of one of the most terrible defeats the British Empire suffered in the First World War as their most solemn national day?
One explanation is fanciful. It suggests that something in the national psyche is drawn to stories of audacious exploits that end in disaster - Burke and Wills, Ned Kelly, Phar Lap, Gallipoli. Another is more persuasive. It argues that it was only with the news of the landing at Gallipoli that the Australian nation felt it truly had been born. But if so, why?
The historian John Hirst's convincing brief answer goes like this. Despite the creation of vibrant democracies in all the British colonies of Australia, despite the magnificent but sober political achievement of federation, in 1915 the key to the Australian political psychology remained a gnawing sense of colonial inferiority.
The Gallipoli landing was the first action of a solely Australian military unit. The first report to reach our shores came, importantly, not from an Australian but from the British war correspondent Ellis Ashmead-Bartlett. The mode was unashamedly heroic. "There has been no finer feat in this war than this sudden landing in the dark and the storming of the heights." Even more significantly, Ashmead-Bartlett wrote the words Australians most yearned to hear. "General Birdwood told the writer that he couldn't sufficiently praise the courage, endurance and the soldierly qualities of the Colonials (The Australians) were happy because they had been tried for the first time and not found wanting." Ashmead-Bartlett's report was published throughout Australia. The Anzac myth was created.
Soon the myth of Anzac gained two additional dimensions. Australians came to believe that during the terrible eight months on Gallipoli, fixed features of the national character had been revealed. Australians were innocent and fit; stoical and laconic; irreverent in the face of hidebound authority; naturally egalitarian and disdainful of British class differences. Above all, in times of trouble, they stood by their mates. The war historian Charles Bean was the most influential articulator of this myth. For the soldiers at Gallipoli, he argued, life would not have been worth living if they had betrayed the ideal of mateship. ...<cont>
http://www.theage.com.au/news/robert-manne/the-war-myth-that-made-us/2007/04/24/1177180648069.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1