Was the aftermath of war a return to pre-war normality or a break from it?

By Rhea Snaith, Third Year History Student

The aftermath of the Second World War can be understood as a break from pre-war normality. This essay will focus on the emotional state of civilians in the immediate aftermath of post-war Britain and will expand on many scholars who have studied this field. Frank Biess, 2010, has claimed “hope,” “fear,” and “resentment” were important factors in confronting the legacies in the Second World War. This essay will particularly focus on the fear and anxiety that came with the aftermath of war. Claire Langhamer’s 2019 article expands on emotional states during and after the war by arguing people grouped themselves into ‘communities of feelings’ with those who shared the same views, which in turn could shape each other’s emotions. For example if people saw fear within their community, mass mentality meant others within that community would alter their emotions based on this. Lucy Noakes has recently added to this conversation as she uses the term ‘emotional communities’ to argue those with the same grief or fears come together to support each other in times of need. These can suggest the emotion of fear was collectively felt throughout communities in Britain. This essay will study ten different directives over four months: March 1939 and May, November and December 1945. This gives insight into the emotional state of pre-war civilians and their immediate emotional state after the war ended, and how they progressed and changed as months went on. This essay will argue that in contrast with pre-war emotions, post-war civilians were overwhelmed with fear and anxiety. However, they also became reflective and humbled by the war. There is a change over time concerning these emotions. When news of VE day broke in May 1945, these worries were temporarily forgotten. Looking at accounts from November and December, the emotional state of civilians shows concerns and anxiety about the future as they were brought back to reality. The emotions of these groups can support Langhamer and Noakes’ views as the ‘emotional communities’ are shown through the collective undertones of sorrow and worry.

The primary evidence used in this essay is the Mass Observation study carried out by Tom Harrison, Charles Madge and Humphrey Jennings. They aimed to record the lives of everyday Britons and to access the ‘collective unconscious.’ The Mass Observation (MO) questions were open ended and focused on the feelings of the individual allowing for a qualitative set of answers which displayed the ‘collective unconscious’ as intended. However, there are limitations to this sample. The researchers were comprised of middle-class intellectuals, therefore when interpreting the working-class, they had a limited understanding on the factors that effected the dynamics of working-class communities. James Hinton combats this view by arguing while they were middle-class, Harrison and Madge were not raised in Britain suggesting they may look at the data without the prejudices of their own class. Therefore still gives some weight to the MOs in showing the aftermath of war. This essay will not claim the directives studied are representative of the whole civilian population as the sample size is too small. However, it gives a good, in-depth insight into the thoughts and feelings of those civilians involved.

To understand whether the aftermath of war was a return to pre-war normality or a break from it, we firstly have to acknowledge the emotional state of pre-war civilians. The March 1939 directive asked for a forecast of Hitler’s next moves and if they have taken any precautions for an emergency. They were also encouraged to ask and submit answers of anyone they have asked. All answers from four MOs consisting of twelve people’s opinions seemed to be relaxed. Seven people had taken some kind of action however out of these not everyone thought A.R.P was a sufficient form of defence against potential German bombs. One young man states while he thinks Hitler will invade “‘all those countries’” he is “confident” Britain will not go to war. This demonstrates the lack of fear and worry some people had and suggests pre-war normality for civilians was relaxed and even naïve about foreign affairs. The use of the phrase “‘all those countries’” further suggests a lack of concern and reveals this man does not recognise the scale of Hitler’s threat. The fact he is “confident” about this further emphasises this lack of concern.11 While this confidence is not the case in every answer, the lack of worry about Britain going to war can be seen even in those who had taken some precautions. One woman feels although she does not think Hitler will do anything, she has taken a first aid course just in case anything would happen. While she holds a sensible outlook it still suggests she doesn’t see Hitler as a real threat to Britain explaining her calm attitude. Cook supports this as she claims that in British culture, people are sensible in the feelings they express. The need to panic before a justifiable reason was certainly not encouraged, therefore this explains why panic may not have been widespread.

The immediate aftermath of the Second World War is mostly a break from pre-war normality however it can be argued the MOs show a slight return to the pre-war emotional state. It can be argued a weight had now been lifted from the civilians shown in the May 1945 directive. There were nation-wide celebrations, fireworks and decorations. It can suggest the heavy burden of the war was lifted and shows a similar stress-free attitude to before the war. Even when people did not celebrate in an extravagant way, they still took advantage to take down blackout blinds or go see friends or family. This can reveal they wanted to return to pre-war normality the best way they could and further supports that this is somewhat a return to pre-war normality as the relief is apparent in these answers. Directive 1165 reported the people in London looked happy and “the fear was out of their eyes.” This shows high morale at this time and gives the impression the emotions of civilians were now positive, mirroring the lack of fear in pre-war Britain. It is also telling that she mentions fear in her answer which suggests it was a large factor in the emotions of civilians during the war. However, this woman goes onto say people seemed relieved, but things were not quite right. Which could suggest fear and worry were still at the back of people’s minds and the high morale of VE day drowns out the anxiety hinting the immediate aftermath of war was only a return to pre-war normality to a small extent. Biess supports this as he argues there was conflict between what people wanted and were ‘meant’ to feel and the feelings they actually felt. This confirms that even though they were expected to feel happiness and joy on VE day and expressed it rightly so, there was still tension with the fear they held within.

This argument can further be supported as many people seemed to not want to celebrate. Some saw celebrations but did not want to join in on the festivities.19 While others were just concerned with going to see family or friends. This can suggest people are viewing the simpler things as the right things to do, revealing some have become more reflective by the atrocities of war and in turn were humbled by their experiences. A woman describes feeling elated after realising that bombers going past were not carrying bombs. However she goes onto say it was not as joyful as she expected and “nothing in the future is likely to be nearly as good as in the past.” Her reminiscing of the past can show even with her elation she is not optimistic about the future, thus showing the clear change from their pre-war emotional state. It can be argued she believes the world has changed beyond return, as if there is no going back to pre-war conditions, additionally showing the pessimistic nature of post-war civilian emotions. Biess can support this as he argues fear was an increasing pattern in post-war Britain and links fear with concerns over the immediate future which can also be seen in the directive’s answers.

Looking at accounts from November 1945, it can be argued that emotions had not returned to pre-war normality. Morale had dipped; worry and fear were clearly evident among responses. This essay will analyse the answers of three questions put forward within the November directive. The answers to these questions give a good insight into the everyday emotions of civilians. They include plans for Christmas, a normally cheerful event, views on the German people, which can show their thoughts on the war and the former enemy, and their views on a potential world state, which gives understanding into how they view the future. Lucy Noakes argues the emotional economy was to uphold a ‘strong upper lip’ attitude to keep morale high after the war. This section of her argument does not correspond well with the answers received by the directives. When asked about plans for Christmas that year, all answers were very expressive about their gloomy attitudes. Only one out of the seven who responded said that they were going to make the most out of Christmas this year. All others had no plans or would just make it a quiet day. Directive 1095 even described it to mean nothing and had no preparation or excitement for it. Another said, it will just be another Sunday and she realises many are worse off than she is.27 These show while she is reflective of other people around her, they suggest spirits are low following the months after the war. She is recognising the suffering in Britain and beyond by acknowledging many are worse off. By doing this she paints a gloomy picture of Britain, making the post-war emotional state seem even more bleak. Christmas, a typically joyful occasion has been turned into one of sorrow and despair and these civilians are not hiding these emotions to uphold the morale of their community.

This dip in morale can also be seen in civilians’ views on the international scale. For example, all seven of those who answered believed a world state is desirable but not practical. Some believed people would be too stupid and patriotic to visualise it. Another said it was not achievable because people are “too petty, greedy [and] chauvinistic.” Emotions described here show a dip in morale as people have little faith in those around them. Arguably this would make the emotional community weaker as people were not coming together due to a mutual distrust. There is a clear consensus that there was a weak community of emotions here as Noakes claims those who support each other within the emotional communities have a stronger sense of unity and more stable emotions, thus in line with being a break from pre-war normality. This can also be shown by looking at the views of the German people which while displaying a break from the pre-war state, the views are a lot less unanimous. On the one hand, more than half of the directives felt sympathy for the people of Germany. Directive 1346 describes her feelings as even though she has a hatred for Germans, she still feels sympathy for the women and children who are suffering. One women even goes as far as wanting to help the German people by sacrificing her own rations. These show people were sympathetic towards the German civilians and did not think of the German people as a collective guilty entity. This shows compassion for the ordinary German people although morale and emotions were low, people were humbled by the war and recognised some Germans were much worse off. This can suggest people were more reflective than before the war, in comparison with the relaxed view surrounding foreign affairs previously. Sonya Rose can support this as she states when in a crisis, such as the German suffering, people would come together and feel and act alike within their community. Thus, upholding the reflective emotional unity they have to support each other and the Germans in their time of need.

Despite this, some answers are not in-line with Rose’s view as they still held a grudge over the Germans as a collective. One responder states that her sympathy for the Germans cannot be upheld because the images of Belsen are always in the back of her mind. This shows the powerful portrayal of the wartime Germans as evil had stuck with a number of people, suggesting the propaganda during the war was very effective in altering the feelings towards the Germans. This can be supported by another directive’s answer which had very strong and harsh views of Germans. She states, “I hate them and all they stand for” and when given a pamphlet explaining 11 million Germans would die that winter if they weren't helped, her response was, “glad to hear it.” This cold response showing bitterness and hostility can give an insight into some of the populations’ views of Germans. This dark response can show a break from pre-war normality, showing that the war had desensitised some civilians to death. While we cannot claim this is representative of the whole of Britain’s civilians, it does offer insight into some of the people’s thoughts and feelings on foreign affairs in post-war Britain. Using Biess and Langhamer together can give an explanation for this ruthlessness. Biess argues fear is closely linked to the experience and memory of violence and goes onto argue fear can be a motivating force for violence. While Langhamer argues fears over nuclear weapons caused the majority of MO answers to be less optimistic about the future. By looking at these together it can be argued many people were changed by the war. Post-war Britons now had fears surrounding foreign affairs, which caused their views to become more volatile and caused them to the see the future in a less optimistic light.

The emotional state of civilians continued to be negative in December 1945. For the directive month of December 1945, this essay will focus on two questions linking to views about Russia and America, and how they feel about 1946. These questions give a good understanding into the emotions of civilians. This follows on from questions asked in the November directive about views on foreign affairs and how people were feeling about the future. The general consensus over views on Russia and America were feelings of worry and unsettlement. All seven of those who answered commented on their worries about Russia. They called her “irritating,” “foolish” and “unreasonable.” One woman is “afraid” over Russia potentially attacking Britain. Another is disappointed regarding their behaviour at the end of the war and is worried Russia will discredit socialism. These answers support the view that there was an anxious atmosphere in civilians in the aftermath of the war. Using this tense language such as “afraid” and “foolish” shows the war has scarred these people into becoming more nervous about foreign affairs. This is a stark contrast with the pre-war attitudes of confidence. America was also not seen in the best light after the war. Directive 1095 described America as “selfish savages” and “warlike.” This shows that civilians were even worried about former close allies evident of the high levels of discontent in the aftermath of war. Hinton supports this by arguing many people after the war retreated into the private sphere and did not want to engage with the public sphere. This can be seen by a lack of engagement in foreign affairs, which could suggest people were withdrawing back to what is familiar. Dibley and Kelly can expand on this as they argue as the gap between the private opinion and the public sphere grew, tensions were raised and good morale decreased.

The most striking question asked in the December directive was, “What do you FEEL about 1946?”. The capitalisation of “FEEL” clearly demonstrates the observers are emphasising the emotions of those who answered. The answers seen are very striking to the negative emotional state of the civilians. Seven of the eight who answered were pessimistic about the future. “1946 lies under a dark shadow of the threat of hunger and starvation for millions.” The negative language shows her fears about 1946, “dark shadow” suggesting the looming threat of the upcoming year. This is amplified considering the war was over, yet only now a “dark shadow” had cast upon them. Directive 1980 supports this sombre view describing the year as “gloomy to the extreme” and wishes she "could go to sleep and not wake up until the end of the year.” This suggests she has given up on mankind and is at rock bottom. By wishing she does not want to live through 1946, she gives off a strong sense of fear as to what is to come. Biess supports that by stating fear fuelled the distrust in the authorities to provide security for the ordinary people. Which could suggest the community of feelings gathered amongst the civilians against the state. Thus, showing why she has given up on mankind and those who are in charge. One answer is particularly interesting to look at among these. Directive 1637 gives only a one-line answer for this question, “I feel depressed and apprehensive about 1946.” This short but precise answer gives a good insight into how people are feeling. The words “depressed” and “apprehensive” show the low emotional state she is in, further revealing the change in post-war emotions and how they have taken a large dip in morale. The short answer is almost like she is trying to not talk about the subject to avoid any further grief. As far as she is concerned that is all she needs to say, she is worried and afraid.

In conclusion, the immediate aftermath of the Second World War was a break from pre-war normality due to the growing fear and worries over the future and foreign affairs. Answers collected from the Mass Observation Archive have shown a shift from a relaxed, untroubled population to one of fear and anxiety. This can be as a change over time following the war as fear in May 1945 was almost hidden in the back of people minds. As some celebrated, some only visited family and friends and was more reflective on the war. As time went on, the shift into darker emotions set forth and by November and December 1945 there was a low dip in morale across the community. People took these dark times to reflect on themselves and others making some more humbled. But this also came with worry surrounding foreign affairs and the state of the world, as seen in answers surrounding the German people and Russia and America. The responses surrounding the feelings over 1946 gives a good insight into how people felt about the future and supports that fear and anxiety spread throughout the communities of Britain. Overall, as it has been shown by this sample, the aftermath of the war brought fear and anxiety upon civilians.

Bibliography

Primary Sources

Mass Observation Archive. Directive. 1056

Mass Observation Archive. Directive. 1075

Mass Observation Archive. Directive. 1095

Mass Observation Archive. Directive. 1165

Mass Observation Archive. Directive. 1346

Mass Observation Archive. Directive. 1563

Mass Observation Archive. Directive. 1637

Mass Observation Archive. Directive. 1669

Mass Observation Archive. Directive. 1679

Mass Observation Archive. Directive. 1980

Mass Observation Archive. Directive. December 1945

Mass Observation Archive. Directive. March 1939

Mass Observation Archive. Directive. May 1945

Mass Observation Archive. Directive. November 1945

Secondary Sources

Addison, Paul, The Road To 1945: British Politics and the Second World War (London: Pimlico, 2011)

Ahmed, Sara, The Cultural Politics of Emotion. (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2004)

Beaven, Brad, John Griffiths, ‘The Blitz, Civilian Morale and the City: Mass-Observation and Working-Class Culture in Britain, 1940-41’, Urban History 26:1 (1999) 71-88

Biess, Frank, Histories of the Aftermath: The Legacies of the Second World War in Europe (Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2010)

Bourke, Joanna, ‘Fear and Anxiety: Writing about Emotion in Modern History.’ History Workshop Journal 55 (2003) 111–133.

Cook, Hera, ‘From Controlling Emotion to Expressing Feelings in Mid-twentieth Century England’, Journal of Social History, 47:3 (2014) 627-646

Dibley, Ben, and Michelle Kelly, ‘Morale and Mass Observation: Governing the Affective Atmosphere on the Home-Front.’ Museum and Society 13:1 (2015) 22–41

Grant, Matthew, ‘Historicizing Citizenship in Post-War Britain.’ Historical Journal 59:4 (2016) 1187–1206.

Hinton, James, Nine Wartime Lives: Mass Observation and the Making of the Modern Self (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010)

Hinton, James, The Mass Observers. A History, 1937–1949 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013)

Hubble, Nick, Mass Observation and Everyday Life: Culture, History, Theory (London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2005)

Kushner, Tony, We Europeans? Mass-Observation, Race and British Identity in the Twentieth Century (London: Taylor & Francis, 2004)

Langhamer, Claire, ‘Mass observing the atom bomb: the emotional politics of August 1945’, Contemporary British History, 33:2 (2019) 208-225

Langhamer, Claire, ‘The Live Dynamic Whole of Feeling and Behaviour: Capital Punishment and the Politics of Emotion, 1945–1957.’ Journal of British Studies 51:2 (2012): 416–441.

Noakes, Lucy, ‘Valuing the dead: death, burial, and the body in Second World War Britain’, Critical Military Studies, 2 (2020) 224-242

Noakes, Lucy, Dying for the Nation: Death, Grief and Bereavement in Second World War Britain (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2020)

Plamper, Jan, and Keith Tribe, The History of Emotions: An Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015)

Rose, Sonya O., Which People’s War? National Identity and Citizenship in Wartime Britain 1939-1945 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003