The Spectator’s Notes | 13 June 2013

Few things in history can be more worth thinking about than the first world war, so in a way one welcomes the government’s plan for extensive centenary commemorations. And I do not agree with the critics that part of the purpose should be to blame the Germans: such blame is not a task for government. The bigger worry is surely twofold. One is that, over the planned four years, the commemorations will dissipate their energies in cultural trench warfare and get muddled up with the normal (and excellent) patterns of Remembrance. The other is that they will resemble those semi-apologies about any violent death in our history which have become a cheap way for political leaders to show themselves more enlightened than their predecessors. This lavish attention on the Great War contrasts with the government’s refusal to commemorate the bicentenary, in 2015, of the battle of Waterloo. The bicentenary campaign, Waterloo 200, which is preparing its own celebrations, went to see the Culture Minister Ed Vaizey (why should war be departmentally downgraded to DCMS?), but he won’t help.