I have had a lot of emails, comments on social media and WhatsApp messages asking if I knew about this two part documentary coming out from Minnow Films.
As it happens they contacted me for some input when they were pitching the idea back in early 2024 as they had been reading the blog and listened to early early episodes of the podcast ‘Islands at War’ that Keith and I produce.
I gave they them a steer and we had a long Zoom call about potential diarists that they could use and other contacts. This was followed by a lot of emails with guidance. As is the way with these things they go quiet for a long time and you never know what route they will take. I have had my fingers burned before!
Pleased to report that they have done a cracking job with episode one and it is entirely accurate, save for the stock footage of aircraft, no Stukas took part in the Bombing of the Channel Islands on the 28th June 1940. The only other slight blooper spotted by my friend Alasdair Davidson, a fairly niche spot, of an external shot of the outside of the Royal Court in Guernsey and then an internal shot of the Royal Court in Jersey! Can you tell he is acquainted with both on a professional level? Oh and apparently I missed some Matilda Tanks that he spotted! 🙂
So well done Minnow Films for an accurate representation of life under German Occupation seen through the eyes of those that lived through it.
If this has increased your appetite for more of the stories from these diarists and others that are unpublished then check out our podcast on your favourite podcast app by searching ‘Islands at War’ or by going here
The forgotten occupation of the Channel Isles
Having watched one episode, I found two important problems with the program.
Firstly, the title. In my experience I do not believe that the occupation of the islands has been forgotten. Overall, it was a small part of the role of Britain in the war. Of course, it was of great importance to those who lived there from 1939, many of whom suffered the occupation from 1940, but in the context of the whole British part of WW2 it is a small section. There have been several documentaries covering this subject, including parts within long series about the history of WW2. Just to name two of the dramas that portrayed the occupation, “Islands at War” and “Enemy at the Door”. Also, I have seen several documentaries that covered this topic. So, the occupation has not been forgotten and the title is misleading, showing a prejudice that is not valid.
Secondly, the format of the program is a confused mash-up. The producers could not make up their mind whether to make a documentary, a drama or a history lecture. All three formats are intermingled within the program and there is no good logic to do this. The format simply breaks the program up into messy bits and pieces.
Even those taking on the role as historians in the program cannot make their minds up whether they are historians, presenters or actors which detracts from their information. Partly they spend time explaining personal points of view that are more pertinent to a university lecture than to a history program of general interest.
Although the diary references are interesting, they would have been much clearer had the information been dramatised properly by good actors under good direction, but that is limited to seeing actors simply present their thoughts in their home with little visual evidence to support their recollections.
It is a shame that the producers and directors have failed to grasp the subject and present it in a clear and easily followed story. There is a lot of good material used but it is broken up because of the messy format.
Yes, your format is a new approach, but there is a good reason why most programs presenting this sort of content use either a documentary or a drama type of format. Those formats work and are better to make the story clear and cohesive.
I suggest that if you were to repeat the program, you go back to the story boards and redesign the program with a new format and new script.
Thanks for your comments. Just to be clear I only gave them pointers as to sources for them to use. I didn’t chose the name or format!
Hello everyone
I noticed another mistake in Episode 1, from 28:36. Reverend Ord is made to say, ‘People are discussing the NOTICE in the Star: “It must now be known to local inhabitants that some eight persons recently left this Island in a boat with a view to reaching France.” ’
This is confirmed in the subtitle: ‘6th September 1940, Occupation Day 55: 8 Islanders escape Guernsey in a boat, bound for France.’
I knew immediately that it was wrong; it would have been absurd to make for occupied France rather than freedom in England. It was only after the liberation of the Cotentin in 1944 that any Channel Islander would have contemplated escaping to France.
I looked it up in Ord’s diaries, and sure enough, it says, ‘23th (sic – should be 28th)—In Town people in little groups were discussing the NOTICE in the Star signed by the Procureur: “It must now be known to a good many local inhabitants that some eight persons recently left this Island in a boat with a view to reaching England.” ‘
Needless to say, they intended to reach England, not France, and safely reached Brixham 19 hours later, after leaving Guernsey on 6 September 1940 in the motorboat ‘Tim’. In the boat were Frederick Hockey with his three sons Frederick, George and Harold, along with growers William Mahy, Percy du Port, William Dorey, and Herbert Le Conte Bichard.
So why on earth would someone go out of their way to change England to France? It makes no sense to me, and the change does not seem to be a careless mistake, but a conscious decision.
Good spot Paul. I missed that they said that went to France which is indeed incorrect. They went to England and I have written about them at length in my forthcoming book
.
Thanks for your comment, Nick, and for this excellent site. Just one question: in my grandfather’s (Edward Arthur Dorey) unpublished occupation diary, he says the ‘Tim’ belonged to ‘Cann’, but his handwriting is a bit unclear. Could you confirm the identity of the Tim’s owner? And first name, if possible?