Edward Nute

How does the example of the RAF memorial at St Clement Danes demonstrate the relationship
between public memory and the ethical issues brought about by war?
1,557 Words

The Church at St. Clement Danes today, for all intense and purposes, serves as a memorial for the
Royal Air Force and its contribution in the Second World War. It also serves as a uniquely transparent
example of the long-lasting yet contrasting public memory that both Britain and Germany have
experienced since the war. St Clement Danes demonstrates the fine line between the right and wrong
side of public history, and how easy it may be to fall on the wrong side. The Church and the statues
that have been unveiled outside it demonstrate how the morals of war may be understood completely
differently cross-generationally and cross-nationally. St Clement Danes is a celebration of the triumph
of the air war for Britain, thus showing within the British public memory it is morally acceptable to
celebrate.

As you step into the front door of St Clement Danes there is no escaping the all-encompassing,
almost shrine-like, commemorative nature of the Church. Wall to wall there are Royal Air Force
memorial books enclosed from touch. The floor is coated with R.A.F plaques dedicated to different
flying squadrons. It is trying to make no secret that this Church is overtly celebratory of its links to the
bombing raids of the Second World War and its honour to the participants. With all this considered it
is hard to imagine such a Church being constructed in Germany. This may be because “the cultural
significance of memorials as reminders of past wars has always been simultaneously a political one” 1.
In simpler terms, war memorials don’t simply celebrate the fallen soldiers but rather the political
regime they fought for as well. This perhaps most clearly shows that the relationship between the
morality of the war and the German public is different from those of Britain. This may explain why
memorials to the German military do not exist. Furthermore, it demonstrates the influence of public
memory upon the public spaces a nation creates and maintains. A Church in Dresden has unrivalled
parallels with St Clement Danes. The Frauenkirche building was also a Church that was destroyed in
the bombing. Upon the conclusion of the war it was not rebuilt in the same way, but rather its ruins
lay virtually untouched in the city for over four decades2. Why did Dresden not rebuild the
Frauenkirche? Perhaps this may be explained by the joint facts that Germany not only lost the war but
in doing so suffered immense human and material costs. During the same raids on Dresden that
destroyed the Church, between 25,000 and 35,000 Germans were killed in the city3. The post-war
generations were confronted from birth with the reality of war and annihilation by the first-hand

1 Bill Niven, ‘War memorials at the intersection of politics, culture and memory’, Journal of War & Culture
Studies, vol. 1, no. 1 (2007), 43.
2 Jason James, ‘Undoing trauma: reconstructing the Church of Our Lady in Dresden’, Ethos, vol. 34, no. 2
(2006), 3.
3 Ronald Schaffer, Wings of Judgment: American Bombing in World War II (Oxford, 1988), 36.
1
Edward Nute

accounts of their surviving family members4. With all living in Germany sharing a public memory of
the war, not only of defeat but also of utter destruction, the decision to not celebrate the participants in
the ruins of the Frauenkirche is perhaps more understandable. This possibly explains why people in
Britain who weren’t alive during the war continue the legacy of celebrating the war and remembering
the British participants at St Clement Danes. In British public memory the war and its positive
perception of the contributors lives on.

Upon leaving St Clement Danes one is met immediately by the imposing figures of two large
brass statues. An inspection of their respective plaques reveals who these men were and what they
did. Sir Arthur Harris, often referred to as ‘Bomber Harris’, is best known for his role as the head of
bomber command during the Second World War. Dowding is credited for his role as head of fighter
command during the successful battle of Britain. His was to be the first of the neighbouring
monuments to be erected. ‘Dowding's heroic status was further reinforced by the unveiling of his
statue at St Clement Dane, London by the queen mother in 1988’5. Dowding’s statue was received as
would have been expected, causing little outcry from those conscious of the past. It was only when
Harris’ turn came a few years later that controversy flared. Before the unveiling of the statue of
Harris, the Queen Mother was asked to distance herself, from the what was officially a private event,
by people that included the Mayors of Cologne and Dresden6. The unveiling saw unsavoury scenes as
10 people were arrested after protestors had caused the disturbance whilst the Queen Mother was
giving her speech. It was reported the protesters chanted that Harris was a mass murderer 7. It was
without question Harris’ perceived role as the mastermind behind a bombing of Germany, which by
the war’s conclusion had left more than 400,000 civilians dead, that caused such tensions 8. The events
that unfolded at the unveiling demonstrates that public memory changes throughout time. It is likely
that had a memorial of Harris been erected in the immediate time after the war it wouldn’t have been
met with such controversy both in Britain and in Germany. Harris’ reception in the early 1990s
demonstrates that public memory changes with modern moral scope. Albert Speer, the German
armaments minister from 1942 onwards, said ‘the strategic bomber was the cause of all our setbacks'
and that the failure to stop the bombers was 'the greatest lost battle on the German side' 9. Speers
thoughts likely resonated with the majority of the British public in the immediate aftermath of the
war, Harris’ actions had weakened the enemy’s ability to continue to fight and so were an acceptable
means to an end. Why was the statue of Harris met with such contempt amongst some whilst the

4 Michael Geyer & Michael Latham, ‘The place of the Second World War in German memory and history’, New
German Critique, 71 (1997), 10.
5 Anthony J. Cumming, ‘The Air Marshal versus the Admiral: Air Marshal Sir Hugh Dowding and Admiral of the
Fleet Sir Charles Morton Forbes in the Pantheon’, History, vol. 94, no. 314 (2009), 203.
6 The Times, 25 May 1992, ‘QUEEN MOTHER TO GO AHEAD WITH UNVEILING OF "BOMBER" HARRIS STATUE’.
7 Financial Times, 1 June 1992, ‘Ten arrests at unveiling of ‘Bomber’ Harris statue’.
8 R. G. Moeller, ‘On the history of man-made destruction: Loss, death, memory, and Germany in the bombing
war’, History Workshop Journal, 61 (2006), 103-134.
9 Robin Neillands, ‘Facts and myths about bomber Harris’, The RUSI Journal, vol. 146, no. 2 (2001), 73.
2
Edward Nute

statue of the fighter command leader was met with none? This must be understood by the fact that for
public memory to be created, actors, both individual and institutional, must create, transmit and
sustain particular interpretations of history10. Dowding, it seems, fell on the right side of the public
memory spectrum. It has been thought, taught and maintained that he waged a war of defence in the
skis, whilst Harris waged one of terror on the ground. It is these simple narratives that were so evident
at St Clement Danes that makes the sight so thought-provoking whilst showcasing the power of public
memory. The whole Church is dedicated to the Royal Air Force, and Dowding was as much part of
the Royal Air Force’s efforts in the war as Harris. It is only through the collective memory that Harris
has been blamed for the actions of an institution and for which no one man could be responsible.

St Clement Danes is a testament to the way the British public understand the Second World War. It is
a shining example of how ethics behind war can be portrayed in different ways. The Church is
contrary to anything that has been done in Germany, this perhaps is the clearest way to show that
public memory and the public acceptance of the morality of actions differs from nation to nation. The
large statues outside that memorialise two British Royal Air Force leaders during the war are another
striking case of how differently public memory can paint history in people’s minds and draws a very
black and white line between good and bad. It would be hard to find a more contrasting view of two
statues next to one another, both from the same institution and both working for the same objective
with such contrasting public images. It is this, coupled with the shrine like interior of St Clement
Danes dedicated to their institution of the Royal Air Force, that makes the Church such an intriguing
example of how differently the public may engage with the ethics of war. Whilst they respect the
Church and the statue of Dowding there are calls for Harris to be taken down. All three celebrate the
British victory of the air war against Germany, yet all three are so differently represented in public
memory.

Bibliography

10 Andersen, Tea Sindbæk & Barbara Törnquist-Plewa, The Twentieth Century in European Memory:
Transcultural Mediation and Reception (Leiden, 2017), 28.
3
Edward Nute

Andersen, Sindbæk, Tea & Törnquist-Plewa, Barbara, The Twentieth Century in European Memory:
Transcultural Mediation and Reception (Leiden, 2017), 28.

Cumming, Anthony J., ‘The Air Marshal versus the Admiral: Air Marshal Sir Hugh Dowding and
Admiral of the Fleet Sir Charles Morton Forbes in the Pantheon’, History, vol. 94 no.314 (2009), 203.

Financial Times.

Geyer, Michael & Latham, Michael, ‘The place of the Second World War in German memory and
history’, New German Critique, 71 (1997), 10.

James, Jason ‘Undoing trauma: reconstructing the Church of Our Lady in Dresden’, Ethos, vol. 34,
no. 2 (2006), 3.

Moeller, R. G., ‘On the history of man-made destruction: Loss, death, memory, and Germany in the
bombing war’, History Workshop Journal, 61 (2006), 103-134.

Neillands, Robin ‘Facts and myths about bomber Harris’, The RUSI Journal, vol. 146, no. 2 (2001),
73.

Niven, Bill, ‘War memorials at the intersection of politics, culture and memory’, Journal of War &
Culture Studies, vol. 1, no. 1 (2007), 43.

Schaffer, Ronald, Wings of Judgment: American Bombing in World War II (Oxford, 1988).

The Times.