Carries War: A Professional Account of Evacuee Foster Homes.

Source G is an extract from 'Carrie's War' written by Nina Bowden. The extract tells about what it was like for evacuees when they reach their foster homes. The children seem very happy and chirpy. The source tells you about what many children thought of their foster homes, and how the people saw the evacuees. But the reliability of the source needs to be questioned. This source was taken from a story for children, so most of it could have been made up to make it more interesting for children to want to read it.

It also may have a lot of details taken out as it might not of be suitable for children to read. It is a story and therefore many not be factual.

It was written in 1977 which was a long period after the evacuation process, with meant things may have been forgotten. Another fault is that we are not sure of what the context is, this again is something that we need to question.

Get quality help now

writer-Charlotte

Verified writer

Proficient in: Bias

4.7 (348)

“ Amazing as always, gave her a week to finish a big assignment and came through way ahead of time. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

The women in the Novel gives a very sterioptical view. She makes out to think that all the evacuees where poor and that they couldn't afford things.( E.g. Slippers.) We know for a fact that not all the children where poor as many private school where evacuated as well. Nina Bowden was not a eye witness, was she even evacuated? She could just be making up a nice story for children to read. She must of done research to find out about evacuees, where the sources in which she got her information could have been incorrect.

In conclusion I think that the source's reliability is very questionable. Did Nina Bowden have access to all the evidence, we don't know so we can not state if it is factual or if her novel was for children just to read and enjoy. I think that we need to read more of the novel and also take a look at the research that Nina did to find out weather or not the source is reliable or not. "Evacuation was a great success." Do you agree or disagree with this interpretation? Explain using the sources and the knowledge from your studies.

In August 1938 Adolf Hitler began making speeches that suggested he was going to send the German Army into Czechoslovakia. The British government now began to fear a war with Nazi Germany and Neville Chamberlain ordered that Air Raid Precautions (ARP) volunteers to be mobilized. Cellars and basements were requisitioned for air raid shelters, deep trenches were dug in the parks of large towns and the government also ordered the flying of barrage balloons over London.

The government also made plans for the evacuation of all children from Britain's large cities. Sir John Anderson, who was placed in charge of the scheme, decided to divide the country into three areas: evacuation (people living in urban districts where heavy bombing raids could be expected); neutral (areas that would neither send nor take evacuees) and reception (rural areas where evacuees would be sent).

Just before the outbreak of the Second World War the government decided to begin moving people from Britain's cities to the designated reception areas. Some people were reluctant to move and only 47 per cent of the schoolchildren, and about one third of the mothers went to the designated areas. This included 827,000 schoolchildren, 524,000 mothers and children under school age, 13,000 expectant mothers, 103,000 teachers and 7,000 handicapped people. But was this a success? To help me answer that question I have decided to anayls some for of evidence given to me in sources.

Source A is an interpretation of the relation between evacuees and the hosted families. The source tells you what the children where like and how much shock all the children where in when they arrived at their new homes. Another good point of the source is that it was written for schools so the author is likely to have checked the evidence. But the source has many faults in helping me answer the success of evacuation.

The source in a interpretation, so facts could be very incorrect. It was written for a text book, so there many have been things missed out as the context of them may have not been appropriate. It was also written for British schools, so I may be biased towards Britain. The book was also written a while after the war, so again things many have been forgotten or missed out. The source is useful as I given evidence towards have new life was like, but its not all reliable.

Source B is a photograph of evacuees walking to a station in London. The children all look very happy as they are walking and they are all waving to the camera. This source as also a number a problems with its reliability. The source is just one moment in time, and it also could have been staged. The teacher in the picture could be telling the children to wave as they go past the camera. Another fault is that the evacuation process might not of taken part in the same way all over the country, so this again shows faults in the reliability of the source. The perpus of the source is also unknown. It could have been taken for propaganda reasons, to try and get people to sent there children out of an area.

The photograph was taken very early on the evacuation process. Changes might have occurred in the way things happened or children where treated. The source helps me as it given evidence on what the children where wearing and how they all got to the stations, but the reliability of the source in very questionably. Source C is a teacher remembering what happened to her and the children she was with, when she was evacuated. The source gives great emotion details on what was said and how all the children and mothers where feeling, but there are some problems with the reality of the source.

The source was given by a teacher haven been interviewed 49 years after she was evacuated. She may have forgotten details, or it might have been so traumatic for her that she remembers only the bad parts of the evacuation process. The source is also only a small moment in time. There might have been more things going on while she can only remember theses parts. The source is useful as it gives me an emotional account of what the evacuation process was like, but the reliability of the source questions my views.

Source D is a photograph of evacuees at bath time. The photograph is of 4 boys in one bath, smiling and laughing away. It gives them impression that evacuees where very happy , but there are many problems the source. The photograph was issued by the government during the war, so it might be propaganda, again encouraging mothers and fathers to let their children be evacuated. The photograph might not have anything to do with evacuation. It could be a poster for the water campaign.('Don't have more than 4 inches of water in a bath. Wash all the boys in one bath and all the girls in another.') It could be encouraging mothers to wash all the children together, so that they can help save water. The source might not have anything to do with evacuation, so therefore it is of little use to me.

Source E is from an interview with a lady of a 'host family.' The source tell you all about how the children that she fostered behaved. The source is useful as it is telling you about how ill mannered the children where, but the source is also unreliable. The children seem to be very stereotypical and that they lady might just of ended up with some bad children. The lady might of also forgotten all the positive points about the children because of the first impression was very traumatic for her. Details also might have been forgotten as the interview took place about 49 years after the evacuation process had started. The source is useful as it gives me a view from a foster home, but they are may problem with the evidence that it gives me.