The History of the World Is but the Biography of Great Men.’ (Carlyle) How Does Ambrose Portray Leadership in Band of Brothers? What Leadership Traits Does He Identify? Are the Officers ‘Eventful’ or ‘Eventmaking’?
Question: ‘The history of the world is but the biography of great men.’ (Carlyle) How does Ambrose portray leadership in Band of Brothers? What leadership traits does he identify? Are the officers ‘eventful’ or ‘eventmaking’?
‘I have not been in a battle; not near one, nor heard from a far, nor seen the aftermath’, claims John Keegan a distinguished war historian and lecturer of Military History at Sand Hurst Academy. This begs the question, just how competent is a man who has never witnessed war in person capable of teaching young cadets what they shall be faced with if or when they are sent to the battlefield. Many may suggest that hands-on experience in warfare is irrelevant when taking up occupation as a leader and that leadership is something that is a gift one is either born with or without. Ambrose in some ways seems to portray these ideas albeit altered to fit the psyche of the tragic and seemingly hopeless character of Sobel. Ambrose conveys Sobel as an autocratic man who lacks any credence for delegation with others. In many respects however these traits are what make great leaders, as to be a leader in the manic setting of the battlefield one would be led to believe that decisions must be made quickly, without haste and thus without delegation. These characteristics however are only applicable should the commander be completely competent and educated in all aspects of war. Hence Sobel is conveyed in the light of a petulant fool with little better to do than put his cadets through rigorous and often pointless exercises and from early on it is clear that his attention to E-company is only for his own pleasure, he wants to be known as the man who leads the best company. He lacks the ability to read a map, a fundamental in the art of war. How then can these men have faith let alone confidence in the man who shall lead them through streams of gun-fire and treacherous landscapes? Whether or not the men have faith in Sobel is irrelevant as
‘I have not been in a battle; not near one, nor heard from a far, nor seen the aftermath’, claims John Keegan a distinguished war historian and lecturer of Military History at Sand Hurst Academy. This begs the question, just how competent is a man who has never witnessed war in person capable of teaching young cadets what they shall be faced with if or when they are sent to the battlefield. Many may suggest that hands-on experience in warfare is irrelevant when taking up occupation as a leader and that leadership is something that is a gift one is either born with or without. Ambrose in some ways seems to portray these ideas albeit altered to fit the psyche of the tragic and seemingly hopeless character of Sobel. Ambrose conveys Sobel as an autocratic man who lacks any credence for delegation with others. In many respects however these traits are what make great leaders, as to be a leader in the manic setting of the battlefield one would be led to believe that decisions must be made quickly, without haste and thus without delegation. These characteristics however are only applicable should the commander be completely competent and educated in all aspects of war. Hence Sobel is conveyed in the light of a petulant fool with little better to do than put his cadets through rigorous and often pointless exercises and from early on it is clear that his attention to E-company is only for his own pleasure, he wants to be known as the man who leads the best company. He lacks the ability to read a map, a fundamental in the art of war. How then can these men have faith let alone confidence in the man who shall lead them through streams of gun-fire and treacherous landscapes? Whether or not the men have faith in Sobel is irrelevant as
Bibliography: Ambrose, Stephen E. Band of Brothers (London, Simon & Schuster, 2001) Keegan, John. The Face of Battle Holmes, Richard. Firing Line