Helping Or Hindering?

[CtahhR]

Simple question on the topic of research.

We've all seen the wide array of feats that are deemed award worthy but here is a simple either/or to gauge the collecting field.

What returning research is more appealing to you personally?

Comrade X killed 2 enemy...

Comrade X recovered 8 wounded...

[Tretov]

I prefer the second one.

[Tommy]

Good question but very difficult to answer.

For me a lot depends on other factors, for example "Comrade x killed 2 enemy during fighting for the city of Stalingrad/Budapest/Berlin" would be prefereable to me over " Comrade x recovered 8 wounded during fighting for [some town in romania]".

Fragments of sentences like "with the butt of his rifle" or "despite being 3km behind enemy lines", when added to either option could swing my choice in their favour

If the citation is purely what you mentioned above, then i chose recovering 8 people.

It seems awful to compare and judge feats of bravery against another, when all involved were living through hell but i suppose its human nature to have "favourites".

Tom

Ps. I nearly clicked the wrong choice on the survery. The answers in the "vote" box are the opposite way to in your post, be careful to tick the right box everyone!

[CtahhR]

I deliberated switched the question and answer choices as not to bias and make sure it is being read. A little tricky but nothing like a European Parliament ballot paper.

For this scenario we can suppose that the two actions are during the very same battle (wherever you want it to be Austria to Japan) and the two recipients are in the very same unit with the citation just giving "X killed/recovered X at/on X" with absolutely no additional write up (we all come across those one line citations from time to time). As for their biographies, let's say they were identical twin brothers and this was their first combat experience - this way there are no mitigating factors.

[Bill Garvy]

I prefer both. I think the question is irrelevant given the significant contribution of both actions. To my way of thinking it is all of a piece, not an either/or. Think "butterfly effect". . .

[CtahhR]

I know many of us really don't care what type of deeds the recipients did, we just want to know.

I'm thinking more of a case that in front of you there are two awards, one for the killing, one for the recovering. You can only pick one - heads or tails, this coin can't land on its edge. We don't live in a perfect world unfortunately.

This is a scenario currently laid out for me, over which I am powerless but I am interested in what others would prefer. The results of my own scenario (same type of "X did X" citation as they were written by the same person) will be displayed in the researchers' section "at a time yet to be determined".

[Eryk]

Usually I think "both" is a cop out, a way to avoid rather than answer a question. So to give an answer, in this case my gut reaction, that is no thinking just choose NOW, is "killed 2" appeals more than "recovered 8". (What this may reveal about my psychology I leave to my betters...)

But! That doesn't matter!

Because the question's real answer is, of course, both. Or rather neither. The scenario itself is invalid in the real world of collecting in that one can never only pick one of two where the only difference is "kill 2" or "recover 8". The awards are physically different, the dates are different, the cost is different, the state of my collection and what would add to it overall is different, etc.

Truth is that if presented with this scenario now I would actually choose "recovered 8", because my collection has plenty of "killed 2" awards. And part of the purpose (such as it is) of my collection is to give me a chance to flap my jaw to people about the huge breadth of exceptional things that were recognized during the war.

[CtahhR]

Well it turned out in this particular case we didn't need to get Schrödinger involved and the either/or presented itself. Further research shows that the Medal picked up was for Killing 2 Germans and being wounded twice near Königsberg. Not for recovering 1 officer and 7 soldiers from the battlefield near Muling.

I've recently obtained a large number of Soviet awards/groups (as if I ever don't keep adding) in a job lot of about 50 or so awards with 15 of them being researchable on "the site". The first group I researched was to a man who was in the Air Force, Naval Infantry and Railway Troops during the war (covering all forces there even throwing in trains) and later went on to be MVD. The second group I researched included an award for action at (amongst a few other places) a Tractor Factory in Stalingrad in October 1942 (a wartime award and not one of these 1970's-80's "oh, by the way" awards).

Would the phrase "Stalingrad Tractor Factory" (correctly) attached to an award attract the interest of everyone no matter in which role the person was positioned? Then again I suppose there was no such thing as a non-combatant at the Tractor Factory in October 1942. Just combatants and the deceased.

[Eryk]

Originally Posted by CtahhR

Would the phrase "Stalingrad Tractor Factory" (correctly) attached to an award attract the interest of everyone no matter in which role the person was positioned?

For those of us interested in the history of course!