Scouts Out is a very hard read, almost a textbook. Plenty of photos, but not sure about using coloured in film for reference! Not cheap either!
Beevor's Normandy book was awful. The first and probably the last time I'll read one of his books. Dire writing, boring and just about managed to finish it, simply for the reason that I hate not finishing a book once I start.
Patton's Gap by Richard Rohmer. There must be a wobbly table needs fixing somewhere. Tripe. The War Between The Generals by David Irving. (Please note, this was when he still had a modicum of a reputation and was not yet exposed as a fruit-loop Holocaust denier) I took this to read on a long coach trip from Birmingham to Hull in 1983. I gave up a third of the way in and have never bothered further. I wearied of his central contention that every senior officer at SHAEF was trying to get their leg over Kay Summersby. As Dorothy Parker once said: "This is not a book which should be put down lightly. No. It should be thrown, with great force."
I see an opportunity to make a bit of space on the shelves (and floor) as I've magpied a few of these from library sales and the like over the years in case they were useful; which now they're not.
I was quite disappointed by Tony Colvin's "The noise of Battle". Though the area has my interest, I simply cannot finish this voluminous book. The myriad (mostly trivial) details and the time lines that constantly jump backwards and forward, leave me behind dizzily. After three efforts to finish it, I have quit, not even halfway the book. But maybe it's me.
Not a lot of love for Beevor here. When I'm critical of him I'm occasionally accused of just sneering at 'popular' history, as nerds are wont to do in their particular areas. Really do not think that's the case. Given his work a fair shake, tried maybe three or four titles, found all of them pretty unsatisfying. I'm not that keen on James Lucas either. One or two reasonably solid early books (for their time), then a slew of promising subjects weakly done. Only really registered his name When I got around to the Sutton 'German Army Handbook'. All the others I have in the Handbook series are, while not exactly the be-all-end-all, quite useful quick reference, but that one's probably the least informative. Feels rushed. Cobbled together. In an attempt to be fair, I'm going to have to put a Walter Spielberger book in here too. Normally, I love his German FV series & have paid top dollar for some that I still regard as essential (if sometimes ageing and/or soporific) reference. But... 'Panzers I & 2 ' - nah. There's the core of a bit of classic Spielberger in there, but it's thin stuff, badly coloured, at least in my edition, by poor translation. Still not sure what the best Pz I & II references out there may be, but until I am I'd say avoid that unless you see it really cheap. Maybe stick with Panzertracts.
I found his latest book on the Ardennes Offensive, with all the superficialilty and nothing new to report, a case of 'senseless violence'
Lucas is a curious case who, rather likes Reynolds, allowed deeply questionable politics to take him on massive flights of fancy. Latter's work is thoroughly in the realm of curate's egg, excessive massaging of casualty figures and accounts to present the most fantastic narrative. Beevor oddly enough does the same on some German arty, edited out any part of quotes regarding ammunition shortages to make it appear they were eagerly chewing up all. The worst handbook I've had the misfortune to pick up was the Waffen-SS one, terribly written, infantile and... not even good enough for recycling.
I forgot I have the SS handbook. Think I merged with the Army. Agreed! Flimsy gap-filling. As if Osprey went 'no thanks' so it just got printed on spec in a first draft flabby state.
I wasn't sure how many people outside Canada might have read it but I couldn't agree more on Pattons Gap. With several novels under his belt, I had high hopes for this book but it is thin, amateurish and virtually without merit. Rohmer, a former RCAF recon pilot with 135 sorties to his credit, is now 93 and by all accounts, a lovely man. He remains active and visible here.
"This book is shit and the author is an idiot." You two should team up and write reviews--I'd read 'em.
Me too. Great book. OK book. Shit book. Idiot book. Could be the marking criteria for a perfectly valid literary blog, saving a lot of time and expense.
I haven't read the book but I wondered if the 'ten armies' refers to nationalities? From memory British, Indian, New Zealand, Polish, French and United States all took part, plus German makes seven. I can't recall if Italian units fought under Allied or Axis banners, and am trying to think if Canadian and South African units were involved, which would make ten national armies. It's been a long time since I found or made the time to sit down and read a proper book. I think the one that sticks in the memory as my really not liking was some supposed memoir of a former SAS type. It read more like fiction and on reflection probably was. More recent was a translation of a German war diary, included in CD-rom of Arnhem related documents. That definitely caused me some physical discomfort to read. Gary
Angus Mansfield gets my vote. Published his Grandads log book combined with the ORB and passed it off as a fascinating memoir. Then took on Rodney Scrase from the same squadron (who is still with us) and pretty much repeated his first book! I was especially annoyed as I'd seen Rodney give a talk on his life and it was fascinating. Bland facts about operating heights repeated interminably.
Having never read the book `` Liri Valley `` by Mark Zuehlke I can only report that the late Tom Canning had issues with the accuracy of the content and with the author. But, not to do Zuehkle a disservice for his other works have been well researched with the help of JVD, Dutch historian.