A general rule is that if the publisher's blurb includes the words "blunders" and "incompetence" that is a good sign to stay well clear. It basically signifies that the author is projecting their own sense of impotence, frustration and failure onto the historical protagonists.
Well written negative reviews have a special sort of joy to them, whether it's a book review or one for a restaurant or film. You can't wait to see how the writer will next excoriate those responsible.
My "spidey sense" gets tingling when publishers plaster "Secret" "Hidden" "Unknown" - and other synonyms for them - across book jackets. They usually aren't. Sensationalist hyping, more like.
OK so, to sum up then - avoid Beevor like the plague, Beevor's work not worth reading and, oh, don't bother with Beevor - ok, roger that (actually I have given away both my copies of his books that I did attempt, unfinished - very unusual for me with a military book but his writing is like wading through porridge in gumboots). As for Rude Mechanicals - fair enough, it's not great (ok, it's REALLY not great) but it does have a bit on Matilda usage in 1940 which makes it of interest to some of us aficionados, even if much of the rest of it is of variable quality. Regards to all Andrew
For Matilda fans, this is worth a look as it covers I as well as 2 Page samples here: British Infantry Tanks In World War II
Thank you kind sir - my wife will be pleased! Actually, it was on my radar for when it hits the bookshops; a nice series this although a touch expensive for the amount of material that you get (yes, I know, you can't judge a book on its weight, look at Beevor) but these books are on the slim side so I'll wait and see a copy before splashing out. Actually, don't know why I've written this really, if its got more than a couple of pages on Matildas, I'll be buying it. Regards Andrew
OooooOOOOOOOOH! I'm working on a Matilda II model right now, and there's bound to be Valentine and Churchill coverage... And it's by Dick Taylor! Sold!
Thank you once again - I'll have to buy it then! When I used to work for Vauxhall they had a museum of all their stuff, including all the Churchill work that they'd done. I made copies of lots of their photographs for an article on the Churchill for a well known military vehicle magazine - never got them back. The bods at the museum (ex factory workers) were bemused that someone was interested in the tanks but not the cars. Regards A
I suspect that if our dear Mr. Canning had been at Dieppe and in NW Europe he would also have had issues with the remainder of Zuehlke's work. I've read them all and he does a reasonably good job. When Tom suspected some minor detail errors he tended to discount the entire book and wasn't shy in letting the author know. He could be cantankerous but he kept the discussion interesting. He's up there frowning at me right now.
Vauxhall cars at one time would rust away before your eyes. The tanks had a better shelf life but wouldn't win many design awards.
Ah - Tamiya, Airfix or Zvezda? And when is someone going to produce a decent kit of the inter-wars Vickers medium? (another of my all time favourite tanks). Kind regards Andrew
Thought I'd start a bad books thread, and, oh look, of course - we already have some. Stuff you think just not worth the candle, cobbled together & pointless. Mine don't seem to have changed for years, though the memory might grind into gear eventually. Likely repeating myself dreadfully above - I merged a couple of threads. Belton Cooper - Death Traps. The narrowest of narrow perspectives, spun up by a Historian helper into a truly dreadful appraisal of Allied armour work in the period. Sadly, it's become rather popular, & I think has done immense damage to the field by virtue of often being the only book 'outraged person on the internet' has read on the subject. Narrow, often completely wrong, impact out of proportion to its worth. Could have been a half decent personal memoir if it hadn't been blown into something else. Franz Kurowski - Panzer Aces (I, II, III, Gottstraffe England!) Sigh. Again, a seeming influence out of all proportion to its worth. The steely gaze of the grizzled steely veteran in his ice-bound steely steed. Steely steely steely. FFS. Manstein - Lost Victories. Though I dunno, Shaggy might actually be able to write a paragraph or two without sending you to sleep. Seem to have chosen things all by dead people. Cowardice, maybe. What have you thought was, frankly, rubbish? Edit: Yup. Still my top three. Also reminded of some terrible Beevor. I think three years fallow is long enough to allow repeating myself, and I do seem to have remained consistent.
The one where I gave my review copy to the gerbils to chew up. Not even going to name it but if anyone wants to know just do a search for "gerbils" by member "owen". Nice of you to bump a thread started by Kyt. I hope he's well.
Having commenced authour myself, I am a little reluctant to award a Bad Book Prize. I worked like a horse on my own stuff but still made some goofs. That I suppose is different from cynically churning out yet another Boys-in-Panzer potboiler for the Proud Boys/National Front crowd. I am distressed, however, to read that the Bad Sex prize has now been done away with. That was a great source of hilarity and I'll miss it.
Part of my problem too, mate. Fully appreciate the effort in bringing something together, but also think criticism fair. * *As long as you at least tried to read the thing.
I'm reminded of M: The Man Who Became Caravaggio by Peter Robb. The (in)famous art critic Brian Sewell stated in his review that it 'should be pulped', so the publishers put that quotation on the cover of the paperback edition!