As with previous Cornwell novels, this one reads well and quickly. You can easily finish the book in a day if you have the time, the inclination you'll find easily enough. As with previous Uhtred books in the Saxon Tales, Cornwell is attempting to tell the story of how the beginning of what would become England was formed prior to 1066. We've all heard of William the Conqueror, but who has heard of Alfred the Great (especially since he was great about 900 years before the well known Peter, Frederick, and Catherine)? Even though Alfred is not fully successful in bringing England together, Cornwell believes the story should start with him. Uhtred, a warrior in many ways out of place in the world he's found himself in (be it religion or 'ethnicity'), is Alfred's 'champion', someone he can consistently rely on yet never fully trust. Thus a warlord who has helped secure parts of England for Alfred and regularly goes on to defeat one Danish or Saxon king after another is left without money or any estates. And this is where we meet Uhtred when the "Death of Kings" begins. Like previous novels in the Saxon series, there is a mixture of humor, action, intrigue, mystery, violence, and polemical thoughts on religion. It has somewhat become predictable, but in that predictability you have a character that you can consistently identify with and rely on throughout the series. We are creatures of habit, and Uhtred is no different. While I believe other novels in this series had more battles/violence/action than "Death of Kings", that doesn't mean there isn't enough of everything else to keep a reader interested and reading late into the night. The only real issue I have with this novel is the similarity in at least 4/5 names that are regularly referenced but which I continued to have trouble identifying up until the end of the book (but this is not the author's fault as he is using historical names). Otherwise, highly recommended for those interested in historical fiction and/or English history.
Death of Kings by Bernard Cornwell
↧
↧
Osama Bin Laden by Michael Scheuer
Michael Scheuer's biography of Osama bin Laden, although slim, speaks to the understanding we in the west have of a figure that can be claimed to have changed the United States like few others could only imagine. Granted, he was not alone in ushering in that change (our government and 'think tanks' are a huge part of that transformation), but at the time Scheuer was writing this biography, some ten years after the tragic events of September 11, 2001, much of the US was still ignorant as to who and what Bin Laden actually was and represented. Unfortunately, Scheuer is not a trained historian, his analysis of the material he has to work with is good but it is riddled with ideas that intelligence analysts concentrate on rather than historians. This is a good beginning for understanding where Bin Laden came from and what he believes in/fights for, but some of the accusations made against other authors (be they journalists or former acquaintances of Bin Laden) are more polemical than they are scholarly. While much of what Scheuer points out makes sense - the idea that Bin Laden is regularly depicted as suffering from some kind of medical condition, yet there has been no real proof of such - how or why this came about is not based on factual information or any real insight. The most interesting sections of the book deal with the strategy that Bin Laden has set up with the organization that we've come to know as al-Quaeda (for those that believe it is a fictitious organization, Scheuer would disagree, and he makes an excellent case for his position) and under what rules they operate in foreign territory. There is no doubt that Bin Laden has largely influenced US history for the past decade, and now with his recent death, perhaps we can begin to have a more objective an analytical look at both his life and his ideas which led to the events of 9/11 and took the US to the far corners of Iraq and Afghanistan.
↧
The Fifteen Biggest Lies about the Economy: And Everything Else the Right Doesn't Want You to Know about Taxes, Jobs, and Corporate America by Joshua Holland
If you're a liberal, or at the very least an open-minded individual when it comes to what you've heard for the past decade in regards to our economy, then this book will be an eye-opening experience for you. I contemplated giving this book four stars (on amazon) but in truth the author does exactly what the title promises. He discusses how our politicians and media outlets regularly lie, obfuscate, generalize, and omit details from their reports, statements, sound bites, and speeches. I would have appreciated if the author spent a little more time on what he believes are the answers to some of the problems we're experiencing, but that is not what the title promised, so I can overlook that weakness. Also, while the author points out some of the problems inherent in 'big government', there are definitely situations that are overlooked; but that doesn't take away from what the author's arguments offer in respect to the regurgitated lies we're often confronted with on a daily basis. Furthermore, the book is about events in our very, very recent past. Thus what is a simple 'truth' today might become a complex look at a piece of our history five or ten years down the road. This also applies to the author's sources, the majority of which are newspaper/journalism pieces. While the author is meticulous in his sources and presents a lot of evidence to back up his position and opinions, I am more inclined to trust scholarly monographs and peer-reviewed journals, especially when today's journalists are as interested in pursuing sensationalist stories as they are in pursuing some form of the truth or challenging the status quo. At the very least this book will give you an interest in further research about topics like the 'free market' and whether it truly exists in today's world of big corporate America. To what degree is government regulation good, needed, or superfluous for our everyday safety. What really caused the recent economic recession, how it was handled, and why government regulation of the financial sector is still lacking and leaves us all open to another bubble and perhaps an even worse outcome for the middle and working class. Why tax breaks for the rich are not a guarantee that jobs will be created and in fact are part of the reason for the recent economic disaster the world experienced. How Republicans can ramble on and on about 'small government' but in truth are inclined to spend as much, if not more, than Democrats who are by proxy made out to look as if they want 'big government' when in truth they are interested in government responsibility and society's safety and progress. These are some of the issues discussed and they will undoubtedly make you question the dominant narrative we hear on a daily basis coming out of the mouth's of TV personalities and our politicians.
↧
Power Systems: Conversations on Global Democratic Uprisings and the New Challenges to U.S. Empire by Noam Chomsky
I've read at least two books by Chomsky in the past. I approach his polemical style as I do any other literature that deals with historic topics, or current events that are rooted in history (practically all of them), as a historian would. As usual, Chomsky has a lot to say on a variety of topics. His problem, also as usual, is that he's mostly relying on what is called the 'first rough draft of history', journalism. Much of the source material that's presented in the endnotes is either his own work or journalistic pieces from within the last decade. Thus, while much of what he has to say is interesting and provocative, that's pretty much a result of the fact that he's relying on what newspapers and weeklies are supposed to produce and sell as a product (perhaps all that "manufacturing consent" he's going on and on about is going right over his head when it's information that's supportive of his views/ideas). But the ideas and stories he's delving into will change ten years from now, and will be unrecognizable half-a-century down the road. So in a way Chomsky is helping to change the story that we're familiar with (the growth of China and India put into perspective, the war in Afghanistan, unions, labor, etc.) but it's a step in a direction that one cannot yet call 'right' or 'wrong' until more time has passed and historians have been able to view all the variables, which Chomsky himself has admitted are not yet visible (especially when dealing with China).
While throughout the text there are are interesting 'nuggets' of information offered they are also weakened by various factors. A case in point is when Chomsky discusses why Canada has a national health care system while the United States doesn't. He points to unions, which in Canada petitioned for health care for the whole country while in the United States unions made a deal with corporations for their own health care. When those corporations decided to change the deal, there was little unions could do. Unfortunately this entire section is without endnotes or citations. Thus the usefulness of this information is immediately questionable. But one also must keep in mind that this discussion is centered around the early-to-mid-nineteenth-century, thus it is history and not original or new information, therefore this information is removed from current events and readily verifiable. And yet, as already mentioned, it's unsourced.
Then there are instances of what should be clearly understood and recognized, yet is often missed due to the rhetorical fog our society has created around these issues. For instance, the idea that single mothers who are taking care of children don't deserve welfare or the idea that markets work like economic textbooks teach us. In the first case, being a single mother who needs to take care and provide for her children is a tough enough position to find oneself in. But, more importantly, how that child is raised, under what conditions, will affect what they do later in life. Are we interested in a society where single mothers have to neglect their children and constantly work or search for jobs, or mothers who make the best of the situation they've found themselves in, with support and help from the government, and raise children who will add to civil society and the work force rather than look for ways to fight the society that's put them in a position of constant neglect, moving toward delinquency. As for markets, as Chomsky states, the idea behind them is based on an informed public making rational decisions to fulfill their needs. But in truth the propaganda bombarding the population on television and other outlets is full of lies, misconceptions, and delusions to try and trick the public into creating a need where there isn't one and a market for kitsch.
Overall I found the book very provocative. A lot of things to think about, especially in terms of education and labor. The way things are going, it is easy enough to see that there is a type of 'conflict' that's going on against anything that has 'public' attached to it. Be it health or education. That our schools and universities are turning their backs on what they were originally created for, while simultaneously spurring attempts to change the way we educate our 'future generations', is widely evident by poor performance and the anti-intellectual culture that has permeated media rhetoric for years. The answer is not privatization and capitalistic for-profit motivation. When people begin to realize that civilization and civil society were not created by today's financial institution and corporations perhaps they'll change their attitudes about both and their usefulness for the future.
While throughout the text there are are interesting 'nuggets' of information offered they are also weakened by various factors. A case in point is when Chomsky discusses why Canada has a national health care system while the United States doesn't. He points to unions, which in Canada petitioned for health care for the whole country while in the United States unions made a deal with corporations for their own health care. When those corporations decided to change the deal, there was little unions could do. Unfortunately this entire section is without endnotes or citations. Thus the usefulness of this information is immediately questionable. But one also must keep in mind that this discussion is centered around the early-to-mid-nineteenth-century, thus it is history and not original or new information, therefore this information is removed from current events and readily verifiable. And yet, as already mentioned, it's unsourced.
Then there are instances of what should be clearly understood and recognized, yet is often missed due to the rhetorical fog our society has created around these issues. For instance, the idea that single mothers who are taking care of children don't deserve welfare or the idea that markets work like economic textbooks teach us. In the first case, being a single mother who needs to take care and provide for her children is a tough enough position to find oneself in. But, more importantly, how that child is raised, under what conditions, will affect what they do later in life. Are we interested in a society where single mothers have to neglect their children and constantly work or search for jobs, or mothers who make the best of the situation they've found themselves in, with support and help from the government, and raise children who will add to civil society and the work force rather than look for ways to fight the society that's put them in a position of constant neglect, moving toward delinquency. As for markets, as Chomsky states, the idea behind them is based on an informed public making rational decisions to fulfill their needs. But in truth the propaganda bombarding the population on television and other outlets is full of lies, misconceptions, and delusions to try and trick the public into creating a need where there isn't one and a market for kitsch.
Overall I found the book very provocative. A lot of things to think about, especially in terms of education and labor. The way things are going, it is easy enough to see that there is a type of 'conflict' that's going on against anything that has 'public' attached to it. Be it health or education. That our schools and universities are turning their backs on what they were originally created for, while simultaneously spurring attempts to change the way we educate our 'future generations', is widely evident by poor performance and the anti-intellectual culture that has permeated media rhetoric for years. The answer is not privatization and capitalistic for-profit motivation. When people begin to realize that civilization and civil society were not created by today's financial institution and corporations perhaps they'll change their attitudes about both and their usefulness for the future.
↧
Under the Wire: The Bestselling Memoir of an American Spitfire Pilot and Legendary POW Escaper by William Ash and Brendan Foley
Few in this world 'live in interesting times' and even fewer, one could argue, live 'interesting lives'. William Ash, however, can lay claim to both. Growing up in depression era America, Ash lived a hard yet adventurous life in Texas during the 1930s. Soon he found himself hopping trains and moving around the US with other job-seekers as America, and much of the world, experienced a period few could imagine getting any worse. Yet while the economy would eventually improve, it came at the cost of a World War that took the lives of some 60 million. Ash was not one to sit out the war and while the United States retained her neutral position. He went across the border into Canada to sign up with the RAF and forgo his American citizenship as the Second World War had begun and entered its second year with soon enough Great Britain, and her present and former colonies, being the last German opponent on the continent. Ash takes us through flight training and his eventual voyage to England where he was introduced to the plane he would fight and be shot down in, the Spitfire. His career as a pilot didn't last very long, so the majority of the book is taken up with stories of being on the run in occupied territory, living as a POW and his numerous escape attempts.
Soon after being shot down Ash becomes part of the French resistance network that worked to get allied pilots out of occupied territory and back to England to fight another day. Unfortunately, he was shot down just after a traitor had done tremendous damage to the network and French resistance fighters were attempt to rebuild it. Thus, Ash was never able to get out of France and found himself living with a couple in the middle of Paris for weeks. During that time he was even able to take in some sights! Sadly, this arrangement didn't last long and soon the Gestapo broke through the front door and arrested the couple and Ash. After being interrogated and beaten by the Gestapo, Ash was handed over into the hands of the Luftwaffe and put into his first POW camp.
Being in a POW camp didn't suit Ash much, so he begins to think up ways to escape his current situation and somehow reach England. He attempts to escape from various camps located in Germany, Poland, and Lithuania but again and again he is caught, thrown into isolation, and released to try again. Much of what Ash recalls has to do with German treatment of western prisoners of war and their time in confinement. It seems many attempted to escape, but there were also those who became content with their lot and chose to wait out the war or help those escaping in other ways (distracting guards, creating fake uniforms, passes, etc.). It is somewhat amazing to see how sophisticated escape attempts became and how detail oriented one had to be in order to not only successfully escape but also make it back to England.
To the author's credit, while he mainly concentrates on the actions of British, Canadian, and American POWs there is a minor yet frank discussion of Soviet POWs and the fate many suffered in German camps. Their deaths numbered in the millions and while western POWs were put in lice-infested barracks and served meals with minimal caloric nutrition, Soviet POWs were left to the elements without a roof over their head and surrounded by barbed wire while slowly starved to death or forsaken to die of various diseases and infections.
Although there are many stories related about daring escapes and what happened to those men after (at times it's hard to keep track of all the characters introduced), the idea of POW 'escapologists' raises the question of if the western allies had so many escapes (and their POW numbers were quite minimal when compared to, for instance, Soviet POWs) how many and what type of escapes were there on the Eastern Front? Unfortunately, this is one aspect of the Eastern Front that will remain either unknown or related in limited anecdotal tales. First, the Germans would hardly allow Red Army soldiers to escape more than once if caught (something that also changed for western POWs following 'The Great Escape'). Secondly, for the Soviet Union, prisoners were automatically labeled 'traitors to the motherland' while in the west it almost seems as if they were on 'temporary leave' - awaiting the next opportunity to attempt an escape and rejoin the fight. (That is not to say that allied POWs did not suffer during their time in confinement, but their treatment can not readily be compared to that of their Soviet counterparts.) Thus, few Red Army soldiers would be willing to admit they spent time as POWs in German hands, and without that acknowledgment, there's simply no room for 'escape' stories.
For all of Ash's escape attempts, he was truly successful only at the end of the war when his entire POW camp was put on the move, trying to evade Red Army forces and the Western allies as Germany's thousand year Reich lay in ruins. The forced march these prisoners experienced is similar to those of concentration camp victims but, once more, the treatment of allied prisoners of war cannot be compared to concentration camp inmates who at the slightest pretext were killed even as the war was coming to an inevitable conclusion and defeat for the Germans. Yet, wanting to end the war on a similar note to how he started it, he escaped from his handlers and came over to allied lines, eventually being evacuated to England. So, overall, a highly entertaining and interesting story of one man's war. A volunteer from the United States who wanted to do something few others were capable of or interested in, fly and fight against the menace of Hitler on behalf of the 'underdog'.
Soon after being shot down Ash becomes part of the French resistance network that worked to get allied pilots out of occupied territory and back to England to fight another day. Unfortunately, he was shot down just after a traitor had done tremendous damage to the network and French resistance fighters were attempt to rebuild it. Thus, Ash was never able to get out of France and found himself living with a couple in the middle of Paris for weeks. During that time he was even able to take in some sights! Sadly, this arrangement didn't last long and soon the Gestapo broke through the front door and arrested the couple and Ash. After being interrogated and beaten by the Gestapo, Ash was handed over into the hands of the Luftwaffe and put into his first POW camp.
Being in a POW camp didn't suit Ash much, so he begins to think up ways to escape his current situation and somehow reach England. He attempts to escape from various camps located in Germany, Poland, and Lithuania but again and again he is caught, thrown into isolation, and released to try again. Much of what Ash recalls has to do with German treatment of western prisoners of war and their time in confinement. It seems many attempted to escape, but there were also those who became content with their lot and chose to wait out the war or help those escaping in other ways (distracting guards, creating fake uniforms, passes, etc.). It is somewhat amazing to see how sophisticated escape attempts became and how detail oriented one had to be in order to not only successfully escape but also make it back to England.
To the author's credit, while he mainly concentrates on the actions of British, Canadian, and American POWs there is a minor yet frank discussion of Soviet POWs and the fate many suffered in German camps. Their deaths numbered in the millions and while western POWs were put in lice-infested barracks and served meals with minimal caloric nutrition, Soviet POWs were left to the elements without a roof over their head and surrounded by barbed wire while slowly starved to death or forsaken to die of various diseases and infections.
Although there are many stories related about daring escapes and what happened to those men after (at times it's hard to keep track of all the characters introduced), the idea of POW 'escapologists' raises the question of if the western allies had so many escapes (and their POW numbers were quite minimal when compared to, for instance, Soviet POWs) how many and what type of escapes were there on the Eastern Front? Unfortunately, this is one aspect of the Eastern Front that will remain either unknown or related in limited anecdotal tales. First, the Germans would hardly allow Red Army soldiers to escape more than once if caught (something that also changed for western POWs following 'The Great Escape'). Secondly, for the Soviet Union, prisoners were automatically labeled 'traitors to the motherland' while in the west it almost seems as if they were on 'temporary leave' - awaiting the next opportunity to attempt an escape and rejoin the fight. (That is not to say that allied POWs did not suffer during their time in confinement, but their treatment can not readily be compared to that of their Soviet counterparts.) Thus, few Red Army soldiers would be willing to admit they spent time as POWs in German hands, and without that acknowledgment, there's simply no room for 'escape' stories.
For all of Ash's escape attempts, he was truly successful only at the end of the war when his entire POW camp was put on the move, trying to evade Red Army forces and the Western allies as Germany's thousand year Reich lay in ruins. The forced march these prisoners experienced is similar to those of concentration camp victims but, once more, the treatment of allied prisoners of war cannot be compared to concentration camp inmates who at the slightest pretext were killed even as the war was coming to an inevitable conclusion and defeat for the Germans. Yet, wanting to end the war on a similar note to how he started it, he escaped from his handlers and came over to allied lines, eventually being evacuated to England. So, overall, a highly entertaining and interesting story of one man's war. A volunteer from the United States who wanted to do something few others were capable of or interested in, fly and fight against the menace of Hitler on behalf of the 'underdog'.
↧
↧
The Defense of Moscow 1941: The Northern Flank by Jack Radey and Charles Sharp
The title is somewhat of a misnomer, the book covers the fight over the town of Kalinin during the beginning of Operation Typhoon. The fighting that went on in the 'northern flank' of Moscow would have a direct impact on future German operations when they decided on a last lunge toward the capital, but the events covered in this book would have been better described as part of Operation Typhoon rather than a part of the Defense of Moscow. In either case, the authors have done a service for those interested in the Eastern Front and the Second World War in general. 1941 is too often presented as a series of successful German victories that flawlessly took them to the Gates of Moscow until the weather, logistics, and the Red Army interfered with their victorious march. A balanced account of 1941 has yet to be written (not to speak of the entirety of the Eastern Front) but books by professional historians like David Glantz and David Stahel have been a tremendous help in giving readers a more nuanced and contextualized understanding of both the Wehrmacht and Red Army throughout the opening phases of Operation Barbarossa.
Jack Radey and Charles Sharp build on what has already been written with their study of the defense of Kalinin in October 1941. The book contains some 177 pages of text, some of which could have readily been put into an appendix (I don't really see a huge need for an order of battle or to go through the table of organization and equipment in the main text, that type of information could just has easily have been placed in a footnote/endnote or an appendix). Taking almost two hundred pages to write about a few days in October only reenforces the complexity of the Eastern Front and what it takes to create a balanced account. The authors use both Soviet/Russian and German sources, making for a comprehensive retelling of the battles around and within Kalinin. For those familiar with works by David Glantz, expect the same amount of information and detail here, with relevant end of chapter/book summaries, but on a smaller level (whereas Glantz usually deals with divisions, corps, armies, and fronts/army groups, this book includes accounts from the brigade and regimental level as well).
The main focus of 'The Defense of Moscow' is the immediate aftermath of the beginning of Operation Typhoon. Initial German plans were never to take Moscow off the march, but to encircle the city. Once Red Army forces were encircled at Viazma and Briansk, the Wehrmacht did not face much opposition directly opposite Moscow. German commanders were thus more concerned about their flanks and dealing with the numerous armies that remained there. Radey and Sharp point out that the initial plans for German forces attacking toward Kalinin were not to simply take the city and create favorable conditions for future operations, but to encircle numerous Soviet armies in another grand offensive. Once again, German hopes were not based on the reality their forces found themselves in but on visions of further encirclements for which the necessary troops and logistics would somehow materialize in due time. Their Soviet counterparts, at least in this case, understood the meeting engagement that their forces were initially involved with and developed further offensive actions as circumstances allowed. Too often bad communications and scratch units put together from newly arriving recruits and recently scrounged up forces from previously encircled and decimated units led to failures, but these numerous 'small cuts' would lead to eventual German exhaustion and collapse when the Moscow Counter-Offensive began in early December.
Although Radey and Sharp point out that the details of this battle are often overlooked or are overshadowed by what was going on in Rostov, Tikhvin, and on the road to Moscow, the truth is that one can only deduce so much from the fight for Kalinin. I would say they overestimate how much of an impact this had on the Wehrmacht, especially since they themselves realize that the previously contested Smolensk Encirclement took a large toll on the Wehrmacht. There is no doubt that constant offensive actions ordered by Zhukov and other like-minded commanders (in this case, Konev), be they in front of Leningrad, Smolensk, or Kalinin, slowly bled the Germans on their way to Moscow. But a more important task remains. All of these actions need to be put into a greater context and allow for the ability to analyze the actions of the Werhmacht and Red Army from June through December of 1941. Thus far historians have mainly presented us with generalized studies or detailed case studies of battles. Taking all that information and crafting a new, original, and updated narrative of 1941 is still a task unfulfilled.
Jack Radey and Charles Sharp build on what has already been written with their study of the defense of Kalinin in October 1941. The book contains some 177 pages of text, some of which could have readily been put into an appendix (I don't really see a huge need for an order of battle or to go through the table of organization and equipment in the main text, that type of information could just has easily have been placed in a footnote/endnote or an appendix). Taking almost two hundred pages to write about a few days in October only reenforces the complexity of the Eastern Front and what it takes to create a balanced account. The authors use both Soviet/Russian and German sources, making for a comprehensive retelling of the battles around and within Kalinin. For those familiar with works by David Glantz, expect the same amount of information and detail here, with relevant end of chapter/book summaries, but on a smaller level (whereas Glantz usually deals with divisions, corps, armies, and fronts/army groups, this book includes accounts from the brigade and regimental level as well).
The main focus of 'The Defense of Moscow' is the immediate aftermath of the beginning of Operation Typhoon. Initial German plans were never to take Moscow off the march, but to encircle the city. Once Red Army forces were encircled at Viazma and Briansk, the Wehrmacht did not face much opposition directly opposite Moscow. German commanders were thus more concerned about their flanks and dealing with the numerous armies that remained there. Radey and Sharp point out that the initial plans for German forces attacking toward Kalinin were not to simply take the city and create favorable conditions for future operations, but to encircle numerous Soviet armies in another grand offensive. Once again, German hopes were not based on the reality their forces found themselves in but on visions of further encirclements for which the necessary troops and logistics would somehow materialize in due time. Their Soviet counterparts, at least in this case, understood the meeting engagement that their forces were initially involved with and developed further offensive actions as circumstances allowed. Too often bad communications and scratch units put together from newly arriving recruits and recently scrounged up forces from previously encircled and decimated units led to failures, but these numerous 'small cuts' would lead to eventual German exhaustion and collapse when the Moscow Counter-Offensive began in early December.
Although Radey and Sharp point out that the details of this battle are often overlooked or are overshadowed by what was going on in Rostov, Tikhvin, and on the road to Moscow, the truth is that one can only deduce so much from the fight for Kalinin. I would say they overestimate how much of an impact this had on the Wehrmacht, especially since they themselves realize that the previously contested Smolensk Encirclement took a large toll on the Wehrmacht. There is no doubt that constant offensive actions ordered by Zhukov and other like-minded commanders (in this case, Konev), be they in front of Leningrad, Smolensk, or Kalinin, slowly bled the Germans on their way to Moscow. But a more important task remains. All of these actions need to be put into a greater context and allow for the ability to analyze the actions of the Werhmacht and Red Army from June through December of 1941. Thus far historians have mainly presented us with generalized studies or detailed case studies of battles. Taking all that information and crafting a new, original, and updated narrative of 1941 is still a task unfulfilled.
↧
Legacies of Stalingrad: Remembering the Eastern Front in Germany since 1945 by Christina Morina
I had high hopes for this book, but unfortunately the title is somewhat misleading. While 'Stalingrad' plays a role throughout the book, there is little to no analysis of the battle itself or its varied interpretations in the post-war period. Rather, as happens so often in academia today, the war itself is used as a tool through which memory is studied and analyzed throughout the post-war period in both East and West Germany. The concentration, unoriginal as it might seem, is once more on the Wehrmacht and the crimes it committed.
If there is anything 'original' in the content it is the contextualization of the politics that revolved around the memories of the Eastern Front and the German invasion of the Soviet Union. Similar to the history of the Holocaust, which in the decades following the war was infantile compared to the studies we have today, the history of the Eastern Front in Germany (both east and west) was limited and mainly written by generals putting their memories to paper and the memories of Germans themselves from the latter period of the war when Germans could claim 'victimhood' at the hands of the western allies and the Red Army. The Wehrmacht's hands remained clean since in the east the majority of the Wehrmacht was viewed as working class (only those remaining in POW camps in the Soviet Union, after the major amnesty in the beginning of the 1950s, were viewed and charged as criminals - some 23,000) and thus simply a tool of Hitler and his Nazi regime. While in the west the concentration was soon on the Soviet Union and the crimes of the Red Army.
Thus, surprisingly, it was not until the 1980s when real attention began to be paid to the casualties and destruction inflicted on the Soviet Union by the Wehrmacht (Leningrad, Stalingrad, etc.) and only in the 1990s, with the Wehrmacht exhibit, did Germany come face-to-face with the activities of her armed forces during the Second World War. (The lack of knowledge about the former, in part, can be blamed on the Soviet Union itself since during Stalin's leadership the real cost of the war was kept hidden and it wasn't until decades later that the world heard the number 27 million in reference to military and civilian deaths.) These are the topics that make up the majority of this study. Unfortunately, too often it seems that the war itself, and Stalingrad in particular, are far in the background and there is little to no original research or analysis of literature dealing with the war itself (aside from a few pages on the memoirs written by the likes of Manstein, Halder, Guderian, etc.). For hobbyists and those interested in the war itself, I'm afraid you'll find little of interest here. This monograph is built on a foundation of memory studies and utilizes the memory of the Eastern Front in general to view and analyze post-war Germany and her politics.
↧
The White Rose of Stalingrad: The Real-Life Adventure of Lidiya Vladimirovna Litvyak, the Highest Scoring Female Air Ace of All Time by Bill Yenne
One would think that "The White Rose of Stalingrad" by Bill Yenne is an attempt to tell the story of Lidiya Litvyak, the highest scoring Soviet female pilot of the Great Patriotic War. Unfortunately, the title is beyond a misnomer in this case. For better or worse, the author uses Litvyak and her family to tell the greater story of the Soviet Union and the Second World War. Litvyak herself takes up perhaps 15-20% of the book, and that's being generous. The rest of the 280+ pages are a rehashing of Soviet history with no original research or conclusions. This lack of originality is also evidenced by the author's bibliography. While his sources for delving into the history of the Soviet Union seem wide enough, too often there was an unneeded reliance on the likes of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. Yes, Solzhenitsyn definitely has a place in Soviet history, but to rely on his impressions about general Soviet history more so than historians who specialize in the Soviet Union is an odd choice.
Having read quite a bit of historical literature on the subject, I was somewhat vexed by the literary license the author continually utilized. I, personally, don't care about the dusty steppe, descriptions of sweat pouring down a pilot's face on a day that one could call a "scorcher," or the swaying of the wheat when I'm reading historical monographs. Furthermore, the lack of any footnotes or endnotes is something I consistently find impossible to understand. It might have been the publisher's decision, but it takes away from the reading experience for me, rather than adding to it. Granted, Yenne seems to think that mentioning an author's or historian's full name and the title of their work before quoting or referencing something will be helpful, but it soon becomes redundant and annoying (explaining that Volkogonov was Stalin's biographer was fine the first time; there is no need to do it continually when referencing Volkogonov).
Finally, minor issues include Yenne's use of transliterated Russian words and phrases. While they might be helpful to some, and even then only to an extent, they are out of place when utilized incorrectly. Additionally, the author labels patronymics "middle names," mistranslates at least one "phrase," and conflates the Great Patriotic War with WWII - they are separate concepts and ideas for Soviets/Russians. While Yenne relies on a few historians for his information when it comes to military matters, he still manages to incorrectly assess and present the Winter War against Finland and goes on to express a baseless assertion that Moscow could have 'easily' been captured in 1941. Unfortunately, this is not a book I could recommend for those interested in the Eastern Front, the Soviet Union, Soviet pilots, etc. All of the topics covered already have multiple books written about them and in most, if not all, cases they are better written and researched than "The White Rose of Stalingrad."
Having read quite a bit of historical literature on the subject, I was somewhat vexed by the literary license the author continually utilized. I, personally, don't care about the dusty steppe, descriptions of sweat pouring down a pilot's face on a day that one could call a "scorcher," or the swaying of the wheat when I'm reading historical monographs. Furthermore, the lack of any footnotes or endnotes is something I consistently find impossible to understand. It might have been the publisher's decision, but it takes away from the reading experience for me, rather than adding to it. Granted, Yenne seems to think that mentioning an author's or historian's full name and the title of their work before quoting or referencing something will be helpful, but it soon becomes redundant and annoying (explaining that Volkogonov was Stalin's biographer was fine the first time; there is no need to do it continually when referencing Volkogonov).
Finally, minor issues include Yenne's use of transliterated Russian words and phrases. While they might be helpful to some, and even then only to an extent, they are out of place when utilized incorrectly. Additionally, the author labels patronymics "middle names," mistranslates at least one "phrase," and conflates the Great Patriotic War with WWII - they are separate concepts and ideas for Soviets/Russians. While Yenne relies on a few historians for his information when it comes to military matters, he still manages to incorrectly assess and present the Winter War against Finland and goes on to express a baseless assertion that Moscow could have 'easily' been captured in 1941. Unfortunately, this is not a book I could recommend for those interested in the Eastern Front, the Soviet Union, Soviet pilots, etc. All of the topics covered already have multiple books written about them and in most, if not all, cases they are better written and researched than "The White Rose of Stalingrad."
↧
Golden Harvest: Events at the Periphery of the Holocaust by Jan Tomasz Gross and Irena Grudzinska Gross
Jan Gross has a somewhat controversial history when it comes to the Holocaust and Poland. Many view his book on the Jedwabne 'massacre' as something groundbreaking and very much thought-provoking when it comes to both the Holocaust and Poland. Unfortunately, many others who would prefer to continue viewing Poland as the innocent first victim of Nazi Germany continually close their eyes to the debates that have begun in the wake of Gross's findings. While his book(s) might not be perfect, they are provocative and engage the reader on the emotional level more than some other histories. Mainly, this is due to Gross's reliance and trust in eye-witness accounts (not to say that they shouldn't be trusted, but many historians would and do have a problem with 'blind trust') that continue to offer new ideas about the actions of the local population during the Holocaust.
Within the pages of 'Golden Harvest' the reader is greeted with various accounts from Poland that deal with the economic aspects of the Holocaust. Those familiar with the development of the Holocaust within Nazi Germany know about the numerous laws enacted against Jews that enabled a forfeiture of goods, money, property, and businesses. This did not happen in the areas east of Germany. There, what has been dubbed the 'Holocaust by bullets', unfolded. The local population readily turned on their Jewish neighbors and while some took their lives, others continually and consistently robbed them of their possessions. Oft was heard the idea that Jews going to their deaths should give up their clothing and valuables to their neighbors so that those doing the killing, the Germans, wouldn't receive additional benefit from Jewish deaths. While it is true that Poles are the first Righteous Among the Nations, many who received the selfless title wound up having to hide it so that their neighbors wouldn't find out. Finally, one of the more interesting disclosures that Gross makes is that the repeated notion that Poles who hide Jews were liable to be killed immediately if found out is untrue. Many of those who discovered Jews in hiding within Poland were other Poles who chased, beat, raped, or murdered them but did nothing to those who hid them.
'Golden Harvest', for all of its weaknesses and limitations, once more initiates a conversation that many want repressed. Nation states are rarely an innocent entity. Their very existence and survival depends on death and destruction as they are created and baptized through the fires of war, be it revolutionary, civil, or otherwise. To hold oneself up as nothing but a selfless victim is to invite controversy. Poland has too often been victim, but her hands are far from clean when it comes to the twentieth century. Accepting that history is complex and multifaceted, filled with not only a Manichean duality of hero and villain, will go a long way in helping us understand the twentieth century better, including Poland's role in the Second World War and the Holocaust.
Within the pages of 'Golden Harvest' the reader is greeted with various accounts from Poland that deal with the economic aspects of the Holocaust. Those familiar with the development of the Holocaust within Nazi Germany know about the numerous laws enacted against Jews that enabled a forfeiture of goods, money, property, and businesses. This did not happen in the areas east of Germany. There, what has been dubbed the 'Holocaust by bullets', unfolded. The local population readily turned on their Jewish neighbors and while some took their lives, others continually and consistently robbed them of their possessions. Oft was heard the idea that Jews going to their deaths should give up their clothing and valuables to their neighbors so that those doing the killing, the Germans, wouldn't receive additional benefit from Jewish deaths. While it is true that Poles are the first Righteous Among the Nations, many who received the selfless title wound up having to hide it so that their neighbors wouldn't find out. Finally, one of the more interesting disclosures that Gross makes is that the repeated notion that Poles who hide Jews were liable to be killed immediately if found out is untrue. Many of those who discovered Jews in hiding within Poland were other Poles who chased, beat, raped, or murdered them but did nothing to those who hid them.
'Golden Harvest', for all of its weaknesses and limitations, once more initiates a conversation that many want repressed. Nation states are rarely an innocent entity. Their very existence and survival depends on death and destruction as they are created and baptized through the fires of war, be it revolutionary, civil, or otherwise. To hold oneself up as nothing but a selfless victim is to invite controversy. Poland has too often been victim, but her hands are far from clean when it comes to the twentieth century. Accepting that history is complex and multifaceted, filled with not only a Manichean duality of hero and villain, will go a long way in helping us understand the twentieth century better, including Poland's role in the Second World War and the Holocaust.
↧
↧
The Guns at Last Light: The War in Western Europe, 1944-1945 by Rick Atkinson
Although I usually remain mired in books dedicated to the Eastern Front of the Second World War, when offered the opportunity to receive an advance reader’s copy of ‘The Guns at Last Light’, I was happy to dive into the history of the Western Front. For all the praise the previous two volumes written by Atkinson received I was expecting something out of the ordinary. That, unfortunately, was not what I found. Speaking as someone who has studied history and the Second World War for over a decade, this is a good book for hobbyists and those new to the topic, but nothing groundbreaking. One can easily tell this is a journalistic effort (akin to what Max Hastings has written previously) as the author deals with the equivalent of sound bites of information. Atkinson all too often relies on emotional narratives to tell a story many are already familiar with. Without superfluous information that can be found on practically every page (needless descriptions of the sky and ground, or counting the paper plates, napkins, and bottles of alcohol needed for the participants of the Yalta conference), this book could have been reduced by 100-200 pages and still retained its readability and fluid historical narrative.
Coming in at 640 pages, this is a book that will take you days if not weeks to finish. For those unfamiliar with the Second World War or the Western Front, this makes for a good grounding and introduction. Some of the most interesting passages discuss and showcase the troubles Eisenhower encountered in Europe while dealing with the likes of British and French commanders whose egos often took center stage. Too often their ineptitude and callous disregard for their allies resulted in missed opportunities and needless casualties straining relations and nerves on a daily basis. Combined with logistical difficulties that took numerous divisions out of the line and held up offensive operations along the front, the achievements of the allies need to be lauded when seen for what they were able to overcome. Descriptions of the more important battles – Normandy, Market Garden, Hürtgen Forest, and the Ardennes offensive – get the usual majority of attention. But other operations are also touched on with allied failures and missed opportunities coming to the forefront of what little analysis is offered. I was surprised to see the limited coverage of the liberation of concentration and labor camps; at most one or two dozen pages were devoted to the discovery of the genocidal campaign waged by the Third Reich.
Atkinson commands a wide range of knowledge when it comes to the history of the Western Front and the bibliography and endnotes attest to that. Unfortunately, the best he can do is regurgitate all that information for his readers while practically omitting any analytical conclusions. What analysis there is usually comes from quotes of participants, ranging from the highest echelons of the military and government to the average private in a foxhole. The end result is that while at times there is some analysis for why the allies were successful in their operations (again, mainly relying on quotes and opinions of participants and at times historians) there is an obvious lack of such scrutiny for the axis. Furthermore, when stepping outside of the Western Front there is an obvious lack of context.
The Eastern Front is mentioned numerous times throughout this volume. The harsh conditions German formations experienced against the Red Army are often the barometer which German soldiers measure the western allies against. In one case, during operation Market Garden, a German soldier comments that he’s fought a battle harder than any he experienced in Russia. Unfortunately, there’s no way to know exactly what he experienced on the Eastern Front; thus there is no real way to qualify this statement with what we know about the Eastern Front. As much as this quote adds to our understanding of the violence that was encountered, the reader is also left wanting more and not knowing how to contextualize what he’s just read. While this is a rather minor point, similar weaknesses are evident throughout the text. Another example is when discussing the offensive in the Ardennes. Instead of pointing out that the allies asked the Red Army to move up their offensive in January to help alleviate the damage done by the German attack, the author contends that the German forces utilized in the Ardennes made possible the success of the Soviet January offensive. This is a rather cheap attempt to make amends for the mistakes the western allies made and make further sense of the casualties they suffered.
Nevertheless, for all its faults and weaknesses ‘The Guns at Last Light’ showcases that the ‘clean’ war of good vs. evil that is so often portrayed in the media was hardly the case on the ground. The liberation of Europe was a multi-faceted event that took the lives of hundreds of thousands on both sides and extended the suffering to the civilian sector at every step of the way – from allied bombing raids to German and allied reprisals. Those interested in an introduction to the western allied campaign in Europe would do well to invest in this volume while keeping in mind that this is still a 640 page tip of a much larger iceberg.
↧
The Whisperers: Private Life in Stalin's Russia by Orlando Figes
Orlando Figes is a well known name in the historical community. He's also a popular historian whose books sell. To write a book as dense and factually rich as 'The Whisperers' requires decades, and as Figes himself explains, the original idea came about some three decades ago. Figes also gained support and help from numerous colleagues, friends, and volunteers who helped him interview victims of the purges and the GULag as well as obtained archival information to supplement those interviews and help understand the context of what happened to these victims from beginning to end. Twice this book was supposed to have been published in Russian but was rejected both times. The second rejection, the more pertinent to any review of this book, was a result of accusations against Figes due to the numerous issues that were brought up by the Memorial society (which helped Figes with research as well). A few western scholars have also accused Figes of sloppy research and translation errors but he has consistently defended himself (feel free to google the issue(s)). In some ways this is inevitable since trying to write a book for some three decades can result in sloppy research and, unfortunately for Figes, his previous actions (writing negative reviews of books by other historians on amazon under a pseudonym) combined with accusations of plagiarism (which he was found innocent of) should make all readers approach his texts with some caution.
When it comes to the subject matter of 'The Whisperers', even without mentioning all of the above, at best this book would earn only some four stars out of five. This book is for those who want to understand what life was like for that percentage of the population that suffered at the hands of Stalin and his regime, and continued to suffer (whether purely in their mind after all that they had been through, or in reality as a result of their 'sordid' past in eyes of employers, friends, and family) in the post-Stalin period. The immediate problem here is that this is not a full representation of 'Private Life in Stalin's Russia' because it only represents those who were arrested, tortured, and suffered in prisons or camps (including their close relatives and sometimes friends). For all of those who suffered under such conditions there were many more who did not, and they are almost wholly left out of this monograph. Imagine for a moment a history of the United States based purely around men and women who were falsely accused of crimes, beaten by police officers and jailers, and suffered years of abuse and humiliation in the prison system. Upon realization that they were innocent, apparently someone in the system had lied or made a mistake, they are released to the outside world but instead of enjoying life they are immediately relegated to the dregs of society. Throughout this entire process, not only did these innocent men and women suffer the humiliation of a trial and time in prison, after their release they consistently fail to find employment due to the stigma of their time in prison or receive fair compensation for the years they were forced to waste and suffer through. Can this be a fair representation of everyday life in the United States? For some, maybe even many, most definitely, but it certainly would not apply to the majority. Keeping in mind that the Soviet Union operated on totally different parameters than the US, the above comparison is purely cosmetic and made to showcase the limited use of 'The Whisperers' in fully understanding what life was like in the Soviet Union.
From the point of view of history, 'The Whisperers' contains no new conclusions or analysis about the Soviet system. While dense and filled with interesting factoids, this text does little in terms of contributing to a better understanding of Stalin's reign or the period immediately following when the GULag prison population slowly began to filter back into cities and towns. These topics have been previously covered and in greater detail and depth. At best 'The Whisperers' is a good, although flawed, introduction to aspects of what life was like in the Soviet Union and during Stalin's reign for those caught up in the infamous purge trials of the 1930s.
↧
The Unknown Eastern Front: The Wehrmacht and Hitler's Foreign Soldiers by Rolf-Dieter Muller
"The Unknown Eastern Front: The Wehrmacht and Hitler's Foreign Soldiers" by Rolf-Dieter Muller gives a brief account of the various formations that joined the Wehrmacht or became units (ranging from battalions to divisions) within the German Wehrmacht and Waffen SS. The book is divided into three sections dealing initially with Germany's allies (Finland, Hungary, Romania, Italy, Slovakia, and Croatia), volunteers from neutral and occupied territories (Spain, France, Belgium, The Netherlands, Denmark, and Norway), and Eastern European states (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Byelorussia, Ukraine, Russia, and the Caucasus). The territory covered here would take two dozen volumes to truly understand. While there are a multitude of works that deal with local collaboration and foreign units in the German Armed Forces throughout the Second World War, the majority rely on presenting just one nation or ethnicity and thus leave out the impact that all of these foreign soldiers had on the German war effort.
Muller deals with numerous complex issues and, more often than not, provides a good foundation for understanding just how complicated and convoluted German policy was when dealing with allies, collaborators, and the local population of whatever territory is being considered and discussed. Unfortunately, because this a slim volume, it barely skims the surface of many issues that need to come to the forefront when studying both the war the Wehrmacht waged on the Eastern Front as well as the Wehrmacht itself. This is a great introduction for those interested in the Second World War and the Eastern Front. You should have some basic knowledge about battles, events, and main characters (both nations and individuals) as while there is some context presented much more is left out. Additionally, there are also numerous weaknesses and errors sprinkled throughout the text, including the idea that Richard Sorge predicted the date the Germans were going to invade the Soviet Union, an ambiguous statement about Stalin's reaction to the invasion, a lack of endnotes for every chapter (often some interesting information is present but no source is listed), and at least in one instance (chapter on Hungary) there are some 30 endnotes in the text but only 17 in the endnote section at the end of the book(!).
For those familiar with the Eastern Front and Germany's efforts, little presented here is original information or groundbreaking analysis. Rather, Muller does something that often escapes many of us who study this subject in-depth. To begin, lets take a step back and look at what made possible Germany's ability to wage war. If we leave the Eastern Front for a moment and take a look at Germany's previous 'miracles' during the initial stages of the Second World War, what do we see? An initial invasion of Poland that received help some two weeks later from a Red Army invasion from the East. A miraculous victory over France that saw Italy join in the war and, unfortunately, much of France's army and air force remain uncommitted for various reasons. Finally, the struggles in North Africa relied heavily on Italian forces and the Italian navy. Yet who gets the credit? Germany. Now, moving on to the Eastern Front. The initial invasion featured some one million foreign volunteers from allied Finland, Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, in addition to tens of thousands of foreigners within the German Army. While German forces advanced on a 2,000-kilometer front, their allies held some 1,200 kilometers of frontline for them, allowing them to concentrate on encirclements at Kiev, Briansk, and Viazma. In 1942, as German forces continued to deteriorate through attrition, further allied forces were mobilized and fielded together with additional foreign volunteers, allowing for the German advance on Stalingrad and the Caucasus. Finally, after the destruction of the German Sixth Army around Stalingrad, it was with the aid of foreign helpers that the Wehrmacht continued to put up a fight for as long as it did. And, of course, not to forget the help that local populations and foreign volunteers offered in the rear-areas that were routinely contested by partisan forces throughout Eastern Europe. Over 3 million allies and volunteers went through the ranks of the Wehrmacht and Waffen SS throughout the Second World War, helping Germany wage a war of genocide (which many foreigners also participated in). For all those who keep wondering how it was possible that Germany could fight for so long against the combined might of the USSR, Britain, and America, this book in part details a very important factor that contributed to German success and is often overlooked.
↧
The Taste of Ashes: The Afterlife of Totalitarianism in Eastern Europe by Marci Shore
'The Taste of Ashes' is an odd book to categorize. I can't say it is a memoir as its concentration is rather limited. It's definitely not a historical monograph in the traditional sense of the word, especially since it has no bibliography or index (which I found quite odd). The focus is on the career of the author and her interactions with Eastern Europeans from the 1980s through the next three decades, which inevitably leads to discussions and tangents about Eastern European history in general from the turn of the century up to the present. For those unfamiliar with Polish, Czech, Ukrainian, and Russian history, you will become quickly lost in a quagmire of names, places, and events that are invoked, described, and mentioned as the author attempts to weave dozens of stories into a coherent narrative, an attempt that I found lacking.
While I am immensely interested in intellectual history, and the previous monograph published by the author is something I'd be interested in reading in the future, attempting to discuss the history of some half a dozen nations through the lived experiences of the men and women she's encountered in her travels throughout Eastern Europe leaves a lot to be desired. There is plenty of fascinating information offered but an immense amount of context is missing. One example would be the discussion of the Warsaw Uprising by the Polish Home Army, which is wholly inadequate. It's missing relevant information and offers a rather biased view of events. Additionally, jumping from one storyline to another will undoubtedly leave even those familiar with the people, places, and events mentioned flipping back and forth trying to find the relevant thread they should be following or keeping in mind. While I found parts of the book interesting, I can't help but feel that more could have been done if a greater history/narrative was attempted, which included, or intermixed, the lived experiences of the author and her acquaintances/friends. Their lives and struggles are worth knowing and acknowledging, but they're hardly different than dozens, hundreds, and most likely thousands of others who lived, suffered, or even prospered in Eastern Europe during the twentieth century.
↧
↧
The Role of the Soviet Union in the Second World War: A Re-examination (Helion Studies in Military History) by Boris Sokolov
Many have written on the history of the Second World War in Russia in the past twenty to thirty years. Gorbachev’s ‘glasnost’ opened the way for new questions, ideas, theories, and accounts from the Stalinist period, including the Eastern Front. Unfortunately, with all the new information that became available many took it upon themselves to begin writing sensationalist books that flooded the market and continue to do so today. Thus, the current Second World War book market in Russia is a mixture of historical monographs, journalistic and amateur accounts, and sensationalist conspiracy theories. ‘The Role of the Soviet Union in the Second World War: A Re-Examination’ falls somewhere in between all three. The author, Boris Sokolov, was forced to resign from his position as professor of Social Anthropology, which automatically raises questions about his historical background.
What Sokolov and many authors like him do well is raise questions that have yet to be answered in a satisfactory manner. Unfortunately, often the questions they raise are pushed beyond their boundaries and become the basis of ill-defined generalizations and fallacious comparisons. Thus, throughout this slim volume of articles that were previously published in Russian newspapers or western academic journals, there is some interesting information offered but it is missing valuable context and is warped by numerous theories that already exist in Russia, which Sokolov latches onto with his own version of events and evidence.
The initial chapter discusses the oft-repeated idea by conspiracy theorists that Stalin was preparing to attack Hitler in the summer of 1941. This is usually most associated with the likes of Viktor Suvorov (Vladimir Rezun), even though the initial creator of this myth was Hitler himself who declared the invasion of the Soviet Union a pre-emptive strike against gathering Red Army forces who were poised to strike against Germany. While Suvorov grasps at every straw that’s available to him, be it real or imaginary, Sokolov utilizes the simplistic idea that because an order was issued to create a Polish division by 1 July 1941, an invasion was imminent. He points to the corresponding creation of a Finnish Corps on the eve of the Soviet invasion of Finland, but curiously enough fails to point out the entire lead-up to the invasion of Finland and juxtapose it with the diplomatic situation on the ground in the spring and summer of 1941. The rest of the chapter offers little of substance or new information to those already familiar with the eve of the war on the Eastern Front.
The more interesting chapters are those on the Battle of Kursk and Lend Lease. In the case of the former, Sokolov makes an interesting point in his discussion of whether it was ideal to wait for the Germans to attack or whether an earlier offensive by the Red Army against a Wehrmacht lacking Tigers, Panthers, and Ferdinands would have garnered greater success and fewer losses. Unfortunately, he doesn’t offer enough information about the strengths and weaknesses of both sides in April or May of 1943, nor does he analyze the weather conditions or logistical constraints that either side might have been under. It’s easy to pass judgment by simply mentioning a few figures, harder still to analyze the entire contextual situation that existed on a month-by-month basis. The more interesting aspect of this chapter is his discussion of the losses the Red Army sustained. Unfortunately, his example is limited to the Central Front and a figure of some 50-60,000. There is no adequate explanation for why the Central Front is listed as containing 738,000 men on July 5, yet numbered 645,300 on July 12 when it supposedly only suffered 33,897 casualties. The only Order of Battle change was the departure of two rifle brigades and the arrival of a tank brigade, at best a change of strength of some 5-7,000 men, according to Sokolov. Yet no explanation is offered of why such a drastic change in figures exists. The author believes this represents an undercounting of losses, which is the simplest explanation and there’s no doubt that undercounting existed in every army (who doesn’t want extra rations?). While this is the only real evidence Sokolov presents about the undercounting of casualties, he readily begins to apply this formula (undercounting by around 1/3) to other operations, creating a generalization out of one example. When discussing Red Army losses in general compared to the Wehrmacht, Sokolov comments that the ‘unfavorable ratio of losses may be explained by the superiority of the new German tanks and also the superiority of German command and control in armor combat.’ While this analysis is undoubtedly accurate in some scenarios, Valery Zamulin has shown quite well that the losses the Red Army sustained were a result of a combination of factors, few of which can be analyzed without understanding the greater context of specific engagements, forces utilized, etc.
The chapter on Lend Lease seems to be a limited analysis of random equipment and materials and again lacks context. Yes, it is important to stress that value of Lend Lease supplies and the fact that the Soviet Union played down the aid it received while some in the west believed it represented a lifeline in the fullest sense of the term. Unfortunately, Sokolov doesn’t do a great job in getting his point(s) across. He discusses aviation fuel but fails to offer a breakdown of deliveries by year. There is also no breakdown of motor vehicle deliveries by year nor does Sokolov discuss the fact that Soviet domestic production of motor vehicles could have been increased if the need arose at the expense of light tank production, which was being curbed as is by the latter years of the war due to the dominance of the T-34. The reason Soviet domestic truck production was so low was because they knew that Lend Lease trucks were supposed to be delivered, but this is left out of Sokolov’s discussion(s). Thus, similar to previous chapters, the author discusses important subjects and brings up relevant examples only to then exaggerate their value and importance without adequate context and analysis.
The last two chapters deal with losses and to some extent overlap each other. The more interesting look at the Soviet Union’s losses once more shows that serious research is still needed to give a more credible account and understanding of the devastation the Soviet Union experienced and how well or poorly the Red Army performed throughout the war. Sokolov again points to interesting information but fails to accurately analyze it. For instance, he lists the number of prisoners of war the Soviet Union sustained from 1943-1945 as 604,000 by Soviet estimates while German data gives a figure of 746,000. Yet there is no mention made of the fact that the Germans counted anyone of military draft age as a prisoner of war, no matter if they were part of the Red Army or were civilians (and there are accounts of civilians in German POW camps). This is also why the figures of the prisoners taken from the Kiev encirclement in 1941 differ when Soviet numbers are compared to German ones. Sokolov is also quick to dismiss Germany’s allies when calculating losses, his reasoning being the Red Army suffered fewer losses and Germany’s allies didn’t actively participate during the entire war. Not what I’d call an objective analysis.
There’s much more one can say but the above is a good representation of what this thin volume offers. For those interested in understanding how much of Russia’s literature on the war is written this is a good starting point that features a middle ground between historical analysis and journalistic tendencies that create the ability to exaggerate and sensationalize without adequate understanding. Due to the limited archival access that was available to historians interested in writing on the Eastern Front within the Soviet Union, the end result was a plethora of literature that said little but never failed to exaggerate socialist heroism and economic abilities. Today’s Russian historians, journalists, and amateurs have access to much more information but lack a foundation or grounding in how to properly analyze and present the raw data at their disposal. The end result is that all too often the right questions are asked but adequate answers are not always forthcoming.
↧
Our Harsh Logic: Israeli Soldiers' Testimonies from the Occupied Territories, 2000-2010
The problem with books like "Our Harsh Logic" is that they're fuel for the fire. The Palestinian-Israeli conflict has been going on for generations and the presentation of these testimonies without adequate context only enrages those who know little about what's going on in the Middle East or have a stake in playing the 'victimhood' card. There is little doubt that Israel sits in a position few, if any, find enviable. Their policies often make more enemies than friends, but to rashly judge all their positions and put them in the camp of 'imperialists' or 'zionists' is too easy and accommodating for those with ulterior motives. This is a book that is solely based on testimony from soldiers who more often than not participated in the activities they are describing and only after felt remorse. This says more about the culture of the military than it does about Israel. Imagine a book based on the US intervention/occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, the Soviet invasion/occupation of Afghanistan, or the US war in Vietnam told solely from those who witnessed abuse and atrocities. Would that be a fair depiction of the actions of any of these nations in their respective war zones? Hardly. And while the previously mentioned conflicts lasted for around a decade, Israeli soldiers have lived with terror and violence for generations, as have their Palestinian neighbors. There's no question that abuse takes place on a daily basis when you give teenagers and young adults weapons that can readily be used to kill and maim, especially as they're growing up in an environment where each side demonizes the other. Highlighting that abuse is pointless without adequate context and analysis. Thus there is nothing new or original among the pages of this book for those familiar with the institution of the military (which seems to cover things up on a regular basis, only to be discovered for their lies sooner or later) or the situation in the Middle East as it stands today. It's a tragic situation that few have the patience to attempt to understand, where generational animosities plays themselves out on a regular basis and perpetuate violence and hatred.
↧
The Politics of Memory in Postwar Europe by Richard Ned Lebow, Wulf Kansteiner, and Claudio Fogu
The overall thread running through all the chapters in this book is that the memory of the Second World War is continually contested territory that up to the present is still being interpreted and reinterpreted depending on the politician, historian, or institute in question. One issue that is continually brought up is the lag that studies on the Second World War, and simultaneously Holocaust studies, experienced in the immediate postwar period. While studies of WWII and the Holocaust are part of the mainstream today, and in some ways have over-saturated the market, the immediate postwar period saw a dearth of any discussion or analysis about what Europe had just gone through. The reasons differed from country to country, but in many ways all European states are still feeling this omission. West Germans treated themselves as victims of the allies, Nazis, and Hitler. Poland saw itself as the first victim and most heroic for being the first to stand up to Hitler (and Stalin) and for resisting Germany the longest. France continually had to walk a fine line between her collaborationist past and her history of resistance. The Soviet Union omitted any real research or studies on the war as long as Stalin was alive and only began to recall her role in the war with Khrushchev and Brezhnev.
The authors regularly take the reader through the postwar histories of their respectively studied nations and address not only what historians might have been producing but also the field of literature and television/theater. At times it took the initiative of an artist (writer, poet, etc.) to prod his peers and politicians into asking the right questions and begin to offer meaningful analysis for issues few wanted to deal with or address. The more interesting chapters deal with Austria, The Federal Republic of Germany, and to a lesser extent France and Poland. The chapter on the Soviet Union was, unfortunately, a waste of paper and time. It was one of the weakest and added nothing original or worthwhile to the discussion(s) offered by the other chapters or the introduction. Overall, recommended for those who are interested in how the memory of the war has transformed in various European states from the immediate postwar period through the past few decades.
The authors regularly take the reader through the postwar histories of their respectively studied nations and address not only what historians might have been producing but also the field of literature and television/theater. At times it took the initiative of an artist (writer, poet, etc.) to prod his peers and politicians into asking the right questions and begin to offer meaningful analysis for issues few wanted to deal with or address. The more interesting chapters deal with Austria, The Federal Republic of Germany, and to a lesser extent France and Poland. The chapter on the Soviet Union was, unfortunately, a waste of paper and time. It was one of the weakest and added nothing original or worthwhile to the discussion(s) offered by the other chapters or the introduction. Overall, recommended for those who are interested in how the memory of the war has transformed in various European states from the immediate postwar period through the past few decades.
↧
Death in the Baltic: The World War II Sinking of the Wilhelm Gustloff by Cathryn Prince
It's hard to know what to make of this book. The subject is well enough known for those familiar with WWII. For those who are not, reading about the event changes nothing in the grand scheme of things. Furthermore, there's no new information provided for greater analysis or contextualization. The only thing that's new or original are the few recollections from the survivors of the ship. But their fates don't much differ from the millions of others who survived the Second World in general while living in Germany. Instead of surviving fire bombings these men and women survived a sinking ship. Worse is the fact that the author is continually looking for something hidden to unearth but ends up unable to find any such evidence.
The writing leaves a lot to be desired. There is no chronological coherence throughout much of the text and random tangents that add little to nothing to the overall story are constantly present. The author randomly jumps from one event and time period to another, introduces random characters, gives minor histories to pad the page count, and moves on. Journalistic tendencies are evident as the author begins putting thoughts, ideas, and words into the mouths and minds of men and women long dead. "Would have", "might have thought" belong in fiction, not historical monographs. This combined with regularly grasping at straws to gain as much sympathy as she can get from the reader, as if the words and recollections of survivors aren't filled with enough emotion, make for an awkward reading experience for those interested in history rather than a forced tearjerker. Worse are the random generalizations and even a mixing up of the actions of the Wehrmacht for those of the Red Army (page 67). The latter is evidence of the limited amount of research that went into this book, at times relying on dubious journal and online articles, when it comes to the background and history of the Second World War and, more specifically, the Eastern Front. Unfortunately, the weaknesses often outnumber the strengths in "Death in the Baltic."
↧
↧
What Soldiers Do: Sex and the American GI in World War II France by Mary Louise Roberts
Unfortunately, it appears that many who read the title assume that some type of diatribe awaits them within the pages of this text. The truth, however, is that this is an academic attempt to do a few things at once. First, the author capitalizes on the popularity of the Second World War and the 'greatest generation'. Secondly, using the Second World War and the American liberation of France as a tool, she utilizes her knowledge base (gender, women, bodies, etc.) to present the liberation in an original way and showcase how the US military and French civilian population interacted through intimate, and at times violent, sexual encounters. Roberts is hardly accusing the American GI of doing anything that other armies or previous and future generations are not guilty of. On the contrary, she's pointing out that the military as an institution is one that has skeletons in its closet, something one can hardly deny.
Rape and sex in general have always been a part of warfare, be it women camp followers who joined armies on campaigns and provided companionship to soldiers, or female victims of victorious forces when cities and lands were sacked/pillaged. Aside from pointing out the obvious, that prostitution was a booming industry and rape was a common enough phenomenon, Roberts utilizes US and French attitudes, ideas, and relations to describe the situation both sides found themselves in during 1944 and 1945. While the French were happy to be liberated from the Germans, they somehow forgot all that comes with an occupying power, which the US and the British were, though not in the traditional sense. Unfortunately for the French, millions of armed Americans (among others) on their soil did not only come with altruistic intentions in mind. The French expected a liberating power that would make life easier, perhaps help them reclaim their previous geopolitical position, and liberate them from the Germans. What they were presented with was an armed force eager to finish the war but with an insatiable appetite for sex.
Those making high-level decisions had no real issues with prostitution as long as it was kept quiet. The problem was quietly attempting to control something that they were loudly disavowing proved impossible. Prostitution, something that could be regulated and made (relatively) safe, was uncontrollable thanks to both soldiers and prostitutes (one wanted sex, the other a way to make money and receive food/protection). The biggest issue for US forces became venereal disease, something the US Army could hardly allow on a large scale. Rape, however, was an issue both the US and French wanted to address and suppress yet in the process allowed preconceived racial notions to guide their reasoning behind why rapes occurred in the first place. African American troops were consistently singled out, both when a rape had actually occurred and even when false accusations were made, and both French and US representatives allowed their racist agendas to dictate the guilt of many innocent African American GIs. For those interested in understanding the liberation of France through an academic study that highlights how both the French and Americans handled the issue of sex during 1944 and 1945, this is definitely a monograph to look into.
↧
Interpreting Dan Brown's Inferno: Reading Between the Lines by Deborah Parker and Mark Parker
Before I review this minor snippet of the larger book I was allowed to read through, I'd like to first write my review of Dan Brown's Inferno.
Dan Brown is far from a 'one hit wonder'. I enjoyed both 'The Da Vinci Code' and 'Angels and Demons'. So a 'two hit wonder' it is. Unfortunately, 'The Lost Symbol' and 'Inferno' have taken what 'The Da Vinci Code' paved and trampled it to death, again and again. Take the same semi-interesting Robert Langdon, give him a female lead who has no idea what's going on but readily agrees to help and do whatever it takes to see Langdon through to the end, add in some highly 'classified' organization with endless amounts of money and political, military, and police connections, including assassins, who apparently can't track and find a bewildered professor with a British clothing fetish and tease the reader with a few interesting tidbits from art history and history in general, which in the end might or might not be true, and with that recipe you have Dan Brown's last three attempts at writing fiction. In the case of 'Inferno' you'll spend more time getting to know gardens, passageways, and bridges throughout Florence than anything else. Have you ever wanted to experience Florence, or maybe Venice? Read this book. Or did you want a thriller with interesting character development and plot? Sorry, you won't find any of that here. It's definitely a page turner, but more often than not you'll want to turn that page to forget what you just read and the fact that you've lost time you'll never get back. The few twists that Brown incorporates come too late to make up for the superfluous descriptions of museums and architecture that make up the majority of the text. Keep trying to recreate that Da Vinci wheel Mr. Brown, no luck thus far.
With that out of the way, Interpreting Dan Brown's Inferno, was somewhat of a let down for me. Although I find Dante interesting, from both a historical and literary point of view, analyzing Inferno with Dante in mind seems to be an exercise in futility. Literary analysis in general already takes a good amount of literary license. Overall, there's something very interesting in attempting to deconstruct or analyze an original piece of literature and showcase the historical context it was written in (what it says about the time and place it was published) and how it can be used to better understand the author, society, and contemporary ideas and ideals. Unfortunately, with Dan Brown, such an analysis is a lost cause. The only thing the authors can reference is Dante himself, while grasping at straws at what Brown might have meant or alluded to, but in fact they themselves admit there are plenty of errors and mistakes which might have been made on purpose. I can save them some time and effort - they weren't. Brown isn't interested in historical or literary accuracy, he's interested in conspiracy theories and secret organizations/societies, and the former hardly deals with accuracy or facts. Nor is Brown a paragon of literary excellence in need of detailed analysis. For those interested in linking Dante to Inferno, this 'Reading Between the Lines' offers just such an examination and comparison, but I somehow doubt the lay reader will find much of interest here.
Dan Brown is far from a 'one hit wonder'. I enjoyed both 'The Da Vinci Code' and 'Angels and Demons'. So a 'two hit wonder' it is. Unfortunately, 'The Lost Symbol' and 'Inferno' have taken what 'The Da Vinci Code' paved and trampled it to death, again and again. Take the same semi-interesting Robert Langdon, give him a female lead who has no idea what's going on but readily agrees to help and do whatever it takes to see Langdon through to the end, add in some highly 'classified' organization with endless amounts of money and political, military, and police connections, including assassins, who apparently can't track and find a bewildered professor with a British clothing fetish and tease the reader with a few interesting tidbits from art history and history in general, which in the end might or might not be true, and with that recipe you have Dan Brown's last three attempts at writing fiction. In the case of 'Inferno' you'll spend more time getting to know gardens, passageways, and bridges throughout Florence than anything else. Have you ever wanted to experience Florence, or maybe Venice? Read this book. Or did you want a thriller with interesting character development and plot? Sorry, you won't find any of that here. It's definitely a page turner, but more often than not you'll want to turn that page to forget what you just read and the fact that you've lost time you'll never get back. The few twists that Brown incorporates come too late to make up for the superfluous descriptions of museums and architecture that make up the majority of the text. Keep trying to recreate that Da Vinci wheel Mr. Brown, no luck thus far.
With that out of the way, Interpreting Dan Brown's Inferno, was somewhat of a let down for me. Although I find Dante interesting, from both a historical and literary point of view, analyzing Inferno with Dante in mind seems to be an exercise in futility. Literary analysis in general already takes a good amount of literary license. Overall, there's something very interesting in attempting to deconstruct or analyze an original piece of literature and showcase the historical context it was written in (what it says about the time and place it was published) and how it can be used to better understand the author, society, and contemporary ideas and ideals. Unfortunately, with Dan Brown, such an analysis is a lost cause. The only thing the authors can reference is Dante himself, while grasping at straws at what Brown might have meant or alluded to, but in fact they themselves admit there are plenty of errors and mistakes which might have been made on purpose. I can save them some time and effort - they weren't. Brown isn't interested in historical or literary accuracy, he's interested in conspiracy theories and secret organizations/societies, and the former hardly deals with accuracy or facts. Nor is Brown a paragon of literary excellence in need of detailed analysis. For those interested in linking Dante to Inferno, this 'Reading Between the Lines' offers just such an examination and comparison, but I somehow doubt the lay reader will find much of interest here.
↧
Hitler's Wave-Breaker Concept: An Analysis of the German End Game in the Baltic by Henrik O. Lunde
"Hitler's Wave-Breaker Concept" is hard to contextualize or fit into the greater literature of the Eastern Front. Unlike the author's previous projects ("Finland's War of Choice", for instance), this newest volume is hard to follow chronologically or thematically. The author has taken much of what he wrote about in "Finland's War of Choice" and superimposed a new dimension to it, specifically, the Germans in the Baltics and outside Leningrad (and the role of Finland, among others, in how the end of the war played out for Army Group North/Courland). For those familiar with the Eastern Front, including Finland's role in the war, there's little new, innovative, or original to be found here. The Soviets are once more something of a shadow in the background, with little analysis being offered for the war they waged, while the German side is a rehashing of old and new literature that's readily available in your local library. The later chapters on Sweden and German U-Boats seem to be a 'copy-paste' job in that the reader is presented with minimal background information on each topic with the addition of some common knowledge (and each is about 25 pages of text). The author tries to contextualize both topics and their impact on Hitler's decision making process. The problem is that each topic could have been covered in a few pages, but that would reduce the size of this book by some forty, if not more, pages. And in part, that is the biggest problem with this text. It is as if various subjects that hold some type of connection to the battles outside Leningrad and in the Baltics should be included by default in their entirety, rather than contextualized to fit into Hitler's decision making process. At best, if originality was sought, this could have been an essay of a few dozen pages on the northern area of operations that included Finland's role, among others, but to expand it into a 250 page book is a stretch that doesn't seem to pay off.
For those unfamiliar with the war, this isn't the best starting point but one that features many arguments and ideas that are both old and new, which will help contextualize parts of the Eastern Front. Unfortunately without an adequate background, novice readers will most likely have a hard time understanding the intricacies involved. Although the author jumps from topic to topic without adequate context or transitions, he does often make relevant points. Unfortunately the writing style in general is lacking (at least for those who are used to popular histories and/or academic works on the subject) and there are times when the author makes claims without adequate evidence or sources. Mistakes will probably be evident throughout. Although I wasn't looking for any specifically, there was a lack of uniformity when it came to naming Soviet commanders. In one instance the author refers to "Marshals Georgi K. Zhukov (1896-1974) and Polkovnik Vasilevsky (1895-1997)..." (121). First, Vasilevsky's name was Alexander Mikhailovich, "Polkovnik" means Colonel in Russian, secondly, he died in 1977 not 1997. In the photo section, Zhukov has gone from Georgi K. Zhukov to G.A. Zhukov. Overall this isn't a work I was impressed with and one that would be hard to recall months from now when asked for recommendations on the topic(s) this text covers.
For those unfamiliar with the war, this isn't the best starting point but one that features many arguments and ideas that are both old and new, which will help contextualize parts of the Eastern Front. Unfortunately without an adequate background, novice readers will most likely have a hard time understanding the intricacies involved. Although the author jumps from topic to topic without adequate context or transitions, he does often make relevant points. Unfortunately the writing style in general is lacking (at least for those who are used to popular histories and/or academic works on the subject) and there are times when the author makes claims without adequate evidence or sources. Mistakes will probably be evident throughout. Although I wasn't looking for any specifically, there was a lack of uniformity when it came to naming Soviet commanders. In one instance the author refers to "Marshals Georgi K. Zhukov (1896-1974) and Polkovnik Vasilevsky (1895-1997)..." (121). First, Vasilevsky's name was Alexander Mikhailovich, "Polkovnik" means Colonel in Russian, secondly, he died in 1977 not 1997. In the photo section, Zhukov has gone from Georgi K. Zhukov to G.A. Zhukov. Overall this isn't a work I was impressed with and one that would be hard to recall months from now when asked for recommendations on the topic(s) this text covers.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
