Worst WW1 books?

[GavinH]

Kim,

Once again I do agree with the points you make, and I can see how the campaign has became such a part of Australian identity. Like any famous event, it has naturally attracted myths and legends, and been oversimplified. The point I think I was trying to make, was that some authors seem to take this simplified perception of history, and make it even more black and white. In my opinion, this is what Laffin does. He seem to have a preconceived idea of what happened, and only presents facts that support his view of events. The results are I feel unconvincing.

I'll give the Patrick Lindsey book a try.

Regards

Gavin

[Chris Backhouse]

One more vote for Laffin's "British Butchers and Bunglers...." It had me seething at it's lack of objectivity and bias: trotting out the same old myths. Bought it in a remaindered book shop but was still ripped off at £6.99.

[7:29am]

1918 - The Year of Victories by Martin Marix Evans

I just couldn't get into this book at all as it seemed like a resume on the work of other authors and not a fresh perspective on that momentous year.

It should be at the bottom of Santa's stocking this year (underneath the satsuma)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have just started reading this one, in to about the 30th page.. not too impressed myself and seems to get worse as i go on but will let you know.

Cheers

Jim Royall

P.S "Voices" is an excellent read.

[RichardH]

The War Walk - Nigel Jones.

I know this will annoy somebody

But I was the one who bought it only to be sorely disappointed.

Des

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its not that bad Des! I read it on holiday with the wife and kids- sat under the sun on a hot crowded beach with it I could easily transport myself to where I really wanted to be for two weeks.... An easy read, light and breezy, and almost sincere I thought. Unlike the other 'accidental historian' travelogue- 'Back to the Front' by Stephen O Shea- absolute rubbish- patronising, self assured- typical journalistic nonsense! By far the worst book on the Great War!

Regards

Richard

[birkettm]

"My Warrior Sons - The Borton Family Diary 1914-18" - Peter Davies. The letters home of two RFC officer toffs who seemed to do their best to avoid any meaningful contributions to the war (far to dangerous old chap), while whinging that they werent getting the V.C. fast enough.

Still the only WW1 book ive not managed to finish. And ive read a lot of those already mentioned.....

Suddenly feeling inspired to go and read a book.....

[Michelle Young]

Kathie...............As one who early on in this thread expressed his dissatisfaction at this book, I will try to articulate why.......................It's not what is written per se but what I can only describe as 'a feeling' I get..................It’s an undertone within the writing which demeans those who remember. I feel that my own acts of remembrance are somehow belittled.............as if the sincerity of my remembrance is being questioned.........I can only describe it as very personal dislike of what Geoff Dyer has written.................I appreciate that if you don't get the same 'vibe or feeling' from the book, my dislike of it seems illogical.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree Will, I just got this overwhelmimng urge to give Mr Dyer a hard kick somewhere painful if I ever had the misfortune to meet him. I had, prior to reading the book, read an article by him, written along the same lines. He described sitting smoking a joint at Thiepval. I guess that didn't help in forming my impressions.

[Justin Moretti]

I read it on holiday with the wife and kids- sat under the sun on a hot crowded beach with it I could easily transport myself to where I really wanted to be for two weeks....

Richard

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

On holiday with the wife and kids, a sunny beach to enjoy, and you'd rather be on the Western Front?

Strange, strange man.

(Of course I know that's not what you really mean, but it gave me a laugh and helped cure the "Mondayitis")

[SOMMESOLDIER]

On holiday with the wife and kids, a sunny beach to enjoy, and you'd rather be on the Western Front?

Strange, strange man. 

(Of course I know that's not what you really mean, but it gave me a laugh and helped cure the "Mondayitis")

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Justin,

Richard may not have been joking !!

Give me the choice of 2 weeks on a crowded beach or 2 weeks walking the Somme and I can assure you , I'd be on the Somme everytime !!

Cheers

Tim.

[healdav]

Edith Warton (can't remember the name of the book, but its on the internet) writing of the 'jolly little dugouts' in the Vosges.

Stupid woman.

[Guest]

It is true to say that most Australians had a tough upbringing, but what about the British soldier who had previously worked in the mines, ironworks, shipyards and mills? Did he not have a hard and tough upbringing? Did the farmers in the Highlands and Pennines have it easier than the Australian in the Outback? They certainly had it colder.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It is often overlooked that a significant minority of ANZAC and Canadian troops were actually British in origin and had emigrated to those countries.

[Guest]

I venture a guess that most who vote for anything other than Mosier's Myth of the Great War have not read it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I haven't for one. I know I could order it or buy it online, but I trawl the bookshops round here, such as Broders, Waterstones and Ottakars, regularly and I have never seen it on the shelves.

So, it is hardly likely to attract any casual purchases in the UK.

[Guest]

David I thoroughly agree with you re the Regeneration trilogy. In fact, these books put me off reading anything remotely connected with WW1 for the best part of 5 years.

Robbie

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well I enjoyed them as novels, but I don't keep them in the history part of my bookshelves. I think this distinction needs to be made.

[Guest kaisa]

I thought Niall Ferguson's Pity of War was readable at times - for example the chapter Captor's Dilemma was quite interesting. However I found it odd he didn't use primary sources at all. And the way the book was constructed also felt a bit strange...

And I completely agree with Stanley Weintrub's Silent Night. Pompous tosh. I mean - what's with the quote from HIS OWN previous book on title page ?!?!

I didn't mean my first post to be a negative one...

War Letters of Fallen Englishmen is brilliant, though

[Bob Mitchell]

Hi everyone!

I'm new to the forum but I felt inclined to add my opinion based on my last year of study on the Great War. I apologise if there's some unwritten rule regarding a certain Paul Fussell's work (Great War and Modern Memory) . But from my admittedly limited reading, I found that one of the most unreadable and dire histories (even if it is literary) of the Great War. I had to limit myself to one chapter a day lest I destroy the book in some random fit of rage.

I'm just entering my third year of University and the Great War has fast become my forté, hence why I'm here! Anyway, I would firstly like to disagree with the comments on Mud, Blood and Poppycock. This was one of the first books I read on WW1 and I found it thoroughly enjoyable. I had to write a review of it for my WW1 course and my main criticism was Corrigan's tone. I perfectly understand how some people could find his style jarring. Nevertheless I found it to be one of the funniest and most enjoyable history books I've ever read. So much so I've gone through it 3 times. I'm aware some people have disagreement with the facts, but from what I've seen none are glaringly obvious nor undermining of his general thesis. Corrigan's reason for writing MB&P is exactly the same reason why I've become so obsessive about the subject myself: I can't stand the constant diminishment of the worthy sacrifice so many of our ancestors made. Still I can understand how people may not find his style engaging.

Finally If I could slightly go off topic. I've found Paddy Griffith's: Battle Tactics On The Western Front one of the most informative and interesting insights into the workings of the BEF between 1916-1918. I've also had the priviledge of studying under Dr Dan Todman. His book Great War: Myth and Memory (forethcoming August apparently) promises to be an interesting new insight into the Great War. Having seen and heard a number of his theories I can't help but be impressed. One final addition to the popular histories list: David Stevenson 1914-1918... I found that to be an interesting, easily accessible and informative general history.

Apologies in advance for any spelling or grammar errors! It's been a long day.

[Justin Moretti]

"Thirteen Days" by Clive Ponting. This traces the diplomatic moves, on all sides and by the minor players too, in support of the author's theory about who was really to blame for WW1.

An interesting premise, and appears meticulously researched, but... yawn. A very, very dry and difficult read. And a few horrible mistakes which make me wonder how well the whole book has been proofed and checked (for example, the French plan XVII, or 17, is referred to as plan XVIII, or 18).

Sadly due to be consigned as a paperweight on my desk.

Also a small brickbat to Prior and Wilson's "The Somme," which in parts felt like I was reading "Command on the Western Front" by the same authors, word for word. Now, I think C.O.T.W.F. is a damn good book, and I know that both books cover the same ground for a significant proportion of their length, but... whole blocks of text that appear directly transferred? Puts me off. Can they not at least paraphrase themselves just a little?

[Muerrisch]

I can well believe that if 'Mud Blood and Poppycock' is one of the first books one reads on the Great War, it will be more acceptable [other than its tone swerving from levity sarcasm to jingoism, and its factual errors]. The book has neither the breadth, depth nor focus required to become a "must read".

I should add that the edited recent edition of Haig's diaries has my 100% attention: I am reading it in preference to anything else at the moment.

My three BEST books of the recent year are Tommy, Haig and Call to Arms. I can well imagine them being quoted for years. But MB & P, and Boy Soldiers, I wish I had kept the money in the sock drawer.

[Coldstreamer]

Hello

worst book has got to be

"Haig - I did it my way" especially the 1916 chapter

Ian

only joking!

[Steven Broomfield]

Way back at the beginning someone mentione "The Big Push" by Gardner - definitely rubbish, as was Weintraub's book.

However, a writer whom I find difficult is Rob Neillands. Can't fault the content, but I've tried reading several of his books (including "The Great War Generals") and just found it like wading through treacle. I got about half-way through the named book and just stopped; I couldn't go on.

Is it me?

[armourersergeant]

Way back at the beginning someone mentione "The Big Push" by Gardner - definitely rubbish, as was Weintraub's book.

However, a writer whom I find difficult is Rob Neillands.  Can't fault the content, but I've tried reading several of his books (including "The Great War Generals") and just found it like wading through treacle. I got about half-way through the named book and just stopped; I couldn't go on.

Is it me?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Strange i found this book very easy to read and others he has written. I have more of a problem with his supposed independent approach that by the end seems to sawy totally one way while trying to say it is impartial.

All that said i found the contnet good and easy to digest if alittle biased.

regards

Arm.

[truthergw]

However, a writer whom I find difficult is Rob Neillands.  Can't fault the content, but I've tried reading several of his books (including "The Great War Generals") and just found it like wading through treacle. I got about half-way through the named book and just stopped; I couldn't go on.

Is it me?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I found that the examples in the book did not back up his ideas. At times I was forced to draw conclusions which were in direct contradiction to the author's.

[Justin Moretti]

I can well believe that if 'Mud Blood and Poppycock' is one of the first books one reads on the Great War, it will be more acceptable [other than its tone swerving from levity sarcasm to jingoism, and its factual errors].  The book has neither the breadth, depth nor focus required to become a "must read".

One needs to have been exposed to some of the myths first. Only then is it really useful, and then only to those who are prepared to be disabused. It's the book I needed in 1985 and '86 for my high school history, to make the teachers' heads explode.

My only real complaint, in retrospect, was that I'd read enough of John Terraine's "Haigiography" (pun definitely intended) that Corrigan was simply preaching to the converted. I dig it out whenever I come across something particularly offensive put out by the adherents to the opposite viewpoint; otherwise it's a bookend.

[Piscator]

Having plowed through five pages of what books to either avoid or approach with some reluctance how about you experienced Pals coming up with a list you would recommend for newbies. Theres a lot of books out there some more difficult than others and anyone just starting needs information that is correct, well written, and without to much of the politics, they can dot the i's and cross the t's later when they've acquired the basics.

Len

[truthergw]

Having plowed through five pages of what books to either avoid or approach with some reluctance how about you experienced Pals coming up with a list you would recommend for newbies. Theres a lot of books out there some more difficult than others and anyone  just starting needs information that is correct, well written,   and without to much of the politics, they can dot the i's and cross the t's later when they've acquired the basics.

Len

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would not describe myself as an experienced pal, far from it, but if you are looking for a list, I think you should read everything you can lay your hands on. In UK, the Public Libraries can provide an awesome variety. After a while you will have your own list. You can't really appreciate the good books until you have struggled with a few of the clunkers.

[Bob Mitchell]

I can only offer what I've found most helpful to myself, but here are the books i'd reccomend reading to get a balanced view of the WW1 hostlilities:

1. Gary Sheffield - Forgotten Victory - Interesting, Factual and most of all extremely readable. Brilliant.

2. John Terraine - The Smoke and the Fire - To me, the original myth breaker, readable and interesting if often a little partisan.

3. David Stevenson 1914-1918: The History of the First World War, Comprehensive to the point of obsession, very fair and balanced portrayal with an accurate portrayal of events.

4. Tim Travers - The Killing Ground, A refreshing if somewhat dated view of the British High Command. Influential and still often cited by a range of historians. This alone should be an ode to it's fairness.

5. Paddy Griffiths - Battle Tactics of the Western Front, At the moment this is by far my favourite WW1 book. Not only does Griffiths (partly out of inexperience) show a great appreciation for both sides of the coin, but he goes on to paint a very realistic and understandable picture of the problems faced by the BEF and how they overcame them.

6. Robin Prior and Trevor Wilson - Command on the Western Front - By taking Rawlinson as their focus they narrow their study, nevertheless it is still comprehensive and fair.

7. Adrian Gregory - Silence of Memory, psuedo-revisionist look at the cultural rememberance of the Great War. Interesting and interpretive history.

8. Dan Todman - Sans Peur Et Sans Reproche, this is an article in the journal of military history vol.39 if I remember correctly. The opus that collected my thoughts on the Great War and moulded them into a semi-respectable thesis.

I could seriously go on all night, but that should give you a decent spectrum of views of the cultural and military aspects. One to check if you want complete rubbish, but a great example of "the mass/popular interpretation" is Paul Fussell's The Great War and Modern Memory. Complete bull throughout. It was like my A level WW1 poetry exam expanded into a book. Thus complete rubbish!

[CROONAERT]

if you are looking for a list, I think you should read everything you can lay your hands on. In UK, the Public Libraries can provide an awesome variety. After a while you will have your own list. You can't really appreciate the good books until you have struggled with a few of the clunkers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's the perfect answer!

In my opinion, you should read everything you can lay your hands on that attracts your interest (I know I do and have done for years!) and make your own mind up! A book should never be avoided on the say-so of another person. (Neither should any be taken as 100% accurate either!!! )

Dave.