Storm of Steel

[spike10764]

I'll not try too hard to get Copse 125 then,

Just my personal view of Mr Jungers writing in my post , for what it's worth, I accept that the translation can change the whole tenor of a book written in a foreign language.

[doogal]

I think I will have a long breathing space before I tackle Storm of Steel.

Well, faced with a week shut in an empty office with no telephone and just a kettle, a mug and a box of tea bags, I started on Storm of Steel.

I wasn't expecting a lot - but it is a much more readable book. Whether this is because of the translation (more than partly by the feel of it), or because Junger got carried away in Copse 125 (equally true I think), it makes a genuinely better read of the two books.

Be warned though, Copse 125 was such heavy going, it took the prospect of being locked in an empty building for a week before I contemplated picking up Storm of Steel. I have yet to finish it, but am certainly enjoying it. Full of insights and details about day-to-day attutide and also endless bits and pieces cropping up about how the war was fought at a platoon level. I wish I'd read this one first.

reagrds

doogal

[healdav]

I have two books and Copse 125 is intersting in at least one aspect.

At one point he describes repelling a British trench raid. I can stand and read out this paragraph in the trenches of Bois le Pretre and point to every feature he mentions in precisely the sizes he mentions. And remember how far it is from Rossignol to the Lorraine.

Then I go down the road to where he was stationed near Regnieville and although I haven't yet traced the front line trenches, the third and fourth line trenches bear absolutely no resemblance. Very strange.

[Eddie Bosano-Andrews]

the account seemed to be all over the place - scattered as I said in a previous posting.

I'm inclined to agree. I'm currently halfway through SOS and although I will finish it , it really hasn't grabbed me in any way.

Maybe it's the translation (Hoffman) I can't seem to get any deep sense of humanity from Junger.

How could you be surrounded by such horror and yet treat the whole thing like some day out with the lads !, I cannot understand Junger.

[doogal]

I can stand and read out this paragraph in the trenches of Bois le Pretre and point to every feature he mentions in precisely the sizes he mentions.

I think Copse 125's precision in this area is the book's best feature. This was what kept me reading to the end of a difficult book

Ultimately, I think we're coming back to the translation - from reading the translator's introduction on the version I have, and also from talking to some of the Pals, I think the attitude and indeed linguistic ability of the translators has varied widely between versions - I think the version of Copse 125 I have is an older version, whils the latest SoS is a newer updated version. What issues this raises regarding authenticity and authorship and so on are myriad...

regards

doogal

[Tag]

I've read Junger's books, and have the old 1929 version of "TSOS." I wonder what the new addition would be like.

I've read parts of "Copse 125," but put it down after 30 pages or so, finding it just a bit much.

I have to say that I echo Spike's comments about Junger. He's a bit fanatical for me. "Iron Youth forged in the trenches," and all that. He strikes me as the type of guy who becomes very unpopular in a combat unit.

I much prefer Robert Graves, or, "The middle parts of fortune."

On the German side, "The Holocaust," by Willi Hermanns remains my favorite. "Fritz," by Fritz Nagel also ranks up there.

Ciao,

Paul

Paul, I just have to ask you why you liked Hermanns book so well? I recently picked up a copy of it and have found it truly dissapointing. The book is only 141 pages and I wallowed through more than a third of it till I found him to say any thing the least bit positive about his War experience. Getting through this book is akin to trench warfare , very tough going so say the least.The book seems a slap in the face to every ally who faced the german army . Why would the allies have such a hard time for four very long years facing an opponent who were so short of supplies , so demoralized , etc etc etc led by barbaric tyrants,who seem to only be intent to slaughter their own army? While Jungers book isn't perfect, but I belive at least it portarys a different and more realistic view of the german soldier than from the lopsided view we are accustumed to reading. Regards.........Tag

[paullaw1155]

A fantastic book!!! In my opinion, by far the best of all the "memoir/diary" style books to come out of the Great War. An absolute breath of fresh air!

Dave (lifelong, fully committed Junger fanatic )

I agree with Dave.

I bought the book two years ago and read it within a few days.

I remember reading some of the other comments about translation and did not agreee with them, So unless it has only just been translated again, It may be that I was lucky to buy when I did.

cheers

Paul

[Paul Hederer]

Taq,

I think I enjoyed Hermanns' book just because it was written from a different perspective.

As I said in one of my other posts I think Hermanns was bad soldier, with a bad attitude, and they were right to strip him of his officer candidate status.

If I had to have one of them in my platoon, I'd want Junger, no doubt. On my literature shelf I like to see them both.

It takes all kinds to make an army, pretty much a reflection of the society from which it's drawn. I think it's valuable to try and understand as many facets as possible.

Neither account is balanced. Junger is almost a fanatic and Hermanns a defeatest. Put together they give two poles of the picture.

As I told Andy in our discussion of Remarque's AQ (in relation to Junger) that's the beauty of literature--we all see it differently and take away something unique.

I find Junger a fascinating character. He is a big figure in the literary field, but with works like "Copse 125," under his belt some of his other works must have been better

For an interesting view of Junger see:

Heinrich Böll, "Most of it is still strange to me: Ernst Junger on the occasion of his 80th birthday."

I agree with Böll when he says (of Junger,) "I've never been able to make my mind up about him."

Paul

[Tag]

Taq,

  I think I enjoyed Hermanns' book just because it was written from a different perspective. 

  As I said in one of my other posts I think Hermanns was bad soldier, with a bad attitude, and they were right to strip him of his officer candidate status. 

  If I had to have one of them in my platoon, I'd want Junger, no doubt.  On my literature shelf I like to see them both. 

  It takes all kinds to make an army, pretty much a reflection of the society from which it's drawn.  I think it's valuable to try and understand as many facets as possible.

  Neither account is balanced.  Junger is almost a fanatic and Hermanns a defeatest.  Put together they give two poles of the picture.

  As I told Andy in our discussion of Remarque's AQ (in relation to Junger) that's the beauty of literature--we all see it differently and take away something unique.

  I find Junger a fascinating character.  He is a big figure in the literary field, but with works like "Copse 125," under his belt some of his other works must have been better 

For an interesting view of Junger see:

Heinrich Böll, "Most of it is still strange to me: Ernst Junger on the occasion of his 80th birthday."

  I agree with Böll when he says (of Junger,) "I've never been able to make my mind up about him."

Paul

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Paul,I finished the book and I totally agree with you that Hermanns & Junger are on two ends of the the spectrum. Hermanns did have a very unigue style of writting and and when he wasen't in his defeatest mindset had me riveted to the pages. I wish he could have written more on the war with a more neutral tone, but I guess wasen't possible for him to do that. Did he ever write anything else of the war? Tag

[Paul Hederer]

Tag,

I think that's the only book Hermanns wrote, though I think he gave some lectures many, many years ago. It's hard to find his book even now.

Paul

[andigger]

I've just started reading Copse 125. I read and enjoyed Storm of Steel, but had heard a number of warnings about Copse (even off Forum). I have to admit... it is hard, and I think I am at the 30 page mark and facing a decision - press on or go to the next bookon the shelf.

Andy

[Simon Jones]

I've just started reading Copse 125.  I read and enjoyed Storm of Steel, but had heard a number of warnings about Copse (even off Forum).  I have to admit... it is hard, and I think I am at the 30 page mark and facing a decision - press on or go to the next bookon the shelf.

Andy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Andy

Press on, he gets back to the actual war, I seem to recall the description of the bombing attack makes it worthwhile.

Simon

[egbert]

I've just started reading Copse 125.  I read and enjoyed Storm of Steel, but had heard a number of warnings about Copse (even off Forum).  I have to admit... it is hard, and I think I am at the 30 page mark and facing a decision - press on or go to the next bookon the shelf.

Andy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What's your problem with Waeldchen 125? This is my all time high favourite!!!!!I am serious

[CROONAERT]

What's your problem with Waeldchen 125? This is my all time high favourite!!!!!I am serious

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Copse 125 is , in my opinion, another fantastic book. Though it might be a little harder to read (if that's the correct term?) than Storm of Steel, the detail is greater as it describes a shorter time period. The ideology of Junger may be a little lost on some people (I've heard it described as very Wagnerian - to an extent, true I suppose), but I've always found him very inspirational.

I don't re-read many memoir based accounts more than once, but Storm of Steel and Copse 125 are two that I do!

Dave.

[truthergw]

Hello

I see Storm of Steel 1994 version on e-Bay for £4.00 if anybody is interested.

Regards

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This was the first WW1 book by a foreign author which I read. I thought it very good. I read it because I wanted a different viewpoint on the war. I also read French books on the war for the same reason. Luckily I can read these in the original. My German is too badly fractured to allow me to enjoy a story, so I had to read a translation of SOS. Knowing the career of the author after the war, should warn you that his opinions and standpoints are going to be very different.

[Jack Sheldon]

A batman is a soldier who, usually as a secondary duty, acts as an officer's personal servant. In return for the extra work involved, he is frequently excused a number of fatigues. This system is not as decadent as it sounds. A commander's time, at whatever level, is extremely precious in combat. He has too much to do in terms of reconnaissance, planning, checking positions, receiving orders, preparing orders, reports and returns etc. etc. to devote much time to personal administration or even sleep. So the batman steps in to make sure his officer's heavy baggage gets to where it should be, that he has somewhere to get his head down when time permits and food to eat from time to time when he has a spare moment to eat it. He will also run errands and carry messages and frequently doubles up as close protection. Bernard Fergusson, then a Chindit brigadier, has left us a description of his long-time batman Peter Dorans of the Black Watch saving his life one day in Burma when a 'dead' Japanese soldier was about to drop him whilst he was preoccupied with other matters. Peter, rightly, was concentrating on his task to the exclusion of all else.

Jack

[Jack Sheldon]

I forgot to mention that the above posting was in response to Andigger's question, just in case anyone thinks I am barking to be putting this on the Book Review section!

Jack

[Steven Broomfield]

I forgot to mention that the above posting was in response to Andigger's question, just in case anyone thinks I am barking to be putting this on the Book Review section!

Jack

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OK Jack - I was paying attention. I prefer the old style 'soldier servant' - batman strikes me as redolent of Gotham City.

Back on topic, I have read SOS, but note Copse whatever. I found it easy to read, but (to be honest) I found the author's apparent glorying in death and destruction slightly repelling. To be blunt, I found it a bit sick-making. I won't rush to try Copse 125

[spike10764]

Bringing this back to the top

This edition, translated by Michael Hoffman, published in 2003, this is what I would describe as a sympathetic version. It makes a better book in english out of Ernst Junger's "In Stahlgewittern".This reads more like a War Diary and less like some piece of epic prose, badly done. Unfortunately I cannot recall the version I first read, last year, but this one is many, many times better. I actually enjoyed Junger's book and could feel some sympathy with where he was coming from, in this translation. Well done Michael Hofmann and Ernst Junger.

[ackimzey]

Spike,

Is this the edition you would recommend to someone who has never read Storm of Steel?

Ann

[Gibbo]

As I understand it, Junger revised the book several times as his political views changed. The Basil Creighton translation is, I think, of the most nationalist version whilst the Michael Hoffman one is of a post WWII edition, which it might be reasonable to assume would be the least nationalist.

[Hedley Malloch]

EJ was an inveterate writer and re-writer of his texts. He constantly edited and changed material. My information is that the Hoffman version is based on a text written by Jünger as late as 1978, more than 60 years after the event. The Creighton version was based on the original German edition published by Klett-Cotte in the 1920s. So it's perhaps unfair to attribute differences in the versions to the two translators - the differences appear to come from the author.

And differences do exist and in places they are not merely cosmetic. For example, in the chapter dealing with the retreat from the Somme I would estimate that not more than 50% of the material is common to both versions.

Which is best is a question of fitness for purpose. If you want an aristocratic German officer's view of the war as seen through the optic of a 1920s Germany sliding into chaos, then the 1929 version is probably best. If you want a full picture of his military actions, then you have to use both. On the other hand if you are looking for something cheap and accesssible you can read in the back of your coach en-route to Ypres, then Hoffman is best. If your needs are for accuracy then the one written nearest the events it describes is probably best; in this case Creighton's translation is the book of choice.

[ackimzey]

Thanks,

Ann

[spike10764]

Spike,

Is this the edition you would recommend to someone who has never read Storm of Steel?

Ann

Certainly Ann, this is an edition comparable to say "Old Soldiers Never Die", whereas the first one I read I found a little hard going and "aryan".

On the other hand if you are looking for something cheap and accesssible you can read in the back of your coach en-route to Ypres, then Hoffman is best.

As I understand it, Junger revised the book several times as his political views changed. The Basil Creighton translation is, I think, of the most nationalist version whilst the Michael Hoffman one is of a post WWII edition, which it might be reasonable to assume would be the least nationalist.

Cheap and accessible for me, then Hedley..

I agree, Gibbo, the less literal more, modern translation made it more readable for me.....

[egbert]

As I said before; EJ is one of the great German contemporary witness. Regardless which edition you read: they are all historic documents. I have read 3 different SOS in original language. They all are written/edited in another time frame and thus mirror EJs sentiments. Get/Buy whatever is most affordable it is worth it in any circumstance. The early versions from the 20 and 30s are indeed pretty "Arian", but similar/comparable national excessive attitude will be found with Brit writers from that time frame. Go get it; you will not be disappointed -promise!