Most helpful customer reviews
2.0 out of 5 stars
A let down, July 22 2011
While others have rated this work highly, it should be noted that this book (even the newly published 2000 version) is extremely bias and now out-dated by more modern works. My main critique D'Este's work is that he spends what appears to be large amount of the book overly criticising the Anglo-Canadian armed forces and there commanders while not also doing the same for the Americans or Germans. In fact he spends the entire of Chapter 16 on this subject and then in a single footnote tells readers to go elsewhere for any criticism of the American forces. While this may be only one chapter, this trend is throughout the book and makes one question the author's bias and reliability when talking about the Anglo-Canadians. The work is also now very outdated and there are a large number of books which can replace this one work especially when covering single battles or operations where I feel it is at its weakest and in some places littered with errors. For various examples, see `Colossal Cracks' for criticism aimed at claims D'Este makes in regards to British manpower etc, the Battle Zone Normandy books for up to date general overlooks of various battles and the essays contained in `Normandy: Sixty years on' that raise new points of view on a number of key issues regarding the campaign and the perceptions of it. While D'Este does bring up some good points during the course of the book I would recommend loaning a copy first.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
5.0 out of 5 stars
Solid work, very informative on the 'why' and 'how' of Normandy campaign, Aug 27 2010
This is by far the most informative book on the events following 6 june 44. Very well documented and fair to involved parties. After well over a hundred books on second world war, this remain one on the best books to understand what really went on ('Eisenhower's lieutenants' and 'Duel for France' are other good ones). D'Este ranks with the best (Hastings, Glantz, Overy, Morison, Blumenson...). Fundamental differences of view between US and British generals are very well explained and documented. Being fully stuffed with references, it could be a bit dry for those who prefer narrative and action-driven sequences (Balkoski: 'Utah', 'Omaha', 'From beachhead...' and books by Gerald Astor are more user-friendly). But for scholars and those wanting to go beyond the myths (Montgomery, Patton, etc) it's first rate stuff. 'Anzio' and 'The battle for Sicily' by the same author are sure shots too! By the way, it could be a good idea to read this one before Montgomery memoirs or Bradley 'Soldier's Story'. D'este 'Patton, a genius for war' is a good complement and, for the British view, Alanbrooke 'War diaries'(very frank and straigth if we compare with Churchill 'Memoirs' which is great litterature but a bit Pro-domo).
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
5.0 out of 5 stars
Very balanced, well-researched, Nov 24 2000
This review is from: Decision In Normandy (Hardcover)
This is an excellent book, and leaves it clear that Montgomery was not a great and able strategist. The whole controversy over the Falaise Gap is an intriguing one, and tho I have read much on D-Day and its aftermath I did not have a good view of the events of the summer of 1944 until I read this excellent book
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|