Commentaires client les plus utiles
|
|
5.0étoiles sur 5
Long Overdue Revisionism, Mai 15 2007
Few revisionist histories have been so informative or well thought out at Mud, Blood and Poppycock by Gordon Corrigan. A former officer in the British Army, Corrigan in his book has taken to task many of the false and downright malicious lies that have been propegated into popular belief by men such as David Lloyd George and Basil Liddell Hart.
According to Corrigan the British Army was not run by incompetants senselessly throwing men into impossible situations, nor were soldiers doomed to weeks in the firing lines as attrition slowly whittled units to nothingness. The idea of a 'lost generation' is also throughly disbanded by Corrigan through a careful and judged amassment of facts and sources. Corrigan's heavy research into this field as his text is peppered throughout with many informative endnotes - though one might have wished for more regular footnotes. It also doesn't hurt that Corrigan does not shy away from littering his text with an incomparable amount of detailed charts, maps, and lists, often comparing these statistics with later conflicts to place the fighting in its proper context.
First World War historiography has managed to spend most of the last half century clawing its way out of the false convictions of bitter politicians and junior officers, and we can only hope more professional revisionists begin to look at the First World War.
|
|
|
5.0étoiles sur 5
Two Cheers for WW I, Juil 18 2004
You know the conventional wisdom. In World War I stupid and unimaginative generals sent hundreds of thousands of men to their deaths in parade-ground charges into the machine guns of the enemy. The common soldiers lived knee deep in mud in the trenches while just a few miles away prissy staff officers dined on white tablecloths and plotted the next ridiculous attack. Au contraire regarding the British army says the author, a former British military officer -- and he says so vociferously. After the war, poets and biased historians gave a distorted picture of life in the trenches and created a myth of brutal, uncaring officers. The author marshals quite a few facts in support of his view. For example, he maintains that few British units spent more than three days at a time in the trenches and more that 4 or 5 days a month on the firing line. The mistakes of the British army were largely a result of the necessity of quickly building up a small pre-war army into a much larger one and the resultant inexperience of both officers and men. Contrary to the opprobrium usually poured on the head of British commander, Field Marshall Douglas Haig, the author finds him to be a man who did the best with what he had. Corrigan has little use for British politicians. The Prime Minister Lloyd George comes across as meddling, dishonest, philandering obstacle to winning the war. Winston Churchill suffers from "flights of fancy." He likewise has little use for the French, especially after a soldier's mutiny in 1917 reduced the capability of the French army to defense only. He gives a nod of appreciation to the Americans, but "in 1918 it was the British army which made the major contribution to the defeat of the German army." Moreover, he claims that the British army of 1918 was a better army that Monty's in 1945. Corrigan's view of World War I is so radically different from most other authors that I don't know how much credibility to give him. He makes a good case for his point of view. Still, the British had almost 700,000 soldiers killed in World War I out of a population of 45 million. The author points out that British losses were less than German and French losses -- but, anyway you look at it, 700,000 dead is a bloodbath and suggests that British strategy and tactics were hardly brilliant. I highly recommend this book as a well-argued, icon-breaking history of the British army in World War I.
|
|
|
5.0étoiles sur 5
If I could give 6 stars..., Avril 22 2004
I would give them to Gordon Corrigan. Having read voraciously on WWI, I picked up this book expecting some more of the same, rather dry approach that I've found in many accounts of The Great War. (Rick Atkinson, please write about WWI after you finish your trilogy). But "Mud, Blood.." was a pleasant surprise. Corrigan has a wonderful wit and a keen insight into the myths of the most important event of the 20th century. While once again we get the English view, it's a different one, often tongue in cheek, often heart-rending, but always with fine choice of detail, clear writing, and an ability to look at events and actions from a different persecptive. The men who fought and directed the war to end all wars deserve a book of this quality to tell their story. Mr. Corrigan, please. Give us more.
|
|
|
Commentaires client les plus récents
|
de Giles MacDonogh
