1914 - Fight The Good Fight: Britain, The Army and the Coming of WWI

[Guest]

Written by Allan Mallinson...

I have just bought this book. Wondered if anyone has a view on it. MG

[Steven Broomfield]

No, but I am currently reading the same authors The Making of the British Army and enjoying it tremendously.

[Guest]

No, but I am currently reading the same authors The Making of the British Army and enjoying it tremendously.

Indeed,...one of the reasons for buying Fight the Good Fight.

Philpott (Prof of Hist of Warfare at the Dept of War Studies at King's, London) reviews the book here along with Sir Max Hasting's 'Catastrophe' and Macmillan's 'The War that Ended Peace' His latest book arrives soon. Like Heffer, he's not a fan of Sir Max and this is the article that Heffer was quoting on Hasting's work.

[centurion]

Bought 2nd hand in Hay on Wye some weeks ago and in the yet to read pile

[Guest]

Bought 2nd hand in Hay on Wye some weeks ago and in the yet to read pile

I would be very interested to hear your thoughts once you have had time to get through the backlog. The chapter covering Le Cateau is rather thin and makes some omissions in its analysis in my view.

Philpott accuses him of leaning too much on now 'discredited' views promoted in the 1920s. I think he (Philpott) is not particularly keen on authors who he thinks regurgitate earlier theories without adding their own analysis. According to the blurb Heffer was more positive in the Daily Wail but I cannot bring myself to look. MG

[Terry_Reeves]

Martin

I have read it, and for me at least Mallinson does not provide any fresh insights. I class it as a quite ordinary book one of the rush to take advantage of the centenary. In that respect I am glad I bought the Kindle edition and not the hardback. Others may have different views of course.

[centurion]

I would be very interested to hear your thoughts once you have had time to get through the backlog. The chapter covering Le Cateau is rather thin and makes some omissions in its analysis in my view.

Philpott accuses him of leaning too much on now 'discredited' views promoted in the 1920s. I think he (Philpott) is not particularly keen on authors who he things regurgitate earlier theories without adding their own analysis. According to the blurb Heffer was more positive in the Daily Wail but I cannot bring myself to look. MG

I have an essay to complete - once done I'll start my way down the pile.

[Gareth Davies]

I don't think the book does Allan justice. I agree with Terry, it's a bit ordinary, which is annoying as Allan is much better than that.

[Stoppage Drill]

I don't think the book does Allan justice. I agree with Terry, it's a bit ordinary, which is annoying as Allan is much better than that.

Is that not the almost inevitable result when the temptation to jump on a bandwagon proves to be irresistible ?

[Gareth Davies]

It would appear so Mr D.

[Guest]

Martin

I have read it, and for me at least Mallinson does not provide any fresh insights. I class it as a quite ordinary book one of the rush to take advantage of the centenary. In that respect I am glad I bought the Kindle edition and not the hardback. Others may have different views of course.

I think on of the issues is that much of the ground has been covered well and authors trying to write something groundbreaking on 1914 have an extremely difficult task. The reference material has largely been squeezed dry and is fairly consistent across dozens of publications. The only real chance any author has is to discover some new high level source that conflicts with the received view or to present a radically different analysis/interpretation of existing material. The blurb on Peter Hart's forthcoming book on 1914 claims to challenge some views so it will be interesting to see.

The other challenge is that there are layers of informed views. There are huge differences between 'popular histories' and the weightier academic tomes (my preference). The academic world has produced some very fine books that begin to break new ground or have a radically different view from consensus - I am thinking of Gardner's 'Trial By Fire'.....Badsey's 'Doctrine and Reform in the British Cavalry 1880-1918....Simkin's utterly fabulours "Kitchener's Army" and anything by Mitchinson, or Beckett. There is also opportunity to break new ground (or a revision of very old ground) or cover ground neglected for years in areas such as the Indian Army Corps (Morton Jack) or the British Cavalry (Kenyon) or East Africa (Pace) which have all been crying out for decent authors for years. Their ability to break new ground is arguably 'easier' (for want of a better word), although doubtless required years of research.

Was there enough room for another book on the British Army in 1914? I find it is rather like the laws of diminishing returns - the incremental return on incremental capital (£££ and mental capital) is ever decreasing. I bought the book on a whim, along with Tuchman's 'The Guns of August' which I have never read. I had an hour to kill due to a cancelled meeting and the beacon of Waterstone's drew me in like a moth into the flame. Flicking through the pages of Tuchman's book (1962) it is very obvious she never had access to some primary British material that is the common currency of modern authors.

I must add that the choice of Great War books in Waterstones was extremely limited. Thank the Lord they only had paperbacks..... MG

[centurion]

I have found that it is worth going back in time and looking at accounts from the German side, apart from Bloem there are others now in translation or at least part translation( for wretched uniphones like me) who were on the battlefields in 1914 and wrote memoires (usually before late 1916 - the 2nd Reich seems to have clamped down by then) - whilst some were quite Anglophobe in general most seem to have been deeply impressed by the performance of the BEF

[Steven Broomfield]

Is that not the almost inevitable result when the temptation to jump on a bandwagon proves to be irresistible ?

And sadly I suppose a few more good authors will fall by the wayside in the next four years.