n cherry Posted 4 January , 2007 Share Posted 4 January , 2007 I've never really read anything by Richard Holmes before except his two war walk books but have recently started his Tommy book and only got through the first 50 pages or so....does anyone else think this book is basically broad brush albeit with some useful detailed facts? I was slightly concerned though to read on page 37 that the Battle of Loos started on the 26th September 1915 and on page 41 that the 39th (Welsh) Division fought at Mametz Wood in July 1916. I would have expected something better....has anyone else found similar errors in his other books? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armourersergeant Posted 4 January , 2007 Share Posted 4 January , 2007 Light reading would be my opinion, sort of narrative but not contraversial. However as an author, I would have thought you would realise how easy a mistake can be Says Arm of to get his copy of 'Most Unfavourable Ground' for closer study. Though I will conceed that these are 'easy' mistakes. Arm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clive_hughes Posted 4 January , 2007 Share Posted 4 January , 2007 Hi, I agree, nice light reading with occasional insights and details would be a good description of TOMMY - and my copy also contains the errors spotted previously. The ref. to the "39th" Welsh Div. is a slip (possibly typographical) which is not mentioned in the index either under that number or the correct "38th". The Loos date is wrong by a day - maybe also a typo?? I have to say, however, that anyone who cites me as authority in a couple of footnotes can't be all bad... LST_164 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinWills Posted 4 January , 2007 Share Posted 4 January , 2007 Light reading would be my opinion, sort of narrative but not contraversial. However as an author, I would have thought you would realise how easy a mistake can be Says Arm of to get his copy of 'Most Unfavourable Ground' for closer study. Though I will conceed that these are 'easy' mistakes. Arm SHould that read "...off to get his copy of .....". Easy to make these typos ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borderman Posted 4 January , 2007 Share Posted 4 January , 2007 Although for a novice like me, it gives the background to delve deeper later. Or are there better reads for sprogs? Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Bennitt Posted 4 January , 2007 Share Posted 4 January , 2007 I've not read 'Tommy', but I have 'Fatal Avenue', 'Firing Line' and 'Riding the Retreat,' all of which I reckon are pretty good. Do I get the impression 'Tommy' seems more of a potboiler to some Pals? cheers Martin B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armourersergeant Posted 4 January , 2007 Share Posted 4 January , 2007 SHould that read "...off to get his copy of .....". Easy to make these typos ..... yes it should.....however should that be a capital 'H' I ask? Arm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaymen Posted 5 January , 2007 Share Posted 5 January , 2007 only got through the first 50 pages or so... Same here - maybe one day I'll pick it up again but looking at the piles on the shelf..... unlikely. Glyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 5 January , 2007 Share Posted 5 January , 2007 Enjoyed reading Tommy. Agree that it is useful for those of us without detailed knowledge to find the parts to look deeper in to and there are also some good bits of detail in it as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonraker Posted 5 January , 2007 Share Posted 5 January , 2007 yes it should.....however should that be a capital 'H' I ask? Arm May I enter into the spirit of this thread? Should the above be: "Yes, it should. However, should that be a capital 'H', I ask?" Moonraker former editor and self-confessed pedant, often hoisted on his own petard, and frequently altering his own past posts when he sees a typo or worse, and now anticipating constructive (or destructive) criticism of this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyHollinger Posted 5 January , 2007 Share Posted 5 January , 2007 I found Redcoat good but Tommy, very, very repetitive and dull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted 5 January , 2007 Share Posted 5 January , 2007 I found Tommy a real struggle too get through and abandoned ship about half way through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostonian Posted 5 January , 2007 Share Posted 5 January , 2007 I've not read Tommy, but bought "In The Footsteps Of Churchill" at a book signing and talk. The talk he gave was excellent, and he fielded all the questions fired at him with very concise answers, but I found the book rather dull. I was considering buying Tommy as a second chance for him, but I may reconsider now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsears Posted 5 January , 2007 Share Posted 5 January , 2007 I found it quite hard going in places although there are some very good actual letters and incidents related that are quite moving. I would say probably more a book for someone who has not read too many books relating to WW1. Barrie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armourersergeant Posted 5 January , 2007 Share Posted 5 January , 2007 May I enter into the spirit of this thread? Should the above be: "Yes, it should. However, should that be a capital 'H', I ask?" Moonraker former editor and self-confessed pedant, often hoisted on his own petard, and frequently altering his own past posts when he sees a typo or worse, and now anticipating constructive (or destructive) criticism of this one. Well, thats me lost. Retires to corner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desmond7 Posted 5 January , 2007 Share Posted 5 January , 2007 http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...=25818&st=0 Still in me dug-out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrynee Posted 5 January , 2007 Share Posted 5 January , 2007 It's worth sticking with just for the final couple of lines ' let us never forget that generation whose courage and endurance lifts my spirits and breaks my heart'. One of my favourite lines written about the great war Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarvis Posted 5 January , 2007 Share Posted 5 January , 2007 A book that thick can't be light reading - I found it more than interesting - read it some time ago - Tommy - John Thomas - British Soldier - more of an insight into the PBI than a history of the Great War - I think that was it's intention. Not sure though. I read it as such and it didn't dissapoint. Not sure what I would have expected anyway. I was lucky and got the hard back from local market for £4 - hey....how can I be upset ? Did I have to fight it (WW1) to differ in opinion ? Thank goodness no. They are only books and all convey an opinion. If it was an opinion I already knew (or that fitted in with my way of thinking) then I wouldn't need to read the book. Guess it's about my bed time now - I've never been that critical in the past - please forgive me... ZZZZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Take on me Posted 7 January , 2007 Share Posted 7 January , 2007 I have to say that I enjoyed Tommy a great deal. i thought that it provided a lot of interesting information and was exactly ahat I was looking for, a book about what it was like to serve on the Western Front between 1914-18 in the British Army. However I can see why others disliked it. Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 7 January , 2007 Share Posted 7 January , 2007 I think Holmes' books are often broad brush - he's a 'popular' historian, after all, not an academic one. I liked "Tommy", and I liked "Redcoats", and I found "Sahib" fascinating, so you may infer that I an a fan of Brigadier Professor Holmes! IMHO, he has done more to popularise military history than most, and his admiration of the common fighting man - the redocat, the sahib or the Tommy - flows through his work. "Face of Battle" and "Six Armies in Normandy" are superb books: I have (I think) learned more about the sound and smell of battle from him than from many other historians. yes, he is broad brush, and yes, there are errors, but overall, I have to say that Richard Holmes, through his books, TV work and lectures, has probably brought more people into an interest in military history than most, so I'm happy to accept the downside! Oh yes, also most of my Holmes books have been bought cheap, so that's even better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clive_hughes Posted 7 January , 2007 Share Posted 7 January , 2007 I think Holmes' books are often broad brush - he's a 'popular' historian, after all, not an academic one. I liked "Tommy", and I liked "Redcoats", and I found "Sahib" fascinating, so you may infer that I an a fan of Brigadier Professor Holmes! "Face of Battle" and "Six Armies in Normandy" are superb books: I have (I think) learned more about the sound and smell of battle from him than from many other historians. Hang on, Steven - Not that I disagree with you at all re. Holmes...but aren't the last two books by John Keegan?? As for him, "The Face of Battle" is what you might call seminal - I haven't changed my views on that since I bought it back in the 1970s and I can see how it's coloured the "what was it really like" school of military history since then. "Six Armies" (which I also have) has I believe had some indifferent reviews from Normandy specialists, though I get on with it well enough as a non-specialist. I have various others of Keegan's and have appreciated most of them; but I can't quite agree with all of his notions - for example (if you boil down "Warpaths" to its basic arguments) that the native American Indians virtually deserved to be conquered by the advancing whites - or his objections to taking extremist WW2 revisionism before a court of law. That aside, I'm sure I'd acquire more of his writings : academic and readable - not always seen in combination! Holmes for the popular face of military history - yes! LST_164 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 7 January , 2007 Share Posted 7 January , 2007 You're quite right - I was having a rant ant got carried away! Shame-faced.... Anyway, I agree about Keegan - I sometimes grind my teeth a bit at his 'Telegraph' articles, too. I won't edit the post I made: let everyone see the mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trenchtrotter Posted 7 January , 2007 Share Posted 7 January , 2007 From the other side. I have read extensively on the Great War and have yet to find a book that has not taught me at least a few new snippets. I thought the bok was a good general read and written from the heart. Also whenever new quotes are published then the excercise is worthwhile. Typos I can forgive. I would say 7/10. I did read my copy sat by the pool on holiday in beautiful French rural countryside deep in the Dordogne!!! Perhaps this and the Vino added to my enjoyment of the book TT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clive_hughes Posted 7 January , 2007 Share Posted 7 January , 2007 I won't edit the post I made: let everyone see the mistake. Quite right Steven - confession and public repentance are good for the soul... My turn - TT, I confess that the Arctic horrors of Alister Maclean's HMS ULYSSES are in my humble opinion best appreciated when sweltering in the sub-tropical heat of the Canaries or maybe the western French coastline when the temperature's baking and the Biscay breakers are really high and rolling in... This perverse streak probably means that if I ever get to the Western Front, I won't be reading either Holmes or Keegan but Jilly Cooper - chilling thought. LST_164 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuartd Posted 7 January , 2007 Share Posted 7 January , 2007 I have to say that I was rather disappointed with 'Tommy': written in a turgid, plodding style and full of huge quotes. I finished it, but was happy to see the back of it. Much prefer 'Death's Men'! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now