R. A. Jackson

Okay - but I expected it to be better

Revisado: 09-26-22

The premise of this title is a good one. However, I was a bit disappointed in how Richardson chose to support the central theme of this work. This does not meant that this book is not worth reading; because it is worth reading. There is a great deal of information in this narrative, but some of the historical trends Richardson chooses to illustrate her larger points are not the best historic trends for her to use. There is a lot to commend the idea that the western social, economic, and political developments gradually merged with those from the American south from the period following the Civil War and running up to and including today. I cannot go into the details of this as I do not want to ruin the title for others who may wish to read it. It is a well-written book and it does cover a number of characteristics of western American history which are too frequently left out of our national narrative.

The lone example I will share involves Richardson's treatment of the Frederick Jackson Turner's Frontier Thesis from 1893. Richardson seems to dismiss the Frontier Thesis out of of hand as an idea designed to extol an idea of racial supremacy which, I don't believe, was the main point of the Thesis. In fact, the the general idea of the Frontier Thesis centered on the influence of the frontier on American history in total. In which case, Turner's Thesis should have served as a partial framework for Richardson's overarching theme in this title. To deny the validity of that thesis seems to, in turn, deny Richardson's claim that that same western influence is what breathed new life in the ideals of the Southern Aristocracy that ruled the Confederacy.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Great Sharp book

Revisado: 11-16-20

This book is a gem in the series because it's setting and it's story line are different than the others, the story line is a good one, and it is as crisp a narrative as the others.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

great play

Revisado: 06-20-20

Miller is one of my favorite play writes. The Drama in this play is very tight. The interplay between the characters was lovely and pretty raw at certain times. Ass in a lot of plays, this one is set at a moment where a number of separate dramas collide in rapid succession. Somewhat too many. that was the biggest issue for me. In all other ways though, I enjoyed it completely.

it is by no means Miller's best, but it made for some tense drama. And the actors were all fantastic.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Fantastic Story

Revisado: 06-20-20

This book has been around for a few years now and I had read it long ago. But I wanted to listen to it as a told story. It took me a bit of time to get used to the tone of the narrator, but it did not take overlong to become used to him. In any event, he does a good job reading this book. Overall this story is worth listening to; the characters are vivid and the setting is original. I recommend it most highly.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

Best 1 Voume WW1 History I've Read Since College

Revisado: 06-07-20

This is a fantastic book. It represents a complete history of the war with a thorough coverage of its world and moment in history – and not once did the narrative become tedious. The writing, the material, and the English translation remained crisp throughout. The author, Jorn Leonhard, examines battles and strategies on all fronts and in all theaters; even those beyond Europe and the Middle East and into the Pacific, Africa, and the southwest Atlantic. In addition, Leonhard describes the cultural and social geography of the regions, societies, cultures, and political systems that formed the environment or "setting" of the war.
Although I would (and below I do) quibble with Leonhard about some of the specific examples used to support his general points, the particular relationships, comparative positions of individuals, and societies he has highlighted to demonstrate his broader observations work very well. Leonhard's presentation of his themes and arguments remain sound from the start through the conclusion. This is a solid work of scholarship and I also applaud the translator, Patrick Camille, for maintaining a vivid prose style into the English version. I enjoyed this book a great deal and I will soon re-read it.

The weakest portions of the narrative rest in the initial discussions concerning the background to the outbreak of the war and later in his examination of the Versailles peace talks. The consequences of the war on world history and on the subsequent histories of the combatants and the wide range of peoples and circumstances overall is excellent. The entire main narrative of the war years from its outbreak to it repercussions across Europe and elsewhere, the military actions and decisions, the political actions and decisions along with cultural, social, and economic realities and considerations make for interesting and informative reading.

There are two details or particular considerations which I believe could have strengthened Leonhard's general observations about certain developments. Leonhard does not include Clemenceau's consistent efforts to obtain British and American guarantees to support France's territorial borders against any future rise in German militarism during the Versailles negotiations. The debates on Clemenceau’s suggestion of this revealed a great deal which supports the author’s points regarding the conflicting views and aims among the leading allied negotiators. The meetings between the Big Three (France, the USA, and Britain) on this subject highlighted the clear differences of perspective. This difference was most pronounced between Clemenceau and Wilson, and only to a lesser degree, for George. Clemenceau's desire for something more practical and more direct than the League of Nations to enhance the security of France evidences the strongest support for Leonhard’s argument that France did not come out of the war with great confidence in its future security.

Wilson’s response that such an arrangement would have no meaning supports the author’s assessment of Wilson and America’s future actions just as well. Wilson argued that such a commitment on the part of the US and Britain would simply initiate the same problems that caused the war and be contrary to the purpose of creating the League of Nations. A short discussion of this moment in the Allied negotiations would have clearly illuminated Leonhard's points about the practicality of the Versailles Treaty and the difficulties the diplomats at Versailles faced in developing a successful treaty which could stabilize the forces unleashed by the war while accommodating a new era in world diplomacy. For all practical purposes, France was left as the defender of an order it never once felt it had the power or the support to defend.

The other consideration the author should have used to greater effect pertains to the background section of the work. The annexation of Alsace and Lorraine by Germany after the 1870 war created a wound between the two nations which would not heal. People as diverse as Otto von Bismarck and Karl Marx warned that the annexation would create a permanent barrier to reconciliation between the two states. The hostility over what the French referred to as “our two lost daughters” and “the hole in the Vosges” became a central fixture in the diplomacy of Europe after 1870. A great degree of the complexity of Bismarck’s diplomacy resulted from the permanence of that single problem. The diplomatic environment created by that event would have contributed mightily to Leonhard's background narrative.

Of all that was presented in this book, I only have one comment which is negative. I do not know if this is from the translator or the writer, but a word like "leitmotif" should be used far more sparingly than it was used in this narrative. It is the kind of word which draws a great deal of attention to itself so, using it too frequently minimizes the importance and impact of the word when it gets used and its strength is appropriate.

All 5 stars on this book and I look forward to reading it again. Likely, I will get the Kindle edition to go with the Audible edition.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 8 personas

Excellent book on tactics & strategy.

Revisado: 05-14-20

I cannot say that I agree with all the analysis in this book, because the author's focus left some of the wider causes for how the Battle France played out. But I can tell you that this is an excellent study to showcase the relationship between tactical decisions and the success or failure on the strategic objectives. it is laid out in this text better than in most histories of battles and military histories of wars. The author pinpoints choices and actions which through a clear light on this relationship.

There is one thing, which the author does raise; though with not as much firmness as it deserved as as caveat to this tactical and strategic victory that should be stressed. Tactically it there is little to suggest that the German military was not fully prepared for this battle, However, there was one strategic error in both the planning and the delivery of the operation. Perhaps a knock-out blow against Britain would not have been a proper matter to squeeze into a plan as sweeping as Case Red. However, did beg the question of "now what?" From a strategic standpoint, the absence of any real material idea on what to do since Great Britain would remain in the war and the Battle of France, though it left Germany in a position to move forward in the war against Britain. We can say it may be easy to understand why Germany did not believe Britain "really did not matter" once France was knocked out of the war. But that presumption proved to be a vital failure on the part of the German war plan,

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Very enjoyable book and story.

Revisado: 05-01-20

This was an excellent story and it was well-narrated. Graeme Malcolm is an excellent narrator for these Scandinavian crime novels. As an earlier reviewer stated, if you enjoy the Department Q novels and you enjoy Nesbo's Harry Hole series, you likely will enjoy this book. Another reviewer said they knew the ending right away - but I find that hard to believe. The ending is not a huge surprise as you read the book, but that is because the ending is deeply wedded to the course of the story. How the story plays out is as important as how it ends and it is a complete ending which develops perfectly alongside the story line. I appreciate an ending that is neither contrived nor hidden. I like being as aware of the story unfolding as the main characters are. And in this book, it is all very well done.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 42 personas

Book was light on the Asian Theater

Revisado: 04-30-20

There were a couple of factual errors in this title, but it made for a good overall presentation on the Second World War. One warning though, this book is heavily slanted toward the European theater and does not contain as much on the Asian theater. But for what it is, it is well done.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

Fairly good story overall.

Revisado: 03-12-20

This was a good story. The author was a bit too dependent on the main character explaining so many things in her thoughts rather than letting the story unfold. It was understandable because there were an unending number of future technology requiring explanation. But, from a narrative perspective, it became tedious. The narrator was excellent.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Great, But It Is an Overview

Revisado: 02-16-20

I needed to revisit an overall history of Europe in order to access more recent scholarship in the subject areas that I no longer spend time studying. Davies' Europe served this purpose well. I would recommend it also for anyone who would like to get a solid overview of the course of European history. However, go in knowing that it is a survey level study and do not expect sufficient explanation supporting many of Davies' interpretations. This is simply an affectation of this level of coverage.

My own interpretations of the events and flow of European history differ much from the author's. And there are areas where Davies didn't really stretch for ballance between the differing views. He also tends to oversimplify views which he does not subscribe to. That is somewhat unfortunate but is unavoidable to a certain degree.

In my read of study, I found much to question and disagree with. Again though, this is a survey level study. Davies' idea to present those focuses upon particular events or persons in between the Chapter themes worked wonderfully in communicating the historical context of each period.

This book is worth the listen and I probably will listen to it number of times. I will also make use of the more recent secondary sources Davies discussed.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 26 personas