The Geeklist :http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/12852179#12852179 has had me try several light books from mostly German ‘eyewitness’ authors of titles such as “Tigers in the Mud” Otto Carius, “Viking Panzers”, and “The Grenadiers” by Kurt Myer. The narrative, and journeys of these writers are interesting. The political statements are annoying, but are they accurate? It comes across as stridently apologist.
These are in stark contrast to writing by Glantz for example, no shock there. These books seem like a plea to blanket accept the German soldier as a noble warrior on the whole with no exceptions.
But then I went online to find out more about German WWII apologist writers such as David Irving, I was stuck wondering if there is clear timeline for any change or shift in the view points of the German soldiers actions WWII, or changes in view point of capabilities of the armed forces of the various sides. Were the changes (if any) occurring socially as part of the passage of time, or due to new records and sources, or other factors?
In our gaming then, books which have influenced designs decades ago might now lay waste to some titles based on more current books and research. Lots of games like [thing=3041][/thing] Panzer Gruppe Guderian leverage the notions of the invincible Wermacht and their superior capabilities, which according to some books is not entirely accurate ;). A recent play of this with a friend prompted the commentary about the ‘invincible panzers’.
that same friend recommended reading the Nov 2012 THE DEFENSE OF MOSCOW 1941: The Northern Flank by Jack Radey, which apparently talks a different story about the war in the East than shared by other authors so far. I’m reading Glantz’s Kursk title at the moment and so far it seems to deal with the situation factually without a lot of supposition and inference, clearly highlighting current strengths and weaknesses of both sides forces at that point in time.
When you read history regarding the German WWII armed forces capabilities versus others what filters do you apply to the content read?
I love eyewitness accounts..memoirs etc etc. Usually great reads. Glantz is to dry for me..much prefer Jason Marks..my favourite modern WW2 author..followed by Jack Sheldon (WW1).
I try to take a balanced approach to my reading so filters aren’t needed. For example, when studying Operation Market-Garden, I first read the classic A Bridge Too Far by Cornelius Ryan. Having gotten the British perspective, I went on to September Hope by John McManus. Finally, with the Allies view in hand, I turned to It Never Snows in September by Robert Kershaw to see the campaign from the German side. Admittedly, this isn’t always possible because it can be difficult to find the right titles in English – but I do try.
Kershaws Garlands book I really enjoyed..but I just couldn’t get into the MG book.
ABTF is a superb book. Stood the test of time.