Customer Reviews

World War I

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Mr. Marshall has written an excellent overview of WWI - an overview is all this book is, though. It is important to keep in mind that any book, which attempts to examine one of the most complex conflicts in human history on less than 500 pages, will have to be brief. Consequently, the book is best used as a study, which offers a sense of structure of the events between 1914 and 1918. As a source of information on particular events, may they be political or military, the book is incomplete.

Mr. Marshall's study is a valuable source for establishing a broad sense of the sequence of events. The interlocking of state policies is described with captivating simplicity. The first chapter, which examines the political climate of Europe leading up to the war, manages to present a convincing, if simplistic, narrative about the forces, which chose the path of armed confrontation over diplomacy and negotiation. Subsequent chapters chart the different stages of the conflict, spanning from 1914 to 1918 and shifting between the hills of Verdun and the peaks of Kilimanjaro. The different campaigns are described schematically and their most important themes and considerations are highlighted at the expense of more obscure factors. Given the complexity of the war, Mr. Marshall's ability to impose structure on the events is a rather praiseworthy achievement.

Another commendable quality of Mr. Marshall's work is his literary style. Unlike many historical studies, this book is actually very readable. The author has an excellent sense of rhythm and a pleasant ratio of seriousness and irony. A favorite passage dealing with the early stages of the trench war describes how the shell shortage forced the British to "...mark time on the Aisne while Germans fortified. The French followed suit so that they might live longer, and the novelty, while offensive to their doctrine, swiftly became a habit" (page 127)

If I have anything critical to say about this book, it will be about the analysis of the conflict as a series of chess moves. Mr. Marshall traces most events back to the intentions of a single individual (may these intentions be correct or erroneous). This desire to rationalize the development of the war in terms of the influence of the individual political and military figures does not capture the chaotic atmosphere of the period.

In conclusion, I would like to reiterate that Mr. Marshall has compiled an overview of WWI, which affords an excellent structure of the conflict. If you want to understand the basics of this crucial point in world history, this compendium is for you. If you are looking for an in-depth analysis, it probably will not carry the title "World War I" but something more like "The First Marne". As Charles Jenks once wrote: "You cannot blame a donkey for being a bad sort of horse."

Just consider for a moment the logistical nightmare that writing a book no longer than 500 pages about the First World War is, and then reflect on how much more difficult this task would be should the narrator have to make the text memorable and brilliantly descriptive as well; once you've done this, you will quickly understand just how special S.L.A. Marshall's concise, flavorful, and skilled accounting of the happenings of supposed War to End all Wars actually is. For a career soldier, the general penned an unexpectedly engaging work filled with highly original metaphors and colorful prose. This is human conflict at its very worst, and the errors committed both politically and militarily will manage to astound the previously uninformed. The lack of concern on the parts of Joffre, Falkenhayn, and Haig for their men is absolutely indecent. It tells us so much about how mindless acts of masochism like the planned battles of Verdun and the Somme in fact were--by comparison, the great majority of the general staff decisions of the Second World War appear logically consistent. This brings me to my oft repeated point that the best history is that which is indistinguishable from psychology in its conveyance of personality along with cause and effect. When juxtaposed alongside their nation's elite, Petain and Lloyd George are paragons of mental health as they are able to easily recognize the reality before their faces. If only everyone else did the same then maybe the slaughter could have ended in 1916. Alas!

S. L. A. Marshall wrote more than thirty books on military history and warfare during his life-time; "World War I" may be one of his best books on "the war to end all wars." Marshall writes with authority and clarity, his research is well documented, and his writing is objective.

Marshall begins by describing how one terrible event: the assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand, on 28 June 1914, set off a chain of events that engulfed the world in a war of attrition. But Marshall goes further into that event by exploring the possible underlying causes of World War I.

"World War I" covers military and political leaders, the economics of running a war, military strategy, weaponry, and even war manufacturing plants and their importance in waging war. Marshall clearly depicts what awaited the soldiers of the Entente and Central Powers, the lethal ground bombing, the introduction of poison gas, the relatively new and deadly machine-gun, tanks, and all the diseases that were part of trench warfare. Marshall writes that "after only five months of fighting, there were more than one and a half million dead, wounded, or captured on both sides". The author also covers military campaigns from the disastrous British attack at the Somme to the monumental French defense at Verdun.

The book clearly describes the horrors of war; the carnage of human life which Marshall attributed to reckless actions and irrational thinking by military leaders on both sides. Marshall gives readers some important background on some of the heroes and villains of the war; he looks at the personalities of such Entente leaders as Georges Clemenceau, Ferdinand Foch, Lloyd George, Douglas Haig, "Black Jack" Pershing, and Woodrow Wilson. Next, he tackles leaders of the Central Power; among them, Conrad von Hötzendorf, Erich von Falkenhayn, Paul von Hindenburg, and Wilhelm Ludendorff. Marshall describes Germany's effort to recruit Mexico as their ally against the United States with the infamous Zimmermann Telegram. The author takes a brief look at Alvin York, the American soldier who fought bravely in the Meuse-Argonne Offensive in France.

A great deal of Marshall's books focuses on the war in Europe and rightfully so, since the United States did not enter the war until April 1917, but as with the European campaigns, Marshall writes objectively of America's political and military participation including their successes and failures. Marshall dedicates his final chapters to the surrender of the Central Powers - especially Germany, even covering a disgruntled Corporal from the German army by the name of Adolf Hitler. Marshall again speaks objectively about the Treaty of Versailles whereby he covers both the winners and losers during the peace process. Marshall explores the idea that it was the Treaty of Versailles that truly laid the groundwork that led to World War II.

S. L. A. Marshall's "World War I" is a notable accomplishment and account of the First World War and should be considered a must-read book for first time readers of World War I.

This book, among other things, is a blistering attack on the stupid leaders in this war. In one sentence, for example, Mr. Marshall describes a general he respected and reveals his own attitude about most of the other generals in this war. "He was less loved then mistrusted by others of this rank because he was suspected of harboring brains." (412) Blunt, is the author's middle name.

Or, for example, on American military procedure, Marshall talks a lot about morale. He states that, initially, "One of (the A.E.F.s) egregious blunders (was that) line companies were compelled to bury their own battle dead. They should have been spared this, for human emotions are no less fragile on the battlefield then elsewhere." (p.410) I would never have thought about what a toll this would take on solders. Neither, at first, did their generals. As Marshall says "having to cut dog-tags and shovel dirt in a dead friend's face was the heartbreaker." (P.410) Expressed this bluntly, I understood.

This is the charm, and sometimes the distraction, of this book. It is very honest and clear as a former general, who was a mere foot solider during WWI, details the origins and outcomes of the most import war in modern history. Sometimes his writing can be a little slow, but there is so much knowledge of the events and military doctrine that any serious reader of history, and anyone would wants a good primer of this war, should buy and enjoy this book.

More then anything else, however, I had bought this book to learn about America's participation in this war. Mr. Marshall delivers. He describes the bravery, and the naivety, of WWI veterans. From their first losses, to their first major victory, we learn that America's contribution to this war was much more important then is usually acknowledged.

America did not merely tip the balance in favor of the Entente. American confidence was vital in restoring French and English hopes. American bravery was decisive in winning crucial battles. (like Amiens) American solders did not win this war by themselves, but Mr. Marshall makes clear that they were not second string or second level solders.

If anything Marshall's admiration for them seems to be in direct inverse proportion to his loathing of their leaders, especially Wilson. President Wilson has had a great reputation for a long time with many people. After reading this book, I have to wonder why.

First, after he asked for a declaration of war, which was approved, Congress gave him an ovation. Wilson stated "Think of what it was they were applauding. My message of today was a message of death for our young men. How strange to applaud for that." (p. 281) For me, this was a strange comment. Wilson speech was designed to stir these people to action. When it did, he seemed to harbor second thoughts. Wilson always seemed to think he knew more then most men around him.

Thus, later in the war, the Germans sent a letter to him directly, asking for terms based on Wilson's "14 points." The same president concerned about "our young men" did nothing for days. He didn't tell his allies about this peace proposal; he didn't tell his generals that they may be able to tone down the fighting. His actions were to have serious consequences later on. Even at that time, however, the British wrote that Mr. Wilson answer to the Germans was a "complete usurpation of the power of negotiation. He practically ignores us and the French." (p.444) While Mr. Wilson crusaded on a utopian platform, his own general stated that "the damage done by the war forbade leniency toward Germany." Worse was to come.

After an armistice was declared, American troops were suppose to come home quickly, but there weren't enough ships. Mr. Wilson kept many of them in Europe longer then necessary, because he held up a large ship for his own use. Against all advice, he came to Europe to negotiate a peace treaty. Even after losses for his party in the latest elections, Mr. Wilson refused to bring along any influential Republican leaders. When he arrived in Europe, he refused to visit the lands the Germans destroyed giving the impression that he was avoiding "the ugly sights" because it might "ruin his impartiality as the arbiter of a just peace." (P.461.)

His arrogance seemed almost boundless.

Returning with a flawed treaty, which he negotiated, Mr. Wilson stated that "it has come about by no plan of our conceiving but by the hand of God who led us this way." (P.479) Mr. Wilson's arrogance now was boundless. Yet, no matter how close to God he thought he was, other felt differently. In the end, Lansing, his own secretary of state, his personal adviser, Col. House, and the Senate, two times, rejected this treaty.

Marshall says the end of the war "had been a victory of sorts, but what the victors celebrated chiefly was that mass death, after four years, had taken a holiday. The illusion was that all of humanity would profit by the great lesson." (P.455) As we know now, Europe apparently didn't learn enough as WWII came so soon after.

S.L.A. Marshall's WWI text will dispell any ideas that Generals cannot
be both literate, insightful and able to turn a phrase better than practically
any "literary" author. His attention to detail is phenomenal and he has an
expert's knowledge that allows him to skillfully point out the foibles of various
decisions made by the participants and how they came about. He understands
thoroughly the situations that surrounded those decisions and never unduly
criticizes. You will find no better guide thru the complicated morass of that
poorly orchestrated debacle. He displays a terrific sense of humor in describing
what, objectively, were depressing events. I often reread portions of the book
simply to gain pleasure from his writing style. I have read more military history
than I care to mention, but never encountered a writing style and wit as superb as
Marshall's. He knows his stuff, and knows how to tell it, without an inkling of bias
or slant. A writer's writer.

S.L.A. Marshall takes the reader through the high points of WWI including the lesser known fronts such as the Middle East, Italy and the Mediterranean. There are plenty of other books that relay the same information. The maps in the book are very detailed and can be related back to the text's description of a variety of battles. I have quite a few of these books which hit the highlights of WWI and this book is one of the better ones. Not a bad read all things considered.

Book as ordered was used, but arrived in very good condition as described in ad by seller. Arrived quickly and I am now reading. Would definitely buy from this seller again.

This book is great for the weekend historian or anyone with nothing more than a passing or general interest in the first world war. It provides a great "high-level" overview of the war. The book focuses more on military strategy and commanders than anything else, but it still provides a wonderful look into the war as well as a wonderful read!

Good description of events of WWI particularly in the European theater. Coverage of the war in the Middle East is lacking. Last Chapter on the "peace settlement" is very good with regard to the effect on Europe. Battles are described in detail almost to the point of "purple prose". That combined with the terrible maps make certain parts difficult to follow. Personally, I prefer more of a political and strategic analysis rather than a tactical account.

World War 1 by SLA Marshall was relatively well-written book from a literary perspective. However, several critiques stand out in fairly sharp relief. First, the author presents a cookie-cutter view of each of the major persons; uniformly he treats them as idiots without understanding or knowledge. Second, the author does not treat the social and political situation very well. In some areas, it is very nuanced, in some areas, it is written in a exceptionally blank and white situation. Third, he does not retain footnotes. While the material may be solid, having a full set of footnotes would aid in cross-referencing into other works on World War One.

Generally I found this work to have a high bias heavily in favor of the enlisted man and slanted against the officers and politicians. While there was idiocy to go around, it would have been better to leave off the journalistic footnotes and comments in the op-ed of the newspaper instead of a history book.