Grand unified books thread

[Savonarola]

My parents lent me a biography of opera composers by Victor Borges called "Intermissions."  The plots of operas and the lives of composers were such that Borges really didn't need to put much effort into it to make the book hilarious.  I think Rex Francorum would enjoy this one (yes, there's a biography of Handel.)

It's hard to imagine a time when Victor Borges caught on.  He was a child prodigy who eventually adapted his classical piano playing into a classical piano-comedy act where he told anti-Nazi jokes.  By luck he was in Sweden when the German invaded Denmark; fled to Finland and then got on a ship to America.  He had all of $17 and spoke no English, but watched movies until he spoke the language, translated his jokes and started performing his classical piano-comedy act again; eventually performing on movies and in television.  Even the whole "America welcoming refugees" element of the story seems to belong to a misty, romantic past.

[grumbler]

Victor Borges was brilliant.  It's hard to imagine a time or place where he would NOT catch on.  I'd never heard that he was an author, though, so will see if I can find this at the library.

How much of his background legend is of his own making is hard to say.  He was in show business, after all.

[Savonarola]

I found a collection of Henry James' short stories/novellas that I had bought back in high school.  We were required to read "The Turn of the Screw," and that was the only thing I read at the time.  I get now why they had us read it; it's short, a good introduction to a major author and a good introduction to concepts like ambiguity and an unreliable narrator.  At the time I disliked it; James' prose seemed dull (it is quite heavy, even today I sometimes find myself wondering when Henry is going to end the sentence) and the whole "Ghost story" element isn't exactly Stephen King.  Today I realize he's a great writer with both a masterpiece of prose as well as a real insight into psychology.  The best one in this collection, which I hadn't read before, was "Daisy Miller".  "The Beast in the Jungle" is a stylistic masterpiece, but the protagonist is a little too strange to care about.  "The Aspern Papers" with its whole McGuffin driven plot was clever.  "The Pupil" was great, but maybe the antagonists are more interesting than the protagonists.  The other two stories, "Washington Square" and "The Turn of the Screw" I had read before.

My favorite James short story not in the collection is The Madonna of the Future.  I always think of it when I hear the Bob Dylan Song "When I Paint My Masterpiece."

[11B4V]

I've drilled very deep in other areas.

FFS man, there's only so many ways Kursk is going to come out   


Anyway, my Required Reading Vietnam War List--

Non-Fiction
A Bright Shining Lie, Neil Sheehan
Dereliction of Duty, H.R. McMaster
A Rumor of War, Philip Caputo
We Were Soldiers Once...and Young, Hal Moore
The Best and The Brightest, David Halberstam
In Retrospect, Robert McNamara
Chickenhawk, Robert Mason

Fiction
Fields of Fire, Jim Webb
Going After Cacciato and The Things They Carried, Tim O'Brien

I have a collection of short stories from the Vietnamese perspective around here somewhere, can't remember the name;  but I would like to read General Giap's book one day. HOW DID THEY DO IT

Anybody else with any recommendations?

About halfway through McMaster's book. Like watching an episode of The Twilight Zone. Every Vietnam get should read that book.

[garbon]

I started reading the gift I got from my Republican aunt and uncle, What Happened. All it has mainly made me feel in the first 30 pages is very depressed.

[Valmy]

I started reading the gift I got from my Republican aunt and uncle, What Happened. All it has mainly made me feel in the first 30 pages is very depressed.

Are you going to finish it? I would be interested to know if she has anything worthwhile to say.

Showing such respect to my Republican friends and relatives all this time has paid off since none of them have gloated at all 

[garbon]

I will give it a try. So far it just is dredging up memories of November 9th and how it felt to be an American in the first following months.

[The Brain]

Finished Duffy's book on the army of Frederick the Great. Reasonably good, pros and cons similar to his books on the Austrian army. One thing he could have done was discuss what did and what did not influence the Prussians. For instance, what were the similarities and differences between the Prussian cantonal system and the Swedish indelningsverk? Was Frederick's early fascination with cold steel influenced by the Swedish way in the GNW? And why does Duffy describe a guy inventing aiming screws for artillery decades after they had been introduced in the Swedish army without making any additional comment (was it a new type or whatever)?

[dps]

Victor Borges was brilliant.  It's hard to imagine a time or place where he would NOT catch on.  I'd never heard that he was an author, though, so will see if I can find this at the library.

Yeah, if he's anywhere near as good as a writer as he was a performer, it should be well worth seeking out.

[ulmont]

I will give it a try. So far it just is dredging up memories of November 9th and how it felt to be an American in the first following months.

I bought that (more for my wife; shared Kindle account) as a performative act more than as a "book I want to ever read."

[The Brain]

Surely some people here have read The Enemy at the Gate, by Wheatcroft (about the siege of Vienna)? I started reading it and two things struck me:

1) He seems to have done research all over the place but not in Istanbul and he seems to have used very little Ottoman sources. I don't get it.

2) He claims that the Japanese imperial family was rendered impotent with the creation of the Tokugawa shogunate. I don't get it. Even if you count the Go-Daigo adventure that's more than 250 years before the Tokugawa. Doesn't he know basic stuff or doesn't he care about presenting the facts correctly?

So my question is, is the book factually correct about the siege of Vienna? Should I read it? It seems to be a good read, and I'd love to read it, but I don't like wasting my time on questionable quality.

[jimmy olsen]

Surely some people here have read The Enemy at the Gate, by Wheatcroft (about the siege of Vienna)? I started reading it and two things struck me:

1) He seems to have done research all over the place but not in Istanbul and he seems to have used very little Ottoman sources. I don't get it.

2) He claims that the Japanese imperial family was rendered impotent with the creation of the Tokugawa shogunate. I don't get it. Even if you count the Go-Daigo adventure that's more than 250 years before the Tokugawa. Doesn't he know basic stuff or doesn't he care about presenting the facts correctly?

So my question is, is the book factually correct about the siege of Vienna? Should I read it? It seems to be a good read, and I'd love to read it, but I don't like wasting my time on questionable quality.

Why is he talking about the Japanese imperial family in a book about the siege of Vienna?

[The Brain]

Surely some people here have read The Enemy at the Gate, by Wheatcroft (about the siege of Vienna)? I started reading it and two things struck me:

1) He seems to have done research all over the place but not in Istanbul and he seems to have used very little Ottoman sources. I don't get it.

2) He claims that the Japanese imperial family was rendered impotent with the creation of the Tokugawa shogunate. I don't get it. Even if you count the Go-Daigo adventure that's more than 250 years before the Tokugawa. Doesn't he know basic stuff or doesn't he care about presenting the facts correctly?

So my question is, is the book factually correct about the siege of Vienna? Should I read it? It seems to be a good read, and I'd love to read it, but I don't like wasting my time on questionable quality.

Why is he talking about the Japanese imperial family in a book about the siege of Vienna?

He compares the Ottoman and Japanese empires and notes that the Sultans didn't lose political power the way the Emperors did.

[Oexmelin]

1) He seems to have done research all over the place but not in Istanbul and he seems to have used very little Ottoman sources. I don't get it.

Have not read it, but this does not surprise me, unfortunately. Reading Ottoman sources is hard, and requires long training, which many "scholars" consider they can avoid by reading stuff in translation. A quick, non exhaustive, perusal of Wheatcroft reviews in academic presses indicates he was well reviewed in places dedicated to military history and general audiences, while experts in the field seem to decry precisely his engagement only with German sources (and often only through English translation).

[The Brain]

1) He seems to have done research all over the place but not in Istanbul and he seems to have used very little Ottoman sources. I don't get it.

Have not read it, but this does not surprise me, unfortunately. Reading Ottoman sources is hard, and requires long training, which many "scholars" consider they can avoid by reading stuff in translation. A quick, non exhaustive, perusal of Wheatcroft reviews in academic presses indicates he was well reviewed in places dedicated to military history and general audiences, while experts in the field seem to decry precisely his engagement only with German sources (and often only through English translation).

Thanks! Yeah when I read his acknowledgments and glanced at his sources they seemed oddly parochial. I've often encountered the same with Swedish writers dealing with the Great Northern War. It seems lazy to me to think that you can just ignore important parts of the story if you truly want to understand it.