Grand unified books thread

[Gups]

Looking at picking up Wolf Hall by Hilary Mantel, since her second book in the trilogy is out and the third is supposed to be coming out relatively soon. I know Sheilbh and JR have read it. Worth my time?

I loved it and the second book. But some people are put off by the use of pronoouns whcih can make it difficult to follow until you understand that "he" is always Thomas Cromwell.

Currently reading The Song of Achilles, a retelling of the Illiad. Not bad at all.

[Malthus]

I've been reading a series of historical fiction by a Toronto writer, that starts with Killer of Men:


http://www.amazon.com/Killer-Men-Christian-Cameron/dp/0752898582/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1353959324&sr=8-1&keywords=%22killer+of+men%22

Highly recommended for historical fiction fans: the writing quality is very high, and the period detail is spot-on - but more to the point, it's a gripping read. 

The setting is classic Greece, the Ionian Revolt (the next book deals with the Battle of Marathon).

[merithyn]

I've been reading a series of historical fiction by a Toronto writer, that starts with Killer of Men:


http://www.amazon.com/Killer-Men-Christian-Cameron/dp/0752898582/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1353959324&sr=8-1&keywords=%22killer+of+men%22

Highly recommended for historical fiction fans: the writing quality is very high, and the period detail is spot-on - but more to the point, it's a gripping read. 

The setting is classic Greece, the Ionian Revolt (the next book deals with the Battle of Marathon).

This would be good for my son. Thanks, Malthus.

[jimmy olsen]

I was perusing Amazon last nite to find something to read & came upon 1632. What a ridiculous premise, it has me intrigue.

Read it online for free at the Baen free library

[Darth Wagtaros]

The 1632 books by Flint and Weber are entertaining enough. Just don';t read the rest.  They just took the least bad submissinos of fan fiction to the Baen site and bound them together.  They range from boring to crap.

[Ed Anger]

Read Watch on the Rhine from the free baen cd's instead.

[Darth Wagtaros]

No. That one is tainted by rabid Libertarians. 

[Grey Fox]

I was perusing Amazon last nite to find something to read & came upon 1632. What a ridiculous premise, it has me intrigue.

Read it online for free at the Baen free library

I don't have any where to read it on except my computer screen unless I print it out. I don't feel like doing neither ever.

[Ed Anger]

No. That one is tainted by rabid Libertarians.

Don't ruin it.

[Sheilbh]

Just finished Armed Truce by Hugh Thomas. It's an interesting book about the start of the Cold War in 1945-6. I think it's probably the first generation of books arguing that it wasn't Western provocation and Truman's inexperience that caused it all. This is the start of the revisionism that's focused more on Stalinism, the internals of the USSR and rather admired Truman.

It's also odd reading it because it was published in 1986 so a lot of it is probably wrong (no access to Soviet records) and its expectation that the war would continue was very flawed. But generally very interesting because of the potted portraits of the situation, and US, UK and USSR policies, in a number of countries like German, Poland, Romania etc.

Two questions prompted by this and other books I've read recently:
1 - Are Simon Sebag Montefiore's two biographies of Stalin worth reading? How about Orlando Figes's 'A People's Tragedy'?
2 - Any good books on Roosevelt? I've read some more negative accounts of him now, so something more positive would be interesting.

[Admiral Yi]

I think it's probably the first generation of books arguing that it wasn't Western provocation and Truman's inexperience that caused it all.

[Sheilbh]

That's a simplification but I believe that was roughly the standard historical view from the late 50s until the 70s and 80s.

The argument was that the Cold War wasn't caused by the Soviet/Stalinist system's expansionism and the West's desire to counter it. Rather the US bore a lot of responsibility for the breakdown of the wartime alliance. A lot of this was to be blamed on Truman's bungling and incompetence, whereas Roosevelt was more able to manage the Soviets in the war and would've been able to manage them into the peace too.

[sbr]

I'm not sure many, if any, of those books made it across the pond.

[Admiral Yi]

What he said.  I've never read anything like that.

Surely those historians were discredited when they were all found to be on the Kremlin's payroll?

[Sheilbh]

I'm not sure many, if any, of those books made it across the pond.

I think many of them were American.

Even ones that weren't so dogmatic on the Cold War took a very negative view of Truman. His reputation's been transformed since the 80s. At best he was seen as a well-meaning blunderer, compared to the cheerful misdirection of FDR.