|
| 
 enlarge | Author: Niall Ferguson
Publisher: Basic Books
Category: Book
List Price: $21.95
Buy New: $13.00
You Save: $8.95 (41%)
New (17) Used (14) from $10.83
Avg. Customer Rating:  54 reviews
Sales Rank: 50393
Media: Paperback
Edition: New edition
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 608
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.4
Dimensions (in): 7.6 x 5.3 x 1.5
ISBN: 0465057128
Dewey Decimal Number: 940.3
EAN: 9780465057122
ASIN: 0465057128
Publication Date: March 10, 2000
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Customer Reviews:
 A different look at WWI February 25, 2006
7 out of 11 found this review helpful
Niall Ferguson is known to stir the pot on touchy subjects and Pity of War does not disappoint. Filled with statistics and theories, Ferguson gives us his view of why the Allies won and Germany lost. This question has produced heated debates ranging from ludicrous (John Mosier and Fritz Fischer) to well thought out and researched (Hew Strachan and John Keegan). Ferguson falls somewhere in the middle by providing some good arguments such as Britain failed to provide the pivotal advantage needed to end the war despite their superior economy because the workforce was sent to fight. Another point made is why Germany failed to win despite having a vastly superior army. Ferguson believes the failure to pursue their political goals via force of the military removed any clear objective to obtain and relegated the war to senseless violence. Due to the lack of objectives, the war was extended needlessly and subsequently lowered the morale of the soldiers as was seen on both sides in the later years.
Ferguson also adds what almost every war book lacks, the human element. He poses the question: why did the men keep fighting despite the carnage surrounding them.
One last issue I have with this book is in scope. Britain and Germany are covered extensively, leaving the other participants to be mentioned here and there. More information on the French, Russians, Americans would make the book a more rounded work. Inclusion of the African and Asian portions of the war would help readers who are not as knowledgeable, but this point is neglected by a majority of WWI authors.
 Interesting Arguments Well Presented December 30, 2005
7 out of 10 found this review helpful
Niall Ferguson is a pretty amazing writer, a great researcher, and an interesting thinker. I'm not going to try to argue whether or not the case he represents is right or wrong. I suspect it's as much right as wrong. The interesting part is how well he presents a different way of thinking about what happened to the British Empire, and by pretty immediate extension, the world at the start of the 20th century. The book can get overwhelming in the economic details and occasionally the writers quoted, at length, are a bit dull, especially when compared to Mr. Ferguson. However, the read is engaging and informative and it will honestly leave you thinking anew about the causes and results of the Great War.
The Pity of War August 24, 2005
6 out of 14 found this review helpful
In THE PITY OF WAR, Ferguson has demolished some (by no means all) of the remaining myths about World War 1 - most prominently, the myth about Britain's reasons for entering the War. With this book, Ferguson has reserved his place among the foremost historians of our age.
 A necessary book on the subject July 18, 2005
8 out of 10 found this review helpful
Niall Ferguson's book on WWI is excellent.
I have read books on WWI before, but they were often about the `guts-and-glory' side of the event. This is a must read, although I agree it is not an easy one.
I think it is great that Ferguson takes another angle at the subject. Even though he is controversial he hits the mark on many of the questions he sets out to answer.
WWI was not inevitable, indeed. The cold war prior to the event could have continued for some time, if not indefinitely. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by itself was not terribly important, yet provided the triggering event for Germany to decide that now was the best time to fight out of a `perceived' weak position. Britain, as Ferguson quite rightly points out, decided to enter the war against Germany because a German win and the creation of a Central European Customs Union, which could have been used quite effectively against the British, could not possibly have been in her interest. In that context, I find the comparison between the European Customs Union and today's EU not absurd at all. Just witness the German heavy-handedness of the EEC/EC/EU right up to 2004. That should give us a good taste on what the Central European Customs Union would have been like.
The chilling bit about Ferguson's book to me is that the detente (France, Britain, Russia) had far more resources at its disposal but used them rather poorly. Whereas, the German Empire by itself (not counting the rather ineffective Austrians) were in a minority position resources-wise, yet managed to inflict far greater casualties on the detente than should have been expected. The other chilling lesson I took home from the book is that the German Empire could have won the conflict. The German blunders of 1918, thank God, put an end to any such hopes. It is not a surprise that this notion is not terribly popular in Germany; the `Dolchstoss-Legend' is a more convenient concept to believe in.
Not having ever been involved in war or even close to it, I found the chapter on casualties and the `issue of surrender' a most fascinating read. I have never read it in such detail in any other book on WWI.
If you expected the usual `guts-and-glory' book then this is the wrong book for you. Being an economic historian allows Ferguson to innocently tell the WWI story from a different angle. He perhaps takes a clinical view of the factors leading up to WWI and the issues arising during its execution. But this is as it should be.
Excellent uncovering of painfull truths December 3, 2004
14 out of 17 found this review helpful
I'm glad this book came out. Unfortunately history is often too clouded in a shround of emotion and partisanship to gain a proper understanding of what really went on. Ferguson does us a favour by concentrating on the hard facts, mainly economic, to show what was really going on rather than wallowing in an emotional fit while pointing the finger at the usual suspects.
For example
Myth: Britain was antogonised into joining with France and Russia by German militarism and naval ambitions.
Fact: German pre-war, GDP spending on military was equivalent to Britains and even lower than France and Russias. Germany had lost the naval race 2 years before and in fact had only half the naval strength of Britain. Hardly good preparation for a pre-meditated war of conquest.
And he goes on, one by one to take apart some of the most commonly held myths of the "Great War". How as early as 1905, the British had been formulating plans for a surprise attack on Germany, some of which would have incidently violated Belgian neutrality. He also brings up intesreting idea about how the jingoism of the press contrasted sharply with the real world of trench warfare, and how the men, while hating their homefronts, grew used to bloodshed and killing, which became normafied for them.
In the final analyses, we all know that the governments of France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Serbia, Russia and Britain are equally guilty of the conflict which caused over 10 million deaths and Europe to fall from being the centre of civilisation to being a back water.From that point of view there was only one winner, and the was the US, the only blameless combatant. Britains part in all this is usually always downplayed, however, it seems certain that British duplicity(thanks to Sir Edward Grey) in the June 1914 crisis had a lot to do in convincing the Germans and Austrians that the conflict would remain localised. Had Britain given a clear message as to her intentions war might have been averted. It seems in fact that every effort was made in order calm the fears of the central powers, which makes one wonder if Britain was really looking for peace in Europe. Or perhaps it was just plain incompetence. Anyway I think thats almost a subject for a sequel.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
