No comments about Through the Maelstrom: A Red Army Soldier's War on the Eastern Front, 1942-1945 (Modern War Studies).

5 comments about Few Returned: Twenty-Eight Days on the Russian Front, Winter 1942-1943.

1. I was excited when I came across this book. I have read every German ostfront book I could find. Had been searching in vain for first-hand accounts from axis allies(if anyone knows of any hungarian ones, let me know).

   The reviews for this were good, so I bought it. Much to my dismay, it is boring. I can sum it up in one paragraph:

   "We retreated over the hill. Our lines are only a days march away. It is real cold, there are wounded men everywhere. We don't have any trucks. All of our men have left their equpiment behind and are not following orders. I consider shooting one of them, but decide against it. The Germans are bad people, yet they don't panic and continually protect us with their tanks and AT guns. In the village, the germans take all the huts, we sleep outside in the hay. We are constantly worried that the Germans will leave us behind. We get over the hill, and it is another day to go.. up a hill, down a hill, sleep in village, up a hill, down a hill, sleep in village..." ad nauseum.

   Nothing interesting happens whatsoever. The terrible conditions on the eastern front have been well descirbed in many other books.

   The most interesting point is how much the author hates the Germans, except that he would have been long ago dead had the germans not been with them, as most of the Italians fled like cowards and wouldn't carry their equipment with them as they retreated.




2. Above all, this book is a record of one man's experience as an Italian soldier fighting on the Eastern Front during World War II against Russia. More specifically, it is about a few horrible weeks of fighting and retreating. It is *not* a story or novel, really, but almost like an after action report. The book contains the author's feelings and some of what he saw, but you get the distinct sense while reading this book that he wrote it as a record of what he saw and did, and as an homage to his friends who never made it out of Russia, but not as an attempt to write a story. The author never really tries tying the events into a broader context or explaining the full experiences he had on the Eastern front; it is just a snap shot of a limited time frame, and only limited snapshots even within that time frame.

   This book is not a blow by blow recitation of combat. While the author is clearly involved in a number of intense fights, both before and during the period covered in the book, we never really hear about it. It's almost as if he is trying NOT to make this a book about combat. If there is an engagement we hear of the troops forming up for it, a sentence or two about the fight, and then more pages about the aftermath - the wounds, the dead.

   The most insightful and remarkable aspects of this book to me are: 1) the ability of the author to show us the horrors of war; 2) the brutality on both sides; and 3) how horrible the Nazis were even to their allies. I take each in turn.

   1) This book makes very clear how much human suffering war brings with it. Through its dry, almost camera-like recitation of horror after horror (friends freezing to death in front of him, morter shells cutting people in two) we can almost imagine what it must be like to be walking through a combat zone strewn with bodies and wounded men and animals. We also see how war turns honorable, good men into self-interested beings centered only on survival. The author, for example, is clearly a brave, honorable, educated man and officer. We watch as his pride in being an officer and an Italian soldier slowly gives way to self-survival. We also watch as this man with deep loyalty to his unit and his friends gives way (as we all would, I'm sure) to self-interest. Fascinating.

   2) Suffice it to say that the book makes clear how brutal all sides were in this war: Soviets and Nazis alike commit brutal, heartless acts.

   3) The savagery and callousness of the Nazis towards their allies is stunning. While paying homage to the combat skills of the Nazis, the author shows clearly how the Nazies treated the Italians serving and dying in their cause only slightly better than their hated enemy the Soviets. For example, we read of a time when, during the retreat, the Nazis held up thousands of Italians, subjecting them to withering small arms and artillery fire from the Russians for hours, in order to clear mud off of German trucks. We see how Nazis failed to share food, information or shelter with their "allies." We see Germans shooting at wounded Italians (their allies, remember!) who dared to try and get a ride on a German vehicle.

   This book is somewhat dry, somewhat repetititious, but worth a read for those wanting a sense of what the winter retreat was like for an Italian soldier serving in WW2's horribly grueling East Front.




3. .. I think that one of the "soldier view" of the whole Eastern Front history from axis side is "The Sergeant In The Snow" by Mario Rigoni Stern.



4. This book is different from others in that it does not glorify War,it does not tend to over exaggerate what happened in battle, it does'nt even try to blow up the truth with nonsensical war heroics recounted ( like many german or British books, dare I say).
   Its a straight forward recount in diary form of how onw Italian officer and his brave troops dared all to fight back the Russians, the bitter cold and the odds of making it back on foot without decent rations , heavyweapons or transportation which were rendered useless in battle or just plainly nevr had their ammo resupplied by the faster retreating better equiped self serving Nazis.
   It si common for the uneducated armchair historian or plainly ignorant war hobbyist to brand the Italians as cowards, however when one delves deeper into the actualities of WW2 and gets to the events as they really happened unaltered by propaganda and rascist reporting then we really see that the Italians which were up against it from the start, put in as brave a performance as any fighting man could and beyond that in many a case.

   I recommend this book to all for the honesty and open portrayal of the horrors of War and the true nature of men when faced with the harshness and desperation of survival.
   Its not a novel as anyone who's half literate can plainly see, but a diary of man brave man and his troops that fought their way thru the russians, the elements and evn the Nazis cruelty to survive!
   Enjoy the read! A must have for the war historian at heart.




5. I have always been interested in the Second World War and especially the little known battles and actions of that war.
   Lately; I have delved into the Italian part in this conflict and the tragic consequences to their brave soldiers.
   "Few Returned", gives you a first hand glimpse of what it was like for man, pack animals and equipment, fighting and struggling to survive on the Eastern Front.
   You will wonder how anyone returned from that winter retreat.
   The author Eugenio Corti also gives the reader a good feel for the national differences between the Italians, Germans and Russians.
   Combat is sporadic throughout the retreat, but again Corti gives you a good feel of how it was for all sides.

No comments about Confederate Struggle For Command: General James Longstreet and the First Corps in the West (Texas A&M University Military History Series).

4 comments about FINAL ENTRIES 1945: THE DIARIES OF JOSEPH GOEBBELS.

1. I didn't really know how to rate this book. As a diary? As history? Should I have rated Trevor-Roper's editing?

   So I rated it a "5", but it hardly matters. I don't think anyone will read Goebbel's diary because it's "popular."

   My reactions to this book were mixed. I found my opinion of Goebbels as a man and a mind considerably lower after finishing the book. Yes, I knew beforehand that he was a recalcitrant Nazi and mass-murderer. On the other hand, I've read Albert Speer's books, and he always spoke admiringly of Goebbel's intellect. I respect Speer's intellect highly, but I must say that he was wrong about Goebbels. Goebbels in this diary is an ugly, sordid, vicious little man, repeating the same tired mantras again and again, transparently trying to varnish his image for history, and sniping and gossipping about everyone around him. (But then, Speer found himself to be dreadfully wrong about Hitler, too.)

   Intellect? I hardly found myself able to discern one in this mess.

   Still, I'm glad I read the book. It adds another dimension to my understanding of the Third Reich, and serves as a counterbalance to the other accounts I've read.

   But I wouldn't call the experience of reading this book enjoyable.




2. Having just been through the Iraq war, some of Goebbels musings resonate peculiarly with some of the more grandiose statements that came out of the end of that particular conflict.
   
   It is very hard to judge Goebbels as a man from these pages. Even given that they were unedited, this was intended to be the record of a Reich that won the war. This is not a private journal in the sense that he was always intending to rewrite it for history-- and presumably he was smart enough to realize that if he was still around to rewrite it for history then the Hitler regime had in some measure made it successfully through the war.
   
   What is interesting for the armchair historian are the places where his real feelings break through the propaganda. Presumably these are the moments that would have been edited out for publication. At times he whines about other nazi officials, at another point he sarcastically remarks that a plan of Hitler's would have been brilliant had it had any chance at all of succeeding.
   
   He was clearly a bright man (if an evil one), and it is interesting to watch his mind work in what were obviously (even to him) the final days.



3. This was the third of three Goebbel War Year diaries that I bought and read. Although not the easiest prose to read -- in part they were not written necessarily to be read but to be perhaps used in a memoir that was destined to never be written -- this and the other two diaries are fascinating books for people fascinated by that era.

   This diary ends on 9 April 45. According to the introduction he continued writing through at least 22 April 45 when he and his family moved into the bunker. It would be interesting to read any additional entries through 22 April -- and beyond if available -- as the situation became more hopeless. The book does, however, conclude with an epilogue that included his and his wife's last letters to his stepson, the only member of the Goebbels family to survive the war.

   The term "Jekyll and Hyde" was easily applicable to the first diary and not as easily applicable to this diary. However there term is somewhat applicable. The man -- despite the obvious problems at the fronts -- still has hope. Maybe the hope is flickering but he still has hope. He does realize that military victory is now unattainable but maybe if the military can score one or two major successes they can finagle some kind of a negotiated settlement more favorable than "unconditional surrender". This thought appears to be running through the Nazi government during the February - April 45 timeframe covered in the book.

   Whereas in the previous two diaries great words are written about great events that resulted in great victories, this time Goebbels write great words about not so great events. The brave German military puts up great resistance to stall an American, or a British, or a Soviet offensive. Nazi forces counterattack and push eight or ten or twelve kilometers. The war is not lost yet! Why are such events important? The longer the war goes on and the more casualties are inflicted upon the enemy maybe the people in the West will grow tired and more conciliatory towards a less than complete defeat of Germany. Or maybe by stretching out the war maybe the Nazis can finagle a separate settlement with the Soviets. Or maybe the western Allies will realize how dangerous the Soviets are -- who are, after all, spreading its Bolshevic tentacles over eastern Europe contrary to previous agreements. Goebbels is hoping that something -- anything -- will happen to preclude what looks like an inevitable defeat.

   Reading the book one realizes how little hold the government actually had over the people. Even in the previous diaries there were criticisms of the government that was voiced by the people that Goebbels acknowledged. Of course, in 1945 there was little the government could do. The people were unhappy about the air raids for which the government generally and the Luftwaffe specifically had no answer. Althought Goebbels still disliked several of his counterparts in the government like Foreign Minister Ribbentrop his greatest condemnation falls upon Hermann Goering. He feels Goering's corrupt and inept leadership of the Luftwaffe is the main reason why victory that appeared so close in 1941 is now so far away in 1945. Yet he still writes that even as late as April 1945 if there are major personnel changes in the military and the government National Socialism could still be saved in Germany.

   He is not beyond criticizing is Fuehrer. He still thinks Adolf Hitler himself can do no wrong. The problem is that Adolf Hitler has surrounded himself with wrong people and for whatever reasons will not get rid of them. Although Hitler agrees with almost all of Goebbels suggestions for fixing the government Hitler does virtually nothing. Goebbels is frustrated.

   It is also interesting how his attitude toward the inferior Slavic Soviet forces has evolved. He is still convinced the Soviet military is -- man for man -- inferior to the German soldier. But the Germans are being overwhelmed by superior numbers and machinery being thrown at them by the Allies. But he is impressed with Stalin. Once upon a time he and others had scorned Stalin for the massive purges of the Soviet military in the late 1930s. At one point in the book he relates reviewing the biographies of the leading Soviet military leaders. The Soviet military leaders were all under the age of 50 and were die-hard Bolshevics who would do anything to win. This was a big reason why the Soviets survived the seemingly hopeless situation in 1941 and why they were winning the war in 1945. In contrast, the German military leaders were old and had no deep political or philosopical ties to National Socialism. If they won the war, great. If not, oh well. Goebbels concludes that maybe Stalin was not so crazy for purging his military and after the war the Nazis should do likewise with their military.

   The popular perception of Hitler and his entourage is they were living in an insane fantasy land as the Soviets closed in on Berlin. Unfortunately, the last three weeks of Goebbels life were missing so maybe there was some degree of truth to that perception. But in the book you see a somewhat different view. Yes the war was going bad but he had to grasp at some kind of hope -- whatever that may be. Goebbels recognized that if the end is near it would be a catastrophic defeat. Therefore his only hope was to stretch the war out as long as possible and hope for some miracle. Hitler himself is not so much a ranting, raving lunatic (many of the accounts of Hitler's final days were written by witnesses who were the target of his anger and thus had a reason for depicting his as insane) as a man who is angry with his generals but is resigned to his fate.

   As we know, neither Joseph Goebbels nor his Fuehrer survived the war and neither man was able to write their autobiographies explaining why they did what they did. Perhaps the closest thing to a Hitler autobiography would be Mein Kampf that depicted his early life and early political battles through 1924 and his "Table Talks" -- a series of monologues recorded between 1942 and 1944. For his Propaganda Minister these diaries is the closest we can probably hope to find to an autobiography. These "autobiographies" may be distorted but they are distorted in their own words.




4. In the closing weeks of the European component of WWII, Goebbels's attitude towards the Jews remained unchanged: (April 3, 1945): "The Jews have applied for a seat at the San Francisco Conference. It is characteristic that their main demand is that anti-Semitism be forbidden throughout the world. Typically, having committed the most terrible crimes against mankind, the Jews would now like mankind to be forbidden even to think about them." (p. 305).
   
   However, Jews were not the only scapegoats; nor were they the only ones blamed for starting WWII. On March 18, 1945, Goebbels referred to Poland's losses to, of all things, "...Polish arrogance in August 1939..." and having failed to accept the "...extraordinarily generous [German] proposals at that time..." [Sic!] (p. 165). Goebbels engages in an even more overt blame-the-victim mentality towards Poles when, in his entry of March 30, 1945, he quips about: "...Poland, which began this war anyway..." (p. 274). In addition, on March 26, 1945, Goebbels mentioned "...Poland and Russia, the most primitive countries of Europe." (p. 233).
   
   In other contexts, Goebbels had various scapegoats coming in handy, as summarized by historian Trevor-Roper: "...castigating whole classes, whole groups, whole nations: the miserable bourgeoisie, the generals, the Luftwaffe, the Churches, the Jews, the Swiss, the Swedes." (P. xxx).
   
   It is both sobering and sad to realize that someone of Goebbels's character had a much better grasp of Soviet intentions that did Churchill or Roosevelt. Goebbels even quoted a British newspaper in this regard (March 3, 1945): The Daily Mail just made a truly sensational admission; it says that for two years now I have been the only person to analyze the case of Poland correctly and forecast accurately the way in which England would succumb to the Kremlin. Churchill comes in for criticism of rare severity." (p. 30).
   
   In stark contrast to the appeasing attitude of western politicians towards "Uncle Joe" Stalin, Goebbels commented (March 9, 1945): "In the region which was formerly Poland the Soviets are pursuing their bloody reign of terror undeterred by Anglo-American protests. They take not the smallest notice of Churchill and Roosevelt. A new wave of arrests is sweeping across the country, the victims being mainly the Polish nationalists." (p. 88). Also (March 21, 1945): "The Soviets are going quietly on deporting Poles to the interior of Russia. They take not the smallest notice of the Anglo-Americans." (p. 190).
   
   The situation under which Poles found themselves was obvious to Goebbels: (March 11, 1945): "Stalin is firmly determined--and no one can understand this--to negotiate with no one over the Polish question. How rigidly he has already imposed his will is evident from the fact that Mikolajczyk, the former Polish Minister-in-exile, now proposes to submit to the dictates of the Kremlin. Under protest admittedly, but what value are such protests today? Anyway the only choice for the Poles is either to be exterminated by force or to bow the Kremlin." (p. 100).
   
   Goebbels saw right through the Communist smear campaign directed against non-Communist regimes (March 19, 1945): "It is well known that Communists always call everything fascist that is not Communist and, under the guise of a struggle against fascism, exterminate all forces opposing bolshevization of a country in which they have any influence...According to Pravda, the London Poles are a gang of degenerate landowners rejected by the Polish people. In short, Pravda's general tone is one hardly customary even between enemies, let alone between allies." (p. 172).
   
   On March 22, 1945, Goebbels discussed the Soviet-staged trials, in Bulgaria, of two witnesses who had been present, two years earlier, at the site of the Katyn massacre (p. 206). The two priests were tearfully forced to recant their blame of the Soviets.
   
   Goebbels repeats certain themes throughout this latest set of his diaries. He seems obsessed with the incipient British loss of their worldwide colonial empire, and that regardless of the outcome of the war. He thinks that the new German jets can enjoy a 5:1 kill ratio over the Allied propeller-driven planes, but recognizes that Germany can produce far too few jets to make a realistic impact in the air war. He repeatedly suggests that the Germans should have withdrawn from the Geneva Convention. This would have allowed the Germans to kill Allied POWs in reprisal for the German civilians killed by Allied bombing raids. It also would make the German soldiers fight harder, aware of the fact that the Allies would reciprocally take no prisoners.

5 comments about Billy Heath: The Man Who Survived Custer's Last Stand.

1. Although not an historian of the Battle of Little Bighorn, the author does offer compelling evidence that there was a survivor. In addition, the book provides interesting information on the Pa. coal region, Custer, Little Bighorn, etc. The information appears to have been thoroughly researched and well written. It's very evident that the writer believes that Billy Heath is, in fact, the sole suvivor of the Battle of Little Bighorn.



2. Ever since Custer's debacle at Little Big Horn numerous stories about survivors have popped up. This is another one of those stories. While on the surface this book may seem compelling, the author's argument is not. The author's lack of notation and sources creates numerous problems for serious historians. A glimpse through the slightly less than two page bibliography reveals that the author, who identifies himself as "an amateur historian," has not done exhaustive primary research. The sources that he lists are generally secondary and there is a sprinkling of published primary sources.

   The authors lack of documentation also does not bode well for this book in academic circles. Suggesting that Heath was the sole survivor and not providing one footnote is a poor methodological practice.

   In all this book offers nothing more than another "survivor story." This book is of no great historical significance because nothing is substantiated.




3. I don't know if Billy Heath survived the Battle of the Little Bighorn, but as a student of the battle and of Custer, I enjoy considering the "what ifs" of history. For a long time History (with a capital H) was only about the great, a contradiction to the principles of our democratic society. Now we have in addition the recuperation of the lives of others, such as the enlisted man Billy Heath. I find his life as a nineteenth-century working man fascinating, above and beyond whatever role he may have played on June 25, 1876. As for the negative portrait of Custer, this is more in keeping with the view of a 7th cavalry enlisted man than a privileged officer (or reader!). See for comparison Private Theodore Ewert's sour view of the Black Hills expedition. Many historians have put stock in the oral tradition of Native American accounts of the battle--why not in the oral tradition of a soldier's family? The detail that William Heath was unmarried can be just as inaccurate as his name being erroneously placed on the battlefield monument. Information about enlisted men is notoriously slippery. As for Frank Finkel and other fraudulent "sole survivors," they have already been written about by others. This is Billy Heath's story, as reconstructed by a determined and intrepid researcher. Was Heath in reality a deserter? History never gives us all the information we want, and that's its challenge.



4. This is a gem of a book that not only relives, but provides new information about the fascinating and horrifying battle of Little Big Horn -- Custer's Last Stand. Contrary to common belief among scholars that no white man survived the battle, this book provides solid evidence that one white man actually did survive -- Billy Heath, the Seventh Calvary's farrier (person responsible for the well being of the company's horses). The author, Vincent J. Genovese, supports this startling claim by providing us with photocopies of birth, army, tax, and funeral records. Genovese also enlivens the text with photographs of the key participants (both White and Native American), and important locations. The background information makes interesting and exciting reading -- the harsh life of making a living in the coal mines of Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania; the Molly Maguire episode; the biography of George Custer; the balanced presentation of the plight of the Indians; the shocking battle of Little Big Horn itself; and the daring, but necessarily hypothetical, means of escape by Billy Heath. I think this book provides lively and fast-paced reading for the general public and provides ample groundwork for scholars.



5. Custer's Last stand is one of the most famous events in American History. Supposedly all 210+ men in the five companies that accompanied him to attack the village on the Little Bighorn river died along with him, but legends have persisted ever since that there were survivors. The current book is an attempt to prove that one man did survive: William Heath, a farrier (horse handler) in Company L of the 7th Cavalry.
   
   The difficulty is that the author has little proof for his story beyond the bare bones of tax records and army enlistment papers. Records don't always tell the whole story, and in some cases the facts they present are completely inaccurate. Here those records seem to show that Heath entered the USA in 1872 from England, enlisted in the army in 1875, fought at the Little Bighorn and was killed, and then reappearred the next year in Pennsylvania at his home and lived for another dozen or so years, fathering half a dozen children in the meanwhile.
   
   The difficulty with the above is that there are major discrepancies which the author either ignores or unconvincingly explains away. For one thing, Heath was a coal miner for much of the period 1872-5, then became a policeman working for the coal company. In 1872 he was illiterate, and made his mark on his citizenship papers. In 1875 he signs his name (with a beautiful flowing script) on his enlistment papers. When did he find time to learn to read and write? Another circumstance which the author ignores is that Heath's reason for leaving his home and enlisting in the army was that the Molly Maguires (violent proto-Union coalminers) threatened him. A few pages later, the author tells you that the Mollies cut off the ears of those they wanted to threaten, but not kill. Later still, he tells you that Heath had part of one ear cut off during his service with the 7th Cavalry. However, he never makes the obvious conclusion that perhaps he lost the ear in a confrontation with the Mollies as opposed to a fight with the Sioux.
   
   I think, from the available evidence presented by the author, that it's equally likely that Heath fled home after one of the Mollies cut his ear off, and that somehow someone else from the area took his name for some reason and used it when they entered the army. This would account for him learning to read, and explain how he could reappear after being killed at the Little Bighorn. He simply wasn't there. One thing the author doesn't explain at all: after the battle, Heath supposedly was found and nursed back to health by a family of settlers, and made his way home. The Mollies, in the meanwhile, had been broken up and sent to jail or the gallows. How did Heath, out on the frontier, receive word that it was safe to go home? My suspicion is he was holed up in Philadelphia or New York City, and read about it in the paper.
   
   Another difficulty of the book is that since there's so little evidence, the author feels the need to pad things with extraneous information, to flesh out his story. As a result we get a painfully amateurish history lesson, replete with politically correct silliness and psychohistory. Everything from a half-baked psychoanalysis of Custer to Andrew Carnegie's nickname for John D. Rockefeller is included. Not exactly what I was expecting or looking for.
   
   All in all, this is an interesting theory, but it's far from fully supported by the meager documentation the author has. He only has one photograph of the man (only reproduced on the front cover of the book) and hardly anything else about him is available. This leaves the premise way more thin than it should be for the author to make such a claim with the certainty that he exhibits.

5 comments about In Love and War.

1. I read this in '91 and still recall it on a frequent basis. A true hero, Stockdale portrays captivity objectively and with fine introspection. More than a view of being a POW during Vietnam, Stockdale's conveyed inner strength reinforced my beliefs and provides encouragement. As a gross understatement, the Stockdale's will remind many what's most important in life. The movie was shallow, as are most debates - and as such, Mr. Stockdale should reconsider his performance for '92 VP under Perot as another "badge of honor". To wit, unable to become superficial with PC pancake. This is a real book by real people



2. This book conveys the honor, courage and commitment one family had to their god, each other and their country during a very trying time.



3. I have read this book twice, the original edition and the revised and updated edition (which includes his life following his homecoming). A true American hero, whose only blunder was the Vice Presidential debate, wherein he came across poorly (in my opinion, because he was out of his element). Admiral Stockdale relates his experiences as a Naval Aviator who was shot down, captured and tortured in the Hoa Lo prison. His wife, Sybil, relates in every other chapter what was going on in her life, and her involvement with her husband as a POW. She, too, deserves tremendous credit for her activities. I contrast this book with Admiral Jeremiah Dentons's book, "When Hell was in Session", which I feel is remarkably self serving.



4. This book should be mandatory reading for history classes. Beautifully written from both perspectives of a POW and the family at home. A true American hero.



5. Without a doubt the Stockdale's should be considered a national treasure becuase of the lives they lived under arduous circumstances and horrific conditions. None of us will every fully know or much less comprehend the extent of the mutual sacrifice from both Admiral and Sybil Stockdale in service to one another, other POW/MIA families, and their country. If you want inspiration, then read their book. If you want to learn to rise above your circumstances, then read their book. If you want to move from self absorption, then read their book. If you want to understand and see commitment, sacrifice, loyalty, perseverance, tenacity of spirit, and an ability to rise above the chaos of life, then read their book. If you want a rich philosophy and ethic for life, then read their book. If after reading it you don't come away with a different outlook on life, then read it again . . . you must have been distracted. The book is a journey through their history, skewed governmental policies, personal endurance, and the value of having a personal philosophy of life.

1 comments about In the Bunker with Hitler: 23 July 1944-29 April 1945.

1. Freiherr von Freytag-Loringhoven lived a fascinating life. He joined the Wehrmacht in 1933 (under a commission to become an officer) just after the Nazis gained power. He spent the next 12 years involved in many of the most interesting aspects of World War II: including the invasion of Poland (as a staff member under Walter Wenck, who would later command the German 12th Army and become the focus of Hitler's famous "Where is Wenck?" calls at the end of the war), the invasion of France, and the invasion of the Soviet Union (working under Blitzkrieg specialist Heinz Guderian) where he eventually becomes promoted to major and in command of a tank battalion that is part of the troops encircled at Stalingrad (he escapes after he is selected to be flown out to take a message personally to Field Marshal Erich von Manstein essentially asking for immediate aid from von Manstein's, Army Group Don, for the imperiled Sixth Army of Paulus).
   
   After the July 20, 1944 assassination plot against Hitler fails and the purge of the officer corps begins, Guderian is named Chief of the Army General Staff and Loringhoven his aide-de-camp. After Hitler sacks Guderian in a tumultuous row over Hitler's growing gap between fantasy and reality, Hans Krebs is appointed the new army chief of staff and Loringhoven remains on as aide-de-camp for Krebs. During this period Loringhoven dutifully fulfilled his duties, which included twice daily briefings with Hitler (and a wide assortment of top-ranking Wehrmacht officers and Nazi party officials) first at the Wolf's Lair in East Prussia and then, as the Soviets advance, at the Fuhrer's bunker under the Reich Chancellery in Berlin.
   
   Loringhoven's reminiscences of these hectic times as aide-de-camp to Guderian and Krebs, where Loringhoven himself had to provide daily situation briefings assembled from intelligence reports from the front (at least when he could, toward the end he was reduced to compiling reports from radio newscasts by Reuters and BBC and by telephoning homes in Berlin to see if their sector had been overrun yet -- when a Russian answered the phone he didn't need to ask).
   
   His book is a revealing look at the mindset of the rulers of the Third Reich, especially after he was invited to live in the bunker toward the end of April 1945 (an invitation he considered a death sentence, however, he is miraculously allowed to leave by Hitler the day before Hitler commits suicide). We do not learn much, however, that he has not already revealed before in countless interviews since the end of World War II, beginning with his interrogation by historian Hugh Trevor-Roper, who used the information he gleaned as a springboard for his seminal 1947 book, "The Last Days of Hitler."
   
   We are reminded first-hand in Loringhoven's book of many things about these last days: for example, that the conversations and mindset of the people in the bunker during the last days were often farcical and absurd; that although Hitler was deluded and often angry he never screamed or foamed at the mouth, instead his rage was one of ice-cold and forceful aggression; that Hitler was obsessed with wreaking vengeance on all those responsible, however remotely, for the July 20 attempted assassination and this hampered his ability to govern; that drunkenness was a not uncommon means of avoiding contemplating the inevitable end (Loringhoven claims to have never seen any sexual orgies/dalliances attested to by others); that the news that Himmler had attempted to negotiate a peace hit Hitler like a psychological bomb.
   
   All of this information is quite interesting. What I find disturbing is the author spent the 60 years before the publication of this book in denial. Denial about his intimate involvement in Nazism (the fact that he was vetted to work in the bunker after the July 20 assassination attempt speaks for itself), if not outright support, and denial of any knowledge about atrocities, including the murder of Jews and other innocent civilians.
   
   For example, the author puts a clever spin on his joining the Wehrmacht in 1933: He states he originally wanted to be a lawyer but changed his mind when he found out that in order to be a lawyer he had to join the "ultra-conservative and anti-Semitic" Nazi party, so he joined the Wehrmacht because it did not require membership in the Nazi party, but at the time membership in any party for members of the Wehrmacht was forbidden so the fact it did not require membership in the Nazi party appears to be a flimsy excuse and the Wehrmacht itself was both "ultra-conservative and anti-Semitic", especially the officer corps of which he was a member.
   
   In addition, he claims to have never heard anything about atrocities against the Jews until after the war, stating that while there were "rumors" of such things he did not even know the name of a single concentration camp and discussing such things was "taboo". I find this hard to believe as well and an almost incredible statement considering his wartime experiences in Poland, France, and the Soviet Union and, again, his association with the top leadership of the Nazi party the last nine months of the war when the killings of Jews and others actually accelerated and he was privy to conversations involving Speer and others who were indirectly, if not directly, responsible for the oversight of concentration camps used for slave labor.
   
   Loringhoven had a chance to come clean in these memoirs (he died shortly after their publication) about these issues as well as provide some real background about his pre-bunker wartime experiences in Poland, France, and the Soviet Union. Because he chose not to, I give the book an overall 3-star rating (5 stars for its historical value regarding the goings on in the bunker and 1 star for the author's lack of candor).

5 comments about Falling Through the Earth: A Memoir.

1. Incredible book, Danielle lived through a period of time that was the darkest of our countries history, except for now, and lived to tell about it. Not only dealing with the VN war but the consequences of a father with post traumatic stress syndrome that affected her and her families lives. For her to detail it as she did and have the brilliance to turn it into the literary expression of "my life with a VN vet" is incredible. A must read!



2. I was bored with this book but finished it because I wanted it to be better! I kept reading, hoping for something. Never found it!!!!



3. Danielle Trussoni, author of Falling through the Earth, is as much a casualty of the Viet Nam war as was her father, Dan, who returned from that war as damaged goods, a man unable to show his wife and children that he loved them. Trussoni's benign neglect of his children forced them to grow up tough and able to solve their own problems because he was a firm follower of the old adage that "whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger." Sadly, their situation shows clearly how the crippling aftereffects of combat can be so easily passed on from one generation to the next, making one wonder where the cycle finally ends.
   
   Dan Trussoni was a volunteer tunnel rat in Viet Nam, one of those incredibly brave men who went alone into the underground tunnel system that allowed Viet Cong soldiers to disappear at will and that provided them with a safe haven to recover from wounds and to hide food and weapons until they were needed. These young American soldiers, armed with little more than a pistol and a flashlight, had to crawl through booby traps and utter darkness never knowing what awaited them around the next corner as they tried to clean out the systems they discovered. It is little wonder that they came back with mental scars that never really heal.
   
   Danielle became aware at an early age of how her father's Viet Nam experience impacted his life. She found the pictures of dead bodies and the human skull that he brought home. She also found that she was largely going to have to raise herself after her parents split up and she decided to live with her father. Dan Trussoni's idea of a little quality time with his daughter was to bring her to his favorite neighborhood bar in which she spent so much time that she was considered to be one of the regulars.
   
   Life for the Trussoni kids was full of surprises, including the appearance of an illegitimate half-sister and a full sister who had been placed for adoption by their parents who felt too young and overwhelmed to keep her when she was born. Danielle was her father's daughter in every way, fearless, tough, brash and willing to take whatever life threw her way. That personality led her to Viet Nam, alone, where she saw for herself some of the same sights and experienced a little of the fear that her father felt while he was there, even forcing herself to "tour" one of the famous tunnel systems with a guide.
   
   Falling through the Earth, with chapters that alternate between views of growing up in the Trussoni family, Dan's Viet Nam war, and Danielle's own trip there, is a fascinating book, one that makes me wish that we would make absolutely certain that our wars are really necessary before we send our young men into them.



4. I read Trussoni's memoir and found it to be well-written, insightful, and subtlely compelling. It's not the kind of thing that you "can't put down," but it grabs you enough to want to pick the thing back up again once you have set it down.
   
   My only complaint, really, is that it felt like the whole thing was a build-up to something, but I never really saw what it was. And the epilogue confused any sense of what I had Thought the build-up was for.



5. All throughout their childhood, Danielle Trussoni and her younger siblings knew one thing -- stay wary of Dad. A veteran of the Vietnam War, Dan Trussoni's duties included the exploration of claustrophobic tunnels, searching for guerrillas.
   
   By the time he made it home, something inside him changed. He had divorced his first wife and abandoned two young children; he drank excessively and was, at best, unreliable for Danielle, Kelly and Matt.
   
   Still, Danielle loved him, simply for being her dad. Wasn't she his namesake? Didn't their familial bond go beyond anything else in their lives? Even after her mother left and her father sunk deeper into alcoholism and one-night stands, Danielle continued with an almost incomprehensible loyalty.
   
   When she is a young woman, Danielle impulsively decides to embark on a group tour of Vietnam. Ignoring the surprise and protests of family and friends, Danielle is determined to see the place her father's life changed, anxious to try to understand him better in order to understand *herself* better.
   
   Trussoni goes from past to present in a highly effective and engrossing manner, combining pathos, history and bits of humor.

No comments about Aftermath: A War of Memories.

5 comments about Lonely Soldier: The Memoir of an American in the Israeli Army.

1. This is a nice peak in to the Israeli army, but doesn't really cover any new ground. The writing style is decent, but doesn't keep you interested throughout. Its mostly about the training process and doesn't go very deep in to his thoughts politically or even his changing thoughts about Zionism. I kept feeling like I wanted to know more about his inner thoughts, not just which wadi they were hiking through for a particular mission. While worth reading, it is not inspiring.
   
   If you want an inspiring book about the Israeli military, I recommend either Portrait of a Hero -- about Yoni Netanhayu who led the raid and fell in Entebbe or Alex -- about Alex Singer who fell in battle in Lebanon. Both of which are excerpts from diaries.



2. Marechal De Saxe wrote, "The reputation of an organization becomes personal just as soon as it is an honor to belong to it." He was referring to that illusive entity we refer to as esprit de corps. In this memoir we gain an insight into such a noted organization and how men and women are molded to be honored members. It is not an uncommon story type but seeing inside the Israeli defense forces gives it a new exotic twist.
   
   It is not an objective study of middle eastern politics. Soldiers do not have the luxury of political objectivity. The corps is their primary loyalty, acceptance as a fellow soldier by the man or woman at their side their main concern.
   
   This is pure enjoyment treading for those of us who enjoy the comradere and esprit de corps band of brothers story. To enjoy it best, try to ignore the political slant and just enjoy the story for its face value.



3. Lonely Soldier: The Memoir of an American in the Israeli Army
   I have served in the United States Marine Corp and traveled to Israel. It was with interest that I read this book hoping to gain some insight into the IDF and life in Israel. I found the book to be well written and very interesting. I am not a speed reader but I read Lonely Soldier in less than a week. My wife kept trying to pry it out of my hands but it was difficult to put down.
   
   The author's details regarding training and his personal feelings are fascinating. The discipline of the author and his desire to serve well are an inspiration to anyone traveling through life and seeking a personal mission.
   
   Best of fortune to all and I hope you enjoy the book as much as I did.



4. A beautiful story. Adam is a true hero. A must read for those of us who love Israel.



5. Neither well written nor engaging. A Purity of Arms: An American in the Israeli Army by Aaron Wolf is a much better book.