A damned good read.

[molehill]

Into The Silence: The great war, Mallory and the conquest of Everest. By Wade Davis.

Had this out the library and just finished it, a fascinating insight into all the above and an eye opener into a different world - but less than 100 years ago.

If you want a good book as a christmas pressie, ask for this and you won't go wrong, a good long read too.

[shaunaneto]

Sounds like my kind of book, Ta Moley I'll have a gander

[paulo]

sounded like my kind of book (climber, history freak) but I go straight to look for it and see an enthusiastic Amazon reviewer saying

"A comprehensive study of early exploration set in the context of the "Great War". Incredible insight into the waste, suffering, and incredible bravery of men from an innocent time. Fantastic evocation of front line trench warfare which emphasises the belief that these young men were indeed "lions led by donkeys". General Haig would always commence attacks at 7.30am not surprisingly the Germans were ready. He thought that the widespread use of machine guns would have a detrimental effect on British soldiers individual resolve and bravery. The Germans had machine guns and were deeply entrenched. The General saw this almost as a form of cheating! As men were dying in their thousands his solution was to demand more cavalry, obviously useless in the mud and craters of the Somme, Ypres, Paschendale etc."

which if true suggests the author is seriously lacking in any sensible historical perspective of WWI and needs to read up on the historical revision that has occurred in the last 20-30 years rather than trust in AJP Taylor and Blackadder

I might have thought the reader at fault but the two critical reviews on Amazon (most love it and find it very well written) are from people citing some very basic factual inaccuracies and misunderstandings

has put me off - It's nice for history to be well written and readable but it needs to based on accurate facts P

or is that unfair?

[Stolly]

which if true suggests the author is seriously lacking in any sensible historical perspective of WWI and needs to read up on the historical revision that has occurred in the last 20-30 years rather than trust in AJP Taylor and Blackadder[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

I might have thought the reader at fault but the two critical reviews on Amazon (most love it and find it very well written) are from people citing some very basic factual inaccuracies and misunderstandings

has put me off - It's nice for history to be well written and readable but it needs to based on accurate facts P

Here here Paulo. Everyone should be made to read Bloody Victory - the Sacrifice on the Somme

[Deadlegs]

sounded like my kind of book (climber, history freak) but I go straight to look for it and see an enthusiastic Amazon reviewer saying

"A comprehensive study of early exploration set in the context of the "Great War". Incredible insight into the waste, suffering, and incredible bravery of men from an innocent time. Fantastic evocation of front line trench warfare which emphasises the belief that these young men were indeed "lions led by donkeys". General Haig would always commence attacks at 7.30am not surprisingly the Germans were ready. He thought that the widespread use of machine guns would have a detrimental effect on British soldiers individual resolve and bravery. The Germans had machine guns and were deeply entrenched. The General saw this almost as a form of cheating! As men were dying in their thousands his solution was to demand more cavalry, obviously useless in the mud and craters of the Somme, Ypres, Paschendale etc."

which if true suggests the author is seriously lacking in any sensible historical perspective of WWI and needs to read up on the historical revision that has occurred in the last 20-30 years rather than trust in AJP Taylor and Blackadder

I might have thought the reader at fault but the two critical reviews on Amazon (most love it and find it very well written) are from people citing some very basic factual inaccuracies and misunderstandings

has put me off - It's nice for history to be well written and readable but it needs to based on accurate facts P

or is that unfair?

Which part do you disagree with? There has been some historical revision recently but that is still opinion. Also this is an Amazon review of the book. It has been critically well recieved I believe. Why not read it and see what you think?

[paulo]

Also this is an Amazon review of the book. It has been critically well recieved I believe. Why not read it and see what you think?

I went straight off to amazon to buy it but taking that (I agree a reviewer's opinion and left some doubt related to that in my post), and the easily check-able list of very basic factual errors in the 2 (of more than 20) critical reviews I've been put off. Reading history is my hobby and the current reading list exceeds my possible time on the planet so careful selection is important. I don't want to read inaccurate, lazily researched tired cliche mongering no matter how grippingly written - any more than I want to run on the road ;-)- didn't intend to upset anyone

P

ps I think the "revisionist" view of WWI is the generally accepted place to start from nowadays and any other account needs to be raised as an argument, otherwise the unknowing approaching an account as described in this book are being fed a widely discredited polemic. I'm guessing the author does know his climbing and exploring which would make for some good reading, which i regret missing out on, but the other stuff would annoy me too much - personal pov

[molehill]

I can't comment on the accuracy of the history of WW1 - I don't have that knowledge. But the section on the war is really an introduction to the people involved in the climbing, it is about where and how they served, how they met etc. and were then recruited to join the climbing expeditions. As the Everest expeditions were basically run and involved recently serving army officers from WW1, that part of the book kind of explains how and why descions were made and the attitudes of the sahibs to natives.

If you read it, I would be very interested to hear your views from a historical point. It took the author 10 years to research and write, so it shouldn't be that inaccurate, though possibly history from a different perspective - the author is a Canadian anthropologist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wade_Davis