Human Smoke: the Beginnings of World War II, the End of Civilisation

This is, quite possibly, the single most depressing book that I have ever read. So much death and destruction could have been prevented. The book is also fascinating. I was already fairly cynical when it came to politicians, but having read this I will be even more cynical about their motives, their aims and even their humanity.

The book presents relevant information chronologically across both Allied and Axis powers. The deceit, war-mongering and lack of humanity were shocking despite the amount of WWII literature I've already read. Apparently I'm also idealistic enough to expect the 'good' side to behave better than the 'bad' side, but history is written by the victors and this book shows just how well it can be done.

This book forms part of the Non-fiction Non-memoir challenge as well as the What's in a Name challenge, where it represents the book with something seen in the sky (which is smoke).

Tolkien and the Great War: the Threshold of Middle Earth

This is an amazing book. I've never really read much about the First World War. Anyone who's so much as glanced at my non-fiction shelves or GoodReads stats will note a decided preponderance of works relating to the Second World War, but nothing on the First. Everything I know about the First World War is due to Sue Harsant, who taught me history in high school (and I shall never forget her complaining after an exam/test/assignment that we should not simply say Ferdinand, because she might think we were referring to Ferdinand the Bull who went traipsing through the daisies. Her very dry sense of humour delighted myself and Tiina Napoleon at the time).

Anyway, the point of that long aside was that this is the first work I've ever read about the First World War and so was my first glimpse into the horrors of trench warfare. I had an intellectual understanding that it was a horrific thing, but I didn't understand. I still don't, thankfully, but now I have a greater idea of what about it was so horrific. Of what it was like to be there, what happened to people on the ground. On the one hand it makes me glad for the 'advances' of mechanised warfare. At the same time, those same supposed advances terrify me. No longer does individual kill individual, now machine destroys machine and life from afar. I know they had machine guns and bombs and so on, but on the whole they could at least see who they were killing. The horror of war, and the facts of war - the facts being that you are killing individuals that are really no different from yourself - were up close and personal. They no longer are.

At the same time as this works as a general introduction (for me) to the First World War (because you can be sure I'm going to be looking for more on the subject now), it also works really well as a biographical work on Tolkien. Specifically with regard to the effect that his experiences in the war and in the Battle of the Somme particularly must have had on his writing. You cannot go through an experience of that sort without undergoing profound changes. There's a fair amount of speculation on the author's part because Tolkien was extremely reticent regarding those experiences. That speculation is backed up by fairly solid reasoning (in my completely uncritical opinion) and while I'm of the opinion that you can never know exactly how things influenced the creative process, you can work out a fair amount, especially when it's something as significant as this.

If you're interested in either the First World War or Tolkien, I'd recommend this.

A Trail of Blood

Set during the reign of Henry VIII, this is a story that seeks to explain the mystery of the Princes in the Tower. The two princes, Edward and Richard, went to live in the Tower of London when their father, Edward IV, died. For whatever reason the crowning of their uncle as regent was postponed. Finally the uncle was crowned Richard III. His Tudor successors later claimed that he had murdered the princes in order to ascend to the throne. There has never been any conclusive proof regarding what happened to the two princes.

This novel claims that the reason the coronation of Richard as regent was postponed was because the two princes (and consequently their sister, the mother of Henry VIII) were found to be illegitimate. Richard III kept the boys in the Tower to protect them, as he had sworn to do. The story explains why they felt the need to escape and how Edward was killed in the attempt. The rest of the novel is spent uncovering the movement and final location (really quite obvious from the beginning) of Richard, Duke of York.

The aim of the protagonists is to unearth a Yorkist claimant to the throne, ostensibly to succeed Henry VIII (who had no son at the time) but really to put an end to the Reformation and what they saw as a corrupt regime with dubious claims to royalty. The aim of the author is to solve the mystery in as plausible a manner as possible. I think he succeeds, though some of the events and coincidences are a little far-fetched. I'm interested in finding more by the author, particularly the non-fiction related to this period.

The Screwtape Letters

This was a most amusing book that manages to make you laugh and think at the same time. I felt very sorry for poor Wormwood, though I didn't need Screwtape to tell me he was seriously screwing up. I'm tempted to say that the last letter in the book was the best of the lot.

Though I don't believe in demons or devils or whatever it is that they're supposed to be, I find myself questioned my motivations more now than I did before. As much as this is a work of fiction there is a certain amount of truth underneath, as in all CS Lewis's work.

Highly recommended.

The End of the Affair

I'm not sure that this was the best book to read after Cold Mountain, but that's what I did. This book was less depressing, though I must say that I rather suspected the ending. I was wrong about the path that lead to the end, however. I was not expecting a sudden pact with a god that one didn't truly believe in. I was not expecting the truth of just why Sarah wasn't doing what she was supposed to be doing. I thought she had cancer or something and was seeing some kind of kooky healer. The religious undertones to the book completely surprised me.

I have to say that I was very pleased to be wrong about the journey to get to the end. It's not often that this kind of story can surprise you, though that might have been less true when it was written.

Now, what I really want to know is whether or not this book should be considered a classic. Read it and tell me what you think.

Cold Mountain

This is a very sad book. Set during the American civil war, Cold Mountain follows the story of Inman, a Confederate deserter trying to get home, and Ada, a woman with no idea how to survive on her farm.

I personally found the sections about Inman to be on the less interesting side. It does get a bit more interesting once he starts running into the Home Guard, who are on the lookout for deserters. I suspect that says more about me than about Frazier's skill as an author. I much preferred the chapters that dealt with Ada's struggles, particularly after the introduction of Ruby. I adore the character of Ruby. I can relate most easily to the abstract academic life of Ada. Ruby, on the other hand, is earthy, superstitious and entirely focused on survival. The contrast between the two of them is fantastic.

Personally, I could have done without the semi-happy ending of the epilogue. I think ending with Inman dying in Ada's arms would have been perfectly appropriate, if rather depressing.

Hidden Children of the Holocaust

This book is about the lower echelons of the Catholic clergy during the Nazi occupation of Belgium in World War II. While the higher levels kept quiet, the parish priests and nuns hid thousands of Jewish children and saved their lives.

Vromen undertook this research as a sociological study and the book reads somewhat like a thesis. She has interviewed one priest, a number of nuns, a number of hidden children and a couple of members of the secular resistance movement responsible for getting the children from their families to the institutions that hid them.

I am left feeling depressed and uplifted at the same time. Nazis and nuns are two of my greatest fascinations, so it's no surprise that I enjoyed this study. What I'm left with is a sense that armed resistance receives too much acclaim in comparison with other forms. The people who just did a few tiny things - carrying messages or providing food - were just as courageous as those who chose a more militant form of resistance. But what about all those others who chose not to resist, neither actively nor passively. Did they collaborate or embrace Nazi ideology? Did they merely think of themselves as neutral? Which begs the question, how can you remain neutral in the face of such inhuman behaviour? More interestingly, how would I have behaved? There's no way to know without finding myself in a position that I hope the world never sees again. I suspect, though, that as survivors die memory will fade and such horrors may again be committed. The extreme religious right of the United States and their vilification of Muslims give me cause for concern. The eternal conflict in the Middle East gives me cause for concern. Every continent shows some form of intolerance and oppression of humanity. I can only do what little I can to ensure that we do not forget.

Seven Cities of Gold

I borrowed this from Confluence recently. It's a beautifully written book with a lyrical quality that one doesn't often find in prose.

I jumped straight in to the story, skipping the explanatory note at the beginning. Possibly I would have found the story easier to understand in terms of geopolitical stuff if I had read it first. Also, I would have liked for this book to have had a map so that I had a clearer idea of the geography and whereabouts events were taking place. As it is I found the story fairly easy to follow without it, though there were a number of questions I had.

This is not the sort of book that ties everything up neatly for the reader. This is the sort of book that leaves you with questions. Nagging thoughts that simmer in the back of your brain as you try to work out just what exactly it is that things are supposed to mean and whether or not you got all the nuances that you were supposed to.

If you don't like to think about things, especially those complicated things that make people uncomfortable, then this is not a book you should read.

The Two Towers

I love this book. It's my favourite part (I know, I said the same about Fellowship and I'll probably say it again for RotK). One of the most interesting things about it is, in the words of a truly awful song, 'there's no beginning, there'll be no end' ('Love is All Around' by Wet Wet Wet, if you're wondering). This is the middle of the story and there is no real beginning and no real end - those are in the other books. This dives right in to the adventure and makes no attempt to tie the ends off. It does, in fact, end off on a cliffhanger.

I am particularly fond of the last chapter, The Choices of Master Samwise. It's such a fascinating insight into the relationship between Sam and Frodo from Sam's perspective. It's also interesting to see the way in which Sam considers his choices and eventually decides what it is that he's supposed to do. There's something poignant about the whole chapter, as Sam grieves and then finds his strength. His confusion is so real and the whole section is incredibly moving.

I'm also extremely fond of anything that involves Eowyn. She's the single major female character in the entire volume. I love Eowyn. She loves and she despairs. She's bound by the culture and the time period in which she lives and yet she manages still to be headstrong and independent. I love watching her character develop. Even though, in this book, one merely glimpses her a few times, one can feel her strength and her desperation behind the scenes and from what people say about her. At least, I think you can, I may be projecting because I've read it so many times I know the characters better than I know myself.

Of course, the heroes of Gondor and Rohan appear here for the first time. Faramir and Eomer. Both are honest, law-abiding men. And yet they're not afraid to bend the laws of their countries (and, really, as heir-apparent in both cases they're probably two of the few who can). These are strong, confident men who trust in their judgement. They believe that they can tell the truth of your intentions and what is best and right to do. They will not take the easy path. They will always do what they believe is right. These are the kind of men that you want to have as your leaders.

My extra super favouritest thing about this book? Merry and Pippin in Fangorn Forest with the ents. I love Treebeard's speeches. I love the contrast of the tiny, quick hobbits with the enormous, deliberating ents. I love love love the scene where the party from Helm's Deep arrives on the edge of the ruin of Isengard and is greeted by the hobbits. The reaction of the Fellowship members and Theoden, with Gandalf amused in the background is something that I read two or three times every time.

I could probably write a ten page essay on the things I love about this book, but I won't. I'll just leave you with the highlights.

The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich

It seems wrong, somehow to say that I really enjoyed a book about the Nazis. Somehow, it seems like it's an endorsement of their ideology and the things they did. I don't agree with them about anything, but I find them fascinating. I'm an archaeologist because I'm interested in people and people are easier to deal with when they're dead (apparently this is different for kittens). I have an abiding interest in World War II and Nazi Germany, for which I blame my high school history teacher, Sue Harsant. Nazis fascinate me because they took the treatment of other human beings to an extreme. I don't understand how they did the things they did. I don't know how some of them turned a blind eye to the things that were going on. I hope that if I keep reading, I'll figure it out.

I'm also interested in reading some alternative histories. There were so many points during the rise of Hitler and the Nazis and during the war, where everything could have been ended so much more quickly. Where everything could have gone on for so much longer. Where quite a different result could have come about. I'd like to know what people think might have happened in those cases. I hope that it will give me some insight into the ways in which these people thought and why things happened the way they did.

This book is a fantastically detailed history of, as it says, the rise and fall of the Nazis in Germany. This book was originally published in 1960 and it shows. There's a slight hint of sexism, but given that almost no women played important roles in this conflict, I can forgive that as a product of its time. There's a severe anti-Nazi, anti-Hitler thread to the book, and given what they did I can forgive that. I would have preferred the book to be slightly more objective, but given the incredible access to sources that Shirer had, as well as the fact that he was on hand as a journalist at many of the events chronicled I'm willing to forgive his subjectivity. He can't view this as one completely objective for the simple fact that he was there, he experienced it. I will also note a fair amount of scorn for the blindness of other leading politicians and say that he was just as biased against them as against the Nazis (well, maybe not quite, but a bit). I could have done with less of the "good christian men" motif - many Nazis considered themselves good christian men as well and as someone who thinks that organised religion is responsible for a great deal of the worlds ills having it so regularly referred to was rather grating. Also, it needed a map. You can never have too many maps and this book had none.

If you're not interested in WWII or the Nazis or any of that, don't bother. If you are, this is a must-read.

The Lord of the Rings

It's that time of year again. For some reason my thoughts turn towards this book every year around Autumn. Rather like Frodo contemplating adventuring out of the Shire every Autumn. I imagine that LotR is my mental equivalent of comfort food, in somewhat the same way as Enid Blyton is. Also, as I said somewhere previously, I'm somewhat obsessional and my obsessions tend to be cyclical, so I go through a LotR phase every now and then.

My first experience of Tolkien was not a good one. Some years later I was told to read LotR by my Dad, and I did. I loved it. There were some bits that dragged (there still are, but I've read every word multiple times and have no issues with skipping entire chapters if I feel like it), but most of it was phenomenal. I love this book. Until the last few years, I lived at home and read my Dad's copy. Then I moved out. I had no LotR of my own. I was given a beautiful 50th Anniversary edition one year. It's gorgeous. I adore this book. The cover is soft, it has a little box, the edges of the pages are shiny gold, like in very old books and there's a little red ribbon to mark your place. The maps are fantastic, in black and red and there are some images in the book of the pages of the Book of Mazarbul (from the Chamber of Records in Moria). I also have a copy of Two Towers illustrated by Alan Lee. I'd like individual illustrated copies of Fellowship of the Ring and Return of the King as well (by John Howe, preferably, but I'll take Alan Lee as well) - this is a book I like to read in the bath and my single volume is too unwieldy and precious for that.

I like to watch the movies too, despite the many and varied objections I have to it (not the least of which is our missing 2nd half of the Two Towers Extended Edition). It's a fun romp through a book that tugs at the heart strings and evokes all manner of feeling. Also, it's pretty and quicker than reading the book. Of course, no sooner than I watch the movie (again) than I want to read the book (again), so they feed into themselves.

Tolkien's precision and profundity are two of the most enduring qualities of this work. The language is exquisite, the descriptions are evocative, the characters are real. This is a book that stays with me, always. The issues are real and - most importantly - applicable to each and every stage of a person's life. Also, I'd make a very good hobbit.

How I Live Now

Daisy is sent from New York to live with relatives in England because her stepmother doesn't like her. Or something, that bit isn't important. What is important is how she interacts with these new-found relatives who live out in the country. Next thing you know, there's a war on and the only adult in the house is in a different country.

This is a story of survival in the face of horror, and tenacity. It's a story of how bonds are made and sustained. It's a 'young adult' book, which I usually take to mean children, along with things like Nancy Drew and the Twilight series (neither of which you'll find on my bookshelves, though I have read them). This is not a story I'd recommend for anyone under sixteen. It's a harsh, sometimes graphic description of the horrific reality of war and the effects that exposure to this can have on people - both individually and as a group.

It's a fantastic book, well-written and I heartily recommend it to adult readers.

The Castle in the Forest

When I picked up this book, I thought it was a biography. It's certainly biographical in style, but it is nevertheless fiction. It didn't take long to establish that it was fiction once I started reading it, given the fact that it makes reference to a number of things that I simply do not believe in. A more credulous reader might actually have believed this to be a biography (though I find it difficult to imagine how anyone could believe some of the things written. Besides, if you actually read the back of the book, it says "blend of fact and fiction", so there really aren't any excuses).

As I've said, I'm interested in why people do the things they do. This book explores the nature of evil, in particular, the nature of evil as expressed in Adolf Hitler. I've read quite a bit about World War II, partly from a desire to understand why (and how) people do such awful things to other people, and partly because I had the most amazing high school history teacher in the world, Sue Harsant. She left me with an indiscriminate love of history and some of the most bizarre wit I've ever come across.

Anyway, this is a very interesting take on the 'evil' of Hitler. It's also one that I disagree with entirely. I do not believe that it is necessary to look any further than humanity, and society in particular, to find reasons for such behaviour. The idea that we must turn to external sources of evil is ridiculous. Particularly after reading The Anatomy of Villainy, despite that author's belief in an actual external source of evil. This is a book that will leave you with a number of uncomfortable thoughts and for that reason alone is worthy of recommendation (there are others, I just think that that's the most important and quite sufficient without all the other stuff about excellent writing and so on).