用打长春的办法应该死人最少 Knappe的那本"革命战争回忆录"电驴上有下载,我下了一本.电驴是个好东东,用它下了3g的Osprey.不过他的话仅供参考.美国人是这么评价他的书的 Interesting but not compelling, January 2, 2001 Reviewer: Christopher Farrell (Cupertino, CA USA) - See all my reviews Sigfried Knappe's book is interesting for what it is: a personal history of WWII. Don't be fooled by the copy on the back of the book, though - it provides relatively little insight into the psycology of WWII Germany, the operation of the German Army, or the reality of Soviet prison camps. In fact, even the title is somewhat misleading ... while Knappe was a soldier in that he was employed by the Wermacht, he spent relatively little time during the war actually doing any shooting. The problem here is that Knappe spent his life as an artillery staff officer, and while he nominally served in all those campaigns, he saw relatively little combat (none at all in Italy; only a few days in France; more in the invasion of Russia, but he was wounded early in Typoon, before things got really tough; and then none again until the last days of the 3rd Reich). His service in the late war is mostly as operations officer. On the one hand, this *is* quite interesting if you are curious about logisitcal details of the German Army; if you are interested in combat conditions and operational details, though, you'll need to look elsewhere. Knappe was a staff officer who lacked real decision-making authority, so you won't get either good high-level coverage of the campaigns, nor will you get the gritty details. Additionally, the writing in this book has some issues. For one, the line between Knappe's contributions and Brusaw's ghostwriting is in some places clearly drawn, which raises questions about the areas where it isn't. For example, early in the book, distances and such are stated in English units; most of the middle in metric; and later on, metric with English conversions (Knappe, as a German, would presumably only use metric, and certainly would only have used metric in his diaries). Secondly, the book was apparently written mostly from diaries, and the style shows; the writing tends towards long, rambling narratives, and it tends to be unfocussed. We get long sections of realtively uninteresting material, and short sections on crucial campaigns and battles that cry out for some more supporting detail. Bottom line, this is a book that will be of some interest to die-hard WWII buffs, but I doubt it will be of that much interest to most people. I hate to give a marginal review to a book like this, which probably has merit just for being what it is, but time is short and there are a lot of better books out there. Soldat hardly stands up in comparison to Guy Sajer's excellent (if somewhat mysterious) The Forgotten Soldier. That book is more compelling, more interesting, and far better written. |