I’ve just read Deighton’s “Fighter” over the summer break. God knows why I’d never read it before but there you go. The forward is by the very intriguing AJP Taylor and, from what I can tell, the book seems to be generally ackowledged as a well researched account of the BoB. But for me the book raises as many questions as it answers. Make no mistake, I learnt a lot (assuming it’s on the money) but there are some aspects of it I find remarkable and I will test them on this forum. The first is the discussion, in the chapter on ACM Sir Hugh Dowding, about the war cabinet meeting of 15 May 1940.
Deighton notes that on 10 May the great blitzkreig of 1940 began – panzer columns crossed the French borders and headed for the Meuse and; “The French asked the British to employ their heavy bomber force against the German columns”. At the meeting of the War Cabinet on 15 May it was agreed that RAF Bomber Command be authorised to attack and on the same night “the RAF mounted the largest air bombardment the world had yet to see”. But it was directed at various targets in the Ruhr, not the advancing German forces.
He goes on to note that the French argued desperately that air attacks upon the Ruhr would have no effect upon Guderian’s armoured invasion of France. They were right, in fact the attacks had little or no effect at all. Deighton says that the RAF official history admits that the bombers achieved none of their objectives. Industrial damage was negligible. He also says the official history goes on to explain that the greatest benefit expected from this opening shot of the strategic bombing of Germany was [apparently quoting the official history] ‘an informal invitation to the Luftwaffe to bomb London.’ and thereby indirectly support by the French by drawing away some Luftwaffe strength.
Well I’ll be amazed. I know it was war, but it was early days and the UK largely untouched and things were still fairly, shall we say, chivalrous. An invitation by the War cabinet to bomb its own citizens? Any students of RAF Bomber Command and/or the strategic bombing campaign care to discuss?
By: JDK - 17th January 2005 at 01:01
Hi Andy,
Good clarification. I think Deighton’s OK. Happy to be corrected, but I don’t like “it’s no good” without supporting data. It’s as bad as statements without support.
As you are part of the dubious Putholic Ring, you can get yr own books! (Cheek) 😉
Have I read Yeates yet? Sorry, no something about shipping all my books, needing no more. When I’m in bamier climes and earning, I’ll put it on my list. (Unless you are suppling copies? 😀
By: Andy in Beds - 17th January 2005 at 00:07
Hi Andy.
So you’ve not read it.
But you know it’s dubious.
Let me guess. The bloke down the pub told you? 😉
Mark, you’re just jealous because ‘Zimmer’ is longer than ‘Mark’…
MARK12
THE OMEGA
ZIMMER
MYSTERY
Actually wrong James.
I read it a long time ago. About twenty years I would think.
I actually thought it was almost complete ‘clart’.
However at this distance in time I can’t quite remember why I thought that but I remember thinking ‘this is complete b*ll*cks’ while I was reading it.
I’m quite happy to read it again with a more open mind and I’ll put pen to paper on what I find.
Have you read ‘Winged Victory’ by VM Yeates yet?? If not why not?
The difference?
Yeates made truth into fiction, Deighton made fiction into truth.
Send me a copy.
Andy
By: JDK - 16th January 2005 at 23:54
Hi Andy.
So you’ve not read it.
But you know it’s dubious.
Let me guess. The bloke down the pub told you? 😉
Mark, you’re just jealous because ‘Zimmer’ is longer than ‘Mark’…
MARK12
THE OMEGA
ZIMMER
MYSTERY
By: Smith - 16th January 2005 at 23:48
Are you up for it Andy? It would be a very interesting critique.
The book is a good read, “fact” filled in the style of a written documentary. There’d be a lot of cross-referencing and researching required to test it on a number of fronts …
– biographies of the major players
– correlation with the official history
– lots of technical pros/cons/features of the various aircraft and weaponry
I can’t send you my copy, borrowed it is, someone local (UK) step in here?
cheers, Don
By: Andy in Beds - 16th January 2005 at 23:22
James/Damien
are you challenging me to read this and post a detailed critique?
if you are I’ll actually enjoy doing it.
Just send me a copy someone and I’ll labour to produce in a few weks.
Andy
By: Smith - 16th January 2005 at 22:06
It’s the one on the left
By: Mark12 - 16th January 2005 at 22:03
Font
*
By: Smith - 16th January 2005 at 22:02
Thanks Andy, I’ll follow up on Terraine. I have Middlebrooks’s BCWD and have read widely on Bomber Command generally, that is why I was surprised by Deighton’s text.
And Yes, Damien – this book is the same one – I found it full of facts I’d never heard before :rolleyes:
By: JDK - 16th January 2005 at 22:02
I’m with Damien here. I agree that he makes mistakes, but like Derek Robinson (CF ‘Piece of Cake’ – the book) much of the opubrum is due to the fact that he likes to look ard at some comforting myths – which then evaporate, to some folks’ discomfort.
‘SS GB’ is one of W.W.II’s best ‘might have been’ books, and based on a viable scenario. His book of war short stories is excellent. (Name escapes me at the mo.) ‘Bomber’ was lashed by some because of bits people would rather forget.
As to the Rhur. There was a lot of British businesses lobying to avoid bombing the Ruhr as they had money tied up there… The war took a while to disilusion these optomist capitalists!
Andy, Mark – any chaper n’ verse, and rating of errors vs accurate comment?
Cheers
By: Andy in Beds - 16th January 2005 at 21:56
I see … well, it was a good summer read. And Bomber is good fiction too! Thanks guys, apologies for sullying the forum 😉
Gnome
don’t apologise, you’ve started an interesting thread.
May I suggest the following:-
‘The Bomber Command War Diaries’ by Martin Middlebrook and Chris Everitt and ‘The Right of the Line’ by John Terraine.
These two books will give you a much more balanced account of what was going on in this period than Deighton ever will.
My own opinion for what it’s worth is that the RAF had no way of effectively stopping the German panzer columns or of strategically bombing Germany.
However, Terraine will explain it all much better than me.
Cheers
Andy
By: Smith - 16th January 2005 at 21:48
Len Deighton
An author always noted for his absolute regard for historical( 😉 😉 😉 :rolleyes: :rolleyes: ) accuracy and never letting the truth get in the way of selling copy.Gnome.
file the book under fiction in your library.
Cheers
Andy
I see … well, it was a good summer read. And Bomber is good fiction too! Thanks guys, apologies for sullying the forum 😉
By: Smith - 16th January 2005 at 21:42
Gnome,
Tell me.
Is the authors name in a larger font than the title on the front page. :rolleyes:
Mark
I don’t know, book’s not in front of me – but I take your point and wondered myself. Is this grandstanding or fact? I have no idea, but was intrigued by the assertion and the implications.
But as I note above, Deighton appears to be quoting the official history. The War Cabinet consisted of Churchill and a handful of selected Ministers; it was a tough bunch (and fair enough given the task). But it struck me as rather callous. That said of course, London was bound to be bombed sooner or later.
By: Andy in Beds - 16th January 2005 at 21:38
Len Deighton
An author always noted for his absolute regard for historical( 😉 😉 😉 :rolleyes: :rolleyes: ) accuracy and never letting the truth get in the way of selling copy.
Gnome.
file the book under fiction in your library.
Cheers
Andy
By: Mark12 - 16th January 2005 at 21:29
Fighter
Gnome,
Tell me.
Is the authors name in a larger font than the title on the front page. :rolleyes:
Mark
Sign In
January 15, 2005 at 9:08 am