Skeleton Crew and "Mr.Monster" by Dan Wells.
What Are You Reading? Part Deux
- Thread starter Dana Jean
- Start date
-
This message board permanently closed on June 30th, 2020 at 4PM EDT and is no longer accepting new members.
Working my way through the University of Warsaw's 1960 book, The History of Poland. Greatly interesting historical account of the nations history done by Marxist historians, excellent.
Let me know what you think about this when you're done.
I have The Hawley Book of the Dead by Chrysler Szarlan on my reading list. I bought it from the guy who inspired my screenplay.
Still working on that one too.
I can't see the image, sorry Notaro.
It's a book called Morecambe And Wife, written by Joan Morecambe, it details her life with the late great Eric Morecambe of Morecambe & Wise. It was published a year after his death in 1984.
reading All Hell Let Loose. A pne-volume history of WW2 by Max Hastings. Quite good. It is a bottom to top history. It concentrates on diaries, letters chronicles from those who experienced the war, not necessarily soldiers but civilians too. The big political decisions, Hitler, Stalin Churchill, Roosevelt, Mossulini, Franco and their underlings are there too but unlike, for instance Anthony Beevors book World War 2 that is a Top to Bottom history, they arent there all the time.. Just in the beginning yet. The Us and Japan has not entered the war and Hitler is preparing for the attack on russia. I think that if you reed both Beevors book and this one you have read two of the best one volume histories of the war written from two different perspectives.
I just finished Disappearance at Devil's Rock by Paul Tremblay and highly recommend it.
It's about a 13 year old boy that goes missing and the agonizing aftermath as a search is conducted. When the boy first disappears, there doesn't seem to be any foul play, as he was with a couple of friends and he ran off in the woods and they couldn't find him. But as time goes on, new clues are slowly revealed and the mystery deepens. This book unfolds in a slow burn much like Head Full Of Ghosts. There are elements of horror, suspense, family drama and mystery in this book (like Head Full Of Ghosts) so I don't think you can put a particular label on this like horror. Like Head Full of Ghosts, it has elements of horror but it's so much more.
It's about a 13 year old boy that goes missing and the agonizing aftermath as a search is conducted. When the boy first disappears, there doesn't seem to be any foul play, as he was with a couple of friends and he ran off in the woods and they couldn't find him. But as time goes on, new clues are slowly revealed and the mystery deepens. This book unfolds in a slow burn much like Head Full Of Ghosts. There are elements of horror, suspense, family drama and mystery in this book (like Head Full Of Ghosts) so I don't think you can put a particular label on this like horror. Like Head Full of Ghosts, it has elements of horror but it's so much more.
Just finished The Chill by Scott Carson. Suspense to the max, disaster always present, a touch of horror , and the supernatural.
You may be surprised to realize that this was written by an established author using a new name. Read on and enjoy!! Highly recommend it.
You may be surprised to realize that this was written by an established author using a new name. Read on and enjoy!! Highly recommend it.
I cannot stress this enough, if you haven't read GOT, do so.
I love Marxist accounts from history, the bias is there, of course, but it makes a change from the biased western/capitalist accounts of WW2. Most US history books like to lessen the influence of the Russians, and claim it was them who defeated the Nazi's, not the case, without Russia, the Nazi's would have won, even with US intervention.
Im still reading Stephen King's Institute. Not great like Sleeping Beauties or Outsider novels but in a way, The Institute is pretty much a remake of Firestarter
Well, this is not a marxist history. Just because it has a lot of diaries, letters and so on in it doesn't make it marxist. But you're quite right in saying that too many history books has downplayed the eastern theatre. And not only Russia but Chinas importance as well. Not so much as a fighting nation but the suffering they lived through, or died during, in the hands of the japanese and the manpower they had to keep there and not in the pacific theatre.
I wasn't saying that your book was Marxist, I was just making a general statement about WW2 History! You also notice in US accounts of WW2, especially with the Japanese, they tend to think of these as an inferior people who were warmongering and had to be defeated. The only real exception to this is the book Letters from Iwo Jima, which is an incredible account of the bravery of Japanese soldiers against insane opposition. The Japanese remind me of the Fins, great fighters, but there simply wasn't enough of them, if the Nazi's had an army of Fins, they would have defeated the Russians easily.
My bad then. The nazis were actually rather good fighters, at least their army was, the problem was that there was, just as for the japanese, too few of them. As long as they were reasonably close to their bases they won both against the brits in northafrica and the russians in Russia. But when the lines got stretched and they gave Stalin time to wake a sleeping bear numbers overwhelmed them and the new recruits that took the deceaseds place was not as well trained. But until D-day in 1944 the main war was fought between Germany and Russia in Europe. Northafrica, greece, crete and the rest was, to be blunt, sideshows in comparison. Not to take away anything from them who fought there but in manpower, armywise and so on between 1941 and 1944 the main players were Russia and Germany.
The Nazi's or The Wehrmacht, were undoubtedly the greatest army of the war, like you said, they went too thin. The SS divisions were the elite of the elite, and like the Fins and Japanese, there simply wasn't enough of them. The Africa theatre wasn't important, I agree, at least not with regards to the whole war and the final outcome. The British were laughably poor in WW2, both from a technological standpoint and leadership. The Americans were decent, but they were greatly helped with supply and air support. The Russians were numerous and immovable. Italians, don't need to say a lot about them. But yes, the Wehrmacht were undoubtedly the best.