Was perusing the internet and happened to see this little nugget. I always find top ten lists entertaining. I don't agree with many, but it is an interesting list. https://tgnreview.com/2017/02
A interesting list, all I think are worth reading, but I'm not sure that it is the best (or essential) top ten that must be read. The spy double dip seems much when there is not really much about either the Atlantic or Pacific naval war or the war in the Mediterranean, or the early campaign's in Poland, France and the Low Countries..
I agree, Two derivative books by Hastings and one doubly-derivative book by Beevor channeling Hastings? Give me a break.
Two books on spies...No books on ULTRA? I am also unimpressed with the lack of books examining the political background to the war, and the overabundance that focus on the European Front.
Your right. The major flaw in this list, other than the focus on spies, is the European Theater. It also seems this list leans towards narrative history other than pure history. I like many of the titles here, but seems more geared towards casual historians.
"This collection does not contain any first person memoirs or accounts from major political figures (e.g. Winston Churchill’s History of the Second World War). Neither does it contain any biographies nor what might be considered “traditional” choices on the subject (e.g. William L. Shirer’s The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich). Finally, encyclopedic A-Z volumes of World War II have not been included because, while informative, this group tends to lack a greater sense of contextual focus." Reading that made me not bother reading the list since its clearly extremely subjective and is purposely excluding what could very well be some of the best books written on WW2.
Why not list them on the opening page? As others have stated rather questionable list. Including a book on Downfall for instance? Certainly an interesting topic but if I'm choosing the top 10 books on WWII it's not on my list. 2 books on D-day and the aforementioned 2 on spies and several important areas left unmentioned. That all the comments are positive is a bit suspicious as well. While the Molotov-Ribbentrop pack was important in the overall scheme of things does it really rate a book to itself?
To be honest, none of these books would be on my list. I liked many of them and I could say that at least two I would recommend to others (I'm picky when it comes to Hastings). Like I said, not defending the list, but it seems very limited to casual observers. Just a favorites list of sorts.
It is easy to fill space with a top ten list. The good news reader is not particularly well through through. There are two books by Hastings and Roberts, and only one contemporary writer - Grossman. Two books on spies and intelligence and a counter factual on the invasion of japan that never happened. Nothing on Blitzkreig and the German or Japanese rise to power or collapse of the European empires or Nothing on the war at sea or on the higher political leadership by the Anglo American alliance and the creation of the United nations, or for that matter on the nature of Naziism - say "total moral war" If you want to evaluate WW2 books try reading this first. The Battle for History: Re-fighting WorldWar II by John Keegan, Vintage Books, New York, 1996 This is a historiography WW2 by a really good military historian.
