This was an odd book. Not in the writing, or the editing, or the details, or the footnotes. But in the targeting. Who is this book for?
I enjoyed reading it, absolutely. It was a well-written, engrossing explanation of the realities of trench warfare, with a style that was matter-of-fact but not clinical. I especially liked that the author made an attempt to go out of his way to dismiss certain myths about trench warfare. There is a persistant view of WWI that involves men climbing out of the trenches and then running (or even walking) in a line towards another trench. While this absolutely did happen early on, tactics did change. Not necessarily for the better, of course, but the generals weren't idiots. At least not in the sense of assaulting machine guns at a walk without a bombardment after the first months of the war. A large part of this book is about the evolution of tactics, from brisk assaults with light artillery support, to heavy bombardments followed by sprinting masses of troops, to gas attacks followed by masses of troops, to "crater warfare", when small groups of men worked there way across a battlefield, using smoke, grenades, and tactically placed machine guns to cover their advance.
The other major angle of the book is with the evolution of trench systems themselves. Initially a simple ditch to hide in, they became enormous, very elaborate networks that had second and third lines of defense and deep bunkers for the men to shelter in. The author even points out that trenches themselves really weren't that bad. It wasn't trenches that killed men, it was climbing OUT of them that was the problem. Trenches kept countless thousands, and even millions, alive during the war.
I should come back to my initial point questioning the audience. This is undoubtedly a scholarly, well-researched book. But it is laid out and edited like a college textbook, or an introductory book intended for young adults. Not a knock on it, I guess (the pictures were very well-chosen) but it just had an unusual feel to it.