Read to Win the War discussion

Hello readers!

Apologies for the delay as we've been getting resettled in our return to working at the museum. Hope everyone is well!

We are forging ahead with our June selections for the anniversary of the Battle of Dunkirk, which concluded 80 years ago yesterday. To kick it off we'll be hosting a real-time chat of the first halves of both books on our discussion board next Friday, June 12! Remember you don't need to read both The Miracle of Dunkirk, and Dunkirk: The History Behind the Motion Picture. We will be discussing both so your input on either will be very welcome! Post any comments, questions, and thoughts on this thread throughout the week, and please join us here for the real-time chat next Friday!

Then we will wrap up the Dunkirk books with a live video chat on Friday, June 26, so mark your calendars!

Librarian's note: if you are a local here in New Orleans, you can borrow both of these titles for free on your mobile device through the New Orleans Public Library's subscription to Hoopla. All you need is a library card, so check out their website to do both. And for anyone outside Nola, you can always check with your local library to see what they can offer.

Live event update: Our wrap-up event for the Dunkirk books on June 26 just got a little more interesting. We will be joined in discussion by Joshua Levine, author of Dunkirk: The History Behind the Motion Picture! It was super nice of him to agree to participate on relatively short notice, so I hope you will show him some love and attend what will surely be an interesting discussion!

In the meantime, join us this Friday, June 12 at 1pm CT for a real-time chat on our discussion board about the first half of both books. Feel free to submit questions and comments in this thread throughout the week and we'll address them in the chat. Hope to see you then, and read on!

Great news on getting Joshua Levine to participate in the Dunkirk chat. If I can get up early enough (1pm CT is around 4.00am in Australia) I'll try and join in otherwise I will pick up the chat later.

'Aussie Rick' wrote: "Great news on getting Joshua Levine to participate in the Dunkirk chat. If I can get up early enough (1pm CT is around 4.00am in Australia) I'll try and join in otherwise I will pick up the chat la..."

Thanks Aussie Rick, I know you're a time zone or two away, so I always appreciate your participation and hope you can make it to the chats! But remember for those who can't make it to the live author event we will post the recorded video on our group page afterwards to view at your convenience.

On a different note but still concerning Australia and getting up way too early for events across the world: I'm looking forward to the return of AFL (Aussie rules football for the unfamiliar), and my side Collingwood play tomorrow morning (at 4:30am here). Up the pies!

Yo! To grow your interest and get the ball rolling on the discussions, here are some links to reviews, an interview, a podcast, and a video.

Reviews of Walter Lord's Miracle of Dunkirk when it was released in 1982...

...from a general reader's perspective:
https://www.csmonitor.com/1983/0211/0...

...and from a military perspective (remember it's still the cold war when this was released):
https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi...

Interview with Joshua Levine about the Dunkirk film and book:
https://www.military.com/undertherada...

Recent podcast remembering the 80th anniversary of the Battle of Dunkirk, with a unique format. Joshua Levine sets up the context while voice actors bring to life first-hand accounts of the battle:
https://historyhack.podbean.com/e/104...

And finally, a video lecture of Joshua Levine from the London Library:
https://vimeo.com/268800704

Now you have really taken me by surprise, an AFL follower and a Collingwood supporter at that (a good team indeed)! I'm afraid I go for Richmond :)

Thanks for those links, I will check them all out a bit later. Walter Lord's book was one of the first I read on Dunkirk and I still regards it as a decent account on the subject.

'Aussie Rick' wrote: "Now you have really taken me by surprise, an AFL follower and a Collingwood supporter at that (a good team indeed)! I'm afraid I go for Richmond :)

Thanks for those links, I will check them all ou..."

Oh nice! Next door rivals who happen to be squaring off tomorrow to reopen the season! Much respect to Richmond, I recall the 2018 prelim final when we nicked you in an exciting upset before we blew that Grand Final. But your Tigers made up for it with a dominant Grand Final last year. Congrats and good luck this season!

And agreed, there are many books on Dunkirk but Walter Lord's seems to have held up over time and is still considered classic. Cheers!

I have been enjoying rereading Walter Lord's book and will get to Joshua Levine's shortly. Interested to see how their styles and take on the subject differ. Lord is a master at weaving together personal stores of the event to create a dynamic and relatable narrative. He pulled me right in and threw me into the action. In many ways this is , from my perspective, a standard approach to writing non-fiction...and Lord is great at it. Excited to see if Levin takes a different approach.

Mark wrote: "I have been enjoying rereading Walter Lord's book and will get to Joshua Levine's shortly. Interested to see how their styles and take on the subject differ. Lord is a master at weaving together pe..."

Hi Mark! Glad to hear you've been enjoying the Walter Lord book again, it definitely rewards re-reading. It has that journalistic style of using personal accounts to better illustrate what was happening on the ground, which seems to be the norm for popular histories nowadays. Levine originally did an oral history book on Dunkirk which inspired the film, but this companion book does try to give a broader context to the battle which we hope will add more to this discussion.

Hello all! Welcome to our live discussion board about our June reads, The Miracle of Dunkirk by Walter Lord and Dunkirk: The History Behind the Motion Picture. Let's chat books!

Both books seems to bring complimentary background, as Lord give you the play by play, while Levine tries to bring more context to the overall situation. Both rely on personal accounts for depth.

Perhaps we can start with the build up to Dunkirk. How did we get here? What forces led to the retreat and then evacuation?

Wesley wrote: "Both books seems to bring complimentary background, as Lord give you the play by play, while Levine tries to bring more context to the overall situation. Both rely on personal accounts for depth."

Personal accounts are always a vital part of the story, but I feel they are even more important in the story of Dunkirk due to the chaotic nature and vast experiences of those trying to evacuate.

Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Both books seems to bring complimentary background, as Lord give you the play by play, while Levine tries to bring more context to the overall situation. Both rely on personal accoun..."

Agreed Kali, personal accounts are always important, but maybe more so here because of how differently people experienced it.

Levine mentions as much in the opening interview with the film's director Christopher Nolan. "for very individual...there was a different reality"

Wesley wrote: "Perhaps we can start with the build up to Dunkirk. How did we get here? What forces led to the retreat and then evacuation?"

Hey Wes,

I think this is a perfect example of the saying "baptism by fire." The Allies should have had a better idea of what German forces could do, they had rolled over most of Eastern Europe by this point. But despite the intelligence they had, they were spread too thin, and really had no hope of standing up to Germany's new mechanized army and tactics. They learned quickly, but not in a situation where they could react in any manner to fight back.

Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Perhaps we can start with the build up to Dunkirk. How did we get here? What forces led to the retreat and then evacuation?"

Hey Wes,

I think this is a perfect example of the sayin..."

You nailed it. The British, and especially the French were ill-prepared for the new German way of waging war on the go. In fact, the French Army considered themselves the finest in the world at that time, but that was quickly proved wrong.

Wesley wrote: "Levine mentions as much in the opening interview with the film's director Christopher Nolan. "for very individual...there was a different reality""

I really liked how he continued by acknowledging that the stories sometimes seem to contradict one another, because that's a challenge historians face in using first person accounts. They often do contradict one another or they contradict the "official" record. But the Dunkirk experience puts that into perspective that a singular event really can be vastly different for individuals.

I thought is was interesting when I was rereading Erich Manstein's memoir when he stated that he helped devise the 1940 assault in through the Ardennes because using the WW1 Schleiffen plan was outdated and (as he said) our generation could do better. The Allies were behind the curve on operational thinking and Dunkirk was the result.

Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Levine mentions as much in the opening interview with the film's director Christopher Nolan. "for very individual...there was a different reality""

I really liked how he continued b..."

Totally agree, some folks were getting drunk and swimming or even reading paperbacks on the beach while bombs fell, then others were tied up in the fight to maintain the escape corridor, you couldn't have more disparate experiences

Wesley wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Perhaps we can start with the build up to Dunkirk. How did we get here? What forces led to the retreat and then evacuation?"

Hey Wes,

I think this is a perfect example..."

As much of a blow as Dunkirk was, it's interesting to think, what if they had held on? Would there have been as much of a drive to change what they were doing to actually have the ability to fight back? What I'm getting at is this defeat and evacuation, though a horrible blow for the French who had to stay and fight, did allow the British time to reevaluate their fighting, their equipment, their plans, and their enemy. I think in many ways the defeat at Dunkirk led to eventual success, and not just for the fact that the army was saved, but it taught the British a lot about what they needed to do to win.

Mark wrote: "I thought is was interesting when I was rereading Erich Manstein's memoir when he stated that he helped devise the 1940 assault in through the Ardennes because using the WW1 Schleiffen plan was out..."

Great point Mark, the allies were indeed way behind the curve and learning in real-time, and as you said, they were lucky to get away at dunkirk given how ill prepared they were

Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Perhaps we can start with the build up to Dunkirk. How did we get here? What forces led to the retreat and then evacuation?"

Hey Wes,

I think this is a ..."

That's a very interesting notion Kali, what if they had held on? Your point dovetails with Mark's, being able to escape and reset strategy was huge, one of many reasons it's viewed as a victory even though it was a defeat. Very interesting to think about how differently the vountries saw it at the time, while we all know how important it was now, some saw it as a massive loss, especially for the French, but also for the allies who needed those footholds on the continent.

So the dunkirk evacuation happened for many reasons, but one that gets discussed a lot was how the germans halted their rapid advance for three days, allowing precious for the allies to pull back and plan the evac. Was it hubris? Like they can win with the luftwaffe and save tanks?

Mark wrote: "I thought is was interesting when I was rereading Erich Manstein's memoir when he stated that he helped devise the 1940 assault in through the Ardennes because using the WW1 Schleiffen plan was out..."

The Allies were indeed terribly behind. 1941-1942 are really two years of the Allies testing things out and trying to figure out what works and what doesn't, with varying degrees of success. The Dieppe Raid, Torch. Even when the Allies get back on the continent in '44 and stay there, they get hit in just about the same spot as '40. Had we really learned?

Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Perhaps we can start with the build up to Dunkirk. How did we get here? What forces led to the retreat and then evacuation?"

Hey Wes,

I think this is a ..."

If Britain had eventually fallen then Dunkirk would probably not have become such an integral part of the story of the eventual triumph by the Allies. So not only did it save the core of the British Army but it became a great first act in the story of the war in the west that was spun in the 50-60s. Lord certainly burnishes that story.

Wesley wrote: "So the dunkirk evacuation happened for many reasons, but one that gets discussed a lot was how the germans halted their rapid advance for three days, allowing precious for the allies to pull back a..."

If I recall correctly, wasn't that hubris on the part of Goering who wanted a major victory for the Luftwaffe?

Mark wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Perhaps we can start with the build up to Dunkirk. How did we get here? What forces led to the retreat and then evacuation?"

Hey Wes,

I thi..."

Surely Dunkirk would be known as the beginning of the end if it had gone the other way, an interesting thought on how we build up these stories over time

Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "So the dunkirk evacuation happened for many reasons, but one that gets discussed a lot was how the germans halted their rapid advance for three days, allowing precious for the allies..."

Yep! Goering had to have his Luftwaffe get the glory, and Hitler agreed that the tanks should be saved for taking the rest of france, but all of the german staff beyond them were miffed at how they could just stop when victory was so near

Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "So the dunkirk evacuation happened for many reasons, but one that gets discussed a lot was how the germans halted their rapid advance for three days, allowing precious for the allies..."

I want to read more on this. I'm assuming Lord touches on it and I have not reached that section yet. But I have to assume that it was probably a combination of the panzers being a little worn down, gathering French resistance to the west and Goering's bluster. An historian that I know at the naval war college did a deep dive on France 40 and found that the attrition to the Wehrmacht was actually very very high....its just that the French were worse and collapsed totally.

Hitler shows that he's not al blitzkrieg by also using the excuse to halt that he wanted a political victory in belgium, he thought by not destroying it that it would create support for the nazis

Wesley wrote: "Mark wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Perhaps we can start with the build up to Dunkirk. How did we get here? What forces led to the retreat and then evacuation?"

He..."

That's a really interesting point to consider. In Levine's book he talks about the "Dunkirk Spirit" and how its meaning as evolved over the decades.

Wesley wrote: "Hitler shows that he's not al blitzkrieg by also using the excuse to halt that he wanted a political victory in belgium, he thought by not destroying it that it would create support for the nazis"

Good points!

Mark wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "So the dunkirk evacuation happened for many reasons, but one that gets discussed a lot was how the germans halted their rapid advance for three days, allowing precious f..."

That's really interesting and I've seen that elsewhere, that germany rolled over inept armies, and people only took notice when it was France but they were just as weak apparently!

Mark wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "So the dunkirk evacuation happened for many reasons, but one that gets discussed a lot was how the germans halted their rapid advance for three days, allowing precious f..."

It began as a short rest period for the panzer units, and to allow infantry to catch up. But then Goering called Hitler and made his case for allowing the Luftwaffe to finish them off, and so Hitler ordered the panzer units to stop. In hindsight, it was a good indication of how Hitler's interference in troop movements and military decisions would play a big part in major defeats for the German army. Had Hitler not had control of the panzers in '44, they would have been turned loose on the Allies landing in Normandy and we might not celebrate June 6 every year.

great point and analogy with normandy that occurred to me as well, the german commanders on the ground were certain of victory at dunkirk, and couldn't believe it when hitler got involved, same deal at normandy, everyone is saying do this and hitler's like nah i like this better!

Kali wrote: "Mark wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "So the dunkirk evacuation happened for many reasons, but one that gets discussed a lot was how the germans halted their rapid advance for three days, allowi..."

Yes....Manstein also talks about how Germany was not prepared for such a stunning success. They were a little at loose ends on how to proceed and in the void Hitler stepped up with his own ideas....

Another one of those what ifs, but it does seem like the german commanders were hamstrung by hitler's delusional overthinking

Thanks again for the chat! It has been helpful during this pandemic. Looking forward to finishing Lord and cracking open Levine!

Have a great weekend!

Mark wrote: "Kali wrote: "Mark wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "So the dunkirk evacuation happened for many reasons, but one that gets discussed a lot was how the germans halted their rapid advance for three..."

that's righ tmark, i remember reading that in Lord, he says they advanced to the coast so fast they didn't know what to do next, in fact they had not written out any plans at all! I think he even mentioned that turning inland and forgetting dunkirk was an option, but they saw the chance to eliminate a huge chunk of the BEF, which was probably the right move but again why didnt they finish the job

Mark wrote: "Yes....Manstein also talks about how Germany was not prepared for such a stunning success. They were a little at loose ends on how to proceed and in the void Hitler stepped up with his own ideas...."

It's something I've found interesting researching is that despite all of the war games and planning and theorizing, they didn't really know how something would work until they put it into action. In my research on naval shore bombardment I found a letter from a USMC Major and he basically said all of the "experiments" were great, but they wouldn't really have any clue what they were doing until they actually had to put it into practice against the enemy. And the enemy is kind of the weak point in your planning. You can only guess their reaction, so you really can only successfully plan so far.

Mark wrote: "Thanks again for the chat! It has been helpful during this pandemic. Looking forward to finishing Lord and cracking open Levine!

Have a great weekend!"

Thanks Mark for participating! We really appreciate you joining us, and I look forward to further discussions on these books going forward. Have a good weekend!

Kali wrote: "Mark wrote: "Yes....Manstein also talks about how Germany was not prepared for such a stunning success. They were a little at loose ends on how to proceed and in the void Hitler stepped up with his..."

Excellent! Thanks!

Wesley wrote: "Mark wrote: "Kali wrote: "Mark wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "So the dunkirk evacuation happened for many reasons, but one that gets discussed a lot was how the germans halted their rapid adva..."

The thought of German forces getting to the coast and then thinking "now what?" has a distinct Monty Python skit feel to it. It almost seems absurd that it could happen. With the hubris so often blatantly obvious with the German army at the time, it's surprising to think they did not expect to advance so quickly and had actually given more credit to the strength of the Allied forces than they did.

Kali wrote: "Mark wrote: "Yes....Manstein also talks about how Germany was not prepared for such a stunning success. They were a little at loose ends on how to proceed and in the void Hitler stepped up with his..."

that's really interesting research Kali, you could almost argue that the first few years of the war were an experiment for germany to see what works, like we already mentioned the blitzkrieg concept caught everyone off guard, including themselves! and maybe that says something about their disagreement in the field on how to finish off dunkirk

Wesley wrote: "Kali wrote: "Mark wrote: "Yes....Manstein also talks about how Germany was not prepared for such a stunning success. They were a little at loose ends on how to proceed and in the void Hitler steppe..."

That's a good point. I've never really stepped back and thought about those first few years in the European theater as such a time of learning war, but it really was. I think the Allies thought it was going to be much like the previous war and they were prepared to entrench. It was definitely one of the biggest changes in warfare compared to what had been fought previously. So how do you prepare for something so new?

Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Mark wrote: "Kali wrote: "Mark wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "So the dunkirk evacuation happened for many reasons, but one that gets discussed a lot was how the germans halted t..."

Haha! Any opportunity to include monty python in the discussion is always welcome! It is very much comical to imagine them realizing their own strength as they realized the surprising weakness of the allies. I'm sure that didn't help the hubris factor, they figure if we can do this, we don't need to waste materiel on dunkirk. big mistake

Wesley wrote: "Kali wrote: "Mark wrote: "Yes....Manstein also talks about how Germany was not prepared for such a stunning success. They were a little at loose ends on how to proceed and in the void Hitler steppe..."

I have to run but this conversation is too interesting!!! I agree totally. The Germans were not prepared for their success. I believe that the original goal of the invasion of France was to just grab the ports near Dunkirk so they could have forward bases for U-Boats....the thought of marching down the streets of Paris was probably a pipe dream to the German General Staff. One aspect of the studying the war is this idea that technological, tactical, operational, etc. advances are made because of stunning victories or defeats in real time during the war

Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Kali wrote: "Mark wrote: "Yes....Manstein also talks about how Germany was not prepared for such a stunning success. They were a little at loose ends on how to proceed and in the voi..."

Agreed, it makes oyu think about how weak the US military was and how we needed all of 1941-1944 to figure it out before we got onto the continent

Wesley wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "Mark wrote: "Kali wrote: "Mark wrote: "Kali wrote: "Wesley wrote: "So the dunkirk evacuation happened for many reasons, but one that gets discussed a lot was how the ger..."

I think there were numerous times that the Allies had greater success due to the hubris of the German command, especially Hitler. Dunkirk was definitely one of those.