Sledge v.s. Manchester

When I heard a history buff state that William Manchester's, "Goodbye, Darkness" was superior to E.B. Sledge's " With the old breed". I said aloud to myself, "Bull***t" and downloaded it purely out of spite.
The difference between the two books couldn't have been more immediately apparent. E.B Sledge's memoir is just that, a sledge hammer that hits you in the chest and knocks down any romance you ever had about combat. I would describe it as a rollercoaster through a Hell so terrible, I could never imagine it on my own.
When I started "Goodbye Darkness", it enveloped me like the feeling of when the first stiff drink hits after a long hard day. I just felt taken care of. I knew instantly I wanted more.

Vous avez donné votre avis sur cette évaluation.

Vous avez donné votre avis sur cette évaluation.

1 personne a trouvé cela utile

One Does Not Love Horror, One Respects It.

This is the third first person account of the Pacific War I have listened to. Sledge, Leckie, and Manchester each provide a view of that horrific time from different perspectives.

Sledge's view is deeply personal. You are on the front line with him and you never forget the complete horror of his experience. He is telling you all he experiences. I really dislike the review of Sledge's writing by Tom Hanks. Hanks is no critic and he should have kept his thoughts to himself. There is much left out of Sledge's book, which can be sensed by knowing Leckie's and Manchester's work. You can review them all and you will know what I mean. Sledge's view is Sledge's view only and it is limited as any single person's is. I think Sledge was an incredible man to have endured and survived, and from his writing it is clear he looked around after the war and wondered at that too. His is that of the innocent returning from the damnation of combat.

Leckie is brilliantly evocative when he is describing the non-combat experiences, but becomes hushed and crimped when he is describing combat. He is clear when he mows down four Japanese soldiers, killing three, but it's obvious he, like Sledge, was deeply affected by the killing and death around him. He tried to write about it, but his style is muted when he is in combat, and he was in vicious combat, but he has none of the richness of Sledge. It is incredibly evocative to realize the enjoyment to be had from his whoring is probably all the more colourful because Leckie realizes he should have been killed, yet survived and he is determined to live well for that reason. His irreverence to the Marines is deeply satisfying because it is good that rebellion survives even in that vicious world.

William Manchester, writing 30 years after his wide Pacific War experiences, is a perfect blending of Sledge and Leckie. Manchester describes combat as clearly, mercilessly, honestly, as Sledge. And he describes his personal life as richly and honestly as Leckie does his. But Manchester is more than honest, he is historically minded. He gives the view up close and from years later, providing a richness and depth that as long as humans study combat, they will search out this book.

Some reviews, I suspect, are offended by Manchester's boldness, sexually, emotionally, militarily. And I suspect Hanks wouldn't touch this book for his movies about WW II because it's just too smart for Hollywood. Telling the truth was never, ever La La Land's purpose. Thank heavens Hanks left this book alone, for others to enjoy it without his blinkered view of honesty.

Amen.

Honesty may be the first casualty of war, but Lazarus-like it arises wise and angry once peace returns.

You won't be the same after you listen to this book.

Vous avez donné votre avis sur cette évaluation.

Vous avez donné votre avis sur cette évaluation.