Rating: 
Summary: Poor Title, Useful Book
Review: Enough has been made of the misleading title, so I won't go into that--I assume it's the publisher playing the bimbo. (As opposed to, say, giving the book a competent copyediting and proofreading job.) This book has all the lineaments of something knocked off during a slow weekend. It's casual, offhand, and rife with errors (e.g., Barbarossa beginning on 22 June 1942). It's also arguably the best checklist of literature on WW II available. Keegan, as might have been surmised, has done the reading, and here he tells you all about it. Even the novel selections (Jones and Waugh) are incisive.
If you were to work your way through the notes of this book (I confess I haven't--not completely; not yet), title by title, you would have, in the end, a master's knowledge of the war and the circumstances surrounding it. So go on--get cracking.
Rating: 
Summary: A major disappointment
Review: For me this book is a major disappointment. I expected a wellwritten bibliography of literature on WWII. I wanted information about useful and reliable books regarding different topics of WWII. Instead I got very short history of the war with a few remarks on very few books. Neither is really explained exactly why they are recommended nor are there enough books mentioned. This book is only useful for those who never have read any book about WWII.
Rating: 
Summary: A neccessary tool for the WWII reader.
Review: I admit it...the title is a bit misleading. Consequently, I was surprised by what this book actually is: a bibliographic essay. But what a pleasant and enjoyable surprise it was! I read this book in one day and couldn't wait to begin reading all the books that Mr. Keegan discussed. Consider this book your road map to future WWII reading. An indispensable road map!
Rating:
Summary: Wonderful Bibliographic Survey Of World War Two Titles!
Review: In a manner that will surprise few of his faithful readers, historian and writer John Keegan turns what one would expect to be a dry bibliographic survey of what this noted scholar believes to be the seminal and meaningfully works on the subject of World War Two into a fascinating and sometimes provocative survey into the subject of not only that most fateful of conflicts, but also of war itself. As has recently been proven through the edifying work of other authors such as Ian Kershaw with his brilliant two volume study of Adolph Hitler (see my reviews) as well as books by Michael Burleigh's "The Third Reich: A New History", Daniel Goldhagen's "Hitler's Willing Executioners", and Williamson Murray and Allan Millet's "A War To Be Won", the field of investigation is hardly complete. Indeed, given the fact that the integration of all the relevant information concerning the war remains such a daunting task based on its size, complexity, and the fact that it is found in a plethora of languages and dialects, one has to admire Keegan's admission that his own work as well as that by notable others such as Sir Martin Gilbert, Gerhard Weinberg's mammoth "A World At Arms" (my own personal favorite) do not represent anything close to definitive histories of the Second World War. Instead, he insists with both energy and enthusiasm that such a definitive work is yet to be written. Moreover, as anyone familiar with works ranging from Hugh Trevor-Roper's early masterpiece on Hitler's final days in the Berlin bunker to the recent short overview by Richard Overy (see his wonderful short essay and overview in "The Origins Of The Second World War"), arguments regarding the etiology and progress of that war are hardly settled beyond the point of argument or discussion. So while one might think that some half century after the fact the dust of truth would have settled over the subject, Keegan insists the quite the opposite is the case. In my opinion, this book is an essential read for anyone who seriously attempts to study the most amazing string of historical events we now refer to as comprising World War Two. Keegan threads his way through a pile of titles, many of which the serious student of 20th century history will be familiar with, but also including a number of titles I am now scurrying to find or order in order to further my understanding of this endlessly fascinating time period. By the way, by providing such an authoritative survey of all these works, he of necessity must provide a kind of unifying narrative that amounts to one of the most concise and immensely readable histories of the war I have yet seen, including all of Professor Keegan's other works. This may not be the first book on WWII you want to order, and in fact few of us finding this book would expect to approach it as anything like a comprehensive history. But it is at once both an engaging and entertaining read as well as an intelligent guide through the virtual briar patch of the hundreds and hundreds of titles still in print on the subject of the single most important historical event of the 20th century. I highly recommend this book. Enjoy!
Rating:
Summary: A must for WWII history buffs
Review: In this slim, but magnificent, volume, John Keegan sets forth the required reading list for all interested in WWII. It should not construed as a history of WWII in itself: it is not. Rather Keegan compares and analyzes many of the published histories of WWII and provides a critique of the work, its author and his assessment of the biases or omissions in the works he cites. At that level, "The Battle For History" is invaluable. It is as if your studies of the subject are being guided by one of the most eminent historians of the period. First published in 1996, even the lapse of 8 years is telling. Hopefully a revision will be forthcoming. For example, Rick Atkinson's recently published - and superb - history of the North African campaign is not mentioned here. It should be. Jerry
Rating:
Summary: A must for WWII history buffs
Review: In this slim, but magnificent, volume, John Keegan sets forth the required reading list for all interested in WWII. It should not construed as a history of WWII in itself: it is not. Rather Keegan compares and analyzes many of the published histories of WWII and provides a critique of the work, its author and his assessment of the biases or omissions in the works he cites. At that level, "The Battle For History" is invaluable. It is as if your studies of the subject are being guided by one of the most eminent historians of the period. First published in 1996, even the lapse of 8 years is telling. Hopefully a revision will be forthcoming. For example, Rick Atkinson's recently published - and superb - history of the North African campaign is not mentioned here. It should be. Jerry
Rating: 
Summary: Partisan, grossly biased
Review: The book deals with the histriography of World War II.Author being a academic has had the opportunity to amass encyclopedic knowledge on the subject.however Keegan is an orthodox is a historian has espoused the views of the establishment which does not reflect truth.
For instance Keegan despite his stupendous grasp of the subject has faulted Soviet leader J.V Stalin for the outbreak of hostilities in Europe.This is a mistaken notion which needs to be corrected.
Soviet union proposed mutual assistance pact designed to create a united front to resist Nazi aggression.Moscow was willing to come to the defence of the West and was prepared to commit 100divisionsa for this purpose.But it expected Western allies to do the sameif Germany were to attack Soviet Union.Allies particularly Britain prevaricated.As aresult Stalin became suspicious of British intentions.This precisely which drove Moscow to sign a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany with catastrophic consequences for peace in Europe.
Talk tories under Neville Chamberlin was forced to appease Hitler because Allies were impotent ,war weary is a myth.It is no secret Chamberlin and his cronies hated communism considered communists a threat to British aristocracy.Hence Tories started courting Hitler.This can be understood if one were to read Chamberlin's secret correspondence with Hitler executed through special channels.Chamberlin was willing to give Nazi Germany a free hand in Eastern Europe. In this way British hoped to entangle Nazi Germany in a war with Soviet Union.For more details refer this excellent book In our Time:Chamberlin Hitler Collusion by Leibovitz Clement Finkel Alvin.
Controversy surrounding Peral Harbor will be satisfactorily resolved only if American govt decalassifies documents now locked in the vaults of NSA.I am inclined to the view that FDR had extensive foreknowledge about impending Japanese attack.Based on the knowledge at their disposal -derived from the decryption of Japanese ciphers-Washington knew Tokyo was poised to intiate hostilities.FDR and his cronies refused to react to war warnings promptly.For more details refer Day of Deceit:Truth about FDR and Pearl Harborby Stinnet Robert B.
Author condemns Japan's aggresson in China. This statement sounds hypocritical.Much before Japan entered the scene Western powers carved up China among themselves.Chinese reaction to this culminated in Boxer rebellion which was brutally suppressed.
On the positive side author has upheld the primacy of Eastern Front in World War II.Soviet Union bore the brunt of the war with massive armies locked in a bitter and bloody combat along a huge front streching from Barents sea to the Black sea coast.
To conclude ,despite a few imperfections this book helps the reader to gain a comprehesive picture on World War II.Those having a inquisitive bent of mind will find this book a useful guide to literature available on the subject.
Rating:
Summary: Misleading
Review: This book is a shameless attempt on the part of the publisher and the author to trade on Keegan's reputation and the great general interest in WWII. The title and subtitle to this book leads readers to expect a historiography of WWII. Instead, this is a short bibliographic essay on important books on WWII. While Keegan's recommendations are useful, this slight book is not worth spending money on unless you can buy it at a steep discount. This is the kind of information that should appear at the back of a decent one volume history and which I suspect is absent from Keegan's book on WWII.
Rating: 
Summary: New name and description would help out a lot.
Review: This book is simply a list of other books. The "description" of the book seems great. It talks about controversies with Pearl Harbor, and etc. However there are merely just 3 lines in the entire book on these controversies like Pearl Harbor. Keegan just states a book title, and gives a line or two, and then gives another book. It just was not what I expected from the description. If I would have realized it was a big "list of other books" I would have chose something with informational content of WWII. If you are already a huge WWII itellectual and looking for other books, then it is a great list. But I think something went wrong when the editors was naming the book and writing the description.
Rating:
Summary: New name and description would help out a lot.
Review: This book is simply a list of other books. The "description" of the book seems great. It talks about controversies with Pearl Harbor, and etc. However there are merely just 3 lines in the entire book on these controversies like Pearl Harbor. Keegan just states a book title, and gives a line or two, and then gives another book. It just was not what I expected from the description. If I would have realized it was a big "list of other books" I would have chose something with informational content of WWII. If you are already a huge WWII itellectual and looking for other books, then it is a great list. But I think something went wrong when the editors was naming the book and writing the description.
| 
