Whilst acknowledging your points, I think you are being a little unkind to Monty. Personally he was a flawed, difficult character who big noted himself and antagonised colleagues and superiors. But, and it is a big but, he was a consummately professional general who understood how to use the British Army to maximise its strengths and minimise its very real weaknesses. I would rate him as second only to Slim amongst UK WW2 generals. Britain was lucky to have him with all his flaws. In addition, I would say operationally he was better than any US general except Patton.
David, I agree. The review wasn’t meant to deprecate his very real achievements. I did say ‘This is not to say that Monty’s achievements were simply an unsubstantiated story’ but I can see how one might think that I was being unnecessarily negative. Mead doesnt make this mistake.
I have been frustrated by books on Monty that are either exceedingly, almost aggressively negative (Anthony Beevors books are excellent but he was not happy with Monty at all) or overly accepting of his unusual personality traits (The Lonely General by Alistair Horne is a very good book though and worth a read, but doesn't reflect on Monty's more negative characteristics).
A balanced book on Monty is needed, particularly if it helps inform when next Monty is imagined on screen. I've yet to watch a film or TV program, that I feel at least, properly represents the man.
Actually, its about the 21st Army Group, called Monty's Men. You will also like Colossal Cracks by Stephen Hart, also about the 21st Army Group under Monty.
Whilst acknowledging your points, I think you are being a little unkind to Monty. Personally he was a flawed, difficult character who big noted himself and antagonised colleagues and superiors. But, and it is a big but, he was a consummately professional general who understood how to use the British Army to maximise its strengths and minimise its very real weaknesses. I would rate him as second only to Slim amongst UK WW2 generals. Britain was lucky to have him with all his flaws. In addition, I would say operationally he was better than any US general except Patton.
David, I agree. The review wasn’t meant to deprecate his very real achievements. I did say ‘This is not to say that Monty’s achievements were simply an unsubstantiated story’ but I can see how one might think that I was being unnecessarily negative. Mead doesnt make this mistake.
Thanks for the review. I have been wondering about this biography…so have now ordered it.
Will definitely be looking into this.
I have been frustrated by books on Monty that are either exceedingly, almost aggressively negative (Anthony Beevors books are excellent but he was not happy with Monty at all) or overly accepting of his unusual personality traits (The Lonely General by Alistair Horne is a very good book though and worth a read, but doesn't reflect on Monty's more negative characteristics).
A balanced book on Monty is needed, particularly if it helps inform when next Monty is imagined on screen. I've yet to watch a film or TV program, that I feel at least, properly represents the man.
You'll enjoy this. Beevor was too harsh. A good counter to him is John Buckley
I have his armchair general book on WW1, didn't know he had written on Monty too. Will look that up 👍
Actually, its about the 21st Army Group, called Monty's Men. You will also like Colossal Cracks by Stephen Hart, also about the 21st Army Group under Monty.