Beevor ha declarado que la batalla de Normandía ha sido mitificada por culpa del cine y la televisión, y que mucha gente tiene un concepto erróneo de lo que en realidad significó el desembarco de las tropas aliadas, sin distinguir entre realidad y ficción.

No fueron héroes todos los que participaron en el desembarco de Normandía
Con este libro, Antony Beevor pretende desmontar esta imagen irreal de una de las batallas más famosas de la historia. Nos habla de las víctimas civiles, los franceses que sufrían bajas por parte de los dos contendientes, el penoso avance por el territorio francés, las miserables disensiones entre los jefes militares, y lo peor de cualquier guerra: los heridos, los desnudos y los muertos.

An excellent read. It gives the big picture of grand strategy and large-scale offensives, but intersperses anecdotes about and quotes from ordinary people which gives it a human touch and makes it very readable.

This story of the D-Day landings and the campaign for Normandy takes us right up to the liberation of Paris. It appears to be well-balanced; its criticism of Montgomery is probably pretty mainstream these days.

My usual complaint about this type of book is the maps. For about two thirds of this particular book, I found the maps to be very clear and comprehensive. Only towards the end of the book did I find the text mentioning places that were not marked on the maps. While the detailed maps of the battles were good (apart from that proviso), it would have benefited from a couple of general maps to show where everything fitted together, again especially towards the end when the stage suddenly expanded. ( )

Beevor has a beautiful written style and specialises in a holistic historical narrative style that is always enjoyable to read. He combines sources from both sides in the conflict and makes sure to include the civilian view of affairs to paint a whole picture of complex events.

I have enjoyed his previous books and while this has all the hallmarks of his writing I cannot feel that perhaps the history of D-Day has been retrodden once too often.

Beevor makes sure the German side of events is represented and clarifies the suffering of the French population during the campaign. He does not gloss over the atrocities and friendly fire incidents on both sides. He is clear-eyed on the numerous conflicts within the allied forces. It is a good, balanced piece of history that refuses to make simple judgements in the absence of evidence and tries to provide the reader with the means to draw their own conclusions.

And yet, what more is there that can be said really? Beevor decides against Montgomery in one of the key controversies of the period. He also indicates that he thinks air power was less decisive as a weapon that generally judged while still allowing for its important interdictive effect on supplies and German movement.

It is a great introduction but those familiar with the outline of events will find a few interesting bits and pieces (for me I felt the politics and mindsets of both sides were revealing, neither side grasped the psychology of the other instead assuming that their opponents shared their own view of the world) and a well-written narrative history. Stalingrad or Berlin would probably be better choices if you haven't read them already. ( )

Very interesting account of D-Day and the subsequent battles for Normandy up to the Liberation of Paris.Gripping narrative of the fierce battles in the Normandy "Bocage",where American soldiers proved themselves against the Germans.However the book illustrates the terrible suffering and sacrifices of French civilians from both Air and Artillery bombardment ,which is often understated in other D-day books.The book is critical of Montgomery and his strategies and gives due credit to the dogged defense by the German army which lacking Air cover made the Allies fight for every inch of Normandy before the brilliant breakout by American armor led by Bradley and Patton which eventually led to the Paris uprising and the liberation of the city by both French and American troops. ( )

Originally published on Upublica: http://www.upublica.com/article_c/art...

Unlike the majority of military historians, Antony Beevor wastes little time describing the military planning or the politics leading up to the Allied invasion of Normandy in June 1944. Rather, he gets right to the point, and in a fast-paced style akin to a Tom Clancy novel he manages to paint a highly vivid picture of the invasion at ground level.

The reader is right next to the paratrooper as he jumps from the C47 troop carrier, slips in vomit and breaks his ankle as he hits the ground. We share the plight of the American infantry troops heading for Omaha beach as they are lowered into the water in landing crafts, vomiting in their helmets, disoriented by the shockwaves from battleship guns bombarding the beachhead.

Turning military events into a great read is no mean feat, and Beevor deserves praise for striking a fine balance between readability and the necessary substance to render a credible account of military events. Place names, description of terrain and technical terms do not bog down the account.

The Allied invasion of Normandy still has a nostalgic, almost romantic place in the public consciousness, largely thanks to the Hollywood film industry. On a subconscious level we cannot help but compare and be influenced by the typically heroic imagery of the WWII film and the somewhat less heroic imagery often rendered in Vietnam War films. As a result, when we think of WWII we automatically conjure up nostalgic notions of a bygone era filled with unblemished heroes, whereas the American soldiers in Vietnam are seen more as war criminals. Of course, neither picture is true. While the Allied soldiers of WWII should indeed be remembered as real heroes, the nostalgia that surrounds WWII and the rosy picture that is often painted are far from justified.

Crucially, Beevor’s graphic account does not leave out the nasty sides of war. It follows the more truthful trend that has also been replicated in more recent Hollywood films such as Saving Private Ryan (1998), which leaves nothing to the imagination in depicting the Omaha beach landings with soldiers drowning, having their limbs blow off, vomiting and walking aimlessly around on the beach in a state of shock. Likewise Band of Brothers (2001) is not afraid to show unlawful and revengeful killings or trophy hunting and excellently conveys the claustrophobic experience of bocage fighting (small fields enclosed by hedgerows). This is a great antidote to the sanitary imagery of old-school Hollywood productions such as The Longest Day (1962) where the violence of war is limited to John Wayne breaking his ankle as he is dropped above St-Marie du Mont (82nd Airborne Division).

Beevor’s account also deserves praise for placing events in their rightful perspective. Violent as the fighting undeniably was at Omaha, the imagery rendered in Hollywood films has turned this particular event into an American legend and blown it somewhat out of proportion. In fact 1,465 American soldiers were killed during the first 24 hours of fighting compared to 3,000 French civilians killed within the first 24 hours of the invasion (largely as a result of Allied bombardment). Allied casualties during the landings were in fact smaller than anticipated. Total Allied losses between June and August amounted to 225,000 casualties, while the Germans lost 240,000.

A topic that has been neglected in most Hollywood films is unlawful killings committed by Allied soldiers. Although hinted at in dream-like sequences in Band of Brothers, unlawful killings of prisoners of war began the very first day Allied soldiers set foot on French soil and continued throughout the campaign. And it was not just in the heat of the moment that Allied soldiers committed unlawful killings. In one recorded incidence injured American paratroopers killed a few Germans on the way to England as they were being evacuated on the same LST vessel as the German prisoners.

By shedding a more critical light on the Allied war effort during World War II, Beevor belongs to a new breed of British historians who – without being an out-and-out revisionist or questioning our indebtedness to the Allied soldiers – have nevertheless begun to challenge the public perception of the Allied war effort being one of irreproachable heroism. In emphasising the Allies’ indiscriminate area bombing of German cities and describing it as mass slaughter, Niall Ferguson in The War of the World (2006) argues that WW II was not a simple war of good against evil but a war of evil against lesser evil. ( )