|
Acts of War: The Behavior of Men in Battle
by Holmes
Product Group: Book
Publisher: Free Press (1986-03-24)
ISBN: 0029150205
EAN: 9780029150207
Dewey Decimal #: 303.66
Hardcover: 436 pages
SKU: 20015
Condition: Used: Good
Comments: Book Condition: Good. Dust Jacket Condition: Good. 3-4 pages have bent corners.
|
Editorial Reviews
|
Product Description
This ambitious, wide-ranging, exhaustively researched book is a compelling attempt to grasp the very nature of war. It takes us through the soldier's experience in its entirety - from the humiliation of basic training and the intense comradeship of army life, to the terror, isolation and exhaustion of battle. What does it feel like to be in the firing line? How does killing change a man? And what do the extreme conditions of war reveal about a man's basic instincts, his courage or his fear, his urge for self-preservation or self-sacrifice? Covering several centuries of warfare, and including the personal recollections of veterans from two World Wars, from Korea, Vietnam, the Falklands and the Arab-Israeli conflicts, Richard Holmes gives us a powerful picture of what motivates the soldier and enables him to maintain the struggle in conditions of extreme degradation and danger.
|
Customer Reviews
|
Solid Book About Facing Death and Killing in War
Rating  (4)
Date: 2005-10-14
2 out of 2 customers found this reveiw helpful
Whether intentional or not, this book's audience is the former or current military member. But if you have read and enjoyed works such as the first two volumes of "Roots of Strategy", you should have no trouble following this book.
The author successfully shows that military personnel have mixed feelings about war. Although he addresses behavior in the midst of battle, the author seems more interested in the views about war held by those outside war itself, i.e., those who had not yet experienced it and those who were looking backward in retrospect. How those people felt in the midst of the madness is almost certainly different from how they anticipated or how they adjusted their feelings afterwards. I think this "flavor" derives from his personal-interview-and-historical-research approach. I do not see this as a negative but rather staying within his scope of knowledge and expertise.
The review titled "Flawed work of a historian with no sociological credibility" seems too harshly critical. Perhaps this reviewer expected a highly technical, in-depth psychological approach. As a note: page 58 cites S.L.A. Marshall as stating that only "some 15 per cent of American infantrymen fired." True, the subject of women in the military is barely broached. However, in all fairness, the author never pretends to have extensive knowledge about how women react in battle and simply doesn't go there. Perhaps that is a deficiency of character, but not of the book. I get the feeling that this review didn't find what he wanted and then "skimmed" the book without thinking into what was being presented.
Although now much more interested in peace studies, I enjoyed reading this book. I found a number of passages that shed light on where I have been and where I seek to go. I don't see this as a pro-military book although at times it may seem so. I characterize it as an honest endeavor to address and understand some of the difficult questions that most of us have concerning death and killing in war-time.
|
|
very good
Rating (4)
Date: 2005-01-30
3 out of 5 customers found this reveiw helpful
I write this review because it seems that most reviews are written on the basis of the theories or ideas of the author confronted to others the reviewers prefer.
I am not an expert in militar books, I just bought this book because I picked it from a shelve and I thought I would like to read something about the subject of human behaviour in war.
I found it deep, well writen and fairly interesiting. I have recommended it to frequent business literature readers and they also loved it and found in it new views of human behaviour under maximum stress circumstances.
From an average man point of view, not expert in militar literature, I think it is a must read.
|
|
Flawed work of a historian with no sociological credibility
Rating  (2)
Date: 2005-01-14
19 out of 31 customers found this reveiw helpful
There is no doubt that much of what Holmes writes is true or solidly based in fact. However, there are glaring ommissions from this book that are quite damming.
Holmes quotes Col. S.L.A. Marshall at length throughout the book. And yet, despite this pattern, not once (that I could find anyway) did Holmes mention the massive WW II Marshall study which concluded that the *majority* of US combat troops did not fire in the heat of combat.
Marshall showed how many soldiers, in the heat of combat, exhibit "posturing" which is identical to behavior exhibited throughout the animal world. The idea is to look and sound aggressive without actually attacking to kill. In combat this might mean shooting wildly in various directions, shooting over the enemy's heads, etc. To the casual eye (e.g. watching archival combat footage) this looks like true combat, but it's not. Marshall discovered this behavior through interviews with countless US soldiers who admitted (with much guilt) what they had done.
The result of that study was the overhaul of basic training and boot camp so that soldiers not only experienced the sights and sounds of combat, but that they also simulate killing as much as possible - which in turn has resulted in a huge majority of US soldiers (since Vietnam) actually shooting to kill.
Essentially, the Marshall study negates much of Holme's central thesis that warfare is "natural" for men and that most men seek it out willingly.
Holmes also gives lip service to women and combat and uses convenient examples to discredit. For example, many people use Israel as an example of a sexually intregated force. This is despite the fact, as Holmes points out, that women really don't handle weapons much in the Israeli military. However, there is at least one force that Holmes failed to mention -- the Viet Cong which consisted of over 75 percent women! Because he doesn't mention that example, he can easily sweep the issue of sex under the rug. The truth of the matter is, in war environments where one side views itself as attempting to liberate itself women usually play an integral role, including combat. This was seen throughout the 20th century.
Holmes' sociological ignorance is never more obvious than when he discusses the sexuality of soldiers versus those who oppose war. Soldiers biologically want sex with women more! Holmes issues this proclamation without the slightest effort to back it up or to explore other options. In Holmes' world all soldiers are heterosexual and want lots of sex. This would certainly be surprising to the many great homosexual military leaders in warfare history. And I think quite a few "peaceniks" from the 60's might have some contrary evidence to offer Holmes as well.
Holmes is a historian with a military background. He is not a sociologist and he lacks the experience, training and understanding to explore deeper issues and to look at contradictions to his beliefs.
I give this book two stars just because this is important field to look at. Hopefully someone with better understanding of the use of propaganda (from all sides), gender roles, sexism, cultural history (that isn't Anglo Saxon!) will come along and do this topic justice.
|
|
third rate historian's psychobabble
Rating  (1)
Date: 2004-09-15
What more would you expect from a revisionist historian whose books read like novels, with no researches yet dressing up all half baked hypotheses as proven theses. Treat this book as some infantile rantings from an inadequate mind.
|
|
Very good...
Rating  (5)
Date: 2000-07-21
18 out of 25 customers found this reveiw helpful
"Acts of War" examines the behavior of men under fire by using a combined historical/anthropological approach to the institution of soldiering. "Acts of War" is a complementary prelude to similar works such as "The Savage Mind", "On Aggression", and "On Killing". Holmes, thankfully, doesn't propogate the "Marshall-myth" premise that most troops will refuse to fire their weapons when engaged with the enemy. Archived combat footage from the Second World War, Korea, and Vietnam disproves that theory at a glance. It's unfortunate that S.L.A.M. has had such a pervasive influence on the U.S. Army's marksmanship training program for the last fifty years (if you disagree, I urge you to consult after action reports on Marine marksmanship in France extolling the virtues of the [known distance] course). Holmes goes on to provide ample evidence supporting his argument that Man is naturally predisposed to warfare. Holmes has been accused of defaming and minimizing the role of women in combat. It's an unjustified accusation. Female combatants are the exception to the rule, not the norm, and their historical contribution has been sensationalized. "Acts of War" is reminiscent of Keegan's "The Face of Battle" yet much more detailed when discussing the development and maturation of a soldier's psyche.
|
|
|