Author Critique: Franz Kurowski

Commissar D, the Evil · Sun Dec 08, 2002 4:18 pm

Heh Heh! Got your attention. Okay, all Kurowski doesn't suck. "Panzer Aces" I + II were interesting reads, but were they history? How exactly did he know of conversations and thoughts in past battles? "Sturmgeschutz Vor!", as incomplete as it was, appeared to be an actual history, with a minimum of theatrics and some dates and places. But "Bridgehead Kurland" was, IMHO, deplorable in its incompleteness. Aside for a few selected units, the reader gets absolutely no information on the overall structure of Army Group North (later "Army Group Courland") and really only a sketchy overview of the momentous battles for Kurland. Does anyone think I'm wrong about the lack of a clear narrative of events in "Bridgehead Kurland"? Did the author ever think to add unit strengths, detailed OOBs or lists of unit Commanders? Why do units appear briefly in this book and then just completely disappear from the "history"? Can anyone suggest a substitute for this book?
Best Regards, David

charlie don't surf · Post by **charlie don't surf** » Sun Dec 08, 2002 4:48 pm

Hi David, I asked a similar question once. The reply I got was that Kurowski himself was a panzer veteran and that he had personal contact with all the veterans in the books. But I agree, sometimes one ask oneself how the veterans really can remember all the things that they said.

regards

Commissar D, the Evil · Sun Dec 08, 2002 5:11 pm

Hi Daniel, Kurowski a panzer veteran? I've never heard that before. Are you certain? I know that Walter Spielberger, the author of several very good books on different types of Panzers crewed a Jagdpanther. (I don't think he's written more than a few words about his own experiences.) But I've never heard anyone say that Kurowski was a Panzermann. Best Regards, David

charlie don't surf · Post by **charlie don't surf** » Sun Dec 08, 2002 5:26 pm

Hi David, I'm quite certain that this was what I was told.

regards

Sebastian Pye · Post by **Sebastian Pye** » Sun Dec 08, 2002 7:34 pm

The exact words are probably not correct in the conversations, but does it really matter?

Commissar D, the Evil · Sun Dec 08, 2002 8:04 pm

The exact words are probably not correct in the conversations, but does it really matter?

Hi Sebastion. Well, Kuroski is regarded as an historian. For an historian, words matter because the truth--not the simulated truth or the imagined truth or the most dramatic truth--is what matters.

Still and all Sebastion, and I think this is your real question, it's almost impossible not to enjoy a book like "Panzer Aces". Best Regards, David

Marc Rikmenspoel · Post by **Marc Rikmenspoel** » Mon Dec 09, 2002 10:30 am

JJF told me Kurowski was a signaller in WW2, and that he saw little or no frontline action. His essential quality was that he decided very early on to write about the war, so from the mid-1950's (at the latest) he began to collect material and to interview important veterans. So of course his Aces books are fictionalized, and even his "straight" history works contain errors which have been corrected by subsequent research (since he might use information he collected in 1965 in a book written in 1995, for example), but I think all of us who have read his works understand that you can't rely on him for literal accuracy.

So what is the point to reading Kurowski (aka Volkmar Kühn and several other pen names)? He gives the reader a feel for conditions, for what German soldiers experienced in the various theaters of war. So no, Hermann Bix did not actually have every thought or statement attributed to him, but he did share his experiences and impressions with Kurowski, as did veterans of the sSS-PA 101/501 who knew Michael Wittman (who was of course unavailable for comment). The value in reading Kurowski is to better understand what life is like inside a tank, or trying to live in the swamps of the Volkhov. In this sense, I have taken a lot from his books, even as I know they can't be considered as reliable sources of secondary information.

sid guttridge · Post by **sid guttridge** » Tue Dec 10, 2002 6:03 am

Hi,

I haven't read Kurowski. However, his work sounds like that new cross-over style: Faction.

Personally, I don't like to insert historical fiction into historical fact. If one can invent dialogue, why stop there? James Mitchener doesn't. Is his fiction much different from Kurowski's purported fact? Both seem to use historical fact as the background but introduce fictional contents in their books. However, Mitchener is at least straight up in classifying his work in the fiction category. Where is Kurowski's placed?

Cheers,

Sid.

Commissar D, the Evil · Tue Dec 10, 2002 7:01 am

Well Sid, I think you've hit the heart of the problem. "Panzer Aces I +II"
were clearly marketed as History but appear to be a mix of fact and fiction. "Sturmgeschutz Vor" is closer to what one would expect from a history book. It's major failure isn't dubious dialogue as it actually indicates when a portion of text is a quote and where it comes from. The failing of that book is simply that it covers such a large topic (StuG units) and misses many of them. "Bridgehead Kurland" also isn't of the same order of "Panzer Aces" and purports to be straight history.

However, there is sort of a cumulative and lingering effect from having read Kuroski's work when it wasn't pure history. A reader has a tendency to be a bit sceptical when, with great rhetorical flare, the author writes of specific instances of combat in "Bridgehead Kurland". The Germans are always brave, the Russians are alway faceless hordes being slaughtered by the outnumbered defenders. This style rather reminds me of Panzer Aces and inspires doubt in my mind as to the accuracy of the "history" even when the author makes it clear that his source for the combat scene is a particular soldier who was actually there.

But, getting back to your question, all of these books are marketed as history. Panzer Aces makes great reading and there is enough factual information to tempt the reader into believing it is a straight history, but it's not. Also, footenotes are rare things in any of Kuroski's works, so unless the source is indicated in the text, one can only guess where it came from.

Best Regards, David

Morden · Post by **Morden** » Wed Dec 11, 2002 3:51 am

Personally I don't like Kurowski. I have his "Panzer Aces" and "Infantry Aces". These were poorly written (or translated). I have difficulties to follow his narrative and was expecting more history facts and less fiction.

Morden

Wolfkin · Post by **Wolfkin** » Thu Dec 12, 2002 2:29 am

I have Panzer Aces I by Kurowski. I found it an entertaining read but with quite a few errors in it. Units, dates, events, crews, compositions and such. A good story to see what some "Aces" were like but I tend to view it as "Historical Fiction".

I actually have been preparing a Review of this book. I have gone through the whole book and attempted to correct some of the errors. I am unsure if I want to post it anywhere though because I do not know if it would be insulting to the author or not. I am not trying to pick on his book, I respect all authors, it is just that there are quite a few little errors in the book.

I dunno, maybe I will just write out my review and keep it to myself. Or maybe I will post it, it is a good review, just with a few corrections.

I have some of my older reviews on the Panzerworld site if y'all want to check them out.

Cheers,

Wolfkin

Frederick L Clemens · Post by **Frederick L Clemens** » Thu Dec 12, 2002 6:08 am

Wolfkin wrote:I actually have been preparing a Review of this book. I have gone through the whole book and attempted to correct some of the errors. I am unsure if I want to post it anywhere though because I do not know if it would be insulting to the author or not. I am not trying to pick on his book, I respect all authors, it is just that there are quite a few little errors in the book.

Wolfkin, all authors are accountable for the flaws in their books, whether they like it or not. An honest author will welcome corrections as a way to get closer to the historical truth, even if he suffers a temporary embarrassment in the process. A less sincere author will be insulted and try to insult you back, but so what?
Please do post your review and corrections. Your corrections will stand or fall on their merit.

Commissar D, the Evil · Thu Dec 12, 2002 7:31 am

Hi Wolfkin, by all means post the corrections you've found for "Panzer Aces", the information is quite valuable to the
honest researcher. As you know, people have been arguing over "kill" numbers, types of tanks, etc., for years and Kurowski is a prime candidate for that kind of clarification.

On a personal note Wolfkin, this will be my last post in the "Books" section of this forum. I find the hypocritical self-righteousnes of the new moderator intolerable and, in my years of wandering over the Net,
I've never encountered such blatant censorship (through post-deleting), and ideological rigidness as clemens indulges in.

So, I will see you on other. friendlier forums.
Best Regards, David

Wolfkin · Post by **Wolfkin** » Thu Dec 12, 2002 11:11 pm

Hey guys!

Ok, when I get everything finished I will post it. I ,myself, might be wrong in some of my corrections and I will welcome anyone to correct me as well. My corrections mostly involve units, ranks, dates, vehicle crew compositions, commanding officers etc etc. I don't really get into the "kill" numbers because I myself am not completely knowledgeable on these numbers.

As y'all said, we as historians value correct information and with this I am just trying to do my part.

David, I will miss you on here, but we still have our other "hang outs" so I'll see y'all there!

Cheers,

Wolfkin