Shocking new book references Feldgrau.com extensively...

[Jason Pipes]

For what it's worth libel constitues false or incorrect statements made that result in direct and specific harm being done to the person referenced.

Libel or not Mark, its further proof that the authors of this work did no fact checking and didn't bother to contact any of the people they were writing about. I suggest we keep a running count of the incorrect references and false statements in this work so that they can be pointed to specifically in the various rebuttals, reviews, and response statements that will hopefully be generated shortly.

[Richard Hargreaves]

Errors per se do not amount to libel. The test of libel is whether a "right thinking individual" reading a book or article would have a lower opinion of you - incorrectly - having read the false statements.

[Jason Pipes]

Correct.

I would assume that a right-thinking person would think lower of me personally if they thought I was directly and specifically associated with Landwehr who actively denies the holocaust. I can and have reference some of his research work but I don't agree with his personal opinions. I've also never worked with or for him specifically. Ever.

[Paddy Keating]

You may well have a case for libel of you feel that the authors are portraying you as some sort of pro-Nazi apologist or denier but you should also look at other potential avenues like defamation of character and malicious falsehood. The publisher should be the first target, with the authors conjoined to the lawsuit.

CUP has offices in New York and is doubtless incorporated in the United States as well its home country and some other territories. Another thing you might consider is the example of the pressure groups in France that sued Yahoo over Nazi symbols and so on a few years ago. You could perhaps get a court order in your home state forcing, for a start, Amazon to ensure that nobody in your home state can read the offending material on the web.

The authors are academics. Ronald Smelser: http://www.fubis.org/en/01allgemeine_in ... elser.html. He appears to have written a number of books. Edward J. Davies ll also appears to be connected with the University of Utah. Like his colleague, he is also the author of a number of books.

PK

[Benoit Douville]

I agree with Paulus II, I also can hardly believe that a respected university like Cambridge would help publish that kind of materials.

I think that the objective of those Authors is that they would really want that Feldgrau & Axis History being shut down.

Regards

[Uncle Joe]

Where can I read the text on Marc? BTW, CUP site says the authors are both professors at University of Utah.

[krichter33]

What you can do is go to Amazon.com click on the cover of the book, it says "See inside." Then in the search bar you can type in whatever name or word you want and it lists all the pages. There is only a certain amount of pages you can read, like I believe 20 or more, then it stops. Once I read more of it I will definitely post a negative review. If everyone on Feldgrau did that that would be incredible!

[Uncle Joe]

Thanks for the tip! Though as I don´t have an amazon password (and have reluctance to register) I can´t read the whole excerpts.

But perhaps it is a sign of the knowledge of these fellows that they talk about Jochen PIPER and Matthew RIDGEWAY.

[Michael Miller / ABR]

I note that "Axis Biographical Research" appears in the index (p. 218). Would be interested to know if they've [mis]identified me as a "romancer" of the Third Reich.

~ Mike

[sniper1shot]

This should be good as I doubt the authours will join the site they are against.

**Cracking Knuckles**

Let the games begin..................

[Opa]

Jason,

You are mentionned over 12 pages, according to this index!

http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogue/c ... 316&ss=ind

Thomas

[John P. Moore]

I was able to read through an assortment of 25 - 30 pages on the Amazon site before I reached some kind of limit. The authors appear to be academics who had an agenda. While I could not gain access to the pages where Jason was mentioned I did read 5-6 consecutive pages about Mark Yerger and Richard Landwehr. I can't disagree with what they had to say about Landwehr, who seems to be a very negative stereotype for those who research the SS.

John

[Qvist]

It should be possible to write a good book about romanticised conceptions of the war in the east and starry-eyed Wehrmacht-admiration in popular culture - that is real enough - but these guys don't appear to have done so. Instead, they lump the nonsense in with some of the best work in the field, apparently on the reasoning that any work that a) shows a persistent interest in the German military or b) contains any sort of positive evaluation of any aspect of their military performance is part of the problem. Try searching "Dupuy", "Creveld" or "Nash" - Doug Nash gets a ribbing for having posted some statements about John Erickson's work that are, in fact, demonstrably accurate, while the characterisations of Creveld and Dupuy are downright ridiculous IMO. What I read here about having made damaging and untrue allegations about some of you who have already posted is of course even more troubling. It seems to fall into all the traps that "de-mythification" literature is unfortunately prone to, such as sweeping with a far too wide brush and taking it for granted that everybody can sorted out by association, without any need for engaging in an argument as to whether positions stated can in fact be defended or not. Take Dupuy - he based his assessment of the combat performance of the German Army on extremely extensive research used to validate predictive combat models, not on having over-read on Sven Hazel. And these guys think they can simply dismiss that because they consider his conclusion to be of a type that fits their model of "the myth"? So what's the truth then? Neccessarily the opposite? One is reminded of Mosier's and Pätzold's work, which is not a compliment. I guess the best that can be said of the book judging from the excerpts I have seen is that it costs 75 bucks, so presumably few will read it.

But it should perhaps nevertheless lead to some reflection also. There is such a thing as a romanticising popular culture about the war in the East, ranging in silliness from bands like Hanzel and Gretyl to just oversimplistic assumptions, much of the existing historiography is weak and perhaps the various institutions and entities specialising in the field have not always done much to maintain distinctions. Why, for example, does there seem to be some unwritten rule with specialised publishers that every book about German military subjects must have a dramatic-sounding title, preferably printed in gothic script? We all know the answer to that one, namely that it sells books, and the reason it sells books is that this sort of things appeals to most people who buy expensive books about German military subjects. They like, in short, to have it presented with drama and pathos, and publishers caters to this taste, which does not derive from scholarly interest but has obvious iconographic connotations to pop culture. Which, in a way, is close to the point these guys are making, if not very successfully. Point I'm making is, if Fedorowicz wants to be regarded as a scholarly enterprise (which they are) it would probably be a good idea not to use cover art that would be more appropriate to a comic book. For the forums, it's the same as always - a forum is perceived as a community. We are inevitably defined in part by the level and tone of the discussions people encounter when they visit, and for my part )speaking as a moderator elsewhere) I would say that there is a continual need to always evaluate if that is everything we want it to be. It's never easy to find the right balance, and I don't think many people who try run a forum feel they have it just right. But there is anyway no defense against someone who just picks out the savoury bits, as these people seem to have done.

cheers

[Uncle Joe]

May I ask which JJF titles have "comic book covers"? Speaking of Gothic script, what is more apppropriate for a book dealing with old Germany? Right before my eyes, I have a CD of Russian march music. Its cover art is basically a Russian military medal. By your standards, a serious cover would feature e.g. two Norwegians reading poetry.

I find it odd that you have not attacked the cover designs of many Glantz books that have "comic book" features like red stars and hanmmer and sickle.

Personally, if I published eastern front books, I woould put either a swastika or a red star (whether book is German or Russian oriented) on the spine and use either Gothic or Cyrillic like text for the covers. Black would be the base colour.

[Christian Ankerstjerne]

While there is certainly some truth in the points raised in the books, the authors has chosen some odd examples to make their point. Ignoring the information which is downright false, as mentioned by Jason, I would like to point to the apparent idea of the author, that any direct or indirect reference to the Wehrmacht should be followed by a condemnation of the crimes of the Third Reich.

The best example of this, in my opinion very flawed, logic, is the reference to George Parada's* website Achtung Panzer ! For those who doesn't know the site, Achtung Panzer ! is focused on the German armoured forces, and mainly its equipment. Still, the authors are surprised that the contents on the website and discussions on the forum is focused on the history and technical specifications of German tanks and tank commanders, rather than war crimes.

The authors even go so far as to write that the site recognises these war crimes in its disclaimer. This, however, is apparently not sufficient to escape the label of being a romanticiser. It would appear that any website (and, consequently, book and article) which does not primarily deal with the crimes of the Third Reich, is by definition romanticising. Specialised research seems forbidden to the authors.

The logical conclusion of this requirement would seem to be, that any research must primarily be focused on the negative consequences of any action, regardless of how marginal the connection is. It seems to follow from this, that the authors have failed to properly mention the following:

• The paper production needed for making the book has a negative impact on plant and animal life, both from forest cleaning and from paper manufacturing.
• The distribution of the book increases the emission of CO2 and micro particles.
• Being printed at Cambridge University Press, rather than in a third-world book press, the book sales supports both elitism and increases the first world/third world gap.
• Being Americans, the authors should constantly reference the US treatment of Native Americans in the 19th century, but fail to do so.

* George Parada's last name is spelled Prada in the book, for those who wish to search the contents. The authors could at least have the courtesy of spelling the names of the persons they criticise correctly.