France 1940

Defending the Republic

De: Philip Nord

Narrado por: Sean Runnette

Duración: 4 h y 16 m

Resumen del Editor

In this revisionist account of France's crushing defeat in 1940, Philip Nord argues that the nation's downfall has long been misunderstood. Nord assesses France's diplomatic and military preparations for war with Germany, its conduct of the war once the fighting began, and the political consequences of defeat on the battlefield. Ultimately, he finds that the longstanding view that France's collapse was due to military unpreparedness and a decadent national character is unsupported by fact.

Nord reveals that the Third Republic was no worse prepared and its military failings no less dramatic than those of the United States and other Allies in the early years of the war. What was unique in France was the betrayal by military and political elites who abandoned the Republic and supported the reprehensible Vichy takeover. Why then have historians and politicians ever since interpreted the defeat as a judgment on the nation as a whole? Why has the focus been on the failings of the Third Republic and not on elite betrayal? The author examines these questions in a fascinating conclusion.

©2015 Philip Nord (P)2015 Tantor

Reseñas de la Crítica

"A well thought-out and well-presented book on a thorny problem of European history." (Robert Gildea, author of Marianne in Chains)

A much needed revision to oversimplified, partisan historiography

Nord's prose is worthy of congratulation alone. Were it not also for his piercing analysis, one could end the review here. For the sake of the interested reader, it's my pleasure to add that Nord handles the Laval administration and the Reynaud ministry with a balanced, nuanced deconstructive hammer. He demystifies and clarifies how exactly Paris fell in 1940. Gently and respectfully pushing back against Bloch's decline-ist narrative, Nord paints a picture of ruthless fascists taking advantage of a faltering Third Republic.

Eye opening opinion changing work.

This work is very important if you wish to consider yourself well versed on WW2. Case Red will leave you think the French were dumb ineffectual idiots. This book breaks down the reasons why the government failed to function. It is tantamount to understanding why Vichy France was even possible and how the French could even contemplate buddying up to Nazi Germany. It’s nice to see a work that doesn’t just lambast the French but also doesn’t go out of their was to excuse them. It’s cuts to the root of the problem and is very matter of fact about it. Not as long or through as Collapse of the Third Republic or Case Red but just as important IMO.

Poor France...

Solid book, if somewhat repetitive. It doesn't go too deep, but it does give nuance and context to a subject which has often been presented simplistically. Recommended for those who got the "Belgium, lol" narrative of the Maginot Line.

There are probably plenty of better books out there, but this is pretty good, and can be read in a night.

Insightful analysis of the fall of France

Why did France fall so swiftly in 1940? The government and the military leadership made a long string of bad decisions. The French generals were arthritic and timid where the German generals were young and bold. The French government gave way to a inwardly evil Petain and his grasping henchman laval. Laval paid for his crimes in the end, but Petain should have have had his 90 years old carcass hanged for his. Nord’s main point is France fall was not preordained. At any number of key points, the right decisive action could have changed the outcome. But the Germans made every right decision and the French at all levels, except the common soldier, who fought heroically took all the wrong ones.

Some good info, but inconclusive

The author clearly had intimate knowledge of the events surrounding France's surprising capitulation in early summer of 1940. What I liked best about this book is how he points out the strategy/material/mindset of France's approach to dealing with the Nazi threat was on par or better with other contemporary major players. He also breaks down the political climate that seemed accurate, but I found difficult to follow.

What I didn't like. I'm not quite sure what the 'so what' or 'conclusion' was. The writing style is something like puts forward a common question, examines it from two sides, and then... examines it some more... and then says "Was France really so different?" But 'xyz' approach of the French elite was inexcusable.

Hard to explain the issue with this book accurately other than to say whatever conclusions the author came to were not very clear. Or they seemed clear for a minute until he went back and contradicted himself.

All in all worth a listen, don't get me wrong, but it is a bit of an unusual book.