Eagle Days: Life and Death for the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain

[Bombphoon]

New archival research on the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain in this whopping 464-page book:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/18045499...v_ov_lig_pi_dp

[Chris Goss]

Crikey how many more books are coming out on this subject? I am interested to know what new revelations this and the plethora of others will reveal

[Jukka Juutinen]

She has pretty solid academic credentials and seems to be involved in aircraft history off-duty as well. Which is much more than can be said for many other authors. I think even Axis Wings has her work.

[robert]

And cover shows a Bf109 that has been not involved in BoB

[Jukka Juutinen]

Originally Posted by robert

And cover shows a Bf109 that has been not involved in BoB

Authors don't choose cover designs. There was once an Amazon review of a book on history of air war from a doctrinal point of view by a top-class military analyst Martin van Creveld. That reviewer dismissed the book because the cover photo was a mirror image...

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by robert

And cover shows a Bf109 that has been not involved in BoB

You should see British TV when it reports on the Battle of Britain: to illustrate Summer 1940 they use a package of Imperial War Museum footage that includes an Fw 190 being shot down over a snow-covered landscape.

Dr. Taylor's website is here, by the way: https://spitfirefillyaviation.com

[John Vasco]

Originally Posted by Jukka Juutinen

She has pretty solid academic credentials and seems to be involved in aircraft history off-duty as well. Which is much more than can be said for many other authors. I think even Axis Wings has her work.

Are you suggesting that authors should have solid academic credentials in order to research and write? What is the point you are making with what I have put in bold above? Please enlighten me, and others...

[edwest2]

I have 40 years at a publishing company without a college degree. Our head writer has no college degree. Both of us had to learn the publishing business by the seat of our pants. Learning how to write to inform and entertain takes years. It can be done.

However, unlike the illustrators we work with, writers seem more easily offended, to a greater or lesser degree. While I can tell an artist that a leg is too long, all writing is black ink on paper. A quick glance does not suffice. When converting original documents to book form, a way to order the material for the specialist reader and those just curious has to be chosen. There are plenty of fine examples in existence.

Unfortunately, descriptions and even titles chosen by publishers, and, in some cases, writers can create the wrong impression or put off potential buyers. Reviews on Amazon range from bad to atrocious. Far, far removed from proper book reviews. And if a review for a specialist book cannot be found quickly, what happens? Potential buyers tend to discount it.

I have seen many Ph.D. papers online. The writer usually offers only surface impressions with occasional bits of originality. A seasoned writer does not spring into existence overnight. I suspect that if some went on to write history books that they would drown in the deep water of actual research into original documents. It appears that 5 years is a minimum while 10 years or more is average.

There is no How to Write History Books to a High Standard in 5 Easy Lessons. Too many writers think they can complete a book in less time than what those documents would allow.

Finally, a proper discussion, such as can be had by two people sitting face to face or even on the phone cannot be had. It takes just one or two off hand remarks to cause a problem.

[Jukka Juutinen]

Originally Posted by John Vasco

Are you suggesting that authors should have solid academic credentials in order to research and write? What is the point you are making with what I have put in bold above? Please enlighten me, and others...

No, I am not suggesting that because my favourite aircraft authors have either aircraft engineering or test pilot background. But I am suggesting that Ms. Taylor's academic credentials have something to do with aviation history in the deepest sense. Which is very different from e.g. what that coalminer-looking man in a recent British Dambusters TV documentary had; that guy's credentials were in cultural history with zero connections to Dambusters. He was obviously chosen for the same reason the doc did not name Gibson's dog.

[Nick Beale]

But I am suggesting that Ms. Taylor's academic credentials have something to do with aviation history in the deepest sense.

I'd be interested to hear your reactions to reading Dr. Taylor's thesis on the dams raid. My own impression, as I posted earlier, was that she was more interested in reviewing others' writings and angles they might not have looked at (historiography). What she seemed less concerned with was herself exploring said neglected areas and presenting her findings.