Scan barcode
textpublishing's review against another edition
5.0
‘The finest and noblest book of men in war that I have ever read. I read it over once each year to remember how things really were so that I will never lie to myself nor to anyone else about them.’
Ernest Hemingway
‘A classic of enduring validity. I am glad he was an Australian, for this is a profoundly democratic book. I know of no story of the first world war which is so effectively written, not only from the ranks, but from the point of view of the ranks it remains, with Richard Mahony, almost alone among the products of Australian writers.’
Australian Book Review
‘No praise could be too sheer for this book. It justifies every heat of praise. Its virtues will be recognised more and more as time goes on.’
Lawrence of Arabia
‘A wise book among the most thoughtful novels of the war.’
New York Times Book Review
‘Frederic Manning’s novel of the first world war, The Middle Parts of Fortune, first appeared in London in 1929, in a limited edition intended for subscribers only. It was issued to the public the following year under the title Her Privates We, with some minor alterations made in concession to the conventions of the time. In rendering the everyday language of soldiers, for example, certain niceties were observed; “fuckin’s” were changed to “muckin’s,” and “buggers” to “beggars.” These transparent amendments did little to diminish the impact of the book, which struck its many readers, particularly those who had served in the war or witnessed its after-effects on their loved ones, as being true to the actual experience of modern warfare in ways that nothing else had managed to be. In the judgement of many of his admirers, Manning’s achievement has not really been surpassed even now, many decades and many wars later.’
Inside Story
Ernest Hemingway
‘A classic of enduring validity. I am glad he was an Australian, for this is a profoundly democratic book. I know of no story of the first world war which is so effectively written, not only from the ranks, but from the point of view of the ranks it remains, with Richard Mahony, almost alone among the products of Australian writers.’
Australian Book Review
‘No praise could be too sheer for this book. It justifies every heat of praise. Its virtues will be recognised more and more as time goes on.’
Lawrence of Arabia
‘A wise book among the most thoughtful novels of the war.’
New York Times Book Review
‘Frederic Manning’s novel of the first world war, The Middle Parts of Fortune, first appeared in London in 1929, in a limited edition intended for subscribers only. It was issued to the public the following year under the title Her Privates We, with some minor alterations made in concession to the conventions of the time. In rendering the everyday language of soldiers, for example, certain niceties were observed; “fuckin’s” were changed to “muckin’s,” and “buggers” to “beggars.” These transparent amendments did little to diminish the impact of the book, which struck its many readers, particularly those who had served in the war or witnessed its after-effects on their loved ones, as being true to the actual experience of modern warfare in ways that nothing else had managed to be. In the judgement of many of his admirers, Manning’s achievement has not really been surpassed even now, many decades and many wars later.’
Inside Story
anitaofplaybooktag's review against another edition
4.0
I found this book to be both monotonous and beautifully rendered at the same time.
Set in World War I, the book focuses on the lives of ordinary soldiers in the trenches, mostly as seen through the eyes of one particular soldier, Bourne. The first three quarters of the book focuses on the every day lives of the soldiers as they wait for something to actually happen. There's a lot of obtaining of rations and going out for drinks. In addition, some soldiers speak in an uneducated dialect that's hard to follow. And there are whole paragraphs in French. My high school French was partially up to the task of translation, but if I hadn't had that, I never would have known what was said. Not that it really mattered.
You can tell Manning focused on writing and teaching poetry. His writing itself is really evocative of time and place. I credit him highly for that. There are numerous exquisitely rendered sentences that make you go "oh wow". But the rest of what makes novels great seemed a bit missing.
He isn't big on building suspense. Honestly, until the last quarter of the book, I just felt like I couldn't keep going at times. Oddly paralleling some of the sentiments of the soldiers. But when I am reading for pleasure, this feeling really isn't a plus.
The ending (which I won't elaborate upon), when battle finally came, was very well done, and you almost felt like you were in the war yourself. That part was five star.
All in all, I just don't think this is a book I'd recommend anyone read for enjoyment. If you enjoy literature about war and the military, you may want to read it. I think it would be a great book to teach in a literature class even just to expose students to the writing itself. But it is a book I'm glad to have read, but was really sorry I was reading while I was reading it. And it's a book I just wouldn't go around recommending to regular readers; but if you were an English lit major or read and love fiction about war, this one may be for you.
Set in World War I, the book focuses on the lives of ordinary soldiers in the trenches, mostly as seen through the eyes of one particular soldier, Bourne. The first three quarters of the book focuses on the every day lives of the soldiers as they wait for something to actually happen. There's a lot of obtaining of rations and going out for drinks. In addition, some soldiers speak in an uneducated dialect that's hard to follow. And there are whole paragraphs in French. My high school French was partially up to the task of translation, but if I hadn't had that, I never would have known what was said. Not that it really mattered.
You can tell Manning focused on writing and teaching poetry. His writing itself is really evocative of time and place. I credit him highly for that. There are numerous exquisitely rendered sentences that make you go "oh wow". But the rest of what makes novels great seemed a bit missing.
He isn't big on building suspense. Honestly, until the last quarter of the book, I just felt like I couldn't keep going at times. Oddly paralleling some of the sentiments of the soldiers. But when I am reading for pleasure, this feeling really isn't a plus.
The ending (which I won't elaborate upon), when battle finally came, was very well done, and you almost felt like you were in the war yourself. That part was five star.
All in all, I just don't think this is a book I'd recommend anyone read for enjoyment. If you enjoy literature about war and the military, you may want to read it. I think it would be a great book to teach in a literature class even just to expose students to the writing itself. But it is a book I'm glad to have read, but was really sorry I was reading while I was reading it. And it's a book I just wouldn't go around recommending to regular readers; but if you were an English lit major or read and love fiction about war, this one may be for you.
thecheesestandsalone's review against another edition
Slog. Could tell it was worth my while but couldn't commit.
juliwi's review against another edition
4.0
Born in Australia in 1882, Manning moved to England in 1898 with a close friend and finally settled there in 1903. He started a career of writing reviews and independent fictional work here and there, becoming friends with the likes of Ezra Pound and Richard Aldington. He enlisted in 1915 and became Private 19022, which he used as a pseudonym later to publish Her Privates We. He was sent to the Battle of the Somme, the experience of which he recounts in his novel. Manning wasn't a healthy man and on top of that a heavy smoker and drinker, which prevented his chances of becoming an officer.
Manning's protagonist, Bourne, is modelled to a certain extent upon the author himself, although I think Manning is guilty of presenting himself more favourably despite not forgetting to mention his faults. Bourne is his own man, aware of both the camaraderie and isolation caused by War, and although he initially seems more than capable to survive cope, he slowly changes over the course of the novel. Written in third person, you don't get Bourne's internal dialogues to the same extent as if it had been written in first person like Under Fire or All Quiet on the Western Front, but the reader is still privy to his thoughts. Although the other novels and poems picked up on the sometimes ridiculous bureaucracy and rules of the army, none of the authors are as critical of it as Manning is. His independence also extends to his autonomy and his dislike for taking a commission and becoming an officer translates to a dislike of joining the system. The officers and sergeants that populate the novel are not automatically "superior" characters. Often they are vengeful, petty and unable to take independent initiative. More than in any other novel, the War seems absolutely hopeless and stuck.
Each chapter in this novel is preceded by a Shakespeare quote, which I naturally looked up immediately. The plays most quoted are the two Henry IV's and Henry V. Especially Henry V is a very military play, centering around the figure of King Henry V and his campaign in France. Especially the scenes around Harfleur are very interesting, where the true brutality of warfare is brought to the forefront. I can see how this play that tries to deal with the justness and effectiveness of war and the emergence of a good leader, would to some extent inspire Manning. The two Henry IV's show the growth of Prince Hal into a crown prince worthy of the throne and an old leader slowly declining. Bourne, and Manning, are both older soldiers in their thirties, surrounded by younger men and death. It must have been difficult to see 18 year-olds die besides you when you are still living. It's survivor's guilt and during the First World War they didn't recognize PTSD as an actual consequence of the fighting in the trenches.
One of my favourite quotes from the novel is
'They marched out of the village, past the stone cavalry at the end of it, and men who had known all the sins of the world, lifted, to the agony of the figure on the cross, eyes that had probed and understood the mystery of suffering.' p.129
I really like the way Manning compares and contrasts the soldiers to Jesus. The set up of the scene is quite reminiscent of Judgement Day, the sinners walking past Jesus in rows, being judged on their sins. The way Manning writes it, he compares the suffering of Jesus on the cross to that of himself and the other soldiers. Both of them are bearing the consequences for the sins of others. While others make decisions that control their lives, they risk their lives every single day. And yet there is an undertone of brutality and a bestial nature to the soldiers, very different from the saintliness that exudes from Jesus. And the soldiers aren't finished yet, but march on and on. This novel is, in many ways, darker and more tragic than the others because it is very unapologetic.
Manning's protagonist, Bourne, is modelled to a certain extent upon the author himself, although I think Manning is guilty of presenting himself more favourably despite not forgetting to mention his faults. Bourne is his own man, aware of both the camaraderie and isolation caused by War, and although he initially seems more than capable to survive cope, he slowly changes over the course of the novel. Written in third person, you don't get Bourne's internal dialogues to the same extent as if it had been written in first person like Under Fire or All Quiet on the Western Front, but the reader is still privy to his thoughts. Although the other novels and poems picked up on the sometimes ridiculous bureaucracy and rules of the army, none of the authors are as critical of it as Manning is. His independence also extends to his autonomy and his dislike for taking a commission and becoming an officer translates to a dislike of joining the system. The officers and sergeants that populate the novel are not automatically "superior" characters. Often they are vengeful, petty and unable to take independent initiative. More than in any other novel, the War seems absolutely hopeless and stuck.
Each chapter in this novel is preceded by a Shakespeare quote, which I naturally looked up immediately. The plays most quoted are the two Henry IV's and Henry V. Especially Henry V is a very military play, centering around the figure of King Henry V and his campaign in France. Especially the scenes around Harfleur are very interesting, where the true brutality of warfare is brought to the forefront. I can see how this play that tries to deal with the justness and effectiveness of war and the emergence of a good leader, would to some extent inspire Manning. The two Henry IV's show the growth of Prince Hal into a crown prince worthy of the throne and an old leader slowly declining. Bourne, and Manning, are both older soldiers in their thirties, surrounded by younger men and death. It must have been difficult to see 18 year-olds die besides you when you are still living. It's survivor's guilt and during the First World War they didn't recognize PTSD as an actual consequence of the fighting in the trenches.
One of my favourite quotes from the novel is
'They marched out of the village, past the stone cavalry at the end of it, and men who had known all the sins of the world, lifted, to the agony of the figure on the cross, eyes that had probed and understood the mystery of suffering.' p.129
I really like the way Manning compares and contrasts the soldiers to Jesus. The set up of the scene is quite reminiscent of Judgement Day, the sinners walking past Jesus in rows, being judged on their sins. The way Manning writes it, he compares the suffering of Jesus on the cross to that of himself and the other soldiers. Both of them are bearing the consequences for the sins of others. While others make decisions that control their lives, they risk their lives every single day. And yet there is an undertone of brutality and a bestial nature to the soldiers, very different from the saintliness that exudes from Jesus. And the soldiers aren't finished yet, but march on and on. This novel is, in many ways, darker and more tragic than the others because it is very unapologetic.
hannicogood's review against another edition
4.0
The realistic account of war is harrowing and heartbreaking. It is a haunting read but it really captures the sense of fatalism amongst the soldiers so well.
charlottereed's review against another edition
4.0
Hemingway stated that this book was, "The finest and noblest book of men in war" - although I have never been too enthusiastic about Hemingway, this really is a great piece of text. There is a lot of waiting around and little action.
bookeboy's review against another edition
5.0
No other book on the first world war details the loss of individual identity suffered by those involved as precisely. No other book I've read on that war conveys the heavy weight of the wasted hours so well. The writing is spare, unsentimental, intelligent and beautiful. If Jane Austen had been in the trenches, this is the book she might have written.
isbale3's review against another edition
4.0
3.5
Menos cruda que Sin novedad en el frente y hasta eso se agradece un poco, igual me gustó.
Menos cruda que Sin novedad en el frente y hasta eso se agradece un poco, igual me gustó.
northerncastle's review
dark
informative
sad
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.75
cgnick's review
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
More...