"Review of The Battle by Patrick Rumbaud" Topic
4 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Remember that you can Stifle members so that you don't have to read their posts.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Blogs of War Message Board Back to the Napoleonic Media Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral Napoleonic
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Profile ArticleThe Editor is invited to tour the factory of Simtac, a U.S. manufacturer of figures in nearly all periods, scales, and genres.
|
Sir Able Brush | 22 Sep 2019 7:36 a.m. PST |
One of you suggested this as a good period novel.. I've reviewed it here link Thank you |
Drocton | 22 Sep 2019 8:33 a.m. PST |
I've read it myself and though the writing is certainly good, there are so many strange details, you get the idea he is completely inventing… At one point voltigeurs are shooting from inside a strong building (granary?), and he says that they kneel down to recharge. I'm not saying it's impossible, but why should one do that, with a musket, when the building already offers cover? It looks like a Western movie, really. At another point he says it took them 6 minutes to recharge… maybe I didn't get that right. Also it seems like there are thousands of voltigeurs, all banded together. And before a charge, the evil cuirassier is said to be in the 6th rank, so he can't see anything. So they're charging in column, in an open field? Why would they do that? Also, when Napoleon tells the officer on the tree, with telescope, "watch the masses, not the individuals", I take it this is actually intended for the reader, because what else would an officer care for when watching a battle, if not flags and masses? And last, do I remember well? One character attributes to Achilles something that was done by Ulysses… I mean didn't the writer get a proofreader? Or is that done on purpose, to show the character is not so cultivated, after all? Same for Stendhal's probable syphilis, described as a mild annoyment… |
Frederick | 22 Sep 2019 4:44 p.m. PST |
I have to agree, having read this a fair few years ago – extremely well written but some details seemed a bit odd |
MaggieC70 | 23 Sep 2019 11:32 a.m. PST |
I read this first in French, then in English and, as they say, quite a bit was lost and muddled in translation. Agree with regard to the occasional oddities as they concern some of the battle scenes, especially on the larger scale; the down-and-dirty wasn't so bad, but perhaps because the author could picture them better. Rimbaud [not Rumbaud] was positively fanciful in his portrayals of Massena and Lannes in particular, but I suppose we all need a good laugh in the middle of a battle that's not going especially well. |
|