Rating: 
Summary: Good read, but physically inferior book
Review: This is a fact filled account that takes some concentration to get through, but all in all it is very interesting. I read Keegan's WWII account and thought that truly exceptional.My real complaint lies with the physical nature of the book. Books can be beautiful, but this one has the paper cut to uneven widths, giving it a cheap and unprofessional look (I probably would have taken it out of the library instead of buying it had I known). I think Knopf does this quite often.
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing, but ultimately worthwhile
Review: I share many of the complaints that previous reviewers have mentioned: 1) This book needs more maps. The description of the opening battles in 1914 is difficult to follow if one is not familiar with European geography. 2) The writing is turgid in places. Keegan's description of the Battle of the Somme repeats the phrase "The Germans were fighting for their lives" at least twice in close succession. Well, of course they were! 3) The analysis is thin in critical areas, particularly in analyzing pre-war events. Lack of communication was a problem, but it appears that the political systems of the European powers placed control of events in the hands of the people who had no incentive to practice restraint, and who had clearly performed no serious thought as to how new weaponry (particularly the machine gun!) would affect the conduct of war: the military commanders. Despite the problems, I didn't have much trouble finishing the book. This book was my first comprehensive history of WWI, and has stimulated my curiousity about that war. I think Mr. Keegan is to be complimented on releasing this book. For Americans, WWI is a forgotten war, and I thank him for a sobering and thought-provoking look at this conflict that destroyed men, nations, and ideals without mercy.
Rating:
Summary: Pretty good but I was expecting more from such a geat writer
Review: As usual he writes well and knows his subject matter. However, the book was weakest when he got into endless lists of divisions and towns which are incomprehensible without a map. I'm British and even I got tired of his pro-British slant.
Rating: 
Summary: Not up to Keegan's usual standard.
Review: Keegan could have used some help from his editors. The maps are next to useless. For example, the map accompanying the text on why the German right was extended and had to retreat during the first stage of the war shows nothing even suggesting the military problem. Keegan states that many people have suggested ways that the always failing attacks against dug-in troops could have been improved. This is one of the great military questions of the war, since all sides continually attacked with terrible losses. But then he dismisses all suggestions with a wave of the hand, stating categorically none would have helped, except improved communications with hand held radios--which were not technically possible. He really should have explained why none of the suggestions would have made a difference. Whenever he quotes battle statistics, some number is missing so you can't get a full understanding. Finally, the Brits on the Western Front get more than their fair share of the coverage. If you want to know about the Eastern Front, you really need another book.
Rating:
Summary: good tactical narrative and more!
Review: Keegan's book is one of military history. A General's perspective of strategy, logistics, objectives and equipment. To the extent that this is a briefing, I'd concur with some previous reviews that appendixes of maps and lists of battles, dates and names would have been extremely helpful. This is more than a dry rendering of the facts of battles, though. Keegan's narrative strength is his gift for language, and his ability to weave in a human element to the clinical reasoning which justified sacrificing millions to the gain a few meters of waste land. Time and again he refers to the beautiful garden cemeteries that string out along what was the Western Front, marking the great offenses-- the Marne, Ypres, Somme, Verdun-- where 10's of thousands died in single day, shattered by bombardment, raked by machine gun fire, blistered and strangled by mustard or phosgene gas-- the 'cauldron' battles like Tannenberg in the East, where uncounted dead were left to return to the earth, unmarked-- the rocky and barren coast of Gallipoli, where single monuments remember both sides. It's a remarkable achievement to produce this type of history of the First World War, giving clarity and proportion to the tactical sweep of events, while retaining a sense of horror and futility at the losses of this particular war, which resolved nothing and paved the way for more devastation within a couple of decades.
Rating:
Summary: Good overview on the first phase of the world wars
Review: A thoroughly enjoyable book on the first World War, which the author admits was just the first phase of the "World War" of the 20th Century. As other reviewers have already stated, the books lack of maps makes it difficult to visualize the location of various battles and fronts. A few more maps and I would have provided a 5 star rating on a well written and compelling book. The book seems to make a few key points about how the body politic of Europe moved a cooperative mass of people toward war; how the concept of a fast war eroded into a war of attrition, yet neither side moved toward peace. Finally, how the emerging and existing technologies lead to the needless slaughter of a significant percentage of a generation of Europeans. Part of this slaughter was based on tactics not up to par with the technologies at hand. These aspects of the book make it read like a tragic novel as well as a work of history. Like many books on the first World War, it leaves the reader unclear as to the disposition of the allies toward the end of 1918. While Germany crumbled, the allies failed to conquer the remnant German army.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent military history from Keegan, as usual
Review: Very good overview of the war as war, with social, technological and diplomatic background. As this is a military history, you may want to supplement your reading of this book with others. Tuchman's 'The Guns of August' on the war's origins; Fussell's 'The Great War and Modern Memory' on the larger social context and impact of the war; Winter's 'Death's Men' for the soldier's view. I also recommend the novel 'A Very Long Engagement' by Japrisot. I would give Keegan's book five stars, but, as others have noted, this book desperately needs more maps.
Rating:
Summary: Ho Hum, What is New Here?
Review: John Keegan provides us with another one-volume survey of the First World War, followed in well-traveled footsteps that include authors ranging from B. H. Liddell-Hart to Martin Gilbert. One must first ask why Keegan would make the latest attempt; the answer, surely, is that it was a quick way to sell books. Certainly there is nothing new in any of his interpretations, nor is there any particularly great amount of research. If you are looking for a fantastic comprehensive study of a war, such as Gerhard Weinberg provided us for the Second World War, don't look for it here. This is a glib, shallow account. One of the most telling symptoms of its flaws is its treatment of one of the most vibrant issues of World War I historiography in recent years: the question of battle tactics. Writers from Timothy Travers to Paddy Griffith have been earnestly engaging each other on this subject, fundamental to the war. Yet Keegan essentially dismisses the whole debate as boring and not worthy of discussion. Amazing! Also indicative of the lack of effort are misspelled names in the short bibliography. This book may be better than some--it surpasses Martin Gilbert's intellectually dead and purely chronologically arranged history--but there are plenty of other works out there.
Rating:
Summary: The writing is flat and there are way too few maps.
Review: When I bought "The First World War" by John Keegan, I was looking forward to a my first comprehensive military history of World War I. I was disappointed and I wonder why the reviews have been so glowing. The first months of the war are desperate maneuvers by both sides to encircle and avoid encirclement. But trying to follow Keegan's description with the sorry minimum of maps, I was constantly frustrated. The key battles have no maps whatsoever. There's just a few summary maps. Keegan's descriptive style is as flat as the terrain of Ypres. I'm struggling to stay with the book. Arrgh. If you want to read a really good book about the initial stages of World War I, read Barbara Tuchman's "The Guns of August".
Rating:
Summary: My kingdom for a map...or two....or try lots!
Review: Well-written and interesting account of the events of the first world war. The text would be better elucidated with the aid of maps indicating troop placements, battle field movements, as well as the geography and topography. Words are fine, but maps would have replaced half the text and saved some trees. Great book for filling in the history gaps, next time try a few maps.
| 
