Rating: 
Summary: Stephen Ambrose, Meet Noam Chomsky!
Review: Flyboys has many interesting features such as the history of Japanese/American relations, the rise of Japanese militarism and distortion of the Bushido concept, brutal American treatment of indigenous peoples in the eras prior to World War II, insights into the Japanese homefront and view of American bombing during the Second World War, and barbarism on both sides in the Pacific. Bradleys's view seems to be that although the Japan of World War II was an evil force, Americans are not spotless either. Although uncomfortable for me to read, it was useful to be exposed to another perspective. Yet the book's subtitle is "A True Story of Real Courage." I suppose that means the story of theAmerican fliers in the Pacific. Thus Flyboys is sort of like a blending of Stephen Ambrose and Noam Chomsky into a single author. Unfortunately, I found the part dealing with American fliers to be quite boring to read. I did not learn anything new and the charicatures were dull. It simply does not work in the context of the rest of book. Readers expecting a heroic, gripping, and satisfying story of the American air war in the Pacific will be dissappointed. Since this assumption is why most people purchased or borrowed the book, they were in a sense betrayed. In conclusion, Flyboys is worth reading, but not for what the book's title implies.
Rating: 
Summary: Scattered and Inconsistent
Review: Hmmmm.......where to start. A friend offered a loan of this book. When I first saw the title, my thoughts were "this guy's a yahoo". I read the back flap of the dust cover and noted that absolutely nothing is written about the author's past other than he wrote a book about his father, leafed through the book, checked out the photo captions, looked up 'bush' in the index, read a bit about bush, and came to the conclusion this guy is not only a yahoo, he is a yahoo with an over inflated ego sucking up to a modern day war criminal. I turned the offer down. But my curiosity was piqued, so I ran a search on this book on the web and read a few 'revues'. What struck me was that no one mentioned the obvious hokum about bush and many were 'upset' the author discussed American war atrocities as well as Japanese (gasp, horror of horrors). This odd combination of foolishness changed my mind and I took up my friend's offer and borrowed the book. Well. It turns out my first impression was correct. The terminology he uses (flyboys, spirit warriors, etc.) is just plain childish and the book reads like a second rate television documentary. The author is no historian. There is so much historical inaccuracy about the war, I question whether the detailed history of the flyers itself is very accurate and not just the author using testimony and quotations out of context. The one thing I do commend about this book is the author does make an attempt to show that there were decent and monstrous people involved on both sides and that the historical past of the USA is not the diaper filler passed on by Hollywood, 5th Avenue and in the high school history books that most Americans never get beyond and believe to be fact. His general historical background of the USA and Japan at the beginning of the book is the most accurate and interesting part of this book. As the book progresses, his historical and technical accuracy plummets. Unfortunately, he doesn't delve deep enough, nor check his sources for accuracy. He gets some things correct, but is wide of the mark on others. Examples. In the accounts of bush's activities, there is no mention of Chester Mierzejewksi as a witness. Why? Look it up on the web. His information about the Coral Sea battle is dead wrong. Bradley mentions the Japanese fear of encirclement by the 'ABCD' countries, yet gives no reason why and leaves one with the impression it was just paranoia by the 'Spirit Warriors'. Wrong again. It was not paranoia. Europe and the US had shut Japan out of their colonies in the Far East. Just about everything about Hirohito is out of context and dead wrong. The background of Mitchell's bomb tests on the ships is wrong, not to mention the nauseating hero worship of that general. The reason for stalin not going to war with Japan is completely misrepresented and the background why is non-existent. The background to the Allied terror bombing campaign is also inaccurate. Just about every detailed piece of information about naval vessels is wrong. The reasons behind the invasion of Iwo Jima - wrong (one would think he would have at least got that right - considering his previous attempt). The bombing casualties of the Dresden raid. Wrong. In fact he consistently uses the lowest estimates of casualties committed by American and Allied forces. The events surrounding the atomic bombing are completely skewed and again, the author displays his shoddy scholarship with his hero worship of the war criminal tibbits and various other war criminals' involved in that crime. In fact, that is where I stopped reading. Historical fiction is entertaining, but only if the author makes it so. Bradley does not. Someone made a comparison of this hack job with works by Noam Chomsky. No even close. Chomsky does his homework, Bradley read a book. In his short essay, 'On the Backgrounds of the Pacific War' ( http://www.chomsky.info/articles/196709--.htm ), Chomsky provides far more understanding of Japanese behaviour leading up to WW2 than Bradley does in all of Flyboys. While the book had a promising beginning, the rest doesn't measure up, neither as a historical work nor as a piece of quality prose.
Rating: 
Summary: a thought provoking look at the pacific conflict
Review: Wow, what an amazing book. This is a difficult read, not because it is hard to understand what the author is explaining, but because it stirs so many emotions within, not the least of which is a familiar sorrow for the victims (on both the side of the loser and the side of the victor) of war. Bradley does an excellent job of portraying the horrors of warfare and he does so in a fair manner. One of the best things about this book is that Bradley does not submit to a hackneyed version of patriotism by villifying the Japanese and commending the US as rightful and morally superior conquerers; he instead points out that atrocities of war are committed by all sides and that there is no true right or wrong in the end - just shades of gray. The most meaningful parts of the book are the accounts of survivors, both American and Japanese, who acknowledge the horrors they endured but who have learned to forgive, if not forget. And after reading the stories of these eight flyboys, one realizes that there is no forgetting for anyone involved in war. This is an even-handed and masterful account of two nations in conflict and Bradley deserves recognition for his abilities to portray even the most grisly events with dignity and sensitivity.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliantly Balanced Historical Tome!
Review: This book is a MUST READ for younger generations to understand where we've come from and where we are going in the world, especially the Middle East. If not for the extremely graphic content, this should be required reading for all high school students. For those Neanderthal reviewers who were disappointed that the book didn't fit their myopic worldview that the American military can do no wrong, there's always Soldier of Fortune magazine and John Wayne movies. I, for one, was quite pleasantly surprised that the book was not "Rah-Rah! U-S-A! U-S-A!", especially given the title. It is NOT PC - just very even-handed and captures the HUMANITY of war like no other books I've read by exposing the INHUMANITY from both sides.
Rating: 
Summary: Has its faults, but important nevertheless...
Review: I read about 20 of the earlier reviews of "Flyboys" as I struggled through the book this past week. Some of the negative comments are deserved, such as referring to the late Gen. Curtis LeMay as "Curtis" in half or more of the references to him. This is bizarre and distracting. Whether a result of careless editing or author-torial stubborness, it does not work. Also, I agree that the term "Flyboys" as a collective description of pilots, gunners and radiomen is over-used. I also agree that the book perhaps tries to cover too much history and abandons its cover story for too many pages at a time. Some condensing and reorganization would have enhanced its power. That said, many of the other negative comments seem to be unfair. Yes, Mr. Bradley dwells on America's mistreatment of Indians and Filipinos at length, including prisoners of war. Yes, he gives disgusting details of how our napalm drops on Japanese cities destroyed civilians indiscriminately. But he is not making up those facts. And to emphasize how easily combat and its stresses can make soldiers willing to do horrible deeds is not exactly the same thing as excusing the acts. I have read my share of WW II books, as I near 60 years of age, and "Flyboys" is the first one which sensibly explains how the Japanese fighter rationalized not only his willingness to die in already-lost battles, but his contempt for those from other cultures who chose to be prisoners of war instead. To explain the Japanese viewpoint, again, is not to excuse the acts. Nor is it unpatriotic. "Flyboys" describes disgusting acts of brutality and cannibalism, and is ultimately a very sad tale. It is not a work that should be tackled by readers who are emotionally fragile. As most people reading this review will already know, Mr. Bradley's dad was one of the Iwo Jima flag-raisers, wounded physically by Japanese soldiers in that fight, and wounded in some ways psychologically by the whole of his wartime service. The fact that his son went off to study in Japan, and developed much respect for the residents there, must have been painful and puzzling for the father. But I don't think any intelligent reader of Bradley's earlier book, "Flags of Our Fathers" or of "Flyboys" can question the younger Bradley's respect for our troops or our country. One of our strengths as a representative democracy is that we can love our nation for having humane ideals even if we are imperfect in living up to them every minute. And we can learn from injustices committed in our names by our government or military agents, and change our ways. I stuck with "Flyboys" right to the end, flaws and all, and I'm glad I did. It gets more powerful as it goes on, and it does finish the story of the eight Chichi Jima American POW's as much as it could be completed, so long after their 1945 deaths. We live in a time when we may be facing 30 years or more of sporadic war with terrorists and the countries which fund and hide them. To read a book which makes war and its (initially) unintended horrors seem like a step to be accepted only with the greatest caution is not a bad thing right now. While Mr. Bradley is not the smoothest historian/writer on the block, he shows promise. In some ways this book is better than "Flags of Our Fathers" despite its problems of style, language and organization. For sure, it is more important than the previous book, because the Iwo Jima battle story had already been well-covered in earlier works. Former President George Bush came close to being a prisoner on Chichi Jima, and plays a small part in this book. If he cooperated, and if he thinks Jim Bradley has done a service to the country with his research into the horrors of war in the Pacific from both sides, I won't argue with him. He was there, I was not. I'm glad I read "Flyboys" but unlike "Flags of Our Fathers" which I've read three times since it was first published, I won't be reading it twice. Its medicine is too strong for a second dose.
Rating: 
Summary: It could have been a good book
Review: It could have been a good book if Bradley had kept to the story of the nine American flyers, but he spends far too much time blaming Americans for fire bombing cities and strafing civilians. Bradley leads the reader to believe that the Japanese turned murderous and savage only after American's landed on their islands in the 1800's. He gives little/no background on their conflicts before that. They were cutting off the noses and notching the ears of Koreans long before Perry showed up. Save your money, don't buy this book. It's nothing more than P.C., blame America first pap. It's just too bad, this could have been a good book if Bradley stuck to the Flyboys. DB
Rating:
Summary: Not about heroic "flyboys"
Review: The author describes the bombing of German and Japanese cities sounding off as if he is writing an op/ed article. When he does speak of the "flyboys" the book is supposed to cover he describes their torture and beheading with no intended or practical purpose. Why would the author lure the reader into believing the book would be about a certain number of "flyboys" that were captured by the Japanese only to bombard the reader with anti-strategic bombing commentary of two brutal and fanatical countries that started World War II? This book is misleading to say the least. James Bradley's primary story is some personal resentment and not about the fate of the "flyboys." His first attempt at history (Flags of Our Fathers) was a success. His second attempt with "Flyboys" is a dismal failure.
Rating:
Summary: What does it mean to be civilized?
Review: There are already a billion one-sided war stories and movies about 'heroic American soldiers.' I'm glad this book isn't just another one of them. As stated by another reviewer, this book gives an important history of Japanese-American relations beginning before WWII. The most important thing I am getting form this book however, is not a history lesson. The question this book poses, is "what does it mean to be civilized?" Both Japan and the US claim to be civilized countries, yet they are both guilty of the most unthinkable brutal acts known to humanity. This book illustrates how evil mankind can be, no matter what their country of origin. I am reading another book right now called the Devil in White city about a psychopath serial killer. HH Holms murdered countless people with no remorse at all, and actually seemed to enjoy it. There are trueborn psychopaths, who can hurt others without feeling or remorse. They are thankfully un-common and generally not respected in our 'civilized' society. The fact that governments, (even our government) actually intentionally created people like Holms sickens me.
The Chinese government forbids its schools from teaching about the 1989 massacre in Tiananmen Square and even forbids discussion of the event, period. In our country, we do not teach what is covered in this book in the public schools, as far as I know. Thankfully, we are allowed freedom of speech in the US and therefore freedom to read what is this book. Yet so many Americans choose to blindly slap a "these colors don't run" bumper sticker on their car, and avoid American history that may make them feel uncomfortable. What kind of American are you?
Rating:
Summary: Dummies guide to killing a good story...
Review: This is undoubtedly a good story, and if presented in the style of Hampton Sides "Ghost Soldiers", would have been a great read. I'll not dwell on the PC side of the story because its been dissected by others. Based on the writing style alone, this book is awful (quotations with no citation or reference, lack of a cohesive thought pursued to its conclusion, poor paraphrasing of interviews). In the end, I think the thing that made me the maddest about this book is the authors use of cute nicknames for various people (Flyboys, the Dutchman, Spirit Warriors). He should have shown more respect with words like naval Aviators, the President, and Japanese soldiers. In the end, this is a very aggravating read. If you want a good WW2 read, use your money wisely and read Ghost Soldiers instead.
Rating:
Summary: American bashings ruins good air war history
Review: Don't buy this book or Bradley might write another one!
Bradley spends an incredible amount of this book bashing America, the Indian, Filipino, Japanese civilian killers. Between the bashing he does a decent job of describing America's air war history.
I almost threw this book away by the time I got a couple of chapters into it. I persisted despite his continued trashing of America. Bradley's point seems to be that firebombing Japan was immoral despite the fact that the Japs killed 30 million enemy soldiers, women, children and noncombatants.
|
