So I want to go on a half.com shopping spree and want to pick up some of his works. What are his must haves? I have never read any of his works. There have been a few threads about his works but not really a definative "what are his best" thread.

From what I've heard it seems like...

Undaunted Courage
Band of Brothers
D-Day
Citizen Soldiers

...are some of the more popular ones.

Is there one that I should absolutely read first?

Thanks for your recommendations.

If I were you, I would read Band of Brother first. Well, simply because I haven't read all of them and I've seen the mini series.

**

BoB
D-Day
The Wild Blue

And for one that nobody talks much about: Nothing Like It in The World - about the building of the Transcontinental railroad.




** = I recommend these to you, but as a writer, I do not support nor endorse Stephen Ambrose

I read and recommend:

Crazy Horse and Custer: The Parallel Lives of Two American Warriors

I liked this last one "To America"...talks about all the lessons he learned while being a historian for 50 years.

His best books are definitely his earlier ones, including his biographies of Eisenhower and Nixon.

His more popular ones were the more recent books on WWII, etc., but they weren't of the same scholarly quality. The book on the transcontinental railroad, for example, was dreadful.

You're probably right with your comment about Nothing Like It In The World (book on transcontinental railroad). I picked it up at B&N for $5.95

I thought it started out pretty dull (and I'm a big railroad enthusiast) and I never have finished it.

I found the forward to be rather touching when he was talking about how people react to seeing steam engines and how railroads are ingrained into the american psyche, but the book ended up being little more than the dry recitiation of facts and statistics about various businessmen and engineers.

Why no love for Ambrose?



It seems like there is a lot of different opinions on his books and which are good.

I really like Mr. Ambrose's writing, but his late works seemed like mostly retread. I admit, though, that I really enjoyed Citizen Soldiers and D-Day. Very interesting, and goes into great detail about the men and the events--I'd highlly reccomend them.

I'm guessing BoatDrinks problem with him is his admission of academic dishonesty by not properly quoting/citing his sources, especially in Wild Blue.

http://www.forbes.com/2002/01/07/0107ambrose.html

Someone who presents himself as a professional historian shouldn't be writing in a way that would result in harsh academic sanctions to a college student.

That's about the nicest way I've ever heard it put.

Imho, and the opinion of many in the writing community, he plagiarized. There are many more instances other than just failing to credit in Wild Blue, but that's for another thread.

In fact we had a big Ambrose debate thread here a few months back.

Anyway, you can learn from his books, so go ahead and read them.

I enjoyed reading Band of Brothers I also enjoyed D-Day, at least the first half of it. It's so detailed that I was about half way through and still wasn't at June 6, 1944 yet. Someday, I'd like to finish it.

I too bought Nothing Like it in the World and B&N for $6 I haven't read it yet but the above comments don't leave me with much hope.

If I can find Undaunted Courage anywhere for cheap, I'd like to give it a try as well.

Well, I was trying to present it objectively. Personally, it disgusts me, and I won't be reading any more of his books (had previously read Band of Brothers).

sooo......

his information is still historically accurate?

I guess if I buy it on Half I really won't be putting any more money in his pocket, actually I guess his inheritance recipients pockets.

As both a writer and a historian, I think the whole brouhaha with Ambrose was largely much ado about nothing. The thing he was most guilty of was sloppy research techniques -- or, more accurately, relying on the sloppy research techniques of his assistants. By the time of his last handful of books, Ambrose had become more a writing congolmerate than a historian, at which point these kinds of errors and offenses are inevitable. I certainly don't believe that he deliberately set out to steal anyone's work. But a scholar has a responsibility to keep a closer eye on the "bottom line" (so to speak) and this was a burden he abrogated.

BUT, for the purposes of his readers, his books tend to be well written, ably presented, and historically accurate. For most, that will be enough.

While completely disagreeing with djmont re: the "brouhaha" I do agree with his above statement.