What Does Michael Bess And Richard Overy Bring To Study World War II?

What perspectives do Michael Bess and Richard Overy bring to studying World War II?

In Choices Under Fire Michael Bess explores the dimensions and perspective of morality in the time of war. Bess delves into moral choices made by soldiers, civilians, and all levels of government officials from the Allies to the Axis powers. We will see the stark reality of how war can change a person and expose parts of ourselves that we never thought possible. He also wants the reader to better understand and contemplate how these moral decisions impacted the course of the war and postwar era. He asks the difficult moral questions that challenge the moral clarity and high ground that we tend to view the World War II with. Richard Overy begins Why the Allies

He uses people’s personal stories and moral choices as a lens to tell the story of World War II. From these stories, he draws common themes and traces their impact on the war, and the impact on society postwar. On page 13 he talks about using two different hats in which to use in our historical observance while reading his book. The first is, “the stance of celebration: the imperative one feels to recapture vividly the drama, sacrifice, and extraordinary achievement that culminated in allied victory.” This stance is how we tend to usually view the war. (Bess 13) The second hat is called, “the stance of scrutiny: the imperative one feels to reconstruct the full story of what happened as accurately as possible.” (Bess

In the East, Germany pulverized the Soviet Union’s four-million-man army in a matter of months, and by October, as Soviet documents now show, Stalin was contemplating capitulation. In Asia, Japan seized the oil fields of Borneo with ease, clobbered the British at Singapore, and was poised to sweep American forces out of the Pacific.”

Are their works complementary or at odds?

I found the two books to complement one another. They both desire to challenge the illusion of World War II but in different ways, Bess does it through a moral lens while Overy seeks to convey through facts, how close the allies came to not winning the war. Each book forces the reader to ask difficult questions of themselves and their beliefs of the war prior to beginning the book. I found that so far the books support one another in terms of overall themes. I have not found anything that puts them at odds.

Is one perspective more valid than the other?

I do not think that one perspective is more valid than the other. I believe that they are both equally important in having a healthy nonbiased view of the events of the war. A blend of both perspectives will give an individual the most educated and dogmatic take away of the war that shaped our modern world. There is a saying that