Poor editing sinks research
Have you ever wished someone would write a book or make a movie about an obscure topic that greatly interested you, but then when it happens, the result is disappointing--and what's worse, you know that the only shot this obscure topic was ever going to get had been squandered?
That's my feeling of disappointment in this near-miss by Maxwell Kennedy. The book is filled with insightful research into the world of the Japanese suicide pilots commonly called kamikaze and into life on a large aircraft carrier in the final months of World War II. But doing the research and putting the information together into a readable bookor two different things.
It seems as if Mr. Kennedy filled 3 by 5 notecards with snippets of facts and arranged them in piles by topic and then threw each small pile into the air and whatever order they came down in is how he presented them in the book. Time after time the reader is jolted to a stop by a sentence or a paragraph that leaves one asking, "What does that have to with this?" A little farther along the topic resurfaces and the reader is now asking, "He already said that, and why didn't he put this information together with that information?"
Sometimes, the effect is that he beats a point to death because it appears three times over the course of two pages, when consolidating the three references into one cohesive paragraph would have had more effect. A case in point is his assertion that the design and placement of the pilot's ready room just below the flight deck placed the pilots in unnecessary danger. Instead of writing a strong argument to support his assertion (which, by the way, is valid), he throws in a sentence here and there as is he wasn't confident enough to say it directly.
Mr. Kennedy was poorly served by his editor. A competent editor would have helped rewrite passages into a flowing narrative that supported his story, would have caught the inconsistencies in usage (in some places pilots are referred to by last name and then first name and then nickname in the same passage, making it sound as if he was writing about three men), the use of acronymns and jargon without definition, and references to people without explanation as to who they are and why they are being included.
What we have here is a collection of facts and observations that could have been arranged into a long magazine article, maybe in American Heritage or Smithsonian, but instead, has been scrambled into a book--a long, curvy road where a straight highway would have sufficed.
All that being said, Mr. Kennedy certainly did his homework, especially in delving into the lives of the suicide pilots and the culture that made such a strategy even thinkable, debunking a lot of myths about the supposed fanaticism of the Japanese pilots. He also makes a strong argument that Japan was defeated by the summer of 1944 and that a lot of subsequent bloodshed on both sides was ultimately for no good reason other than a refusal by one side to admit defeat and a racially motivated desire for revenge on the other side.
Because it is unlikely no one else will ever write anything that will be published about this event, you'll have to settle for this effort and wonder what could have been.
1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback.
Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.