General Patton: A Soldier's Life. . - book review

Parameters, Spring, 2003 by Martin Blumenson

General Patton: A Soldier's Life. By Stanley P. Hirshson. New York: HarperCollins. 826 pages. $34.95. Reviewed by

There is much to admire in Stanley P. Hirshson's biography of George Smith Patton, Jr. His style, always lucid and direct, is lively--what else could it be with a subject so colorful and controversial?--and his study of Patton is easy to read. Also admirable is Dr. Hirshson's research. A history professor at Queens College in New York City, he has consulted a good many sources, and his proud account of his prodigious travels in search of knowledge is impressive.

As a consequence, his story of the early Patton is detailed and sharp. He has all the Virginians and Californians, the cousins and the connections, down pat. He describes Patton's childhood, youth, and middle age fairly well. His essay on the movie and the books after Patton's death is excellent.

Dr. Hirshson has written a civilian's appraisal of Patton, however, and he stumbles when he comes to World War II. What is missing from his examination of Patton's life is the perception of certain inner realities that comes when one is familiar with the customs, habits, ethos, and lore of a particular profession, in this case, the military. Many of these values are nuanced and difficult to document. Yet they are nevertheless true.

To overcome this deficiency, Dr. Hirshson has relied on others, among them Bradford Chynoweth, S. L. A. Marshall, John S. Wood, and more. This reviewer was amazed by the number of "reminiscences" and "recollections" in the footnotes, many rendered quite a few years after the events. As anyone who has performed historical interviewing can attest, memories are forgetful, play tricks, and lead listeners astray.

Specifically, Hirshson's nonmilitary focus mistakes the intent of some of Patton's talks to the troops. He starts his narrative with the killing of prisoners of war in Sicily, apparently the result of Patton's language. To begin this way is manifestly unfair. No one endorses atrocities, yet they occur in wartime. To blame Patton's inciting words is to be unaware of the tough and brutal leadership required to overcome the defenders of Nazism and the Holocaust.

Inspiring hatred against the enemy was Patton's message on the battlefield, and it worked, not only in Sicily, but also in North Africa and Europe. It is perfectly right and just that Patton's Third Army was the first to overrun and uncover at Ohrdruf the horrors of the concentration camps.

Contrary to Hirshson's view of Sicily as a minor campaign of the war, Sicily was of prime importance. Many British officers after the disastrous American defeat during the Kasserine Pass battle believed US troops to be second-rate fighters. Thus, Sir Harold Alexander, the Allied ground commander in Sicily, assigned Patton and his Seventh Army the insulting role of protecting Sir Bernard L. Montgomery's flank and rear as he drove to Messina, the only strategic objective of note.

Patton was determined to prove the British wrong. That's why he drove so ruthlessly first to Palermo (not to split the island as Hirshson says, but to obtain a port for logistical support), then to Messina. It explains why he wanted so desperately to reach Mes sina ahead of Montgomery. That's why he ordered the small amphibious operations. That's what Bradley and Truscott--and incidentally Hirshson--failed to understand. From then to the end of the war, there was no talk of Americans being inferior fighting forces. And that was Patton's achievement.

Hirshson makes no effort to understand why Patton slapped two different soldiers in two different hospitals a week apart. The question hangs. Was Patton out of his mind? Somewhat nuts? General H. Essame has provided the most plausible reason for Patton's actions. Patton, Essame says, was simply frustrated, unable to dominate the battlefield, unable to prevent the enemy from withdrawing into the northeastern corner of the island, then ferrying substantial numbers of troops and equipment to safety on the Italian mainland. The Allied inability to prevent the massive Axis evacuation, Patton knew, would prolong the war. And that bothered him deeply.

It was the slapping incidents that promoted Bradley, Patton's immediate subordinate in Sicily, to become his immediate superior in Europe. Hirshson seems hardly aware of the humiliation thus imposed on Patton.

In England when Patton was preparing his Third Army for combat, his location was supposed to be an Allied secret. After every public talk, Patton told his audience that he was a myth, he was incognito, he wasn't there, they didn't see him. Yet when his innocuous words in Knutsford were suddenly revealed in a British newspaper, he was again close to being fired, relieved of his command. I was told confidentially that British intelligence, in charge of managing the great pre-invasion deception, was responsible for the publication. They wanted the Germans to be sure to know that Patton was in the United Kingdom and commanding the nonexistent army group that was apparently planning to invade the Pas de Galais area.