2011 Books – Patton: A Genius for War

Well, after spending so much time reading about Hilter last year, I decided to pick up some light reading to start off this year… which turned out to be Carlo D’Este’s 900 page biography on General George S. Patton Jr.

Patton: A Genius for War is more than just a book about the general’s tactics and war maneuvers. It’s about Patton the man. D’Este makes two statements in the prologue that define Patton.

“What made Patton so remarkable was his willingness to take risks and to make crucial life-and-death decisions no one else would dare” (page 3), and just below it, D’Este says, “Patton was an authentic and flamboyant military genius whose entire life was spent in preparation for a fleeting opportunity to become one of the great captains of history. No soldier in the annals of the U.S. Army ever worked more diligently to prepare himself for high command than did Patton.”

And throughout the course of the book, D’Este shows nearly everything Patton did to become the best soldier he could be.

D’Este starts the book by going through Patton’s genealogy and spends time showing the reader the war heroes in Patton’s line, and why and how they impressed on Patton the need to be a soldier, and not just any soldier, to be the best.

D’Este also spends about half the book (which would cover Patton’s early life up until the start of WWII) showing how Patton’s dyslexia impacted his life. As a young boy/man, Patton had trouble reading, spelling, math and he developed an inferiority complex.

Due to the dyslexia (which wasn’t a known disability back then) Patton didn’t start to read and write until he was eleven, but up to that point, he learned history from stories he was told or that were read to him. When he did begin school, he learned to memorize everything. He wasn’t born with a photographic memory, but he trained himself to develop one. And with that memory, he absorbed everything he could find on any type of war history. From the Romans to Alexander to the Revolutionary and Civil Wars to Napoleon, he knew every battle by heart. He also could quote the Bible, Shakespeare and Kipling (among countless others) at length.

Patton loved to read and write. Many of his battle strategies and other such related documents are still read and studied by students at West Point. He often wrote poetry when he was facing tough decisions or had been through a rough ordeal, or simply just bored.

D’Este pulls from Patton’s own diaries to give the reader a sense of the real man. Patton was actually quite a compassionate and humble person. But, because of the sense of honor and pride that had been instilled in him about his forefathers, and his study of great war leaders of the past, he acted like the rough and tough general he thought he should be. Or rather, how he thought a general should be.

On page 400, D’Este says, “Patton never lost sight of the vital importance of his men’s survival and his subsequent reputation as a bloodthirsty warrior (“our blood, his guts”), uncaring of his men and bent only on success, is unfounded. No commander ever devoted more time to training his troops to such a high standard that would save, not waste, their lives.”

As D’Este takes us through his years at VMI then West Point and Patton’s early years in the cavalry, he shows the reader both the warrior and the softer side. Patton pushed himself to learn all he could on any given matter. Whether fencing or the new invention of the tank, he studied it all – every nut and bolt. Then he taught people what he knew.

On the battlefield, Patton always preferred to scout the terrain personally. Though often told (or in some cases, ordered) not to leave the HQ, he still went out. In many ways, this helped him to plan his attacks. Because he knew his men and his equipment so well, and by seeing the field for himself, he could adjust his strategy to make the greatest impact.

He also felt it necessary to visit the front lines during battle. Again, something he was told not to do. Patton said, “My theory is that an Army commander does what is necessary to accomplish his mission and that nearly 80 per cent of his mission is to arouse morale in his men.” And in example after example, D’Este shows us how Patton even just driving through in his command car cheered his men. His men knew that Patton would never ask anything of them that he would not do himself.

Something that I found interesting is that General Omar Bradley pretty much hated Patton. Where Bradley would stay at the command center, Patton would be on the field. Where Bradley played it safe, often more of a defensive position, Patton would be ready to strike and detested being on the defensive. D’Este pulls from Bradley’s own notes about his disdain for Patton’s “grandstanding” as he saw it. However (again pulled from diaries and notes and interviews) during WWII, the German command never asked where Bradley and his army were, or what Eisenhower might be planning, or Montgomery was up to, their eyes were always on Patton. He was the one they feared.The Germans paid close attention to the movement of Patton and his Third Army because they thought he was the most dangerous general on the Allied side.

D’Este also goes into great detail about the two slapping incidents where Patton slapped two soldiers (two different incidents about two weeks apart) for being what he thought was cowardice. Both men were in the hospital for battle fatigue and had no other injuries. These two incidents nearly ruined Patton’s career. But Eisenhower, knowing that he needed Patton’s skill in Europe (the slappings happened while Patton was in North Africa), he strongly reprimanded his friend and put him on hold until Operation Overlord was to commence.

D’Este suggests that had these incidents not happened, it would have been Patton commanding the entire operation, not Bradley, perhaps not even Eisenhower.

Of course the reader is taken step by step through Patton’s movements during WWII. From North Africa, to England, to France and to the ultimate battle that truly showed Patton’s brilliance: the Battle of the Bulge.

There are stories that are hilarious, some quite moving (Patton losing his aide, Dick Jenson, who he openly wept for) and a lot of the anger, frustration and even loathing of Patton by so called friends and the press. Ironically, Patton thought Montgomery (his British counterpart) hated him and was trying to upstage him, but Montgomery had no intentions whatsoever and had the highest respect for Patton. But Eisenhower, who’d been a close friend long before WWII, even, in the end, turned against Patton. As I stated, Bradley didn’t like him and the press goaded him into situations that got him into trouble with his commanders (even though most of what he said was taken out of context or even misquoted).

There are three things that I like about this book, that make it worth reading if you want to learn about the real Patton. One, he pulls from direct sources: Patton’s own diaries, documented interviews with family, subordinates, commanders, etc. Things that are speculated are noted as such… and the last 130 pages of the book are the notes he pulled from. Very well documented.

Secondly, though there is a lot of army terminology, it is written so that the layperson can understand it. Very helpful for someone like me.

Last, but not least, it shows both sides of Patton: the warrior with his most outlandish speeches, and the compassionate, emotional gentleman. He also shows both sides of the various incidents that got Patton into trouble. He tells us what Patton wrote in his notes about them and what his commanders thought as well as how his subordinates and people back home in the U.S. perceived them.

D’Este ends the book with various opinions about Patton’s legacy. From those who loved him to those who hated him and points out that even those who disliked him took a “certain perverse pride in being able to state that they had served in the Third Army” (page 812).

Page 813:
What made Patton different? Historian Eric Larrabee suggests that he was not merely a man thoroughly schooled in his profession: “…To think like a platoon over a few hundred yards is no great trick; to think like a division over a score of square miles is difficult, but the gene pool seems to cast up an adequate number of men who can manage it. To think like a corps is an unusual gift… and to think like an army is a rarity itself. Patton could think like an army. When the occasion demanded it he could turn it on a dime, and this raises him high above the rest of the Allied generals.”

I love his part: “Ask any soldier what his outfit was, and invariably he will reply, such and such a division or regiment. Ask anyone who served in the Third Army and he will answer: “Third Army” or “I was with Patton.”

This is an amazing work. When D’Este starts the book by explaining that when asked about who they think Patton was, the person thinks of the opening scene in the movie: the gigantic American flag with Patton all decked out with his medals standing on the stage to address his men. But at the bottom of that page, D’Este points out that the movie was “based on the bestselling memoir of another famous general, Omar N. Bradley, who served as the film’s chief military adviser. It was ironical that Bradley received a considerable sum of money, including a percentage of the gross receipts, for his professional consultation on a film about a comrade-in-arms he despised and never understood.” Then D’Este begins the arduous task of showing us the real Patton. The guts, the glory, the gaffes. Good stuff.