Having read the introduction to this book, which mentioned how much men like Sir Arthur Currie hated it, I was eager to read on to see if I could discern precisely what would give rise to their rage. Now that I've finished reading I can't be sure of anything. Was it that soldiers were referred to as 'bewildered youths' in the dedication, and not hailed as patriotic warriors? Or possibly distinguished readers would not like to be reminded of the queues for the services of prostitutes? With one queue for officers and another for 'other ranks'? Perhaps Currie was enraged by the mention of the possibility that Canadian soldiers might murder their Germans POWs, rather than share their dismal rations?

Could any of this be true, or were Currie and the others angry because the book is altogether false?

Generals Die in Bed: 100th Anniversary of World War I Special Edition by Charles Yates Harrison is a novel of a soldier's time in the trenches of WWI. Harrison was born in Philadelphia but raised in Montreal. He served as a machine gunner in the Royal Montreal Regiment in WWI, wounded in the battle of Amiens, and became a writer in Montreal and later New York. Generals Die in Bed was serialized in several American and German periodicals in 1928 and eventually published as a novel in 1930.

Perhaps one of the hardest things to remember while reading this book is that it is a novel. It reads as a memoir and with the author’s war experience it is difficult to tell how much is actually fiction -- even to the point of the author, in real life, and the main character both being taken out of the war by a foot wound. It is easy for the average reader to think this is an autobiography. Many more educated people made the same mistake. The Senior Historian at the Canadian War Museum discredited the book by treating it as an autobiography and criticizing Harrison for promoting himself in the book. The book was hailed and condemned at its release. Many of the military commentators had a very low opinion of the book, coming just short of calling it treasonous.

There is little doubt that we today learn much of the war through nonfiction, research, news articles, government documents, memoirs, and letters. Anyone who has written a graduate level paper in history or political science can attest to this. What brings history to life is first hand information, the event being told by the participant. Perhaps, one thing that makes first hand information more valuable in understanding is when it is fictionalized. Not fictionalized in the Hollywood sense of selling a movie, but in the sense of removing inhibitions about telling the whole truth. It may be difficult to reveal friends secrets, or name names for the acts of someone who fell in battle. Fiction, in this sense gives the reader more than the entire story, it gives the reader the feel of the event.

Harrison is able to identify with the soldier, as he was one. His telling of life in the military rings true today. There is questioning. There is a change from patriotism to self preservation. Basic human needs to continue breathing and having a full stomach trump the sense of duty. You do your job, and do it well. You just lose that naive patriotism. You form bonds with those you serve with; that brotherhood becomes as strong as or stronger than family. Those in the trenches where doing the job the vast majority of the population did not want to do. Governments had to force people into uniform with a draft. Harrison’s fiction brings this to life. There is a timeless bond to those in uniform. Give this book to a Marine who fought in Fallujah and he will relate to the feelings, emotions, and actions of soldiers in trenches one hundred years ago. The people may change, but the fighting man is always the same.

Generals die in bed. The higher the rank the better chance of that happening. When the general or officer speaks to the enlisted man of “we”, the enlisted man knows “we” does not include the officer. This was much more pronounced in WWI than today, but the feeling still remains among the enlisted. There is a reason this book was vilified by ranking members of the Canadian military. Generals Die in Bed is a moving account of the war. Perhaps the most moving I read since Johnny Got His Gun, but more real. A great read for anyone wanting to the trench level experience of WWI. ( )

Hale writes from a journalistic lens, writing short, dry sentences with very simple structures. Despite this, Hale is able to capture the true horrors of the Great War. The loneliness, death, and sense of injustice all come through clear in this terse and beautifully written book. ( )

A gritty first hand account of life on the Western front in the trenches. ( )

A short memoir of a Canadian soldier in the trenches of World War 1. Full of the horror and futility of old style fighting with the carnage of new style weapons. No wonder they called WW1 the war to end all wars. Well, they did for 20 years or so, anyway.
Read Dec 2016 ( )

Originally published in 1930, this searing novel by a Canadian veteran of the Western front vividly depicts the horrors of trench warfare. ( )

A Canadian story first released in 1930. The author was 20 years old when he was shipped to the Western Front. A "nasty" and harrowing story without any feeling of mateship or comradeship that always seems to come out in stories by the Australian diggers. This story has has a much more lonely feeling to it, with everyone for himself. Although it purports to be a fictional account of WW1 it is based very much on the authors own experiences. There are graphic descriptions of living conditions for the soldiers
eg.: lice more of an enemy than the Germans
descriptions of very fat rats
descriptions of the soldier's injuries and illnesses (& the assorted cures)
scenes involving the camp followers/prostitutes ( )

Great description of life in the trenches during WWI. Blows away all patriotic notions of the valour of fighting for ones country. ( )