Arthur Gould lee

I picked up his book No Parachute unsuspecting its content and was drawn into the personalities and circumstances of the first world war. I was hooked and read every book I could find on the subject. I later chanced upon a book written by him about the first flight in England. He is my ideal in a writer. Years later I found a book by him called fly past that described his life in the RAF What really struck a chord for me was the zest for life he had in old age was the same as when he was a young fighter pilot in the first worlld war.

I too enjoy his work, but I've read that "No Parachute" is not EXACTLY his diaries and letters from that time. He may have rewritten them in later life, as a memoir, but in diary/letter form. No deception was intended or implied, other than he wanted to appear to be a better writer than he was at 20.
Who doesn't?

His writing had me right with him I couldn't believe how farmiliar the front in france was to me, the hangers the sausage baloons in the distance, The loss of Barranger. His being shot down. The magnitude in his mind about a small leg wound. his first ride in an automobile. and the futility at the end of almost being requested to commit suicide. and I equally enjoyed his other books.
Cheers
Ken McKenzie
www.starapex.com

[Richard_Schrader]

"No Parachute" remains my favorite WW1 book. I wish I could find another copy, mind has fallen apart from being read so many times.
Richard

Richard
You have got one on me. I Don't have a copy of any of the books he wrote, all I have is memory.
Cheers
Ken McKenzie
www.starapex.com

Funny you should mention this particular book, "No Parachute", at this time, as I'm just now rereading it for the first time since high school. (Thanks again, Mr. Conley!)
What makes the book special to me is the fact that there is very little of the romanticism that other writers have tended to inject into that particular experience. A. G. Lee may not have had Lewis' flair for flowery prose, but his books certainly make you feel like you're there.

Dean

[stephen]

Tom, I've heard rumors before that Lee re-wrote his letters to add a dash of glory here and there, but I have never seen a single shred of evidence to support it. In fact, when the accusation is brought up, its usually to undermine Lee's presumed sighting of MvR because his description of MvR's Tripe doesn't match the colors that some historians believe it was painted in. It seems much easier to simply dismiss Lee's work with a waive of the hand than to re-assess their work. Have you ever heard anything other than rumor and innuendo to solidly demonstrate that Lee's work was tainted?

I have been to the Cambrai battlefield twice to retrace Lee's flights in that battle, and have found his descriptions of the sites and landmarks to be remarkably accurate even 80 years later. I was able to pinpoint and photograph his forced landing sites, the sunken road down which he ran to escape German MG fire, and the trenches from which he sat and watched the rest of the battle, and in each case he was correct almost to the yard. I'm perfectly willing to believe that he falsified all or part of his letters but not without some sort of evidence, because it runs contrary to what little I know of his work.

"Tom, I've heard rumors before that Lee re-wrote his letters to add a dash of glory here and there, but I have never seen a single shred of evidence to support it."

Nor have I, or do I. I do think it's a reasonable suggestion that he POLISHED what he wrote when he was young. It just seems too well written for such a young author. POLISH does not mean EMBELLISH--only that he collected random thoughts together and created a more readible book.

"Have you ever heard anything other than rumor and innuendo to solidly demonstrate that Lee's work was tainted?"

Real diaries and letters are seldom so well written and to the point. Look at Ken McLeash's letters--random and personal, and spur of the moment, and he was an Ivy League grad. Lee wrote books after he retired; he was a good writer and good writers REwrite. It doesn't change the truth of what he said, only the style in which he said it.

"I'm perfectly willing to believe that he falsified all or part of his letters but not without some sort of evidence, because it runs contrary to what little I know of his work."

I don't believe he falsified a thing. "No Parachute" is the equivalent of an old photo, restored with PhotoSoap--not the 1917 picture, but one in a sharper focus, and still a true image.

[stephen]

>>>>>I do think it's a reasonable suggestion that he POLISHED what he wrote

I don't doubt the reasonability of the suggestion, but I'm still looking for something to support it. According to Lee's notes, the letters were only edited to remove redundant points and take out private family matters, and otherwise accurately represent his letters as written to his first wife, Gwyneth Anne. So if he did polish his notes, he lied about it as well in his forward. Either that, or in his mid-twenties he actually was a pretty decent writer.

Just curious if anyone knew anything other than rumor or suggestion.

I no longer have the book but if my memory is correct he came across the letters in an attic and that gave him the nuclius for the book.
There are parts in the book when he is not telling a story. He is documenting what happened in the earlier hours of the day. Information brought to light afterwards gets woven in between the documentation.
Cheers
Ken McKenzie
www.starapex.com