Firstly, this is an incredibly readable novel and one I've been waiting to read for some time. It's also a novel that is full of difficulties and can feel a little derivative; almost every line, anecdote, and plot development sounds - if you've ever studied the war - as if it's come from somewhere else. This is explained in the historical notes but still can feel a bit clunky. However, this is splitting hairs (it's not like Napoleon the film where historical accuracy is seen as a blot on the landscape of story-telling) as the tale is believable and the sense of being in the trenches is thoroughly realistic in places; it's like looking at a photograph from the war. But you could argue that a story about two posh kids from a public school citing poetry at each other and hiding (but not hiding) an illicit affair seems to suggest that this was the norm. Therefore, readable but sometimes infuriating.
My yardstick for a book about The Great War is the Pat Barker Regeneration series. One of the reasons for this is that it is not set at the front entirely. This fact saves it from the temptation to fall into tired tropes of the conflict: callous Generals, pointless slaughter, brave young heroes and a generation wiped out by the guns. In Memoriam is set in various locations but doesn't entirely slip free of the easy, low-hanging fruit of these battles. I can't help but wonder if a more subtle approach to this would have made the novel more powerful. Birdsong is a great book and like Winn's novel is a powerful tale with strongly written characters but its description of the Somme is so reductive and paints a picture of the battle that is so simplistic and 3rd Form History that it is a bit frustrating to read. In fact, Winn admits that the In Memoriam sections quoted in the Preschutian were deliberated altered to give an impression of a lost generation even though the statistics on this just don't bear out in the painful light of day; it's easier to believe the myth than the reality.
Another aspect of the book that fell, in my opinion, into the territory of stereotype, was the depiction of the Public School. I know that stereotypes fall into place through the truth but again the depiction of ruthless bullying and latent homosexuality around every corner was a little on the "I've seen it all before" side and I wasn't entirely sure that it was necessary. On that note, I did feel that the depiction of Hayes (a temporary gentleman) was sympathetic and well-rendered but as it was so limited to this one character, it began to feel a bit tokenistic. For example, there was a moment just before the first day of the Somme that just felt too contrived. All the old Preshutian officers seem to be gathered together instead of actually with their companies. There seems to be a total absence of any senior officers, the private soldiers are hardly mentioned and it feels a bit like Blackadder. Another aspect of the text that clashed a bit was the episode where Ellwood returns with his prisoner to the Chateau where the senior officers are enjoying port and cigars and he gets berated for having unpolished buttons. This is inspired by the scene from Journey's End but is also seen in Band of Brothers and perpetuates the idea of the callous officers, badly out-of-touch with the situation at the front (as if they somehow never read the casualty lists) and seeing the whole thing as a bit of an adventure. Again, this just jarred with me. There is enough history written about this that it's just unfair and probably untrue to assume that this scene is representative. Casualty rates among senior officers were very high, part of their duty was to visit the front, and many were cautioned by their subordinates for visiting too frequently and putting their lives at risk. No doubt, there would have been officers who were not quite so keen to do this and I'm sure there is a kernel of truth behind the comparative luxury of the HQs vs the trenches themselves but this scene seems to take its lead from Oh, What a Lovely War! and I thought it was a bit disappointing and unnecessary (especially as the reason for the trench raid is over an old-school rivalry and ordered by a junior officer- just felt a bit unrealistic). Returning to the Somme I thought we were going to get away with this battle in avoiding the mention of footballs but I'm afraid the footballs came out as did the General's speech about the Germans wanting to surrender straight away etc. These speeches did happen but not as much as you'd think and the fact that they are so heavily written about has made them so cliched that I think they are probably now worth forgetting.
The German view of the Somme was written about and I read into it the heavily implied Lions Led by Donkeys schtick and I was partly relieved that it wasn't mentioned. Again, this was invented by an Historian with an axe to grind (there is no evidence that this was ever mentioned - many reports from German officers were astonished at the reserves that the British had to hand and were also reported to have said that the war was lost at the Somme). There is a later mention of the battle raging on - which it did - but the focus is so exclusively on the first day and focused in one area that again, it's just reductive and tired (Birdsong has done this battle and In Memoriam doesn't offer anything new of nuanced).
The central love story was intriguing and the scenes set in the POW camp were novel and gave the novel something new to say. The prose is good, if a little filmic, the notion of a ripping yarn is definitely there even if the history can feel a little bit clunky at times.