Commanding Canadians: The Second World War Diaries of A.F.C. Layard (review)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: Commanding Canadians: The Second World War Diaries of A.F.C. Layard Richard Goette Commanding Canadians: The Second World War Diaries of A.F.C. Layard. Edited by Michael Whitby. Vancouver: UBC Press, in association with the Canadian War Museum, Studies in Canadian Military History Series, 2005. Pp. 383, illus., $85.00 Since the Somalia Inquiry, much attention has been given to the study of leadership and command in the Canadian Armed Forces. The historical discipline has been no exception, and Michael Whitby, a historian with the Department of National Defence's Directorate of History and Heritage, provides a welcome addition to the growing literature on this subject in his book, Commanding Canadians: The Second World War Diaries of A.F.C. Layard. Part of UBC Press's excellent Studies in Canadian Military History series, Commanding Canadians, is an edited account of the diaries of Commander A.F.C. Layard, a Royal Navy officer who commanded Royal Canadian Navy escort groups during the last half of the Second World War. Layard was a skilled and able officer, whose experience in 'small ships' earned him command over support groups in the rapidly growing RCN during the Battle of the Atlantic. As an experienced professional naval officer, Layard played a crucial role 'at that time of crisis,' when 'there were simply not enough Canadian officers of Layard's calibre to fill the RCN's leadership void at sea' (339). As a book that examines the performance of Canadians during the Battle of the Atlantic through the eyes of an experienced British officer, it complements well other classics, including U-Boat Killer (1956) by Donald Macintyre, RN, and also 50 North, by Alan Easton, an RCN officer who served under Layard's command. Layard's diaries were an outlet – 'a release, a way to get things off his chest' (306), and his frankness and honesty offer insight into how Canadians under his command fought the longest campaign of the Second World War. Quite often Layard was complimentary towards his Canadian subordinates, on one occasion calling his radar officer 'an excellent man' (137) and in another describing his first officer as 'the best I've [End Page 346] ever had' (198). Nonetheless, Layard did believe that 'the R.C.N. is very different' (45) from the RN, and he was often critical of the Canadians' lack of professionalism and experience. In one instance, he grumbled, 'You can never trust a Canadian ship to do anything without being told three times' (150), and in another he bemoaned Canadian sailors' getting too drunk while ashore (140). Layard, however, did not give the Canadians a monopoly on criticism. In fact, one of the most common themes throughout the diaries was his own self-doubt, what he felt were huge failings in his leadership and command abilities. In one notable case, Layard agonized over what he thought was a lost opportunity to sink a U-boat, writing, 'I've let the ship and the group down and feel suicidal with shame' (132), when in fact it was later revealed that he had in fact sunk U-311 in his attack. The job of editing a diary in order to make it appeal to a reader is a difficult one, but Whitby succeeds. He breaks up the diaries chronologically into chapters that examine different aspects of Layard's experiences during the Battle of the Atlantic. At the beginning of each chapter Whitby provides a few pages of excellent analytical context for the reader, setting up and fleshing out some of the major themes and developments that the forthcoming diary entries examine. Through meticulous research, including information from primary and secondary sources, and also excerpts from Layard's unpublished manuscript and accounts from those under his command, Whitby provides insight with footnotes throughout the diary entries, without disturbing the day-by-day account of Layard's experiences. The book contains appropriate appendices, a good index, and well-chosen photographs to supplement the book, although one would have liked to see a photograph of how the diary appeared in its original written form. This book is a welcome addition to the historiography of the later phases of the Battle...
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".