Winston Groom (1944–2020)

I've loved the film Forrest Gump ever since I was a kid growing up in the Nineties. Some of its scenes are among my most vivid early memories. It was my crash course in 20th century history; it was where I first learned about Elvis, JFK, John Lennon, Vietnam, Watergate… the list goes on. It's where I first understood heartbreak (Jenny), wanderlust ("I just felt like runnin'") and melancholy (Lieutenant Dan in the bar as everyone sings 'Auld Lang Syne').

It's a film that uncovers its layers show more over time (as a kid, I somehow overlooked Forrest's mama's grunting episode with the teacher, or the reason Jenny threw rocks at her childhood home) and I can rewatch it again and again as comfort, as nostalgia, as storytelling. It's also a damn good film besides, and I can watch it as a fine piece of filmmaking. All in all, it's fair to say I enjoy Forrest Gump. But I've never been more convinced that it deserved its Oscar for best adapted screenplay than I am now, having read its source book by Winston Groom.

It's so different, it's startling. I won't list all the differences between book and film – we'd be here for hours – but I have to say, without hyperbole, that Eric Roth, the screenwriter, must be responsible for about 90% of the film's content. All of those famous lines and scenes – none of which are in the book. It's an odd feeling. It's not the usual feeling where you feel a film dominate your impressions of its source book, or vice versa. Rather, it's like peering into an alternate universe, one in which the film Forrest Gump never existed – like trying to imagine a world in which the Beatles never formed. Groom's Gump is so far removed from Tom Hanks' character that you see the familiar names on the page but they don't seem right – like you've been told 'up' is 'down' now, or like driving on the other side of the road in a foreign country.

Once I overcame this disappointment – and, to be honest, I had fair warning from all the other reviews of this book – I still found myself in the position of not rating Groom's novel. His Gump is different from the one we're used to, yes, but it also becomes rapidly clear that his Gump is also lesser. His narrative voice is less well-rounded and more dislikeable. His motivations are less endearing, or consistent. His character arc is bumpy, and the story's message is limp. Gump's experiences are less resonant (both for himself and his audience), including – in the book's two plummeting nadirs – a stint as a wrestler known as 'the Dunce', fighting another wrestler known as 'the Turd', and a spell as an astronaut who crash-lands in the jungle, where he plays chess with 'bongo-bongo'-style cannibal tribes.

The book as a whole is throwaway, short-changing on character and structure. I know some people don't like the film, seeing it as a saccharine Boomer fever-dream, but I don't think anyone can deny it's a tight piece of filmmaking, rewatchable, accessible to all ages, with great acting and direction and some truly thoughtful moments. The book, on the other hand, is petty, cynical, juvenile – and glib. It's not a coincidence that I find myself referring to the film's character as 'Forrest', but to the book's as the more impersonal 'Gump'. There's none of the film's heart in evidence here.

Rather than bringing it all home with Forrest, Jenny, Lieutenant Dan and Forrest Junior, as Zemeckis and co. do in the second half of their film, Groom writes the second half of his novel into the ground. The main companion for Gump in this turgid, leaden limp to the finish line is not Jenny or Dan or his own inner monologue, but a male ape called Sue. Winston Groom might have provided him with a few basic cues, but Eric Roth earned that golden statue (and let's not forget he was up against Frank Darabont for The Shawshank Redemption that year). Under our noses, he seemed to have performed a feat of pure alchemy. show less

Winston Groom, most known for Forrest Gump, tells the sombre story of the battle at the Ypres Salient from an American perspective. Groom provides historical details and personal accounts of the "gigantic corpse factory" that the Belgium land became during the four year battle.

The Ypres Salient in Belgium Flanders was the most notorious and dreaded place in all of the First World War, probably of any war in history.

Written with flourishes and cringe-worthy imagery often found in fiction, show more Groom relates the terrible events that occurred over the course of four years (1914-1918). Everything from the German's first use of poisonous gas in warfare to Britain's detonation of mines in the Battle of Messines, A Storm in Flanders doesn't skip a beat. The land becomes littered with corpses throughout the tug-of-war for control of the land to the extent that statisticians can only estimate the total number of lives lost. Groom's detailed narrative has reader's seeing, hearing and smelling the battle on a physical level.

It was said you could smell the battlefield miles before you ever reached it.

Groom gives enough background story to make the cause of the war understandable without giving too much detail to lose the reader in politics. Incorporating soldiers' diaries and personal letters to home is a constant reminder of the truth in the horrific details.

It was in this small confine of Belgium from 1914 to 1918 that more than a million soldiers were shot, bayoneted, bludgeoned, bombed, grenaded, gasses, incinerated by flamethrowers, drowned in shell craters, smothered by caved-in trenches, blown to pieces by artillery shells. It became one of the most vast graveyards on earth.

Readers learn of what the soldiers on both sides had to endure and the grave cost of a country at war. The tactics and strategies that were born in Flanders would be used again in future wars. If history books were written in a similar fashion, even the most unenthusiastic scholar would have no difficulty recalling historical events. The result is known beforehand, but the path to the destination is haunting and a tale that needs to be told and remembered because the consequences of war are long-lasting.

Today Belgian farmers are still plowing up tons of old shells and explosives each year.

My personal reflection:
I'm not one to typically read historical nonfiction only because every single time I've tried, I get bored and find myself daydreaming while reading. I'm not a history buff and don't pretend to be and that is, in part, due to the fact that I lose interest when reading history texts. Movies, there's enough explosions to keep me watching, but books the explosions are a little different.

Winston Groom, however, is a wonderful writer. He knows just when to provide terrifying images and just when to insert personal accounts of the war. The balance of those along with the details of the battle that can be found in any history book had me turning pages (clicking my Kindle if we're being honest) until the wee hours of the morning.

I had heard of the Ypres Salient, but did not know much about what happened there or how difficult the battle had been or the large number of lives lost. I knew it was one of the moments that changed the war and all future wars because strategies, like using flamethrowers and poison gas, were first used in the Ypres Salient, but repeated later on in history.

Honestly, there were parts of this book that gave me nightmares. I cannot even begin to relate to what those soldiers must have felt when they saw walls of flames from flamethrowers coming their way or the constant barrage of artillery shells. The near escapes from being blown to bits and pieces by grenades and the fear of watching men slowly suffocate because of inhaling poison.

The images in this book are not only haunting because of their descriptions but also because they're real. These events really happened. It is a part of history and it should never be forgotten.

Groom truly did an amazing job telling the story of the Ypres Salient in a way that had me on the edge of my seat and cringing while I read. show less

Having read this many years ago, I decided to revisit it if for no other reason than laughs. What I'd forgotten was that Gump was an 'idiot savant', something left out entirely in the film. Capable of high level math and good with the harmonica, Forrest was higher functioning that Hank's character would have us think; he was also a rather large fellow and didn't run across the country. His adventures included others not shown in the movie, though its not unusual at all. A good laugh when he show more meets Nixon who pulls him aside, rolls up his sleeve and asks, "wanna buy a watch?"... Not a Pulitzer winner but fun just the same! show less

The Aviators starts off awkwardly but once you get used to the round-robbin technique sit back and enjoy a fine 3-for-one biography of aviation pioneers from the heroic age of flight. There are many famous events skillfully retold by novelist Winston Groom. Most of it is new to me but even the parts I am familiar with give the impression of fresh perspective and new details. I listened to the audiobook narrated by Robertson Dean whose gravely voice is perfect for the heroic theme. Groom show more gives time to all aspects, for example not just Lindbergh's cross Atlantic flight but his actions during WWII and later environmentalism which I didn't know about; similar with Doolittle and Rickenbacker who led interesting lives. What they had in common Groom doesn't really say other than fame, airplanes and heroism. There's no thesis but it's a well done retelling. There are many other books by and about the three, which I hope to read more of, and I now have some perspective on their importance, it is an excellent easy to read introduction. show less