
Ten Days That Shook the World
by John Reed
Release Date: February, 1990
Edition: Paperback
Price:
More Info
Although Ten Days That Shook the World is clearly totally biased towards the Bolsheviks, it is still an interesting read. It does an excellent job of revealing the dramatic side of the Russian Revolution, and it gives the events of the revolution the sort of immediacy that can only be achieved by on-the-spot reporting. There are also many facinating quotes and interviews with leaders, like Trotsky. It is an engaging and exciting book, and it is very well written. However, it is not really ideal (never mind ideal, it is pretty useless) for a research project or for real information. Unless you are pretty familiar with the events of the revolution, it would probably be confusing (he uses many terms without really explaining them and is VERY detailed). Furthermore, the book was written by a dedicated believer in the regime right after the event occured. Reed did not have the benefit of hindsight in writing his book - and he was blinded by his faith in socialism. Some of the events in the book are somewhat inaccurate, and Lenin and Trotsky are totally idealized! One thing that shows how biased Reed was towards the Bolsheviks is that Lenin himself states that the book is an accurate depiction of the revolution. This would seem like a good thing, but actually, when the revolution is depicted in way that is favorable to Lenin, one thing is for sure: it is completely inaccurate! For instance, the book leaves the reader with the impression that the Bolsheviks had planned the revolution much more carefully than they did in reality (it was more a lucky break than anything else). Nevertheless, this book is irreplaceable as a first-hand illustration of what the revolution was like. Even though some of the information cannot be trusted completely, it is still a facinating book!
From Amazon.com
"Ten Days That Shook The World" is the account by John Reed of what he saw during the Russian Revolution. Reed was an American Communist and journalist who is the only American known to be buried in the Kremlin. Throughout this book we read a series of observations and dialogues reported by Reed, virtually without comment, although his bias is apparent. We read his reports of political meetings, encounters with minor officials and his observations of events occurring during those turbulent revolutionary days in Petrograd. This book is a classic case of missing the forest for the trees. The view is too up close to permit the reader to see the big picture. One does not look here for the history of the Revolution. We look here for its spirit. Here we see the swirling chaos, hear the repeated buzz words and get a feeling for the competing factions which fashioned the Communist tyranny which emerged from the Revolution. In writing this book, Reed gives the reader a view of himself and other American Communists who saw in the Revolution the future that worked. His view can best be summarized in his comment that, while watching a funeral, he realized that the Russian people no longer needed priests to pray them into heaven because they were building a world brighter than any which heaven promised. This hope is in stark contrast to the now known Communist record. Overall I enjoyed this book as it taught me some more about the Russian Revolution than I had learned from other books which I had read. (See my Amazon review of "The Russian Revolution" by Alan Moorehead.) For that it was worth reading.
From Amazon.com
|