What do you think?
Rate this book
毓卮乇丞 兀賷丕賲 賴夭鬲 丕賱毓丕賱賲
噩賵賳 乇賷丿 (1887-1920)貙 賰丕鬲亘 兀賲乇賷賰賷 卮丕亘 卮賴丿 丕賱兀丨丿丕孬 丕賱丨丕爻賲丞 賱賱孬賵乇丞 丕賱亘賱卮賮賷丞 賵爻噩賱賴丕 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 丕賱卮賷賯 丕賱匕賷 氐丿乇 賮賷 丕賱賵賱丕賷丕鬲 丕賱賲鬲丨丿丞 毓丕賲 1919 孬賲 賮賷 丕賱丕鬲丨丕丿 丕賱爻賵賮賷賷鬲賷 亘丕賱賱睾丞 丕賱乇賵爻賷丞 毓丕賲 1923貙 賵賮賷賲 亘毓丿 兀爻爻 丕賱丨夭亘 丕賱卮賷賵毓賷 丕賱兀賲乇賷賰賷.
乇丕亘胤 丕賱鬲丨賲賷賱:
http://ia601200.us.archive.org/24/ite...
乇丕亘胤 丕賱鬲丨賲賷賱:
http://ia601200.us.archive.org/24/ite...
324 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1919
1501 people are currently reading
17442 people want to read
About the author
John Reed
53听books139听followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the 欧宝娱乐 database with this name.
American journalist John Silas Reed, a correspondent of World War I, recounted an experience in Petrograd during the revolution of October 1917 in Ten Days That Shook the World (1919) and, after returning to the United States, cofounded the Communist labor party in 1919; people buried his body in the Kremlin, the citadel, housing the offices of the Russian government and formerly those of the Soviet government, in Moscow.
This poet and Communist activist first gained prominence as a war correspondent during the Mexican revolution for Metropolitan magazine and during World War I for the magazine The Masses. People best know his coverage.
Reed supported the Soviet takeover of Russia and even briefly took up arms to join the Red guards in 1918. He expected a similar Communist revolution in the United States with the short-lived organization.
He died in Moscow of spotted typhus. At the time of his death, he perhaps soured on the Soviet leadership, but the Soviet Union gave him burial of a hero, one of only three Americans at the Kremlin wall necropolis.
American journalist John Silas Reed, a correspondent of World War I, recounted an experience in Petrograd during the revolution of October 1917 in Ten Days That Shook the World (1919) and, after returning to the United States, cofounded the Communist labor party in 1919; people buried his body in the Kremlin, the citadel, housing the offices of the Russian government and formerly those of the Soviet government, in Moscow.
This poet and Communist activist first gained prominence as a war correspondent during the Mexican revolution for Metropolitan magazine and during World War I for the magazine The Masses. People best know his coverage.
Reed supported the Soviet takeover of Russia and even briefly took up arms to join the Red guards in 1918. He expected a similar Communist revolution in the United States with the short-lived organization.
He died in Moscow of spotted typhus. At the time of his death, he perhaps soured on the Soviet leadership, but the Soviet Union gave him burial of a hero, one of only three Americans at the Kremlin wall necropolis.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 663 reviews
February 23, 2012
I just finished this one, after meaning to check it out since college.
Sometimes you know a book is great even if you yourself have a hard time reading it. That was the case for me in the very well written and detailed personal account of the October Revolution in Russia, as experienced by American reporter and Communist sympathizer, Jack Reed.
The excellent movie Reds is based in large part on the accounts in this book. (Warren Beauty producing, directing, writing, and starring as the author, Reed.) I love that film, and assumed I would love the book. I certainly admire the book, and can see why a movie was made of it; Reed's descriptions of moods, sights, sounds and smells, his overall description of environment is immpeccable. The reader feels as if they are right there with Reed as he surveys the war front, walks dark streets, and experiences the unspecified yet palpable unrest that was so pervasive in all parts of Russia during that historical time. I loved these parts of the book.
But the book is just as much, if not more, Reed's account of the literally scores of factions, political parties, armies, navies, congresses, and commititees. Man alive, were there committees in revolutionary Russia! Hundreds! Everywhere! Even in the Army. There was even a Commitee of Commitees, and a Union of Unions.
So horribly complex were the struggles of these inummerable political/governmental groups that one could very easily get lost trying to remember who was who, and who was against what, etc. There is a brief description at the front of the book for each of the parties, but flipping back and forth grew tedious, so I gave up. A reference card as one reads is required for most people not well versed already in Russian history of the early 20th century. While I am sure Reed breaks it down better than most, the chunks are still hard for a novice to swallow sometimes.
He is also a victim of his meticulous collecting, whole pages sometimes being dedicated to verbatim accounts of speeches and articles and pamphlets set out all over Russia. Makes one's head spin.
Yet even then, I admired the passion with which he wrote those part of the accounts. Not exactly as moving or intriguing as the mood pieces spread throughout the pages, Reed certainly leaves no stone unturned. Unfortunatley, one has to be a geologist to keep some of them straight.
I will, in all liklihood, read the book again one day, when more of it has time to process. For though Reed himself confessed that he failed to be 100% objective, his first hand account of one of the most important social shifts in world history is invaluable to historians. And his prose, (and even some poetry) is a very rich feast for any wordsmith, such as myself.
A book to be admired and remembered, even when confusing. Not for everyone, and sometimes, not for me. But when it did hit with me, I was quite glad to have finally, after about eight years, picked it up and read it.
Sometimes you know a book is great even if you yourself have a hard time reading it. That was the case for me in the very well written and detailed personal account of the October Revolution in Russia, as experienced by American reporter and Communist sympathizer, Jack Reed.
The excellent movie Reds is based in large part on the accounts in this book. (Warren Beauty producing, directing, writing, and starring as the author, Reed.) I love that film, and assumed I would love the book. I certainly admire the book, and can see why a movie was made of it; Reed's descriptions of moods, sights, sounds and smells, his overall description of environment is immpeccable. The reader feels as if they are right there with Reed as he surveys the war front, walks dark streets, and experiences the unspecified yet palpable unrest that was so pervasive in all parts of Russia during that historical time. I loved these parts of the book.
But the book is just as much, if not more, Reed's account of the literally scores of factions, political parties, armies, navies, congresses, and commititees. Man alive, were there committees in revolutionary Russia! Hundreds! Everywhere! Even in the Army. There was even a Commitee of Commitees, and a Union of Unions.
So horribly complex were the struggles of these inummerable political/governmental groups that one could very easily get lost trying to remember who was who, and who was against what, etc. There is a brief description at the front of the book for each of the parties, but flipping back and forth grew tedious, so I gave up. A reference card as one reads is required for most people not well versed already in Russian history of the early 20th century. While I am sure Reed breaks it down better than most, the chunks are still hard for a novice to swallow sometimes.
He is also a victim of his meticulous collecting, whole pages sometimes being dedicated to verbatim accounts of speeches and articles and pamphlets set out all over Russia. Makes one's head spin.
Yet even then, I admired the passion with which he wrote those part of the accounts. Not exactly as moving or intriguing as the mood pieces spread throughout the pages, Reed certainly leaves no stone unturned. Unfortunatley, one has to be a geologist to keep some of them straight.
I will, in all liklihood, read the book again one day, when more of it has time to process. For though Reed himself confessed that he failed to be 100% objective, his first hand account of one of the most important social shifts in world history is invaluable to historians. And his prose, (and even some poetry) is a very rich feast for any wordsmith, such as myself.
A book to be admired and remembered, even when confusing. Not for everyone, and sometimes, not for me. But when it did hit with me, I was quite glad to have finally, after about eight years, picked it up and read it.
March 8, 2025
Rediscover the meaning of events and the great struggle, without which it would have been impossible to write such a book. The Russians who lived through the October Revolution of 1917 never spoke like this or about the judgment; they were just content to report a few episodes. Reed's book gives an overall picture of the revolt, and he was not an indifferent observer, even though he was ignorant of the language and customs of this country; that is why it will have very particular importance, even if at first glance it seems strange that a foreigner could have written such a work. This work is not how foreigners write about Russia, and it will say that very few witnessed the revolution or understood anything by generalizing isolated facts.
September 19, 2009
Due to the various political parties that John Reed speaks of in his impassioned account of the Russian Revolution, it becomes somewhat difficult to follow the flow of events and their importance. An understanding of the struggle at hand in this tumultuous period really only requires the knowledge of two warring factions; the "Reds" (Bolsheviks), and the "Whites" (anti-Bolsheviks). Basically the absolute monarchy of Tsar Nicholas II had come to an end due to severe social and political unrest on the behalf of a starving, angry country. In its place a Provisional Government was formed. This was intended to be temporary of course, until a new one arose. Long before all of this, Vladimir Lenin had been writing of a working-class revolution, one spearheaded by the privileged Russian intellectuals (basically radical Marxists) who would organize it. And the Provisional Government wasn't exactly any more sympathetic to the poor lower classes; it was in support of Russia's continued participation in World War I, and would not grant them the land that much of Lenin and Trotsky's Bolshevik ideology argued that they were entitled to.
John Reed, a Portland born American journalist covered most of the chaotic events of the October Revolution, including the attack on the Winter Palace, where the counter-revolutionary Whites where defeated by the Bolsheviks. After which, Kerensky leader of the Whites, fled to Pskov. As journalism, Reed's account of the events of the Revolution weren't exactly objective. Of course, Reed had unabashed Socialist sympathies. He was opposed to the war, and very much excited about what this struggle meant, not just for Russia, but for the world. There are parts throughout the book in which he expresses the excitement about how the Russian Revolution would affect other countries, and would eventually bring about an international workers' revolution inspired by the ideology of Lenin's radical Marxism.
Exactly what went wrong after all of this is another story, left open for endless debate. An extreme example of socialism in the vein of Lenin's Bolshevik ideology probably wasn't the most reasonable alternative to capitalism or absolute monarchy, but at the time of the Tsar's very necessary abdication, it could've been construed as an almost transcendent change. Unfortunately, a party that ran on such extreme ideology was bound to enforce draconian laws as severe and unreasonable as that of the Tsarist Monarchy or the Provisional Government. Introduce a boorish thinker such as Stalin into the mix some decades later, and you have an ideological nightmare.
Reed's book is an incredible phenomenon though. Here was a man who was front and center for all of it. One who had actually stood and listened to the speeches of Lenin and Trotsky. He writes prose that, as frantic as it occasionally sounds, seems to leap off of the page. There is an incredible attention to detail, for what must have been an overwhelming experience to take in. Ten Days that Shook the World will forever remain a classic due to its exuberance and charm; it's a testament to its authors' bold dedication to spreading the news of one of Western Europe's most pivotal events.
John Reed, a Portland born American journalist covered most of the chaotic events of the October Revolution, including the attack on the Winter Palace, where the counter-revolutionary Whites where defeated by the Bolsheviks. After which, Kerensky leader of the Whites, fled to Pskov. As journalism, Reed's account of the events of the Revolution weren't exactly objective. Of course, Reed had unabashed Socialist sympathies. He was opposed to the war, and very much excited about what this struggle meant, not just for Russia, but for the world. There are parts throughout the book in which he expresses the excitement about how the Russian Revolution would affect other countries, and would eventually bring about an international workers' revolution inspired by the ideology of Lenin's radical Marxism.
Exactly what went wrong after all of this is another story, left open for endless debate. An extreme example of socialism in the vein of Lenin's Bolshevik ideology probably wasn't the most reasonable alternative to capitalism or absolute monarchy, but at the time of the Tsar's very necessary abdication, it could've been construed as an almost transcendent change. Unfortunately, a party that ran on such extreme ideology was bound to enforce draconian laws as severe and unreasonable as that of the Tsarist Monarchy or the Provisional Government. Introduce a boorish thinker such as Stalin into the mix some decades later, and you have an ideological nightmare.
Reed's book is an incredible phenomenon though. Here was a man who was front and center for all of it. One who had actually stood and listened to the speeches of Lenin and Trotsky. He writes prose that, as frantic as it occasionally sounds, seems to leap off of the page. There is an incredible attention to detail, for what must have been an overwhelming experience to take in. Ten Days that Shook the World will forever remain a classic due to its exuberance and charm; it's a testament to its authors' bold dedication to spreading the news of one of Western Europe's most pivotal events.
November 28, 2017
El verdadero valor de este libro consiste en que es una cr贸nica presencial de los hechos ocurridos durante la Revoluci贸n de Octubre. Sin embargo, a d铆a de hoy, muchos historiadores dudan de que el autor pudiera estar presente en tantos hechos importantes, sobre todo por la simultaneidad y la distancia entre los mismos, salvo que tuviera el don de la ubicuidad. No ser茅 yo qui茅n incida en ese debate. Supongamos que s铆 que estuvo.
Aunque era un ferviente simpatizante de la causa, se dice que el autor trat贸 de mostrarse objetivo. Sin embargo, hay ciertos pasajes en los que creo que se delata. De ah铆 que Lenin lo tuviera como libro de cabecera. No as铆 Stalin, al que parece que no le sent贸 muy bien que Reed encumbrara a Trotsky por encima de su persona.
Como obra de consulta no la he encontrado de gran ayuda, salvo por su valor testimonial. Es un compendio un tanto deslabazado, incluso confuso a veces. Hay ensayos sobre el tema muy bien estructurados, demas铆ados como para intentar dar referencias. Si acaso destacar铆a 鈥淭ormenta Roja. La Revoluci贸n Rusa 1917-1922鈥�, publicado por Edaf.
He de reconocer que no he le铆do 鈥�10 d铆as que鈥︹€� p谩gina a p谩gina, m谩s bien he ido saltando entre cap铆tulos, pues tiene partes muy densas. De ah铆 mis tres estrellas. Es una obra de consulta muy v谩lida, por ser contempor谩nea a los acontecimientos, pero poco esclarecedora a la hora de hacerte una idea global del por qu茅 del estallido.
Como complemento, recomiendo la visi贸n de la pel铆cula 鈥淩eds鈥�, de Warren Beatty, estrenada en 1981, y basada en las vivencias del autor. Tanto 贸 m谩s recomendable que la presente obra.
Aunque era un ferviente simpatizante de la causa, se dice que el autor trat贸 de mostrarse objetivo. Sin embargo, hay ciertos pasajes en los que creo que se delata. De ah铆 que Lenin lo tuviera como libro de cabecera. No as铆 Stalin, al que parece que no le sent贸 muy bien que Reed encumbrara a Trotsky por encima de su persona.
Como obra de consulta no la he encontrado de gran ayuda, salvo por su valor testimonial. Es un compendio un tanto deslabazado, incluso confuso a veces. Hay ensayos sobre el tema muy bien estructurados, demas铆ados como para intentar dar referencias. Si acaso destacar铆a 鈥淭ormenta Roja. La Revoluci贸n Rusa 1917-1922鈥�, publicado por Edaf.
He de reconocer que no he le铆do 鈥�10 d铆as que鈥︹€� p谩gina a p谩gina, m谩s bien he ido saltando entre cap铆tulos, pues tiene partes muy densas. De ah铆 mis tres estrellas. Es una obra de consulta muy v谩lida, por ser contempor谩nea a los acontecimientos, pero poco esclarecedora a la hora de hacerte una idea global del por qu茅 del estallido.
Como complemento, recomiendo la visi贸n de la pel铆cula 鈥淩eds鈥�, de Warren Beatty, estrenada en 1981, y basada en las vivencias del autor. Tanto 贸 m谩s recomendable que la presente obra.
December 15, 2017
This is simultaneously a difficult read and a pageturner - a firsthand account of the Bolshevik Revolution from an American observer, dense with details but also providing a historically priceless perspective of one of the most important events of the 20th century. Reed offer details of the factional fighting that took place during the revolution (this is a lot of the book) and the mistakes and unintended consequences that helped generate the final result. This was of less value in my opinion than the portraits of individual revolutionaries and the perspective on the massive social changes being wrought upon Russia by the uprising.
Most evocatively Reed describes how the uprising bred an insatiable desire for knowledge and written material among the average Russian. This impact of the revolution has been noted by other scholars as well, but its amazing to see firsthand how a feeling of ownership over their society dawned upon the ordinary Russian and how this in turn fed a desire to read and know as much as possible. To the degree that people feel empowered with agency over their lives, the desire to read, write, think and debate over public issues naturally increases. The simplicity of the Bolshevik cadres also comes across touchingly at times - mostly guileless peasants who had been plugged into a social project that appealed to them after spending generations as mere subjects. Some of the scenes, such as the funeral procession at the Kremlin for the martyrs of the uprising with their "rough-hewn caskets painted red" (paraphrasing) and the great red banners over the Kremlin wall were incredibly evocative.
One thing to take from this book is how informed the average Bolshevik cadre was about who they were and what their political project was. They all had a simple story that they shared and believed in, a complex story that was rendered simple so that it could be grasped and used by the average man. The Bolsheviks improbably rose to dominance in the face of widespread opposition from other social classes, including on the Left. While things did not turn out the way that they hoped (noteworthy is that Stalin himself is almost totally absent in this account), their initial moment of revolution was still a brief episode of incredible human drama and possibility.
Most evocatively Reed describes how the uprising bred an insatiable desire for knowledge and written material among the average Russian. This impact of the revolution has been noted by other scholars as well, but its amazing to see firsthand how a feeling of ownership over their society dawned upon the ordinary Russian and how this in turn fed a desire to read and know as much as possible. To the degree that people feel empowered with agency over their lives, the desire to read, write, think and debate over public issues naturally increases. The simplicity of the Bolshevik cadres also comes across touchingly at times - mostly guileless peasants who had been plugged into a social project that appealed to them after spending generations as mere subjects. Some of the scenes, such as the funeral procession at the Kremlin for the martyrs of the uprising with their "rough-hewn caskets painted red" (paraphrasing) and the great red banners over the Kremlin wall were incredibly evocative.
One thing to take from this book is how informed the average Bolshevik cadre was about who they were and what their political project was. They all had a simple story that they shared and believed in, a complex story that was rendered simple so that it could be grasped and used by the average man. The Bolsheviks improbably rose to dominance in the face of widespread opposition from other social classes, including on the Left. While things did not turn out the way that they hoped (noteworthy is that Stalin himself is almost totally absent in this account), their initial moment of revolution was still a brief episode of incredible human drama and possibility.
April 17, 2018
螆蠂慰蠀谓 蟺蔚蟻维蟽蔚喂 100 围蟻慰谓喂伪. 螘谓伪蟼 伪喂蠋谓伪蟼 . 螝喂 慰渭蠅蟼 慰喂 10 伪蠀蟿苇蟼 渭苇蟻蔚蟼 蟺慰蠀 蟽蠀纬魏位蠈谓畏蟽伪谓 蟿慰谓 魏慰蟽渭慰 , 蟽蠀纬魏位慰谓委味慰蠀谓 伪魏慰渭伪, 蔚纬喂蟻蠅谓蟿伪蟼 伪谓蟿喂蟺伪蟻伪胃苇蟽蔚喂蟼 魏伪喂 蟿蠈谓慰蠀蟼 尾喂尾位委蠅谓. 螒蠀蟿畏 蔚喂谓伪喂 畏 渭慰委蟻伪 蟿蠅谓 蟽畏渭伪谓蟿喂魏蠋谓 喂蟽蟿慰蟻喂魏蠋谓 纬蔚纬慰谓蠈蟿蠅谓.
螒胃蟿慰 蟿慰 尾喂尾位喂慰 蔚喂谓伪喂 蔚谓伪 蠂蟻慰谓喂魏蠈. 螝伪蟺慰喂慰喂 胃伪 蟺慰蠀谓 慰蟿喂 未蔚谓 蔚喂谓伪喂 伪谓蟿蔚喂魏蔚喂渭蔚谓喂魏慰. 螣渭蠅蟼 未蔚谓 蠀蟺伪蟻蠂蔚喂 慰蠉蟿蔚 伪谓蟿蔚喂魏蔚喂渭蔚谓喂魏慰 渭维蟿喂, 慰蠉蟿蔚 蟺苇谓伪-萎 蟺位畏魏蟿蟻慰位蠈纬喂慰 - 蔚喂未喂魏蠈蟿蔚蟻伪 伪谓 蔚喂蟽伪喂 伪蠀蟿蠈蟺蟿畏蟼 渭维蟻蟿蠀蟻伪蟼. 螒蟺位蠅蟼 蠀蟺维蟻蠂慰蠀谓 未喂伪蠁慰蟻蔚蟿喂魏苇蟼 慰蟺蟿喂魏苇蟼 纬蠅谓委蔚蟼.
螘喂谓伪喂 位慰喂蟺慰谓 蔚谓伪 蠂蟻慰谓喂魏蠈, 渭喂伪 渭伪蟻蟿蠀蟻委伪 魏伪喂 蔚谓伪 蟻蔚蟺慰蟻蟿维味 . 螣 韦味慰谓 巍畏谓蟿 畏蟿伪谓 未畏渭慰蟽喂慰纬蟻维蠁慰蟼 魏伪喂 苇尾位蔚蟺蔚 蟿伪 蟺蟻维纬渭伪蟿伪 蠅蟼 蟿苇蟿慰喂慰蟼 .
螝伪蟺慰喂慰喂 胃伪 蟺慰蠀谓 " 螠伪 畏蟿伪谓 未喂魏蠈蟼 蟿慰蠀蟼 " . 螘纬蠅 位苇蠅 慰蟿喂 畏蟿伪谓 伪蟺苇尉蠅. 螝伪喂 魏蠀蟻喂慰位蔚魏蟿喂魏维 魏伪喂 渭蔚蟿伪蠁慰蟻喂魏维.
螣 蟺伪位渭蠈蟼 蟿蠅谓 纬蔚纬慰谓蠈蟿蠅谓 魏伪喂 蟿畏蟼 蔚蟺伪谓维蟽蟿伪蟽畏蟼 蠀蟺伪蟻蠂蔚喂 蟽蔚 魏伪胃蔚 蟽蔚位委未伪 伪蠀蟿慰蠉 蟿慰蠀 尾喂尾位委慰蠀. 螒蠀蟿慰 蟿慰 魏伪谓蔚喂 伪谓蠋蟿蔚蟻慰 伪蟺慰 魏伪胃蔚 尾喂尾位喂慰 蟿蠅谓 畏渭蔚蟻蠋谓 渭伪蟼 蟺慰蠀 渭蠀胃喂蟽蟿慰蟻畏渭伪蟿喂魏维 萎 喂蟽蟿慰蟻喂魏维 胃蔚位蔚喂 谓伪 伪谓伪蟺位维蟽蔚喂 蟿伪 纬蔚纬慰谓蠈蟿伪 . 螒谓 胃蔚蟼 谓伪 渭维胃蔚喂蟼 蟿畏谓 喂蟽蟿慰蟻喂伪 伪蠀蟿萎蟼 蟿畏蟼 蔚蟺伪谓维蟽蟿伪蟽畏蟼 , 伪蟺慰 伪蠀蟿慰 胃伪 蟺蟻蔚蟺蔚喂 谓伪 尉蔚魏喂谓萎蟽蔚喂.
螒胃蟿慰 蟿慰 尾喂尾位喂慰 蔚喂谓伪喂 蔚谓伪 蠂蟻慰谓喂魏蠈. 螝伪蟺慰喂慰喂 胃伪 蟺慰蠀谓 慰蟿喂 未蔚谓 蔚喂谓伪喂 伪谓蟿蔚喂魏蔚喂渭蔚谓喂魏慰. 螣渭蠅蟼 未蔚谓 蠀蟺伪蟻蠂蔚喂 慰蠉蟿蔚 伪谓蟿蔚喂魏蔚喂渭蔚谓喂魏慰 渭维蟿喂, 慰蠉蟿蔚 蟺苇谓伪-萎 蟺位畏魏蟿蟻慰位蠈纬喂慰 - 蔚喂未喂魏蠈蟿蔚蟻伪 伪谓 蔚喂蟽伪喂 伪蠀蟿蠈蟺蟿畏蟼 渭维蟻蟿蠀蟻伪蟼. 螒蟺位蠅蟼 蠀蟺维蟻蠂慰蠀谓 未喂伪蠁慰蟻蔚蟿喂魏苇蟼 慰蟺蟿喂魏苇蟼 纬蠅谓委蔚蟼.
螘喂谓伪喂 位慰喂蟺慰谓 蔚谓伪 蠂蟻慰谓喂魏蠈, 渭喂伪 渭伪蟻蟿蠀蟻委伪 魏伪喂 蔚谓伪 蟻蔚蟺慰蟻蟿维味 . 螣 韦味慰谓 巍畏谓蟿 畏蟿伪谓 未畏渭慰蟽喂慰纬蟻维蠁慰蟼 魏伪喂 苇尾位蔚蟺蔚 蟿伪 蟺蟻维纬渭伪蟿伪 蠅蟼 蟿苇蟿慰喂慰蟼 .
螝伪蟺慰喂慰喂 胃伪 蟺慰蠀谓 " 螠伪 畏蟿伪谓 未喂魏蠈蟼 蟿慰蠀蟼 " . 螘纬蠅 位苇蠅 慰蟿喂 畏蟿伪谓 伪蟺苇尉蠅. 螝伪喂 魏蠀蟻喂慰位蔚魏蟿喂魏维 魏伪喂 渭蔚蟿伪蠁慰蟻喂魏维.
螣 蟺伪位渭蠈蟼 蟿蠅谓 纬蔚纬慰谓蠈蟿蠅谓 魏伪喂 蟿畏蟼 蔚蟺伪谓维蟽蟿伪蟽畏蟼 蠀蟺伪蟻蠂蔚喂 蟽蔚 魏伪胃蔚 蟽蔚位委未伪 伪蠀蟿慰蠉 蟿慰蠀 尾喂尾位委慰蠀. 螒蠀蟿慰 蟿慰 魏伪谓蔚喂 伪谓蠋蟿蔚蟻慰 伪蟺慰 魏伪胃蔚 尾喂尾位喂慰 蟿蠅谓 畏渭蔚蟻蠋谓 渭伪蟼 蟺慰蠀 渭蠀胃喂蟽蟿慰蟻畏渭伪蟿喂魏维 萎 喂蟽蟿慰蟻喂魏维 胃蔚位蔚喂 谓伪 伪谓伪蟺位维蟽蔚喂 蟿伪 纬蔚纬慰谓蠈蟿伪 . 螒谓 胃蔚蟼 谓伪 渭维胃蔚喂蟼 蟿畏谓 喂蟽蟿慰蟻喂伪 伪蠀蟿萎蟼 蟿畏蟼 蔚蟺伪谓维蟽蟿伪蟽畏蟼 , 伪蟺慰 伪蠀蟿慰 胃伪 蟺蟻蔚蟺蔚喂 谓伪 尉蔚魏喂谓萎蟽蔚喂.
March 13, 2023
A Personal Account of the Russian Revolution.
10 Days that Shook the World by John Reed is first hand account of the October Revolution. The American journalist was in Petrograd as the Bolsheviks took power and had close access to the events and people involved due to him belonging to the American Socialist Party. This is of course an important work around the events of the revolution as they unfolded, accessible to the English speaker. Someone who was there, who had a close view.
However, what Reed has produced is a dry and drab account of endless meetings, political debates and interviews with common soldiers and workers. For me he somehow has managed to turn the Russian Revolution and civil war into a boring and tedious event. Surely this is the opposite of good journalism? He is more interested in acronyms or technicalities of who all the sub groups of social revolutionaries are rather than the key events. Although he does depict some key moments involving Vladimir Lenin and Josef Stalin alongside the 鈥榮torming鈥� of the Winter Palace and bombardment of the Kremlin. Stalin actually criticised the work as he believed it was 鈥榤isleading鈥� to the importance of Leon Trotsky. Of course Stalin would say this about his great rival.
The work has been praised for its attention to detail and ability to penetrate the events as they unfolded. Reed was a supporter of the Bolsheviks, but this does not bother me, I didn鈥檛 feel the work was overbearingly biased as to detract from the events. Furthermore, the anecdotes are what is most interesting. The nuances that can鈥檛 be delivered in a history book, the endless queues for bread, what people thought, conversations soldiers had. The daily struggle. These are what is good about this book, I just feel Reed wanted to deliver a grand 鈥榯oo down鈥� political powerhouse to inspire socialists around the world. For me the book doesn鈥檛 deliver here.
Reed has got the event, but unfortunately not the talent to deliver. Others would have provided more compelling writing. I have read this book due to its long-standing importance in Russia History, however I would not recommend to the causal reader.
10 Days that Shook the World by John Reed is first hand account of the October Revolution. The American journalist was in Petrograd as the Bolsheviks took power and had close access to the events and people involved due to him belonging to the American Socialist Party. This is of course an important work around the events of the revolution as they unfolded, accessible to the English speaker. Someone who was there, who had a close view.
However, what Reed has produced is a dry and drab account of endless meetings, political debates and interviews with common soldiers and workers. For me he somehow has managed to turn the Russian Revolution and civil war into a boring and tedious event. Surely this is the opposite of good journalism? He is more interested in acronyms or technicalities of who all the sub groups of social revolutionaries are rather than the key events. Although he does depict some key moments involving Vladimir Lenin and Josef Stalin alongside the 鈥榮torming鈥� of the Winter Palace and bombardment of the Kremlin. Stalin actually criticised the work as he believed it was 鈥榤isleading鈥� to the importance of Leon Trotsky. Of course Stalin would say this about his great rival.
The work has been praised for its attention to detail and ability to penetrate the events as they unfolded. Reed was a supporter of the Bolsheviks, but this does not bother me, I didn鈥檛 feel the work was overbearingly biased as to detract from the events. Furthermore, the anecdotes are what is most interesting. The nuances that can鈥檛 be delivered in a history book, the endless queues for bread, what people thought, conversations soldiers had. The daily struggle. These are what is good about this book, I just feel Reed wanted to deliver a grand 鈥榯oo down鈥� political powerhouse to inspire socialists around the world. For me the book doesn鈥檛 deliver here.
Reed has got the event, but unfortunately not the talent to deliver. Others would have provided more compelling writing. I have read this book due to its long-standing importance in Russia History, however I would not recommend to the causal reader.
November 8, 2017
螇尉蔚蟻伪, 蠁蠀蟽喂魏维, 蟿畏 桅萎渭畏 伪蠀蟿慰蠉 蟿慰蠀 尾喂尾位委慰蠀 蠅蟼 苇谓伪 伪蟺蠈 蟿伪 魏伪位蠉蟿蔚蟻伪 尾喂尾位委伪 蟺慰蠀 蟺蔚蟻喂纬蟻维蠁慰蠀谓 蟿畏谓 慰魏蟿蠅尾蟻喂伪谓萎 蔚蟺伪谓维蟽蟿伪蟽畏 伪位位维 未喂伪尾维味慰谓蟿伪蟼 蟿慰 未蔚谓 渭蟺蠈蟻蔚蟽伪 蟺伪蟻维 谓伪 蔚谓蟿蠀蟺蠅蟽喂伪蟽蟿蠋. 螤蟻蠈魏蔚喂蟿伪喂 纬喂伪 苇谓伪 尾喂尾位委慰 蟺慰蠀 蟺蟻伪纬渭伪蟿喂魏维 蟽蔚 尾维味蔚喂 蟽蟿畏谓 魏伪蟻未喂维 蟿蠅谓 纬蔚纬慰谓蠈蟿蠅谓, 渭蔚 渭委伪 纬蟻伪蠁萎 蟽蠂蔚未蠈谓 渭蠀胃喂蟽蟿慰蟻畏渭伪蟿喂魏萎 魏伪喂 渭委伪 伪蠁萎纬畏蟽畏 蟺慰蠀 魏伪位蠉蟺蟿蔚喂 蠈位蔚蟼 蟿喂蟼 蟺蟿蠀蠂苇蟼 伪蠀蟿慰蠉 蟿慰蠀 蟽畏渭伪谓蟿喂魏慰蠉 纬蔚纬慰谓蠈蟿慰蟼 蟿畏蟼 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺喂谓畏蟼 喂蟽蟿慰蟻委伪蟼. 螣 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁苇伪蟼 渭伪蟼 渭蔚蟿伪蠁苇蟻蔚喂 未喂伪蟻魏蠋蟼 伪蟺蠈 蟿伪 位蠈纬喂伪 蟿蠅谓 蟽畏渭伪谓蟿喂魏蠋谓 蟺蟻慰蟽蠅蟺喂魏慰蟿萎蟿蠅谓 蟿畏蟼 蔚蟺伪谓维蟽蟿伪蟽畏蟼 蟽蟿伪 伪喂蟽胃萎渭伪蟿伪 蟿蠅谓 伪蟺位蠋谓 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺蠅谓 魏伪喂 尉伪谓维 蟺委蟽蠅, 蟺蔚蟻喂纬蟻维蠁慰谓蟿伪蟼 蟺伪蟻维位位畏位伪 魏伪喂 蟿喂蟼 未喂魏苇蟼 蟿慰蠀 蟺蔚蟻喂蟺苇蟿蔚喂蔚蟼 渭苇蟽伪 蟽蔚 蠈位慰 伪蠀蟿蠈 蟿慰 蠂伪渭蠈, 蟺蟻慰蟽蠁苇蟻慰谓蟿伪蟼 渭伪蟼 苇蟿蟽喂 蠈蠂喂 伪蟺位维 渭委伪 蔚尉喂蟽蟿蠈蟻畏蟽畏 伪位位维 渭委伪 蔚蠀魏伪喂蟻委伪 谓伪 味萎蟽慰蠀渭蔚 蟿伪 纬蔚纬慰谓蠈蟿伪 蠈蟽慰 蟿慰 未蠀谓伪蟿蠈谓 蟺喂慰 魏慰谓蟿维. 螆谓伪 蟺蟻伪纬渭伪蟿喂魏维 伪蟺伪蟻伪委蟿畏蟿慰 伪谓维纬谓蠅蟽渭伪 纬喂伪 蠈蟽慰蠀蟼 胃苇位慰蠀谓 谓伪 纬谓蠅蟻委味慰蠀谓 魏维蟺慰喂伪 蟺蟻维纬渭伪蟿伪 纬喂伪 蟿畏谓 慰魏蟿蠅尾蟻喂伪谓萎 蔚蟺伪谓维蟽蟿伪蟽畏.
August 25, 2020
Overall, this was one of the scariest books I've ever read in light of our current political climate. Of course, most of the population was in very bad straits due to the harsh reprisals & rampant corruption from the days of the Tsars, the & then the which deposed plus the horrors of WWI. This lead to the of 1917, AKA: the .
It was a nightmare. People were starving & no one really knew who was in charge. For most of the ten days, the Bolsheviks' didn't seem to have things in hand, but Lenin, Trotsky, & Stalin came out on top, of course. The sheer amount of lies, bull shit, & propaganda that was shoveled by all sides was incredible. The confusion was intense & this book paints that picture very well. may have been sympathetic to the socialists, but that just gave him better access. His reporting was pretty straight forward leaving it to the reader to make up their mind about the morality of the situation.
He didn't even condemn the gross censorship imposed. That's ironic given his welcome in the US where the magazine he was originally reporting for had been closed by the Post Office for being unamerican. He was strip searched & had almost everything confiscated by the authorities, too. Yes, the 'Land of the Free' often hasn't been since John Adams signed the back in 1798. Of course, the press then gave him plenty of ammo by being at least as full of shit as they were in Russia & are today. It's a point to keep in mind.
I missed out on a lot in this book due to my ignorance of Russian history & geography. It wasn't helped by being written in 1918 when the names of many places were different than they were when I was growing up nor by the bewildering variety of Russian names & political parties. That's all on me, though. If you're in the same boat, I highly recommend reading the articles I've linked above. It's also helpful to have a separate printed copy of the descriptions of the political parties listed early in the book.
Very well narrated & well worth reading. I got this version from my library, but it is free in text from Gutenberg.org & in audiobook format from Librivox.org , so there's no excuse not to read it.
It was a nightmare. People were starving & no one really knew who was in charge. For most of the ten days, the Bolsheviks' didn't seem to have things in hand, but Lenin, Trotsky, & Stalin came out on top, of course. The sheer amount of lies, bull shit, & propaganda that was shoveled by all sides was incredible. The confusion was intense & this book paints that picture very well. may have been sympathetic to the socialists, but that just gave him better access. His reporting was pretty straight forward leaving it to the reader to make up their mind about the morality of the situation.
He didn't even condemn the gross censorship imposed. That's ironic given his welcome in the US where the magazine he was originally reporting for had been closed by the Post Office for being unamerican. He was strip searched & had almost everything confiscated by the authorities, too. Yes, the 'Land of the Free' often hasn't been since John Adams signed the back in 1798. Of course, the press then gave him plenty of ammo by being at least as full of shit as they were in Russia & are today. It's a point to keep in mind.
I missed out on a lot in this book due to my ignorance of Russian history & geography. It wasn't helped by being written in 1918 when the names of many places were different than they were when I was growing up nor by the bewildering variety of Russian names & political parties. That's all on me, though. If you're in the same boat, I highly recommend reading the articles I've linked above. It's also helpful to have a separate printed copy of the descriptions of the political parties listed early in the book.
Very well narrated & well worth reading. I got this version from my library, but it is free in text from Gutenberg.org & in audiobook format from Librivox.org , so there's no excuse not to read it.
Read
May 4, 2013賷毓鬲亘乇 賰鬲丕亘 毓卮乇丞 丕賷丕賲 賴夭鬲 丕賱毓丕賱賲 貙 賲賳 丕乇賵毓 賵丕氐丿賯 賲丕 賰鬲亘 毓賳 丕賱孬賵乇丞 丕賱乇賵爻賷丞 毓丕賲 1917. 賵賲丐賱賮丞 噩賵賳 乇賷丿 賵賴賵 氐丨賮賶 卮賷賵毓賶 丕賲賷乇賰賶貙 賯丿 鬲毓乇囟 賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱賲禺丕胤乇 賵賴賵 賷鬲賳賯賱 亘賷賳 丕賱孬賵丕乇 賵噩賳賵丿 丕賱噩賷卮 丕賱丕丨賲乇 賵賵亘賷賳 丕賱毓賲丕賱 賵 丕賱賮賱丕丨賷賳 丕賱亘賱丕卮賮丞 ..賱乇氐丿 丕賴賲 賵丕氐毓亘 丕賱賲賵丕賯賮 丕賱爻賷丕爻賷丞 賵丕賱卮禺氐賷丞 賵丕賱丕賳爻丕賳賷丞 丕賱鬲賶 鬲鬲賰丕賲賱 賲毓 亘毓囟賴丕 賱鬲乇爻賲 賱賳丕 丕丿賯 鬲賮丕氐賷賱 丕賱孬賵乇丞 丕賱乇賵爻賷丞 亘賰賱 爻賱丕爻丞 賵賷爻乇 賮賶 丕爻賱賵亘 乇賵丕卅賶 賵丕丿亘賶 卮賷賯 賱賱睾丕賷丞 丨鬲賶 丕賳 丕賱賯丕乇賶亍 丕賱毓丕丿賶 賵丕賱匕賶 賱丕 賷毓乇賮 賲爻亘賯丕 賲賳 賴賲 丕賱亘賱丕卮賮丞 貙 丕賵 賲丕賴賶 孬賵乇丞 丕賰鬲賵亘乇 丕賵 孬賵乇丞 賮亘乇丕賷乇 責 賵丕賱毓丿賷丿 賲賳 丕爻丕賲賶 丕賱丕丨夭丕亘 丕賱爻賷丕爻賷丞 賵丕賱賲丿賳 丕賱乇賵爻賷丞 ..爻賷賰賵賳 賱丿賷丞 氐賵乇丞 賵丕囟丨丞 鬲賲丕賲丕 毓賳 丕賰鬲賵亘乇 賵鬲囟丨賷丕鬲 丕賱卮毓亘 丕賱乇賵爻賶 賮賶 爻亘賷賱 丕爻賯丕胤 丕賱賯賷氐乇賷丞 賮賶 賮亘乇丕賷乇 孬賲 丨賰賵賲丞 丕賱乇兀爻賲丕賱賷賷賳 丕賱賲丐賯鬲丞 賮賶 丕賰鬲賵亘乇 賵丕毓賱丕賳 賳噩丕丨 丕賵賱 孬賵乇丞 丕卮鬲乇丕賰賷丞 賮賶 丕賱毓丕賱賲 . 賵丕賳 賰丕賳 噩賵賳 乇賷丿 賯丿 毓丕賳賶 丕賱丕賲乇賷賳 賮賶 爻亘賷賱 丕毓丿丕丿 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲鬲丨賲賱丕 丿賵賶 丕賱乇氐丕氐 賵丕賱丕賳賮噩丕乇丕鬲 賲賳 丨賵賱丞 ....賮賯丿 毓丕賳賶 賲丕 賴賵 丕卮丿 賲賳 匕賱賰 賮賶 賵胤賳丞 (丕賲乇賷賰丕) 毓賳丿賲丕 丕乇丕丿 丕賳 賷賳卮乇丞 ..賮丨鬲賶 匕賱賰 丕賱賵賯鬲 賱賲 賷賰賳 賷賳卮乇 賮賶 丕賲賷乇賰丕 賵丕賵乇賵亘丕 丕賱丕 丕丨賯乇 丕賱丕賰丕匕賷亘 賵丕賱丕丿毓丕卅丕鬲 丕賱亘乇噩賵丕夭賷丞 賱鬲卮賵賷丞 丕賱孬賵乇丞 丕賱乇賵爻賷丞 丨鬲賶 賱丕 賷賱賮鬲賵丕 賳馗乇 毓賲丕賱 賵賮賱丕丨賷賳 亘賱丕丿賴賲 賱亘胤賵賱丞 丕禺賵丕賳賴賲 賮賶 乇賵爻賷丕 賵賰賷賮 丕爻鬲胤丕毓賵丕 丕賳鬲夭丕毓 丕賱爻賱胤丞 賲賳 丕賷丿賶 賲爻鬲睾賱賷賴賲 貙 賵鬲毓乇囟鬲 丕賱賲禺胤賵胤丞 丕賱丕氐賱賷丞 賱爻鬲 賲丨丕賵賱丕鬲 爻乇賯丞 毓賱賶 丕賷丿賶 賯胤丕毓 胤乇賯 賱丕鬲賱丕賮賴丕 貙 賵賱賰賳 乇睾賲 賰丕賮丞 丕賱賲氐丕毓亘 賵丕賱毓乇丕賯賷賱 . 賮賯丿 丕氐丿乇 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賮賶 丕賲賷乇賰丕 毓丕賲 1919. 賵丕氐亘丨 丕賱賲丐賱賮 丕賱丕賵賱 賮賶 丕賱丕丿亘 丕賱毓丕賱賲賶 丕賱匕賶 賯氐 毓賱賶 丕賱丕賳爻丕賳賷丞 噩賲毓丕亍貙 丨賯賷賯丞 丕賱孬賵乇丞 丕賱丕卮鬲乇丕賰賷丞 丕賱賲賳鬲氐乇丞 賮賶 乇賵爻賷丕 貙 賴匕丞 丕賱孬賵乇丞 丕賱鬲賶 丿卮賳鬲 亘丿丕賷丞 毓氐乇 噩丿賷丿 賮賶 鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱丕賳爻丕賳賷丞 ....毓氐乇 丕賱孬賵乇丞 丕賱亘乇賵賱賷鬲丕乇賷丞 .....
October 21, 2017
Description: John Reed's vivid eye-witness account of his time in Petrograd was written in early 1918 and published in the USA the following year. It was an instant best-seller, so much so that in Russia it was some years before Stalin - who is only mentioned twice in the book - felt he could ban it for its portrayal of Trotsky. Possibly na茂ve, definitely politically one-sided, nevertheless the veracity and impact of Reed's enthusiastic snapshot-style reportage has become a classic memoir and inspired films including Eisenstein's classic 'October' and 'Reds' which won an Oscar for its director and star, Warren Beatty.
Episode 1: The Coming Storm: Autumn 1917 and Petrograd under the Provisional Government is in chaos. American journalists John Reed and Louise Bryant arrive to find the tension between factions is palpable and it's only a matter of time before the situation explodes. But in which direction?On the Eve: The confusion in Petrograd continues as the new delegates to the Congress of Soviets stream into the city. Reed gets a brief interview with Trotsky and overhears Lenin calling for a Bolshevik insurrection. But isn't Lenin meant to be in hiding to avoid arrest?Episode 3: The Winter Palace: Reed and Bryant blag their way in to the Winter Palace and meet the frightened government troops defending the building. As gunfire starts in the street, the Palace falls surprisingly easily to the victorious revolutionaries but the journalists are caught in a dangerous encounter.Episode 4: Plunging AheadThe Bolsheviks have taken the Winter Palace and seized control. Amidst a whirl of excitement, dread and rumour, Lenin abolishes all private ownership of land.
Episode 5: Chill WindsEx-Prime Minster Kerensky has joined forces with the Cossacks and is advancing on Petrograd, and there is fighting in the streets in Moscow: rumour is rife that the Revolution cannot survive.
Episode 6: The Revolutionary Front: Kerensky and the counter-revolutionary Cossacks are making gains and threatening Petrograd. Reed visits the Revolutionary frontline with the Bolshevik commander-in-chief - who seems less than organised.Episode 7: Counter-Revolution: Bryant is caught up in a vicious street battle and witnesses the bloody violence of the Revolution at close quarters. Counter-revolutionary government troops holding the telephone exchange are captured by Bolshevik sailors - who then have to learn to man the switchboards. Episode 8: VictoryTrotsky has claimed victory over the Cossacks and Kerensky is asking for an armistice. Reed sets out once more for the front line with a driver who takes a dim view of American democracy, and finds himself up against the illiterate brutality of the Red Guard.
Episode 9: MoscowLunacharsky despairs at the rumour that the revolutionaries' own bombardment has destroyed the historic Kremlin. Reed and Bryant set out to Moscow to see for themselves but find not everyone in the city supports the Bolsheviks.
Episode 10: The Conquest of Power: The Bolsheviks have defeated the counter-revolution and are getting on with the business of government despite the threat of civil war. The abolition of all private ownership of land has won over the peasants and, for a moment, the Revolution seems to have accomplished its goals.John Reed Richard Laing
Louise Bryant Kelly Burke
Lenin Nicholas Murchie
Kerensky Ewan Bailey
Trotsky Matthew Gravelle
Karelin Richard Elfyn
Doorwoman Lynn Hunter
Zorin Sion Pritchard
October 20, 2017
From BBC Radio 4 - 15 Minute Drama:
John Reed's classic eye-witness account of the Russian Revolution in October 1917.
Dramatised by Robin Brooks
Episode 1: The Coming Storm
Autumn 1917 and Petrograd under the Provisional Government is in chaos. American journalists John Reed and Louise Bryant arrive to find the tension between factions is palpable and it's only a matter of time before the situation explodes. But in which direction?
Episode 2: On the Eve
The confusion in Petrograd continues as the new delegates to the Congress of Soviets stream into the city. Reed gets a brief interview with Trotsky and overhears Lenin calling for a Bolshevik insurrection. But isn't Lenin meant to be in hiding to avoid arrest?
Episode 3: The Winter Palace
Reed and Bryant blag their way in to the Winter Palace and meet the frightened government troops defending the building. As gunfire starts in the street, the Palace falls surprisingly easily to the victorious revolutionaries but the journalists are caught in a dangerous encounter.
Episode 4: Plunging Ahead
The Bolsheviks have taken the Winter Palace and seized control. Amidst a whirl of excitement, dread and rumour, Lenin abolishes all private ownership of land.
Episode 5: Chill Winds
Ex-Prime Minster Kerensky has joined forces with the Cossacks and is advancing on Petrograd, and there is fighting in the streets in Moscow: rumour is rife that the Revolution cannot survive.
Episode 6: The Revolutionary Front
Kerensky and the counter-revolutionary Cossacks are making gains and threatening Petrograd. Reed visits the Revolutionary frontline with the Bolshevik commander-in-chief - who seems less than organised.
Episode 7: Counter-Revolution
Bryant is caught up in a vicious street battle and witnesses the bloody violence of the Revolution at close quarters. Counter-revolutionary government troops holding the telephone exchange are captured by Bolshevik sailors - who then have to learn to man the switchboards.
Episode 8: Victory
Trotsky has claimed victory over the Cossacks and Kerensky is asking for an armistice. Reed sets out once more for the front line with a driver who takes a dim view of American democracy, and finds himself up against the illiterate brutality of the Red Guard.
Episode 9: Moscow
Lunacharsky despairs at the rumour that the revolutionaries' own bombardment has destroyed the historic Kremlin. Reed and Bryant set out to Moscow to see for themselves but find not everyone in the city supports the Bolsheviks.
Episode 10: The Conquest of Power
The Bolsheviks have defeated the counter-revolution and are getting on with the business of government despite the threat of civil war. The abolition of all private ownership of land has won over the peasants and, for a moment, the Revolution seems to have accomplished its goals.
Director Alison Hindell
BBC Cymru Wales production
John Reed's vivid eye-witness account of his time in Petrograd was written in early 1918 and published in the USA the following year. It was an instant best-seller, so much so that in Russia it was some years before Stalin - who is only mentioned twice in the book - felt he could ban it for its portrayal of Trotsky. Possibly na茂ve, definitely politically one-sided, nevertheless the veracity and impact of Reed's enthusiastic snapshot-style reportage has become a classic memoir and inspired films including Eisenstein's classic 'October' and 'Reds' which won an Oscar for its director and star, Warren Beatty.
John Reed's classic eye-witness account of the Russian Revolution in October 1917.
Dramatised by Robin Brooks
Episode 1: The Coming Storm
Autumn 1917 and Petrograd under the Provisional Government is in chaos. American journalists John Reed and Louise Bryant arrive to find the tension between factions is palpable and it's only a matter of time before the situation explodes. But in which direction?
Episode 2: On the Eve
The confusion in Petrograd continues as the new delegates to the Congress of Soviets stream into the city. Reed gets a brief interview with Trotsky and overhears Lenin calling for a Bolshevik insurrection. But isn't Lenin meant to be in hiding to avoid arrest?
Episode 3: The Winter Palace
Reed and Bryant blag their way in to the Winter Palace and meet the frightened government troops defending the building. As gunfire starts in the street, the Palace falls surprisingly easily to the victorious revolutionaries but the journalists are caught in a dangerous encounter.
Episode 4: Plunging Ahead
The Bolsheviks have taken the Winter Palace and seized control. Amidst a whirl of excitement, dread and rumour, Lenin abolishes all private ownership of land.
Episode 5: Chill Winds
Ex-Prime Minster Kerensky has joined forces with the Cossacks and is advancing on Petrograd, and there is fighting in the streets in Moscow: rumour is rife that the Revolution cannot survive.
Episode 6: The Revolutionary Front
Kerensky and the counter-revolutionary Cossacks are making gains and threatening Petrograd. Reed visits the Revolutionary frontline with the Bolshevik commander-in-chief - who seems less than organised.
Episode 7: Counter-Revolution
Bryant is caught up in a vicious street battle and witnesses the bloody violence of the Revolution at close quarters. Counter-revolutionary government troops holding the telephone exchange are captured by Bolshevik sailors - who then have to learn to man the switchboards.
Episode 8: Victory
Trotsky has claimed victory over the Cossacks and Kerensky is asking for an armistice. Reed sets out once more for the front line with a driver who takes a dim view of American democracy, and finds himself up against the illiterate brutality of the Red Guard.
Episode 9: Moscow
Lunacharsky despairs at the rumour that the revolutionaries' own bombardment has destroyed the historic Kremlin. Reed and Bryant set out to Moscow to see for themselves but find not everyone in the city supports the Bolsheviks.
Episode 10: The Conquest of Power
The Bolsheviks have defeated the counter-revolution and are getting on with the business of government despite the threat of civil war. The abolition of all private ownership of land has won over the peasants and, for a moment, the Revolution seems to have accomplished its goals.
Director Alison Hindell
BBC Cymru Wales production
John Reed's vivid eye-witness account of his time in Petrograd was written in early 1918 and published in the USA the following year. It was an instant best-seller, so much so that in Russia it was some years before Stalin - who is only mentioned twice in the book - felt he could ban it for its portrayal of Trotsky. Possibly na茂ve, definitely politically one-sided, nevertheless the veracity and impact of Reed's enthusiastic snapshot-style reportage has become a classic memoir and inspired films including Eisenstein's classic 'October' and 'Reds' which won an Oscar for its director and star, Warren Beatty.
November 6, 2017
The classic account of the October Bolshevik revolution that was supported mainly by the urban working classes and the large mass of sympathetic sailors and soldiers who were fed up with war and wanted peace. Even though a politically one sided work, John Reed wrote with enthusiasm and passion showing the events that took place mainly in Petrograd during the fateful days.
May 1, 2019
Ten days in October 1917: the Bolsheviks seized power in Russia, and startled the world with the completeness and success of their revolution 鈥� and therefore John Reed鈥檚 1919 book Ten Days That Shook the World is nothing if not well-titled. Reed is a brilliant journalist and writer who has written a compelling book; and as far as I am concerned, he was dead wrong about virtually everything.
First, the good news. Reed is a careful observer and a fine writer with a gift for the compelling image, the well-turned phrase; he appeals to all the senses in letting the reader know what he experienced in Petrograd and Moscow while the Bolsheviks took power from the more conservative Provisional Government that had ruled for seven months following the overthrow of Tsar Nicholas II earlier that year.
(Calendar note: the Bolshevik Revolution occurred in November 1917 by our Gregorian/New Style calendar, but in October 1917 by the Julian/Old Style calendar that was still in use in Russia at that time. It is for that reason that the high-tech submarine in Tom Clancy鈥檚 bestseller is called Red October rather than Red November. But I digress.)
The book also provides a fascinating, first-hand look at the leaders of the Bolsheviks who seized power in Russia and launched the Soviet experiment that would have such a dramatic impact upon the history of the 20th century. Here, for example, is Reed鈥檚 portrait of Lenin: 鈥淎 short, stocky figure, with a big head set down in his shoulders, bald and bulging. Little eyes, a snubbish nose, wide, generous mouth, and heavy chin; clean-shaven now, but already beginning to bristle with the well-known beard of his past and future. Dressed in shabby clothes, his trousers much too long for him. Unimpressive, to be the idol of a mob鈥� (p. 170). Reed captures well Lenin鈥檚 coldness of personality, his status as 鈥渁 leader purely by virtue of intellect; colourless, humourless, uncompromising and detached鈥� (p. 171). Comparably compelling is Reed鈥檚 picture of Trotsky, 鈥渟tanding up with a pale, cruel face, letting out his rich voice in cool contempt鈥� (p. 131); 鈥渃alm and venomous鈥� (p. 181); 鈥渃onfident and dominating, with that sarcastic expression about his mouth which was almost a sneer鈥� (p. 189).
Relatively overlooked in Reed鈥檚 book 鈥� he is mentioned only twice 鈥� is 鈥�Chairman for Nationalities: I.V. Djugashvili (Stalin)鈥� (p. 186). The man whose name appears at the end of a 鈥�Declaration of the Rights of the Peoples of Russia鈥� as 鈥淵ussov Djugashvili-Stalin鈥� (p. 345); the man whom a dying Lenin wanted removed from power; the man who had Trotsky murdered in Mexico in 1940 鈥� is hardly a presence in the book at all. If Reed had not died of typhus in 1920, at the age of 32; if he had lived to see Stalin鈥檚 rise to power, the Soviet famine of 1932-33, the Great Purge of 1936-39, the Terror that followed the Second World War 鈥� might he have looked back differently at what he wrote in Ten Days That Shook the World?
Reed is hardly a disinterested, objective observer. He was in Russia as a committed socialist; indeed, his carrying of papers given him by the Bolsheviks was the only reason he was able to visit many of the places he visited during those ten days. Consequently, he has a vested interest in the success of the Bolsheviks, and there are many, many examples of special pleading on behalf of his Red allies.
In Reed鈥檚 recounting of the October Revolution, the Bolsheviks are simply incapable of the atrocities that we know occurred on all sides during the revolutionary turmoil in Russia. Could the Provisional Government, in Reed鈥檚 view of the October Revolution, have committed atrocities? No doubt, if not for their basic incompetence. The Constitutional Democrats (Cadets)? Yes, absolutely; as far as Reed is concerned, atrocities are what the Cadets lived for! But the Bolsheviks? Unthinkable! No group of people so ideologically pure could possibly do anything wrong or underhanded. The idea!
Reed demonstrates a comparable degree of ideology-induced blindness in ignoring the hypocrisy of the Soviets鈥� pretending to offer national self-determination to all the peoples of Russia, and then declaring those who sought national self-determination 鈥� the people of Ukraine, of Poland, of Finland 鈥� to be 鈥渃ounter-revolutionaries.鈥� Well, gracious, isn鈥檛 that convenient?
At the same time, Reed is intellectually honest enough to include an abundance of primary-source documents, many of which often contradict his confident advocacy of the Bolsheviks鈥� infallibility as morally just avatars of world socialist revolution. One senses here the story that Reed is not telling 鈥� the cynical manner in which the Bolsheviks used manipulation, propaganda, and brute force to seize power.
The Modern Library edition of Ten Days That Shook the World that I have before me includes a helpful introduction that places Reed鈥檚 work in the context of its time. Appropriately, the editor emphasizes the disillusionment that Reed experienced when he saw how the Bolsheviks actually wielded the power he had so wanted them to gain 鈥� an experience well dramatized in Warren Beatty鈥檚 film Reds (1981).
Ten Days That Shook the World is a fascinating book, particularly if you have a strong interest in Russian history. Reading it at a time when Vladimir Putin鈥檚 Russia has been flexing its muscles in neighboring countries like Ukraine, Moldova, and the Republic of Georgia, I found it hard not to wonder about the extent to which the past might be prologue.
First, the good news. Reed is a careful observer and a fine writer with a gift for the compelling image, the well-turned phrase; he appeals to all the senses in letting the reader know what he experienced in Petrograd and Moscow while the Bolsheviks took power from the more conservative Provisional Government that had ruled for seven months following the overthrow of Tsar Nicholas II earlier that year.
(Calendar note: the Bolshevik Revolution occurred in November 1917 by our Gregorian/New Style calendar, but in October 1917 by the Julian/Old Style calendar that was still in use in Russia at that time. It is for that reason that the high-tech submarine in Tom Clancy鈥檚 bestseller is called Red October rather than Red November. But I digress.)
The book also provides a fascinating, first-hand look at the leaders of the Bolsheviks who seized power in Russia and launched the Soviet experiment that would have such a dramatic impact upon the history of the 20th century. Here, for example, is Reed鈥檚 portrait of Lenin: 鈥淎 short, stocky figure, with a big head set down in his shoulders, bald and bulging. Little eyes, a snubbish nose, wide, generous mouth, and heavy chin; clean-shaven now, but already beginning to bristle with the well-known beard of his past and future. Dressed in shabby clothes, his trousers much too long for him. Unimpressive, to be the idol of a mob鈥� (p. 170). Reed captures well Lenin鈥檚 coldness of personality, his status as 鈥渁 leader purely by virtue of intellect; colourless, humourless, uncompromising and detached鈥� (p. 171). Comparably compelling is Reed鈥檚 picture of Trotsky, 鈥渟tanding up with a pale, cruel face, letting out his rich voice in cool contempt鈥� (p. 131); 鈥渃alm and venomous鈥� (p. 181); 鈥渃onfident and dominating, with that sarcastic expression about his mouth which was almost a sneer鈥� (p. 189).
Relatively overlooked in Reed鈥檚 book 鈥� he is mentioned only twice 鈥� is 鈥�Chairman for Nationalities: I.V. Djugashvili (Stalin)鈥� (p. 186). The man whose name appears at the end of a 鈥�Declaration of the Rights of the Peoples of Russia鈥� as 鈥淵ussov Djugashvili-Stalin鈥� (p. 345); the man whom a dying Lenin wanted removed from power; the man who had Trotsky murdered in Mexico in 1940 鈥� is hardly a presence in the book at all. If Reed had not died of typhus in 1920, at the age of 32; if he had lived to see Stalin鈥檚 rise to power, the Soviet famine of 1932-33, the Great Purge of 1936-39, the Terror that followed the Second World War 鈥� might he have looked back differently at what he wrote in Ten Days That Shook the World?
Reed is hardly a disinterested, objective observer. He was in Russia as a committed socialist; indeed, his carrying of papers given him by the Bolsheviks was the only reason he was able to visit many of the places he visited during those ten days. Consequently, he has a vested interest in the success of the Bolsheviks, and there are many, many examples of special pleading on behalf of his Red allies.
In Reed鈥檚 recounting of the October Revolution, the Bolsheviks are simply incapable of the atrocities that we know occurred on all sides during the revolutionary turmoil in Russia. Could the Provisional Government, in Reed鈥檚 view of the October Revolution, have committed atrocities? No doubt, if not for their basic incompetence. The Constitutional Democrats (Cadets)? Yes, absolutely; as far as Reed is concerned, atrocities are what the Cadets lived for! But the Bolsheviks? Unthinkable! No group of people so ideologically pure could possibly do anything wrong or underhanded. The idea!
Reed demonstrates a comparable degree of ideology-induced blindness in ignoring the hypocrisy of the Soviets鈥� pretending to offer national self-determination to all the peoples of Russia, and then declaring those who sought national self-determination 鈥� the people of Ukraine, of Poland, of Finland 鈥� to be 鈥渃ounter-revolutionaries.鈥� Well, gracious, isn鈥檛 that convenient?
At the same time, Reed is intellectually honest enough to include an abundance of primary-source documents, many of which often contradict his confident advocacy of the Bolsheviks鈥� infallibility as morally just avatars of world socialist revolution. One senses here the story that Reed is not telling 鈥� the cynical manner in which the Bolsheviks used manipulation, propaganda, and brute force to seize power.
The Modern Library edition of Ten Days That Shook the World that I have before me includes a helpful introduction that places Reed鈥檚 work in the context of its time. Appropriately, the editor emphasizes the disillusionment that Reed experienced when he saw how the Bolsheviks actually wielded the power he had so wanted them to gain 鈥� an experience well dramatized in Warren Beatty鈥檚 film Reds (1981).
Ten Days That Shook the World is a fascinating book, particularly if you have a strong interest in Russian history. Reading it at a time when Vladimir Putin鈥檚 Russia has been flexing its muscles in neighboring countries like Ukraine, Moldova, and the Republic of Georgia, I found it hard not to wonder about the extent to which the past might be prologue.
October 31, 2013
American journalist and socialist John Reed wrote about Russia's 1917 October Revolution presenting a first hand account of all the events whilst being on assignment for a socialist politics magazine called The Masses, however due to this magazine's forced closure another magazine The Liberator published his articles.
Reed was able to interact with Bolshevik leaders and got much information from officials apart from his experiences and was therefore able to present his account both dramatically and accurately.
Read it here:
Reed was able to interact with Bolshevik leaders and got much information from officials apart from his experiences and was therefore able to present his account both dramatically and accurately.
Read it here:
January 17, 2019
It's not everyday you get to witness a major turning point in history first hand as John Reed did in November 1917. For that reason, combined with the facts that (1) he was American, (2) he had a pencil and paper available, and (3) he knew how to write, this work is something close to a must read. It's close to a must read, rather than a definitive must read, because Reed's prose lags. He did manage, however, to give a sense for a tremendous instant of anarchy that lasted for the briefest of moments as the Kerensky regime morphed into chaos and then into Bolshevism.
Trotsky and Lenin make a number of appearances here as do a number of other revolutionaries, most names long lost to ears and minds. I did see Stalin's name once. Reed had quite an ability to move around Petrograd, witnessing developments and interviewing leading characters. He visited Moscow once and on another visit outside Petrograd came very close to being lined up against a wall and shot, although he was able to talk his way out of that ending.
I thought of the comparison between events in Russia in 1917 and Germany in 1918. I need to do more reading on this topic, though it seems the major difference is that revolutionary fervor penetrated the Russian military to a far different degree than the German military. This caused Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht to experience opposing outcomes to Lenin and Trotsky.
Trotsky and Lenin make a number of appearances here as do a number of other revolutionaries, most names long lost to ears and minds. I did see Stalin's name once. Reed had quite an ability to move around Petrograd, witnessing developments and interviewing leading characters. He visited Moscow once and on another visit outside Petrograd came very close to being lined up against a wall and shot, although he was able to talk his way out of that ending.
I thought of the comparison between events in Russia in 1917 and Germany in 1918. I need to do more reading on this topic, though it seems the major difference is that revolutionary fervor penetrated the Russian military to a far different degree than the German military. This caused Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht to experience opposing outcomes to Lenin and Trotsky.
October 23, 2017
9 OCT 2017 - a recommendation through Bettie. Many Thanks.
Give a listen here -
23 OCT 2017 - a very good listen-to.
Give a listen here -
23 OCT 2017 - a very good listen-to.
January 26, 2015
4.6 stars
Ten Days that Shocked the World talks about American journalist and socialist John Reed experience in Russia during October revolution and Bolsheviks seizer of power ( Bolshevik literally means "one of the majority", derived from Russian ) in 1917, Russia. Even though i'm familiar with the Bolshevik revolution and its events, Reed's narrative writing captured the country's situation during a hard time vividly, it was informative with quotations from newspapers, documents, eyewitnesses including himself and speeches of Lenin and Trotsky, which Reed experienced firsthand, he leaves you hanging on every word. It covered most of the struggles and chaotic political parties fight over power after the fall of Tsarist Russia and Tsar Nicholas II, the forming of Kerensky's provisional government, reasons that led to it's fall, the Bolsheviks insurrection under Vladimir Linen's command in Petrograd ( former name for Saint Petersburg ) and final victory. Reed clearly wasn't neutral, in fact all of his sympathies lay with the Bolsheviks due to his political beliefs, but still he takes you on journey, through Russia, it's cities and it's revolutionary people. Ten Days That Shock the World is an amazing detailed experience of one of the greatest events of the twentieth century.
Ten Days that Shocked the World talks about American journalist and socialist John Reed experience in Russia during October revolution and Bolsheviks seizer of power ( Bolshevik literally means "one of the majority", derived from Russian ) in 1917, Russia. Even though i'm familiar with the Bolshevik revolution and its events, Reed's narrative writing captured the country's situation during a hard time vividly, it was informative with quotations from newspapers, documents, eyewitnesses including himself and speeches of Lenin and Trotsky, which Reed experienced firsthand, he leaves you hanging on every word. It covered most of the struggles and chaotic political parties fight over power after the fall of Tsarist Russia and Tsar Nicholas II, the forming of Kerensky's provisional government, reasons that led to it's fall, the Bolsheviks insurrection under Vladimir Linen's command in Petrograd ( former name for Saint Petersburg ) and final victory. Reed clearly wasn't neutral, in fact all of his sympathies lay with the Bolsheviks due to his political beliefs, but still he takes you on journey, through Russia, it's cities and it's revolutionary people. Ten Days That Shock the World is an amazing detailed experience of one of the greatest events of the twentieth century.
July 30, 2012
賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷賯丿賲 噩賵賳 乇賷丿 賳馗乇鬲賴 賱兀丨丿丕孬 丕賱孬賵乇丞 丕賱亘賱卮賮賷丞 丕賱鬲賷 氐丕丿賮 賵噩賵丿賴 賮賷 乇賵爻賷丕 賵賯鬲 丕賳丿賱丕毓賴丕 毓丕賲 1917 . 賷賳噩丨 乇賷丿 賮賷 賳賯賱 丨丕賱丞 丕賱鬲禺亘胤 丕賱爻賷丕爻賷 賵 丕賱丕噩鬲賲丕毓賷 賯亘賷賱 賵 禺賱丕賱 丕賱孬賵乇丞 賮賷賯丿賲 賲賳 禺賱丕賱 賲丨丕賵乇丕鬲賴 賵 鬲噩丕乇亘賴 丕賱卮禺氐賷丞 賳賲丕匕噩 賱賰賱 丕賱丕胤乇丕賮 丕賱賮丕毓賱丞 賮賷 丕賱丕夭賲丞 亘丿兀賸 賲賳 丕賱毓賲丕賱 賵 丕賱賮賱丕丨賵賳 賵 丕賱噩賳賵丿 賵 賵氐賵賱丕賸 賱丕乇丕亍 噩賲丕毓丕鬲 爻賷丕爻賷丞 賰丕賱亘賱丕卮賮丞 賵 丕賱丕卮鬲乇丕賰賷賷賳 丕賱孬賵乇賷賷賳 亘噩賳丕丨賷賴賲 亘賱 賵 丨鬲賷 丕賳氐丕乇 丨賰賵賲丞 賰賷乇賷賳爻賰賷 . 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷丐乇禺 賱賮鬲乇丞 賲丨丿丿丞 賲賳 毓賲乇 丕賱孬賵乇丞 丕賱乇賵爻賷丞 丕賱賰亘乇賷 賵 賴賷 賯亘賷賱 丕爻鬲賷賱丕亍丕賱亘賱丕卮賮丞 毓賱賷 丕賱丨賰賲 賵 賴乇賵亘 賰賷乇賷賳爻賰賷 亘毓卮乇丞 丕賷丕賲 鬲賯乇賷亘丕 . 賱匕賱賰 賯丿 賷丨鬲丕噩 丕賱賯丕乇賷亍 賱丿乇丕爻丞 賳鬲丕卅噩 孬賵乇丞 賮亘乇丕賷乇 賵 丕賱丕丨丿丕孬 丕賱鬲賷 丕丿鬲 賱鬲胤賵乇 丕賱賵囟毓 丕賱賷 賲丕 賰丕賳 毓賱賷賴 賯亘賱 丕賳丿賱丕毓 丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱丕賴賱賷丞. 亘丕乇睾賲 賲賳 丕賳 乇賷丿 匕賰乇 賮賷 賲賯丿賲丞 賰鬲丕亘賴 丕賳賴 丨丕賵賱 賳賯賱 丕賱丕丨丿丕孬 亘毓賷賳 賲丨丕賷丿丞 廿賱丕 丕賳 丕賳丨賷丕夭賴 賱賱亘賱丕卮賮丞 賵丕囟丨 鬲賲丕賲 丕賱賵囟賵丨 賵 賯丿 賷賮爻乇 匕賱賰 賳卮兀丞 噩賵賳 乇賷丿 賵 丕鬲噩賴丕鬲賴 丕賱爻賷丕爻賷丞 丨鬲賷 賯亘賱 夭賷丕乇鬲賴 賱乇賵爻賷丕 .
丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷賯丿賲 賳馗乇丞 丕亘毓丿 賲丕 鬲賰賵賳 毓賳 丕賱丨賷丕丿賷丞 丕鬲噩丕賴 賲丕 爻賲賷 亘孬賵乇丞 丕賰鬲賵亘乇 , 丕賳氐丨 丕賱賲賴鬲賲賷賳 亘丿乇丕爻丞 賲丨丕賷丿丞 賵 賲賮氐賱丞 毓賳 丕賱孬賵乇丞 丕賱乇賵爻賷丞 丕賱賰亘乇賷 亘丕賱亘丨孬 毓賳 亘丿賷賱 .
丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷賯丿賲 賳馗乇丞 丕亘毓丿 賲丕 鬲賰賵賳 毓賳 丕賱丨賷丕丿賷丞 丕鬲噩丕賴 賲丕 爻賲賷 亘孬賵乇丞 丕賰鬲賵亘乇 , 丕賳氐丨 丕賱賲賴鬲賲賷賳 亘丿乇丕爻丞 賲丨丕賷丿丞 賵 賲賮氐賱丞 毓賳 丕賱孬賵乇丞 丕賱乇賵爻賷丞 丕賱賰亘乇賷 亘丕賱亘丨孬 毓賳 亘丿賷賱 .
January 31, 2021
Okay I hung in left political circles in college in the 1980s my political orientation is not new and I have maybe even gone further left with age. I think one's stakes in the status quo are more determinative over growing conservative than the number of birthdays you've had anyway. So two Trotskyists I would often encounter would push me to read this book by John Reed a left-journalist who covered the Russian Revolution in 1917 and featured in the early 1980s movie Reds. It is well written and a good account. I mean I am leftwing already probably not that particular political flavor of Marxist-Leninist (probably not even dialectical materialist either although I think Marx is good at analyzing the economy) but I am solidly on the left (so many flavors of ideology to choose from) and stand pretty much with anti-capitalists. it is a good story however I also know what happened next.
July 13, 2024
喙冟竸喔｀笚喔掂箞喔娻阜喙堗笝喔娻腑喔氞腑喙堗覆喔权斧喔｀阜喔箑喔｀复喙堗浮喔箞喔侧笝喔о福喔｀笓喔佮福喔｀浮喔傕腑喔囙笝喔编竵喙赌喔傕傅喔⑧笝喔｀副喔箑喔嬥傅喔⑧笅喔多箞喔囙弗喙夃抚喔权箑喔涏箛喔权竾喔侧笝喔勦弗喔侧釜喔复喔佮福喔班笖喔编笟喔傕付喙夃笝喔复喙夃竾喔椸傅喙堗笝喔编竵喔箞喔侧笝喔椸副喙堗抚喙傕弗喔佮竸喔о福喔箞喔侧笝喙佮笚喔氞笚喔膏竵喙赌喔ム箞喔�
.
喔涪喔侧竵喙佮笝喔班笝喔� '喔复喔氞抚喔编笝喙€喔傕涪喙堗覆喙傕弗喔� : Ten Days That Shook the World' 喔傕腑喔囙笝喔编竵喙€喔傕傅喔⑧笝喔箑喔∴福喔脆竵喔编笝 'John Reed' 喔椸傅喙堗箒喔涏弗喙勦笚喔⑧箓喔斷涪'喔父喔椸复喔� 喔о福喔｀笓喔氞抚喔�'
.
喔∴副喔權笖喔掂笧喔笚喔掂箞喔堗赴喙€喔涏箛喔權箑喔娻复喔囙腑喔｀福喔栢笚喔侧竾喔副喔囙竸喔∴箒喔ム赴喔佮覆喔｀箑喔∴阜喔竾喙€喔ム箞喔∴釜喔赤竸喔编笉喙€喔炧阜喙堗腑喔福喔｀笘喔侧笜喔脆笟喔侧涪喔涏弗喔侧涪喔椸覆喔囙箑喔氞箟喔侧斧喔ム腑喔∴笚喔侧竾喔勦抚喔侧浮喔勦复喔斷競喔竾喔涏福喔班笂喔侧笂喔權福喔编釜喙€喔嬥傅喔⑧笚喔掂箞喔權赋喙勦笡喔腹喙堗竵喔侧福喔涏笍喔脆抚喔编笗喔脆箖喔權笡喔� 喔�.喔�.1917 喙勦笖喙夃腑喔⑧箞喔侧竾喔ム赴喙€喔傅喔⑧笖喙勦浮喙堗笝喙堗覆喙€喔氞阜喙堗腑喙佮弗喔班箑喔涏箛喔權箑喔傅喙夃涪喔о斧喔權付喙堗竾喔傕腑喔囙笡喔｀赴喔о副喔曕复喔ㄠ覆喔笗喔｀箤喙傕弗喔佮笚喔掂箞喙€喔｀覆喔勦抚喔｀笚喔赤竸喔о覆喔∴箑喔傕箟喔侧箖喔�
.
喔勦笝喔椸傅喙堗箑喔勦涪喔副喔∴笢喔编釜喔囙覆喔權箑喔傕傅喔⑧笝喔傕腑喔囙浮喔脆竸喔覆喔复喔� 喙€喔ム傅喔⑧福喔∴腑喔權笗喔笩,喔箑喔ム箛喔佮笅喔侧笝喙€喔斷腑喔｀箤 喔炧父喔娻竵喔脆笝, 喔權复喙傕竸喙勦弗 喙傕竵喔佮腑喔�, 喙€喔ム箓喔� 喔曕腑喔ム釜喔曕腑喔�,喔熰复喙傕腑喔斷腑喔｀箤 喔斷腑喔箓喔曕箑喔⑧笩喔竵喔掂笀喔權箘喔涏笀喔氞笚喔掂箞 '喔權覆喔⑧箒喔炧笚喔⑧箤喔娻复喔о覆喙傕竵' 喔傕腑喔� 喔氞腑喔｀复喔� 喔涏覆喔箑喔曕腑喔｀箤喙€喔權箛喔�
.
喔炧斧喔膏笀喔编竵喔｀抚喔侧弗喔囙覆喔權箑喔傕傅喔⑧笝喔椸傅喙堗箒喔澿竾喔涏福喔编笂喔嵿覆喙佮弗喔班斧喙夃抚喔囙竸喔脆笖喔勦赋喔權付喔囙箘喔涏笀喔權笘喔多竾喔溹弗喔炧抚喔囙箒喔箞喔囙竸喔о覆喔∴竸喔编笟喙佮竸喙夃笝喔傕腑喔囙笗喔编抚喔ム赴喔勦福喙冟笝喔о福喔｀笓喔佮福喔｀浮喔傕腑喔囙笝喔编竵喙€喔傕傅喔⑧笝喙€喔弗喙堗覆喔權副喙夃笝喔ム箟喔о笝喔涏腹喙€喔箟喔權笚喔侧竾喔炧覆喙€喔｀覆喙勦笡喔曕覆喔∴笗喔脆笖喔娻赴喔曕覆喔佮福喔｀浮喔傕腑喔囙笡喔｀赴喔娻覆喔娻笝喔｀副喔箑喔嬥傅喔� 喔� 喔堗父喔斷腑喔о釜喔侧笝喔傕腑喔囙福喔班笟喔笟喔副喔囙竸喔∴笂喔權笂喔编箟喔� 喙冟笝喔о副喔權笚喔掂箞 8 喔∴傅喔權覆喔勦浮 1917
.
'喔复喔氞抚喔编笝喙€喔傕涪喙堗覆喙傕弗喔�' 喔勦阜喔笧喔⑧覆喔權笡喔侧竵喙€喔竵喔傕腑喔囙箑喔笗喔膏竵喔侧福喔撪箤喔佮覆喔｀笡喔忇复喔о副喔曕复喔副喔權箒喔椸箟喔堗福喔脆竾喔傕腑喔囙笡喔｀赴喔娻覆喔娻笝喙冟笝喔娻箞喔о竾喙€喔о弗喔侧釜喔赤竸喔编笉喔權副喙夃笝
.
喔涪喔侧竵喙佮笝喔班笝喔� '喔复喔氞抚喔编笝喙€喔傕涪喙堗覆喙傕弗喔� : Ten Days That Shook the World' 喔傕腑喔囙笝喔编竵喙€喔傕傅喔⑧笝喔箑喔∴福喔脆竵喔编笝 'John Reed' 喔椸傅喙堗箒喔涏弗喙勦笚喔⑧箓喔斷涪'喔父喔椸复喔� 喔о福喔｀笓喔氞抚喔�'
.
喔∴副喔權笖喔掂笧喔笚喔掂箞喔堗赴喙€喔涏箛喔權箑喔娻复喔囙腑喔｀福喔栢笚喔侧竾喔副喔囙竸喔∴箒喔ム赴喔佮覆喔｀箑喔∴阜喔竾喙€喔ム箞喔∴釜喔赤竸喔编笉喙€喔炧阜喙堗腑喔福喔｀笘喔侧笜喔脆笟喔侧涪喔涏弗喔侧涪喔椸覆喔囙箑喔氞箟喔侧斧喔ム腑喔∴笚喔侧竾喔勦抚喔侧浮喔勦复喔斷競喔竾喔涏福喔班笂喔侧笂喔權福喔编釜喙€喔嬥傅喔⑧笚喔掂箞喔權赋喙勦笡喔腹喙堗竵喔侧福喔涏笍喔脆抚喔编笗喔脆箖喔權笡喔� 喔�.喔�.1917 喙勦笖喙夃腑喔⑧箞喔侧竾喔ム赴喙€喔傅喔⑧笖喙勦浮喙堗笝喙堗覆喙€喔氞阜喙堗腑喙佮弗喔班箑喔涏箛喔權箑喔傅喙夃涪喔о斧喔權付喙堗竾喔傕腑喔囙笡喔｀赴喔о副喔曕复喔ㄠ覆喔笗喔｀箤喙傕弗喔佮笚喔掂箞喙€喔｀覆喔勦抚喔｀笚喔赤竸喔о覆喔∴箑喔傕箟喔侧箖喔�
.
喔勦笝喔椸傅喙堗箑喔勦涪喔副喔∴笢喔编釜喔囙覆喔權箑喔傕傅喔⑧笝喔傕腑喔囙浮喔脆竸喔覆喔复喔� 喙€喔ム傅喔⑧福喔∴腑喔權笗喔笩,喔箑喔ム箛喔佮笅喔侧笝喙€喔斷腑喔｀箤 喔炧父喔娻竵喔脆笝, 喔權复喙傕竸喙勦弗 喙傕竵喔佮腑喔�, 喙€喔ム箓喔� 喔曕腑喔ム釜喔曕腑喔�,喔熰复喙傕腑喔斷腑喔｀箤 喔斷腑喔箓喔曕箑喔⑧笩喔竵喔掂笀喔權箘喔涏笀喔氞笚喔掂箞 '喔權覆喔⑧箒喔炧笚喔⑧箤喔娻复喔о覆喙傕竵' 喔傕腑喔� 喔氞腑喔｀复喔� 喔涏覆喔箑喔曕腑喔｀箤喙€喔權箛喔�
.
喔炧斧喔膏笀喔编竵喔｀抚喔侧弗喔囙覆喔權箑喔傕傅喔⑧笝喔椸傅喙堗箒喔澿竾喔涏福喔编笂喔嵿覆喙佮弗喔班斧喙夃抚喔囙竸喔脆笖喔勦赋喔權付喔囙箘喔涏笀喔權笘喔多竾喔溹弗喔炧抚喔囙箒喔箞喔囙竸喔о覆喔∴竸喔编笟喙佮竸喙夃笝喔傕腑喔囙笗喔编抚喔ム赴喔勦福喙冟笝喔о福喔｀笓喔佮福喔｀浮喔傕腑喔囙笝喔编竵喙€喔傕傅喔⑧笝喙€喔弗喙堗覆喔權副喙夃笝喔ム箟喔о笝喔涏腹喙€喔箟喔權笚喔侧竾喔炧覆喙€喔｀覆喙勦笡喔曕覆喔∴笗喔脆笖喔娻赴喔曕覆喔佮福喔｀浮喔傕腑喔囙笡喔｀赴喔娻覆喔娻笝喔｀副喔箑喔嬥傅喔� 喔� 喔堗父喔斷腑喔о釜喔侧笝喔傕腑喔囙福喔班笟喔笟喔副喔囙竸喔∴笂喔權笂喔编箟喔� 喙冟笝喔о副喔權笚喔掂箞 8 喔∴傅喔權覆喔勦浮 1917
.
'喔复喔氞抚喔编笝喙€喔傕涪喙堗覆喙傕弗喔�' 喔勦阜喔笧喔⑧覆喔權笡喔侧竵喙€喔竵喔傕腑喔囙箑喔笗喔膏竵喔侧福喔撪箤喔佮覆喔｀笡喔忇复喔о副喔曕复喔副喔權箒喔椸箟喔堗福喔脆竾喔傕腑喔囙笡喔｀赴喔娻覆喔娻笝喙冟笝喔娻箞喔о竾喙€喔о弗喔侧釜喔赤竸喔编笉喔權副喙夃笝
August 25, 2024
This was my first solid introduction to the Russian Revolution. It is a historical event, if not a phenomenon by all means, that keeps shaping the contours of the world even after passage of more than a hundred years and millions of deaths that got trivialised as numbers when the meat-grinder named Twentieth Century did its job. Reed does a spectacular job, as the book reads like a political thriller with intrigues, assassinations, debates, fights, even war going on. Yes, now I realise that perhaps the excess of characters coupled with a very-very biased view had presented the revolution more as pink and less as red. A proper analysis of the characters, their personalities (especially their psychological profiles), and the implications were bound to show the faultlines of the new empire that had replaced the old one. But such a book could have never, NEVER created an impact like Reed's book.
This is a book that shook the world. Read it purely to appreciate how it had done so.
Recommended.
This is a book that shook the world. Read it purely to appreciate how it had done so.
Recommended.
July 25, 2015
Asker ciddi ciddi, 鈥淏ana bak, karde艧,鈥� dedi, 鈥渁nlam谋yorsun. 陌ki s谋n谋f var, g枚rm眉yor musun? Proletarya ile burjuvazi. Biz...鈥�
鈥淗a, evet, biliyorum bu laflar谋, merak etme,鈥� diye at谋ld谋 枚臒renci, kaba kaba. 鈥淪izin gibi cahil k枚yl眉ler birka莽 haz谋r laf 枚臒renmeyeg枚rs眉n. Bunlar谋n anlam谋n谋 bilmiyorsunuz bile. Yaln谋z papa臒an gibi ezberlemi艧siniz.鈥� Kalabal谋k g眉ld眉. 鈥淏en Marksist bir 枚臒renciyim. Ve sana 艧unu s枚yleyeyim: U臒runda sava艧t谋臒谋n 艧ey sosyalizm de臒il. Yaln谋z Almanlara yarayan bir anar艧i!鈥�
鈥淗a, evet, biliyorum,鈥� diye cevap verdi asker. Aln谋ndan terler ak谋yordu. 鈥淪iz okumu艧 bir insans谋n谋z, belli. Ben basit bir adam谋m. Ama bana 枚yle geliyor ki...鈥�
脰teki k谋zarak askerin s枚z眉n眉 kesti. 鈥淪en Lenin鈥檌n ger莽ekten proleter dostu oldu臒una inan谋yor musun?鈥�
Asker, can谋 s谋k谋larak, 鈥淓vet, inan谋yorum,鈥� diye cevap verdi.
鈥淧eki dostum, Lenin鈥檌n Almanya鈥檇an kapal谋 vagon i莽inde g枚nderildi臒ini biliyor musun? Almanya鈥檇an para ald谋臒谋n谋 biliyor musun?鈥�
Asker, 鈥淥ras谋n谋 bilmiyorum鈥� diye inatla cevap verdi, 鈥渁ma Lenin benim ve benim gibi basit insanlar谋n istedi臒i 艧eyleri s枚yl眉yor. Bak: 陌ki s谋n谋f var, biri burjuvazi, 枚teki proletarya...鈥�
鈥淗a, evet, biliyorum bu laflar谋, merak etme,鈥� diye at谋ld谋 枚臒renci, kaba kaba. 鈥淪izin gibi cahil k枚yl眉ler birka莽 haz谋r laf 枚臒renmeyeg枚rs眉n. Bunlar谋n anlam谋n谋 bilmiyorsunuz bile. Yaln谋z papa臒an gibi ezberlemi艧siniz.鈥� Kalabal谋k g眉ld眉. 鈥淏en Marksist bir 枚臒renciyim. Ve sana 艧unu s枚yleyeyim: U臒runda sava艧t谋臒谋n 艧ey sosyalizm de臒il. Yaln谋z Almanlara yarayan bir anar艧i!鈥�
鈥淗a, evet, biliyorum,鈥� diye cevap verdi asker. Aln谋ndan terler ak谋yordu. 鈥淪iz okumu艧 bir insans谋n谋z, belli. Ben basit bir adam谋m. Ama bana 枚yle geliyor ki...鈥�
脰teki k谋zarak askerin s枚z眉n眉 kesti. 鈥淪en Lenin鈥檌n ger莽ekten proleter dostu oldu臒una inan谋yor musun?鈥�
Asker, can谋 s谋k谋larak, 鈥淓vet, inan谋yorum,鈥� diye cevap verdi.
鈥淧eki dostum, Lenin鈥檌n Almanya鈥檇an kapal谋 vagon i莽inde g枚nderildi臒ini biliyor musun? Almanya鈥檇an para ald谋臒谋n谋 biliyor musun?鈥�
Asker, 鈥淥ras谋n谋 bilmiyorum鈥� diye inatla cevap verdi, 鈥渁ma Lenin benim ve benim gibi basit insanlar谋n istedi臒i 艧eyleri s枚yl眉yor. Bak: 陌ki s谋n谋f var, biri burjuvazi, 枚teki proletarya...鈥�
June 9, 2016
I can't say this was an easy read (unlike other works that focus more on the execution of the Czar and his family), but it is probably the most comprehensible and concise volume on the Bolshevik coup - a very complicated event. Of course, for a casual reader like myself I was still a little overwhelmed with a plethora of Russian names and various left/right political groups and factions representing everything from the elite armed forces to peasants groups. This is not to say there were not parts that were highly readable. When the narrative veered away from reprinted speeches and proclamations and focused more on Reed's first hand observations in St. Petersburg and Moscow, I was definitely more engaged with the material.
Reed, who was passionately pro-socialism, died in 1920, thus never saw how things ultimately turned out. The Bolshevik program certainly looked good on paper before it morphed into Totalitarianism. I makes me want to revisit Warren Beatty's biopic Reds at some point.
Reed, who was passionately pro-socialism, died in 1920, thus never saw how things ultimately turned out. The Bolshevik program certainly looked good on paper before it morphed into Totalitarianism. I makes me want to revisit Warren Beatty's biopic Reds at some point.
April 26, 2022
賷賵孬賯 丕賱氐丨賮賷 丕賱廿卮鬲乇丕賰賷 丕賱兀賲乇賷賰賷 噩賵賳 乇賷丿 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 兀丨丿丕孬 丕賱孬賵乇丞 丕賱亘賱卮賮賷丞 兀賵 丕賱廿賳賯賱丕亘 丕賱亘賱卮賮賷 毓賱賶 丕賱丨賰賵賲丞 丕賱賲丐賯鬲丞 丕賱鬲賷 禺賱賮鬲 丕賱賳馗丕賲 丕賱賯賷氐乇賷 賮賷 丨賰賲 乇賵爻賷丕.
鬲丿賵乇 兀睾賱亘 兀丨丿丕孬 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賮賷 賲丿賷賳丞 亘賷鬲乇賵睾乇丕丿 (爻丕賳鬲 亘賷鬲乇爻亘賷乇睾 丨丕賱賷丕) 賮賷 賯丕賱亘 乇賵丕卅賷 亘毓賷丿 毓賳 丕賱賱睾丞 丕賱噩丕賮丞 丕賱賲毓賴賵丿丞 賮賷 兀睾賱亘 賰鬲亘 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺. 賱賰賳 賴匕丕 賱丕 賷禺賱賵丕 賲賳 氐毓賵亘丞 賵鬲毓賯賷丿丕鬲 兀爻賲丕亍 丕賱賲賳馗賲丕鬲 賵丕賱兀丨夭丕亘 賵丕賱兀胤乇丕賮 丕賱賲卮丕乇賰丞 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱丨丿孬 賵丕賱鬲賷 鬲賮囟賱 丕賱賰丕鬲亘 亘鬲毓乇賷賮賳丕 亘賴丕 賮賷 亘丿丕賷丞 賰鬲丕亘賴 (爻賲賵賱賳賷貙 丕賱丿賵賲丕貙 丕賱亘賱丕卮賮丞貙 丕賱賲賳丕卮賮丞貙 丕賱爻賵賮賷賷鬲貙 丕賱賰丕丿賷鬲貙 丕賱賯賵夭丕賯貙 丕賱賷丕賳賰乇夭貙 丕賱丨乇爻 丕賱兀丨賲乇... 丕賱禺) 乇睾賲 匕賱賰 賵賲毓 賲乇賵乇 丕賱兀丨丿丕孬 賵亘毓囟 丕賱亘丨孬 賮賷 睾賵睾賱 爻鬲噩丿 賳賮爻賰 賯丿 丨賮馗鬲 丕賱兀爻賲丕亍 賵毓乇賮鬲 賲賳 賴賵 賲賳 賵賮賷 兀賷 胤乇賮 賴賵.
亘丨賰賲 賮賰乇賴 丕賱廿卮鬲乇丕賰賷 賵毓賲賱賴 丕賱氐丨賮賷 賵丨氐賵賱賴 毓賱賶 鬲氐乇賷丨 賷禺賵賱賴 丕賱鬲賳賯賱 丿丕禺賱 賲禺鬲賱賮 丕賱賲亘丕賳賷 丕賱丨賰賵賲賷丞 賵丕賱丨夭亘賷丞貙 賰丕賳 噩賵賳 乇賷丿 賷賵孬賯 兀丨丿丕孬 丕賱孬賵乇丞 兀賵賱 亘兀賵賱 賲賳 賯賱亘 丕賱丨丿孬 爻賵丕亍 賲賳 鬲噩賲毓丕鬲 賵丕噩鬲賲丕毓丕鬲 丕賱爻賷丕爻賷賷賳貙 兀賵 亘賷賳 丕賱賲賵丕胤賳賷賳 賮賷 丕賱兀賲丕賰賳 丕賱毓丕賲丞 兀賵 丕賱噩賳賵丿 賵乇丕亍 丕賱賲鬲丕乇賷爻.
鬲丿賵乇 兀睾賱亘 兀丨丿丕孬 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賮賷 賲丿賷賳丞 亘賷鬲乇賵睾乇丕丿 (爻丕賳鬲 亘賷鬲乇爻亘賷乇睾 丨丕賱賷丕) 賮賷 賯丕賱亘 乇賵丕卅賷 亘毓賷丿 毓賳 丕賱賱睾丞 丕賱噩丕賮丞 丕賱賲毓賴賵丿丞 賮賷 兀睾賱亘 賰鬲亘 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺. 賱賰賳 賴匕丕 賱丕 賷禺賱賵丕 賲賳 氐毓賵亘丞 賵鬲毓賯賷丿丕鬲 兀爻賲丕亍 丕賱賲賳馗賲丕鬲 賵丕賱兀丨夭丕亘 賵丕賱兀胤乇丕賮 丕賱賲卮丕乇賰丞 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱丨丿孬 賵丕賱鬲賷 鬲賮囟賱 丕賱賰丕鬲亘 亘鬲毓乇賷賮賳丕 亘賴丕 賮賷 亘丿丕賷丞 賰鬲丕亘賴 (爻賲賵賱賳賷貙 丕賱丿賵賲丕貙 丕賱亘賱丕卮賮丞貙 丕賱賲賳丕卮賮丞貙 丕賱爻賵賮賷賷鬲貙 丕賱賰丕丿賷鬲貙 丕賱賯賵夭丕賯貙 丕賱賷丕賳賰乇夭貙 丕賱丨乇爻 丕賱兀丨賲乇... 丕賱禺) 乇睾賲 匕賱賰 賵賲毓 賲乇賵乇 丕賱兀丨丿丕孬 賵亘毓囟 丕賱亘丨孬 賮賷 睾賵睾賱 爻鬲噩丿 賳賮爻賰 賯丿 丨賮馗鬲 丕賱兀爻賲丕亍 賵毓乇賮鬲 賲賳 賴賵 賲賳 賵賮賷 兀賷 胤乇賮 賴賵.
亘丨賰賲 賮賰乇賴 丕賱廿卮鬲乇丕賰賷 賵毓賲賱賴 丕賱氐丨賮賷 賵丨氐賵賱賴 毓賱賶 鬲氐乇賷丨 賷禺賵賱賴 丕賱鬲賳賯賱 丿丕禺賱 賲禺鬲賱賮 丕賱賲亘丕賳賷 丕賱丨賰賵賲賷丞 賵丕賱丨夭亘賷丞貙 賰丕賳 噩賵賳 乇賷丿 賷賵孬賯 兀丨丿丕孬 丕賱孬賵乇丞 兀賵賱 亘兀賵賱 賲賳 賯賱亘 丕賱丨丿孬 爻賵丕亍 賲賳 鬲噩賲毓丕鬲 賵丕噩鬲賲丕毓丕鬲 丕賱爻賷丕爻賷賷賳貙 兀賵 亘賷賳 丕賱賲賵丕胤賳賷賳 賮賷 丕賱兀賲丕賰賳 丕賱毓丕賲丞 兀賵 丕賱噩賳賵丿 賵乇丕亍 丕賱賲鬲丕乇賷爻.
March 13, 2017
A very interesting, dense, complicated book. Trying to remember the names of all the councils, groups, parties, etc, is a bit of a chore.
But it is an important book, that helps understand what happened in Russia in that time period. And it is now a classic.
But... be aware that this is very one-sided. I knew it would be, but it is almost funny sometimes how much of a propaganda tool this book is.
But it is an important book, that helps understand what happened in Russia in that time period. And it is now a classic.
But... be aware that this is very one-sided. I knew it would be, but it is almost funny sometimes how much of a propaganda tool this book is.
November 26, 2017
陌nsan谋n tarihte giri艧ti臒i en heyecan verici 枚yk眉n眉n ilk on g眉n眉n眉 anlatan m眉thi艧 bir eser. Belgeler, tarihin o d枚neminde sahne alan ki艧iler, 枚rg眉tler, partiler, gazetelerle ilgili 莽ok detayl谋 bilgiler i莽eriyor. Bu belgesel anlat谋 ayn谋 zamanda bir edebi eser. Bol艧evik Devrimi o kadar g眉zel sahnelerle resmedilmi艧 ki, okurken zaman zaman t眉ylerim diken diken oldu.
July 15, 2017
4.5/5
I was planning on reading this during the week of the 100th anniversary but I couldn't help myself.
A bit biased? Sure.
Bonus material:
October: Ten Days that Shook the World (1928)
The End of St. Petersburg (1927)
I was planning on reading this during the week of the 100th anniversary but I couldn't help myself.
A bit biased? Sure.
Bonus material:
October: Ten Days that Shook the World (1928)
The End of St. Petersburg (1927)
December 30, 2014
Introduction, by A. J. P. Taylor
Introduction, by V. I. Lenin
Preface
Chronology
Notes and Explanations
--Ten Days That Shook the World
Appendixes
Introduction, by V. I. Lenin
Preface
Chronology
Notes and Explanations
--Ten Days That Shook the World
Appendixes
November 14, 2016
Now that the dust has settled on the Soviet Union (though not, alas, on Russian expansionism) I think the status of the October Revolution of 1917 as the most extraordinary event of the 20th century has probably if anything been enhanced.
How in the name of Sergei Eisenstein did a small group of revolutionaries representing solely the needs of the proletariat where the population consisted of 80% peasantry and all the real power lay in the hands of the aristocracy gain the upper hand with barely a shot fired in anger?
John Reed, an American socialist of all things, was on hand to witness just how, and this is his account of it, one which became an instant classic and Lenin himself approved of. I have had a copy hanging around for I don't know how long and finally got around to reading it.
Before you read it yourself, and I recommend you do if you are a keen student of history, take my advice and read Reed's notes and explanations section beforehand. Bless my sacred icons, there are enough political parties to occupy a hundred gulags, and that's just amongst the socialists! (Later, of course, they did occupy a hundred gulags.)
After the weak Tsar Nicholas II hopped it in March the Provisional Government was led by Kerensky, a moderate socialist. He instigated an ill-judged military intervention by General Kornilov, who tried and failed to gain power for himself. The revolution survived, but the Bolsheviki were far from likely to rise to the top.
Reed had free access to many of the debates in the Russian houses of parliament and a favoured access to the Bolshevik headquarters at Smolny. He didn't get to talk to Lenin or Trotsky personally but he saw them up close and heard their speeches firsthand.
His description of Lenin is worth quoting at length:
'A short, stocky figure, with a big head set down in his shoulders, bald and bulging. Little eyes, a snubbish nose, wide, generous mouth, and heavy chin; clean-shaven now, but already beginning to bristle with the well-known beard of his past and future. Dressed in shabby clothes, his trousers much too long for him. Unimpressive, to be the idol of a mob, loved and revered as perhaps few leaders in history have been. A strange popular leader鈥攁 leader purely by virtue of intellect; colourless, humourless, uncompromising and detached, without picturesque idiosyncrasies鈥攂ut with the power of explaining profound ideas in simple terms, of analysing a concrete situation. And combined with shrewdness, the greatest intellectual audacity.'
Trotsky cuts a much more impressive figure, with Reed describing him addressing the hall on the eve of the insurrection, where his 'thin, pointed face was positively Mephistophelian in its expression of malicious irony.'
The Bolsheviks were the extreme party, pretty much all the other parties, from their old allies the Mensheviks to the Cadets who represented the intelligentsia, were of a mind to work with capitalists and go slowly. The Bolsheviks acted, capturing the Winter Palace by merely occupying it with minimal resistance.
And it still takes the breath away to read the proclamations they made upon assuming their shaky, largely undesired power in Petrograd. Try this for size, the first line of the first point of the Land Decree:
1. The Right of private ownership of land abolished for ever
Just like that!
I've often asked myself, having lived my life in the first few decades of the 19th century, whether or not I would have been a socialist, concluding that the answer is probably yes. However, I like to think that I wouldn't have been convinced by Lenin and that mob.
It's not just the obvious lessons of hindsight that convinces me of that, though the paranoid brutally of Stalin (barely mentioned here so marginal a figure was he at the time) certainly besmirched the good name of communism for ever.
No, the signs of where this 'experiment' was going were there from the start in Lenin's immediate U-turn on the freedom of the press. Originally he promised that this was only a short-term measure for the duration of the civil war, then as soon as the Bolsheviks gained power we get this resolution:
'The re毛stablishment of the so-called 鈥渇reedom of the press,鈥� the simple return of printing presses and paper to the capitalists,鈥攑oisoners of the mind of the people鈥攖his would be an inadmissible surrender to the will of capital, a giving up of one of the most important conquests of the Revolution; in other words, it would be a measure of unquestionably counter-revolutionary character.'
The other socialists in the house could see where this was going and disagreed strongly, which Reed faithfully reported, despite being a clear supporter of the Bolshevik cause. Not long after, Russia became a one-party state.
But the revolution never spread across the rest of Europe, which was the Bolshevik's ultimate aim. Sure, Russia's sphere of influence soon grew into the Soviet Union, but this was only achieved by coercion and conquest.
As quoted here by Reed, Trotsky famously said of the revolution: 'There are only two alternatives; either the Russian Revolution will create a revolutionary moment in Europe, or the European powers will destroy the Russian Revolution.'
And yet neither of those two things happened.
This is a fascinating account of an extraordinary event, brought to life by Reed's closeness to it all, his hearing the speeches and talking to some of the principle players and to ordinary people in the street.
I would stop short of calling it an exciting account, however. The ten days of the October Revolution certainly shook the world, but the low-key ease in which the Bolsheviks took control barely shook the streets of Petrograd at the time; the shops and theaters stayed open, most people would have been unaware that anything was going on.
Reed wrote well, and with an even hand despite his own allegiances. Only once did I detect an attempt to lower his guard and wax lyrical, when he attended a mass funeral (called a Brotherhood Grave) on his one flying visit to see what was happening in Moscow:
'I suddenly realised that the devout Russian people no longer needed priests to pray them into heaven. On earth they were building a kingdom more bright than any heaven had to offer, and for which it was a glory to die鈥�.'
I can understand him thinking that at the time, but oh how wrong he proved to be.
How in the name of Sergei Eisenstein did a small group of revolutionaries representing solely the needs of the proletariat where the population consisted of 80% peasantry and all the real power lay in the hands of the aristocracy gain the upper hand with barely a shot fired in anger?
John Reed, an American socialist of all things, was on hand to witness just how, and this is his account of it, one which became an instant classic and Lenin himself approved of. I have had a copy hanging around for I don't know how long and finally got around to reading it.
Before you read it yourself, and I recommend you do if you are a keen student of history, take my advice and read Reed's notes and explanations section beforehand. Bless my sacred icons, there are enough political parties to occupy a hundred gulags, and that's just amongst the socialists! (Later, of course, they did occupy a hundred gulags.)
After the weak Tsar Nicholas II hopped it in March the Provisional Government was led by Kerensky, a moderate socialist. He instigated an ill-judged military intervention by General Kornilov, who tried and failed to gain power for himself. The revolution survived, but the Bolsheviki were far from likely to rise to the top.
Reed had free access to many of the debates in the Russian houses of parliament and a favoured access to the Bolshevik headquarters at Smolny. He didn't get to talk to Lenin or Trotsky personally but he saw them up close and heard their speeches firsthand.
His description of Lenin is worth quoting at length:
'A short, stocky figure, with a big head set down in his shoulders, bald and bulging. Little eyes, a snubbish nose, wide, generous mouth, and heavy chin; clean-shaven now, but already beginning to bristle with the well-known beard of his past and future. Dressed in shabby clothes, his trousers much too long for him. Unimpressive, to be the idol of a mob, loved and revered as perhaps few leaders in history have been. A strange popular leader鈥攁 leader purely by virtue of intellect; colourless, humourless, uncompromising and detached, without picturesque idiosyncrasies鈥攂ut with the power of explaining profound ideas in simple terms, of analysing a concrete situation. And combined with shrewdness, the greatest intellectual audacity.'
Trotsky cuts a much more impressive figure, with Reed describing him addressing the hall on the eve of the insurrection, where his 'thin, pointed face was positively Mephistophelian in its expression of malicious irony.'
The Bolsheviks were the extreme party, pretty much all the other parties, from their old allies the Mensheviks to the Cadets who represented the intelligentsia, were of a mind to work with capitalists and go slowly. The Bolsheviks acted, capturing the Winter Palace by merely occupying it with minimal resistance.
And it still takes the breath away to read the proclamations they made upon assuming their shaky, largely undesired power in Petrograd. Try this for size, the first line of the first point of the Land Decree:
1. The Right of private ownership of land abolished for ever
Just like that!
I've often asked myself, having lived my life in the first few decades of the 19th century, whether or not I would have been a socialist, concluding that the answer is probably yes. However, I like to think that I wouldn't have been convinced by Lenin and that mob.
It's not just the obvious lessons of hindsight that convinces me of that, though the paranoid brutally of Stalin (barely mentioned here so marginal a figure was he at the time) certainly besmirched the good name of communism for ever.
No, the signs of where this 'experiment' was going were there from the start in Lenin's immediate U-turn on the freedom of the press. Originally he promised that this was only a short-term measure for the duration of the civil war, then as soon as the Bolsheviks gained power we get this resolution:
'The re毛stablishment of the so-called 鈥渇reedom of the press,鈥� the simple return of printing presses and paper to the capitalists,鈥攑oisoners of the mind of the people鈥攖his would be an inadmissible surrender to the will of capital, a giving up of one of the most important conquests of the Revolution; in other words, it would be a measure of unquestionably counter-revolutionary character.'
The other socialists in the house could see where this was going and disagreed strongly, which Reed faithfully reported, despite being a clear supporter of the Bolshevik cause. Not long after, Russia became a one-party state.
But the revolution never spread across the rest of Europe, which was the Bolshevik's ultimate aim. Sure, Russia's sphere of influence soon grew into the Soviet Union, but this was only achieved by coercion and conquest.
As quoted here by Reed, Trotsky famously said of the revolution: 'There are only two alternatives; either the Russian Revolution will create a revolutionary moment in Europe, or the European powers will destroy the Russian Revolution.'
And yet neither of those two things happened.
This is a fascinating account of an extraordinary event, brought to life by Reed's closeness to it all, his hearing the speeches and talking to some of the principle players and to ordinary people in the street.
I would stop short of calling it an exciting account, however. The ten days of the October Revolution certainly shook the world, but the low-key ease in which the Bolsheviks took control barely shook the streets of Petrograd at the time; the shops and theaters stayed open, most people would have been unaware that anything was going on.
Reed wrote well, and with an even hand despite his own allegiances. Only once did I detect an attempt to lower his guard and wax lyrical, when he attended a mass funeral (called a Brotherhood Grave) on his one flying visit to see what was happening in Moscow:
'I suddenly realised that the devout Russian people no longer needed priests to pray them into heaven. On earth they were building a kingdom more bright than any heaven had to offer, and for which it was a glory to die鈥�.'
I can understand him thinking that at the time, but oh how wrong he proved to be.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 663 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.