What do you think?
Rate this book
Ten Days that Shook the World
"Ten Days That Shook the World" is American journalist and socialist John Reed's first-hand account of the Russian October Revolution of 1917. While it is intended as an impartial and unbiased historical account, by Reed's own admission, "in the struggle [his] sympathies were not neutral". An important historical document of an event that would shape the political landscape for most of the 20th century, "Ten Days That Shook the World" is a must read for those interested in the socialistic movement and how it shaped Russian history.
281 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1919
1586 people are currently reading
18203 people want to read
About the author
John Reed
53 books144 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads 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 690 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.
November 2, 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 typically write about Russia, and it will argue that very few witnesses to the revolution or those who understood it in general have been able to generalize from 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 crónica presencial de los hechos ocurridos durante la Revolución de Octubre. Sin embargo, a día 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 seré yo quién incida en ese debate. Supongamos que sí que estuvo.
Aunque era un ferviente simpatizante de la causa, se dice que el autor trató de mostrarse objetivo. Sin embargo, hay ciertos pasajes en los que creo que se delata. De ahí que Lenin lo tuviera como libro de cabecera. No así Stalin, al que parece que no le sentó 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, demasíados como para intentar dar referencias. Si acaso destacaría “Tormenta Roja. La Revolución Rusa 1917-1922”, publicado por Edaf.
He de reconocer que no he leído “10 días que…” página a página, más bien he ido saltando entre capítulos, pues tiene partes muy densas. De ahí mis tres estrellas. Es una obra de consulta muy válida, por ser contemporánea a los acontecimientos, pero poco esclarecedora a la hora de hacerte una idea global del por qué del estallido.
Como complemento, recomiendo la visión de la película “Reds”, de Warren Beatty, estrenada en 1981, y basada en las vivencias del autor. Tanto ó más recomendable que la presente obra.
Aunque era un ferviente simpatizante de la causa, se dice que el autor trató de mostrarse objetivo. Sin embargo, hay ciertos pasajes en los que creo que se delata. De ahí que Lenin lo tuviera como libro de cabecera. No así Stalin, al que parece que no le sentó 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, demasíados como para intentar dar referencias. Si acaso destacaría “Tormenta Roja. La Revolución Rusa 1917-1922”, publicado por Edaf.
He de reconocer que no he leído “10 días que…” página a página, más bien he ido saltando entre capítulos, pues tiene partes muy densas. De ahí mis tres estrellas. Es una obra de consulta muy válida, por ser contemporánea a los acontecimientos, pero poco esclarecedora a la hora de hacerte una idea global del por qué del estallido.
Como complemento, recomiendo la visión de la película “Reds”, de Warren Beatty, estrenada en 1981, y basada en las vivencias del autor. Tanto ó más 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.
September 17, 2025
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 ‘storming’ of the Winter Palace and bombardment of the Kremlin. Stalin actually criticised the work as he believed it was ‘misleading’ 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’t feel the work was overbearingly biased as to detract from the events. Furthermore, the anecdotes are what is most interesting. The nuances that can’t 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 ‘too down’ political powerhouse to inspire socialists around the world. For me the book doesn’t deliver here.
Reed has got the event, but unfortunately not the talent to deliver. Others would have provided more compelling writing. I have read 10 Days that Shook the World
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 ‘storming’ of the Winter Palace and bombardment of the Kremlin. Stalin actually criticised the work as he believed it was ‘misleading’ 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’t feel the work was overbearingly biased as to detract from the events. Furthermore, the anecdotes are what is most interesting. The nuances that can’t 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 ‘too down’ political powerhouse to inspire socialists around the world. For me the book doesn’t deliver here.
Reed has got the event, but unfortunately not the talent to deliver. Others would have provided more compelling writing. I have read 10 Days that Shook the World
April 17, 2018
Έχουν περάσει 100 Χρονια. Ενας αιώνας . Κι ομως οι 10 αυτές μέρες που συγκλόνησα�� τον κοσμο , συγκλονίζουν ακομα, εγιρωντας αντιπαραθέσεις και τόνους βιβλίων. Αυτη ειναι η μοίρα των σημαντικών ιστορικών γεγονότων.
Αθτο το βιβλιο ειναι ενα χρονικό. Καποιοι θα πουν οτι δεν ειναι αντεικειμενικο. Ομως δεν υπαρχει ούτε αντεικειμενικο μάτι, ούτε πένα-ή πληκτρολόγιο - ειδικότερα αν εισαι αυτόπτης μάρτυρας. Απλως υπάρχουν διαφορετικές οπτικές γωνίες.
Ειναι λοιπον ενα χρονικό, μια μαρτυρία και ενα ρεπορτάζ . Ο Τζον Ρηντ ηταν δημοσιογράφος και έβλεπε τα πράγματα ως τέτοιος .
Καποιοι θα πουν " Μα ηταν δικός τους " . Εγω λέω οτι ηταν απέξω. Και κυριολεκτικά και μεταφορικά.
Ο παλμός των γεγονότων και της επανάστασης υπαρχει σε καθε σελίδα αυτού του βιβλίου. Αυτο το κανει ανώτερο απο καθε βιβλιο των ημερών μας που μυθιστορηματικά ή ιστορικά θελει να αναπλάσει τα γεγονότα . Αν θες να μάθεις την ιστορια αυτής της επανάστασης , απο αυτο θα πρεπει να ξεκινήσει.
Αθτο το βιβλιο ειναι ενα χρονικό. Καποιοι θα πουν οτι δεν ειναι αντεικειμενικο. Ομως δεν υπαρχει ούτε αντεικειμενικο μάτι, ούτε πένα-ή πληκτρολόγιο - ειδικότερα αν εισαι αυτόπτης μάρτυρας. Απλως υπάρχουν διαφορετικές οπτικές γωνίες.
Ειναι λοιπον ενα χρονικό, μια μαρτυρία και ενα ρεπορτάζ . Ο Τζον Ρηντ ηταν δημοσιογράφος και έβλεπε τα πράγματα ως τέτοιος .
Καποιοι θα πουν " Μα ηταν δικός τους " . Εγω λέω οτι ηταν απέξω. Και κυριολεκτικά και μεταφορικά.
Ο παλμός των γεγονότων και της επανάστασης υπαρχει σε καθε σελίδα αυτού του βιβλίου. Αυτο το κανει ανώτερο απο καθε βιβλιο των ημερών μας που μυθιστορηματικά ή ιστορικά θελει να αναπλάσει τα γεγονότα . Αν θες να μάθεις την ιστορια αυτής της επανάστασης , απο αυτο θα πρεπει να ξεκινήσει.
November 8, 2017
Ήξερα, φυσικά, τη Φήμη αυτού του βιβλίου ως ένα από τα καλύτερα βιβλία που περιγράφουν την οκτωβριανή επανάσταση αλλά διαβάζοντας το δεν μπόρεσα παρά να εντυπωσιαστώ. Πρόκειται για ένα βιβλίο που πραγματικά σε βάζει στην καρδιά των γεγονότων, με μία γραφή σχεδόν μυθιστορηματική και μία αφήγηση που καλύπτει όλες τις πτυχές αυτού του σημαντικού γεγονότος της ανθρώπινης ιστορίας. Ο συγγραφέας μας μεταφέρει διαρκώς από τα λόγια των σημαντικών προσωπικοτήτων της επανάστασης στα αισθήματα των απλών ανθρώπων και ξανά πίσω, περιγράφοντας παράλληλα και τις δικές του περιπέτειες μέσα σε όλο αυτό το χαμό, προσφέροντας μας έτσι όχι απλά μία εξιστόρηση αλλά μία ευκαιρία να ζήσουμε τα γεγονότα όσο το δυνατόν πιο κοντά. Ένα πραγματικά απαραίτητο ανάγνωσμα για όσους θέλουν να γνωρίζουν κάποια πράγματα για την οκτωβριανή επανάσταση.
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 1905 Revolution & then the Revolution of 1917 which deposed Tsar Nicholas II plus the horrors of WWI. This lead to the October Revolution of 1917, AKA: the Ten Days that Shook the World.
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. John Reed 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 Alien & Sedition Acts 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 here in multiple etext formats & in audiobook format from Librivox.org here, 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. John Reed 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 Alien & Sedition Acts 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 here in multiple etext formats & in audiobook format from Librivox.org here, so there's no excuse not to read it.
Read
May 4, 2013يعتبر كتاب عشرة ايام هزت العالم ، من اروع واصدق ما كتب عن الثورة الروسية عام 1917. ومؤلفة جون ريد وهو صحفى شيوعى اميركى، قد تعرض لكثير من المخاطر وهو يتنقل بين الثوار وجنود الجيش الاحمر ووبين العمال و الفلاحين البلاشفة ..لرصد اهم واصعب المواقف السياسية والشخصية والانسانية التى تتكامل مع بعضها لترسم لنا ادق تفاصيل الثورة الروسية بكل سلاسة ويسر فى اسلوب روائى وادبى شيق للغاية حتى ان القارىء العادى والذى لا يعرف مسبقا من هم البلاشفة ، او ماهى ثورة اكتوبر او ثورة فبراير ؟ والعديد من اسامى الاحزاب السياسية والمدن الروسية ..سيكون لدية صورة واضحة تماما عن اكتوبر وتضحيات الشعب الروسى فى سبيل اسقاط القيصرية فى فبراير ثم حكومة الرأسماليين المؤقتة فى اكتوبر واعلان نجاح اول ثورة اشتراكية فى العالم . وان كان جون ريد قد عانى الامرين فى سبيل اعداد هذا الكتاب متحملا دوى الرصاص والانفجارات من حولة ....فقد عانى ما هو اشد من ذلك فى وطنة (امريكا) عندما اراد ان ينشرة ..فحتى ذلك الوقت لم يكن ينشر فى اميركا واوروبا الا احقر الاكاذيب والادعائات البرجوازية لتشوية الثورة الروسية حتى لا يلفتوا نظر عمال وفلاحين بلادهم لبطولة اخوانهم فى روسيا وكيف استطاعوا انتزاع السلطة من ايدى مستغليهم ، وتعرضت المخطوطة الاصلية لست محاولات سرقة على ايدى قطاع طرق لاتلافها ، ولكن رغم كافة المصاعب والعراقيل . فقد اصدر الكتاب فى اميركا عام 1919. واصبح المؤلف الاول فى الادب العالمى الذى قص على الانسانية جمعاء، حقيقة الثورة الاشتراكية المنتصرة فى روسيا ، هذة الثورة التى دشنت بداية عصر جديد فى تاريخ الانسانية ....عصر الثورة البروليتارية .....
October 21, 2017
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0978bgqDescription: 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 naïve, 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 naïve, 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.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0978bgq
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 naïve, 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.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0978bgq
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 – and therefore John Reed’s 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’s 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’s portrait of Lenin: “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” (p. 170). Reed captures well Lenin’s coldness of personality, his status as “a leader purely by virtue of intellect; colourless, humourless, uncompromising and detached” (p. 171). Comparably compelling is Reed’s picture of Trotsky, “standing up with a pale, cruel face, letting out his rich voice in cool contempt” (p. 131); “calm and venomous” (p. 181); “confident and dominating, with that sarcastic expression about his mouth which was almost a sneer” (p. 189).
Relatively overlooked in Reed’s book – he is mentioned only twice – is “Chairman for Nationalities: I.V. Djugashvili (Stalin)” (p. 186). The man whose name appears at the end of a “Declaration of the Rights of the Peoples of Russia” as “Yussov Djugashvili-Stalin” (p. 345); the man whom a dying Lenin wanted removed from power; the man who had Trotsky murdered in Mexico in 1940 – 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’s rise to power, the Soviet famine of 1932-33, the Great Purge of 1936-39, the Terror that followed the Second World War – 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’s 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’s 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’ pretending to offer national self-determination to all the peoples of Russia, and then declaring those who sought national self-determination – the people of Ukraine, of Poland, of Finland – to be “counter-revolutionaries.” Well, gracious, isn’t 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’ infallibility as morally just avatars of world socialist revolution. One senses here the story that Reed is not telling – 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’s 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 – an experience well dramatized in Warren Beatty’s 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’s 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’s 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’s portrait of Lenin: “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” (p. 170). Reed captures well Lenin’s coldness of personality, his status as “a leader purely by virtue of intellect; colourless, humourless, uncompromising and detached” (p. 171). Comparably compelling is Reed’s picture of Trotsky, “standing up with a pale, cruel face, letting out his rich voice in cool contempt” (p. 131); “calm and venomous” (p. 181); “confident and dominating, with that sarcastic expression about his mouth which was almost a sneer” (p. 189).
Relatively overlooked in Reed’s book – he is mentioned only twice – is “Chairman for Nationalities: I.V. Djugashvili (Stalin)” (p. 186). The man whose name appears at the end of a “Declaration of the Rights of the Peoples of Russia” as “Yussov Djugashvili-Stalin” (p. 345); the man whom a dying Lenin wanted removed from power; the man who had Trotsky murdered in Mexico in 1940 – 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’s rise to power, the Soviet famine of 1932-33, the Great Purge of 1936-39, the Terror that followed the Second World War – 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’s 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’s 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’ pretending to offer national self-determination to all the peoples of Russia, and then declaring those who sought national self-determination – the people of Ukraine, of Poland, of Finland – to be “counter-revolutionaries.” Well, gracious, isn’t 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’ infallibility as morally just avatars of world socialist revolution. One senses here the story that Reed is not telling – 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’s 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 – an experience well dramatized in Warren Beatty’s 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’s 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: http://www.marxists.org/archive/reed/...
http://www.bartleby.com/79/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Days...
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: http://www.marxists.org/archive/reed/...
http://www.bartleby.com/79/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Days...
October 23, 2017
9 OCT 2017 - a recommendation through Bettie. Many Thanks.
Give a listen here - http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0978bgq
23 OCT 2017 - a very good listen-to.
Give a listen here - http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0978bgq
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
في هذا الكتاب يقدم جون ريد نظرته لأحداث الثورة البلشفية التي صادف وجوده في روسيا وقت اندلاعها عام 1917 . ينجح ريد في نقل حالة التخبط السياسي و الاجتماعي قبيل و خلال الثورة فيقدم من خلال محاوراته و تجاربه الشخصية نماذج لكل الاطراف الفاعلة في الازمة بدأً من العمال و الفلاحون و الجنود و وصولاً لاراء جماعات سياسية كالبلاشفة و الاشتراكيين الثوريين بجناحيهم بل و حتي انصار حكومة كيرينسكي . الكتاب يؤرخ لفترة محددة من عمر الثورة الروسية الكبري و هي قبيل استيلاءالبلاشفة علي الحكم و هروب كيرينسكي بعشرة ايام تقريبا . لذلك قد يحتاج القاريء لدراسة نتائج ثورة فبراير و الاحداث التي ادت لتطور الوضع الي ما كان عليه قبل اندلاع الحرب الاهلية. بارغم من ان ريد ذكر في مقدمة كتابه انه حاول نقل الاحداث بعين محايدة إلا ان انحيازه للبلاشفة واضح تمام الوضوح و قد يفسر ذلك نشأة جون ريد و اتجهاته السياسية حتي قبل زيارته لروسيا .
الكتاب يقدم نظرة ابعد ما تكون عن الحيادية اتجاه ما سمي بثورة اكتوبر , انصح المهتمين بدراسة محايدة و مفصلة عن الثورة الروسية الكبري بالبحث عن بديل .
الكتاب يقدم نظرة ابعد ما تكون عن الحيادية اتجاه ما سمي بثورة اكتوبر , انصح المهتمين بدراسة محايدة و مفصلة عن الثورة الروسية الكبري بالبحث عن بديل .
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
ใครที่ชื่นชอบอ่านหรือเริ่มอ่านวรรณกรรมของนักเขียนรัสเซียซึ่งล้วนเป็นงานคลาสสิกระดับขึ้นหิ้งที่นักอ่านทั่วโลกควรอ่านแทบทุกเล่ม
.
อยากแนะนำ 'สิบวันเขย่าโลก : Ten Days That Shook the World' ของนักเขียนอเมริกัน 'John Reed' ที่แปลไทยโดย'สุทิน วรรณบวร'
.
มันดีพอที่จะเป็นเชิงอรรถทางสังคมและการเมืองเล่มสำคัญเพื่ออรรถาธิบายปลายทางเบ้าหลอมทางความคิดของประชาชนรัสเซียที่นำไปสู่การปฏิวัติในปี ค.ศ.1917 ได้อย่างละเอียดไม่น่าเบื่อและเป็นเสี้ยวหนึ่งของประวัติศาสตร์โลกที่เราควรทำความเข้าใจ
.
คนที่เคยสัมผัสงานเขียนของมิคฮาอิล เลียรมอนตอฟ,อเล็กซานเดอร์ พุชกิน, นิโคไล โกกอล, เลโอ ตอลสตอย,ฟิโอดอร์ ดอสโตเยฟสกีจนไปจบที่ 'นายแพทย์ชิวาโก' ของ บอริส ปาสเตอร์เน็ก
.
พหุจักรวาลงานเขียนที่แฝงปรัชญาและห้วงคิดคำนึงไปจนถึงผลพวงแห่งความคับแค้นของตัวละครในวรรณกรรมของนักเขียนเหล่านั้นล้วนปูเส้นทางพาเราไปตามติดชะตากรรมของประชาชนรัสเซีย ณ จุดอวสานของระบอบสังคมชนชั้น ในวันที่ 8 มีนาคม 1917
.
'สิบวันเขย่าโลก' คือพยานปากเอกของเหตุการณ์การปฏิวัติอันแท้จริงของประชาชนในช่วงเวลาสำคัญนั้น
.
อยากแนะนำ 'สิบวันเขย่าโลก : Ten Days That Shook the World' ของนักเขียนอเมริกัน 'John Reed' ที่แปลไทยโดย'สุทิน วรรณบวร'
.
มันดีพอที่จะเป็นเชิงอรรถทางสังคมและการเมืองเล่มสำคัญเพื่ออรรถาธิบายปลายทางเบ้าหลอมทางความคิดของประชาชนรัสเซียที่นำไปสู่การปฏิวัติในปี ค.ศ.1917 ได้อย่างละเอียดไม่น่าเบื่อและเป็นเสี้ยวหนึ่งของประวัติศาสตร์โลกที่เราควรทำความเข้าใจ
.
คนที่เคยสัมผัสงานเขียนของมิคฮาอิล เลียรมอนตอฟ,อเล็กซานเดอร์ พุชกิน, นิโคไล โกกอล, เลโอ ตอลสตอย,ฟิโอดอร์ ดอสโตเยฟสกีจนไปจบที่ 'นายแพทย์ชิวาโก' ของ บอริส ปาสเตอร์เน็ก
.
พหุจักรวาลงานเขียนที่แฝงปรัชญาและห้วงคิดคำนึงไปจนถึงผลพวงแห่งความคับแค้นของตัวละครในวรรณกรรมของนักเขียนเหล่านั้นล้วนปูเส้นทางพาเราไปตามติดชะตากรรมของประชาชนรัสเซีย ณ จุดอวสานของระบอบสังคมชนชั้น ในวันที่ 8 มีนาคม 1917
.
'สิบวันเขย่าโลก' คือพยานปากเอกของเหตุการณ์การปฏิวัติอันแท้จริงของประชาชนในช่วงเวลาสำคัญนั้น
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, “Bana bak, kardeş,” dedi, “anlamıyorsun. İki sınıf var, görmüyor musun? Proletarya ile burjuvazi. Biz...”
“Ha, evet, biliyorum bu lafları, merak etme,” diye atıldı öğrenci, kaba kaba. “Sizin gibi cahil köylüler birkaç hazır laf öğrenmeyegörsün. Bunların anlamını bilmiyorsunuz bile. Yalnız papağan gibi ezberlemişsiniz.” Kalabalık güldü. “Ben Marksist bir öğrenciyim. Ve sana şunu söyleyeyim: Uğrunda savaştığın şey sosyalizm değil. Yalnız Almanlara yarayan bir anarşi!”
“Ha, evet, biliyorum,” diye cevap verdi asker. Alnından terler akıyordu. “Siz okumuş bir insansınız, belli. Ben basit bir adamım. Ama bana öyle geliyor ki...”
Öteki kızarak askerin sözünü kesti. “Sen Lenin’in gerçekten proleter dostu olduğuna inanıyor musun?”
Asker, canı sıkılarak, “Evet, inanıyorum,” diye cevap verdi.
“Peki dostum, Lenin’in Almanya’dan kapalı vagon içinde gönderildiğini biliyor musun? Almanya’dan para aldığını biliyor musun?”
Asker, “Orasını bilmiyorum” diye inatla cevap verdi, “ama Lenin benim ve benim gibi basit insanların istediği şeyleri söylüyor. Bak: İki sınıf var, biri burjuvazi, öteki proletarya...”
“Ha, evet, biliyorum bu lafları, merak etme,” diye atıldı öğrenci, kaba kaba. “Sizin gibi cahil köylüler birkaç hazır laf öğrenmeyegörsün. Bunların anlamını bilmiyorsunuz bile. Yalnız papağan gibi ezberlemişsiniz.” Kalabalık güldü. “Ben Marksist bir öğrenciyim. Ve sana şunu söyleyeyim: Uğrunda savaştığın şey sosyalizm değil. Yalnız Almanlara yarayan bir anarşi!”
“Ha, evet, biliyorum,” diye cevap verdi asker. Alnından terler akıyordu. “Siz okumuş bir insansınız, belli. Ben basit bir adamım. Ama bana öyle geliyor ki...”
Öteki kızarak askerin sözünü kesti. “Sen Lenin’in gerçekten proleter dostu olduğuna inanıyor musun?”
Asker, canı sıkılarak, “Evet, inanıyorum,” diye cevap verdi.
“Peki dostum, Lenin’in Almanya’dan kapalı vagon içinde gönderildiğini biliyor musun? Almanya’dan para aldığını biliyor musun?”
Asker, “Orasını bilmiyorum” diye inatla cevap verdi, “ama Lenin benim ve benim gibi basit insanların istediği şeyleri söylüyor. Bak: İki sınıf var, biri burjuvazi, öteki proletarya...”
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
يوثق الصحفي الإشتراكي الأمريكي جون ريد في هذا الكتاب أحداث الثورة البلشفية أو الإنقلاب البلشفي على الحكومة المؤقتة التي خلفت النظام القيصري في حكم روسيا.
تدور أغلب أحداث الكتاب في مدينة بيتروغراد (سانت بيترسبيرغ حاليا) في قالب روائي بعيد عن اللغة الجافة المعهودة في أغلب كتب التاريخ. لكن هذا لا يخلوا من صعوبة وتعقيدات أسماء المنظمات والأحزاب والأطراف المشاركة في هذا الحدث والتي تفضل الكاتب بتعريفنا بها في بداية كتابه (سمولني، الدوما، البلاشفة، المناشفة، السوفييت، الكاديت، القوزاق، اليانكرز، الحرس الأحمر... الخ) رغم ذلك ومع مرور الأحداث وبعض البحث في غوغل ستجد نفسك قد حفظت الأسماء وعرفت من هو من وفي أي طرف هو.
بحكم فكره الإشتراكي وعمله الصحفي وحصوله على تصريح يخوله التنقل داخل مختلف المباني الحكومية والحزبية، كان جون ريد يوثق أحداث الثورة أول بأول من قلب الحدث سواء من تجمعات واجتماعات السياسيين، أو بين المواطنين في الأماكن العامة أو الجنود وراء المتاريس.
تدور أغلب أحداث الكتاب في مدينة بيتروغراد (سانت بيترسبيرغ حاليا) في قالب روائي بعيد عن اللغة الجافة المعهودة في أغلب كتب التاريخ. لكن هذا لا يخلوا من صعوبة وتعقيدات أسماء المنظمات والأحزاب والأطراف المشاركة في هذا الحدث والتي تفضل الكاتب بتعريفنا بها في بداية كتابه (سمولني، الدوما، البلاشفة، المناشفة، السوفييت، الكاديت، القوزاق، اليانكرز، الحرس الأحمر... الخ) رغم ذلك ومع مرور الأحداث وبعض البحث في غوغل ستجد نفسك قد حفظت الأسماء وعرفت من هو من وفي أي طرف هو.
بحكم فكره الإشتراكي وعمله الصحفي وحصوله على تصريح يخوله التنقل داخل مختلف المباني الحكومية والحزبية، كان جون ريد يوثق أحداث الثورة أول بأول من قلب الحدث سواء من تجمعات واجتماعات السياسيين، أو بين المواطنين في الأماكن العامة أو الجنود وراء المتاريس.
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
İnsanın tarihte giriştiği en heyecan verici öykünün ilk on gününü anlatan müthiş bir eser. Belgeler, tarihin o döneminde sahne alan kişiler, örgütler, partiler, gazetelerle ilgili çok detaylı bilgiler içeriyor. Bu belgesel anlatı aynı zamanda bir edebi eser. Bolşevik Devrimi o kadar güzel sahnelerle resmedilmiş ki, okurken zaman zaman tüylerim 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—a leader purely by virtue of intellect; colourless, humourless, uncompromising and detached, without picturesque idiosyncrasies—but 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 reëstablishment of the so-called “freedom of the press,” the simple return of printing presses and paper to the capitalists,—poisoners of the mind of the people—this 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….'
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—a leader purely by virtue of intellect; colourless, humourless, uncompromising and detached, without picturesque idiosyncrasies—but 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 reëstablishment of the so-called “freedom of the press,” the simple return of printing presses and paper to the capitalists,—poisoners of the mind of the people—this 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….'
I can understand him thinking that at the time, but oh how wrong he proved to be.
July 19, 2025
Pubblicato nel 1919, “I dieci giorni che sconvolsero il mondo" di John Reed è un reportage intenso e appassionato, scritto da questo giornalista americano che fu testimone diretto e partecipe degli eventi narrati. Si tratta di una cronaca in presa diretta perché Reed non si limita a descrivere i fatti da una prospettiva esterna, ma immerge il lettore nell'atmosfera febbrile e tumultuosa di Pietrogrado (l'attuale San Pietroburgo) proprio nei giorni di ottobre, cruciali per la Rivoluzione. Lui in prima persona assiste ai discorsi di leader come Lenin e Trotsky, entra nelle sedi dei Soviet e ovunque ci sia fermento, coglie le voci e le emozioni delpopolo dagli operai ai soldati ai contadini. Questa immersione totale rende la narrazione incredibilmente viva e coinvolgente. Ci troviamo praticamente di fronte ad un reportage di eventi che si susseguono freneticamente. Il suo stile è proprio quello di un grande giornalista: diretto, ricco di dettagli, con un ritmo incalzante. Spesso mescola il fatto personale con quello politico, e alterna osservazioni piccole a resoconti più estesi della lotta di classe. Bellissime sono per esempio le descrizioni dell'assalto al Palazzo d'Inverno, quasi cinematografiche. Poi i dibattiti infuocati nei soviet o durante gli scioperi sono potenti e memorabili. Quest’opera divenne rapidamente un classico e fu persino raccomandato dallo stesso Lenin per la sua diffusione "senza riserve agli operai di tutto il mondo".
Displaying 1 - 30 of 690 reviews