Revised review, circa 2018: While this volume certainly collects some important works of anarchism, on my second read, it seems unfortunately obvious to me that its skew towards work written by German/Russian/white American men produces unfortunate blind spots. Goldman is represented, which is great; but where is Voltairine de Cleyre, Lucy Parsons, Errico Malatesta, Emiliano Zapata, Louise Michel, Noe Itō, Lizzie Holmes, Juana Belén Gutiérrez de Mendoza, Malvina Tavares, Enrique and Ricardo Flores Magón? I don't mean that any of these thinkers in particular is a must-include, and given that this was collected in 1971, it's entirely understandable that one's access to the knowledge necessary to include such thinkers would be much more limited than it is today. However, from the point of view of our moment in history, I think we can do better at representing the geographical vastness and diversity of experiences entangled with anarchist thought. Whose work counts as essential is a political matter even in subordinated traditions of knowledge. If anarchism is to fulfill Kropotkin's promise to truly be for all, then we must decolonize the anarchist canon. Recalling anarcha-feminist and anti-colonial anarchist thinkers/activists who were important in their day but who are too-often forgotten by Anglophone history is an important part of the project of building a movement that truly fights for the liberation of everyone, everywhere.
Original review, circa 2007 or so: Excellent broad-spectrum reader on late 19th century anarchism
I picked it up at a roadside yard sale on a winding mountain road in Colorado -- a total chance encounter. It turned out to be the book that would most strongly determine what I would be thinking about for the following fifteen years of my life.
The only two essays I enjoyed were the excerpt of Emma Goldman's memoir and Communitas by Paul and Percival Goodman. My questions going into this book were: How does anarchism plan to deal with the kind of greed that causes deviant/antisocial behavior? How will transgressions be handled? Will there be any arbitration, and if so, according to what principles? And those questions are still unanswered. The authors kinda just assume that once the Revolution comes everything will probably fall into place like they've planned and any discord or violence in society won't be a problem, or at least won't be treated as such. And then we get to the part of the book that describes the failed anarchist experiments and it's like Oh right, this shit doesn't even work on a small scale. That store in Cincinnati lasted 2 years but everything else collapsed pretty much immediately. Thoroughly unconvincing.
Marshall Shatz's compendium, The Essential Works of Anarchism, is a comprehensive anthology of essays on anarchism. Included in this volume are classic essays on theory, including excerpts from Godwin's seminal work, as well as personal memoirs and autobiographies from thinkers such as Peter Kropotkin, Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman. Finally there are selections on the practical application of anarchism and its status in the twentieth century. Suggestions for further reading make this a well-conceived volume for anyone seriously interested in the theory, practice and history of anarchist thought.