What do you think?
Rate this book
Fuego en las cenizas
Esta es la historia de una nueva Europa surgiendo entre las cenizas de la desesperación y también la historia de la gran aventura de los Estados Unidos de América como potencia más destacada en la comunidad de pueblos de Occidente.
White cree que el destino de Europa depende de lo que ocurra durante los próximos años en Inglaterra, Francia y Alemania. Con penetrante visión estudia esos tres países en un examen de conjunto y describe luego, con trazos muy humanos, sus personalidades más representativas.
White cree que el destino de Europa depende de lo que ocurra durante los próximos años en Inglaterra, Francia y Alemania. Con penetrante visión estudia esos tres países en un examen de conjunto y describe luego, con trazos muy humanos, sus personalidades más representativas.
- GenresHistoryNonfiction
352 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1953
51 people want to read
About the author
Theodore H. White
37 books74 followersTheodore Harold White was an American political journalist, historian, and novelist, best known for his accounts of the 1960, 1964, 1968, and 1972 presidential elections.
White became one of Time magazine's first foreign correspondents, serving in East Asia and later as a European correspondent. He is best known for his accounts of two presidential elections, The Making of the President, 1960 (1961, Pulitzer Prize) and The Making of the President, 1964 (1965), and for associating the short-lived presidency of John F. Kennedy with the legend of Camelot. His intimate style of journalism, centring on the personalities of his subjects, strongly influenced the course of political journalism and campaign coverage.
White became one of Time magazine's first foreign correspondents, serving in East Asia and later as a European correspondent. He is best known for his accounts of two presidential elections, The Making of the President, 1960 (1961, Pulitzer Prize) and The Making of the President, 1964 (1965), and for associating the short-lived presidency of John F. Kennedy with the legend of Camelot. His intimate style of journalism, centring on the personalities of his subjects, strongly influenced the course of political journalism and campaign coverage.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
November 1, 2021
Building Europe Back after WW II
This was a piece of crash-hot reportage back in 1953 that told in depth the successes and failures of Europe’s rebirth after the devastation of World War II. It also delves into the American connection, full of statistics and facts based on interviews. The author concentrates on France, Germany and England to the near obliviousness of everywhere else. We can say there are two basic themes: “Europe’s reconstruction under American influence” and “the renaissance of West Germany”. On top of these, there were two nemeses that hung over the times. One, of course, was the Cold War with the USSR, which threatened quite often to become a hot war and only by the grace of God and the odd statesman did it not. The second was the “Dollar Gap”. Nowadays this is not much remembered by anyone, but in those times, roughly 70 years ago, America was the only power that had come through the war with its economy intact. It was immensely rich compared to any other power and produced almost everything it needed [minus rubber, tin, coffee, chocolate and less vital items]. The gap between what Europe needed to buy in dollars and what it could earn in dollars by selling products was known as the “dollar gap”. Europe was still struggling, a lot of people were impoverished. The nature of the struggle to bring back their economies and to unite, economically and militarily, is yet another topic discussed in the book.
America decided that given the rising hostility of their erstwhile ally, Russia, Europe had to be helped back onto its feet as soon as possible. In the years between 1945 and 1950, a Russian invasion would have made it to the English Channel with ease since all the Western powers were demobilizing and America had withdrawn a large part of its military. The decision to implement the Marshall Plan followed. It was aimed at bringing up the economic abilities of Europe. Today we may look back on it and (if American) pat ourselves on the back and say “well done.” It was a surprise to me that this conservative reporter wrote that it was a relative failure, that it was never implemented as planned due to the onset of the Korean War in 1950. A lot of money was poured in, but the goals were not really met.
There are three biographies given, perhaps the most interesting parts of the book. White saw France as hopelessly fractured, nobody willing to cooperate with others. They needed to rebuild their industrial base, but were already fighting in Indochina. The biography he chose to write was of the head of the Sureté, the equivalent of the FBI. In Germany, he contrasted two “Germanies”: the democratically-inclined side and the “other” which meant those who still felt that Nazism was not so bad. His biography is of a man who oversaw the steel industry before the war and after some penitent time, got back into the same role in West Germany. For his English biography, White traced the life and career of a trade unionist in the coal mines.
As for the rest, it is a rather boring story of blow by blow developments towards the European Union—the first baby steps, we can say—and the beginnings of NATO. So close to the time, it lacks a broader view. A chapter about Communism rather misses the point, I would say, because he believes that its attraction is an offer of a better material life plus power for the leaders. I think a desire for justice played a much larger role than he is willing to concede. However, his assessment of Russia, though he never set foot there, was quite good, especially his views on the Victorian tastes of the leadership and the deviousness of Stalin. Finally, he writes about America’s role abroad from the viewpoint of 1953. He, like almost everybody else, could not predict the demise of the Soviet Union in less than 40 years. Though he didn’t predict China’s rocket-like rise in our day, he did feel—based on several years’ experience there—that they would certainly not follow Russia very far.
All in all, this is a book which lets you look at the world (or at least the European) situation with the eyes of 1953. It is a world that is almost forgotten now, so much has changed. If that interests you, give it a try. It is history in the guise of current reportage.
This was a piece of crash-hot reportage back in 1953 that told in depth the successes and failures of Europe’s rebirth after the devastation of World War II. It also delves into the American connection, full of statistics and facts based on interviews. The author concentrates on France, Germany and England to the near obliviousness of everywhere else. We can say there are two basic themes: “Europe’s reconstruction under American influence” and “the renaissance of West Germany”. On top of these, there were two nemeses that hung over the times. One, of course, was the Cold War with the USSR, which threatened quite often to become a hot war and only by the grace of God and the odd statesman did it not. The second was the “Dollar Gap”. Nowadays this is not much remembered by anyone, but in those times, roughly 70 years ago, America was the only power that had come through the war with its economy intact. It was immensely rich compared to any other power and produced almost everything it needed [minus rubber, tin, coffee, chocolate and less vital items]. The gap between what Europe needed to buy in dollars and what it could earn in dollars by selling products was known as the “dollar gap”. Europe was still struggling, a lot of people were impoverished. The nature of the struggle to bring back their economies and to unite, economically and militarily, is yet another topic discussed in the book.
America decided that given the rising hostility of their erstwhile ally, Russia, Europe had to be helped back onto its feet as soon as possible. In the years between 1945 and 1950, a Russian invasion would have made it to the English Channel with ease since all the Western powers were demobilizing and America had withdrawn a large part of its military. The decision to implement the Marshall Plan followed. It was aimed at bringing up the economic abilities of Europe. Today we may look back on it and (if American) pat ourselves on the back and say “well done.” It was a surprise to me that this conservative reporter wrote that it was a relative failure, that it was never implemented as planned due to the onset of the Korean War in 1950. A lot of money was poured in, but the goals were not really met.
There are three biographies given, perhaps the most interesting parts of the book. White saw France as hopelessly fractured, nobody willing to cooperate with others. They needed to rebuild their industrial base, but were already fighting in Indochina. The biography he chose to write was of the head of the Sureté, the equivalent of the FBI. In Germany, he contrasted two “Germanies”: the democratically-inclined side and the “other” which meant those who still felt that Nazism was not so bad. His biography is of a man who oversaw the steel industry before the war and after some penitent time, got back into the same role in West Germany. For his English biography, White traced the life and career of a trade unionist in the coal mines.
As for the rest, it is a rather boring story of blow by blow developments towards the European Union—the first baby steps, we can say—and the beginnings of NATO. So close to the time, it lacks a broader view. A chapter about Communism rather misses the point, I would say, because he believes that its attraction is an offer of a better material life plus power for the leaders. I think a desire for justice played a much larger role than he is willing to concede. However, his assessment of Russia, though he never set foot there, was quite good, especially his views on the Victorian tastes of the leadership and the deviousness of Stalin. Finally, he writes about America’s role abroad from the viewpoint of 1953. He, like almost everybody else, could not predict the demise of the Soviet Union in less than 40 years. Though he didn’t predict China’s rocket-like rise in our day, he did feel—based on several years’ experience there—that they would certainly not follow Russia very far.
All in all, this is a book which lets you look at the world (or at least the European) situation with the eyes of 1953. It is a world that is almost forgotten now, so much has changed. If that interests you, give it a try. It is history in the guise of current reportage.
March 1, 2018
Quite an interesting look at the period immediately following WW II, written from reporting and first-hand observation and completed/published in July 1953. As one might expect from that timetable, the comments on the 1952-53 events lack the perspective White brings to the immediate post-war period, say from 1946 to the end of the Marshall Plan. At the end, he's projecting, not analyzing, and the book is less useful.
I read this while reading White's 1978 memoir "In Search of History: A Personal Adventure" -- stopped reading that and read "Fire In The Ashes" at the point he was writing it. Just an accident that I happened to own both books . . . picked them up second-hand without really realizing the connection.
I read this while reading White's 1978 memoir "In Search of History: A Personal Adventure" -- stopped reading that and read "Fire In The Ashes" at the point he was writing it. Just an accident that I happened to own both books . . . picked them up second-hand without really realizing the connection.
March 3, 2016
Written sixty three years ago, yet still a strong and acute portrait of Europe, and the challenges of American policy.
February 14, 2017
I'm ashamed to admit how much of this history was new to me. I knew a brief overview, but Theodore White excels in the details. A lot of the politics of Europe when I was growing up (and even now) make a lot more sense after reading this book.
March 2, 2024
Read Bob Newman's review
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews