What do you think?
Rate this book
The Gun: The AK-47 And The Evolution Of War
The AK-47, or 'Kalashnikov', is the most abundant and efficient firearm on earth. It is so light it can be used by children. It has transformed the way we fight wars, and its story is the chilling story of modern warfare. C.J. Chivers's extraordinary new book tells an alternative history of the world as seen through these terrible weapons. He traces them back to their origins in the early experiments of Gatling and Maxim, and examines the first appearance of the machine-gun - a weapon that first created the 'asymmetric' colonial massacres enjoyed by the British in Africa but which then led to the nightmarish stalemate of the First World War. The quest for ever greater firepower and mobility culminated in the AK-47 at the beginning of the Cold War, a weapon so remarkable that, over sixty years after its invention and having broken free of all state control, it has become central to civil wars all over the world. The machine-gun reused many innovations associated with the new agricultural technology of its time (as did the tank), and there is perhaps no better example of how so much of the modern era has turned on the awful ambiguity at the heart of human inventiveness. Drawing on a huge amount of fascinating and original research, "The Gun" is the story of modern its inventors, its users and its victims. It examines the weapon's impact from Eastern Europe to Vietnam to Afghanistan and Iraq. It is a book of eccentrics, sadists, obsessives, but also of the countless individual soldiers, terrorists, militiamen and civilians whose lives the AK-47 has transformed or destroyed.
496 pages, Hardcover
First published October 12, 2010
195 people are currently reading
2414 people want to read
About the author
C.J. Chivers
7 books69 followersA former Marine Corps infantry officer, C.J. Chivers is a senior writer at The New York Times. He contributes to the Foreign and Investigative desks and frequently posts on the At War blog, writing on war, tactics, human rights, politics, crime and the arms trade from Afghanistan, Iraq, Russia, Georgia, Chechnya and elsewhere on a wide range of assignments.
In addition to writing, he shoots video and, occasionally, photographs. He served as Moscow correspondent from June 2004 through 2007, and was the paper's Moscow bureau chief in 2007 and 2008. He has also covered war zones or conflicts in the Palestinian territories, Israel and Central Asia. From 1999 until 2001 he covered crime and law enforcement in New York City, working in a three-reporter bureau inside the police headquarters in Lower Manhattan. While in this bureau, he covered the attacks on the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.
Before joining The Times, Chivers was a staff writer at The Providence Journal in Rhode Island from 1995 until 1999, covering crime and politics, and was a contributor to several magazines, writing on wildlife, natural history and conservation. He remains a contributor to Esquire and Field & Stream.
From 1988 until 1994, Chivers was an officer in the United States Marine Corps, serving in the Persian Gulf War and performing peacekeeping duties as a company commander during the Los Angeles riots. He was honorably discharged as a captain in 1994.
In 1996, Chivers received the Livingston Award for International Journalism for a series on the collapse of commercial fishing in the North Atlantic. Two of his stories in The Times from Afghanistan were cited in the award of the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service in 2002. In 2007, his reconstruction for Esquire of the terrorist siege of a public school in Beslan, Russia, won the Michael Kelly Award and National Magazine Award for Reporting. He was also part of The Times's team that was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting in 2009, for coverage of Afghanistan and Pakistan. His combat reporting from Iraq and Afghanistan, with that of his colleague Dexter Filkins and the photographer Tyler Hicks, with whom he often works, was selected in 2010 by New York University as one of the Top Ten Works of Journalism of the Decade.
His book of history and conflict, "The Gun," mixes years or archival research, battlefield reportage and investigative reporting in Europe, Russia, the United States and Africa to document the origins, spread and effects of the world's most abundant firearm. Told through battlefield reconstructions and character sketches that trace an evolution in technology and in war, it will be published by Simon & Schuster in October, 2010.
Chivers was born in Binghamton, N.Y. He graduated with a B.A. cum laude in English from Cornell University in January 1988 and was the 1995 valedictorian of Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. He also graduated from several military schools, including the United States Army's Ranger Course. He lives in Rhode Island with his wife and their five children.
Articles, essays, blog posts, photographs and video reports by C.J. Chivers can be found on the websites of The New York Times, Esquire, and the At War blog, or on www.cjchivers.com.
In addition to writing, he shoots video and, occasionally, photographs. He served as Moscow correspondent from June 2004 through 2007, and was the paper's Moscow bureau chief in 2007 and 2008. He has also covered war zones or conflicts in the Palestinian territories, Israel and Central Asia. From 1999 until 2001 he covered crime and law enforcement in New York City, working in a three-reporter bureau inside the police headquarters in Lower Manhattan. While in this bureau, he covered the attacks on the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.
Before joining The Times, Chivers was a staff writer at The Providence Journal in Rhode Island from 1995 until 1999, covering crime and politics, and was a contributor to several magazines, writing on wildlife, natural history and conservation. He remains a contributor to Esquire and Field & Stream.
From 1988 until 1994, Chivers was an officer in the United States Marine Corps, serving in the Persian Gulf War and performing peacekeeping duties as a company commander during the Los Angeles riots. He was honorably discharged as a captain in 1994.
In 1996, Chivers received the Livingston Award for International Journalism for a series on the collapse of commercial fishing in the North Atlantic. Two of his stories in The Times from Afghanistan were cited in the award of the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service in 2002. In 2007, his reconstruction for Esquire of the terrorist siege of a public school in Beslan, Russia, won the Michael Kelly Award and National Magazine Award for Reporting. He was also part of The Times's team that was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting in 2009, for coverage of Afghanistan and Pakistan. His combat reporting from Iraq and Afghanistan, with that of his colleague Dexter Filkins and the photographer Tyler Hicks, with whom he often works, was selected in 2010 by New York University as one of the Top Ten Works of Journalism of the Decade.
His book of history and conflict, "The Gun," mixes years or archival research, battlefield reportage and investigative reporting in Europe, Russia, the United States and Africa to document the origins, spread and effects of the world's most abundant firearm. Told through battlefield reconstructions and character sketches that trace an evolution in technology and in war, it will be published by Simon & Schuster in October, 2010.
Chivers was born in Binghamton, N.Y. He graduated with a B.A. cum laude in English from Cornell University in January 1988 and was the 1995 valedictorian of Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. He also graduated from several military schools, including the United States Army's Ranger Course. He lives in Rhode Island with his wife and their five children.
Articles, essays, blog posts, photographs and video reports by C.J. Chivers can be found on the websites of The New York Times, Esquire, and the At War blog, or on www.cjchivers.com.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 253 reviews
July 15, 2018
I was pretty intrigued when I had come across this book – a book about a gun, even if it happens to be one of the most recognized and probably most feared guns in the world. I found that the author had served in the US Marines and won a shared Pulitzer for covering the Afghan war. Hmm! Probably the best person to write such a book.
The name AK-47 in this book encompasses original and all the derivatives and knock-offs of the gun.
The book not only tries to chronicle the origin and widespread use of the rifle, but tries to set the richer context - how the miniaturization and simplification of rapid-fire weapons, politics and national arming decisions have shaped war and influenced security in large sections of the world.
The book delves into how the earlier precursors to the machine guns such as the Gatling and the Maxim guns came into existence. Initially such guns were used by the colonial forces against the native soldiers as the former sought to “civilize” the “savages”. Later some countries would realize their value as efficient killing machines in conventional warfare.
The author has a commendable job of tracing the origin of the AK-47, the rifle he refers to as “Stalin’s gun” and which changed warfare forever. Though Mikhail Kalashnikov is regarded as the inventor of this weapon, the author shows how it was a child of the Soviet political climate and ambitions, and how the Soviet policies would make it the most ubiquitous weapon in the world.
The story of the AK-47 is remarkable indeed, and I liked the way the author had presented the usage of the weapon in wars, rebellions and terrorist attacks. Slowly the governments would lose control over the gun and it would end up as the weapon of choice for terrorists, insurgents, and criminals. There are quite a few "horror" stories where the rifle was used as a tool of death - its use by the African child soldiers was more horrifying than its use by Eastern Bloc forces and terrorists. The author’s depiction of the weapon’s symbolism was great – when terrorists wield or do not wield their AK-47s in front of the camera, they are trying to send out a message. The gun has found place in the flag of a country and not surprisingly in the flags of terrorist groups.
The author has made a valid point – the AK-47 is probably the biggest brand of the Soviet. Look at movies, shooting games, TV series, and comics – if there is a terrorist or a Russian soldier, he will carry the AK-47. It is a legacy which had outlived the state that had created it. An AK-47 rifles has a longevity of decades.
The author ends with the hope that the guns out in the market – in the hands of child soldiers, terrorists, gangsters would one day break down and the rifle would cease to be a significant factor in war and terrorism. A wonderful hope, but knowing the deviousness of the human mind bent on inflicting death and misery on fellow humans, some other weapon, maybe something even more lethal, would surely find its way into the hands of the killers.
As I have mentioned before, the book is well-written and it is thoroughly researched. Kings, dictators, soldiers, rebels, profiteers and terrorists populate the pages of the book and there are tales of bloodshed, massacres and wars. It made for a compelling read, and it made me aware of the evolution of the rifle, and enhanced my understanding of how modern firearms affected the history of mankind.
I do understand this book would not appeal to everybody, but I think readers who have an interest in military history would like the book.
The name AK-47 in this book encompasses original and all the derivatives and knock-offs of the gun.
The book not only tries to chronicle the origin and widespread use of the rifle, but tries to set the richer context - how the miniaturization and simplification of rapid-fire weapons, politics and national arming decisions have shaped war and influenced security in large sections of the world.
The book delves into how the earlier precursors to the machine guns such as the Gatling and the Maxim guns came into existence. Initially such guns were used by the colonial forces against the native soldiers as the former sought to “civilize” the “savages”. Later some countries would realize their value as efficient killing machines in conventional warfare.
The author has a commendable job of tracing the origin of the AK-47, the rifle he refers to as “Stalin’s gun” and which changed warfare forever. Though Mikhail Kalashnikov is regarded as the inventor of this weapon, the author shows how it was a child of the Soviet political climate and ambitions, and how the Soviet policies would make it the most ubiquitous weapon in the world.
The story of the AK-47 is remarkable indeed, and I liked the way the author had presented the usage of the weapon in wars, rebellions and terrorist attacks. Slowly the governments would lose control over the gun and it would end up as the weapon of choice for terrorists, insurgents, and criminals. There are quite a few "horror" stories where the rifle was used as a tool of death - its use by the African child soldiers was more horrifying than its use by Eastern Bloc forces and terrorists. The author’s depiction of the weapon’s symbolism was great – when terrorists wield or do not wield their AK-47s in front of the camera, they are trying to send out a message. The gun has found place in the flag of a country and not surprisingly in the flags of terrorist groups.
The author has made a valid point – the AK-47 is probably the biggest brand of the Soviet. Look at movies, shooting games, TV series, and comics – if there is a terrorist or a Russian soldier, he will carry the AK-47. It is a legacy which had outlived the state that had created it. An AK-47 rifles has a longevity of decades.
The author ends with the hope that the guns out in the market – in the hands of child soldiers, terrorists, gangsters would one day break down and the rifle would cease to be a significant factor in war and terrorism. A wonderful hope, but knowing the deviousness of the human mind bent on inflicting death and misery on fellow humans, some other weapon, maybe something even more lethal, would surely find its way into the hands of the killers.
As I have mentioned before, the book is well-written and it is thoroughly researched. Kings, dictators, soldiers, rebels, profiteers and terrorists populate the pages of the book and there are tales of bloodshed, massacres and wars. It made for a compelling read, and it made me aware of the evolution of the rifle, and enhanced my understanding of how modern firearms affected the history of mankind.
I do understand this book would not appeal to everybody, but I think readers who have an interest in military history would like the book.
February 9, 2011
The AK-47 holds almost mythological status in the world. Terrorists, revolutionaries, and insurrectionists all brandish this Russian-made weapon in defiance of those in power. Chivers calls it “a ready equalizer against morally or materially superior foes.” The U.S. decided to be more sophisticated and complicated and outfitted its soldiers with the M-16, a weapon I remember hearing it being loathed by soldiers just returned from Vietnam as chronically unreliable. A theme of the book is the United States’ failure to design a gun of similar technical merits to the AK-47. Chivers estimates there are currently over 100 million of these lethal weapons floating around out there, a staggering number., a weapon he describes as “the most lethal instrument of the Cold War.” It was first produced the same year as the Russians detonated their own atomic bomb.
The AK-47 could be considered a form of machine gun, so Chivers spends a considerable portion of the book to the history of machine guns. Ironically invented by a southern slave-holder, Richard Gatling, it was offered by the inventor to Lincoln in 1864 to support the Union cause. His reasons were philanthropic if naive. He reasoned that if one man could control the firepower of several with his Gatling gun, there would be need for fewer soldiers on the battlefield and thus fewer casualties. He was distraught over the number of wounded returning from the front. The US Army purchased the first Gatling guns in 1866. Foreign governments found them particularly useful in destroying native uprisings.even though they were notoriously unreliable. There was nothing worse than to have a machine gun jam while being descended upon by thousands of screaming natives. “The Gatlings jammed and the colonel dead,” was Sir Henry Newbolt’s line in 1897.
Hiram Maxim’s gun (“the most dreadful instrument I have ever seen or imagined,” was the Archduke William of Austria’s comment) took killing to a new level. His gun was much more reliable (he had been born in Maine, then emigrated to the UK) water-cooled and belt-fed design was lighter, requiring not a carriage but merely a tripod and variations remained in use well into the 1960’s. Thinking they had a huge advantage, the British knighted Maxim (his gun was renamed the Vickers) but in German hands it proved to be quite useful in mowing down British soldiers. The British actually mistrusted the machine gun as being extraordinarily wasteful of ammunition. One of the most mind numbing aspects of WW I is the willingness of troops to attack barbed wire emplacements defended by machine guns. It was wholesale slaughter on an unimaginable scale.
The forerunner of the AK-47 and M-16 was the Schmeisser, an assault rifle that entered the war in 1944. The AK-47 was designed by Mikhail Kalashnikov and while his name has always been associated with the gun, Chivers says it was really a product of the Stalinist state. Chivers also asserts that much of what we think we know about Kalashnikov was reworked to fit the requirements of Communist propaganda. The Russians, contrary to those in the west who championed the more accurate rifles, believed in mass assaults and required weapons with high rates of fire. What makes the Kalashnikov so different is the almost loose fitting of the parts. They clank around and rattle but it would work even after being subjected to extremes of the battlefield and weather.
The U.S. decision to ignore the lessons of the Kalashnikov lies at the feet of Robert McNamara who had heard of an incredibly lethal weapon (the lethality tests were conducted on live goats and cadavers imported from India, an extremely sensitive topic) produced by the ArmaLite Company in California. The impact of its bullets was so messy and destructive that the Americans just had to have it for the nascent war in southeast Asia. That it required a different bullet than the standard 7.62 NATO round even though that standardization had been imposed on NATO by the U.S. The M-16’s malfunctions became a scandal during the Vietnam War, but Colt, maker of the gun, blamed the soldiers’ poor cleaning habits. By this time, the top brass had become so linked with the decision to manufacture the weapon, they supported Colt. One soldier when asked by his commander why he carried a captured AK-47 instead of the M-16 simply replied, “because it works.” According to Chivers, the Army in Afghanistan uses the M-4 carbine but the current generation’s platoon has much more firepower in the form of other types of weapons than the Taliban who use the AK-47. Still, he wonders if the unsophisticated IED may yet cause the downfall of the more technologically advanced. Another triumph of the simple over the complex. (See http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/12/was... for another example.)
A more depressing theme of this book is how American exceptionalism prevents us from connecting to peoples whose motivations are high and technologies unsophisticated, yet in the end, as in Vietnam and elsewhere, manage to beat the more technologically advanced.
Chivers is a former Marine officer and war correspondent. He writes well, if frighteningly, in this fascinating work that details the political and psychic effects of the Cold War on policy and decision-making, often to our detriment.
The AK-47 could be considered a form of machine gun, so Chivers spends a considerable portion of the book to the history of machine guns. Ironically invented by a southern slave-holder, Richard Gatling, it was offered by the inventor to Lincoln in 1864 to support the Union cause. His reasons were philanthropic if naive. He reasoned that if one man could control the firepower of several with his Gatling gun, there would be need for fewer soldiers on the battlefield and thus fewer casualties. He was distraught over the number of wounded returning from the front. The US Army purchased the first Gatling guns in 1866. Foreign governments found them particularly useful in destroying native uprisings.even though they were notoriously unreliable. There was nothing worse than to have a machine gun jam while being descended upon by thousands of screaming natives. “The Gatlings jammed and the colonel dead,” was Sir Henry Newbolt’s line in 1897.
Hiram Maxim’s gun (“the most dreadful instrument I have ever seen or imagined,” was the Archduke William of Austria’s comment) took killing to a new level. His gun was much more reliable (he had been born in Maine, then emigrated to the UK) water-cooled and belt-fed design was lighter, requiring not a carriage but merely a tripod and variations remained in use well into the 1960’s. Thinking they had a huge advantage, the British knighted Maxim (his gun was renamed the Vickers) but in German hands it proved to be quite useful in mowing down British soldiers. The British actually mistrusted the machine gun as being extraordinarily wasteful of ammunition. One of the most mind numbing aspects of WW I is the willingness of troops to attack barbed wire emplacements defended by machine guns. It was wholesale slaughter on an unimaginable scale.
The forerunner of the AK-47 and M-16 was the Schmeisser, an assault rifle that entered the war in 1944. The AK-47 was designed by Mikhail Kalashnikov and while his name has always been associated with the gun, Chivers says it was really a product of the Stalinist state. Chivers also asserts that much of what we think we know about Kalashnikov was reworked to fit the requirements of Communist propaganda. The Russians, contrary to those in the west who championed the more accurate rifles, believed in mass assaults and required weapons with high rates of fire. What makes the Kalashnikov so different is the almost loose fitting of the parts. They clank around and rattle but it would work even after being subjected to extremes of the battlefield and weather.
The U.S. decision to ignore the lessons of the Kalashnikov lies at the feet of Robert McNamara who had heard of an incredibly lethal weapon (the lethality tests were conducted on live goats and cadavers imported from India, an extremely sensitive topic) produced by the ArmaLite Company in California. The impact of its bullets was so messy and destructive that the Americans just had to have it for the nascent war in southeast Asia. That it required a different bullet than the standard 7.62 NATO round even though that standardization had been imposed on NATO by the U.S. The M-16’s malfunctions became a scandal during the Vietnam War, but Colt, maker of the gun, blamed the soldiers’ poor cleaning habits. By this time, the top brass had become so linked with the decision to manufacture the weapon, they supported Colt. One soldier when asked by his commander why he carried a captured AK-47 instead of the M-16 simply replied, “because it works.” According to Chivers, the Army in Afghanistan uses the M-4 carbine but the current generation’s platoon has much more firepower in the form of other types of weapons than the Taliban who use the AK-47. Still, he wonders if the unsophisticated IED may yet cause the downfall of the more technologically advanced. Another triumph of the simple over the complex. (See http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/12/was... for another example.)
A more depressing theme of this book is how American exceptionalism prevents us from connecting to peoples whose motivations are high and technologies unsophisticated, yet in the end, as in Vietnam and elsewhere, manage to beat the more technologically advanced.
Chivers is a former Marine officer and war correspondent. He writes well, if frighteningly, in this fascinating work that details the political and psychic effects of the Cold War on policy and decision-making, often to our detriment.
April 11, 2017
Like McPhee, Chivers is able to (with capable narrative flair) revisit a subject you thought you already knew and show you just what you didn't understand. Not only does Chivers deliver the goods on the AK-47 and Kalashnikov (despite all the propaganda surrounding 'Everyman's Gun' and its maker) but explores the AK-47 in terms of the world, the nations, the armies and the people impacted by this tool of modern war and global conflict.
***
And today, 4/10/27, Chivers won the Pulitzer for his writing at the NYTIMES.
***
And today, 4/10/27, Chivers won the Pulitzer for his writing at the NYTIMES.
December 26, 2014
The AK47 was first manufactured way back in the early 1950's and some of these very early models are still in use. It is a gun that has been used by armies, revolutionaries, hoodlums and criminals. It's simple construction gives it a robustness and longevity that mean that these weapons will be around for a long time to come.
In the biography of the gun, and the man Kalashnikov who invented it, Chivers takes us through the murky world of the arms industry, and Soviet cold war secrets. Form how the initial concept was conceived and developed to the modern iterations of the weapon. Along the way he writes about the times these guns have been seen by the public, normally some terrorist atrocity, and the history of arms that lead to the lightweight sub machine gun.
The history and anecdotes about this are fairly interesting, but in there is 200 pages of history about the earlier guns such as the Gatling, and a lot of the failure of the M-16 in battle. Interesting in its own way, and necessary to set the context, but it is half the book.
In the biography of the gun, and the man Kalashnikov who invented it, Chivers takes us through the murky world of the arms industry, and Soviet cold war secrets. Form how the initial concept was conceived and developed to the modern iterations of the weapon. Along the way he writes about the times these guns have been seen by the public, normally some terrorist atrocity, and the history of arms that lead to the lightweight sub machine gun.
The history and anecdotes about this are fairly interesting, but in there is 200 pages of history about the earlier guns such as the Gatling, and a lot of the failure of the M-16 in battle. Interesting in its own way, and necessary to set the context, but it is half the book.
August 19, 2021
-"Ооо, каква интересна книга! Чакай малко - ти си момиче. Как така ти е интересно"?!
-"Не виждам как едното пречи на другото".
Да оставим дълбоко вкоренените полови стереотипи настрана. "АК-47. Оръжието на XX век" представлява стегнато и все пак обширно изложение на развитието на автоматичното огнестрелно оръжие от ранните дни на картечниците, тежащи по половин тон - толкова големи, че поставени на лафети, са били смятани за част от артилерията; през тяхното олекотяване и господството им по бойните полета на Първата световна война до създаването на може би най-успешната машина за убиване в историята досега (спомената в заглавието, за онези, които не са се досетили) и е подходящо четиво за всеки, интересуващ се от политическа и военна история.
-"Не виждам как едното пречи на другото".
Да оставим дълбоко вкоренените полови стереотипи настрана. "АК-47. Оръжието на XX век" представлява стегнато и все пак обширно изложение на развитието на автоматичното огнестрелно оръжие от ранните дни на картечниците, тежащи по половин тон - толкова големи, че поставени на лафети, са били смятани за част от артилерията; през тяхното олекотяване и господството им по бойните полета на Първата световна война до създаването на може би най-успешната машина за убиване в историята досега (спомената в заглавието, за онези, които не са се досетили) и е подходящо четиво за всеки, интересуващ се от политическа и военна история.
October 8, 2011
Mr Chivers was able to write a lengthy volume detailing the invention of the Kalashnikov family of arms without making it into a ponderous or uninteresting reading chore. The book is thoroughly researched; my only criticism would be that the writer missed the opportunity to include photographs of all AK variants for the edification of the reader.
August 17, 2019
Историята на създаването на АК-47 е побрана в стотина страници в тази книга и половината от тях са излишни.
Самата книга започва с дълъг и предълъг предговор, който с витиеватото си словоблудство прекрасно олицетворява какво ни чака понататък.
"АК-47. Оръжието на ХХ век" е изградена от ирелевантни на каквото и да било случки, анекдоти и техническа информация (която не е техническа информация за самите оръжия, а техническа информация за продажби и производства) и доста малко интересна и истинска информация.
Книгата разглежда създаването на първите автоматични огнестрелни оръжия, омаловажава опитите на германците за създаването на щурмова винтовка/картечен пистолет и практическото открадване на дизайна на sturmgewehr 44 от Калашников, занимава ни надълго и нашироко с разни войни, които нямат нищо общо с АК 47, освен че известно количество от него са използвани в тях и като цяло е три пъти по-дълга, отколкото би трябвало да бъде.
Самата книга започва с дълъг и предълъг предговор, който с витиеватото си словоблудство прекрасно олицетворява какво ни чака понататък.
"АК-47. Оръжието на ХХ век" е изградена от ирелевантни на каквото и да било случки, анекдоти и техническа информация (която не е техническа информация за самите оръжия, а техническа информация за продажби и производства) и доста малко интересна и истинска информация.
Книгата разглежда създаването на първите автоматични огнестрелни оръжия, омаловажава опитите на германците за създаването на щурмова винтовка/картечен пистолет и практическото открадване на дизайна на sturmgewehr 44 от Калашников, занимава ни надълго и нашироко с разни войни, които нямат нищо общо с АК 47, освен че известно количество от него са използвани в тях и като цяло е три пъти по-дълга, отколкото би трябвало да бъде.
August 19, 2016
While cutting edge quantum mechanics may hint that object permanence is not existentially true, it remains a developmental milestone that signifies depth in a child’s understanding of the structure of the world. Things outside of immediate visible range still exist; this takes care of the “spatial” component of spacetime, but the “time” portion can remain a messy bundle well into adulthood. It is something with which I often struggle, feeling like I have a child’s problem with history, a difficulty in conceiving the world before I existed or how things now taken for granted were not yet imagined. A mental image of battle before assault rifles exists in my mind solely because of cultural imagery: swords or whips or lightsabers or lances are the weapons of heroes. I can picture Agincourt without the M4A and Waterloo with an effective cavalry charge, but guns of war beyond muskets become automatic rifles through syllogism.
Non-projectile weapons—archaic weapons of a more heroic aura—have their own issues. The conceptual problems that I had as a child still have not been resolved; when Leonardo from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles unsheathes a katana, what’s he going to do with it? The action—the childhood promise of satisfactorily acrobatic action, anyway—dies. Maybe Leo blocks some laserblasts or cuts a rope holding something heavy that falls onto a bad guy but you’re not going to see him decapitate The Shredder. No, he will always use the flat of the blade to knock someone out, expending a portion of his focus in each battle trying to not use lethal force. At least Raphael could use his pointy sais to pin people’s wrists and ankles.
It is the impracticality of these weapons, their purposeful malignancy and impetus to cause damage, that still gives me pause. It doesn’t fit the setting. You can’t just slice and dice in a cartoon! You can’t just start shooting wildly if you’re the hero! You can, Batman-style, bludgeon and cripple a thousand villains and skate by on the illusion of non-lethality, I suppose. But a bullet? You’re limited by the threat of death, of too much violence, of overkill. Smash a man’s face and he may live. Give a G.I. Joe a laser pistol and his or her enemies fall over in gust of sparkly lights and scorched camo. Actual guns firing real bullets cannot be downplayed and will never, in the zeitgeist, come across as less than lethally efficient. They cannot be used the way something like nunchucks or a quarterstaff or a fist can be used.
In fiction, at least. In reality, guns and bullets are not just shockingly simple, they are everywhere. They are the de facto usable tools of combat, the everyfist of the wartime world:
The most startling revelation while reading The Gun was not that I knew very little about modern weaponry—I don’t—or that I can recognize the AK-47 and its descendants immediately—I do—but that before my life the automatic rifle wasn’t the ubiquitous ur-image of infantry fighting that it is in my paradigm of violence. There are so many small details and fascinating facts in the book that the pages zip by, and learning little bon mots are the rhyme and reason to easy non-fiction. These big conceptual shifts, though, they are few and far between; when you find a book that changes your landscape and hammers it home over three-hundred pages of fascinating detail, you know you’ve picked up a winner. The little bits, you never know what they’re going to be:
Non-projectile weapons—archaic weapons of a more heroic aura—have their own issues. The conceptual problems that I had as a child still have not been resolved; when Leonardo from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles unsheathes a katana, what’s he going to do with it? The action—the childhood promise of satisfactorily acrobatic action, anyway—dies. Maybe Leo blocks some laserblasts or cuts a rope holding something heavy that falls onto a bad guy but you’re not going to see him decapitate The Shredder. No, he will always use the flat of the blade to knock someone out, expending a portion of his focus in each battle trying to not use lethal force. At least Raphael could use his pointy sais to pin people’s wrists and ankles.
It is the impracticality of these weapons, their purposeful malignancy and impetus to cause damage, that still gives me pause. It doesn’t fit the setting. You can’t just slice and dice in a cartoon! You can’t just start shooting wildly if you’re the hero! You can, Batman-style, bludgeon and cripple a thousand villains and skate by on the illusion of non-lethality, I suppose. But a bullet? You’re limited by the threat of death, of too much violence, of overkill. Smash a man’s face and he may live. Give a G.I. Joe a laser pistol and his or her enemies fall over in gust of sparkly lights and scorched camo. Actual guns firing real bullets cannot be downplayed and will never, in the zeitgeist, come across as less than lethally efficient. They cannot be used the way something like nunchucks or a quarterstaff or a fist can be used.
In fiction, at least. In reality, guns and bullets are not just shockingly simple, they are everywhere. They are the de facto usable tools of combat, the everyfist of the wartime world:
During this time, the American intelligence community would fixate, understandably and properly, on the Soviet Union’s nuclear programs. The activities in Izhevsk [where the AK-47 was manufactured] would be missed. As the mushroom cloud towered over the Kazakh steppe, no one noticed the arrival of Stalin’s new firearm. No one would pay much mind as these rifle plants, and others across the Eastern bloc and in nations aligned with the Soviet Union or the socialist ideal, would ship off their automatic rifles by the untold millions during the years ahead. And no one would have predicted, as the world worried over nuclear war, that these rifles, with their cartridges of reduced size, would become the most lethal instrument of the Cold War. Unlike the nuclear arsenal and the infrastructure that would rise around them—the warheads, the mobile launders, the strategic bombers and submarines—an automatic rifle was a weapon that could actually be used.Nuclear stockpiles are sharp blades in a kids’ show—no one really wants to use them because then it won’t be a kids’ show any longer. But a rifle? That can be employed. And is employed. By anyone and everyone.
The most startling revelation while reading The Gun was not that I knew very little about modern weaponry—I don’t—or that I can recognize the AK-47 and its descendants immediately—I do—but that before my life the automatic rifle wasn’t the ubiquitous ur-image of infantry fighting that it is in my paradigm of violence. There are so many small details and fascinating facts in the book that the pages zip by, and learning little bon mots are the rhyme and reason to easy non-fiction. These big conceptual shifts, though, they are few and far between; when you find a book that changes your landscape and hammers it home over three-hundred pages of fascinating detail, you know you’ve picked up a winner. The little bits, you never know what they’re going to be:
Bin Laden’s selection of this design (it is less than twenty inches long and weighs not quite six pounds) was on technical merits a strange endorsement. An AKSU-74 is inaccurate and fires rounds with less muzzle velocity than an AK-74, making it potentially less useful and lethal than many available choices. But people who regard themselves as warriors inhabit worlds in which symbols matter. And in the particular history of bin Laden’s martial surroundings—western Pakistan and Afghanistan of the last three decades—a short-barreled Kalashnikov emanated a trophy’s distinction. Relatively new, the AKSU-74 had been carried in the Soviet-Afghan War by specialized soldiers, including helicopter and armor crews, for whom a smaller weapon was useful in the tight confines of their transit. For an Afghan fighter, possession of one of these rifles signals bravery and action. It implied that the holder had participated in destroying an armored vehicle or aircraft; the rifle was akin to a scalp. By choosing it, bin Laden silently signaled to his followers: I am authentic, even if his actual combat experience was not what his prop suggested.A deep knowledge of Afghani culture and guerilla symbolism is required, as well as baseline weapons-system recognition; I wouldn’t have known there was a language in that image to parse, let alone how to do it, without the book. The mixture of high-level conceptual displacement and cool cocktail-party fact makes this potentially disastrous material a breeze to read. The Gun is accessible and simple in conveying its trenchant insights, edging into must read territory for anyone interesting in global history or modern politics. It, like the gun it describes, can be picked up by anyone to devastating effect. This is information that can be used.
August 30, 2017
A history of death and destruction, but beautifully written, even poetic at times
September 20, 2019
I received this book as a gift from a family member that knew I loved Chivers's more recent book, The Fighters. I wanted to read this one not because of the topic, but because of the writer. Chivers has an engaging writing style that's approachable and understandable, and his sources are thorough and impeccable.
So for many people, this will be a five star read. What held me back and caused me to shelve this book about halfway into it is my complete lack of interest in firearms. I thought perhaps someone as capable as Chivers might make me want to learn more, but that's a tall order. In retrospect, this was a doomed mission for me. The only time I have ever fired any gun was in riflery class at age 14; I took it as a PE credit because we weren't required to change into the obnoxious gym shorts. You could wear your blue jeans to riflery, so I took the class and passed it. Neither that nor this book has heightened my desire to learn more about guns.
For you I'd recommend it if the history of the AK-47 evokes interest.
So for many people, this will be a five star read. What held me back and caused me to shelve this book about halfway into it is my complete lack of interest in firearms. I thought perhaps someone as capable as Chivers might make me want to learn more, but that's a tall order. In retrospect, this was a doomed mission for me. The only time I have ever fired any gun was in riflery class at age 14; I took it as a PE credit because we weren't required to change into the obnoxious gym shorts. You could wear your blue jeans to riflery, so I took the class and passed it. Neither that nor this book has heightened my desire to learn more about guns.
For you I'd recommend it if the history of the AK-47 evokes interest.
February 28, 2013
Chivers sets out to provide a history of the Soviet AK-47 assault rifle. He promises to provide not just an account of the weapon and its users, but the broader political context of the widespread availability of cheap, reliable assault rifles, to militaries, to paramilitaries and to criminals too. This availability has, Chivers writes, "influenced security and development in large sections of the world." For the most part, I think he succeeds in what he sets out to do.
The Gun is extremely accessible. Chivers does not rely on any background interest or knowledge of military subjects. This is a history written by a journalist, not a historian, and this has a profound impact on the style. He often dramatises key events like a novelist, giving the book the feel of a television documentary where certain events have been re-enacted. I think this was usually well handled, although in at least one of these passages (the attempted assassination of Barham Salih in 2002) the writing seemed a bit sensationalist to me, bordering on pornographic. Chivers also is not afraid to editorialise and offer judgement in places where facts might have been allowed to speak for themselves, making this much closer to Rolling Stone than to Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Nevertheless, the writing is always clear, straightforward, and precise; I found the text a joy to read.
I also very much liked Chivers' extensive and thoughtful use of primary sources right throughout the book. He is also critical of his sources, and points out their inconsistencies to demonstrate some of the difficulties in separating fact from myth in a subject as iconic as the AK-47.
In the course of The Gun, Chivers provides two lengthy digressions. First, he starts the book with a long survey of the history of automatic weapons through the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Second, he includes a detailed history of the American Cold-War competitor to the AK-47, the M-16. The first of these digressions was of particular personal interest to me, and the second one I found scandalously compelling: a heady mix of incompetence, corruption, and lies.
I think that Chivers tells the story of the AK-47 itself well, but I'm less certain that he succeeds at conveying the broader context. He presents a number of case studies of incidents around the world where AK-47 has played a part, outside of the hands of traditional militaries. He examines this phenomenon first in the context of the Soviet Union attempting to influence other states politically, and then in describing the opportunities that enormous stockpiles of Cold-War weapons have created for arms dealers. However, there's little evaluation here of social ramifications, or even the effect on global development that he hinted at in the book's introduction.
It's this lack of synthesis and evaluation that makes me give The Gun only four stars instead of the five that I was expecting to give right up to the end of the book. Still, a great read, and one I highly recommend!
The Gun is extremely accessible. Chivers does not rely on any background interest or knowledge of military subjects. This is a history written by a journalist, not a historian, and this has a profound impact on the style. He often dramatises key events like a novelist, giving the book the feel of a television documentary where certain events have been re-enacted. I think this was usually well handled, although in at least one of these passages (the attempted assassination of Barham Salih in 2002) the writing seemed a bit sensationalist to me, bordering on pornographic. Chivers also is not afraid to editorialise and offer judgement in places where facts might have been allowed to speak for themselves, making this much closer to Rolling Stone than to Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Nevertheless, the writing is always clear, straightforward, and precise; I found the text a joy to read.
I also very much liked Chivers' extensive and thoughtful use of primary sources right throughout the book. He is also critical of his sources, and points out their inconsistencies to demonstrate some of the difficulties in separating fact from myth in a subject as iconic as the AK-47.
In the course of The Gun, Chivers provides two lengthy digressions. First, he starts the book with a long survey of the history of automatic weapons through the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Second, he includes a detailed history of the American Cold-War competitor to the AK-47, the M-16. The first of these digressions was of particular personal interest to me, and the second one I found scandalously compelling: a heady mix of incompetence, corruption, and lies.
I think that Chivers tells the story of the AK-47 itself well, but I'm less certain that he succeeds at conveying the broader context. He presents a number of case studies of incidents around the world where AK-47 has played a part, outside of the hands of traditional militaries. He examines this phenomenon first in the context of the Soviet Union attempting to influence other states politically, and then in describing the opportunities that enormous stockpiles of Cold-War weapons have created for arms dealers. However, there's little evaluation here of social ramifications, or even the effect on global development that he hinted at in the book's introduction.
It's this lack of synthesis and evaluation that makes me give The Gun only four stars instead of the five that I was expecting to give right up to the end of the book. Still, a great read, and one I highly recommend!
September 18, 2013
"I would like to ask Mr. Kalashnikov, what made you think about making such a horrible machine? What were you thinking about? Helping people or destroying their lives? I'm sure that you are a smart guy. Why didn't you go for finding a way to bring peace to life again? What we had--all those kind of guns through history--wasn't enough to make a man think about something more useful for people's lives rather than finding another killing machine?" (-asked by a man almost killed by AK47 fire.
Almost a century before the AK47 ( Automat Kalashnikov , first prototype released in 1947) was conceived in an arms design contest kicked off by Stalin, Richard J. Gattling saw the carnage of the American Civil War and it made him dream of creating an automated gun that could do the work of many men and thus save countless lives. Oh and make him very rich. His priorities on this project are negligible.
And then peace has never been profitable.
The Gatling Gun was the very first point on an arms trajectory that sought to miniaturize, improve, simplify, simplify, until the quest for automatic fire came to a grand halt at the AK47. Designed by Kalashnikov (and a whole Soviet war machine purring behind him), the firearm has become one of the most recognized symbols in the entire world and the time of its creation (post WWII Cold-War era) was perfect for imitation, stock-piling, and mass world-wide proliferation. Today,the gun once designed to be a friend and protector of the Soviet State has become a symbol of guerrilla warfare, civil unrest, revolution and terrorism.
"Arms-control specialists and students of conflict look to the price of Kalashnikov assault rifles in a nation's open-market arms bazaars to determine both the degree to which destabilized lands are awash in small arms and the state of risk. When prices rise, public anxiety is considered high. When they sink, the decline can indicate a conflict is ebbing. Because there is no surer sign that a country has gone sour than the appearance of Kalashnikovs in the public's grip. {...]...when Kalashnikovs turn up in the hands of mobs, it is time to leave." (pg 13)
Why the AK47? Why this gun? What made the second half of the 20th century so perfect for the spread of this particular firearm, until urban arms legend claimed (however untruly) that you could procure one in certain places for the price of a chicken?
Chivers explains all in a book one of the blurbs likened to a Tolstoyan epic. Really fascinating.
Almost a century before the AK47 ( Automat Kalashnikov , first prototype released in 1947) was conceived in an arms design contest kicked off by Stalin, Richard J. Gattling saw the carnage of the American Civil War and it made him dream of creating an automated gun that could do the work of many men and thus save countless lives. Oh and make him very rich. His priorities on this project are negligible.
And then peace has never been profitable.
The Gatling Gun was the very first point on an arms trajectory that sought to miniaturize, improve, simplify, simplify, until the quest for automatic fire came to a grand halt at the AK47. Designed by Kalashnikov (and a whole Soviet war machine purring behind him), the firearm has become one of the most recognized symbols in the entire world and the time of its creation (post WWII Cold-War era) was perfect for imitation, stock-piling, and mass world-wide proliferation. Today,the gun once designed to be a friend and protector of the Soviet State has become a symbol of guerrilla warfare, civil unrest, revolution and terrorism.
"Arms-control specialists and students of conflict look to the price of Kalashnikov assault rifles in a nation's open-market arms bazaars to determine both the degree to which destabilized lands are awash in small arms and the state of risk. When prices rise, public anxiety is considered high. When they sink, the decline can indicate a conflict is ebbing. Because there is no surer sign that a country has gone sour than the appearance of Kalashnikovs in the public's grip. {...]...when Kalashnikovs turn up in the hands of mobs, it is time to leave." (pg 13)
Why the AK47? Why this gun? What made the second half of the 20th century so perfect for the spread of this particular firearm, until urban arms legend claimed (however untruly) that you could procure one in certain places for the price of a chicken?
Chivers explains all in a book one of the blurbs likened to a Tolstoyan epic. Really fascinating.
May 28, 2022
Ubiquitous, the AK-47 (and its many derivatives) changed the course of history throughout many infamous human conflicts. In this work, Christopher Chivers unpacks the narrative trajectory of the "Avtomat Kalashnikova" both well before its inception and long after the fall of the regime which created it. Chivers, as a former US Marine and current NYT journalist, grapples with not only the technical aspects of the most prolific weapon in modern history but also the socio-political contexts the weapon has traversed.
Pros:
- Extremely detailed, methodical research approach to a single piece of equipment which is not common for the paperback mass market.
- Critical analysis of every assumption, urban myth, and common misconception surrounding a weapon with such global name recognition.
- A mature, "step-back" approach to the AK without the ideological or commercial dogma often associated with infamous weapons (just see any shooters' forums by way of comparison).
Cons:
- An often dry work, caught up in minor details and anecdotes (some of which are necessary to illustrate the point and others which are completely superfluous) which can drag the work on.
- Extremely long work, requiring significant discipline and academic interest to fully grasp and complete. Not for those looking for the BLUF ("Bottom Line, Up Front") format learning.
- Technically accurate, some of the terminology and descriptive sections could be far more concise and use a simpler format to explain specifications rather than fully worked out numbers and components.
Rating: 7/10
Pros:
- Extremely detailed, methodical research approach to a single piece of equipment which is not common for the paperback mass market.
- Critical analysis of every assumption, urban myth, and common misconception surrounding a weapon with such global name recognition.
- A mature, "step-back" approach to the AK without the ideological or commercial dogma often associated with infamous weapons (just see any shooters' forums by way of comparison).
Cons:
- An often dry work, caught up in minor details and anecdotes (some of which are necessary to illustrate the point and others which are completely superfluous) which can drag the work on.
- Extremely long work, requiring significant discipline and academic interest to fully grasp and complete. Not for those looking for the BLUF ("Bottom Line, Up Front") format learning.
- Technically accurate, some of the terminology and descriptive sections could be far more concise and use a simpler format to explain specifications rather than fully worked out numbers and components.
Rating: 7/10
September 30, 2019
АК-47, оръжието на ХХ век – и еволюцията на войната: http://knigolandia.info/book-review/a...
”АК-47. Оръжието на ХХ век” е толкова мащабна книга, че не мога да засегна и частица от нея. Чивърс е абсолютен ерудит в своята област и покрай самата история на прочутия автомат успява да опише еволюцията на войната в последния век и половина, да проследи как създаването на автоматичните оръжия уж за мир носят непонятно количество смърт, а и изследва в задълбочени детайли как една тоталитарна държава фокусира усилия в цел, която се оказва невъзможна за най-мощната икономика на планетата. Но и как после разпадането на СССР пръсва “Калашниците” като осколки по целия свят и осигурява постоянното подклаждане на безброй кървави конфликти. Защото има оръжия, произведдни преди над половин век, които още стрелят и носят смърт – и това е и тяхната огромна ценност, и огромния им ужас.
CIELA Books
http://knigolandia.info/book-review/a...
”АК-47. Оръжието на ХХ век” е толкова мащабна книга, че не мога да засегна и частица от нея. Чивърс е абсолютен ерудит в своята област и покрай самата история на прочутия автомат успява да опише еволюцията на войната в последния век и половина, да проследи как създаването на автоматичните оръжия уж за мир носят непонятно количество смърт, а и изследва в задълбочени детайли как една тоталитарна държава фокусира усилия в цел, която се оказва невъзможна за най-мощната икономика на планетата. Но и как после разпадането на СССР пръсва “Калашниците” като осколки по целия свят и осигурява постоянното подклаждане на безброй кървави конфликти. Защото има оръжия, произведдни преди над половин век, които още стрелят и носят смърт – и това е и тяхната огромна ценност, и огромния им ужас.
CIELA Books
http://knigolandia.info/book-review/a...
April 23, 2019
This is a fun little history with quite a lot of interesting information on the invention and development of machine guns in general and the AK47 specifically. However, it totally misses the opportunity to be a unique political lens through which to understand the various insurgent, rebel and terrorist groups that the AK47 has come to represent. Instead The Gun sticks disappointingly closely to a history of the design and manufacture of... the gun.
June 11, 2017
This book won't be everyone's cup-o-tea, but it was definitely mine. The stories imparted are well written, engaging, and on several occasions, infuriating. I've learned a lot, not just about the K and its history/legacy, but training, leadership, and how not to treat people as well.
February 15, 2023
АК - 47, Оръжието на XX век
Автор: К. Дж. Чивърс
Преводач от английски: Христо Димитров
Жанр: история, военна, нехуд. литература, документалистика
18+
Време за четене: 8 минути
Пишейки черновата за този пост, неволно в бързината записах заглавието на книгата като: К2 -47, което разбира се е един необясним от никого абсурд.
Замислих се, че всъщност това е "симбиозата" между: К2 - азиатският връх убиец и -47 цифровата част от името на оръжие убиец.
Записано, може би под влияние на заглавия, въртящи се пред погледите ни тук и трагичните събития станали последната седмица на този връх.
Всичко това сега ме води до един много сериозен въпрос: Колко струва съдбата и живота на един обикновен човешки живот в световен мащаб, когато е зависим изцяло от външи обстоятелства, обстановка, среда и време (метереологично, и най-вече географско-историческо).
✨ Има ли избор всеки "алпинист" правото да взима и променя вече взети решения.
✨ Жаждата да се достигне и покори на всяка цена даден ВРЪХ ли е движещата сила, в ситуации, които видимо водят до промяна на съдби, карта и историята на света.
✨ Калашников, инженер техник, съдател на АК-47 оставил името си като печат върху най-масово разпространеното от всички създадени оръжия и до днес.
✨ За съзнателния избор в създавеното му, както и за желанието на една могъща бивша държава да завладее ВЪРХА в техническо-индустриална и военна посока.
✨ За реалната цена и стойност в покоряването изобщо на ВЪРХовете.
Въпроси, които могат да бъдат открити в тази книга.
Книгата АК-47 ( АК-47: кодово име, под което е регистриран и прозведен автомат Калашников ), се оказа за мен голямо книжно предизвикателство, даваща отговори за:
✔️ Исторически събития, придружени от богати документални и биографични факти
✔️ Тайни за реални хора и събития
✔️ Истината за един обременен житейски път, тръгнал от една професионална отдаденост за създаване и усъвършенстване на АК , прераснал в "служба към отечествето"
Биографичната част заема малък дял от колосалния по размери труд на Чивърс ( около 800 страници ), но напълно достатъчна за едно изследователско начало по този въпрос
Останалата част на книгата запознава с историята на военните оръжия преди и до създаването на АК, употребени в политически обстановки и събития по цял свят.
За мен остава недоизяснен един основен въпрос:
🔥 Как и защо Калашников е взел изобщо решение да създаде АК-47. В книгата е упоменато само и до някъде взимането на следващите му решения за работа по този проект.
Книгата излиза на бял свят, на английски, през 2010 год. , и е написана от журналиста CJChivers, под името The Gun, в превод Оръжието. Харесах добрия журналистически стил и подход.
Пъвоначалната и вече реализирана идея на автора е била да проследи всички подобни оръжия на автомат Калашников, в период преди неговото създаване, както и и да ги сравни: всяко създадено ново с предхоното поколение огнестрелни оръжия.
Интересна, повече от интересна, скучна - не, никак дори.
Авторът е представил книгата като едно задълбочено проучване, без да дава своя лична оценка и пристрастност към събития, факти и реална политическа обстановка.
Не взима лично отношение в никой момент, нито част, събитие, така че работата му да има политическо и пропагандно звучене, което всъщност бе за мен ключов фактор, за да се спра в избора си на тази книга.
Автор: К. Дж. Чивърс
Преводач от английски: Христо Димитров
Жанр: история, военна, нехуд. литература, документалистика
18+
Време за четене: 8 минути
Пишейки черновата за този пост, неволно в бързината записах заглавието на книгата като: К2 -47, което разбира се е един необясним от никого абсурд.
Замислих се, че всъщност това е "симбиозата" между: К2 - азиатският връх убиец и -47 цифровата част от името на оръжие убиец.
Записано, може би под влияние на заглавия, въртящи се пред погледите ни тук и трагичните събития станали последната седмица на този връх.
Всичко това сега ме води до един много сериозен въпрос: Колко струва съдбата и живота на един обикновен човешки живот в световен мащаб, когато е зависим изцяло от външи обстоятелства, обстановка, среда и време (метереологично, и най-вече географско-историческо).
✨ Има ли избор всеки "алпинист" правото да взима и променя вече взети решения.
✨ Жаждата да се достигне и покори на всяка цена даден ВРЪХ ли е движещата сила, в ситуации, които видимо водят до промяна на съдби, карта и историята на света.
✨ Калашников, инженер техник, съдател на АК-47 оставил името си като печат върху най-масово разпространеното от всички създадени оръжия и до днес.
✨ За съзнателния избор в създавеното му, както и за желанието на една могъща бивша държава да завладее ВЪРХА в техническо-индустриална и военна посока.
✨ За реалната цена и стойност в покоряването изобщо на ВЪРХовете.
Въпроси, които могат да бъдат открити в тази книга.
Книгата АК-47 ( АК-47: кодово име, под което е регистриран и прозведен автомат Калашников ), се оказа за мен голямо книжно предизвикателство, даваща отговори за:
✔️ Исторически събития, придружени от богати документални и биографични факти
✔️ Тайни за реални хора и събития
✔️ Истината за един обременен житейски път, тръгнал от една професионална отдаденост за създаване и усъвършенстване на АК , прераснал в "служба към отечествето"
Биографичната част заема малък дял от колосалния по размери труд на Чивърс ( около 800 страници ), но напълно достатъчна за едно изследователско начало по този въпрос
Останалата част на книгата запознава с историята на военните оръжия преди и до създаването на АК, употребени в политически обстановки и събития по цял свят.
За мен остава недоизяснен един основен въпрос:
🔥 Как и защо Калашников е взел изобщо решение да създаде АК-47. В книгата е упоменато само и до някъде взимането на следващите му решения за работа по този проект.
Книгата излиза на бял свят, на английски, през 2010 год. , и е написана от журналиста CJChivers, под името The Gun, в превод Оръжието. Харесах добрия журналистически стил и подход.
Пъвоначалната и вече реализирана идея на автора е била да проследи всички подобни оръжия на автомат Калашников, в период преди неговото създаване, както и и да ги сравни: всяко създадено ново с предхоното поколение огнестрелни оръжия.
Интересна, повече от интересна, скучна - не, никак дори.
Авторът е представил книгата като едно задълбочено проучване, без да дава своя лична оценка и пристрастност към събития, факти и реална политическа обстановка.
Не взима лично отношение в никой момент, нито част, събитие, така че работата му да има политическо и пропагандно звучене, което всъщност бе за мен ключов фактор, за да се спра в избора си на тази книга.
October 30, 2020
The Gun by C.J Chivers is not only the story of AK 47 but also the story of automatic firearms. He starts his story from Gatling and then goes on to talk about the Maxim gun. These were the predecessors of the AK 47 whose development and introduction was no less revolutionary than the Gatling and the Maxim.
One of the main points which come out of this book is that the popularity of the AK 47 was not because of its reliability or design. In C.J Chivers's view, the main reason AK 47 became ubiquitous in conflicts was that it was made in USSR, whose planned economy produced it on a vast scale. The USSR policies and the subsequent fall of the USSR made it possible for the AK 47 to become a gun that is associated with conflict in the modern world.
This book also gives a brief introduction about the M16 and how the early introduction of M16 was plagued with problems.
This is good for those who want to know more about Automatic rifles' evolution and how assault rifles came into existence.
One of the main points which come out of this book is that the popularity of the AK 47 was not because of its reliability or design. In C.J Chivers's view, the main reason AK 47 became ubiquitous in conflicts was that it was made in USSR, whose planned economy produced it on a vast scale. The USSR policies and the subsequent fall of the USSR made it possible for the AK 47 to become a gun that is associated with conflict in the modern world.
This book also gives a brief introduction about the M16 and how the early introduction of M16 was plagued with problems.
This is good for those who want to know more about Automatic rifles' evolution and how assault rifles came into existence.
November 9, 2018
For me, this book is a 5+ star book! Before I go on, however, it should be pointed out that "The Gun" by C. J. Chivers will not appeal to everyone. Chivers has written a superb history lesson wrapped around the story of the Russian AK-47 Assault Rifle and its namesake. He takes us through the history of automatic rifles, from the Gatling gun near the end of the U.S. Civil War to the Maxim Machine Gun prior to World War I, to the present. If weapons do not interest you, this book probably isn't for you. But even if you aren't interested in guns, the stories Chivers tells and the "bunny trails" he goes down are very intriguing.
C.J. Chivers is a Marine veteran, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, and author. This is the second of his books I've read ("The Fighters" was the first, also excellent). He's a wonderful writer and story teller. I will be following his writing career, and highly recommend his books, including specifically "The Gun".
C.J. Chivers is a Marine veteran, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, and author. This is the second of his books I've read ("The Fighters" was the first, also excellent). He's a wonderful writer and story teller. I will be following his writing career, and highly recommend his books, including specifically "The Gun".
Read
March 9, 2023Interesting book on the impact of the AK-47 on modern warfare and society at large. It is interesting that the US Marine Corps recently adopted the M-27 infantry rifle, which while it superficially resembles the classic M-16, actually has an operating system that more closely resembles that of the AK-47.
April 17, 2022
Interesting chapters, but very repetitive on the main points (socialist economies of scale led to mass proliferation of the AK, and the historical march of innovation up until the modern assault rifle) and a little too on the anti-gun whingeing side towards the end.
December 20, 2017
A terrific narrative and analysis of the development and impact or automatic weapons on warfare and political violence over the last 120+ years. Delivers an excellent comparative history of the development and proliferation of the AK-47 and the M-16, the two most prominent assault rifles in military lore.
September 26, 2025
This is a very good, no bullshit guide to product management.
June 22, 2012
I first heard of this book when publicity from NPR interviewed its author. I briefly thumbed through a hard bound copy at Books, Inc., and it cross my "consider to read" threshold (when I had time). I chanced to find a discounted paper back copy at Eliot Bay during a business trip/conference in Seattle. Publicity worked.
The Gun is mostly a threaded history of automatic weapons leading up to the AK-47, Kalashikov the man, and issues which make the AK social symbol (mostly notably on flags {the author points out}).
Subtle points:
the ammunition for the AK-47 and the M-16 are significant. Perhaps more so than the weapons firing them. This is like the well trod history of cars ignoring the lesser published history of roads.
The AK-74 isn't a typo: the book explains.
Eugene Stoner's role is explained more, being an aircraft designer post WWII shows further the role aircraft had with new (not necessarily better) ideas for lighter materials and technologies in all areas of modern life but in the military especially with aluminum armor, used of turbine engines, and in this case fire arms.
Those are just three points. While the book likely has flaws that I'm not necessarily knowledgeable, having not chosen the military as a career as my old man wanted, it interestingly tied together bits and pieces of media, history, and a little experience. The AK-47 is one of the automatic rifles that I've not been photographed sampling. (The M-1 Garand I heard stories from my dad is another; no hurry to try, but I've used .30-06 rifles.)
As Chivers notes the history of Gattling (looking to sample, have seen the two reproductions makers at Knob Creek but none were available to sample that year) and Maxim. I have sampled Thompsons (the notorious Tommy gun from war movies and gangster films: rentable in Las Vegas, near Reno, Springfield, OR, Honolulu, and MG shoots around the country (I don't see them as crazies {a few attendees might be (check with minorities)}). Thompsons are slightly heavier than one might imagine.
What is it about this technology which fascinates people? I once had an officemate (he would have loved Chivers' book) who was a 24 gun NRA member and nuclear weaponeer. As he was living the last of his days, I was the only person capable of getting him to a conference we had started. Returning once from Phoenix and gassing up in Barstow, a hand bill "Fire an Uzi" caught my eye. "I always wanted to fire one," he said. He didn't have much to live for in those days of failing health. His kids had moved out and his wife has passed on. "Las Vegas," I said. And thus began a small adventure to sample rapid fire military technology.
He'd fire his Uzi (2 clips $35) two months late on a lark road trip. And since I was present I tried a dozen vastly different sub-machine guns. Chivers (other reviews also) distinguishes what makes a sub-machine gun from a full machine gun vs. an automatic rifle (which the AK-47 is). The AK-47 was not available that day (had Chivers been available I would have been outraged: the most mass produced? Not available?). I kept my targets: MP-5 (mine jammed a lot), MP40: the infamous burp gun which went against my dad's M-1 (I liked it, smooth running like the Uzi), the Sten: I'm amazed the Brits didn't lose the war sooner: the Allies won because the Axis ran out of ammo, the M3 grease gun (my best target but notorious from that period), and even an M249 SAW (25 rounds my first belted full machine gun).
My AK experience would come a little later outside Reno. No friends came on that trip, but my old officemate could experience the gun fire (MG42 most impressive: tried one at Knob Creek) over the cell phone. My facebook photo taken by the nice people at the range has me with the M2 flame thrower, an engineer's weapon. Oh, also mentioned in the M-16 chapter (tried 3 different models including the M-4 in the Las Vegas experience), I got to try a couple M-79 training grenade rounds. Nice launcher. I leave out other interesting more modern pieces. I took the expended M79 (it has a .22 in the base) and 0.50 cal as tokens for my old office mate. Again the experience would have been enhance had Chivers' book been available. (I did fire the M-134 (200 rounds), can jam a lot: my first Gattling design).
The read and the outside experience was fascinating, but it doesn't tell you the little bits: it takes everything to work, and one little problem can be fatal to the operator (like the Thompson clip falling out (I video taped one doing such)). I'd suggest urban dwellers try these experiences based on my reading The Gun.
But the lesson from veterans who have seen combat (I've merely had a few rounds go over my head) is the old line from a recent move: The way to win is not to play.
The Gun is mostly a threaded history of automatic weapons leading up to the AK-47, Kalashikov the man, and issues which make the AK social symbol (mostly notably on flags {the author points out}).
Subtle points:
the ammunition for the AK-47 and the M-16 are significant. Perhaps more so than the weapons firing them. This is like the well trod history of cars ignoring the lesser published history of roads.
The AK-74 isn't a typo: the book explains.
Eugene Stoner's role is explained more, being an aircraft designer post WWII shows further the role aircraft had with new (not necessarily better) ideas for lighter materials and technologies in all areas of modern life but in the military especially with aluminum armor, used of turbine engines, and in this case fire arms.
Those are just three points. While the book likely has flaws that I'm not necessarily knowledgeable, having not chosen the military as a career as my old man wanted, it interestingly tied together bits and pieces of media, history, and a little experience. The AK-47 is one of the automatic rifles that I've not been photographed sampling. (The M-1 Garand I heard stories from my dad is another; no hurry to try, but I've used .30-06 rifles.)
As Chivers notes the history of Gattling (looking to sample, have seen the two reproductions makers at Knob Creek but none were available to sample that year) and Maxim. I have sampled Thompsons (the notorious Tommy gun from war movies and gangster films: rentable in Las Vegas, near Reno, Springfield, OR, Honolulu, and MG shoots around the country (I don't see them as crazies {a few attendees might be (check with minorities)}). Thompsons are slightly heavier than one might imagine.
What is it about this technology which fascinates people? I once had an officemate (he would have loved Chivers' book) who was a 24 gun NRA member and nuclear weaponeer. As he was living the last of his days, I was the only person capable of getting him to a conference we had started. Returning once from Phoenix and gassing up in Barstow, a hand bill "Fire an Uzi" caught my eye. "I always wanted to fire one," he said. He didn't have much to live for in those days of failing health. His kids had moved out and his wife has passed on. "Las Vegas," I said. And thus began a small adventure to sample rapid fire military technology.
He'd fire his Uzi (2 clips $35) two months late on a lark road trip. And since I was present I tried a dozen vastly different sub-machine guns. Chivers (other reviews also) distinguishes what makes a sub-machine gun from a full machine gun vs. an automatic rifle (which the AK-47 is). The AK-47 was not available that day (had Chivers been available I would have been outraged: the most mass produced? Not available?). I kept my targets: MP-5 (mine jammed a lot), MP40: the infamous burp gun which went against my dad's M-1 (I liked it, smooth running like the Uzi), the Sten: I'm amazed the Brits didn't lose the war sooner: the Allies won because the Axis ran out of ammo, the M3 grease gun (my best target but notorious from that period), and even an M249 SAW (25 rounds my first belted full machine gun).
My AK experience would come a little later outside Reno. No friends came on that trip, but my old officemate could experience the gun fire (MG42 most impressive: tried one at Knob Creek) over the cell phone. My facebook photo taken by the nice people at the range has me with the M2 flame thrower, an engineer's weapon. Oh, also mentioned in the M-16 chapter (tried 3 different models including the M-4 in the Las Vegas experience), I got to try a couple M-79 training grenade rounds. Nice launcher. I leave out other interesting more modern pieces. I took the expended M79 (it has a .22 in the base) and 0.50 cal as tokens for my old office mate. Again the experience would have been enhance had Chivers' book been available. (I did fire the M-134 (200 rounds), can jam a lot: my first Gattling design).
The read and the outside experience was fascinating, but it doesn't tell you the little bits: it takes everything to work, and one little problem can be fatal to the operator (like the Thompson clip falling out (I video taped one doing such)). I'd suggest urban dwellers try these experiences based on my reading The Gun.
But the lesson from veterans who have seen combat (I've merely had a few rounds go over my head) is the old line from a recent move: The way to win is not to play.
December 9, 2010
Although the title may initially put off some readers, The Gun is a far-ranging work of war reporting, military history, sociology, and politics. The automatic weapon is, of course, the focus, but Chivers goes far beyond a mere technical history to offer "an engrossing yet plainspoken exploration of what guns are and what they do," from their psychological effects to their economic and political impacts (Salon). Chivers, whose firsthand reportorial and military experiences informed his book, left few sources uncovered; he even interviewed the aging Kalashnikov. Despite general praise, a few critics thought the broad historical perspective (such as the long sections on the American M-16 assault rifle) too digressive, but most agreed that The Gun is a riveting, well-handled look at one of the modern world's most influential -- and destructive -- technologies. This is an excerpt from a review published in Bookmarks magazine.
August 2, 2018
Although a Pulitzer Prize winner, this is a deeply flawed book. It purports to be about the AK-47, the world's most ubiquitous assault rifle. And when it IS about that topic, it is excellent. However, the majority of the book doesn't even concern the AK family of guns directly; rather it focuses on the development of automatic weapons in general and other tangential topics.
Only 3 of the 8 chapters are directly about the AK, while the Civil War development of the Gatling Gun and the US development of the flawed M-16 each receive a substantial chapter a piece. What makes this worse is that in these chapters, few links are made to the AK at all, making the chapters feel even more out of place, almost as if you're reading a completely different book.
This choppiness undermines the book as a whole, even though it is otherwise well-written, informative, and interesting. There is some great history here, but this is not a great book.
Only 3 of the 8 chapters are directly about the AK, while the Civil War development of the Gatling Gun and the US development of the flawed M-16 each receive a substantial chapter a piece. What makes this worse is that in these chapters, few links are made to the AK at all, making the chapters feel even more out of place, almost as if you're reading a completely different book.
This choppiness undermines the book as a whole, even though it is otherwise well-written, informative, and interesting. There is some great history here, but this is not a great book.
March 2, 2011
Great book, highly recommended. This is not an engineering treatise or a book about the battlefield; it is a book about people. Although guns are the author's unifying theme, the stories are all about individuals: heroes, charlatans, arms merchants, tribesmen, terrorist, victims, and their courage, fear, pain, joys and so on. Oddly, I found the least interesting person to be Comrade Kalashnikov. The latter part of the book is quite engaging as it describes the consequences of proliferating the "world's most popular killing machine" into the hands of unskilled individuals into almost every corner of the earth. Of course those consequences are tragic, but compelling to read and understand.
November 7, 2011
I picked this up while browsing in the UW bookstore. The title was not very appealing and the reviews only encouraged me to skim a couple of pages. But just by chance I started reading about the initial distribution of the M-16 to soldiers in Vietnam and the total disregard for the lives of service members who tried to use them.
Even though Mr Chivers focuses on the development and distribution of the AK-47, he gives an accurate description the low ethical value of the commonly termed Military Industrial Complex.
I would particularly recommend this book to anyone interested in the Cold War era.
Even though Mr Chivers focuses on the development and distribution of the AK-47, he gives an accurate description the low ethical value of the commonly termed Military Industrial Complex.
I would particularly recommend this book to anyone interested in the Cold War era.
November 2, 2021
Repetitive, get a better book
Repeats the same material several times. The material is interesting, but the book would have been better if it was edited to be shorter, omitting repetition,or if it had more original content. Roughly 40% of the book is end notes. It has obvious lacks. There are no technical descriptions of AK models, features, mechanical operation, ammunition, etc. The history of the AK development and manufacturing is very
sketchily done, with no significant original research. Documentation and research on tactics and doctrine is nonexistent. Possibly the most unique parts describe a smuggler, and the weapon's use in a child army. I'd give it a miss.
Repeats the same material several times. The material is interesting, but the book would have been better if it was edited to be shorter, omitting repetition,or if it had more original content. Roughly 40% of the book is end notes. It has obvious lacks. There are no technical descriptions of AK models, features, mechanical operation, ammunition, etc. The history of the AK development and manufacturing is very
sketchily done, with no significant original research. Documentation and research on tactics and doctrine is nonexistent. Possibly the most unique parts describe a smuggler, and the weapon's use in a child army. I'd give it a miss.
April 30, 2014
Broad book on the evolution of machine guns. Breadth is a plus, but writing is longwinded. Some human interest parts seem superfluous, why all those pages dedicated to the shooting of an Iraqi body guard? Best part is actually on the failure of the M16 in Vietnam. M16 takes 80secs to assemble, AK47 only 34 seconds (p360). Another good bit, but too short in context of whole book, is on the physics and mechanics of the gun (p.195). Interesting factoid (p110): in Franco-Prussian war there were 65,000 German casualties, swords had killed six men.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 253 reviews