Rating: 
Summary: one fine book
Review: Firstly, it is hard to call this book a biography (not being one is fine with me). Stalin's life before the revolution is described in no detail at all in a few pages. The first forty years of his life are basically left out. Rather than chronicling Stalin's life, the author chooses to discuss certain aspects of his personality with a loose flow of time in the background. A list of functionaries of the Soviet system under Stalin in the back of the book might be considered for future editions of the book. And being a first-time reader of Soviet history, the names of state institutions and the titles of their leaders were totally new to me. That turned it into tough reading at times. The book seems to be intended for a Soviet audience or one that is familiar with the Soviet system.
Rating: 
Summary: A biography more suited to historians than thegeneral reader
Review: Gen. Volkogonov is not a professional historian, and certainly not a great writer. His work his well researched and meticolous, but is fails to either capture the general reader or to impress the reader looking for a clear analysis of causes and consequences. The book is very long, the style of prose quite boring and at times repetitive. The author very often has a moralistic tone ("How could Stalin posssibly be so cruel? Look how corrupt his cronies were...") that bothers those who would like a more detached approach. I guess one has to remember that once he believed in Communism and cannot have helped being shocked by what he found in the state's archives (where he ventured with the original purpose of writing an orthodox biography of the Great Leader); this might explain his being upset at Stalin, but does not make the book more appealing. In the end, Gen. Volgokonov's main merit is exactly this: to have been able to access, thanks to his position in the Red Army, the USSR's impenetrable archives, and to have revealed to the world a deluge of details and documents. Some of them are immensely controversial in their potential consequences (eg the statements made by Stalin before the German attack that war was inevitable; or Zukov's plan for a preventive strike against Germany). Indeed, this book deservedly appears in most bibliographies on the USSR and the Russo-German war, and has provided the academic community with valuable insights for further analysis on Stalin and Stalinism. But it is probably more suited for an historian than for a general reader.
Rating:
Summary: Too subjective but interesting
Review: I agree with a_reader_999 (review elsewhere on this page) that Mr. Volkogonov allows his judgement to be clouded by his own Leninist views, blames everything bad on Stalin, and like a lot of Marxists, still lives in denial. For someone having spent his whole life on something, accepting defeat can be a very giant step indeed, so one tends to be sympathetic, but it does not make for quality objective history writing. But minus the diatribes and the nitpicking, this work provides a lot of details for the history buff, and is also quite interesting reading.
Rating:
Summary: A four star Stalin
Review: I am giving this book 4 stars because it tends to be slightlysuperficial in its biographical analysis of Stalin and in itsdescription of the Russian condition the book explores in its 600 pages. The author takes for granted you know the detailed history of Russian and Stalin and therefore glosses over certain events or aspects of events that Stalin engendered. At times you feel left out of the book because the important detail is missing e g a description of the plight of the peasants during the collectivization effort would have been valuable to better understand and feel the malignancy of this action which offended Bukahrin so deeply. You tend to view the man more than get into his skin or even into the hearts and minds of the cast of characters and the evnets the author covers. I feel that I was seriously enlightened by the book and found it valuable. I guessmy problem with it was Volkogonov's style (particularly after reading Pipes' three volumes on the history of Russia...a beautiful writer). Read the book, it's worth it, but it is not a 5 star achievement in general. END
Rating: 
Summary: the best book on Stalin, a timepiece, frame it
Review: I bought this book first when I was in Russia. I bought it in the original Russian. I had already read Volkogonovs study of Lenin and Trotsky and his book 'Autopsy of the Soviet empire'. THis, though, is the seminal work of a man who passed far to quickly from our view. He had yearned to detail the crimes of Stalin, the secrets also. This grand book details many obscure facts not found in other books. DIsjointed writing,as anyone fmailiar with VOlkogonov knows, this book nevertheless is very readable. Many critisize this saying it was not written by a true historian, its not organized, it smacks of a freshmens writing, in that it does not develop a topic thouroughly before going on to something else. It jumps around. THis is all true. Mr. Volkogonov was not a writer by trade. He was a military bureacrat who yearned to breeth free and compiled this information, independent of the west, for years before publishing his account after the fall of the Soviet empire. If we view it that way this book is unique, it is a testimony of a man who witnessed the evils of the Soviet system, who knew personally what Stalin had done and wanted to expose it. He could weight the good and the bad. This book is invaluable as history. It is by a Russian writing about the failings of his own country, in its formative period nonetheless. A must have and a must read. A landmark in Soviet studies.
Rating:
Summary: the best book on Stalin, a timepiece, frame it
Review: I bought this book first when I was in Russia. I bought it in the original Russian. I had already read Volkogonovs study of Lenin and Trotsky and his book 'Autopsy of the Soviet empire'. THis, though, is the seminal work of a man who passed far to quickly from our view. He had yearned to detail the crimes of Stalin, the secrets also. This grand book details many obscure facts not found in other books. DIsjointed writing,as anyone fmailiar with VOlkogonov knows, this book nevertheless is very readable. Many critisize this saying it was not written by a true historian, its not organized, it smacks of a freshmens writing, in that it does not develop a topic thouroughly before going on to something else. It jumps around. THis is all true. Mr. Volkogonov was not a writer by trade. He was a military bureacrat who yearned to breeth free and compiled this information, independent of the west, for years before publishing his account after the fall of the Soviet empire. If we view it that way this book is unique, it is a testimony of a man who witnessed the evils of the Soviet system, who knew personally what Stalin had done and wanted to expose it. He could weight the good and the bad. This book is invaluable as history. It is by a Russian writing about the failings of his own country, in its formative period nonetheless. A must have and a must read. A landmark in Soviet studies.
Rating: 
Summary: Purges?
Review: I have a great respect for general Volkogonov, and I like his books very much, but unfortunately this one has one bad point: purges. General Volkogonov (as well as many other historicians), claims that Stalin purged his army from the best strategists in history like marshalls Tukatchevskii, Bluecher, or komandarms Yakir, Putna. The bad thing is, is that everybody seems to forget that these people didn't have too good minds, and were simply very bad strategists. For example, everybody thinks that Tukatchevskii was brilliant 'cause he developed "polemostrategy", or "dakavilks", or the "archpassive defensive system", and many other great "tactics". If you look at his works, you'll see that his tactical ideas are: "You have to fight with the enemy." "You have to destroy the enemy." "You have to attack the enemy." And the endless texts like this. His "reconstruction" plans, was simply to build from 50 to 100 thousand tanks in 1928, before industrialization! If proposals like that are not a sabotage then what? He also warned Stalin about the upcoming invasion, but about... french, american and british invasion. Marshall Bluecher, was for example an alcoholic (for Russian standarts!). Komandarm Szmidt, warned Stalin that he will cut off his ears. People of komandarm Dybienko, attacked Stalin on the revolution anniversary etc. etc. If you analyse it you'll see that Stalin was fightning with the hooligans, and idiots. And the last thing: the number of Stalin's victims is not 36.761, but 10.686. The rest of the strategists, were sacked. Also note that until May 1940 over 12.000 officers were brought into army. And for the end in this 10.686 you also have lawyers, sportsmen, political commisairss (for 26 shot komandarms of the II category, 15 were political commisairs) and on top of all chekists (like komandarm of the I category Mikhail Frinovski, the vice-chief of the NKVD).
Rating:
Summary: I have to agree
Review: I haven't quite finished the book, but I'm going to fire this off anyway. Never having been a great reader of biographies, I was hesitant to start one asfat as Volkogonov's *Stalin*, but the book grabbed me quickly and hasn't let go. Well-written and utterly absorbing, it beats most novels for sheer narrative drive. We all knew Stalin was bad, but you may not have known he was this bad. Get it and read it.
Rating:
Summary: Simply Excellent
Review: I've read Volkogonov's other seminal biographies on Lenin and Trotsky which are extremely good, but this is by far his best. It contains his most effective writing and a fluidity that all solid bios should have. It's clear that in writing this superb and terrifying book, he is writing about his own struggle in learning that one of the 'Big Men' of Russia had more than clay feet. Stalin was really, a Big Tyrant...and a most murderous one
Rating:
Summary: A truly *awesome* historical biography ...
Review: Reading "Triumph and Tragedy" is, quite simply, a life-altering
experience. Volkogonov was a loyal member of the Red Army and
Communist Party when he gained access to the whole of the KGB's
archives. As he researched the past, his level of disenchantment grew
until the very core of his world-view was torn asunder. This book is
written unevenly, as Volkogonov was still struggling to absorb the
historical record as he wrote. Nevertheless, the occasional
awkwardness serves to drive home the horror of this period. The
experience is as if the reader can feel the author there with them,
reeling from it all. While the book certainly contains much
interesting historical information, particularly with respect to
Stalin's purges of the Red Army and its affects on WWII, it is also
much, much more. When I read it, the phrase "the horror, the horror"
from Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" kept coming into my mind.
|
