Rating: 
Summary: It is a powerful and amazing book
Review: Although I read this book just out of high school over thirty years ago, its images are still fresh on my mind. This was both a terrifying and fascinating book -terrifying because of the stark brutality of war, the slaughter of innocents and the depravation that the people of Leningrad experienced; and fascinating in how a people managed to survive in such desolation. The story of the eastern front is largely forgotten in the West. Recently, our nation celebrated the 60th anniversary of the D-Day invasion, but as terrible a fight as it was; it was a cakewalk when compared to the horrific fighting on the Eastern front. In the sieges of Leningrad and Stalingrad alone over two million people perished- they were cauldrons of death. Although Stalin urged Roosevelt to commence the D-Day invasion to take the pressure on the eastern front and to hasten the defeat of the Nazis, the plain fact of history is that even without the invasion Hitler would had been defeated by the Soviet juggernaut. From the western perspective, the D-Day invasion served not to defeat Hitler (Stalin would have done that himself) but to keep all of Western Europe from falling Soviet domination. Now, back to the book. Yes, Salisbury was a journalist, not an historian and this is both a strength and weakness of the book. Yes, the plight and the hardship of the German Army is largely ignored, and yes, he misses some of the political ramifications of the battle, but as for telling a story of the survival of the human spirit he is unsurpassed. Put this book on you're a-list. It is a powerful and amazing book.
Rating:
Summary: It is a powerful and amazing book
Review: Although I read this book just out of high school over thirty years ago, its images are still fresh on my mind. This was both a terrifying and fascinating book -terrifying because of the stark brutality of war, the slaughter of innocents and the depravation that the people of Leningrad experienced; and fascinating in how a people managed to survive in such desolation. The story of the eastern front is largely forgotten in the West. Recently, our nation celebrated the 60th anniversary of the D-Day invasion, but as terrible a fight as it was; it was a cakewalk when compared to the horrific fighting on the Eastern front. In the sieges of Leningrad and Stalingrad alone over two million people perished- they were cauldrons of death. Although Stalin urged Roosevelt to commence the D-Day invasion to take the pressure on the eastern front and to hasten the defeat of the Nazis, the plain fact of history is that even without the invasion Hitler would had been defeated by the Soviet juggernaut. From the western perspective, the D-Day invasion served not to defeat Hitler (Stalin would have done that himself) but to keep all of Western Europe from falling Soviet domination. Now, back to the book. Yes, Salisbury was a journalist, not an historian and this is both a strength and weakness of the book. Yes, the plight and the hardship of the German Army is largely ignored, and yes, he misses some of the political ramifications of the battle, but as for telling a story of the survival of the human spirit he is unsurpassed. Put this book on you're a-list. It is a powerful and amazing book.
Rating:
Summary: The Classic Tome On The Seige Of Leningrad
Review: Few events in the annals of modern history compare to the saga of the terrifying siege of Leningrad for almost three years by the German Wehrmacht during World War Two. In this classic historical work, "The 900 Days" written by long-time New York Times correspondent and editor Harrison Salisbury, the incredible toll in terms of blood, sweat and tears of the millions of Russian protagonists trapped by the Nazis in the city is told. The story is told in such a graphic and moving fashion that the individuals involved are portrayed from a common sense, human perspective, in terms of describing breathing, struggling individuals locked into a living nightmare, each of them having to make a titanic effort day after day just to endure the hardships and survive. The scale of the siege itself boggles the mind; some three million residents and soldiers were encircled and entrapped at the beginning of the Nazi incursion into Russia in Operation Barbarossa, intensifying with a ruthless German offensive in early October of 1941 that literally strangled the lifeline for food and critical supplies from the embattled urban area. Of those trapped, almost half succumbed, and most of these fatalities were in a relatively brief period of time, commencing with the events of October 1941 and climaxing in early April of 1942. People starved, froze, drowned, were run over by tanks, walked into mine fields, succumbed to a wide range of diseases, were murdered by German soldiers, and sometimes were caught in artillery fire. In all, almost one and one half million people were lost during the siege. Yet in the midst of all this immense suffering and the degraded conditions that forced many to the brink of extinction, the people of Leningrad consistently fought back, fighting environmental conditions, temperatures that dipped below 30 degrees below zero, with no heat, no light, little or no food or water. Yet the fighting on the front went on, supported by the inhabitants, who did everything from digging ditches to helping to care for the wounded in the midst of their own daily struggles to survive. In this instance, they didn't merely endure; in fact they prevailed against incredible odds. In the final analysis, it was the German army that was destroyed. The scope of this achievement seems to be little appreciated today. And while Salisbury traces the causes in the tragedy of Leningrad in Stalin's sectarian governmental policies that ultimately played into Hitler's plans for capturing the city, he also describes the incredible contributions of a cross-section of the citizenry of the city, including artists, factory workers, soldiers, teachers, housewives, children, writers, and others engaged in the common daily struggle to survive without ever ceding the ground or the war to the foe. Even more impressive is his unflinching attention to detail, and his retelling of the final coup-de-grace delivered by Stalin, jealous and politically fearful of the genuine heroes made by the siege, who then arranged to charge, convict and execute all the principals of the city's campaign against the Germans based on trumped up charges of treason. This was one of the first books to deal with the levels of Soviet suffering and contribution to the war effort, and it has been praised quite consistently by readers and critics alike. I can recommend this book without reservation.
Enjoy!
Rating:
Summary: "Let no one forget. Let nothing be forgotten."
Review: Having adopted two children from St. Petersburg orphanages and having twice visited the city in the past three years, I read this book from the perspective of an adoptive parent trying to gain a better understanding of the society and city my children came from. I was not disappointed. This well researched book tells the nearly forgotten tragic story of the people of Leningrad during what the Russians call the Great Patriotic War (WWII). It begins in great detail explaining Stalin's blunders before the war, which nearly allowed the Nazis to win a swift and easy victory. The bulk of the book of course recounts the stories of how a people, almost abandoned by its own country, coped with one of the most savage sieges of history. Finally, the book tells of the sad fate of many of the heroic survivors. The book does not try to tell the German perspective nor should it. By telling the stories of the victims we are more easily reminded of the horror of war and are less inclined to glorify aggression. The theme rather is taken from Leningrad poet, Olga Berggolts , "Let no one forget, let nothing be forgotten." For those of us not used to Russian names, places or war heroes, it can be difficult to keep track of how the war and the siege are progressing in the book. Poets, writers, composers and artists may seem a bit over represented in the book, but the reader should remember that since the book is non-fiction, the author had to rely on real accounts of what happened. These accounts are much more likely to have been written about the more famous. On the other hand, having been to St. Petersburg, it's hard to find someone there who is not at least a poet, writer, composer or artist at heart. So the author might have the right mix of artist/not artist accounts in the book after all.
Rating: 
Summary: Worth Reading, But Not Fantastic
Review: I wasn't nearly so impressed by this work as I had expected and hoped to be. The theme is extraordinary, the two great Western totalitarian powers square off over the fate of a city of enormous historical significance (it was the seat of the Russian Revolution) and geographical significance (it was either the first or last Western city depending on which direction you're facing). The book might better have been titled "Scenes from 900 Days" and if it were titled that or, better, written with the intention of being that, it might have been a great book. But the book aspired to be history and, because of that, it ought to have been more coherent. The reader gets a lot of the deprivation and misery among the ever dwindling Leningrad residents. And, in describing that, Salisbury is at his best. His descriptions are passionate and human without being mawkish. However, the military element of the siege (an important part -- if the Germans hadn't brought guns and artillery and all the other accoutrements of war along, the situation would have been more than just a littledifferent) is badly handled. We know that, at times, the Germans and Russians fought in places like Mga, but Salisbury rarely makes it clear why or how. The geography of the region remains a complete mystery. The two included maps were of little help and Salisbury wasn't particularly interested in describing the area or the significance of particular geographical features. There is precious little description of combat and either none or almost none of battlefields, strategies, tactics, and the like. The manner in which the Germans laid the siege is all but absent, so it becomes virtually impossible to figure out how the Russians would have or could have lifted it. Moreover, he explains that Stalinist-era Soviet incompetence, mendacity, and villainy exacerbated or even caused much of the Leningraders' suffering, but he never demonstrates how. It might, for example, have been nice to know exactly how food and basic supplies were received and distributed among Leningraders, what the exact policies were, what the bureaucracy charged with that task was like and how it behaved, but all that is left vague. I got to know that Leningraders were given increasingly austere rations on which to survive, but that's about all. The political and social structure of the city is likewise left vague. We are apprised of the political tensions among the ambitious political elites of the USSR, but the treatment is too superficial. His characters (and he draws too much on the experience of a group of writers, presumably because they were the people to whom he had access) are often flat and uninteresting. True, the historian doesn't always have the luxury of being able to play psychologist, but Salisbury rarely even seemed to make the attempt. Some of the players (Stalin, Andrei Zhdanov, and Marshal Zhukov) are well-enough known people that he could have provided a decent amount of insight into them and their motivations (history without some psychology tends to be about as interesting and as morally useful as literature without character development), and occasionally he did. The treatment of Beria and Malenkov is decent in this respect. There are, to be sure, some well-written and engaging scenes. Salisbury has the journalist's flair of not being boring (but seldom rises above that level of high competence). The sections on the construction of the supply-railroad across Lake Lagoda is extremely good. As is his discussion of canibalism. The problem is that if his virtues are those of a journalist, so are his shortcomings. Too much of the book reads like news items or human interest stories. His eye is permanently fixed on the sorts of details that people would have wanted or needed to know immediately during the war (he has a fondness for describing with mathematical precision the amount of food each Leningrader got at certain points and the bureaucratic designations of military outfits -- the 291st infantry or whatever). And the historian needs details to be sure, he just needs better ones than these. To be fair, the Soviet Union was a closed society and information about the siege must have been limited, both by official bureaucratic means and because, owing to the inculcation of contrary values and natural selection, candor ceased to be an attribute of the Russian character, if it ever was. Salisbury might have done the best he could with the limited resources he had. But that doesn't mean the book ought to be judged differently. And it certainly wouldn't have been possible to provide every significant aspect of the siege in full detail (that seems to have become a virtual mantra among historians and history students). Still, he could have done a better job of picking the most important aspects and describing them in as much detail as he had time for. I honestly wish I could have liked the book better. It's about an important part of 20th centory history by a writer who strikes me (from this one encounter) as perfectly decent and likable. Sadly, that wasn't an option. He deserves credit for taking on such an ambitious project, and the book is worth reading if for no other reason than it describes such an important and awesome period in history (hence my giving it three stars -- it was certainly an above average book), but the final product was too uneven to be as great as one would hope it would be.
Rating:
Summary: The largely forgotten 900days
Review: I'd like to mention this. Although the subject of this book is the one of the tragic battles in WWII( and largely forgotten) , It's not a 100% military history book. It's more like what happened and how Russian people suffered and finally prevailed Nazi juggernaut. Unlike Stalingrad, Hitler determined not to make his legions into the city of Leningrad.instead Armeegruppe Nord kept maintaining an encirclement of the city until 1944 . no doubt there were numeorus innocenet civilian victims.(and German soldiers loses were equally high.. if you need more information on this subject , read. Mr. sydnor's "solders of destruction" which well represents Armeegruppe Nord's bloody road to Leningrad) this book rather focuses on this painful victory of people of Leningrad than purely military triumph..(vainglory?)
for die-hard German Military fan, this book would be a great dissapointment yet, it is readable,well searched and balanced one.
If you are interested in military more than human drama.. it would be better purchase Col.Glantz 's 900days of terror(2001), but If you like to read human drama.. this book is for you.
Rating: 
Summary: 900 Days...it takes about that long to read it ;)
Review: It's a long book, but worth reading. Most books about the Eastern Front are written from a German perspective, so it was refreshing to see the Russian side of the story (and what a side!). The last thing I would want to be would be a Soviet officer during that time! If the Nazis didn't shoot you, the Communists would! Overall a good book. It got dull at a few points, but the author keeps it interesting by blending stories and anecdotes told by people who were there. Could have used some maps, too.
Rating:
Summary: A Detail Story of the Seige of Lenningrad
Review: Readers will find a detailed depiction of the Seige of Leningrad from a Russian point of view. Very few references are from a German standpoint. The book describes the view from a military, political and societal perspective and it relates to the 900 day siege.
Russia was not the backward country that the west percieved it to be. It was far advanced in many ways in terms of the arts, science, and even militarily. The reason for Russia's defeats in the first years of the war lay in the lack of organization and leadership. Russia was a sleeping giant who did not even realise it's true potential until it was invaded in June 1941. The Nazi's soon realized the vast expanse of the land and hardiness of the Russian people. One German soldier commented that, "How can we defeat an enemy who can exist at a level no better than their livestock". This quote described perfectly a nation that would sacrifice 30 million of its people out of a population of 200 million to defeat Hitler and the Nazi's. The book allows you to place yourself in the position of a person living in Leningrad during the siege. You can almost feel the cold of the winters and the hunger brought on by starvation. It is a must read for anyone interested in World War II on the Eastern Front.
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing/undisciplined/incomplete
Review: Salisbury certainly must be embarassed by this book. It is not even an acceptable first draft. If the title were changed to 'The first 90 Days' it would be more accurate. His time line is a mess. He space is just as bad as he provides no sense of the geography or the role it played. Reader never knows when and where he is. Also, salisbury writes as though artists were the only ones to suffer the horror...ignoring the 1 million others who died.
I bought this book because of the reputation of the author. Silly me. I wasted my time.
Rating:
Summary: Journalists are not historians
Review: Salisbury's semantics say it all: he refers to the Russian Army, and the Nazi Army. But either both are political, or both are not. German Army and Russian Army, or Nazi Army and Communist Army. This is one of many signals revealing his strange affection for a barbaric regime and his amateurish mishandling of the subject. I have kept this book only as a lesson in how not to write, or research, history. Journalists are not historians. I wonder if Solzhenitsyn ever read Salisbury - or vice versa - and what he thought. For a history of the struggle for Leningrad, read a historian.
|
