Rating: 
Summary: I can't imagine a better account
Review: A masterful biography. As a non-Turk with an above-average interest in the country, the account only rarely and briefly lost my interest. I can't imagine a better Ataturk biography being written. It is accessible yet comprehensive enough for all but specialist academics. The story and the man are fascinating and the major issues raised are many and topical: East/West relations, Islam/Modernity, Developing Nations/Democracy, Traditional culture/Globalism....Great read.
Rating: 
Summary: Fair and informative study about a great statesman
Review: Actually one of the best books about Atatürk written by a foreign author. As the author spent long years in Turkey,he was able to give the reader an understanding of the social and psychologic structure of turkish society which is absolutely necessary to understand the historical developement of our nation and therefore of Ataturk and his politics. While the author researched most of turkish and foreign sources about Ataturk and presents a well structured and informative study,it has to be said that some facts are shown in a speculative way,especially while the author tries to solve some myths and anecdotes linked to the personality of Ataturk,as he doesnt show sources which would support his theories. Mango's book does not contain any unknown or real new facts about Ataturk for the Turkish (or Turkish speaking foreign)reader who is familiar with this theme,but is a well presented and objective foreign point of view and therefore of great interest for both turkish and non-turkish readers. An interesting and fair study about this great statesman
Rating:
Summary: A Man, A Vision, A Country
Review: Andrew Mango first gives his readers an excellent introduction to the declining Ottoman Empire so that they better understand where Mustapha Kemal Atatürk was coming from. The Ottoman Realm, though modernizing slowly, no longer had the means to live up to its ambitions and was shrinking fast under pressure of competing empires and nascent states at the end of the nineteenth century. Furthermore, the Ottoman State was undermined internally by increasingly restive minorities that no longer accepted their subservient condition, as well as, by part of the elite that was dissatisfied with the perceived backwardness and incompetence of the Ottoman ruling class. Born in Salonica in today's Greece around 1880 in a Muslim, Turkish-speaking and middle-class family, Atatürk early on made up his mind to join the westernizing army and thereby discard the external signs of oriental life. Mango narrates with mastery the steady progress that Atatürk, a successful and popular student, made during his military education. Work was all that mattered to Atatürk. Atatürk became a politically savvy professional soldier while studying hard during his years of military education in Istanbul, the imperial capital. After his admission to the prestigious Staff College at 21, Atatürk kept in touch with his military friends who were assigned elsewhere, a circle that would reveal its greatest usefulness in the accession of Atatürk to the highest post of Modern Turkey two decades later. Because of his subversive political activities, Atatürk was assigned not to Europe but to the Near East after finishing his studies in 1904. Mango does a great job in giving background information, which helps readers understand the environment in which Atatürk was bound to as a soldier while he actively remained involved in politics through his connections in the empire before, during and after WWI. In 1908, the Society of Union and Progress, of which Atatürk became a member, served as the launching path for the Young Turks in their successful military coup. Atatürk understood very fast that the Young Turks, even with the help of Germany later on, were not up to the task to save the empire from its ultimate downfall after the end of WWI. Atatürk was still too junior to play a key role in the new administration. As usual, Atatürk was critical of the new ones on top because he alone deserved to be leader. From 1911, Atatürk, still an obscure officer, progressively rose to preeminence. Atatürk first tried to quell rebellions in the disintegrating empire before WWI. Atatürk then illustrated his military superiority when he decisively helped ruin the allied venture at Gallipoli in 1915. After a new promotion in 1916, Atatürk, very resentful of the Germans for continuously meddling into military operations from the beginning, spent two agitated years in the Near East where he did what he could to slow down the advance of the allies until the end of WWI. Officers who ultimately played a key role in the War of Independence were placed under his command during these two years. After the armistice in 1918, Atatürk proved to be the most effective of all Ottoman officers who refused the diktats of the victorious allies and thwarted their efforts to carve up the territory of Modern Turkey into pieces. Mango clearly explained how with the help of other nationalist officers, Atatürk turned Anatolia into a redoubt of resistance while accommodating the decadent rule of the sultan in the short term. Atatürk also progressively centralized all military and political levers of power in his hands through shrewd maneuvering. Mango is brutally honest about the enlightened despotism of Atatürk. Modern Turkey needed a strong regime to impose its legitimacy both internally and externally. It took Atatürk and his army several grueling years before they could finally defeat the Greeks militarily and thereby commanding the grudging respect of the remaining divided allies. The signature of the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923 was a personal triumph for Atatürk by making the humiliating Treaty of Sevres of 1920 associated with the discredited old regime almost totally obsolete. As George Curzon, a British imperial statesman, noted at the end of the conference: "Hitherto we have dictated our peace treaties. Now we are negotiating one with an enemy who has an army while we have none, an unheard of position." The Treaty of Lausanne, still in existence, has been the most successful and the most lasting of all the post-war treaties. Atatürk was 42 years old when he became the first president of Modern Turkey. He assumed this position until his premature death in 1938. Mango never bores his audience when he overviews the successful and not-so-successful revolutionary reforms that Atatürk enacted during the successive terms of his presidency. Unsurprisingly, Modern Turks still revere Atatürk for westernizing and modernizing at high speed their country at its creation in 1923. In present times, the adhesion of Turkey and United Cyprus to the European Union should be a fitting tribute to western-bound Kemalism. In addition, this adhesion should help engineer a historic reconciliation between Greece and Turkey, two key U.S. allies. On top of that, Turkey is called to play a key role as a bridge between the European Union and a would-be Islamic Union. Turkey has been an anchor of stability for over 80 years in the most volatile region of the world and has demonstrated with a growing success how to marry democracy, economic liberalism and Islam with one another. Unsurprisingly, Islamic terrorists have had Turkey on their hitting list for this reason.
Rating:
Summary: A Man, A Vision, A Country
Review: Andrew Mango first gives his readers an excellent introduction to the declining Ottoman Empire so that they better understand where Mustapha Kemal Atatürk was coming from. The Ottoman Realm, though modernizing slowly, no longer had the means to live up to its ambitions and was shrinking fast under pressure of competing empires and nascent states at the end of the nineteenth century. Furthermore, the Ottoman State was undermined internally by increasingly restive minorities that no longer accepted their subservient condition, as well as, by part of the elite that was dissatisfied with the perceived backwardness and incompetence of the Ottoman ruling class. Born in Salonica in today's Greece around 1880 in a Muslim, Turkish-speaking and middle-class family, Atatürk early on made up his mind to join the westernizing army and thereby discard the external signs of oriental life. Mango narrates with mastery the steady progress that Atatürk, a successful and popular student, made during his military education. Work was all that mattered to Atatürk. Atatürk became a politically savvy professional soldier while studying hard during his years of military education in Istanbul, the imperial capital. After his admission to the prestigious Staff College at 21, Atatürk kept in touch with his military friends who were assigned elsewhere, a circle that would reveal its greatest usefulness in the accession of Atatürk to the highest post of Modern Turkey two decades later. Because of his subversive political activities, Atatürk was assigned not to Europe but to the Near East after finishing his studies in 1904. Mango does a great job in giving background information, which helps readers understand the environment in which Atatürk was bound to as a soldier while he actively remained involved in politics through his connections in the empire before, during and after WWI. In 1908, the Society of Union and Progress, of which Atatürk became a member, served as the launching path for the Young Turks in their successful military coup. Atatürk understood very fast that the Young Turks, even with the help of Germany later on, were not up to the task to save the empire from its ultimate downfall after the end of WWI. Atatürk was still too junior to play a key role in the new administration. As usual, Atatürk was critical of the new ones on top because he alone deserved to be leader. From 1911, Atatürk, still an obscure officer, progressively rose to preeminence. Atatürk first tried to quell rebellions in the disintegrating empire before WWI. Atatürk then illustrated his military superiority when he decisively helped ruin the allied venture at Gallipoli in 1915. After a new promotion in 1916, Atatürk, very resentful of the Germans for continuously meddling into military operations from the beginning, spent two agitated years in the Near East where he did what he could to slow down the advance of the allies until the end of WWI. Officers who ultimately played a key role in the War of Independence were placed under his command during these two years. After the armistice in 1918, Atatürk proved to be the most effective of all Ottoman officers who refused the diktats of the victorious allies and thwarted their efforts to carve up the territory of Modern Turkey into pieces. Mango clearly explained how with the help of other nationalist officers, Atatürk turned Anatolia into a redoubt of resistance while accommodating the decadent rule of the sultan in the short term. Atatürk also progressively centralized all military and political levers of power in his hands through shrewd maneuvering. Mango is brutally honest about the enlightened despotism of Atatürk. Modern Turkey needed a strong regime to impose its legitimacy both internally and externally. It took Atatürk and his army several grueling years before they could finally defeat the Greeks militarily and thereby commanding the grudging respect of the remaining divided allies. The signature of the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923 was a personal triumph for Atatürk by making the humiliating Treaty of Sevres of 1920 associated with the discredited old regime almost totally obsolete. As George Curzon, a British imperial statesman, noted at the end of the conference: "Hitherto we have dictated our peace treaties. Now we are negotiating one with an enemy who has an army while we have none, an unheard of position." The Treaty of Lausanne, still in existence, has been the most successful and the most lasting of all the post-war treaties. Atatürk was 42 years old when he became the first president of Modern Turkey. He assumed this position until his premature death in 1938. Mango never bores his audience when he overviews the successful and not-so-successful revolutionary reforms that Atatürk enacted during the successive terms of his presidency. Unsurprisingly, Modern Turks still revere Atatürk for westernizing and modernizing at high speed their country at its creation in 1923. In present times, the adhesion of Turkey and United Cyprus to the European Union should be a fitting tribute to western-bound Kemalism. In addition, this adhesion should help engineer a historic reconciliation between Greece and Turkey, two key U.S. allies. On top of that, Turkey is called to play a key role as a bridge between the European Union and a would-be Islamic Union. Turkey has been an anchor of stability for over 80 years in the most volatile region of the world and has demonstrated with a growing success how to marry democracy, economic liberalism and Islam with one another. Unsurprisingly, Islamic terrorists have had Turkey on their hitting list for this reason.
Rating:
Summary: A Man, A Vision, A Country
Review: Andrew Mango first gives his readers an excellent introduction to the declining Ottoman Empire so that they better understand where Mustapha Kemal Atatürk was coming from. The Ottoman Realm, though modernizing slowly, no longer had the means to live up to its ambitions and was shrinking fast under pressure of competing empires and nascent states at the end of the nineteenth century. Furthermore, the Ottoman State was undermined internally by increasingly restive minorities that no longer accepted their subservient condition, as well as, by part of the elite that was dissatisfied with the perceived backwardness and incompetence of the Ottoman ruling class. Born in Salonica in today's Greece around 1880 in a Muslim, Turkish-speaking and middle-class family, Atatürk early on made up his mind to join the westernizing army and thereby discard the external signs of oriental life. Mango narrates with mastery the steady progress that Atatürk, a successful and popular student, made during his military education. Work was all that mattered to Atatürk. Atatürk became a politically savvy professional soldier while studying hard during his years of military education in Istanbul, the imperial capital. After his admission to the prestigious Staff College at 21, Atatürk kept in touch with his military friends who were assigned elsewhere, a circle that would reveal its greatest usefulness in the accession of Atatürk to the highest post of Modern Turkey two decades later. Because of his subversive political activities, Atatürk was assigned not to Europe but to the Near East after finishing his studies in 1904. Mango does a great job in giving background information, which helps readers understand the environment in which Atatürk was bound to as a soldier while he actively remained involved in politics through his connections in the empire before, during and after WWI. In 1908, the Society of Union and Progress, of which Atatürk became a member, served as the launching path for the Young Turks in their successful military coup. Atatürk understood very fast that the Young Turks, even with the help of Germany later on, were not up to the task to save the empire from its ultimate downfall after the end of WWI. Atatürk was still too junior to play a key role in the new administration. As usual, Atatürk was critical of the new ones on top because he alone deserved to be leader. From 1911, Atatürk, still an obscure officer, progressively rose to preeminence. Atatürk first tried to quell rebellions in the disintegrating empire before WWI. Atatürk then illustrated his military superiority when he decisively helped ruin the allied venture at Gallipoli in 1915. After a new promotion in 1916, Atatürk, very resentful of the Germans for continuously meddling into military operations from the beginning, spent two agitated years in the Near East where he did what he could to slow down the advance of the allies until the end of WWI. Officers who ultimately played a key role in the War of Independence were placed under his command during these two years. After the armistice in 1918, Atatürk proved to be the most effective of all Ottoman officers who refused the diktats of the victorious allies and thwarted their efforts to carve up the territory of Modern Turkey into pieces. Mango clearly explained how with the help of other nationalist officers, Atatürk turned Anatolia into a redoubt of resistance while accommodating the decadent rule of the sultan in the short term. Atatürk also progressively centralized all military and political levers of power in his hands through shrewd maneuvering. Mango is brutally honest about the enlightened despotism of Atatürk. Modern Turkey needed a strong regime to impose its legitimacy both internally and externally. It took Atatürk and his army several grueling years before they could finally defeat the Greeks militarily and thereby commanding the grudging respect of the remaining divided allies. The signature of the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923 was a personal triumph for Atatürk by making the humiliating Treaty of Sevres of 1920 associated with the discredited old regime almost totally obsolete. As George Curzon, a British imperial statesman, noted at the end of the conference: "Hitherto we have dictated our peace treaties. Now we are negotiating one with an enemy who has an army while we have none, an unheard of position." The Treaty of Lausanne, still in existence, has been the most successful and the most lasting of all the post-war treaties. Atatürk was 42 years old when he became the first president of Modern Turkey. He assumed this position until his premature death in 1938. Mango never bores his audience when he overviews the successful and not-so-successful revolutionary reforms that Atatürk enacted during the successive terms of his presidency. Unsurprisingly, Modern Turks still revere Atatürk for westernizing and modernizing at high speed their country at its creation in 1923. In present times, the adhesion of Turkey and United Cyprus to the European Union should be a fitting tribute to western-bound Kemalism. In addition, this adhesion should help engineer a historic reconciliation between Greece and Turkey, two key U.S. allies. On top of that, Turkey is called to play a key role as a bridge between the European Union and a would-be Islamic Union. Turkey has been an anchor of stability for over 80 years in the most volatile region of the world and has demonstrated with a growing success how to marry democracy, economic liberalism and Islam with one another. Unsurprisingly, Islamic terrorists have had Turkey on their hitting list for this reason.
Rating:
Summary: Finally!
Review: Andrew Mango has done an incredible job of honestly portraying one of the most important statesmen of the 20th century. For ages Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, and the new Turkish Republic for that matter, have intentionally been ignored by the western authors, historians and even cultural institutions, such as universities. However, there is a new trend in the west nowadays: Especially in US, studying and understanding the Ottoman Empire, and the Turkish Republic established after the empire's collapse is one of the most attractive topics in liberal arts, along with studies on Islam and the Middle East in general. Mango's book is one of the latest examples of this trend. The book is exclusive, detailed and very informative. On the other hand, it is hard to believe that some readers commented on the lack of deep dive in Ataturk's personality, although this book provides probably the most intimate details about who Ataturk really was. I was born and raised hearing "The Official Turkish Point of View" as one reader put it, and this book is nothing, but the official point of view on Ataturk's life. I have learned more about Ataturk from this book than all my past education combined. Also, one particular reader's comment of Ataturk being similar to Hitler, or Stalin is nothing but just a dishonest, or probably an ignorant comment. I assume some of the readers' prejudice against Ataturk, and against Turks in general, blinded their eyes when they were reading the book. Mango puts all stories in perspective; he does not hesitate to provide the other side's comment on issues when there is a conflict. He presents proof of what he is writing, and that's why there is a thick section at the end of the book for references. One last word to those amazon.com customers who commented on Ataturk's role on the so called the Armenian genocide: Since the so called genocide is nothing but a fictitious, one sided, mostly exaggerated war propaganda, and since there is no proof other than what the western governments' fake productions of war material during the WWI talk about in order to justify attacking the Ottoman Empire, it is normal that there is no reference. My recommendation to those readers who want to learn the truth on the so called Armenian genocide is to listen both sides of the story. Do not decide on history by only hearing what your Armenian or Greek neighbor or friend is talking about. There is definitely a conflict on this matter, and conflict resolution requires both sides to be heard.
Rating:
Summary: A Nationalist/Secularist shrouded in controversy
Review: Anyone concerned with religious fundamentalism should become familiar with Kemal Attaturk, one of the few statesmen in history to confront it headon. Andrew Mango's book is not easy to read, partially because he tries to be comprehensive. Most American readers will not be interested in many parts of the book. However, Mango is much clearer than Lord Kinross, author of the only other Attaturk biography in English, on certain aspects of Attaturk's life. Mango is much clearer on the role played by Attaturk at Gallipoli. He points out that although he is now described as the "victor of Gallipoli", that in 1919 the British did not recognize his name (Mustapha Kemal, at that time). Nevetheless, it is clear that Attaturk deserves much credit for the outcome of the battle, even if the credit must be shared with others--including the Germans. When reading the Kinross biography, I assumed the author was hiding something regarding Attaturk's involvement in the massacre of the Armenians. Mango clearly indicates that Attaturk had no role and was still at Gallipoli when it occurred. I don't claim to be an expert on the subject, but I do wonder where one of the other reviewers, who compares Attaturk to Hitler and Stalin, gets his information. It is clear that the population exchange between Greece and Turkey in the 1920s is similar in some respects to ethnic cleansing. However, I suspect that Mango is correct in portraying the atrocities as occurring on both sides. It is also clear that the Greeks were the aggressors in the Turkish War of Independence and the Kemal Attaturk's role in defeating them entitles him to a place in Turkish history equivalent to Washington and Grant. Mango sheds more light than Kinross on Attaturk's unusual personal life. He also indicates that in 1926 he allowed a number of innocent people to be executed and persecuted to remove all potential competitors from the Turkish political scene. Whether Attaturk's efforts to wean the Turks from Islamic fundamentalism are successful in the long run remains to be seen. Personally, I regard him very highly for trying, and wish there were more leaders with the courage to confront the religious fundamentalists in other countries, not only the Islamic countries, but also the United States and Israel.
Rating: 
Summary: Important Man, Much Needed Book, Tough Read
Review: Before I started teaching global history in New York I had no idea who Kemal Ataturk was. After a Year of teaching Global History I had no idea who Kemal Ataturk was. The only time I saw his name was on the New York State Regents Final Exams in Global History. When I saw his name the first time, I did not think much of it. It was when I saw his name on the test several years in a row that I decided to pay attention. For those of us who teach Global History in NY, Kemal Ataturk is one of those people we need to learn about and teach to the kids. In was under that pretext that I learned more about Ataturk and his importance in world history and not just in my classroon. Therefore I was very excited to find this spring that a new English language biography of his life was written using many Turkish sources. The book itself is very needed. It was something I knew I had to read to improve my understanding of Ataturks life and his importance. Overall the book is good. The book is best in describing the state of the crumbling Ottoman Empire before WWI. The book also does a great job showing how the Young Turks came to power and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the rise of Kemal and the Turkish republic after WWI. I enjoyed reading about the intrigue, the rival leaders, the disasterous Balkan War, WWI, and the Greek Wars. The book also does a great job showing how Ataturk finally overthrew the Ottoman Empire while at the same time dealing with the Greeks, and the victorious Allies after WWI. The book also clearly shows Ataturk's love of Drink and how it shortened his life. Unfortunately this is not an easy read. This books takes a long time to get through. Too much of the book is also a laundry list. To often the author gives too much detail. To many day by day descriptions of events. These faults make the book tough to read. However, the ultimate understanding one gains of Ataturk and Turkish history is worth the effort. I also feel the author failed to address the Armenian genocide. The Ottoman Empire committed horrible acts upon the Armenians and this book failed to address this and any role or thoughts Ataturk had on this subject. I do not know if Ataturk had anything to do with the Armenians and I would have liked to find out. Kemal Ataturk is the father of modern Turkey. He overthrew the Ottoman Empire, secured a sovereign Turkey, modernized Turkey, westernized Turkey, and is a major figure in World History. This book is not the most exciting biography in the world but it tells the story of an important man who needs to be studied.
Rating:
Summary: Powerful, Unrivalled Achievement
Review: Certainly, I am not the only Turk who feels indebted to Andrew Mango for his wonderful biography of a man whom the west could know more about. However, before reading this scholarly, thoroughly researched and authoritative book about Ataturk, those who are not familiar with the history of Ottoman Turkey could read as a primer Lord Kinross' "A History of the Ottoman Centuries". In a gesture of gratitude, the Turkish Parliament in 1927 conferred on Mustafa Kemal the surname Ataturk which means "Father Turk". To this day, Turks revere Mustafa Kemal Ataturk because his vision, courage and leadership eventually saved the country from invasion and extinction as a nation. Ataturk's progressive reforms have allowed Turkey to develop into the modern nation it is today. Even his ardent critics in Turkey enjoy freedom today because of Ataturk's life long dedication and service for his country. This book is a gem, a rich source of information about the life and times of Kemal Ataturk. Anyone who is interested in further understanding the character of this brilliant soldier, the architect of the Turkish Republic and a rare individual whose spirit is alive and well in Turkey today should read this book.
Rating: 
Summary: can't keep up with the names
Review: Doubtlessly, Dr. Mango knows what he's talking about. He swamps the reader in names, names, names and doesn't tell the story. Attaturk needs to be rewritten as a narrative, not an exhausting list of Attaturk's buds. I do want to understand this complex man, but I think I'll start in another place.
|
