Rating: 
Summary: Maybe the best history we have, but perversely incomplete
Review: Rousseau's legacy is one of the most fascinating details of the book. Schama's treatment of a number of other aspects of the Revolution is also exemplary: the economic reforms that preceded the Revolution; the Vendeean uprising and the bloody reprisals; the September massacres; the terror in Lyons; the careers of Talleyrand, Lafayette, and David. But Schama's anti-Romanticism reminds me of Burke's. In addition, he conceives of reform as a basic concept encompassing both economic and representational reforms; while in the American Revolution, these were clearly linked, the French Revolution was entirely different. Worse, in this nine-hundred-page book, he leaves too much out: Madame Roland is barely mentioned; the tennis court oath is not explained; nor is the Paris commune; and instead of ending where the Revolution really ended, on December 25, 1799, with the rise to power of Napoleon Bonaparte, Schama closes his book, without explaining why, with the execution of Robbespierre four years earlier.
Rating: 
Summary: Fascinating History
Review: Schama brings great light to bear on an immensely complicated and fascinating series of events that constituted the Revolution.Written in the form of a good novel it is immensely engaging and the opposite to dry,arid history.The most important thing Schama does is disabuse us of stale,trite opinions as to how and why the Revolution happened. The incredible complexity and cast of characters is simply stunning-it is an amazing story as to what actually happened and even more amazing when you realise that Louis-far from being a despot was himself an enlightened and intelligent man but vacillated at crucial moments-he could have saved his monarchy but instead a new nation was formed almost on an ad hoc basis as the members of the self styled assembly took power for themselves and then didn't know what to do once they got it! This is a great piece of History writing on a fascinating subject-it has certainly prompted me to read more books on this pivotal event.
Rating: 
Summary: More Right Wing blather about The Cold War
Review: Simon Schama's book, Citezan's has nothing to do with the French Revolution of 1789, and everything to do with the on-going revisionist assualt on the history of the Cold War. Perhaps some day, someone niether terrified of the left-wing, nor a stoodge of the right, will write a true useful history of a fascinating time, and deal with the revolution in context! But, don't hold your breath waiting, and don't waste your money reading this farce of a book.
Rating: 
Summary: Finally persuaded me to accept...
Review: That history is inherently political. Schama's treatment of the Revolution as a destructive force to decent people (the Old Regime) should be pretty embarassing even for conservatives (not neccessarily by modern standards, I mean only in contrast to revolutionaries). The Old Regime was by no means as modern or innovative as he would have people believe. Yes, of course there were idealistic nobles, but the peasants were starving. Hunger doesn't make an appearance until page 280-something. His basic lack of compassion for the early revolutionaries, and their basic human needs, is pretty disheartening. It is also sad to see him shrug off the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen. It just seems hypocritical for him to focus on the revolutionary (benevolent) nature of Old Regime nobles and not focus on the truly revolutionary nature of the DRMC.I've always been idealistic about the unbiased nature of histroy, and have been unwilling to link politics with history. But Schama's book, truly laced with conservative prejudices and presuppositions, kind of disillusioned me. He is a very good writer, and his incorporation of pictoral evidence is good, but he gives a slanted view of the Revolution. Nevertheless, read it, but do so in comparison to an alternate history of the Revolution. For an equally skewed version, socialist histories are great counters. Georges Lefebvre is good (for a counter), and draw your own conclusions based upon the often counter theories. Just don't think of Schama as the unbiased truth.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent but revisionist narrative of the French Revolution
Review: The French Revolution is one of the decisive landmarks in human history. Though feudalism was long past much of it's vestiges (social, political and economic) remained in some form or other in Western Europe. By the end of Napolean's reign it had all been swept away. Even Metternich couldn't put Europe back together again. For better or for worst the French Revolution set the tone for much of what would follow in Europe. At its worst the Terror was a glimpse into the horrors of the Nazi's and Stalin's great purges. At its best the ideals of the revolution set the tone for free elections, representative government and constitutional law. For revisionist historians it's the former that is the great legacy while for those of the old school it is the latter that is the primary message. Schama's "Citizens" is above all a great narrative history well documented and thought out. Like most who lean toward the revisionist side he is somewhat sympathetic to the regime and the nobility. That information should certainly aid the reader while navigating this well written work. You can't help but admire the combination of writing and research that marks this great book. One note, Schama's area of expertise was not originally the French Revolution but rather the Dutch trading empire and it's aftermath. The strengths of Citizens is non stop chronicle of the actions and interactions of the key members of the revolution's story, from Louis the XVI's incompetence to Robspierre's chilling demeaner. This is an almost epic narrative of the age. It unfortunately, but because of its size, understandably ends far too soon for a complete grasp of the whole era and its aftermath. Definately recommended for students and casual readers of history.
Rating:
Summary: Tour de force
Review: This book, in compelling narrative, makes is clear that the French Revolution actually began not with the clamor of the common people but with the blue-blooded aristocracy and the high clergy of the ancien régime who had been enamored with the writings of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and the views of the enlightenment (i.e., convincingly demonstrated in the Assembly of Notables convened in February 1787). Moreover, the revolution spilling into the streets of France began not in Paris but in the streets of Grenoble, the actual cradle of the revolution, with the Day of Tiles (June 10, 1788), and from there eventually spreading to the countryside with the grain riots and finally in March through April of 1789 in the concerted defiance of the hated game laws protecting birds and animals. The mobs learned to command the streets after the Réveillon Riots (April 1789) so that by July 14, 1789, they had had ample practice for the storming of the Bastille. One gets to know with almost casual familiarity the important personages in the ancien régime, including those working behind the scene. (This has been heretofore usually the case only with the most bloodthirsty revolutionaries like Marat and Robespierre.) Regardless of what you have been led to believe, the earliest revolutionaries were not bourgeoisie, but nobility and high clergy, many of them functionaries in the old regime. Intoxicated by idealism and Rousseau's sublime concepts of virtue, reason, equality, etc., they had set out to correct real or perceived iniquities in France. Louis XVI's ministers saw the dangers lurking ahead, but seemed impotent to effectively protect the monarchy and solve the problems afflicting France, particularly the looming, serious financial problems and the threat of national bankruptcy. Nevertheless, these old regime functionaries, for the first time, are seen by the author as people of flesh and blood, although with all the frailties of ordinary men when all too often in times of crises - unlike other books in which they are portrayed almost anonymously as faceless aristocrats imbued not in human virtue, but only suffused of arrogance and other vices of idle and luxuriant living. This book argues persuasively that the old regime was of itself undergoing changes of modernity in trade, technology, and laissez faire capitalism influenced by the teachings of the physiocrats, and these changes, rather than being openly welcomed by the people because of the advent of greater economic freedom, were actually decried and resented because these changes brought them insecurity and incertitude. The common people wanted cheap bread and regimentation whereas the lesser nobility wanted to hold onto the only thing left to them - their titles of nobility and what remained of their ancient land privileges, poor as most of them had become. It wasn't the lesser nobility or the bourgeoisie who led in the revolution. From the outset of the revolution, for the most part, the liberal elite coming from the upper crust of the high nobility and clergy pushed for progressive change from above (operating in the voice of Mirabeau, Siéyès, Tallyrand, etc.) leading, whereas the poor and displaced persons militated from below. The destructive winter of 1788-1789 had forced the destitute and other disaffected elements of society to tread in the path of the revolution. The bitter harvest of 1787, the scarcities that followed, and the concomitant high prices for grain, bread, and other commodities did not help the looming economic and financial crisis. Mr. Schama certainly provides good evidence and persuasive arguments that those men of the nobility and clergy who were making war against their own classes set the revolution in motion - a tumbling, violent cascade that later they were unable to control. One must visualize the French Revolution from its inception in 1789 to the end of the Terror on 9 Thermidor as a speeding log moving from left to right representing first the alleged enemies of the people, the aristocrats, the refractory priests, then the constitutional monarchists and foreigners, then the Feuillants, Girondins, Dantonists (and the Cordeliers), Hébertists, even more moderate or inconvenient Jacobins, and finally the Robespierrists - devoured by their own revolution. This log is ever being mounted by fresh radicals on the left while it continuously moves and is turned into lumber on the right by the circular saw of the revolution. (Only the Hébertists were out of sequence in the political spectrum only because the dictatorship of Robespierre outflanked them in the struggle for power.) In the end, if the aristocratic leaders didn't escape as émigrés from the flames of the revolution they had created - almost uniformly, they, like reluctant ordinary Frenchmen, paid the ultimate price in the guillotine. Miguel A. Faria, Jr., M.D., Editor-in-Chief of the Medical Sentinel of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) and author of Vandals at the Gates of Medicine (1995) and Medical Warrior: Fighting Corporate Socialized Medicine (1997).
Rating:
Summary: spectacular panorama of a watershed
Review: This has got to be one of the best history books I have ever read. Unlike his other books, which all to often get lost in sensuous detail, this one is a perfect balance of analysis and portraits of the quirkiness of the human condition. In other words, you get a flavor for the vast array of people involved, while the narrative follows well trod lines. It is an immensely complex story. The result is a masterpiece and truly great. Schama's take on the Revolution is that what happened was far more richly textured than the crude class-based analyses that have held sway for too long. In what I believe is a convincing performance, he shows that not only was (the politically inept) Louis XVI pursuing many progressive agendas for change, but that it was the aristocrat-intellectuals who formed the basis of the Revolutionary leadership and not bourgeois or working class heroes. What made it so violent, in this reading, was the collapse of the old order and then the struggles that ensued for the control of the instruments of military and police power. It was the birth of the popular army, he concludes, and not the abstract ideals enshrined in official propaganda, that was the real legacy of the Revolution and the basis for Napoleon's later military dominance. What makes it all such a watershed event was that it was the first example of the passions unleashed by nationalist fanaticism: the jacobans led directly to the communards and then the more purified revolutionary violences of fascism and marxist-leninism. Reading of the horrors of the Terror, this is also convincing (and frightening). One of the greatest pleasures of this book is the personalities that Schama describes in loving detail, as they appear and re-appear at crucial moments. You get the heavyweights Lafayette and Talleyrand, but also innumerable lesser known characters, whose lives and fates the author takes to symbolise the Revolution's legacy. If you know Paris, you learn who a lot of the people were whose names are on the streets and the institutions, such as Necker and de la Tour du Pin. That made it especially fun for me, but that is personal. That being said, the book is occasionally uneven. Though Schama tells a great story in the most elegant of prose, there are sections that read as if it were written too fast. Moreover, the story is so complex that some basic details, such as what the people in the various factions actually thought and stood for, are lost or obscured by the endless succession of stories. Warmly recommended.
Rating: 
Summary: Wonderful account of a bloody time
Review: This is a brilliant account of a bloody time, when the parties in power toppled like dominoes, when men did not hesitate to execute other men in the names of morality and virtue, and a time when governmental control was lost. Some of the best parts of this book were the section on Beaumarchais, the royal family's doomed flight, and the fall of the Girondins. This is a very detailed book with the first 200 pages as a sort of introduction to what France was culturally and politically in 1789 and how that was a dramatic change from about 1770. This is a new view of the Revolution where the author shows how it was the aristocrats, turned citizen-nobles, who led the Revolution and not the people. The people were the sheep and power was determined by who could control the violence of the people and use it to their own advantages. This book also contains a lot of characters and sometimes that can get confusing, many times I had to refer to the index in order to read back on a particular character. Because of that and a few, but rare, dry spots I give this book 4 stars and I highly recommend it to both historian and non-historian. As to a previous reviewer's comment on why it ends with the death of Robespierre and not the final rise of Napoleon is because after the death of Robespierre the actual Revolution was over. In the years from 1794-1799, it was just waiting for Napoleon to seize power. Once again, buy this book you will not be disappointed.
Rating:
Summary: A detailed look at the events of the French Revolution
Review: This is a hefty volume, and while the writing is sometimes a little too academic, I managed to read the entire book over several weeks. I found this book to be very enlightening in describing the conditions in France prior to the Revolution and explaining the motivations and reasons behind the Revolution. These early portions were by far the strongest part of the book. However, I found the subsequent descriptions of the events of the Revolution to be confusing. Part of that may be due to the confusion of the Revolution itself, but it was hard to keep track of all the various individuals involved and their various relationships to each other. The book's ending was also somewhat disappointing, as it never really described how the Revolution ended with the rise of Napoleon. It seems that at least a little discussion of the relationship of the Revolution and Napoleon would have been appropriate here, but then again, the book was plenty long enough without it! Overall, an educational book, especially in the opening chapters.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Examination of the Revolution
Review: This is a massive book (over 800 pages) that exhaustively examines the French Revolution. It has a large number of illustrations and maps that brings the text to life and while Doyle's History of the French Revolution may be more neutral, this book addresses areas not fully explored by Doyle.
One of Schama's themes is that the common peasants did not desire liberty so much as protection from their landlords in the local courts and to preserve grazing rights. Had Louis been a little more assertive he could certainly have remained King of a constitutional monarchy. All in all a facinating read.
|
