Rating: 
Summary: Disjointed, long, and overly detailed
Review: A book like this should serve to give us a history of the Balkans. What it does instead is give us a history of the different regions within the Balkans. Imagine a book that claims to be about Europe, but breaks the book into separate sections on England, France, Germany, Italy, and Poland; apply that concept to the Balkans and you get Glenny's book.The Balkans is also too long and detailed. The book seems to be tailored to an audience that is more interested in journailsm than scholarship. In spite of it all, the book is still worth reading.
Rating:
Summary: Thoughtful, readable account
Review: Aside from briefly studying the Yugoslav Civil War of the 1990s while in college, I didn't know much about modern Balkan history before reading this book. I recommend it to anyone who wishes to gain more insight on the current state of affairs among and within the Balkan countries.
Glenny provides a concise, readable account of Balkan histiry since the turn of the 18th century while remaining faithful to his thesis. Perhaps his background in journalism provides the intellectual discipline to avoid straying from his central argument. In any case, this approach makes reading about extremely complex events, trends and historical forces much less confusing.
However, based on his account, one gets the impression that the history of this region during this period has been largely reactive. In this respect, the book provides a somewhat limited perspective.
Rating: 
Summary: Refreshing survey of Balkan history
Review: Glenny presents a very refreshing, well-planned, and very readable general survery of modern Balkan history. Starting out with a discussion of the "West's" Orientalist outlook on the Balkans, Glenny sets out to discuss the region's history with a view to correct many of the misconceptions developed in the popular foreign discourse on the region. Glenny's extensive discussion of the history of the non-Yugoslav nations is also appreciated, as the history of these nations has often been forgotten, despite their historical involvement with the Yugoslav state. Having lived and travelled in the Balkans, I can say from personal experiences and encounters that Glenny conveys an accurate, and relatively unbiased account of the region's rich history. This book is a MUST for anyone interested in understanding the past, present, and future of this most interesting region. It is a shame that most of the policy makers, and journalists involved with the region have not read this book -- a fact made plain by their often skewed coverage.
Rating: 
Summary: A fairly mediocre Balkan history
Review: Glenny's history of the Balkans is often engaging and highly readable, and is perhaps suitable for a newcomer to the subject. However, it is unsuitable for understanding the region in any depth. Glenny has clearly conducted an enormous amount of research on the topic, but often limits the scope of his history to the relationship between the Balkans and the Great Powers. The latter is unfailingly dominant. While this fact is advertised on the front cover, Glenny neglects the organic components of Balkan history, and the text suffers for it. For example, in considering the Bulgarian National Revival period and the Russo-Turkish war, Glenny devotes far more attention to the military and diplomatic intervention of the West and the purely territorial/political ramifications of this intervention. Insufficient attention is paid to the Bulgarian aspects of the political movement, and the importance of the Bulgarian Exarchate Church and the Greek-Bulgarian church conflict are greatly understated. Glenny's history is unsatisfactory as a scholarly history. For a more thoughtful and profound history of the Balkans, I recommend Barbara Jelavich or Maria Todorova.
Rating:
Summary: An Authoritative Look at a Conflicted Topic
Review: Having done a considerable amount of reading and reasrch on the Balkans, I have discovered that this history is very much debated and often subjectively interpreted. It is necessary to take into account the author of any work on this subject and to understand what their relationship to the subject is. This is true in any scholarly work but in the history of the Balkans it is particularly vital. I personally consider this an authority. It is what I turn to when I come across discrepancies in other texts. It is an easy and comprehensive read and I think a must-have for any individual interested in understanding the Balkans and/or Eastern European history.
Rating:
Summary: A monumental work with only minor shortcomings
Review: Misha Glenny attempts the unimaginable by trying to write a two hundred year comprehensive history of nationalism in the Balkans. Stunningly, his work is a tremedous success of epic proportions. His basic thesis is that the problems in the Balkans are not a result of the ignorance or war like nature of the Balkan people as many suggest but rather a result of the carelessness of Imperialism and the great powers.
Glenny's evidence is primarily drawn from the events leading up to and including WWI. Here lies the great strenght of the work. Glenny gives an in depth and accurate evaluation of the reasons for imperialistic expansion and how these actions affected the Balkan peoples. The overview of WWII is equally enlightening but not quite as impressive as that of WWI.
The book does have some minor shortcomings when it comes to the communist period. The chronological that Glenny keeps so nicely in place before beginnigs to break down. In addition, some areas lack in depth review. Most notalbly, there is very little of Bulgarian Strongman Todor Zhivkov. Most disappointing is dearth of information on the Bosinan War of 1992-5 and the war in Kosovo. It probably goes a little beyond the scope of the work which is primarily a backgroung to this situation. At 660 pages you cannot complain too much that he decided to end it but it does leave you wanting a little more.
Glenny was a correspondent for the BBC which makes the book a lot more accessible than most of the pedantic works put out by academia. His writing is entertaining enough with just enough anecdotes to keep the reader focused. Sometimes he feels the need to share his own personel views, like his opposition to the death penalty. (there is a slight European bias but nothing to be concern the average reader.) The work is comprehensive and easily the best read you will find on Balkan nationalism in general.
Rating:
Summary: A monumental work with only minor shortcomings
Review: Misha Glenny attempts the unimaginable by trying to write a two hundred year comprehensive history of nationalism in the Balkans. Stunningly, his work is a tremedous success of epic proportions. His basic thesis is that the problems in the Balkans are not a result of the ignorance or war like nature of the Balkan people as many suggest but rather a result of the carelessness of Imperialism and the great powers.
Glenny's evidence is primarily drawn from the events leading up to and including WWI. Here lies the great strenght of the work. Glenny gives an in depth and accurate evaluation of the reasons for imperialistic expansion and how these actions affected the Balkan peoples. The overview of WWII is equally enlightening but not quite as impressive as that of WWI.
The book does have some minor shortcomings when it comes to the communist period. The chronological that Glenny keeps so nicely in place before beginnigs to break down. In addition, some areas lack in depth review. Most notalbly, there is very little of Bulgarian Strongman Todor Zhivkov. Most disappointing is dearth of information on the Bosinan War of 1992-5 and the war in Kosovo. It probably goes a little beyond the scope of the work which is primarily a backgroung to this situation. At 660 pages you cannot complain too much that he decided to end it but it does leave you wanting a little more.
Glenny was a correspondent for the BBC which makes the book a lot more accessible than most of the pedantic works put out by academia. His writing is entertaining enough with just enough anecdotes to keep the reader focused. Sometimes he feels the need to share his own personel views, like his opposition to the death penalty. (there is a slight European bias but nothing to be concern the average reader.) The work is comprehensive and easily the best read you will find on Balkan nationalism in general.
Rating:
Summary: Deeply flawed
Review: Misha Glenny is a good reporter and an even better writer, but it takes more than that to make a good historian. This is particularly true for such an ambitious history, which covers events in the Balkans for an almost 200-year period. Indeed, much of the time this book reads like an extended newspaper feature for the Sunday edition rather than a work of in-depth, intelligent analysis. Not much more can be expected, since Glenny depended primarily on (generally very good) secondary sources and a number of travelogues, memoirs and similarly "light" primary literature. Even here, though, it's obvious that Glenny found the vastness of the material daunting, so he often fails to integrate the findings and conclusions of the many authors who came before him and neglects many major themes in Balkan history. The result is a summary of wars, crisis, etc. and even here the coverage is rather episodic: countries and peoples emerge, disappear and then abruptly reappear throughout the text. Thus, Romania is dealt with until its provinces were first unified and its independence was recognized during the 1860s, then fades out only to reappear for a brief cameo in the Balkan Wars over 40 years later. History in Bulgaria apparently ended after communist dictator Zhivkov assumed power in the mid-1950s, while Greek history peters out somewhere during the 1970s. By the 1990s, only the republics of the former Yugoslavia receive any attention at all, and this is rather piecemeal at that. There is also a rather odd section devoted to post-WW2 Turkey, which, if one can still consider it a Balkan country after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, leaves one to question why Glenny neglected telling us something about the crucial interwar period, when Kemal Ataturk initiated the efforts to transform Turkey into a modern, secular state. This is truly a journalist's approach to history: always focusing on major, often violent and traumatic events and the movers and shakers like kings, dictators, generals and major politicians, while almost completely ignoring the less noticeable people (writers, scholars, intellectuals) and often confusing (hence the need for illumination) economic, social and cultural trends and changes so crucial to a true comprehension of the region's history. There is therefore never any meaningful discussion of nationalism - part of the book's subtitle! - which has had such an inestimable impact on Balkan history. Instead, nationalism is just treated as some sort of amorphous force that emerges to make matters even worse during times of trouble. The local manifestations of other ideologies that have had and still do exercise a great influence on events in the region (socialism, communism, fascism, peasant populism) are similarly neglected. Glenny instead frequently resorts to the simpler (and much more readable) device of using anecdotal evidence to illustrate larger points. This is at times interesting and informative - particularly the section that deals with the memories of Holocaust survivors from several Balkan countries - but falls short of providing an understanding of the causes or motives behind specific events. Perhaps this failed effort best illustrates the fact that there are few if any living Balkan historians in the English-speaking world who are willing to take on the task of writing a well-researched, well-argued and well-written integrative contemporary history of the Balkans for both students and lay readers alike. This leaves the field open to talented and well-meaning, but nonetheless unqualified publicists like Glenny.
Rating:
Summary: Comprehensive, clear, and readable
Review: Misha Glenny succeeds marvelously at presenting a broad history of southeastern Europe as a combination of national and international forces. He does not unduly belabor his points, he is generally fair to all his subjects, and he organizes an incredible amount of information into a coherent framework without relying on grandiose theories. Some academic types may deride this as mere "informed journalism", but it is refreshing to read a history book of this scale in which the author relies on knowledge and literary competence rather than hagiography, melodrama, or overindulgent theorizing. Throughout the book Glenny tries to demonstrate that the region's contemporary problems are mainly the result of interference from the great powers rather than suppressed historical animosities. Ultimately I think the book demonstrates otherwise, showing that while the great powers were excellent enablers, strife in the Balkans has consistently been fueled by local alliances, less-than-neighborly designs on Bosnia, Croat fascism, Serb nationalism, Albanian exceptionalism, etc. That Glenny's point can be well taken but is not entirely convincing is an enormous credit to him as a writer even if it diminishes him as an advocate. The greatest problem I have with the book is that it is not long enough. Postwar history, which reads as a comparatively brief outline, could use another two hundred pages.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Depth but Excessively Detailed
Review: Misha Glenny's book "The Balkans - Nationalism, War and the Great Powers, 1804-1999" is very in-depth look at that regions history. As others have said, this is a very detail look at this area and seems to cover every possible part of it.
The one problem that I had with the book is that not having a large "expertise" on this area before I started reading it, I was forced to constantly go back to previous areas to make sure how this group was relate to that group, etc. I would have enjoyed some part or section that had maybe some graphs, pictures, or charts that could be used to help keep everyone straight.
Other than this comment, I found this a very good book.
|
