Books about the Russian Revolution/Civil War from an anarchist perspective?

[Aspiring Humanist]

Does anyone know of any published accounts of the revolution and civil war from the anarchists perspective? Maybe something like Homage to Catalonia, or a journal of some kind?
Thanks

[x359594]

The Unknown Revolution by Voline, A History of the Makhnovist Movement by Petr Arshinov, Anarchy's Cossack by Alexander Skirda, The Anarchists in the Russian Revolution by Paul Avrich, Kronstadt 1921 by Paul Avrich, The Russian Tragedy by Alexander Berkman, The Bolshevik Myth by Alexander Berkman, The Kronstadt Uprising by Ida Mett, My Disillusionment in Russia by Emma Goldman and The Guillotine at Work by G.P. Maximov.

[praxis1966]

Word. AH, if you read everything in x's list you'll know just about everything you ever wanted to know and more about the subject.

[RED DAVE]

I would add Victor Serge's Anarchists and the Russian Revolution.

The following is somewhat academic but a good introduction.

http://www.cultiv.net/cultranet/1129719388anarchists_russianrevolution.pdf

RED DAVE

[bezdomni]

You should read "Ten Days That Shook the World (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Days_that_Shook_the_World)" by John Reed.

It isn't from an "Anarchist perspective", more simply I would say just with a revolutionary perspective. It is very well-written, a classic work in journalism.

[Os Cangaceiros]

You should read "Ten Days That Shook the World (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Days_that_Shook_the_World)" by John Reed.

It isn't from an "Anarchist perspective", more simply I would say just with a revolutionary perspective. It is very well-written, a classic work in journalism.

Buuuuuuut....it's not what the OP asked for.

Anyway. Emma Goldman's writings on her time in Russia (which was re-published as "My Disillusionment In Russia"...that was not it's original title, IIRC) is the only book on the nascent USSR that I've read. It's OK.

Well, actually, I don't remember much of it. But hey, it's from an anarchist perspective. She was an anarchist, she was in Russia, she wrote about it. Check it out.

[bezdomni]

Buuuuuuut....it's not what the OP asked for.


So what? It is one of the best accounts of the Russian revolution, and it was written by a revolutionary (who sympathized more politically with the communists of his time than with the anarchists).

Anarchists and communists alike would both gain from reading that book. In fact I would expect anarchists would quite like it, as Stalin is mentioned briefly only twice.

I've read a lot of books on the Russian revolution (including Goldman's writings, which are not bad, but not as powerful as Reed's book from a purely literary point of view), and none of them capture the atmosphere and excitement of the upheaval as Reed did.

Lenin read it in 1918 and liked it so much he wrote an introduction for it (naturally, Lenin's introduction was omitted in most later copies and the book was banned in the Soviet Union after Stalin took power).

John Reed was so respected in the Soviet Union that he was buried in the Kremlin Wall, along with Soviet leaders and war heroes.


Anyway. Emma Goldman's writings on her time in Russia (which was re-published as "My Disillusionment In Russia"...that was not it's original title, IIRC) is the only book on the nascent USSR that I've read. It's OK.


You know she was close friends with John Reed? They were both in Russia at the same time, and even shared an apartment for a while.

[Susurrus]

The movie Reds could be said to relate to this. Though it mainly centers around the relationship of John Reed and his wife, the second half takes place in the Russian Revolution and Civil war. It's not explicitly anarchist, but it has a critical view of the aftermath of the revolution and Bolshevik authority, and there are several scenes with Emma Goldman pretty much reading excepts from her books about the subject. Here's a nice little scene to demonstrate: www(dot)youtube(dot)com/watch?v=mEGxN-AJxN4

Good movie regardless, sorry if it's not what you're looking for.

Fun fact about Ten Days etc, Lenin said everybody should read it, Stalin banned it almost immediately. I believe it has an excerpt of an article Stalin wrote in Pravda praising Trotsky as one of the chief architects of the revolution in it somewhere, though that may just be my particular edition. If you do get a copy, get one with extensive notes included, as he made quite a few major slips in his memory that the editors generally correct with an explanatory note(hardly surprising, seeing as his notes for the book were taken by the U.S. Customs agents upon his return and never given back to him).

[Os Cangaceiros]

I know about John Reed and associates. I just think that it's bad form when someone asks for a recommendation for something from a specific ideological standpoint and gets something that may be totally opposed to that standpoint (for example, if I wanted left communist recommendations and someone said "oh you should totally read "Left Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder by Lenin"). Maybe the recommendation was totally innocuous though.

[Bitter Ashes]

I recently got a book called The Russian Anarchists by Paul Avrich from the library. Just finished reading it last week. It's a really good book and around half of the book is related to this subject. I recommend it

edit: It is worth pointing out though that it is a history book, with some political analysis, not a journey like Homage to Catalonia. I'd still say it's worth a look!

[bezdomni]

Maybe the recommendation was totally innocuous though.

The book I recommended isn't some Leninist "hang the anarchists" rag, it isn't either intrinsically Leninist or anarchist (e.g. it can be equally appreciated by both trends).

More importantly, it is basically "required reading" for anybody seriously trying to understand the Bolshevik revolution.

I sense that your objection to my recommendation is more closely related to the possibility that reading an account of the Bolshevik revolution that isn't written "for anarchists, by anarchists" will make the OP break with anarchism (or something), rather than simply finding my suggestion irrelevant to the original question. (I don't mean this to be rude.)

[Os Cangaceiros]

The book I recommended isn't some Leninist "hang the anarchists" rag, it isn't either intrinsically Leninist or anarchist (e.g. it can be equally appreciated by both trends).

More importantly, it is basically "required reading" for anybody seriously trying to understand the Bolshevik revolution.

I sense that your objection to my recommendation is more closely related to the possibility that reading an account of the Bolshevik revolution that isn't written "for anarchists, by anarchists" will make the OP break with anarchism (or something), rather than simply finding my suggestion irrelevant to the original question. (I don't mean this to be rude.)

Oh no, people can make up their own minds about the Bolsheviks and the Russian Revolution. I have no problem with that.

But John Reed was supportive of the Bolsheviks AFAIK, and he doesn't really give the perspective of a pretty marginal force in Russia at the time, when compared to the other factions (Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, Socialist Revolutionaries etc.)