[STUDY GROUP] Homage to Catalonia

[blackstone]

We will have a study group on Homage to Catalonia by Geoge Orwell. The text will be found here.

http://www.george-orwell.org/Homage_to_Catalonia/0.html

I am hoping to wrap up this study group by next week.

Monday- Chapter 1
Tuesday- Chapter 2
Wednesday- Chapter 3
Thursday- Chapter 4
Friday- Chapter 5
Saturday-Chapter 6
Sunday-Chapter 7
Monday- Chapter 8
Tuesday- Chapter 9
Wednesday- Chapter 10
Thursday- Chapter 1
Friday- Chapter 12 and Appendices

You can join anytime, but try to limit discussion to either the days chapters or previous day's chapters.


Brief Summary

[FONT=Arial]Orwell goes to Spain in 1936, 6 months after the beginning of the war; he goes there as a reporter, but soon after he enlists on the Republican side. He joins the militia of the P.O.U.M., (The workers’ party of Marxist unification), an anti-Stalinist party of anarchist tendency, called "trotskyist" by the enemies. After weeks of approximate battle training he’s sent to the front, where he lives weeks of inactivity, suffering from cold, badly armed and badly equipped. He goes on leave in Barcelona few days before the "days of Barcelona": the battle between the orthodox Communist party and the Anarchist and P.O.U.M.. Then he goes back to the front, where he’s badly wounded in the siege of Huesca. During his convalescence the P.O.U.M. is put outside the law so the writer, who has never been a member of that party, but has fought with its militia, must hide himself. Meanwhile he tries to obtain the liberation of some miliziamen in prison[/FONT]

[blackstone]

[FONT=Arial]Blackstone's Notes on Chapter 1:

[/FONT] [FONT=Arial]In chapter 1 the narrator describes his surprise visiting Barcelona, and he quotes his impressions: "I believed that this was a workers’ State and the entire bourgeoisie had either fled or been killed, or voluntarily come over to the workers’ side" but he also anticipates what will happen some months later: "In outward appearance it was a town where the wealthy classes had practically ceased to exist"; he also writes: "I did not realise that great numbers of bourgeois were simply lying low and disguising themselves as proletarians for the time being". Barcelona seemed to him a "utopian" town. Noting, "[/FONT][FONT=Arial]It was the first time that I had ever been in a town where the working class was in the saddle". He says of Barcelona, "[/FONT][FONT=Arial]Practically every building of any size had been seized by the workers and was draped with red flags or with the red and black flag of the Anarchists; every wall was scrawled with the hammer and sickle and with the initials of the revolutionary parties; almost every church had been gutted and its images burnt. Churches here and there were being systematically demolished by gangs of workmen. Every shop and cafe had an inscription saying that it had been collectivized; even the bootblacks had been collectivized and their boxes painted red and black"

Orwell also noted the way the Spaniards acted and how certain old practices were abolished. "[/FONT][FONT=Arial]Waiters and shop-walkers looked you in the face and treated you as an equal. Servile and even ceremonial forms of speech had temporarily disappeared. Nobody said 'Senior' or 'Don' or even 'Usted'; everyone called everyone else 'Comrade' and 'Thou', and said 'Salud!' instead of 'Buenos dias'.[/FONT][FONT=Arial]Tipping was forbidden by law; almost my first experience was receiving a lecture from a hotel manager for trying to tip a lift-boy." It was certainly a different atmosphere and a new culture than what he had ever experienced, a revolutionary culture. "[/FONT][FONT=Arial]Above all, there was a belief in the revolution and the future, a feeling of having suddenly emerged into an era of equality and freedom. Human beings were trying to behave as human beings and not as cogs in the capitalist machine"

The chapter also goes onto detailing the wretched conditions of the militia and the Spaniard tendency to put things off(like instructions on shooting a rifle) to another day.

Orwell says:
"T[/FONT][FONT=Arial]he Spaniards are good at many things, but not at making war. All
foreigners alike are appalled by their inefficiency, above all their maddening
unpunctuality. The one Spanish word that no foreigner can avoid learning is
manana--'tomorrow' (literally, 'the morning'). Whenever it is conceivably
possible, the business of today is put off until manana."

The chapter ends with him being sent to the Aragon front. Overall a real good chapter that describes revolutionary times in Barcelona.

[/FONT]

[Lynx]

I read this book many years ago. It will be a pleasure to read again
This book is more than just a grim account of the Spanish Civil War, and I'm grateful for that.

[blackstone]

[FONT=Arial]Blackstone's Notes on Chapter 2:
Chapter 2 begins with Orwell's company being sent to Alcubierre, which was just behind the line fronting Zaragoza and with him describing the towns horrible conditions."We were near the front line now, near enough to smell the characteristic smell of war--in my experience a smell of excrement and decaying food." Noting that the "constant come-and-go of troops had reduced the village to a state of unspeakable filth."

He mentions that up in the front line things were very quiet. The some bit of excitement they received was from Fascist deserters. ". Many of the
troops opposite us on this part of the line were not Fascists at all, merely
wretched conscripts who had been doing their military service at the time when
war broke out and were only too anxious to escape. Occasionally small batches of
them took the risk of slipping across to our lines. No doubt more would have
done so if their relatives had not been in Fascist territory."

When the militia finally get their weapons, Orwell is appalled at the condition of their weaponry. "I got a shock of dismay when I saw the thing they gave me. It was a German Mauser dated 1896-- more than forty years old! It was rusty, the bolt was stiff, the wooden barrel-guard was split; one glance down the muzzle showed that it was corroded and past praying for." Not only that, but the militia didn't receive decent instructions on how to use them! "The sergeant gave us five minutes' 'instruction', which consisted in explaining how you loaded a rifle and how you took the bolt to pieces. Many of the militiamen had never had a gun in their hands before, and very few, I imagine, knew what the sights were for".

The chapter goes on of Orwell's criticism of the militia, how they were not real soldiers and poorly trained. He also, admits that even on the frontline, they rarely saw any action. Yet, while in the trench, Orwell was almost shot in the head by a bullet! But luckily it whizzed past his ear![/FONT]

[blackstone]

Haven't had the chance to put my other notes up, i was hoping for more participation.

But oh well!

I'll jumpstart this again..

[Random Precision]

I'm game. You might want to post in ChitChat and Literature/Films, etc. so we can get more people in on this.

[jaffe]

haha I started reading yesterday because I bought the book.

[Coggeh]

K im in .. i have it somewhere around here ...

[ellipsis]

I am reviving this thread with an blog post of mine from earlier this year. The topic is reading the book as an insurgency manual.

Apart from being a fantastic novel and a historical account of an interesting period in history, Homage to Catalonia can be read as an case study for insurgency, guerrilla warfare and possible alternative organization schemes than those of conventional armed forces. While he fighting in which Orwell was engaged was trench warfare, the insight that he provides into the inner workings of POUM is invaluable to the guerrilla. There are four key lessons that I took away from the novel.

1) The importance of weapon maintenance on the battle field. Long time readers of the blog should already know this, and it is a pretty basic fact of military operations; firearms are metal(no polymers back then) machines which foul up, corrode, break, etc. and in order to operate safely, accurately and reliably, they need to be regularly maintained. This includes thorough cleaning after use and a comprehensive lubrication in order reduce wear on the gun, prolonging it's operational life and reduce misfires, malfunctions and jams. In the novel, the troops were cursed with poorly maintained Mausers and Enfields, which were grossly inaccurate due to the corrosion of the barrel's rifling. Orwell describes how most of the causalities they inflicted were upon the user as the rifle blew up in their faces. If POUM troops had been trained to clean their weapons, which they weren't the rifles would have never deteriorated to the dangerous condition that they were in by the time Orwell's unit received them.

2) The logistics of supplying troops. This is always a major consideration/expense/fetter in military operations. This relates to the first point; in order to maintain your weapons, it is helpful to have cleaning kits, gun oil, bore solvent and spare parts. The POUM had been given the worse weapons by the Republic for political reasons and blocked from receiving Soviet aid by the Communist party. Because of these barriers and due in general to supply shortages inherent to warfare, they soon ran out of food, matches, cigarettes and were never given the military supplies that the POUM so desperately needed. Fortunately I stockpile arms, ammo and supplies so that I will be able to look after me and my own, or could answer any call to defend Vermont from foreign aggression. The acquisition of supplies and procurement of foreign benefactors should be taken care of at the very beginning of an insurgency. In order to make ammo and other supplies last as long as possible, you should encourage conservancy at all times with your troops. Orwell recalls how his fellow militia men would waste ammo firing at fascists at absurd distances at which they could not ever hope to hit them.

3) Beware of foreign entanglements. Eventually Orwell has to flee Spain as the POUM was declared illegal, thanks to the Soviets and the Communist Party of Spain which followed their party's lines. Had the anarchists and trade unionist not allowed themselves to be stabbed in the back by the government for which they fought and died, perhaps a more sustainable version of the egalitarian, class-less society which flourished in Catalonia during the early days of the civil war would have been formed. Unfortunately the war against fascism was the most pressing issue at the time for failure in that struggle would have consequences far more sinister than failure to foment socialist/anti-capitalism revolution. It turns out that the enemy of your enemy is not always your friend. Alliances which other organization who have separate goals and motivations than your own should only be forged if absolutely necessary. Solid alliances are vital for the exchange of information and resources are necessary for military operations.

4) Does military equal hierarchy. Despite conventional beliefs that strict discipline and chain of command are vital to the operation of any military, there have been many attempts at more egalitarian forms of military organization. Various units in Spain at the time experimented with non-hierarchical formations of troops, including the POUM, which kept some very basic ranks and all troops and officers were equals. Orders were more like suggestions and initially lack of discipline severely disrupted their operations. But Orwell describes how eventually the troops became better disciplined and more responsive to orders. Although their organization model isn't perfect, I believe that contemporary movement can learn from lessons learned during the Spanish Civil War.

[Devrim]

I am reviving this thread with an blog post of mine from earlier this year. The topic is reading the book as an insurgency manual.

I think that this is to miss all the lessons of the events in Spain, which are primarilary political ones concerned with workers' power.

Devrim

[ellipsis]

I think that this is to miss all the lessons of the events in Spain, which are primarilary political ones concerned with workers' power.

Devrim

but that topic is more often written about and not really in lines with the theme of my blog, for which the piece was originally written. And one text can be read many ways, one interpretation does not detract from the value of another. Rather it adds to the discourse surrounding the text and Spanish civil war as a whole.

I think that the events in question give us many lessons on varied topics relating to making a revolution work.

[Devrim]

The question is not about the military issues though. The question is one of which class was in power. After the working class failed to overthrow the state, and the workers organisations were definitivly intergrated into the structures of that state, there could be no victory regardless of issues like logistics and carring for weapons.

The last gasp of the working class in the Spanish civil war was the uprising against the Republican government in Barcelona in May 1937. Probabely by then it was already too late, but certainly after that there is little for workers to choose from between either side. Defintely not for the communist/worker militants who were being murdered by the police forces of both sides.

The working class will not win revolutions through military power alone, or even mainly military power. The most important weapons of the working class are its solidarity and consciousness. Discussing how a war was fought seventy years ago does not help to develop either of these.

Devrim

[ellipsis]

Umm ok. You seem to be countering arguements I never made. my blog is about military warfare, so I wrote about the book in that context. I made no broader statement about the importance of relavance of my analysis.

[Devrim]

Yes, I think that the leftist fascination with the military and armed struggle is reactionary through and through.

Devrim

[Forward Union]

I think that this is to miss all the lessons of the events in Spain, which are primarilary political ones concerned with workers' power.

Devrim

This is true. But I would certainly not dismiss the military failures. The reality is, even if the workers had overthrown the republican government, they still would have been bombed to fuck by the luftwaffe and invaded by Italy.

Class concioussness cannot shoot down aircraft. But I agree that without the political class conciousness and workers power first, theres not as much worth defending.

Though even if there were no organised working class bodies, I would still (as a spanish citizen) would have prefered a liberal capitalist republic to a fascist dictatorship.

[Devrim]

This is true. But I would certainly not dismiss the military failures. The reality is, even if the workers had overthrown the republican government, they still would have been bombed to fuck by the luftwaffe and invaded by Italy.

I don't think that it is that useful to get into hyperfactuals. I think by 1936 the international working class had suffered a huge array of political and physical defeats. The world revolution had been defeated. Possibly a revolution is Spain could have reignited it, but it seems more reasonable to conclude that there wasn't a revolution in Spain because the working class was weighed down with democratic anti-fascist ideology.

Though even if there were no organised working class bodies, I would still (as a spanish citizen) would have prefered a liberal capitalist republic to a fascist dictatorship.

This misses the point though. It is not as if the working class in a particular country can decide which type of regime it wants. Yes, most people would rather live in Sweden than Iran. Do you believe that the solution for workers in Iran is to fight for a 'liberal capitalist republic'?

Devrim

[ellipsis]

Yes, I think that the leftist fascination with the military and armed struggle is reactionary through and through.

Devrim

I want to be able to defend me and when own from bougeois aggression and fascism, if the need arises. If that makes me reactionary then I'm on the wrong forum.

[ComradeOm]

There are four key lessons that I took away from the novel...

It would have been quicker to simply note the most important lesson - the complete failure of the militia structure

The working class will not win revolutions through military power alone, or even mainly military power. The most important weapons of the working class are its solidarity and consciousness. Discussing how a war was fought seventy years ago does not help to develop either of these

And a working class that is unable to defend its gains through force of arms will not see a successful revolution. "Military power" is something that all communists are forced to consider when faced with actual revolutionary circumstances. To so blithely dismiss the lessons of Spain strikes me as extremely short-sighted

[Nwoye]

It would have been quicker to simply note the most important lesson - the complete failure of the militia structure

could you please expand on the "failure" of the militia structure of anarchist spain. And also elucidate on what would have been a more efficient or desirable alternative.

[ComradeOm]

could you please expand on the "failure" of the militia structure of anarchist spain

This should be fairly self-evident to anyone who has read Orwell's work. The single most important criteria for success in a civil war, or indeed any war, is military success. That is, the ability of a military force to withstand and ultimately defeat an opposing military force. If a formation, no matter how egalitarian, cannot prove successful on the battlefield then it is worthless

This is the most important measurement by which wars are won and lost and it is the area in which the Spanish militias were abject failures; ie, they lost repeatedly. When the Army of Africa faced the newly raised militias in summer 1936 it was a matter of pitching professionals against amateurs and the latter lost badly. The march to Madrid was one of unopposed victories for the Nationalists. Republican militias proved incapable of preparing defensive positions, incapable of counter-attacking effectively, and incapable of even deploying coherently. Often they were incapable of even staying in the field when faced with the advancing Regulares. It was not until the Nationalist offensive bogged down at Madrid, an urban centre where militia tactics actually were effective, and the reorganisation of the militias into a Popular Army that the Republics were able to hold their ground and act in a coherent fashion

In short, I ask you to find one positive from the initial confrontations between Nationalist formations and Republican formations. The only one that Caballero et al (IIRC an opinion that Orwell shared) could see was that they bought time for the Republic to organise its own proper army under a central command

Similarly the problems described by theredson above are uniformly derived from the inefficient militia structure. Of course logistics, training, and procurement (to name just three) are going to suffer in an extremely decentralised structure. The early months of the SCW were marked by an almost complete lack of coordination between the various loyalist units - witness the armed clashes between Basque and anarchist militias (both nominally on the same side!) as early as August/September 1936. Frankly I have no idea how someone can look at this complete fiasco and assert that there is a model to be followed here. You, like Orwell himself at time, are happy to describe the many failings of the militias without making the rather obvious leap of logic - that these were due to the militia structure itself

And also elucidate on what would have been a more efficient or desirable alternative.

The Popular Army. Granted, it was hardly covered in success either but it at least proved capable of standing against the Nationalist formations. When "Orwell noted that eventual [sic] the troops became better disciplined and more responsive to orders", this was the growing influence of the Popular Army at work