By RJ Tarr at www.activehistory.co.uk / 1

Recent Books on Stalin’s USSR

Main Arguments

Gulag: A

History of the Soviet Camps

by Anne Applebaum

(2004)

Importance of the book ▪ This is the first major work on the Gulag system since Solzhenitsyn's controversial "Gulag Archipelago" of 1973 (he was accused of fabricating large parts of his memoirs to paint a bleaker picture of Stalin's USSR). Key ideas ▪ The Gulag system was in fact even worse that Solzhenitsyn argued. ▪ Its roots can be traced back not not just to Lenin (= Solzhenitsyn) but right back to Das Kapital. ▪ The worst depravities of the Gulag system were part of a deliberate master plan; not due to administrative chaos. The Big Question "Why do we know and care so much about the concentration camps, and so little about the Gulags?"

Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar by Simon Sebag

Montefiore (2004)

Importance of the book ▪ Montefiore focuses on Stalin's personality, family and friendships rather than an abstract treatment of "big themes" like the Purges, Collectivisation and the Five Year Plans. Main arguments ▪ Stalin was not a dull, dreary, heartless monster. He was capable of great charm as well as passionate hatred. ▪ Stalin inspired not just fear, but genuine devotion, from a clique of surprisingly talented and important Bolsheviks. ▪ Stalin's closest circle was surprisingly stable – e.g. Molotov, Kaganovich, Voroshilov, Mikoyan. The Big Question "What was Stalin like on a personal level, and what was his relationship to his ministers?"

Young Stalin

by Simon Sebag Montefiore

(2007)

Importance of the book ▪ Montefiore's book takes us right back to Stalin's previously murky youth to reinforce the now-popular view that Stalin was anything but a "grey blur" Main arguments ▪ The ultimate success of the Bolshevik party in 1917 was not just the work of Lenin's oratory and Trotsky's organisation, but Stalin's finances (he organised a multi-million pound bank robbery in Tiflis in 1903 for the party which was essential for its survival, growth and triumph). ▪ Although supremely intelligent, Stalin was never a Marxist ideologue. He was a gangster. He was not corrupted by power; he was always corrupt. ▪ Stalin was never a "Grey Blur". Even as a young revolutionary, he was sharp, brave and dynamic. The Big Question "What was Stalin's role in, and contribution to, the Bolshevik Party up to 1917?"

By RJ Tarr at www.activehistory.co.uk / 2

The

Whisperers: Private Life in Stalin's Russia

by Orlando Figes (2007)

Importance of the book Montefiore's approach, for all its value in "bringing alive" the leading figures of the period, is still fundamentally traditional – a "Great Man" approach to the period. Figes seeks to redress the balance by assessing the role of ordinary people in Stalin's great experiment: not just as abstract national minorities or social groupings, but as living, breathing individuals speaking in their own words from their own memoirs. Main arguments ▪ The devastation of the Stalinist system was even more monumental than we had previously thought. Not only were people killed in their millions, but millions more were left emotionally and psychologically disabled by their experiences. ▪ Despite this, the family unit was never destroyed by Stalin's efforts. People were prepared to spend decades if necessary tracing missing relatives. The Big Question "To what extent were the Soviet people victims, and to what extent were they perpetrators, in Stalin's Russia?" "What were the psychological effects of Stalinism upon the Soviet people and their families?"

The Great Terror: A

Reassessment by Robert Conquest

(2008)

Importance of the book ▪ Conquest's book stresses the similarities between Lenin and Stalin, the continuities between Leninism and Stalinism. By so doing, he suggests that socialism is itself a flawed philosophy. ▪ The second edition was produced after Conquest gained access to the newly opened Soviet archives in 1990. He did not change any of his main findings. In fact, when his publishers asked him what title he wished to use for the new book, he suggested "I Told You So, You F*cking Fools!". Main arguments ▪ Lenin was just as bad as Stalin. ▪ The Stalinist system was the logical result of Leninism, not an aberration from it. ▪ Socialism is flawed and impractical. The Big Question "Was Stalinism and its horrors the logical culmination of Leninism?" (Conquest answers a resounding "Yes!").

Questions and Tasks 1. If you were forced to read just one of these boo ks (God forbid), which one would you choose and why? 2. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the current trend towards "personalised" histories of the Stalinist period? 3. Why do you think that Hitler, the Gestapo and th e Nazi concentration camps are commonly regarded as being much more evil than Stal in, the NKVD and the Gulag network? 4. What lessons for today does a study of the Stali nist period provide us with?