Review

General Books

This collection of essays by leading scholars in history, political science, and sociology focuses on political revolution in Europe during the twentieth century. While acknowledging that revolution as a concept has been applied to all aspects of human life from science, industry, and agriculture to art, literature, and religion, the editors focus this volume on profound and enforced political change. Their stated goal is to offer a new look at an old topic by re-examining what revolution means in the light of the unexpected overthrow of communism between 1989 and 1991. Their underlying assumption is that our perceptions and definition of revolution may now be more fruitfully changed, broadened, and debated, because the demise of the Soviet Union as a political entity also brought with it the end of the definition of the Russian revolutions of 1917 as the main model of revolution.	1
The book includes a range of essays that are stand-alone explorations of specific revolutions, including events not traditionally considered classical revolutions, like Stalin's "Great Turn," The Spanish Civil War, and the Russian Revolution of 1905. Other essays study more conventional examples of revolution, such as Russia 1917, Eastern Europe 1989-91, and the Nazi seizure of power in 1933. An introductory essay by the editors frames the analytical context for the book and provides a list of questions to ponder: What makes a revolution? Is it necessary for a revolution to exhibit certain common features? What are revolutions about? What are the motivations and ideas that inspire and guide the participants? What makes for the success or failure of revolutions? To what extent is revolution ultimately elusive and uncontrollable? Some of the essays treat these questions with varying degrees of directness, but readers, by and large, are responsible for drawing their own comparisons and conclusions. The essays do not respond to one another, nor do the editors provide their own conclusions. Their objective, they say, is not to create a new typology or re-definition of revolution, but to ensure that the definition becomes more a matter of debate than it has been hitherto. From that perspective, the book's title is somewhat misleading. The volume does not really reinterpret revolution, but rather provides a series of case studies in which authors present different and sometimes opposing viewpoints, challenging readers to make their own reinterpretations. Nonetheless, it is a welcome addition to the body of literature on revolution. While a sizeable number of excellent monographs on specific national revolutions already exist, and is increasing, there are far fewer volumes that provide a comparative perspective. Reinterpreting Revolution in Twentieth Century Europe makes a contribution to the field by conveniently gathering interpretations on revolutions in Russia, Germany, Spain, and Eastern Europe in a single volume and raising questions to provoke the reader into forming a more nuanced view of the concept of revolution.	2
In addition, the book contains several essays that can fruitfully be used in undergraduate survey courses. Jeremy Noakes' essay on the Nazi Revolution, for example, is a model of clarity and thoroughness in explaining Hitler's revolutionary goals and the Nazi seizure of power. Similarly, Catherine Merridale's essay on Stalin's Great Turn, and Tim Rees' essay on the Civil War in Spain provide excellent introductions to those topics without diminishing the complexity of the events they seek to interpret. Each of these would be effective in an introductory European history or Western Civilization course by providing clear introductory reading that does not sacrifice depth for brevity. The entire volume is most suitable for an upper level undergraduate seminar on Revolution. Advanced students are more likely than novices to appreciate the authors' emphasis on ambiguity rather than clarity in discussing the nature of revolution. An adequate general background in European history is also important to appreciate the enlightening comparative essays in the volume, such as Edward Acton's comparison of the Russian Revolutions of 1917 and 1991, and Moira Donald's comparison of the Russian Revolutions of 1905, 1917, and 1991. Ultimately, the volume merits careful reading because of the multiple perspectives that it provides and the questions that it raises. A valuable addition to subsequent editions would be a concluding essay in which the editors respond to questions they raise in their introductory essay, or at least provide an analytical connection to the various threads running through the different essays.	3
Golden Gate University Amy R. Sims

Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.