If the word “revolution” implies, etymologically, a world turned around, then what unfolded in Russia in 1917 was just that. Everything changed. Old-school deference was dead; the proletariat was in power.
The communist American journalist John Reed was there to witness the contretemps that captured the suddenness of the change.
Reed had the zeal of the convert. Born into a pig-iron fortune in Oregon, he rebelled against his preppy upbringing by embracing the bohemia of Greenwich Village. Thereafter, he was fired up by the silk weavers’ strike in New Jersey in 1913. Four years later, a sense of adventure and a folie a deux with his socialist wife Louise Bryant took them to Saint Petersburg (then Petrograd), where they witnessed the revolution’s great set pieces first-hand.
Warren Beatty’s portrayal of him as a true believer in the biopic Reds, leafleting and dodging bullets, got him down to a tee. So it was hardly surprising that he was faced with sedition charges on his return. He was indicted for violating the Espionage Act for inveighing against US entry into WWI. Hounded out of his homeland, he fled to Russia and died of typhus, aged 32; no medicines were available on account of the Western blockade of the Russian Civil War.
Reed’s is one of six lives served up by historian Simon Hall in his new book. Three of them are revolutionaries — Vladimir Lenin, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) and Fidel Castro — and three are American journalists who filed stories from the frontlines of the Russian, Chinese and Cuban revolutions, respectively: Reed, Edgar Snow and Herbert Matthews. These are unexpected pairings, chosen, one presumes, for their convenience in enabling Hall to reconstruct his three very foreign societies with the help of a largely monoglot bibliography.
The conceit is to chronicle the journeys that represented turning points in 20th-century history. In Lenin’s case, it was his return to Russia from Swiss exile in April 1917. Something of a party pooper, he maintained that the February Revolution that overthrew the tsar wasn’t the real deal. In good time, his comrades came around, and that’s how we got the Russian Revolution.
In China, meanwhile, the Long March of 1934-5 was a desperate retreat. It was also a lesson in geography and endurance. On the run from the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who was working with Hitler’s general Hans von Seeckt, some 90,000 troops and persecuted communists made the 9,000-kilometer trek from the Jiangxi Soviet in the south to Yan’an in the north. Only about 6,000 survived, and Mao emerged as their leader.
For his part, Castro returned to Cuba from Mexico in 1956 aboard the Granma, “a creaking, leaking leisure yacht.” As one companero put it, it was not so much a landing as a shipwreck. Not all of them managed to negotiate the mangrove thickets of Playa Las Coloradas and Fulgencio Batista’s strafing planes, but Castro did. Three years later, he toppled the dictator.
Hall’s tired trot through the three coups is less interesting than the three scoops he describes. Besides Reed’s, we have the midwestern ad man turned journalist Edgar Snow’s. He spent four months swimming and playing tennis with Mao’s guerrillas in Bao’an, writing up the experience gushingly in Red Star Over China. Zhou Enlai (周恩來), wrote Snow, was “every inch an intellectual,” Mao a “gaunt, rather Lincolnesque figure,” and the comrades “the freest and happiest Chinese I had known.”
Hall says that Red Star Over China was “no crass work of propaganda.” But it was. Snow would have known about Mao’s purges in the Jiangxi Soviet from 1931-36, in which, it was later revealed, 700,000 people perished.
Herbert Matthews of the New York Times was equally starstruck by his subject. Here he is on Castro, whom he met in the Sierra Maestra mountains in 1957: “This was quite a man — a powerful six-footer, olive-skinned, full-faced with a straggly beard.” What’s more, Castro was “not only not Communist but decidedly anti-Communist.” Matthews’ dispatches went a long way in swaying American opinion against Batista’s dictatorship, but needless to say, some of the more confident pronouncements about Castro’s politics aged badly.
Hall’s potted narratives trundle along, absorbing rich period and cultural details. His strengths lie in storytelling, not history-writing, which is to say he is more at home with description than analysis. But there lies the rub. Unlike Reed, Snow and Matthews, he is writing at one remove. This necessitates extensive quotation and, worse, lengthy paraphrases that are inevitably weaker than the lapidary originals.
Oct. 27 to Nov. 2 Over a breakfast of soymilk and fried dough costing less than NT$400, seven officials and engineers agreed on a NT$400 million plan — unaware that it would mark the beginning of Taiwan’s semiconductor empire. It was a cold February morning in 1974. Gathered at the unassuming shop were Economics minister Sun Yun-hsuan (孫運璿), director-general of Transportation and Communications Kao Yu-shu (高玉樹), Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) president Wang Chao-chen (王兆振), Telecommunications Laboratories director Kang Pao-huang (康寶煌), Executive Yuan secretary-general Fei Hua (費驊), director-general of Telecommunications Fang Hsien-chi (方賢齊) and Radio Corporation of America (RCA) Laboratories director Pan
The consensus on the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chair race is that Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) ran a populist, ideological back-to-basics campaign and soundly defeated former Taipei mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌), the candidate backed by the big institutional players. Cheng tapped into a wave of popular enthusiasm within the KMT, while the institutional players’ get-out-the-vote abilities fell flat, suggesting their power has weakened significantly. Yet, a closer look at the race paints a more complicated picture, raising questions about some analysts’ conclusions, including my own. TURNOUT Here is a surprising statistic: Turnout was 130,678, or 39.46 percent of the 331,145 eligible party
The classic warmth of a good old-fashioned izakaya beckons you in, all cozy nooks and dark wood finishes, as tables order a third round and waiters sling tapas-sized bites and assorted — sometimes unidentifiable — skewered meats. But there’s a romantic hush about this Ximending (西門町) hotspot, with cocktails savored, plating elegant and never rushed and daters and diners lit by candlelight and chandelier. Each chair is mismatched and the assorted tables appear to be the fanciest picks from a nearby flea market. A naked sewing mannequin stands in a dimly lit corner, adorned with antique mirrors and draped foliage
The election of Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) as chair of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) marked a triumphant return of pride in the “Chinese” in the party name. Cheng wants Taiwanese to be proud to call themselves Chinese again. The unambiguous winner was a return to the KMT ideology that formed in the early 2000s under then chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) put into practice as far as he could, until ultimately thwarted by hundreds of thousands of protestors thronging the streets in what became known as the Sunflower movement in 2014. Cheng is an unambiguous Chinese ethnonationalist,