| Title | : | Rising 44: The Battle for Warsaw |
| Author | : | |
| Rating | : | |
| ISBN | : | 0330488635 |
| ISBN-10 | : | 9780330488631 |
| Language | : | English |
| Format Type | : | Paperback |
| Number of Pages | : | 784 |
| Publication | : | First published January 1, 2003 |
| Awards | : | Orwell Prize (2004), Hessell-Tiltman Prize (2004) |
Rising 44: The Battle for Warsaw Reviews
-
A book split into 3 parts, with before, during and after scenarios. Copious footnotes, maps galore and 36 appendices. 2 sections of plates. Obviously well researched. This long book is on a very interesting subject that should have been right up my reading alley. It wasn’t.
My complaints are many. I thought the author Norman Davies got bogged down far too often. Trying to justify his opinion over and over again became repetitive. The first part discussing east west European alliances should have been a brief history. Author Davies gave us history back as far as the nineteenth century and even at one point called Tsarist Russia a “liberalising regime”. No doubt that can be debated but in the context of the book it was pointless. We, the reader got page after page of in depth analysis of these Western / Eastern machinations that were interesting in themselves but I was wanting to read a book on the lead up to Warsaw Rising. I can read many general histories of Grand Alliances.
That leads to the 2nd part of the book that was about the rising itself. I came out the end of this vital part of the book a bit perplexed. It seemed I had read little on the military aspect of the event. Or at least if I did it got lost in the rhetoric. Also at this point the author included “Capsules”. Short stories from eye witness’s for example. Interesting in themselves but interfered with the flow. And when they came they sometimes made little sense as to the general gist of the history being told.
The final part took in the aftermath, everything from the treatment of Poland by the USSR through to the thoughts and memories of the survivors. This part of the book I found the most interesting but even then it was padded with “capsules” and long rhetorical treatise by the author about the mistreatment of Poland by both East and West.
Some final complaints. Why not trust the reader to understand Polish names, “Premier Mick” for example drove me up the wall. “First Ally” instead of Poland’s name itself being used. Poems are nice but they just added to the length of an already long book. So many pointless analogies. The main text ended on an analogy and I just shook my head and thought why insult my intelligence. All this, and a few more things I have no doubt forgotten, made me question who this book was aimed at. I like to think that I am fairly well read on WW2 history but I had this feeling that the book was aimed at a sympathetic audience that was going to lap up the rhetoric no matter what. A form of confirmation bias? I mean the book is hardly for WW2 beginners but to not use Polish names throughout the text insults the intelligence of the amateur historian with good knowledge.
Now I am not going to say that others should not read this book. It is a very interesting subject. Anyone with any interest in the Poland and the Eastern Front should get something out of this book no matter it being a long slog. I learnt a lot. I learnt a heck of a lot to put it bluntly. And with that learning it is hard not to think that the author is right in the final treatise that he calls Interim Report. The treatment of Poland in terms of the political machinations of the west was weak kneed at best. At worst it was darn right Machiavellian. As to the Nazis and the USSR? History has been the judge and they are damned forever for their inhumanity to their fellow man. The criminal treatment of the people of Poland had no justification. May the perpetrators of such inhumanity rot for eternity. -
It has amazed me in my further educating myself about all things Polish that so much of the history of the Poles in (and post) World War II has been suppressed and/or distorted. The Katyn massacres were only finally acknowledged over a half century after they occurred. The whole "big politics" picture, long-standing stereotypes about high moral ground subscribed to by the Allies' leaders, most notably Roosevelt and Churchill, during the war was altered by Plohky’s Yalta: The Price of Peace. The story of Warsaw Rising 1944 is yet another persuasive and unsettling addition to the realpolitik that almost destroyed a nation – certainly destroyed a generation of Polish young adults. Norman Davies has given Poles back part of their history with this book.
There are many reasons to read this book, especially if one is a Pole, but also if one is a history buff. It is but one document that begins to give credit to the Poles for their courage and unrecognized contributions in World War II. The disrespect and apathy accorded Poles and Poland for these, was brought home to me by a documentary on General Sosabowski in which a military cemetery director in response to a journalists questions about grave markers replies: “Oh, those. Those are just some Poles.” Just some Poles.
If for no other reason than correcting the erroneous conflation of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of 1943 and the Warsaw Uprising against the Nazis of 1944, this book is valuable. These two events were confused as recently as the rising's 50th anniversary in 1994 by Germany's President Herzog, by advisers to the British prime minister, by NBC News and Reuters. Even Polanski's film The Pianist “telescopes “events of the two risings. Davies book helps to explain why many people confuse the two events: The post-WWII government in Poland purposely obfuscated the heroism of the 1944 pro-democracy Polish patriots who fought the Nazis. Moscow required the idea of a failed rising in the minds of the Poles for its puppets to take power, which was portrayed as ultra-nationalist, reckless, even criminal. They persecuted its surviving heroes, many of whom emigrated to the U.S., Australia, Canada, or the U.K., and many of whom I grew up knowing well. Two of them were my parents.
It was not until Andrzej Wajda’s 1956 film, Kanal, that the truth of the Rising was made openly public. Now there is a magnificent museum in Warsaw dedicated to these brave souls.
Rising ‘44 is a carefully researched and argued indictment of the Churchill government concerning its treatment of the Poles during the Warsaw Rising against the Germans by the Armia Krajowa. The generally accepted view of historians is that the uprising was an ill-conceived, romantic exercise of the Polish commander General Bór-Komorowski. The truth is something dramatically different.
The rising of August 1944 concerns the city holding out against the Nazis for 63 days, with the loss of 200,000 lives. True to their compulsive nature and Hitler’s psychotic obsession with the “subhumanity” of Poles, the Germans then destroyed Warsaw street by street. They destroyed 90% of Warsaw, which was a heap of rubble when they finished.
Poland’s home army (Armia Krajowa or AK) belonged within an Allied coalition nominally fighting a common enemy in unison: 10 per cent of all Battle of Britain fliers were Polish. America under Roosevelt was compliant to Stalin's wishes. Roosevelt and Churchill treated the Polish government in exile like pesky children, even after their heroic breakthrough on behalf of the “Allies” at Monte Casino. How many people know that it was only the Poles who managed to take Monte Casino and clear a path for the allies to Rome, after 3 other attempts by other countries armies failed?
When Churchill - first to fathom Stalin's malevolence - ordered air-drops from Brindisi, the Soviets refused the planes landing-rights, or even shot at them. The Soviets first encouraged the Poles, then stalled on the far side of the Vistula, watching the Germans do their own dirty work. Wajda’s last scene in Kanal leaves no mystery as to what the two young lovers are seeing and what awaits Poland through the sewer grate across the entrance to the Vistula.
Although Churchill recognized (late in the game) what he was dealing with, the situation in Britain was muddied by infiltration of the leadership by communist spies and moles, disinformation, arrogance, an attitude that Poles were simply a nuisance, and that they were paranoid on the issue of the Soviets. They should have listened to them about Stalin; after all, Poles had years of experience with the Russians and knew what they were about and that they wanted to obliterate Poland.
No less than George Orwell, who was a socialist and journalist during WW II (I had no idea he was a socialist), and author of Animal Farm, castigated the British press for their shabby attitude toward Poles and Poland.
One of the strategic mistakes of the Poles was to trust their British allies to support a rising that ostensibly had the full backing of Churchill and about which the British had full knowledge in all stages of planning. Another was to assume that they could rely on the U.S. In point of fact, Poland was not even on the radar screen of the U.S. military leadership or Roosevelt and his government.
I came to dislike Roosevelt after reading “Yalta: The Price of Peace” which I have reviewed on Goodreads as well. After this, I have nothing but contempt for his fawning obsequiousness with respect to Stalin. Blue blood and a Groton/Harvard education didn’t mean much – Harry Truman, who only had a high school education had more sense about who he was dealing with (see my review of The Last Empress for more). To be fair, the U.S. was distracted by the war with Japan, so perhaps my views are a bit harsh, but the kind of treatment I, and my parents, had to endure when we emigrated to the U.S. in 1952 as second class “DPs” does not predispose me kindly to any of this and it underscores what I was reluctant to learn from them.
Poles have two outstanding qualities, and those do not always serve them well. They are tenacious and they are honorable. Poles determined to go against Machiavellian realpolitik and do the decent thing and to make an alliance with the British and the French early in the war, assuming that their “allies” would also do the decent thing. It was inconceivable to them that their “allies” would sit by while their country was first invaded by Germans, partitioned by the Germans and Soviets, and then almost destroyed by Germans while the Soviet troops sat across the Vistula waiting like vultures to move in on the traumatized country.
The tenacity led to the Rising and the remarkable events since the 1980s during which they took back their country from communist control. Honor sometimes led to blindness with respect to the honor of their “allies.” It should have been clear what Poland was dealing with when one considers that no British soldier died fighting the Germans during the entire blitzkrieg of Poland.
I found this commentary on the Rising very interesting: "Norman Davies, who is probably the greatest historian of Poland ever, has laid out a brief of bravery and betrayal that all Polish statesmen might well heed. “Whom can we trust to defend Ireland?” asked the Irish bard. “We ourselves (sinn fein)."
OK, I could write a lot more. What about commenting on the book itself as a read? It is dense, and like many histories is not linear. This is requires a commitment because it becomes a bit difficult at times to keep events straight. But, again, this is the nature of a history, especially one as meticulously researched as this one. I have to say that I agree with the folks who reviewed the book in various venues (New York Times etc.) in that Davies’ decision to “anglesize” Polish names and assign some pseudonyms is annoying and condescending. Although he did this to keep folks from getting confused insofar as the Polish language can be remarkably tortuous, filled with multiple consonants that bump up against each other. Sometimes one feels as though some impersonal god took an alphabet and threw down the letters willy-nilly when one sees the names and words. But the language is a people and to infanticize or take away a language is a step to extinguishing a national identity. Shame on Davies for this. He should have known better and thought this through better.
Another comment. A book cannot be all things to all people. But my parents were heroes of the Rising, and spoke little of those years. I would like to have seen more about the “regular people” and more about the day to day life under the Rising. Davies does go into it some, but my own selfishness in this regard begged for more. Perhaps my visit to the Muzeum Powstanje Warsawskje will fill in some blanks and connect some dots. -
Sigh.
Okay, the mean bits first. The book was mis-titled, poorly edited, and full of so many cognitive leaps, it could have formed its own Irish dance troupe. If this weren't billed as a history book, these flaws might be tolerable; but lets deal with them one by one.
Mis-titled: The book is titled Rising '44: The Battle for Warsaw. A reasonable person would assume from that title that we were going to read about this Rising. But instead, the thesis we get to read is "Given that the Allied were vicious scuzzbags, and that vicious scuzzbaggery during the Rising explains everything about Eastern Europe, here is the story from '39 to '91, oh and Gentile-Jewish Pole relations were wonderful".
Editing: The book needed to be shorter, they needed to stop him from copy-pasting entire words/phrases/paragraphs throughout the book. They needed to make sure all his vignettes actually had something to do with the part of the book in which they were referenced. Make sure that all the vignettes were actually referenced. Stop him from randomly replacing famous Pole names with made up names he liked better, etc, etc, etc.
Cognitive Leaps: History books shouldn't be full of words/phrases "clearly", "obviously", "we can guess that", "no doubt". Especially when the thought shoots off at a right angle to the text. When the cognitive leaps get so big, even he can't express them as a fact with good conscience, he maligns through implication. "Many would guess that ...". Even a few of these are tolerable (to me) in a book, but they just don't stop, often several times a page.
Nice bits. While I had to slog through the last half of the book ('46-'90 in random order), there were some bits I did enjoy. Unfortunately, my purpose was to learn more about this uprising, and all I learned is that the British/American effort was larger than I thought.
He did point out two great books that either need to be written or already exist, waiting for me to read them. A book on the failures of the Western Allies intelligence system when it came to the USSR, and a book on the '44 Warsaw Rising -
I am unsure how to rate this book since it has some very well researched information but has faults that are hard to overlook It is one of those very large book which you know will take a while to read but this took me much longer than I thought since the editing and free flow time frames kept me off balance. I was particularly put off by the use of initials for the Polish names which the author explained would make the reading easier for those who don't speak Polish; however, he used full Russian names, so what about readers that don't speak Russian, an equally difficult language. That seemed a bit condescending especially when these freedom fighters deserve to have their real names recorded in a history book that is about freedom fighters.
The Warsaw Uprising (not to be confused with the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising), has not gotten the kind of attention by historians that it should and I was hoping that this book would fill in the many gaps in my knowledge of that brave but futile battle. I will say that I learned quite a bit that I didn't know but it was really slow going at times. There seems to be mixed feelings about this book and the ratings are all over the place, so take your chances and give it a try......or not. -
i just wrote a really long and excellent review of this book. and then i deleted it. fuck.
so, good book. yeah. -
This is one of three of the most tragic; yet, historically written works I read in 2017.
The author admits up front in this work that the definitive history cannot be completed until the Russian Federation/Soviet Union open up the archives for research on this topic; they are still closed. There are links within this non-linear work – the most important of course is 1 August 1944 the day the Uprising began. The author created an intrinsic work based on available information and survivors that he interviewed. There was throughout this work no reason to doubt either the documentation nor the personal reflections that he received. There are criticisms of this work and that is understandable; to date – and in my opinion there is no work that is as comprehensive as this on this topic of the tragedy of Poland during the Second World War. First third of this book sets the tone and prepares the reader, the second third is the in-depth detail of the fighting, depravity, and betrayal; the last third is Post WWII both immediately and years following; the photos are relevant and add value to the work; the vignettes in between the chapters support the active overall recorded history – all of it is fully tragic and should be read by anyone interested in the Second World War. Unfortunately, I do not believe Americans would fully undertake this effort with a full appreciation of Poland and Polish people – I would hope Polish Americans would continue to pass this History down to the younger generations; and, Americans and the Second World War are on the surface interested most in the war in Europe as it pertains to France – the war in the Pacific always gets seconded and merely rises to full attention only when the nuclear bombs are discussed (the Japanese holocaust is rarely even mentioned).
I am guilty in this realm of important History in that I have confused (in my mind) the “Ghetto Rising” (1943) with “Warsaw Rising” (1944); based on the occasional periphery of reading on the Second World War – the Soviet style propaganda has been over the years of time most effective in the downplaying of the Warsaw Rising, the Ghetto Rising was unto itself an important event to the Second World War – both of these have never truly been taken into account for the significance to which they lay in the past. I wish to state to good people of Poland and of persons of Polish ancestry everywhere, that as a Canadian born American and Veteran I wanted to honor your History of Self Determination by reading this work. As I read the history (within these pages) it hit home to me like a gust of wind on my face as I pondered the effects. The effects of so much reading on the Second World War that this arena of Poland during this time frame has been ignored in many prevalent in books – opinions of course lay everywhere. I wish to state once again that it is (for me) the Battle of Monte Cassino that inspired my further interest in not only the New Zealand Forces but those of the many good Polish lads under General Anders; he and Major General Freyberg were of extraordinary character – the forces they both led were exemplary of the virtues they held.
The disappointments of in this work weren’t many. I would have liked to have had a bit of longer reflection of the period leading up to the year 2000 – I felt this was sort of glossed over and I don’t believe it was intentional but given the extent of the work I felt it was too condensed. I believe there are enough “dots connected” at this point in time to show the intentional slow arrival of the Soviet Forces from across the Vistula; I would have to agree; however, that when Marshal Rokossovsky first arrived to his location on the eastern edge he did have to refit, rearm, and rest his forces – however, the length of time this was used as an excuse is reprehensible – given that “Uncle Joe” wouldn’t allow supply aircraft to land and refuel in the USSR sector it is apparent that he was looking to the post war end as to the expansion of the Soviet territory. A disappointment from the author, given his distinct background and this most modern day definitive work on file, I was taken that not once in the historical account was there any form of reference to King John III Sobieski – the hero who kicked out the Muslims from Vienna in 1683 – the minor reference to “Semper Fidelis” didn’t even scrape the surface of the background – 2 paragraphs could have taken care of this oversight and could have added value to what the Polish people not only endured – but fought for in their efforts to destroy the Nazi regime locally. There were in fact two sides to Hans Frank – he paid his price of course on 16 October 1946 with a noose around his neck.
Overall – I enjoyed this book, at times finding my eyes watering over the horrific events and the determination of the Polish people. They deserved better – they are still striving. The five stars is based on the research involved, the eye witness accounts that Mr. Davies recorded for history; and, for the acknowledgement that today the Russian Federation and the former Soviet archives on this battle will likely never be opened up freely for Historians to write and determine the final outcome of the Soviet side of this history. Historians however, have connected the dots with as expected questions that follow each dot in those connections. I speculate they have been to date 90-95% correct in the assumptions they have made about the Soviet Forces.
Anyone who reads or studies the Second World War should make every effort to gain a wider picture by reading this book; these souls of Poland deserve to be remembered. -
Ambivalensek az érzéseim. Egyrészt nyilvánvaló, hogy ez a magyarul megjelent világháborús munkák között egy megkerülhetetlen alkotás – pláne mert akkora, hogy egy birodalmi lépegető is felbotlana benne. Másfelől meg valahogy nem tudtam úgy élvezni*, mint sok más édestestvérét. Davies könyve mindenre kiterjedő figyelemmel és lengyel szemszögből vizsgálja a ’44-es varsói felkelés** eseményeit, mind előzményeit, mind utóéletét akkurátus aprólékossággal tárgyalva. A két fenti jelző (a „mindenre kiterjedő figyelem” és a „lengyel szemszög”) az oka e kötet minden erényének, és paradox módon hibájának is.
Ami a mindenre kiterjedő figyelmet illeti: talán kicsit feszesebb szerkezet nem ártott volna. Itt vannak például ezek a „kapszulák” – olyan dokumentumok és visszaemlékezések, amiket Davies a főszövegbe illesztett. Maga az ötlet nagyon eredeti, és alapvetően inkább produktív, mint nem, csak épp folyamatosan megszakítják az elbeszélést, helyenként olyan sűrűséggel, ami már az érthetőség rovására megy. Ráadásul az sem mindig világos, hogy miért oda lettek beillesztve a szövegbe, ahová, némelyik pedig egész egyszerűen nem tágítja a látókörünket, csupán megismétli azt (egy másik szemtanú szájával), amit pár oldallal előbb már megtudtuk. Mintha Davies-nek nem lett volna lelke kihagyni egyet is közülük.
Aztán a lengyel szempont. Néha az volt az érzésem, Davies nem viszonyul kellő objektivitással témájához. Ez többek közt abban nyilvánul meg, hogy ugyan leírja a felkelők által elkövetett atrocitásokat is, de sosem fűz hozzájuk erkölcsi kommentárt – amit viszont a nyugatiak és a szovjetek esetében ritkán mulaszt el***. Ezzel semmiképpen sem szeretnék arra utalni, hogy a felkelők sem voltak jobbak, mint a többi fél: hihetetlen hősiességgel és páratlan szívóssággal vívtak meg egy olyan küzdelmet, aminek (a tények utólagos ismeretében legalábbis) csak a vesztesei lehettek. Egyszerűen arról van szó, hogy ha egy nagyobbfajta embercsoport fegyvert kap a kezébe, akkor ott óhatatlanul lesznek túlkapások – és ezen egy történésznek nem kell szemérmeteskedni. Ez minden felkelés és forradalom a priori tulajdonsága, független attól, hogy az adott esemény becses vagy becstelen szándékból született. (Én a magam részéről ezért igyekszem elkerülni az ilyesmiket.)
De ez bőven megbocsátható. A háborús szakirodalomban Dunát lehet rekeszteni az olyan szövegekkel, amik a nyugati álláspontot tükrözi, és olyat is találunk (elsősorban a ’89 előtti kiadványok között), amik a marxista történelemszemléletet követik, egyértelműen „felszabadításnak” tekintve a Vörös Hadsereg ténykedését. Mostanság pedig egyre nagyobb számban jelennek meg a piacon a Wehrmacht szerepét relativizáló, önigazoló visszatekintések is – de ilyen szöveg, ami a „kicsikre”**** fókuszál, magyar nyelven alig akad. Lengyelország az első ország volt, aki fegyveresen szállt szembe a németekkel, és végig, kompromisszumok nélkül, a legbénítóbb veszteségeket is állva harcolt ellenük. A győztesek oldalán harcolt, mégis veszített: egyik megszállást a másikra cserélte. Lehet (sőt kell is) mélázni azon, mennyiben hagyták őket cserben nyugati szövetségeseik – nyilván nagyon. A brit és amerikai felelősség tény, az pedig, hogy milyen hamar és milyen könnyen szemet hunytak Sztálin lengyelországi cselekedetei fölött, egyszerűen gyomorforgató. Diplomáciai és morális téren elkövetett mulasztásaikat tehát tárgyalni kell, de (és ezt Davies nem igazán hangsúlyozza) katonai téren nem sok mindent tehettek a lengyelekért, ami azt jelenti, hogy azok végeredményben pusztán Sztálin jóindulatától függtek. És hát tudjuk: Sztálin és a jóindulat…
Ez persze felveti a kérdést: volt így értelme az egész küzdelemnek? Varsó a földig lerombolva, az emberveszteség iszonyatos, és mit kaptak cserébe? Csöbörből vödörbe kerültek. Ugyanakkor ebből a heroikus küzdelemből felépíthették maguknak Európa egyik legcsillogóbb nemzeti mítoszát – ami nem kevés. Davies pedig hozzáteszi a magáét a legendához. Bár azért érdemes észben tartani, hogy az efféle nemzeti mítoszok mindig hordoznak magukban némi kockázatot. Alkalmazzuk hát őket kellő visszafogottsággal.
* Tisztában vagyok vele, e helyütt mennyire abszurd, mi több: perverz e szó használata.
** Ami nem keverendő össze a varsói gettólázadással.
*** Talán groteszk, de a nácik esetében viszont gyakran mellőzi ezt – mondjuk ahhoz, hogy az SS kivégzett egy komplett varsói városrészt, igazából tényleg nincs értelme kommentárt fűzni. Magáért beszél.
**** Persze a lengyel részvétel a második világháborúban egyáltalán nem nevezhető kicsinek. Az Anders hadsereg a nyugati frontokon, a Berling hadsereg a keleti fronton, a lengyel pilóták a brit Királyi Légierőben, a Honi Hadsereg pedig a megszállt Lengyelországban mind a katonák számában, mint az elért eredményekben a legfontosabb hadviselő felek közé emeli Lengyelországot. Valószínűleg többet tettek (és mindenképpen többet szenvedtek) a győzelemért, mint mondjuk a franciák. -
Rising '44 est un très grand livre sur la très controversée Insurrection de Varsovie qui a lieu entre le 1er aout et le 2 octobre 1994. Pendant cette insurrection 17,000 soldats allemands et 25,000 soldats polonais sont mort. Les pertes de vie chez les civiles se sont chiffrées entre 160 000 et 180 000. La grande controverse se fait entre ceux qui sont de l'avis que l'Insurrection a été un acte courageux commis par les polonais qui voulaient combattre les Nazis et ceux qui pensent que l'acte a été une action irresponsable commise par des forces réactionnaires qui voulaient empêcher l'URSS d'établir un régime communiste en Pologne. Il y a un peu de vrai dans les deux positions. Les polonais avaient bel et bien une envie folle de faire la guerre contre les allemands. C'est vrai aussi qu'ils ne voulaient pas tomber sous la domination de l'URSS.
Cependant, Norman Davies s'abstient de trancher sur cette controverse. Ses buts sont autres. Il veut raconter l'histoire des combats et décrire la vie des Varsoviens pendant l'insurrection. Finalement il présente une critique féroce de La Grande Bretagne et les É-U qui n'ont exercé aucune pression l'URSS pour que son armée qui était campée a l'extérieure de la ville rentre dans la ville afin de secourir les insurrectionistes et les Varsoviens.
Le point fort de son livre est la manière dont Davies décrit l'ambiance dans la ville pendant les combats. Il se sert des journaux et des mémoires qui ont survécu. Même le lauréat du prix Nobel de Littérature Czeslaw Milosz a garde un journal durant l'insurrection. Davies racontent biens des histoires très touchants. Il y avait des volontaires qui bâtissaient des barricades et qui travaillaient comme bénévoles dans les hôpitaux. ll y avait des jeunes amants qui se rencontraient et qui faisaient l'amour pendant les pauses dans des combats. Finalement, il y avait des gens qui mouraient de milles façons terribles. En somme Davies nous livre une histoire remarquable de la vie des petits gens prisonniers dans leur ville qui s'était transformée en champ de bataille.
Ca vaut vraiment la peine de lire cet excellent livre. -
Best review I can give is to direct you to Wanda Mohr's
review.
This is an excellent and engrossing read. It is made all the better because Davies devotes space to before and after as well as during. I particulary enjoyed the capusules, which were first hand accounts. I do wish that some of the material in the appendixs had been in the actual book, but that's quibbling.
If you study WW II, read this. -
Davies concentrates on the brewing storm of politics, internal and external, just as much as the events of the Uprising itself, which limits its utility as a straight-ahead conflict narrative but provides a deep contextual framework for the doomed events of August, 1944. Lucid and well written, engaging and well worth reading.
-
This was a brilliant and poignant book about a little known chapter in the Second World War. The historical events themselves are easily told, but the lessons to learn from them are profound. In August 1944, with the Soviet Army nearby and the German Army in retreat, the Polish Home Army launched a major uprising in Warsaw with the aim of contributing to the liberation of Poland and strengthening their ability to negotiate a post war settlement that was more favourable. However, the Soviet armies cynically halted their advance on Warsaw so that the Germans would eliminate the Polish Home Army on their behalf, and the Western Allies were unwilling to either confront Stalin decisively or to render effective to the uprising directly. Despite the gallant resistance of the Polish fighters, which even forced terms from the Germans, the city was virtually razed to the ground and the remaining insurgents forced to surrender. The Germans continued their inevitable retreat, and Poland was swallowed up by the Soviet Union with virtually no protest from Britain or America. There is a feeling of futility and frustration that permeates the whole book, with many passages that were both gripping extremely moving. The descriptions of the desperate fighting as the Germans advanced on the city, and the post war persecution of the surviving members of the Home Army by the Soviet Union stand out in this regard.
So much for the events themselves, but what can we learn from them? I think we can learn at least two things, the first in our understanding of history and the second in the area of morality.
It took until almost the end of the 20th century for the Warsaw Rising to enter the historical narrative of the Second World War, a fact that is in itself highly significant. The Nazi Reich that had suppressed it was long since dead; the Allied Coalition that had failed to render effective assistance had been superseded by new organisations and by fresh geopolitical realities; and the Soviet Union, which had stood idly by, had collapsed. The totalitarian ideologies of Fascism and Communism against which the insurgents had staked their all had lost all credibility, and the remaining combatants and survivors of the Rising were coming towards the end of their lives, with no recognition of their courage or sacrifice.
The Warsaw Rising is an event that needs to be carefully considered in any overall assessment of the Second World War in Europe. Britons and Americans tend to view the war as an unconditional success and as ending with the liberation of the world from Evil. But episodes like the Warsaw Rising highlight that the reality is much less simple, and much greyer. Not only were the Western democracies willing to shamelessly abandon their principles in the face of difficult geopolitical realities, but their main partner in the war in Europe, the Soviet Union, was just as morally objectionable as Nazi Germany. In Eastern Europe, one tyranny was simply replaced by another and liberation was delayed by almost 50 years. It shows that, in reality, the victory in Europe was somewhat limited and that evil was not decisively defeated. It is sobering to realise that exactly the same number of European countries were subjugated by Communism in 1944-45 as were reclaimed for democracy.
As can be seen from Warsaw, and elsewhere, a more accurate view of the Second World War in Europe is that it was a 3 sided struggle, mainly between the 2 totalitarian monsters of Germany and the Soviet Union. The Western democracies were frequently a third party of only moderate importance, as the Soviet Union undoubtedly made the largest military contribution to defeating Nazi Germany. The huge financial and material contribution of America was undoubtedly extremely important, but the point still stands.
The Warsaw Rising also plays an important role in two other historical considerations, the origins of the Cold War and military history. As to the former, Western relations with the Soviet Union started to go wrong in 1944. Warsaw is a clear example of Stalin showing malice, and the Western leaders responding with a lack of both wisdom and resolve. It stands as a warning again alliances of convenience, as they too easily enable principles to be set aside as the price of holding the coalition together. As to the latter, the rising is important in military history as it is the archetypal model of urban guerrilla warfare, showing how relatively ineffective modern weapons and professional armies are in such a context, especially when fighting a brave, determined and skilful enemy.
Finally, the Rising has a timeless moral message. It demonstrates that some things in life are dearer than life itself. Like the heroes of the Ghetto rising the year before, the 1944 insurgents faced death willingly, not gladly but by deliberate choice. The least that we can do is to remember both their cause and their sacrifice, and to learn the lessons of it for our own day. -
Overall, a good telling of the story but has a lot of side bars that are actually more distracting than helpful. Also, refers to Polish players by first name and last initial which can be confusing if you are used to reading about these people with the use of the last names. Author claims it's to make it easier for the reader, so he/she doesn't have to struggle with the difficult Polish names yet doesn't do the same with difficult German, French and Russian names. Give the reader a little credit, Mr. Davies.
-
I didn't actually read this book as it is way too heavy for me. However, I did glean a tidbit about "Czechs being nice children", p. 22
For Western views of the nations of Eastern Europe, where they existed at all, often possessed a decidedly judgemental character. Winston Churchill, for example, divided the states of Europe unkindly into 'giants' and 'pygmies'. The giants were the Great Powers who had just fought the Great War. They pygmies were all those troublesome national states which had emerged through the collapse of the old empires and which had promptly started to fight each other. The dismissive approach to the New Europe was thinly disguised. And it was accompanied by a tendency to classify the pygmies as one might classify children, into the nice and the naughty. Europe's new nations were pictured as nice in Allied eyes if, like the Czechs and the Slovaks, they had won their independence by fighting against Germany or Austria. If, like the Ukrainians or the Irish, they had gained it by rebelling against an Allied power, they were naughty, not to say downright nasty. In the case of Ukraine, which had carved out its own republic with German help, it was taken to be a fiction. States which had not obtained Allied recognition did not really exist.
As for the Poles, who had dared to assert themselves both against the Central Powers and against Russia, they could be nothing other than mixed-up problem children. They were pygmies pretending to be giants.
and an explanation of why Britain threw Czechoslovakia under the bus, p. 28 (which is as far as I got)Britain's dilemma with its eastern allies was well illustrated by the case of Czechoslovakia, which, after Austria, was the second of Germany's neighbours to feel the heat of Hitler's attentions. In the 1930s, Britain simply had no means of intervening in Central Europe. The RAF had very few warplanes with the practical capability to fly across Germany and to return without refuelling. The Royal Navy could not steam along 'the coast of Bohemia'. The tiny British army could not contemplate marching across Germany. And to take any sort of action on the Continent without French support was unthinkable. Hence, during the Munich Crisis of September 1938, the British Government took the perfectly rational option of appeasing Nazi Germany rather than of confronting it. They did not play their hand very cleverly, and missed the chance of reaching a workable compromise. But they had already made the mistake of issuing an unenforceable guarantee to Austria and of seeing the guarantee humiliatingly sideline by the Anschluss. So they were all too eager to save face and to reach a settlement. Czechoslovakia capitulated without a fight, signing an agreement that proved to be its death warrant. In less than six months, Hitler was in Prague, waving from the same window in Hradcany Castle from which Presidents Masaryk and Benes had been wont to wave. Slovakia broke away. Bohemia nad Moravia were turned into a protectorate of the Reich. President Benes and his Czecho-Slovak Committee took up residence in Paris, and then, after the fall of France, moved to London, where they stayed until the end of the war.
However, as we all know, the Czechs were not at all pleased with the Soviet occupation.
Throughout the war years, the Czechs planned for the day when their people would rise against the Nazi oppressor and welcome their exiled rulers back home. They were to have many setbacks, and a long wait. Yet in the end their patience was rewarded. A rising broke out in Slovakia in late August 1944, and in the first week of May 1945 a popular rising in Prague immediately preceded Liberation. An understanding was reached between the Western Allies and the Soviets to avoid friction. It was swiftly followed by the homecoming of President Benes and the restoration of the exiled Government with the blessing of the Allied powers. -
Davies has quite simply created a masterpiece with this one. A long neglected story of the Warsaw Rising and a searing condemnation of the Allies who considered keeping Stalin sweet more important than Polish independence and the people of Warsaw. His knowledge of the subject matter knows no bounds and the excellent use of "capsules" to convey first hand accounts brings the story of the Rising alive. [return][return]Before having visited Warsaw in 2009 I was, like many others, only aware of the Ghetto Rising, a tragic but separate event which took place in 1943. However, I had the great fortune of visiting the Warsaw Uprising Museum which made me aware of the tremendous sacrifice of all of the citizens of Warsaw in the face of the Nazis in 1944 and brought about the city's total obliteration. Davies brings the spirit of the museum and the story of the Home Army to modern readers and it is one book that anyone studying resistance movements in the Second World War should study thoroughly. It is a truly phenomenal work.
-
I have just finished "Rising '44" by Norman Davies and I am silenced by the remarkable, painstakingly unfolded piece of history about the fight by Poles to save their capital, their culture and themselves against monstrous oppressors and how all those who should and could have helped them, did not. It is a detailed unveiling of a horrific betrayal.
This was such a complex historic story to tell and Davies did an excellent job of making it all clear. I have much to reflect upon about the roles of the United Kingdom and United States of America and their roles in the destruction of Poland's capital and Poland itself. I had known of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising and some of what Nazi Germany did to Poland as well as that the Soviets had taken over Poland and oppressed it until the late 1980s. However I did not have any idea of the full story.
The book is long and detailed, but every page is so full of vital information and food for thought that you cannot quickly flip the pages. Davies is a thorough researcher and a masterful historian, storyteller and educator.
If you have any interest in Poland, WWII or history, this is must reading. it makes you deeply proud of Poland, Poles and their strong, courageous, warm national character and their long history of independence, democracy and desire for freedom. -
Davies has quite simply created a masterpiece with this one. A long neglected story of the Warsaw Rising and a searing condemnation of the Allies who considered keeping Stalin sweet more important than Polish independence and the people of Warsaw. His knowledge of the subject matter knows no bounds and the excellent use of "capsules" to convey first hand accounts brings the story of the Rising alive. [return][return]Before having visited Warsaw in 2009 I was, like many others, only aware of the Ghetto Rising, a tragic but separate event which took place in 1943. However, I had the great fortune of visiting the Warsaw Uprising Museum which made me aware of the tremendous sacrifice of all of the citizens of Warsaw in the face of the Nazis in 1944 and brought about the city's total obliteration. Davies brings the spirit of the museum and the story of the Home Army to modern readers and it is one book that anyone studying resistance movements in the Second World War should study thoroughly. It is a truly phenomenal work.
-
Norman Davies is one of the few authors writing good, serious, and readable history of Poland in English. Of the three books of his that I have read this is by far the best. It also ranks on my short list of WWII related books that I would recommend (and trust me I have read a lot of these). Although not as entertaining as Stephen Ambrose, it is still very good. Davies also breaks out special interest stories into separate boxes that the reader can review at leisure.
Although I greatly enjoyed this book, I would caution any reader that this is not a light subject. Reading this book through is an emotional journey, at the end of which I felt profound guilt for actions of my country well before I was born. -
A gigantic effort by the effort by the author resulting in an overwhelmingly detailed and hard to read massive book. The urge to provide documentation has taken the control of the narrative and compromises the overview of the reader who is left exhausted. Probably a similar effect could be provided by splitting up in two volumes: 1. The core story and account of events, leaders, strategy and operations 2. The documentation in form of the many eyewitness accounts, documents etc.
(And why provide the unnecessary confusion of using code-names for all Polish participants - trust your reader to be able to navigate these names too) -
This is one of those books that you read a paragraph and think 'wait, I didn't take in a word of that' and reread it... hence it's taken me six weeks to get to page 296 (out of about 500, 150 of which are appendices). Fascinating stuff, though. Norman Davies loves the Poles (and we love him) and this history of the Warsaw Rising shows the tragedy that could have been avoided had Britain and the US pulled their collective finger out and helped a bit more, like they promised. The Russians don't come off too well, either.
-
Correction: one third of the length is about the battle.
The other two thirds go too far back and forward in Polish history to be wholly relevant to the events '44.
Read
Warsaw 1944: The Fateful Uprising by
Alexandra Richie instead. It's on the mark. -
I read this when I was about 14 or 15 and I remember being completely gripped by it. Definitely required reading if you have an interest in European history. If only all history books were written like this...
-
Dense, dense, dense. I think I'll master Polish before I finish this tome.
-
Illuminating but the structure could be a bit better. Also quite long. These two features combined make it a bit repetitive.
-
Decided to book a trip to Warsaw whilst reading! Very interesting and informative. Not for light reading
-
Comprehensive look at the '44 Warsaw uprising starting with a review of Poland's plight at the beginning of WW II and concluding with Poland under Soviet denomination and the effects that had on denying those involved in the rising any recognition other than an enemy to the USSR. The author could have used a better editor and I wish he would have used the real polish names of individuals instead of abbreviations (though he does have a guide to those in the appendix), but still a good read on Poland's tragic position sandwiched between German Nazis and Soviet Communists - neither of which was a positive outcome for Poland.
-
This is a hard book to review. On the one hand it provided a lot of information and insight, on the other it was presented in a difficult way. In particular, I resented the way that many of the Polish individuals were represented with only their surname initial - not for reasons of privacy but because as westerners we would find their names too difficult!!! Such presumption! Also at times there is a prevelance of detail and at others a glossing over in very general terms. The writing style is not the most engaging either and it seemed more of a slog at times. On the plus side though, I have learned a lot about this traumatic period.
-
Great British historician wrote a book about very important for Poland and Warsaw war episode from Polish history. The book written with passion shows different points of view despite the fact that the author is strongly connected with Poland. Great reading for anybody interested in history of Europe.
-
No es una de mis lecturas favoritas sobre la SGM porque el autor se centra más en mostrar; de un lado, el abandono en que los aliados dejaron a Polonia; y de otro, el momento que aprovechó la URSS en su avance hacia Berlín, que en narrar el levantamiento en su día a día. Aunque también pueda ser que esperaba algo más al estilo de Beevor.
-
This is a great history of the Polish Home Army and it's uprising against the German Occupational Forces.
-
Misleading title and
A few distracting things such as
using ‘First Ally’ instead of POLAND, using initials, nicknames, changed name spellings instead of real names.
I was disappointed.
