Nearly every Russian sees Pushkin as their country's greatest writer. This perception, however, is not shared by many foreigners. The problem, of course, is translation. Pushkin's verse is supremely elegant, witty and musical. Few, if any, great poets are harder to translate.

Charles Johnston's version is not at all bad, and conveys much of Pushkin's wit - though not his lyricism. James Falen's version (Oxford World's Classics) is better still. And Stanley Mitchells's version of the first chapter, published in the journal "Modern Poetry in Translation" vol 11, is truly outstanding. I enjoyed it every bit as much as the original - something I would never have believed possible. This journal is well worth seeking out in libraries!

When Russians ask you who your favorite poet is they will often add a "Besides Pushkin, of course." Pushkin has an iconic status in Russia that is maybe unparalleled in the English speaking world. Shakespeare probably comes the closest. Eugene Onegin is a masterpiece and the genius of it's creator is apparent. It is alwasy difficult, however, to read poetry in translation. Others have spoken of the translation difficulties already. As a non-Russian speaker, I won't comment on them except to say that, at some points, the difficulties encountered in translation are obvious and frustrating. Professors have told me, however, that this translation is about as good as they come. Like any other work of genius, Eugen Onegin needs a careful reading. Each layer, and there are many, proves more rewarding then the next. Pushkin is often funny, passionate and has a pretty keen sense of satire. I would advise everybody to read this. Pushkin is doubly important as background to Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy. He began the Russian literary tradition.

Eugene Onegin is a masterpiece. It is supposedly the precursor to the great 19th century Russian novels, and this is plain to see. Onegin prefigures the 'superfluous man'. He does not live for an idea, like some of Dostoyevsky's characters, nor does he live content with an idea, like some of Tolstoy's. Onegin simply exists, and it gives him a perspective on life which is overly rationalistic: one sees it in his rejection of a certain lover's letter, his toying with others, and in the cold and calm manner in which he raises his gun during the duel. But the story soon snaps him out of it, but only when it is too late. My attitude to him was largely ambivalent, and I warmed more to Lensky. (Actually, the narrator is an interesting character in himself). The poem skips along beautifully and the rhyme is quite seductive. Lovers of poetry and of Russian literature should enjoy this immensely.

Nabokov and Pushkin are among my favorite authors, both having an excellent command of the language, the media, and the art. But Nabokov's Pushkin is too literal to be any good. James Falen's trans. is far superior, perhaps the best, and it's worth while to read the very best Pushkin. Ironically, Nabokov was fretted that anyone other than his son would ever translate his words; I think Pushkin would have felt the same if he saw Nabokov's translation of his masterpiece. Falen, while also literal, also is metered and rhymes. Nabokov's thuds. Read Nabokov's great novels (Pnin, Lolita, King Queen & Knave, Bend Sinister, Invitation to a Beheading, Despair, etc.) but leave Pushkin to Falen, not Nabokov.

I'm a Russian Language and Literature major in Yonsei Univ. in Korea. Having lived in Moscow for around 3 years, I'd heard there a lot about Pushkin and read many of his famous works. The most prestigious of his, however, must be "Onegin." It's a great mixture of verse and prose in its form. If possible, try to read this in Russian, as well. This long poetical prose was written for 8 years and the ending rhyme perfectly matches for the entire line until the very end. Compared to others, it is definitely a conspicuous and brilliant one. "Onegin" can be the author himself or yourself. The love between Onegin and TaTyana is neither the cheap kind of love that often appears in any books nor the tragic one that is intended to squeze your tears. As a literature, this book covers not only love between passionate youth, but also a large range of literary works in it, which can tell us about the contemporary literature current and its atmosphere. Calling Onegin "My friend", Pushkin, the author, shows the probability and likelihood of the work. Finally, I'm just sorry that the title has been changed into English. The original name must be "Yevgeni Onegin(¬¦¬Ó¬Ô¬Ö¬ß¬Ú¬Û ¬°¬ß¬Ö¬Ô¬Ú¬ß)." If you are a literature major or intersted in it, I'd like to recommand you read this. You can't help but loving the two lovers and may reread it, especially the two correspondences through a long period of time. Only with readng this book, you'll also learn a huge area of the contemporary literature of the 19th century from the books mentioned in "Onegin" that take part as its subtext. Enjoy yourself!

I'm so happy that I'm Russian and I could read this masterpiece in original language. This is one of the best Russian books ever written, and it is the example of all-time classics. Evgeniy Onegin is so extremely well-written, so original, so interesting, so intelligent. If you want to understand Russian people, you should live in Russia for years. But if you want just to approach to understanding them read some Russian literature. Your first authors may be Tolstoy or Dostoyevskiy, but I should recommend reading Pushkin at first because he is the most Russian of all Russian writers.

The only thing that may make your reading not so great is the fact that you will read it in translation. I have never read any but I think that if you like (or dislike) one of them you should try some others.

I know that Nabokov didn't translate it using the verses (and Pushkin's verses are so great), but I think it is the most punctual one. So maybe you should try to read exactly it (especially if you have already read some not so punctual translation but in verse form).

Anyway Evgeniy Onegin is one of the greatest books ever written!!!

D.M. Thomas does a masterful job in showing the world a great writer, a great Russian, and a, oh so human, man. I was not left with a bad taste for Sanya or his writings. On the contrary, I am now even more an admirerer of the great man "Alexander Solzhenitsyn". Mr. Thomas is most fair in his criticism of Sanya's life and mistakes. He does not try and glorify or vilify the man. He has put together a story that moves the heart in all directions. You feel distaste for Sanya's character, then sorry for him, then you rise to the glorious heights of his literary endeavors. Mr. Thomas makes Solzhenitsyn very human and, I believe, prophetic. I am an admirerer of Solzhenitsyn and after reading this book my devotion to his truths are firmer. The book is long, but, I believe, readable. Much more than just one writer is eloquently portrayed and satisfactorily explained as to their importance to Russian literature. If you are interested in just how important men like Alexander Solzhenitsyn are to Russian literature and the world at large then this is a must read book.

Can't say enough about this book. The subject's life is truly epic, spanning the Russian Revolution, World War II and the cold war. Thomas is right when he says that if you judge a writer by how he affects history, Solzhenitsyn is the greatest writer of our century. Plus his life is riveting. I loved this biography as much as any I've read since Robert Caro's wonderful LBJ Volume One. It's neat to have a novelist doing a biography too, as that seems to add a dimension here. Anyway, this is a brilliant work about a riveting subject. Can't say enough about it.

Tedious? Hardly! This critical biography of Alexander Solzhenitsyn is a brilliant and masterful piece of work. Solzhenitsyn's life and art, his epic and singular 20th century struggle, are persuasively treated with courage and truthfulness, and absolutely first-class literary accomplishment by novelist D. M. Thomas. Rarely have I encountered a more affecting piece of biographical literature! Solzhenitsyn's complexities seem to overload the century, and Thomas' patient and exceptionally intelligent narrative follows the thread of every turn with a novelist's master plan giving us, in the end, a scorching and beautiful appreciation of one of the rare writers of the 20th century. The book is a compendium of modern Russian history as much as anything else, and it serves its subject well in refusing to varnish either the man or his milieu; Soviet history, especially with respect to the jarred lives of most of its great artists, is already known as one of history's great tragedies, and Thomas traces Solzhenitsyn's life-long transformation from Soviet man to Russian icon with meticulous care, and with a miraculous understanding of the wayward chagrin of history not often articulated in the biographer's art. It's a massive book, yet because every word is made essential the narrative sails with genuine authority, and with a special beauty. This is an important book, I would say even a gifted book, as indeed befits the story of one of the authentic geniuses of modern literature. Highest recommendation without reservation.

This is Khinchin's classic work, translated from Russian in the 1930's. Although the book is rich with insight and information, Khinchin stays one nautical mile ahead of the reader at all times, the book moves at a truly alarming pace, and the book is not suitable to be used ALONE as an introduction to continued fractions. To supplement this book if this is a first exposure to continued fractions, I would recommend C.D. Old's book, which has many more examples which can be worked through until the reader is comfortable with the topic.

The book is brilliant and necessary for understanding continued fractions, but can't stand alone without supplemental material unless one is a professional mathematician. Khinchin frequently employs contrapositive proof formats, and there are occasional translation errors from Russian. The errors range from minor (awkward usage) to major (in one place, the translation is "negative" when it should be "non-negative", which confused me for half a day).

A Y Khinchin was one of the greatest mathematicians of the first half of the twentieth century. His name is is already well-known to students of probability theory along with A N Kolmogorov and others from the host of important theorems, inequalites, constants named after them. He was also famous as a teacher and communicator. Several of the books he wrote are still in print in English translations, published by Dover. Like William Feller and Richard Feynman he combines a complete mastery of his subject with an ability to explain clearly without sacrificing mathematical rigour.

In this short book the first two chapters contain a very clear development of the theory of simple continued fractions, culminating in a proof of Lagrange's theorem on the periodicity of the continued fraction representation of quadratic surds. Chapter three presents Khinchins beautiful and original work on the measure theory of continued fractions. The proofs of the theorems in this chapter are also entirely elementary.

4 1/2 stars.

As the several reviews above have noted, this is the biography of Alexander Orlov, the pre-WWII Soviet foreign intelligence general whose flight from the reaches of the NKVD was broadly and mistakenly believed by the Americans (and most Soviets) to be a genuine defection. Costello and Tsarev, through reference to genuine KGB archives, convincingly show that belief to be completely incorrect, as Orlov deceived the West for many years.

This book, as it states on the cover, was the first history of espionage by a Western author actually based upon KGB files. Discussions from an earlier document request to the KGB by Costello led to a surprising agreement for him to co-author this book with his KGB press office contact, Oleg Tsarev, shortly before the failed coup attempt and fall of the Soviet Union. Tsarev was given wide latitude in utilizing and disseminating information from the KGB files on Orlov and his various colleagues and agents. Furthermore, Costello takes academic-level care to document accurately all sources for all facts and assertions in this book, a welcome contrast with the cursory, sometimes conclusory books by other British so-called "historians" of espionage such as West, Knightly and Pincher.

The primary discovery made by the authors was that while Orlov did indeed flee to the U.S. with his family, he never genuinely defected. In 1938 during the height of the purges within the Soviet military and intelligence services, Orlov received cryptic instructions to rendezvous with another NKVD officer on a ship. He failed to keep that meeting, knowing it to be a trap to return him to Moscow for execution and fled to North America. Upon arrival in Canada, Orlov wrote to Stalin and NKVD chief Yehzov and set forth a simple blackmail to insure that he did not suffer the fate of Ignace Reiss, an NKVD deserter caught by his former service's assasination squads. Orlov listed the various operations he had planned or worked on, including political assasinations and kidnapping, the theft of the Spanish gold reserves to Moscow and the development of spy networks throughout Europe (along with a list of sixty Soviet agents) with the implied promise that this information would be released to Western intelligence services if he were assasinated or kidnapped. Both the Soviets and Orlov kept to their bargains.

Orlov was able to stay hidden in the U.S. for fourteen years before immigration problems and his release of a book condemning Stalin brought Orlov to the attention of the FBI and CIA in the early 1950's. Although interrogated extensively by American intelligence, he substantially downplayed his seniority, participation and knowledge of NKVD activities and never disclosed the names of dozens of Soviet agents who had infiltrated into Western governments, keeping loyal to communism to the end. The authors state that the CIA had substantial doubts about the true extent of knowledge that Orlov was disclosing, but somehow were never able to bring enough pressure upon him to divulge that information.

The major disappointment of this book (through no fault of the authors) is that aside from the revelation that Orlov deceived the U.S. for so many years, that there are no other major revelations. The authors do reveal many significant previously unknown details from KGB files concerning Orlov's involvement in the founding of the Cambridge spy ring (including the fact that Philby was the "first man' of the ring), the founding of the Rote Kapelle and his involvement in the Spanish Civil War as the NKVD resident and senior Soviet officer in the country. However, the Russian Intelligence Service refused to disclose any facts regarding agent names or missions that were never discovered by Western intelligence services, leaving readers impatient to know the identities of those sixty agents whose names were redacted from copies made from KGB files, particularly the completely undiscovered KGB Oxford spy ring. Hopefully, in not too many further years, the need to protect the individuals involved and operational strategies will no longer exist and the RIS will open up all of the KGB files.

Deadly Illusions is a very interesting history of Orlov and soviet foreign intelligence operations, but readers expecting it to read like a Forsyth spy novel will be disappointed; it is not a difficult read, but not at all a quick one. The faults of this book are minor: Costello has a sometimes annoying habit of diverting the reader on tangents that, while not uninteresting, are not logically and relevantly tied to the preceding text. I also felt that the authors downplayed Orlov's role in political terrorism too much; aside from a somewhat limited description of Orlov's involvement in the NKVD assasination of Andres Nin, the leader of the anti-Soviet Spanish Republican faction POUM, the authors failed to emphasize Orlov's real role in establishing Soviet dominance of the Republicans during the Spanish Civil War, via terrorism. Finally, I found Costello's admission of error with regard the main theory of his previous book Mask of Treachery (in which he claimed that Anthony Blunt was the "first man" of the Cambridge ring - see my Amazon.com review of Mask of Treachery) to be rather sparse and barely adequate.

Overall, this is an extremely significant book that should be part of any espionage historian's library.

I dont know much about John Costello but two of his books, Mask of Treachery and Deadly Illusions, are absolute gems. As well as being exciting to read, they are valuable resources on the underside of the cold war, the real business of espionage. The most exciting thing is how he takes us back through the mists of time to the beginning of the century to reveal how the Soviet espionage effort developed practically simultaneously witherh Russina Revolution. It has been fashionable for years to lampoon the communist witchhunts and McCarthyism of the early cold war but there was a massive sophisticated and implacably determined Soviet penetration effort throughout the world and it much it began long before WWII. The Cheka, the Comintern, the NKVD, the Rote Kapelle, the Spanish Civil War(which seems to have been the most affecting event, more than WWII, for a whole generation on both sides of the Atlantic), the Cambridge Spys, the forth man, the fifth man, the Rosenbergs, the mole-hunts that debilitated Western counter-intelligence services, it was a seamless continuum, real but hidden, that the world was and is still largely ignorant. Costello's bravura scholarship plus his relationship with former Soviet intelligence players make a valuable resource for all who would know how things really did occur in the defining political struggle of this century.

There is much more to this book than the story of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, but it is for the Russian viewpoint of this story that I bought the book. Having read the recently published book The Brother I wanted to read this book to compare the two. Alexander Feklisov paints a kindly picture of Julius Rosenberg as being an individual who sympathized with the plight of the Jews in Germany during World War II. Julius felt the Russians bore the brunt of the fighting against Nazi Germany and he wanted to do whatever he could to help them. Since Russia was an ally of America during World War II he wanted to do what he could to be of assistance since he wasn't in the front lines fighting the Nazis. Julius comes across as a rather kindly and meek individual and a genuine friendship between him and Feklisov developed. Rosenberg's biggest contribution to Russian intelligence was in providing them with the proximity fuse in which an explosive shattered when it neared an airplane causing damage instead of having to score a direct hit on the plane. Julius's wife Ethel was aware and sympathetic of her husband's activities, but was otherwise not involved. Whether she actually did any typing of her brother's, David Greenglass', notes is still questionable. It may very well have been David's wife, Ruth. David worked at Los Alamos in a machine shop and provided what information he could on America's efforts to develop an atomic bomb, but his childish sketches of a lens was of no value according to Feklisov. David Greenglass agreed to turn against his sister and brother-in-law in exchange for immunity for his wife Ruth and a prison sentence for himself. The Rosenbergs could have fled to Russia when things got "hot", but they wanted to remain close to Ruth because she was in a hospital recovering from burns suffered in an accident. From reading this book and The Brother I conclude that the Rosenbergs' hatred was against Nazism and their treatment of the Jews and not against America. As he saw it, Julius was helping an American ally (Russia) to fight an American enemy (Germany). The book is also interesting in showing the precautions spies take in their meetings. At a time when Communism was a hot topic in the early 1950's it is questionable whether the Rosenbergs received the fairness they deserved. The book covers much more including Feklisov's role along with John Scali during the Cuban Missile Crisis, but I'll limit my review to the case of the Rosenbergs since that is the part of the book I was most interested in.

The Man Behind The Rosenbergs is the personal and candid memoir of Alexander Feklisov, a KGB spymaster. This fascinating, compelling account in Feklisov's own words relates his claims of a close friendship to Julius Rosenberg (whom Feklisov felt was wrongly executed) and his duty as a secret messenger who helped bring to an end the terrifying tension of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. Especially recommended for students of "Cold War" era, The Man Behind The Rosenbergs is a revealing, gripping narrative, impossible to put down from first page to last!

In the years before Lenin and the harsh, bleak application of socialist thought to autocracy there existed a group of philosophers who believed in the beauty of the commune and its cooperation with a Republican government. Britain had Robert Owen and his factory town, the French had Fourier (the phalanstery) and Proudhon among others, and the Russians had Herzen. Here existed a time where the leading academics saw folly in violent revolution, and Herzen was by no means a demogogue willing to mobilize the Russian peasants in a siege of Moscow like a simple Pugachev or a Decembrist.

This perhaps explains Herzen's stern dislike of Marx and Engels, for he saw too much of the Robespierre in them and their ideas.

Herzen believed in democracy almost in a modern American sense. Indeed, much of the work is laced with arguments in disfavor to the flowering of socialism in Europe, citing particularly the cruelty of the police in France during 1848: "The Latin world does not like freedom, it only likes to sue for it." Certainly the tendencies of the Germans were no more progressive either. Instead at one point in the text the author suggests that those who "can put off from himself the old Adam of Europe and be born again a new Jonathan had better take the first steamer to some place in Wisconsin or Kansas."

The selections and abridgement of the text emphasize Herzen's basic belief about reform: revolution is gradual. One has to breed engrained stupidity out of the ruling class and make laws that better everyone, like the English and Americans. Laws make a better society, not people: "The Englishman's liberty is more in his institutions than in himself or his conscience. His freedom is the 'common law.'"

The text covers the demise of Herzen, culminating in his rejection on his deathbed by the new revolutionary ("terrorist") camps in Russia, headed ideologically by Chernyshevsky and best seen in the widespread incendiary and murderous practices of Sergei Nechaev. These are all topics of the years after Herzen's death, the tragic history of the latter half of the nineteenth century and the prelude to the pall of 1917.

A worthwile read for anyone with an interest in 19th century history - or Russian thought. Herzen's narrative begins with Napoleon's retreat from Moscow and winds on through Nichlos II's reign to the larger events of Napoleon the III's Europe. At times a witty and fascinating account of both Russia and Europe during a crucial era, Herzen occasionally drifts off into somewhat tedious personal speculation.

Herzen is one of the many authors whom Americans never are exposed to and rightfully should be. He was a great thinker; he writes lucidly (although tending toward personal speculation.... you've got to remember-- he was living at a similar time to Tolstoy who does the same thing....) and CAN BE surprisingly contemporary for someone so long dead....

It's understandable why Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, and Solzenitzen (sp?) are much more widely read than he is: they are better novellists and never got cursed by the fact that they were socialists (such a dirty word in the US!) BUT, Herzen is definately someone whom anyone trying to pawn themselves off as a psuedo-intellectual should read.

One problem with this book: some of his best stuff is obviously just not in here (as it is his memoirs....) His philosophy is brilliant; some of his letters to his son are as moving as any I can think of (excepting perhaps Rilke's to the young poet...)

His memoirs are a definate must-read.... for whomever is reading this review.... Just buy the book!

Fairy tales get us into the psyche of a culture. Americans see themselves as Paul Bunyan and Johnny Appelseed, conquoring the frontier. This book introduces us to the Russian psyche. It shows us how they look at things--the world, society, life, family, and government.

Some of the stroies are charming, such as the fabel of the Turnip and the Honey-pot. Other stories made absolutley no sense. But I had fun trying to crack these weird nuts.

I enjoyed the translation. It is not as energetic as Seamus Heaney, or J. B. Phillipws, but it is readable, athough you realize that you are reading a translation.

C. S. Lewis, in his preface to "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe," mentions that as children we read fairy tales, then we outgow them. Then, as adults, we come back to these stories and read them with different eyes. I had that experince with this book.

Afanasyev has assembled an absolutely wondeful collection of Russian folktales, animal tales and even epics. The stories are great to read, but there are a lot of them. I felt like something may have been lost in the translation, and tht's the only reason i didn't give this book a five.

What the Grimm Brothers did for fairy tales in Germany, Afanas'ev did for Russia. Over the course of his lifetime(1826-1871), he collected countless of these wonderful little stories from common folk, just as the Grimms did. This collection contains stories of adventure and enchantment, animal fables and more. Included are stories of Vasilissa and Baba Yaga, the witch whose house was built on chicken feet, and the famous story of the giant turnip. There's even some stories about vampires. But be prepared, this book is huge! And every bit of it distinctly Russian.

There are lengthy biographies of Solzhenitsyn by Scammell and Thomas, and specialized studies (e.g. Ericson's). Pearce's book meets the need of public and undergraduate libraries for a very readable, concise, and up-to-date biography of this controversial Nobel Prize winner. Pearce's book includes some otherwise unavailable recent material by Solzhenitsyn -- the prose poems at the end of the book -- so graduate libraries ought to have it, also.

Individuals who have read Solzhenitsyn's own autobiographical works and open letters might not need this book, but for most readers it will be a good introduction. It has the salutary effect of prompting one to go and (re)read works such as The First Circle. Pearce doesn't go into depth in discussion of Solzhenitsyn's books, but says enough to quicken interest in them.

Pearce shows affinity between Solzhenitsyn's positive ideas and those of people such as E. F. Schumacher (Small Is Beautiful). The critique of Enlightenment progressivism and positivism isn't detailed, but there's enough to remind me of writers as otherwise diverse as Phillip Sherrard (The Eclipse of Man and Nature), Russell Kirk, and the author of Ideas Have Consequences. I was also reminded a little of C. S. Lewis's prophetic novel That Hideous Strength, where Lewis presents a distinction between Britain and Logres, as I read Solzhenitsyn as quoted by Pearce, on the souls of nations. Familiarity with these writers -- who are often not known, or well known, to persons who presume to speak of their ideas -- can help one to understand where Solzhenitsyn is coming from.

Alenandr Solzenitsyn is a man certainly worthy of full scale treatment by a biographer. DM Thomas' biography a couple of years ago was strangely unmoving,and barely mentioned Solzenitsyn's religious views, which are at the core of his beliefs. At one time.AI solzenitsyn was the darling of the right in America,a virulent anti-communist who scorned ANYTHING resembling a welfare state{his attacks on free-market capitalism was soft pedalded by these same people}.Slowly, though, he became more and more removed from the centre of attention, and his novels became more and more obscure{and ,truth be told,rambling and quite boring.The red wheel trilogy...}This Biography places solzenitsyn's religious beliefs front and centre and the core of his being{and the reason he was able to survive the hell of the gulag}. While these are quite interesting, and really have rarely been covered in the West, Solzenitsyn's disdain for the West, his dismissal of pope John Paul II during and audience,his Tsarist tendencies and his almost messianic xenonphobia are not touched{though all are of one piece.] Solzenitsyn in many ways reminds me of Gandhi{without the charm}: wanting Holy Mother Russia to rise again to her greatness without the taint of western Decadence through a spiritual revolution. While he is a moral giant and an extraordiany example of the resilience of the human spirit, he is not served well by fawning, uncritical praise. Alexandr I solzhenitsyn deserves a full ,massive critical biography covering all of his life{his return to Russia has been bittersweet,his tv show was canceled for LACK OF INTEREST.Amazing how short peoples memories are!} This is one small step in the process. Interesting,but...

Solzhenitsyn: A Soul In Exile is a new biography of Alexander Solzhenitsyn portraying a complex man of integrity and faith, and whose anti-materialist stance and call for a "moral revolution" are as relevant today as they were fifty years ago. Biographer Joseph Pearce reassess this influential Russian writer who gave voice to the more than sixty million victims of Soviet terror, and who won the Nobel Prize for "the ethical force" of his literary work. Even with the collapse of Communism, Solzhenitsyn continues to be an outspoken critic of Russian leadership's role in that country's economic collapse and consequent rise of lawlessness. This impressive, highly recommended biography showcases Solzhenitsyn's life and work as a courageous stand for truth rooted in Christian and moral beliefs as evidenced in his life, poetry, plays, novels, and pronouncements.

For lovers of Russian literature and history buffs, this is a terrific book! If you're not a fan of this genre, however, it's going to be ONE TOUGH READ. Solzhenitsyn throws in characters with machine-gun rapidity as well as hundreds of local historical references that will be lost on many folks simply eager to find out about a bit about one of the greatest writers of the century.

That having been said, this one is a winner. Rich description, lovely prose and Solzhenitsyn's obvious love for his homeland are woven into a terrific work that offers deep insights into the Russian view this tumultuous period in their history. For my money, the portion of the book dealing the desperate Russian army and their misguided leaders is Solzhenitsyn at his finest: brutally accurate and never lacking in a deeper understanding of the flawed human beings that made up the events.

This is a must read, but don't make it your first foray into Russian literature or Solzhenitsyn. Try a shorter, less complex work first and then move to this if you like the genre.

To get the most out of this book, you have to be prepared for the very detailed account of the battles in East Prussia during August 1914. If you're not into military history, I should imagine that the book will be a tedious read. As it is, I don't mind military history, and so found this an interesting experience, illuminating what has become almost the forgotten part of World War One. Solzhenitsyn treats the Russian armies as a microcosm of the Tsarist state - their failures are a reflection of the decay of pre-revolutionary Russian society. The details of the experiences of the troops under bombardment, and their shock at the orderly condition of the German towns and farms (almost as if the Russians had landed on another planet) are particularly interesting. I'd put "War and Peace" and Zola's "The Debacle" above "August 1914", but nonetheless, it does not pale a great deal in comparison. What would be most interesting to think about (particularly bearing in mind Solzhenitsyn's earlier works) is how it was that only 20 years later Communist Russia managed to defeat a far more serious German threat.

Solzhenitsyn's The Red Wheel, Knot I is an extraordinarily work. His attention to historical detail and ability to draw the reader into the mind of each character make this an extremely enjoyable reconstruction of this chaotic period in Russian history. Solzhenitsyn incorporates newspaper clippings, military communiqués, multiple character viewpoints including German, Russian, revolutionary, soldier, and student in an almost patchwork manner which conveys history's turbid nature. The author occasionally employs a screenplay method, which lends an interesting visual element to the book. Overall, the only comparable book I have read would be Tolstoy's War and Peace. Solzhenitsyn's The Red Wheel is not an "easy read", but I highly recommend it to anyone with some backround in Russian history (without which you may find yourself lost at times) and an interest in historical fiction. Read the "complete and unabridged" version to get the most out of this book.