Утопия у власти

by Mikhail Heller, Александр Некрич, Михаил Геллер

"Утопия у власти" имела три русских издания, но публиковало "историю Советского Союза с 1917 г. до наших дней" лондонское издательство. В 1982 г., когда книга была закончена, о московском издании, конечно, не могло быть речи.
Настоящая книга - первое московское издание, история СССР, написанная свободно, без всякой цензуры.

Genres: History, Russia, European History, Nonfiction

856 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1982

About the author

An alternate spelling of Russian Mikhail Geller, Михаил Геллер, and Michel Heller.
Not to be confused with
Michał Heller or Michel Heller

Full name: Михаил Яковлевич Геллер, Mikhail Yakovlevich Geller, known in France, to where he emigrated, as Michel Heller, and in Poland, where he also lived for a while, as Mikhail Geller. Usually published in English as Mikhail Heller.

A Russian emigré dissident historian, publicist, writer and literary critic, researching and writing about Russian history, culture and literature, especially during the Soviet period.

From ru.wikipedia.org:

Михаил Яковлевич Геллер (1922, Могилев, БССР—3 января 1997, Париж, Франция) — историк, публицист, писатель, критик, диссидент. Автор ряда книг, исследующих различные аспекты русской истории и литературы советского периода, издававшихся в Англии, Франции, Польше, Венгрии и других странах. Зарекомендовал себя авторитетным специалистом в области современной русской литературы, новейшей истории России. Его работы более известны за пределами России.

В 1950 г. был арестован и приговорен к 15 годам лагерей. Отсидел 7 (по другим данным 6) лет. В 1957 г. освобожден из тюрьмы.

В 1963 г. (по другим данным в 1957) был вынужден уехать из СССР. Жил в Варшаве, затем — в Париже, где получил звание профессора Сорбонны.

В эмиграции написал несколько фундаментальных исторических трудов, в том числе — в соавторстве с другим известным историком-диссидентом Александром Некричем — многотомную работу «Утопия у власти», об истории Советского Союза. В соавторстве они написали три тома, после смерти Некрича Геллер написал четвёртый. До 1994 года его книги издавались только за рубежом. Начиная с 1994 года многие книги были переизданы в России.

В течение ряда лет вел регулярную хронику в парижской газете «Русская мысль», подборка которой была выпущена в России в виде книги «Глазами историка. Россия на распутье. 1990—1995». Под псевдонимом Адам Кручек (Adam Kruczek) вел постоянную рубрику «Русские заметки» в польском литературно-политическом журнала «Культура», выпускающемся в Париже.

Скончался в Париже в 1997 г.

Reviews

[Ivan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Pubblicato nel 1982, in Italia uscì nel 1984, due anni prima del disastro di Černobyl' e a meno di dieci anni dalla dissoluzione dell'impero sovietico, opera di due studiosi russi dissidenti ed emigrati in Occidente. Quando lo lessi nel 1984 ancora nulla lasciava presagire dell'imminente crollo (almeno per i non specialisti). Era però una struttura sclerotizzata, burocratizzata e inefficiente, governata da una gerontocrazia i cui membri si ammalavano e morivano di raffreddore, che mostrava la corda ed aveva esaurito tutta la spinta propulsiva della rivoluzione e dello stalinismo. Si reggeva sulla repressione interna fortissima, anche se non più sanguinaria, su un'ideologia dogmatica che non diceva più niente nessuno, e soprattutto sulla menzogna elevata a sistema (ideologia=menzogna, ricordate Marx?). Černobyl' sarà il prodotto finale e disastroso della menzogna elevata a sistema (Satana è il padre della menzogna, in lui non c'è mai stata verità alcuna). Dimenticavo: l'Armata Rossa e le testate nucleari; ma già da lì a qualche anno sarà piegata dai mujaheddin afghani e il gen. Gromov per ultimo chiuderà la ritirata sul ponte sull'Amu Darya. Ma tutto questo nel libro naturalmente non c'è, e non ci poteva essere. C'è invece uno studio e una riflessione profonda su ciò che significò e comportò la rivoluzione, il leninismo e lo stalinismo, di cui si poteva dare già da allora un bilancio: valeva la pena far tutto quel putiferio, quelle montagne di morti, quel delirio economico e sociologico, quell'acme di cattiveria, malvagità, superbia?
Beh, ognuno se la dà da sé la risposta.

[Lisajean · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this book, but it also upset me. I was surprised and disappointed by how much I learned from it, which is weird, I know, but I've been studying Russian and Soviet literature for 7+ years now, and I thought I had a pretty good grasp of the essential history. Apparently not. I wish I had read this years ago, but better late than never! For me, the three best parts of the book are: 1. The authors make the inherent evil of the Soviet system very clear. Stalin was not a deviation; he was the perfect inheritor of Lenin's system, and those in power were willing collaborators in the terror rather than victims of Stalin's paranoia. 2. Obviously I knew about the Gulag, I knew about the Holodomor, I knew about the disregard for soldiers' lives in WWII. And yet, I was still surprised by just how mismanaged the Soviet Union really was, at every level. Some might complain about the length of this book, but I think it's necessary, as example after example builds up to compelling proof of the sheer incompetence of Soviet leadership. 3. I appreciated the post-Stalinist history. It was something I knew even less about, and it was fascinating and depressing to learn how long the leaders clung to the failed policies of socialism.

This is a long, depressing book and, since it was published before the fall of the Soviet Union, it doesn't have the most up-to-date statistics, but I still strongly recommend it to anyone interested in Russian history or in the strong historical case against communism.

[Zach Michael]

soviet history be like
new minister of agriculture takes over, 50 million dead, 8 million arrested

[molas · Rating 5 out of 5]

The first full history of Soviet Union, published by Russian historians in the West in eighties, when the empire still existed. Now, after many years, the empire fortunately dissapeared, and many authors wrote books about its history. This monumental volume however, passed the test of time. I would say it is a history classics now. It is excellently written, with a lot of great citations and important judgments. Of course as a ultimate historical source has to be treated with caution, but the general opinions are still fresh and deep.

Returning to this lecture after years, I was curious whether the opening of the post-Soviet archives in the early 1990s resulted in the need to revise its judgments and assessments. Well, some details need to be improved, but general opinions of the authors are still disturbingly up-to-date. In particular the book excellently portraits Lenin and Stalin, founders of the empire, extremely evil people but very efficient politicians (unfortunately). The process of creating stalinist totalitarian state is described in detail, and looks disturbingly fresh... Then authors excellently write about IIWW and horrible mistakes of soviet generals and Stalin in particular, which resulted in loss of million lives.

Very interesting is chapter about Kchruschev, those enfant terrible of Soviet party. The main reason for his demise was a war with Party apparatus, a ruling class of empire. So the ruling class removed him and chosen opportunistic and easy to manipulate Brezhnev instead.

Highly recommended for all interested in history of Soviet Union.

[Alexandra · Rating 1 out of 5]

Perhaps the worst account of soviet history I've read! Just focusing on what I study, the book totally ignores any political plurality, social movements, or contingency which characterised the 1920s. The presentation of the bolshevik project as 'promising everything for everyone right away' is also just... nonsensical.

Why were there so many people and events listed in the 'chronology' that weren't mentioned at all in the text?

Asides from the dubious writing style (I'll let the translator take the blame for that), the most offensive characterisation were of the people of Russia and members of communist groups outside Russia - shown as helpless victims and willfully ignorant goons respectively. Top down 'great man' history to the extreme.

Do not alight here

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book gave insight into the rise and subsequent disintegration of the USSR. Especially interesting was its coverage of Stalin's overt anti-Semitism as well as the transformation of Soviet ideology from traditional Marxism to Communist authoritarianism (not a far leap I suppose).

[Michael Conway · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent history of the Soviet Union.

[Brett · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book purports to cover the years 1917 to about 1982 in Soviet history. It's very long at over 850 pages, but obviously there is a lot of ground to cover. It's written by two historians who were born in the Soviet Union and became ex-pats in Europe. It's translated into English, so some of the prose is on the clunky side. Still, it's a book that documents many of the worst atrocities of the Soviet Union in a way that's difficult to read and sheds light on the carelessness and brutality which human life was treated in this supposed utopia.

The set up of the book is unusual, with one author taking the first several chapter then the other taking the next several, with both receiving credit for the last couple. It does lead some noticeable shifts in authorial voice. Like many books of its kind, this one is focused very much on the Lenin/Stalin years, with the decades after receiving less attention. The book is packed with figures, but plenty of human level stories of suffering as well. It gives a good approximation to the reader of what it must have been like to live under conditions where policies could turn on a dime, and you might find yourself under suspicion by the state for activities that were expressly deemed legal and acceptable a short time before.

It spends much time on agricultural policy, and the ways in which peasants starved in order to try to feed the cities. It's portrayal of the Soviet state is of one at war with itself, unable to allocate resources, and at all times willing to put huge numbers of its citizens in concentration camps for crimes real or imagined. The fact that the authors emerged from Soviet system and write with firsthand knowledge does give it extra heft and credibility.

It's no easy read, but I've gone through a few of these thick Soviet histories in recent years, but this one is worthwhile. I would rank it behind A People's Tragedy in terms of poetry or readability, and also behind the Soviet Colossus, which came out around the same time and is more of a political science style examination of the political system, but it is nonetheless a powerful book that reminds us the dangers of state power when wielded by people without check or balance and willing to destroy the lives of their fellow citizens in service of abstract concepts or systems.

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

Terrifying and very focused on terror. A big book that is probably a little incomplete.

[Jeffery Dunham · Rating 5 out of 5]

A well researched, written and structured historical book that definitively lays out what the Soviet regime was and how it worked - its history and development. A classic that now stands in contrast to newer contemporary texts that slide down Marxist Romanticism and sympathies with the tyranny of the USSR; if you are searching for concrete & accurate historical truths and not a surface-face diluted history then this book is highly recommended. This text should be promoted more in the Western academic circles and encouraged for those that naively follow Communistic ideologies, its lessons still resonate today.

[Michael · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an excellent and thorough history of the Soviet Union, from it early moments of the revolution through the factional infighting of the Bolsheviks through the self-inflicted wounds of the show trials to its final ossification. Readable, detailed, and smart.

[Cathy · Rating 1 out of 5]

It makes a very nice door stop.

[Mjklin]

Russia is bad.

[Chris · Rating 5 out of 5]

Epic in scope, exhaustive in detail. Excellent info but not for the faint of heart.

[Shawn Kupfer · Rating 3 out of 5]

Bit dry. Good reference, though. Also, it's Mikhail Heller on the copy I have.