What do you think?
Rate this book
Moscú
Barcelona. 19 cm. 454 p., 1 h. Encuadernación en tapa dura de editorial con sobrecubierta ilustrada. Colección 'Colección Ancora y Delfín', numero coleccion(v. 170). Plievier, Theodor 1892-1955. Traducción del alemán por Tristán La Rosa. Traducción Moskau. La Rosa, Tristán. 1915-1990 .. Este libro es de segunda mano y tiene o puede tener marcas y señales de su anterior propietario.
446 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1953
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
August 25, 2020
Una lectura muy meticulosa y pormenorizada de la parte tocante a la invasión de la URSS por el ejército nazi. Tiene toda la pinta de ser un guión fiel de la realidad sin necesidad de decorarlo o adornarlo más que la cruda realidad. A penas hay unos protagonistas principales, los pocos que hay son personajes casi anónimos (aunque con nombre). No deja de ser una lectura un poco tediosa por la cantidad de detalles bélicos, geográficos, volumen de páginas, pero que en mi caso particular me hicieron seguir con la lectura por un afán meramente didáctico y de aprender algo de historia.
February 28, 2016
An amazing book, written by Theodor Plievier, that explains the true story of one of the fiercest battles in the eastern front in world war 2. It is one of the 3 books of a trilogy written by the same writer that talks about the 3 fiercest wars between the Germans and Russians: the battle of Moscou, then that of Stalingrad and finally the Battle of Berlin !!! I really look forward to read the 2 other books of the trilogy !! The book is divided into three parts: the first part describes the war from the German viewpoint, the second part describes the war from the Russian viewpoint and the third part describes it from both viewpoints. The way the details are used and entered in the storyis incredible !!! However there will be no spoilers about the book ...
Currently Reading
September 24, 2010I knew it all already and this books confirms it: war has no winners, just losers
June 19, 2026
When Josef Stalin was informed by his spies that Japan, because of its imminent surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, was not planning to open a second front against him as Fall 1941 drew to a close, he immediately transferred multiple divisions of the Red Army westward over the Trans-Siberian Railway in order to halt the German advance upon Moscow. The Russians succeeded, at great cost, in pushing the German army back about 50 miles and they never again menaced Moscow. It was the beginning of a bloody tale that would end in May 1945 in the ruins of Berlin.
Theodor Plievier’s “Moscow” is the first instalment, in chronological order, of a masterful trilogy (also including “Stalingrad” and “Berlin”) which synthesizes the awful reality of the war on the Eastern Front, a dirty war of extermination and annihilation, fueled by competing ideologies and mutual hatreds more than anything else. It is told from the viewpoint of both German soldiers and Russian soldiers and civilians, and shows the strengths and failings of both sides which led to the shattering denouement just a few miles from the spires of the Kremlin, as men and women, caught up in events beyond their control, simply struggled to stay alive.
For the Germans, it was incompetent leadership (epitomized by General Bomelbuerg) and the increasing conviction on the part of the common soldiers (such as Lt. Col. Zecke) that their leadership was exactly that—inability to comprehend how vast the steppes of Russia really were and the logistical and supply problems which resulted; failure to anticipate—through faulty intelligence—that the fall rainy season would turn Russian roads into quagmires of mud; lack of foresight about the rigors of the Russian winter, resulting in failure to equip the troops with adequate winter clothing; finally, and perhaps most importantly, a total underestimation of the fighting ability of the Russian army and its willingness to continue the fight in the face of seemingly catastrophic losses. This, of course, resulted from ignorance of Russian manpower and, most fundamentally, from the racist Nazi doctrine of “Aryan superiority” which dictated that the Russians, being a Slavic people, were by definition inferior in every respect and that the battle would be a German walkover. These issues are well illustrated in various chapters of the novel.
Much of the book is written from the Russian perspective, especially common soldiers and civilians. As they fled eastward in an effort to escape the seemingly inexorable, invincible advance of the German juggernaut, the soldiers were caught in a vise: they were expected to stand and fight, and even counterattack westward in the face of certain death or capture, under constant surveillance by commissars and political officers, in order to maintain the propaganda fiction that Russia was stopping the German advance and even counterattacking and throwing the Germans back. Yet, if they retreated toward the east in order to regroup or perhaps try to form a new line of defense, which militarily was often the only prudent course of action, they could be accused of cowardice or treason, and executed. Many met this fate. For the civilians, it was likewise a matter of trying to flee to the east as best they could, or stay behind and face uncertain treatment at the hand of the Germans.
A sense of confusion and chaos pervades the book and grows stronger as the climax is reached with the approach of the Germans to Moscow, especially in the passages describing the partial evacuation of the city, as party officials commandeer available transport in the mad rush toward Kuybyshev and other locations in the Urals, showing little concern for their fellow citizens, and, indeed, exhibiting the callous attitude of the Soviet leadership toward its own people which characterized the entire history of the Soviet Union. And the Germans are overcome by a sense of panic and frustration as they are thrown back by swarms of T-34 tanks (powered by diesel fuel, which did not freeze like gasoline) and hordes of Soviet soldiers dressed in warm, camouflage white winter clothing. This sense of foreboding and fear of what was coming was to grow on the eastern front throughout the war, at Stalingrad and Kursk, as defeat followed defeat, and reached its climax in the ruins of Berlin—but those are stories for the next two volumes in this epic series.
***** review by Chuck Graham *****
Theodor Plievier’s “Moscow” is the first instalment, in chronological order, of a masterful trilogy (also including “Stalingrad” and “Berlin”) which synthesizes the awful reality of the war on the Eastern Front, a dirty war of extermination and annihilation, fueled by competing ideologies and mutual hatreds more than anything else. It is told from the viewpoint of both German soldiers and Russian soldiers and civilians, and shows the strengths and failings of both sides which led to the shattering denouement just a few miles from the spires of the Kremlin, as men and women, caught up in events beyond their control, simply struggled to stay alive.
For the Germans, it was incompetent leadership (epitomized by General Bomelbuerg) and the increasing conviction on the part of the common soldiers (such as Lt. Col. Zecke) that their leadership was exactly that—inability to comprehend how vast the steppes of Russia really were and the logistical and supply problems which resulted; failure to anticipate—through faulty intelligence—that the fall rainy season would turn Russian roads into quagmires of mud; lack of foresight about the rigors of the Russian winter, resulting in failure to equip the troops with adequate winter clothing; finally, and perhaps most importantly, a total underestimation of the fighting ability of the Russian army and its willingness to continue the fight in the face of seemingly catastrophic losses. This, of course, resulted from ignorance of Russian manpower and, most fundamentally, from the racist Nazi doctrine of “Aryan superiority” which dictated that the Russians, being a Slavic people, were by definition inferior in every respect and that the battle would be a German walkover. These issues are well illustrated in various chapters of the novel.
Much of the book is written from the Russian perspective, especially common soldiers and civilians. As they fled eastward in an effort to escape the seemingly inexorable, invincible advance of the German juggernaut, the soldiers were caught in a vise: they were expected to stand and fight, and even counterattack westward in the face of certain death or capture, under constant surveillance by commissars and political officers, in order to maintain the propaganda fiction that Russia was stopping the German advance and even counterattacking and throwing the Germans back. Yet, if they retreated toward the east in order to regroup or perhaps try to form a new line of defense, which militarily was often the only prudent course of action, they could be accused of cowardice or treason, and executed. Many met this fate. For the civilians, it was likewise a matter of trying to flee to the east as best they could, or stay behind and face uncertain treatment at the hand of the Germans.
A sense of confusion and chaos pervades the book and grows stronger as the climax is reached with the approach of the Germans to Moscow, especially in the passages describing the partial evacuation of the city, as party officials commandeer available transport in the mad rush toward Kuybyshev and other locations in the Urals, showing little concern for their fellow citizens, and, indeed, exhibiting the callous attitude of the Soviet leadership toward its own people which characterized the entire history of the Soviet Union. And the Germans are overcome by a sense of panic and frustration as they are thrown back by swarms of T-34 tanks (powered by diesel fuel, which did not freeze like gasoline) and hordes of Soviet soldiers dressed in warm, camouflage white winter clothing. This sense of foreboding and fear of what was coming was to grow on the eastern front throughout the war, at Stalingrad and Kursk, as defeat followed defeat, and reached its climax in the ruins of Berlin—but those are stories for the next two volumes in this epic series.
***** review by Chuck Graham *****
June 3, 2024
Remarkable novel. Plievier is an interesting guy: a Commie, he worked for the USSR during the war in the Soviet's propaganda division. He interviewed survivors of the German Sixth Army after Stalingrad and wrote "Stalingrad," his most famous novel, at the end of the war. "Moscow" and "Berlin" came later.
"Moscow" is on a level with "Stalingrad." Plievier does a wonderful job of concentrating throughout on individuals. While he paints unforgettable pictures of the savagery of war, and its impact on both soldiers and civilians, his focus allows a reader to care more deeply than they might about general misery.
"Moscow" is different than "Stalingard," however, in that it focuses more on Russians than Germans (although both Gnotke and Vilshofen, who are characters in the latter reappear - or first appear - here). And despite his Communist leanings, Plievier gives it to the Bolsheviks with both barrels. It's remarkable a fellow traveler saw things so clearly, although Plievier did have first-hand experience with those monsters.
The novel unfolds in straight chronological order, from Operation Barbarossa's launch in June 1941 to the Red Army's counterattack that threw the Germans back from Moscow (and essentially sealed Nazi Germany's doom right then) in December of that year. Plievier notes how many in the Russian countryside, starved and enslaved by the Communists, welcomed the Germans as liberators. As a Red Army conscript remarks early, "Why fight when our industry, which for thirty years only produced for defense and give it such priority that for thirty years it couldn't let the people have a cooking spoon or shoes or clothing, leaves us without a weapon when it comes to the point?"
There are some powerful descriptions of the Holomodor, Stalin's forced starvation that murdered millions of Ukrainians in the 1930s and contributed to the welcoming attitude toward the Germans. We also met Uralov early. Uralov, an epic soldier, is an orphan who has been brought up by the Soviet state and instilled with a love and respect for it. That slowly evaporates as the early catastrophes of the war mount for the USSR. "Why must one first have lost his father and mother at birth, and not know his own name or the history of his family in order to be a devoted Soviet citizen," one Russian officer muses and another, moments later, wonders yes, what does that mean after all?
"Well, our Uralov has learned to read and write, has got everything he possesses from our Soviet State - and doesn't know what the Soviet State has taken from him. Now he's ready to give his life and says, 'For the Fatherland, for Stalin,'" the officer marvels. ("Fatherland" is an odd translation of what would be "rodina" or, usually, the "Motherland" in Russian).
That such experiences were *by design* with Communism dawns on the millions caught completely unprepared and ill equipped to deal with the Wermacht's onslaught.
One of the most depressing things in "Moscow" is that not everyone gets what they deserve, but of course war pays no attention to worth and Communists value only heartlessness. In particular, a nasty Commie rat, an unthinking apparatchik, Yadanov, never gets his comeuppance. He oversees a secret slave labor camp and, like a good Bolshevik, cares nothing for individuals. But, like many party members, Yadanov often lives well. Many flee, leaving the populace to starve or die, gorging themselves in retreat or in Moscow.
As the Germans advance over a carpet of people (literally, in one scene), Plievier gives a wonderful, sweeping shot of Moscow, and then bores in on Stalin and the Politbureau within a Kremlin warren. The toadies surrounding the dictator are depicted like the scheming bastards they were, and they have no concern with the unprecedented horrors they have inflicted on the people. "The maintenance and extension of their power throughout the world - that was the only consideration of these men. The fifteen faces collected round the table were empty masks; the problem for one and all was how to hold on to power."
Fortunately, they didn't (though they have never paid the price they should, historically, to the West's detriment). Plievier writes with great feeling about the catastrophe Communism and its twin, Fascism, produced in so many lives, and provides a pitiless view of war. A moving, powerful book.
"Moscow" is on a level with "Stalingrad." Plievier does a wonderful job of concentrating throughout on individuals. While he paints unforgettable pictures of the savagery of war, and its impact on both soldiers and civilians, his focus allows a reader to care more deeply than they might about general misery.
"Moscow" is different than "Stalingard," however, in that it focuses more on Russians than Germans (although both Gnotke and Vilshofen, who are characters in the latter reappear - or first appear - here). And despite his Communist leanings, Plievier gives it to the Bolsheviks with both barrels. It's remarkable a fellow traveler saw things so clearly, although Plievier did have first-hand experience with those monsters.
The novel unfolds in straight chronological order, from Operation Barbarossa's launch in June 1941 to the Red Army's counterattack that threw the Germans back from Moscow (and essentially sealed Nazi Germany's doom right then) in December of that year. Plievier notes how many in the Russian countryside, starved and enslaved by the Communists, welcomed the Germans as liberators. As a Red Army conscript remarks early, "Why fight when our industry, which for thirty years only produced for defense and give it such priority that for thirty years it couldn't let the people have a cooking spoon or shoes or clothing, leaves us without a weapon when it comes to the point?"
There are some powerful descriptions of the Holomodor, Stalin's forced starvation that murdered millions of Ukrainians in the 1930s and contributed to the welcoming attitude toward the Germans. We also met Uralov early. Uralov, an epic soldier, is an orphan who has been brought up by the Soviet state and instilled with a love and respect for it. That slowly evaporates as the early catastrophes of the war mount for the USSR. "Why must one first have lost his father and mother at birth, and not know his own name or the history of his family in order to be a devoted Soviet citizen," one Russian officer muses and another, moments later, wonders yes, what does that mean after all?
"Well, our Uralov has learned to read and write, has got everything he possesses from our Soviet State - and doesn't know what the Soviet State has taken from him. Now he's ready to give his life and says, 'For the Fatherland, for Stalin,'" the officer marvels. ("Fatherland" is an odd translation of what would be "rodina" or, usually, the "Motherland" in Russian).
That such experiences were *by design* with Communism dawns on the millions caught completely unprepared and ill equipped to deal with the Wermacht's onslaught.
One of the most depressing things in "Moscow" is that not everyone gets what they deserve, but of course war pays no attention to worth and Communists value only heartlessness. In particular, a nasty Commie rat, an unthinking apparatchik, Yadanov, never gets his comeuppance. He oversees a secret slave labor camp and, like a good Bolshevik, cares nothing for individuals. But, like many party members, Yadanov often lives well. Many flee, leaving the populace to starve or die, gorging themselves in retreat or in Moscow.
As the Germans advance over a carpet of people (literally, in one scene), Plievier gives a wonderful, sweeping shot of Moscow, and then bores in on Stalin and the Politbureau within a Kremlin warren. The toadies surrounding the dictator are depicted like the scheming bastards they were, and they have no concern with the unprecedented horrors they have inflicted on the people. "The maintenance and extension of their power throughout the world - that was the only consideration of these men. The fifteen faces collected round the table were empty masks; the problem for one and all was how to hold on to power."
Fortunately, they didn't (though they have never paid the price they should, historically, to the West's detriment). Plievier writes with great feeling about the catastrophe Communism and its twin, Fascism, produced in so many lives, and provides a pitiless view of war. A moving, powerful book.
July 18, 2025
Didn't enjoy this as much as "The Kaiser goes...".
October 28, 2019
Novela muy cruda, donde se describe la dureza de la guerra. Se ven los conflictos entre las tres partes que siempre se ven afectadas en toda guerra, los civiles contra el ejército y los políticos y también los políticos contra el ejército, cada uno contra todos y defendiendo su "verdad", y quién siempre paga es...., sí los civiles, aunque en este caso también el ejército o mejor los dos ejércitos.
Las posiciones debieron ser tal y como se describen y las batallas también.
Se ve la diferencia entre ejército y SS, dentro del avance alemán.
Final crudo para los vencidos y con un poco de propaganda por parte del autor hacia sus simpatizantes.
La arenga del Oficial alemán a sus hombres es fabulosa, así como la crudeza de los pensamientos y acciones de Hitler y Stalin, carne de cañón, sólo carne de cañón.
El General Invierno es al final el verdadero protagonista de la novela y eso que no mantiene ni un solo diálogo, sólo actúa.
Buena novela para todos, amantes y no amantes del género bélico.
Las posiciones debieron ser tal y como se describen y las batallas también.
Se ve la diferencia entre ejército y SS, dentro del avance alemán.
Final crudo para los vencidos y con un poco de propaganda por parte del autor hacia sus simpatizantes.
La arenga del Oficial alemán a sus hombres es fabulosa, así como la crudeza de los pensamientos y acciones de Hitler y Stalin, carne de cañón, sólo carne de cañón.
El General Invierno es al final el verdadero protagonista de la novela y eso que no mantiene ni un solo diálogo, sólo actúa.
Buena novela para todos, amantes y no amantes del género bélico.
December 28, 2016
This war novel is an impressive account of the Eastern Front. Plievier describes the Barbarossa campaign till the defeat for the gates of Moskow. He uses the perspective of the German army via various persons, e.g. Bomelbürg, the commander of a tank regiment, but also Gotke, a leutenant in the same regiment. And he describes the Russian perspective as well, again by describing the lives of certain Russion military men or their family.
This war novel is part of a trilogy that made Plievier famous in the years after the war. Being a German in exile in Moskow, Plievier got to interview many German prisoners of war, and access to Red Army sources. This novel, as well as the other two "Stalingrad" and "Berlin" are graphic accounts of this very gruesome episode in our history.
This war novel is part of a trilogy that made Plievier famous in the years after the war. Being a German in exile in Moskow, Plievier got to interview many German prisoners of war, and access to Red Army sources. This novel, as well as the other two "Stalingrad" and "Berlin" are graphic accounts of this very gruesome episode in our history.
August 21, 2015
Makes you feel like you are part of the war
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews