What do you think?
Rate this book
1947: hier begint het heden
När börjar vår tid? Vårt nu?
1947 är allt i rörelse. Allt kan fortfarande bli annorlunda.
- Den 10 februari tecknas fredsfördraget i Paris. Det andra världskriget är härmed slut. Samtidigt arbetar Europas fascister och nazister målmedvetet med att samla sig igen efter det stora nederlaget.
- Simone de Beauvoir erfar sitt livs passion, aldrig har hon känt sig så beroende av någon man. Hon börjar skriva feministbibeln Det andra könet.
- En kommitté får fyra månader på sig att lösa Palestinaproblemet.
- Christian Dior presenterar sin första kollektion, The New Look.
- FN:s mänskliga rättigheter ska formuleras, bara några få känner till begreppet folkmord.
- Sonen till en egyptisk urmakare, Hasan al-Banna, önskar vrida tiden mot islam. Han inför den plan som fortfarande är jihadisternas ideal.
- I ett tyskt flyktingläger för barn vars föräldrar mördats av nazisterna, finns tioårige Joszéf. Nu ska han ensam fatta ett livsavgörande beslut- börja ett nytt liv i Palestina eller återvända till förföljelsernas Budapest? Långt senare flyr han till Sverige där han får en dotter, Elisabeth.
Av dessa till synes disparata händelser har Elisabeth Åsbrink skrivit fram berättelsen om en värld som på gott och ont börjar ta form, där idéer om demokrati och medbestämmande föds och dör i samma stund, där en gammal ordning faller och en ny tar vid. Vår tid nu.
1947 är allt i rörelse. Allt kan fortfarande bli annorlunda.
- Den 10 februari tecknas fredsfördraget i Paris. Det andra världskriget är härmed slut. Samtidigt arbetar Europas fascister och nazister målmedvetet med att samla sig igen efter det stora nederlaget.
- Simone de Beauvoir erfar sitt livs passion, aldrig har hon känt sig så beroende av någon man. Hon börjar skriva feministbibeln Det andra könet.
- En kommitté får fyra månader på sig att lösa Palestinaproblemet.
- Christian Dior presenterar sin första kollektion, The New Look.
- FN:s mänskliga rättigheter ska formuleras, bara några få känner till begreppet folkmord.
- Sonen till en egyptisk urmakare, Hasan al-Banna, önskar vrida tiden mot islam. Han inför den plan som fortfarande är jihadisternas ideal.
- I ett tyskt flyktingläger för barn vars föräldrar mördats av nazisterna, finns tioårige Joszéf. Nu ska han ensam fatta ett livsavgörande beslut- börja ett nytt liv i Palestina eller återvända till förföljelsernas Budapest? Långt senare flyr han till Sverige där han får en dotter, Elisabeth.
Av dessa till synes disparata händelser har Elisabeth Åsbrink skrivit fram berättelsen om en värld som på gott och ont börjar ta form, där idéer om demokrati och medbestämmande föds och dör i samma stund, där en gammal ordning faller och en ny tar vid. Vår tid nu.
272 pages, Paperback
First published August 1, 2016
309 people are currently reading
4547 people want to read
About the author
Elisabeth Åsbrink
18 books108 followersElisabeth Katherine Åsbrink is a Swedish author and journalist.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 374 reviews
December 22, 2017
Rather than taking a year and giving a full account of what happened during it, this book is something slightly different. Yes, the year is split by months; , but, while it is certainly factual, it is also full of poetic writing and is also quite personal at times. Although the book has a worldwide perspective, it is Eurocentric and takes a cast of characters (some you will have heard of, such as Christian Dior, Primo Levi and Simone de Beuvoir, while others are less well known, such as Raphael Lemkin) through the events of a traumatic and compelling period of history.
In 1947 the war may have finished, but Europe was in turmoil. The Cold War was beginning, a battered England threw up its hands and abandoned both Palestine and India, leaving Palestine to become someone else’s problem, and leading to the partition of India. It could also no longer provide support to Iran, Turkey and Greece to hold off Soviet Intervention; directly leading to America having to step up and take over Britain’s role. As America offered to provide support to a Europe left with bombed cities and displaced people, the Soviet Union prevented Eastern Europe from receiving aid, widening the division between East and West.
It was a time of upheaval, conflict, movement and, yet, optimism (as well as changes in fashion and music, Thomas Mann releases “Doctor Faustus” and George Orwell is hidden away writing “1984”). When Raphael Lemkin fought to have the concept of genocide accepted legally, while it was first used (although not in legal existence) at the Neuremberg trials that year. With ex-Nazi’s fleeing to South America, many of those who survived the concentration camps found they were unwanted by America and Britain and tried to make it to Palestine. In all European countries, the war was still very close and very emotional. As Primo Levi attempted to publish his memoirs of his time in Auschwitz, his was a story that nobody was yet ready to hear and Holocaust deniers were already in existence, while Germany struggled to find a meaning to their recent history and dreamed of a united Europe.
This then is the chaotic world that Elisabeth Åsbrink writes about. A time of change, where much that happened then still resounds today. For example, she tells of Hasan al-Banna, who started the Muslim Brotherhood and pushed for Jihad in Palestine. Those problems, in India and the Middle East, have their beginnings in events in 1947, when rushed, poorly made decisions, led to chaotic beginnings and troubled histories. It is also the beginning of the Cold War, with the Un-American Activities Committee in the States, the Soviet Union tightening its grip on Eastern countries and a Europe coming to terms with the aftermath of the war. If you feel that 2017 has been a year when so much happened that you cannot quite get to grips with it, then perhaps this book will help both explain the past and help you understand the present.
In 1947 the war may have finished, but Europe was in turmoil. The Cold War was beginning, a battered England threw up its hands and abandoned both Palestine and India, leaving Palestine to become someone else’s problem, and leading to the partition of India. It could also no longer provide support to Iran, Turkey and Greece to hold off Soviet Intervention; directly leading to America having to step up and take over Britain’s role. As America offered to provide support to a Europe left with bombed cities and displaced people, the Soviet Union prevented Eastern Europe from receiving aid, widening the division between East and West.
It was a time of upheaval, conflict, movement and, yet, optimism (as well as changes in fashion and music, Thomas Mann releases “Doctor Faustus” and George Orwell is hidden away writing “1984”). When Raphael Lemkin fought to have the concept of genocide accepted legally, while it was first used (although not in legal existence) at the Neuremberg trials that year. With ex-Nazi’s fleeing to South America, many of those who survived the concentration camps found they were unwanted by America and Britain and tried to make it to Palestine. In all European countries, the war was still very close and very emotional. As Primo Levi attempted to publish his memoirs of his time in Auschwitz, his was a story that nobody was yet ready to hear and Holocaust deniers were already in existence, while Germany struggled to find a meaning to their recent history and dreamed of a united Europe.
This then is the chaotic world that Elisabeth Åsbrink writes about. A time of change, where much that happened then still resounds today. For example, she tells of Hasan al-Banna, who started the Muslim Brotherhood and pushed for Jihad in Palestine. Those problems, in India and the Middle East, have their beginnings in events in 1947, when rushed, poorly made decisions, led to chaotic beginnings and troubled histories. It is also the beginning of the Cold War, with the Un-American Activities Committee in the States, the Soviet Union tightening its grip on Eastern countries and a Europe coming to terms with the aftermath of the war. If you feel that 2017 has been a year when so much happened that you cannot quite get to grips with it, then perhaps this book will help both explain the past and help you understand the present.
April 5, 2018
Autore: svedese. Saggio storia.
Questo non potevo non prenderlo.
I fatti scelti (non sono ovviamente tutti quelli accaduti nel 1947) sono quelli che hanno prodotto cambiamenti epocali ci cui ancora oggi viviamo le conseguenze. La nascita dello stato di Israele, la fondazione dei Fratelli Musulmani, la fine dell’Impero britannico in India, la sopravvivenza del nazismo e del fascismo come correnti politiche nascoste ma operative, il delinearsi della politica dei blocchi contrapposti (Usa e Russia), la presa di posizione presidenziale Usa contro il comunismo, l’istituzione del Piano Marshall e anche pizzichi di altro.
Ai fatti si intrecciano anche ricordi della famiglia dell’autrice e brevi note su due scrittori: l’amore travolgente di Simone de Beauvoir per Nelson Algren e il precario stato di salute di George Orwell.
La prima tra i palpiti amorosi darà il via a Il secondo sesso e il secondo nella pace della vita in campagna scriverà 1984.
Piacevole, scorrevole e per chi non ha idea o memoria un breve ripasso di vicende vecchie, ma non morte. Purtroppo nella storia ci sono molti evergreen. Alla faccia dei nostri programmi scolastici.
02.04.2018
Questo non potevo non prenderlo.
I fatti scelti (non sono ovviamente tutti quelli accaduti nel 1947) sono quelli che hanno prodotto cambiamenti epocali ci cui ancora oggi viviamo le conseguenze. La nascita dello stato di Israele, la fondazione dei Fratelli Musulmani, la fine dell’Impero britannico in India, la sopravvivenza del nazismo e del fascismo come correnti politiche nascoste ma operative, il delinearsi della politica dei blocchi contrapposti (Usa e Russia), la presa di posizione presidenziale Usa contro il comunismo, l’istituzione del Piano Marshall e anche pizzichi di altro.
Ai fatti si intrecciano anche ricordi della famiglia dell’autrice e brevi note su due scrittori: l’amore travolgente di Simone de Beauvoir per Nelson Algren e il precario stato di salute di George Orwell.
La prima tra i palpiti amorosi darà il via a Il secondo sesso e il secondo nella pace della vita in campagna scriverà 1984.
Piacevole, scorrevole e per chi non ha idea o memoria un breve ripasso di vicende vecchie, ma non morte. Purtroppo nella storia ci sono molti evergreen. Alla faccia dei nostri programmi scolastici.
02.04.2018
December 18, 2018
L’Europa è tutta una rovina. Sono distrutte la Gran Bretagna, la Francia, l’Austria, la Germania. Fra le macerie si aggirano persone senza nulla, né cose né famiglia.
Billie Holiday gira un film in cui le assegnano la parte della domestica. D’altronde è negra, che cosa si aspettava.
Gli inglesi lasciano l’India.
Gli indù ed i musulmani si contendono il territorio.
I sikh uccidono musulmani.
I musulmani uccidono indù.
Vengono fondati i grandi magazzini H&M.
Un giornalista americano inventa l’espressione “guerra fredda”.
Un ebreo rifugiato in America lotta perché venga riconosciuto il termine “genocidio”. Lo ha coniato lui, fino a quel momento non esisteva.
Simone de Beauvoir fa un viaggio negli Stati Uniti e si innamora perdutamente dello sceneggiatore Nelson Algren. Non lascerà Sartre per lui.
Si tengono processi contro i gerarchi nazisti. A Norimberga, ma anche a Cracovia, ad Amburgo, a Venezia. Sono costosi. Comunque, molti potenziali imputati scivoleranno fra le maglie della rete ed avranno un futuro sereno.
Gli ebrei vagano per l’Europa. Vivono in campi profughi. Non li vogliono in Gran Bretagna, in Svezia, in Ungheria, in Romania (neanche negli Stati Uniti, se è per questo), ma gli accessi in Palestina sono centellinati.
Christian Dior crea una moda completamente nuova, molto più femminile di quella uscita dalla guerra.
I nazisti ed i fascisti si organizzano. Sono in Svezia, in Gran Bretagna, in Italia, ovviamente in Germania. Sono anche in America del sud. Nel nome del comune odio verso gli ebrei, hanno ottimi rapporti con il Gran Muftì di Gerusalemme.
Gli inglesi non vogliono più il protettorato della Palestina.
Un certo Michail inventa una nuova arma, particolarmente efficace. Lui di cognome fa Kalashnikov.
Gli ebrei vogliono la Palestina.
Gli arabi musulmani abitano in Palestina.
Una commissione ONU di dodici uomini di dodici nazioni diverse viene incaricata di decidere l’assetto da dare alla Palestina.
I terroristi ebrei dell’Irgun uccidono arabi.
I terroristi musulmani uccidono ebrei.
I fratelli musulmani non vogliono sentir parlare di uno stato ebraico in Palestina, vorrebbero uno stato unitario con una minoranza ebraica.
Un diplomatico libanese cerca di mediare fra il Gran Muftì e la commissione ONU. Confida a qualcuno che se gli arabi non adottano una posizione più elastica la causa dei palestinesi è persa.
Viene inventata la Polaroid.
Un giornalista del New York Times osserva che se gli Stati Uniti avessero accolto i profughi ebrei a partire dalla fine della guerra, adesso sarebbero tutti cittadini americani integrati nella società.
George Orwell scrive “Il grande fratello”.
La Commissione ONU elabora due proposte: costituire due province, una ebraica ed una araba, riunite in una federazione; oppure creare due stati indipendenti.
L’assemblea dell’ONU sta per votare, ma viene ottenuto un rinvio. Quando si vota, molti stati hanno cambiato idea. Nei tre giorni del rinvio gli Stati Uniti hanno fatto sapere che avrebbero revocato gli aiuti economici se loro avessero votato contro la creazione di uno stato ebraico. Ad altri invece hanno promesso un aiuto economico se avessero votato a favore della creazione di uno stato ebraico.
L’assemblea vota la divisione della Palestina in due stati indipendenti, uno arabo e uno ebraico. Nel giro di poco 750.000 arabi vengono sloggiati dalle loro case, costretti a lasciarsi dietro tutto.
Com’è finita lo sappiamo. Forse poteva andare diversamente.
E’ il 1947, l’anno in cui l’oggi è cominciato (nella versione inglese questo è il titolo del libro).
A differenza del suo fratellino glamorous, il 1968, che si occuperà soprattutto di libertà individuali, del rapporto fra gli individui e le istituzioni, il fratello maggiore deve pensare per grandi numeri, deve rassettare il mondo, distrutto dalla guerra più devastante di sempre.
Come si vede dal sunto del libro, fa parecchi disastri, ma il compito era probabilmente ingestibile.
Per quel che vale, io credo che sarebbe andata meglio se gli integralisti, i fondamentalisti e gli irriducibili di ogni genere fossero stati imbavagliati.
Il libro non so neanche se è scritto bene o male: l'argomento è talmente importante che gli do cinque stelle a prescindere.
Billie Holiday gira un film in cui le assegnano la parte della domestica. D’altronde è negra, che cosa si aspettava.
Gli inglesi lasciano l’India.
Gli indù ed i musulmani si contendono il territorio.
I sikh uccidono musulmani.
I musulmani uccidono indù.
Vengono fondati i grandi magazzini H&M.
Un giornalista americano inventa l’espressione “guerra fredda”.
Un ebreo rifugiato in America lotta perché venga riconosciuto il termine “genocidio”. Lo ha coniato lui, fino a quel momento non esisteva.
Simone de Beauvoir fa un viaggio negli Stati Uniti e si innamora perdutamente dello sceneggiatore Nelson Algren. Non lascerà Sartre per lui.
Si tengono processi contro i gerarchi nazisti. A Norimberga, ma anche a Cracovia, ad Amburgo, a Venezia. Sono costosi. Comunque, molti potenziali imputati scivoleranno fra le maglie della rete ed avranno un futuro sereno.
Gli ebrei vagano per l’Europa. Vivono in campi profughi. Non li vogliono in Gran Bretagna, in Svezia, in Ungheria, in Romania (neanche negli Stati Uniti, se è per questo), ma gli accessi in Palestina sono centellinati.
Christian Dior crea una moda completamente nuova, molto più femminile di quella uscita dalla guerra.
I nazisti ed i fascisti si organizzano. Sono in Svezia, in Gran Bretagna, in Italia, ovviamente in Germania. Sono anche in America del sud. Nel nome del comune odio verso gli ebrei, hanno ottimi rapporti con il Gran Muftì di Gerusalemme.
Gli inglesi non vogliono più il protettorato della Palestina.
Un certo Michail inventa una nuova arma, particolarmente efficace. Lui di cognome fa Kalashnikov.
Gli ebrei vogliono la Palestina.
Gli arabi musulmani abitano in Palestina.
Una commissione ONU di dodici uomini di dodici nazioni diverse viene incaricata di decidere l’assetto da dare alla Palestina.
I terroristi ebrei dell’Irgun uccidono arabi.
I terroristi musulmani uccidono ebrei.
I fratelli musulmani non vogliono sentir parlare di uno stato ebraico in Palestina, vorrebbero uno stato unitario con una minoranza ebraica.
Un diplomatico libanese cerca di mediare fra il Gran Muftì e la commissione ONU. Confida a qualcuno che se gli arabi non adottano una posizione più elastica la causa dei palestinesi è persa.
Viene inventata la Polaroid.
Un giornalista del New York Times osserva che se gli Stati Uniti avessero accolto i profughi ebrei a partire dalla fine della guerra, adesso sarebbero tutti cittadini americani integrati nella società.
George Orwell scrive “Il grande fratello”.
La Commissione ONU elabora due proposte: costituire due province, una ebraica ed una araba, riunite in una federazione; oppure creare due stati indipendenti.
L’assemblea dell’ONU sta per votare, ma viene ottenuto un rinvio. Quando si vota, molti stati hanno cambiato idea. Nei tre giorni del rinvio gli Stati Uniti hanno fatto sapere che avrebbero revocato gli aiuti economici se loro avessero votato contro la creazione di uno stato ebraico. Ad altri invece hanno promesso un aiuto economico se avessero votato a favore della creazione di uno stato ebraico.
L’assemblea vota la divisione della Palestina in due stati indipendenti, uno arabo e uno ebraico. Nel giro di poco 750.000 arabi vengono sloggiati dalle loro case, costretti a lasciarsi dietro tutto.
Com’è finita lo sappiamo. Forse poteva andare diversamente.
E’ il 1947, l’anno in cui l’oggi è cominciato (nella versione inglese questo è il titolo del libro).
A differenza del suo fratellino glamorous, il 1968, che si occuperà soprattutto di libertà individuali, del rapporto fra gli individui e le istituzioni, il fratello maggiore deve pensare per grandi numeri, deve rassettare il mondo, distrutto dalla guerra più devastante di sempre.
Come si vede dal sunto del libro, fa parecchi disastri, ma il compito era probabilmente ingestibile.
Per quel che vale, io credo che sarebbe andata meglio se gli integralisti, i fondamentalisti e gli irriducibili di ogni genere fossero stati imbavagliati.
Il libro non so neanche se è scritto bene o male: l'argomento è talmente importante che gli do cinque stelle a prescindere.
December 14, 2020
This is one of those books that’s going to change the way I look at the world forever…
To quote part of the blurb:
It’s a remarkable book. It charts world events – month by month, city by city – for the year of 1947, as the world recovers from the cataclysm of WW2. And even if you think you are reasonably up to speed with modern history because you’ve read books and watched films and you know people who lived through it, you will probably find yourself surprised by some of what’s chronicled here. I certainly was.
The author does include the unsurprising past i.e. the beginnings of Soviet reprisals against its dissidents; the collapse of the British Empire (and blaming Britain for the catastrophe of Partition in India); the emerging Cold War and the Truman Doctrine of two Germanys. But by personalising these events with the people involved, Åsbrink shakes off the dust of history and makes them vivid. Mikhail Kalashnikov rewarded with a watch. Musa Alami’s cautious attempts to influence the fate of Palestine. Christian Dior hounded over the extravagance of his designs in Britain under the bitterness of austerity. (My mother wasn’t one of them. She loved Dior).
One of the events that did surprise me was the Dutch expulsion of Germans:
To read the rest of my review please visit https://anzlitlovers.com/2017/11/07/1...
To quote part of the blurb:
In 1947, Elisabeth Åsbrink chronicles the creation of the modern world, as the forces that will go on to govern all our lives during the next 70 years first make themselves known.
It’s a remarkable book. It charts world events – month by month, city by city – for the year of 1947, as the world recovers from the cataclysm of WW2. And even if you think you are reasonably up to speed with modern history because you’ve read books and watched films and you know people who lived through it, you will probably find yourself surprised by some of what’s chronicled here. I certainly was.
The author does include the unsurprising past i.e. the beginnings of Soviet reprisals against its dissidents; the collapse of the British Empire (and blaming Britain for the catastrophe of Partition in India); the emerging Cold War and the Truman Doctrine of two Germanys. But by personalising these events with the people involved, Åsbrink shakes off the dust of history and makes them vivid. Mikhail Kalashnikov rewarded with a watch. Musa Alami’s cautious attempts to influence the fate of Palestine. Christian Dior hounded over the extravagance of his designs in Britain under the bitterness of austerity. (My mother wasn’t one of them. She loved Dior).
One of the events that did surprise me was the Dutch expulsion of Germans:
… no one even wants to hear the word ‘Germany’ so strong is their hatred after the Occupation. Under a new law, 25,000 Dutch nationals of German ancestry are branded ‘hostile subjects’ and sentenced to deportation – even if they happen to be Jews, liberals, or opponents of the Nazis.
The violence takes a well-trodden path. The Dutch-Germans are given an hour to pack everything they can carry, up to a maximum of 50kg, then they are despatched to jails, or to prison camps near the Dutch-German border. Their homes and businesses are confiscated by the state. Operation Black Tulip. (p.26)
To read the rest of my review please visit https://anzlitlovers.com/2017/11/07/1...
January 2, 2020
You will find incredible real history under this cover!
It turns out that people lived their life after World War II. The Nazis were running through Sweden to Argentina, the allies were to refuse "punishing all the Nazis for their crimes" in favour of "we need a strong anti-communist Europe". The Jews were trying to get into Palestine, the Arabs were trying to stop them, the British did not want to quarrel with the Arabs, and the French - with the British. Simone de Beauvoir went to the United States and fell in love there, while Jewish man who lived in Lviv Raphael Lemkin was trying to persuade the UN to introduce the concept of "genocide" into the international law. And in Europe, the unpunished supporters of the Nazi regime made a fresh start with their old ideas. And in India, one decision flooded the country with blood. And ... In short, people lived their lives. And so much has been done in this 1947 that still affects us today.
You will read this book with the help of google. Otherwise, you are a specialist in world history.
It would be nice to get a series of such books for each year of the XX century if they could so briefly and with clear accents tell me about the past that defines my present.
It turns out that people lived their life after World War II. The Nazis were running through Sweden to Argentina, the allies were to refuse "punishing all the Nazis for their crimes" in favour of "we need a strong anti-communist Europe". The Jews were trying to get into Palestine, the Arabs were trying to stop them, the British did not want to quarrel with the Arabs, and the French - with the British. Simone de Beauvoir went to the United States and fell in love there, while Jewish man who lived in Lviv Raphael Lemkin was trying to persuade the UN to introduce the concept of "genocide" into the international law. And in Europe, the unpunished supporters of the Nazi regime made a fresh start with their old ideas. And in India, one decision flooded the country with blood. And ... In short, people lived their lives. And so much has been done in this 1947 that still affects us today.
You will read this book with the help of google. Otherwise, you are a specialist in world history.
It would be nice to get a series of such books for each year of the XX century if they could so briefly and with clear accents tell me about the past that defines my present.
November 8, 2017
Reviews are often very specific to the reader, more so than the text. For me, this book was just the right thing at just the right time, but I suspect that at a different point in my life, or if I were a different person, my perception would be completely different.
First, this is very clearly a translation - not necessarily in terms of words or meaning - but it is very European in pacing and cultural perspective. I really enjoyed this aspect; it is nice to read something that isn’t the American view.
I also felt like I learned a ton of history, without even being stuck in long passages of dates and details. This was simply one year, and individual days were less important than the flow of time. Switching quickly through multiple people, some of whom were encountered once and some quite often, also enhanced the readability and kept me interested. If one passage didn’t thrill me, I only had to push on for a few sentences.
Finally, I loved the drastic changes in scale - one passage was an everyday person with an ordinary life, the next a global leader, the next an artist or author living out their own moments, from the mundane to the momentous and back without any irony or disjunction. That to me was the best part of all. “Real life” in the midst of “history.”
First, this is very clearly a translation - not necessarily in terms of words or meaning - but it is very European in pacing and cultural perspective. I really enjoyed this aspect; it is nice to read something that isn’t the American view.
I also felt like I learned a ton of history, without even being stuck in long passages of dates and details. This was simply one year, and individual days were less important than the flow of time. Switching quickly through multiple people, some of whom were encountered once and some quite often, also enhanced the readability and kept me interested. If one passage didn’t thrill me, I only had to push on for a few sentences.
Finally, I loved the drastic changes in scale - one passage was an everyday person with an ordinary life, the next a global leader, the next an artist or author living out their own moments, from the mundane to the momentous and back without any irony or disjunction. That to me was the best part of all. “Real life” in the midst of “history.”
October 16, 2024
Ha valaki olvasta már Florian Ilies 1913 című könyvét, akkor ismerős (már-már zavaróan ismerős) lesz neki ez a formátum: többé-kevésbé ötletszerűen kiválogatott, párhuzamosan futó skiccek egy adott történelmi év (itt – mily meglepő! – 1947) ikonikus alakjairól. Látjuk Beauvoirt, amint birkózik az emésztő szerelemmel, Orwellt, ahogy egy skót szigeten versenyt fut a tuberkolózissal, Raphael Lemkint, aki az életét teszi fel arra, hogy elismertesse a világgal a népirtás fogalmát, vagy épp Thelonious Monkot, akinek zaklatott jazz-zenéje mintha a világ szabálytalan szívdobbanásait akarná hallhatóvá tenni. Asbrink mindazonáltal két témát kifejezett hangsúllyal tárgyal:
1.) Az egyik az új vallási-etnikai törésvonalak rendszere, amelyek a második világháború vége után is gondoskodnak arról, hogy a világ ne maradjon véres konfliktusok nélkül. Palesztina és az indiai szubkontinens ügyetlen kézzel történő felszabdalása garantálja az erőszak, a menekülés, a bosszú és viszontbosszú máig tartó spirálját – ebben a kérdésben pedig a nagyhatalmak felelőssége vitathatatlan, és ez még akkor is igaz, ha így utólag sem könnyű eldönteni, mit kellett volna abban a történelmi pillanatban tenniük.
2.) A másik pedig a fasizmus továbbélése. Asbrink bemutatja, hogy a nácik totális veresége nem volt elég ahhoz, hogy a tan a történelem szemétdombjára kerüljön – bőven akadtak büszke utóvédharcosok, akik továbbra is a fehér és zsidómentes Európáról prófétáltak, miközben erősködtek, hogy a holokauszt meg se történt. És nem akadt egy jó szándékú ököl, hogy orrba csűrje őket.
Felületes könyv? Nos, meglehet. De nem is célja a mélyelemzés, hanem egy szintúgy fontos ideát valósít meg: emlékeztet bennünket arra, hogy a történelem nem jégbe fagyott, lezárt idővonal, hanem olyasvalami, ami mindig emberekkel történik, és soha nem ér véget. Látni az egyén szempontjait, félelmeit, ez alkalmasint sokkal közelebb hozza hozzánk a múltat, mint egy mégoly alapos Romsics-tanulmánykötet. És ebben a formátumban igenis az is elfér, hogy a szerző oldalakon keresztül a saját szüleinek és nagyszüleinek tragédiájáról beszél – mert az is történelem. És mint történelem, a szerző személyes ügye. És a te személyes ügyed, meg az én személyes ügyem.
1.) Az egyik az új vallási-etnikai törésvonalak rendszere, amelyek a második világháború vége után is gondoskodnak arról, hogy a világ ne maradjon véres konfliktusok nélkül. Palesztina és az indiai szubkontinens ügyetlen kézzel történő felszabdalása garantálja az erőszak, a menekülés, a bosszú és viszontbosszú máig tartó spirálját – ebben a kérdésben pedig a nagyhatalmak felelőssége vitathatatlan, és ez még akkor is igaz, ha így utólag sem könnyű eldönteni, mit kellett volna abban a történelmi pillanatban tenniük.
2.) A másik pedig a fasizmus továbbélése. Asbrink bemutatja, hogy a nácik totális veresége nem volt elég ahhoz, hogy a tan a történelem szemétdombjára kerüljön – bőven akadtak büszke utóvédharcosok, akik továbbra is a fehér és zsidómentes Európáról prófétáltak, miközben erősködtek, hogy a holokauszt meg se történt. És nem akadt egy jó szándékú ököl, hogy orrba csűrje őket.
Felületes könyv? Nos, meglehet. De nem is célja a mélyelemzés, hanem egy szintúgy fontos ideát valósít meg: emlékeztet bennünket arra, hogy a történelem nem jégbe fagyott, lezárt idővonal, hanem olyasvalami, ami mindig emberekkel történik, és soha nem ér véget. Látni az egyén szempontjait, félelmeit, ez alkalmasint sokkal közelebb hozza hozzánk a múltat, mint egy mégoly alapos Romsics-tanulmánykötet. És ebben a formátumban igenis az is elfér, hogy a szerző oldalakon keresztül a saját szüleinek és nagyszüleinek tragédiájáról beszél – mert az is történelem. És mint történelem, a szerző személyes ügye. És a te személyes ügyed, meg az én személyes ügyem.
September 6, 2021
“Wounds must be healed.”
Reading these curated stories spanning from January to December like a diary, I found it shocking what a pivotal year 1947 truly was.
•In the wake of the Nuremberg trials, Raphael Lemkin coins the term “genocide,” and works to make it a prosecutable crime
•The Truman Doctrine is announced, and the term “cold war” becomes more popular
•The British Province of India is partitioned into the independent states of India and Pakistan
•A Partition plan is also adopted to divide Arabs and Jews in Palestine, and the Muslim Brotherhood organization re-introduces the term jihad.
•UFO’s spotted over Roswell, New Mexico bring “flying saucers” into common parlance
•George Orwell retreats to the Scottish Island of Jura to write 1984
•The writers Simone de Beauvoir and Nelson Algren meet and begin their intense relationship
•Pilot Chuck Yeager breaks the sound barrier, making anything seem possible
And these are just some of the events described. Åsbrink has a background in investigative journalism, and while she chooses selective bits of history to make certain points, she leaves space for the reader to fill in what, looking back, we now know, creating a powerful reading experience.
I enjoyed the human interest details that rarely make it into historical summaries. “All Budapest residents have to spend ten days a year clearing up rubbish and debris from ruined buildings, but those who can afford to bribe their way out of this duty do so.”
In the middle of the book, she takes a turn to the personal, and tells a tragic story of her grandfather, and the importance of keeping memories alive. “I have little experience of having a family. There is nothing but names, rain falling over names, names falling through the generations.”
Creative, moving, informative and thought-provoking.
Reading these curated stories spanning from January to December like a diary, I found it shocking what a pivotal year 1947 truly was.
•In the wake of the Nuremberg trials, Raphael Lemkin coins the term “genocide,” and works to make it a prosecutable crime
•The Truman Doctrine is announced, and the term “cold war” becomes more popular
•The British Province of India is partitioned into the independent states of India and Pakistan
•A Partition plan is also adopted to divide Arabs and Jews in Palestine, and the Muslim Brotherhood organization re-introduces the term jihad.
•UFO’s spotted over Roswell, New Mexico bring “flying saucers” into common parlance
•George Orwell retreats to the Scottish Island of Jura to write 1984
•The writers Simone de Beauvoir and Nelson Algren meet and begin their intense relationship
•Pilot Chuck Yeager breaks the sound barrier, making anything seem possible
And these are just some of the events described. Åsbrink has a background in investigative journalism, and while she chooses selective bits of history to make certain points, she leaves space for the reader to fill in what, looking back, we now know, creating a powerful reading experience.
I enjoyed the human interest details that rarely make it into historical summaries. “All Budapest residents have to spend ten days a year clearing up rubbish and debris from ruined buildings, but those who can afford to bribe their way out of this duty do so.”
In the middle of the book, she takes a turn to the personal, and tells a tragic story of her grandfather, and the importance of keeping memories alive. “I have little experience of having a family. There is nothing but names, rain falling over names, names falling through the generations.”
Creative, moving, informative and thought-provoking.
July 10, 2023
This book is a chronicle of sorts of the title year, 1947, when the world was still recovering from the trauma of World War II. Various trials of war criminals were happening, most famously, the ones at Nuremberg, Germany. France was also dealing with those who had collaborated with the German occupation; some were executed. A certain Raphael Lemkin was working to make the word "genocide" a legally defined crime.
The British were beginning to dismantle their empire. India was being given its independence, but the Hindus and Muslims of the subcontinent could not get along, so Pakistan came into being, but with a lot of violence and bloodshed. The British were also getting out of Palestine where they had been ruling under a League of Nations mandate acquired after World War I. Again, there was a lot of violence between the Muslim Palestinian Arabs and the Jewish Zionists who the following year would create the state of Israel. The UN voted to partition Palestine between a Jewish state and a Palestinian state, but many Palestinian leaders rejected that. In the meantime, there were thousands of Jewish refugees, Holocaust survivors, who were attempting to leave Europe for Palestine, which the British were trying to keep a lid on to keep the Arabs happy - a near impossible task.
The British also quit supporting Greece and Turkey against the Communists, so the United States stepped in. The Cold War was happening, leading to the founding of NATO.
The author also follows some of the Nazi fugitives and their collaborators in Sweden and elsewhere. Some of them were publishing periodicals. A lot of former Nazis escaped to Argentina, then ruled by the dictator Juan Peron who was sympathetic.
Various cultural trends are followed. George Orwell was busy writing "1984". Simone de Beauvoir was having an affair with the American novelist Nelson Algren and would go on to write "The Second Sex". The discovery of the great jazz pianist and composer Thelonious Monk is traced. Christian Dior's rise in the fashion industry is followed. A woman named Grace Hopper was working on the earliest computers. In June a pilot named Kenneth Arnold was flying over the Cascade Mountains and saw some aerial phenomena which he described as saucer-like. The Flying Saucer/UFO craze started. Billie Holliday was one of the great blues singers of the era, but she had a heroin addiction problem.
And, not least, the author's own family is occasionally mentioned. Her father was himself a refugee.
The British were beginning to dismantle their empire. India was being given its independence, but the Hindus and Muslims of the subcontinent could not get along, so Pakistan came into being, but with a lot of violence and bloodshed. The British were also getting out of Palestine where they had been ruling under a League of Nations mandate acquired after World War I. Again, there was a lot of violence between the Muslim Palestinian Arabs and the Jewish Zionists who the following year would create the state of Israel. The UN voted to partition Palestine between a Jewish state and a Palestinian state, but many Palestinian leaders rejected that. In the meantime, there were thousands of Jewish refugees, Holocaust survivors, who were attempting to leave Europe for Palestine, which the British were trying to keep a lid on to keep the Arabs happy - a near impossible task.
The British also quit supporting Greece and Turkey against the Communists, so the United States stepped in. The Cold War was happening, leading to the founding of NATO.
The author also follows some of the Nazi fugitives and their collaborators in Sweden and elsewhere. Some of them were publishing periodicals. A lot of former Nazis escaped to Argentina, then ruled by the dictator Juan Peron who was sympathetic.
Various cultural trends are followed. George Orwell was busy writing "1984". Simone de Beauvoir was having an affair with the American novelist Nelson Algren and would go on to write "The Second Sex". The discovery of the great jazz pianist and composer Thelonious Monk is traced. Christian Dior's rise in the fashion industry is followed. A woman named Grace Hopper was working on the earliest computers. In June a pilot named Kenneth Arnold was flying over the Cascade Mountains and saw some aerial phenomena which he described as saucer-like. The Flying Saucer/UFO craze started. Billie Holliday was one of the great blues singers of the era, but she had a heroin addiction problem.
And, not least, the author's own family is occasionally mentioned. Her father was himself a refugee.
December 23, 2018
Completely absorbing. Highly recommend.
Read
December 3, 2018UK English Audiobook, read by Joan Walker
(I also read parts of the book, or read and listened at the same time.)
A mostly enjoyable and interesting light popular history that feels like hearing or reading news from 71 years ago (if it were in the style of contemporary broadsheet news with a culture section).
I haven't read any others of the crop of popular histories named after individual years, but I understand that this one is different from the usual, because it concentrates not on a specific discovery or person, but on news and events from countries around the world during one year. It has month-by-month chapters, with one interlude in the middle about the author's family history. The book's underlying argument is that many aspects of later 20th-century and contemporary western life have their roots in the events and cultural products of 1947. It highlights these items in a news-magazine style, but Åsbrink does not give a counterargument to her thesis: this is history in the style of creative non-fiction rather than academia. There is an extensive bibliography and sources list, but there are no footnotes.
The countries most frequently discussed are Sweden (Åsbrink is Swedish), Britain, Palestine, India, France, the USA, Germany, Hungary (the author's father was Hungarian-Jewish), Poland and Egypt. Several cultural figures recur, and the narrative episodically follows George Orwell (writing 1984 on the isle of Jura) and Simone de Beauvoir (started The Second Sex) throughout the year, as well as making less frequent mentions of many others, such as Tolkien finishing The Lord of the Rings, computer scientist Grace Hopper who coined the term 'bug' (the first bug was a moth that had got into the computer) and was later involved in the development of COBOL, and Christian Dior and the waves made by his New Look. The quotes from Dior have a camp charm which contrasts with the serious topics making up the rest of the book, and give a flavour of the aesthetic relief from wartime austerity his designs brought to the fashion-conscious. I've never been a fan of it as a style, and prefer earlier 1940s looks, but these phrases and his personal frivolities made me grok it more than I ever had before. There is more about women here than one would probably find in an older popular history by a man, and fashion is treated with a cultural seriousness it wouldn't necessarily have been (the book also notes that Hennes, later H&M, was also founded this year), but 1947 remains a general history of predominantly political world events, at a time when the vast majority of politicians were men, rather than a history of women. Eleanor Roosevelt is the most politically powerful woman here, involved in drawing up the UN Declaration of Human Rights - that cornerstone of modern secular morality - with a working-group surveying and quoting philosophy texts from across the world, including Confucian philosopher Mencius and (unspecified) Hindu thinkers.
I'm not rating the book because I haven't checked most of the facts in it which I hadn't heard before, and with this being a translation as well as a popular history by a journalist, there are no English reviews by academics available. I didn't hear anything which I knew to be wrong, and in the one instance I did find online pointing out a mistake (an Amazon review mentioning Operation Black Tulip, in which the Dutch planned to expel German civilians from the Netherlands) it was simply the case that Asbrink hadn't included the conclusion of the episode via events that happened after 1947, rather than being wrong per se.
The book was at its most engaging when it stuck to month-by-month events, newslike, rather than breaking the spell with accounts of later developments going into the 1950s as it did for a few topics.
Asbrink devotes too much space to developments in European fascism in the early 1950s - this is the reason for that 'mostly' in the first sentence. It is depressing to hear about, but it is an important part of the post-war story that fascists were still active and internationally networking with one another after 1945 (a lot of people seem to assume that apart from Germany, and the Nazis hiding in South America, they disappeared in a puff of smoke, or were merely isolated figures of ridicule) but the amount of material about them in the book dwarfs the other topics predominantly because of the history of fascism in Europe extending beyond 1947. However, it will be a new idea to readers who've had little contact with history of the period, and who base their assumptions on more recent politics, that these postwar fascists were - at a time when internationalism was the prevailing trend across the political spectrum - in favour of a united Europe.
Among the other biggest international stories here are the partition of India - its borders shockingly delineated by Sir Cyril Radcliffe, considered by the Lord Chancellor a good man for the job due to "his brilliance as a lawyer and his ignorance of India". Gandhi is later quoted decrying violence against women during the aftermath of partition, without reference to his dubious personal behaviour which has become better known in recent years.
Also ongoing throughout 1947 were efforts to address the Holocaust, its survivors and perpetrators. The Nuremberg Trials were initially halted, but restarted as new documentary evidence of Nazi atrocities was uncovered. Public boredom with news of the trials is commonly mentioned, as many people wanted to be able to move on from the war. Raphael Lemkin is here too, a figure who seemed to be rarely mentioned in the past (and a lonely, impoverished crusader at the time, for official recognition of the crime of genocide) but one who seems increasingly well-known recently, perhaps since British barrister and law professor Philippe Sands' award-winning East West Street: On the Origins of "Genocide" and "Crimes Against Humanity".
The most complex issue of all, and one I'd, rather appalings, barely heard about in reference to this period in history, was Palestine - its difficulties also, in part, a legacy of the Holocaust. Åsbrink implicitly indicates similarities to the current decade's refugee crises, with accounts of the illegal immigration of Jewish survivors from all over Europe, heading to Palestine: waiting in camps for visas or boarding clandestine ships, such as one the the British (in their last days of colonial power in the area) sent back to France, despite disagreement by the US. There is a widespread sense that Jews no longer want to live in the countries where mass crimes against them had been committed, and many wanted to go to Palestine or the US. A UN delegation with members from neutral countries - some of whose levels of competence may have been questionable - was set up to find a solution. It was clear that Britain could no longer hang on to Palestine, so the question was how to find a plan that met the needs of both Zionist Jews and Arab powers in the region.
The background to the tension in Palestine in 1947 is a politically sensitive topic that really needs comment from someone who's studied the history in depth: it is the type of issue where selection of facts may be as significant as the accuracy of what is stated. I will try to delineate what Åsbrink says, or what I picked up from it, although I know it won't be the full story. There had once been a anti-colonial, anti-British, pan-Arab tendency that was inclusive of Jews, but in the 1930s, following the foundation of the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt in 1928 - a revival of the idea of jihad after hundreds of years - this shifted. A key figure in the Palestine Region was the Grand Mufti, Amin al-Husseini, who had links to Hitler's regime and who appears to have supported the Holocaust; he later opposed Zionism and Jewish immigration. There were also moderate Arabs who considered that their people should not have to lose land as a knock-on effect of the actions of Hitler, who was nothing to do with them. There was active terrorism from both sides, including an incident in 1947, in which Zionist paramilitaries killed two British soldiers; this was followed by a week of anti-Semitic riots across British cities, with smashing-up of shops that echo East European pogroms. Åsbrink notes, with foreshadowing, that various sources in 1947 predicted a bloodbath in the Palestine region, if a suboptimal plan (was there an optimal one?) were chosen for the area's borders. Åsbrink heavily implies that the roots of ongoing problems in Israel and Palestine lie in the decision-making of 1947. (This has to be a factor, although other causes such as British colonialism itself, or hundreds or thousands of years of religious history, are not thoroughly explored here.)
Although I can't say how exact all of this history is, overall 1947, carrying the perspective of a writer from another European country, seems like an instructive book for the British reader or listener, who is probably unused to hearing about their country's history as just one among several, discussed without any hint of specialness. It does not go out of its way to make Britain seem bad, but it does not try to gloss over negatives as a lot of UK popular historians (even the less conservative ones) seem to do by reflex.
The book has short subchapters, making it an ideal read/listen for commuting, waiting, cooking and so forth. I hadn't really noticed before that Metro - the free newspaper commonly found on buses and in city centres - had 'Books of the Year' but it seems fitting that this would be one of them, as highlighted in one edition's blurb.
This was a lovely audiobook reading - the narrator had a light, airy timbre which worked perfectly for the more literary and descriptive sections as well as for the more news-like episodes; some of the descriptions would not have worked as well read out in a matter-of-fact radio-announcer tone.
I found the first two episodes of this short Radio 4 series, The Death of the Postwar Settlement a great follow-up to 1947: When Now Begins. The first episode discusses the UN and the foundational assumptions, and the programmes then go on to explain how things changed from the fall of Eastern Bloc Communism onwards.
(I also read parts of the book, or read and listened at the same time.)
A mostly enjoyable and interesting light popular history that feels like hearing or reading news from 71 years ago (if it were in the style of contemporary broadsheet news with a culture section).
I haven't read any others of the crop of popular histories named after individual years, but I understand that this one is different from the usual, because it concentrates not on a specific discovery or person, but on news and events from countries around the world during one year. It has month-by-month chapters, with one interlude in the middle about the author's family history. The book's underlying argument is that many aspects of later 20th-century and contemporary western life have their roots in the events and cultural products of 1947. It highlights these items in a news-magazine style, but Åsbrink does not give a counterargument to her thesis: this is history in the style of creative non-fiction rather than academia. There is an extensive bibliography and sources list, but there are no footnotes.
The countries most frequently discussed are Sweden (Åsbrink is Swedish), Britain, Palestine, India, France, the USA, Germany, Hungary (the author's father was Hungarian-Jewish), Poland and Egypt. Several cultural figures recur, and the narrative episodically follows George Orwell (writing 1984 on the isle of Jura) and Simone de Beauvoir (started The Second Sex) throughout the year, as well as making less frequent mentions of many others, such as Tolkien finishing The Lord of the Rings, computer scientist Grace Hopper who coined the term 'bug' (the first bug was a moth that had got into the computer) and was later involved in the development of COBOL, and Christian Dior and the waves made by his New Look. The quotes from Dior have a camp charm which contrasts with the serious topics making up the rest of the book, and give a flavour of the aesthetic relief from wartime austerity his designs brought to the fashion-conscious. I've never been a fan of it as a style, and prefer earlier 1940s looks, but these phrases and his personal frivolities made me grok it more than I ever had before. There is more about women here than one would probably find in an older popular history by a man, and fashion is treated with a cultural seriousness it wouldn't necessarily have been (the book also notes that Hennes, later H&M, was also founded this year), but 1947 remains a general history of predominantly political world events, at a time when the vast majority of politicians were men, rather than a history of women. Eleanor Roosevelt is the most politically powerful woman here, involved in drawing up the UN Declaration of Human Rights - that cornerstone of modern secular morality - with a working-group surveying and quoting philosophy texts from across the world, including Confucian philosopher Mencius and (unspecified) Hindu thinkers.
I'm not rating the book because I haven't checked most of the facts in it which I hadn't heard before, and with this being a translation as well as a popular history by a journalist, there are no English reviews by academics available. I didn't hear anything which I knew to be wrong, and in the one instance I did find online pointing out a mistake (an Amazon review mentioning Operation Black Tulip, in which the Dutch planned to expel German civilians from the Netherlands) it was simply the case that Asbrink hadn't included the conclusion of the episode via events that happened after 1947, rather than being wrong per se.
The book was at its most engaging when it stuck to month-by-month events, newslike, rather than breaking the spell with accounts of later developments going into the 1950s as it did for a few topics.
Asbrink devotes too much space to developments in European fascism in the early 1950s - this is the reason for that 'mostly' in the first sentence. It is depressing to hear about, but it is an important part of the post-war story that fascists were still active and internationally networking with one another after 1945 (a lot of people seem to assume that apart from Germany, and the Nazis hiding in South America, they disappeared in a puff of smoke, or were merely isolated figures of ridicule) but the amount of material about them in the book dwarfs the other topics predominantly because of the history of fascism in Europe extending beyond 1947. However, it will be a new idea to readers who've had little contact with history of the period, and who base their assumptions on more recent politics, that these postwar fascists were - at a time when internationalism was the prevailing trend across the political spectrum - in favour of a united Europe.
Among the other biggest international stories here are the partition of India - its borders shockingly delineated by Sir Cyril Radcliffe, considered by the Lord Chancellor a good man for the job due to "his brilliance as a lawyer and his ignorance of India". Gandhi is later quoted decrying violence against women during the aftermath of partition, without reference to his dubious personal behaviour which has become better known in recent years.
Also ongoing throughout 1947 were efforts to address the Holocaust, its survivors and perpetrators. The Nuremberg Trials were initially halted, but restarted as new documentary evidence of Nazi atrocities was uncovered. Public boredom with news of the trials is commonly mentioned, as many people wanted to be able to move on from the war. Raphael Lemkin is here too, a figure who seemed to be rarely mentioned in the past (and a lonely, impoverished crusader at the time, for official recognition of the crime of genocide) but one who seems increasingly well-known recently, perhaps since British barrister and law professor Philippe Sands' award-winning East West Street: On the Origins of "Genocide" and "Crimes Against Humanity".
The most complex issue of all, and one I'd, rather appalings, barely heard about in reference to this period in history, was Palestine - its difficulties also, in part, a legacy of the Holocaust. Åsbrink implicitly indicates similarities to the current decade's refugee crises, with accounts of the illegal immigration of Jewish survivors from all over Europe, heading to Palestine: waiting in camps for visas or boarding clandestine ships, such as one the the British (in their last days of colonial power in the area) sent back to France, despite disagreement by the US. There is a widespread sense that Jews no longer want to live in the countries where mass crimes against them had been committed, and many wanted to go to Palestine or the US. A UN delegation with members from neutral countries - some of whose levels of competence may have been questionable - was set up to find a solution. It was clear that Britain could no longer hang on to Palestine, so the question was how to find a plan that met the needs of both Zionist Jews and Arab powers in the region.
The background to the tension in Palestine in 1947 is a politically sensitive topic that really needs comment from someone who's studied the history in depth: it is the type of issue where selection of facts may be as significant as the accuracy of what is stated. I will try to delineate what Åsbrink says, or what I picked up from it, although I know it won't be the full story. There had once been a anti-colonial, anti-British, pan-Arab tendency that was inclusive of Jews, but in the 1930s, following the foundation of the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt in 1928 - a revival of the idea of jihad after hundreds of years - this shifted. A key figure in the Palestine Region was the Grand Mufti, Amin al-Husseini, who had links to Hitler's regime and who appears to have supported the Holocaust; he later opposed Zionism and Jewish immigration. There were also moderate Arabs who considered that their people should not have to lose land as a knock-on effect of the actions of Hitler, who was nothing to do with them. There was active terrorism from both sides, including an incident in 1947, in which Zionist paramilitaries killed two British soldiers; this was followed by a week of anti-Semitic riots across British cities, with smashing-up of shops that echo East European pogroms. Åsbrink notes, with foreshadowing, that various sources in 1947 predicted a bloodbath in the Palestine region, if a suboptimal plan (was there an optimal one?) were chosen for the area's borders. Åsbrink heavily implies that the roots of ongoing problems in Israel and Palestine lie in the decision-making of 1947. (This has to be a factor, although other causes such as British colonialism itself, or hundreds or thousands of years of religious history, are not thoroughly explored here.)
Although I can't say how exact all of this history is, overall 1947, carrying the perspective of a writer from another European country, seems like an instructive book for the British reader or listener, who is probably unused to hearing about their country's history as just one among several, discussed without any hint of specialness. It does not go out of its way to make Britain seem bad, but it does not try to gloss over negatives as a lot of UK popular historians (even the less conservative ones) seem to do by reflex.
The book has short subchapters, making it an ideal read/listen for commuting, waiting, cooking and so forth. I hadn't really noticed before that Metro - the free newspaper commonly found on buses and in city centres - had 'Books of the Year' but it seems fitting that this would be one of them, as highlighted in one edition's blurb.
This was a lovely audiobook reading - the narrator had a light, airy timbre which worked perfectly for the more literary and descriptive sections as well as for the more news-like episodes; some of the descriptions would not have worked as well read out in a matter-of-fact radio-announcer tone.
I found the first two episodes of this short Radio 4 series, The Death of the Postwar Settlement a great follow-up to 1947: When Now Begins. The first episode discusses the UN and the foundational assumptions, and the programmes then go on to explain how things changed from the fall of Eastern Bloc Communism onwards.
October 5, 2018
Quite a novel way to write a history book. At times it reads like a novel with lyrical writing, that is sometimes quite personnel.
A range of sometime little remembered people, an interesting set of events and a premise of the number of inventions, systems, issues that occurred in 1947 and went on the form today. It's a balanced look covering mainly Europe and the US, literary giants, Christian Dior, an original computer designer, the fate of escaped Nazis, the fight to recognise that genocide occurred, the India/Pakistan partition, the establishment of the CIA and the UN given 4 months to figure out a solution in the Palestine.
A range of sometime little remembered people, an interesting set of events and a premise of the number of inventions, systems, issues that occurred in 1947 and went on the form today. It's a balanced look covering mainly Europe and the US, literary giants, Christian Dior, an original computer designer, the fate of escaped Nazis, the fight to recognise that genocide occurred, the India/Pakistan partition, the establishment of the CIA and the UN given 4 months to figure out a solution in the Palestine.
June 3, 2018
1947, momento storico in cui il mondo si lecca le ferite della guerra da poco conclusa, disegnando un futuro più che mai incerto fatto di guerra fredda e di nuovi fascismi, della nascita dello stato di Israele e di quella del fondamentalismo islamico. E, come tessuto che tiene insieme a tutto questo, l'autrice inserisce le gesta di Simone De Beauvoir, George Orwell, Primo Levi, Thelonous Monk, Billy Holiday. E, al centro del libro, suo padre. Libro ibrido fra saggistica e narrativa che riesce a essere emozionante. Apprezzabile sia per stile e struttura, spezzettata e insieme coesa, che per l'indubbio valore di memoria.
«La vita spirituale dell'Europa può svilupparsi solo se gli europei supereranno i limiti e l'egoismo dello stato nazionale. Spetta a tutti i popoli del continente, soprattutto a quello tedesco, prepararsi per lo sviluppo dell'Europa che ci troviamo davanti [...]. I problemi economici, i problemi di comunicazione in tutti gli stati europei, i progetti di un'unione doganale, l'idea di una moneta comune europea - tutto punta nella stessa direzione».
Documento dell'Europa-Bund - 1947
«La vita spirituale dell'Europa può svilupparsi solo se gli europei supereranno i limiti e l'egoismo dello stato nazionale. Spetta a tutti i popoli del continente, soprattutto a quello tedesco, prepararsi per lo sviluppo dell'Europa che ci troviamo davanti [...]. I problemi economici, i problemi di comunicazione in tutti gli stati europei, i progetti di un'unione doganale, l'idea di una moneta comune europea - tutto punta nella stessa direzione».
Documento dell'Europa-Bund - 1947
February 18, 2017
Fruktansvärd - inte boken alltså men den värld som vi lever och har levt i. Intressant om året 1947.
May 22, 2018
Táto kniha nie je zlá. Nie úplne však spĺňa to, čo by som od knihy s názvom podľa jedného roku ( a niektorých zahraničných vydaniach aj dovetkom Keď resp. Kde začína súčasnosť) očakával. Vydavateľstvo knihu propaguje ako "fascinujúcu knihu , ktorej hlavným hrdinom je jediný rok v živote ľudstva", "fascinujúcu mozaiku najrôznejších svetových udalostí, ktoré ovplyvňovali povojnový vývoj sveta a mnohé z nich ovplyvňujú ešte aj našu prítomnosť i budúcnosť". No nie je to celkom pravda. Väčšina udalostí sa naozaj udeje v roku 1947. Autorka si vybrala určité udalosti (internacionalizácia krajnej pravice,rozpad Indie a vznik nástupníckych štátov, vznik moderného džihádizmu, masová židovská emigrácia do Palestíny a napätie medzi arabmi a židmi, Norimbergský proces a definovanie pojmu genocída v práve atď) Po druhom prečítaní som si všimol, že autorka píše o Rímskom kongrese (medzinárodné stretnutie krajnej pravice), ktorý sa konal v roku 1950. Je pravda, že tematicky patrí do okruhu internacionalizácie krajnej pravice. V roku 1947 sa však nekonal, stretli sa však švédsky fašista Engdahl s nemeckým nacistom na úteku Johannom von Leersom (Engdahl mal byť pôvodne hlavnou postavou knihy, avšak autorka o jeho činnosti v roku 1947 nemala dostatok informáciií - aspň tak som to z rozhovoru pre The Guardian pochopil; pri pátraní po jeho činnosti ju však zaujalo, koľko zásadných udalostí sa v danom roku odohralo, preto sa neskôr rozhodla písať o nich).
Čítanie o týchto hlavných udalostiach je veľmi zaujímavé. Problematické je zaradenie časti opisujúcej vzťah Nelsona Algrena a Simonde de Beauvoir. Opis ich vzťahu je na môj vkus príliš dlhý a až na konci je ako tak vysvetlená jeho úloha (De Beauvoir začne pracovať na texte Druhého pohlavia a boj za rovnoprávnosť žien je prirovnaný k boju za rovnoprávnosť afroameričanov). Zbytočne pôsobia aj časti o Diorovi.
POZOR, MOŽNÝ SPOILER: Okrem svetových udalostí sa však autorka vracia k minulosti svojho otca, židovského utečenca. Až postupne sa dozvieme, že ide o jej otca. KONIEC MOŽNÉHO SPOILERU.
Čo je na tejto knihe zaujímavé (a mne sa to páči) je, že autorka udalosti nehodnotí, iba ich predkladá. V jej predošlej knihe A vo Viedenskom lese stále rastú stromy pracovala podobne, ale sugestívnejšie (aj to sa mi páčilo). Mimochodom, otca a mamu spomína v obidvoch.
Nebavili ma autorkine poetizmy; chápem, že chcela nejako pracovať s témou času, ale mne sa zdali kostrbaté.
Na záver jedna myšlienka pre vydavateľsto Absynt: Dajte si prosím väčší pozor na redakčnú úpravu. Vašu prácu degradujú zlé preklady. Konkrétne v tejto knihe som si všimol, že v kapitole o lordovi Mountbattenovi, poslednému britskému miestodržiteľovi Indie píšete, že "Hráva pochopiteľne pólo. Úloha viesť Indiu do novej budúcnosti mu pripomína posledných sedem minút v zápase...V liste bratrancovi zhŕňa situáciu: "Posledný indický chukka - dvanásť gólov". Ďalej v texte sa píše "Lord Mountbatten prijme zásadné rozhodnutie. Britský parlament mu dá osemnásť mesiacov na to, aby zrušil britskú suverenitu v Indii, ale on nemá v pláne nechať poslednému indickému chukkovi toľko času..." Chukka je časový úsek, na ktorý sa delí jedna hra póla a zvyčajne trvá 7,5 minúty (...).
Čítanie o týchto hlavných udalostiach je veľmi zaujímavé. Problematické je zaradenie časti opisujúcej vzťah Nelsona Algrena a Simonde de Beauvoir. Opis ich vzťahu je na môj vkus príliš dlhý a až na konci je ako tak vysvetlená jeho úloha (De Beauvoir začne pracovať na texte Druhého pohlavia a boj za rovnoprávnosť žien je prirovnaný k boju za rovnoprávnosť afroameričanov). Zbytočne pôsobia aj časti o Diorovi.
POZOR, MOŽNÝ SPOILER: Okrem svetových udalostí sa však autorka vracia k minulosti svojho otca, židovského utečenca. Až postupne sa dozvieme, že ide o jej otca. KONIEC MOŽNÉHO SPOILERU.
Čo je na tejto knihe zaujímavé (a mne sa to páči) je, že autorka udalosti nehodnotí, iba ich predkladá. V jej predošlej knihe A vo Viedenskom lese stále rastú stromy pracovala podobne, ale sugestívnejšie (aj to sa mi páčilo). Mimochodom, otca a mamu spomína v obidvoch.
Nebavili ma autorkine poetizmy; chápem, že chcela nejako pracovať s témou času, ale mne sa zdali kostrbaté.
Na záver jedna myšlienka pre vydavateľsto Absynt: Dajte si prosím väčší pozor na redakčnú úpravu. Vašu prácu degradujú zlé preklady. Konkrétne v tejto knihe som si všimol, že v kapitole o lordovi Mountbattenovi, poslednému britskému miestodržiteľovi Indie píšete, že "Hráva pochopiteľne pólo. Úloha viesť Indiu do novej budúcnosti mu pripomína posledných sedem minút v zápase...V liste bratrancovi zhŕňa situáciu: "Posledný indický chukka - dvanásť gólov". Ďalej v texte sa píše "Lord Mountbatten prijme zásadné rozhodnutie. Britský parlament mu dá osemnásť mesiacov na to, aby zrušil britskú suverenitu v Indii, ale on nemá v pláne nechať poslednému indickému chukkovi toľko času..." Chukka je časový úsek, na ktorý sa delí jedna hra póla a zvyčajne trvá 7,5 minúty (...).
Read
November 17, 2017I gave up. I almost never do. I mean I've read a number of "Year X" books, incl. those about 1945 & 1946 - no less painful ones. However, E. Asbrink apparently has a penchant for excess dramatizing or seeks opportunity to fictionalize what should have been a work of nonfiction. Whenever some sad opportunity presents itself, the author jumps at it and turns her narration into something I could only compare with slow disembowelment of a wriggling reader - extracting one's long guts by slowly wrapping them around a stick to protract the agony. I suffered this absolutely unnecessary pain till July of 1947 and then gave up, left absolutely bemused as of the writer's intentions. She clearly either overdid with drama or should have written a fictionalized account of those events.
July 12, 2018
Loved this history of a year told in significant events from many sectors and slowly-creaking-along-developments, from well- and lesser-known perspectives (including the author’s father’s critical movements during that year in postwar Europe.) From the first few pages it felt like something special. Gorgeous, haunting writing that makes history feel like it’s playing out in front of you, and so many little things that surprised me. No joke about that “where now begins” part.
November 24, 2019
информативно и душераздирающе.
книга про ключевые события в мире два года спустя после второй мировой войны. несмотря на множество дат, цифр, фактов, имен, она написана красиво как стихи, отчего читается на одном дыхании. перерывы приходилось делать только для того, чтобы поплакать и успокоиться.
книга про ключевые события в мире два года спустя после второй мировой войны. несмотря на множество дат, цифр, фактов, имен, она написана красиво как стихи, отчего читается на одном дыхании. перерывы приходилось делать только для того, чтобы поплакать и успокоиться.
November 15, 2018
Någonstans mellan en trea och en fyra. Jag tror den här boken är större än jag förmår ta till mig just nu, därför borde den kanske få en fyra. Men jag vet att jag definitivt var mer förtjust, på mer än ett sätt, i Och i Wienerwald står träden kvar av samma författare.
Elisabeth Åsbrink skriver om tiden strax efter att andra världskriget tagit slut, om året 1947 som påverkade världen så mycket. Ett intressant, men lite spretigt grepp. Hon får verkligen 1947 att framstå som ett avgörande år, men jag blir nyfiken på om samma sak kunde göras med andra år också, om någon gjorde sig besväret.
Mest fick jag ut av de delar som handlade om Åsbrinks egen familj, men jag fascinerades också, på ett obehagligt sätt, av att läsa om vad som hände med nazismen efter kriget. Så länge har jag föreställt mig att den bara försvann, gick upp i rök. De senaste åren har jag börjat förstå att det inte var så enkelt.
Elisabeth Åsbrink skriver om tiden strax efter att andra världskriget tagit slut, om året 1947 som påverkade världen så mycket. Ett intressant, men lite spretigt grepp. Hon får verkligen 1947 att framstå som ett avgörande år, men jag blir nyfiken på om samma sak kunde göras med andra år också, om någon gjorde sig besväret.
Mest fick jag ut av de delar som handlade om Åsbrinks egen familj, men jag fascinerades också, på ett obehagligt sätt, av att läsa om vad som hände med nazismen efter kriget. Så länge har jag föreställt mig att den bara försvann, gick upp i rök. De senaste åren har jag börjat förstå att det inte var så enkelt.
July 11, 2018
Uno dei libri più belli che abbia letto quest'anno e in generale. Un saggio-racconto degli eventi storici e politici del 1947 che cerca di tenere traccia dei nazisti scappati in Sud America e illustra in modo semplice le dinamiche e le origini del conflitto in Palestina. Lettura consigliata.
April 9, 2018
I learned a fair bit from this book, and it does give food for thought. One thing I took away from it is that there's no reason to be surprised at the resurgence of fascism we are experiencing at the moment: fascism never waned, let alone died. As soon as WWII was over, Nazi survivors and sympathizers regrouped and started agitating again. Of course I was aware that many Nazis had managed to flee to South America, but what I didn't realize was that they had a fair bit of help from Swedish sympathizers, and that in most cases they didn't even bother to keep a low profile. The 3 main strands of the book, following 1/the partition of India 2/the events leading to the foundation of the state of Israel 3/Raphael Lemkin's life-long struggle to have the word "genocide" adopted, are consistently interesting. So is the stuff about Per Engdahl's role in helping Nazis on the run and keeping the Nazi propaganda mill churning, although it's a pity that Asbrink follows this particular story through into the 1950s, since this violates the constraint she set up for herself. On the other hand, the sections on Simone de Beauvoir's doomed affair with Nelson Algren were repetitive, and far too numerous given how trivial this is compared with the other issues under discussion. It wasn't clear to me why Beauvoir was a recurring character whereas a smattering of other writers (Nelly Sachs, Paul Celan, George Orwell and Primo Levi) made only brief appearances. And I guess this is my main problem with this book: while the sections on India and Palestine read more or less like history, the rest of the text flaunts its subjective character. We have no word other than Asbrink's that what she has elicited to write about constitute the major events of 1947. Asbrink also gives herself away by smuggling a short memoir about her father, born György Fenyö in Budapest, into the heart of the book. Seizing on the trendy idea of the biography of a year is probably the only way Asbrink could find of bringing together her material without making hard decisions about what story she really wanted to tell. And that's not good enough.
January 15, 2018
For starters I am the complete mark for this type of book. The style of writing, how it looks at the history between the cracks. There is no need to have George Orwell counting eggs in this book, but it's delightful.
When I start to love a book I start to love the book itself, how it lays open, where is crinkles, how the page feels under my finger as I turn a page. It was a good book.
I adored Asbrink's writing, it was the type of book that seemed more about myth making than history, this was in large part to the present tense. But for me it made it more of an immersive experience and just a book I wanted to inhabit.
When I start to love a book I start to love the book itself, how it lays open, where is crinkles, how the page feels under my finger as I turn a page. It was a good book.
I adored Asbrink's writing, it was the type of book that seemed more about myth making than history, this was in large part to the present tense. But for me it made it more of an immersive experience and just a book I wanted to inhabit.
January 31, 2021
ספר מרתק שסוקר אירועים שקרו ברחבי העולם לאורך שנת 1947. הוא מחולק לפי חודשים וסוקר אירועים הסטוריים ואירועים בתחומי הספרות, האופנה ועוד. הסופרת, בת למשפחה יהודיה ממוצא הונגרי החיה בשוודיה, משלבת גם את הסיפור של אביה ומשפחתו במלחמת העולם השנייה ואחריה. היא מלווה לאורך הספר כמה נושאים מרכזיים - עליית האחים המוסלמים והפיכת האיסלם מדת לתנועה פוליטית, סיום השלטון הבריטי על הודו וחלוקת הודו, סיום השלטון הבריטי על פלשתינה וועדת החלוקה של האו"ם, התנועה הניאו- נאצית, תנועת זכויות האזרח, סימון דה-בובואר, מוזיקת הג'אז ועוד. ספר שכתיבתו לא לגמרי אובייקטיבית אבל הוא מעניין מאוד ומומלץ.
March 30, 2018
heb er me een beetje moeten doorworstelen eerlijk gezegd!
February 6, 2020
Fick tips om den här av min kollega Maria, tack så himla mycket för det! Otrolig bok, faktiskt.
March 2, 2024
En idéhistorisk pärla. Vilket språk och berättarteknik Elisabeth Åsbrink har! Det är en samhällsgärning att skriva så gripande om så viktiga ämnen. Boken är omskakande – Åsbrink når fram, tack vare sin litterära förmåga, och det hon skriver om är brutalt. Jag uppskattar att traditionell historieskrivning (begränsad till ämne eller geografi) utmanas genom att låta intellektuella kärlekshistorier och stora vetenskapliga upptäckter löpa parallellt med bearbetningen av förintelsen och den dubbelsidiga terrorn i Palestina. Åsbrink lyckas dessutom med konsten att undvika stereotyper av välkända historiska figurer (t.ex. Simone de Beauvoir) och att vara nyanserad istället för tesdriven eller trots ämnets politiska aktualitet.
March 16, 2021
“Nikdy viac, nikdy viac, nikdy viac. Tieto slová sa ozývajú takmer dva roky - od prvého dňa kapitulácie v máji 1945 do desiateho februára 1947, keď posledný činiteľ podpísal Parížsku mierovú zmluvu.
V ten deň sa formálne skončí druha svetová vojna.”
Ak sa o tému čerstvo povojnového sveta nejako špeciálne nezaujímate, zo školy ste asi vyšli s tým, že v 45 sa skončil najhorší konflikt v dejinách ľudstva a potom sme šťastne žili až kým... veď viete, kým sme neprišli na to, aké všetky malé vojny sa ešte dajú viesť.
V skutočnosti ale žiadny zvonec, čo by zázračne všetko v tom štyridsiatom piatom vyriešil, nezvonil. Bolo to skôr zatrúbenie na štarte sakramentsky dlhej trate, ktorá bola navyše poriadne chaotická a zarúbaná. A to aj dva roky po kapitulácii.
“Európa je plná sirôt. Rodičov zastrelili, udusili v plynovej komore, nechali umrieť od hladu alebo zamrznúť. Deti zavše prežili vďaka tomu, že im zafarbili vlasy na blond a vybavili kresťanské rodné listy, inokedy ich poslali do kláštora alebo skryli do vedier, za stenu, na povalu či do pivnice. Niekedy ich rodičia odstrčili do zadu, keď čakali v rade na zastrelenie na nábreží Dunaja.”
Elisabeth Åsbrink sa pozrela na rok 1947 pekne mesiac po mesiaci, keď sa svet ešte zmietal v dozvukoch a dôsledkoch vojny, keď sa nacisti dostávali pred súd, mnohí unikali spravodlivosti a tí nenápadnejší sa zďaleka nevzdali, ale dôsledne si budovali novú organizáciu slúžiacu okrem iného aj na to, aby sa do Argentíny dostali “tí správni ľudia”.
Židia, ktorí prišli o svoje domovy, sú stále stratení, tisícky z nich túžia po novom živote v Palestíne, takže je treba riešiť horúci problém Židovského štátu.
A to sú len niektoré témy. Udalosti jednotlivých mesiacov občas Åsbrink preruší rozprávaním o histórii svojej rodiny, ktorú tiež zasiahla druhá svetová vojna. A primiešava aj zaujímavosti - okrem veľkej politiky a veľkých procesov vznikalo aj veľké literárne dielo, veľká móda a veľká romanca.
Rozhodne skvelé čítanie, ktoré ale vďaka bulvárnejším vsuvkám pre mňa malo hluché miesta. Rozumiem zámeru (no dobre, pri tej de Beauvoir fakt až tak celkom nie, hoci sa tam napokon spomína kultové Druhé pohlavie), ale mňa tento aspekt knihy trošku míňal. Ostatné informácie - skvelé. Určite odporúčam prečítať si o tom, ako tažko sa vlastne formoval nový svet.
“V tomto čase neexistujú univerzálne ľudské práva. Ale môže ľuďom na celom svete chýbať niečo, o čoho existencii ani netušia? Stačia im svetové náboženstvá, ktoré chcú chrániť to ľudské ako črepinu boha?
Svet sa zviecha z masívneho ľudského popolniska. Tu a teraz, v dočasnej kancelárii OSN v závode v Lake Success, sa majú vytvoriť univerzálne hodnoty. Nové myšlienky, nové základy ľudstva, nová morálka. Ľudské práva nesmú závisieť od náboženstva, bohatstva rodiny, mena, pohlavia, statusu, krajiny pôvodu či farby pleti.”
V ten deň sa formálne skončí druha svetová vojna.”
Ak sa o tému čerstvo povojnového sveta nejako špeciálne nezaujímate, zo školy ste asi vyšli s tým, že v 45 sa skončil najhorší konflikt v dejinách ľudstva a potom sme šťastne žili až kým... veď viete, kým sme neprišli na to, aké všetky malé vojny sa ešte dajú viesť.
V skutočnosti ale žiadny zvonec, čo by zázračne všetko v tom štyridsiatom piatom vyriešil, nezvonil. Bolo to skôr zatrúbenie na štarte sakramentsky dlhej trate, ktorá bola navyše poriadne chaotická a zarúbaná. A to aj dva roky po kapitulácii.
“Európa je plná sirôt. Rodičov zastrelili, udusili v plynovej komore, nechali umrieť od hladu alebo zamrznúť. Deti zavše prežili vďaka tomu, že im zafarbili vlasy na blond a vybavili kresťanské rodné listy, inokedy ich poslali do kláštora alebo skryli do vedier, za stenu, na povalu či do pivnice. Niekedy ich rodičia odstrčili do zadu, keď čakali v rade na zastrelenie na nábreží Dunaja.”
Elisabeth Åsbrink sa pozrela na rok 1947 pekne mesiac po mesiaci, keď sa svet ešte zmietal v dozvukoch a dôsledkoch vojny, keď sa nacisti dostávali pred súd, mnohí unikali spravodlivosti a tí nenápadnejší sa zďaleka nevzdali, ale dôsledne si budovali novú organizáciu slúžiacu okrem iného aj na to, aby sa do Argentíny dostali “tí správni ľudia”.
Židia, ktorí prišli o svoje domovy, sú stále stratení, tisícky z nich túžia po novom živote v Palestíne, takže je treba riešiť horúci problém Židovského štátu.
A to sú len niektoré témy. Udalosti jednotlivých mesiacov občas Åsbrink preruší rozprávaním o histórii svojej rodiny, ktorú tiež zasiahla druhá svetová vojna. A primiešava aj zaujímavosti - okrem veľkej politiky a veľkých procesov vznikalo aj veľké literárne dielo, veľká móda a veľká romanca.
Rozhodne skvelé čítanie, ktoré ale vďaka bulvárnejším vsuvkám pre mňa malo hluché miesta. Rozumiem zámeru (no dobre, pri tej de Beauvoir fakt až tak celkom nie, hoci sa tam napokon spomína kultové Druhé pohlavie), ale mňa tento aspekt knihy trošku míňal. Ostatné informácie - skvelé. Určite odporúčam prečítať si o tom, ako tažko sa vlastne formoval nový svet.
“V tomto čase neexistujú univerzálne ľudské práva. Ale môže ľuďom na celom svete chýbať niečo, o čoho existencii ani netušia? Stačia im svetové náboženstvá, ktoré chcú chrániť to ľudské ako črepinu boha?
Svet sa zviecha z masívneho ľudského popolniska. Tu a teraz, v dočasnej kancelárii OSN v závode v Lake Success, sa majú vytvoriť univerzálne hodnoty. Nové myšlienky, nové základy ľudstva, nová morálka. Ľudské práva nesmú závisieť od náboženstva, bohatstva rodiny, mena, pohlavia, statusu, krajiny pôvodu či farby pleti.”
January 3, 2018
Some reviews of this work have linked it comparatively to recent anniversary histories (such as the flood of 1914 titles), but Asbrink makes a much broader claim for her work. This is not merely a 70th commemoration of the year 1947 but its recognition as a pivotal period in shaping the world as we know it. She asserts that this was the time when now began.
But she does not build her case through a chain of cause and effect. As a journalist, Asbrink provides the reader with a chronology of (apparently unrelated) events described in the present tense. She transports us from Ismailia in February, to New York in May and on to Jura in September but demands that we create our own links to "future" events that will justify the special status of 1947 as a beginning.
Readers in some situations may challenge the view that there is a single now much less that its beginning can be identified uniquely. The book makes almost no mention of Africa, and Asia outside the Indian sub-continent is invisible. This euro-centricity can be explained (even if not excused) by Asbrink's personal connections to the now that the work presages. Her father was one of the multitude of displaced persons seeking to create a home and a new life after the catastrophe of war and she now lives (and writes) in Sweden. The number of international editions in which the translation has been published suggests that her lived experience of now and her reflection on its antecedents is widely shared.
Asbrink breaks her newsreel-like coverage of the events of the year twice. The first is essential and well-managed but the second seemed intrusive. Between June and July, there is an interpolated chapter (called Days and Death) that chronicles more than a century of the author's family history and provides vital context to interpret what has already been revealed and to prepare for what is to come. In September, the narrative returns to a journal of emigre National Socialists published in Argentina called Der Weg which (inconveniently) distributed some key material over six years after 1947. The author has sought to overcome this by suddenly developing a prescience that allows her to report what is to come.
Nevertheless, this is a very polished work. It is cleverly conceived and well executed. Who would have imagined that a "mere" collection of news snippets concerning George Orwell, Thelonius Monk, Dickie Mountbatten, Simone de Beauvoir and Mohammed Amin al-Husseini could be so revealing? Or that an author could weave so many tales without making a single one explicit. This truly is a case where the reader is co-creator.
But she does not build her case through a chain of cause and effect. As a journalist, Asbrink provides the reader with a chronology of (apparently unrelated) events described in the present tense. She transports us from Ismailia in February, to New York in May and on to Jura in September but demands that we create our own links to "future" events that will justify the special status of 1947 as a beginning.
Readers in some situations may challenge the view that there is a single now much less that its beginning can be identified uniquely. The book makes almost no mention of Africa, and Asia outside the Indian sub-continent is invisible. This euro-centricity can be explained (even if not excused) by Asbrink's personal connections to the now that the work presages. Her father was one of the multitude of displaced persons seeking to create a home and a new life after the catastrophe of war and she now lives (and writes) in Sweden. The number of international editions in which the translation has been published suggests that her lived experience of now and her reflection on its antecedents is widely shared.
Asbrink breaks her newsreel-like coverage of the events of the year twice. The first is essential and well-managed but the second seemed intrusive. Between June and July, there is an interpolated chapter (called Days and Death) that chronicles more than a century of the author's family history and provides vital context to interpret what has already been revealed and to prepare for what is to come. In September, the narrative returns to a journal of emigre National Socialists published in Argentina called Der Weg which (inconveniently) distributed some key material over six years after 1947. The author has sought to overcome this by suddenly developing a prescience that allows her to report what is to come.
Nevertheless, this is a very polished work. It is cleverly conceived and well executed. Who would have imagined that a "mere" collection of news snippets concerning George Orwell, Thelonius Monk, Dickie Mountbatten, Simone de Beauvoir and Mohammed Amin al-Husseini could be so revealing? Or that an author could weave so many tales without making a single one explicit. This truly is a case where the reader is co-creator.
January 26, 2018
I received a free Kindle copy of 1947: Where Now Begins by Elisabeth Asbrink courtesy of Net Galley and Random House, the publisher. It was with the understanding that I would post a review to Net Galley, Goodreads, Amazon, Barnes and Noble and my nonfiction book review blog. I also posted it to my Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter and Google Plus pages.
I requested this book as I the subject of the book sounded interesting and I have read a great deal around this time period. This is the first book by Elisabeth Asbrink that I have read.
This book was a major disappointment for me. This due to the author's writing style of mixing facts in with side interludes that can be classed as fiction rather than nonfiction. The book is organized in a logical fashion in that it goes from month to month during 1947, but the author bounces around subjects, starting with something in a month, moving to several other subjects and then jolting back to the original subject.
This book may resonate with certain readers, but if you are a hard core nonfiction history reader I would recommend avoiding this book.
I requested this book as I the subject of the book sounded interesting and I have read a great deal around this time period. This is the first book by Elisabeth Asbrink that I have read.
This book was a major disappointment for me. This due to the author's writing style of mixing facts in with side interludes that can be classed as fiction rather than nonfiction. The book is organized in a logical fashion in that it goes from month to month during 1947, but the author bounces around subjects, starting with something in a month, moving to several other subjects and then jolting back to the original subject.
This book may resonate with certain readers, but if you are a hard core nonfiction history reader I would recommend avoiding this book.
November 1, 2016
Femstjärnig. Utan tvekan.
Åsbrink visar hur nutiden hänger ihop med "dåtiden" och hur historien upprepar sig, bokstavligen.
1947 visar sig vara ett år som har en så direkt anknytning till oss så det känns nästan skrämmande. Det var tyska judiska flyktingar som skickades runt mellan olika europeiska länder, inte syriska, men skeendet är det samma. Beslutet om Israels grundande tas. Det muslimska brödraskapet bildas. Och. Så. Vidare. I oändlighet.
Samtidigt är detta en berättelse om Åsbrinks far och farföräldrar som vävs in i berättelsen.
Språket är fantastiskt. Jag tänker på Alexievich när jag läser. Bägge är journalister som skildrar aktuell historia på prosa.
Håller tummarna för ytterligare ett Augustpris.
Åsbrink visar hur nutiden hänger ihop med "dåtiden" och hur historien upprepar sig, bokstavligen.
1947 visar sig vara ett år som har en så direkt anknytning till oss så det känns nästan skrämmande. Det var tyska judiska flyktingar som skickades runt mellan olika europeiska länder, inte syriska, men skeendet är det samma. Beslutet om Israels grundande tas. Det muslimska brödraskapet bildas. Och. Så. Vidare. I oändlighet.
Samtidigt är detta en berättelse om Åsbrinks far och farföräldrar som vävs in i berättelsen.
Språket är fantastiskt. Jag tänker på Alexievich när jag läser. Bägge är journalister som skildrar aktuell historia på prosa.
Håller tummarna för ytterligare ett Augustpris.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 374 reviews