What do you think?
Rate this book
The Burning of Moscow 1812
Hardcover ALLEN & UNWIN 1966.; First British Edition (1966)
- GenresNonfictionHistory
221 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1966
4 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
January 3, 2010
It was only after I finished this book that I read the flap and realized it was originally written in French. Which changes things a bit then because I can maybe blame the translator instead of the author...or I can just blame both of them, because I've read translated from French books before on Napoleon and enjoyed them.
This book was just strange. It only covers September-November really of the French Invasion of Russia, which is fine, because those are the months involving the Fire of Moscow and the book is just on that. I've read maybe a dozen or more books on Napoleon's campaigns in Russia and was just curious on Moscow, since all books cover it naturally, but wanted something more in depth. However it skips around a lot and nothing is doing in a cohesive manner.
For example! During the fire, author mentions how in one hospital, wounded soldiers, afraid that the hospital would be burnt (though the fire hadn't reached that district yet), threw themselves out of the windows, where 1,000 either died on impact, or reopened their wounds and bled to death on the street. She devotes like three sentences to this, and then moves on. Meanwhile, I was appalled at this lemming-like mental imagery and wanted something a bit more on this--like a chapter. And she cites nothing or gives no other facts than this.
How many were in that hospital? Why weren't doctors or other patients trying to stop them? What the hell? Then, in Part II, she has a long quote from a letter Napoleon wrote to his Polish girlfriend, where he comments on how the hospital was gigantic and the largest he had ever seen. This also didn't have much context in this chapter, so I don't know why this wasn't moved to the earlier mass-suicide part. Then, way farther in a Part III chapter (book is divided into 3 sections and has chapters in each Part), in one of the footnotes (the footnotes are also odd and random and for most part totally unnecessary) mentions how the hospital was one of the few buildings spared.
So I don't know... I want to read more on this now so I can know what really happened in this situation. But this is just one example of how a single event gets scattered across the entire book.
Also, I don't know if it's just terrible writing on author's part or bad translating, but here's a little slice of the style in this sentence: "The fact that he was the man [she's talking about Alexander I:] of a fleeting moment did not matter: he was that man to the full and the future could not tarnish that deep and sincere impulse, that obstinate determination and that manifestation of energy--fleeting though it was--by a man whose weakness of character was his worst curse."
Parts were interesting though (I guess it would be hard not to be, even with the overly florid writing and nonsensical organization) and Alexander's sister and Rostopchin are two of the main figures in this book, so that was pretty fascinating.
This book was just strange. It only covers September-November really of the French Invasion of Russia, which is fine, because those are the months involving the Fire of Moscow and the book is just on that. I've read maybe a dozen or more books on Napoleon's campaigns in Russia and was just curious on Moscow, since all books cover it naturally, but wanted something more in depth. However it skips around a lot and nothing is doing in a cohesive manner.
For example! During the fire, author mentions how in one hospital, wounded soldiers, afraid that the hospital would be burnt (though the fire hadn't reached that district yet), threw themselves out of the windows, where 1,000 either died on impact, or reopened their wounds and bled to death on the street. She devotes like three sentences to this, and then moves on. Meanwhile, I was appalled at this lemming-like mental imagery and wanted something a bit more on this--like a chapter. And she cites nothing or gives no other facts than this.
How many were in that hospital? Why weren't doctors or other patients trying to stop them? What the hell? Then, in Part II, she has a long quote from a letter Napoleon wrote to his Polish girlfriend, where he comments on how the hospital was gigantic and the largest he had ever seen. This also didn't have much context in this chapter, so I don't know why this wasn't moved to the earlier mass-suicide part. Then, way farther in a Part III chapter (book is divided into 3 sections and has chapters in each Part), in one of the footnotes (the footnotes are also odd and random and for most part totally unnecessary) mentions how the hospital was one of the few buildings spared.
So I don't know... I want to read more on this now so I can know what really happened in this situation. But this is just one example of how a single event gets scattered across the entire book.
Also, I don't know if it's just terrible writing on author's part or bad translating, but here's a little slice of the style in this sentence: "The fact that he was the man [she's talking about Alexander I:] of a fleeting moment did not matter: he was that man to the full and the future could not tarnish that deep and sincere impulse, that obstinate determination and that manifestation of energy--fleeting though it was--by a man whose weakness of character was his worst curse."
Parts were interesting though (I guess it would be hard not to be, even with the overly florid writing and nonsensical organization) and Alexander's sister and Rostopchin are two of the main figures in this book, so that was pretty fascinating.
Displaying 1 of 1 review