This book has given me a new perspective on the second world war. The war between Russia and Germany has not been examined in detail by most U.S. accounts of the war. The case has certainly not been made that nearly the entire outcome of WWII was decided by the clash between the Russian and German armies. In his extermely readable acount of the entire eastern front campaign, Werth provides invaulable first hand accounts of many aspects of the Soviet drive to defeat the Nazi's. Werth was on location in Stalingrad shortly after the surrender of German troops. His account of the famous battle rivals that of any other I have read, including Anthony Beevor's Stalingrad. The only draw back of this great account is that it is written in such a pro-Soviet manner as to almost make the reader believe that Werth is an apologist for the crimes of the Soviets during the entire conflict, especially the invasion of Germany. This book is not for the cold warrior, but a must read for anyone with an interest in the little explored eastern front.

There are many books on the Russian-German conflict of the Second World War, but Alexander Werth's RUSSIA AT WAR is one of the longest, the most detailed, and the most comprehensive. It is impossible to read it and not get a sense of the masses of men and machines that bashed into each other for nearly four years. His use of detail, map, and breadth of coverage make his book a worthy complement to the bookshelf of war historians. There is, however, a flaw running throughout that nullifies much of the veracity and objectivity that ought to be intrinsic to a serious work of military history. That flaw is his pro-Soviet bias, in particular his refusal to see First Secretary Joseph Stalin as the murderous thug that he was.
Werth divides his history into seven sections. In the first,called 'Prelude to War,' he discusses the months and years that preceded Operation Barbarossa. To him, Hitler is correctly identified as the architect of the war. Werth analyzes what now seems painfully evident in hindsight--the plans for the invasion of Poland. He is less than truthful with Stalin's role in pre-1941 attempts at European hegemony. Werth writes, 'Throughout, Stalin recalls, the Soviet Union had pursued a policy of peace.' (page 40) In that same paragraph, he adds, 'The Soviet Union wanted peace; she wanted peace and business relations with all countries, so long as they did not impinge on her interests.' It is difficult to read this and not gasp in disbelief at Werth's naivete. Russia gobbled up Finland in 1940 even though the Finns did not 'impinge on her interests.' As for Poland, Werth rationalizes the Russian invasion after the Poles were already thoroughly beaten by the Nazis as 'the Soviet government could no longer be neutral in the face of reigning chaos in Poland or the fact that 'our blood-brothers, the Ukrainians and Belorussians are being abandoned to their fate.'' As Werth progresses in his history, he tends to become somewhat more even-handed, and it is in his middle chapters that his true stengths as a writer and historian are evident. He describes the siege of Leningrad and the assault on Moscow by the Wehrmacht in their bloody horror, even if he allows masses of details of lives lost to punctuate his claims.
Some pertinent analyses are missing. Nowhere does he blame Stalin for the great military purges of 1937 as one of the leading factors that ripped the heart out of the Soviet High Command and left Russia very nearly without competent leadership. Nowhere does he describe the fall of Berlin in 1945, for if he had done so, he would have had to explain the mass rape that was perpetrated on all Berlin women by elements of the Red Army. Nowhere does he even hint at the role the NKVD played as Stalin's personal execution squads, a group that undoubtedly killed more fellow Slavs with a bullet to the back of the neck than it did Germans in defense of the Soviet homeland. As I finished reading this massive history, I paused for a moment to read the publicity comments written on the front cover by William L. Shirer, author of RISE AND FALL OF THE THIRD REICH, 'The result...is the best book we probably shall ever have in English on Russia at war.' Werth's book is useful in connecting the myriad of dots that was the war on the Eastern Front, but the best book? I don't think so. It is fatally flawed by his unabashed admiration for a thug who feared his own people more than he did his neighbors.

Russia at War: 1941-1945 by Alexander Werth is one of the most incredible history books in existence. Eyewitness accounts of the aftermath of barbaric Nazi occupation and interviews with survivors of German captivity are haunting and unforgettable. With its maps, contemporary press clippings and excerpts from memoirs by Nazi and Russian officers the book appears to be an invaluable repository of second world war facts put in concise, popularly accessible form. To a modern day revisionist, Cold War warrior or russphobe, some of Alexander Werth's accounts may seem to be overly pro-Soviet (or rather too unsympathetic to the Nazis - the complaint one hears most frequently) and the style with which he described certain events as insensitive and even callous (like his stunning narration of the last days of the German army at Stalingrad), however to most people reading Alexander Werth's Russia at War will uncover a new honest perspective both on the events leading to the WWII and on the actual meaning of the allied Victory at its conclusion. This fascinating book is so well written, that comparing it to other books on the same subject is difficult and perhaps unfair to their authors, one can compare reading Russia at War: 1941-1945 by Alexander Werth to playing an addictive (computer) game: once started, it is almost impossible to stop.

No doubt we owe a debt of gratitude to Robert Service. He has given us a badly needed new biography of this very important figure, one that incorporates some materials held secret in Russia for over 80 years. What is more, the work is quite complete for a shortened biography (he has a 3 volume version), with a few odd exceptions. Service performs on the whole admirably. His work is without major errors, and he gives us Lenin from start to finish. In workmanlike fashion, he moves chronologically through this active life, addressing the familiar issues with common sense. The style is pedestrian, but, no pun intended, serviceable. If you want to get to know Lenin in one volume, this is the one to choose.
Yet, for all of that, there are a number of areas, a few of them quite significant, where this book is ultimately unsatisfying. I found it odd, for example, that there is not a word in the book about the peculiar Bauman affair in 1904. Bauman (for whom the most famous technical institute in Moscow is named) was a disgusting character who seduced and impregnated a married fellow Bolshevik, and then boasted about it, ridiculing her in public. When her appeals to him for help fell on deaf ears, she appealed to the Party, and ultimately committed suicide. Lenin's decision to laugh this off, as the essentially harmless prank of one of his own, reveals quite early Lenin's basically amoral nature. Similarly, the dispute with the Mensheviks over "Exes", ie armed robberies to 'expropriate the expropriators', as Lenin infelicitously put it, is hardly addressed, even though this issue was not insignificant. It turned on the question of the Party's reputation (and, consequently, its potential for recruitment and its appeal to society) - was it to be a high-minded, even idealistic political organ, or was it to be besmirched by these activities, and thus identified with gangsters and their base criminality? Lenin recognized the Menshevik point, in principle, but actually did nothing to discourage Stalin's and others' gangsterism (indeed, quite the opposite) - again, an episode revealing Lenin's absence of moral standard. Service also ignores the last act of the suppression of the Constituent Assembly on Jan. 6 (OS), when the Bolsheviks gunned down the small demonstration of support, killing 20. (To be fair, this episode is hardly remembered today by anyone, including the most famous names in the writing of Russian history. Instead, they almost uniformly disparage Russian society, particularly the intelligentsia, for cowardice and irresolution in the apparent absence of any support for the Assembly. True, the demonstration was not massive, but those who marched knew, surely, what was likely awaiting them. These victims bear the conscience of Russia's commitment to its first democratic institution, and it is just shameful to ignore or forget them.) Or, the infamous expulsion of the flower of Russian intellectual life, the nearly 300 academics, world-renown scholars, and cultural figures in 1922 who, in a moment of uncharacteristic generosity, were not murdered on the spot, but actually permitted to take two pieces of clothing into permanent exile.
Inclusion of these relatively minor matters might have undermined the work's brevity and accessibility. Perhaps, but what is one to make of more major omissions? In particular, it can be shown that Lenin not only was not disturbed by the development of the Civil War, but actually welcomed and encouraged it. In fact, it is not too much to say that he, far more than any other single individual, caused it. In a series of decrees and directives, he made it impossible for the former "ruling classes", including the only nascent bourgeoisie, to live. Their turn to active resistance was most often undertaken very reluctantly (the sorry defense of the Constituent Assembly is but one example), an act of desperation and a simple matter of life and death, something to which they were goaded and prodded. Lenin was even surprised that it took so long. There is no evidence that Service is aware of the proof of this in Stephan Courtois' "Black Book of Communism" and Nicolas Werth's book-length article there on Russia.
Further, while Service cites some chilling documentation on Lenin's sanguinary attack on the church, he does not detail the well-known incident at Shuya, the most revealing of them all. It was this that served as the trigger for his shockingly violent rhetoric, long concealed, calling for the destruction of the church and the murder of its ecclesiastics. Again, see Werth.
It is in matters of interpretation that the reader is left most dissatisfied. While there is plenty of evidence scattered throughout the book to damn Lenin as completely amoral, the reader comes away from the book without a clear statement or unequivocal understanding of this crucial insight. In fact, I would argue that there is something pathological at work in a man who is absolutely incapable of any introspection, a pathology that remains unidentified and uninvestigated by Service. To cite the most critical example, there is no evidence that Lenin ever questioned, much less regretted, making the Revolution, despite the fact that it had violated all of his own theoretical principles. Yet, early on, certainly by 1920, it was possible to see that the Mensheviks were right in opposing it. It was catastrophic: Mass murder and massive starvation were its direct result. For Lenin, though, ideology takes second place to reality. This unstable balance between theory and necessity is crucial to understanding Lenin. And, the pathology which permits it, without internal debate or vacillation, had devastating implications for his subjects, but it is not explored.
Lenin's view of Russia as nothing but a backwater, only good for igniting the real revolution in the west, and of Russians as incompetent bunglers is never given the emphasis it deserves, nor the ultimate irony of his remaining in state on Red Square. Were it so, Service would perhaps see this, and the current condition of Russia, as possibly the ultimate revenge of history.

Service is a British historian of Soviet Russian history who has written this quite good narrative of the life of Lenin. While not definitive, it is nevertheless the best synthesis of the political and personal life of Lenin

One of the better reasons to read Service is that while he has no qualms about outlining the viciousness and brutality of Lenin and the Bolsheviks, he is also not a hard line ideologue. He is a historian and he takes history as he finds it. There is none of the strident cold-war dogmatism of Conquest or the russophobia of Pipes that often make their writings come uncomfortably close to political diatribes rather than analytical histories.

Service walks the fine line between personal and political biography fairly well. He also has the added bonus of being a good narrative historian which makes this an immensily readable book.

Lenin's early life is covered in good detail. What Service does well is to show how, after brother Alexander's excecution, the Ulyanovs were marginalized by the very class of society they had aspired to, and how this effected both Lenin and his sisters. Service goes on to show the interaction between Lenin and his female relatives and how this carried on throughout his life.

Being a total biography- personal and political- the political side gets a bit of a short shrift at times. Lenin as shown as the "bookish fanatic" and hypocondriact who is all revolution all the time with little time to spare in life for other diversions.

His single-mindedness is such that he dictates executions (never naming individuals just groups) to achieve his ends. What Service show best is how his temperament in childhood carried on to his political life- never brooking disagreement- throwing tantrums and denounciations- and rarely compromising.

And yet Lenin is at heart, a middle class bourgeois in his social manners. His personal relationships with women are not especially notorious save for a life-long relationship with Inessa Armand who may or may not have been his mistress.

Personal without being gossipy and showing Lenin's idiocincracies without being psychoanalytical, Service handles his biography well. All in all this is a highly readable, not perfect, but enjoyable biography of the life of one of the century's most notorious figures.

This is probably the best biography of Lenin that I have read. It is interesting, easy to understand, very detailed, and is fair towards a man too often judged superficially. Lenin was one of the major figures of the 20th century, and he had a tremendous impact on the world. He was also far more complex than many of his biographers have made him out to be. He was neither a benevolent idealist (as Soviet propaganda would have one believe), nor was he a Stalin-style dictator (although they had some things in common).

Instead, as Service's book reveals, Lenin was an ideologue who, while having the best interests of the country in mind, was willing to ruthlessly kill thousands of people to maintain his dictatorship. Service does an excellent job of depicting Lenin as a many sided individual, and he includes lots of background information on the personal side of his life that makes it easier for one to view him as a real person (also, it is often easy to see connections between his actions as a politican and his personal life).

All in all - a great biography for anyone wishing to understand the true Lenin.

Nabokov, in his Lectures on Russian Literature, suggested that Dostoevsky be knocked off the canon of Russian writers, especially in favor of Turgenev, whom Dostoevsky hated. The reason was that Nabokov was against the "novel of ideas" because, he would say, it managed to achieve neither.

Demons is, of Dostoevsky's novels, the most ideological, yet still it is masterfully pulled off. Let it be known, however, that at times, the plot suffers at the expense of ideology, just as one has to expect, BUT THE IDEAS!

This book, although in my opinion it has the nuance of neither, is a perfect bridge between Notes From the Underground and The Brothers Karamazov. The intelligentsia, you suspect, are trying to build the positivistic paradise that the Underground man railed against, but as the novel progresses, you realize that the idealist vision has already been lost by Stepan Trofimovich, that all that remains is his desire to feel alive, even if that means inflicting every sort of pain. This is the same type of monster that Ivan warns against, and identifies himself with--if he were to act--in the Grand Inquisitor.

Also, please note, I tried once to read it in an older translation, and gave up somewhere in the 100s. This one I plunged through with little trouble.

Dostoevsky's tackling political novel is given new life in this fresh translation. This work has been unilaterally been praised for capturing Dostoevsky's power and subtlety. This story is about the political and philosophical ideas that swept Russia in the second half of the 19th century. These demons, then, are ideas, that legion of -isms that came to Russia from the West: idealism, rationalism, empiricism, materialism, utilitarianism, positivism, socialism, anarchism, nihilism, and, underlying them all, atheism.'' Dostoevsky, taking as his starting point the political chaos around him at the time, constructs an elaborate morality tale in which the people of a provincial town turn against one another because they are convinced of the infallibility of their ideas. Stepan Trofimovich, an affable thinker who does little to turn his liberal ideas into action, creates a monster in his student, Nikolai Stavrogin, who takes his spiritual father's teaching to heart, joining a circle of other nihilists who will justify any and all violent excesses for the sake of their ideas. Stavrogin aims for a systematic corrupting of society and all its principles so that out of the resulting destruction he may raise the banner of rebellion. A chilling foreshadowing of Stalinist years. This is a work of art in literature!

Dostoevsky, as the great historian of Russia Richard Pipes notes, hated Socialism and Socialists more than all else under the sun. This is a continuation of his bombardment of collectivists and utopianists that began with "Notes from Underground" and continued with "Crime and Punishment." Dostoevsky, a Christian and a Russian patriot (in the best -- Roger Scrutonian -- sense of the word) -- rejected anything and everything that would make men and women into mere social ciphers, cogs in the machine of history, into "means" rather than "ends" (to use the terminology of Kant).

Dostoevsky's primary inspiration for this novel came from an absolutely horrid novel by one Nikolai Cherneshevsky called "Chto Eto", or "What is to be Done?" An early bit of Russian utopianism, it was a precursor of the vicious theories Lenin/Stalin would deploy to "drag" Russia into the 20th century (indeed it was Lenin's favorite novel). The fact that some 66 million would be killed on the grand march to utopia was irrelevant (as the lunatic Shigalyov states in Dostoevsky's novel, "from unlimited freedom, I ended with unlimited despotism. . ." the solution] to the problems of mankind is to grant absolutely freedom to one-tenth and turn the remaining nine-tenths into a herd).

This echoes, of course, the magisterial "dialogue" between Christ and the Grand Inquisitor on the nature of human freedom in The Brothers Karamazov. But this novel is relevant for more than its attack on socialism and communism -- both of which, outside of Cuba, China, and a couple of bookstores in New York City and maybe California -- have collapsed precisely because they could do no more than create misery and murder. What makes The Demons -- indeed, the entire Dostoevsky corpus -- particularly relevant in this first decade of the 21st century is his take on the Russian intelligentsia/liberals of the 1840s -- a group characterized by out and out hatred for their country, which created the conditions for the rise of nihilism, terrorism, and bolshevism in the 1860s-1890s. Those 1840s intellectuals, like the "intelligentsia" of today's America, adopted a "blame Russia first" attitude toward all internal and external problems -- glorying in Russia's humiliations, and cursing her victories. It's not a far leap from Dostoevsky's Stepan Verkhovensky to the likes of Lapham, Vidal, and Moore. The real threat to one's community, Dostoevsky argues, is not the farmer or the factory worker who attends church, votes Republican, and drinks his beer in a tavern, whose sons and daughters march to war because they believe it their duty to the country that bore and sustained them, but those who, cloaking themselves in the false-prophet mantle of "dissent," spit and sneer at the foundations of community, or what Russians would call sobernost -- the things that makes Russia Russia, the things that make America America. Dostoevsky's work is both warning and antidote. It's no wonder he was banned by Lenin; one doubts he is discussed around the smart parties of Manhattan today.

Obviously a previous reader didn't actually read this book since Katia doesn't talk about aborting her child in A Letter for Daria. This book is full of stunning pictures and you can see the love and happiness within this family. The story to her daughter is wonderful. Maybe this book will start a trend-all mothers should write journals to their children. I wish mine had.

This book is so sweet and cute, mostly filled with pictures, Katia Gordeeva writes a very touching letter to her little daughter Dasha. She tells her of life in both America and Russia, what her hopes for her daughter are, who she is in figure skating and what challenges there are. She also talks about Daria's father and tells her how they were such a happy family and one day they will see him. An excellent heartfelt book.

This is a delightful book that showcases a mother's obvious love for her daughter and for her own mother and grandmother. In this book Katia reveals as much or more about herself than she did in her previous book (also a great book) and tells lots of cute and funny antecdotes about her family. As much as I love My Sergei, I think I actually like this one better. But, you should know, it is written for an older children's reading level and is very different from My Sergei in style.

Just so no one is mislead, there is NO mention of abortion in this book. Katia says only that she was very lucky that her parents and Sergei were supportive of her having Daria - nothing more, nothing less. Nor does Katia mislead anyone about her (and Sergei's) arrangements for the care of her/their daughter while they were away from home on tour for half the year (her parents moved to the U.S. with them so they could care for Daria while her parents worked (touring) - all children should be so lucky to have their grandparents with them rather than spending long hours in daycare - and Katia expresses her gratitude that that option was available and her desire to do the same for Daria's children one day just as her grandmother took care of her while her own parents were away).

In short, this is a delightful book that anyone with a mother or a child can enjoy and appreciate whether they are fans of skating or not. The wisdom Katia has gained from her grandmother and mother and passes on (along with her mom) to Daria is delightful and rings true across all cultures. This book also has some interesting glimpses into Russian/Soviet culture as it differs from our own.

It's official-I've lost my mind! I'm in love with a man who's been dead for 60 years. Michael Romanov was everything, apparently, a high-born nobelman was born to be; handsome, loyal, intelligent and completely besotted and in love with his bride. Unfortunately, she was a twice-divorced commoner. Therein the problems lay.

This wonderful and tragic story is so intriguing and meticulously researched that it reads like a novel rather than a biography. Donald and Rosemary Crawford play off each other's experience in journalism writing (she wrote about society, he is a hard-nosed newspaper man) to bring about an intriguing story of love and politics that takes us back to this gilded age where the rich, beautiful and tragic central figures play at being the second Russian court in exile. They have so much material (personal letters, telegrams, pictures, etc.) to use that you feel like you're a part of Michael and Natasha's lives. It's a pleasure to read and will definately be read again by me.

Rosemary and Donald Crawford present a little known adenda to the story of the Romanov Tsars. Their research and sympathetic presentation offers entrance for the reader into the great love story of Michael and Natasha. It quickly catches you up in a pace, all too fast, racing to a tragic finalle. The reader is plundged into the confusion and multiple currants of the Russian experience of the First World War and then, the following Revolution. You shout helplessly at the book, "flee for your lives!" during the short window that they had that opportunity. You pour over and over the wonderful pictures as you become more and more familiar with the characters. I was supprised at a new and revealing discription of Nicholas and Alexandra, showing them with all their weaknesses, bumps and warts. It was interesting that the brothers, Nicholas and Michael shared the trait of complete love and devotion to one woman. One wonders about the family dynamics that produced such a shared commitment. The book is another opportunity to examine the Russian capacity for ineptitude that still goes on today. In the sum, it is the account of a great love story, doomed by it's time.

As an avid fan of Russian history and letters, I was delighted by the publication of Michael and Natasha: The Life and Love of Michael II, the Last of the Romanov Tsars, by Rosemary and Donald Crawford. I was first intrigued by Michael Romanov and Natasha Wulfert through Kyril FitzLyon and Tatiana Browning's superb pictorial volume, Before the Revolution: Russia and Its People Under the Czar, where the couple appears photographed together on the occasion of Natasha's birthday. Somehow, and despite the grandeur of their surroundings and attire -- the epitome of that majestic and romantic age -- they came across as very appealing and almost modern individuals. Their story is the moving saga of a love that was doomed, not merely due to differences in pedigree and status, but because of historic forces they (particularly Michael, with his unswerving belief in human kindness) unfortunately underestimated. Throughout this engaging work, the quality that most vividly comes across is the couple's deep and abiding love for one another -- a love that survived ostracism, political cataclysms, and, one is convinced, even the alleged finality of death. The lifestyle they exemplified, spent amid the grandeur of vast country estates, brilliant St. Petersburg salons, and the intrigues of the Romanov court, has been faithfully preserved by Russia's leading authors in enduring works of fiction, and, in fact, striking parallels exist between Natasha and Tolstoi's immortal Anna Karenina. That Natasha herself may have examined the similarities, with perhaps a mixture of dread and amusement, is a clear possibility, as she was a cultivated woman who, moreoever, moved in artistic circles. Status, rank, and privileged position notwithstanding, both Michael and Natasha reveal themselves, through letters and contemporary testimonies, as thoroughly decent human beings who found themselves (proverbially) at the wrong place and time in history, and whose love, courage, and integrity alone were no match against a harsh age. Foreknowledge of the events that conspired and ultimately triumphed over their hopes for happiness and, indeed, their very existence, is not a damper to the reader's obstinate hope that, despite history's well known verdict, they and their private world will endure. Natasha, noted for the beauty of her "sad eyes," perhaps always sensed that tragedy would one day overtake her, even when tangible evidence of that fact was still far in the future. Michael, an avid photographer, left behind a rich pictorial record of their brief time together, so as to capture and preserve moments that, in their poignancy, he perhaps sensed were too lovely and fragile to endure. Reading this excellent work of biography, one is again moved to sorrow by the fate of the Romanovs who, despite their political blindness, did not deserve the cruel and bloody end which, with rare exceptions, befell most of their lineage. If there is a flaw to the biography at all, it is that a story that was so consistently rich in intimate detail for nearly 400 pages is abruptly cut off with Natasha's acceptance of Michael's tragic fate six years after his disappearance in 1918. Her own later life, which encompassed nearly three decades, is quickly summarized in a few terse paragraphs that leave the curious reader somewhat disoriented. Though her own ending in poverty, loneliness, and illness is almost too disturbing to absorb after all she has had to endure, I believe Natasha (and those interested in her fate) deserved a more gradual and gentle farewell.

A book both sweet and sour. Sweet in that it is a well written book on an oft neglected yet fascinating subject. As is often the case, a foreign land seen through the eyes of a visitor, makes for an interesting, revealing, and insightful read. Sour in that the author's point of view is often jaded, cynical, and superficial.

The book is an attempt at writing about complex geopolitical history in an approachable, easy, anectdotal way, and insofar as the book is enjoyable and engaging it is successful, but there are problems with this approach.

While professing a love of Ukraine and Ukrainians, Ukrainian heroes are given short shrift - branded as reactionary nationalists or self-serving opportunists and endowed with obligatory character flaws. Meanwhile, the shadows of Russian historiography loom large over the book, apparent in the coloring of the author's viewpoints - though to her credit, she is bright enough to see through some of the more blatant propaganda which many other authors and academics have blindly accepted. Her innate skepticism comes to her rescue, though often inconsistently.

In truth, it is not completely her fault, as the Russian version of Ukrainian history is the most widespread (the victors get to write the history). That said, one would think that a book devoted to Ukraine from a post empire, post soviet outlook would want to present the facts in a less biased, more informed manner, perhaps giving the Ukrainian version of history some much needed ink to balance the several hundred years of virtual Russian monopoly on Ukrainian history.

Whether intentional or not, and contrary to the author's stated feelings, the book casts Ukraine and Ukrainians in a largely unflattering light - corrupt, inept, devious, inferior, simple, anti-semitic.....all tired Russophile stereotypes popular since the days of Catherine. Never do we get a clear idea of the Ukraine the author fell in love with, or what makes it worthy of such devotion. Reid just cannot seem to give a compliment without following it with a bit of derision. Perhaps she is afraid of seeming biased? In my opinion she went too far the other way, leaving readers with an unsavory impression of the subject of her book.

Nevertheless, read the book for enjoyment or as an introduction to Ukraine. If you are after the historical facts, read Subtelny or Hrushevsky.

I can understand the criticisms from some of the native Ukranians who have reviewed this book. However, this book does a great job of unwinding the chaotic and confusing history of the Ukraine to the western reader. Reid writes with a westerner's perspective yet she truly loves and understands her subject matter. In addition to her tireless reporting, she has translated and deciphered Russian, Polish and Ukranian history to weave a story with great proportion. In addition, Reid is a great writer: the book is both informative and concise; translating history into a comprehensive, interesting read.

Ms Reid presented an excellent review of Ukrainian history, geography, political and socio-economic issues. There are some historical inaccuracies in the book, but one assumes that these data were supplied to the author by both Polish and Russian sources. Otherwise, this a good book for reader interested in getting his "feet wet" on this newly independent nation.

This is an excellant book for those seeking detailed accounts of the war between the USSR and Germany. Mr. Erickson does a masterful job of detailing the Soviet failures at the beginning of the war through their successful defense of Moscow to the fall of the Crimea setting the stage for Germany's catastrophic defeat at Stalingrad. This account is largely from the Soviet perspective, but I do not believe that detracts from its value. The author displays little bias, he rather lets the facts speak for themselves. This has one weakness: as others have said, it has no maps. The lack of maps make it somewhat difficult to follow unless one has some idea of the geography of the USSR; even then, it is still difficult to follow at times. However, overall this is an excellent work for anyone seeking more detail about the Great Patriotic War.

If you're studying Stalingrad or building up a credible military library, you really need this book, which stands alongside Antony Beevor's best-selling "Stalingrad: The Fateful Siege" and Joel Hayward's definitive "Stopped at Stalingrad: The Luftwaffe and Hitlers Defeat in the East 1942 - 1943". Make sure you have all three.

Erickson's book explains Soviet grand strategy, operational art, and tactics, and does so during a narrative that is gripping and informative. Yes, it is true that you need maps to help you locate the place names but check out the good maps in Hayward's book while you are reading Erickson's.

Erickson cut a trail with his meticulous use of Soviet russian-language archival documents. This gives the book real strenth and reliabilty.

Soviet sacrifices were as great as Soviet suffering. I would like to shake the hand of every Soviet commander Erickson mentions. Thank God for them is all I can say. THEY won World War II.

The books I mention in this book review are so far ahead of the rest that I would give them all six stars. You must get them. Erickson's companion volume, by the way, is about the period from Stalingrad to Berlin. It is also magnificent.

By the way, I once met Professor Erickson and I can affirm that he is a thoroughly nice gentleman. He signed his book for me and happily answered my dumb questions. Isn't it nice that at least some of our paramount scholars aren't ivory-tower types?

Not in print for perhaps 10 years, this study has, since it's initial release in the seventies, been the quintisential work on the subject of the Russo-German war as viewed from the Russian side. Erickson is still the formost scholar in the world on the red army and it's war with Germany.

However, this is not a book for those not already familiar with the subject. It was written for scholars of Barbarossa, and so Erickson assumes the reader to posses considerable knowledge of the subject. It contains no maps or battle plans, and references are made in passing to events and topics which it is assumed the reader has knowledge. If you have the background, this is THE study on the topic.

By now many readers have become happily acquainted with the style of Major Sean Drummond's amusingly sarcastic personality. In The Kingmaker, Brian Haig's third book, circumstances affect Major Drummond in such a way that his attitude becomes occasionally more caustic than normal.

This time around, our beloved JAG officer is asked to defend a man accused of treason - not just any treason, however, but the worst case against the United States government to date. To make matters more difficult, treason is not the only charge against him.

The overzealous prosecutor has also added such things as adultery, perjury and murder. Major Drummond has a hard road ahead of him, and not just in defending someone that seems to have no possible defense, but also due to the fact that he despises his client.

Brigadier General William Morrison is married to the one woman Drummond has always wanted to spend his life with...the one that got away. Morrison has been a thorn in Drummond's side for years, and now he's stuck trying to prove his innocence when helping him is the last thing he truly wants to do.

The clouds eventually open up, though, and a ray of possibility shines through. If Drummond can find the man known as "The Kingmaker," he can possibly find the truth behind the accusations against Morrison. With the help of his Russian-speaking, leather-wearing co-counsel, Katrina Mazorski, and the ever-present legal assistant Sergeant First Class Imelda Pepperfield, he might just be able to beat the odds.

Brian Haig has developed a character that is likeable and laughable at the same time that he is being brash and brilliant, which gives life to the books rather than making them just dry, legal tomes.

One of the best aspects of these novels is that they can each stand alone. While Sean Drummond, Imelda Pepperfield and some of the other characters surrounding his career are present in each volume, there is not a thread connecting them in such a way that the reader must follow them in order.

In fact, Brian Haig even takes the time to explain Drummond's "black unit" background in all three. In this way, one isn't left guessing as to how exactly he got where he was, yet he doesn't approach it in such a way that makes a Drummond "follower" feel as though it is redundant.

Each time out, Brian Haig gets more accomplished as a writer of thrillers. In Sean Drummond he has created an engaging protagonist worthy of the complex and timely plots he constructs. JAG lawyer Drummond has so far travelled from the the atrocity-scarred Balkans to the turmoil of the Korean peninsula and now, in The Kingmaker, to the chaos of the Russian Federation to find the truth behind the allegations of treason levelled against his latest client, who just happens to be a former Academy classmate. An altogether thrilling ride, with some remarkable insights into who actually controls the political landscape of present day Russia.

Well, what can I say. I am a big Brian Haig fan. I enjoyed this book so much. I look so forward to Mr. Haig's books and I was not disappointed. I love the Sean Drummond character, not only his great sense of humor, but the fact that he makes mistakes, has vulnerabilities just like the rest of us. I think Mr.Haig is up there with Ludlum, Forsyth and Demille, which as far as I'm concerned is really good company. I will be reading his next one too. I hope Drummond will be back, but if not, I still look to any story that Mr. Haig will tell.

A book by a bright young man who happens to play hockey! A fascinating look into the origins of current Russian hockey stars in the NFL and the backward conditions they endured. I hope Tod follows up with another book. Richard Rossiter (rossiter@localnet.com)

This book offers a great insight into the Russian hockey system, especially now that so many European players have entered the NHL. To read of the adversity they must overcome in terms of lack of facilities and equipment makes you stop and look at what a luxury it is to grow up in the US. A great fast read for players and fans of any age.

Not only is it an insightful look at the intimidating Soviet hockey program, but a lesson in Russian culture as well. This was an easy read, cover to cover; I was engrossed in reading about the spy-novel style in which players were coaxed into defecting from their native land in order to pursue the NHL dream. I would highly recommend this book to anyone who has a love for the sport of hockey or Russian culture

This book is one of my treasures, and a must for anyone wishing to know more about the lost world of Tsar Nicholas and Alexandra. From menus of the coronation supper to artifacts found after the murders at Ekaterinburg, the life of the last Imperial family is presented in rich and poignant detail. The notes are also extremely well written, adding to the pleasure of this book.

First time I saw this book, I wasn't very interested. But I bought it anyway because it was on sale, and I like to have everything Romanov. But as it turned out, it grew on me like a fungus. Now it is one of my treasures, I look through it often, it is so full of pictures of artifacts you won't see in any other Romanov book and it thus gives color to a world that is otherwise in black and white. Pictures of the members of the extended family were also fascinating and also got me interested in them, though NAOTMAA are still my favorites. What a pity I didn't get to see the exhibition, but this book is I think as close as you'll ever get to the real thing, unless you get the chance to see the palaces.

If you know nothing of Nicholas and Alexandra, this is not the book to buy. However, if the Romanovs already captivate you, you will be captivated by this book. The work catalogs many of the imperial family's possessions. The color photographs are stunning; I was particularly moved by the photo of the tsarevich's teddy bear. Such an intimate glimpse makes these people all too "real" (and, hence, their merciless slaughter all the more appalling). The book features the Romonov's ornate palaces, family and studio photographs, clothing, and much more. For the price, one cannot find a better photographic chronicle of the last Romanovs.