The first Russian reviews (or at least the first reviews published in Russia) of The New Cold War came out in the past couple of days, and the bottom line is two thumbs up.
I have to say that when I started this book, I never expected to get a positive review from the state-run Itar-Tass news agency, especially given my history of run-ins with the Kremlin (most infamously, they once accused me of "connivance at terrorism" and invited me down to Lubyanka for a chat). But Vladimir Kikilo's fair-minded review in the weekly ЭХО ПЛАНЕТЫ finds the book to be full of "rich material" that "sheds new light on many events in recent history."
Now maybe, just maybe, the Kremlin will give me another visa.
Mike Averko (a Russophile blogger and frequent commentator on this site) is less enthusiastic. In a review first published in the Russia Journal (is that thing still alive?), he takes issue with a lot of what I have to say, but concedes that the "prose is crisp" and ends up recommending the book anyway, if only so people like him can better understand "views we find disagreeable."
The review was posted over at Siberian Light, and has generated some decent debate there. (And may I assure any would-be readers that I know my Marovics from my Markovics and don't confuse the two in the book. One's a dark-haired guy with an earring who lives in Belgrade, the other (Marko) has blonde hair, lives in Kiev and has largely given up revolution-making to help out at things like Eurovision.)
4 comments:
Mark & Co.
As currently constructed, The Russia Journal (TRJ) offers a very good news wire service of recently released English language material on the former USSR. Along with News Now and Global Voices, TRJ picked up my book review after it was posted at Siberian Light.
I am pleased to say that the non-posted private feedback to my review was good. It includes two thumbs up from some relatively well known individuals who would have to go under the Russophobic tag, if I'm to be referred to as a Russophile.
I once gain reiterate my recommendation of the book with the spirit of earnestly engaging different views. Despite the Russophile label, I can nevertheless find fault with some Russian behavior. Likewise, the two mentioned political opposites in the prior paragraph offered frank criticisms of some manner from "their side." (if you may)
Thanks Mike,
I'd be interested to hear more of your unnamed colleagues' criticisms (and of course, what they liked about it)...
Hi Mark:
Their criticisms weren't of your book, but of how their side (as they see it) can have better advocacy. One of them said that the Medish/Legvold/Khrushcheva Russia isn't a threat (or such a great threat) side won the recent Eurasia Foundation debate in NYC. The other lauded your referencing (in the book) of Cheney's remarks in Vilnius. On the latter, I posted an excerpt of it in the comments section below my SL review.
Couldn't you have sold the last six books on that table? Or is that all they allowed you to import into the country?
Post a Comment