Status
Available
Description
The first truly European history of contemporary Europe, from Lisbon to Leningrad, based on research in six languages, covering 34 countries across 60 years, using a great deal of material from newly available sources. The book integrates international relations, domestic politics, ideas, social change, economic development, and culture--high and low--into a single grand narrative. Every country has its chance to play the lead, and although the big themes are handled--including the cold war, the love/hate relationship with America, cultural and economic malaise and rebirth, and the myth and reality of unification--none of them is allowed to overshadow the rich pageant that is the whole.--From publisher description.
User reviews
LibraryThing member nbmars
Tony Judt's detailed monumental work (at over 800 pages) is well-written and well-organized. He begins by documenting the devastation in Europe following World War II. Post-war planning for Europe was informed by the knowledge that both Fascism and Communism thrived on social despair; ergo "the
There was a continuing interest in Communism as a promising ideology throughout the world, especially until Krushchev's "secret speech" denouncing Stalin in February 1956. But as Judt observes, "enthusiasm for Communism in theory was characteristically present in inverse proportion to direct experience of it in practice." Moreover, the invasion of tanks into Hungary in November, 1956 "dispelled any illusions about this new, 'reformed' Soviet model." After 1956, Judt laments, "the Communist states of Eastern Europe, like the Soviet Union itself, began their descent into a decades-long twilight of stagnation, corruption and cynicism."
Judt adduces evidence to support his claim that when Communism fell in 1989 it was "Mr. Gorbachev's revolution." Not only did Gorbachev liberalize his own country, but he let it be known that he would not intervene in the internal politics of his colonies. Without the threat of military action from Moscow, there wasn't much to keep them in their antiquated inefficient systems. Much of the book is devoted to a detailed explanation of how each of the Eastern European countries went through the process of liberation.
Another helpful section outlines the concerns of the European Union, and just what membership means for both members and non-members. In a discussion of the culture of today's Europe, Judt speculates on the future of identity in Europe, with nationalism competing with Europeanism and now even with Islam.
His final chapter explores the nature of memory itself in Europe; in particular, how the different nations have negotiated the rocky shoals of Holocaust memory. As he emphasizes, "A nation has first to have remembered something before it can begin to forget it." For many nations, their complicity in Fascism is something they prefer not to acknowledge. He ends on a note of caution. "History," he believes, "does need to learned - and periodically re-learned. In a popular Soviet-era joke, a listener calls up 'Armenian Radio' with a question: 'Is it possible', he asks, 'to foretell the future?' Answer: 'Yes, no problem. We know exactly what the future will be. Our problem is with the past: that keeps changing.'" Therein, he writes, lies the challenge: we must keep renewing Europe's recent history: "If in years to come we are to remember why it seemed so important to build a certain sort of Europe out of the crematoria of Auschwitz, only history can help us."
(JAF)
Show More
physical and moral condition of the citizenry [became] a matter of common interest [for both the victors and the vanquished] and therefore part of the responsibility of the state." Economic recovery was essential. A brutal winter in 1947 exacerbated the urgency. U.S. Secretary of State George C. Marshall's plan for a European Recovery program, proposed in the summer of 1947, helped avert a political crisis in Europe. It's real benefit, however, was psychological: "[The infusion of money and aid] helped [Europeans] break decisively with a legacy of chauvinism, depression and authoritarian solutions." There was a continuing interest in Communism as a promising ideology throughout the world, especially until Krushchev's "secret speech" denouncing Stalin in February 1956. But as Judt observes, "enthusiasm for Communism in theory was characteristically present in inverse proportion to direct experience of it in practice." Moreover, the invasion of tanks into Hungary in November, 1956 "dispelled any illusions about this new, 'reformed' Soviet model." After 1956, Judt laments, "the Communist states of Eastern Europe, like the Soviet Union itself, began their descent into a decades-long twilight of stagnation, corruption and cynicism."
Judt adduces evidence to support his claim that when Communism fell in 1989 it was "Mr. Gorbachev's revolution." Not only did Gorbachev liberalize his own country, but he let it be known that he would not intervene in the internal politics of his colonies. Without the threat of military action from Moscow, there wasn't much to keep them in their antiquated inefficient systems. Much of the book is devoted to a detailed explanation of how each of the Eastern European countries went through the process of liberation.
Another helpful section outlines the concerns of the European Union, and just what membership means for both members and non-members. In a discussion of the culture of today's Europe, Judt speculates on the future of identity in Europe, with nationalism competing with Europeanism and now even with Islam.
His final chapter explores the nature of memory itself in Europe; in particular, how the different nations have negotiated the rocky shoals of Holocaust memory. As he emphasizes, "A nation has first to have remembered something before it can begin to forget it." For many nations, their complicity in Fascism is something they prefer not to acknowledge. He ends on a note of caution. "History," he believes, "does need to learned - and periodically re-learned. In a popular Soviet-era joke, a listener calls up 'Armenian Radio' with a question: 'Is it possible', he asks, 'to foretell the future?' Answer: 'Yes, no problem. We know exactly what the future will be. Our problem is with the past: that keeps changing.'" Therein, he writes, lies the challenge: we must keep renewing Europe's recent history: "If in years to come we are to remember why it seemed so important to build a certain sort of Europe out of the crematoria of Auschwitz, only history can help us."
(JAF)
Show Less
LibraryThing member Angelic55blonde
If you want a comprehensive, thoroughly researched book on Post-War Europe, then this is the book for you. There are no footnotes or endnotes to help the reader figure out where the author got his information, however there is a "suggested reading" section at the end of the book for each chapter.
This book is very long, about 800 pages, but it is thorough and covers everything from 1945 onwards. It's interesting and informative at the same time. However, if you are only casually interested in European history, you may not want to tackle this right away.
Show More
This book is very long, about 800 pages, but it is thorough and covers everything from 1945 onwards. It's interesting and informative at the same time. However, if you are only casually interested in European history, you may not want to tackle this right away.
Show Less
LibraryThing member McCaine
Judt's book "Postwar" is a massive product of a massive undertaking, which is to tell the story of Europe's history since World War II. He pays attention to all the relevant aspects of European history, taking care to balance between Western and Eastern Europe in his narration. The most original
The downside of this is that the political views of the author (solidly British conservative) serve as a lens through which he views the social and economic developments of Europe, rather than putting the political side "in the open", so to speak, as most popular historians do. This does however allow him to describe the history of the communist states in Eastern Europe with a suitably detached air, certainly an improvement over the denunciatory tone many American historians of Eastern Europe use.
The overall balance of subjects within the book is very well done, and one never leaves a chapter feeling that there was more to be told about the period. Nevertheless the focus on Europe is itself quite narrow, and hardly anything is said about the influence of the United States or Japan on Europe (except some platitudes about American cinema and the like), or for example the effects the decolonization had on European colonizing states' perception of their own history. This hole in Judt's historiographical approach will not hinder anyone who is just looking for a general overview of European post-war history, but does prevent it from becoming more than a popular historical work. Too bad, since Judt obviously has a keen eye for the kaleidoscope of social relations.
Mostly recommended for non-European readers who want a thorough overview of what's happened on the continent since 1945.
Show More
aspect of this book is the way Tony Judt gives predominance rather to the socio-economic history of the continent instead of the political history, elevating his analysis above the level of high school "Kings and battles" overviews. The European project of unification as well as the perceived downfall of ideological politics is also put into the spotlight. The downside of this is that the political views of the author (solidly British conservative) serve as a lens through which he views the social and economic developments of Europe, rather than putting the political side "in the open", so to speak, as most popular historians do. This does however allow him to describe the history of the communist states in Eastern Europe with a suitably detached air, certainly an improvement over the denunciatory tone many American historians of Eastern Europe use.
The overall balance of subjects within the book is very well done, and one never leaves a chapter feeling that there was more to be told about the period. Nevertheless the focus on Europe is itself quite narrow, and hardly anything is said about the influence of the United States or Japan on Europe (except some platitudes about American cinema and the like), or for example the effects the decolonization had on European colonizing states' perception of their own history. This hole in Judt's historiographical approach will not hinder anyone who is just looking for a general overview of European post-war history, but does prevent it from becoming more than a popular historical work. Too bad, since Judt obviously has a keen eye for the kaleidoscope of social relations.
Mostly recommended for non-European readers who want a thorough overview of what's happened on the continent since 1945.
Show Less
LibraryThing member edfinn
It took me a year to read this book. It's quite good but incredibly long, so unless you have a ceaseless fascination for E.U. union politics and Soviet bloc shenanigans, you may want to be more selective than I was. On the other hand, I do feel glad to have read up on recent history, since it often
Show More
falls through the cracks of history survey courses. Show Less
LibraryThing member atheist_goat
Read this. It's eight hundred pages of tiny print and dense information, and one of the best books I've ever encountered. Read it.
LibraryThing member Shrike58
In this work Judt is at his best dealing with the short period between the Zero Hour of April, 1945 and the onset of the Cold War, and how the new German Question of what to do with the wreckage of the Third Reich contributed to the new international struggle between Washington and Moscow over
Show More
predominance in a prostrate Europe. Apart from the issues of writing the all-encompassing general history the main issue here is that this book is already feeling a little dated, despite having only been published in 2005. Sadly, Judt is no longer with us to rectify matters in a follow-on work; his erudition and wit will be missed, Show Less
LibraryThing member William.Kirkland
Incredible breadth and depth to Judt's knowledge, from the details of the Polish communist party, for example, to falling birthrates across Europe in the 1960s. Amazing. Must read, especially for those who have lived through the years of the Post-War. Little of the U.S. except as the outsider,
Show More
viewed by Europeans, and as partner in the Second Cold War with USSR. Show Less
LibraryThing member tfehr
This is an incredible book, one of the best I've read in a long time. For me, it gave me real insight into the truly remarkable transformation that occurred in Europe after the war, and how profound, dramatic, and unprecedented these changes were. Although over 800 pages, at no point did I lose
Show More
interest, and was constantly captivated with the historical narrative. This book has the potential to make Judt the Edward Gibbon of contempoary European history. Show Less
LibraryThing member HadriantheBlind
Very thorough and impressive study of a very broad area/era in history. Filled in a lot of gaps in my historical knowledge.
LibraryThing member gregdehler
This is a masterpiece in historical synthesis. There is a lot of information in this book. One thing that really stood out for me was how Stalin resettled millions of people in post-World War 2 East Europe. This reconciled nationalities with new post-war borders. Judt chronicles the immediate cost
Show More
of these forced moves as Poles moved west into the new Poland as Germans were forced west into East Germany, but also the long term implications of this mass migration. Show Less
LibraryThing member ohernaes
“Since 1989 it has become clearer than it was before just how much the stability of post-war Europe rested upon the accomplishments of Josef Stalin and Adolf Hitler (p. 9).” The previously ethnically heterogenous societies become more homogenous states.
Details how devastated Europe was, in
Observes that (German) occupation may have made non-democratic alternatives less appealing, and thus strengthened democracy.
In Norway the highest proportion prosecuted for collaboration after the war - all 55 000 members of NS and 40 000 others (of a population of 3 mill). Otherwise great variation in the extent of prosecution. In Denmark, where collaboration was little known of, people were punished harshly, while in France it was more common so punished less (when speaking about civil servants). And in Greece it was the wartime resisters, from the left, who were prosecuted, since Britain and US thought it vital not to disrupt the business interests, who had been dealing with the Germans. And in general often also took the form of settling old scores, e.g. in Yugoslavia and Hungary.
Collective amnesia was a key in Europe’s success after the war. Former nazis held important positions in many countries, both because of necessity and because of choice.
Big fear in France about American culture taking over through the Marshall aid, and great protests against Coke opening bottling plants. Indeed American films did dominate the European market in the 50’s, and actually got 50 % of their revenue from there.
It is easy to forget how dramatically living standards and real wages grew in the decades after the war.
Radio became widespread, then TV. Judt thinks the shared experiences this brought as being more important for a sense of national community than earlier efforts at nation-building, in particular in Italy. Both radio and tv were first controlled by the adults, then by those who were listening or watching. Did that opportunity for autonomy, exploration, shallowness, etc. do something to the generation that experienced it?
Argues that the wartime industrial structure and investments in Germany laid the ground for the country’s later industrial and economic success. Made quality goods.
I was surprised to learn that censorship of the theatre in the UK did not formally end until 1968, but I probably should not have been - Monty Python’s Life of Brian from 1979 was actually banned in Norway... In fact censorship in the BBC subsisted long into the 70’s and 80, and indeed still takes place, now with reference to e.g. violence, racism and animal cruelty. Although the postwar censorship of what was considered improper is certainly nothing to be proud of, this state of affairs should be kept in mind when getting discouraged by censorship in different regimes around the world today. A related issue to keep in mind in the context of “developing” countries is the strong link between religion and politics in many European countries in the postwar year, e.g. in Germany and Belgium, where Catholics at times had to fear excommunication were they to vote for anyone else than the Christian Democrats.
The beginning of an official thought police in Soviet in the triall (1965-66) against Sinyavsky and Daniel, accused of publishing anti-Soviet material: “The Sinyavsky-Daniel trial was held in camera, although a press campaign vilifying the two writers had drawn public attention to their fate. But the trial proceedings were secretly recorded and transcribed by several people admitted to the courtroom and they were published both in Russian and English a year later, generating international petitions and demands for the men’s release. The unusual aspect of the affair was that for all the brutality of the Stalin decades, no-one had hitherto been arrested and imprisoned solely on the basis of the content of their (fictional) writings. Even if material evidence had been freely invented for the purpose, intellectuals in the past had always been accused of deeds, not merely words (p. 425).”
In the 80’s and 90’s, it was working class districts that most directly were affected by low-skilled East European immigration and later globalisation, and as the left often no longer had as strong a presence as previously, this created an opening for the far right. E.g. Front National in France often did very well in former communist districts.
More than one in five military officers in Norway joined Nasjonal Samling.
Judt’s concluding message is how Europe to a large degree has come well to terms with its past. After the war many stories were purposefully suppressed and forgotten, like the fact that more than one in five military officers in Norway joined Nasjonal Samling, and some of this was necessary to go forward. I think that the crucial question is how to do this in real time. I do not know.
Details how devastated Europe was, in
Show More
terms of physical and human capital, many children were orphaned or ill fed, people were killed and displaced, many German (and East European) women were raped by the Red Army. But still managed to rise.Observes that (German) occupation may have made non-democratic alternatives less appealing, and thus strengthened democracy.
In Norway the highest proportion prosecuted for collaboration after the war - all 55 000 members of NS and 40 000 others (of a population of 3 mill). Otherwise great variation in the extent of prosecution. In Denmark, where collaboration was little known of, people were punished harshly, while in France it was more common so punished less (when speaking about civil servants). And in Greece it was the wartime resisters, from the left, who were prosecuted, since Britain and US thought it vital not to disrupt the business interests, who had been dealing with the Germans. And in general often also took the form of settling old scores, e.g. in Yugoslavia and Hungary.
Collective amnesia was a key in Europe’s success after the war. Former nazis held important positions in many countries, both because of necessity and because of choice.
Big fear in France about American culture taking over through the Marshall aid, and great protests against Coke opening bottling plants. Indeed American films did dominate the European market in the 50’s, and actually got 50 % of their revenue from there.
It is easy to forget how dramatically living standards and real wages grew in the decades after the war.
Radio became widespread, then TV. Judt thinks the shared experiences this brought as being more important for a sense of national community than earlier efforts at nation-building, in particular in Italy. Both radio and tv were first controlled by the adults, then by those who were listening or watching. Did that opportunity for autonomy, exploration, shallowness, etc. do something to the generation that experienced it?
Argues that the wartime industrial structure and investments in Germany laid the ground for the country’s later industrial and economic success. Made quality goods.
I was surprised to learn that censorship of the theatre in the UK did not formally end until 1968, but I probably should not have been - Monty Python’s Life of Brian from 1979 was actually banned in Norway... In fact censorship in the BBC subsisted long into the 70’s and 80, and indeed still takes place, now with reference to e.g. violence, racism and animal cruelty. Although the postwar censorship of what was considered improper is certainly nothing to be proud of, this state of affairs should be kept in mind when getting discouraged by censorship in different regimes around the world today. A related issue to keep in mind in the context of “developing” countries is the strong link between religion and politics in many European countries in the postwar year, e.g. in Germany and Belgium, where Catholics at times had to fear excommunication were they to vote for anyone else than the Christian Democrats.
The beginning of an official thought police in Soviet in the triall (1965-66) against Sinyavsky and Daniel, accused of publishing anti-Soviet material: “The Sinyavsky-Daniel trial was held in camera, although a press campaign vilifying the two writers had drawn public attention to their fate. But the trial proceedings were secretly recorded and transcribed by several people admitted to the courtroom and they were published both in Russian and English a year later, generating international petitions and demands for the men’s release. The unusual aspect of the affair was that for all the brutality of the Stalin decades, no-one had hitherto been arrested and imprisoned solely on the basis of the content of their (fictional) writings. Even if material evidence had been freely invented for the purpose, intellectuals in the past had always been accused of deeds, not merely words (p. 425).”
In the 80’s and 90’s, it was working class districts that most directly were affected by low-skilled East European immigration and later globalisation, and as the left often no longer had as strong a presence as previously, this created an opening for the far right. E.g. Front National in France often did very well in former communist districts.
More than one in five military officers in Norway joined Nasjonal Samling.
Judt’s concluding message is how Europe to a large degree has come well to terms with its past. After the war many stories were purposefully suppressed and forgotten, like the fact that more than one in five military officers in Norway joined Nasjonal Samling, and some of this was necessary to go forward. I think that the crucial question is how to do this in real time. I do not know.
Show Less
LibraryThing member deusvitae
It is hard for words to do justice to the magisterial, comprehensive, insightful, and penetratingly insightful narrative of European history from 1945 to 2005 contained in this work.
It's a long book, full of detail, but yet highly readable. The author does well at contextualizing the history of
The opening section on the immediate postwar events is extremely illuminating in order to understand all that happened since. It's hard to resist the author's conclusion that European peace was secured because the people were made to fit the borders (since there was mutually agreed upon ethnic cleansing, forcing minority groups to move across central and eastern Europe) after making borders around different people had failed (the attempted solution of 1919); this seems all the more prescient in light of the events of the past decade which have only reinforced the thesis.
The postwar boom period is also well contextualized, and again, recent events probably reinforce the thesis that it was a one-time flourishing in order to return to the level of wealth and status which existed before the 40 years of war and unrest.
The collapse of Communism is well detailed. Discussions of life after Communism in both West and East were fruitful, as was the emphasis on the European project. One acutely feels the loss of the author: one wishes to hear what he would have to say about how the European project has fared with the economic crash and the resurgence of nationalism of late.
The epilogue is an absolute must read, using the way the Holocaust was or wasn't remembered in Europe in different countries at different times as a way of discussing the difficulties of remembering and forgetting, and the times in which it is necessary to do either or both. We Americans can profit from that kind of exploration in light of our own heritage and how we remember and forget it.
An extremely valuable read.
It's a long book, full of detail, but yet highly readable. The author does well at contextualizing the history of
Show More
Europe at that time in light of what had come before. The whole of Europe throughout this whole period is discussed. The opening section on the immediate postwar events is extremely illuminating in order to understand all that happened since. It's hard to resist the author's conclusion that European peace was secured because the people were made to fit the borders (since there was mutually agreed upon ethnic cleansing, forcing minority groups to move across central and eastern Europe) after making borders around different people had failed (the attempted solution of 1919); this seems all the more prescient in light of the events of the past decade which have only reinforced the thesis.
The postwar boom period is also well contextualized, and again, recent events probably reinforce the thesis that it was a one-time flourishing in order to return to the level of wealth and status which existed before the 40 years of war and unrest.
The collapse of Communism is well detailed. Discussions of life after Communism in both West and East were fruitful, as was the emphasis on the European project. One acutely feels the loss of the author: one wishes to hear what he would have to say about how the European project has fared with the economic crash and the resurgence of nationalism of late.
The epilogue is an absolute must read, using the way the Holocaust was or wasn't remembered in Europe in different countries at different times as a way of discussing the difficulties of remembering and forgetting, and the times in which it is necessary to do either or both. We Americans can profit from that kind of exploration in light of our own heritage and how we remember and forget it.
An extremely valuable read.
Show Less
LibraryThing member jonfaith
A sublime samizdat selection. This stretched across our collecitve interests and strove to shake us from lazy preconceptions. This was an amazing analysis.
LibraryThing member karatelpek
Wow. A truly epic book and vital to read if you wish to understand modern Europe.
LibraryThing member marshapetry
I just couldn't get through this... maybe way above my understanding? Or boring and dry? Not sure which
LibraryThing member renbedell
A historical coverage of Europe from after World War 2 to the early 2000s. It is a book that covers a vast amount of information and time. The information is mostly political, but it also covers culture and any main historical events. Since it covers all of Europe, it does jump around a lot between
Show More
different countries or years. It is written really well, without any unnecessary fluff. It is definitely written in an education way, so there aren't any entertaining stories. Overall I enjoyed it, but it isn't an easy read at almost 1,000 pages long. Show Less
LibraryThing member stillatim
I read this last year over the summer holiday, and forgot to Goodreads review it! I'm very disappointed in myself. Anyway, it's as good as everyone says.
LibraryThing member merganser
This book attempts to draw a history of Europe during the postwar period from 1945 to 2005. It considers four main periods: post-war, 1945-1953; prosperity, 1953-1971; recession, 1971-1989; and after the fall of communism, 1989-2005.
I found it a fairly easy read and quite fascinating. I have a
Highly recommended.
I found it a fairly easy read and quite fascinating. I have a
Show More
general knowledge of this historical period and this book filled in a lot of gaps and provided a good overall context that I lacked. Born in 1958 I found it filled in a lot I didn't know and helped illuminate the period of time I've lived through. An example is the large migrations of people at the end of the war which helped to make most European countries more ethnically homogenous after the war. The author argues that Yugoslavia did not go through this process and this contributed to the Balkan wars during the 1990s.Highly recommended.
Show Less
LibraryThing member qaphsiel
If you ever wanted to understand today's Europe better, read this book. It is not a superficial history of postwar Western Europe, but covers all of Europe in some depth (as much as 900 pages will allow). Nor is it a simple political history, Judt covers cultural and social movements and changes as
But, beyond these things, the book is a joy to read. Judt is a wonderful writer with a sharp wit and deft wryness. Combined with his encyclopedic knowledge of European history, the resulting book is not one you will want to put down nor to end.
Show More
well.But, beyond these things, the book is a joy to read. Judt is a wonderful writer with a sharp wit and deft wryness. Combined with his encyclopedic knowledge of European history, the resulting book is not one you will want to put down nor to end.
Show Less
Awards
Pulitzer Prize (Finalist — General Non-Fiction — 2006)
LA Times Book Prize (Finalist — History — 2005)
Arthur Ross Book Award (Gold Medal — Gold Medal — 2006)
Baillie Gifford Prize for Non-Fiction (Shortlist — 2006)
European Book Prize (2008)
Mark Lynton History Prize (Finalist — 2006)
San Francisco Chronicle Best Book of the Year (Nonfiction — 2005)
Time Magazine's Best Books of the Year (Nonfiction — 2005)
Guardian 100 Greatest Non-Fiction (History)