Mao: A Life

Rating:
Summary: Another Dream gone bad
Review: I have always been put off by Chinses history and never found it appealing in comparison with other history. But this book is a good introduction to Chinese history from 1920 to 1976, and subsequent thereto. I thought the early parts kind of a chore to read, but was very glad I kept on and the coverage for the years since 1945 was infomative and full of interest. The author spends no time considering views of Mao from outside China (except from Russia), and such I thought would have been of interest. For instance, the people who are considered so carefully in Barbara Tuchman's Stilwell and the American Experience in China (read by me with considerable appreciation in September of 1972) figure not at all in this account. What a blessing Mao's death was for China: as great as Stalin's was for Russia and maybe as great as Hitler's was for the world. The book lacks footnotes, tho there are source notes for the pages. I was dismayed to see no bibliography: I presume the author figured one could deduce such from the source notes, but I sure would have liked to see a bibliography. There are two maps, but neither shows the town where Mao was born. I think maps in a book should show every city or town mentioned in the book, if possible. But these are minor complaints and I recommend the book to those who want to read a well-written and carefully researched life of a major figure of the 20th century.

Rating:
Summary: Finally! A decent biography of Chairman Mao.
Review: I thought this was an excellent book. Short obviously tirelessly researched Mao's pre-power life. The pre-1949 pages (most of the book) were superb.

Sadly, it gets a little sparse after that, but isn't it mostly the early part of Mao's life that we knew less about?

The thing that really made this bood five stars, in my mind, was its objectivity. Short stays on track without any rambling anti-Mao essays. This is really good, considering that many of the Mao biographies would be better titled "The Big Book of Pro-American Propaganda" and have little usefull information about Mao himself.

Overall a great book, easy to read, great writing, AND there are interesting features like the "cast of charachters" page that gives a brief political description of many of the major players in the book. No, its not so much about China as it is about Mao, as one reviewer complained about, but if it says its about Mao than it should be right?

Rating:
Summary: Balanced Bio
Review: I was surprised to find this to be the best English-language biography of Mao since Ross Terrill's. Jonathan Spence's view of Mao seems to me too politically correct, despite his credential as a distinguished sinologist.

Short is a BBC journalist with no special background in Chinese history. (I also gather from his "Acknowledgements" that he doesn't read Chinese either - his wife, who is his assistant, does.) Ironically, this intellectual detachment may have helped. I think Short's opinions of Mao are just right - neither laudatory nor overcritical.

Mao may have been a great criminal as well as a great man. Of the three great tyrants of the 20th century - Hitler, Stalin, Mao - Mao was probably the least destructive. Mao's rule caused more deaths than Hitler's and Stalin's combined. But this must be qualified by two facts: First, Mao's greatest number of casualties came from his famine, which, unlike Stalin's, was mostly unintentional - the result of his stupidity about agricultural methods. Stalin's was half-deliberate, aggressively enforced by the OGPU. Mao's famine upset him, while Stalin didn't mind his. (Hitler couldn't care less about casualties in war - German or foreign - and before he died he only regretted he hadn't killed MORE Jews, Russians, etc.) Also, Mao's toll is relatively small as a percentage of China's huge population, while Hitler's and Stalin's deaths made up a big chunk of theirs.

Conversely, of the great statesmen of the 20th century, Mao was the least likeable and probably the most ruthless. At the same time, compared with other Chinese emperors in history, Mao was neither the worst (though he often said he wished he were) nor anywhere near the best. He was well above average in achievements - but definitely near the top of the list in power. Mao was undoubtedly one of the most influential revolutionaries of all time, anywhere. He was also one of history's greatest military thinkers and commanders.

As with Napoleon, there will be no end to arguments for and against Mao, and Short makes it clear he shares this view in his final words. This seems to me a sensible and objective attitude. (Short does point out Mao's artistic and literary talents, which were undeniable.) I recommed this book to anyone who wants to know why Mao is still admired - if not worshipped - by two-thirds of Chinese today (again rather like Bonaparte is still France's national hero).....

Rating:
Summary: A Solid Biography Of One Of The Greatest Men Of Our Time
Review: I would say that this is probobly the best biography of comrade Mao currently in print.It is very easy to read,despite its length.However,I would say that after 1949,the author loses much of his objectivity.He did not focous on all the great things that Mao did for China.He told many lies in the last few hundred pages.For a better understanding of Mao,I would suggest checking out the Revolutionary Communist Party.

Rating:
Summary: Strong on Detail
Review: It is strange that in the West, of the most powerful totalitarians of the last century -- Hitler, Stalin, and to some extent even lesser figures like Peron, Mussolini, and Franco -- we know the least about the man who ruled the most people for the longest time. Short's book more than fills the gap.

This ample biography offers every detail about Mao Zedong's life -- his childhood, political evolution, rise to power, and prowess as a guerilla. Short also satisfactorily explains the evolution of Mao's peculiar and extreme brand of communism.

While the book is a bit dry, it is thorough, and would be enjoyed by any fan of history or political biography.

Rating:
Summary: Unbalanced but realistic, informative, and insightful
Review: Philip Short draws a realistic picture of Mao Zedong; he strips away much mystery surrounding Mao and leaves a simple austere portrait of a complex man. Today, Mao tends to be either lionized or demonized but Short avoids sensationalism and sticks to presenting us with information, insights, and informed opinion.

The chapters on Mao's childhood and youth are particularly interesting. Short shows us how a well-to-do peasant with one or two farm hands lived at the end of the 19th century, and how an eldest son (Mao) was expected to behave. He shows us what a large Chinese town looked like at the turn of the 19th/20th century and how a young man would have felt seeing it for the first time. Short forces us to remember the obvious: at 14 years old, Mao was a boy, albeit a bright one.

A good example of the insights Short gives us can be found in his treatment of Mao's schooling. Mao was taught to read, write, and think in a traditional Confucian village school. The loud and mindless rote repetition methods worked, but they impress neither the author nor the reader. The insight we get from Short's presentation is that youths who in the 1960s memorized Mao's Little Red Book were following the same pedagogy, substituting Mao for Confucius, and youth groups for village schools.

As an example of realism, Short deflates some of the sex scandals around Mao. Yes, Mao enjoyed the company of young women, but these were enthusiastic communist girls, more like rock groupies than members of an imperial harem.

Where the book loses its balance is that not enough is made of Mao's real failures, both as a leader and as a human being. Short faces these failures square on, but late and he does not give them nearly enough emphasis. Short's evaluation of Mao as being not as bad as Hitler or Stalin fails to convince us, perhaps because the effect Mao had on China was as bad as Stalin's on Russia: millions of dead and a crippled economy that could not sustain the population.

Rating:
Summary: Determination, stubborness, fate...
Review: Philip Short's 'Mao: A Life' is an amazingly researched biography. Short enlightens the reader on a large portion of Chinese history. Great detail is given to the most important periods of Chairman Mao's life. The revolution of the Red Army through the awful mistakes made as a leader of the most populous nation ever were written in a way to keep you interested.

I recommend this title for those interested in: Chinese history, Socialism, Soviet history, Mao as a commander and leader, and those that are infatuated with history in general.

Rating:
Summary: Determination, stubborness, fate...
Review: Philip Short's 'Mao: A Life' is an amazingly researched biography. Short enlightens the reader on a large portion of Chinese history. Great detail is given to the most important periods of Chairman Mao's life. The revolution of the Red Army through the awful mistakes made as a leader of the most populous nation ever were written in a way to keep you interested.

I recommend this title for those interested in: Chinese history, Socialism, Soviet history, Mao as a commander and leader, and those that are infatuated with history in general.

Rating:
Summary: This Mao, bu yao cos' bu hao!
Review: Sorry, but I couldn't make it through this one. A shame because the book began with such promise. Alas, I got bogged down by the somewhat turgid and unimaginative prose which Short utilizes to kick the shins of the hapless reader with. The book also suffers from an interesting method of making attributions, and the quirky and somewhat erratic use of old and new-style romanization. Short says that he chose to use the old, Wade-Giles I suppose, romanization where the close association of the old name to the subject renders the name otherwise unintelligible. Thus, it took me a double take to recognize Short's 'GMD' as the 'KMT' or KuoMinTang. It also causes one's teeth to gnash when a paragraph contains different names transcribed in both romanization standards.
I feel that the author wished to make us to figuratively live the Long March and could think of no better way than to drone on and on around a central theme as a bee would buzz around a flower when it is unsure whether to land and take its pollen until we have quite forgotten what central point was being made. In fact, when people ask I always admit to having survived it, the march I mean. It would be absurd to claim to anyone who's picked it up that I had finished the book. Here's why it is so bad: If this is meant to be a scholarly treatise, this book should have been heavily footnoted and accompanied by an extensive and traditional bibliography. If this book is meant to be popular history then it should be written in a lively manner that makes its point with grace, charm and wit and none of the hemming and hawing that Short seems to get caught up in.

Rating:
Summary: In depth, but not too in depth, basic, but not too basic
Review: This extremely researched chronicle teaches you everything you would want to know about Mao. But theres more to it than that. What this book tells you from the very beginning on the inside flaps of the hardcover addition, is that Mao is the father of modern China. Many Chinese in America act as though Sun Yatsen or Chiang Kaishek of the Guomindang was the father of modern China but are lying to prevent hostility. What this book also mentions is that Mao was responsible for cultural change for the better: women were out of the homes and into public life such as in medicine, politics, and society. But this is not a pro-Mao book. I wouldn't speak highly of it if it was. Mao was responsible - as this book mentions - for the deaths of millions more people than any other person in human history.
My favorite part of the book is the conclusion. It explains how Mao is viewed in china today.
Read this book if you like history.