Rating: 
Summary: Detailed yet never boring, well written
Review: I've rarely found an author who can take such a complex series of parallel stories and weave them together into a coherent whole. Her writing reminds me of Sir Winston Churchill's, both in 'History of the English Speaking People' and 'The Second World War'. Hers is a rare gift indeed.It's easy to look at the legacy of the Paris Peace Talks and proclaim them the result of arrogance and incompetence. But now I've read this book, I can see that at worst you can only blame Wilson for naivety and Lloyd George, Clemenceau, and Sonnino for trying to get reasonable reparations for their countries. None of them seemed to really understand the threat of emerging Russian Communism. The assertion that the failure of the four to support China's territorial integrity contributed to the establishment of a communist China is a new one to me, and very interesting. I love the detail in this book; the characters and interplay between the main four. I liked reading about the staid Balfour going to a riskee play, about the petitioners and the players behind the scenes. I particularly liked the descriptions of the interplay that arose when a country had multiple factions competing for legitimacy. That's the kind of insight you rarely get with history books. This is not a history book any more that Watership Down is a wildlife book. It's much deeper, yet so well written that it reads like a story - a complex story with multiple themes, but a well-written one. Thank you Ms. Macmillan - I wish I could afford to attend one of your history classes.
Rating:
Summary: The Political Basis of the Modern World
Review: Go out and get this book immediately and read it: it supplies the framework for the reconfiguration of Europe and the Far East that makes it possible to understand the alignments of the modern world and the problems we face. The wrangling and the greed of the greater and smaller powers in 1919 gives you an insight into the confusion that follows the end of a world war.
Rating:
Summary: Splendid, candid, and well written.
Review: Magaret Macmillan, writes a candid account of the Paris Peace accords which followed World War I. But she choose to do so in a less critical way then her fellow historians. She has a positive outlook on the deliberations, but makes it well known that many things were left unadressed, causing turmoil throughout the world. The current situation in the Middle-East, the Palistenean-Israeli conflict, and unfinished business in Yugoslovia in the late 1990's, can be accredited to the poor diplomacy of the post-World War I era. Her writing is coherent, well-organized, and well-researched, making it worth all five stars.
Rating:
Summary: a fascinating look behind the scenes
Review: This is a remarkably intereresting, well-written, and timely book about a critical period in recent history. Anyone interested in "how we got to where we are" in international politics would be well-advised to dig into this highly readable yet scholarly examination of the process and personalities that came together (or in some cases FAILED to come together) in Paris during that critical period. As David Lloyd George's great grand-daughter Macmillan is in an interesting position vis a vis some of the key players at Versailles, yet while she does not disguise her interest in (and knowledge of) the real people in the photographs we get strikingly balanced portraits of most everyone without the vinidictive tittle-tattle & sniping that has marred several other recent history texts. Macmillan is able to convey both the grand sweep of history and the very human foibles of her subjects in a way that keeps one turning the pages late into the night and coming away with a real sense of what happened, what could have happened & what we might learn from what Churchill referred to all too prophetically as "Not Peace, this is Armistice for 20 years". One can only wish that the enthusiasts for the latest New World Order would read this book and ponder the fallibility of even the best of intentions
Rating:
Summary: An overlooked historical event of importance
Review: This book has so many things going for it. Outside of giving a detailed account of the Paris Peace Conference in the summer of 1919, I learned a great deal about the history of a number of European countries, their relevance toward the war and the Peace Conference (raise your hand if you knew that Armenia had something to do with World War I), as well as many of the key players' personalities and conflicts that they had to reconcile not only within themselves, but for their countries. I was really taken aback by how many of the decisions by the Paris Peace Conference (ie. "The Big Three," after Japan and Italy were more or less muscled out, of the United States, Great Britain, and France) still resonate today. For example, the decision to move Israelis to Palestine (where there was supposedly, "more land than the Arabs could populate.") and how one diplomat characterized the move as a "great experiment." It is really incredible to think of the power the three heads of each country (Wilson, Lloyd George, and Clemenceau) had, not to mention the delicate and potentially dangerous risks they had to balance. Macmillan does a wonderul job of making potentially dull material interesting. She writes of how the French, eager to bury the Germans no matter what the cost, made sure that the Germans' train ride to Paris (through the heart of Europe and her WWI battlefields and shattered towns) was ridiculously slow in order to allow the Germans to see what "they" had done to Europe. In addition, the French made sure the Germans' signing of the Treaty of Versailles was indeed a most humiliating experience. An additional incentive to read this book is that I honestly learned more about the actual battles and goings on of World War I through this book than many other dryly written books on the war itself (see John Keegan's "The First World War"). We learn of many independent treaties signed between European countries prior to the war that not only played a part during choosing war alliances, but also in deciding what land should go to who and why after the war was over. There were two main problems among many other minor ones that weighed on "the Big Three": because Germany was never really "defeated" in World War I (they signed an armistice on November 11, 1918), what was the proper punishment? Should the Allied forces militarily go into Germany and bury the country to the point where they couldn't become a future threat, or should they impose incredibly harsh "peace" sanctions on Germany regarding war reparations, loss of land, and a significant loss of munitions. Obviously, The Big Three opted for the latter. The other problem The Big Three had was that it was hard to draw nation-state boundaries when natives, nationalities, and religions were so spread out throughout Europe. As a result, major European countries (Germany, for example) were forced to deal with minorities that could not be geographically placed, and the result often lead to anti-semitism, extreme nationalism, and death or oppression for many. The only difference I had with the book was in its conclusion. Macmillan's purpose is to show that the results and the mismanagement of the Peace Conference could not have led to World War II as some historians have claimed. To take on that thinking, Macmillan writes, would be to disregard every move from a diplomat, politician, ambassador, etc. etc. from 1919 to 1939. And while I agree with this assertion, I cannot agree entirely with her claim that had Germany been appeased by "The Big Three" and some of the more harsh penalties not been imposed on the Germans (such as war reparations), that Hitler still would have come to power and carried out his ideas for Germany. From all that I have learned about post-WWI Germany, Hitler's coming to power was a direct result of anger on behalf of the German people due to the harsh "peace" sanctions of the Treaty of Versailles. If you take away essentially what the Treaty of Versailles was attempting to do through its peace sanctions- if you appease Germany - I am led to believe that the German people would have been less inclined to provide a young, angry Adolf Hitler the political platform to stand on. The German people believed the Treaty to be incredibly unfair- and maybe it was - but if you take out the heart of what it was trying to do then, in my opinion, you take out the heart of Hitler's argument (and propaganda) he presented to the German people. Just an opinion..... A very well-written book whose subject, though nearly eighty-five years behind us, still holds shocking relevance today. While reading this book I often thought of the circumstances some historical figures are put in and the incredible ramifications of how one (or in this case, three) man's decisions can effect millions. I also thought of how different the Conference (indeed, the world) might look today had Teddy Roosevelt represented the United States instead of Woodrow Wilson. An interesting side-note that you may overlook (located in her bio) is that Macmillan is the great-grand daughter of Great Britain's Lloyd George.
Rating:
Summary: An extraordinary book about an extraordinary event
Review: For the last couple of weeks, since finishing "Paris 1919", I have grappled with writing a review that would do justice to a book that is not only excellent reading, but also has the potential to reshape the way a reader views current events. Rather than wait longer for the writing muse who refuses to appear, I will take the more direct approach and simply write, "Buy this book and read it. It will afford you a greater understanding of international events unfolding in the world today." Margaret Macmillan is an exceptional history writer: engaging, direct and interesting (sometimes even funny), but also a wide-ranging thinker who see and explains the vast sweep of history as well as the apparently minor ripples. She juggles the enormous cast of characters in the drama that unfolded in Paris, 1919 and explicate the myriad brought to the major players at the peace conference. Her knowledge of world history and her ability to explain it concisely are fully illustrated in her explanations of the various ethnic claims for land and self-rule individual; her ability to compare and contrast these claims is extraordinary. She quickly reduces the Big Five to the Big Four, as the Four themselves did when they eliminated the Japanese representative from most of the debate and negotiation - he could barely follow the mostly English conversation anyway. Her descriptions of the Big Four (who eventually operated, without Italy, as the three), though apparently honest and precise, are hardly flattering: *Wilson, preoccupied with his Fourteen Points and convinced that all would be well if the peoples of the world were allowed to practice self-determination (even though the definition varied depending upon the case and people)
*Lloyd George, determined to expand the British Empire at all costs, but who proved, ultimately, to be the mediator between Wilson and Clemenceu
*Clemenceu, torn between extracting vengeance on Germany (in the form of reparations and a land buffer) and expanding French holdings
*Orlando, whose overwrought, weeping behavior eventually embarrassed the other three and led them to exclude him from many major decisions, eliciting further weeping and an eventual walk-out (followed by a less-than-noble return) That these four thought they could accomplish the multi-pronged task they assigned themselves - to deal with the defeated Germany, to establish national boundaries that would help ensure future world peace and to establish an organization to help enforce that peace - now seems naïve. As Ms. Macmillan illustrates, the participants appear to believe they could accomplish their goals. However, as she also illustrates, time and again, as each the discussion on question reached a stalemate, the Four either delayed a final decision or deferred the question to a committee for further study. As a result, many decisions remained unresolved while others had less-than-satisfactory solutions. She neatly and convincingly debunks the theory that the financial burden placed on Germany as part of the war reparations was a major factor leading to Hitler's rise and WWII. Not only were the reparations significantly less than those Germany extracted from France after the 1870s Franco-Prussian War, but Germany never paid the WWI reparations and, indeed, indulged itself in such tactics as scuttling part of its navy rather than turn it over to Britain. On the other hand, she reinforces the argument that Germany did not feel compelled to accept terms of an agreement that were enforced rather than negotiated - and were determined to avenge the humiliation their representatives endured during the conference. This is an extremely interesting book and, as another reviewer has mentioned, a real page-turner. Read it. (Do note that Wilson's Fourteen Points are in an appendix at the back of the book. Ms. McMillan refers to them often and it is very helpful to have them close at hand.)
Rating: 
Summary: Solid Overview
Review: This well written book is an informative overview of the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 and its associated treaties. This is an immense subject. As the author points out, for the period of the Paris Peace Conference, the primary conferees were essentially a world government. WWI largely destroyed the pre-existing world order and the decisions of the Paris conference would be the foundation for subsequent international, regional, and national politics for much of the globe. Macmillan systematically covers the whole gamut of decisions made by the conferees. The terms of the settlement with Germany, the political boundaries of Eastern Europe, the structure of the Middle East, the disposition of German colonies, the formation of the League of Nations. This is a real virtue as many tend to associate the Paris conference solely with the Treaty of Versailles that dictated terms to Germany. Macmillan shows nicely the world wide scope of the decisions and how decisions at the conference proper led to the series of important treaties that were aimed at settling the crucial issues. These included, for example, the Trianon treaty that set the borders of Hungary and the Treaty of Sevres that attempted to dictate the borders of Turkey. Any of these individual topics can and have been the subjects of substantial monographs. David Fromkin, for example, dealt very well with Turkey and the Middle East in his book A Peace to End All Peace, which covers much of the same ground. The breadth of the Paris 1919 means precludes in depth examination of each important topic but Macmillan has done a very nice job of explaining and covering the key issues and decisions. An unavoidable drawback of the book is its organization. Topics are covered thematically rather than chronologically. This makes topical analysis much more concise but makes it difficult at times to see how issues related to each other. A strictly chronological approach, however, would probably be less informative and I feel Macmillan made the correct choice. Macmillan is particularly good on the personalities of the major decision makers, Wilson, Lloyd George, Clemenceau, and in revealing the political tensions they faced in resolving issues. Macmillan is also very good in showing the underlying contradictions of the Paris Peace Conference. Wilson in particular had made national-ethnic aspirations a central issue but putting this into practice proved insuperably difficult in many situations, such as Eastern Europe, and rubbed against national interests in many others. Macmillan also does well in connecting decisions in Paris to some of our contemporary problems, such as the disintegration of Yugoslavia. Finally, she treats the failings of the Paris conference, particularly with respect to Germany, in a clear and careful fashion. While not sparing the mistakes of the treaty makers, she undercuts the common notion that the Versailles treaty was a vigorously punitive measure that was responsible in large part for WWII. Following considerable modern scholarship, she presents the treaty as more moderate than thought commonly and suggests that Germany was treated too leniently in some ways.
Rating:
Summary: Historical Page Turner
Review: This book is pure magic! It is one of the few history books that one can not put down -- a true page turner. I highly recommend this book to anyone who would like to better understand our past and what our future might hold. Brilliant!
Rating:
Summary: This Book Deserves Every Award It's Won...
Review: So much has been written about the First World War, with comparatively little written about the "Peace" that ended it. This book fills that gap, and does it with beautiful, engaging writing. It's history writing at its very best.
Rating:
Summary: Impressive, Thorough, Encompassing
Review: Six months that changed the world, indeed. It is not often these days that a subtitle for a work of history that claims so much (and they often do) is actually accurate. Margaret Macmillan, in Paris 1919, backs up her subtitle completely in this brilliant work of history. The book examines the Paris Peace Conference in all its glory and all its infamy. Four, and sometime only three, men sat in a room and decided the future of the countries of the world and the fate of millions of people. It is both that simple and, equally, that complicated. This book brilliantly portrays these men but also, with just as much genius, many of the lesser officials who attended on behalf of either themselves or their (sometimes prospective) nations. So many sources are used, from either official documents to private letters, from so many countries that the book feels all-encompassing which is appropriate considering its vast topic, even, god bless the author, the little colony of Newfoundland finds space for a mention. This book will be the one to challenge in this new century concerning the peace conference as Keynes' was the one last century. A very impressive work and highly recommended.
|
