, Es intersante Es un abordaje eminentemente socioecon mico Para legos en la materia, como es mi caso, no es una lectura f cil No obstante hecha luz y desidealiza el caracter de esta revoluci n Pasar del regimen fudal y eminentemente aristocr tico a un regimen burgues y capitalista fue un avance muy importante aunque parcial en la evoluci n de la sociedad Los ideales que movilizaron este movimiemnto social libertad, igualdad, fraternidad , facticamente no fueron ni tan rom ticos ni tan ideales y tampoco fueron plasmados de un d a para el otro, de hecho no llegaron a plasmarse salvo parcialmente Interesante lectura. It took me ten months of consistent, grinding effort to read this book I found it to be one of difficult and time consuming books that I ve ever read My patience was not really rewarded.The only reason I read it is because I want to read everything about the French Revolution, and this book contains information that is simply too boring to appear elsewhere I learned all about the economy of prerevolutionary France and the various ways that the assignat and bread maximums did not work He is also the only historian I ve read yet that weights all parts of the Revolution so evenly that he gives equal time to the White Terror, which is usually overshadowed by the regular Terror.He also made it to page 525 before I found a mistake, which is some kind of record I feel that he misinterprets Napoleon s intentions towards England, but honestly, SFW 525 pages of closely reasoned single spaced nonstop dates and names, I don t mind if he misses a motivation.I have no idea how anyone expected to read this book before Wikipedia It was clearly meant for people who already knew everything in it I guess you were supposed to attack it with a biographical dictionary in one hand, either that or you were supposed to be a student in one of Soboul s classes If his intention is to impress me that he knows everything about the French Revolution, mission accomplished You were smart, Dr Soboul Congratulations.I, on the other hand, had to resort to the internet every third sentence, because he never explains who he s talking about or why He mentions Condorcet several times, but never tells you why he thinks he was important until exactly four pages from the end I cannot imagine that many Americans besides myself ever made it to four pages from the end, so it was sort of a waste to ship the book all the way over here from Mr Condorcet s point of view There is just no good reason to write text this dense As I said, I read it because I was desperate for the information and determined Nobody else is even interested in the French Revolution at all I honestly can t imagine why anyone would pick this book up It s a total failure as an introductory source, because he simply assumes that you know the subject perfectly It should be read after reading twenty or thirty other books, when you are so curious about the details of Babeuf s Conspiracy of Equals that you just can t wait any.His economics are intriguing I am no economist, but I must admit that I never found Necker s portion of the story clearer than here Soboul also really liked that dashing young sociopath Saint Just, who is basically portrayed as Luke to Robespierre s Ben Revolutionary fervor is oddly forgivable to Soboul, who is rather harshly disposed to writing off huge segments of the French population, and not the ones you d think Of all the historians I ve read, he s the one with the most pragmatic psychopathic view of the Terror, and discusses its effectiveness and efficiency with the calm precision of a Mafia boss It was at this time, and when reading his barely concealed panegyrics for Babeuf, that I was most uncomfortably aware that Soboul had a very militant view of life and social warfare.I can t say whether it was his prejudices or mine, but I must admit that for the first time in my studies of the French Revolution, while reading about the jeunesse dor e and the White Terror, I was moved to get a rifle and a time machine and put some holes in some ancient fools Wow were those guys jerks.They say this guy pioneered social history, or history from below, and I don t know if that s true or not It does seem to me that this is a modern history written in an old fashioned style, so perhaps that is true.He also switches back and forth between regular dates like January and April and revolutionary dates like Thermidor and Nivose completely at random, which is FUCKING OBNOXIOUS HERE IS A HINT FOR ENGLISH WRITERS ON THE FRENCH REVOLUTION you are already translating Septembre into September, so go a fucking head and translate Fructidor into September too For the sake of fuck, it is so annoying. The France of the old regime was divided into estates or classes By the onset of the French Revolution there developed classes within the third estate Intraclass dynamics within the third estate determined the fate of the country Claude Manceron s history of the final years leading up to French Revolution devotes much of the narrative to individual lives of many members of the third estate who aspired to nobility or feigned noble status It is inconceivable that a substantial history of the revolution would not examine the successive stages and ultimate outcome of the revolution as based on class, with the winning class being the bourgeoisie and precisely how they prevailed France would not shake loose hereditary dynastic nobility as a basis for the legitimacy of political power until nearly a century after the revolution because of this bourgeios victory. A massive but uninspired treatment of the French Revolution a 20th century Marxist interpretation owing to the Comintern than to the Constituent Assembly.In his 1973 preface, Soboul laments the revisionists vain attempts to deny the French Revolution that dangerous precedent its historical reality and its specific social and national character, and thus, apparently, their denial of the way it still echoes in the mind of men, an event to inspire and stir the spirit Flagwaving is a poor substitute for probing questions or, say, footnotes. Sobul s book is an extremely detailed read, with only a few flaws Firstly it completely covers the entire revolutionary period, from aristocratic revolt in the 1780s, to the storming of the Bastille in 1789, the journees of 1792 and 1793, The Terror, Thermidor, and Napoleon, its all there in detail Sobul s analysis is on bases on class warfare, and he very aptly traces how this class conflict developed over the time period The skill with which he does this is very impressive and brings a nice perspective to the revolution, and perhaps importantly can lead to an understanding of the revolutionary movements of today.The book does have some flaws Sobul s writing can be quite a bit dry, he doesn t capture the emotion and power of the revolutionary spirit, which you would expect to find in a book about the Fr Revolution You understand full well why the Parisians were out in the streets, but at times the connection is lost In fact in many points reading the book I felt as if Sobul wasn t conveying a real reason to care about what was happening, just explaining it this is a shame and in fact I don t think was his intention, his conclusion to the book ends with how the revolutionary spirit lives on to this day but I feel almost like he failed in his task of expressing that Its clear that he expects his reader to have some knowledge of the revolution already, so I would never ever consider recommending it to someone who knew nothing about it The pace moves a bit too quick in some spots and you feel as if you must have missed something quite frequently Alot of that stems from the fact the book is short, covering a decade of history in 500 pages is impressive but its clear that he had to rush some points Of course those points that I felt rushed through were most likely the points I knew nothing about I m far from an expert on the topic and that I think is the real nature of this book its an amazing reference book, one that I can see myself flipping through for years to come to track down facts and info from All in all I highly recommend it, the analysis is amazing, and being able to read about the whole revolution in 1 narrative and 1 volume straight through is a real joy Just so long as you have your basics down already you ll get alot of mileage out of this book. First of all, you have to know that this is a very thorough work on the French revolution but it is written from a marxist point of view I didn t know this before I started reading it It doesn t mean that it s not punctual or it distorts history, but it interprets it differently, and also it writes down certain groups or events with marxist terminologies such as class, bourgeoisie, class warfare, class interests etc It s rather materialistic An interesting grab on the revolution s history though I highly recommend it because from it you may see nowadays events differently. Albert Soboul, Frans z devrimini klasik Marksizm er evesinden de erlendiren bir tarih sunmu Alan n klasiklerinden Frans z Devrimi ne ili kin Marksist tarih vs Revizyonist tarih tart mas n n merkezindeki metinlerden biri Kitab n yazar Nazi i gali alt ndaki Fransa daki direni e destek oldu u i in niversitedeki g revinden uzakla t r lm , tescilli bir sosyalist.Yazar n geldi i gelenekten kaynakl olarak olduk a ak c , anla l r bir giri metni S n flar aras ndaki m cadeleyi, Jakobenleri, y k lmaya mahkum eli kili ideolojilerini, Termidor kar devrimini, burjuva iktidar n kurulu unu ve Napolyon un ad m ad m geli ini g zel aktarm Marx n da d nsel dayanaklar ndan biri olan Frans z Sosyalizmi nin k kenlerini hep merak ederdim Kitapta Babeuf ve arkada lar n n kom nist devrim giri imini ve ba ar s z olmalar n n ard ndan idam edili lerini anlatt b l mler ayr ca ilgin ve co ku vericiydi erik a s ndan yanl lar n do rular n ele tirebilecek bir bilgi birikimine sahip de ilim Ancak bi imsel olarak kronolojiye ok fazla yasland n ve fazlas yla meclis ve h k met odakl bir tarihsel anlat m sundu unu g zlemledim Frans z Devrimi ndeki ideolojik m cadele alan n da ba ka al malar okuyarak doldurmak gerekiyor, nk kitapta pek yok.