I’ll confess here and now that it is somewhat tempting, after having read a book of this scale, complexity, and emotion, to try and write a review that in some way reflects those aspects of the book. In a way I want to do it justice. I want to pass on a feeling inside that I rarely feel after having read a book, that this is a work that will have a big affect when read by the nation for whom I think it was intended.
Doing it justice is clearly something of a tall order. However, in a few words I simply have not previously come across a book that you feel, from the moment you first hold it in your hands and flick through it, that it is such a thorough, incisive, ground-breaking and - perhaps in a departure from other biographies - passionate expose of one man’s affect on a nation, in its most momentous and turbulent period of history. For a nation of China’s size, and history, this is some feat. And it’s carried off with aplomb, for it is one of the greatest biographical works I have had the pleasure to read.
The scale is what takes you back most about the book. Chung and Halliday have spent over a decade researching and writing it. Interviewing more people who knew Mao than any other biography to date. Accessing Soviet records that simply weren’t available until recently. Delving into previously widely accepted assumptions and using those most important of historical devices: the critical assessment of sources, and the combination of evidence to reconstruct the events as they happened.
The authors have been criticised publicly on a number of matters. Firstly, that it is overly passionate, and critical of Mao. Like many others, I dispute that. I think a biography is all the better - and more accessible - for being passionate, so long as it follows form and gives references and validates and cross-references them when reinforcing points. Whilst that’s not possible in some cases, due to the fear of repercussions in China, over 130 pages of references and interviewee notes is no mean feat.
There are accusations too that the picture painted is so different from anything else that has been published before, that it is therefore somehow wrong. The cross-referencing aside, it’s hard to dispute the theme they paint of “Mao’s quest for power, by any means” that permeates the story. They have found the core essence of Mao’s character, then proven it in their extensive references. The picture is compelling, and it is - by direct implication - extremely, destructively, critical of many previous works and histories which merely seem to have followed the official Communist version. The most famous example is their dispensing of the Datu chain bridge myth, as well as Mao’s role - he was largely carried - in the Long March.
There are allegations that Chung is somehow unfamiliar with the history of China. Some people have been vocally very impassioned, but I fear unwittingly naive in that regard due in part to the education system through which they have passed. They seem unaware of her personal history, as laid out in her other work - Wild Swans.
In media interviews, Chung is frequently asked for Mao’s positive points. To date, I’m aware she has cited just one: his love of books. Before pointing out it was a love he denied the people he ruled. Special editions of books, sometimes barely a handful, were published especially for Mao. It’s the sort of attitude of the rulers in communism that Orwell derided in Animal farm, but Mao seemingly paid just lip-service to Communist ideals, favouring outright brutality and violence to exert control.
Even today, Mao is heralded as a saviour of China. Reading this book, bias of Chung/Halliday aside, it’s easy to see both how Mao forged that image, but also ruthlessly ensured those left in his wake were indebted to him and dare not touch it, even some thirty years after his death.
Whilst the book is better for being passionate, it is not an easy read. No book that portrays the millions of deaths (at least 70 million) - through misguided and arrogant policies seeking to “industrialise” China during the “Great Leap” - can be easy to read. At times, the mental picture I built up as I read - certainly after Mao became the leader of China - felt more like a novel, complete with a mental plea for some hero figure to step in and save people from the desperate situation they found themselves in. But no such figure exists, and the book is all the more desperately sad as a result. Even figures within the party, loyal to Mao, find themselves on the receiving end of vicious treatment they themselves were often responsible for creating.
I’m yet to visit China (my parents have just returned from their second visit, and loved it immensely), but whilst I feel I have attained a better knowledge of China now than I ever had before, I’m worried by the continued existence of the communist party. Despite embracing elements capitalism to the benefit of many of the Chinese people, it is still a society that - from what I can gather - still represses many of its people, who are unable to speak out or voice their opinions. It is also - by the postings I’ve seen elsewhere - one that is yet to shake off the shackles left by Mao.
Most notably, discussion of the book to fall passionately one side of the fence or the other. Rarely is it just “this is an interesting book”! A browse about the Amazon’s customer reviews of the book illustrates that effectively. Chung is either doing Mao - and therefore China - a disservice, or it is the most incisive work ever. It’s clear which side I fall on, but as Roger Darlington points out in this interesting discussion it is striking how few outright vocal critics appear to have actually read the book (or seem capable of critical thought, and acceptance of criticism).
My view is that no person, no matter how great they are felt to be, is worthy of idolatry. To take that further, one of the best indicators of a society’s freedom is its ability - in any situation - to criticise, and tolerate criticism of, it’s leaders. Take note of how the USA treated any criticism of its policies in the wake of September 11th, and prior to the invasion of Iraq. To denounce people because of their opinions is to fail one of the basic tenants of democracy: Respect of other people’s opinion.
Mao’s portrait still hangs on Tiananmen square. His fingers still reach into Chinese society today. Public criticism of Mao isn’t possible, as demonstrated by the fact that the book, and Wild Swans, is banned in China. However, such a powerful work as this will surely find its way in. It’s not the only work by any means, but it paints a compelling alternative that deserves wider attention, if only for the debate it provokes. Perhaps then it will help bring China to better understand Mao’s true role in their history, and help to turn this fascinating country into a truly open and democratic society that is then able to take its full and rightful place in the world.
Entries (RSS)
July 29th, 2005 at 1:06 am
a book full of lies which has cheated 10,000,000 readers.if this shamful women is history,there are 1,300,000,000 different history of china.if anyone want to know truth about Mao,go to China
and ask any people except this woman.
July 29th, 2005 at 1:53 am
My daughter’s practice in writing opposing views not only has improved her critical thinking skills, but the relationship between she and me.
Six years ago when she arrived at Toronto as a Grade 9 student, she was fully brainwashed by the China’s mainstream efforts. I was shocked by her indoctrinated views on the rich (i.e. smart and industrious) and the poor ( i.e. dumb and lazy). She also thought Deng Xiaoping and American capitalism were great. Whereas, Mao was a guy so mean and harmful to China, virtually a living copy of our internet fellows Raj. and Elder Sister Jiang, who amusingly complained the China ruling elite has thoroughly brainwashed the Chinese people in pro-Mao fashion.
When a prominent U.K. medium boldly claimed Chang’s book would fundamentally change the whole views on Mao in the world, it seemed so ignorant at the fact of millions, millions young Chinese like my daughter had been changed long time ago, thanks to the anti-Mao Chinese mainstream propagandas in 30 years. Or its definition of “the world” simply excludes China. Or it really means before Chang’s book coming out, the western world always took Mao as a great hero in the past 30 years! (Which one is true, can Joann kindly tells me?)
The deep gap has been gradually reduced only after she knew how to analyse and judge the issues with the different views. And she got excited whenever in her school (now in university) she had learned some fresh viewpoints similar with the previously unacceptable arguments from me that directly conflict to those she was fully loaded in China. Obviously, the Canadian educational system not utterly dominated and spoiled by the “Raj. And Elder Sister Jiang” type persons yet. Therefore, my daughter has a pretty chance to learn how to judge the past and future world more objectively.
I have acquired same invaluable skill through my own experience of self-conversion from a capitalist into a New-Maoist. I guess, among the Chinese intellectuals, only those who are willing to perceive the world in different ways would be able to switch their original standing driven by the naked truths and reality.
For the same token, Raj. and Elder Sister Jiang sound not strange to me at all. They are just repeating what I was used to think and talk 15 years ago. Sadly, I have several friends quite prominent in the Chinese academy still think the way they used to think 20 years ago. The great sufferings of the Chinese ordinary people because the Chinese ruling elite have betrayed and broken away with genuine Communism and Maoism never made these professors re-exam their previously rosy picture of modernizing China resulting in a cruel reality that only benefits a handful “New Bourgeoisie in the Party” Mao was worried so much during his latest days.
Joann, for sure the west isn’t completely ignorant. As a matter of fact, I have the solid evidence of some prominent western professors and historians are firmly standing up with us. But the majority of western massive media’s captives do think the way the manipulators want them to think. They have been fooled so long, so much and become so foolish that they even don’t know nowadays the Chinese regime regards the real Maoist as their most dangerous enemy with the ruthlessly persecution. Ironically, the western media which by its nature are so interested in publicizing any persecution by the regime never provide their audiences with a single piece of the news cover in this aspect.
When you said the western media only care about money, I have to admit: yes, it is about money, but in a very peculiar way just as the big tobacco corporations do. They constantly apply the certain flavour into its well designed products and services. The indispensable anti-Mao sentiment is a good example to add the nicotine to effectively trap vast smokers into their life timing royalty. Therefore, any taste of saying Mao is a good guy will be repulsively not sellable.
That is the whole meaning of my previous description that the western media “constantly cultivate the indoctrinated mind so they can stay capable of convincing the free world readership” forever!
That is why all the big and reputable western media have fanfared so hysterically to Jung Chang’s book on Mao without solid ground, meanwhile 90% of BBC’s Chinese audiences’ angry voices against Chang’s book at BBC’s Chinese version website are totally ignored! And surprisingly, including BBC, so far none of the western media have carried on these up-to-date crucial messages and responses from the Chinese all over the world towards their main-stream audiences and readers for a possibly worthwhile second thought.
What’s a shame of such an ugly nudity of the media covering and conception relating to Chang’s so-called “A great works”!
August 28th, 2005 at 12:23 am
Don’t mind this guy - he’s a troll that hits all the blogs with the same post on Jung’s new book.
Personally I think it’s worth reading!
March 3rd, 2007 at 4:35 pm
All lies across the book. A shameful woman with a shameful book. “Truth” claimed by this disgusting woman can only cheat western people.
August 14th, 2007 at 8:37 pm
I believe this book is mostly true. the story in this book are real.
The stories told in the book are consistent with my experience in China. Some of things I have experienced first hand. I myself had to report on my classmates, neighbor,…ect.
Mao is indeed as cruel as described in the book.
many people in china are scared to tell the truth. And in China there are plenty of people who are willing to lie for the communist out of selfishness.
Even today Mao remained a taboo.
I grew up in China. Even at a young age children were required to study politics. It is not really politics, it is purely communist propaganda. The communist has lied to people from the very beginning. they change their lies based on what they can lie about.
If you can get a chance to read the newspaper(people’s daily) in china from 50’s 60’s and 70’s, 80’s. You will see that the Communist kept on changing their story, their lies.
November 28th, 2007 at 7:47 am
Chang and Halliday’s Mao, Unknown Story is good, but it is not good as The Private Life of Chairman Mao by Dr. Zhisui Li
Chang and Halliday’s Mao, Unknown Story provided a brand new version and perspective of Chairman Mao. It is the first time to portray Chairman Mao as a bloody mass-murderer. In their book, Chairman Mao was a large-scale murderer during a Chinese peace era. Nearly 80 million people were dead by his Utopian idealism: that was an unbelievable number. It is four times the number of deaths of the Soviets in the war between the Soviet Union and Germany. He used drastic violence to suppress people who he believed stood in his way for industrializing China. He ignored the death of 30 million people during the starvation period of the Great Famine, which was caused by his foolish “Great Leap Forward” for overtaking the British and catching up to the Americans. After the Great Famine, his lunatic behavior reached new heights. He launched the culture revolution, which was completely insane. He became a maniac. Under his direction, the violence was propelled to its bloodiest high tide. The horror broke historic records. Elementary school students unbelievably beat their teachers to death. The death toll was continuing to pile up until the day he died. From Mao, Unknown Story, the figure of Chairman Mao was drawn as a vicious monster and mass-murderer.
No wonder, horrible bloody killings described in Mao, Unknown Story truly happened in China from 1949, when Chairman Mao took over China, to 1976 when Chairman Mao died. Chairman Mao did everything so lunatic, and insane. From the catastrophe which he brought to China, he deserves to be considered a bloodthirsty monster and a bloody mass murderer. Overall, the book is good and correct.
Even though the book is good and correct, it cannot compare with Dr. Zhisui Li’s The Private Life of Chairman Mao in deeply and lively describing of Chairman Mao. No less than Dr. Andrew Nathan pointed out, all of biographic writers have a limitation in deeply and lively describing their objects. Because they have never served their objects, they have no chance to observe them closely. Also they have done a lot of research, but the inherent defect is that they don’t really know their objects’ personality and psychology. They don’t know their objects’ courtyard operations; their objects’ retainers, and the relationship between their objects, their objects’ retainers and the government officials.
Dr. Zhisui Li’s The Private Life of Chairman Mao did not portray Chairman Mao as a bloodthirsty monster and a bloody mass murderer; instead of that, it focused on details of Chairman Mao’s personality, psychology and his courtyard operation. Owing to Dr. Zhisui Li’s position, it made him as so called: inside man. He could know a lot of Chairman Mao’s important information that an outsider could not know. Even Chairman Mao’s former public health minister told Dr. Li to come see him anytime if Dr. Li wanted to tell him about any of Chairman Mao’s activities. In the same way, Chairman Mao’s former chief commanding officer of guards also was available to Dr. Li with no appointment.
The deepest impression for me about Dr. Li’s book is the Chairman Mao’s courtyard and his retainers. Chairman Mao’s medical doctor, chief commanding officer of guards and secretaries comprised his retainers. They were called “Group One”. Chairman Mao’s retainers formed a powerful and vicious retainer circle. Their power was even above party officials. The party officials were not servants of people. Instead they were servants of Chairman Mao. They cared for Chairman Mao’s retainers a lot of more than they cared for people. The gossip of those retainers could cause party officials a serious trouble. People were powerless and ignored. The party officials entertained Chairman Mao’s retainers with the best Chinese whiskey and the best Chinese cuisine while the Chinese commoners had a little of meat to eat. During the starvation period of the Great Famine, Chairman Mao even stopped eating meat. But his retainers flaunted the banner of celebrating Chairman Mao’s birthday, and required the local party officials to hold a grand dinner party for them. The dinner fulfilled the best Chinese cuisine, seafood, and the best Chinese whiskey, wine, beer. The party was in the name of celebrating Chairman Mao’s birthday, but Chairman Mao didn’t even attend. Dr. Li found it very hard to swallow that tasty food. However his colleague exhorted Dr. Li, saying that unless he wanted to leave “Group One”, he had better wallow in the mire with them. Some party officials even colluded with some of Mao’s retainers making a fraud deal in secret. The fraud deal deceived party treasurers by saying that Chairman Mao ate more than one thousand chickens in three, four days. Actually, the party officials took chickens for their own meals. Chairman Mao even had never known it until he was dead.
The factions in Chairman Mao’s retainers circle were stricken by each other fiercely. Opponents attempted to topple their counter part desperately. A vicious atmosphere permeated daily life. Nobody felt safe. Chairman Mao’s wife was frequently involved in the factions’ conflicts. In this vicious atmosphere, even Chairman Mao himself suspected somebody of crawling on his bedroom roof at midnight. He did not trust any of his retainers. He even suspected that the swimming pool in his palace was poisoned.
Dr. Li’s dream to be a great neural surgeon became a surviving nightmare. Although Dr. Li wanted to avoid touching this vicious politics, he could not stay out from it. For survival he was forced to stay with one faction. Later, the factions’ grappling escalated to a cross line battle between the retainer circle and party officials, and eventually led to a palace coup after Chairman Mao was dead. Chairman Mao’s wife and her three colleagues were arrested. However, Dr. Li survived successfully.
I feel that Dr. Li portrayed the figure of Chairman Mao and his courtyard operation more close to the true Chinese history, what was really happened in China from 1949 to 1976. Compared to Dr. Li’s book, Chang and Halliday’s Mao, Unknown Story seems pale.