Ten Days That Shook The World - Critical Response

Critical Response

Ten Days that Shook the World has received mixed responses since its publication in 1919, resulting in a wide range of critical reviews from negative to positive. However, the book was overall positively received by critics at the time of its first publication, despite some critics' vocal opposition to Reed's political beliefs.

George F. Kennan, an American diplomat and historian who had no love for Bolshevism and is best known as "the father of containment," praised the book: "Reed's account of the events of that time rises above every other contemporary record for its literary power, its penetration, its command of detail" and would be "remembered when all others are forgotten." Kennan saw it as "a reflection of blazing honesty and a purity of idealism that did unintended credit to the American society that produced him, the merits of which he himself understood so poorly." On March 1, 1999, The New York Times reported New York University's "Top 100 Works of Journalism" list, which placed Ten Days that Shook the World at #7. Project director Mitchell Stephens explains the reasoning behind the judges' decision:

Perhaps the most controversial work on our list is the seventh, John Reed's book, "Ten Days That Shook the World," reporting on the October revolution in Russia in 1917. Yes, as conservative critics have noted, Reed was a partisan. Yes, historians would do better. But this was probably the most consequential news story of the century, and Reed was there, and Reed could write. The magnitude of the event being reported on and the quality of the writing were other important standards in our considerations.

But not all responses were positive. Joseph Stalin argued in 1924 that Reed was misleading in regards to Leon Trotsky. The book portrays Trotsky (head of the Red Army) as a man who co-led the revolution with Lenin and mentions Stalin only twice—one of them being only in the recitation of a list of names, as both Lenin and Trotsky were internationally known, whereas the activities of other Bolshevik militants were virtually unknown. Russian writer Anatoly Rybakov elaborates on Stalinist Soviet Union's ban on Ten Days that Shook the World: "The main task was to build a mighty socialist state. For that, mighty power was needed. Stalin was at the head of that power, which mean that he stood at its source with Lenin. Together with Lenin he led the October Revolution. John Reed had presented the history of October differently. That wasn't the John Reed we needed." After Stalin's death, the book was allowed to recirculate.