A good snapshot of the mood during 1989 and how events in the four featured countries were connected. Also, thoughtful insights as to how to view this book, especially this edition, which is re-printed many years later. Ash's theory as to what, if any, learnings are to come out of how each government went about their transformation is especially relevant given the status of those same governments today. Not always the easiest read, nor the best on the subject, but a good companion for further investigations.

It was a very informative book, especially considering the author could write it from the point of view that he did. The only major downside, which I will point out is a downside on my part and not his, is that I sometimes would get a little confused when he mentioned too many foreign names.
Nonetheless, it was an excellently written book.

Eberhart - 1

Before the Fall:


A critical analysis of The Magic Lantern a book by Timothy Garton Ash


By: David C. Eberhart II

The Magic Lantern is a based on the events leading up to the fall of the soviet empire as

experienced from a first hand point of view. The title of the book is taken from a theater in Prague

called "the magic Lantern". This was where the reformers and revolutionaries came together to rid

themselves of the communist regime and to start anew. This is a common theme in this book. That

theme being one n which the reformers and the revolutionists work together with the communists of

old to recreate the old soviet satellite countries. According to Ash this "refolution" (p.14) worked

very well since the powers that be wanted to reform the system from above and the lay people wanted

to reform the system from below. As such changes of power were expected and reform was

implemented. However in each case; Hungary, Prague, Warsaw, and East Germany the unexpected

often cropped up. But the people and the communists worked together to over come these issues. In

effect this refolution and compromise brought about the end of the communist empire and ushered in

a new dawn of free market capitalism.

The book is divided into seven easily read chapters. But the meat and potatoes of the book is

written in the four chapters devoted to the Eastern European states held by the dominant soviet

oppressors. The language is often harsh but one must realize that this book was written shortly after

the communists were removed from power. The old hatreds are still fresh and this hatred is subtly

woven into the chapters. This is done by blaming the communists for most of the problems with the

economy, the stifling of innovation, and the backwardness of these areas. The most obvious of these

references is in the chapter on Berlin. Wall sickness (P. 65) was the name given to the general

malaise of the east Berliners. The fact that they were walled in depressed them and reduced the

Eberhart - 2

people to shadows. Once the wall is removed the people are instantly transformed into glorious

people.

The transformation of an oppressed and tired people into a glorious and productive people is

another common thread in the book. As if by magic the problems of the people disappear when the

communists are no longer in power. This is an odd facet of the book. Since the book also states that

the communists were always in power, even when they were not officially in power. The people may

have voted the communists out but the communists often controlled the military, the police, and the

economy. As such the reformers, the revolutionaries, and the communist party had to swallow their

pride, make compromises, and work together.


It was the right time to do this. Communist Russia was falling apart. Relations between Russia

and the U.S.A. had grown friendly and the Russians could not afford to toe the hard line between it's

satellite nations and mother Russia. So dialogue and compromise was often used to smooth the way

between the satellites and Russia. But this meant that Russia gave up it's last ace in the whole. That

being the truth. Instead of covering up and hiding the truth, the communists came clean. This mean

that when the communists lost the first free election in Warsaw they did not try and cover it up.

Instead they admitted defeat, validated the new government, and tried to work things out to the best

of everyone's ability. This might not seam so shocking today but in the later part of the 1980's any

compromise with the Communists was unthinkable. Especially when it was the Communists who

helped make the first moves towards openness.

To complicate matters as Russia and the Soviet Empire was evolving China was on the offensive.

When student demonstrators protested the Communists in Tiananmen Square the Chinese

Communist Party reacted with violence. Tanks, tear gas, bullets, and the combined might of the

Chinese army ruthlessly crushed this act of defiance. This was terrifying. For the most part the

Eberhart - 3


Chinese were viewed as the lesser of the two communists evils. Between Russia and the Chinese the

Chinese were viewed as the nice guys. If China was this desperate and ruthless in keeping control of

her empire then the question remained. Would Russia react in the same manner? OR would it be

worse? No one thought that Russia and the Soviet Empire would use dialogue and peaceful means to

restore order among the Soviet Union.


Instead of controlled markets the people wanted free markets. The Soviet Union was fragmenting

and instead of giving up power completely the party decided to work with the leaders of the

revolution and the reformers to create a new era of "good will" between Russia and her former

Satellites. After all with the economies of Eastern Europe heavily recessed who else was going to

trade with them but the former Empire.


However Mr. Ash tends to view things from the reformers side and not the Communists. Instead

of seeing how the Communists opened up and worked with the revolutionaries Mr. Ash instead tells

us that it was the revolutionaries and reformers who forced the Communists open. Ash , our author

and self proclaimed hero, takes the moral high ground in his writings and admits that he is on the side

of the revolutionaries. He admits his bias to sway the reader into his form of objectivity. But he is

not objective. Indeed he states very early in his writings that, "I cannot emphasize too strongly that

this is not a comprehensive history of the events of 1989 in Eastern Europe" (P. 20). By stating that

he does not have the entire history written here in his book he tries to trick you into accepting his

form of reality. After all the history of this time period, and specifically the year 1989 had a lot going

on but by only presenting one side and a very small side of this temporal period we are flooded with

his bias. By omission he taints what he writes faster than if he was more vocal on the subject. By

remaining silent he subtly influences the reader to side with him.


The problems with Mr. Ash is his optimism. He tends to play down the violence, the pain, the

Eberhart - 4


tears, and the awful fear that the Eastern Europeans felt under the Communists. Instead of trying to

focus the reader on the dread of the time Mr Ash gets you to focus on the positive. Things might

have been very bad but the was under the Communists. The image of hope, unity, and brotherhood is

stated in bright optimism. Perhaps this is how the people actually felt. After decades under the

Communists perhaps this is the breath of fresh air everyone wanted. But Mr. Ash contradicts his own

optimism in the Chapter on the Warsaw election. "My own . . . suggested that the main reason was a

deep tiredness and disbelief in the capacity of any political force." (P.31) So the elation Mr. Ash tries

to convey may have been his own optimism or perhaps he was picking up on the promises the

reformers felt but this optimism was probably not felt by the majority of people. Change is difficult

for anyone and instead of wanting a complete revolution most people just wanted things to get better.

The people got more than they bargained for when Communist Russia decided to give in to the

people's demands.

Even with Mr. Ash's cheery optimism one has to wonder if this man is truly qualified to report on

the events that are conspiring. All to often the reader gets the impression that Mr. Ash is like Forest

Gump. That being a man who is always in the right place at the right time and looked at for advice.

If he was a mover and shaker in the politics that transpired than his reporting of events is tainted.

Since he states that he used television, personal observations, and even telephone conversations to

reconstruct the events leading up to the events in the book one has to ask if the author is just making

his observations up. The majority of notes, telephone conversations, and meetings have nothing

documented to check upon. So it is the word of the author against the rest of the historical

community.


Most people have gone into a bar or spent time with a survivor from a great event. Whether it be

a war or a natural disaster. The common line most people use is "No Shi@#$%T their I was . . . "

Eberhart - 5


These stories are often colourful but based only slightly in fact. The mind can play tricks on your

memories of the situation and in the immortal words of Patrick Warburton, "Stories are not made up.

Instead they are made "Good". The idea being that a boring story or one that is uninteresting is

embellished to make it more palatable to the reader. This is obviously what has happened here in the

magic lantern.


Although an amusing read the book is not a reliable work for historical research. To much of this

book is based on faith instead of hard historical evidence. It is almost as if the writing style of the

author mirrors the movement of Solidarity. After all these brave men and women placed much on

faith and ignored the brutal history of the Communists party. Whether this was done on purpose or

if it was a side effect of living with these refolutionaries does not matter. What matters to the

historian is the ability to track the primary documents that this author's work is based on. Since these

primary documents do not exist you can not prove one way or another that what Mr. Ash says is true

or not true.

You then have a wonderful story that frustrates the historical community. The fall of the Soviet

Empire and the liberation of the Satellite nations could have happened exactly like Mr. Ash says it

did or it might not have. There is no real way to find out since the majority of Mr. Ash's sources are

all his friends or have a stake in presenting the history of these events as Mr. Ash has presented them.

In the end you have to take this book with a grain of salt and realize that it is only one piece of the

puzzle of 1989. To understand the whole you must research the entire time period and come to your

own conclusion. Sadly since most of the books written about these events are from first hand

accounts the majority will be biased. It is then up to the historian to look at all the materials

objectively in order to reconstruct the events leading up to 1989 and this time specifically. Still it is a

start and when used as part of a larger source of research this book is able to shed light on some of the

Eberhart - 6

mysteries of the fall of the Soviet Empire. But as a stand alone book this book alone is not sufficient.

The Magic Lantern, like the reference to Aladdin's lamp we learn one thing. That being when

you let the genie out of the bottle you can never stuff him back inside. The same was true of the

book. For when Communism falls and freedom comes to Eastern European everything is changed

forever. For good and for ill, for better and for worse, for richer or poorer. So saying the

Refolutionaries were an odd marriage between the locals and the communists. It worked and in that

manner so does the book. One only has to realize that, like a marriage, this book is often frustrating

at times and leaves you asking for more. Which is probably what the refolutionists felt, so in the end

you are able to feel what they feel as they experienced it. An odd feeling when reading a historical

work but one that is surprisingly justified for this work.














I've got better things to do tonight than die.

--Springer

I know not whether laws are right,
or whether laws are wrong.
All that we know
is that we who live in Gaul,
is that the wall is strong.
And everyday is like a year.
A year that is oh so long.

-- Oscar Wilde

• Please: A Novel
• The Peoples of the British Isles: A New History : From 1870 to the Present
• Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology (2 volume set)
• Reinventing Human Services: Community- and Family- Centered Practice (Modern Applications of Social Work)
• Contemporary Issues in Healthcare Law and Ethics, Second Edition