Content area
Full Text
Daniel W. Lehman, (Athens: Ohio University Press 2002)
UNDERSTANDING THE CAREER and reputation of John Reed has long been a preoccupation of American historians and literary critics primarily because it is not readily apparent where to place him and his work. The subject of several biographies as well as shorter evaluations in works about Greenwich Village intellectuals and the forerunners of literary radicalism in the 1920s and 1930s, Reed continues to occupy a central if disputed place. As a writer, a romantic hero, a rebel, a journalist, as well as a participant in two of the great revolutions of the 20th century (Mexico and Russia), he remains a figure of interest and controversy. On this last point Reed's allegiance was claimed by supporters and enemies of the Soviet Union. Because he died just as the Communists were consolidating their hold on Russia, Reed's future loyalties could not be known: all the more reason to speculate. Would he have joined his friend Max Eastman as a bitter critic, or would he have gulped back his objections and become a defender of Stalin?
Reed's writings have also been the source of varying evaluation. Some critics have found his production uneven and lightweight, sometimes careless. He also has his admirers, among them, Professor Lehman whose work is both an attempt to defend Reed against his critics as well as explain exactly in what ways Reed contributed to modern journalism and literature. His book thus takes up the argument around several important works: Insurgent Mexico and Ten Days That Shook The World, his war correspondence on the European Front in 1915, and shorter essays such as the sketch of Billy Sunday during his Philadelphia religious crusade. The book also reprints two samples of Reed's reporting: "In the German Trenches" and "Back of Billy Sunday," both of which were published by Metropolitan Magazine in 1915.
While the outline of this reevaluation of Reed is more or less chronological, Lehman does not strictly adhere to a time-line, principally because he is more interested in defining...