Talk:The Age of Extremes

message: I hope that others will agree with me about the value of such sharing.
I asked and received the permission from the publisher, who requested that the appropriate credit is made, which I believe is not in contradition with the Copyright requirements of Wikipedia. Marc Girod 17:37, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: actually, it probably is. I doubt the publishers have licensed it under GFDL. -- Tarquin 17:40, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)

text: this cannot be a strict requirement: no quote whatsoever could ever be made. We are under the realm of fair use, and, again, with the explicit agreement of the publishers. Quoting words implies indeed refraining from modifying them, but this restriction must be admissible. Anyway, for now, the issue is different since the page was unilaterally censored. Marc Girod 08:00, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [2004 discussion]

message: Fascism was used in the comment of a change. Just remember that Hobsbawm is himself both Jewish and communist. Marc Girod 14:19, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allegation of fascism 

message: One weakness of Hobsbawm's explanations is that, although he insists that the régimes which called themselves communist after 1929 were "not really communist", he doesn't put forward another analysis of what they were. In particular he doesn't dialogue with those theoreticians who have seen in thes societies a new form of capitalism, state capitalism.
(Uncited opinion cut from article, verbatim.) - Jmabel | Talk 03:02, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncited opinion cut from article 

message: There's way too much on popular culture here.  Is when or how particular figures died really important, just because Hobsbawm has a sentence about them? -- Danny Yee 23:04, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If we are going to include his ignorant remark about them, we should indicate their actual causes of death. Holly and Marley died in ways that had nothing to do with anything like a decadent "life-style". I'd be just as glad to lose the section completely, but it's not appropriate to quote him saying something misleading and leave it at face value. - Jmabel | Talk 07:03, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're right, a lot of readers may not understand the background to the quote or its point, without some elaboration.  It just seems a disproportionate presence in the article, so maybe cut the section.  Or can we critique Hobsbawm's knowledge of popular culture using a quote from someone else? -- I'll see if I can find a review or other source that comments on it. -- Danny Yee 07:14, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular culture 

message: Shouldn't we move this to the full title: The Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century, 1914–1991? While this has the longest title of the four, the two other books from the series we have articles on, The Age of Empire: 1875–1914 and The Age of Revolution: Europe 1789–1848, do use full titles. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 20:24, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. --Cheol (talk) 06:38, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: The article as currently written may suffer from lack of a criticism section. Hobsbawm's personal page has this commentary:
Brad DeLong strongly criticised Age of Extremes: "The remains of Hobsbawm's commitment to the religion of World Communism get in the way of his judgment, and twist his vision. On planet Hobsbawm, for example, the fall of the Soviet Union was a disaster, and the Revolutions of 1989 a defeat for humanity. On planet Hobsbawm, Stalin planned multi-party democracies and mixed economies for Eastern Europe after World War II, and reconsidered only after the United States launched the Cold War." After reading Age of Extremes, Kremlinologist Robert Conquest concluded that Hobsbawm suffers from a "massive reality denial" regarding the USSR, and John Gray, though praising his work on the nineteenth century, has described Hobsbawm's writings on the post-1914 period as "banal in the extreme. They are also highly evasive. A vast silence surrounds the realities of communism, a refusal to engage which led the late Tony Judt to conclude that Hobsbawm had 'provincialised himself'. It is a damning judgement".
Is there any reason not to include this sort of criticism of this book in a balanced way? TMLutas (talk) 15:19, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I will add a section named "Appraisal" and put criticisms in there. Would be great if you have the time to contribute. --Greece666 (talk) 06:37, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: Currently used for footnote 16, this is not a reliable source, it's a personal blog. Moreover, the footnote does not support the phrase it is attached to. I suggest it gets deleted. --Greece666 (talk) 10:29, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Danny Yee