Εμφύλια πάθη
Νίκος Μαραντζίδης, 2015
★ 3.68 from 353 ratings on Goodreads
Two social scientists answer, in plain questions and short chapters, how Greeks remember the civil war — and why those memories keep changing with the present. It sold far beyond the academy. This is the expanded edition. Fans love the cool, unshowy dissection of how a party rewrites its own past. The book is a study of memory, not a memoir or a narrative history — its pleasure is argument, evidence and clear thinking. The passages that follow are from the authors' preface to the expanded edition and the opening of their chapter on how the Communist Party remembers the civil war. Keep that scholarly, essayistic voice in every annotation. The book is non-fiction essay; the register is intellectual, measured, often ironic. Do not invent plot, characters or scenes. Do not describe the book as a novel. Greek annotations must be in natural modern Greek (monotonic), with «» for quotations. Hooks must be calm, literate, specific, no clickbait, no exclamation marks, max 14 words. Context max 35 words. Insight max 45 words, factual and specific. Tags: 1–3 emotions, 1–3 themes, 1–2 registers, weights 0.3–1. Highlights: 0–2 per passage, most 1, some 0, at most one passage with 2. Highlight phrases must be copied character-for-character from the kept part of the Greek passage. Provide English and Greek versions of hook, context, insight, highlight prompts; phrase stays Greek. Palette: 4 hex colors [background, background-2, text, accent], text contrast ≥4.5:1 on both backgrounds, tinted paper, no pure black/white, accent like a stamp. Backdrop from the vocabulary; no backdrop more than 3 times; 'gradient' only if nothing else fits. Typeface: serif-classic, serif-italic, sans-modern, mono-typewriter, display. Motion: still, drift, pulse, fall, rise. Motif: one concrete noun from the passage's imagery. Luminance: light or dark (dark ≤1 in 4). Year: 2015 (first edition; expanded edition 2016). Choose 1–3 passages, each ≤150 words, from different excerpts, not neighbouring paragraphs. Prefer passages that show what fans love: the cool clarity, the turn of argument, the irony, the plain-language explanation of something tangled. Do not choose the publisher's front-matter/logistics (passages 0–2 are preface acknowledgements — weak). Best candidates: [3] the party's obsession with the 1940s; [4] 'the only party that is also its own historian'; [5] history as self-justifying propaganda aimed both outward and inward; [6] the party changing its positions over time; [8]/[9]/[10] Zachariadis's own words contrasting the two 'occupations'. Choose 2–3: [4] is the strongest single aphorism ('Το Kομμουνιστικό Kόμμα είναι το μόνο κόμμα που αποτελεί συγχρόνως και τον ιστορικό του εαυτού του'). [5] is excellent on the double audience. [6] is good on mutability. [10] has the vivid 'hidden contempt' for ELAS and the captain's men. Avoid [8] and [9] (heavy quotation, footnote debris, 'Το αποτέλεσμα είναι γνωστό' trails into logistics). Keep [4], [5], [10]. For [4], keep whole passage but note the OCR debris 'RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTY1MTE= ΣΤΑΘΗΣ Ν. ΚΑΛΥΒΑΣ, ΝΙΚΟΣ ΜΑΡΑΝΤΖΙΔΗΣ 516' interrupts it mid-sentence — the passage as given is broken. I must use startsWith/endsWith copied character-for-character from the candidate, at sentence boundaries, keeping ≥40 words. I can start at 'Σε κανένα άλλο πολιτικό κόμμα δεν δημιουργήθηκαν' and end at 'όπως κάνει το ΚΚΕ.' — but that trims before the best line. Alternatively start after the debris: 'άλλη πολιτική οργάνωση δεν φροντίζει' ... to 'τον ιστορικό του εαυτού του.' That keeps the best material (41+ words). Let me count: 'άλλη πολιτική οργάνωση δεν φροντίζει να δημοσιεύονται στην εφημερίδα του κόμματος τόσo πολλά άρθρα ιστορικού περιεχομένου. Κανένα κόμμα δεν συντήρησε και προφύλαξε από τα «αδιάκριτα μάτια» με τόση συνέπεια και συστηματικότητα τα κομματικά αρχεία, σαν να είναι ιερά κειμήλια. Το Kομμουνιστικό Kόμμα είναι το μόνο κόμμα που αποτελεί συγχρόνως και τον ιστορικό του εαυτού του.' That's about 60 words. Good, but starts mid-sentence with 'άλλη' — awkward as a card opening. Better: use [5] and [6] and [10] instead, all clean. Or use [4] starting 'Κανένα άλλη πολιτική οργάνωση' — no, it's 'άλλη'. Let me instead take [4] with startsWith 'Κανένα άλλο πολιτικό κόμμα δεν φρόντισε να εκδώσει' and endsWith 'τον ιστορικό του εαυτού του.' But the debris sits between 'Καμία' and 'άλλη' — the text 'Καμία RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTY1MTE= ΣΤΑΘΗΣ Ν. ΚΑΛΥΒΑΣ, ΝΙΚΟΣ ΜΑΡΑΝΤΖΙΔΗΣ 516 άλλη πολιτική οργάνωση' would be included, which is garbage. So avoid [4]. Use [5], [6], [10]. [5]: clean, whole passage, 117 words, ends well. [6]: has debris 'RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTY1MTE= ΠΏΣ ΘΥΜΆΤΑΙ ΤΟ ΚΚΕ ΤΟΝ ΕΜΦΎΛΙΟ; 517' mid-passage. Can I trim? startsWith 'Όπως συμβαίνει συνήθως, η ιστορική γραφή' and endsWith 'για την περίοδο 1941-1949' — too short? Let's see: 'Όπως συμβαίνει συνήθως, η ιστορική γραφή διαμορφώνεται από το παρόν, ενώ το παρελθόν «επιμολύνεται» από τους στόχους και τις επιθυμίες για το μέλλον.' then debris 'Το ΚΚΕ και η μνήμη της δεκαετίας του ’40 Πράγματι, όλα αυτά τα χρόνια, και αντίθετα απ’ ό,τι πολύς RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTY1MTE= ΠΏΣ ΘΥΜΆΤΑΙ ΤΟ ΚΚΕ ΤΟΝ ΕΜΦΎΛΙΟ; 517 κόσμος πιστεύει...' — so the sentence 'Πράγματι, όλα αυτά τα χρόνια...' is broken by debris too. Only the first sentence is clean (27 words) — under 40. So skip [6]. Use [5] and [10]. [10] is clean and vivid: 'Καθώς λοιπόν η εαμική αντίσταση...' through the Zachariadis quote — 114 words, ends with a quotation. Good. So two passages: [5] and [10]. Both non-fiction. Different moods: [5] analytical/ironic on propaganda's double audience; [10] the cold institutional contempt for one's own fighters. Good range within an essay. Let me write annotations. Passage [5]: hook EN: 'A history written to convince outsiders and reassure the faithful at once.' (12 words) — names tension. Better: 'What a party's history is for, when it is aimed at two audiences.' Hmm, must be an invitation to the reader's curiosity. 'Every institution tells its past twice: once outward, once inward.' That's a claim, calm, 11 words. Good. Greek: «Κάθε οργάνωση αφηγείται το παρελθόν της δύο φορές: μία προς τα έξω, μία προς τα μέσα.» Context EN: 'The authors, two political scientists, examine how the Greek Communist Party narrates the 1940s. Here they ask what that narration is for.' (24 words) Greek: «Οι δύο συγγραφείς, πολιτικοί επιστήμονες, εξετάζουν πώς το ΚΚΕ αφηγείται τη δεκαετία του ’40. Εδώ ρωτούν σε τι χρησιμεύει αυτή η αφήγηση.» Insight EN: fact about 'αυτοδικαιωτικό'? That's a word worth glossing. Or the concept 'πολιτική γραμμή' — 'the party line', a Comintern term. True: 'Party line' (γραμμή) was Comintern vocabulary; the book's title plays on Εμφύλια πάθη, echoing Aristotle's πάθη as emotions, not just 'sufferings'. Actually «Εμφύλια πάθη» puns on the civil war and on passions/emotions. Insight EN: 'The title's «πάθη» means passions as much as sufferings — Aristotle's word for the emotions, which a history of civil war also is.' That's interpretive but grounded. Better a solid fact: the Comintern term. Insight EN: '«Γραμμή» — the line — entered Greek communist vocabulary through the Comintern: the binding course set from above, which every party history then had to justify.' That's true and specific. Greek: «Η «γραμμή» πέρασε στο ελληνικό κομμουνιστικό λεξιλόγιο από τη Γ΄ Διεθνή: η δεσμευτική πορεία που χαράσσεται από πάνω και που κάθε κομματική ιστορία καλείται στη συνέχεια να δικαιώσει.» Hmm, is that certain? The Comintern did impose 'lines' (e.g., the 1935 popular front line). Reasonably safe. Alternatively gloss «αυτοδικαιωτικό» — self-justifying, a word coined in modern Greek political prose. Safer to do a word angle: «αυτοδικαιωτικός» = 'self-justifying', from δικαιώνω, to vindicate — a word the passage leans on twice. Insight EN: 'The passage's key word, «αυτοδικαιωτικός», literally 'self-vindicating': a history that puts itself on trial and acquits itself. Greek αὐτο- + δικαιόω, to make right.' That's a good etymology, safe. Greek: «Η λέξη-κλειδί του αποσπάσματος, «αυτοδικαιωτικός», σημαίνει κυριολεκτικά ό,τι δικαιώνει τον εαυτό του: μια ιστορία που δικάζει και αθωώνει μόνη της τον εαυτό της.» Good. Highlights for [5]: phrase 'σφυρηλατείται η ταυτότητα του κομμουνιστή και ενισχύονται οι δεσμοί των μέλων με την οργάνωση' (13 words) — question: 'Which story about your own past do you tell to keep belonging somewhere?' Hmm too abstract. Better reflection. Or highlight 'έναν λόγο αυτοδικαιωτικό, προπαγανδιστικό κατά βάση' — context about «λόγος» meaning discourse? Might be fine. Let me pick one highlight: 'έναν λόγο αυτοδικαιωτικό, προπαγανδιστικό κατά βάση, που με πολιτικά κίνητρα απευθύνεται προς «τα έξω» και προς «τα μέσα» ταυτόχρονα' — that's 17 words, within limit? Count: έναν(1) λόγο(2) αυτοδικαιωτικό(3) προπαγανδιστικό(4) κατά(5) βάση(6) που(7) με(8) πολιτικά(9) κίνητρα(10) απευθύνεται(11) προς(12) «τα(13) έξω»(14) και(15) προς(16) «τα(17) μέσα»(18) ταυτόχρονα(19). 19 words — fine (3–20). Kind: reflection. EN: 'Two audiences, two versions of the same story, and no rule that they must agree.' Greek: «Δύο κοινά, δύο εκδοχές της ίδιας ιστορίας, και κανένας κανόνας που να τις υποχρεώνει να συμφωνούν.» Good. Genre/tags for [5]: emotions: curiosity, irony? Emotion is what reader feels: 'cool fascination', 'skepticism'. Themes: memory, politics, history-writing. Registers: analytical, essayistic. Passage [10]: hook EN: 'How a movement comes to hold its own fighters in quiet contempt.' (12) Greek: «Πώς ένα κίνημα φτάνει να περιφρονεί, σιωπηλά, τους ίδιους του τους μαχητές.» Context EN: 'The authors trace how the party leadership under Nikos Zachariadis judged the wartime resistance, ΕΛΑΣ, against the later civil-war army, ΔΣΕ.' (22) Hmm, better simple: 'We are in the leadership's assessment of the wartime resistance army, ΕΛΑΣ, as it compared with the later civil-war army.' Greek: «Βρισκόμαστε στην κρίση της ηγεσίας του Ζαχαριάδη για τον ΕΛΑΣ της Κατοχής, καθώς τον συγκρίνει με τον μεταγενέστερο Δημοκρατικό Στρατό.» Insight EN: 'ΕΛΑΣ and ΔΣΕ are both acronyms built to be spoken: Ελληνικός Λαϊκός Απελευθερωτικός Στρατός, and Δημοκρατικός Στρατός Ελλάδας. The names themselves carry the argument.' Good, true. Greek: «Ο ΕΛΑΣ και ο ΔΣΕ είναι αρκτικόλεξα φτιαγμένα για να προφέρονται: Ελληνικός Λαϊκός Απελευθερωτικός Στρατός και Δημοκρατικός Στρατός Ελλάδας. Ως και τα ονόματα κουβαλούν το επιχείρημα.» Highlight for [10]: phrase 'αντιμετωπιζόταν με κρυφή έστω περιφρόνηση και καχυποψία' — question: 'Have you ever quietly looked down on the work you once gave everything to?' 14 words, second person, concrete-ish. Greek: «Περιφρόνησες ποτέ, έστω και σιωπηλά, κάτι στο οποίο κάποτε έδωσες τα πάντα;» Good. Maybe a second highlight: 'η σύγκριση μεταξύ της περιόδου της Αντίστασης και αυτής του Εμφυλίου 1946-1949 απέβαινε σε βάρος της πρώτης' — reflection about how a later, larger effort makes the earlier one look timid. That's two highlights; allowed at most 1 passage with two. Fine for [10]? Better keep one to be sparing. I'll give [10] one, [5] one, so 2 of 2 passages marked — the instructions say leave about 4 in 10 unmarked; with 2 passages, marking both is acceptable but let me leave [10] with one and [5] with one; total 2 highlights over 2 cards is fine. Actually maybe give [5] zero and [10] two? Keep simple: [5] one question (reflection), [10] one question. Now tags and visuals. Card [5]: paper tint — cool intellectual, slightly grey-blue or sage. Palette light: ['#e8e6dc'? that's greige — avoid]. Use duck-egg: bg '#dde6e4', bg2 '#cfdcd9', text '#22333a' (indigo-slate), accent '#7a4a3a'? Accent like a stamp — maybe oxblood '#8c4a3c'. Contrast: #22333a on #dde6e4 ~ 11:1 fine. Backdrop: geometric (reason, argument) — good. Typeface: serif-classic. Motion: still. Motif: 'αρχείο' (archive) — concrete from passage. Luminance light. Card [10]: mood colder, military, slightly grim but light card: palette slate/pewter with a cold blue ink and rust accent. bg '#dfe2e6'? near-grey — needs visible tint: '#d9e0e6' (cool blue), bg2 '#c7d2da', text '#28323c', accent '#8a3b2e' (rust). Backdrop: ink (spreading ink: the act of writing/doctrine) or fog (uncertainty) — use 'ink'. Typeface: sans-modern? The passage is quotation-heavy analysis; serif-classic again would repeat. Use sans-modern for cold clarity — but the passage includes a long official quote. sans-modern fits 'stark, modern, clinical'. OK. Motion: pulse (dread of doctrinal judgment) or still. Use 'pulse'? The contempt is a slow institutional thing — 'still'. Two cards both still is fine. Motif: 'ΕΛΑΣ' is not a noun object; choose 'καπετάνιοι' → motif 'αντάρτης'? Motif should be a concrete noun from imagery: 'όπλο'? Not in passage. 'καπετάνιοι' → 'καπετάνιος'. Use 'καπετάνιος'. Or 'αρχείο' for [5]. Good. Variety: backdrops geometric and ink, typefaces serif-classic and sans-modern — satisfies at least two typefaces and three backdrops Cool, patient argument in short chapters: two scholars testing claims against evidence, with a dry wit that keeps the prose light.
Feels like curiosity, serenity and unease. About power, memory and society.
Who it’s for
You may like it if you want a calm, question-and-answer account of how memory of the civil war is made and remade. One caveat readers raise: some find the book tilts toward one side, and that repetition and loose editing weaken its claim to balance.
Why read it
It gives you the tools to watch a political party shape its own past, and to notice the same habit closer to home.
A page from the book
A party that is, uniquely, also its own official historian.
Σε κανένα άλλο πολιτικό κόμμα δεν δημιουργήθηκαν «ιστορικά τμήματα» με τόσο ισχυρή αίσθηση καθήκοντος συγγραφής της κομματικής ιστορίας. Κανένα άλλο πολιτικό κόμμα δεν φρόντισε να εκδώσει βιβλία που καταγράφουν την επίσημη ιστορία του, όπως κάνει το ΚΚΕ. Καμία RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTY1MTE= ΣΤΑΘΗΣ Ν. ΚΑΛΥΒΑΣ, ΝΙΚΟΣ ΜΑΡΑΝΤΖΙΔΗΣ 516 άλλη πολιτική οργάνωση δεν φροντίζει να δημοσιεύονται στην εφημερίδα του κόμματος τόσo πολλά άρθρα ιστορικού περιεχομένου. Κανένα κόμμα δεν συντήρησε και προφύλαξε από τα «αδιάκριτα μάτια» με τόση συνέπεια και συστηματικότητα τα κομματικά αρχεία, σαν να είναι ιερά κειμήλια. Το Kομμουνιστικό Kόμμα είναι το μόνο κόμμα που αποτελεί συγχρόνως και τον ιστορικό του εαυτού του. What readers say
Readers are divided: many value the calm, evidence-based overview and accessible structure, saying it challenges myths and opens discussion; others find it ideologically skewed toward one side, with repetition and editing flaws weakening its claimed balance.
Νίκος Μαραντζίδης.Marantzidis, a professor of Balkan, Slavic and Oriental Studies at the University of Macedonia in Thessaloniki, co-wrote the book with sociologist Stathis Kalyvas.
Books that feel like this
Where to get it
Some of these links earn us a small commission, at no cost to you. It keeps BookFeed free.
Questions readers ask
- Is Εμφύλια πάθη for me?
- You may like it if you want a calm, question-and-answer account of how memory of the civil war is made and remade. One caveat readers raise: some find the book tilts toward one side, and that repetition and loose editing weaken its claim to balance.
- What is Εμφύλια πάθη like?
- Cool, patient argument in short chapters: two scholars testing claims against evidence, with a dry wit that keeps the prose light. Feels like curiosity, serenity and unease. About power, memory and society.
- What should I read after Εμφύλια πάθη?
- If you liked Εμφύλια πάθη, try Trump (Donald Trump with Tony Schwartz), Decision Points (George W. Bush) and The Laws of Human Nature (Robert Greene).
A taste of the feed
The case for leaving your door open and your calendar empty.
Most people are surprised by the way I work. I play it very loose. I don’t carry a briefcase. I try not to schedule too many meetings. I leave my door open. You can’t be imaginative or entrepreneurial if you’ve got too much structure. I prefer to come to work each day and just see what develops.
Trump · Donald Trump with Tony Schwartz
When the market stops following the rules, who is truly responsible for the collapse?
I was furious the situation had reached this point. A relatively small group of people—many on Wall Street, some not—had gambled that the housing market would keep booming forever. It didn’t. In a normal environment, the free market would render its judgment and they could fail.
Decision Points · George W. Bush
He did not want a statue. He wanted a city that could live without him.
“I could give you many other reasons,” he concluded, “why you should feel confident in ultimate victory, if only you will make up your minds not to add to the empire while the war is in progress, and not to go out of your way to involve yourselves in new perils. What I fear is not the enemy’s strategy but our own mistakes.” The novelty of what he was proposing aroused great debate. Neither hawks nor doves were satisfied with his plan, but in the end, his reputation for wisdom carried the day and his strategy was approved. Several months later the fateful war began.
The Laws of Human Nature · Robert Greene
Read pages from books like this, one at a time
Keep reading in the feed