Review of: Was Mao Really a Monster? The Academic Response to Chang and Halliday's "Mao : The Unknown Story"

Michael Schoenhals

Review of: Was Mao Really a Monster? The Academic Response to Chang and Halliday's "Mao : The Unknown Story"

Michael Schoenhals

Chinese Studies

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review (Book/Film/Exhibition/etc.)

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	219-220
Journal	The China Quarterly
Volume	201
Publication status	Published - 2010

Bibliographical note

Reviewed Work(s):
Was Mao Really a Monster? The Academic Response to Chang and Halliday's "Mao: The Unknown Story" (by Gregor Benton and Lin Chun)

Subject classification (UKÄ)

History and Archaeology

Cite this

@article{5c8f0ee76c394ba0997daf0bb309971f,

title = "Review of: Was Mao Really a Monster? The Academic Response to Chang and Halliday's {"}Mao : The Unknown Story{"}",

author = "Michael Schoenhals",

note = "Reviewed Work(s): Was Mao Really a Monster? The Academic Response to Chang and Halliday's {"}Mao: The Unknown Story{"} (by Gregor Benton and Lin Chun)",

year = "2010",

language = "English",

volume = "201",

pages = "219--220",

journal = "The China Quarterly",

issn = "1468-2648",

publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Review of: Was Mao Really a Monster? The Academic Response to Chang and Halliday's "Mao : The Unknown Story"

AU - Schoenhals, Michael

N1 - Reviewed Work(s): Was Mao Really a Monster? The Academic Response to Chang and Halliday's "Mao: The Unknown Story" (by Gregor Benton and Lin Chun)

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

M3 - Review (Book/Film/Exhibition/etc.)

SN - 1468-2648

VL - 201

SP - 219

EP - 220

JO - The China Quarterly

JF - The China Quarterly

ER -