Chang and Halliday’s Mao: The Unknown Story is apparently considered to be intent on portraying him as an utter cynical monster from his earliest years, relying on what has been deemed very selective and circumstantial evidence.
Okay, so is it really that bad? I noticed early on that the narrative was rather bombastic (kind of like Suetonius, amirite?), but if one is always aware of that, keeping one’s distance, can the book still be useful? After all, I like how it uses many Soviet sources, providing a truly enlightening perspective on the birth and growth of the CCP.
And if it is that unreliable, what would be the definitive, ultimate Mao biography, from a historian’s point of view?
Can I ask a related question about a forthcoming book?
Andrew Walder has a new book coming out, China Under Mao: A Revolution Derailed. He's a political sociologist and I doubt it qualifies as a biography, but it might be of interest. More to the point, assuming any historians of modern China come around, are you familiar with Walder's work? Does it fit with what's happening in (academic) Chinese history?
Please remember answers to this questions should be substantiated and in depth--more than just one sentence.