They managed to be thoroughly confused and still seize power because the Provisional Government simply vanished, just as the vaunted autocracy had vanished. Thus Kotkin makes a kind of sense of the events in Russia of October 1917 in his captivating biography of the young Stalin. The despot and monster to be isn't yet the Stalin we're all familiar with; indeed, in many ways he's very far from that figure in the year of the two revolutions. Not exactly likable, and obviously possessed of a drive that makes him far from ordinary, but not a man necessarily destined for power - and nor, as Kotkin makes clear from the quotation above, were the Bolsheviks.
Previously in my encounters with the events of this period I've tended to read in the inevitability of it all. Not in Marxist terms, but just those of the common human experience of the betrayals of revolutionary energies. Now I'm thinking it was all a bit of a mess, a series of sometimes quite daft accidents & coincidences - like all history.
At one point Kotkin suggests that a couple of well-aimed bullets taking out Lenin & Trotsky would have changed everything, and that feels true somehow. How much suffering might have been avoided if someone with a gun and a bit of authority had listened to the British military attaché Alfred Knox? Mind you, things could have turned out even worse. You never really know, do you?