Home | Reviews | Blog | Daily | Glossary | Orrin's Stuff | Email

One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich (1963)

Brothers Judd Top 100 of the 20th Century: Novels

    Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the
    following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: "Men have forgotten God;
    that's why all this has happened." Since then I have spend well-nigh 50 years working on the history
    of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal
    testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing
    away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as
    possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people,
    I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has
    happened."
           -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Over the course of his long and brilliant career as a gadfly to both Russia and the West, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn managed to pull off a remarkable trifecta: he was exiled by the USSR, banished from the Cold War dialogue by Western political and cultural elites and then banished from the discussion over Russia's future by the intelligencia there. He has truly made a career as a voice crying in the wilderness, launching one jeremiad after another.

In 1945, Solzehenitsyn was sent to the Gulag for ten years after writing derogatory comments about Stalin in a letter to a friend. One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, as the title suggests, describes what just one day would have been like behind the barbed wire. The story is set in the forced labor camp where he was imprisoned from 1950-53. That the system that perpetrated such crimes was evil is obvious, but it is through the sheer accumulation of mundane indignities and small triumphs (over hunger, cold, ill health, etc.) that the horror of the camps is really brought home. One of the most dramatic moments in the book, nicely illustrative of the small scale but enormous stakes of the victories won, comes when Ivan manages to secrete a spoon that he had forgotten he was carrying. In the end, simply surviving this barbaric system becomes the greatest victory.

With the publication of this book, in 1962, during the brief Kruschev thaw, Solzhenitsyn became an international sensation. In 1974, when the first sections of The Gulag Archipelago were published in Paris, Solzhenitsyn was arrested, tried for treason and forced into exile, eventually settling in Vermont. I suppose folks must have expected him to be so grateful for his asylum that he would express undying gratitude to the United States. If so they underestimated the moral tenor of the man. He proved to be nearly as outspoken a critic of the West as he had been of the USSR, culminating in his 1978 Harvard Commencement speech, where first he excoriated Western intellectuals in general:

    A decline in courage may be the most striking feature that an outside observer notices in the West
    today. The Western world has lost its civic courage, both as a whole and separately, in each
    country, in each government, in each political party, and, of course, in the United Nations. Such a
    decline in courage is particularly noticeable among the ruling and intellectual elites, causing an
    impression of a loss of courage by the entire society. There are many courageous individuals, but
    they have no determining influence on public life.

    Political and intellectual functionaries exhibit this depression, passivity, and perplexity in their
    actions and in their statements, and even more so in their self-serving rationales as to how realistic,
    reasonable, and intellectually and even morally justified it is to base state policies on weakness and
    cowardice. And the decline in courage, at times attaining what could be termed a lack of manhood,
    is ironically emphasized by occasional outbursts and inflexibility on the part of those same
    functionaries when dealing with weak governments and with countries that lack support, or with
    doomed currents which clearly cannot offer resistance. But they get tongue-tied and paralyzed
    when they deal with powerful governments and threatening forces, with aggressors and
    international terrorists.

Must one point out that from ancient times a decline in courage has been considered the first
symptom of the end?

then liberal humanism:

    This tilt of freedom toward evil has come about gradually, but it evidently stems from a humanistic
    and benevolent concept according to which man - the master of the world - does not bear any evil
    within himself, and all the defects of life are caused by misguided social systems, which must
    therefore be corrected.

then the Press:

    The press can act the role of public opinion or miseducate it. Thus we may see terrorists heroized,
    or secret matters pertaining to the nation's defense publicly revealed, or we may witness shameless
    intrusion into the privacy of well-known people according to the slogan "Everyone is entitled to
    know everything." (But this is a false slogan of a false era; far greater in value is the forfeited right
    of people not to know, not to have their divine souls stuffed with gossip, nonsense, vain talk. A
    person who works and leads a meaningful life has no need for this excessive and burdening flow of
    information.)

    Hastiness and superficiality - these are the psychic diseases of the twentieth century and more than
    anywhere else this is manifested in the press. In-depth analysis of a problem is anathema to the
    press; it is contrary to its nature. The press merely picks out sensational formulas.

    Such as it is, however, the press has become the greatest power within Western countries,
    exceeding that of the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. Yet one would like to ask:
    According to what law has it been elected and to whom is it responsible? In the Communist East, a
    journalist is frankly appointed as a state official. But who has voted Western journalists into their
    positions of power, for how long a time, and with what prerogatives?

then made his way back to attack the very fundament of Western modernity--rational humanism:

    How has this unfavorable relation of forces come about? How did the West decline from its
    triumphal march to its present debility? Have there been fatal turns and losses of direction in its
    development? It does not seem so. The West kept advancing steadily in accordance with its
    proclaimed social intentions, hand in hand with a dazzling progress in technology. And all of a
    sudden it found itself in its present state of weakness.

    This means that the mistake must be at the root, at the very foundation of thought in modern times.
    I refer to the prevailing Western view of the world in modern times. I refer to the prevailing
    Western view of the world which was born in the Renaissance and has found political expression
    since the Age of Enlightenment. It became the basis for political and social doctrine and could be
    called rationalistic humanism or humanistic autonomy: the pro-claimed and practiced autonomy of
    man from any higher force above him. It could also be called anthropocentricity, with man seen as
    the center of all.

    The turn introduced by the Renaissance was probably inevitable historically: the Middle Ages had
    come to a natural end by exhaustion, having become an intolerable despotic repression of man's
    physical nature in favor of the spiritual one. But then we recoiled from the spirit and embraced all
    that is material, excessively and incommensurately. The humanistic way of thinking, which had
    proclaimed itself our guide, did not admit the existence of intrinsic evil in man, nor did it see any
    task higher than the attainment of happiness on earth. It started modern Western civilization on the
    dangerous trend of worshiping man and his material needs.

    Everything beyond physical well-being and the accumulation of material goods, all other human
    requirements and characteristics of a subtle and higher nature, were left outside the area of attention
    of state and social systems, as if human life did not have any higher meaning. Thus gaps were left
    open for evil, and its drafts blow freely today. Mere freedom per se does not in the least solve all
    the problems of human life and even adds a number of new ones.

    And yet in early democracies, as in American democracy at the time of its birth, all individual
    human rights were granted on the ground that man is God's creature. That is, freedom was given to
    the individual conditionally, in the assumption of his constant religious responsibility. Such was the
    heritage of the preceding one thousand years. Two hundred or even fifty years ago, it would have
    seemed quite impossible, in America, that an individual be granted boundless freedom with no
    purpose, simply for the satisfaction of his whims.

    Subsequently, however, all such limitations were eroded everywhere in the West; a total
    emancipation occurred from the moral heritage of Christian centuries with their great reserves of
    mercy and sacrifice. State systems were becoming ever more materialistic. The West has finally
    achieved the rights of man, and even excess, but man's sense of responsibility to God and society
    has grown dimmer and dimmer. In the past decades, the legalistic selfishness of the Western
    approach to the world has reached its peak and the world has found itself in a harsh spiritual crisis
    and a political impasse. All the celebrated technological achievements of progress, including the
    conquest of outer space, do not redeem the twentieth century's moral poverty, which no one could
    have imagined even as late as the nineteenth century.

By the time he was finished administering this necessary emetic to the Western body politic, he had alienated virtually every important opinion making group of the liberal establishment and they began to dismiss him as a sort of cranky right wing kook. The powers that be simply stripped him of his legitimacy because they didn't like what he said.

Then came the fall of the Soviet Union and his triumphal return home--well, what should have been a triumphal return. Instead his brutally honest and morally centered jeremiads against Russian materialism, gangsterism and feeble democratic reforms have alienated most of his natural allies in his own homeland.

Throughout all of these travails, his vision has remained constant and his will unbreakable. The reaction to him of the varying societies suggest just how rare a creature he is and how seldom we see his like. He is one of the truly pivotal intellectual and moral figures of the century and One Day in the Life is an excellent introduction to his estimable corpus of great works.

(Reviewed:09-Dec-99)

Grade: (A+)

Websites:

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn Links:

    -WIKIPEDIA: Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn
    -OBIT: Alexander Solzhenitsyn, 1918–2008: Russian traditionalist, Nobel laureate, feted in the West for criticism of Soviet Communism, then spurned for rejecting liberal materialism (Andrew Cusack, 3 August 2008, Norumbega)
    -OBIT: The death of Solzhenitsyn: The Ukrainian novelist Andrey Kurkov on how the author of the Gulag Archipelago, who related the terrible truth about Soviet totalitarianism, outlived his era to become something of a living monument to Russia's past (Andrey Kurkov, 05 August 2008, New Statesman)
    -In Memoriam: Solzhenitsyn's Life And Writings (Forbes, 8/05/08)
    -INTERVIEW: Alexander Solzhenitsyn On The New Russia (Paul Klebnikov, May 9, 1994, Forbes)
    -ESSAY: The Prophet at Harvard (Dinesh D'Souza, 8/05/08, AOL News)
    -OBIT: The man who shook the Kremlin: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who died this week, was instrumental in bringing the Soviet Union to its knees, and he never wavered from his belief in a writer's moral responsibility to truth and beauty (Alexander Nazaryan, 8/05/08, Salon)
    -OBIT: Chronicler of the gulag (The Australian, August 05, 2008)
    -OBIT: Nobel Winner Chronicled Tyranny of Soviet Union (J.Y. Smith, 8/04/08, The Washington Post)
    -OBIT: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1918–2008) (Gregory McNamee, August 4th, 2008, Britannica Blog)
    -TRIBUTE: Solzhenitsyn at Work (JOHN McCAIN, August 4, 2008, NY Sun)
    -OBIT: Last struggle is over for Nobel laureate Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (Tony Halpin, 8/04/08, Times of London)
    -OBIT: Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn, R.I.P. (National Review, 8/04/08)
    -OBIT: Alexander Solzhenitsyn, the man who exposed the horrors of Soviet Communism, dies aged 89 (Tamara Cohen, 04th August 2008, Daily Mail)
    -OBIT: CHRONICLER OF THE GULAGS: Russian Literary Giant Solzhenitsyn Dies: Alexander Solzhenitsyn, the man whose writings exposed the brutality of Stalin's murderous labor camps, has died at the age of 89. Death, he told SPIEGEL last year, "is a natural milestone of one's existence." (Der Spiegel, 8/04/08)
    -VIDEO: Solzhenitsyn Dies at 89; David Remnick Reflects (Open Culture)
    -ESSAY: Understanding Solzhenitsyn (William F. Buckley Jr., April 14, 1976, National Review)
    -ESSAY: Solzhenitsyn -- a Rightist? (William F. Buckley Jr., August 1975, National Review)
    -OBIT: Alexander Solzhenitsyn dies aged 89 (Damien Francis, 8/04/.08, guardian.co.uk)
    -INTERVIEW: An Interview with Alexander Solzhenitsyn (Joseph Pearce, February 2003, St. Austin Review)
    -INTERVIEW: 'I Am Not Afraid of Death': In an interview with SPIEGEL, prominent Russian writer and Nobel laureate Alexander Solzhenitsyn discusses Russia's turbulent history, Putin's version of democracy and his attitude to life and death. (Der Spiegel, 7/23/07)
    Alexander Solzhenitsyn dies at 89 (BBC, 8/03/08)

Russian writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who exposed Stalin's prison system in his novels and spent 20 years in exile, has died at 89, Russian media say.

Obituary: Alexander Solzhenitsyn (BBC, 8/03/08)

Born into a family of Cossack intellectuals, Alexander Solzhenitsyn graduated in mathematics and physics, but within weeks the Soviet Union was fighting Hitler for its survival. Solzhenitsyn served as an artillery officer and was decorated for his courage, but in 1945 was denounced for criticising Stalin in a letter. He spent the next eight years as one of the countless men enduring the gulags. He was one of the lucky ones to survive.

The rest of us were the lucky ones. MORE:
    _REVIEW ARCHIVE & LINKS: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (BrothersJudd.com)
    -LECTURE: A World Split Apart (Text of Address by Alexander Solzhenitsyn at Harvard Class Day Afternoon Exercises,Thursday, June 8, 1978)
    -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, 1918 - 2008(dwhudson, August 3, 2008, GreenCine)

    -OBIT: Nobel prize winner Alexander Solzhenitsyn dies aged 89 (guardian.co.uk, 8/03/08) -OBIT: Soviet Dissident Writer Solzhenitsyn Dies at 89 (Reuters, August 3, 2008)
    -OBIT: Alexander Solzhenitsyn Dies at 89 (VOA News, 03 August 2008)
    -ESSAY: Empire-Slayer (Daniel J. Mahoney, Dec. 19, 2005, National Review)
    The Last Prophet: Alexander Solzhenitsyn (Ian Hunter, July/August 2003, Touchstone)
   -ROUNDTABLE: 1998 AMERICA: TRIUMPHANT? OR IN TROUBLE?: responses to A World Split Apart by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn * John O'Sullivan * Mark Steyn * John Lukacs * Edward Ericson * DavidAikman * Michael Novak, The American Enterprise)
    -REVIEW: of Two Hundred Years Together by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (Richard Pipes, New Republic)
    -REVIEW: of The Solzhenitsyn Reader: New and Essential Writings, 1947–2005, by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, edited by Edward E. Ericson, Jr., and Daniel J. Mahoney (Daniel L. Tubbs, Claremont Review of Books)
    -REVIEW: of Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, by Joseph Pearce and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: The Ascent from Ideology, by Daniel J. Mahoney (James F. Pontuso, Claremont Review of Books)

Of particular merit is Mahoney's chapter on Pyotr Stolypin, prime minister of Russia from 1906 until 1911, who might be called the "hero" of Solzhenitsyn's Red Wheel. Stolypin, a liberal who nevertheless admired Russia's ancient culture, attempted to reform his nation's semi-feudal political and economic practices while at the same time preserving the old customs and habits that were the bonds tying Russian society together. Stolypin was the only Russian statesman who understood the delicate balance between the old and the new — between conservation and change. His assassination led to the fall of the Tsar, the victory of Bolshevism, and the murder of millions of innocent people crushed under the relentless and inhuman Red Wheel.

FILM :
    -FILMOGRAPHY : Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (Imdb.com)
    -INFO : One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich (1970) (Imdb.com)
    -INFO : The Knot (1999) (Imdb.com)
    -REVIEW : of The Knot : Written and directed by Aleksandr Sokurov (Alexander Soifer , American Historical Review)

GENERAL :
    -Russian Orthodox Church
    -Post-Soviet Media Law & Policy Newsletter
    -Russia Reform Monitor
    -ARTICLE : Father's ideals strike a chord with Solzhenitsyn (Kelly Burke, 30/04/2001, Sydney Morning Herald)
    -ESSAY : Russia Repents? (Vladimir Osherov, First Things, December 1997)
    -LECTURE : Address by Václav Havel, President of the Czech Republic, before the Members of Parliament (Prague, 9 December 1997)
    -LECTURE : Awakening from Nihilism: The Templeton Prize Address (Michael Novak, First Things, August/September 1994)
    -ESSAY : "Redeemer Empire": Russian Millenarianism Ý(DAVID G. ROWLEY, American Historical Review)
    -ESSAY : Stalin's Apologists at The Nation (Dr. Thomas S. Garlinghouse , FrontPageMagazine.com | June 21, 2001)
    -ESSAY : The Era of Error (Michael Ignatieff, New Republic)
    -ESSAY : I, Spy : The sanatorium-spas of the former Soviet Union--once serving only party workers, KGB agents, and the sick--stand now as "instant ruins." (LYLE REXER, July 2001, Metropolis)
    -REVIEW : of Galina Mikhailovna Ivanova. Labor Camp Socialism: The Gulag in the Soviet Totalitarian System (Bruce F. Adams, American Historical Review)
    -REVIEW : of Retreat from the Finland Station: Moral Odysseys in the Breakdown of Communism. By Kenneth Murphy (James Finn, First Things)
    -REVIEW : of Resurrection: the Struggle for a New Russia by David Remnick (Vitali Vitaliev, booksonline)
    -REVIEW : of The Rise and Fall of the Soviet Empire: Political Leaders from Lenin to Gorbachev by Dmitri Volkogonov (Anne Applebaum, booksonline)
    -REVIEW : of A History of Twentieth-Century Russia by Robert Service (Orlando Figes, booksonline)

Home | Reviews | Blog | Daily | Glossary | Orrin's Stuff | Email

One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich (1963)

Brothers Judd Top 100 of the 20th Century: Novels

Websites:

See also:

Comments: