Modern Critical Views ALEKSANDR SOLZHENITSYN Edited and with an introduction by Harold Bloom Sterling Professor of the Humanities Yale University ©2001 ISBN:0791059189 Contents Editor'sNotevii Introduction1HaroldBloom HumanityInExtremis:OneDayintheLifeofIvanDenisovichandTheLove-GirlandtheInnocent3EdwardE. EricsonJr. Solzhenitsyn'sTraditionalImagination:Tolstoy13JamesM.Curtis PrussianNights:APoeticParableforOurTime73KennethN.Brostrom TheGulagArchipelago:AlternativetoIdeology85JohnB.Dunlop TheCalfandtheOak:DichtungandWahrheit95EdwardJ.Brown Solzhenitsyn:TheRussianLiberal113MikhailS.Bernstam Solzhenitsyn,theCreativeArtist,andtheTotalitarianState127Q.D.Leavis HumanRightsandLiterature:SolzhenitsynandPasternak151AnnaDiegel TheWorldofDetentioninDostoevskyandSolzhenitsyn161SophieOllivier TheWordofAleksandrSolzhenitsyn171CarylEmerson TheSolzhenitsynThatNobodyKnows183HughRagsdale TheSubtextofChristianAsceticismin OneDayintheLifeofIvanDenisovich189SvitlanaKobets Chronology205 Contributors211 Bibliography213 Acknowledgments215 Index217 Editor's Note MyIntroductionwonderswhetherSolzehenitsyn'simportancemayprovetobemorehistoricalthanaesthetic,and questionsalsowhetherhehasbeenabletotranscendTolstoy'sinfluenceuponhim. ThechronologicalsequenceofcriticismbeginswithEdmundE.EricsonJr.'sconsiderationoftheshortnovel One DayintheLifeofIvanDenisovich,whichisseenasatributetohumanity'sendurance. Inaverychallengingessay,JamesM.CurtisanalyzesSolzhenitsyn'scomplexrelationtohisgreatprecursor, Tolstoy,afterwhichKennethN.BrostromfindsinthepoemPrussianNightsSolzhenitsyn'sinsistencethatmorality residesinouractions,andnotinourfeelings. TheGulagArchipelagoisregardedbyJohnB.Dunlopasa"positive"statement,despitethehorrorsitdepicts, becauseitrepresentsatriumphoverideology. EdwardJ.BrownexaminesSolzhenitsyn'spolemicalliterarysatireTheCalfandtheOak,findinginitacrucial documentofRussianculturalhistory,whileMikhailS.BernstamseesSolzhenitsynasanoriginalLiberalwithout precedentinRussiantradition,andthereforedoomedtobemisunderstoodbothinRussiaandtheWest. Q.D.LeavisdefendsSolzhenitsynbothasaliterarystylist,andasanadvocateofindividualrights,afterwhich AnnaDiegelcomparesPasternakandSolzhenitsynassuchadvocates. DostoevskyiscontrastedtoSolzhenitsyn,asnovelisticvisonariesofdetentionbythestate,inSophieOllivier's essay,whileCarylEmersonviewsSolzhenitsynasaprophetwhoseWordwarnsusagainstthe"relentlesscultof novelty." HughRagsdaleemphasizeswhatisstillSolzhenitsyn'spoliticaldilemma:howtopreservethefolkethosofRussian culturewhilethenationrecoilsfromSovietMarxismtowardsWesterncapitalism. Inthisvolume'sfinalessay,SvitlanaKobetsfindsahiddenpatternofChristianasceticisminOneDayintheLifeof IvanDenisovich,theTolstoyantalethatmarkedSolzhenitsyn'strueinception. Introduction SolzhenitsynisacentralfigureintheGreatRussiannarrativetraditionwhosetitansincludeTolstoy,Dostoevsky, andLeskov,allofwhomwerecrucialinfluencesuponSolzhenitsyn'sownfiction.Tolstoy,thelargestofthese presencesinSolzhenitsyn,seemstohavehadasprofoundaneffectuponthelaterwriter'slifeasuponthework.The heroicstanceagainstacorruptandbrutalgovernment,thepatrioticRussianreaffirmationoftheOldBelieverFaith: thesepassedfromTolstoytoSolzhenitsyn.CountTolstoy,aristocratandheresiarch,wasuntouchablebytheawed Czaristregime.Solzhenitsyn,anuncommoncommoner,servedintheGulagdespitehisheroisminbattle,and finallywassentintoexilebyaperplexedandfrightenedPolitboro.ReturningfromhisNewEnglandexilewhen Communismfell,theagingSolzhenitsynat81isscarcelyathomeinthequasi-democraticRussiaofPutin,whereas writerheisallbuttotallyisolated.Tolstoy,inhisdarkestmoments,wassupportedbythousandsofTolstoyans, literaryandreligious,butSolzhenitsynseemstohavelivedbeyondhistime.Asaprophetcryingoutagainstmoral depravityinhisbelovedRussia,heisignored,ordismissedasarelic.Jeremiah-like,hedenouncesRussianyielding toWesternconsumerism,buttheconsumersarenotmoved.HecameoutneitherfornoragainstYeltsinandPutin, butdeclaredagainforJesus,theRussianJesusofTolstoyand(withmanydifferences)ofDostoevsky. ItisdifficulttojudgeSolzhenitsyn'smajorworks—August1914,CancerWard,TheFirstCircle,TheGulag Archipelago,OneDayintheLifeofIvanDenisovich—apartfromtheircontext,hismagnificentstruggleagainstthe Stalinistlegacy.ThejudgmentofhisyoungerRussiancontemporariesisthatallthesearenow,atbest,admirable PeriodPieces.Willthatnowfashionablejudgmentprevail? Clearly,thereisnoWarandPeacenorAnnaKarennina,noTheBrothersKaramazovnorCrimeandPunishment, amongSolzhenitsyn'snarratives.Are wetosaythatheisdoomedtoberememberedonlyinthecategoryofthewriter-as-witness,amuchlargerversionof thesincerebutlimitedElieWiesel?IfonelooksforhisAmericanequivalent,onefindsnotFaulknernoreven HemingwaybutJohnDosPassos,agrandcameraeye,orevenSteinbeck,whoseTheGrapesofWrathseemsnot unworthyofSolzhenitsyn'spopulistreligiosity. WedoSolzhenitsyn'snovelsakindofviolencebyattemptingtoreadthemapartfromtheircentral,historical positionaspolemicaltestimoniesagainstStalinandhisheirs.Yetitistheyear2001.Dothesebookssustain themselvesaestheticallybytheirowninternalstrength?CanwereadTheFirstCircleaswereadTheCharterhouse ofParmaandTheMagicMountain,asanothergreatinstanceoftheclassicEuropeannovel? Theanswerseemstomeatouchmixed:yesandno,noandyes.TheFirstCirclederivesfromWarandPeace,a dangerousoriginforanynovelwhatsoever,andalsofromTolstoy'sgreatshortnovel, HadjiMurad.Severalcritics havenotedtheclearrelationbetweenCzarNicholasIinHadjiMuradandStalininTheFirstCircle;bothrulersare accuratelyportrayedasviciousegomaniacs.ButagenerallyTolstoyanatmospherepervadesallofTheFirstCircle, andbecomesdisconcerting.Solzhenitsyntendstobealaconicwriter,morelikeHemingway(whomhehadread closely)thanlikeTolstoy.ApersistentTolstoyanismdemandsTolstoy'sownpowertofreshlyre-perceivenatural reality,asthoughhewereanewHomer.Solzhenitsynisawriterofawhollydifferentorder,drivenbyangerand heroicendurancebutlackingTolstoy'ssuperblynaturalgrace. FictionwritersofthecenturynowendinginRussiahaveincludedIsaacBabel,permanentlymemorableforhisshort stories,andMikhailBulgakov,whosefantasy-novelTheMasterandMargaritaisanastonishment.Solzhenitsyn doesnotprovidethepurepleasureofreadingtheydo,atleastforme.Andhemaynothavetheabsoluteaesthetic eminenceofthegreatmodernRussianpoets:AlexanderBlok,AnnaAkhmatova,OsipMandelstam,Marina Tsvetayeva.YetSolzhenitsyn,whocannotbesaidtohavetriumphedinhisaestheticagonwithTolstoy(butthen, whocould?),hasaneminenceintimesostrongthatitmayprevailovertime.Hislifeandhisworkalikeare exemplary,andscarcelycanbedistinguished,onefromtheother. EDWARDE.ERICSONJR. Humanity In Extremis: One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich and The Love-Girl and the Innocent The short novel One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich is a very importantwork,bothforSolzhenitsyn's artisticreputationandfortheunfoldingstoryofhiscareer.TheplayTheLove-GirlandtheInnocentisconsiderably lessimportantonbothscores.Whatlinksthemtogetheristheirsettinginsimilar(notidentical)hard-laborprison camps;theyreflectonthesamegeneralperiodandexperiencesofSolzhenitsyn'slife.Bothwerecomposedshortly aftertheauthor'sreleaseintofreedom. ThestoryofthepublicationofOneDayintheLifeofIvanDenisovichisoneoftheexcitingliterarystoriesofour time.When,in1961,SolzhenitsynhopedthattheSovietculturalclimatemightpossiblyhavethawedenoughto allowhisnoveltobepublished,hesoughttogetitthroughtoAlexanderTvardovsky,editorofNovyMir.His middlemanwasLevKopelev(thereal-lifemodelforthecharacterLevRubininTheFirstCircle.)Solzhenitsyn knewthatheriskedhislifeinseekingtobepublished.HeknewalsothatifanySovietperiodicalwouldpublishhis story,NovyMirwouldbetheone.Tvardovskystuffedthisworkbyatotalunknownintohisbriefcaseandtookit home;and,aswashiswont,heproppedhimselfupcomfortablyinhisbedtopagethroughnewlyreceived manuscripts.HeopenedOneDay.Theworkimmediatelyoverwhelmedhim:"Irealizedatoncethattherewas something (FromSolzhenitsyn:TheMoralVisionbyEdwardE.EricsonJr.©1980byWm.B.EerdmansPublishingCo.) important,andthatinsomewayImustcelebratetheevent.Igotoutofbed,gotfullydressedagaininevery particular,andsatdownatmydesk.ThatnightIreadanewclassicofRussianliterature." Anticipatingtheknee-jerkresponseoftheSovietliteraryestablishmenttothissearingindictmentofStalin'sprison camps,Tvardovsky,thesupremeliterarydiplomat,usinghispowerfulpositionandconnections,wentrighttothe topandsoughtfromNikitaKhrushchevpermissiontopublishthenovel.Khrushchevapparentlydecidedthatthis novelwouldhelphimconsolidatehisbaseofpower,whichhewasbuildingpartlyonadenunciationofStalin's corruptionoftotalcontrol.Khrushchev'sfellowmembersofthePolitburofeltthattheyhadlittlechoicebuttoallow NovyMirtopublishthecontroversialnovel. ItappearedintheNovember1962issue,inanoverrunof95,000whichsoldoutimmediately.Aseparaterunof nearlyamillioncopiesalsosoldoutquickly.Anunknownsmall-townteacherwas,atonestroke,onthecenterstage ofRussianliterature.Thewholeworldtooknote.Forhis"liberalism"Khrushchevwaspraisedwidely. Earlyreviews,eveninthemostorthodoxofSovietsources,wereoverwhelminglyfavorable.Pravdaremarkedon Solzhenitsyn's"profoundhumanity,becausepeopleremainedpeopleeveninanatmosphereofmockery."Zhores Medvedev,whowaslatertowriteTenYearsafterIvanDenisovich,emphasizedtheartistryofthenovel.Butmost responses,inkeepingwithKhrushchev'smotivationforallowingpublication,centeredonthebook'spolitical significance.Importantly,mostWesternreviewsalsoemphasizedthepoliticaldimension;thebook'spublication wasviewedasaneventillustratingtheincreasingthawwithintheSovietUnion,thusauguringwellforfutureEast- Westrelations.SofromthebeginningSolzhenitsyn'sworkwasviewedthroughthewronglens. ApoliticalapproachdoesnotpenetratetotheheartofOneDay.Thenovelisnot,initsessence,aboutStalin's inhumanitytoman;itisaboutman'sinhumanitytoman.Stalinisnotsomeaberrationinanotherwisesmooth progressionofhumanenessinhistory.Theevilofthehumanheartisauniversaltheme:thisisSolzhenitsyn's approach. Perhapsneverhasthepoliticalappropriationofaworkofartbystateauthoritiesbackfiredsodramaticallyand totallyasinthecaseofOneDay.Oncehavingbeencatapultedintothelimelightofworldattention,Solzhenitsyn wouldnotbesilent.Nowhehadaplatform,andhissenseofdutyurgedhimon.Khrushchevhadletoutofthebottle ageniewhichhissuccessorscouldnotputbackin.ThehighvisibilityaffordedbyKhrushchev'sdecisionprovided Solzhenitsynwithalltheprotectionofworldopinionwhichheneededinordertoescapethebrutalitieswhich almost certainlywouldotherwisehavebeenvisiteduponhimforsayingwhathewentontosay. Despitethefactthatsomecriticsconsider OneDayintheLifeofIvanDenisovichthebestpieceSolzhenitsynever haswritten,heseemstohavefeltthathewasstillatakindofapprenticeshipstage.Hehadalreadylaidplansfor muchlargernovels;firsthehadtoperfecthiscraftbyworkinginunitsofsmallerscope. OneDayneverthelesshasmanytraitsincommonwithoneormoreofthelongernovels.Ofcourse,itkeepsitseye onthoseuniversalissuesofhumansuffering,ofgoodandevil,oflifeanddeath.LikeTheFirstCircleandCancer Ward,itisbasedonpersonsandeventswhichSolzhenitsynexperiencedandobservedinhisownlife.Ithas Solzhenitsyn'scharacteristicallytightsettingintime—onedayinthiscase.Ithasalargenumberofcharacters, givingussomethinglikeacrosssectionofSovietsociety—anotherSolzhenitsyntrait. IfOneDaywaspartofaperiodofapprenticeship,itstandsneartheendofthatperiod.Theauthorwasaboutto embarkonthoselongnovelsofhismaturity.Andthisnovelisapieceofsuchconsummateartistrythattocallitthe workofanapprenticeseemsultimatelyinadequate.HadSolzhenitsynwrittennothingafterOneDay,hisreputation asanauthorofnotewouldhavebeensecure.Withthisshortnovelhehadarrived,whateverhisfurtherambitions. HisliterarysituationatthisstageisinterestinglyparalleltothatofMilton:hadMiltonwrittennothingafter "Lycidas,"hewouldstillbeananthologizedpoet;buthewentontoParadiseLost,ParadiseRegained,andSamson Agonistes. Thenoveldepictsasingledayinthelifeofasimplepeasant,IvanDenisovichShukhov,whohasbeenunjustly thrownintoaprisoncamp.Whileweseemanyofhisfellowzeks,thefocusremainsrathertightlyfixedonShukhov. Itisadayinwhichnotmuch,certainlynothingmomentous,happens.Thezekseattheirpitifullyinadequategruel, workhardasbricklayersandfoundrymen(Solzhenitsynhimselfworkedasboth),arecountedandrecounted,and finallyretire—toprepareforanotherday,andotherdays,ofthesame. Solzhenitsynshowsgreatrespectforhistitlecharacter.Shukhovisnotatallanauthorialalterego,asareOleg KostoglotovinCancerWard(somewhat)andGlebNerzhininTheFirstCircle(considerably).Theclearestsignof respectisinthemerenamingofthehero.Thecombinationofgivenname(Ivan—significantly,themostcommonof Russiannames)andpatronymic(Denisovich—sonofDenis)isapoliteformmostreadilyusedforpersonsofhigh stationorintrinsicimportance.Solzhenitsynappliesittoa simplepeasant.Theauthordeemshischaracterworthyoftherespectusuallyreservedfor"important"people. ThemostmemorabletechnicaltraitofOneDayisitsunderstatement.Thenoveldepictshorrorswhichmightwell elicitwhite-hotanger—or,ifnotthat,akindofsentimentalityoverthesufferingofinnocents.Thennovelmakesno suchexplicitclaimonouremotions.Rather,itdescribesthedayofShukhovandhisfellowsasnottoobad,as almostagoodday.Thefinalpassageofthenovel,cappedbyabrilliantlyconceivedfinalsentence,highlightsthe deviceofunderstatement: Shukhovwenttosleep,andhewasveryhappy.He'dhadalotoflucktoday.Theyhadn'tputhiminthecooler.The ganghadn'tbeenchasedouttoworkintheSocialistCommunityDevelopment.He'dfinagledanextrabowlofmush atnoon.Thebosshadgottenthemgoodratesfortheirwork.He'dfeltgoodmakingthatwall.Theyhadn'tfounda pieceofsteelinthefrisk.Caesarhadpaidhimoffintheevening.He'dboughtsometobacco.Andhe'dgottenover thatsickness. Nothinghadspoiledthedayandithadbeenalmosthappy. Therewerethreethousandsixhundredandfifty-threedayslikethisinhissentence,fromreveilletolightsout. Theextraoneswerebecauseoftheleapyears.... Thisconcludingpassagealsoallowsustocheckontheimportanttechnicalmatterofnarrativepointofview.Itisa matterhandleddelicatelybutconsistentlyinthisnovel.Theauthorisalwaystellingthestory;Shukhovisalwaysin thethirdperson.Yet,byacleversleightofhand,theauthorkeepsmakinghisreadersfeelasiftheyareinsidethe mindofthemaincharacter;truly,IvanDenisovichistheonewhothinksthatthisisnottheworstofdays.Readers areleftwiththeimpressionthattheyseeandexperienceShukhov'sdaythroughhisowneyes,thoughintechnical facttheyneverdo.Inthis,Solzhenitsynhasshownconsiderableskillasafictionwriter. AsistypicalofSolzhenitsyn'sworks,OneDayshowsussufferinghumanityinextremis.ButbecauseofShukhov's limitedperspective,sufferinghereisdepictedasprimarilyphysical.InTheFirstCirclethemoresophisticatedGleb Nerzhinshowsthatsufferingisalsopsychologicalandevenspiritual.Yetbothofthesenovels—incontrastwith CancerWard,whichdealswiththemysteryofsuffering—treatasufferingtheperpetratorofwhichisnomysteryat all.Still,eveninOneDaythesufferingofthebodytakesonametaphysicaldimension—throughthemediationof theauthor,whocangobeyondthekenofthemaincharacter.Theinhospitablycoldclimate becomesasymboloftheinhumanesettingforhumanlifeingeneral,andthereadercomesawayfeelingmoral outrageratherthanmerevicariousphysicalpain.WhenamedicalassistantfindsthefeverishIvannotillenoughto exemptfromtheday'swork,theauthorqueries,"Howcanyouexpectamanwho'swarmtounderstandamanwho's cold?"Itisoneofthosemicrocosmicremarksfromwhichrayoutlargesymbolicmeanings.Thewarmmanisthe oneopentoperpetratinginjustice.Solzhenitsyndevoteshislifetomakingwarmmenfeelthecold. Anysuch"big"thoughtsareasfarbeyondShukhovastheyarebeyondtheprisonguards.Shukhov,nowyearning afterahandfulofoatsthatoncehewouldhavefedonlytohishorses,thinks,ashegetshispittanceoffoodforthe day,"Thiswaswhataprisonerlivedfor,thisonelittlemoment."Butevenherethestomachischeatedandthesoul, thereby,troubled.Andwhatdotheseguardsofthe"animals"care?"Everyrationwasshort.Theonlyquestion was—byhowmuch?Soyoucheckedeverydaytosetyourmindatrest,hopingyouhadn'tbeentoobadlytreated." Thearbitrarinessofthelifeofthezeksisall-governing.Theguardsarenotallowedtorecognizethediversityand unpredictabilityoflife;onlytwozeksmaybesickperday;onlytwolettersperzekmaybemailedoutperyear. "Sovietpower,"Solzhenitsynsatirizes,hasdecreedthatthesunstandshighestintheskynotatnoonbutanhour later.Beingdehumanizedentailsbeingdenatured. GiventhecollectivistideologyoftheSoviets,anironiceffectoftheirprisonregimenisthatitbreaksdownthesense ofhumansolidarity.Solzhenitsyn,whospeaksconsistendyonbehalfofindividualdignity,alwaysspeakswithequal consistencyonbehalfofhumansolidarity.Sohelamentsthatinazek'sminditisanotherzekwhoisone'sworst enemy.Occasionaldisplaysofsolidarity,whichshouldbeanaturaloutflowingofthezeks'commonhumanityand theirsharedplight,usuallysuccumbtothecampattitude,"YoucroaktodaybutImeantolivetilltomorrow." Nevertheless,howevermuchthegrimenvironmentandtheneedtoadaptsomehowtoitmayreducethebasic humanityofthezeks,suchpressurescannevereradicatethehumanessence.Tobesure,Shukhovisconstantlyand instinctivelyconcernedwithself-preservation.Whenhewasaccused,absurdly,ofhightreasonforsurrenderingto theGermanswiththeintentionofbetrayinghiscountry,hecoollycalculated:"Ifhedidn'tsign,hewasasgoodas buried.Butifhedid,he'dstillgoonlivingawhile.Sohesigned."Butthereismore.Amanwillasserthiswantsas wellashisneeds.Forinstance,hewantstosmoke;itisanunnecessarysmallpleasure,buthewillfindaway.Then, thereissatisfactioninwork.Ivanworkspoorlyonlywhengivenmeaninglesstasks.Layingbrickswellpleaseshim, evenifin prison.Constructiveworkbringsoutinhimtheennoblingqualityofself-validationthroughcreativeeffort.And whattrulyhumanbeingcanremainforeversilentwhenheistreatedasmerefleshandbones?When,onthewayto work,Ivanisfriskedbythecampguards,hethinks,"Comeon,pawmeashardasyoulike.Thereisnothingbutmy soulinmychest."Thecampsystemwouldgranthimthestatusonlyofananimal,aworkhorse.Itisuptohimto insist,howeverinaccurately,thatheismorethanthat,thatheisspiritual,too,andnotonlymaterial. ThegreatestofallhumancapacitiesdemonstratedbyIvanDenisovichishiscapacitytoabsorbpainandyetto endurewithatleastsomevestigesofhumanityintact.ThisenduringhumanityisoneofSolzhenitsyn'smost importantthemes,anditishisgreatconsolationasheweepsformankind.Thebesteffortstoreducehumanitytothe leveloftheanimalareneverentirelysuccessful;and,bydefinition,aprocessofdehumanizationwhichisnottotally successfulisafailure:somehumanityremains."There'snothingyoucan'tdotoaman..."—exceptthatyoucannot doawaywithhishumanityaltogether.Longsuffering,Solzhenitsynthinks,isapeculiarlystrongtraitoftheRussian peasantry.Thepeasantmaybepatient,butheisalsodurable;andultimatelyhewillovercome. IvanDenisovich'sattitudetowardreligionismuchlikeMatryona'sin"Matryona'sHouse."Bothshowlittleinterest informalreligion,eitherecclesiasticalorcredal.Yetbothbreatheakindofnaturalpiety,andreligiousreferences peppertheireverydaytalk.Ivan'sreadyresponsetohistribulationsinprisonis,"Aslongasyou'reinthebarracks— praisetheLordandsittight."Atday'send,gratefulthatheisnotinthecellsandthinkingthatitisnot"sobad sleepinghere,"hemurmurs,"ThankGod."Whenheforgetsuntilthelastmomentbeforeheisfriskedthathehasa hacksawbladeonhim,healmostinvoluntarilypraysas"hardashecould":"GodinHeaven,helpmeandkeepme outofthecan!"Afterwards,however,thisdown-to-earthpeasant"didn'tsayaprayerofthanksbecausetherewasn't anytimeandtherewasnosenseinitnow." Ivan'sfaithisnaiveandunreasoned,andincludesasizeabledoseofsuperstition.HebelievesinGod:"WhenHe thundersupthereinthesky,howcanyouhelpbelieveinHim?"Healsobelieves,asfolkinhisvillagedo,thateach monthGodmakesanewmoon,becauseheneedstheoldonetocrumbleupintostars:"Thestarskeepfallingdown, soyou'vegottohavenewonesintheirplace."Atheisticrulersmaycurtailthegrowthofreligion("TheRussians didn'tevenrememberwhichhandyoucrossyourselfwith"),butitisbeyondtheirpowertoshakethefaithofthe MatryonasandIvans. WhileSolzhenitsynclearlyadmiresIvan'sfaith,Ivandoesnot representhisreligiousideal.AcharacterwhocomesclosertodoingsoisAlyosha(orAlyoshka)theBaptist.Itis intriguingthatSolzhenitsyn,whohasreturnedtohisancestralRussianOrthodoxChurch,givesthedeepestreligious sentimentsinthisnoveltoacharacterwhoishostiletoOrthodoxy.Thisdepictionisofapiecewiththenovel'shigh praiseoftwoEstonianzeks—andthisfromanauthorsometimescalledchauvinisticandnationalistic.Thefactis thattheauthorissimplybeingfaithfultothequalityofthepersonswhomheknewinthecamps.Inaddition, Solzhenitsyn'shandlingofAlyoshashowsthathisprimaryreligiousconcernsarenotwiththeparticularitiesof OrthodoxybutwiththosecentralaspectsoftheChristianfaithheldincommonbyallChristians. TheclimacticconversationofthenovelisbetweenIvanandAlyosha.Alyosha'sprominenceherehasbeenprepared forbyfrequentearlierdepictionsofhimasagoodworkerandkindperson.Alyosha'sfaithdoesnotincapacitatehim forsurvival.Onthecontrary,itisasourceoftheinnerstrengththatsooftencharacterizesSolzhenitsyn'slittle heroes,thesmallpeoplewhosomehowareabletowithstandeverythingthatasoullessbureaucracyinflictsonthem. Whileheallowsanyonetoorderhimabout,heisstillcleverenoughtohavehiddenhisNewTestamentinachinkin thewallsothatithassurvivedeverysearch.TheregularSundayfellowshipofAlyoshaandhisfellowBaptists allowsthemtocopewiththehardshipsofcamplife"likewateroffaduck'sback."Heissustainedbybiblical passagesofconsolation:"YetifanymansufferasaChristian,lethimnotbeashamed;butlethimglorifyGodon thisbehalf." TheclimacticconversationbeginswhenAlyosha,readinghisBible,overhearsIvan'sroutine,day'sendprayerand says,"Lookhere,IvanDenisovich,yoursoulwantstopraytoGod,sowhydon'tyouletithaveitsway?"Ivan,the naiveOrthodox,associatesthisBaptistwithhighdevotionandthinksthatAlyosha'seyesglowed"liketwocandles." ButIvan,forwhomcampexperienceisamicrocosmofalloflife,doubtstheefficacyofpraying:"...allthese prayersarelikethecomplaintswesendintothehigher-ups—eithertheydon'tgetthereortheycomebacktoyou marked'Rejected.'"AlyoshkascoldsIvanfornotpraying"hardenough,"andadds,"ifyouhavefaithandtellthe mountaintomove,itwillmove."Thisboldconfidenceistoomuchforliteral-mindedIvan,whohasneverseena mountainmove(thoughhethenallowsthathehasneverseenamountainatall!).Forhispart,Ivan,unlikethose zekswhohavelosttheircapacityforcompassion,pitiestheBaptistsas"poorfellows":Theywereinnoone'sway, and"alltheydidwaspraytoGod";yet"theyallgottwenty-fiveyears...."Onthequestionofmountain-moving, Alyoshaassertsthesupremacyofthespiritualrealmoverthematerial,sinceofallphysicalthings,theLord commanded themtoprayonlyfortheirdailybread;beyondthat,"Wemustprayaboutthingsofthespirit—thattheLordJesus shouldremovethescumofangerfromourhearts...." Ivandoesnotwanttobemisunderstood.Althoughdisillusionedbyabadpriest,heinsiststhathebelievesinGod. "ButwhatIdon'tbelieveinisHeavenandHell."Theafterlife,afterall,isnotopentoempiricalverification,asare monthlynewmoonsandfallingstars.Whenheprays,hesays,itwillbeforsomethingreal,likereleasefromprison. ThisattitudescandalizesAlyosha,whoconsciouslysuffersforChrist.Hecounters,"Whatdoyouwantyour freedomfor?Whatfaithyouhaveleftwillbechokedinthorns.Rejoicethatyouareinprison.Hereyoucanthinkof yoursoul."Thisspiritualfocus,whichSolzhenitsynelsewhereassertsinhisownperson,affectsIvan:"Alyoshawas talkingthetruth.Youcouldtellbyhisvoiceandhiseyeshewasgladtobeinprison." SolzhenitsynadmirestheBaptist'sabilitytogiveapositivemeaningtohisprisonexperience;Alyoshaistheonly characterinthenovelwhocandoso.Ivanadmiresthat,too.Butitjustwillnotdoforhim."ItwasChristtoldyouto comehere,andyouareherebecauseofHim.ButwhyamIhere?Becausetheydidn'tgetreadyforthewarlikethey should'veinforty-one?Wasthatmyfault?" AlthoughhecannotbelieveeverythingAlyoshacan,Ivan'sactionsareasgoodasanyone's.ConsideringAlyosha impractical,alwaysgivingandnevergetting,Ivangiveshimabiscuit,thoughthatgestureleavesthegiverwith nothingforhimself.Solzhenitsyncomments,"We'venothingbutwealwaysfindawaytomakesomethingextra." Ivangivesthecupofcoldwater,thoughnotalwaysknowinglyinGod'sname.IfAlyoshahasthebestwords,noone hasbetterdeedsthanIvan. IvanandAlyoshaarebrothersundertheskin.Botharemodelsofhumanityinthemidstofinhumanity;bothcarefor othersasmuchasforthemselves.Ivanrepresentsthebestpossiblefromamanwithoutanarticulatedfaith;aman canactverywellwithoutfaithinatranscendentreality.Suchaoneisinnoposition,however,toexplainthe mysteryofsuffering.Thiscrucialmatter,whichIvandeeplyneeds,iswhatAlyoshacanadd.WithoutAlyosha,the novelwouldbemuchdiminished.Ivan,asgoodasheis,needsAlyosha'sinsighttocompletethepicture. TheLove-GirlandtheInnocentisoneofSolzhenitsyn'stwopublishedplays,neitherofwhichranksamonghistop literarysuccesses.Inthiscase,thelargecastofcharactersinabriefworkisespeciallyproblematical(fifty-seven individuals,plusothersingroups—inaplayof133pages).ItshareswithOneDayintheLifeofIvanDenisovichthe settingofaprisoncamp,thoughthistimeamixedcampof"politicals"andthieves.Italsosharesthe themesofsuffering,injustice,anddehumanization.Campland,that"invisiblecountry,"istheplace"whereninety- ninemenweepwhileonemanlaughs." Thetwomemorablecharactersarethetitlecharacters:LyubaXyegnevitskaya,thelove-girl,andRodionNemov,the newlyarrivedinnocent.Herviewisthatallmenare"onlyafteronething."Sosheadapts.She,aso-calledkulak fromaland-owningfamily,hadbeenmarriedoffatfourteenyearsofage.Nemov,nottheadapterLyubais,feels "sorryforeveryone"inthecruelcampsetting.HecarrieswithinhimthestapleSolzhenitsynconvictionthat conscienceismoreimportantandvaluablethanlifeitself.Formerlyacavalrycaptain,Nemovuponhisarrivalthere isnamedproductionchiefofthecamp.Butquicklytheprofessionalthieves,whomStalinconsidered"socialallies," persuadethecampcommandanttogetridofthiscircumspectmanandtoreplacehimwithamanoftheirownilk, theengineerKhomich.Lyuba,despitehercompromises,hasenoughinsighttoknowagoodmanwhensheseesone, andshefeelssorryforNemov;sherecognizesthatheisnotcamp-wise. AfterNemovisdemotedtofoundryman,heandLyubadiscoverastrongmutualattraction.Theyliveforaweekina courtship-likearrangement.Butthecampdoctor,Mereshchun,wantsLyubaforhislive-in"campwife."Nowin lovewithNemov,shesuggeststhatheandthedoctorshareher;shecanmanagethatmuch.ButtheidealisticNemov cannottoleratesuchanarrangement. Shortlythereafter,Nemovisstruckontheheadbyafallinglumpofcoal.Firstwordisthatheisdead,butitturns outthatheisnot.ThefinalsceneshowsLyubareturningtothedoctor'scabin,sadbutreconciledtoherdemeaning fate. Thisdrama,especiallygivenSolzhenitsyn'selaboratestagedirections,wouldprobablybebetterintheplayingthan inthereading.Thebackground,picturingStalinandflowersandchildren,aswellasposters("Workennoblesman," "Hewhodoesnotworkdoesnoteat,"andlater"Peoplearethemostvaluablecapital—J.Stalin"),providesa strikingcontrastwiththeforegroundanditsunmitigatedmiseryandinjustice. TheLove-GirlandtheInnocentshowsasclearly,ifnotsoeffectively,asOneDayintheLifeofIvanDenisovichthe dehumanizationoftheSovietcamps.LittleofSolzhenitsyn'sreligiousoutlookcomesthroughinthisplay,although hismoralvisionremainsconstant.Inthatlight,thisplaycouldbeseenasthemostdirectlyanti-Stalinist,oranti- Soviet,ofallSolzhenitsyn'sfull-lengthworks—theothersalwaysrisingratherclearlytomoreuniversalthemes. Still,thedualvisionofhumannature,withgoodandevilwarringineachhumanheart,remainsprominent.The struggleisseenmoresharplyinLyubathaninanyothercharacter. Itispossibletoreadthisplayallegorically,thoughcaremustbeexercisedhere,sinceSolzhenitsyn'swritings generallydonotinvitesuchaninterpretation.YetitiseasyenoughtoseeLyubaasMotherRussia,whosubmits unhappilytothedemeaningyokeofservitude;repressingherbestmoralinstincts,sheturnsherback,regretfully,on thehighbuthardway—toprivatefreedomwithinpublicbondage—offeredbytheexampleofNemov. JAMESM.CURTIS