Return to: Home | World Affairs | Europe

The death of Solzhenitsyn

Andrey Kurkov

Published 05 August 2008

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

On the death of such figures as Solzhenitsyn, the phrase ‘end of an era’ is bound to come up, but Alexander Isaevich outlived his era and never truly accepted the new ‘post-soviet’ epoch.

Having sincerely dedicated his life to a desperate struggle against communism, in 1991 Solzhenitsyn suddenly found himself without a battle to fight.

From that moment his activities grew less noticeable. He was less and less asked for his commentary on developments. A note of irony appeared in the use of his nickname: the ‘Vermont Recluse’. Then in 1994 he came out of seclusion and returned to Russia.

He returned to the country he had literally torn apart in 1962 with his short story “A Day In the Life Of Ivan Denisovich”. During a meeting of the Politburo Khrushchev himself insisted on the story’s publication. It contained no direct criticism of the Soviet system. It was a simple but detailed description of one day in a camp prisoner’s life, one almost happy day.

Solzhenitsyn was immediately made a member of the writer’s Union. More of his work was published. He felt his time had come and he tried to write as much as possible, perhaps fearing that any ‘thaw’ would be temporary. However you look at it, Solzhenitsyn was of great use to Krushchev in his efforts to ‘de-Stalinize’ the Soviet Union.

Solzhenitsyn had been sent to a camp three months before the end of the Second World War for having referred to Stalin and Lenin disrespectfully in a letter to an old school friend who was serving on the front line.

Solzhenitsyn spent eleven years in camps, special prisons, secret KGB institutions and internal exile. During that time he twice overcame cancer.

It seems he was destined to be hardened through the cruellest of suffering. He admitted that having overcome cancer for the second time, he lost all fear of death and after the publication of his first stories he lost his fear of the Soviet system.

Kruschev had been overthrown, but Solzhenitsyn still believed in the possibility of democracy in the Soviet Union. Publication of his work ceased in 1965 and, two year later, in an open letter to the Fourth Congress of the Writers’ Union of the USSR he said: “I call upon the Congress to demand and insist on the abandonment of all forms of censorship…”

In May 1967 the Soviet authorities decided to ‘deal with’ Solzhenitzyn, but the writer himself saw it the other way round; he was dealing with the Soviet Authorities.

His 1968 novels “Cancer Ward” and “In the First Circle”, which were banned from publication in the USSR, were published abroad. At the same time, Solzhenitsyn smuggled out to the west a microfilmed manuscript of his most important work – the three volumes of research into the Soviet system of repression and punishment, “The Gulag Archipelago”.

A Samisdat (homepublished) copy of this work appeared in my home at the beginning of the eighties. My older brother had managed to get hold of a copy for a couple of days. I remember trying to read it as quickly as possible.

Anyone found by the KGB in possession of it would get five years in a prison camp. By that time the author was already living in Vermont, where he had bought a house with 20 hectares of land around it to guarantee his creative isolation.

He had already won the Nobel Prize for Literature. In 1974 he had been stripped of his Soviet citizenship and sent into exile as a traitor. This was the “humane face” of the Brezhnev era. After all, instead of a special flight to Germany, he could have been thrown into a train wagon bound for the camps.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn never fell in love with the USA or the west in general and, having returned to his homeland he was disappointed to discover that his compatriots no longer read his books. Disenchantment with the Yeltsin’s form of democracy encouraged pro-Putin sympathies.

Putin himself would go to ‘take tea’ with Solzhenitsyn and discuss what was to be done with Russia. But Putin’s visits were more representative than practical – a ritual attendance at a ‘living monument’ to the fight against Communism and Stalinism.

Solzhenitsyn was unable to influence contemporary Russia, although he did provoke further discussion of the “Jewish question” in one of his last works, “Two Hundred Years Together”. That book will continue to stir emotion within Russia, but on the international plane, Solzhenitsyn will forever remain the author of “Gulag Archipelago” - that terrible and truthful book about the Soviet totalitarian regime.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

4 comments from readers

Pencils
05 August 2008 at 21:49

Is this a parody?

Gideon Polya
06 August 2008 at 01:06

Excellent article. I read Alexander Solzhenitsyn's "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch" over 40 years ago and was immensely moved. Over the years I then read "The First Circle", "Cancer Ward" and "The Gulag Archipelago".

I came to Solzhenitsyn pre-primed because my Hungarian grandmother's cousin Dr Edith Bone, a British subject, was arrested by the Stalinist secret police in 1949 as a "British spy" while covering an international Socialist conference in Budapest for the London Daily Worker. She survived 7 years solitary confinement in a Hungarian prison (she was released during the Hungarian Revolution in 1956) and wrote an account of her extraordinary physical and mental survival in a book entitled "Seven Years Solitary".

Another such hero was Swedish diplomat Raoul Wallenberg who disappeared into the Soviet Gulag after saving many Hungarian Jews from the Nazis (there is a monument to this wonderful man in Melbourne's busy Kew Junction) .

A key action of Alexander Solzhenitsyn was his May 1967 open letter to the Fourth Congress of the Writers’ Union of the USSR in which he said: “I call upon the Congress to demand and insist on the abandonment of all forms of censorship…”

Soviet Communism and its censorship has more or less fallen (e.g. my great grandfather Jakab Polya's translation into Hungarian of Adam Smith's classic "An Inquiry into the Wealth of Nations" was forbidden to all but specialist economists) but Russian media are still evidently State-dominated.

Solzhenitsyn's message on censorship needs to be taken seriously in the Western Murdochracies in which Monopoly Media (rather than the NKVD, GUGB or KGB) determine what people read and believe and how they vote.

Thus in the "open societies" such as the British Murdochracy, Mainstream media censorship and entrenched lying by omission means that most people are utterly unaware of the carnage in the American Gulag that stretches (with a few interruptions) from Occupied Somalia to Occupied Afghanistan and Predator Robot-bombed Waziristan in formerly "British" Pakistan.

Thus, using estimates from the UN Population Division, UNICEF and top US medical epidemiologists, it is estimated that the continuing Palestinian Genocide, Iraqi Genocide and Afghan Genocide involve post-invasion excess deaths of 0.3 million, 2 million, and 3-6 million, respectively; post-invasion under-5 infant deaths of 0.2 million, 0.6 million and 2.3 million, respectively; and refugees totalling 7 million, 4.5 million and 4 million, respectively) (for the latest details and documentation see: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/19915/42/ ; http://www.brusselstribunal.org/Messages190308.htm#polya ; http://www.countercurrents.org/polya080208.htm; http://www.liberalati.com/?q=node/261 and "Obama, Mccain, Iraqi Genocide & Afghan Genocide": http://www.newsvine.com/qana ).

Indeed many Britons would have been utterly surprised to learn from a January 2008 BBC broadcast involving myself, 1998 Economics Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen and other scholars that in 1943-45 Britain deliberately starved 6-7 million Indians to death in the man-made Bengal Famine atrocity that has been largely deleted from history in the English-speaking world (see: http://www.open2.net/thingsweforgot/bengalfamine_programme.h... ).

Silence kills and silence is complicity. We are obliged to inform others about gross abuses of humanity. We cannot walk by on the other side.

knave
06 August 2008 at 08:53

good article and interesting comment Gideon

Douglas Chalmers
06 August 2008 at 15:31

# "...the story .....was a simple but detailed description of one day in a camp prisoner’s life, one almost happy day..."

It is remarkable how it is the stark experiences which we mostly avoid that bring us the greatest insights. From that experience on, if we survive it, everything we see or feel or hear is aligned with its true worth. There is no more room for illusions or the superficiality of personality. One can then write clearly and with great effect.

# "...Putin..... would go to ‘take tea’ with Solzhenitsyn and discuss what was to be done..."

Interesting how Putin remarked quite seriously after the funeral about the era of "repression" in Russia - especially so coming from the grandson of Joe Stalin's cook. Pity that the West only uses these people for its own propaganda but never applies the lessons to itself.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website

Read More

Vote!

Was the government wrong to sack David Nutt?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 – 2009

Tracker