What is totalitarianism?
This concept is used to mean political regime, in which government is concentrated among a narrow group of people and, based on the curtailment of democracy, eliminates the constitutional guarantees of individual rights and freedoms, through the violence of police-command methods of influence on the population, the spiritual enslavement of people, and completely absorbs all forms and spheres of self-expression of a social person.
The minimum set of signs of totalitarianism, allowing one or another society to be classified as totalitarian, includes such parameters as: the sole power of the leader (pharaoh, king, “father of nations”...), an openly terrorist political system, one-party system, rigid structure and at the same time consolidated society based on mass mythology, introducing the ideas of emergency and basic national “accord”. Totalitarianism exists where there is a cult of rigid centralized power.
By the beginning of the 30s, Stalin moved on to monstrous pogroms of dissidents. In order to accustom the people to the idea of a huge number of enemies in the country, Stalin first decided to deal with the old cadres of engineering and scientific intelligentsia, blaming them for all the failures. Having set the goal of instilling in the people the idea of the “real culprits” of conflicts in the economy, technology, social life, Stalin was preparing for the defeat of the intelligentsia, for the destruction of everyone who was displeasing to him.
To create the appearance of credibility of the accusations, these processes were framed with legal declarations and delegations of the “working masses” were allowed to attend them to fuel “popular indignation.” The press, radio, as well as hastily published "scientific and political literature" - brochures and collections of articles - actively incited public indignation against the defendants.
Being an unsurpassed leader, Stalin managed to force the people, artistic and creative intelligentsia to believe in the “criminal” activities of his victims, to come to terms with the monstrous legal conveyor belt of political persecution and terror, which was zealously carried out by the punitive-inquisitorial and propaganda apparatus subordinate to him. Stalin demanded selflessness in the name of a bright tomorrow, discipline, vigilance, love for the motherland, and people were involuntarily drawn to him.
Many fell under the “machine of repression” famous figures science, culture, political workers, philosophers... The list is endless. Solzhenitsyn was among those repressed. In his works he expressed the entire era of totalitarianism.
Novel "The Gulag Archipelago"
This is a book that revealed the meaning and essence of the Soviet totalitarian system. The novel not only represented detailed history destruction of the peoples of Russia, not only testified to misanthropy as the ever-present essence and goal of the communist regime, but also affirmed the Christian ideals of freedom and mercy, bestowed with the experience of resisting evil, preserving the soul in the kingdom of “barbed wire.” “The Gulag Archipelago” made us realize the religious problematics of Solzhenitsyn’s entire work, revealed its core - the search for evidence about man, his freedom, sin, the possibility of rebirth, and finally showed that Solzhenitsyn’s work is the struggle for the human person, Russia, freedom, life on Earth, who are threatened by a doomed system of lies and violence that denies God and man.
How can we explain the title of this three-volume work? Solzhenitsyn explained it simplistically: “The camps are scattered throughout Soviet Union small islands and larger ones. All this together cannot be imagined otherwise, compared with something else, like an archipelago. They are torn from each other as if by another environment-will, that is, not camp world. And, at the same time, these islands, in their multitude, form a sort of archipelago." The word following "Archipelago" has a double spelling in the book: "GULAG" - to abbreviate the main administration of the camps of the Ministry of Internal Affairs; "GULAG" - as a designation of the camp country, Archipelago.
At the very beginning of the first volume of The Archipelago, Solzhenitsyn names his 227 co-authors (without names, of course): “I do not express personal gratitude to them here: this is our common friendly monument to all those tortured and killed.” Here is the Dedication of “Archipelago”: “I DEDICATE myself to everyone who didn’t have enough life to tell about it. And may they forgive me that I didn’t see everything, didn’t remember everything, didn’t guess about everything.”
The author calls his work "experience artistic research". With strict documentation, this is quite piece of art, in which, along with the famous and unknown, but equally real prisoners of the regime, another fantastic actor the Archipelago itself. All these “islands”, interconnected by “sewage pipes”, but through which people, digested the monstrous machine of totalitarianism into liquid - blood, sweat, urine; archipelago living own life, experiencing now hunger, now evil joy and fun, now love, now hatred; an archipelago spreading like a cancerous tumor.
The Gulag archipelago is some other world, and the boundaries between “that” and “this” world are ephemeral, blurred - that’s one thing space. “We rushed happily along the long crooked street of our life or wandered unhappily past some fences, fences, fences of rotten wood, adobe, brick, concrete, cast iron fences. Have we ever wondered what is behind them? We didn’t try to look behind them either with our eyes or with our minds - and that’s where the Gulag country begins, very close by, two meters from us. And we also did not notice in these fences the myriad of tightly fitted, well-camouflaged doors and gates. All, all these gates were prepared for us! And then the fatal one quickly swung open, and four white male hands, unaccustomed to work, but grasping, grabbed us by the leg, by the arm, by the collar, by the hat, by the ear - they dragged us like a sack. And the gate behind us, the gate into ours past life, slammed forever."
“Millions of Russian intellectuals were thrown here not for an excursion: to be injured, to die and without hope of return. For the first time in history, so many people, developed, mature, rich in culture, found themselves without an idea and forever in the skin of a slave, slave, lumberjack and miner. Thus, for the first time in world history, the experiences of the upper and lower strata of society merged!”
"One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich"
"One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich" is not only a portrait of our history, it is also a book about resistance human spirit camp violence. Furthermore, the plot of internal resistance, the confrontation between man and the Gulag is stated on the very first page of the work.
The "secret" of the origin of the story "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich" and genre form its writer explained it this way: “In 1950, on some long winter camp day, I was carrying a stretcher with a partner and thought: how to describe our entire camp life? In fact, it is enough to describe just one day in detail, in down to the smallest details, and the day of the simplest worker, and here our whole life will be reflected; And there is no need to intensify any horrors, it is not necessary for this to be some special day, but an ordinary one, this is the very day from which life is made up.”
The convict camp was taken from Solzhenitsyn not as an exception, but as a way of life. In one day and in one camp, depicted in the story, the writer concentrated the other side of life, which before him was a secret behind seven seals. Having condemned the inhumane system, the writer at the same time created a realistic character that was truly folk hero who managed to carry through all the trials and preserve best qualities Russian people.
RESPONSE PLAN
1. Exposing the totalitarian system.
2. Heroes of “Cancer Ward”.
3. The question of the morality of the existing system.
4. Choice of life position.
1. The main theme of A. I. Solzhenitsyn’s work is the exposure of the totalitarian system, proof of the impossibility of human existence in it. His work attracts the reader with its truthfulness, pain for a person: “...Violence (over a person) does not live alone and is not capable of living alone: it is certainly intertwined with lies,” Solzhenitsyn wrote. - And you need to take a simple step: do not participate in lies. Let this come into the world and even reign in the world, but through me.” More is available to writers and artists - to defeat lies.
In his works “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich”, “Matryonin’s Dvor”, “In the First Circle”, “The Gulag Archipelago”, “ Cancer building"Solzhenitsyn reveals the whole essence of a totalitarian state.
2. In “Cancer Ward”, using the example of one hospital ward, Solzhenitsyn depicts the life of an entire state. The author manages to convey the socio-psychological situation of the era, its originality on such seemingly small material as an image of the life of several cancer patients who, by the will of fate, found themselves in the same hospital building. All heroes are not easy different people With different characters; each of them is a bearer of certain types of consciousness generated by the era of totalitarianism. It is also important that all the heroes are extremely sincere in expressing their feelings and defending their beliefs, as they are faced with death. Oleg Kostoglotov, a former prisoner, independently came to reject the postulates of the official ideology. Shulubin, Russian intellectual, participant October revolution, surrendered, outwardly accepting public morality, and doomed himself to a quarter of a century of mental torment. Rusanov appears as the “world leader” of the nomenklatura regime. But, always strictly following the party line, he often uses the power given to him for personal purposes, confusing them with public interests.
The beliefs of these heroes are already fully formed and are repeatedly tested during discussions. The remaining heroes are mainly representatives of the passive majority who have accepted official morality, but they are either indifferent to it or do not defend it so zealously.
The entire work represents a kind of dialogue in consciousness, reflecting almost the entire spectrum of life ideas characteristic of the era. The external well-being of a system does not mean that it is deprived internal contradictions. It is in this dialogue that the author sees a potential opportunity to cure the cancer that has affected the entire society. Born in the same era, the heroes of the story do different things life choice. True, not all of them realize that the choice has already been made. Efrem Podduev, who lived his life the way he wanted, suddenly understands, turning to Tolstoy’s books, the entire emptiness of his existence. But this hero’s insight is too late. In essence, the problem of choice confronts every person every second, but out of many decision options, only one is correct, out of all the paths in life, only one is to one’s heart.
Demka, a teenager at a crossroads in life, realizes the need for choice. At school he absorbed official ideology, but in the ward he felt its ambiguity, having heard very contradictory, sometimes mutually exclusive statements of his neighbors. Clash of positions different heroes occurs in endless disputes affecting both everyday and existential problems. Kostoglotov is a fighter, he is tireless, he literally pounces on his opponents, expressing everything that has become painful over the years of forced silence. Oleg easily fends off any objections, since his arguments are hard-won by himself, and the thoughts of his opponents are most often inspired by the dominant ideology. Oleg does not accept even a timid attempt at compromise on the part of Rusanov. And Pavel Nikolaevich and his like-minded people are unable to object to Kostoglotov, because they are not ready to defend their convictions themselves. The state has always done this for them.
Rusanov lacks arguments: he is used to being aware of his own rightness, relying on the support of the system and personal power, but here everyone is equal in the face of the inevitable and near death and in front of each other. Kostoglotov’s advantage in these disputes is also determined by the fact that he speaks from the position of a living person, while Rusanov defends the point of view of a soulless system. Shulubin only occasionally expresses his thoughts, defending the ideas of “moral socialism.” It is precisely the question of the morality of the existing system that all the disputes in the House ultimately revolve around.
From Shulubin’s conversation with Vadim Zatsyrko, a talented young scientist, we learn that, according to Vadim, science is only responsible for the creation material goods, A moral aspect the scientist should not worry.
Demka’s conversation with Asya reveals the essence of the education system: from childhood, students are taught to think and act “like everyone else.” The state, with the help of schools, teaches insincerity and instills in schoolchildren distorted ideas about morality and ethics. In the mouth of Avietta, Rusanov’s daughter, an aspiring poetess, the author puts official presentations about the tasks of literature: literature must embody the image of a “happy tomorrow”, in which all hopes are realized today. Talent and writing skill, naturally, cannot be compared with ideological demands. The main thing for a writer is the absence of “ideological dislocations,” so literature becomes a craft serving the primitive tastes of the masses. The ideology of the system does not imply the creation moral values, for which Shulubin, who betrayed his convictions, but did not lose faith in them, yearns. He understands that a system with a shifted scale life values not viable.
Rusanov’s stubborn self-confidence, Shulubin’s deep doubts, Kostoglotov’s intransigence - different levels personality development under totalitarianism. All these life positions dictated by the conditions of the system, which thus not only forms an iron support for itself from people, but also creates conditions for potential self-destruction. All three heroes are victims of the system, since it deprived Rusanov of the ability to think independently, forced Shulubin to abandon his beliefs, and took away freedom from Kostoglotov. Any system that oppresses an individual disfigures the souls of all its subjects, even those who serve it faithfully.
3. Thus, the fate of a person, according to Solzhenitsyn, depends on the choice that the person himself makes. Totalitarianism exists not only thanks to tyrants, but also thanks to the passive and indifferent majority, the “crowd”. Only choice true values can lead to victory over this monstrous totalitarian system. And everyone has the opportunity to make such a choice.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS
1. What is the essence of a totalitarian state?
84. Moral issues story A.I. Solzhenitsyn « Matrenin Dvor" (Ticket 14)
The core theme of A.I. Solzhenitsyn’s work is man’s opposition to the power of evil, both external and capturing the very heart, the story of the fall, struggle and greatness of the spirit, inseparable from the tragedy of Russia.
In the story "Matrenin's Dvor" the author depicted folk character, who managed to preserve himself in the terrible turmoil of the 20th century. “There are such born angels, they seem weightless, they glide as if on top of this slurry,” without drowning in it at all, even if their feet touch its surface?.. These are the righteous, we saw them, we were surprised (“eccentrics”), we took advantage of their goodness, in good moments we answered them in kind, they disposed us, and immediately plunged again into our doomed depths.”
What is the essence of Matryona's righteousness? Life is not about lies. She is outside the sphere of the heroic or exceptional, she realizes herself in the most ordinary, everyday situation, experiences all the “charms” of Soviet rural life of the 1950s: having worked all her life, she is forced to work for a pension not for herself, but for her husband , missing since the beginning of the war. Unable to buy peat, which is mined all around but not sold to collective farmers, she, like all her friends, is forced to take it secretly.
In creating this character, Solzhenitsyn places him in the most ordinary circumstances of collective farm life in the 1950s, with its lack of rights and arrogant disregard for to an ordinary person.
Matryona's righteousness lies in her ability to preserve her humanity even in such inaccessible conditions.
But who does Matryona oppose, in a clash with what forces does her essence manifest itself? In a clash with Thaddeus, an old black man, the personification of evil. The tragic ending of the story is symbolic: Matryona dies under a train, helping Thaddeus transport logs from her own hut. “We all lived next to her and did not understand that she was the very righteous man without whom, according to the proverb, the village would not stand. Neither the city. Neither is our land."
Plan:
1. A concentration camp is a totalitarian state in miniature.
2. “People live here too” is the basic principle of Ivan Denisovich’s life.
3. Only through labor can freedom of spirit and personal freedom be achieved.
4. Preservation of dignity and humanity in any conditions, at any time - all this is the main thing for a person.
5. The human soul is something that cannot be deprived of freedom, cannot be captured or destroyed - this is the meaning of the story.
Alexander Isaevich Solzhenitsyn's story “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” was conceived in the camp in 1950-51, and written in 1959. The image of Ivan Denisovich was formed from the soldier Shukhov, who fought with the author in the Soviet-German war. All yours personal experience life in the camp, the author outlined all his impressions in his story. Main character works - simple Russian man, unremarkable. There were very, very many people like Shukhov in the camp. Before us appear people whom fate brought to a concentration camp, innocent people who did nothing reprehensible. Among them: Gonchik, who carried milk into the forest, Baptists suffering for their faith, Estonians, prisoners. They all live and work in the camp, trying to maintain their own existence. There is everything on the camp territory: a bathhouse, a medical unit, and a dining room. All this resembles a small town. But the matter cannot be done without guards, of whom there are a huge number, they are everywhere, they make sure that all the rules are followed, otherwise a punishment cell awaits the disobedient.
And for eight years now, Ivan Denisovich has been wandering around the camps, enduring, suffering, suffering, but at the same time maintaining inner dignity. Shukhov does not change peasant habits and “doesn’t let himself down”, doesn’t humiliate himself because of a cigarette, because of rations, and certainly doesn’t lick the bowls, doesn’t denounce his comrades to improve his own fate.
Conscientiousness, unwillingness to live at someone else’s expense, or to cause inconvenience to someone, forces him to forbid his wife from collecting parcels for him in the camp, to justify the greedy Caesar and “not to stretch your belly on other people’s goods.” He also never feigns illness, and when he is seriously ill, he behaves guiltily in the medical unit: “What... Nikolai Semenych... I seem to be... sick...” Solzhenitsyn writes that he speaks at the same time “conscientiously, as if he was coveting something that belongs to someone else.” . And while he sat in this clean medical unit and did nothing for five whole minutes, he was very surprised by this: “it was wonderful for Shukhov to sit in such a clean room, in such silence...”
Work, according to Shukhov, is salvation from illness, from loneliness, from suffering. It is at work that a Russian person forgets himself, work gives satisfaction and positive emotions, of which prisoners have so few.
That’s why the character’s folk character emerges so clearly in his work scenes. Ivan Denisovich is a mason, a carpenter, a stove maker, and a poplar carver. “He who knows two things will also pick up ten,” says Solzhenitsyn. Even in captivity, he is overwhelmed by the excitement of the work, conveyed by the author in such a way that Ivan Denisovich’s feelings turn out to be inseparable from the author’s own. We understand that A.I. Solzhenitsyn is a good mason. He transfers all his skills to his character. AND human dignity, equality, freedom of spirit, according to Solzhenitsyn, is established in work; it is in the process of work that prisoners joke, even laugh. Everything can be taken away from a person, but the satisfaction of a job well done cannot be taken away.
The phrase where Shukhov says that “he himself doesn’t know whether he wanted it or not” has a very significant meaning for the writer. Prison, according to Solzhenitsyn, is a huge evil, violence, but suffering contributes to moral purification. With all their behavior in the camp, the heroes of A.I. Solzhenitsyn confirm the main idea of this work. Namely, that the soul cannot be taken captive, it cannot be deprived of its freedom. The formal release of Ivan Denisovich will not change his worldview, his value system, his view of many things, his essence.
The concentration camp, the totalitarian system could not enslave strong in spirit there were a lot of people in our long-suffering country, who stood their ground and did not let the country perish.
Name A.I. Solzhenitsyn appeared in fiction in the 60s, during the Khrushchev Thaw. “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” shocked readers with knowledge of the forbidden - camp life under Stalin.
For the first time, one of the countless islands of the Gulag archipelago was discovered. Behind him stood the state itself, a merciless totalitarian system that suppresses people.
The plot of the story is dedicated to the resistance of living - non-living, human - camp. Solzhenitsyn’s convict camp is a mediocre, dangerous, cruel machine that grinds down everyone who falls into it. The camp was created for the sake of murder, aimed at exterminating the main thing in a person - thoughts, conscience, memory.
Ivan Shukhov “life here was shaking from wake-up to lights-out.” And he had fewer and fewer reasons to remember his native hut. So who wins: camp - human? Or is man a camp? The camp defeated many and ground them into dust.
Ivan Denisovich goes through the vile temptations of the camp, which may be stronger or weaker, but they are relentless. On this endless day, the drama of resistance plays out. Some win it: Ivan Denisovich, Kavtorang, convict X-123, Alyoshka the Baptist, Senka Klevshin, Pavlop the brigadier, the brigadier Tyurin himself. Others are doomed to death: film director Tsezar Markovich, “jackal” Fetyukhov, foreman Der and others.
Life in the camp mercilessly persecutes everything human and implants the inhuman. Ivan Denisovich thinks to himself: “Work is like a stick, it has two ends: if you do it for people, give it quality; if you do it for a fool, give it show. Otherwise, everyone would have died long ago, it’s a well-known fact.” Ivan Shukhov firmly remembered the words of his first foreman Kuzemin, an old camp wolf who had been imprisoned for 12 years since 1943: “Here, guys, the law is the taiga, but people live here too. This is who dies in the camp: who licks the bowls, who hopes at the medical unit, and who goes to knock on their godfather’s door.” This is the essence of camp philosophy. The one who loses heart dies, becomes a slave to sick or hungry flesh, unable to strengthen himself from the inside and resist the temptation to pick up scraps or denounce a neighbor.
What is a camp? And how can a person live and survive in it? The camp is an image that is both real and surreal, absurd. This is both an everyday occurrence and a symbol, an embodiment eternal evil and the usual low anger, hatred, laziness, dirt, violence, thoughtlessness, adopted by the System.
Man fights with the camp, because it takes away the freedom to live for oneself, to be oneself. “Do not expose yourself” to the camp anywhere - this is the tactic of resistance. “And you should never yawn. You must try so that no warden sees you alone, but only in a crowd,” this is a survival tactic.
Despite the humiliating number system, people persistently call each other by their first, patronymic, and last names. Before us are faces, not cogs and not camp dust into which the System would like to turn people. To defend freedom in a convict camp means to internally depend as little as possible on its regime, on its destructive order, and to belong to oneself. Apart from sleep, the camp inmate lives for himself only in the morning - 10 minutes at breakfast, 5 minutes at lunch, and 5 minutes at dinner. This is the reality. That’s why Shukhov even eats “slowly, thoughtfully.” This is also liberation.
The closer the end of the story is, the clearer it becomes for us that the main thing in it is a dispute about spiritual values. Alyoshka the Baptist says that you need to pray “not for a parcel to be sent or for an extra portion of gruel. We need to pray about spiritual things, so that the Lord will remove the evil scum from our hearts...”
The ending of the story is paradoxical to perceive: “Ivan Denisovich fell asleep, completely satisfied... The day passed, unclouded by anything, almost happy.” If this is one of the “good” days, then what are the bad ones?!
Solzhenitsyn made a hole in the " iron curtain” and soon became an outcast himself. His books were banned and removed from libraries. By the time the writer was forcibly expelled from the USSR, “In the First Circle,” “Cancer Ward,” and “The Gulag Archipelago” had already been written. This was pursued with the full might of the state punitive machine.
The time of oblivion has passed. Solzhenitsyn's merit is that he was the first to talk about the terrible disaster that our long-suffering people and the author himself experienced. Solzhenitsyn lifted the veil over dark night our history of the period of Stalinism.
Works of literature about the fate of man in a totalitarian society (list): E. Zamyatin “We”, A. Platonov “The Pit”, “Chevengur”, A. Solzhenitsyn “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich”, “The Gulag Archipelago”, “In the First Circle” , “Cancer Ward”, V. Shalamov “ Kolyma stories”, V. Grossman “Life and Fate”, A. Rybakov “Children of the Arbat”, etc., G. Vladimov “Faithful Ruslan”, Y. Daniel “Redemption”
The theme of man and the totalitarian state in literature
Understanding the theme of man in a totalitarian society began in the 20s with the advent of the dystopian genre - the novel “We” by E. Zamyatin. Zamyatin's novel, written during the years of war communism, became a warning to humanity. A person in a totalitarian society is deprived of a name, and therefore of individuality, he is designated by a letter and numbers. All its activities are regulated by the state, up to sexual relations. In order to check the correctness of the flow of life, it is necessary a whole army observers. The life of the hero and his fellow citizens is imbued with faith in the Benefactor, who knows better than others how to make life beautiful. The election of the Benefactor turns into a national holiday.
An integral feature of a totalitarian society is the conviction of a person that what the state gives him is good, that there is no better country in the world.
A totalitarian state needs scientists who would help strengthen its power, but it does not need people with imagination, because fantasy makes a person think, see what the state would prefer to hide from its citizen. It is love that makes the hero rebel, but his rebellion is broken: he passively watches the murder of his beloved, he, devoid of imagination. It is love that becomes the enemy of totalitarianism, because it makes a person an individual, makes him forget the image of the Benefactor. Mother's love O-90 forces her to protest, to flee the state in order to keep the child, and not give him to the state. The novel “We” has universal significance; it is a reflection of any totalitarian regime based on the suppression of the human personality.
Solzhenitsyn's novels
The works of A. Solzhenitsyn are based on material experienced by the author himself. The writer is an ardent opponent of Soviet power as a totalitarian power. He tries to show the characters of people whose destinies are broken by society. This is how the situation in the novel “Cancer Ward” is a model of different representatives Soviet world, collected in the hospital by one misfortune - illness (cancer). Each image is a persistent system of beliefs: Oleg Kostoglotov, a former prisoner, an ardent opponent of the system, who understands all its anti-humanism; Shulubin, a Russian intellectual, participant in the revolution, outwardly accepts official morality, suffering from its inconsistencies; Rusanov is a man of the nomenklatura, for whom everything prescribed by the party and the state is accepted unconditionally, he does not torture himself moral issues, but sometimes benefits from his position. Main question disputes - is it moral? existing system. According to the author and his hero, Oleg, the answer is clear: the system is immoral, it poisons the souls of children even at school, teaching them to be like everyone else, depriving them of their personality; it reduces literature to serving its own interests (to recreate the image of a beautiful tomorrow), this is a system with a shifted scale of values that demands the same from a person. The fate of a person depends on the choice he makes.
A. Solzhenitsyn will write about this somewhat differently in “Archipelago”: he will say that in a totalitarian society, his insight depends on the fate of a person (the reasoning is that he could turn out not to be a prisoner, but an NKVD officer).
Works by G. Vladimirov
The totalitarian system distorts best features human character, leaves a mark for life. “Faithful Ruslan” is the story of a camp dog.
G. Vladimov shows that even after the dissolution of the camps, the camp dogs continue to wait for their duty to be fulfilled - they can’t do anything else. And when young builders arrive at the station and march in a column to the construction site, dogs surround them, which at first seems funny to the young people, and then terrible. A totalitarian system teaches a person to love his master and obey him unquestioningly. But there is a scene in the novel that shows that submission is not limitless: the prisoners refuse to leave the barracks in the cold, then the head of the camp orders to open the doors and pour ice water on the inside of the barracks, and then one of the shepherd dogs, the most talented one, clamps the hose with her teeth: so the beast protests against the inhumanity of people. The dying Ruslan dreams of his mother, the one whom the state took away from him, depriving him of his true feelings. And if Ruslan himself evokes sympathy, then the image of his master is disgusting in its primitiveness, cruelty, and soullessness.
Y. Daniel and the novel about the Thaw
The horror of totalitarianism is that even the souls of people with a fairly prosperous fate are broken by the totalitarian regime. The action of Y. Daniel's story “Atonement” takes place during the Khrushchev Thaw. The main character of the story is talented, honest, happy, he has many friends, and a wonderful woman loves him. But then an accusation falls upon him: a fleeting old acquaintance of the hero returns from the camp: he is convinced that he was imprisoned as a result of the hero’s denunciation. But the writer initially claims that the hero is not guilty. And now, without trial or investigation, without explanation, the hero finds himself in isolation: not only his colleagues, but also his friends have turned their backs on him; his beloved, unable to bear it, leaves. People are used to accusations, they believe everything; no matter what in in this case The poles change (the enemy of the people is an informer). The hero goes crazy, but before that he understands that everyone in this society is guilty, even those who have lived a quiet life. Everyone is poisoned by the poison of totalitarianism. To get rid of it, like to get rid of oneself as a slave, is the process of life of more than one generation.
The fate of a person in a totalitarian society is tragic - this is the conclusion of all works on this topic, but the attitude towards certain people varies domestic writers different, as different and from position.
Did you like it? Don't hide your joy from the world - share itMaterials are published with the personal permission of the author - Ph.D. Maznevoy O.A.
