Literary Impressions and Reflections of the 1917Russian Revolution

By: Hailey Paige

Introduction

The Russian Revolution set a landmark in Russian

history that completely overturned the social and political

thought and livelihood that had existed under the autocracy

for 200 years. After the 1905 Revolution, the inadequacies

of Tsar Nicholas II became transparent to not only

government officials, but also the general public.

Discontent and criticisms to the injustice of the system

eventually culminated in the Revolution of 1917 giving raise

to a socialist state in the Soviet Union led by Bolshevik

leader Vladimir Lenin. General overlaying historical

accounts have been made on the topic, but an approach not

commonly analyzed is through the literary works of

contemporaneous writers. Living through the experiences of

the Revolution and the subsequent Civil War, writers from

both the bourgeoisie and working class encapsulated the

atmosphere of the era and the mindset of their respective

1

groups through their writing. Many great works of poetry and

prose were written relative to the revolutionary period from

the two diverse classes. Difference in opinion is notably

distinct between the rich and poor factions, who generally

separated to the White and Red armies in the Civil War,

respectively. Whatever party one supported during the

Revolution and Civil War, however, tended to merge once the

Bolsheviks established Socialism. Widespread displeasure

with the Communist regime surfaced as the years dragged on.

Russian literature of the mid-century produced several

critiques of the regime through analysis of the

revolutionary period and the beginning of the Civil War. The

attitudes of authors writing simultaneous to the Revolution

and Civil War were generally distinctive to their classes,

but a communal response to the Socialist Era that followed

can be observed in later literature.

Russian Writer’s Impressions Prior To The Revolution

Literary works created and published in the years

approaching the Revolution can decidedly be split between

2

two categories based on class: the bourgeoisie and the

peasant/working class. At this time in Russia a middle class

was distinctively nonexistent with the autocratic government

favored the bourgeoisie and largely ignoring the daily

necessitates of the common people. For that reason the

grievances and discontents throughout the Imperial Russian

Empire were limited to the lower and working classes. Even

though this group made up the majority of the nation, their

voices were largely unheard, particularly in the realm of

written word, be it poetry, prose, or literature. Highborn

writers were most readily published and read. The

disinterest in the common opinion, however, did not stop

certain individuals from making a name in the literary

world. With the onset of World War I and the changing tides

of Russian society due to the Revolution of 1905, more

voices were being listened to. The country would be changed

forever in the February Revolution of 1917, but the

awareness in the years proceeding is notably contrasted

between the two class levels.

3

Bourgeoisie

With a huge disparity in the lives between the rich and

poor it is not speculated why the bourgeoisie were not

particularly concerned about the welfare of the lower

classes. For the most part their lives and distresses were

unseen to them. When the war struck in 1914, however, the

distinctions between classes became more visible throughout

the cities. Violence and strife as well as the deprived

conditions of the working class and their lack of food were

observable on the streets. Enjoying a life of comfort and

privilege most Russian bourgeoisie directed their attentions

away from the growing concerns in the cities to other

matters, like maintaining their lifestyles. Other select

reform minded elites were conscious of the changes and

understood the importance the coming events would have on

the nation.

Marina Tsvetaeva exhibits the perfect example of a

bourgeoisie writer who held no support for the tensions

rising in Imperial Russia. Moscow born, Tsvetaeva grew up in

an aristocratic family of considerable comfort. She traveled

4

to Paris to study at Sorbonne in 1908 for an education in

French poetry and literary history.1 On her return to Russia

she did not approve of the anger and discontent that was

growing in Moscow. She wrote in her journal: “In the air of

the compartment [train] hung only three axe-like words:

bourgeoisie, Junkers, leeches.”2 Ignorant to the conditions

and concerns of the common class, Tsvetaeva’s poetry before

the Revolution agonized about the coming years. In “An

Otherworldly Evening” she wrote, “The beginning of January,

1916, the beginning of the last year of the old world. The

war at full heat. Dark forces.”3 She describes the

approaching change of the country in an element of darkness.

Seeing her future as uncertain after the change of

government filled her with a sense of foreboding. Indeed

once revolution struck her life did experience a drastic

transformation in the Socialist era.

Novelist Vladimir Nabokov, famously remembered for his

novel Lolita, was another child of the aristocracy. A 1 Martin J. King, ed. and trans, Marina Tsvetaeva, A Captive Spirit: Selected Prose (Ann Arbor, Michigan: Ardis, 1980) 1.2 Ibid 12.3 Ibid 174.

5

politically liberal family, however, Nabokov was the son of

Vladimir Dmitrievich Nabokov, a progressive statesmen and

member of the Constitutional Democratic Party. He was a

member of the First Duma and later became secretary to the

Provisional Government before the Bolsheviks overthrew it in

the October Revolution. Rejecting the state of affairs

Imperial Russia maintained prior to 1917, Nabokov followed

in his father’s opinions. He remembers as a youth how his

father would preach to him the ideas of revolution: “A fiery

revolutionary, he would gesture vehemently on our country

rambles and speak of humanity and freedom and the badness of

warfare and the sad necessity of blowing up tyrants.”4

Despite his father’s enthusiastic teachings, however,

Nabokov never became a committed advocator of the

Revolution. He remarks how his privileged childhood

benefited him during his later years in exile from the

Soviet Union. Though Nabokov believed in the ideals of the

Revolution he did not commend the same dedication his father

4 Vladimir Nabokov, Speak Memory (London: Penguin Group, 1969) 24.

6

did and instead devoted himself to his studies abroad and

his life as a modern novelist.

Another poet born from the elite class saw a shift in

his beliefs due to the changing social conditions in

Imperial Russia in the early 20th century. Mikhail Kuzmin

was a remembered contributor of the Silver Age of Russian

Poetry. He followed the political turmoil of the revolutions

and initially rejected the “gabble of revolutionary

turkeys.”5 Kuzmin viewed the upheaval as a cultural conflict

between the Europeanized intelligentsia and bourgeoisie

versus the Russian masses.6 He did not believe the

Revolution was being made by the common masses, but by the

liberal and radical opinion of the Jews. In 1905 he joined

the loyalist right-winged nationalist party, the Union of

the Russian People, in a belief that it represented the

common mass.7 This organization represented anti-Semitic

beliefs held by urban lower and middle classes, landowners,

nationalist intelligentsia, workers, and peasantry who 5 John E. Malmstad, Mikhail Kuzmin: A Life in Art (Cambridge: Harvard UniversityPress, 1999) 85.6 Ibid 87.7 Ibid 89.

7

organized political assassinations of representatives that

supported the Revolution of 1905. Despite his strong stance

against the Revolution, however, he was an author who

majorly benefited from new liberties granted. His novel

Wings dealt with homosexual topics that were taboo in

Imperial Russia. The radical work could not have been

published before 1905. Previous censorships that would have

forbidden the book were abolished. Whether writers supported

the revolutions or not the influences they provided were

inevitable.

Peasant and Working Class

The majority population of Imperial Russia was composed

of the peasant and working classes. Since before the fall of

serfdom in the 1860’s the distinction between the lower and

uppers classes of society failed to level out. Even though

all men were technically free, they were now more dependent

on themselves to find work and food. With little to no help

from the government, it was a constant struggle to support

oneself and their family. After 1905, however, the seed was

8

planted and the idea of revolution began to grow. Peasant

voices began to speak up for an end to the autocracy and

cried for revolution to change the nation.

Vladimir Mayakovsky was a popular Russian poet during

the early 20th century and one of the most outspoken voices

of the protest demonstrations leading up to the February

Revolution. Coming from impoverished backgrounds, he had

strong reactions of the events in 1905 and joined the Social

Democratic Workers’ Party at the young age of thirteen.8 He

worked at an underground printing press for which he was

arrested in 1908. He was arrested again two times the

following year as well. His poetic activity did not begin

until 1911, however. In 1913 he penned a forthright

manifesto on the philosophy of Futurism and the downfall of

Tsarist society.9 Russian Futurism was inspired by the idea

of modern machinery and urban life. Mayakovsky devoted his

attention to this philosophy, basing his political beliefs

on its ideas. In 1914 he was expelled by Moscow Art School

8 Herbert Marshall, ed. and trans., Mayakovsky (New York: Hill and Wang, 1965) 53.9 Ibid 55.

9

for his political activities, but he continued to work under

the labor of Futurism. He intertwined his ideas of

revolution and his occupation of a writer. He asserted:

“That was revolution. That was verse. Revolution and verse

somehow blended in my head.”10 One of his most significant

poems, “A Cloud in Trousers,” was published preceding the

Revolution and cemented him as an esteemed poet

internationally. The poem discussed the subjects of love,

revolution, religion, and art from the point of view of a

jilted lover. The poem encouraged the masses to take up

rebellion against the state: “Hey, passers-by, take your

hands from your pockets—pick up a bomb, a knife or a stone,

and those without hands, or arms in their sockets—come and

batter with bare brows alone!”11 His work took on the

Russian national spirit, declaring war on both classic and

modern art and proclaiming the bourgeoisie as their enemies.

He continued to work with the Bolsheviks throughout the war

in Petrograd where he was drafted into the Military

10 Ibid 78.11 Ibid 113.

10

Automobile School.12 He would witness and play a role in the

upcoming turmoil that was building in the cities.

Many writers recognized the changing atmosphere as an

important shift in Russian history. Zinaida Hippius was a

poet and religious thinker who has often been called “one of

the most enigmatic and intelligent women of her time in

Russia.”13 Though her father was a senior officer in the

Russian Senate, he died when she was very young leaving her

family with little money. She turned to writing as her

emotional outlet. Her early work dealt with religious

notions, but after 1905 she saw the social changes as

Russia’s most important discussion. She harshly criticized

the Tsar with cries like “Autocracy is from the Antichrist!”

and sought to spread her revolutionary ideals around

Europe.14 When World War I broke out she rebuffed Imperial

Russia’s involvement under the guise of patriotic motives.

Hippius was observant of her surroundings and did not ignore

12 Edward J. Brown, Mayakovsky: A Poet in Revolution (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973) 145.13 Temira Pachmuss, ed. and trans., Between Paris and St. Petersburg: Selected Diaries Of Zinaida Hippius (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1975) 3.14 Ibid 25.

11

societal issues. She believed religious salvation was

Russia’s greatest hope to escape the Tsar’s tyranny and to

structure a utopian society.

Russian Writer’s Impressions During and Following The

Revolution

Whether writers supported the hostilities arising in

Imperial Russia or not, the events occurring throughout the

cities were impossible to ignore. Many authors focused their

attentions on the political changes that were occurring on

the social and political scale. Depending on if one

supported the revolutionary activities or not generally

determined if they would stay in the cities or escape to the

countryside where aggression could be avoided. From

whichever platform they viewed the course of events leading

up to February 1917, their reactions and impressions were

all distinct. Some encouraged the Revolution, while others

rejected its ideas. Whatever their position in February,

however, a general alliance in thought was formed after

October against the Socialist regime that settled over the

12

country as living conditions dropped universally for all

classes.

Bourgeoisie

As a non-supporter and noblewoman, Tsvetaeva escaped

the frightening sights of the Moscow and moved to poet

Maximilian Voloshin’s Black Sea Resort of Koktebel, which

had become a haven for aristocratic writers and artists.

Here she met her husband Seryozha Efron, a cadet in the

Officers’ Academy. His enlistment in the war and the scenes

she witnessed of the Revolution further appalled her with

their impoverished and violent nature. After 1917 her

husband joined the White Army and she moved back to Moscow

to reunite with him and show her support for the anti-

Communist movement.15 She lived there with her daughters for

five years, experiencing a terrible famine at the beginning

of Lenin’s Socialist regime. With no source to feed herself

or her children, she placed them in an orphanage with the

hope they would be cared for and fed. When one of her

15 King 1-2.

13

daughters died of starvation she came to bitterly resent the

new Socialist government even more. Writing lost its

importance to Tsvetaeva and survival became paramount. She

released little to no work during this period of her life.

In 1922 she moved to Berlin with her surviving daughter to

escape the oppressing conditions of the Soviet Union. Though

still impoverished she was able to survive and continue

writing.

From a similar background, Nabokov showed limited

interest in the Revolution, likely due to his young age. His

father was an active participator, however. As a member of

the First Duma, he was arrested after its disbandment for a

revolutionary manifesto he wrote in 1908.16 After his

release he was forbidden to take part in public elections.

Though he did not take part in the active component of the

March Revolution in 1917, he did contribute to the early

stages of the Provisional Government. He served in the

Council of Ministers and later the Constituent Assembly.

After the November Revolution, however, the Bolsheviks

16 Nabokov 137.

14

forced the Nabokov family to flee to Crimea. They stayed

there until the defeat of the White Army and then moved

westward where Nabokov pursued an education as a writer and

poet. Though he had little concern for the events leading up

the Revolution, Nabokov did not support the Bolshevik regime

that followed and renounced Leninism in his later work.

Kuzmin, despite his initial oppositions to the 1905

Revolution, stayed in Imperial Russia and welcomed the

revolutions of 1917. With bleak news coming back from the

front since 1914, Kuzmin detested Imperial Russia’s

involvement in World War I and saw a revolution as a doable

end to the country’s participation. He said of the war, “…

it will be the end of everything. And the end of us.”17 With

the economy in tatters and the government lurching from one

crisis to another, Russia was in need of a resolution. With

positive socialist fervor, he called for a revolution that

was “youthful, chaste, and righteous.”18 When the Bolsheviks

finally seized power in October, he embraced them as a

solution for peace. His faith in them soon diminished, 17 Malmstad 253.18 Ibid 254.

15

however, when the fighting quieted down and daily struggles

for survival set in. He came to renounce his earlier naïveté

and longed for the overthrow of the Bolsheviks. In his poem

“The Angel Announcing Good Tidings,” he commented on the

tyranny of the state: “They took away bread, light, warmth…

They locked us in a cage… ‘Live and be free!’”19 He held

hopes that the regime would fall, but the unlikelihood of

that eventuality became clearer as the years passed.

Peasant and Working Class

On the ground level writers were much more proactive in

their contribution towards the revolutionary atmosphere.

Mayakovsky continued to direct his attention toward helping

the Social Democratic Party. He made posters, placards, and

wrote captions and verses that called for volunteers for the

Red Guards. Becoming a real troubadour for the revolutionary

cause, he travelled from town to town reciting his poems to

encourage support for the Bolsheviks: “The streets shall be

our brushes the square our palettes for 150,000,000 speak

19 Ibid 273-4.

16

through these lips of mine. Bullets—rhythm, rhyme—gunfire

from building to building.”20 Remaining close to the people,

Mayakovsky was able to connect and embody the national

spirit of the Revolution. In “Very Good—An October Poem,” he

called to the masses to take up resistance to reclaim Russia

as their homeland. He speaks of a nation where all are free

to enjoy the wealth of the land and eat as much food as they

desire. He declared this possible only through revolution.

He considered himself a revolutionary writer, which by his

definition participated in everyday activity and preached

socialism.21 Following the Revolution he continued to work

as a poet, encouraging cooperation with the new Soviet

Government. He would become the first poet of the Soviet

epoch and a promoter of socialist society.

Hippius was also in full support of the February

Revolution in 1917. She welcomed the change wholeheartedly

and viewed the Revolution as an outlet for “revolutionary

destruction” that had laid dormant and that would transform

20 Marshall 18.21 Ibid 24.

17

Russia into a free nation.22 She believed new order would be

established that would introduce freedom, equality, and

brotherhood to citizens. Her main desire was that a

religious consciousness would grow among the population that

had been suppressed by the autocracy and the Russian

church.23 She wrote manifestos for the Socialist

Revolutionary party and passed them to the Provisional

Government for review. Eventually a democratic model that

observed the idealistic nature of freedom and universality

surpassed her religious mission. Her ideal was a “republic

of god,” a theocratic democracy exemplifying Christianity.

Just as in 1905, however, her expectations of the February

Revolution were not met. The Provisional Government proved

to be indecisive and weak, which allowed the Bolsheviks to

stage another revolution in October and cement their power.

She saw the October Revolution as the end of Russia. She

hoped for the fall of the Bolshevik regime, but seeing no

end in sight she fled to Poland where she continued to write

on the themes of Russia and freedom.22 Pachmuss 39.23 Ibid.

18

Since 1905 the idea of revolution was ingrained in the

minds of the Russia people. After the outbreak of the war

the ineffectiveness of the government and unfair conditions

of the lower social classes became starkly obvious. The call

for revolution only increased as the war dragged on and Tsar

Nicholas II continued to show his inabilities as a leader.

Once the long awaited revolution struck in 1917, however,

the happiness surrounding the event was short lived. The

entire country collapsed and the government remained shaky.

When Lenin and the Bolsheviks took power the conditions of

citizens only became worse as daily life now became a

constant struggle for survival. Besides Mayakovsky, who

became the most talented poet of the Soviet era, all the

other aforementioned writers were disappointed and angered

by the outcome of the Revolution. For the bourgeoisie,

lifestyle changed so suddenly and drastically it was

incomprehensible, which influenced many to move to Western

Europe. Some members of the lower classes followed suit, but

many were too poor to uproot. The depressed conditions under

the autocracy only worsened under Lenin’s regime. The

19

socialist mindset that swept the nation made revolutionary

thought and action near impossible to manifest as the

Communist era dawned on the newly formed Soviet Union.

Remembrance Through Literature

As the tides of the nation were turning Russian authors

were greatly impacted by the social and political changes of

the early 20th century. In the years approaching 1917

participation in the changing atmosphere was not required.

As evidenced, many bourgeoisie writers simply moved out of

Russian cities to vacation homes or to Western Europe to

escape the ensuing turmoil. Authors who championed the

common classes, like Mayakovsky, remained and experienced

the full weight of the Revolution. Whether one supported the

overthrow of the autocracy or not the political turnover did

occur and everyone reacted and was impacted differently.

Many were overjoyed, while others were unsure of the

country’s future without the political structure that has

held them together for 200 years. Whatever ones opinion, a

widespread regret settled over the nation after October 1917

20

when the Socialist regime declared authority. The theory of

equal social ownership of land and production that was

promised through socialism was greatly embraced by the lower

classes, but when their economic livelihood became worse

then under Tsardom it was too late to reverse the drastic

political revolution that had taken place. Just as the

political events and atmosphere leading up to and during the

Revolution were captured in contemporary poetry and prose of

the period, literature also came to be a reflection of the

judgments of the era. A handful of famous works were written

about the string of traumatic events that occurred from 1914

to the 1920s, that being participation in World War I,

followed by the Russian Revolution, and then the Civil War.

Through literature authors were able to remember these

events decades after their occurrence. After a period of

digestion writers were able to better analyze the events

from various angles and perspectives to create a more

rounded impression of the time on the different social

classes.

21

And Quiet Flows the Don

Winning the Noble Prize for Literature, Aleksandrovich

Sholokhov wrote And Quiet Flows The Don in serial form,

releasing the novel in three volumes from 1925 to 1932. The

work follows the life of Don Cossacks, a group of eastern

Slavic peoples predominantly from Ukraine and southern

Russia, as they experience struggles throughout World War I,

the Russian Revolution, and the Russian Civil War. The novel

raises the peasant question, as while as racial minority

issues, and criticisms of the Tsar. The Cossacks were viewed

as second-class citizens that were required to yield to

upper class “pure” Russians, like those from Moscow and St.

Petersburg. In addition to the disrespect in everyday life,

they were also forced to fight in World War I. An important

passage comes in Chapter 9 of the War volume when a

Ukrainian named Garanzha questioned the forced loyalty of

the state. He rants that they are not fighting for their

country but the bourgeoisie and the Tsar. “You think you’re

fighting for the Czar, but what is the Czar? The czar’s a

nobody, and the Czarina’s a chicken; but they’re both a

22

weight on our backs.”24 Eventually Garanzha transforms the

main character Grigory’s way of thinking. He starts to

question all his former ideas about the Tsar, the country,

and what his duty as a Cossack means for Russia. Garanzha

continues by insisting that a turnover in government must

come to pass. He asserts that when a workers’ government is

established there will be no more cause for war. Garanzha,

however, is not the only character to raise the discussion

of the fall of Tsardom. In another scene among Cossack

soldiers, the men are discussing the growing power of the

Social Democrats and the direction of the country towards

1917. An article of war written by Lenin is read:

The bourgeoisie is deluding the masses by cloaking the

imperialist spoliation with the old ideology of a

‘national’ war. The working class exposes this

deception, raising the cry of transforming the

imperialist into civil war. Of course, such a

transformation is not easy and cannot be accomplished

‘at the wish’ of individual parties. But that is the 24 Mikhail Sholokhov, And Quiet Flows the Don (New York: Vintage Books, 1934)268-9.

23

transformation, which lies in the objective conditions

of capitalism, and of the period of the end of

capitalism in particular. And in this direction, and

this direction alone, must the Socialists carry on

their activities.25

The creation of a government by the working class, a

workers’ dictatorship, is what the Socialists are

envisioning. They accuse the government of sending millions

of soldiers to the front lines to die in order to seize new

lands and oppress peoples of minority nationalities.26 By

using the Tsar’s treachery and autocracy as a point of

injustice and grief, the Socialists advertise the concept of

a government ruled by the people.

And Quiet Flows the Don deals with a lot of issues as

viewed from the lower classes, like the overthrow of the

Tsar and the consequential revolution, as well the Civil War

that followed and life under the Soviet regime. After the

November Revolution much of the population was at a loss for

the future of the country. Having been ruled under an 25 Ibid 284.26 Ibid 292.

24

autocracy for 200 years, an alteration in government was

difficult to imagine. The novel captures the concerns of

both the upper class, who fear the end of their bourgeoisie

lifestyles and equality to the working classes, and the

lower class, who are mostly ignorant to the politics and are

simply being strung along. Once the Soviet Government

established firm authority, however, the treatment of the

Cossacks worsened as they were persecuted by

Decossackization, which was a Bolshevik policy that promoted

the systemic segregation of the Cossacks as an ethnic,

political, and economic entity.27

Sholokhov wrote this novel over fourteen years from

1926-1940. He was a Cossack himself of lowly backgrounds and

joined the Bolsheviks in the Civil War. The experiences in

the novel and those from the previous volume in Tales from the

Don, were largely based on his own. He devoted himself to

creating an example of Socialist realism. And Quiet Flows the

Don became the most widely read novel in the Soviet Union

during the mid-century. Though the work features an obvious 27 Nicholas V. Riasanovsky, A History of Russia, 7th ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005) 467.

25

Communist position, it depicts the split between generations

and the Red and White factions of the Civil War.28 The end,

which was controversial throughout the Soviet Union, saw the

main character Grigory return to his home as oppose to

joining the Red Army, promoting the notion for peace and the

end of the constant conflicts that had plagued Russia since

the beginning of the 20th century.

Doctor Zhivago

Boris Pasternak’s Doctor Zhivago details the revolutions

from the perspective of a gentry-class physician and the

circumstances that follow and restructure his life. Yuri

Zhivago is drafted into the army during World War I and

injured on the battlefield. From the hospital he hears about

the February Revolution and Tsar Nicholas II’s abdication:

“Big news! Street fighting in Petersburg! The Petersburg

garrison has joined the insurgents! The revolution!”29

February is followed with anarchy on the front lines and

28 “Prominent Russians: Sholokhov.” 29 Boris Pasternak, Doctor Zhivago (New York: Pantheon Books Inc., 1958) 128.

26

revolutionary zeal throughout the country. When October

comes and the Civil War begins, Zhivago flees to a small

town called Melyuzeyevo in the Ural Mountains. His life is

completely uprooted and when he finally returns to Moscow he

finds his home drastically altered and his family deported

to France. The October Revolution had devalued money and

food had to be bartered. His pre-war lifestyle completely

transformed and survival now becomes a struggle.

The ideals behind the Revolution were still fresh and

hope was still present, however. Zhivago excitedly stated,

“Last night I was watching the meeting in the square. An

extraordinary sight! Mother Russia is on the move, she can’t

stand still, she’s restless and she can’t find rest, she’s

talking and she can’t stop.”30 He viewed the Revolution as a

positive transformation for the country. As he progressed in

life, however, Zhivago realized the naïveté of his young

ideas and how most people just reiterate intellectual

phrases without understanding the meaning of their words and

the ramifications of their actions. In this tentative period

30 Ibid 146.

27

of history, power-seeking individuals took advantage of

impressionable revolutionary minds to pursue their own

ambitions. Zhivago and by default Pasternak, assert the

failings of the Revolution. While initially the

revolutionary pursuits were directed for a good cause, their

goals were warped and corrupted by the Civil War and the

political figures that arose from it.

Publishers initially rejected Pasternak’s novel for its

position on socialist realism. Zhivago concerns himself more

with the sensibilities and welfare of the characters, as

oppose to the interests of the Socialist state. A major

theme in the work is the death of idealism in the Communist

era and the atrocities of both the Red and White armies to

Russian society. Pasternak shared these views and included

subtle criticisms of Stalinism, collective farming, and the

Great Purge that characterized Stalin’s regime and as a

result some critics viewed the work as anti-Soviet.31 The

novel was refused publication in the Soviet Union so

Pasternak took it to Italy for print in 1957. He received 31 "Doctor Zhivago": Letter to Boris Pasternak from the Editors of Novyi Mir.

28

the Nobel Prize for Literature for Doctor Zhivago, which only

further enraged the Communist party.32

The Red Wheel

In 1971 Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn released a cycle of

historical novels called The Red Wheel that dealt with the

violent end of Imperial Russia and the complicated

beginnings of the Soviet Union. The first installment is

entitled August 1914. This work follows Russia throughout the

First World War, specifically in their defeat at the Battle

of Tannenberg. Throughout the war Russia was extremely ill

equipped for action. Men were frequently sent to the front

lines without any ammunition and expected to pick up

firearms from their fallen comrades. The main character

Colonel Vorotyntsev is sent to report on the Second Army in

East Prussia. He observes the degree to which Russia in

unprepared and improperly supplied for the war. The army was

expected to cover impossible distances, communication was

poor, and soldiers were lacking provisions. Solzhenitsyn

32 Ibid.

29

paralleled the inadequacies of the Russian army to the

Tsarist regime. Despite repeated warnings from advisors,

Nicholas II could not gain a handle on the failures of the

war and the resulting social discontents that developed due

to the economic strains placed on the working and peasant

classes threw the country toward revolt. Russia would be

bailed out of the war by the violent culmination of

grievances in the February Revolution, switching one

conflict for another.

Following Part One of The Red Wheel cycle, Solzhenitsyn

published November 1916, which opens at the outset of the

Russian Revolution and threads a narrative through the eyes

of front line soldiers, workers’ in St. Petersburg,

preparations by Vladimir Lenin and Alexander Parvus for the

Bolshevik administration, and even Tsar Nicholas II. In this

installment, instead of revolving around a specific event,

the novel illustrates the atmosphere clouding Russia during

the months prior to the Revolution. Political and

philosophical arguments are typically presented through long

conversations between characters. Despite Solzhenitsyn’s

30

disapproval for overly liberal thinking at this period of

Russian history, he gives attention to viewpoints from all

levels of the political and social spectrum. Even with a

variety of viewpoints, however, the narrative tends to rant

and badger the topic of disposal of the autocracy. Topics

revolving around the corruption of the government and the

inadequacies of the Tsar were ever present. Critics often

complain that the work is overly dense in detail and lacks

narrative.33 Exiled from the Soviet Union in the 1970s for

his outspoken critic of Stalin’s Soviet regime, he spent

seventeen years writing the entirety of The Red Wheel cycle in

Germany and later the United States.34 Though the cycle was

one of his less popular pieces of work, he raised global

awareness of Soviet oppression in his works The Gulag

Archipelago and One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, which both

described the forced labor camp system. The moral courage in

his literature inspired a generation of nonconformists to

carry on the struggle against ethical injustice.

33 Donald Rayfield, “Solzhenitsyn’s Literary Legacy.” 34 Ibid.

31

Conclusion

The Revolution of 1917 was met with both excitement and

concern between the bourgeoisie and lower classes. Each

group knew that changes would ensue, but the outcome was

indeterminate. Figures writing contemporaneous to the era

were largely split in opinion between their respective

classes. Elites were filled with insecurity as their lives

were indefinitely uprooted and their comfort lost. Members

of the lower classes looked to the Revolution for a

potential positive change in their lives. Dividing into the

Red and White armies the two divisions battled in the Civil

War with the Bolsheviks establishing a Socialist victory on

the nation. The idea of equality quickly turned from hope to

despair as conditions had now worsened for both classes. The

diverging opinions between the two groups before the Civil

War merged into a general discontent that spanned throughout

the Communist Era. Literature that was authored later in the

century looked back on the revolutionary era with a critical

eye. Over time authors where able to utilize the now

understood historical events and the distinctive classes of

32

the pre-revolutionary period to craft award-winning novels.

All three authors of the analyzed works Sholokhov,

Pasternak, and Solzhenitsyn won the Nobel Prize for

Literature. Their works encompassed the contrasting opinions

and ideas of the groups in the Revolution, the naïveté of

their ideals, and the consequences of the resulting

Socialist regime that ruled the country for the following 70

years.

Work Cited

33

Berberova, Nina. The Italics Are Mine. Trans. Philippe Radley.

New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1969. Print.

Brown, Edward J. Mayakovsky: A Poet In The Revolution. Princeton:

Princeton University Press, 1973. Print.

Chervinski, Alexander. Heart Of A Dog. Trans. Michael Glenny.

Woodstock, Illinois: The Dramatic Publishing Company,

1989. Print.

 "Doctor Zhivago": Letter to Boris Pasternak from the

Editors of Novyi Mir. Daedalus, Vol. 89, No. 3, The Russian

Intelligentsia (Summer, 1960), p. 648–668. Web.

Figes, Orlando. A People’s Tragedy: A History Of The Russian Revolution.

New York: Viking Penguin, 1997. Print.

Figes, Orlando. The Whisperers: Private Life In Stalin’s Russia. New

York: Metropolitan Books, 2007. Print.

King, J. Marin, ed. and trans. Marina Tsvetaeva, A Captive Spirit:

Selected Prose. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Ardis, 1980. Print.

Malmstad, John E. and Nikolay Bogomolov. Mikhail Kuzmin: A Life In

Art. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999. Print.

34

Marshall, Herbert, ed. and trans. Mayakovsky. New York: Hill

and Wang, 1965. Print.

Mayakovsky, Vladimir. Poems. Trans. Dorian Rottenberg.

Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1972. Print.

Nabokov, Vladimir. Speak, Memory. London: Penguin Group,

1969. Print.

Owen, Launcelot A. The Russian Peasant Movement, 1916-1917. New

York: Russell & Russell Inc., 1963. Print.

Pachmuss, Temira, ed. and trans. Between Paris and St. Petersburg:

Selected Diaries Of Zinaida Hippius. Urbana: University of

Illinois Press, 1975. Print.

Pasternak, Boris. Doctor Zhivago. Trans. Max Hayward. New

York: Pantheon Books Inc., 1958. Print.

“Prominent Russians: Mikhail Sholokhov.” Russiapedia.

Autonomous Nonprofit Organization, n.d. Web. 17

December 2013. http://russiapedia.rt.com/prominent-

russians/literature/mikhail-sholokhov/.

35

Rayfield, Donald. “Solzhenitsyn’s Literary Legacy.” The

Guardian News and Media. n.d,. 4 August 2008. Web. 18

December 2013.

<http://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2008/aug/04

/solzhenitsynsliterarylegacy>.

Riasanovsky, Nicholas V. and Mark D. Steinberg. A History Of

Russia. 7th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Print.

Sholokhov, Mikhail. And Quiet Flows The Don. Trans. Stephen

Garry. New York: Vintage Books, 1934. Print.

Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr. August 1914. . Trans. Michael

Glenny. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 1971.

Print.

Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr. November 1916. . Trans. H. T.

Willetts. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 1984.

Print.

Tolstoy, Leo. Anna Karenina. Trans. Richard Pevear. New York:

Penguin Books, 2000. Print.

Trotsky, Leon. My Life: An Attempt At An Autobiography. New York:

Pathfinder Press, 1970. Print.

36

37