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
Top Related