Product Description
Great biography. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

Great Abridgement of an Extremely Important Work
In this abridgment authorized by Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago has been made even more accessible to more readers (the complete work is 1300 plus pages).One of the most important books of the 20th Century, The Gulag Archipelago exposed the horrific, authoritarian state that was the Soviet Union.In this book, Solzhenitsyn revealed the failure of the utopian, socialist/communist experiment in Russia.Sadly, in order to perpetuate this experiment, the Soviets used mass imprisonment as a way to control its citizens.The Gulag Archipelago was that system of prison camps stretching to the outer reaches of the Soviet Union.Solzhenitsyn was a prisoner of the Gulag for 8 years and collected his and others' stories in this book.Before this book, much of the West was still under the illusion that the Soviet Union was a wonderful workers' paradise.Solzhenitsyn shattered that myth.For those with an interest in the Cold War, you must read this book.

Stunning depiction of the epitome of Communist Tyranny
If one defines a totalitarian sytsm as a classification of government which attempts, throught the use of power and coercion, to control and regulate all aspects of communication and organizational life, there can be no doubt that The Gulag System, as depicted in The Gulag Arcipelago was in fact a mirror reflection of the larger totalitarian regime, and the epitome of ideological disparity which both motovated and inhibited Russo-American relations throughout the cold war era. A skillfully crafted true-to-life account of the penal system of the Stalinist regime.Awesome in the true sense of the word. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

National conscience in a book-- powerful
Alexander Solzhenitsyn edited a powerful book that dramatically impacted my life in my thinking about how nations are transformed.While it waspublished in 1974 (renewed in 1981) and obviously is now out of print, forseveral of the essays, this book is worth searching for.

It should benoted that Solzhenitsyn is much more well thought of in the West than inRussia today.Even though he returned to live in Moscow, Russiansgenerally feel he left the country to profit on his message, so he is notaccorded the same kind of respect given to other dissidents thatremained.

Still, there are powerful messages here.Personally, the mostimpacting was Solzhenitsyn's chapter "Repentance and theSelf-Limitation in the Life of Nations" and Igor Shafarevich's"Separation or Reconciliation? The Nationalities Question..."Inthese chapters the authors suggest that national "repentance" isa key aspect to any kind meaningful social change.The search for sinsbegins in ourselves and progresses upward on behalf of the nation.Hesays, nations "are suceptible to all moral feelings.. includingrepentance" (p. 109).The nation is "mystically weldedtogether" in this way.He further points to history to show thenature of Russian character in "penitental movements" as part ofthe national character that must be reclaimed to transform society.

Themessage of the book is that national transformations must occur at alllevels but be built on a spiritual foundation.It offers a critical viewof the roles of the church, socialism and personal conscience as obstaclesor conduits for change.

While the social and political nature of Russiahad dramatically entered upheaval for thepast 11 years (25 years afterthese essays were originally penned), the messages are still relevant forRussia today and equally applicable in many respects for our own country aswell. ... Read more

Product Description
Winner of the 1970 Nobel Prize for Literature ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

one of my top five
"One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch," is one of my favorite stories because Solzhenitsyn
is delightful.He fashions brilliant images (think sun-on-snow) and vivid descriptions of familiar thoughts and feelings.Or perhaps NOT so familiar, because in this fictionalized account of his own time in a Soviet labor camp, he displays a positive attitude, enjoys charming friendships, and even sees some good in his captors.
I reread this regularly for the sheer joy I feel being with Ivan D. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (22)

August 1914
I was told that the book was "like new," but upon recept found that it had scratches in the lower portion of the spine. It was only a dollar, so I am not too put out, but if I had known this I may have chosen to purchase a different version, one that was actually "like new."

More Russian literature than war novel.
August 1914 does not strive for the same goals as many war novels, and perhaps should not even be seriously included in that category. I view it as part of Solzhenitsyn's "War and Peace in 1914" and approached it more as a reader of Russian literature than of war novels. Despite the time spent, it is not particularly (or really much at all) concerned with discussing the tactical or strategic minutia involved with the Tannenberg campaign, doing so only to advance the plot, but of trying to capture a sense of the people and times in which it took place.

Aside from the disjointed amalgamation of screenplays and newspaper headlines, the characterizations of many of the actors I found to be not terribly compelling, particularly in light of some of the shades-of-Dostoevsky characters created in other similar Solzhenitsyn works such as The First Circle.

I found myself almost constantly wondering when it was characters doing the talking or Solzhenitsyn saying his own thing from 50 years of hindsight through the characters. This sentiment also contributes to the feeling that the characters lack a certain something present in Solzhenitsyn's other works. This may be an inevitable byproduct of the readers' worldview which is shaped by fame Solzhenitsyn has achieved as a chronicler and critic of the USSR. Nevertheless, this flatness is covered up better in many of his other books.

It feels in many places incomplete and Solzhenitsyn himself has implied as much. It is a pity that it didn't get further than it has, but it is still a valuable piece of literature.

I really wanted to like this book
I was really hoping that I would like this book. I just don't see why people consider Solzhenitsyn to be such a brilliant writer. This seemed to me to read like an unfinished work. The writing is o.k. but the characters are somewhat flat, the story is confusing and lacking direction and, at the end, it's like he started writing a different story that had little or nothing to do with the first. Like someone else already said: a well-done narrative history would be more informative, more interesting, and more entertaining. I definatly won't be moving on to the next book in the series.

Not recommended.

August 1914: Bland
Title: August 1914 by Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Pages: 622

Time spent on the "to read" shelf: 4 or 5 years.

Days spent reading it: 6 days.

Why I read it: In high school I was forced to read "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich." I remember not liking it at all. I thought it was boring. But many things I found boring in high school I now enjoy. So I thought I would read another novel by Solzhenitsyn, and see how it went.

Brief review: I am not sure what I was expecting, but this book was not it. From Solzenhitsyn I guess I expected a little more. The characters were fairly flat, thus it was difficult to tell one officer from another. The fighting sequences were complicated. I had no idea if an advance was good or bad, even after the battle was explained. I have read good war novels that explain complicated maneuvers. The Killer Angels comes to mind as a good example, where I could envision the entire battle and basic battle plans were given as pictures on occasion so I understood the flow of the battle better. That was not present in August 1914 and I think the book suffers because of it.

I have no deep understanding of the Russian front during World War I. So this was my first real exposure to that era. One thing that is brought out in this book was how terrible the conditions of war are. My tenth grade English teacher once summed up every war novel. She said their theme is always very simple: "War is hell." August 1914 does not press this point as much as other novels, but it does convey the hardships endured by the soldiers of the day. The one overriding theme that I did understand was that the Russian generals were completely incompetent in this battle. From start to finish Solzenhitsyn blasts the generals in charge of this offensive (and defensive) blunder.

I had a few qualms with this book in its current form. First, every now and then the narrative stops and we are given these "scenes" that are written with screen play directions. These directions were apparently how Solzenhitsyn envisioned this book on film. It was strange to break the flow of the story in order to introduce his vision for another medium. It felt like the book was 90% complete, not 100% complete. And, oddly, chapter 22 was omitted "by the request of the author." Strange. I have read that this book was revised later and nearly 200 pages were added to it. I don't think I could read through 200 more pages, but I wonder if it would clarify some of the issues I had with the work.

Anyway, in brief, this book was alright, but I would not read it again and I would not recommend it to anyone unless they were extremely interested in Russian literature (or possibly Russian history).

Favorite quote: "Evil people always support each other; that is their chief strength."

Stars: 2.5 out of 5

Final Word: Bland.

Best Translation of an Epic Work
"August 1914" kicks off the epic "Red Wheel" as Solzhenitsyn tries to capture the coming of the Russian Revolution in a series of novels. Another man's book is on Solzhenitsyn's mind; how can a Russian novelist write an epic on war and not confront Tolstoy and "War and Peace"? Tolstoy even makes a brief appearance at the start of the book. Solzhenitsyn guides the reader through the disastrous Russian invasion of East Prussia in August 1914 and unveils a number of characters-some real and some imaginary. There are haunting portraits of General Samsanov and Tsar Nicholas II. There are also descriptions of the battle and Solzhenitsyn's background from World War Two help him a great deal; these are some of the greatest battle scenes I have ever read. He guides the reader through the staff headquarters and to the front lines. He also offers unforgettable characters drawn from all of Russian society: a well off family at home, young officers connecting with the men, radical students, gentle peasants serving as troops. While his narrative is excellent, Solzhenitsyn is not as strong when he attempts to mimic the "camera eye" used by John Dos Passos in the USA trilogy. Nor does he quite succeed when he lists a number of headlines from the newspapers or offers detailed history in small print. But these are minor flaws that do not take away from the grand epic.

If you are reading the work in English, make sure you use the version translated by H.T. Willetts that was released in 1989 and FSG published the paperback in 2000. This version, unlike the original, contains a scathing look at Lenin as well as a detailed description of the rise and death of Stolypin, the one Russian statesman who may have been able to lead Tsarist Russia through the chaos it would succumb to during the Great War.

Be warned. This is an epic undertaking. The book is almost a 1,000 pages and I advise you keep notes on characters, events and places. This is not a book for everyone. But it is a great epic and, if not up to the level of "War and Peace", "August 1914" is still in the same ballpark. How many other recent novels can we make that claim about? ... Read more

Product Description
4.5 hr. unabridged, read by Frank Muller ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

A Day in the Life of a Stalinist Slave Camp
Having read "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich", I was intrigued when I found a copy of this play.As with many plays it may be easier to see this work performed than to read it.While it possesses many of the same qualities as "One Day ...", it has many more flaws.

The main plot shows Rodion Nemov, a new prisoner losing his idealism to Lyuba Nyegnevitskaya.As they fall for each other, the unanswered question is whether Nemov is willing to keep their happiness secret as Lyuba gains luxuries while living with a doctor.Even if this is the main story, it seems to occupy little actual text.The story is flooded with so many characters, it is often difficult to track who is doing what.Certainly, this sacrifices some of the nuances that Solzhenitsyn was trying to portray.

I really like the concept behind this "indecent proposal" storyline in a Stalinist labor camp.Unfortunately, it might be hard to tell the story in more widely scattered wreckage.

Compromise and Socialistic Ideals
It is difficult to evaluate a play only from the written script, and even harder when that script is a translation, but I think the major points of this play show well enough to do this.

The play is set in one of the work camps of post-1945 Russia, and most of its denizens are political prisoners serving ten or twenty year sentences for violation of Soviet Penal Code Article 58 (basically treasonous talk, writing, or actions against the Soviet Union). This point is strongly emphasized by how the prisoners respond to roll-call, by citing the relevant section of this code (of which there are many) that they were sentenced under. How these political prisoners are treated is sharply different from what the normal (or as they are referred to here, the `pros' - professional criminals) prisoners receive.

The main story line deals with Nemov (the `innocent'), who at the start of the play is in charge of the production work force, and Lyuba (the `love-girl'), a supposed `secretary', actually bed-mate to the camp's hospital doctor. Nemov is shown early on to be naive in the ways of the camp, unwilling to make compromises or make deals to further his own ends, but it quickly becomes apparent that this is the only way to survive in these camps, and leads to his demotion to general labor. It is only after he meets and falls in love with Lyuba that he seems to understand the need for these deals, when he has something he truly wants.

There is a very large cast of characters, many of which are only spear carriers, but it is very difficult to sort these out from the important ones until fairly deep into the play. And as the portrayed environment and political culture is radically different from most Westerner's experience, the early portion of this play is quite confusing. Later it becomes much more obvious that Solzhenitsyn is criticizing how these camps are organized, the `production quota' system where the goals are subject to daily changes, the rating of various types of work being worth fixed amounts set by state agencies and having no relationship to the actual value, how essential goods and better jobs are allocated within these camps, and showing how these items lead to a near-capitalistic `black market' in goods and services.

As the environment and basic themes are very similar to that of One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, his first published novel that has also been produced as a television play, comparison is invited, and this play comes up a very poor second to that novel. This play seems muddied and confused, with too many characters and a diffuse story line, to where its major points are almost buried, whereas One Day's simplicity and directness makes it satirical underpinnings deadly effective. Given that Solzhenitsyn did much of his writing during the late fifties, but couldn't publish them at that time, it would seem possible to me that this play was actually written before One Day, and suffers from writing inexperience. It is also possible that this translation is not the best, as the almost lyrical prose so present in One Day seems to be sadly lacking here.

Clearly not his best, and the reader would be better served by reading his more acclaimed works: One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, The First Circle, Cancer Ward, and the Gulag Archipelago, all of which are more than deserving of a read.

--- Reviewed by Patrick Shepherd (hyperpat)

Campland
When we get annoyed at Solzhenitsyn's lack of insight in contemporary politics (for instance, when he applauds the Russian intervention in Chechnya), we can turn back to his depictions of life in the Soviet work camps and delight in the fact that he used to be different (when the ruling was an enemy suiting his conservative and slavophile ideas, as one is tempted to add).

'The Love-Girl and the Innocent' is a brilliant play about the inhuman world of the camps, that have their own rules, and where nothing of the world outside matters.The 'Innocent' is a newly arrived prisoner, who still bears idealism and is reluctant to adopt the camp techniques of survival. His love for Lyuba, one of the many women forced by circumstances to sell themselves for privileges and rations, tempts him to compromise with himself and betray his moral and emotional loyalties. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

The Prisoner's Dilemma
Like Solzhenitsyn's first literary work, the novella "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich", his first full-length novel "The First Circle" is an autobiographical work based upon his experiences as a political prisoner of the Soviet regime. The title is an allusion to Dante's first circle of Hell in "The Divine Comedy", that being the circle reserved for virtuous pagans, especially the ancient Greek and Roman philosophers, who because of their paganism were denied entry to Heaven butbecause of their virtue were not otherwise punished.

The novel is set in Mavrino, a place which can be considered part of the "First Circle" of the Soviet penal system. Mavrino, a former stately home now converted to a "sharashka", or special prison, is a very different place to the Gulag described in "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich". It is not situated in Siberia, or some other remote part of the country, but in the Moscow suburbs. The prisoners, who are mostly intellectuals, especially scientists, engineers or mathematicians, are adequately fed and enjoy good working conditions. They are put to work on technical projects of use to the Soviet military or to the MVD, the organisation which was later to become the KGB.

The novel is unusual in that there is no single main character. One of the prisoners, the mathematician Gleb Nerzhin, is said to be an autobiographical character, based upon Solzhenitsyn himself, but several other characters are given equal prominence.Instead, we are introduced to a wide cross-section of the prisoners, some of the guards, officials and free workers in the prison, as well as a few outsiders. What can be described as the main plot is set in motion when Innokenty Volodin, an official at the Soviet Foreign Ministry, makes a telephone call to a doctor friend, warning him not to give samples of a new drug to a French colleague as he fears that such an action could be construed as espionage by the authorities. Unfortunately for Volodin, the call has been recorded by the secret police and a copy of the recording is sent to Mavrino, where some of the prisoners are already working on a project to invent a system of "voiceprints" which will enable an individual to be infallibly identified from a recording of his voice.

The main action takes place over only three days (December 25th-27th 1949), but there are numerous flashbacks which Solzhenitsyn uses to fill in the background of his characters. We learn that few, if any, of the prisoners have committed serious crimes; most are either guilty of trivial offences or else have been framed by the authorities, normally under the notorious Article 58 of the Soviet Penal Code which defined "counter-revolutionary activity" and which enabled Stalin to imprison as "enemies of the people" any opponents of the Communist system or of his rule. (Solzhenitsyn himself was sentenced to ten years imprisonment for some unflattering remarks he made about the "big boss" in a private letter which was intercepted by the military censors).

The main philosophical theme of the novel is the moral dilemma facing the prisoners. They are acutely aware that they are much better off than the prisoners in the "regular" Gulags, but some have moral scruples about working for the system that is responsible for their suffering, especially as many of the projects they are working on are designed to help the secret police track down and capture other dissidents. The book ends with several prisoners, including Nerzhin and the physicist Illarion Gerasimovich, being transferred to the much harsher regime of the labour camps after they refuse to cooperate with the authorities. Contrasting with their attitude is that of another prisoner, the philologist Lev Rubin who is a key worker on the "voiceprint" project. Despite his imprisonment Rubin remains a convinced Communist and supporter of the Soviet system, who carries out his work enthusiastically. It is his research that leads to the arrest not only of Volodin but also of his totally innocent colleague Shchevronok. (The "voiceprint" system is not as foolproof as Rubin had hoped, and he is forced to admit that he cannot be certain which of the two men made the fatal telephone call. To be on the safe side, therefore, the authorities arrest them both).

This does not necessarily mean that Rubin is the villain of the novel; indeed, he is said to be based on Solzhenitsyn's friend and fellow-dissident Lev Kopelev. On a personal level Rubin is intelligent, cultured and humane. Solzhenitsyn's quarrel is not with the man himself but rather with the ideology he represents and with the "end justifies the means" mentality which that ideology fosters. Rubin believes that anything that furthers the interests of the Party will also further the interests of mankind, so if the Party's interests require that men be murdered, tortured or unjustly imprisoned, then murder, torture and unjust imprisonment- even his own- are morally justified.

Indeed, there are remarkably few villains in the novel, apart from real-life individuals such as Stalin and his brutal Minister of State Security Viktor Abakumov. (Stalin isbriefly but memorably depicted as a paranoid and self-pitying megalomaniac). Although Mavrino has its fair share of brutal guards and venal stoolpigeons, Solzhenitsyn reveals a certain sympathy even for the officials in charge of the prison, such as the Head of Research Colonel Yakanov, confronted with the impossible demands of his superiors, who in turn are placed in an impossible position by the demands of the Party leaders. Even Abakumov lives in constant fear of Stalin.

During my youth in the 1970s and 1980s, Solzhenitsyn was a much talked-about author in the West, although (or perhaps because) his work was banned in Russia. He was hailed on the political Right, and also by some on the non-Communist Left, as one of the Soviet Union's most prominent dissidents. With the end of the Cold War, however, the position was reversed. Although his works could now be published in Russia, interest in him in the West began to wane; his conservative Russian nationalism, his adherence to the Orthodox faith, his support for President Putin and his trenchant criticisms of Western materialism made him an unlikely ally for many of those Westerners who had once feted him. Reading "The First Circle" for the first time made me wonder if we had in fact feted him for the wrong reasons, for transient political rather than artistic ones. Although he was indeed a strong critic of the Soviet system, he was more than that. Like others among his works, the book is a powerful testament to the power of the human spirit to meet hardship and oppression with stoicism and dignity.
... Read more

Customer Reviews (4)

St. Al and the Dragon
I had been reading this book, off and on, for a few months when word came that Alexander Solzhenitsyn had died.What an improbable miracle, that he died outside Moscow at the age of 89, of old age!Surely he would have been glad to know that would be his fate, as a young captain heading west to engage the German invaders, as a new inmate in the belly of the Gulag (like Agent Jones -- or was it Smith? -- being swallowed by the insect at the end of Men in Black), as a cancer patient a few years later -- or during the period covered by this memoir, a knight in the shining armor of truth, facing Leviathan with nothing but the "sword of the spirit," as St. Paul put it.(Or even later, in exile in Vermont.)

It was a deliberate, considered engagement, as Solzhenitsyn shows, though he did not always follow what he saw as his own best instincts.The world knows him best today for two books: One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich (check Amazon sales), and The Gulag Archipelago.(My own favorite is First Circle, however.)This memoir is more or less framed by the publication of those two works -- the first of which made him famous, the second which forced the dragon to cough him out, and finally brought that dragon to its knees.(I prefer not to compare the Soviet Union to a bear -- I like bears.)Solzhenitsyn describes the contest blow-by-blow, guessing what various aparachniks are thinking (to the extent he gives them credit for so exalted an activity), "allies," in particular the poet and publisher Tvardovsky, described with consummate humanity, and his own chess game, played as it was with most the opposing pieces hidden.

I'm not sure that this book is meant for "foreigners" like myself.The writer is dialoguing, if not with himself, or his inner daemon, with the Russian people of his day.This may be why I haven't devoured it, as with one of Solzhenitsyn's novels -- which are written for Russia, too, but also for the ages, for man as man -- but take it in pieces.It's a long book, too -- not light reading, but meaty reading, and with lots of tangents.

One of the glories of Solzhenitsyn's writing is the sense that ghosts surround him -- a passion of duty, Hamlet but sane because the Holy Ghost is also there, he is not speaking or living on his own behalf, but on behalf of those who died, and of a nation whose soul was lost.He seems to hear the voice that Socrates heard, as he was waiting to die: "The most important thing is not life, but the good life . . . one must not give way or retreat or leave one's post . . . Do not value either your children or your life or anything else more than goodness, in order that when you arrive in Hades you may have all this as your defense before the rulers there."

Not in Hades, but in heaven, for whatever his sins may have been, I think he will hear, "Well done, good and faithful servant."

He was also a great writer, by the way!

"One man dies of fear, another is brought to life by it."
Solzhenitsyn writes (p 114) that the quote might have been made for him. The odd title, The Oak and the Calf, is referred to (p 190) as follows: "At any point I can call the book finished or unfinished. I can abandon it or continue it as long as life goes on, or until the calf breaks its neck butting the oak, or until the oak cracks and comes crashing down." Subtitled "Sketches of Literary Life in the Soviet Union" Solzhenitsyn details the difficulties involved in getting his writings published, including specifics of conversations with the staff at Novy Mir, a monthly literary journal, especially involving the editor-in-chief. Surprisingly, the government allowed publication of A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich (a prison camp worker), but others were deemed unsuitable (read - the government didn't want the truth to get out). Although his (p 300) A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, Cancer Ward, and the "lightened" First Circle won him win the Nobel Prize, he'd written much more at that point which he had "kept in reserve." Of winning (p 289) "And what does a Nobel Prize mean to a writer from a Communist country? Somebody's bungled! Sorry--wrong address! Too hot to handle! Or else, get ready to be tarred and feathered." He describes those who stand in the way of the truth: of a censor reading one of his novels (p 176), "But his eyes lit up--well, they weren't his eyes, of course, but replacements installed by the censorship; nor could he call his nostrils his own, since the censorship had equipped them with olfactory hairs..." Notably, The First Circle, The Feast of the Victors, The Republic of Labor and his camp verses were confiscated on September 11, 1965 (Pp 105, 106), his first wife helped the KGB build its case against him, a woman was murdered by the KGB (p 345) after telling them where a copy of Gulag (which she was not supposed to have kept) was hidden, and his works were regularly seized and then published without his knowledge or consent, sometimes in other countries. The book ends with him being picked up and taken to Lefortovo Isolation Prison, although with chapter titles like; The Wounded Beast, The Noose Snaps, Asphyxiation and End of the Road, the reader can deduce, without prior knowledge, his likely fate. An appendix follows which contains the text of letters and conversations referred to in the book.

Although The Oak and the Calf helps in understanding the goings on at the time Solzhenitsyn was trying to publish, it is probably only necessary reading for those who have read some of his other works and want to know more about him or them. Of his other titles, A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, brief and hugely important in gaining a bit of understanding about the plight of Russians under Stalin's rule is a must read. Equally essential, though extremely long and detailed, is The Gulag Archipelago. Both provide insight into a largely overlooked and understudied issue in Russia's history, Stalin's GULAG (Main Camp Administration) system of forced labor camps, which resulted in the death of millions of innocent people. Other great reads on the same subject: Kolyma Tales (short stories) by Varlam Shalamov, Journey into the Whirlwind (memoir) by Eugenia Semyonovna Ginzburg, Man is Wolf to Man (memoir) by Janusz Bardach and Kathleen Gleeson and Gulag (non-fiction) by Anne Applebaum.

The Oak and the Calf
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn holds the honour of being the author to break the news to the world of Russia's treatment of its people. Before him, the Western world - and, disturbingly, a large portion of Russia - had only a faint idea of the true depth of lies, deceit, exploitation and murder that were being committed under the rule of the Communist government. The Oak and the Calf is his memoir of the difficulties faced in being published in Russia, at a time when even typewriters were controlled by the government and publishing without attack by the censors was unheard of. It is a clear, lucid portrayal of Solzhenitsyn's decades long battle to write.

The book is split into four sections, of which the first two and the last two form separate wholes. The first half of the novel recounts his difficulties in first becoming published, then details the difficulties in making Russia and the world aware of Russia's mistakes; the second half focuses on Solzhenitsyn's battles with the KGB to ensure that he was able to publish his more incriminating works within Russia, while avoiding imprisonment, exile or death.

Solzhenitsyn spent the first twenty years of his adult life first at the Russian front in World War II, and then in a labour camp, where he was sentenced after criticising Stalin in personal correspondence. After that, he contracted cancer; he spent time recovering in a hospital at Tashkent. During this time, he would compose prose in his mind - there were no opportunities to write down and store text. He relates that he would spend a week of each month while in the labor camp, going over what he had written in his mind until he remembered it perfectly. He composed his thoughts, wrote prose, plotted novels. From a young age, he wanted to be a writer. Thanks to his imprisonment, Solzhenitsyn gained the source material with which to write.

When Solzhenitsyn was in his forties, he was finally able to publish his work. At home now, living with his second wife (his first abandoned him when he went to the labour camps), Solzhenitsyn could write, but the realities of publishing in Russia were slim.

He had two options. The first, samizdat, an underground network of writers and readers. The second was to be published in one of Russia's literary magazines, but the requirements of publication included the necessity of government censure and approval. Solzhenitsyn, in his own words, 'lightened' a novel of his, Shch-854. Thanks to the confidence of magazine Novy Mir's editor, Alexander Tvardovsky, the novel was published under the name, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. In this book, Solzhenitsyn said what had never been said before - he accurately and honestly described life in the labor camps. What was once taboo was out in the open. It was a sensation, and his name was made.

Instantly, Solzhenitsyn was one of the most dangerous men in Russia. What was the government to do? If they imprisoned him again, or killed him, the outcry would be horrific. But if they allowed him to publish further, then... They were in a terrible place, but so was Solzhenitsyn. His publisher, Novy Mir, faced increasing pressure to silence their new author, and on top of that Tvardovsky began to get wet feet. Still, Solzhenitsyn wrote and tried to publish.

Imagine what we have here. An outstanding novelist is forced to shrink away and hide in the dark. His first published work has caused a sensation in his home country (and, later, abroad), and for that he faces prison, exile or death. And yet, for all that, he continues to write. He scatters his literature throughout the samizdat network, entrusting his terrible, accusative words to friends and strangers. He smuggles his work across the border, to a safe in the West, which is to be opened upon his death. From the very moment One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich is released, Solzhenitsyn must live as a man who can be seized at any time. In one chilling paragraph, Solzhenitsyn outlines what he was prepared to do if they took his children: 'They did not know that we had thought of this and made a superhuman decision: our children were no dearer to us than the memory of the millions done to death, and nothing could make us stop that book.' Can we in the West imagine such consequences for writing? Can we possibly understand what Solzhenitsyn dealt with every day?

While attempting to publish further works, how often Solzhenitsyn hears these words: 'Circumstances could not be less favorable to publication than they are at present. It would probably be impossible, and it would certainly be dangerous, to try bringing it out this year.' Years go by, with little of his work appearing in Russian. His relationship with Tvardovsky forms the bulk of the first half, it is a sad, unequal affair. Tvardovsky is a man of talent, but not talent on the level of Solzhenitsyn. He is more timid, less skilled, and nowhere near as bold. And yet, thanks to Solzhenitsyn's loyalty, they remain together for ten years, up to and including the time when Solzhenitsyn win the Nobel.

The second half of the novel focuses on the struggle Solzhenitsyn undertook for the publication of The Gulag Archipelago, which the author considers his most powerful and damning book. We learn of the machinations involved in dealings with the KGB, as well as the convoluted, intricate schemes Solzhenitsyn and his allies used to transmit, hide and recover pieces of his work.

We are more removed from this half of the novel, perhaps because we cannot rely on the emotional connection that the friendship between Tvardovsky and Solzhenitsyn provided in the first half. This does not weaken the text, it remains a compelling account of struggle in the face of insurmountable odds.

One thing that Solzhenitsyn never explicitly states - but which runs through the entire piece - is that he has a strong feeling of patriotism towards Russia. Not the USSR Russia, but the grand fatherland, the vanished grandeur of his home. Many times, he could have fled to the West to publish at his leisure. Many times, he could have published his vast unpublished works in America and elsewhere. But he stayed with Russia for as long as possible, attempting always to publish first in his home country before anywhere else. He was the cancer from the inside. He needed to show Russia that she was sick; foreigners came second.

A compelling aspect of Solzhenitsyn's work is that he does not indulge in grandiloquent passages of destiny. Nor does he invoke some triumphant mandate of heaven that requires him to write. No, Solzhenitsyn simply states, many times, that what he needs to do with his life is write what he has seen, what he knows, what he thinks. Does a doctor brag of his ability to diagnose illness? No, and nor does Solzhenitsyn when he identifies Russia's vast sickness. Perhaps his talents were the only ones capable of correctly examining the illness, perhaps his skill was the only one capable of showing Russia - and the world - how to heal, but Solzhenitsyn does not seek to glorify himself. He writes, for he is but a humble author. Would that we all possessed such a pen.

I LIKE GULAG ARCHIPELAGO, BUT I LOVE THIS BOOK THE BEST
Don't get me wrong, Gulag Archipelago is one of my favorite all-time works.It's place in world history is secure.But the Oak and the Calf is a personal history of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (arguably the greatest living writer in the world).

At a time when the punishment for owning a copy of Gulag was DEATH, Solzhenitsyn was not afraid to stand up to the Soviet system ALONE AND UNARMED (He has a lot in common with Mahatma Ghandi).

When you are armed with truth and you stand firm, it is Evil itself that must eventually back down.

How did Solzhenitsyn gain so much courage?How did he handle the Soviet system without becoming a corpse?How was he able to write his first several books while still a prisoner in the prison camps?What kept him going when things looked the most bleak?

We can learn much about commitment, will-power, and dedication to principles of truth by seeing how Solzhenitsyn did it.By reading this book, Solzhenitsyn can be your mentor and teach you through his example.

--George Stancliffe ... Read more