One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich (Hardcover)

Hisotry, to Solzhenitsyn, as it was to Tolstoy, is the theatre and arena in which the abominations as well as the glories of human behavior are revealed at their most powerful and on the grandest scale.

For Solzhenitsyn, however, the tragedies of individuals are not decreed by fate, as they were for Tolstoy. Solzhenitsyn sees instead tragedies as parts, packets or "knots" (uzly) of an even larger tragedy. The very things that debase their victims are, for Solzhenitsyn, not the result of "historical necessity," but rather a part of a larger evil, e.g., Soviet society.

Solzhenitsyn is not a revolutionary, however, he is an artist. At times his retelling of the history of twentieth century Russia is stark, bleak and unadorned, however in relating the results of events, Solzhenitsyn always seeks out the causes which have brought about the historical consequences. The major actions occurring in history, as Solzhenitsyn sees it, are due to the consciously-defined motivations of human beings.

For Solzhenitsyn, tragedy is distinctly non-classical and non-Tolstoyan. Heroic characters are not tragically-flawed, innocent victims as they are for Tolstoy. Solzhenitsyn's works are, instead, populated with persons who are either intrinsically evil or intrinsically good. For him, the intrinsically evil certainly outnumber the intrinsically good, although they do not necessarily defeat them. This is a distinctly non-classical, non-nineteenth century view.

For Solzhenitsyn, men create their own tragedy and history and they are the ones who must shoulder the blame.

Solzhenitsyn's style of writing is economical and unadorned. His motto might well be "wie es eigentlich gewesen," or "tell it like it is." As such, he writes in the everyday language of the labor camps. This causes much confusion in translation although it reads perfectly well in the original Russian.

In fact, many "unprintable" Russian words can be found in One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch, all rendered with the frankness of a Henry Miller novel. Solzhenitsyn, however, uses obscenities, not to shock, but to show how debased human beings can become.

The blunt language used by Solzhenitsyn lends an "immediacy and sincerity of tone" to his work. His scenes are enhanced by this device, whether it be a scene in the barracks, at a construction site, or during friskings and body counts.

One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch is told in the "skaz" or folktale manner in the Russian tradition of Pilniak, Zamyatin and Babel, not to mention prerevolutionary writers like Leskov and Gogol. In the skaz tradition, the storyteller, or narrator, shares the same level as the main character in the story. The skaz strategy for storytelling permits the author to insert much "local color" into the story as well as humorous or ironic observations and commentary.

The narrator in One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch allows the reader to participate in situations and to listen to conversations as if he were really there. This is further enhanced by the fact that the language employed is, at times, quite simple and slangy and filled with "zek argot."

Solzhenitsyn, however, established no clear dividing line between Shukhov's speaking and his own speaking. At times, this device necessitates that the reader take great care in untangling an unspoken monologue of Shukhov from an external observation made by the author through the third person narrator.

Additionally, when Shukov, himself, is speaking in dialogue, it is difficult to know whether he is speaking to the reader or to another character.

It is obvious that Solzhenitsyn has employed a number of literary techniques in the telling of One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch. His message in this book, as well as in other books is to convey the raw truth in all its bleakness. In avoiding lengthy sentences and ornamental descriptions (a la Dickens or Dostoyevsky), Solzhenitsyn accomplishes a stoic austerity in style equal to the stoic austerity of his scenes in a Siberian labor camp.