Americans often find themselves working in outlandish moral
environments. Even the typical employer can
resemble a Darwinian jungle, a place in which humanism seems incongruous and
ethical thinking seems irrelevant to daily life. In corporate life, power isn’t easily
constrained. Business leaders silence
dissent and lay off troublemakers whenever senior leaders feel threatened. Apart from the fragile safeguards of union
membership and employment law, corporate leaders acts as savagely as the markets
they navigate. Marxist theorists always
said as much. Even so, Americans often
have access to some sort of ethical discourse.
If they are disempowered at work, they at least exercise the right to
participate in civic life by voting, attending church, or joining neighborhood
organizations. The typical American will
be terrorized at some point in his or her career, but usually not
simultaneously in every segment of his or her life. Thus it is almost impossible to conceive of
the Soviet experience in totalitarian terror, in which the Communist Party and
the state intruded into almost every dimension of a Soviet subject’s struggle
to make a life.
What does such
surveillance feel like? How does it
work? We have only to read Nadezhda
Mandelstam’s memoir, Hope Against Hope, to understand. According to the poet’s wife, the Soviet
government declared war on the individual, enlisting the active and ongoing
support of countless numbers of allies, including bureaucrats, employers,
police agents, educators, cultural actors, neighbors, and alleged friends. The result was victory, at least in the short
run. The individual always lost. He or she usually surrendered straightaway,
but if he or she offered resistance, the result was the same: destruction. Nadezhda Mandelstam’s memoir is
paradoxical of course. By writing it,
she offers some testimony in favor of the long-term violability of
individualism, memory, and revisionist history.
But every page of the book makes one feel that odds against the
individual are extraordinarily poor. If
the average American sometimes gives up in the face of corporate dishonesty and
brutality, how impossible is it to imagine doing battle with the employer when
he or she is fully aligned with a unitary government and its myriad
agents?
Below are a few of Nadezhda
Mandelstam’s throwaway lines about the unequal contest she wages for decades. What’s interesting about Hope Against Hope,
is the extent to which even this martyr for poetry admits to feeling implicated
in the Soviet Union’s ubiquitous system of oppression. For Nadezhda, the result was this: that there really was no way to operate
“outside” the evil of what Sheila Fitzpatrick called everyday Stalinism.
“When we met we spoke in whispers, glancing at the walls for
fear of eavesdropping neighbors or hidden microphones.”
“And we tried to become adept in Aesopian language.”
“The old Russian proverb that prison or the poorhouse waits
for every man has never been more true…”
“It was typical of Elsberg that, after getting his friend S. sent to a concentration camp, he continue to visit S.’s wife and gave her advice.”
“It was typical of Elsberg that, after getting his friend S. sent to a concentration camp, he continue to visit S.’s wife and gave her advice.”
“This was the seventeenth year after the creation of our
system.”
“Having entered a realm of non-being, I had lost the sense
of death. In the face of doom, even fear
disappears. Fear is a gleam of hope, the
will to live, self-assertion.:
“Later I often wondered whether it is right to scream when
you are being beaten and trampled underfoot…I decided it is better to
scream…Silence is the real crime against humanity.”
“There is a moment of truth when you are overcome by sheer
astonishment: ‘So that’s where I’m living,
and the sort of people I’m living with! So this is what they’re capable
of! So this is the world I live in!”
“People are shot everywhere,” the young physicist L. once
said to me. “More so here, you
think? Well, that’s progress.”
“My children love Stalin most of all, and me only second,”
Pasternak’s wife, Zinaida Nikolayevna, used to say.”
“All the murderers, provocateurs and informers had one
feature in common: it never occurred to them that their victims might one day
rise up again and speak.”
“…life can be far more terrible than death, as we have seen
in our times.”
“’How much further must we go?’ and [Arch-priest Avvakum]
replies: ‘Until the very grave, woman.’”
“They are going to behead me, as in Peter’s time.”
“In my long life I have often imagined that we had reached
the limit and that things would ‘ease off,’ as I put it. Nobody likes to part with his illusions.”
“There was in his mind a total contrast between ‘ordinary
people’ and the sort he had encountered in the Lubianka.”
“Walking around Cherdyn, he would look for [Akhmatova’s]
corpse in the ravines.”
“But does one need to be all that hypersensitive to be
broken by this life of ours?”
“When I asked them what she was like, they said she was ‘no
worse than anybody else.’ There are
indeed circumstances in which it is not possible to display high moral
qualities.”
“We all act ‘on instructions,’ and there is no sense in
closing our eyes to the fact.”
“Bleeding to death is not the worst way of getting out of
this life of ours…”
“Magnificent before the defenseless, they are only good at
savaging victims already caught in a trap.”
“’You said to So-and-so that you would rather live in Paris
than Moscow.’”
“The interrogator’s first question was ‘Why do you think you
were arrested?’”
“Public opinion here has always been conditioned to take the
side of the strong against the weak.”
“Why are we supposed to be brave enough to stand up to all
the horrors of the twentieth century prisons and camps? Are we supposed to sing as we fall into the
mass graves?”
“Nothing binds people together more than complicity in the
same crime…”
“When they rebuked him for being late, B. would say: ‘I always fall asleep when I’m in trouble.’”
“Because of this system of ‘interviews,’ people developed
two kinds of phobia—some suspected that everybody they met was an informer,
others that they might be taken for one.”
“This is how we lived, and this is why we are not the same
as other people.”
“…was it my fault for not getting rid of all of the friends
and acquaintances, as did most good wives and mothers at that time?”
“…in this country all real poetry is outrageous…”
“In that memorable year I had already come to understand one
or two things, but it was still not enough.”
“We have all, from top to bottom of society, learned
something, even though we have destroyed our culture in the process and
reverted to savagery.”
“…the people who were making history in those days had all
the cruelty and inconsistency of the children they were.”
“We were set on our fellow men like dogs, and the whole pack
of us licked the hunter’s hand, squealing incomprehensibly.”
“’We must create a type of Russian revolutionary woman,’
said Larisa Reisner…’The French Revolution created its own type. We must do the
same.’”
Sounds like a fascinating book! It's on my "To Read" list!
ReplyDelete