Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

What do you think about Ivan's day?

I'm exhausted, and very cold, and hungry.

loved the detail, felt the cold.

I started this one early, and found the first half tedious. The second half was a bit more interesting due to the conversations about Eisenstein, religion and work, but all in all it left me pretty empty. I gave it 2 stars. Might have given 2.5 if I could.

I could also feel the cold and I was particularly drawn into the description of waiting to get back in the camp in the evening at dinner time. For some reason it reminded me of dealing with thousands of people on trains on a daily basis during a commute. We all want to get home and the last thing we want is someone else messing up the routine.

I was struck by the feeling of hope and almost a strange contentment at the end of the book. As if the human spirit will see out solace, routine, and certainty in even the toughest situations. I also only gave it 2 stars originally but I'm now thinking maybe I was a bit harsh.

I read it a couple of years ago and don't remember too much of it. I definitely felt the cold! I remember the attachment the men felt towards their tools and how you didn't mess with them. I have favorites at my office (don't take my stapler!) and could relate. I think I was struck by how little the guards seemed to interfere with the men. Most German WWII stories focus on how cruel and/or nice guards were, but here they seemed to be as miserable and trapped as the men. Perhaps I'm misremembering.

When I received my used copy of this book from a used bookstore, it had this newspaper article (published in the week following Solzhenitsyn's death in 2008) folded up and inserted into its pages:

[From the Washington Post Book World, Aug 10-16, 2008]
IN MEMORIAM - THE UNYIELDING SOLZHENITSYN


Finding treasures like that is one of the reasons I love purchasing used books. I recently bought a used copy of Gone with the Wind for my mother, and there was a business card inside it belonging to a reporter from the Graduate School of Journalism at Columbia.

It seemed fitting to buy a used copy of One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich as a sort of tribute to the great pleasure that can come from small and simple things.

“Someone that you have deprived of everything is no longer in your power. He is once again entirely free.�

Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ has a page of Alexander Solzhenitsyn quotes:
http://www.goodreads.com/author/quote...

It was snowing outside on the day I read this book. It was only a dusting, but to someone who positively despises the cold, it was too much. Yet, I was out of flavored creamer for my coffee. I couldn't possibly have been expected to go out in that to buy hazelnut creamer for my coffee. I was just going to have to suffer through using plain old 2% milk.

Then I read about Shukhov (A.K.A. Ivan Denisovich, Shcha-854) and I realized that I don't know what cold is.

Or hunger.

Or exhaustion.

Or suffering.

It is humbling to realize just how good I've got it.

Sunny in Wonderland wrote: "It was snowing outside on the day I read this book. It was only a dusting, but to someone who positively despises the cold, it was too much. Yet, I was out of flavored creamer for my coffee. I coul..."

Well said.

I was struck by the telescoping of Ivan's mental life, to the smallest daily concerns. I think that's what happens to all of us when we lose control over large (or ALL, poor prisoners) parts of our environment. I also was saddened that in such an unforgiving situation, where the ability to sustain life was close to the edge, that almost everyone is an enemy, and knowing and living within the bounds of your status in the camp pecking order, and sucking up to the right people is the overarching concern. Basically everyone in the camps was reduced to an animal level, and everything that makes us wonderfully human driven out.

Stephanie "Jedigal" wrote: "I also was saddened that in such an unforgiving situation, where the ability to sustain life was close to the edge, that almost everyone is an enemy, and knowing and living within the bounds of your status in the camp pecking order, and sucking up to the right people is the overarching concern. Basically everyone in the camps was reduced to an animal level, and everything that makes us wonderfully human driven out...."

Yes, and that competition between prisoners just added to the general paranoia. And yet, there seemed to be real camaraderie between some of the workers of Shukhov's group, and the group leader was highly respected for the way he manipulated and worked for the good of the group. And while everything seemed to have a price, there was an interesting voluntary generosity where recompense was hoped for but never assumed... a sort of wordless agreement of give and take.

I found a interesting article on this book:

A movie of the same name as the book was produced in 1970... here is the full version on YouTurbe -

In a sense, the level of minute detail ascribed to Shukhov's tasks and his opinions thereof is a little turgid. However, I can't help but feel that this is rather the point of the novel in some respects.

The greatness of this novel lies not in the beauty of the prose, or the compelling nature of the story-telling (I didn't find it remotely compulsive reading), but in the insight that it gives the reader into the mind of such a prisoner, and by extension, the political situation of the time.

What is also extremely important is that the novel covers only the one day of the title. I found that in many ways, detailing sheer exhaustion of a single day in the life of a prisoner actually makes the long and possibly hopeless sentences of the prisoners seem that much more daunting that it might have done had the book covered a longer timeframe.

Not an enjoyable novel per se, but a must-read nonetheless.

Ben wrote: "What is also extremely important is that the novel covers only the one day of the title. I found that in many ways, detailing sheer exhaustion of a single day in the life of a prisoner actually makes the long and possibly hopeless sentences of the prisoners seem that much more daunting that it might have done had the book covered a longer timeframe..."

There was a point during the reading when all I could think about was how this goes on day after day after day, and the idea of 10 or 25 years seemed too oppressive to bear. In fact, if I remember correctly, Shukhov mentioned the total count of days he would be there -- 3,650 -- and you could just feel the weight of each one of those days.

Can't wait to start it!!

I'm only about a third of the way through at the moment, but one thing struck me. Solzhenitsyn asks "Can a man who's warm understand one who's freezing?", which I see as a metaphor for Solzhenitsyn's enterprise.
How can we in the west truly, fully understand what went on in the GULag. Particularly as we consider this work, which was the first account of the labour camps to be received in the West.

David wrote: "I'm only about a third of the way through at the moment, but one thing struck me. Solzhenitsyn asks "Can a man who's warm understand one who's freezing?", which I see as a metaphor for Solzhenitsyn..."

Good point. I realized while I was reading it that this is no longer new news, but at the time of its publication, it must have been quite shocking.

I read this a few months ago. I cannot believe men worked in -40 degree weather.

Aside from all the big stuff, a little thing struck me. His portrayal of the Baptists: seemingly their faith and belief allowed them to be content or at least not complain about their suffering.
Perhaps this stood out to me because Solzhenitsyn was the favorite author of a teacher of mine at a private Christian school.
I'm not sure how devout Solzhenitsyn was, but I know he did reference God and the necessity of belief when he was in exile.

Diane wrote: "Aside from all the big stuff, a little thing struck me. His portrayal of the Baptists: seemingly their faith and belief allowed them to be content or at least not complain about their suffering.
P..."

I'm fairly certain Solzhenitsyn believed in God, but I don't know whether he was a Christian or belonged to any church.
The discussion at the end between Shukhov and Alyoshka is interesting, because he paints the orthodox priests as only serving themselves, and not looking out for the interests of their people. So, I don't think Solzhenitsyn was especially fond of the Orthodox church.

Alyoshka says, 'Be glad you're in prison. Here you have time to think about your soul.' The only other person who comes close to Alyoshka in that sense is Shukhov, but here his joy seems to be nothing more than a survival mechanism.

David wrote: "Alyoshka says, 'Be glad you're in prison. Here you have time to think about your soul.' The only other person who comes close to Alyoshka in that sense is Shukhov, but here his joy seems to be nothing more than a survival mechanism..."

Interesting point... if you think about it, because life is full of incidents of despair and sorrow (or, as the Buddhists say, "man is born to suffer") joy becomes the ultimate survival mechanism.

Another thing I noticed, is that Shukhov has a certain amount of sympathy and compassion for the guards. Although they were technically free, a posting to Siberia in the middle of winter is not an attractive prospect, and you can imagine many of them had got the job as a 'reward' for getting on the wrong side of a superior.

This book was so-so for me. I think the truth in the writing is what makes this book worth it but I think it lacks a story line that makes it interesting. I kept waiting for that little piece of metal or the extra food he had to cause a problem for him. It sounds terrible of me to want something worse to happen than the circumstances Ivan found himself in but I feel like this story has been told and there are greater works about life in WWII that have had a greater impact on me.

Andrea wrote: "This book was so-so for me. I think the truth in the writing is what makes this book worth it but I think it lacks a story line that makes it interesting. I kept waiting for that little piece of metal or the extra food he had to cause a problem for him. It sounds terrible of me to want something worse to happen [....] but I feel like this story has been told and there are greater works about life in WWII that have had a greater impact on me."

I know what you mean. I definitely experienced some disappointment with this compared to other WWII era works. I think I expected this to be more powerful.

I was finding it surprisingly flat DURING my read, and only was more accepting/appreciative of the flatness (as maybe bringing some prisoner feel to the reader) upon reflection.

I had kind of assumed the author's choice for Ivan's little risks from THAT day to not result in a big problem was deliberate - that on a typical day most prisoners would take tiny little risks - and typically get away with them because they new what was and wasn't possible. And the dullness again as part of the author's statement.

Wayne wrote: "I think the reason for this flatness is ..."

Totally agreed.

Wayne wrote: "I think the reason for this flatness is that Solzhenitsyn wanted to make the point that, although Shukhov thought of this as "...an unclouded day. Almost a happy one." because several good things a..."

Many reviews of this book talk about the overall sense of hope it instills, in spite of the oppressive cold and hunger, deprivation and exhaustion. I agree, I think Solzhenitsyn chose to leave this impression with the reader.

Read it back in 2007....gave it 5 stars.

David wrote: "I'm only about a third of the way through at the moment, but one thing struck me. Solzhenitsyn asks "Can a man who's warm understand one who's freezing?", which I see as a metaphor for Solzhenitsyn..."

I have not read the book yet, as I am deployed and it is enroute to my location, but I think few Americans or even people from the West in general do not truly understand need or any kind of suffering. But ultimately, we all just get through what life throws at us. If we experience a 9-11 or the Indian Ocean tsunami of 2004, the Holocaust or a prison camp, you put one foot in front of the other, get through one minute at a time.

Erin wrote: "David wrote: "I'm only about a third of the way through at the moment, but one thing struck me. Solzhenitsyn asks "Can a man who's warm understand one who's freezing?", which I see as a metaphor fo..."

I would agree that generally, Americans are far better off, and we do have better opportunities to have a good life. However, there are children and adults that are dealing with poverty, mental illnesses, and abuse in America. There are those that are extremely unhappy and are hopeless that any day in the future will be better than the last. My point is that everyone has some cross to bear, and being from America does not mean that every cross is light.

I rated the book 3 stars. It was definitely flat, and it was hard for me to emotionally connect to the main character. Sometimes the narration jumped around so much that I wasn't quite sure what was happening. However, the description of living life in a concentration camp was still overwhelming enough that I can appreciate this book for its literary value.

I loved this. I was expecting something very different, much more of the navel exploring of most russian writers I have read, pondering the nature of existence. Confronted instead by Solzhenitsen's tight sparse prose, I couldn't put it down which surprised me most of all, I think. I identified with the main character, and found a real liking and respect for his small acts of friendship.
I keep reflecting on the novel, on how the description of the skilly, the hard ball of bread sewn into the mattress and the pinches of tobacco are so real to me. This was a book of details, and having now put it down, it is the details which continue to speak to me.

I did enjoy reading this book, which surprised me as I wasn't expecting to. Having just recently finished Anna Karenina I wasn't overly keen on reading another Russian novel straight away. However this has been on my tbr for ages and you guys were discussing it on here, so I thought why not and gave it a go.

It was much more accessible than I expected and the details are so involving and interesting. I could feel his cold and also understand his survival techniques in a truely horrific environment. This book has opened my eyes to the regime of the Stalin camps and what they went through, without being too wordy or complex.

As others have said, not as much of a slog as expected. 4/5 stars from me.

The thing that was most thought provoking about this book, in my opinion, was that this was a GOOD day of Ivan's sentence. Which is pretty close to literary genius as it proves just what the camps were like at their best moments. It proves how little came to mean so much for the prisoners.

That being said, the reason I rated this book 3 stars, instead of 4 or 5, is that although I think this novel was very well constructed, I just wasn't really sucked into the story. The story line moved very slow for me and, although I can see why it was written this way, I found myself struggling through some pages.

I pretty much can chalk it up to one thing that I felt really wrecked this novel. The narrative was just very weak. The writing was good, the story was well thought out, the literary devices were brilliant, but Ivan was just very unmoving as a character. I'm sure that he was written without a strong analytical side in an effort to generalize the entire population that was tortured (grotesquely so) by these camps. But, for me, his lack of inner voice pulled me right out of the story.