Darkness at Noon

Rating:
Summary: Guilty of Political Divergencies - Penalty is Death
Review: A faded photograph reveals the bearded, solemn, serious men that were the delegates to the first Congress of the Party. It is decades later and only a few like Comrade Nicolas Salmanovitch Rubashov have survived. Late one night Rubashov is awakened, arrested, and taken to cell number 404. Like so many others, he now expects to be interrogated, tortured, and shot. We listen to harsh steps echoing down the prison corridor. It is the guard bringing soup.

Darkness at Noon is an authentic and chilling look at Stalin's Russia in the late 1930s. Arthur Koestler completed this superb historical fiction in Paris as WWII was just beginning. In a short forward he says that the characters in this book are fictitious, but that the historical circumstances which determined their actions are real. The life of the man N. S. Rubashov is the synthesis of the lives of a number of men that were victims of the so-called Moscow Trials. Several of them were personally known to the author. He dedicates this book to their memory.

Suffering from a toothache, subjected to endless interrogation, deprived of sleep, Rubashov struggles to delay his inevitable final confession. He questions his own past and motivations. Was he unconsciously disloyal? Is he guilty? Does it matter whether he is guilty? Should he remain silent, argue, or simply capitulate?

Rubashov finds meaning in politics, history, and philosophy. We see him wrestling with the meaning of suffering, senseless suffering versus meaningful suffering. We sympathize with him as he questions the morality of betraying his life long beliefs, despite his recognition that he himself has been betrayed. He clearly knows that he is guilty of betraying others. In his exhausted and muddled state, his motivation for living seems driven by a desire to explore more fully a new idea, the law of the relative maturity of the masses. He only needs time to sort out his questions and to resolve his doubts.

Koestler reveals much about Rubashov through flashbacks. We recognize that his own ethics and morality became victims as he participated in the destruction of well-meaning, loyal party members that unintentionally became guilty of political divergencies. He allows his lover to be imprisoned, and even joins the chorus that condemns her. Nonetheless, Koestler persuades us to have sympathy for Rubashov, now a victim of his own ideology.

I was unfamiliar with Arthur Koestler and I was unprepared when I opened this little book. I was captivated as Rubashov gradually awoke from a disturbing dream of betrayal, only to discover that he was being awakened by the secret police. I carried Darkness at Noon to work and shared it with a colleague. His teenage son was the next reader. Darkness at Noon is a classic that you will share with others.

Rating:
Summary: A synthesis of the lives of a number of men who were victims
Review: Darkness at Noon, though often overlooked as one of a 20th century classics, stands as a significant fictional portrayal of the nightmarish politics of our time. The protagonist, Rubashov, is an aging revolutionary who was once a partisan commander and is imprisoned by the Party to which he had unconditionally and loyally dedicated his life. The book closely follows Rubashov's arrest and his agonized reflections throughout his imprisonment.

Through the reminiscence of a skein of characters, Rubashov re-lived his Party career that embodied the terrible ironies and human betrayals of a totalitarian movement masking itself as an instrument of deliverance. The book is meant to be a piece of fiction-a monologue of Rubashov's excruciating reflection of his party career, but reads like a social commentary and historical account as Rubashov is a synthesis of the lives of a number of men who were victims of the Moscow Trials.

Darkness at Noon lays out some of the most inveterate principles of a Communist regime: the Party embodies the will of history even though history itself maybe proven to be defective. The authority of the Party could never be questioned or challenged or else the Party will settle such disparity with death. In other words, the Party prohibits any swerve from its ideals-some theoretical future of happiness that is unattainable save for Party members can envision.

As interrogation proceeds, Rubashov is coerced to confess preposterous crimes that he never committed. False accusations are brought forth against him to the point such accusations wreck his nerves. Though Rubashov curtly denies committing any subversive acts in the industry entrusted to him, the accusation simply defines his motive as counter-revolutionary and that he had been in service of a hostile foreign power.

Darkness at Noon exposes the bone-chilling tactics the Party operates-it operates without scruples nor accommodation, never caters to any individual needs. The movement is like a river with bends that those who are not ready accommodate the river flow will be inevitably washed ashore. The book also outlines the psychological strategy that such regime uses to manipulate prisoners. A dark tale indeed. 4.0 stars.

2004 (2)

Rating:
Summary: A bit lacking in action...
Review: Arthur Koestler - Darkness at Noon (1940) (translated)

The story of a prisoner, arrested and placed in detention in Room 404...

An interesting and well-written study of the lot of the political prisoner, in the hands of an oppressive regime.

The book is a little too passive and static, lacking much action and dynamism, with a bit too much philosophising, to be of interest to most readers. The book would bore most people. But all the same, it is an interesting book.

6/10

Rating:
Summary: An intriguing anti-totalitarian manifesto
Review: Arthur Koestler's "Darkness at Noon" is a manifesto decrying the totalitarian tactics of the Soviet Union during the 1930's. A political prisoner himself, Koestler had a lot to say about the treatment of those who were considered threats to the Communist ideal. Although Koestler does not name the Party or the associated countries, the implications are obvious, including the identity of the Party's leader, who is known simply by the name "No. 1."

The novel concerns a fifty-ish man named Rubashov, a high-ranking Party official, who is imprisoned for suspected acts of dissension against the Party. Placed in a lonely cell, he communicates with the occupant of the neighboring cell by tapping on the interposing wall. He finds that his anonymous neighbor holds a grudge against him for reasons he refuses to reveal. The prison is filled with people considered "enemies" of the Party, victims of snitching and backstabbing from various levels of bureaucracy.

An old friend and battalion commander of Rubashov's, named Ivanov, turns out to be his primary inquisitor. Rubashov and Ivanov have long discussions about the ideals of the Party and how Rubashov is losing faith in a system he once fought so vehemently to establish. The Party's ideals were noble in the beginning, but it gradually became inefficient and underhanded. During his imprisonment, Rubashov recalls Arlova, a secretary with whom he had an affair, who was fired from her job and sentenced to death for suspected political dissension. Rubashov had the chance to save her by testifying in her defense, but doing so could have damaged his own career.

When Ivanov shows some sympathy for Rubashov, he is "removed" and replaced with a stricter interrogator named Gletkin, who uses draconian tactics to wear Rubashov down to the point of confession. Rubashov is accused of various attempted acts of governmental sabotage, including a planned assassination of No. 1. The reader sees that it is not relevant to his "trial" whether or not he actually committed these crimes; they are merely trying to get rid of those who threaten the stability of the Party.

Koestler demonstrates how the creation of the Soviet Union formed a nation of political prisoners. These are the problems of a government that is concerned more with theory than with practice; that is concerned more with ideals than with individuals.

Rating:
Summary: 'Dazzer's review of Darkness at Noon'
Review: 'Darkness at Noon' not only stands as one of the most incisive political novels of its time, it is also peerless in its bleak portrayal of incarceration. Rawly compelling from the outset, the novel is set in the oppressive Soviet Union of the 1930's. Its hero is the reactionary Rubashov, imprisoned by his own party for crimes he has not committed yet forced, through rigorously severe interrogation, to confess and thus face certain execution. The despair inherent in Rubashov's position, and the gradual abrasion of his own moral and intellectual authority, make this a direct primogenitor to George Orwell's 1984. Koestler (beautifully translated by Daphne Hardy) exposes the cruel hypocrisy of a totalitarian regime which masquerades as a liberal, forward thinking movement. The party's views are expressed unequivocally by the prison interrogator, Gletkin, in the phrase 'truth is what is useful to humanity, falsehood what is harmful.' This statement, along with scores of others, conveys the suppression of free will at the core of Stalinist communism, and remains salient even when viewed in a modern political context. 'Darkness' examines the dilemma of a man who helped to establish his party yet can no longer condone its actions, and who as a consequence is ignominiously rejected by it. Rubashov's bravery in the face of oppression is heroic, yet his earlier treatment of secretary Arlova and his muddy consciousness towards this prevents him from appearing remotely altruistic: Rubashov is selfish and driven, although his aloof flippancy is grimly endearing. Like the Party, he will employ whatever means necessary to achieve his goal, human beings are a mere pawn in the game, ready to be sacrificed if to do so gains a strategic advantage. Koestler's portrayal of the hierarchical nature of oppressive rule, and the indurate self-interest it creates, is chillingly lucid. As Rubashov discards Arlova and young Richard, so the subordinate Gletkin, it is inferred, betrays Ivanov, shot for being 'a cynic', while both interrogators are ultimately controlled by the feared No.1. Implied throughout is the sense of degradation from an intellectual ideal; Gletkin is a 'Neanderthal', a 'barbaric relapse of history', and yet supersedes the thoughtful, intelligent Ivanov. Rubashov's interrogation by Gletkin is a farrago: both parties know there will only be one outcome, Rubashov, for pride's sake, denying endless charges until impelled by Gletkin's warped logic and the very human desire for sleep to acquiesce, exposing the fatuity of a dictatorial system averse to natural justice. The novel's muted end, the 'shrug of eternity' as Rubashov is killed, suggests serene release from a grimly arduous existence, an ambivalently Lethean suggestion of happiness to end this claustrophobically taut, intellectually and emotionally enthralling novel.

Rating:
Summary: One of the greatest novels of all time?
Review: You be the judge. Beautifully written as if Koestler were a pupil of Tolstoy or Dostoevsky, "Darkness at Noon" is one of the most influential books I've ever read. Koestler's use of foreshadowing and symbolism is paralleled only by that of Krzystof Kieslowski's films. The author challenges the reader to constantly think and use their knowledge of post czarist Russian politics to keep up with the clues he leaves for the reader. For example, the author begins each chapter with a passage from Machiavelli, Dostoevsky, or Saint-Just hinting to what the chapter will contain. Koestler also never uses Lenin's name but refers to him as "the old man with the slanting tartar eyes", and refers to Stalin as "No. 1". This book also showcases Koestler's uncanny ability to write dialog between characters. The thought provoking conversations between Rubashov and Ivanov were marvelously written. Even more impressive was the depth given to each character. From Richard, the young German who devoted his life to the movement of the communist party in his country, to Little Loewy, a Dutch dock worker with the same task as Richard, and finally Gletkin, who would succeed Ivanov in becoming Rubashov's tormentor. I highly recommened this book to anyone who loves intelligence and intrigue in their reading. For a truly passionate and realistic view of though Russian politics, read this book.

Rating:
Summary: Fictional account of moscow trials
Review: Nicholas Salmanovich Rubashov is a member of the revolutionary old guard and a leader in bringing the revolution to the masses abroad. Each morning as Rubashov awakes he recalls his arrest and imprisonment many years ago for his revolutionary activity in the days before the revolution succeeded. It is thus with a sense of irony and detachment that Rubashov faces his arrest one morning at the hands of his own party.

In prison, Rubashov waits his turn at interrogation and makes the acquaintance of the unseen prisoner in the cell next to him. This unseen acquaintance is a army officer who has been arrested for his anti-revolutionary views and displays unrestrained glee that the revolutionaries are now turning on themselves. Rubashov waits for his interrogation and reflects on his years of Party activity recalling the members of the Party whom he personally deposed.

Little Lowry was devoted to the Party and assured Rubashov that his local union would not unload shipments for fascist nations. However, when the leader of the nation decided to trade with fascist countries, it became Rubashov's job to remove intransigent elements like Lowry. Arlova served as Rubashov's secretary and lover but when she was wrongly denounced for factionalism, he did not speak to save her and in then end denounced her himself. These actions were justified in his mind as being for the good of the Party and necessary to advance the revolution.

His first interrogation is conducted by an old party comrade, Ivanov, who treats him with firmness but also kindness. Ivanov attempts to coerce a confession out of Rubashov but is unable to do so at their first meeting. Later when Ivanov visits Rubashov in his cell, they have a long talk through the evening. Here Rubashov continues to admit that he was not guilty of the crimes stated but admits that he had begun to have doubts about the revolution. His interrogator then points out that he is guilty of being a counter-revolutionary if his thoughts were not with the Party at all times. Ivanov reminds Rubashov about Arlova and suggests that if Rubashov had doubted her guilt he should not have allowed her to be shot. Rubashov begins to accept that he is guilty of crimes against the revolution simply by his doubts and that he must offer some form of confession.

When he is next interrogated, Rubashov discovers that Ivanov has been himself purged and in his stead is Gletkin. A product of the revolution Gletkin knows nothing of the older order and shows no compassion. Rubashov is subjected to a series of interrogations at all hours of the day and night; he is deprived of sleep and unable to gather his thoughts. It is with amazement that Rubashov notes the robotic stamina of Gletkin who being solely in charge of the interrogation must also be going for days without sleep. While Rubashov is willing to write a confession and to stand trial for some counter-revolutionary thoughts, the Party has decided in advance the crimes for which he must plead guilty and written the confession for him. For days, the old revolutionary and the product of the revolution battle over the semantics of the confession. Eventually worn down by fatigue and confusion as to what the truth is, Rubashov gives in and signs the confession proffered to him. This is his interrogator tells him, "will be the last service you can do for the Party." Rubashov is then tried, convicted and shot.

Reflecting Koestler's own disenchantment with the Russian Revolution and the regime of Stalin, the novel attempts to show how the flawed ideals of the revolution have warped the basis of society. In a society where the ends always justifies the means there are no ethical boundaries and truth exists only in relative terms. This is exactly the kind of society that Rubashov helped to create and he is now the victim of the same ruthlessness that he himself practiced on so many others to advance the cause. Over and over Rubashov tries to justify his own actions and to understand how these actions have brought his country and his revolution to the totalitarian state it is.

The chief source conflict is not between the authorities and the prisoner but rather in the mind of Rubashov as he attempts to reconcile the socialist society he helped to usher into existence. While a prisoner, the protagonist has time to reflect on the suffering he caused in a relentless pursuit towards his ideals. The people discarded along the way are simply part of a mathematical calculation that is designed to bring the most happiness

Rubashov, throughout the novel, has the nervous habit of removing his pince-nez eyeglasses and rubbing them on his sleeve. Repeatedly during his interrogations or when he is lost in thought he attempts to clean the lens of the eyeglasses. When Rubashov drops his glasses on the way to his execution, they fall to the floor and the lenses shatter. This leaves Rubashov now "nearly blind, but he has solid ground under his feet again." (214) In this sustained metaphor Koestler shows the futility of Rubashov's attempts to justify and explain away the errors and excesses of the revolution and the leaders of the Party. For all the protagonists efforts to clean his pince-nez he is still unable to see clearly. For all his efforts to justify the inhumanity of the revolution he is unable to reconcile his doubts. His vision like his party was flawed from the beginning and no amount of cleaning could put it right. Only at the end of his life is he able to regain his footing with solid ground under his feet when he casts away the flawed vision of the Party.

Rating:
Summary: Fantastic
Review: Darkness at Noon is ranked 8 on the top-100 list of books (past century) by the New York Library and I can now see why. This novel has a very simple story line about the imprisonment of a political figure in 1930's Soviet Union. The perspective with which the protagonist approaches his situation and the personal philosophies he employs to deal with his situation are impressive. Koestler dials into the character's mind and paints a picture that is at once complex and yet understandable. His ability to put you into this persons shoes (so to speak) make you feel as though you are there. You understand the reasoning behind his actions and comments. The way that he interacts with the world around him becomes understandable if not almost familiar and you end up feeling as though you have known Nicholas Salmonavitch. This story does not demonize the Soviet Union, it's government or its people in the tumultuous political climate of the 1930's, but rather portrays it simply as it was. Koestler's command and grasp of writing are similar to Hemingway in that he creates a powerful and meaningful story without a lot of flowery prose or a vocabulary that has you running to the dictionary every five minutes. I found this novel to be as impressive and well-written as anything by Joyce, Faulkner, Huxley, etc. if not more (for me) more fun to read. I found the style to be similar to Nabokov and Konrad, both of whom I also enjoy reading.

Rating:
Summary: Wonderful
Review: I loved it. You couldn't read this book without stopping for a second every now and then to think about what was just said. I don't usually dissect books unless I'm reading them for class, but Darkness at Noon just forced me to stop and soak in the full meaning of Koestler's words. I also loved the analogies and communist ideologies presented through Rubashov's ruminations.
A must-read. Very eye opening and informative as pertains to Soviet Russia and communism as well as the human condition.

Rating:
Summary: When free will is the most vile of sins
Review: Although Darkness at Noon is rather light in its length, it is anything but that in its profundity. The true essence of this historical allegory, yet eerily accurate novel is much more than that of its central protagonist Rubashov. As Rubashov's fears of the "Neanderthalers" such as Gletkin and the mysterious No. 1 usurping his command become realized, the original revolutionaries are summarily deposed.

The merciless gulag as witnessed in the novel, the monolithic nature of The Party, the sordid ubiquity of No.1's steely portrait, the systematic elimination of all who hold divergent beliefs from those of The Party, the categorical taking of one's free will, & the neverending insatiable quest of power for The Party all manifest themselves in a most uncanny manner as the very traits of Stalin's totalitarian Mother Russia. In summation, Darkness at Noon is as equally short as it is morose yet germane -- in short, a veritable je ne sais qoui.

"As he raised his head, his gaze fell on the portrait of No. 1 hanging on the wall, and once again he recognized the expression of knowing irony with which years ago No. 1 had taken leave of him-that melancholy cynicism which stared down on humanity from the omnipresent portrait."