What do you think?
Rate this book
To Build a Castle: My Life as a Dissenter
English, Russian (translation)
438 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1978
130 people are currently reading
924 people want to read
About the author
Vladimir Bukovsky
40 books28 followersVladimir Konstantinovich Bukovsky was a Soviet and Russian human rights activist and writer. From the late 1950s to the mid-1970s, he was a prominent figure in the Soviet dissident movement, well known at home and abroad.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews
April 14, 2017
This is my favorite book. I've read it over and over again. Although it is a book about the horror of political repression under communism, it gives me great spiritual comfort, because it is a story of moral triumph.
To Build a Castle is the story of Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky. He was born in Russia during World War II, and he was raised to view Stalin as a benevolent God. But as a teenager, he learned the truth – that Stalin was a monster. The moral injury of this revelation defined Bukovsky's life.
Bukovsky has always said that the dissident movement was not a political movement, but a moral movement. He and his fellow dissidents lived moral lives in defiance of their society. They paid a terrible price for this, but they were successful in creating a moral order that no repression could destroy.
I have read many memoirs of political prisoners. This one is far and away my favorite. It is beautifully written and translated, filled with compelling stories, and surprisingly funny. It is a raw, personal book. It immerses you in the sorrow of the prison world, which only sharpens the joy of Bukovsky's triumphs.
I can't recommend this book highly enough.
To Build a Castle is the story of Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky. He was born in Russia during World War II, and he was raised to view Stalin as a benevolent God. But as a teenager, he learned the truth – that Stalin was a monster. The moral injury of this revelation defined Bukovsky's life.
Bukovsky has always said that the dissident movement was not a political movement, but a moral movement. He and his fellow dissidents lived moral lives in defiance of their society. They paid a terrible price for this, but they were successful in creating a moral order that no repression could destroy.
I have read many memoirs of political prisoners. This one is far and away my favorite. It is beautifully written and translated, filled with compelling stories, and surprisingly funny. It is a raw, personal book. It immerses you in the sorrow of the prison world, which only sharpens the joy of Bukovsky's triumphs.
I can't recommend this book highly enough.
October 16, 2020
Буковский прожил сложную, но достойную жизнь! Он всю жизнь боролся против той власти, сидя в тюрьмах, выходя на площадь, говоря с людьми.
Оно и не удивительно - любой думающий человек рано или поздно садился - или жил всю жизнь, держа язык за зубами, пока не вырвали. Вспоминается какой-то текст Антона Носика, который говорил, что пошел учится на врача, что бы потом, когда посадят, по крайней мере работать в "больничке" и хоть как -то выжить.
Восхищает смелость Буковского и его сообразительность: когда открылись архивы КГБ он срочно полетел в Москву и часами там копировал эти документы, что бы сделать их достоянием гласности.
Учитывая куда сейчас идет Россия - эту книгу стоит читать всем, особенно тем кто там, ведь 37-й может начатся когда угодно.
Оно и не удивительно - любой думающий человек рано или поздно садился - или жил всю жизнь, держа язык за зубами, пока не вырвали. Вспоминается какой-то текст Антона Носика, который говорил, что пошел учится на врача, что бы потом, когда посадят, по крайней мере работать в "больничке" и хоть как -то выжить.
Восхищает смелость Буковского и его сообразительность: когда открылись архивы КГБ он срочно полетел в Москву и часами там копировал эти документы, что бы сделать их достоянием гласности.
Учитывая куда сейчас идет Россия - эту книгу стоит читать всем, особенно тем кто там, ведь 37-й может начатся когда угодно.
May 24, 2012
All my illusions about nice and quiet life in USSR were finally broken. It's all about those thing that couldn't be caught by little boy's mind. Highly recommended as a drug of choice in case of "Back in USSR"-exacerbations.
June 9, 2020
When frustrated Soviet officials asked Vlaldimir Bukovsky why he continued to provoke them, he replied that he doubted he could cause them nearly as much trouble outside the gulag system as inside. Like Natan Sharansky, Bukovsky entered prison not in defeat after his fight with the Soviets, but in anticipation of continuing it. He couldn’t do otherwise: even as a teenager he realized that life as a faithful subject of the Soviet state was impossible for him. It was an empire of lies, where truth changed by the year, where absurdities and corruption were the norm. Organizing a society of dissidents in his youth, he continued to speak the truth about the Soviet state and to demand it conform itself with its own rule of law, f nothing else — until he was at last expelled.
Having read both Sharansky’s Fear no Evil, and Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago, there weren’t any real surprises in here as far as the universal abuses of the Soviet system go. Bukovsky’s refusal to wilt in the face of state repression was so outrageous to the Soviets that they regarded him as a mental case, and the abuse of psychiatric medicine makes this memoir stand out from those other two which I’ve read. According to Bukovsky, late in the sixties the state hit on the idea of using diagnoses of mental disorders to render individuals “unfit to plead”, which they used to prevent dissidents and prisoners from fighting oppression via the legal system. (And fight they did– Bukovsky’s favorite game was to generate mountains of paperwork for the bureaucracy by sending off hundreds of complaints a week on behalf of himself and other prisoners.)
What makes To Build a Castle truly worth reading, though, are Bukovsky’s comments on the human spirit in its eternal struggle with the Soviets. In a line that strongly reminded me of Solzhenitsyn’s observation that the line between good and evil runs through every human heart, Bukovsky comments that what he hates most is Soviet man, the mewling subordinate who is cowed by the state or the pressure of the crowd to conform. Soviet man exists in each of us, he writes, and it is our duty to fight him — to ensure that he doesn’t prevail. A man who who stands against the state fights not only for himself, but for each of us — it is by individual actions that the battle for the soul of a nation is won or lost.
Bukovsky’s memoir is a powerful account, an indictment of not only the Soviet state and its gulags, but the great lies it was built on and which extended its life past reason.
Having read both Sharansky’s Fear no Evil, and Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago, there weren’t any real surprises in here as far as the universal abuses of the Soviet system go. Bukovsky’s refusal to wilt in the face of state repression was so outrageous to the Soviets that they regarded him as a mental case, and the abuse of psychiatric medicine makes this memoir stand out from those other two which I’ve read. According to Bukovsky, late in the sixties the state hit on the idea of using diagnoses of mental disorders to render individuals “unfit to plead”, which they used to prevent dissidents and prisoners from fighting oppression via the legal system. (And fight they did– Bukovsky’s favorite game was to generate mountains of paperwork for the bureaucracy by sending off hundreds of complaints a week on behalf of himself and other prisoners.)
What makes To Build a Castle truly worth reading, though, are Bukovsky’s comments on the human spirit in its eternal struggle with the Soviets. In a line that strongly reminded me of Solzhenitsyn’s observation that the line between good and evil runs through every human heart, Bukovsky comments that what he hates most is Soviet man, the mewling subordinate who is cowed by the state or the pressure of the crowd to conform. Soviet man exists in each of us, he writes, and it is our duty to fight him — to ensure that he doesn’t prevail. A man who who stands against the state fights not only for himself, but for each of us — it is by individual actions that the battle for the soul of a nation is won or lost.
Bukovsky’s memoir is a powerful account, an indictment of not only the Soviet state and its gulags, but the great lies it was built on and which extended its life past reason.
February 23, 2014
Очень жутко становится от того что во время чтения постоянно ловишь себя на мысли, что события и реалии государственного устоя, что имели место быть 60 годах все еще актуальны для нашего времени (2014). Мое чтение книги, как раз пришло на то время когда Украина борется со своим бандитским режимом и если провести параллели между тем что писал Владимир Буковский то можно сделать вывод что в Украине не просто бандитская власть это все та же власть чекистов что была и в 60, 70, 80 годах. Всю ту грандиозную работу котору проводили диссиденты в советских лагерях,к сожалению ,не была достаточно изучена и оценена нашими современниками и того мы все еще идем их стопами. Власть изменилась и система приспособилась к новым реалиями, но методы остались все теже, бестолково беспощадные.
Книгу очень рекомендую на прочтения для разрушения советских мифов о профессионализме и качестве советской жизни и ее устоев.
Книгу очень рекомендую на прочтения для разрушения советских мифов о профессионализме и качестве советской жизни и ее устоев.
April 14, 2008
An amazing book telling the story of protest in the USSR. Everyone should read it at least once.
November 5, 2012
До последнего абзаца захватывает и тревожит все рецепторы. Читаешь и сравниваешь действительность сорокалетней давности и современную - и не видишь разницы. Та же власть, те же методы, люди с тем же менталитетом, такое же расслоение общества на "паханов" с шайками и "мужиков"...
April 30, 2013
TBAC details the arduous journey of a perpetual dissident in the former Soviet Union. Mr. Bukovsky begins to revolt against the state apparatus at an early age, and soon finds himself spending more time in jail than as a free man. Such pressure and extraordinary stress would cause most people to fold or have a nervous breakdown, but the author ironically seems to get stronger the more he is persecuted. He accomplishes this by "building a castle" or formalizing a concrete mental resolve/roadmap/directive that always keeps his mind busy, is indestructible, is impervious to unjustified abuse and is immune to warrant-less searches. Some may become bored with the minutiae of everyday life in detention, but the book triumphs nonetheless by the author's unyielding determination to accomplish a goal and his clever and unique ways of accomplishing these tasks. The book does have a happy ending, and is an inspiration to all.
January 10, 2017
Amazing book, chronicling Bukovsky's run-in with the absurdities that kept the Soviet Union afloat for a while. Specifically exposes the abuse of psychiatric diagnoses for imprisoning/abusing political targets. I am a child of the 1980s, so Bukovsky's narrative is of an earlier Soviet Union that is forgotten by many. Just as Nazi era narratives are important, this is very important for people to read to know what it was like to be an individual caught up in the machinery of the Soviet Union.
There is a thread of humor, reminding me of Crime & Punishment by Dostoevsky, where I just had to laugh. The pyramid scheme of prisoner complaints to gum up Soviet bureaucracy was genuinely funny.
Key passage in the book:
Why should I do it?” asks each man in the crowd. “I can do nothing alone.”
And they are all lost.
“If I don’t do it, who will?” asks the man with his back to the wall.
And everyone is saved.
That is how a man begins building his castle.
There is a thread of humor, reminding me of Crime & Punishment by Dostoevsky, where I just had to laugh. The pyramid scheme of prisoner complaints to gum up Soviet bureaucracy was genuinely funny.
Key passage in the book:
Why should I do it?” asks each man in the crowd. “I can do nothing alone.”
And they are all lost.
“If I don’t do it, who will?” asks the man with his back to the wall.
And everyone is saved.
That is how a man begins building his castle.
August 2, 2019
Автобиография человека, проведшего в тюрьмах, ссылках, психбольницах большую и яркую часть жизни. История о том, как несмотря на голод, холод и карательную психиатрию не потерять веру в людей, мужество отстаивать свои права и чувство ответственности за оставшихся на свободе. В учебниках истории нам об этом не рассказывали, а зря.
May 6, 2020
"[...] finché gli uomini non impareranno a richiedere ciò che a loro appartiene per diritto, nessuna rivoluzione li libererà. E quando impaereranno, nessuna rivoluzione li libererà. No, io non credo nella rivoluzione, non credo nella salvezza attraverso la violenza."
December 31, 2024
This is a stunning autobiographical account of the brutality of the Soviet regime under Khrushchev and Brezhnev and of other socialist systems, and of the extraordinary courage of dissidents who refused to live by their lies.
August 14, 2021
После Архипелага впечатляет уже не так, но все равно стоит прочитать. Про советские репрессии после оттепели и борьбу группки диссидентов и инакомыслящих с советской карательной машиной.
October 4, 2021
9/10
Not as good as Solzhenitsyn, not nearly as good an author, still great.
Not as good as Solzhenitsyn, not nearly as good an author, still great.
January 9, 2018
This was a pretty interesting memoir of a Soviet dissident (who was eventually deported for being a trouble maker)! He talks about his experiences in a psychiatric hospital (which was a thing they did with a lot of dissidents), in prison, in a work camp, on trial, and as an agitator.
He has what struck me as an odd style. Most of the time it reads like he is telling you a funny anecdote only he is talking about some horrible thing that happened to him. The interesting part to me was how he was often successful *acting* as if the rule of law applied, even when it didn't because the system was designed to want to look as if it was behaving as if it was just. The system didn't really know how to respond to an honest person acting on principle. This matches up with what Vaclav Havel said in the Power of the Powerless.
He has what struck me as an odd style. Most of the time it reads like he is telling you a funny anecdote only he is talking about some horrible thing that happened to him. The interesting part to me was how he was often successful *acting* as if the rule of law applied, even when it didn't because the system was designed to want to look as if it was behaving as if it was just. The system didn't really know how to respond to an honest person acting on principle. This matches up with what Vaclav Havel said in the Power of the Powerless.
October 19, 2019
True Story
This was not a book, it was an experience. It was hard to imagine going through what he went through. He was finally exchanged for another prisoner because his mother had written countless letters for him to the west. Let's hear it for mother's. Will there be a "west" to escape to if our country continues to drift LEFT.
This was not a book, it was an experience. It was hard to imagine going through what he went through. He was finally exchanged for another prisoner because his mother had written countless letters for him to the west. Let's hear it for mother's. Will there be a "west" to escape to if our country continues to drift LEFT.
April 24, 2020
***
Парадоксальное явление: на Западе в это время авангардисты были чуть не все как на подбор коммунистами - у нас же они считались вне закона.
***
"Каждый, кто придвинулся к тебе слишком близко, заставляет съеживаться все твои внутренности - скорей бы прошел мимо. Этот шумный мир не терпит невовлеченных - он толкает тебя, тянет, заставляет, требует, грозит и взывает к благоразумию.
Чего вы хотите от человека? Оставьте меня в покое, дайте побыть одному. Не шевелите меня. Я хочу присесть вот здесь, один, смотреть в пространство, ничего не видя. Мне нужно заползти куда-нибудь в нору, где темно и сыро, потому что моя старая кожа должна слинять и отрасти новая. Старая причиняет мне боль. Тише, не кричите, от ваших криков внутри все хохочет эхом - гулким эхом, как в пустом здании, и никакие слова не рождают отклика мыслей.
Но этот мир - он такой добрый, в нем столько жестокого желания спасти тебя. Он оборачивается лицами друзей и родных, их услужливой суетой, советами и надоедливой помощью. Тебя перетаскивают с места на место за загривок, как собака своих щенков, и остается только глупо улыбаться - надо же быть благодарным. О чем говорить с ними, что ответить, чтоб не выглядеть совсем уж дураком... Они все стали такими умными и ждут от тебя глубокомысленных замечаний - тебе же сказать абсолютно нечего, пустота. Мы в разных измерениях, в разных ритмах. Мне так уютно было с моими моложавыми простыми идиотами. Зачем меня сюда вытолкали? И я понимаю теперь своего соседа по камере. Он застрелил жену, тещу, тестя и соседку. Оглядевшись по сторонам, он вдруг увидел кошку - застрелил и ее. Чтоб не смотрела вопросительно."
***
Особенно насмешило меня, что на высокой судейской трибуне прямо под массивным гербом Советского Союза какой-то шутник нацарапал крупно то самое слово из трех букв, которое украшает все заборы, общественные уборные и школьные парты. Под этим-то знаком зодиака и проходил весь наш суд.
***
Так создавались все великие стройки коммунизма: плотины, каналы, дороги, полярные города. Труд принудительный, преимущественно ручной, мало механизированный (при отсталости нашей технологии это вполне рентабельно). Средний заработок заключенного - 60-80 рублей в месяц (для вольных на подобных работах - 140 рублей). Из этого заработка 50 процентов удерживается в пользу государства, а половина оставшегося - на оплату казенного питания, одежды и содержания. Таким образом, реальный заработок заключенного - 15-20 рублей в месяц. Из этих денег он может потратить от 3 до 7 рублей в месяц на ларек, в зависимости от режима. Стимулирование труда - отрицательное, то есть не мерами поощрения, а в основном различными наказаниями за уклонение от работы или невыполнение норм. К тому же эти миллионы людей изъяты из сферы нормального потребления, что при постоянном дефиците товаров очень удобно для регулирования спроса. А товары (главным образом плохие продукты), не имеющие спроса у населения, сбываются заключенным, которым выбирать не приходится. Квартир заключенным не нужно - бараки они себе сами построят.
***
пока люди не научатся требовать то, что им принадлежит по праву, никакая революция их не освободит. А когда научатся - революции уже не потребуется. Нет, не верю я в революции, не верю в насильственное спасение.
Легко представить себе, что произошло бы в этой стране в случае революции: всеобщее воровство, разруха, резня и в каждом районе - своя банда, свой "пахан". А пассивное, терроризируемое большинство охотно подчинилось бы любой твердой власти, т. е. новой диктатуре.
***
Встречал я потом на этапах, по пересылкам старых зэков, всю жизнь просидевших по тюрьмам. По 30-40 лет. Особенно запомнился мне Леха Тарасов. Встретил я его на экспертизе в Институте Сербского в 71-м. Только вошел в камеру, бросился мне в глаза человек лет под 60, беззубый и тощий, как скелет. Все лицо исколото. На лбу: "ЛЕНИН ЛЮДОЕД", На одной щеке "СМЕРТЬ ЦК", на другой - "РАБ КПСС".
Был он моложе, чем мне показалось. В войну, в 44-м году, шестнадцатилетним мальчишкой попал в тюрьму за кражу и с тех пор не выходил. В колонии для малолетних вспыхнул мятеж, и он с приятелями зарезал 11 повязочников. Так получил первый лагерный срок. Потом на Колыме за попытку к побегу - второй. Давно выветрилась у пего воровская романтика, а впереди все оставался неизменный четвертак. В 53-м за убийство кума получил он расстрел, но заменили опять на четвертной - из него 15 лет крытки.
День в день просидел он все пятнадцать лет во Владимирской тюрьме. Ни зубов, ни волос, ни здоровья не осталось. Глотал ложки, пришивал себе к телу пуговицы, резал вены - только чтобы на недельку попасть в больницу. Потом стал делать себе на лице антисоветские наколки. Это был скорейший путь в больницу - наколки вырезали сразу, без наркоза, по живому. Но каждый раз аккуратно добавляли срок. Потом вышел тайный указ: за антисоветские наколки расстрел -как за ?дезорганизацию работы исправительно-трудовых учреждений?. Слишком много развелось ?рабов КПСС?. Он был тогда уже в лагере, но за какую-то провинность опять присудили ему три года во Владимире. Этого он уже вынести не мог - возненавидел он Владимир за те 15 лет, каждый камешек там знал. И дорогой на этапе сделал себе новые наколки.
- Не дадут расстрел - брошусь на конвой. Сколько успею, столько и прихвачу с собой на тот свет.
Его расстреляли в 1972 году. Бросаться на конвой не пришлось.
Парадоксальное явление: на Западе в это время авангардисты были чуть не все как на подбор коммунистами - у нас же они считались вне закона.
***
"Каждый, кто придвинулся к тебе слишком близко, заставляет съеживаться все твои внутренности - скорей бы прошел мимо. Этот шумный мир не терпит невовлеченных - он толкает тебя, тянет, заставляет, требует, грозит и взывает к благоразумию.
Чего вы хотите от человека? Оставьте меня в покое, дайте побыть одному. Не шевелите меня. Я хочу присесть вот здесь, один, смотреть в пространство, ничего не видя. Мне нужно заползти куда-нибудь в нору, где темно и сыро, потому что моя старая кожа должна слинять и отрасти новая. Старая причиняет мне боль. Тише, не кричите, от ваших криков внутри все хохочет эхом - гулким эхом, как в пустом здании, и никакие слова не рождают отклика мыслей.
Но этот мир - он такой добрый, в нем столько жестокого желания спасти тебя. Он оборачивается лицами друзей и родных, их услужливой суетой, советами и надоедливой помощью. Тебя перетаскивают с места на место за загривок, как собака своих щенков, и остается только глупо улыбаться - надо же быть благодарным. О чем говорить с ними, что ответить, чтоб не выглядеть совсем уж дураком... Они все стали такими умными и ждут от тебя глубокомысленных замечаний - тебе же сказать абсолютно нечего, пустота. Мы в разных измерениях, в разных ритмах. Мне так уютно было с моими моложавыми простыми идиотами. Зачем меня сюда вытолкали? И я понимаю теперь своего соседа по камере. Он застрелил жену, тещу, тестя и соседку. Оглядевшись по сторонам, он вдруг увидел кошку - застрелил и ее. Чтоб не смотрела вопросительно."
***
Особенно насмешило меня, что на высокой судейской трибуне прямо под массивным гербом Советского Союза какой-то шутник нацарапал крупно то самое слово из трех букв, которое украшает все заборы, общественные уборные и школьные парты. Под этим-то знаком зодиака и проходил весь наш суд.
***
Так создавались все великие стройки коммунизма: плотины, каналы, дороги, полярные города. Труд принудительный, преимущественно ручной, мало механизированный (при отсталости нашей технологии это вполне рентабельно). Средний заработок заключенного - 60-80 рублей в месяц (для вольных на подобных работах - 140 рублей). Из этого заработка 50 процентов удерживается в пользу государства, а половина оставшегося - на оплату казенного питания, одежды и содержания. Таким образом, реальный заработок заключенного - 15-20 рублей в месяц. Из этих денег он может потратить от 3 до 7 рублей в месяц на ларек, в зависимости от режима. Стимулирование труда - отрицательное, то есть не мерами поощрения, а в основном различными наказаниями за уклонение от работы или невыполнение норм. К тому же эти миллионы людей изъяты из сферы нормального потребления, что при постоянном дефиците товаров очень удобно для регулирования спроса. А товары (главным образом плохие продукты), не имеющие спроса у населения, сбываются заключенным, которым выбирать не приходится. Квартир заключенным не нужно - бараки они себе сами построят.
***
пока люди не научатся требовать то, что им принадлежит по праву, никакая революция их не освободит. А когда научатся - революции уже не потребуется. Нет, не верю я в революции, не верю в насильственное спасение.
Легко представить себе, что произошло бы в этой стране в случае революции: всеобщее воровство, разруха, резня и в каждом районе - своя банда, свой "пахан". А пассивное, терроризируемое большинство охотно подчинилось бы любой твердой власти, т. е. новой диктатуре.
***
Встречал я потом на этапах, по пересылкам старых зэков, всю жизнь просидевших по тюрьмам. По 30-40 лет. Особенно запомнился мне Леха Тарасов. Встретил я его на экспертизе в Институте Сербского в 71-м. Только вошел в камеру, бросился мне в глаза человек лет под 60, беззубый и тощий, как скелет. Все лицо исколото. На лбу: "ЛЕНИН ЛЮДОЕД", На одной щеке "СМЕРТЬ ЦК", на другой - "РАБ КПСС".
Был он моложе, чем мне показалось. В войну, в 44-м году, шестнадцатилетним мальчишкой попал в тюрьму за кражу и с тех пор не выходил. В колонии для малолетних вспыхнул мятеж, и он с приятелями зарезал 11 повязочников. Так получил первый лагерный срок. Потом на Колыме за попытку к побегу - второй. Давно выветрилась у пего воровская романтика, а впереди все оставался неизменный четвертак. В 53-м за убийство кума получил он расстрел, но заменили опять на четвертной - из него 15 лет крытки.
День в день просидел он все пятнадцать лет во Владимирской тюрьме. Ни зубов, ни волос, ни здоровья не осталось. Глотал ложки, пришивал себе к телу пуговицы, резал вены - только чтобы на недельку попасть в больницу. Потом стал делать себе на лице антисоветские наколки. Это был скорейший путь в больницу - наколки вырезали сразу, без наркоза, по живому. Но каждый раз аккуратно добавляли срок. Потом вышел тайный указ: за антисоветские наколки расстрел -как за ?дезорганизацию работы исправительно-трудовых учреждений?. Слишком много развелось ?рабов КПСС?. Он был тогда уже в лагере, но за какую-то провинность опять присудили ему три года во Владимире. Этого он уже вынести не мог - возненавидел он Владимир за те 15 лет, каждый камешек там знал. И дорогой на этапе сделал себе новые наколки.
- Не дадут расстрел - брошусь на конвой. Сколько успею, столько и прихвачу с собой на тот свет.
Его расстреляли в 1972 году. Бросаться на конвой не пришлось.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 1, 2019
Zatímco Solženicynův Souostroví GULAG popisuje zvěrsta sovětské moci od roku 1917 až do poloviny 60. let., včetně monstrprocesů, tak Bukovský popisuje zlovůli Sovětského svazu od 50.-70. let. Skvěle sepsaný popis atmosféry strachy a moci komunistické strany v Sovětském svazu.
July 19, 2008
If you love dissidents, then this is your book.
December 29, 2015
Overall very readable and worthwhile. Bukovsky was an intellectual born during World War II and coming of age in the Khrushchev thaw. He was not one of those looking to save Communism, give it a human face, or restore it to some preceding orthodoxy (Lenin, Marx, etc.). He objected to Communism in its entirety and decided he was not going to support it, even by passively going along with it. He ends up in league with another dissident who coached Bukovsky (and others) to stand up for their rights as Soviet citizens under the Soviet Constitution, a position the authorities were entirely unprepared for. Much of his narrative is of his time in various prisons and mental health institutes, though he talks about how he used his brief periods between incarcerations as well. Of course it is instructive in terms of that period of Soviet history, but it remains timely in its critique of central planning generally, especially when more and more Americans and Europeans are forgetting the lesson of who won the Cold War and are demanding more and more of their respective governments.
Bukovsky realized the power of nonviolent resistance to the Communist regime: "We had grasped the great truth that it was not rifles, not tanks, and not atom bombs that created power, nor upon them that power rested. Power depended upon public obedience, upon a willingness to submit...They no longer demanded of people a belief in the radiant future--all they needed was submission." (pp 31-32)
Bukovsky offers two sorts of wisdom in his work, the immediately practical and the more abstract and general. In terms of his practical wisdom, for example, he finds "it is possible to divide mankind into two categories--those you could share a cell with and those you couldn't." (p 16) Contrast this with his more abstract observations, such as, "it is more just to judge a country by its prisons than by its monuments." (p 25)
As much as I have looked to the failed utopian experiments humans have tried for centuries, it astonishes me that people still fall for the same old promises, the same old lies. Perhaps Bukovsky's observations on the useful idiots who traveled to Stalin's workers' paradise and returned singing its praises captures how this can be true:
[M]illions of political prisoners in Russia were rounded up and driven out to work on the great construction projects of communism. Hundreds of thousands of them died of scurvy and malnutrition. Meanwhile large numbers of people, overcome with admiration, lauded the Soviet regime. It wasn't that they lacked the necessary information; simply they didn't want to know, didn't want to believe it. People need their beautiful dream of justice and happiness somewhere on this earth. (p 31) Bukovsky demonstrates a keen understanding of propaganda and thoroughly deconstructs the Soviet propaganda and how it often kept Westerners perplexed right through Brezhnev.
Bukovsky also examines the everyday rationalizations for those who submitted, as well as those who actively participated in the regime: "If it isn't a crime to manufacture barbed wire, why is it to be a prison guard? One way or another, everyone is implicated in the crimes of the regime, everyone works for government enterprises, reinforcing the system and creating its wealth...what difference does it make whether they send you to work for the police or the KGB? if I don't do it, someone else will." (p 73)
A lesson Bukovsky learned from his experience, which also applies to today's struggles against totalitarianism (Islamic terrorism, for instance): "This problem, in its generalized form, seems to have become one of the central problems of our age. Cultivation and courtesy have turned out to be impracticable when confronted with uncouthness, baseness, and brute force. How can one oppose these things? By using the same methods? But this leads to spiritual degeneration, the two sides become indistinguishable from one another. By remaining the same? But then you face physical extermination." (p 87)
Bukovsky understood the nature of the regime at its top, that it understood humans were not rational animals so much as rationalizing. Just like George Orwell's pigs teaching the sheep to bleat out something different each day, Bukovsky notes "Lenin had but one principle--to supply a theoretical basis for each concrete step that he took." (p 104)
Bukovsky also noted the common failing of all utopians and social reformers from Plato down to the present day embodied by Soviet leaders, "They regard man as being born into this world completely empty, like a vessel, and as malleable as wax, and therefore they assert that there will be no more crime, dissatisfaction, envy, or hatred." (p 106) It would seem everybody ought to be required to read Frédéric Bastiat's Essays on Political Economy.
In the face of his apparently untenable and hopeless circumstances, Bukovsky finds a ray of light in fellow dissident Alik Yesenin-Volpin, who schools Bukovsky and others in how to oppose this regime without degeneration: "we were obliged to agree that if you answered lawlessness with lawlessness, there was precious little chance of ensuring observance of the law. There was simply no other way. In exactly the same way answering violence with violence would only multiply violence, and answering lies with lies would never bring us closer to the truth...citizens who were fed up with terror and coercion should simply refuse to acknowledge them." (p 240) Mahatma Gandhi would be proud!
Bukovsky's mental salvation during his many periods of incarceration and maltreatment lies in building a castle, stone by stone and room by room, in his mind's eye. This refuge keeps him sane during extended isolation, hunger strikes, and other ugly experiences. As he says:
"Why should I do it?" asks each man in the crowd. "I can do nothing alone." And they are all lost. "If I don't do it, who will?" asks the man with his back to the wall. And everyone is saved. That is how a man begins building his castle. (p 249)
For those who think adding government entitlements, legislation, regulation, taxation, etc., can have any positive result, they really need to examine the principle taken to its natural (perhaps even inevitable?) extreme in examples such as the Soviet Union. As Bukovsky eloquently put it:
So there you have a symbolic picture of our glorious motherland! An enormous madhouse where everything is looted down to the last rotten spud, where the whole shebang is run by a handful of the "sane," where even they are drunken crooks who prefer to disguise themselves as schizophrenics, and where they sit and listen to what London has to tell them about life in their homeland. (p 265)
As he encounters the USSR's criminal underground, sharing the same prisons, camps, and lunatic asylums, Bukovsky comes to understand the similarities between government (particularly a lawless government as any central planning system must ultimately be*) and criminal gangs:
I can see little difference between the ideology of some prince with his retinue, laying waste to his surrounding region and exacting tribute from the vanquished, and today's gangleader with his gang. And they don't regard their exploits as in any way shameful. On the contrary, the thieves basically believe they are superior people, while all the rest of the population, the "peasants," are their tributaries. They never steal, they merely exact their "due"--which is literally the word they use. (p 308)
* See Friedrich Hayek's The Road to Serfdom for a thorough examination of this, especially Chapter 6.
One of the other more timely lessons of the book, in our day and age of defeatists warning against any effective action against evil men on account that it might further empower them or play into their agenda, Bukovsky bears terrible witness from the receiving end of such careful thinking. As he notes:
As for the so-called policy of détente--the Helsinki agreements and so on--we could feel on our backs in Vladimir Prison who gained from it. It wasn't the first time that the West's "friendly relations" with the Soviet Union had been built on our bones. The most repulsive thing of all was that the West tried to justify itself with all sorts of intricate doctrines and theories. Just as Soviet man created a countless multitude of self-justifications to facilitate his collusion with total violence, so the West too likes to soothe its conscience. Sometimes these self-justifications are the same. But violence relentlessly revenges itself on those who support it. (p 437)
If I don't rate the book with more stars, it is only because there are other books one might read first. This one is easy to read, despite its apparent size, well worth the trouble, and still timely today. I would, of course, also recommend Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, as well as Anne Applebaum's brilliant though grim Gulag : A History, The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression, and Christopher Andrews's histories of the Soviet Union's secret services, for instance. A good read!
Bukovsky realized the power of nonviolent resistance to the Communist regime: "We had grasped the great truth that it was not rifles, not tanks, and not atom bombs that created power, nor upon them that power rested. Power depended upon public obedience, upon a willingness to submit...They no longer demanded of people a belief in the radiant future--all they needed was submission." (pp 31-32)
Bukovsky offers two sorts of wisdom in his work, the immediately practical and the more abstract and general. In terms of his practical wisdom, for example, he finds "it is possible to divide mankind into two categories--those you could share a cell with and those you couldn't." (p 16) Contrast this with his more abstract observations, such as, "it is more just to judge a country by its prisons than by its monuments." (p 25)
As much as I have looked to the failed utopian experiments humans have tried for centuries, it astonishes me that people still fall for the same old promises, the same old lies. Perhaps Bukovsky's observations on the useful idiots who traveled to Stalin's workers' paradise and returned singing its praises captures how this can be true:
[M]illions of political prisoners in Russia were rounded up and driven out to work on the great construction projects of communism. Hundreds of thousands of them died of scurvy and malnutrition. Meanwhile large numbers of people, overcome with admiration, lauded the Soviet regime. It wasn't that they lacked the necessary information; simply they didn't want to know, didn't want to believe it. People need their beautiful dream of justice and happiness somewhere on this earth. (p 31) Bukovsky demonstrates a keen understanding of propaganda and thoroughly deconstructs the Soviet propaganda and how it often kept Westerners perplexed right through Brezhnev.
Bukovsky also examines the everyday rationalizations for those who submitted, as well as those who actively participated in the regime: "If it isn't a crime to manufacture barbed wire, why is it to be a prison guard? One way or another, everyone is implicated in the crimes of the regime, everyone works for government enterprises, reinforcing the system and creating its wealth...what difference does it make whether they send you to work for the police or the KGB? if I don't do it, someone else will." (p 73)
A lesson Bukovsky learned from his experience, which also applies to today's struggles against totalitarianism (Islamic terrorism, for instance): "This problem, in its generalized form, seems to have become one of the central problems of our age. Cultivation and courtesy have turned out to be impracticable when confronted with uncouthness, baseness, and brute force. How can one oppose these things? By using the same methods? But this leads to spiritual degeneration, the two sides become indistinguishable from one another. By remaining the same? But then you face physical extermination." (p 87)
Bukovsky understood the nature of the regime at its top, that it understood humans were not rational animals so much as rationalizing. Just like George Orwell's pigs teaching the sheep to bleat out something different each day, Bukovsky notes "Lenin had but one principle--to supply a theoretical basis for each concrete step that he took." (p 104)
Bukovsky also noted the common failing of all utopians and social reformers from Plato down to the present day embodied by Soviet leaders, "They regard man as being born into this world completely empty, like a vessel, and as malleable as wax, and therefore they assert that there will be no more crime, dissatisfaction, envy, or hatred." (p 106) It would seem everybody ought to be required to read Frédéric Bastiat's Essays on Political Economy.
In the face of his apparently untenable and hopeless circumstances, Bukovsky finds a ray of light in fellow dissident Alik Yesenin-Volpin, who schools Bukovsky and others in how to oppose this regime without degeneration: "we were obliged to agree that if you answered lawlessness with lawlessness, there was precious little chance of ensuring observance of the law. There was simply no other way. In exactly the same way answering violence with violence would only multiply violence, and answering lies with lies would never bring us closer to the truth...citizens who were fed up with terror and coercion should simply refuse to acknowledge them." (p 240) Mahatma Gandhi would be proud!
Bukovsky's mental salvation during his many periods of incarceration and maltreatment lies in building a castle, stone by stone and room by room, in his mind's eye. This refuge keeps him sane during extended isolation, hunger strikes, and other ugly experiences. As he says:
"Why should I do it?" asks each man in the crowd. "I can do nothing alone." And they are all lost. "If I don't do it, who will?" asks the man with his back to the wall. And everyone is saved. That is how a man begins building his castle. (p 249)
For those who think adding government entitlements, legislation, regulation, taxation, etc., can have any positive result, they really need to examine the principle taken to its natural (perhaps even inevitable?) extreme in examples such as the Soviet Union. As Bukovsky eloquently put it:
So there you have a symbolic picture of our glorious motherland! An enormous madhouse where everything is looted down to the last rotten spud, where the whole shebang is run by a handful of the "sane," where even they are drunken crooks who prefer to disguise themselves as schizophrenics, and where they sit and listen to what London has to tell them about life in their homeland. (p 265)
As he encounters the USSR's criminal underground, sharing the same prisons, camps, and lunatic asylums, Bukovsky comes to understand the similarities between government (particularly a lawless government as any central planning system must ultimately be*) and criminal gangs:
I can see little difference between the ideology of some prince with his retinue, laying waste to his surrounding region and exacting tribute from the vanquished, and today's gangleader with his gang. And they don't regard their exploits as in any way shameful. On the contrary, the thieves basically believe they are superior people, while all the rest of the population, the "peasants," are their tributaries. They never steal, they merely exact their "due"--which is literally the word they use. (p 308)
* See Friedrich Hayek's The Road to Serfdom for a thorough examination of this, especially Chapter 6.
One of the other more timely lessons of the book, in our day and age of defeatists warning against any effective action against evil men on account that it might further empower them or play into their agenda, Bukovsky bears terrible witness from the receiving end of such careful thinking. As he notes:
As for the so-called policy of détente--the Helsinki agreements and so on--we could feel on our backs in Vladimir Prison who gained from it. It wasn't the first time that the West's "friendly relations" with the Soviet Union had been built on our bones. The most repulsive thing of all was that the West tried to justify itself with all sorts of intricate doctrines and theories. Just as Soviet man created a countless multitude of self-justifications to facilitate his collusion with total violence, so the West too likes to soothe its conscience. Sometimes these self-justifications are the same. But violence relentlessly revenges itself on those who support it. (p 437)
If I don't rate the book with more stars, it is only because there are other books one might read first. This one is easy to read, despite its apparent size, well worth the trouble, and still timely today. I would, of course, also recommend Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, as well as Anne Applebaum's brilliant though grim Gulag : A History, The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression, and Christopher Andrews's histories of the Soviet Union's secret services, for instance. A good read!
July 3, 2019
Panašu į Solženicyną. Tik apie vėlesnius laikus. Ir šiek tiek gilesni pamąstymai.
Lyg būtų šiandien parašyta:
Мы никогда не избавимся от террора, никогда не обретем свободы и безопасности, пока не откажемся полностью признавать эти параноические реальности, пока непротивопоставим им свои реальности, свои ценности.
Тысячи книг написаны на Западе, сотни различных доктрин созданы крупнейшими политиками, чтобы найти компромиссный выход. И все они пытаются избежать единственно верного решения — морального противостояния. Изнеженные западные демократии забыли свое прошлое, свою суть, а именно, что демократия — это не уютный дом, красивая машина или пособие по безработице, а прежде всего право бороться и воля к борьбе.
Все эти хитроумно-наивные теории лишь усиливают несвободу, разжигают аппетиты хищников, вводят двойные стандарты, подрывают моральные основы самих западных обществ, порождают бессмысленные иллюзии и надежды. Близорукая политика бесконечных уступок и компромиссов создала это чудовищное государство, вскормила его и вооружила. Затем, не придумав ничего лучшего, вскормила и вооружила Гитлера и поставила все человечество перед необходимостью воевать за то, какого цвета будут в мире концлагеря — красные или коричневые. Выбирайте теперь — рабство или смерть. Другого выхода ваши теоретики вам не оставили. Нет, ни атомные бомбы, никровавые диктатуры, ни теории «сдерживания» или «конвергенции» не спасут демократии. Нам, родившимся и выросшим в атмосфере террора, известно только одно средство — позиция гражданина.
Lyg būtų šiandien parašyta:
Мы никогда не избавимся от террора, никогда не обретем свободы и безопасности, пока не откажемся полностью признавать эти параноические реальности, пока непротивопоставим им свои реальности, свои ценности.
Тысячи книг написаны на Западе, сотни различных доктрин созданы крупнейшими политиками, чтобы найти компромиссный выход. И все они пытаются избежать единственно верного решения — морального противостояния. Изнеженные западные демократии забыли свое прошлое, свою суть, а именно, что демократия — это не уютный дом, красивая машина или пособие по безработице, а прежде всего право бороться и воля к борьбе.
Все эти хитроумно-наивные теории лишь усиливают несвободу, разжигают аппетиты хищников, вводят двойные стандарты, подрывают моральные основы самих западных обществ, порождают бессмысленные иллюзии и надежды. Близорукая политика бесконечных уступок и компромиссов создала это чудовищное государство, вскормила его и вооружила. Затем, не придумав ничего лучшего, вскормила и вооружила Гитлера и поставила все человечество перед необходимостью воевать за то, какого цвета будут в мире концлагеря — красные или коричневые. Выбирайте теперь — рабство или смерть. Другого выхода ваши теоретики вам не оставили. Нет, ни атомные бомбы, никровавые диктатуры, ни теории «сдерживания» или «конвергенции» не спасут демократии. Нам, родившимся и выросшим в атмосфере террора, известно только одно средство — позиция гражданина.
September 19, 2020
"…Я, конечно, сразу стал наводить справки, нельзя ли достать приемник. Оказалось, это очень просто сделать. В каком-то другом отделении был комбайн — телевизор с приемником, и санитары быстренько договорились об обмене его на наш телевизор.
Каждое утро, когда мы усаживались завтракать в столовой, я ловил Би-Би-Си, и, пока идиоты глотали кашу, эпилептики бились в судорогах, а шизофреники неподвижно сидели над мисками, уставясь в пространство невидящим взглядом, мы слушали новости из Лондона. Письма и протесты по делу Синявского и Даниэля, стенограмма самого суда, интервью и заявления Тарсиса в Лондоне… Жулики мои только головами качали — ну, дела! Особенно же стали прислушиваться после того, как несколько раз промелькнуло и мое имя. Теперь мне даже не нужно было самому беспокоиться включить радио вовремя — санитары включали его, и все затихали.
Ну, чем не символическая картина нашего славного отечества! Огромный сумасшедший дом, где все разворовано до последней картофелины, где всем распоряжается горстка «здоровых» детин — спившиеся жулики, предпочитающие прикидываться шизофрениками. Сидим и слушаем, что нам из Лондона расскажут о нашей жизни.”
One of the best books I have read this year.
Somehow I have never heard about this memoir until recently although I would say now that it is one of the must-reads for anyone interested in the Soviet Resistance in the broad sense of the word and in some of the most crucial aspects of the Soviet repressive system, such as political abuse of psychiatry in the USSR, economic repressions, etc.
I did not expect much from the book but I was captivated by the story and personality of the author immediately from the first pages, and I listened to the whole book with the same high level of attention and interest to the very end.
It is not a “memoir” in the classical sense: Владимир Буковский talks a little about his upbringing and some aspects of his life and development but these pages are relatively scarce and they were necessary mostly to illustrate his reflections and provide an integral background. The largest part of this memoir component of the book is about his years of imprisonment and “treatment” in psychiatric hospitals, so it’s mostly not about him personally but rather about “the system” and his experience of being there. However, overall, the book is about the Soviet life in general, all its crazy and absurd things, and what a person can get himself/herself into if they start to notice and fight this. This is a fascinating flow of various reflections and observations, and I really, really recommend reading it because it’s a rarity to find such an intelligent and clear-sighted perspective even among the most respected and trustworthy Soviet dissidents. In this regard, Владимир Буковский reminded me Анатолий Марченко a lot, although Владимир Буковский is more all-encompassing and consistent in his radical attitude to the USSR.
The most prominent feature of this book is that it provides a very important overview of the deeply repressive character of the USSR even during its most “vegetarian” years, yes, during “Ottepel” and all this Khrushchov’s “reforms” and “overcoming the cult of personality.” Not only repressions continued even during these times, but they actually were incessantly modified and developed into something new, no less sinister and deteriorating than direct killings and tortures. The book should be read by everybody who believes that Khrushchov was “a good guy.”
Владимир Буковский is also a very good writer, and it’s just a pleasure to read the book as literature. I should also mention his excellent sense of humor — although nothing from the things described and discussed there is funny in essence, of course, and they are often fucking scary and unbelievable, Владимир Буковский somehow tells about them with awesome intonations of an alien highly amused by this idiotic circus. I laughed out loud or giggled all the time. I was absolutely charmed by his voice and personality — and that’s in addition to all the precious information he provided, a significant part of which can still be quoted somewhere in encyclopedias with minimum corrections.
Каждое утро, когда мы усаживались завтракать в столовой, я ловил Би-Би-Си, и, пока идиоты глотали кашу, эпилептики бились в судорогах, а шизофреники неподвижно сидели над мисками, уставясь в пространство невидящим взглядом, мы слушали новости из Лондона. Письма и протесты по делу Синявского и Даниэля, стенограмма самого суда, интервью и заявления Тарсиса в Лондоне… Жулики мои только головами качали — ну, дела! Особенно же стали прислушиваться после того, как несколько раз промелькнуло и мое имя. Теперь мне даже не нужно было самому беспокоиться включить радио вовремя — санитары включали его, и все затихали.
Ну, чем не символическая картина нашего славного отечества! Огромный сумасшедший дом, где все разворовано до последней картофелины, где всем распоряжается горстка «здоровых» детин — спившиеся жулики, предпочитающие прикидываться шизофрениками. Сидим и слушаем, что нам из Лондона расскажут о нашей жизни.”
One of the best books I have read this year.
Somehow I have never heard about this memoir until recently although I would say now that it is one of the must-reads for anyone interested in the Soviet Resistance in the broad sense of the word and in some of the most crucial aspects of the Soviet repressive system, such as political abuse of psychiatry in the USSR, economic repressions, etc.
I did not expect much from the book but I was captivated by the story and personality of the author immediately from the first pages, and I listened to the whole book with the same high level of attention and interest to the very end.
It is not a “memoir” in the classical sense: Владимир Буковский talks a little about his upbringing and some aspects of his life and development but these pages are relatively scarce and they were necessary mostly to illustrate his reflections and provide an integral background. The largest part of this memoir component of the book is about his years of imprisonment and “treatment” in psychiatric hospitals, so it’s mostly not about him personally but rather about “the system” and his experience of being there. However, overall, the book is about the Soviet life in general, all its crazy and absurd things, and what a person can get himself/herself into if they start to notice and fight this. This is a fascinating flow of various reflections and observations, and I really, really recommend reading it because it’s a rarity to find such an intelligent and clear-sighted perspective even among the most respected and trustworthy Soviet dissidents. In this regard, Владимир Буковский reminded me Анатолий Марченко a lot, although Владимир Буковский is more all-encompassing and consistent in his radical attitude to the USSR.
The most prominent feature of this book is that it provides a very important overview of the deeply repressive character of the USSR even during its most “vegetarian” years, yes, during “Ottepel” and all this Khrushchov’s “reforms” and “overcoming the cult of personality.” Not only repressions continued even during these times, but they actually were incessantly modified and developed into something new, no less sinister and deteriorating than direct killings and tortures. The book should be read by everybody who believes that Khrushchov was “a good guy.”
Владимир Буковский is also a very good writer, and it’s just a pleasure to read the book as literature. I should also mention his excellent sense of humor — although nothing from the things described and discussed there is funny in essence, of course, and they are often fucking scary and unbelievable, Владимир Буковский somehow tells about them with awesome intonations of an alien highly amused by this idiotic circus. I laughed out loud or giggled all the time. I was absolutely charmed by his voice and personality — and that’s in addition to all the precious information he provided, a significant part of which can still be quoted somewhere in encyclopedias with minimum corrections.
October 5, 2024
Я начала читать эту книгу после того, как Владимир Карамурза в своем интервью после обмена отметил, что в ней есть много сходств с тем, как сейчас обращаются с политическими заключенными.
Страшно воспринимать, что за 50 лет система осталось такой же безжалостной и стремящейся убить человека. Карцеры, лагеря, наседки, психбольницы - очень больно про все это читать. Но нужно, чтобы понимать другую реальность, которая существует параллельно обычной жизни.
Страшно воспринимать, что за 50 лет система осталось такой же безжалостной и стремящейся убить человека. Карцеры, лагеря, наседки, психбольницы - очень больно про все это читать. Но нужно, чтобы понимать другую реальность, которая существует параллельно обычной жизни.
November 20, 2019
Прекрасна книга про радянську внутрішню політику, про громадянські свободи, про тюрми і табори, про пропаганду і все інше. Автор пишу у дуже в хорошому стилі, читається легко і цікаво, хоча і про важку долю. Постійно повертаєшся до думки "це ж було тут, з нами, з нашими батьками і їх батьками!" Від цього читається ще краще.
Дуже всім рекомендую.
Дуже всім рекомендую.
January 6, 2022
Пребываю одновременно и в ужасе, и в восторге от этой книги. Горько читать и осознавать, что это история моей страны, ещё страшнее - что всё повторяется. Сохранила очень много цитат, некоторые описывают абсурд, другие - дают надежду.
January 27, 2025
Привет из прошлого, пугающе актуальный для нашего времени. Несмотря на то, что Буковский жил в СССР, перемещаясь из тюрьмы в психушку и обратно, он поразительно глубоко сумел понять и исторический, и политический контекст. Просто маст рид.
October 28, 2019
Прошло 40 лет, и айда по новому кругу. "Новому величию" эту книгу можно использовать как учебник. Лучшее лекарство против ностальгии для трактористов
January 6, 2020
Эта книга должна быть в обязательной школьной литературе.
March 9, 2017
The book “To Build a Castle: My Life as a Dissenter” (1978) is on my shelf, at home, in Russian, with the title И возвращается ветер… (“And the Wind Returns…”, the Biblical famous allusion.) I read the book in 1990, and at that very time I was so impressed with the book’s style and the author’s manner of writing that I regarded it as one of masterpieces of non-fiction literature. Written by Mr Bukovsky the well-known Soviet dissident, who had spent years in Gulag, the book of memoirs is written so well, in terms of Russian language and literary style, that I had been unable to part with it for more than five minutes. As I know today, much in the book is like an eye-opening revelation to young readers as well as to previous generations of people. The book is translated into English, French, German, and it must be read, since it is a breathtaking narration, from the opening to the very ending, an impressive report from those day, and a true document uncovering the most hidden and secretive topics of the Soviet history and crimes against humanity, perpetrated by Bolsheviks.
Read
March 14, 2017According to my diary it was 'just so gripping'
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews