What do you think?
Rate this book
The Life of a Useless Man
This book was begun by Maxim Gorky in 1907, less than two years after the unsuccessful armed rebellion on Bloody Sunday, with which he had been closely involved. Frail, battered and orphaned, Yevsey Kimkov creeps through the undergrowth of life; his intelligence remains observant, but his will is cowed, and his is easily coerced into spying for the military in support of the Tsar. He makes some friends who are capable of defying oppression, and his heart responds to them - but it is this association which is going to brink him to the terrible crisis of his life, which coincides with the insurrection and its suppression.
288 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1907
60 people are currently reading
1473 people want to read
About the author
Maxim Gorky
1,408 books1,753 followersRussian writer Aleksei Maksimovich Peshkov (Russian: Алексей Максимович Пешков) supported the Bolshevik revolution of 1917 and helped to develop socialist realism as the officially accepted literary aesthetic; his works include
The Life of Klim Samgin
(1927-1936), an unfinished cycle of novels.
This Soviet author founded the socialist realism literary method and a political activist. People also nominated him five times for the Nobel Prize in literature. From 1906 to 1913 and from 1921 to 1929, he lived abroad, mostly in Capri, Italy; after his return to the Soviet Union, he accepted the cultural policies of the time.
This Soviet author founded the socialist realism literary method and a political activist. People also nominated him five times for the Nobel Prize in literature. From 1906 to 1913 and from 1921 to 1929, he lived abroad, mostly in Capri, Italy; after his return to the Soviet Union, he accepted the cultural policies of the time.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 91 reviews
Read
February 4, 2017This is the poignant tale of a boy who in church feels sympathy for the Devil, crying over the narrow chinned and sharp bearded figurine of satan they have ( for some curious reason) in his boyhood church, and grows up to become a police informer and agent provocateur.
It is a sad tale and tells of a useless life, yet is oddly sympathetic and tender toward its foolish principal character who by virtue of his profession is cut off from solidarity and genuine closeness with others
It is a sad tale and tells of a useless life, yet is oddly sympathetic and tender toward its foolish principal character who by virtue of his profession is cut off from solidarity and genuine closeness with others
March 13, 2014
As is common in a lot of Russian literature, there is not a whole lot of light or happiness in Life of a Useless Man. There is a lot of despair, suffering, personal and social upheaval and catastrophe, and tragic, violent death. It's a lovely example of tragic Russian literature, and what can I say, I love Russian lit!
Life of a Useless Man does unfold a little slowly, and lots of people walk into and out of Yevsey' s life, so it can be a a challenge to keep track of all that's going on. Still, though, I couldn't put this book down. There was something compelling about how Yevsey lived that kept me involved in the story. Things happened around Yevsey, and to Yevsey, but he was never active in choosing his fate. He was swept along and out of control of his own destiny. I read Yevsey as a metaphor for the average Russian citizen in the early days of the 20th century. The average Russian citizen was just trying to survive, but events that they couldn't control dictated their fates and the roles they ended up playing in the life of the State.
Other Russian writers deal in these themes, but Gorky approached it in a way that drew me in and resonated. I really enjoyed the social commentary and the despondent poetry of this writing. In the hands of great Russian writers, the dark beauty of misery is captured and expressed like in no other literature.
Life of a Useless Man does unfold a little slowly, and lots of people walk into and out of Yevsey' s life, so it can be a a challenge to keep track of all that's going on. Still, though, I couldn't put this book down. There was something compelling about how Yevsey lived that kept me involved in the story. Things happened around Yevsey, and to Yevsey, but he was never active in choosing his fate. He was swept along and out of control of his own destiny. I read Yevsey as a metaphor for the average Russian citizen in the early days of the 20th century. The average Russian citizen was just trying to survive, but events that they couldn't control dictated their fates and the roles they ended up playing in the life of the State.
Other Russian writers deal in these themes, but Gorky approached it in a way that drew me in and resonated. I really enjoyed the social commentary and the despondent poetry of this writing. In the hands of great Russian writers, the dark beauty of misery is captured and expressed like in no other literature.
March 3, 2023
3,5 stars!
Il titolo originale è "La vita di un uomo inutile" (anni fa è stato riproposto come Storia di un uomo inutile da UTET).
A ben vedere è un romanzo piuttosto trascurato nel panorama delle opere di Maksim Gorkij. In effetti, non è ben collocabile ideologicamente, da una parte e/o dall'altra, ragion per cui non godette di particolare prestigio neppure negli anni del sostegno a Stalin. E questo, ovvio, è grande un merito che possiamo appuntare al romanzo.
Si tratta di un'opera del 1908, scritta ben prima degli eventi del '17, ma poco dopo la rivoluzione del 1905.
Un orfano cresciuto dallo zio viene avviato alla vita lavorativa come aiutante di bottega di un libraio. La situazione si fa subito ambigua, sotto più punti di vista. L'amante del libraio lo tradisce con un altro e lo manda ai matti (diciamo pure "fuori di testa"). Il ragazzo si invaghisce sempre più di questa Raissa e nel suo cuore cresce e divampa l'odio per il vecchio. Non serve che dica cosa succede. Succedono delle cose. Squallide, ovviamente, ma non è questo il punto. Il punto è che la storia prende una piega diversa e gli orizzonti si ampliano a dismisura. Ora Evsej entra a far parte della polizia segreta (la tristemente nota "ochrana" dello zar). La polizia segreta ha il preciso compito di indagare e neutralizzare gli elementi ostili e rivoluzionari.
Più la narrazione procede, più ci si rende conto che tutta la realtà è sordida, non importa da quale lato della barricata la si voglia analizzare. Evsej si trova fare l'agente provocatore e questa cosa scatena mille pensieri e dubbi nel suo animo. Diciamo pure rimorsi.
Ma da tali rimorsi non c'è alcuna catarsi. Probabilmente, non ha alcun senso nemmeno passare dall'altra parte, tanto squinternata e squallida è la realtà.
Il titolo originale è "La vita di un uomo inutile" (anni fa è stato riproposto come Storia di un uomo inutile da UTET).
A ben vedere è un romanzo piuttosto trascurato nel panorama delle opere di Maksim Gorkij. In effetti, non è ben collocabile ideologicamente, da una parte e/o dall'altra, ragion per cui non godette di particolare prestigio neppure negli anni del sostegno a Stalin. E questo, ovvio, è grande un merito che possiamo appuntare al romanzo.
Si tratta di un'opera del 1908, scritta ben prima degli eventi del '17, ma poco dopo la rivoluzione del 1905.
Un orfano cresciuto dallo zio viene avviato alla vita lavorativa come aiutante di bottega di un libraio. La situazione si fa subito ambigua, sotto più punti di vista. L'amante del libraio lo tradisce con un altro e lo manda ai matti (diciamo pure "fuori di testa"). Il ragazzo si invaghisce sempre più di questa Raissa e nel suo cuore cresce e divampa l'odio per il vecchio. Non serve che dica cosa succede. Succedono delle cose. Squallide, ovviamente, ma non è questo il punto. Il punto è che la storia prende una piega diversa e gli orizzonti si ampliano a dismisura. Ora Evsej entra a far parte della polizia segreta (la tristemente nota "ochrana" dello zar). La polizia segreta ha il preciso compito di indagare e neutralizzare gli elementi ostili e rivoluzionari.
Più la narrazione procede, più ci si rende conto che tutta la realtà è sordida, non importa da quale lato della barricata la si voglia analizzare. Evsej si trova fare l'agente provocatore e questa cosa scatena mille pensieri e dubbi nel suo animo. Diciamo pure rimorsi.
Ma da tali rimorsi non c'è alcuna catarsi. Probabilmente, non ha alcun senso nemmeno passare dall'altra parte, tanto squinternata e squallida è la realtà.
October 23, 2012
The story of a man, full of fears, that never found the courage to face them. Suffering from tormenting thoughts, but also by an invincible cowardice, lives his life as a spectator, letting himself being dragged by events, which lead him to end up as a spy, an informer for the shake of the Czar. Non- educated, mentally deficient, self-ignorant, tries to please anybody that looks influential and powerful. Although it seems he is dreaming and believes in a better life, he never stands up for it, hoping that everybody else will do. Unfortunately, there is a weak development of the story, that is really tiring, but the penetration into the hero's psychology in parts of the text is compensating.
February 12, 2023
လွယ်လွယ်ပြောရင်တော့ ဒလန်တစ်ယောက် ဘဝဇာတ်သိမ်းမလှတဲ့ ဇာတ်လမ်းပေါ့။
ဒါပေမယ့် လူတစ်ယောက်ဟာ ကိုယ်တိုင် လိုလိုလားလားရှိတာ မဟုတ်ပေမယ့် လူမှုဘဝ အခြေအနေတွေက ဖိနှိပ်တဲ့စနစ်ကို အလုပ်အကျွေးပြုရတဲ့ ဘဝဆီ ဆွဲနှစ်သွားတတ်တယ်ဆိုတာ ကလင်းကော့ဇာတ်ကောင်ဆီမှာ တွေ့ရမယ်။ ဒါပေမယ့် ဖောက်ပြန်ရေးအမြင်တွေကပဲ လုံးဝ လွှမ်းမိုးအနိုင်ယူသွားတာလည်း မဟုတ်ဘူး။ သူ့သတင်းပေးအလုပ်ဟာ နှစ်လိုစရာ မကောင်းဘူး၊ လူထုတွေ ရုန်းကန်တော်လှန်လာတာဟာ လိုလားအပ်တဲ့ အရာဆိုတာလည်း သိတယ်။ ဒါပေမယ့် ရှင်းရှင်းလင်းလင်း နားလည်သဘောပေါက်လာတာမျိုးလည်း မဟုတ်ဘူး။ ဖိနှိပ်မှုတွေထဲမှာ အသားကျ ရှင်သန်နေတဲ့ လူတစ်ယောက်ရဲ့ ဘက်နှစ်ဘက် ဒွိဟဖြစ်နေတဲ့သဘောကို ပြနေတယ်။ ဒီဘက်နှစ်ဘက်ကို မျဉ်းဆွဲပြီး ဘက်တစ်ဘက်တည်းကို ဗြုန်းခနဲ ပြောင်းလိုက်ဖို့ ဆိုတာလည်း ထင်သလောက် မလွယ်လှဘူး ဆိုတာလည်း မြင်ရမယ် ထင်တယ်။
ဒါပေမယ့် လူတစ်ယောက်ဟာ ကိုယ်တိုင် လိုလိုလားလားရှိတာ မဟုတ်ပေမယ့် လူမှုဘဝ အခြေအနေတွေက ဖိနှိပ်တဲ့စနစ်ကို အလုပ်အကျွေးပြုရတဲ့ ဘဝဆီ ဆွဲနှစ်သွားတတ်တယ်ဆိုတာ ကလင်းကော့ဇာတ်ကောင်ဆီမှာ တွေ့ရမယ်။ ဒါပေမယ့် ဖောက်ပြန်ရေးအမြင်တွေကပဲ လုံးဝ လွှမ်းမိုးအနိုင်ယူသွားတာလည်း မဟုတ်ဘူး။ သူ့သတင်းပေးအလုပ်ဟာ နှစ်လိုစရာ မကောင်းဘူး၊ လူထုတွေ ရုန်းကန်တော်လှန်လာတာဟာ လိုလားအပ်တဲ့ အရာဆိုတာလည်း သိတယ်။ ဒါပေမယ့် ရှင်းရှင်းလင်းလင်း နားလည်သဘောပေါက်လာတာမျိုးလည်း မဟုတ်ဘူး။ ဖိနှိပ်မှုတွေထဲမှာ အသားကျ ရှင်သန်နေတဲ့ လူတစ်ယောက်ရဲ့ ဘက်နှစ်ဘက် ဒွိဟဖြစ်နေတဲ့သဘောကို ပြနေတယ်။ ဒီဘက်နှစ်ဘက်ကို မျဉ်းဆွဲပြီး ဘက်တစ်ဘက်တည်းကို ဗြုန်းခနဲ ပြောင်းလိုက်ဖို့ ဆိုတာလည်း ထင်သလောက် မလွယ်လှဘူး ဆိုတာလည်း မြင်ရမယ် ထင်တယ်။
November 25, 2019
I think Gorky’s pro-revolutionary sentiment got in the way of what early on looked like it might develop into an intriguing psychological portrait of the sort of person we don’t usually focus on in literature, or in life; a guy who from early days was dealt a rotten hand — in terms of family circumstances, environment and innate talent — fails to rise above it, and winds up in a universally despised walk of life, becoming an informant, in this case, for the government of Tsar Nicholas II at the time his reign is starting to unravel.
As the novel was unfolding, I was fascinated by the Gorky’s judgment-free depiction of protagonist Yevsey and the “spies” with whom he worked. The beginning of Chapter XV in particular did a nice job of explaining the mission of the spies, how it was a valuable service to the country. It explored the spy’s point of view in a straightforward manner. I admire writers who can step back from their personal agendas and truly understand and depict “the other.” How much talent does it take to sneer in print at characters readers can be expected to see as bad guys? Any hack can do that. (And seriously, we really do need to think more substantively about informers and provocateurs; it’s easy to despise the Tsar’s secret agents, but how do we feel about folks who do it today and wind up foiling terrorist plans, something that does and has happened.
Unfortunately, Gorky didn’t keep it going. He was on the side of the “revolutionists” and it became increasingly apparent as the book progressed and especially into the second half, when narration. As historical things increasingly overwhelmed psychological insight into characters who gradually transformed from three-dimensional beings to one-dimensional caricatures.
As the novel was unfolding, I was fascinated by the Gorky’s judgment-free depiction of protagonist Yevsey and the “spies” with whom he worked. The beginning of Chapter XV in particular did a nice job of explaining the mission of the spies, how it was a valuable service to the country. It explored the spy’s point of view in a straightforward manner. I admire writers who can step back from their personal agendas and truly understand and depict “the other.” How much talent does it take to sneer in print at characters readers can be expected to see as bad guys? Any hack can do that. (And seriously, we really do need to think more substantively about informers and provocateurs; it’s easy to despise the Tsar’s secret agents, but how do we feel about folks who do it today and wind up foiling terrorist plans, something that does and has happened.
Unfortunately, Gorky didn’t keep it going. He was on the side of the “revolutionists” and it became increasingly apparent as the book progressed and especially into the second half, when narration. As historical things increasingly overwhelmed psychological insight into characters who gradually transformed from three-dimensional beings to one-dimensional caricatures.
Want to read
February 2, 2016Free download available at Project Gutenberg.
From LibraThing:
Maxim Gorky was a Russian proponent of the naturalist approach to fiction. He introduced the peasant and workingman as hero and some of his popularity is undoubtedly due to this. Unlike Dostoevsky who saw evil in metaphysical terms, Gorky was an advocate of class conflict as the source of evil. His materialism stemmed from Marxist ideology and would lead him to join with Lenin and the Bolsheviks. This novel was written before that in 1907 and its publication was prohibited by the Czarist regime. Ironically, the Bolsheviks allowed the publication of the novel in 1917 only in an expurgated form. Apparently Gorky's alliance with Lenin did not get him past the censors.
Perhaps young men in Czarist Russia were like those described in this novel. From my own reading of Turgenev and Tolstoy, among others, I think that there were others that would have been more representative, but Gorky prefers to focus on mass hysteria and class conflict. The result is an interesting novel, but the history of ideas is badly represented. Read at your own risk.
http://amysea.booklikes.com/post/8234...
From LibraThing:
Maxim Gorky was a Russian proponent of the naturalist approach to fiction. He introduced the peasant and workingman as hero and some of his popularity is undoubtedly due to this. Unlike Dostoevsky who saw evil in metaphysical terms, Gorky was an advocate of class conflict as the source of evil. His materialism stemmed from Marxist ideology and would lead him to join with Lenin and the Bolsheviks. This novel was written before that in 1907 and its publication was prohibited by the Czarist regime. Ironically, the Bolsheviks allowed the publication of the novel in 1917 only in an expurgated form. Apparently Gorky's alliance with Lenin did not get him past the censors.
Perhaps young men in Czarist Russia were like those described in this novel. From my own reading of Turgenev and Tolstoy, among others, I think that there were others that would have been more representative, but Gorky prefers to focus on mass hysteria and class conflict. The result is an interesting novel, but the history of ideas is badly represented. Read at your own risk.
http://amysea.booklikes.com/post/8234...
December 24, 2016
'Εχει μεγάλο ενδιαφέρον από ιστορική άποψη.
November 10, 2013
A terrific novel, a great channeling of the spirit of a time. 1905, the events prior to the Russian Revolution of 1917 with all its magic, its liberation, its errors and horrors. Of course Gorky is a friend of communism and this leaks through this early novel of his on many occasions. But the writer is much more than that, and this no mere ideological book: It is an amasing study of the human mind and psyche, both of the individual and the collective, as bold and honest as anything I've ever read. And to top it all, Gorky tells not the story of a tragic hero of the people, not the rise and fall of some great man (or woman) in the course of the fall of the Tsarist empire. It is the life of a useless man he focuses on, a mistreated, illfortuned child that turns into a weak, uninspriring and miserable human being. Weakness and fear are the key traits that are being explored; and how they lead people to ill-doings, to betrayal, corruption and lies. Gorky's casual descriptions of the mass-killing of protestors, the random inprisonments and abuse of authority is not only scary, it might shake something in the reader. We live not in times like these (fortunately), but the novel has not yet become incomprehensible and removed, as have others. It is still a burning reminder of those weaknesses and fears in people, that have been capitalised on so recklessly to haunt and torture Europe and its minorities, outsiders and unprotected in the first half of the 20th century.
February 5, 2011
Maxim Gorky was a Russian proponent of the naturalist approach to fiction. He introduced the peasant and workingman as hero and some of his popularity is undoubtedly due to this. Unlike Dostoevsky who saw evil in metaphysical terms, Gorky was an advocate of class conflict as the source of evil. His materialism stemmed from Marxist ideology and would lead him to join with Lenin and the Bolsheviks. This novel was written before that in 1907 and its publication was prohibited by the Czarist regime. Ironically, the Bolsheviks allowed the publication of the novel in 1917 only in an expurgated form. Apparently Gorky's alliance with Lenin did not get him past the censors.
Perhaps young men in Czarist Russia were like those described in this novel. From my own reading of Turgenev and Tolstoy, among others, I think that there were others that would have been more representative, but Gorky prefers to focus on mass hysteria and class conflict. The result is an interesting novel, but the history of ideas is badly represented. Read at your own risk.
Perhaps young men in Czarist Russia were like those described in this novel. From my own reading of Turgenev and Tolstoy, among others, I think that there were others that would have been more representative, but Gorky prefers to focus on mass hysteria and class conflict. The result is an interesting novel, but the history of ideas is badly represented. Read at your own risk.
April 23, 2018
Di buku Pecundang, sepertinya Gorky membuat subyek yang berbeda dengan Ibunda dengan ide cerita yang sama.
Cerita yang sangat kontroversial. Gorky berhasil membuat saya gemas dengan karakter Yevsey. Gorky juga berhasil membuat adegan bunuh diri dengan epik di akhir cerita.
Sepertinya Gorky mencuri start untuk menulis biografinya ya. Saya merasa Yevsey adalah Gorky itu sendiri, si Pahit. Iapun memberikan sedikit colongan kisah pertemuannya dengan sang cinta pertama, Olga.
Ya, rasanya juga tidak adil jika dibandingkan dengan Ibunda yang diterjemahkan oleh Pram, terjemahan Pecundang dirasa sangat berantakan. Saya sangat menangkap sisi realisme sosialis sastra Rusia melalui terjemahan Pram, sempurna, jadi saya cukup terbantu menangkap alur cerita Pecundang.
Walaupun begitu saya tetap menyukai tulisan Gorky dan semakin tertarik dengan literasi Rusia.
Cerita yang sangat kontroversial. Gorky berhasil membuat saya gemas dengan karakter Yevsey. Gorky juga berhasil membuat adegan bunuh diri dengan epik di akhir cerita.
Sepertinya Gorky mencuri start untuk menulis biografinya ya. Saya merasa Yevsey adalah Gorky itu sendiri, si Pahit. Iapun memberikan sedikit colongan kisah pertemuannya dengan sang cinta pertama, Olga.
Ya, rasanya juga tidak adil jika dibandingkan dengan Ibunda yang diterjemahkan oleh Pram, terjemahan Pecundang dirasa sangat berantakan. Saya sangat menangkap sisi realisme sosialis sastra Rusia melalui terjemahan Pram, sempurna, jadi saya cukup terbantu menangkap alur cerita Pecundang.
Walaupun begitu saya tetap menyukai tulisan Gorky dan semakin tertarik dengan literasi Rusia.
June 19, 2023
Yevsey knows there’s something more but he doesn’t know what is it, so he believes anyone who tells him he can get there. Despite that, Yevsey is so lonely. The people who suggest ‘something more’ are talking about something completely separate to what he means, and that’s why it made me really happy near the end of the book to see his character develop and become more forthright. He wanted to run away and live by himself. Hopefully then he would’ve been able to find the ‘something more’ in life, which is not related to life in communist Russia but instead the essence of life itself. But even with this development, he is still the scared child he was at the beginning. Both his historic anxiety (of being caught) and his newfound confidence (having the guts to jump in front of a train) combined to make the title - the life (the amalgamation of these 2 traits) of a useless man (in the end, it resulted in nothing)
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Read
January 23, 2022Τρομερά κακή μετάφραση, το ολοκλήρωσα μόνο και μόνο για να μην το αφήσω στη μέση. Σε κάποια σημεία δεν βγαίνει καν νόημα λόγω μετάφρασης. Αν μπορέσετε να βρείτε σε άλλη μετάφραση καλώς, είναι ένα όχι τρομερά ενδιαφέρον ανάγνωσμα, αλλά πάντως δίνει μια ικανοποιητική εικόνα της εποχής στην οποία τοποθετείται.
August 18, 2022
One of the most depraved books I have ever read, the fact that it hadn’t the slightest tinge of fantasy and seems all quite probable and real only adds to such. Gorki puts his socialist realism skills on full show here, great read.
May 21, 2024
Oliver Twist if Oliver had been a snitch for the met police.
February 16, 2017
A sharp insight into the world of Russian spies during the Tsar's rule, the book delves into the different personas that make up the Security Department of the police during those turbulent times.
The first half of the book defines and builds up the character of Yevsey Klimkov the protagonist who almost till the end of the book seems to be crawling in fright all over the place due to a severe case of low self esteem.
The latter half of the book depicts the birth of civil unrest and birth of the Revolution and its effect on the populace at large and the evolution of Yevsey Klimkov into a man who learns to believe in people and happiness.
This book was begun by Maxim Gorky in 1907, soon after the unsuccessful armed rebellion on Bloody Sunday, with which he was closely involved. Hence at times it is more like a documentation of history and distorted personalities affected by the fluctuating circumstances of the period.
A good read nevertheless to peep into those times when liberty was not even a dream.
The first half of the book defines and builds up the character of Yevsey Klimkov the protagonist who almost till the end of the book seems to be crawling in fright all over the place due to a severe case of low self esteem.
The latter half of the book depicts the birth of civil unrest and birth of the Revolution and its effect on the populace at large and the evolution of Yevsey Klimkov into a man who learns to believe in people and happiness.
This book was begun by Maxim Gorky in 1907, soon after the unsuccessful armed rebellion on Bloody Sunday, with which he was closely involved. Hence at times it is more like a documentation of history and distorted personalities affected by the fluctuating circumstances of the period.
A good read nevertheless to peep into those times when liberty was not even a dream.
June 17, 2012
this book is about a loser, that havent any courage to faced his world. yet he comes spies, not by his effort but by his fate. his silentness locked him into his miserable world and in the end... death is his only choice. cant imagine how can a man keep silent in front of his world and make war with himself. but still this book is worth to read. like it :D
December 10, 2015
Interesante historia sobre un joven perdido. Pero perdido en cuanto a la vida. Va y viene según la corriente, carece de un carácter que le haga decidir por sí mismo. En un entorno complicado, durante el derrocamiento de los zares, vive guiado por los demás.
June 3, 2011
i like the gloomy russians, but ye be warned. this book starts with a pathetic character & leaves him, by the end of the book, more miserable & pathetic than he started (hence the book's title).
December 28, 2012
Most aptly named book ever
March 28, 2014
Gostei bastante do estilo do Autor, mas falta algum objetivo mais claro na história. Alguns outros personagens poderiam ter sido mais aprofundados também, ao invés de centrar só em um.
April 19, 2023
So, if I were to tell you that this is a spy book, would your first thought be:
Well, as it turns out not all spy stories are about handsome men jet-setting around the world living in luxury and basically having the time of their life. In fact, I suspect that this romanticised version of the spy is actually quite recent, no doubt coming out of the World Wars, as well as the Cold War. Actually, James Bond is a product of the Cold War, though I believe there were also quite a number of spy thrillers set during World War II as well.
However, the spy in this story is anything but. In fact, he ended up in that field namely because he was, well, a disposable human being. Right at the beginning we are told that his mother and father died and as such was left in the care of his uncle. As a child, he was bullied and beaten up, and when he came of age his uncle carts him off to the city where he is left with the owner of a bookshop. As it turns out, the owner happens to work for the secret police, and he tricks people into buying books, and then has them arrested.
The story is mainly about Yevsey, and how he makes his way through the world of the Czarist secret police. It’s not a glamourous job, and it certainly isn’t a job that pays all that well either, but then again pay in a dictatorship generally isn’t all that great if you don’t happen to be in the upper classes. Further, it is based on performance, which sounds all well and good, except performance is based on the number of people you have arrested, and the thing is that even if you don’t have evidence, you can always make it up – sure, why let evidence get in the way of randomly having people arrested.
I guess the modern idea of the spy that been romanticised quite a bit. Okay, there is the idea that the CIA isn’t allowed to operate on home soil, but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t agencies that operate on home soil. Of course, I automatically think about the United States, but pretty much every country has their own security organisations. While they are promoted as protecting us from hostile forces, very little has changed since the days of the Czars – these organistions only exist to keep the ruling elite in power, and yeah, even though we live in a democracy, we still have a ruling elite.
Hey, even in Australia, which sounds like a democratic paradise, we have secret trials where we prosecute our own citizens. Hey, they can’t even be reported on, to the point that the only thing we know about this person is a letter, and the reason this person is being prosecuted is because they decided to blow the whistle on the Australian Government after they illegally interfered in an oil and gas discussion. Due to a change of government (and also an adverse ruling regarding secret trials), the charges have since been dropped (see Witness K Trial or Witness J Trial, though Witness J has nothing to do with Witness K.
I guess it was a pretty good coup that the concept of the spy has been flipped on its head, though while this book seems to be, well, one of Gorky’s lesser-known works, it is interesting to consider what the original concept of the spy was all about. It was dirty, underpaid work which involved you ratting out people that you know. In fact, the book even explores that idea. I also note that Yevsey has that problem where you end up forming bonds with people that you are spying on, and ratting out.
The reality is that little has changed since the days of Gorky. In fact, even peaceful protest groups are being monitored and infiltrated, and as I have suggested, flagging national security issues can result in your case being heard behind closed doors, without any public accountability whatsoever. More so, since the government can create these secret tribunals (they do exist), it can actually make you wonder how free, and protected, we are even in a modern democratic state.
Well, as it turns out not all spy stories are about handsome men jet-setting around the world living in luxury and basically having the time of their life. In fact, I suspect that this romanticised version of the spy is actually quite recent, no doubt coming out of the World Wars, as well as the Cold War. Actually, James Bond is a product of the Cold War, though I believe there were also quite a number of spy thrillers set during World War II as well.
However, the spy in this story is anything but. In fact, he ended up in that field namely because he was, well, a disposable human being. Right at the beginning we are told that his mother and father died and as such was left in the care of his uncle. As a child, he was bullied and beaten up, and when he came of age his uncle carts him off to the city where he is left with the owner of a bookshop. As it turns out, the owner happens to work for the secret police, and he tricks people into buying books, and then has them arrested.
The story is mainly about Yevsey, and how he makes his way through the world of the Czarist secret police. It’s not a glamourous job, and it certainly isn’t a job that pays all that well either, but then again pay in a dictatorship generally isn’t all that great if you don’t happen to be in the upper classes. Further, it is based on performance, which sounds all well and good, except performance is based on the number of people you have arrested, and the thing is that even if you don’t have evidence, you can always make it up – sure, why let evidence get in the way of randomly having people arrested.
I guess the modern idea of the spy that been romanticised quite a bit. Okay, there is the idea that the CIA isn’t allowed to operate on home soil, but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t agencies that operate on home soil. Of course, I automatically think about the United States, but pretty much every country has their own security organisations. While they are promoted as protecting us from hostile forces, very little has changed since the days of the Czars – these organistions only exist to keep the ruling elite in power, and yeah, even though we live in a democracy, we still have a ruling elite.
Hey, even in Australia, which sounds like a democratic paradise, we have secret trials where we prosecute our own citizens. Hey, they can’t even be reported on, to the point that the only thing we know about this person is a letter, and the reason this person is being prosecuted is because they decided to blow the whistle on the Australian Government after they illegally interfered in an oil and gas discussion. Due to a change of government (and also an adverse ruling regarding secret trials), the charges have since been dropped (see Witness K Trial or Witness J Trial, though Witness J has nothing to do with Witness K.
I guess it was a pretty good coup that the concept of the spy has been flipped on its head, though while this book seems to be, well, one of Gorky’s lesser-known works, it is interesting to consider what the original concept of the spy was all about. It was dirty, underpaid work which involved you ratting out people that you know. In fact, the book even explores that idea. I also note that Yevsey has that problem where you end up forming bonds with people that you are spying on, and ratting out.
The reality is that little has changed since the days of Gorky. In fact, even peaceful protest groups are being monitored and infiltrated, and as I have suggested, flagging national security issues can result in your case being heard behind closed doors, without any public accountability whatsoever. More so, since the government can create these secret tribunals (they do exist), it can actually make you wonder how free, and protected, we are even in a modern democratic state.
July 8, 2023
In the introduction to this work, I believe written by Moura Budberg, she refers to the failed revolution of 1905, with the flashpoint being Bloody Sunday, as a dress rehearsal for the successful revolution of 1917. Throughout the ensuing story, Gorki describes all the failings plaguing late Tsarist Russia, from the perspective of an everyman, and it too sadly becomes a dress-rehearsal for all the same failings that will show up to plague late Soviet Russia before it's own collapse. Our protagonist, for the bulk of the novel, finds a job as an informant for the Tsarist government. Disguising himself as a peddler, he eavesdrops on conversation, makes friends with politically questionable elements, writes reports on what their saying, and finally turns them all in. In this work, Communists are the underdogs, struggling to spread their message, always on the lookout for both agents of the secret police, or spies within their own ranks. All of the lying, betrayal, backstabbing and ineffectual bureaucracy our protagonist witnesses under the Tsar, flaws that will eventually lead to its downfall, will be something the readers will only get to see again almost a hundred years later after it's publication. Having just read Heart of a Dog by Bulgakov, which gives a satirical take on the innate Russian character, I'm starting to see how apt the idea of history repeating itself is. As the revolutionaries in the book expound to their fellows the values of liberty and free expression, I doubt they'd imagine their great grandchildren would be saying the exact same thing about the government they themselves created.
Being a spy, I can't tell if I actually hate or love our protagonist. Some times you feel bad for him, having had an abusive upbringing, but other times I hated him, being completely unable to stand up for himself as an adult. He simply does what he's told, even if it's morally reprehensible, because he prefers the safety of telling himself "I didn't want to do it, they made me do it!" for all the events in his life. But I think this is what makes him such a great character, this oscillation of love and hate based on his very real flaws and tragic backstory. He's such a great archetype of the useless bureaucrat, maybe of the type you find in Russia, believing that as long as you don't do or say anything, hide in a corner, whatever bad event is happening will pass over you. This sort of passivity is what leads to his eventual ruin, as like many people before and after him, doing what's easy isn't the same as doing what's right, and your conscience pays the price later on. Even outside of the individual level, as all the spies become more misshapen by their behavior, Gorki himself hints at the reality of the system beginning to the break down. People getting paid to do nothing, bureaucracy either completely ignoring or taking advantage of the people, nobody at the bottom knowing what the orders are from the people at the top, and finally revolution in the streets as workers decide to strike en masse.
if there is one moral to this story, not that any story needs one, it's that "no good deed goes unpunished". Many of the other characters, both within or outside the government, end up trusting our protagonist. But being both a spy and a coward, this misplaced faith comes back to haunt them. It's important to note that our man doesn't do this intentionally, he's human like the rest of us, and guided by fear he does what he thinks is necessary to save his own skin. For this reason, I think this is what makes the book such a great read, for making you empathize with someone just as flawed as ourselves.
Being a spy, I can't tell if I actually hate or love our protagonist. Some times you feel bad for him, having had an abusive upbringing, but other times I hated him, being completely unable to stand up for himself as an adult. He simply does what he's told, even if it's morally reprehensible, because he prefers the safety of telling himself "I didn't want to do it, they made me do it!" for all the events in his life. But I think this is what makes him such a great character, this oscillation of love and hate based on his very real flaws and tragic backstory. He's such a great archetype of the useless bureaucrat, maybe of the type you find in Russia, believing that as long as you don't do or say anything, hide in a corner, whatever bad event is happening will pass over you. This sort of passivity is what leads to his eventual ruin, as like many people before and after him, doing what's easy isn't the same as doing what's right, and your conscience pays the price later on. Even outside of the individual level, as all the spies become more misshapen by their behavior, Gorki himself hints at the reality of the system beginning to the break down. People getting paid to do nothing, bureaucracy either completely ignoring or taking advantage of the people, nobody at the bottom knowing what the orders are from the people at the top, and finally revolution in the streets as workers decide to strike en masse.
if there is one moral to this story, not that any story needs one, it's that "no good deed goes unpunished". Many of the other characters, both within or outside the government, end up trusting our protagonist. But being both a spy and a coward, this misplaced faith comes back to haunt them. It's important to note that our man doesn't do this intentionally, he's human like the rest of us, and guided by fear he does what he thinks is necessary to save his own skin. For this reason, I think this is what makes the book such a great read, for making you empathize with someone just as flawed as ourselves.
May 22, 2022
"روسيا العظمى تتهاوى، الشر منتشر في بلدنا والرعب يقض مضاجع الناس الذين يتعرضون للاضطهاد بسبب العوز والحاجة، أعمى الحسد قلوبهم، الروس الصبورون واللطفاء يموتون ويولد عوضاً عنهم قبائل انزاح الخير من قلوبها واعمى الشر و الجشع بصيرتها، باتوا اشبه بالذئاب والحيوانات الوحشية، الإيمان يضمحل، الناس خلف أسوار هذه القلعة يعيشون في تخبط، أما أصحاب القلوب المريضة فيستهدفون العزل و يأسرونهم بغواية من الشيطان، يجرونهم نحو الجريمة ومخالفة قوانينك يا سيدنا.
قال العجوز متذمراً : سيدنا؟ هذا اللقب نطلقه على القساوسة.
ألم يعجبك البيان؟
لا، يجب أن نغير فيه.
كيف نغيره؟
يجب أن نقول له مباشرةً، أن هناك ثورة عامة تنتشر بين الناس بسبب أوضاع الحياة وانت الذي اصطفاك الإله لتخرجنا مما نحن فيه. "
ما الخط الفاصل بين الحرية و الفوضى؟ وبين النظام و الاضطهاد؟ من يخلط الأوراق في لحظات ضعف الدولة؟ ومن يستخدم صوت الشعب؟..
يفترض بالرواية أن تجسد الإجابات كما جسدت الاسئلة لكن مكسيم غوركي لم يحسن السبك، تبدأ رحلة الجاسوسية - وهي رحلة تشبه رحلة شرطي المرور لا يوجد شيء مميز - في الصفحة 146، وهنا نتساءل ماذا سبق هذا كله؟، سبقه تكوين شخصية البطل..تشكيل طفولته ومراهقته لتستوعبه اختياراته لاحقاً. وهذا بالمناسبة ما فشل فيه البصيص في رواية ذكريات ضالة
" استمع يافسي منصتاً لكلام العجوز ومحدقاً في وجهه، لاحظ العجوز احترامه الزائد فقال متذمراً : لاحظت أن فيك خصلة بشرية. سكت هنيهة وتابع حديثه قائلاً : ولكن هذه الخصلة موجود حتى في الكلاب."
يافسي كليمكوف طفل يعيش طفولة ممتلئة بالعنف فيتطور لديه شعور اللامبالاة و الحسد والخوف.. الخوف من الأذى فتراه لا يعترض ولا يمتلك رأي، وهذا سبب تعاطفه لاحقاً مع طرفين متناقضين، واعتداءه على ولي نعمته، وطريقته في تعامله مع شعور الحب او الإعجاب. هذا استهلك 146 صفحة من الرواية مما جعلني أتفكر هل كانت الرواية فعلاً عن جاسوس أم فكرة الجاسوس جاءت مكسيم في منتصف الكتابة؟ بناء شخصية مضطربة نفسياً لا يستهلك هذا كله..خاصة وأنها ردات الفعل ذاتها كل مره.
" استأنف ساشا حديثه قائلا : أنا أعرف أعدائي، إنهم انتم ايها النبلاء، تريدون أن تكونوا نبلاءً حتى وأنتم جواسيس، الكل يبغضكم ويمقتكم أينما حللتم نساءً ورجالاً جواسيسَ وكتاباً، لكنني أعرف كيفية التعامل معكم يا من تنتمون إلى الطبقة الراقية، أعرف طريقة ما، أعرف كيف أدمركم!.
قال مكلاكوف وهو يضع يديه في جيوبه : هذه هي النقطة المثيرة للاهتمام لا كلماتك الهستيرية.
إذن هذا ما يثير اهتمامك، حسناً أنا سأخبرك!
بدا أن ساشا أراد الجلوس لأنه اخذ يترنح مثل البندول، نظر حوله وهو يتكلم دون توقف ويلهث من فرط سرعته في الحديث : من نظم شؤون حياتنا؟ إنهم انتم أيها النبلاء، من أفسد الإنسان الجميل؟ من الذي جعله وحشاً قذراً مريضاً؟ انهم انتم أيها النبلاء، لذا فالواجب علينا أن نقلب عليكم الحياة رأسا على عقب، سنفتح جروحنا وسنغرقكم في دمائنا، سنغرقكم في قيء من سممتم حياتهم، اللعنة عليكم! حانت ساعة إعدامكم واجتثاث أرواحكم من هذه الحياة. كل من شوهتم اجسادهم سيثورون ضدكم وسيخنقونكم ويسحقونكم سحقاً، نعم هذه نهايتكم، هل سمعت عما حدث في بعض المدن حين وضعوا رؤوس اسيادهم على اكتافهم؟. رجع ساشا إلى الوراء، اتكأ على الحائط مد ذراعيه إلى الأمام وانفجر يضحك
نظر مكلاكوف إلى الرجال من حوله وسألهم ضاحكاً : هل فهمتم كلمة مما قاله؟ "
شخصيات كثيرة ملفته ومميزة في هذا العمل لم يستثمر فيها المؤلف، لقد علق مكسيم في تصوير مشاهد الفوضى وصراع يافسي النفسي، استطاع صنع زمرة من الجواسيس لكل منهم طبعه ونظرته وهمه، لكنه لم يجعلهم جسر نعبر منه إلى شوارع المدنية، بل تركنا نمضي مع شخصية منذ البداية كان واضحاً أنها لا تليق لعمل يسعى ليكون لوحة عن بداية الثورة..
March 29, 2020
Sudah ku kira aku akan terkena serangan nausea ketika membacanya. Betapa tidak, melihat orang-orang yang dikuasai rasa takut itu, takut akan kehilangan posisinya dalam penghidupan, baik itu rakyat kecil, penegak hukum, maupun penguasa. Mereka semua dikuasai rasa takut yang menyebabkan mereka melakukan segala cara agar tetap aman, meskipun cara itu kotor, busuk, bahkan inhumanis sekalipun, tak jadi masalah agar diri tetap aman.
Dengan sudut pandang seorang pemuda yang miskin insting politik yang kemudian terjebak dalam tatanan masyarakat yang mencekik. Untuk melanjutkan penghidupan disalah satu kota di Rusia, dia terjun sebagai pegawai di kepolisian dan kemudian Departemen Keamanan yang memaksanya menjadi mata-mata yang kerjanya mengawasi dan melaporkan siapa saja yang membahayakan rezim Czar untum dihukum. Penulis, pembaca, mahasiswa, kaum revolusioner, kaum sosialis, mereka adalah ancaman besar yang terus diawasi. Bahkan jika mereka belum melakukan pergerakan, para mata-mata itu dengan sengaja menyamar dan memprovokasi agar mereka bergerak, kemudian setelah terjadi pergerakan, mata-mata akan melaporkannya dan mendapatkan uang karena pekerjaan kotornya itu. Begitulah keseharian mereka sebagai anjing setia pelayan Czar.
Hingga suatu hari masyarakat terbangun dan kemudian berontak dengan kesemena-menanya rezim Czar, diorganisir oleh kaum revolusioner, sang napas kebebasan yang merindukan keadilan, terjadilah pemberontakan yang menginginkan tatanan masyarakat yang merdeka atas dirinya sendiri dan tanpa dikuasai rasa takut lagi. Pemberontakan ini merupakan aksi yang menengarai terjadinya Revolusi Rusia 1917.
Tapi, tak semudah itu untuk mendapatkan kebebasan. Pemerintah membungkam mereka dengan segala cara dengan menjadikan aksi itu sebagai Minggu Berdarah.
"Selama pemerintah kita punya tentara, polisi, dan mata-mata di pihaknya, ia tidak akan memberikan rakyat dan masyarakat kita hak-hak mereka tanpa pertempuran dan pertumpahan darah. Kita harus ingat itu."
Bahkan mata-mata di Departemen Keamanan yang takut posisi mereka terancam melawan aksi revolusi itu dengan aksi anti-revolusi dimana terjadinya chaos yang menyebabkan terjadi pertumpahan darah, pemandangan kota dihiasi mayat-mayat yang tergeletak dimana-mana.
Yevsey, pemuda yang sejak awal terjebak dalam pekerjaan yang memaksa, pada akhirnya muak dan berakhir tragis tak sanggup lagi menahan bebannya. Mimpinya tentang kehidupan lain dalam tatanan masyarakat yang baru hanya menjadi angan-angan belaka.
Dengan sudut pandang seorang pemuda yang miskin insting politik yang kemudian terjebak dalam tatanan masyarakat yang mencekik. Untuk melanjutkan penghidupan disalah satu kota di Rusia, dia terjun sebagai pegawai di kepolisian dan kemudian Departemen Keamanan yang memaksanya menjadi mata-mata yang kerjanya mengawasi dan melaporkan siapa saja yang membahayakan rezim Czar untum dihukum. Penulis, pembaca, mahasiswa, kaum revolusioner, kaum sosialis, mereka adalah ancaman besar yang terus diawasi. Bahkan jika mereka belum melakukan pergerakan, para mata-mata itu dengan sengaja menyamar dan memprovokasi agar mereka bergerak, kemudian setelah terjadi pergerakan, mata-mata akan melaporkannya dan mendapatkan uang karena pekerjaan kotornya itu. Begitulah keseharian mereka sebagai anjing setia pelayan Czar.
Hingga suatu hari masyarakat terbangun dan kemudian berontak dengan kesemena-menanya rezim Czar, diorganisir oleh kaum revolusioner, sang napas kebebasan yang merindukan keadilan, terjadilah pemberontakan yang menginginkan tatanan masyarakat yang merdeka atas dirinya sendiri dan tanpa dikuasai rasa takut lagi. Pemberontakan ini merupakan aksi yang menengarai terjadinya Revolusi Rusia 1917.
Tapi, tak semudah itu untuk mendapatkan kebebasan. Pemerintah membungkam mereka dengan segala cara dengan menjadikan aksi itu sebagai Minggu Berdarah.
"Selama pemerintah kita punya tentara, polisi, dan mata-mata di pihaknya, ia tidak akan memberikan rakyat dan masyarakat kita hak-hak mereka tanpa pertempuran dan pertumpahan darah. Kita harus ingat itu."
Bahkan mata-mata di Departemen Keamanan yang takut posisi mereka terancam melawan aksi revolusi itu dengan aksi anti-revolusi dimana terjadinya chaos yang menyebabkan terjadi pertumpahan darah, pemandangan kota dihiasi mayat-mayat yang tergeletak dimana-mana.
Yevsey, pemuda yang sejak awal terjebak dalam pekerjaan yang memaksa, pada akhirnya muak dan berakhir tragis tak sanggup lagi menahan bebannya. Mimpinya tentang kehidupan lain dalam tatanan masyarakat yang baru hanya menjadi angan-angan belaka.
April 13, 2025
"Saya tidak ingin menjadi Klimkov" seketika terbesit di pikiran saya setelah menyelesaikan buku yang membuat saya merasa sedih karena kepergiannya di akhir cerita setelah membulatkan tekad untuk membunuh Sasha namun malah bertemu Solovyov dan gagal melakukan aksinya karena terlalu takut. Dia tak pernah bisa memilih untuk berada di sisi pembangkang revolusioner atau di pihak mata-mata yang dia tahu mereka semua sama saja dan tolol pada akhirnya. Nyalinya masih menciut di umurnya yang masih 19 tahun tak ada bimbingan dari orang tua, dibesarkan oleh trauma masa kecilnya, di pukuli Yakov Anak dari pamannya, mencoba berteman dengan Tanya tapi tak bisa merangkai kata yang tepat untuk anak belia yang buta, pergi ke kota untuk bekerja di toko buku bekas revolusioner yang seringkali diawasi oleh mata-mata Dorimedont namanya, gundik majikannya cantik bernama Rayissa memikat hati Klimkov untuk pertama kalinya dan tanpa ia sadari ia terprovokasi dari nya untuk gantung diri seakan-akan tahu takdir seorang Yevsey. Banyak hal yang kupelajari di buku ini kengerian masyarakat yang memerlukan untuk revolusi karena rezim Czar yang telah merugikan banyak masyarakat di aspek kehidupan mereka, Tekanan dari faktor eksternal Sasha yang membuat Klimkov tak bisa memihak kaum revolusioner bahkan memenjarakan Sepupunya sendiri yaitu Yakov anak dari Paman Piotr karena perintah atasannya Sasha yang benar benar menganggap bahwa Czar adalah pemimpin yang dikirim oleh tuhan untuk memimpin rusia sungguh pemikiran Radikal sampai membuat gerakan barbar untuk membunuh para revolutionist, dan kehidupan malang Yevsey Klimkov membuatku belajar untuk sekali lagi merasakan bagaimana rasa bisa berwarna biru, pilu, merah, amarah, dan hitam legam sifat represifitas aparat yang tetap sama saja jahat-tak berakal sejak tahun 1905 di rusia hingga sekarang tahun 2025 terjadi di Indonesia. Selamanya. Selamanya buku ini akan selalu menjadi pembelajaran pribadi untuk saya sendiri menjadi lebih berani untuk memilih kebenaran konkrit yang keluar dari wujud diri tuk tak menjadi kaum netral yang tak berani mempertanggung-jawabkan pilihannya sendiri.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 31, 2022
As ever with books in translation, I didn't know whether the problem was the writing, the translation, or both........but this was a confused, incoherent and rambling reflection on the 1905 Russian Revolution by a writer with a stellar reputation - which was not supported by this novel.
The "useless/superfluous" man in question is Yevsei Klimkov, an orphan from a Russian peasant family. His uncle, a blacksmith, failing to find any potential in him as an artisan, apprentices him to a bookseller in the local town. This bookseller specialises in tempting young students to buy "seditious" literature and then denouncing them, for a fee, to the police. Thus begins Yevsei's "career" as an informer, spy, and agent provocateur for the Tsarist authorities. Naive to the point of idiocy, he just wants someone to tell him what to do as momentous events pass him by.
Bloody Sunday occurs, sparking the 1905 Revolution, and the Tsar is persuaded to introduce a constitution. Yevsei's fellow-spies, many of whom have secret liberal sympathies, don't know what to do for the best.......
I think I could see what the author was trying to do. His hero/focus, Klimkov, is the classic unreliable narrator, too stupid to understand the events he is witness to. All of the characters are "ordinary people" rather than the aristocrats who dominated 19th/early 20th C fiction, and their actions are suitably futile. The multiple betrayals convey a diseased society on the brink of collapse into chaos. But none of this rescued the book from being a confusing, rambling mess.
I have a later book by Gorky which I hope is better. But for his reputation as the great writer of the Russian Revolution, nobody would read this one.
The "useless/superfluous" man in question is Yevsei Klimkov, an orphan from a Russian peasant family. His uncle, a blacksmith, failing to find any potential in him as an artisan, apprentices him to a bookseller in the local town. This bookseller specialises in tempting young students to buy "seditious" literature and then denouncing them, for a fee, to the police. Thus begins Yevsei's "career" as an informer, spy, and agent provocateur for the Tsarist authorities. Naive to the point of idiocy, he just wants someone to tell him what to do as momentous events pass him by.
Bloody Sunday occurs, sparking the 1905 Revolution, and the Tsar is persuaded to introduce a constitution. Yevsei's fellow-spies, many of whom have secret liberal sympathies, don't know what to do for the best.......
I think I could see what the author was trying to do. His hero/focus, Klimkov, is the classic unreliable narrator, too stupid to understand the events he is witness to. All of the characters are "ordinary people" rather than the aristocrats who dominated 19th/early 20th C fiction, and their actions are suitably futile. The multiple betrayals convey a diseased society on the brink of collapse into chaos. But none of this rescued the book from being a confusing, rambling mess.
I have a later book by Gorky which I hope is better. But for his reputation as the great writer of the Russian Revolution, nobody would read this one.
July 18, 2022
There's a sensuous, piquant romance that's allowed to flower in some of the bold, grand descriptions at nicely chosen moments, especially in the earlier sections as Klimkov's world is continually ruptured by new, overwhelming experience. As subtly-delineated, ultimately though not straightforwardly compassionate, and clear a picture of class relations and the shared turmoil experienced by all, class enemies alike, during the weeks where decades happen as I've ever come across in fiction--all this while intensely focused, tightly plotted, and extremely canny as a fraught, harrowing, achingly lonely and sad psychological portrait (a running commentary on the individual that's always informed by the social). Brutal, ruthless, truth-telling revolutionary fiction. The line between agitprop and art need not be thought of as so strict and so clear, especially when it's true.
P.S.--maybe the one thing I found that hasn't aged well is a sort of tying of virtue to different kinds of physical attributes, physiognomy and somatotypes. While vivid and evocative, this ranged at times closer to bioessentialism and other unsavory shorthand that ought to be, though unfortunately isn't yet, lost to time.
P.S.--maybe the one thing I found that hasn't aged well is a sort of tying of virtue to different kinds of physical attributes, physiognomy and somatotypes. While vivid and evocative, this ranged at times closer to bioessentialism and other unsavory shorthand that ought to be, though unfortunately isn't yet, lost to time.
September 12, 2022
This is the story of Klimkov, a shy and cowardly orphan who stumbles into a job as a snitch within the huge czarist repressive machine. Uneducated and lonely, Klimkov is all too eager to please his colleagues and bosses, even if he feels drawn towards the marks he is assigned to follow, and who strike him as better people than his cronies. When the 1905 uprising starts, Klimkov is exhilarated by by the new sense of purpose and hope within the population. While some of the informers openly switch sides or decide to emigrate, Klimkov toys with the idea of shooting a particularly hateful spy, but even in this he loses his nerve and sinks ever lower in his own estimate. After failing to hang himself, he ends up along a railway line and gets hit by a train. Klimkov is the ultimate anti-hero, a sniveling non-entity whose better instincts might yet have prevailed in a different society. Gorki presents him as the kind of parasite an unjust and corrupt society will always look for and exploit, and his pathetic life plays out as a small nightmare within the larger nightmare of czarist Russia. Subtle and affecting.
(I've read this book in a French translation by Annie Meynieux reprinted by Editions Sillage ISBN: 978-2-38141-027-2)
(I've read this book in a French translation by Annie Meynieux reprinted by Editions Sillage ISBN: 978-2-38141-027-2)
November 2, 2019
Обычно точка зрения обосновывается на издержках. В качестве примера от противного берётся самый нелицеприятный эпизод, на котором и доказывается угодное. И так всегда случается, что за правду приходится стоять с помощью лжи, прямо обвиняя неугодное мнение во всевозможных смертных грехах. Разве могли революционеры в царской России представить, будто им противодействуют кристально честные люди, стремящиеся уберечь государство от развала? В любом случае, ничего святого в них революционеры видеть не желали. И Горький развернул пропаганду, всячески очерняя сторонников царской власти. Какими только эпитетами он их не наделял, называя и шпионами, и ненужными людьми, намекая современнику, с какими падшими людьми приходится бороться за право человека на достойную жизнь. Вполне очевидно, таковое произведение в России тех лет опубликовано быть не могло, поэтому русскоязычный читатель довольствовался слухами о подобной работе Горького, либо раздобывал запрещённую литературу, дабы разузнать о принципах работы охранителей царского режима.
(c) Trounin
(c) Trounin
Displaying 1 - 30 of 91 reviews