Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “Buio a mezzogiorno” as Want to Read:
Buio a mezzogiorno
Enlarge cover
Rate this book
Clear rating

Buio a mezzogiorno

4.04 of 5 stars 4.04  ·  rating details  ·  13,838 ratings  ·  682 reviews
Nell'Urss dei tardi anni Trenta, durante l'imperversare delle "purghe" staliniane, l'ex commissario del popolo e rivoluzionario della prima ora Rubasciov è rinchiuso in carcere in attesa di un processo per atti rivoluzionari. Si trova così ad essere vittima di un meccanismo che nella sua indefettibile fedeltà al Partito egli stesso ha infinite volte attivato, tradendo comp ...more
Paperback, 322 pages
Published by Mondadori (first published 1940)
more details... edit details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Buio a mezzogiorno, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about Buio a mezzogiorno

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 3,000)
filter  |  sort: default (?)  |  rating details
Feb 10, 2014 sckenda rated it 5 of 5 stars  ·  review of another edition
Recommends it for: Those Interested in Human Rights and Political Theory
Recommended to sckenda by: Modern Library; Amnesty International
The oceanic sense is counter-revolutionary. --Darkness at Noon

Prisoner #404 resolves not to scream when they torture him. He will eventually confess, of course, but there is an etiquette of torture to which he, as a professional, must adhere. But to what crime will he confess? Charged with “oppositional tendencies,” #404 awaits his interrogation “with serene self-confidence of a student awaiting an exam.”

Darkness at Noon is a political and psychological novel about the Moscow Show Trials and
Jeffrey Keeten
”This is a diseased century.
We diagnosed the disease and its causes with microscopic exactness, but wherever we applied the healing knife a new sore appeared. Our will was hard and pure, we should have been loved by the people. But they hate us. Why are we so odious and detested?
We brought you truth, and in our mouth it sounded a lie. We brought you freedom, and it looks in our hands like a whip. We brought you the living life, and where our voices is heard the trees wither and there is a rustli
Dec 21, 2008 Jessica rated it 3 of 5 stars  ·  review of another edition
Recommends it for: anyone who feels guilty about not being political enough
Oh, how I do love those Russians! Plus I'm hoping reading this will make me feel better about my own life, which lately feels like a grim, freezing Stalinist dystopia of gray hopeless days. It could be worse, right?


I've got a lot of work to do tonight, and somehow I thought this would be an excellent time to go back and review Darkness at Noon. MUCH bigger priority than getting work done, wouldn't you say....?

Well, so, okay, this book was a little bit bleak. Yeah, not the feel-good date nov
An Announcement Concerning the Class Traitor Not

After a scrupulously fair trial in the Amazon People's Court, Comrade Not has been found guilty of posting an ideologically unsound review. To protect other comrades from the possibility of being seduced into thought-crime, the review has now been removed from the community area. Amazon has also offered Not a course of reeducation. Their representatives arrived promptly at 4 am yesterday morning, and courteously but firmly helped Not to understand
Dave Russell
At the end of 1984 Winston Smith asks O'Brien why the party acts the way it does. His answer always pissed me off: "Power for power's sake." That's not an explanation. That's a tautological cop out. It's like Orwell was content to warn us about what a totalitarian state would look like without exploring more deeply why it got there. Thanks George.
Darkness at Noon explores this question more fully and in a more honest way. According to Koestler the Soviets were basically a bunch of Raskolnikovs.
Stephen P
A best friend with different literary tastes than myself recommended a book. An historian buff he reported this psychological, political rendered piece of fiction as his all time favorite. A friendship of many years deserves its many sacrifices. A bit of time seemed small. Maybe many of us here at GR have been in this situation. A small amount of time sacrificed does not only mean plowing instead of the grace of reading but also not getting the time for the next book we have been waiting to rea ...more
Arthur Koestler was a Twentieth Century intellectual who wrote DARKNESS AT NOON, his masterpiece in 1940. The psychological torture of the Old Bolshevik, Rubashov, who is imprisoned and murdered by his Party in the show trials of the late nineteen thirties is the side of collectivist ideology rarely portrayed...the impact on an individual.

Citizen Rubashov's was accused of crimes he did not commit in order to justify his execution. Then, what was he guilty of? According to the Party, his "faction
Before I read Darkness at Noon, I could never quite comprehend the source of the wretched servility and abject self-negation with which the Old Bolsheviks broadcast their guilt and apostasy in so convincing a manner at the Moscow Show Trials in the mid-thirties. Koestler—no stranger to dark, narrow prison cells and the exquisite torture of living minute to precious minute awaiting the stark drum roll of the executioner's approaching footsteps—brings all of his harsh experience to this swiftly-mo ...more
A rather strange experience: here is a book which possesses many great qualities--it is well written, has a gripping story, and a great depth of psychology--but it ultimately falls into that secondary tier of modern novels that fail to make a full philosophical exploration of their quandries.

Perhaps the relative slimness of this book--often cited as the best novel of the Twentieth--is related to that shortcoming. While the political message is powerful and the philosophical questioning interesti
Koestler’s principle character, Rubashov, spends his entire adult life pushing the master narrative of the Soviet Revolution only to fall victim to it when the Stalinist purges of the 30s come calling. He’s arrested, seemingly for no reason, and forced to swallow the same cold philosophy he not only espoused but also used to justify the deaths of friends, compatriots, and even his lover. The Soviet prison where he finds himself is a Kafkaesque nightmare, but for Rubashov, all the conflict is int ...more
Shannon (Giraffe Days)
Comrade Nicholas Salmanovitch Rubashov is one of the founding Party of the Revolution. He is also perhaps the only man of that group of idealising thinkers still alive. For a long time he has had a recurring dream of being arrested in his bed, while sleeping under the poster of No. 1 (Stalin), the same poster that hangs above every bed, on every wall. And finally, he is arrested. As a politicial prisoner he is given solitude and time to sweat. There is a certain degree of fatalism in the way he ...more
Jared Smith
Without hope man has little left to live for. Rubashov was a strong man with an iron heart, willing to sacrifice anyone for Mother Russia (including himself), but without a hopeful reality, idealistic thought doesn’t help much. Set in a Russian political prison during the so-called Moscow Trials of the 1930s, Darkness at Noon paints a solemn picture of life inside a prison, where tapping code on thick cement walls is the only mode of communication and its commonplace to watch a prison mate being ...more
میلاد کامیابیان
تاریخ ظلمات
درباره‌ی «ظلمت در نیمروز» و ترجمه‌های فارسی‌اش

میلاد کامیابیان

کتاب‌های بسیاری تاریخ را روایت می‌کنند و کتاب‌های بسیار کمی اهمیت تاریخی دارند. اما کتاب‌هایی که این هر دو ویژگی را باهم داشته باشند انگشت‌شمارند. «ظلمت در نیمروز» آرتور کوستلر یکی از آن‌هاست. نویسنده خودش از آن تاریخ‌سازها بوده: تا پیش از وقوع جنگ جهانیِ دوم فرصت کرده، با چرخشی اساسی، از صهیونیسم به کمونیسم بگراید و از آن هم بگسلد و، بعد، در حین جنگ، در فرانسه زندانی شود و به ارتش بریتانیا بپوندد و برای بی‌بی‌سی کار کند و،
Masoome Ya
"ظلمت در نیمروز"
نوشته ی "آرتور کاستلر" نویسنده ی مجارستانی است که بهترین اثر او به شمار می رود.
در این رمان ،از دستگیری تا اعدام بولشویک پا به سن گذاشته ای به نام «روباشوف» را میخانیم که( در داستان) از رهبران انقلاب ۱۹۱۷ و عضوی از کمیته مرکزی حزب کمونیست شوروی بوده.

عنوان کتاب " ظلمت در نیمروز " اصطلاحی‌ است که از انجیل گرفته شده و به معنای آن است که کسی به گناه ناکرده دم تیغ برود.

به هنگام نیمروز ظلمت همه‌جا را فراگرفت و تا ساعت سه بعدازظهر ادامه یافت.

در این وقت عیسی با صدای بلند فریاد زد: «ایلوئی
A fiercely intelligent examination of the thought behind ruthless totalitarian communism through the account of a former Party Commissioner who is arrested and interrogated by a member of the younger generation, a native of the revolution.

It seems to me that Koestler has set out to render a great service to humanity in writing this book, and required all of his experience and insight to do so. It closes forever the possibility of ascribing confessions like Rubashov's to 'brainwashing', exposing
Aug 08, 2010 Vheissu rated it 5 of 5 stars  ·  review of another edition
Recommended to Vheissu by:
Shelves: literature
"Honour was to serve without vanity, without sparing oneself, and until the last consequence." (Koestler, p. 189)

This book is less a "novel" than a personal meditation on the nature of
totalitarianism and the role--if any--of individuals in it. Arthur Koestler (1905-1983)was a disenchanted Marxist-Leninist who was jailed and tortured in Spain and France before World War II and subsequently lived out his life in England. The book was published in 1941, just before the United States and Soviet Uni
Erik Simon
I've done a foolish thing. For years, when it's come to the classic political novels (1984, BRAVE NEW WORLD, etc.), I've discarded reading so many of them because I've heard so much about them it's as if I already know them. DARKNESS AT NOON was just such another. But Christopher Hitchens (man crush, I admit, but strictly Platonic: on TV, he always looks so greasy, as if unwashed) speaks so highly of it I thought I finally should. So I did. And I loved.
A joy to read and an important book in a very genuine way: both in its original historical context and, perhaps, for good. While Koestler uses more 'real world' dynamics than his firend Orwell did in '1984', both explore the problems of revolution and modern revolutionary politics. While Orwell's character is a kind of 'everyman', Koestler's is an 'old guard' revolutionary faced with a purge. The ethics and unethics of both worlds collide brilliantly. In particular, in a way perhaps Orwell did n ...more
Moses Kilolo
This is definately not an easy read! A better part of the first half was spent wondering what its all about. There are men in prison, some cases of discussion about suicide and other human ills, lots of twisted ethics and twisted logic, and of corse a lot more prision and political discourse that I honestly did not understand.

The only solid truth about this is that its pretty thought provoking. The discussions between Ivanov and Ruboshov in prison are somewhat confusing, but further analysis re
An interesting novel but I find it pale in comparison with real prison literature, I'd recommend Evgenia Ginzburg's memoir Journey into the Whirlwind above this without hesitation, not on account of literary merit but simply because of the author's sense of surprise at the unlikeliness of it all. Koestler's fiction is a work of the imagination. Something designed to serve the purposes of the author, that gives insight into their opinions and not into (save perhaps accidentally) the situation the ...more

If you liked the parts in 1984 that everyone else thought was boring or too political you might like this book. If you've never considered that revolution takes more than rebellion (and that intrigues you) you should give it a shot (the book, not the rebellion). If you need a book with a lot of fluffy dialogue and no unanswered questions and something that will brighten your day... you should probably stick with the Babysitters Club or something.

I liked it. If there was a three and a half star o
Mark Bruce
Jul 02, 2007 Mark Bruce rated it 2 of 5 stars  ·  review of another edition
Recommends it for: politically minded folk
Period piece from the bad old days of Communism--1941 was the date on the library edition I borrowed. Koestler was a Hungarian who pretty much hated the Soviet Union, and with good reason.

On one level, this is an absorbing study of a man whose political principles are tested as he's imprisoned by the very system he helped to create. The prison scenes and the main charactor's struggle with his past are the most compelling portions of the novel.

Unfortunately, there are long, long, looooooooong pa
Koestler provides a more realistic take on the same territory staked out by Kafka’s The Trial and Orwell’s 1984(which it influenced). Set in specific time and date, that of the 1930’s show trials of Stalinist Russia, though presented in a language that aims for a universal parable.
Erik Graff
Jul 01, 2014 Erik Graff rated it 3 of 5 stars  ·  review of another edition
Recommends it for: Stalin fans
Recommended to Erik by: no one
Shelves: literature
Serious, depressing fictionalized account of what it may have been like to have been one of the victim's of Stalin's show trials in the thirties. I couldn't help but think about Trotsky.
Laura Leaney
Be aware that this review contains commentary on the novel's ending.

Nicolas Salmanovitch Rubashov, protagonist of Darkness at Noon, is the “what if” continuation of Dostoyevsky’s Raskolnikov. What if Raskolnikov had continued his utilitarian revolution? What if logic replaced love? Replaced beauty? Replaced compassion for the individual? Arthur Koestler’s novel attempts the answer.

Neither the “party” nor the country is named, but there is no need. All the names are Russian. Rubashov is one of th
Arthur Koestler's "Darkness at Noon," published in 1940, was an early and powerful exposé of Stalin and the communist dream of world revolution that had turned for so many into a nightmare. This is a novel driven by ideas. Chief among these is an attack upon the notion that only huge historical forces and masses matter. Koestler's hero Rubashov tries to reconnect with the "Grammatical Fiction," the "I," which he had rejected as a leader of the Bolshevik Old Guard. He also recognizes the hopeless ...more
Graham Powell
I supposed that it’s unusual to name as a forgotten book one that was listed in the top ten novels in English in the 20th century, but I have to wonder how widely Arthur Koestler’s Darkness at Noon is read today.

This novel tells the story of Rubashov, a communist since his early youth, a hero of the Russian Revolution, and later a prominent envoy (frequently undercover) to other European countries. As the book opens he’s awakened by hammering at his apartment door. Even before he answers there’s
DARKNESS AT NOON. (1940). Arthur Koestler. *****.
This work was required reading for one of my college courses, a long time ago (1959-1960). At the time of its publication – and even when I read it – the book was banned in the USSR. It may still be banned today, I’m not sure. I do remember that I wished at the time that they had also banned it in Pennsylvania. It is not an easy read, but my second read provided for an appreciation that I wasn’t capable of the first time through. Koestler (1905-19
An excellent book.

Two good things about it:

First, it avoids the temptation to be too clever. Rather, it remains sincere. I anticipated several ways that the book could have gone wrong, for the sake of greater (but shallower) apparent poignancy, for surprise impact, or for sensation, at the sacrifice of truthfulness. The book avoids all such traps. In fact, it's a book on a sensational topic that avoids sensationalism. The author, like his protagonist Rubashov, is commited to following his logi
Based upon the Moscow Trials of 1938, "Darkness at Noon" is an oppressive look at the inner workings of the Stalinist purges. After playing a minor role in the Russian Revolution, and maneuvering after Lenin's death to consolidate his power, Stalin was gripped by nasty bout of paronoia. He thus proceded to try and execute the very top leaders, military or political, who helped overthrow the czar. Arthur Koestler's novel forces us into the mind of Nicolas Salmanovitch Rubashov, ex-Comissar of the ...more
« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 99 100 next »
There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »
  • Studs Lonigan
  • The Way of All Flesh
  • A Dance to the Music of Time: 3rd Movement
  • The Old Wives' Tale
  • Zuleika Dobson
  • A High Wind in Jamaica
  • U.S.A.
  • The Wapshot Chronicle
  • Parade's End
  • Appointment in Samarra
  • Loving
  • The Ginger Man
  • Nostromo
  • The Alexandria Quartet  (The Alexandria Quartet #1-4)
  • Under the Volcano
  • Henderson the Rain King
  • The Ambassadors
  • Point Counter Point
Arthur Koestler CBE [*Kösztler Artúr] was a prolific writer of essays, novels and autobiographies.

He was born into a Hungarian Jewish family in Budapest but, apart from his early school years, was educated in Austria. His early career was in journalism. In 1931 he joined the Communist Party of Germany but, disillusioned, he resigned from it in 1938 and in 1940 published a devastating anti-Communis
More about Arthur Koestler...
The Sleepwalkers: A History of Man's Changing Vision of the Universe The Ghost in the Machine The Act of Creation The Thirteenth Tribe: The Khazar Empire and its Heritage The Roots of Coincidence

Share This Book

“Satan, on the contrary, is thin, ascetic and a fanatical devotee of logic. He reads Machiavelli, Ignatius of Loyola, Marx and Hegel; he is cold and unmerciful to mankind, out of a kind of mathematical mercifulness. He is damned always to do that which is most repugnant to him: to become a slaughterer, in order to abolish slaughtering, to sacrifice lambs so that no more lambs may be slaughtered, to whip people with knouts so that they may learn not to let themselves be whipped, to strip himself of every scruple in the name of a higher scrupulousness, and to challenge the hatred of mankind because of his love for it--an abstract and geometric love.” 43 likes
“It was quiet in the cell. Rubashov heard only the creaking of his steps on the tiles. Six and a half steps to the door, whence they must come to fetch him, six and a half steps to the window, behind which night was falling. Soon it would be over. But when he asked himself, For what actually are you dying? he found no answer.

It was a mistake in the system; perhaps it lay in the precept which until now he had held to be uncontestable, in whose name he had sacrificed others and was himself being sacrificed: in the precept, that the end justifies the means. It was this sentence which had killed the great fraternity of the Revolution and made them run amuck. What had he once written in his diary? "We have thrown overboard all conventions, our sole guiding principle is that of consequent logic; we are sailing without ethical ballast.”
More quotes…