WE, Yevgeny Zamyatin And A modern Utopia, H. G. Wells

by Yevgeny Zamyatin, H.G. Wells

Genres: Fiction, Dystopia, Science Fiction, Russian Literature, Speculative Fiction, Classics

272 pages, Paperback

Published May 28, 2018

About the author

Yevgeny Zamyatin (Russian: Евгений Замятин, sometimes also seen spelled Eugene Zamiatin) Russian novelist, playwright, short story writer, and essayist, whose famous anti-utopia (1924, We) prefigured Aldous Huxley's Brave New World (1932), and inspired George Orwell's 1984 (1949). The book was considered a "malicious slander on socialism" in the Soviet Union, and it was not until 1988 when Zamyatin was rehabilitated. In the English-speaking world We has appeared in several translations.

"And then, just the way it was this morning in the hangar, I saw again, as though right then for the first time in my life, I saw everything: the unalterably straight streets, the sparkling glass of the sidewalks, the divine parallelepipeds of the transparent dwellings, the squared harmony of our gray-blue ranks. And so I felt that I - not generations of people, but I myself - I had conquered the old God and the old life, I myself had created all this, and I'm like a tower, I'm afraid to move my elbow for fear of shattering the walls, the cupolas, the machines..." (from We, trans. by Clarence Brown)
Yevgeny Ivanovich Zamyatin was born in the provincial town of Lebedian, some two hundred miles south of Moscow. His father was an Orthodox priest and schoolmaster, and his mother a musician. He attended Progymnasium in Lebedian and gymnasium in Voronezh. From 1902 to 1908 he studied naval engineering at St. Petersburg Polytechnic Institute. While still a student, he joined the Bolshevik Party. In 1905 he made a study trip in the Near East. Due to his revolutionary activities Zamyatin was arrested in 1905 and exiled. His first short story, 'Odin' (1908), was drew on his experiences in prison.
Zamyatin applied to Stalin for permission to emigrate in 1931 and lived in Paris until his death.

Reviews

[Quratulain · Rating 3 out of 5]

“To accept trashy books because they are bestsellers is the same thing as accepting adulterated food, ill-made machines corrupt government, and military and corporate tyranny and praising them and calling them the American way of life. It is a betrayal of reality. Every betrayal, every lie accepted, leads to the next betrayal and the next lie.
Every country has the government that it deserves. Every people has the srtists it deserves.
Our form of censorship rises from the nature of our institutions. Our censors are the idols of the marketplace. For this reason our form of censorship is fluid…one should never feel sure one has defined it. Suppressions occur before one is aware of them; they occur behind one’s eyes.
If art is seen as having a moral, intellectual, and social content, if real statement is considered possible then on the artists side, self-discipline becomes a major element of creation. The middlemen are are in the business of money; they are happier if art is not taken seriously. They do not want large, durable, real, frightening things.
It’s just so reassuring to feel someone’s sharp gaze lovingly protecting you from making even the smallest mistake, the tiniest step in the wrong direction. The guardian angels the Ancients had dreamed of. So muc of what they had dreamed of has come to pass in our reality.”
Hunger-algebraically the sum of material advantages
The speed of her tongue is miscalibrated. The delay on the tongue should always be a few seconds over the speed of thought and never the other way around.”
If they don’t understand that what we bring them is mathematically infallible happiness, we will be impelled to force them to be happy. But we will try words before resorting to weapons.”
Puritans were big journal writers…you have to believe in the high value of your soul to do that.”
“Men’s courses will foreshadow certain ends, to which, if persevered in, they must lead. But if the courses be departed from, the ends will change.” Ebenezer Scrooge
How could Zamyatin have seen the future so clearly? He didn’t, He saw the present and what was already lurking in the shadows.”

[Lauren Ballinger · Rating 5 out of 5]

1) finished in teddy gallaghers with buffalo chicken dip on my plate and my jaw dropped
2) favorite line is "Who is 'we'? Who am I?" on page 244
3) woweeeee wowweeee wow

[Helen Arnold · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ooh eeeer... The writing was so zingy and exciting, so different, so strange. But honestly I found this so hard to follow at times. It was like a surreal french film, Delicatessen or something... I think because none of the characters had names (aren't names important?!) I just decided to roll with it and soak up the dystopian vibes. Also, I think it's like one of the earliest ones? Pretty cool, you can see how dystopian authors have taken inspiration from this. Ooooh and I loved the idea of the narrative voice being him writing to the people of the past. From a teacher perspective, it makes writers intent pretty clear and exciting!

[Sophia Johnston · Rating 4 out of 5]

***I only read Zamyatin not Wells***
I struggled with either giving this 3 or 4 stars considering it was only 225 pages and took me 3 weeks to read but I settled on 4 purely due to the ending. In the first few records, for me it was quite confusing but as the story progresses it becomes a lot more clear what the motive is.
I think this is a great dystopia novel, explaining the true horrors of giving up our freedom and being indoctrinated into believing that following this life is good. I felt as though the ending, although not how I would’ve wanted it, was quite realistic in a sense (for a dystopian novel😭) that successfully overthrowing an all powerful totalitarian government isn’t always going to happen.
I throughly enjoyed the final record as well showing how the Benefactor still has the power to re control everyone in a sense through the great operation !

[Jon · Rating 2 out of 5]

This has been on my too-read list for years; unfortunately, it was quite a big disappointment. In part, this book suffered from The Godfather complex. By that I mean that so many other works that came after this book use similar tropes that the “original” hardly seems all that innovative or exciting, so while it might be the classic or the first, as a reader coming to it late, it reads as derivative. Not only that, but it doesn't read well.

The book is about a man working for the United State. Everyone works for the state. There is a kind of group think. Outside the state are revolutionaries, aiming for individuality. The man, like all other citizens, is simply a number. No one bears names. They all work for the good of the state. Until . . . The man falls in love with another person. Now, they work to break the system. Numbers: think Lucas's THX 1138; omnipotent, omniscient state with clandestine love affair: think 1984. Unlike those works, however, I never found myself caring about the characters. The writing was emotionally over the top; at the same time, it was hard to follow, and the fact that I fairly early on gave up caring meant I didn't try hard. A synopsis on Wikipedia explained most of what I'd gathered and little of what I hadn't (go there for the real synopsis).

Spoiler: It doesn't end well. Just as you think the revolutionaries might pull it off, the man himself reverts to be interested in supporting the state, soaking up its drug. It betrays his lover. The state wins. One can, I suppose, take the comments from the man's lover as holding hope out—namely, that revolutions never stop. A state might have total control, but eventually someone overthrows it. There is no end to that. We just don't see that overthrow in this story.

[Theresa Sapara · Rating 4 out of 5]

While We isn’t the easiest novel to read—its structure is fragmented, the pacing uneven, and the narrative often jumps without warning—I found it deeply rewarding, especially knowing how profoundly it influenced the great dystopian works that followed: Huxley’s Brave New World, Orwell’s 1984, and Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451. Discovering what many consider the “original dystopian novel” made it easier for me to accept and even appreciate the challenging sections; they’re part of its raw originality.

What stayed with me most was the central tension between the collective “We” and the individual “I.” Zamyatin’s world elevates the State above imagination, freedom, and personal identity—an idea that remains strikingly relevant today. We still see governments and systems that try to suppress individual freedoms in the name of efficiency, order, or the greater good. It’s clear this was front-of-mind for Zamyatin in 1922, and the theme continues to echo far into our future.

[Jay Brindle · Rating 5 out of 5]

Yevgeny Zamyatin’s We left me both disturbed and intellectually captivated. The novel’s portrayal of a society where individuality is crushed for the sake of collective control struck a deep chord. As I followed D-503’s inner turmoil, I couldn’t help but reflect on the tension between personal freedom and societal conformity. Zamyatin’s sharp prose and unsettling imagery created a world that felt eerily prescient, making me question the dangers of a perfect, regulated society.

While the narrative can be complex, the philosophical depth and the emotional weight of D-503’s journey made it an unforgettable experience. We is a five-star novel, challenging me to reconsider the true cost of freedom and individuality in the face of totalitarian control.

[Samar · Rating 3 out of 5]

'we' was interesting. Set in the distant future, this distopia was a disturbing take on how the state controls the masses and the civilians attitude towards this way of life. It follows the life of a middle aged man who procedurally navigates the unusual everyday life, documenting his thoughts.

Theoretically this way of life may exist, and that unsettles me. The extreme, repetitive, efficient, robotic cycle which the characters seek comfort in would unsettle many.

[Paul Tenorio · Rating 3 out of 5]

Novel written by Russian in the 1920s prior to Stalin's authoritarian state. Much of the content hints at the risk of such a state forming. D-503 starts to realize the drawbacks of the Onestate utopia that controls the populace via an oppressive state. He wants to explore his uniqueness and the state quickly identifies the risk of his pursuit as a risk to society (the We). Good book, not as impactful as Brave New World or 1984 but similar.

[Chris Stavropoulos · Rating 5 out of 5]

An entire change of thought. To imagine a world so other than ours, left insight to how we as a society, could be better or worse. Very valuable literature a suggestion to all.

[Shevanna Young · Rating 5 out of 5]

Read during my senior year of college for my Dystopian Literature class and was so invested in the story. Changed my outlook on a lot of things, one of the most enjoyable reads I've ever had.

[Harrum · Rating 3 out of 5]

it was good in regards to the plot, the narration and the harrowing ending but ngl the main character sometimes jsut seemed like a horny man

[Maria Victoria · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of my favourite books of all times. Absolutely worth it.

[Gesú Cristo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Amazing

[Grace · Rating 5 out of 5]

One State, D-503, O-90, lobotomy, Mephi want to destroy the Green Wall and reunite the citizens of the One State with the outside world

[Owlseyes]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/02/bo...