Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

38 views
Book Issues > Should these be separated?

Comments Showing 1-7 of 7 (7 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Peter (new)

Peter (pete_c) | 388 comments In the First Circle by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn In the First Circle and First Circle by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn First Circle are in a combined edition, but they are not the same book (96 vs 87 chapters).

From Wikipedia:
Solzhenitsyn first wrote this book with 96 chapters. He felt he could never get this version published in the USSR, so he produced a "lightened" version of 87 chapters. In the long version, the diplomat Volodin's phone call (chapter 1) was to the US embassy, warning them of a Soviet attempt to get atomic bomb secrets. In the short version this call is to an old family doctor warning him not to share a new medicine with some French doctors he will visit. Another difference, in the long version Sologdin is a Roman Catholic, while in the short version his faith is not described. Shortly after One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich was published, Solzhenitsyn submitted his "lightened" version for publication in the USSR, but it was never accepted. This version was first published abroad in 1968. The complete 96 chapter version (with some later revisions) was published in Russian by YMCA Press in 1978, and has been published in Russia as part of Solzhenitsyn's complete works. Excerpts from the full 96 chapter version were published in English by The New Yorker and in The Solzhenitsyn Reader: New and Essential Writings, 1947-2005. An English translation of the full version was published by Harper Perennial in October 2009, entitled In the First Circle rather than First Circle.


Should these be separated?

If so, do we have someone who can handle the Russian (and any other foreign language) editions?


message 2: by Sandra (new)

Sandra | 24727 comments Sorry, my 2c worth is they shouldn't be separated.

The definitions you've given above are not substantial plot diversions. Just because it isn't identical is not a reason for separation. You're only looking at 10% change and that isn't enough.


message 3: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 43568 comments Mod
I agree with Sandra.


message 4: by Peter (new)

Peter (pete_c) | 388 comments Sandra wrote: "Sorry, my 2c worth is they shouldn't be separated.

The definitions you've given above are not substantial plot diversions. Just because it isn't identical is not a reason for separation. You're only looking at 10% change and that isn't enough. "


According to the publisher's web site, http://www.harpercollins.com/books/First-Circle-Aleksandr-I-Solzhenitsyn/?isbn=9780061479014,
First written between 1955 and 1958, In the First Circle is Solzhenitsyn's fiction masterpiece. In order to pass through Soviet censors, many essential scenes—including nine full chapters—were cut or altered before it was published in a hastily translated English edition in 1968. Now with the help of the author's most trusted translator, Harry T. Willetts, here for the first time is the complete, definitive English edition of Solzhenitsyn's powerful and magnificent classic.
The Washingtom Post, as quoted there, states "A fifth longer than the original, it is a vastly better novel,” which would make for around a 20% change. (Other cited reviews also indicate that the change is more than trivial.)


message 5: by Kim (new)

Kim | 604 comments It would be the same as abridged versions of books which are kept combined with the full versions.


message 6: by Peter (new)

Peter (pete_c) | 388 comments Kim wrote: "It would be the same as abridged versions of books which are kept combined with the full versions."

Thanks. That is the telling point.
In this case, the first published, better known version just happens to be the abridged one.


message 7: by Scott (new)

Scott | 21361 comments Similarly, the two versions of The Stand appear to be combined.


back to top