Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.72 AVERAGE
3.72 AVERAGE
Would it be strange to wish that this book had been written by [a:Irene Nemirovsky|5772020|Irene Nemirovsky|http://www.goodreads.com/assets/nophoto/nophoto-U-50x66.jpg]? I'm not saying that Nemirovsky should have written of life under the Soviets or that I wish this book had her more subtle touch. I wouldn't change a word of it, but swapping Nemirovsky's name for [a:Ayn Rand|432|Ayn Rand|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1168729178p2/432.jpg]'s would make this a better book. (Also, lose any introduction or afterword.)
I realize this sounds like a strange notion, but when you pick up a Nemirovsky book, you know that whatever it's flaws, the main goal is to tell a story about flawed human beings coping with the vicissitudes of life. "We the Living" begins in 1922 with the return of the Argounova family to Petrograd after the civil war that followed the Russian Revolution of 1917. The action principally follows Kira, the oldest daughter, who is eighteen at the beginning of the story, but as the novel proceeds it expands to include members of Kira's extended family, as well as her friends. So we get a view of the horrors of Soviet Russia from several views, including that of young party members. One of these, a man named Andrei, who is a member of the secret police and a hero of the revolution, falls madly in love with Kira. However, she herself has already fallen in love with Leo, the son of an aristocrat.
Rand is a powerful witness to the criminality of the Soviets: their corruption, their arbitrary use of power, their lack of principles. The powers-that-be talk about liberating the people, but instead they starve them, brutalize them and force them to volunteer hours to hold on to menial jobs, while corrupt party officials game the system for their own good and flaunt their ill-gotten riches. Though the dialog is sometimes clunky, Rand's writing is very evocative, conveying the destitution of the regime, the way it crushes some and corrupts others. Perhaps most heartbreaking is the plight of men such as Andrei and Stepan Timoshenko, men who fought against the injustice of the Czars only to be betrayed by the new regime.
If Nemirovsky's name were on the title page, this would be a tale of the way that a brutal system damages people, and in Kira, we would see the odd girl whose reaction to the Soviets is flawed and off-kilter because she is just a human being reacting to a terrible situation. In truth Kira, like Gutierrez' Juan Moreira, is a character whose thoughts and actions I did not always agree with, yet whose willingness to stick to her ideals, even if it means death, makes her admirable.
Yet, because this is a Rand novel, Kira is not just a flawed human being, but Rand's stand-in. Her off-kilter philosophy is meant to be the lesson of the book, and this is where the book's major flaw lies. "We the Living" presents us something peculiar, a novel in which the narrator is trustworthy but the author is not. Rand is a great witness of the life under the Soviets, but her interpretation of things (as reflected by Kira) leaves a lot to be desired.
For Kira/Rand's view is not that the Soviets are an elite using power only to serve themselves while millions toil for little, but is that they scorn men like Leo, whose lives are more meaningful than those of ordinary men. This is perplexing, since it's never clear what makes Leo so great, except that he's handsome, haughty and selfish.
If this were a "Brave New World"-style dystopia, where the contentment of the many bought at the cost of the creative or the different, this would be a reasonable objection. However, it's so clear that talk of the proletariat is just window dressing for a self-serving regime, that Kira's inability to see this makes her seem sort of clueless.
Even worse, when Andrei once asks her, "Don't you know that we can't sacrifice millions for the sake of the few?" her response is not that this is precisely what the Soviets are doing are that you cannot bring about justice through injustice, but the following rant:
So, this should be a brilliant and powerful novel, did it not stop so often to remind me that it was in service to Rand's agenda, her idea of the proper places of the aristocracy and the rabble, the warped views of her stand-in.
Rand meant this book as being not just about Russia or Communism, but about totalitarianism. However, the book falls short compared to Orwell's 1984, which sees to the true dark heart of dictatorship in which power is not a means but an end.
I realize this sounds like a strange notion, but when you pick up a Nemirovsky book, you know that whatever it's flaws, the main goal is to tell a story about flawed human beings coping with the vicissitudes of life. "We the Living" begins in 1922 with the return of the Argounova family to Petrograd after the civil war that followed the Russian Revolution of 1917. The action principally follows Kira, the oldest daughter, who is eighteen at the beginning of the story, but as the novel proceeds it expands to include members of Kira's extended family, as well as her friends. So we get a view of the horrors of Soviet Russia from several views, including that of young party members. One of these, a man named Andrei, who is a member of the secret police and a hero of the revolution, falls madly in love with Kira. However, she herself has already fallen in love with Leo, the son of an aristocrat.
Rand is a powerful witness to the criminality of the Soviets: their corruption, their arbitrary use of power, their lack of principles. The powers-that-be talk about liberating the people, but instead they starve them, brutalize them and force them to volunteer hours to hold on to menial jobs, while corrupt party officials game the system for their own good and flaunt their ill-gotten riches. Though the dialog is sometimes clunky, Rand's writing is very evocative, conveying the destitution of the regime, the way it crushes some and corrupts others. Perhaps most heartbreaking is the plight of men such as Andrei and Stepan Timoshenko, men who fought against the injustice of the Czars only to be betrayed by the new regime.
If Nemirovsky's name were on the title page, this would be a tale of the way that a brutal system damages people, and in Kira, we would see the odd girl whose reaction to the Soviets is flawed and off-kilter because she is just a human being reacting to a terrible situation. In truth Kira, like Gutierrez' Juan Moreira, is a character whose thoughts and actions I did not always agree with, yet whose willingness to stick to her ideals, even if it means death, makes her admirable.
Yet, because this is a Rand novel, Kira is not just a flawed human being, but Rand's stand-in. Her off-kilter philosophy is meant to be the lesson of the book, and this is where the book's major flaw lies. "We the Living" presents us something peculiar, a novel in which the narrator is trustworthy but the author is not. Rand is a great witness of the life under the Soviets, but her interpretation of things (as reflected by Kira) leaves a lot to be desired.
For Kira/Rand's view is not that the Soviets are an elite using power only to serve themselves while millions toil for little, but is that they scorn men like Leo, whose lives are more meaningful than those of ordinary men. This is perplexing, since it's never clear what makes Leo so great, except that he's handsome, haughty and selfish.
If this were a "Brave New World"-style dystopia, where the contentment of the many bought at the cost of the creative or the different, this would be a reasonable objection. However, it's so clear that talk of the proletariat is just window dressing for a self-serving regime, that Kira's inability to see this makes her seem sort of clueless.
Even worse, when Andrei once asks her, "Don't you know that we can't sacrifice millions for the sake of the few?" her response is not that this is precisely what the Soviets are doing are that you cannot bring about justice through injustice, but the following rant:
What are your masses but millions of dull, shriveled, stagnant souls that have no thoughts of their own, no will of their own, who eat and sleep and chew helplessly the words others put into their brains?
So, this should be a brilliant and powerful novel, did it not stop so often to remind me that it was in service to Rand's agenda, her idea of the proper places of the aristocracy and the rabble, the warped views of her stand-in.
Rand meant this book as being not just about Russia or Communism, but about totalitarianism. However, the book falls short compared to Orwell's 1984, which sees to the true dark heart of dictatorship in which power is not a means but an end.
I enjoyed the events and setting more than I enjoyed the didactic themes of individualism.
This book is one of the toughest books I have read in terms of personal conviction.
Do I hate this book ? No.
Do I love this book ? No .
But this book made me question the otherwise black and white convictions that I have had.
For me , as I started the book . I knew I should love Kira, my personal convictions demanded this . But was she really the hero that the novel made her to be ? Whatever she did , was it so different than what Andrei did. Both of them were driven by personal convictions whether it be personal gratification or belief in a social cause , which can also be considered as personal gratification . So , why was she made the undisputed Heroine?
For me, the undisputed hero of this novel is Andrei . His growth was tremendous and he always showed the strength of his character till the very last , where Madam Rand unnaturally decided to cut him off cause such nobel a character can never survive ; this is my only complain against Andrei Taganov.
Coming to think of it , I really liked Leo with his characteristic selfishness . He , I believe , represented "The Art of Selfishness" till the very end .
But, unfortunately I cannot say that for Kira. Personally, I cannot appreciate a lady who puts her entire hopes , aspiration, wishes etc on to a guy . She holds a mantel in her heart , an untouched mantel ; which I believe was not at all her responsibility or also was not something so exalted as the entire novel . Yes, I hoped in the end she would do something for herself but she again chose to follow her dreams , the dreams she thought Leo was capable of living. I don't understand her. I know my hatred towards her is a knee jerk reaction and I hope with time I can become un affected enough to see her as Rand made her . But till then , I despise her.
As a reader , I have no complain against the writing style. The closing chapter can be compared to a few of my favorite chapters. The heart wrenching desperation was very , very real unlike other "Individual V/s State" and "dystopic" materials I have read.
This book will not be one of my favorites , not yet but will surely be one of the books with the highest learning graph.
Do I hate this book ? No.
Do I love this book ? No .
But this book made me question the otherwise black and white convictions that I have had.
For me , as I started the book . I knew I should love Kira, my personal convictions demanded this . But was she really the hero that the novel made her to be ? Whatever she did , was it so different than what Andrei did. Both of them were driven by personal convictions whether it be personal gratification or belief in a social cause , which can also be considered as personal gratification . So , why was she made the undisputed Heroine?
For me, the undisputed hero of this novel is Andrei . His growth was tremendous and he always showed the strength of his character till the very last , where Madam Rand unnaturally decided to cut him off cause such nobel a character can never survive ; this is my only complain against Andrei Taganov.
Coming to think of it , I really liked Leo with his characteristic selfishness . He , I believe , represented "The Art of Selfishness" till the very end .
But, unfortunately I cannot say that for Kira. Personally, I cannot appreciate a lady who puts her entire hopes , aspiration, wishes etc on to a guy . She holds a mantel in her heart , an untouched mantel ; which I believe was not at all her responsibility or also was not something so exalted as the entire novel . Yes, I hoped in the end she would do something for herself but she again chose to follow her dreams , the dreams she thought Leo was capable of living. I don't understand her. I know my hatred towards her is a knee jerk reaction and I hope with time I can become un affected enough to see her as Rand made her . But till then , I despise her.
As a reader , I have no complain against the writing style. The closing chapter can be compared to a few of my favorite chapters. The heart wrenching desperation was very , very real unlike other "Individual V/s State" and "dystopic" materials I have read.
This book will not be one of my favorites , not yet but will surely be one of the books with the highest learning graph.
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Another December of Ayn Rand. . .yes.
I don't know if it helps coming from the dry an impersonal texts of law school, or whether the anticipation built up waiting for this self-prescribed end-of-the-year treat creates such a yearning for a good read, but either way, Ms. Rand delivers on another one here!
We the Living tugs at the emotions throughout. I feared my deep distaste for historical novels would turn me off to a story set in (seemingly ancient) Soviet Russia. Kira however drew me in to her life, her challenges and her resilience. While the forward makes it known that Rand did not intend to breath life to Kira as an autobiographical figure, her convictions and ideals are so strong that one cannot help but recognize they must reflect that buried deep within the author.
Love, longing, and loyalty guide the characters through a treacherous political and social landscape where individuals are rewarded not for their critical thought but for the blind convictions to an ever shifting non-existent set of ideals. Those that stand against this wind face the threat of falling, breaking or holding fast until they can stand no longer.
An exciting and moving read that help to pull me back as I teetered on the brink of questioning whether I'll ever again have time to explore such other worlds, challenging my own as I reflect on those created, or questioned, by others.
I don't know if it helps coming from the dry an impersonal texts of law school, or whether the anticipation built up waiting for this self-prescribed end-of-the-year treat creates such a yearning for a good read, but either way, Ms. Rand delivers on another one here!
We the Living tugs at the emotions throughout. I feared my deep distaste for historical novels would turn me off to a story set in (seemingly ancient) Soviet Russia. Kira however drew me in to her life, her challenges and her resilience. While the forward makes it known that Rand did not intend to breath life to Kira as an autobiographical figure, her convictions and ideals are so strong that one cannot help but recognize they must reflect that buried deep within the author.
Love, longing, and loyalty guide the characters through a treacherous political and social landscape where individuals are rewarded not for their critical thought but for the blind convictions to an ever shifting non-existent set of ideals. Those that stand against this wind face the threat of falling, breaking or holding fast until they can stand no longer.
An exciting and moving read that help to pull me back as I teetered on the brink of questioning whether I'll ever again have time to explore such other worlds, challenging my own as I reflect on those created, or questioned, by others.
This is the first book about communist Russia that I have ever read and I did not know very much about it to be honest. It was quite informative and interesting.
The story itself was quite good albeit extremely long-winded in my opinion. One of the most thrilling love stories I've ever read.
The story itself was quite good albeit extremely long-winded in my opinion. One of the most thrilling love stories I've ever read.
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
informative
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
This book was so harrowing. Brilliantly written, it made me feel all sorts of emotions.
Loveable characters:
No
informative
inspiring
reflective
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
A brilliant and must read. The writing, character development, the plot, and most importantly the relevance of this novel in today’s day and time - is what made me love this book.