Take a photo of a barcode or cover
Reading the novel in breaks rather than one continuous sitting did ruin the flow of the story for me mainly because I have a bad memory and I can't recall completely what I read months ago. But despite that, this book is everything I had hoped it would be. It agglomerates (almost) all things I hold dear: mathematics, dystopia, and Russian literature. I can see themes I have noticed in other Russian novels (the question of free will and happiness) and in other dystopian novels (totalitarian governments and the realisation that there is something wrong with the world around you) and finally those in mathematics (infinity, irrationality) weaving a perfect tale of caution and terror.
I'm even pleasantly surprised by the women in this novel having strong characteristics and important storylines. To be honest, I really was not expecting that. I also drew a lot of comparisons to Dostoevsky and I discovered that Zamyatin was influenced by him and of course, it's very possible that it was intended to be a criticism of "militant atheism" (whatever that is) but like Dostoevsky, Zamyatin left enough room for it to be interpreted as a criticism of organised religion.
My immediate thoughts of the novel were that it wasn't just a usual criticism of totalitarian governments but also that of organised religion because it talks a lot of infinite happiness and how freedom has to be divorced from life to achieve that. People are not aware of what constitutes as happiness and so it's a nifty solution where organised religion just spells it out for them. There is this quote in the book: Remember: in paradise, they don't know desire, they don't know pity, they don't know love. There, angels, the slaves of God, are blissful with surgically excised imaginations (which is why they are blissful.)
I've grown quite fond of this book and I will probably revisit it at some point now that I have finished it. Do check it out, I don't think anybody would regret it. it's one of the giants that somehow isn't all that well-known. I read the translation by Natasha Randall.
I'm even pleasantly surprised by the women in this novel having strong characteristics and important storylines. To be honest, I really was not expecting that. I also drew a lot of comparisons to Dostoevsky and I discovered that Zamyatin was influenced by him and of course, it's very possible that it was intended to be a criticism of "militant atheism" (whatever that is) but like Dostoevsky, Zamyatin left enough room for it to be interpreted as a criticism of organised religion.
My immediate thoughts of the novel were that it wasn't just a usual criticism of totalitarian governments but also that of organised religion because it talks a lot of infinite happiness and how freedom has to be divorced from life to achieve that. People are not aware of what constitutes as happiness and so it's a nifty solution where organised religion just spells it out for them. There is this quote in the book: Remember: in paradise, they don't know desire, they don't know pity, they don't know love. There, angels, the slaves of God, are blissful with surgically excised imaginations (which is why they are blissful.)
I've grown quite fond of this book and I will probably revisit it at some point now that I have finished it. Do check it out, I don't think anybody would regret it. it's one of the giants that somehow isn't all that well-known. I read the translation by Natasha Randall.