A review by linkalipski
Varlam by Michaël Prazan

adventurous informative reflective sad tense medium-paced

2.25

I’m glad I read this book but I also can’t say I enjoyed the experience.

The book structure is all over the place which is likely a poor editor’s choice. There is a constant back and forth with the documentary making timeline and with it the cat timeline. And that is the same for historical retelling. While it’s somewhat chronological overall, this constant jumping around makes it hard to follow. 
The  historical retelling are written in an academic style and mixed with documentary reporting. The latter is written either as passive voice when talking of the crew’s journey or as active first person when it is his personal experiences. 

I can sense the intent to make the cat, the primary thread that weaves all those bits together but unfortunately I don’t think that was done successfully. The relationship with the cat and how the cat mirrors gulag survivors experiences from an emotional perspective would have been a better strategy. 

The writing style is as dry and cold as the Siberian landscape he describes. A lot of political and foreign terms (often unexplained) mixed with a literate vocabulary makes for a tiring read. While his vocabulary is extremely literate, his emotional literacy is sub-par. That may have been a writing choice or a direct reflection of his person, only him knows. But while the books does describe some emotions, they are always at surface levels unless he describes his anger or anxiety. His reflection often didn’t match the underlying complexity of Gulag’s survivors emotions hinted at in his retelling. At times, I felt as if he himself didn’t read his own words for his argument seems so devoid of feelings. 
For instance, why he wanted to do this documentary on the Gulags was unclear. At some point he mentions being of Polish jewish decent but that’s not presented as a motivation. Hence I could speculate that this may be a reason since mass of Polish people were deported to Gulags during WW2, but It doesn’t feel like it. 

 

I learned quite a few things and now want to read Chalamov’s writing (perhaps to understand what my own grandfather survived). However, I was very bothered by his argument that Stalin’s Gulags weren’t part of a mass extermination plan. Arguing that a survivor saying “there’s good and bad” is evidence it wasn’t designed to exterminate is akin to arguing that a domestic violence survivor saying their partner had “good and bad times” is indicative that the perpetrator didn’t intend to harm them and that it was a byproduct. I think this argument shows a misunderstanding of the psychological functioning of cruel mechanism, abuse and manipulation and the complexity of responses in trauma survivors who endure the more sophisticated forms of torture and abuse.
Besides, that the gulags existed pre and post ww2, does not necessarily mean that the ones created by Stalin didn’t have an extermination function. It’s surprising to me as Russian friends of mine were taught at school in Russia of the Gulags as extermination camps. I personally view his argument as a perfect example of the brilliance of Stalin’s manipulation who managed to make his victims believe their abuse was for their own good. I understand these are complicated points that requires deep conversations but I very much felt upset at his point of view which I find to be akin to denial. 

All in all.. I’m not mad I read this book. But I also think, the editor could have helped this book become better.