I was driving to the library when my middle son called to tell me he was reading The Gulag Archipelago, one of those rare books we can honestly say has changed the world. He was again struck by the brazen, unapologetic nihilism of the Soviets and their toadies, and by Solzhenitsyn’s zeal in documenting it. The three volumes possess another rare literary quality – they remain relevant, that often ballyhooed and seldom pertinent virtue that was becoming fashionable when I was in high school.
Michael proposed
that Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag, at least
the abridged version, be incorporated into the curriculum of American high
schools. This simple idea is too commonsensical ever to be adopted. The historical
memory of many Americans has almost evaporated, leaving it eminently inflatable
with hogwash. Think of the other books we might usefully add to Michael’s list –
Nadezhda Mandelstam’s two volumes of memoirs, Aleksander Wat’s My Century, Vasily Grossman’s Life and Fate. And they barely touch the
twentieth century’s other monumental atrocity, the Holocaust. Such volumes are
the essential primers on totalitarianism, of course, but also on the basics of
human nature. Take this passage from Part I of the Gulag, Chapter 4, titled “The Bluecaps,” which might help dispel our
pervasive naïveté about ourselves:
“If only
there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were
necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the
line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And
who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?
“During the
life of any heart this line keeps changing place; sometimes it is squeezed one
way by exuberant evil and sometimes it shifts to allow enough space for good to
flourish. One and the same human being is, at various ages, under various
circumstances, a totally different human being. At times he is close to being a
devil, at times to sainthood. But his name doesn't change, and to that name we
ascribe the whole lot, good and evil.”
At the
library I found a posthumously published collection of essays and articles by
Roger Scruton, Against the Tide (ed.
Mark Dooley, Bloomsbury, 2022). Included is a column Scruton wrote in 1983 for The Times, “The Virtue of Irrelevance.”
It’s a bracing assault on the ongoing trivialization of education, now underway
for more than half a century. Universities have turned into nursery/vocational
schools. Scruton is ever the genteel contrarian in his defense of the humanities:
“The more
irrelevant a subject, the more lasting is the benefit that it confers.
Irrelevant subjects bring understanding of the human condition, by forcing the
student to stand back from it. They also enhance the appetite for life, by
providing material for thought and conversation. This is the secret which
civilisation has guarded: that power and influence come through the acquisition
of useless knowledge.”
Scruton dismisses
such fashionable silliness as “women’s studies” and concludes:
“The value
of such a subject is precisely that it destroys education. It keeps the
student's mind so narrowly focused on his random and transient political
convictions that, when he ceases to be obsessed with them, he will lack the
education through which to discover what to put in their place.”
Have you read "Life and Fate"?
ReplyDeleteWhat a wonderful quote from "The Gulag Archipelago". No one is all one thing or another. I tell people I'm a radical in the morning, a moderate in the afternoon, and a reactionary in the evening. Or some days, the other way around.
ReplyDelete