Darkness at Noon by Arthur Koestler

Essay, Pages 8 (1815 words)

Views

168

Individualism seemed to be an invisible concept in Russia, especially Stalin’s Russia. In the novel Darkness at Noon by Arthur Koestler, he emphasizes how there is a major lack of individualism in Russia, almost as though there is no individual thought at all. Koestler coins the term ‘grammatical fiction’ and uses this term to describe the lack of vocal rights of the individuals living in Russia under Stalin’s rule. The protagonist character, Rubashov, is a high ranking representative of the Communist Party, a prisoner and an Old Bolshevik who tries to comprehend the meaning of ‘grammatical fiction’.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get your custom essay on

“ Darkness at Noon by Arthur Koestler ”

Get custom paper

NEW! smart matching with writer

He is having a hard time understanding this concept of non-individualism when he is surrounded by human sacrifice for a better outcome in the community. Whoever did not fit the societal standards of No. 1 would be eliminated.

Rubashov believes that people are nothing more than a ‘grammatical fiction’, a term for his idea that the singular first person symbolizes an approach for individuality that should not and does not exist in Russia.

Koestler noted this concept through another term called ‘anti-vivisection morality’. The term ‘vivisection morality’ constitutes and justifies that people should and can be sacrificed to the community. He grants this but also insists that, in every way, individuals should be subjected and sacrificed for their society. The principle of vivisection morality was casually advancing into the horror it became since the settlement of Slavic people in Russia and was not exclusive to Stalinist Russia, thus being the precedent for the idea of vivisection morality in Russian history.

‘Anti-vivisection morality’ serves as the opposite. It acknowledges the individual to be sacred and affirms that sacrificion is not to be applied to people. Darkness at Noon serves as a way to comprehend and understand these two concepts and how they were apparent in Stalinist Russia.

In Darkness at Noon, No. 1 wants Rubashov to be sacrificed for the greater good of the community and keep the Party thriving. He is in favor of creating a society where people only believe and rely on the Party and no one else. Stalin strove to create the ‘perfect’ society. To do so he did not want any individual thoughts of the people and wanted everyone to work for the same purpose, to better the society. Rubashov had many thoughts of ‘grammatical fiction’ before, but while being in prison he persuaded himself to challenge the ideas of the differentiation between the old guard’s cogent and reasoned mentality, and the individualistic and distinctive individual that he now has. While in his prison cell, he thinks about his past and starts to think about how untruthful the ‘grammatical fiction’ may be. He recalls on past interpersonal relationships that he has had with individualistic people, such as his secretary Arlova.

His memories of her bring back his thoughts about his inclination to have her executed (regardless of if she is innocent or not) for ‘the cause’ of the society makes Rubashov ponder about if the suffering of the individual is worth it for the progress of an idealistic society. As Rubashov thinks back on these past moments in his life, the disparity between the collective society and the individual becomes obvious to him. When Rubshov’s ‘grammatical fiction’ brings up these memories, “it does not communicate its forbidden messages in the language of rational concepts, but in a sign system consisting of images, scents, sounds, involuntary actions and certain physical symptoms” (Tucev, 2006). Ivanov also acknowledges this disparity and manages it while inquiring Rubashov, implying that it does not matter what the individual thinks or does as long as the Party is satisfied. ‘Grammatical Fiction’ changes Rubashov’s normal thought processes and is a characterization of the self, “I”, a term which seems to not exist to the Party.

Over time, as a result of the increase of grammatical fiction, Russia’s people only continued to be repressed and caused them anger. This correlates to the concept of centralization, the focus to control and have authority over a group of people or organization. Koestler eventually makes Rubashov realize he abandoned himself and others by dis-acknowledging the presence of grammatical fiction (Brooks, 2000). The grammatical fiction is with regard to Rubashov admitting his guilty plea (Caute, 2010). The Party wants affirmation to his guilt, to confirm the statements and publicly affirm what he did is wrong. Koestler coined ‘grammatical fiction’ to distinct between the words “I” and “we” in Soviet Russia (2009).

The grammatical fiction idea was looked down upon by those who wanted to create an idealistic and collectivist Soviet Union. Rubashov thought that his only purpose was to help the Party achieve their mission, to carry out the purges. He viewed himself as an embodiment of grammatical fiction, with reality being the masses, the history [past] and the Party. He is ultimately broken down to pieces through the Party that he devoted his life to and realizes that grammatical fiction exists. Coincidently, Rubashov recognizes at that same time that the people he demolished had not been grammatical fictions. He is sentenced to death and right when he discovers he is alive, he is dead. The significance of individualism and personality viewpoints is also shown through the relationship among Rubashov and his neighbor No. 402 who has been unseen and does not have a name.

They are both convicts who hold different political views, but show similarities to one another on a personal level. Rubashov is eventually sacrificed with other convicts for the conservation of the “Bastion of the Revolution”, the society or ‘mass’ that Rubashov feels the Party cannot understand. At the end of the book, Rubashov concludes that ignoring the uniqueness and individualism of people affects the community and societal progress. Rubashov no longer believes in the Party and when he thinks of the Party’s present or future, he sees “nothing but desert and the darkness of night” (Koestler, 1968). The leaders could not meet the needs and the requests of the masses without understanding of grammatical fiction. Rather, masses were killed [sacrificed] for the Party.

A different concept emphasized is ‘anti-vivisection morality’ which stems from ‘vivisection morality’. ‘Vivisection Morality’ is an aim which constitutes and justifies that people are to be sacrificed to the society. It not only grants this but it insists, in every way, that people should be subjected and sacrificed for their community. Vivisection morality is the concept that a person’s and/or their needs should be sacrificed for the furtherment of the community. Particularly, the “needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few” (Meyer, 1982). ‘Anti-vivisection morality’ serves as the opposite. It acknowledges the individual as sacred and affirms that sacrificion cannot be applied to individuals and is humane and christian. In reference to Darkness at Noon, the coherent and cerebral reasoning towards the old guard can be against the policies of the new guard but can also be disputed to the belief that favors the individual over the community as a whole and to Ivanov, is the remains of a religion that should not be in their country.

Ivanov claims anti-vivisection morality is not possible for any ruler to maintain or support, and he feels sentimental about Rubashov’s new, and all of a sudden interest in the rights of people. In the eyes of the Party, the sacrifice of the individual was essential for the social progress of the Party and their idealistic standard of a society. The views and beliefs of the Party weakened the ideas of grammatical fiction and resulted in a failed attempt to centralize Russia. Despite the idea of grammatical fiction, individuality is needed to help the society and humankind, because without it history would never change. Koestler uses Rubashov as a symbolization of the conflict between individualism and the ideologies of the Party. He defines the terms vivisection morality and anti-vivisection morality through a quote by Ivanov:

“There are only two conceptions of human ethics, and they are at opposite poles. One of them is Christian and humane, declares the individual to be sacrosanct, and asserts that the rules of arithmetic are not to be applied to human units. The other starts from the basic principle that a collective aim justifies all means, and not only allows, but demands, that the individual should in every way be subordinated and sacrificed to the community…The first conception could be called anti-vivisection morality, the second, vivisection morality.”

Every leader, every party and every state that is in charge legitimizes vivisection morality for ‘exceptional circumstances’ like self-defense. The ideology of vivisection morality in Russia existed from the establishment of the commune. It advanced and evolved over time in respect to the changing lives of Russian people. This philosophy also advocates that an individual is a ‘cog in the machine’. In Darkness at Noon, the Party acts as the machine and Rubashov, Arlova, Gletkin, Ivanov, Richard and Little Loewy act as the cogs that provide to the machine altogether but each one can be sacrificed by the Party to further the Party progress (Koestler, 1968).

In Russia, Gulags evolved under the rule of Vladimir Lenin. The gulag system was constructed to use physical work [labor] to re-educate those who did not adapt or comply with democratic social ideals (Pipes, 2014). Under Stalin, Russia utilized the gulags Lenin had developed and created to progress the vivisection morality of individuals and their will by working them to the point of death. Goods that were produced by the gulags, such as ammunition and wartime equipment, made the gulags to be considered crucial to the progression of the industry. The products they developed were for the greater good of the state and their society, and the individual person [worker] was deemed as meaningless and of no importance to the State. Their intention and purpose was to benefit as a collective whole. One singular person, worker in this instance, is seen as meaningless and of no importance but a collective community of authentic, pure individuals is priceless and invaluable. Koestler’s novel does not particularly describe or go into depth of the lives of the gulags since the setting is in prison, nonetheless, their lives are understood to the characters in the novel.

In conclusion, Darkness at Noon by Arthur Koestler showcases major philosophies and ideologies of the Communist Party in Stalinist Russia and the goal for a new improved society. The concepts of ‘grammatical fiction’ and ‘anti-vivisection’ morality are not uniquely communist features. They had precedents in Russian history. Both ‘grammatical fiction’ and ‘anti-vivisection morality’ applied to the ideologies of Stalinist Russia. The State was to be one party as a whole. In Koestler’s novel he emphasized how the individual was not to be valuable and the term ‘individualism’ was practically nonexistent. The ideologies and philosophies shown through Koestler’s novel grew to change the ways of life for the citizens of Russia and helped to shape the Russian society.