BOOKS
641
arc no uri shed by him. In broad outline the theme o f
From Under the
R ubb le
may be cha racteri zed as a summa tion of Russ ia's experi ence in
the twenti eth century and a search for an an swer to the questi on o f
wha t Ru ss ia mu st do furth er, wha t directi on she must move in , and
whether o r no t sh e is a ble to move a t all. Whil e acknowl edging the
imposs ibility of any a ttempt a t radica l change under the exi stin g
appara tus of sta te contro l, the authors focus their a ttenti on on indi vid–
ual means of achi evin g a release from the h ypno ti c trance of the sta te.
T he mos t effective ways o f accompli shing thi s, it is sugges ted, a re
th rough an awakening o f reli g ious con scio usness and through nonreli–
g io us sys tems o f self-perfecti on; tha t is, a revita li za ti o n of Church
in stituti ons o r no nvio lent moral di sobedience- a mixture o f T o lstoy
and Gandhi. Amo ng o ther things, the coll ection conta ins So lzhenit–
syn 's brilli ant in vecti ve aga inst the present-day intelli gentsia, and thus
in a way expands th e ideas of
Landmarks
(a co ll ecti on o f articl es tha t
was publi shed in Ru ss ia more than half a century ago on th e eve of the
revo luti o n ), of whi ch
From Under the R u bble
was in fact conceived as
a continua ti on .
To a reader in thi s hemi sphere
From Under the R u bble
is
p ri ma ril y o f ethnograph ic, specula tive in terest, because no thing ill us–
tra tes th e sta tu s quo better than a descriptio n o f an alternative.
Wh ether the proposals made by the authors of thi s co ll ecti on conta in a
genuine a lterna tive is ano ther questi on . All the autho rs proceed from
the premi se tha t the ca tas trophe which has befall en Ru ss ia in thi s
century ho ld s out some sort o f lesson-for bo th Ru ss ia herself and the
res t o f the wo rld-and is a tes t, as it were, of the na tion 's mo ra l
vi ability. In thi s connecti on I should like to make th e foll owing
o bserva ti on : any ca tas trophe a t all , and tha t includes social caLas–
trophe, is an exi stenti a l phenomenon and as such is no t charged with
meaning. It is like the erupti on of a volcano. The onl y lesson to be
d rawn from a ca tas troph e is tha t it
can happen.
The mo ra l conditi o n o f
a na ti on after a ca tastroph e (especiall y a soc ial ca tas tro phe) is the same
as befo re th e ca tas trophe. The oppos ite presumpti on would mean th a t
a revo luti on (a t leas t th e revo lution o f
1917 )
is wrought by a who le
na tio n , and thi s is no t bo rne out by hi story (a t leas t Ru ss ian hi story). A
revo luti on is ca rri ed o ut by po liti cal groups and
envelops
a na tion , just
as a fire o ri g ina ting in one building may envelop the who le bl ock. The
oppos ite pres ump tio n wo uld mean tha t Coll ecti viza tion and the
Terro r o f
1936- 37
were the work of the people. This is no t borne out by
hi story either. Fo r it was the peopl e who were
~h e
obj ect o f Coll ecti viza–
ti on and the targe t o f the Terror infli cted by the sta te, i.e., by anoth er if
sma ll er segment o f the peopl e. In o th er wo rd s, a social ca tas troph e does
