What do you think?
Rate this book
馗賱賲鬲 丿乇 賳蹖賲乇賵夭
馗賱賲鬲 丿乇 賳蹖賲乇賵夭 亘丕夭賳賲丕蹖蹖 丿丕丿诏丕賴鈥屬囏й� 賳賲丕蹖卮蹖 賵 鬲氐賮蹖賴鈥屬囏й� 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳蹖爻鬲蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 蹖讴 爻丕賱 倬蹖卮 丕夭 噩賳诏 噩賴丕賳蹖 丿賵賲 丿乇 卮賵乇賵蹖 丕賵噩 诏乇賮鬲. 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮貙 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丕氐賱蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳貙 丕夭 乇賴亘乇丕賳 丕賳賯賱丕亘 郾酃郾鄯 丕爻鬲 讴賴 鬲丨鬲 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖鈥屬囏й� 爻禺鬲 亘賴 丕毓賲丕賱蹖 丕毓鬲乇丕賮 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 讴賴 賴乇诏夭 丕夭 丕賵 爻乇 賳夭丿賴 丕爻鬲. 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 卮禺氐蹖鬲蹖 禺蹖丕賱蹖 丕爻鬲貙 丕賲丕 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 丕賵 乇丕 亘乇 丕爻丕爻 賵蹖跇诏蹖鈥屬囏й� 乇賴亘乇丕賳 賮讴乇蹖 丕賳賯賱丕亘 亘賱卮賵蹖讴蹖 賵 爻蹖丕爻鬲賲丿丕乇丕賳 亘乇噩爻鬲賴鈥屰� 卮賵乇賵蹖 禺賱賯 讴乇丿賴 丕爻鬲 賵 卮乇丨 夭賳丿丕賳 賵 丕毓鬲乇丕賮丕鬲 丕賵 亘丕夭鬲丕亘 丌乇丕蹖 爻蹖丕爻蹖 乇賵夭 丕爻鬲. 馗賱賲鬲 丿乇 賳蹖賲乇賵夭 丕夭 鬲兀孬蹖乇诏匕丕乇鬲乇蹖賳 乇賲丕賳鈥屬囏й� 爻蹖丕爻蹖 賯乇賳 丕爻鬲 賵 丿乇 夭賲乇賴鈥屰� 賲賴賲鈥屫臂屬� 丌孬丕乇 乇賵卮賳賮讴乇蹖 毓賱蹖賴 讴賲賵賳蹖爻賲 亘賴鈥屫促呚ж� 賲蹖鈥屫辟堌�. 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 乇丕 賳賯胤賴鈥屰� 毓胤賮蹖 丿乇 诏匕乇 丕夭 丿賴賴鈥屰� 郾酃鄢郯 亘賴 爻丕賱鈥屬囏й� 噩賳诏 爻乇丿 卮賲乇丿賴鈥屫з嗀�.
240 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1940
1308 people are currently reading
49835 people want to read
About the author
Arthur Koestler
182听books905听followers
Darkness at Noon
(1940), novel of Hungarian-born British writer Arthur Koestler, portrays his disillusionment with Communism; his nonfiction works include
The Sleepwalkers
(1959) and
The Ghost in the Machine
(1967).
Arthur Koestler CBE [*K枚sztler Art煤r] was a prolific writer of essays, novels and autobiographies.
He was born into a Hungarian Jewish family in Budapest but, apart from his early school years, was educated in Austria. His early career was in journalism. In 1931 he joined the Communist Party of Germany but, disillusioned, he resigned from it in 1938 and in 1940 published a devastating anti-Communist novel, Darkness at Noon, which propelled him to instant international fame.
Over the next forty-three years he espoused many causes, wrote novels and biographies, and numerous essays. In 1968 he was awarded the prestigious and valuable Sonning Prize "For outstanding contribution to European culture", and in 1972 he was made a "Commander of the British Empire" (CBE).
In 1976 he was diagnosed with Parkinson's disease and three years later with leukaemia in its terminal stages. He committed suicide in 1983 in London.
Arthur Koestler CBE [*K枚sztler Art煤r] was a prolific writer of essays, novels and autobiographies.
He was born into a Hungarian Jewish family in Budapest but, apart from his early school years, was educated in Austria. His early career was in journalism. In 1931 he joined the Communist Party of Germany but, disillusioned, he resigned from it in 1938 and in 1940 published a devastating anti-Communist novel, Darkness at Noon, which propelled him to instant international fame.
Over the next forty-three years he espoused many causes, wrote novels and biographies, and numerous essays. In 1968 he was awarded the prestigious and valuable Sonning Prize "For outstanding contribution to European culture", and in 1972 he was made a "Commander of the British Empire" (CBE).
In 1976 he was diagnosed with Parkinson's disease and three years later with leukaemia in its terminal stages. He committed suicide in 1983 in London.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,331 reviews
August 19, 2019
鈥漈his is a diseased century.
We diagnosed the disease and its causes with microscopic exactness, but wherever we applied the healing knife a new sore appeared. Our will was hard and pure, we should have been loved by the people. But they hate us. Why are we so odious and detested?
We brought you truth, and in our mouth it sounded a lie. We brought you freedom, and it looks in our hands like a whip. We brought you the living life, and where our voices is heard the trees wither and there is a rustling of dry leaves. We brought you the promise of the future, but our tongue stammered and barked....
Nicholas Salmanovitch Rubashov is arrested.
Soviet Prison Doors Similar to the one that Rubashov found himself behind.
The Old Bolsheviks that brought communism to power in Russia are being eliminated one by one by their once friend and colleague referred to in the book as No. 1, but of course he is none other than Joseph Stalin.
The young revolutionary Joseph Stalin.
Rubashov has been in trouble with the party before, but had always managed to do what was necessary to survive. The new generation of revolutionaries are not as well educated, meaner, and barely recognize the names of those that were once heralded as heroes by the revolution. As Rubashov sits in prison he is left to ponder what has went wrong.
鈥漌e whip the groaning masses of the country towards a theoretical future happiness, which only we can see. For the energies of this generation are exhausted; they were spent in the Revolution; for this generation is bled white and there is nothing left of it but a moaning, numbed apathetic lump of sacrificial flesh....Those are the consequences of our consequentialness. You called it vivisection morality. To me it sometimes seems as though the experimenters had torn the skin off the victim and left it standing with bared tissues, muscles and nerves....
Rubashov does not have a safety net of friends, most have perished, some were betrayed by his silence when he was in a position to save them. He is left with his mind and his words to try to once again escape 鈥漃HYSICAL LIQUIDATION鈥� His fellow inmates communicate with him through a tapping code. They are less than impressed to find out who he is; in fact, the only use he has to #402 is to share his last sexual encounter...in detail please.
鈥漌HEN DID YOU LAST SLEEP WITH A WOMAN?鈥�
鈥淭HREE WEEKS AGO.鈥�
鈥淭ELL ME ALL ABOUT IT.鈥�
鈥淪NOWY BREASTS FITTING INTO CHAMPAGNE GLASSES.鈥�
鈥淕O ON. DETAILS.鈥�
鈥淭HIGHS LIKE A WILD MARE.鈥�
鈥淕OOD CHAP! GO ON.鈥�
鈥淭HAT鈥橲 ALL.鈥�
鈥淕O ON- PLEASE, PLEASE...鈥�
Rubashov becomes too embarrassed to go on. He has more thinking to do. More explaining to do to himself. He has two interrogators. One is Ivanov an old friend and comrade from the revolution and the other is Gletkin a man of the new generation whose stiff uniform 鈥渃reaks and groans鈥� every time he moves. One is trying to save him and one is trying to kill him. In his diary Rubashov is still justifying his past decisions. He still believes in the movement, but is disenchanted with the people.
鈥滻n periods of maturity it is the duty and the function of the opposition to appeal to the masses. In periods of mental immaturity, only demagogues invoke the higher judgment of the people. In such situations the opposition has two alternatives: to seize the power by a coup d鈥檈tat, without being able to count on the support of the masses; or in mute despair to throw themselves out of the swing--to die in silence.鈥�
He is an intellectual intellectualizing what is looking like a failed improvement in government. Lots of people die and more will continue to die and when you ask the peasants if their lives are better than they were four years ago or forty years ago or two hundred and forty years ago the answer is the same....no. The revolutionaries turn out to be as brutal as the Czarist government they overthrew and since we know that Stalin is only warming up by the publication date (1940) of this book we know it will get much, much worse.
Stalin had nearly a million of his own citizens executed, beginning in the 1930s. Millions more fell victim to forced labor, deportation, famine, massacres, and detention and interrogation by Stalin's henchmen.
"In some cases, a quota was established for the number to be executed, the number to be arrested," said Naimark. "Some officials overfulfilled as a way of showing their exuberance."
Joseph Stalin
Things do not go well for Rubashov. His mind has been degraded from lack of sleep and he has decided the easiest way to go is to admit guilt on certain points. 鈥滺e had believed that he had drunk the cup of humiliation to the dregs. Now he was to find that powerlessness had as many grads as power; that defeat could become as vertiginous as victory, and that its depths were bottomless.鈥�
I do not really like Rubashov. I do though identify with him enough to feel uncomfortable. I find that most revolutionary/ideological people are frankly irresponsible. They overthrow a government, but are generally so paranoid that they resort to the same or worse tactics as the original government to keep control. They justify their actions by saying such things are necessary for 鈥渢he cause鈥�. We were lucky in our revolution in the United States because it was more about expelling a foreign power from our shores than it was about overthrowing a government. Our Revolutionary Heroes, after the war, were willing to share a certain amount of power with the people. Freedom was more important to them than power. Although the revolution was more about greed (how dare thee tax me) than about being oppressed. This country, by the wisdom of our forefathers,was built on a foundation of freedom and sometimes we have to remind ourselves of those principles. Russia is a country that continues to wrestle with their identity. They need strong leadership confident enough to allow their society to be ruled by freedom rather than by fear. I do hope they find a way to throw off the shackles of their history and become the amazing country I know they are capable of being. Bucket list: grand tour of Russia.
Arthur Koestler
Arthur Koestler, Hungarian by birth, certainly was a man with a controversial past. He joined the Foreign Legion during World War Two and deserted. He attempted suicide when he thought that his manuscript of this book along with his girlfriend Daphne Hardy had been sunk by the Germans. It turned out not to be true. It is unclear which he was more upset about losing. He became a British citizen and later in life he successfully committed suicide when he found out he was terminally ill with cancer. He convinced his much younger wife to commit suicide as well. Their mutual friends felt that he must have bullied her into it. He was also accused of being a "serial rapist" although some of this was 鈥渆xplained away鈥� by the fact that he was a 鈥渞ough lover鈥�. Despite his failings as a human being he did write an important book that will be read and quoted long past the time when anyone will really remember there ever was a USSR.
If you wish to see more of my most recent book and movie reviews, visit
I also have a Facebook blogger page at:
We diagnosed the disease and its causes with microscopic exactness, but wherever we applied the healing knife a new sore appeared. Our will was hard and pure, we should have been loved by the people. But they hate us. Why are we so odious and detested?
We brought you truth, and in our mouth it sounded a lie. We brought you freedom, and it looks in our hands like a whip. We brought you the living life, and where our voices is heard the trees wither and there is a rustling of dry leaves. We brought you the promise of the future, but our tongue stammered and barked....
Nicholas Salmanovitch Rubashov is arrested.
Soviet Prison Doors Similar to the one that Rubashov found himself behind.
鈥淥ccasionally words must serve to veil the facts. But this must happen in such a way that no one become aware of it; or, if it should be noticed, excuses must be at hand, to be produced immediately.鈥� Machiavelli
The Old Bolsheviks that brought communism to power in Russia are being eliminated one by one by their once friend and colleague referred to in the book as No. 1, but of course he is none other than Joseph Stalin.
The young revolutionary Joseph Stalin.
Rubashov has been in trouble with the party before, but had always managed to do what was necessary to survive. The new generation of revolutionaries are not as well educated, meaner, and barely recognize the names of those that were once heralded as heroes by the revolution. As Rubashov sits in prison he is left to ponder what has went wrong.
鈥漌e whip the groaning masses of the country towards a theoretical future happiness, which only we can see. For the energies of this generation are exhausted; they were spent in the Revolution; for this generation is bled white and there is nothing left of it but a moaning, numbed apathetic lump of sacrificial flesh....Those are the consequences of our consequentialness. You called it vivisection morality. To me it sometimes seems as though the experimenters had torn the skin off the victim and left it standing with bared tissues, muscles and nerves....
Rubashov does not have a safety net of friends, most have perished, some were betrayed by his silence when he was in a position to save them. He is left with his mind and his words to try to once again escape 鈥漃HYSICAL LIQUIDATION鈥� His fellow inmates communicate with him through a tapping code. They are less than impressed to find out who he is; in fact, the only use he has to #402 is to share his last sexual encounter...in detail please.
鈥漌HEN DID YOU LAST SLEEP WITH A WOMAN?鈥�
鈥淭HREE WEEKS AGO.鈥�
鈥淭ELL ME ALL ABOUT IT.鈥�
鈥淪NOWY BREASTS FITTING INTO CHAMPAGNE GLASSES.鈥�
鈥淕O ON. DETAILS.鈥�
鈥淭HIGHS LIKE A WILD MARE.鈥�
鈥淕OOD CHAP! GO ON.鈥�
鈥淭HAT鈥橲 ALL.鈥�
鈥淕O ON- PLEASE, PLEASE...鈥�
Rubashov becomes too embarrassed to go on. He has more thinking to do. More explaining to do to himself. He has two interrogators. One is Ivanov an old friend and comrade from the revolution and the other is Gletkin a man of the new generation whose stiff uniform 鈥渃reaks and groans鈥� every time he moves. One is trying to save him and one is trying to kill him. In his diary Rubashov is still justifying his past decisions. He still believes in the movement, but is disenchanted with the people.
鈥滻n periods of maturity it is the duty and the function of the opposition to appeal to the masses. In periods of mental immaturity, only demagogues invoke the higher judgment of the people. In such situations the opposition has two alternatives: to seize the power by a coup d鈥檈tat, without being able to count on the support of the masses; or in mute despair to throw themselves out of the swing--to die in silence.鈥�
He is an intellectual intellectualizing what is looking like a failed improvement in government. Lots of people die and more will continue to die and when you ask the peasants if their lives are better than they were four years ago or forty years ago or two hundred and forty years ago the answer is the same....no. The revolutionaries turn out to be as brutal as the Czarist government they overthrew and since we know that Stalin is only warming up by the publication date (1940) of this book we know it will get much, much worse.
Stalin had nearly a million of his own citizens executed, beginning in the 1930s. Millions more fell victim to forced labor, deportation, famine, massacres, and detention and interrogation by Stalin's henchmen.
"In some cases, a quota was established for the number to be executed, the number to be arrested," said Naimark. "Some officials overfulfilled as a way of showing their exuberance."
Joseph Stalin
Things do not go well for Rubashov. His mind has been degraded from lack of sleep and he has decided the easiest way to go is to admit guilt on certain points. 鈥滺e had believed that he had drunk the cup of humiliation to the dregs. Now he was to find that powerlessness had as many grads as power; that defeat could become as vertiginous as victory, and that its depths were bottomless.鈥�
I do not really like Rubashov. I do though identify with him enough to feel uncomfortable. I find that most revolutionary/ideological people are frankly irresponsible. They overthrow a government, but are generally so paranoid that they resort to the same or worse tactics as the original government to keep control. They justify their actions by saying such things are necessary for 鈥渢he cause鈥�. We were lucky in our revolution in the United States because it was more about expelling a foreign power from our shores than it was about overthrowing a government. Our Revolutionary Heroes, after the war, were willing to share a certain amount of power with the people. Freedom was more important to them than power. Although the revolution was more about greed (how dare thee tax me) than about being oppressed. This country, by the wisdom of our forefathers,was built on a foundation of freedom and sometimes we have to remind ourselves of those principles. Russia is a country that continues to wrestle with their identity. They need strong leadership confident enough to allow their society to be ruled by freedom rather than by fear. I do hope they find a way to throw off the shackles of their history and become the amazing country I know they are capable of being. Bucket list: grand tour of Russia.
Arthur Koestler
Arthur Koestler, Hungarian by birth, certainly was a man with a controversial past. He joined the Foreign Legion during World War Two and deserted. He attempted suicide when he thought that his manuscript of this book along with his girlfriend Daphne Hardy had been sunk by the Germans. It turned out not to be true. It is unclear which he was more upset about losing. He became a British citizen and later in life he successfully committed suicide when he found out he was terminally ill with cancer. He convinced his much younger wife to commit suicide as well. Their mutual friends felt that he must have bullied her into it. He was also accused of being a "serial rapist" although some of this was 鈥渆xplained away鈥� by the fact that he was a 鈥渞ough lover鈥�. Despite his failings as a human being he did write an important book that will be read and quoted long past the time when anyone will really remember there ever was a USSR.
If you wish to see more of my most recent book and movie reviews, visit
I also have a Facebook blogger page at:
July 30, 2021
鈥淭he fact is: I no longer believe in my infallibility. That is why I am lost.鈥�
For me, this a perfect book, a masterpiece- it has it all - the suffering, the guilt, discussions on morality, politics, tyranny, philosophy, spirituality, meaning and death, one not overshadowing other, all perfectly interwoven in the story, without the final conclusion it is trying to impose on the reader, just telling a story in a way it expands consciousness. Due to the controversy of the author I haven't read it sooner which I deeply regret now.
Meet Rubashov, an Old Bolshevik who is arrested, imprisoned, and tried for treason against the government that he helped to create. The novel is set in 1938, during the Great Purge and Moscow trials even though Koestler didn't name directly USSR or Stalin, referring to him as "Number One", giving the novel less factual historian and vaguer dystopian feeling similar to 1984 and Kafkaesquein events. Novel in a way transcends mere historical events and embodies the eternal drama of individual vs. tyrannical collective oppression. Rubashov is not a typical martyr or a hero, an innocent person persecuted for race or religion, or his opposition to repression, he is a morally gray character that has blood on his hands, a Revolutionist eaten by Revolution he was fighting for, creating a monster that will ultimately destroy him in, which makes his struggles and existential and moral crises even more relatable because we see the destructive aspect of collective mirrored in himself.
鈥淚 was one of those. I have thought and acted as I had to; I destroyed people whom I was fond of, and gave power to others I did not like. History put me where I stood; I have exhausted the credit which she accorded me; if I was right I have nothing to repent of; if wrong, I will pay.鈥�
Rubashov is a man for devoted his life to the cause in which he believed in, communism. From an early age, he was a member of the Party, fought in the civil war, endured 2 years of torture from Gestapo, betrayed other communists who deviated from the Party line and proven over and over again that he is unscrupulously loyal to the cause of communism. That was indeed, his meaning and purpose.
鈥淔or forty years he had lived strictly in accordance with the vows of his order, the Party. He had held to the rules of logical calculation. He had burnt the remains of the old, illogical morality from his consciousness with the acid of reason. He had turned away from the temptations of the silent partner, and had fought against the 鈥渙ceanic sense鈥� with all his might. And where had it landed him? Premises of unimpeachable truth had led to a result which was completely absurd; Ivanov鈥檚 and Gletkin鈥檚 irrefutable deductions had taken him straight into the weird and ghostly game of the public trial. Perhaps it was not suitable for a man to think every thought to its logical conclusion.鈥�
Now imprisoned by the Party to which he sacrificed everything and above all, his conscience, he faces an existential crisis, now struggling to find meaning and logic in Marxist philosophy and interpretation of history. Ultimately he finds despair in a revelation that promised utopia is mere dictatorship imposing the suffering on millions of people. Rubashov can no longer cling to Machiavellian philosophies, where historical processes, no matter how vile they may seem, are justified for the cause of socialist utopia and the happiness of future generations. He sees clearly that the vision of a better world is fading and from dread with the promise of a glowing future, there is only death and terror left in the Soviet world. Stripped down from his faith in communism all he has left is the inner voice of his conscience that is condemning him. His consciousness of guilt, called 鈥渕oral exaltation鈥�, could not be expressed in logical formula.
Rubashov was a logical man that was hiding all his guilt and sense of morality in an entanglement of intellectualization and rationalization. But his reason was adequate shelter only when he was not face to face with human suffering. The soviet prison gives him that side of reality, one that is more difficult to argue with reason, the one that shatters most of the philosophical argument and ends debates, the face of a suffering man
.
鈥淩ubashov, Rubashov. ...鈥� that last cry was branded ineffaceably in his acoustic memory. ... Up till now, he had never imagined Arlova鈥檚 death in such detail. It had always been for him an abstract occurrence; it had left him with a feeling of strong uneasiness, but he had never doubted the logical rightness of his behaviour. Now, in the nausea which turned his stomach and drove the wet perspiration from his forehead, his past mode of thought seemed lunacy. The whimpering of Bogrov unbalanced the logical equation. Up till now Arlova had been a factor in this equation, a small factor compared to what was at stake. But the equation no longer stood. 鈥�
The newfound emotional and psychological revelation, as well as moral exaltation, is challenged by his old comrade Ivanov, one of the most intelligent and charming voices of communist reasoning I've read in literature.
鈥淢y point is this,鈥� he said; 鈥渙ne may not regard the world as a sort of metaphysical brothel for emotions. That is the first commandment for us. Sympathy, conscience, disgust, despair, repentance, and atonement are for us repellent debauchery. To sit down and let oneself be hypnotized by one鈥檚 own navel, to turn up one鈥檚 eyes and humbly offer the back of one鈥檚 neck to Gletkin鈥檚 revolver鈥攖hat is an easy solution. The greatest temptation for the like of us is: to renounce violence, to repent, to make peace with oneself. Most great revolutionaries fell before this temptation, from Spartacus to Danton and Dostoevsky; they are the classical form of betrayal of the cause. The temptations of God were always more dangerous for mankind than those of Satan. As long as chaos dominates the world, God is an anachronism; and every compromise with one鈥檚 own conscience is perfidy. When the accursed inner voice speaks to you, hold your hands over your ears. ...鈥�
鈥淏eware of these ecstasies,鈥� he said: 鈥淓very bottle of spirits contains a measurable amount of ecstasy. Unfortunately, only few people, particularly amongst our fellow countrymen, ever realize that the ecstasies of humility and suffering are as cheap as those induced chemically. 鈥�
鈥淚f I had a spark of pity for you,鈥� he said, 鈥淚 would now leave you alone. But I have not a spark of pity. I drink; for a time, as you know, I drugged myself; but the vice of pity I have up till now managed to avoid. The smallest dose of it, and you are lost. Weeping over humanity and bewailing oneself鈥攜ou know our race鈥檚 pathological leaning to it. Our greatest poets destroyed themselves by this poison. Up to forty, fifty, they were revolutionaries鈥攖hen they became consumed by pity and the world pronounced them holy. You appear to have the same ambition, and to believe it to be an individual process, personal to you, something unprecedented. ...
鈥淭he greatest criminals in history,鈥� Ivanov went on, 鈥渁re not of the type Nero and Fouch茅, but of the type Gandhi and Tolstoy. Gandhi鈥檚 inner voice has done more to prevent the liberation of India than the British guns. To sell oneself for thirty pieces of silver is an honest transaction; but to sell oneself to one鈥檚 own conscience is to abandon mankind. History is a priori amoral; it has no conscience. To want to conduct history according to the maxims of the Sunday school means to leave everything as it is.鈥�
One of the most prominent themes and contrasts in the story is one between Christian and communist worldview, the philosophy that celebrates the value of individual, moral and ethical norms that have to be honored no matter the price, the voice of human conciseness vs. world view that elevates collective before all else, before individual life, and all moral and ethical values that can be overlooked in the pursuit for the greater good. The debate between Ivanov and Rubashov is one of the most brilliant ones I have ever read. Some things that are almost overemphasized in Dostoyevski, which I know annoy some people, Koestler does in such a subtle, elegant manner. He gives both sides fair argument, without being overly pretentious and patronizing. His arguments are vibrant and lived-through, not merely abstract ideas. The Christian symbolism is not in your face loud, but quietly and naturally embroidered in the story.
鈥淚 don鈥檛 approve of mixing ideologies,鈥� Ivanov continued. 鈥溾€橳here 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鈥攚hich may dispose of it as an experimentation rabbit or a sacrificial lamb. The first conception could be called anti-vivisection morality, the second, vivisection morality. Humbugs and dilettantes have always tried to mix the two conceptions; in practice, it is impossible. Whoever is burdened with power and responsibility finds out on the first occasion that he has to choose; and he is fatally driven to the second alternative. Do you know, since the establishment of Christianity as a state religion, a single example of a state which really followed a Christian policy? You can鈥檛 point out one. In times of need鈥攁nd politics are chronically in a time of need鈥攖he rulers were always able to evoke 鈥榚xceptional circumstances鈥�, which demanded exceptional measures of defence. Since the existence of nations and classes, they live in a permanent state of mutual self-defence, which forces them to defer to another time the putting into practice of humanism. ...鈥�
Death is also one of the themes that Koestler subtly, but beautifully touched upon. Death in the totalitarian regime is impersonal, just a mere means to an end for a governing regime.
鈥淚n the Party death was no mystery, it had no romantic aspect. It was a logical consequence, a factor with which one reckoned and which bore rather an abstract character. Also death was rarely spoken of, and the word 鈥渆xecution鈥� was hardly ever used; the customary expression was 鈥減hysical liquidation鈥�. The words 鈥減hysical liquidation鈥� again evoked only one concrete idea: The cessation of political activity. The act of dying in itself was a technical detail, with no claim to interest; death as a factor in a logical equation had lost any intimate bodily feature.鈥�
Bit Rubashov finds his own liberation in returning to his true self in the face of death, and a kind of similar metaphysical liberation as in Stranger is implied. He regains all parts of himself he had to repress in order to serve the Party perfectly - the emotional, moral, spiritual and even intellectual parts of himself. On his deathbed, he contemplates the vastness of the universe and returns to the key questions of his youth - the meaning of suffering. The novel ends with Rubashov's utopian hopeful vision of a future in which collectivism and individualism, economic and spiritual growth merge, with a painful realization that that is the world he will never get to see and the darkness he is leaving behind in reality.
鈥淧erhaps later, much later, the new movement would arise鈥攚ith new flags, a new spirit knowing of both: of economic fatality and the 鈥渙ceanic sense鈥�. Perhaps the members of the new party will wear monks鈥� cowls, and preach that only purity of means can justify the ends. Perhaps they will teach that the tenet is wrong which says that a man is the quotient of one million divided by one million, and will introduce a new kind of arithmetic based on multiplication: on the joining of a million individuals to form a new entity which, no longer an amorphous mass, will develop a consciousness and an individuality of its own, with an 鈥渙ceanic feeling鈥� increased a millionfold, in unlimited yet self-contained space.鈥�
鈥淚 bow my knees before the country, before the masses, before the whole people. ...鈥� And what then? What happened to these masses, to this people? For forty years it had been driven through the desert, with threats and promises, with imaginary terrors and imaginary rewards. But where was the Promised Land? Did there really exist any such goal for this wandering mankind? That was a question to which he would have liked an answer before it was too late. Moses had not been allowed to enter the land of promise either. But he had been allowed to see it, from the top of the mountain, spread at his feet. Thus, it was easy to die, with the visible certainty of one鈥檚 goal before one鈥檚 eyes. He, Nicolas Salmanovitch Rubashov, had not been taken to the top of a mountain; and wherever his eye looked, he saw nothing but desert and the darkness of night.鈥�
This book has an element of regaining internal freedom in the midst of physical imprisonment, similar to , existential dread and finding meaning in meaninglessness as in , entanglemnet with the machinery of cold and brutal bureaucracy as in the , and contemplation on guilt as in (mentioned in the book and even mocked by Ivanov). If you like any of mentioned works, I highly recommend you try Koestler.
鈥淚 plead guilty to not having understood the fatal compulsion behind the policy of the Government, and to have therefore held oppositional views. I plead guilty to having followed sentimental impulses, and in so doing to have been led into contradiction with historical necessity. I have lent my ear to the laments of the sacrificed, and thus became deaf to the arguments which proved the necessity to sacrifice them. I plead guilty to having rated the question of guilt and innocence higher than that of utility and harmfulness. Finally, I plead guilty to having placed the idea of man above the idea of mankind. ...鈥�
For me, this a perfect book, a masterpiece- it has it all - the suffering, the guilt, discussions on morality, politics, tyranny, philosophy, spirituality, meaning and death, one not overshadowing other, all perfectly interwoven in the story, without the final conclusion it is trying to impose on the reader, just telling a story in a way it expands consciousness. Due to the controversy of the author I haven't read it sooner which I deeply regret now.
Meet Rubashov, an Old Bolshevik who is arrested, imprisoned, and tried for treason against the government that he helped to create. The novel is set in 1938, during the Great Purge and Moscow trials even though Koestler didn't name directly USSR or Stalin, referring to him as "Number One", giving the novel less factual historian and vaguer dystopian feeling similar to 1984 and Kafkaesquein events. Novel in a way transcends mere historical events and embodies the eternal drama of individual vs. tyrannical collective oppression. Rubashov is not a typical martyr or a hero, an innocent person persecuted for race or religion, or his opposition to repression, he is a morally gray character that has blood on his hands, a Revolutionist eaten by Revolution he was fighting for, creating a monster that will ultimately destroy him in, which makes his struggles and existential and moral crises even more relatable because we see the destructive aspect of collective mirrored in himself.
鈥淚 was one of those. I have thought and acted as I had to; I destroyed people whom I was fond of, and gave power to others I did not like. History put me where I stood; I have exhausted the credit which she accorded me; if I was right I have nothing to repent of; if wrong, I will pay.鈥�
Rubashov is a man for devoted his life to the cause in which he believed in, communism. From an early age, he was a member of the Party, fought in the civil war, endured 2 years of torture from Gestapo, betrayed other communists who deviated from the Party line and proven over and over again that he is unscrupulously loyal to the cause of communism. That was indeed, his meaning and purpose.
鈥淔or forty years he had lived strictly in accordance with the vows of his order, the Party. He had held to the rules of logical calculation. He had burnt the remains of the old, illogical morality from his consciousness with the acid of reason. He had turned away from the temptations of the silent partner, and had fought against the 鈥渙ceanic sense鈥� with all his might. And where had it landed him? Premises of unimpeachable truth had led to a result which was completely absurd; Ivanov鈥檚 and Gletkin鈥檚 irrefutable deductions had taken him straight into the weird and ghostly game of the public trial. Perhaps it was not suitable for a man to think every thought to its logical conclusion.鈥�
Now imprisoned by the Party to which he sacrificed everything and above all, his conscience, he faces an existential crisis, now struggling to find meaning and logic in Marxist philosophy and interpretation of history. Ultimately he finds despair in a revelation that promised utopia is mere dictatorship imposing the suffering on millions of people. Rubashov can no longer cling to Machiavellian philosophies, where historical processes, no matter how vile they may seem, are justified for the cause of socialist utopia and the happiness of future generations. He sees clearly that the vision of a better world is fading and from dread with the promise of a glowing future, there is only death and terror left in the Soviet world. Stripped down from his faith in communism all he has left is the inner voice of his conscience that is condemning him. His consciousness of guilt, called 鈥渕oral exaltation鈥�, could not be expressed in logical formula.
Rubashov was a logical man that was hiding all his guilt and sense of morality in an entanglement of intellectualization and rationalization. But his reason was adequate shelter only when he was not face to face with human suffering. The soviet prison gives him that side of reality, one that is more difficult to argue with reason, the one that shatters most of the philosophical argument and ends debates, the face of a suffering man
.
鈥淩ubashov, Rubashov. ...鈥� that last cry was branded ineffaceably in his acoustic memory. ... Up till now, he had never imagined Arlova鈥檚 death in such detail. It had always been for him an abstract occurrence; it had left him with a feeling of strong uneasiness, but he had never doubted the logical rightness of his behaviour. Now, in the nausea which turned his stomach and drove the wet perspiration from his forehead, his past mode of thought seemed lunacy. The whimpering of Bogrov unbalanced the logical equation. Up till now Arlova had been a factor in this equation, a small factor compared to what was at stake. But the equation no longer stood. 鈥�
The newfound emotional and psychological revelation, as well as moral exaltation, is challenged by his old comrade Ivanov, one of the most intelligent and charming voices of communist reasoning I've read in literature.
鈥淢y point is this,鈥� he said; 鈥渙ne may not regard the world as a sort of metaphysical brothel for emotions. That is the first commandment for us. Sympathy, conscience, disgust, despair, repentance, and atonement are for us repellent debauchery. To sit down and let oneself be hypnotized by one鈥檚 own navel, to turn up one鈥檚 eyes and humbly offer the back of one鈥檚 neck to Gletkin鈥檚 revolver鈥攖hat is an easy solution. The greatest temptation for the like of us is: to renounce violence, to repent, to make peace with oneself. Most great revolutionaries fell before this temptation, from Spartacus to Danton and Dostoevsky; they are the classical form of betrayal of the cause. The temptations of God were always more dangerous for mankind than those of Satan. As long as chaos dominates the world, God is an anachronism; and every compromise with one鈥檚 own conscience is perfidy. When the accursed inner voice speaks to you, hold your hands over your ears. ...鈥�
鈥淏eware of these ecstasies,鈥� he said: 鈥淓very bottle of spirits contains a measurable amount of ecstasy. Unfortunately, only few people, particularly amongst our fellow countrymen, ever realize that the ecstasies of humility and suffering are as cheap as those induced chemically. 鈥�
鈥淚f I had a spark of pity for you,鈥� he said, 鈥淚 would now leave you alone. But I have not a spark of pity. I drink; for a time, as you know, I drugged myself; but the vice of pity I have up till now managed to avoid. The smallest dose of it, and you are lost. Weeping over humanity and bewailing oneself鈥攜ou know our race鈥檚 pathological leaning to it. Our greatest poets destroyed themselves by this poison. Up to forty, fifty, they were revolutionaries鈥攖hen they became consumed by pity and the world pronounced them holy. You appear to have the same ambition, and to believe it to be an individual process, personal to you, something unprecedented. ...
鈥淭he greatest criminals in history,鈥� Ivanov went on, 鈥渁re not of the type Nero and Fouch茅, but of the type Gandhi and Tolstoy. Gandhi鈥檚 inner voice has done more to prevent the liberation of India than the British guns. To sell oneself for thirty pieces of silver is an honest transaction; but to sell oneself to one鈥檚 own conscience is to abandon mankind. History is a priori amoral; it has no conscience. To want to conduct history according to the maxims of the Sunday school means to leave everything as it is.鈥�
One of the most prominent themes and contrasts in the story is one between Christian and communist worldview, the philosophy that celebrates the value of individual, moral and ethical norms that have to be honored no matter the price, the voice of human conciseness vs. world view that elevates collective before all else, before individual life, and all moral and ethical values that can be overlooked in the pursuit for the greater good. The debate between Ivanov and Rubashov is one of the most brilliant ones I have ever read. Some things that are almost overemphasized in Dostoyevski, which I know annoy some people, Koestler does in such a subtle, elegant manner. He gives both sides fair argument, without being overly pretentious and patronizing. His arguments are vibrant and lived-through, not merely abstract ideas. The Christian symbolism is not in your face loud, but quietly and naturally embroidered in the story.
鈥淚 don鈥檛 approve of mixing ideologies,鈥� Ivanov continued. 鈥溾€橳here 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鈥攚hich may dispose of it as an experimentation rabbit or a sacrificial lamb. The first conception could be called anti-vivisection morality, the second, vivisection morality. Humbugs and dilettantes have always tried to mix the two conceptions; in practice, it is impossible. Whoever is burdened with power and responsibility finds out on the first occasion that he has to choose; and he is fatally driven to the second alternative. Do you know, since the establishment of Christianity as a state religion, a single example of a state which really followed a Christian policy? You can鈥檛 point out one. In times of need鈥攁nd politics are chronically in a time of need鈥攖he rulers were always able to evoke 鈥榚xceptional circumstances鈥�, which demanded exceptional measures of defence. Since the existence of nations and classes, they live in a permanent state of mutual self-defence, which forces them to defer to another time the putting into practice of humanism. ...鈥�
Death is also one of the themes that Koestler subtly, but beautifully touched upon. Death in the totalitarian regime is impersonal, just a mere means to an end for a governing regime.
鈥淚n the Party death was no mystery, it had no romantic aspect. It was a logical consequence, a factor with which one reckoned and which bore rather an abstract character. Also death was rarely spoken of, and the word 鈥渆xecution鈥� was hardly ever used; the customary expression was 鈥減hysical liquidation鈥�. The words 鈥減hysical liquidation鈥� again evoked only one concrete idea: The cessation of political activity. The act of dying in itself was a technical detail, with no claim to interest; death as a factor in a logical equation had lost any intimate bodily feature.鈥�
Bit Rubashov finds his own liberation in returning to his true self in the face of death, and a kind of similar metaphysical liberation as in Stranger is implied. He regains all parts of himself he had to repress in order to serve the Party perfectly - the emotional, moral, spiritual and even intellectual parts of himself. On his deathbed, he contemplates the vastness of the universe and returns to the key questions of his youth - the meaning of suffering. The novel ends with Rubashov's utopian hopeful vision of a future in which collectivism and individualism, economic and spiritual growth merge, with a painful realization that that is the world he will never get to see and the darkness he is leaving behind in reality.
鈥淧erhaps later, much later, the new movement would arise鈥攚ith new flags, a new spirit knowing of both: of economic fatality and the 鈥渙ceanic sense鈥�. Perhaps the members of the new party will wear monks鈥� cowls, and preach that only purity of means can justify the ends. Perhaps they will teach that the tenet is wrong which says that a man is the quotient of one million divided by one million, and will introduce a new kind of arithmetic based on multiplication: on the joining of a million individuals to form a new entity which, no longer an amorphous mass, will develop a consciousness and an individuality of its own, with an 鈥渙ceanic feeling鈥� increased a millionfold, in unlimited yet self-contained space.鈥�
鈥淚 bow my knees before the country, before the masses, before the whole people. ...鈥� And what then? What happened to these masses, to this people? For forty years it had been driven through the desert, with threats and promises, with imaginary terrors and imaginary rewards. But where was the Promised Land? Did there really exist any such goal for this wandering mankind? That was a question to which he would have liked an answer before it was too late. Moses had not been allowed to enter the land of promise either. But he had been allowed to see it, from the top of the mountain, spread at his feet. Thus, it was easy to die, with the visible certainty of one鈥檚 goal before one鈥檚 eyes. He, Nicolas Salmanovitch Rubashov, had not been taken to the top of a mountain; and wherever his eye looked, he saw nothing but desert and the darkness of night.鈥�
This book has an element of regaining internal freedom in the midst of physical imprisonment, similar to , existential dread and finding meaning in meaninglessness as in , entanglemnet with the machinery of cold and brutal bureaucracy as in the , and contemplation on guilt as in (mentioned in the book and even mocked by Ivanov). If you like any of mentioned works, I highly recommend you try Koestler.
鈥淚 plead guilty to not having understood the fatal compulsion behind the policy of the Government, and to have therefore held oppositional views. I plead guilty to having followed sentimental impulses, and in so doing to have been led into contradiction with historical necessity. I have lent my ear to the laments of the sacrificed, and thus became deaf to the arguments which proved the necessity to sacrifice them. I plead guilty to having rated the question of guilt and innocence higher than that of utility and harmfulness. Finally, I plead guilty to having placed the idea of man above the idea of mankind. ...鈥�
March 21, 2022
IL SOGNO CONSISTE IN UN'UNICA PAROLA SCRITTA SULLA PORTA DEL CIMITERO DEI VINTI: DORMIRE
Ecco un libro che mi colp矛 molto ed 猫 rimasto profondo nella mia memoria, forse perch茅 猫 stato il primo che ho letto sull'argomento (le purghe staliniane, per usare una definizione riduttiva).
Forse invece perch茅 猫 proprio bello e magari meriterebbe la quinta stella.
Altro elemento che colpisce 猫 che fu scritto nel 1940, pochi anni dopo l'inizio di quel mostruoso periodo storico, e viene da pensare che se non 猫 il primo su questo tema, ci vada molto vicino.
Colpisce anche la biografia dello stesso Koestler: all'universit脿 studia scienze, ma poi abbandona e si unisce a un'organizzazione sionista in Palestina (1926).
Diventa giornalista proprio in Medio Oriente.
Cinque anni dopo lascia tutto e si trasferisce a Berlino: sta crescendo l'onda nazista, e lui, tanto per essere in armonia col paese che lo ospita, s鈥檌scrive al Partito Comunista e attraversa Russia, Ucraina, Caucaso e Asia Centrale per raccontare i risultati del primo piano quinquennale.
A questo punto 猫 il 1934 e non pu貌 pi霉 tornare a Berlino perch茅 Hitler ha preso il potere e non 猫 sano vivere in Germania se si 猫 ebrei.
Cos矛 va a Parigi.
E da qui in Spagna, dove, catturato dai franchisti, 猫 condannato a morte, e salvato grazie a una campagna internazionale che ha al suo centro la diplomazia inglese.
Dopo altre peripezie torna nuovamente in Francia, ma in quella occupata, e quindi lo tengono per qualche mese in un campo di detenzione.
Poi lo liberano, ma rischia brutto, Petain collabora coi nazisti invasori: allora si arruola nella Legione Straniera e riesce a raggiungere Londra, dove si stabilisce definitivamente, prendendo anche la cittadinanza britannica.
Nel '41 pubblica questo romanzo, che certo non piacque al potere sovietico: e infatti Koestler diventer脿 oggetto di un'intensa campagna denigratoria che lo spinse quasi al suicidio.
A dormire.
Suicidio che comunque commise nel 1983, ormai quasi ottantenne, malato di Parkinson e leucemia, se ne and貌 insieme alla terza moglie Cynthia.
Ecco un libro che mi colp矛 molto ed 猫 rimasto profondo nella mia memoria, forse perch茅 猫 stato il primo che ho letto sull'argomento (le purghe staliniane, per usare una definizione riduttiva).
Forse invece perch茅 猫 proprio bello e magari meriterebbe la quinta stella.
Altro elemento che colpisce 猫 che fu scritto nel 1940, pochi anni dopo l'inizio di quel mostruoso periodo storico, e viene da pensare che se non 猫 il primo su questo tema, ci vada molto vicino.
Colpisce anche la biografia dello stesso Koestler: all'universit脿 studia scienze, ma poi abbandona e si unisce a un'organizzazione sionista in Palestina (1926).
Diventa giornalista proprio in Medio Oriente.
Cinque anni dopo lascia tutto e si trasferisce a Berlino: sta crescendo l'onda nazista, e lui, tanto per essere in armonia col paese che lo ospita, s鈥檌scrive al Partito Comunista e attraversa Russia, Ucraina, Caucaso e Asia Centrale per raccontare i risultati del primo piano quinquennale.
A questo punto 猫 il 1934 e non pu貌 pi霉 tornare a Berlino perch茅 Hitler ha preso il potere e non 猫 sano vivere in Germania se si 猫 ebrei.
Cos矛 va a Parigi.
E da qui in Spagna, dove, catturato dai franchisti, 猫 condannato a morte, e salvato grazie a una campagna internazionale che ha al suo centro la diplomazia inglese.
Dopo altre peripezie torna nuovamente in Francia, ma in quella occupata, e quindi lo tengono per qualche mese in un campo di detenzione.
Poi lo liberano, ma rischia brutto, Petain collabora coi nazisti invasori: allora si arruola nella Legione Straniera e riesce a raggiungere Londra, dove si stabilisce definitivamente, prendendo anche la cittadinanza britannica.
Nel '41 pubblica questo romanzo, che certo non piacque al potere sovietico: e infatti Koestler diventer脿 oggetto di un'intensa campagna denigratoria che lo spinse quasi al suicidio.
A dormire.
Suicidio che comunque commise nel 1983, ormai quasi ottantenne, malato di Parkinson e leucemia, se ne and貌 insieme alla terza moglie Cynthia.
September 22, 2024
鈥淓l principio seg煤n el cual el fin justifica los medios sigue siendo la 煤nica regla de 茅tica pol铆tica; todo lo dem谩s no son m谩s que charlataner铆as que se deshacen entre los dedos.鈥�No se puede negar lo que Vargas Llosa afirma sobre la novela de Koestler: 鈥渓os mecanismos de la destrucci贸n de la personalidad y el envilecimiento de las v铆ctimas que pusieron en evidencia los procesos de Mosc煤 de los a帽os treinta鈥�, como tambi茅n es innegable la poderosa descripci贸n que el relato contiene de la cruel degradaci贸n de un sistema que lleg贸 a establecer como verdad solo aquello que lo fortalec铆a y convertir en mentira todo lo que lo pon铆a en peligro, pero s铆 me gustar铆a deciros que no es esto lo m谩s importante de la novela.
"Ten铆a 26 a帽os cuando ingres茅 en el Partido Comunista y 33 cuando sal铆 de 茅l... Nunca antes ni despu茅s fue la vida tan plena de significado como en aquellos siete a帽os. Tuvieron la grandeza de un hermoso error por encima de la podrida verdad"Lo terrible de El cero y el infinito (1940), y lo que la separa y la distingue de sus primas hermanas Rebeli贸n en la Granja (1945) o 1984 (1949), es la representaci贸n que nos ofrece de la l贸gica fan谩tica, de su poder sobre sobre hombres y mujeres una vez que estos aceptan como incuestionables ciertas premisas b谩sicas. Koestler nos muestra los mecanismos por los cuales una idea, su defensa y su propagaci贸n, es capaz de invadir la mente y pasar por encima de la propia dignidad y de la propia vida. Una idea que, en este caso, iba complementada y potenciada por el culto al l铆der. Era tal el imperio de la personalidad de Stalin que la gente mor铆a fusilada dando vivas al dictador. La novela, pues, nos enfrenta a un mecanismo universal de comportamiento humano, estando muy lejos de ser, como tambi茅n afirma Llosa, un libro excesivamente dependiente de unos hechos concretos y, por tanto, perecedero.
鈥溾€� no era un fen贸meno accidental, sino la personificaci贸n de una cierta caracter铆stica humana, a saber, de una absoluta creencia en la infalibilidad de las propias convicciones, de la cual sacaba la fuerza para su completa ausencia de escr煤pulos.鈥�En lo que s铆 acierta el escritor peruano es en afirmar que la obra de Koestler es un ensayo novelado, y aunque el propio autor se lamenta de su man铆a de arruinar su obra al defender en ellas una causa, sortea tan inteligentemente el manique铆smo, es tan potente su carga filos贸fica, son tan fascinantes sus discusiones pol铆ticas, los discursos, supuestamente l贸gicos y racionales, tienen tal carga emocional, y los sucesos narrados, interrogatorios, flashbacks, tal carga dram谩tica, que uno comprende perfectamente que la novela siga siendo un cl谩sico del siglo XX casi 80 a帽os despu茅s de su publicaci贸n.
April 10, 2017
The back of my 1972 copy of Darkness at Noon claims that it is "one of the few books written in this epoch which will survive it." To me, Darkness at Noon seems like a book on the verge of being forgotten. It's almost never on the shelves in bookstores or libraries, and I rarely hear it discussed. I don't think it's taught in schools, at least in my part of the world. Perhaps with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of communism and the Cold War, the importance of the great revolutions of the 20th Century and their ensuing brutal authoritarian regimes is appearing less and less relevant to the current and future global political landscape. Maybe they are being interpreted as more of a political aberration - an anomaly, rather than an important and lasting historical trend.
Stalin is long gone, taking the immediacy of Darkness at Noon with him. But this is a book to be viewed through a much wider lens. I will concede that Darkness at Noon certainly doesn't resonate as clearly with the current state of the world as does Nineteen Eighty-Four, with which it is often compared. But Darkness at Noon is nonetheless a wonderfully profound and important book. It can be compared to Orwell's novel not only for its vision of a totalitarian political state, but also for its penetrating insights into human nature and psychology. Koestler explores the nature and substance of conviction: how belief in an ideology can skew moral judgement and cause people to rationalise their actions within the ideological framework. He exposes logic as a dangerously unreliable tool - one that can be used to justify any course of action, given a sufficiently corrupt set of starting assumptions. He offers a glimpse into the means by which idealistic intentions can develop into totalitarian realities, and how ideology can propagate throughout the political ranks in a process that selects for proponents and perpetuates and reinforces itself.
Although the tone of the writing itself may be somewhat simple and declarative, the execution of these ideas and themes within the narrative is expertly done. There is bleakness, but also humour in the writing. There is a close narrative voice that draws the reader by degrees into the mind of Rubashov. It is a slow untangling of a convoluted web of beliefs, actions and justifications. We observe the internal oscillation in perspective that both creates and dismisses crimes when actions align with or oppose a particular ideological position, and in the next moment we see the inversion of Rubashov's previous judgement when its axioms are called into question. This is a corrupted morality based on the perpetuation of the system, rather than on any real concept of right and wrong.
At the core of Rubashov's story is the struggle of youth against age. Those who become old earn the wisdom to see the folly of their own youthful ideals, but they must now be judged by the young, whose values have been shaped by the systems that those very ideals put into place. There is a twisted irony to this perpetual struggle, and an inevitability which favors the side with energy, boldness and conviction, against that with patience, wisdom and reflection.
Stalin may be gone, but human nature remains unchanged.
Stalin is long gone, taking the immediacy of Darkness at Noon with him. But this is a book to be viewed through a much wider lens. I will concede that Darkness at Noon certainly doesn't resonate as clearly with the current state of the world as does Nineteen Eighty-Four, with which it is often compared. But Darkness at Noon is nonetheless a wonderfully profound and important book. It can be compared to Orwell's novel not only for its vision of a totalitarian political state, but also for its penetrating insights into human nature and psychology. Koestler explores the nature and substance of conviction: how belief in an ideology can skew moral judgement and cause people to rationalise their actions within the ideological framework. He exposes logic as a dangerously unreliable tool - one that can be used to justify any course of action, given a sufficiently corrupt set of starting assumptions. He offers a glimpse into the means by which idealistic intentions can develop into totalitarian realities, and how ideology can propagate throughout the political ranks in a process that selects for proponents and perpetuates and reinforces itself.
Although the tone of the writing itself may be somewhat simple and declarative, the execution of these ideas and themes within the narrative is expertly done. There is bleakness, but also humour in the writing. There is a close narrative voice that draws the reader by degrees into the mind of Rubashov. It is a slow untangling of a convoluted web of beliefs, actions and justifications. We observe the internal oscillation in perspective that both creates and dismisses crimes when actions align with or oppose a particular ideological position, and in the next moment we see the inversion of Rubashov's previous judgement when its axioms are called into question. This is a corrupted morality based on the perpetuation of the system, rather than on any real concept of right and wrong.
At the core of Rubashov's story is the struggle of youth against age. Those who become old earn the wisdom to see the folly of their own youthful ideals, but they must now be judged by the young, whose values have been shaped by the systems that those very ideals put into place. There is a twisted irony to this perpetual struggle, and an inevitability which favors the side with energy, boldness and conviction, against that with patience, wisdom and reflection.
Stalin may be gone, but human nature remains unchanged.
March 20, 2024
This just might be the first time I've come across a novel in which it has been translated into many other languages not from the original text but from the English translated version - making it a translation of a translation. I've no idea how this supposedly superior new translated version compares to the original because I didn't read it, and can only go on what was in front of me -
which, I believe, is a masterpiece not in terms of plot, but of the human condition. While it isn't specified that the country here is the Soviet Union and that 'No. 1' is Joseph Stalin, it doesn't take much to figure that out. Rubashov - who spends a lot of the novel stuck in his cell re-evaluating his life as a party activist, and the crimes he really did commit in his ideology鈥檚 name - is not only an aging Bolshevik but also a former prisoner of Nazi Germany, who had previously been arrested while on a mission in the murky world of the Communist underground. Now he finds himself arrested again, and through his old friend Ivanov - now an interrogator -is persuaded to confess to a series of questionable crimes against his own. While Ivanov is seen as a cold and distrustful person, he stills makes a genuine attempt to save his friend from the death penalty. It's only when the harder, more brutal interrogator Gletkin enters the scene, that the closer examination of Rubashov highlights that his agreed last service to the party confession was more to do with the eye-stinging bright lights and exhausted sleep deprived state of mind that anything else. Told with horrifying realism, this compelling work drills home what life was really like for millions stuck under repressive rule, and how the Party began to consume its own. While there is nothing wrong with the dialogue - which feels genuine in terms of time and place - it was the tension driven internal monologues that truly stuck in my mind. Apparently one of Orwell's faves - now I can see why.
November 27, 2022
"We do not find it so hard to lie. We do not find it that hard to kill. To admit that we have killed for a lie can be much harder."
This observation of human psychology applies to the protagonist of this story, comrade Rubashov. He is an Old Bolshevik, a genuine believer in the ideas of Communism and the final victory of the revolution.
The book takes us to The Soviet Union under Stalin, to the times when the notorious Moscow trials against prominent communists were in full swing. Those trials were open to the public and even foreign journalists were allowed. Many could not understand why those respected old Bolsheviks were making harrowing confessions. Were they tortured, blackmailed, or threatened another way? They might be afraid for their family members. Were they drugged? Perhaps disguised actors played the role of the defendants.
Among those who were perplexed and wanted to know the explanations for their conduct was the author. By writing this story and inventing a fictional character, he attempted to offer his interpretation of the reasons why some of the accused Bolsheviks agreed to expose themselves to humiliation and disgrace.
We are invited to examine the conscience of the Old Bolshevik during the darkest times of his life. After being arrested, he is placed in solitary confinement. He knows too well what is to come. In his single cell, he glances back on his eventful life.
Rubashov spent many years serving the revolutionary ideals. On this path, he betrayed those who trusted him. He even sacrificed the woman with whom he had a relationship only to save himself and continue to be useful to the Party.
Ultimately, he used his talents to drown the country in a state of terror and fear. Now he himself is arrested and accused of high treason. Like many other old Bolsheviks, he is accused of intending to murder 'Number One.' This is an obvious reference to Stalin although his name is never mentioned.
Rubashov thinks in terms of totalitarian ideas - the end justifies the means.
These words belong to one of his jailors. Rubashov has very few arguments to fend them off.
He faces a moral dilemma. He has been brought to the situation when he must decide between two options. He may comply, say what the Party wants him to be saying, or he may refuse to 'cooperate.' The second choice would mean admitting that almost all his life was a fraud. That might be too much to swallow.
The reason he casts aside the principles of human ethics has always been the infallibility of the Party. It had to have been true and has to remain true. He could not be wrong, could he?
Now there is no way back for him. Ironically, if Rubashov wants to stay in the game, he needs to admit that the absurd criminal charges against him are true.
To sum up, Koestler probes into the nature of totalitarianism and human behavior under extreme conditions. The writing is dense but engaging.
This observation of human psychology applies to the protagonist of this story, comrade Rubashov. He is an Old Bolshevik, a genuine believer in the ideas of Communism and the final victory of the revolution.
The book takes us to The Soviet Union under Stalin, to the times when the notorious Moscow trials against prominent communists were in full swing. Those trials were open to the public and even foreign journalists were allowed. Many could not understand why those respected old Bolsheviks were making harrowing confessions. Were they tortured, blackmailed, or threatened another way? They might be afraid for their family members. Were they drugged? Perhaps disguised actors played the role of the defendants.
Among those who were perplexed and wanted to know the explanations for their conduct was the author. By writing this story and inventing a fictional character, he attempted to offer his interpretation of the reasons why some of the accused Bolsheviks agreed to expose themselves to humiliation and disgrace.
We are invited to examine the conscience of the Old Bolshevik during the darkest times of his life. After being arrested, he is placed in solitary confinement. He knows too well what is to come. In his single cell, he glances back on his eventful life.
Rubashov spent many years serving the revolutionary ideals. On this path, he betrayed those who trusted him. He even sacrificed the woman with whom he had a relationship only to save himself and continue to be useful to the Party.
Ultimately, he used his talents to drown the country in a state of terror and fear. Now he himself is arrested and accused of high treason. Like many other old Bolsheviks, he is accused of intending to murder 'Number One.' This is an obvious reference to Stalin although his name is never mentioned.
Rubashov thinks in terms of totalitarian ideas - the end justifies the means.
The principle that the end justifies the means is and remains the only rule of political ethics; anything else is just vague chatter and melts away between one鈥檚 fingers.
These words belong to one of his jailors. Rubashov has very few arguments to fend them off.
He faces a moral dilemma. He has been brought to the situation when he must decide between two options. He may comply, say what the Party wants him to be saying, or he may refuse to 'cooperate.' The second choice would mean admitting that almost all his life was a fraud. That might be too much to swallow.
The reason he casts aside the principles of human ethics has always been the infallibility of the Party. It had to have been true and has to remain true. He could not be wrong, could he?
Now there is no way back for him. Ironically, if Rubashov wants to stay in the game, he needs to admit that the absurd criminal charges against him are true.
They were too deeply entangled in their own past, caught in the web they had spun themselves, according to the laws of their own twisted ethics and twisted logic; they were all guilty, although not of those deeds of which they accused themselves.
To sum up, Koestler probes into the nature of totalitarianism and human behavior under extreme conditions. The writing is dense but engaging.
January 15, 2025
"If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him" - Cardinal Richelieu. Nicholas Rubashov is about to find out that sometimes it doesn't even take six lines...today it is enough to just put something out on social media...and you have a new kind of darkness.
May 9, 2018
Darkness at Noon is a haunting picture of life in the darkest era of Stalinist Russia inside a political prison. The protagonist is Rubashov, an Old Bolshevik who is arrested and tried for treason by the government that he helped create. Vividly realistic, Koestler paints the life of Rubashov in his prison cell, his wall-tapping conversations with other inmates, his memories of life outside and some of the crimes he committed and the rationalizations for them, as well as his confrontation with his jailers - the ill-fated former friend Ivanov, and the brutish and violent neanderthal Gletkin of the starched sleeves and "harsh" methods. The story moves rather quickly and the reader is drawn into the story almost immediately with the difficulty in positioning with respect to Rubashov - he is a victim of an injustice and we want to feel sorry for him and yet he himself has innocent blood on his hands, lots of blood from people he threw overboard in the system (knowing it meant the victims' certain death so he is also repulsive. This ambiguity makes the book an engaging read cover to cover.
As many countries shift towards authoritarian regimes, this is a timely book to read about the harsh realities for those who are not elites and even those elites who fall out of favor politically and are flattened by the machine of the state. A must.
As many countries shift towards authoritarian regimes, this is a timely book to read about the harsh realities for those who are not elites and even those elites who fall out of favor politically and are flattened by the machine of the state. A must.
December 22, 2008
Oh, how I do love those Russians! Plus I'm hoping reading this will make me feel better about my own life, which lately feels like a grim, freezing Stalinist dystopia of gray hopeless days. It could be worse, right?
-----
I've got a lot of work to do tonight, and somehow I thought this would be an excellent time to go back and review Darkness at Noon. MUCH bigger priority than getting work done, wouldn't you say....?
Well, so, okay, this book was a little bit bleak. Yeah, not the feel-good date novel of the year, not this one! Darkness at Noon conveys the brutality and claustrophobia of the prison cell and interrogation room, and you kind of do feel like you're there, toothache and hunger and all, and okay let's be honest: it isn't much fun.
This story, such as it is, covers the madcap adventures of one Mr. Rubashov, a revolutionary who is in the process of being purged by the vaguely Stalinesque "Number One," leader of the Party that Rubashov helped to create. Now, if you think this sounds reminiscent of the delightful 1960s television show The Prisoner, think again! Actually, I bet whoever dreamed up The Prisoner had read this book a few times....But don't get excited. There are no bicycles, womb chairs, or hot mod girls in striped shirts here. There is only the cell, and the Party, and Rubashov's thoughts -- oh, and his pince-nez, and the tapping guy next door, and a few tortured memories.... but really there's pretty much only Rubashov, and the Party.
This was a helpful book for a girl who grew up in Berkeley, California, where they put red diapers on their babies and give the children dolls to play with (Barbie's considered counter-revolutionary). As a good homegrown lefty, I've always been a bit baffled by the Red Scare, and why exactly people get soooooo hysterical about communism. I mean, obviously I understand why people get so freaked out about Stalin, but I mean like communism and all that sort of thing more generally.... and this book did give me a better sense of what that's about. I think I do get a bit more what it is that freaky people like Ayn Rand or whoever are reacting against: it's this idea of subordinating one's self -- in this book, the first-person singular pronoun is called a "grammatical fiction" -- in service of a presumed "greater good," and it's about the deeply unpleasant places one arrives at in following that line of thought to its logical conclusion.
I didn't love this book, but I thought it was successful at conveying this idea well through the form of the novel. The reader is in Rubashov's head -- truly stuck just with him and his thoughts while he sits in solitary confinement awaiting his torture and death -- and what works well here is that disorienting experience of occupying the person of an individual who's in denial of his and everyone else's own individual personhood. Koestler's really emphasized the individuality and humanity of all the book's characters -- even minor ones -- in a way that makes them each distinctive and memorable, and this heightens the sense that there is something seriously wrong with Rubashov's world view. You get (or I got) the eerie feeling of this empty character who's hollowed himself out into a sort of vessel for the Party, but who still retains some sense of individual humanity he suddenly experiences while confronting death. Then I think that there's some trick there on the reader when this soulless, unsympathetic character begins experiencing cognitive dissonance in confronting his own sense of individual humanity, and the reader sort of gets sucked along after him, even if we started out ahead.... at least, that's kind of what happened to me.
On the one hand, this book is agitprop, and on the other, it's a pretty decent novel.... but really there aren't two hands, or if there are, they're cuffed together, or intertwined or something. I mean, there really isn't a novel here without the political stuff, and I sort of feel like I took two main things away from this. First, Darkness at Noon is not just about Stalin but is a specific critique of the left which says that at its extreme, this political philosophy crushes the individual in service of Humanity. Okay, so this is obvious, overly rehearsed stuff, as is its counterpart that the right's extreme crushes Humanity in service of the individual. Blah blah blah blah, who cares, right? I mean, I do. But it's not news.
Though I did benefit from and appreciate the anti-communist perspective, what I ultimately took away from this was beyond the narcissism of left/right differences. When you turn out the lights, those colors and distinctions go away, and then there you are, in a dark cell. Torture and murder by the state certainly didn't start with Stalin or end with -- ahem -- any recent administrations, and personally if I were arrested and tortured, I wouldn't be too overly concerned with the political nuances of the state doing it. I take Darkness at Noon to be saying, on some level, that the state is just scary. Politics is dangerous, because it leads to this construction of "ends" and "means," and that just doesn't usually go anywhere good. I mean, therein lies the road to extraordinary rendition via unmarked planes to Syria or whatever.... and a lotta other real icky stuff.
This book got me thinking about a troubling phenomenon I've always been stuck on, which is how so many activists and such with lovely leftist politics (I don't really know any right-wing activists, so I can't speak on that) very often treat the individuals in their lives like total shit. I mean, clearly not all, but enough to be noticeable, and I've always really wondered about that. My difficulty dealing with really political people on a personal level is one major reason why I'm not more politically active myself, and this book fed into my bias about that. Can most people only really focus on either the individual in the foreground or humanity in the background? Do we lack the lens to see both clearly at the same time? I think Koestler's saying people can't, or at least, people can't in a totalitarian communist state, which is perhaps not a point that needs much belaboring.
Anyway, this was a pretty good book, and I'm glad that I read it. While reading Kiss of the Spider Woman afterwards, I couldn't stop drawing parallels between Valentin and Rubashov, and thinking about how much happier Rubashov could have been if only they'd given him a gay cinophile for a cellmate.... Alas, it was not to be.
By the way, apparently Bill Clinton commented during the whole Lewinsky shitshow that he felt like Rubashov in Darkness at Noon, which to me seems like a very shocking and self-indicting statement, considering the details of the novel ( a little article about that)
-----
I've got a lot of work to do tonight, and somehow I thought this would be an excellent time to go back and review Darkness at Noon. MUCH bigger priority than getting work done, wouldn't you say....?
Well, so, okay, this book was a little bit bleak. Yeah, not the feel-good date novel of the year, not this one! Darkness at Noon conveys the brutality and claustrophobia of the prison cell and interrogation room, and you kind of do feel like you're there, toothache and hunger and all, and okay let's be honest: it isn't much fun.
This story, such as it is, covers the madcap adventures of one Mr. Rubashov, a revolutionary who is in the process of being purged by the vaguely Stalinesque "Number One," leader of the Party that Rubashov helped to create. Now, if you think this sounds reminiscent of the delightful 1960s television show The Prisoner, think again! Actually, I bet whoever dreamed up The Prisoner had read this book a few times....But don't get excited. There are no bicycles, womb chairs, or hot mod girls in striped shirts here. There is only the cell, and the Party, and Rubashov's thoughts -- oh, and his pince-nez, and the tapping guy next door, and a few tortured memories.... but really there's pretty much only Rubashov, and the Party.
This was a helpful book for a girl who grew up in Berkeley, California, where they put red diapers on their babies and give the children dolls to play with (Barbie's considered counter-revolutionary). As a good homegrown lefty, I've always been a bit baffled by the Red Scare, and why exactly people get soooooo hysterical about communism. I mean, obviously I understand why people get so freaked out about Stalin, but I mean like communism and all that sort of thing more generally.... and this book did give me a better sense of what that's about. I think I do get a bit more what it is that freaky people like Ayn Rand or whoever are reacting against: it's this idea of subordinating one's self -- in this book, the first-person singular pronoun is called a "grammatical fiction" -- in service of a presumed "greater good," and it's about the deeply unpleasant places one arrives at in following that line of thought to its logical conclusion.
I didn't love this book, but I thought it was successful at conveying this idea well through the form of the novel. The reader is in Rubashov's head -- truly stuck just with him and his thoughts while he sits in solitary confinement awaiting his torture and death -- and what works well here is that disorienting experience of occupying the person of an individual who's in denial of his and everyone else's own individual personhood. Koestler's really emphasized the individuality and humanity of all the book's characters -- even minor ones -- in a way that makes them each distinctive and memorable, and this heightens the sense that there is something seriously wrong with Rubashov's world view. You get (or I got) the eerie feeling of this empty character who's hollowed himself out into a sort of vessel for the Party, but who still retains some sense of individual humanity he suddenly experiences while confronting death. Then I think that there's some trick there on the reader when this soulless, unsympathetic character begins experiencing cognitive dissonance in confronting his own sense of individual humanity, and the reader sort of gets sucked along after him, even if we started out ahead.... at least, that's kind of what happened to me.
On the one hand, this book is agitprop, and on the other, it's a pretty decent novel.... but really there aren't two hands, or if there are, they're cuffed together, or intertwined or something. I mean, there really isn't a novel here without the political stuff, and I sort of feel like I took two main things away from this. First, Darkness at Noon is not just about Stalin but is a specific critique of the left which says that at its extreme, this political philosophy crushes the individual in service of Humanity. Okay, so this is obvious, overly rehearsed stuff, as is its counterpart that the right's extreme crushes Humanity in service of the individual. Blah blah blah blah, who cares, right? I mean, I do. But it's not news.
Though I did benefit from and appreciate the anti-communist perspective, what I ultimately took away from this was beyond the narcissism of left/right differences. When you turn out the lights, those colors and distinctions go away, and then there you are, in a dark cell. Torture and murder by the state certainly didn't start with Stalin or end with -- ahem -- any recent administrations, and personally if I were arrested and tortured, I wouldn't be too overly concerned with the political nuances of the state doing it. I take Darkness at Noon to be saying, on some level, that the state is just scary. Politics is dangerous, because it leads to this construction of "ends" and "means," and that just doesn't usually go anywhere good. I mean, therein lies the road to extraordinary rendition via unmarked planes to Syria or whatever.... and a lotta other real icky stuff.
This book got me thinking about a troubling phenomenon I've always been stuck on, which is how so many activists and such with lovely leftist politics (I don't really know any right-wing activists, so I can't speak on that) very often treat the individuals in their lives like total shit. I mean, clearly not all, but enough to be noticeable, and I've always really wondered about that. My difficulty dealing with really political people on a personal level is one major reason why I'm not more politically active myself, and this book fed into my bias about that. Can most people only really focus on either the individual in the foreground or humanity in the background? Do we lack the lens to see both clearly at the same time? I think Koestler's saying people can't, or at least, people can't in a totalitarian communist state, which is perhaps not a point that needs much belaboring.
Anyway, this was a pretty good book, and I'm glad that I read it. While reading Kiss of the Spider Woman afterwards, I couldn't stop drawing parallels between Valentin and Rubashov, and thinking about how much happier Rubashov could have been if only they'd given him a gay cinophile for a cellmate.... Alas, it was not to be.
By the way, apparently Bill Clinton commented during the whole Lewinsky shitshow that he felt like Rubashov in Darkness at Noon, which to me seems like a very shocking and self-indicting statement, considering the details of the novel ( a little article about that)
August 17, 2023
賵賯鬲蹖 丨乇賮 丕夭 乇賲丕賳賽 爻蹖丕爻蹖 亘賴 賲蹖丕賳 賲蹖 丌蹖丿 賳丕禺賵丿丌诏丕賴 匕賴賳蹖鬲 賴賲诏蹖 亘賴 爻賲鬲 丕賵乇賵賽賱 讴卮蹖丿賴 賲蹖 卮賵丿貙 丨丕賱 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳 賳丕賲 丌乇鬲賵乇 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 乇丕 賴賲 丿乇 讴賳丕乇 丕賵 亘賴 蹖丕丿 丌賵乇丿.
賴丿賮 賵爻蹖賱賴 乇丕 鬲賵噩蹖賴 賲蹖 讴賳丿貙 丕蹖賳 噩賲賱賴 亘賴 讴乇丕鬲 丿乇 噩丕蹖 噩丕蹖 讴鬲丕亘 鬲讴乇丕乇 卮丿賴貙 蹖毓賳蹖 乇爻蹖丿賳 亘賴 賲賯氐賵丿 亘賴 賴乇 賯蹖賲鬲蹖貙 丕乇噩毓蹖鬲 丿丕卮鬲賳 氐賱丕丨 噩賲毓 亘乇 賮乇丿貙 亘蹖 丕乇夭卮 亘賵丿賳 賮乇丿蹖鬲 丿乇 賴乇 賲賳氐亘蹖 亘賴 噩夭 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖 蹖讴貙 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴蹖 讴賴 丨鬲蹖 賳丕賲蹖 丕夭 丕賵 亘乇丿賴 賳賲蹖 卮賵丿 賵賱蹖 賴賲賴 賲蹖 丿丕賳蹖賲 讴賴 丕賵 讴蹖爻鬲貙 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳.
丕丨鬲賲丕賱丕 亘丕 丿賵乇丕賳 鬲氐賵蹖賴 賵 倬丕讴爻丕夭蹖 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳 丌卮賳丕蹖蹖 丿丕乇蹖丿貙 亘乇賴賴鈥屫й� 讴賴 賳馗乇 賴乇 卮禺氐蹖 丿乇賵賳 丨讴賵賲鬲 蹖丕 禺丕乇噩 丕夭 丨讴賵賲鬲 亘丕 賴乇 賳馗乇 賵 毓賯蹖丿賴 丕蹖 丕夭 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴 丿乇 鬲賳丕賯囟 亘賵丿貙 丌賳 賮乇丿 賲丨讴賵賲 亘賴 丨匕賮 亘賵丿貙 丨匕賮 亘賴 趩賴 卮讴賱責 丕毓丿丕賲.
乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 乇丕 卮丕蹖丿 亘鬲賵丕賳 卮賲丕乇賴 丿賵 賳丕賲蹖丿 蹖毓賳蹖 亘毓丿 丕夭 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳貙 丕賵 丿乇 鬲賲丕賲蹖 毓讴爻賴丕蹖 賯丕亘 卮丿賴 蹖 乇賵蹖 丿蹖賵丕乇 丿乇 讴賳丕乇 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳 賯乇丕乇 丿丕乇丿貙 丕賵爻鬲 讴賴 丕噩乇丕 讴賳賳丿賴 賮乇丕賲蹖賳 賵 爻蹖丕爻鬲 賴丕蹖 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖 蹖讴 丕爻鬲. 丕夭 蹖讴 噩丕蹖蹖 亘賴 亘毓丿 鬲乇爻 丕夭 亘夭乇诏蹖 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 亘乇 鬲賳 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴 賲蹖 丕賮鬲丿貙 丕賵 乇丕 禺胤乇蹖 噩丿蹖 亘乇丕蹖 禺賵丿 賲蹖 丿丕賳丿 賵 丨丕賱 丕賵爻鬲 讴賴 亘丕蹖丿 丨匕賮 卮賵丿.
讴鬲丕亘 爻賴 乇賵丕蹖鬲 丿丕乇丿貙 蹖讴蹖 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 賴丕蹖 丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳貙 蹖讴蹖 禺丕胤乇丕鬲 诏匕卮鬲賴 丕蹖 讴賴 亘乇 賵噩丿丕賳 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 爻賳诏蹖賳蹖 賲蹖 讴賳丿 賵 丿蹖诏乇蹖 賳賵卮鬲賴 賴丕蹖 乇賵夭丕賳賴 蹖 丕賵 丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳.
亘丕夭倬乇爻 讴爻蹖 丕爻鬲 丕夭 賲讴鬲亘 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳貙 丕夭 夭蹖乇 丿爻鬲丕賳賽 賴賲蹖賳 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮. 賵 亘丕夭 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 丕蹖 亘丕 蹖讴 卮賵讴 賳卮丕賳 賲蹖 丿賴丿 丕賲賳蹖鬲蹖 亘乇丕蹖 賴蹖趩 讴爻 賵噩賵丿 賳丿丕乇丿貙 趩賴 卮賲丕乇賴 丿賵貙 趩賴 亘丕夭倬乇爻貙 趩賴 賲賴賳丿爻 讴卮丕賵乇夭蹖 蹖丕 趩賴 胤乇丕丨 夭蹖乇 丿乇蹖丕蹖蹖 賵 趩賴 丨夭亘 鬲賵丿賴. 毓賯蹖丿賴 賯丕賱亘 丕蹖賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 鬲丿丕賵賲 賵 孬亘丕鬲 丨夭亘 亘乇 賴乇 趩蹖夭蹖 丕賵賱丕爻鬲貙 亘賴 賴賲蹖賳 丿賱蹖賱 丕賵 丿乇 亘乇丕亘乇 鬲賵胤卅賴 賴丕 丕蹖爻鬲丕丿诏蹖 賳賲蹖 讴賳丿 賵 賴賲賴 丌賳 賴丕 乇丕 賲蹖 倬匕蹖乇丿 丨鬲蹖 丕毓賲丕賱蹖 乇丕 賴賲 讴賴 丕賳噩丕賲 賳丿丕丿賴 诏乇丿賳 賲蹖 诏蹖乇丿 鬲丕 卮讴 賵 卮亘賴賴 丕蹖 丿乇 丿賱 丿蹖诏乇 丕毓囟丕蹖 丨夭亘 亘賴 賵噩賵丿 賳蹖丕蹖丿 讴賴 丿乇 賳鬲蹖噩賴 亘丕毓孬 囟毓賮 賵 诏爻爻鬲诏蹖 丿乇 丨夭亘 賵 丕賮乇丕丿 卮賵丿.
卮丕蹖丿 賳賴丕蹖鬲丕 亘乇丕蹖 丨購爻賳 禺鬲丕賲 丕蹖賳 噩賲賱賴 丕夭 讴鬲丕亘 亘蹖丕賳诏乇 讴賱蹖鬲蹖 亘丕卮丿 丕夭 丌賳趩賴 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 乇禺 賲蹖 丿賴丿:
"賴賲賴 趩蹖夭 乇丕 亘丕 丕蹖賳 丕氐賱 讴賴 亘丕蹖丿 爻賳诏乇 丨賮馗 卮賵丿 鬲賵噩蹖賴 賲蹖 讴乇丿. 丕賲丕 丿乇賵賳 丕蹖賳 爻賳诏乇 趩賴 卮讴賱蹖 丿丕卮鬲責 亘賴卮鬲 乇丕 賳賳蹖 鬲賵丕賳 亘丕 亘鬲賳 爻丕禺鬲. 爻賳诏乇 賲蹖 亘丕蹖爻鬲蹖 丨賮馗 賲蹖 卮丿 丕賲丕 丿蹖诏乇 賳賴 倬蹖丕賲蹖 亘乇丕蹖 丿賳蹖丕 丿丕卮鬲 賵 賳賴 丕賱诏賵蹖蹖 亘乇丕蹖 噩賴丕賳 亘賴 丨爻丕亘 賲蹖 丌賲丿.
賴丿賮 賵爻蹖賱賴 乇丕 鬲賵噩蹖賴 賲蹖 讴賳丿貙 丕蹖賳 噩賲賱賴 亘賴 讴乇丕鬲 丿乇 噩丕蹖 噩丕蹖 讴鬲丕亘 鬲讴乇丕乇 卮丿賴貙 蹖毓賳蹖 乇爻蹖丿賳 亘賴 賲賯氐賵丿 亘賴 賴乇 賯蹖賲鬲蹖貙 丕乇噩毓蹖鬲 丿丕卮鬲賳 氐賱丕丨 噩賲毓 亘乇 賮乇丿貙 亘蹖 丕乇夭卮 亘賵丿賳 賮乇丿蹖鬲 丿乇 賴乇 賲賳氐亘蹖 亘賴 噩夭 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖 蹖讴貙 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴蹖 讴賴 丨鬲蹖 賳丕賲蹖 丕夭 丕賵 亘乇丿賴 賳賲蹖 卮賵丿 賵賱蹖 賴賲賴 賲蹖 丿丕賳蹖賲 讴賴 丕賵 讴蹖爻鬲貙 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳.
丕丨鬲賲丕賱丕 亘丕 丿賵乇丕賳 鬲氐賵蹖賴 賵 倬丕讴爻丕夭蹖 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳 丌卮賳丕蹖蹖 丿丕乇蹖丿貙 亘乇賴賴鈥屫й� 讴賴 賳馗乇 賴乇 卮禺氐蹖 丿乇賵賳 丨讴賵賲鬲 蹖丕 禺丕乇噩 丕夭 丨讴賵賲鬲 亘丕 賴乇 賳馗乇 賵 毓賯蹖丿賴 丕蹖 丕夭 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴 丿乇 鬲賳丕賯囟 亘賵丿貙 丌賳 賮乇丿 賲丨讴賵賲 亘賴 丨匕賮 亘賵丿貙 丨匕賮 亘賴 趩賴 卮讴賱責 丕毓丿丕賲.
乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 乇丕 卮丕蹖丿 亘鬲賵丕賳 卮賲丕乇賴 丿賵 賳丕賲蹖丿 蹖毓賳蹖 亘毓丿 丕夭 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳貙 丕賵 丿乇 鬲賲丕賲蹖 毓讴爻賴丕蹖 賯丕亘 卮丿賴 蹖 乇賵蹖 丿蹖賵丕乇 丿乇 讴賳丕乇 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳 賯乇丕乇 丿丕乇丿貙 丕賵爻鬲 讴賴 丕噩乇丕 讴賳賳丿賴 賮乇丕賲蹖賳 賵 爻蹖丕爻鬲 賴丕蹖 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖 蹖讴 丕爻鬲. 丕夭 蹖讴 噩丕蹖蹖 亘賴 亘毓丿 鬲乇爻 丕夭 亘夭乇诏蹖 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 亘乇 鬲賳 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴 賲蹖 丕賮鬲丿貙 丕賵 乇丕 禺胤乇蹖 噩丿蹖 亘乇丕蹖 禺賵丿 賲蹖 丿丕賳丿 賵 丨丕賱 丕賵爻鬲 讴賴 亘丕蹖丿 丨匕賮 卮賵丿.
讴鬲丕亘 爻賴 乇賵丕蹖鬲 丿丕乇丿貙 蹖讴蹖 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 賴丕蹖 丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳貙 蹖讴蹖 禺丕胤乇丕鬲 诏匕卮鬲賴 丕蹖 讴賴 亘乇 賵噩丿丕賳 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 爻賳诏蹖賳蹖 賲蹖 讴賳丿 賵 丿蹖诏乇蹖 賳賵卮鬲賴 賴丕蹖 乇賵夭丕賳賴 蹖 丕賵 丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳.
亘丕夭倬乇爻 讴爻蹖 丕爻鬲 丕夭 賲讴鬲亘 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳貙 丕夭 夭蹖乇 丿爻鬲丕賳賽 賴賲蹖賳 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮. 賵 亘丕夭 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 丕蹖 亘丕 蹖讴 卮賵讴 賳卮丕賳 賲蹖 丿賴丿 丕賲賳蹖鬲蹖 亘乇丕蹖 賴蹖趩 讴爻 賵噩賵丿 賳丿丕乇丿貙 趩賴 卮賲丕乇賴 丿賵貙 趩賴 亘丕夭倬乇爻貙 趩賴 賲賴賳丿爻 讴卮丕賵乇夭蹖 蹖丕 趩賴 胤乇丕丨 夭蹖乇 丿乇蹖丕蹖蹖 賵 趩賴 丨夭亘 鬲賵丿賴. 毓賯蹖丿賴 賯丕賱亘 丕蹖賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 鬲丿丕賵賲 賵 孬亘丕鬲 丨夭亘 亘乇 賴乇 趩蹖夭蹖 丕賵賱丕爻鬲貙 亘賴 賴賲蹖賳 丿賱蹖賱 丕賵 丿乇 亘乇丕亘乇 鬲賵胤卅賴 賴丕 丕蹖爻鬲丕丿诏蹖 賳賲蹖 讴賳丿 賵 賴賲賴 丌賳 賴丕 乇丕 賲蹖 倬匕蹖乇丿 丨鬲蹖 丕毓賲丕賱蹖 乇丕 賴賲 讴賴 丕賳噩丕賲 賳丿丕丿賴 诏乇丿賳 賲蹖 诏蹖乇丿 鬲丕 卮讴 賵 卮亘賴賴 丕蹖 丿乇 丿賱 丿蹖诏乇 丕毓囟丕蹖 丨夭亘 亘賴 賵噩賵丿 賳蹖丕蹖丿 讴賴 丿乇 賳鬲蹖噩賴 亘丕毓孬 囟毓賮 賵 诏爻爻鬲诏蹖 丿乇 丨夭亘 賵 丕賮乇丕丿 卮賵丿.
卮丕蹖丿 賳賴丕蹖鬲丕 亘乇丕蹖 丨購爻賳 禺鬲丕賲 丕蹖賳 噩賲賱賴 丕夭 讴鬲丕亘 亘蹖丕賳诏乇 讴賱蹖鬲蹖 亘丕卮丿 丕夭 丌賳趩賴 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 乇禺 賲蹖 丿賴丿:
"賴賲賴 趩蹖夭 乇丕 亘丕 丕蹖賳 丕氐賱 讴賴 亘丕蹖丿 爻賳诏乇 丨賮馗 卮賵丿 鬲賵噩蹖賴 賲蹖 讴乇丿. 丕賲丕 丿乇賵賳 丕蹖賳 爻賳诏乇 趩賴 卮讴賱蹖 丿丕卮鬲責 亘賴卮鬲 乇丕 賳賳蹖 鬲賵丕賳 亘丕 亘鬲賳 爻丕禺鬲. 爻賳诏乇 賲蹖 亘丕蹖爻鬲蹖 丨賮馗 賲蹖 卮丿 丕賲丕 丿蹖诏乇 賳賴 倬蹖丕賲蹖 亘乇丕蹖 丿賳蹖丕 丿丕卮鬲 賵 賳賴 丕賱诏賵蹖蹖 亘乇丕蹖 噩賴丕賳 亘賴 丨爻丕亘 賲蹖 丌賲丿.
January 29, 2012
Definitely one of the greatest novels of the 20th century. I am embarrassed, frankly, that I'm 37 and reading this only now. This is a work I should have read in high school, then in college, then again almost every year since. Standing guard silently behind greats like Orwell and Hitchens is Arthur Koestler. Rubashov is one of the best-realized characters and Darkness at Noon is a near-perfect novel. Dostoevsky would have killed Koestler with an axe, and Tolstoy would have pushed his ass in front of a train just to have stolen this one piece.
November 20, 2021
I inherited a copy of this book from my dad, but it had sat on my shelves for many years, mainly because I felt I had read enough about the Stalinist show trials and the Great Terror. I was prompted to read the book by a review from my GR Friend Lea, the quality of which I can鈥檛 come close to. I鈥檒l post a link to Lea鈥檚 review at the foot of this one.
Darkness at Noon completely deserves its reputation as a 20th century classic. The main character, Rubashov, is a famous old Bolshevik, one of the leaders of the Revolution, and a hero of the Civil War. The novel is the story of his arrest and interrogation, and his reflections on the society he helped to create.
When Rubashov is first arrested, his neighbour in the adjacent cell, whom we only know as 鈥�402鈥�, taps a message to him using prisoners鈥� code. He is an actual counter-revolutionary and, on learning Rubashov鈥檚 identity, sends him the message 鈥淪erves you right鈥�. He follows it up with 鈥淭he Wolves Devour Each Other鈥� and in fact Rubashov has spent his life as a wolf. Throughout it he has believed that everything is subordinate to the creation of the utopia that has been his dream, and he 鈥渂ecomes a slaughterer to abolish slaughtering.鈥� Any individual who gets in the way must be crushed. There can be no room for sentiment in the fight to protect the sacred revolution, and Rubashov has never shown any - he has betrayed friends and colleagues many times. The end justifies the means - any means.
Now, in the novel, it is Rubashov himself who finds himself in the role of the individual who must be sacrificed for the good of the cause. In his interrogations his own writings are quoted back to him, and he recognises the force of the arguments they use. One of his principal interrogators is a younger man, brought up within the new morality that Rubashov and his comrades have created. He is utterly without sentiment.
Koestler creates memorable characters out of Rubashov鈥檚 cell neighbours. 鈥�402鈥� is an ever present but in the other cell 鈥� 406 鈥� several different prisoners come and go. The situation of one man 鈥� a foreign communist - was both touching and believable. Although this novel was written in 1940, there鈥檚 another prisoner who has been jailed over an issue that鈥檚 very topical! I鈥檒l avoid saying more for fear of spoilers.
Much of the novel involves philosophical debate between Rubashov and his captors. Other parts are very dramatic. I thought the ending was superb, absolutely superb.
Link to Lea鈥檚 review:
/review/show...
Darkness at Noon completely deserves its reputation as a 20th century classic. The main character, Rubashov, is a famous old Bolshevik, one of the leaders of the Revolution, and a hero of the Civil War. The novel is the story of his arrest and interrogation, and his reflections on the society he helped to create.
When Rubashov is first arrested, his neighbour in the adjacent cell, whom we only know as 鈥�402鈥�, taps a message to him using prisoners鈥� code. He is an actual counter-revolutionary and, on learning Rubashov鈥檚 identity, sends him the message 鈥淪erves you right鈥�. He follows it up with 鈥淭he Wolves Devour Each Other鈥� and in fact Rubashov has spent his life as a wolf. Throughout it he has believed that everything is subordinate to the creation of the utopia that has been his dream, and he 鈥渂ecomes a slaughterer to abolish slaughtering.鈥� Any individual who gets in the way must be crushed. There can be no room for sentiment in the fight to protect the sacred revolution, and Rubashov has never shown any - he has betrayed friends and colleagues many times. The end justifies the means - any means.
Now, in the novel, it is Rubashov himself who finds himself in the role of the individual who must be sacrificed for the good of the cause. In his interrogations his own writings are quoted back to him, and he recognises the force of the arguments they use. One of his principal interrogators is a younger man, brought up within the new morality that Rubashov and his comrades have created. He is utterly without sentiment.
Koestler creates memorable characters out of Rubashov鈥檚 cell neighbours. 鈥�402鈥� is an ever present but in the other cell 鈥� 406 鈥� several different prisoners come and go. The situation of one man 鈥� a foreign communist - was both touching and believable. Although this novel was written in 1940, there鈥檚 another prisoner who has been jailed over an issue that鈥檚 very topical! I鈥檒l avoid saying more for fear of spoilers.
Much of the novel involves philosophical debate between Rubashov and his captors. Other parts are very dramatic. I thought the ending was superb, absolutely superb.
Link to Lea鈥檚 review:
/review/show...
August 21, 2013
An Announcement Concerning the Class Traitor Not
After a scrupulously fair trial in the Amazon People's Court, Comrade Not has been found guilty of posting . To protect other comrades from the possibility of being seduced into thought-crime, the review has now been removed from the community area. Amazon has also offered Not a course of reeducation. Their representatives arrived promptly at 4 am yesterday morning, and courteously but firmly helped Not to understand her dialectical misconceptions.
Since her reeducation course, Comrade Not's behavior has been much improved. She has not written any more ideologically dubious posts, but sits in front of the TV, watching Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire and weeping quietly.
It is truly a privilege to count myself a member of the Glorious Amazon Online Republic of 欧宝娱乐.
After a scrupulously fair trial in the Amazon People's Court, Comrade Not has been found guilty of posting . To protect other comrades from the possibility of being seduced into thought-crime, the review has now been removed from the community area. Amazon has also offered Not a course of reeducation. Their representatives arrived promptly at 4 am yesterday morning, and courteously but firmly helped Not to understand her dialectical misconceptions.
Since her reeducation course, Comrade Not's behavior has been much improved. She has not written any more ideologically dubious posts, but sits in front of the TV, watching Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire and weeping quietly.
It is truly a privilege to count myself a member of the Glorious Amazon Online Republic of 欧宝娱乐.
January 2, 2018
丨夭亘 乇丕 乇賴丕 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 亘賱賴 賵賱蹖 讴賲賵賳蹖爻賲 乇丕 賳賴. 賳丕賲賴鈥屰� 爻乇诏卮丕丿賴鈥屰� 讴賳丕乇賴鈥屭屫臂� 丕夭 丨夭亘 乇丕 賴賲 讴賴 賲蹖鈥屬嗁堐屫池� 亘丕夭 賴賲 禺賵丿 乇丕 讴賲賵賳蹖爻鬲 賲蹖鈥屫з嗀�. 亘毓丿賴丕 賴賲 丕蹖賳 乇丕 亘丕 禺乇爻賳丿蹖 丕毓賱丕賲 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 鬲丕 丕禺乇 毓賲乇. 丿賵乇賴鈥屰� 毓囟賵蹖鬲 丿乇 丨夭亘 賳賴 亘蹖賴賵丿賴 亘賵丿賴 賵 賳賴 亘蹖鈥屫呚必� 賲鬲囟賲賳 卮賳丕禺鬲 賵 丌卮賳丕蹖蹖 亘丕 丿蹖诏乇 賲爻丕卅賱貙 孬賲乇賴 鬲毓賱賯 禺丕胤乇 倬蹖丿丕 讴乇丿賳 亘賴 丕賳爻丕賳鈥屬囏ж� 亘賴 賲丨乇賵賲蹖賳 夭賲蹖賳貙 賲胤乇賵丿蹖賳 賵 乇賵蹖 丿爻鬲 賲丕賳丿賴鈥屬囏�. 亘毓丿賴丕 丿乇 倬丕蹖丕賳 毓賲乇 亘乇 爻乇 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴鈥屫й� 讴賴 賲胤賱亘蹖 禺賱丕賮 丕蹖賳 賳賵卮鬲賴貙 丿爻鬲禺賵卮 禺卮賲蹖 丿蹖乇爻丕賱 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵 亘乇 爻乇卮 賮乇蹖丕丿 賲蹖鈥屫操嗀� "賲賳 讴賲賵賳蹖爻鬲賲貙 賲蹖鈥屬佡囐呟屫� 讴賲賵賳蹖爻鬲". 丿乇亘丕乇賴鈥屰� 賲丕乇诏乇蹖鬲 丿賵乇丕爻貙 亘乇丿丕卮鬲 丌夭丕丿 丕夭 丨賯蹖賯鬲 賵 丕賮爻丕賳賴 - 丌賱賳 賵蹖乇讴賳丿賱賴
丨丕賵蹖 丕爻倬賵蹖賱乇
馗賱賲鬲 丿乇 賳蹖賲乇賵夭貙 鬲噩爻賲 丕蹖賳 爻禺賳 賲毓乇賵賮 賮丕賳賵賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕賳賯賱丕亘 賮乇夭賳丿丕賳 禺賵丿 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫ㄙ勜关�. 丌孬丕乇 丿丕爻鬲丕賳蹖 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丿乇 賲賵乇丿 丌賳趩賴 丿乇 倬爻 倬乇丿賴鈥屰� 丌賴賳蹖賳 卮賵乇賵蹖貙 亘禺氐賵氐 丿乇 丿賴賴鈥屰� 爻蹖 胤蹖 鬲氐賮蹖賴鈥屰� 讴亘蹖乇 丨夭亘 賵 亘毓丿賴丕 丿乇 丿丕丿诏丕賴鈥屬囏й� 賲爻讴賵 乇禺 丿丕丿賴 亘賴 賳诏丕乇卮 丿乇 丌賲丿賴 丕爻鬲貙 丕賲丕 丕蹖賳 丕孬乇 讴爻鬲賱乇 丕夭 丿賵 噩賴鬲 賳爻亘鬲 亘賴 丿蹖诏乇 丌孬丕乇 丨丕卅夭 丕賴賲蹖鬲 丕爻鬲: 賳禺爻鬲 丌賳讴賴 讴爻鬲賱乇 禺賵丿 丕夭 丕毓囟丕蹖 賵賮丕丿丕乇 丨夭亘 讴賲賵賳蹖爻鬲 亘賵丿 讴賴 賲丿鬲蹖 乇丕 賴賲 丿乇 爻賱賵賱 丕賳賮乇丕丿蹖 賮丕賱丕賳跇賴丕蹖 丕爻倬丕賳蹖丕 诏匕乇丕賳丿 賵 丿賵賲 丌賳讴賴 馗賱賲鬲 丿乇 賳蹖賲乇賵夭貙 丕夭 賱丨丕馗 丕丿亘蹖 丿乇 賳賵毓 禺賵丿 卮丕賴讴丕乇蹖 亘夭乇诏 賵 亘乇丕賳诏蹖夭丕賳賳丿賴 賲丨爻賵亘 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�
乇賵亘丕卮賵賮貙 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丕氐賱蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳貙 讴賲蹖爻乇 毓丕賱蹖 禺賱賯 賵 丕夭 丕毓囟丕蹖 讴賲蹖鬲賴 賲乇讴夭蹖 丨夭亘 讴賲賵賳蹖爻鬲 卮賵乇賵蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 胤蹖 鬲氐賮蹖賴 爻蹖丕爻蹖 爻丕賱 37 卮賵乇賵蹖 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇 賵 丿乇 賳賴丕蹖鬲 胤蹖 丕毓鬲乇丕賮鈥屬囏й屰� 爻丕禺鬲诏蹖 丿乇 丿丕丿诏丕賴 毓賱賳蹖 亘賴 丕毓丿丕賲 賲丨讴賵賲 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丕夭 賱丨丕馗 夭賲丕賳蹖貙 丕夭 夭賲丕賳 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇蹖 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 丌睾丕夭 卮丿賴 賵 丿乇 賱丨馗賴鈥屰� 丕毓丿丕賲 丕賵貙 亘丕 丌禺乇蹖賳 亘丕夭丿賲 亘賴 倬丕蹖丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫必池�. 丌賳趩賴 亘賴 丕蹖賳 爻蹖乇 禺胤蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 噩匕丕亘蹖鬲 夭蹖丕丿蹖 亘禺卮蹖丿賴貙 诏匕卮鬲賴鈥屬嗁呚й屰屸€屬囏й� 倬蹖 丿乇 倬蹖 匕賴賳蹖 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 丕爻鬲 讴賴 胤蹖 丌賳 禺賵丿丿丕賵乇蹖 賵 毓匕丕亘 賵噩丿丕賳 賳丕卮蹖 丕夭 丕賯丿丕賲丕鬲 倬蹖卮蹖賳 丕賵 乇丕 鬲丕 賲乇夭 噩賳賵賳 賲蹖鈥屭┴簇з嗀�. 丕賯丿丕賲丕鬲蹖 讴賴 賲賳噩乇 亘賴 賯乇亘丕賳蹖 卮丿賳 丿賵爻鬲丕賳 賵 丌卮賳丕蹖丕賳卮 卮丿賴 賵 丕賵 丕讴賳賵賳 丿乇 爻賱賵賱 丕賳賮乇丕丿蹖 賮乇氐鬲 丕蹖賳 乇丕 蹖丕賮鬲賴 鬲丕 丕賳诏蹖夭賴鈥屬囏й� 禺賵丿 乇丕 丿乇 丌賳 丕賲賵乇 賵丕讴丕賵蹖 讴賳丿. 賵賮丕丿丕乇蹖 亘賴 丨夭亘 賵 丌乇賲丕賳鈥屬囏й� 乇丕爻鬲蹖賳卮責 蹖丕 爻丕禺鬲賳 爻倬乇 亘賱丕 丕夭 丿蹖诏乇丕賳責
爻賱賵賱 丕賳賮乇丕丿蹖 賵 鬲賳賴丕 賲丕賳丿賳 亘丕 賯丕囟蹖 爻禺鬲鈥屭屫� 賵噩丿丕賳貙 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 乇丕 丿乇 賲賵賯毓蹖鬲蹖 卮亘蹖賴 乇丕爻讴賱賳蹖讴賮 噩賳丕蹖鬲 賵 賲讴丕賮丕鬲 賯乇丕乇 賲蹖鈥屫囏�. 賲賯丕蹖爻賴鈥屰� 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 賵 乇丕爻讴賱蹖賳讴賮 丌賳趩賳丕賳 丿賵乇 丕夭 丕賳鬲馗丕乇 賵 亘蹖鈥屫必ㄘ� 賳蹖爻鬲貙 趩賳丕賳讴賴 丿乇 丿蹖丕賱賵诏蹖 賲蹖丕賳 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 賵 亘丕夭噩賵 诏賱讴鬲蹖賳 亘賴 丕蹖賳 賲賵囟賵毓 氐乇蹖丨丕 丕卮丕乇賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�
乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 诏賮鬲 丌蹖丕 乇丕爻讴賵賱賳蹖讴賵賮 丨賯 讴卮鬲賳 倬蹖乇夭賳 乇丕 丿丕卮鬲 蹖丕 賳賴責 噩賵丕賳 丕爻鬲 賵 亘丕 丕爻鬲毓丿丕丿貙 诏乇賵蹖蹖 丌夭丕丿 賳卮丿賴 丿乇 噩蹖亘 丿丕乇丿. 丌賳 夭賳 賴賲 讴丕賲賱丕 倬蹖乇 賵 丕夭 讴丕乇 丕賮鬲丕丿賴 丕爻鬲. 丕賲丕 賲毓丕丿賱賴 丿乇爻鬲 賳蹖爻鬲貙 夭蹖乇丕 丕賵賱丕 賲丨蹖胤 丕賵 乇丕 賲噩亘賵乇 亘賴 賯鬲賱 卮禺氐 丿賵賲蹖 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 讴賴 賳鬲蹖噩賴 睾蹖乇賲賳胤賯蹖 丕賯丿丕賲蹖 馗丕賴乇丕 賲賳胤賯蹖 亘賴 丨爻丕亘 賲蹖鈥屫③屫� 賵 孬丕賳蹖丕 賵賯鬲蹖 賵丕丨丿 賲丨丕爻亘賴 "丌丿賲" 亘丕卮丿貙 丿賵 丿賵 鬲丕 趩賴丕乇鬲丕 賳賲蹖鈥屫促堌�
丕蹖賵丕賳賵賮 倬丕爻禺 丿丕丿 乇丕爻讴賵賱賳蹖讴賵賮賽 鬲賵 丕亘賱賴 賵 噩賳丕蹖鬲鈥屭┴ж� 丕爻鬲貙 賳賴 亘禺丕胤乇 丕蹖賳讴賴 倬蹖乇夭賳蹖 乇丕 讴卮鬲賴 丕爻鬲貙 亘賱讴賴 趩賵賳 丕夭 爻乇 賳賮毓 卮禺氐蹖 丕蹖賳 讴丕乇 乇丕 讴乇丿賴 丕爻鬲. 丕氐賱賽 "賴丿賮 賵爻蹖賱賴 乇丕 鬲賵噩蹖賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�" 鬲賳賴丕 賯丕賳賵賳賽 賲毓鬲亘乇 丕禺賱丕賯 爻蹖丕爻蹖 丕爻鬲貙 亘丕賯蹖 賴賲賴 丨乇賮 賲賮鬲 丕爻鬲. 丕诏乇 乇丕爻讴賵賱賳蹖讴賵賮 胤亘賯 賲氐賵亘丕鬲 丨夭亘 亘乇丕蹖 噩賲毓鈥屫①堌臂� 倬賵賱 丕毓鬲氐丕亘 蹖丕 趩丕倬禺丕賳賴鈥屫й� 夭蹖乇夭賲蹖賳蹖 倬蹖乇夭賳 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屭┴簇� 賲毓丕丿賱賴 亘乇賯乇丕乇 賲蹖鈥屫簇�
丿乇 賯爻賲鬲蹖 丕夭 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 讴賴 丿乇 爻賱賲丕賳蹖 夭賳丿丕賳 賲蹖鈥屭柏必� 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 賳丕賲賴鈥屫й� 丕夭 卮禺氐蹖 賳丕卮賳丕爻 丿乇 賱亘丕爻卮 倬蹖丿丕 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 亘丕 丕蹖賳 賲囟賲賵賳 讴賴 "亘賲蹖乇 賵 丨乇賮 賳夭賳". 丕蹖賳 賳丕賲賴 丕夭 胤乇賮 讴蹖爻鬲責 蹖讴 賮乇丿 孬丕賱孬責 鬲氐賵乇 賲賳 丕蹖賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕蹖賳 賳丿丕蹖 賵噩丿丕賳 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 丕爻鬲 讴賴 賳賲賵丿 亘蹖乇賵賳蹖 倬蹖丿丕 讴乇丿賴 丕爻鬲貙 賴賲爻賵 亘丕 賴賲丕賳 氐丿丕蹖蹖 讴賴 亘丕乇賴丕 亘丕 禺賵丿卮 鬲讴乇丕乇 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�: 亘丕蹖丿 鬲賯丕氐 倬爻 丿丕丿. 丿乇 賳賴丕蹖锟斤拷 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮貙 賮乇賲丕賳丿賴鈥屰� 倬丕乇鬲蹖夭丕賳鈥屬囏й� 禺賱賯 賵 賯賴乇賲丕賳 爻丕亘賯 夭賳丿丕賳鈥屬囏й� 丿賵賱鬲鈥屬囏й� 賲乇鬲噩毓 丕乇賵倬丕蹖蹖貙 賲蹖丿丕賳 乇丕 乇賴丕 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賵 丨蹖丕鬲 乇丕 亘賴 賲乇诏 賵丕 賲蹖鈥屫囏�. 丕賵 亘賴 賲鬲賴賲 亘賴 噩乇賲蹖 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 讴賴 丨丿丕賯賱 丌卮讴丕乇丕 賯氐丿 丕賳噩丕賲卮 乇丕 賳丿丕卮鬲: 鬲乇賵乇 卮禺氐 丕賵賱 丨夭亘 (丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳).
丿乇 賵乇丕蹖 鬲賲丕賲 丕蹖賳鈥屬囏ж� 賲囟賲賵賳 丕氐賱蹖 馗賱賲鬲 丿乇 賳蹖賲乇賵夭 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫堌з� 丿乇 丕蹖賳 倬乇爻卮 賲毓乇賵賮 賵 趩丕賱卮 亘乇丕賳诏蹖夭 讴賴 "丌蹖丕 賴丿賮 賵爻蹖賱賴 乇丕 鬲賵噩蹖賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�" 禺賱丕氐赖 讴乇丿. 丌蹖丕 賲蹖鈥屫堌з� 亘乇丕蹖 賳噩丕鬲 賵 乇爻鬲诏丕乇蹖 丕亘丿蹖 禺賱賯貙 丿爻鬲 亘賴 賯乇亘丕賳蹖 夭丿賳 毓丿賴鈥屫й� 賴乇趩賳丿 賯賱蹖賱 夭丿責 丌蹖丕 亘丕蹖丿 賴賲賵丕乇賴 鬲賯丿爻 賵 丨乇賲鬲 丨蹖丕鬲 乇丕 丿乇 賴乇 卮乇丕蹖胤蹖 丨賮馗 讴乇丿責 丕賲丕 丕诏乇 趩賳蹖賳 丕爻鬲 亘乇 丕爻丕爻 讴丿丕賲 賲賳胤賯蹖 賯乇亘丕賳蹖 讴乇丿賳 丌锟斤拷丕賴丕賳賴鈥屰� 蹖讴 诏乇賵賴丕賳貙 亘乇丕蹖 賳噩丕鬲 噩丕賳 蹖讴 賴賳诏 讴丕乇 睾蹖乇丕禺賱丕賯蹖鈥屫й� 賲丨爻賵亘 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�
讴爻鬲賱乇 丌乇賲丕賳禺賵丕賴 讴賴 乇賵夭蹖 乇賵蹖丕蹖 亘乇丕亘乇蹖 賵 毓丿丕賱鬲 乇丕 丿乇 爻乇 丿丕卮鬲貙 丨丕賱丕 丨夭亘 乇丕 丿乇 乇丕賴蹖 丿蹖诏乇 賲蹖鈥屫ㄛ屬嗀� 乇丕賴蹖 讴賴 亘丕 賴丿賮 丕賵 賮乇爻賳诏鈥屬囏� 鬲賮丕賵鬲 賲丕賴賵蹖 丿丕乇丿.
賴乇趩賳丿 鬲賲丕賲 賵賯丕蹖毓 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丿乇 爻賱賵賱 丕賳賮乇丕丿蹖 賵 丕鬲丕賯 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 賲蹖鈥屭柏必� 賵 诏丕賴 賵 亘蹖鈥屭з� 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 丿乇 賯丕賲鬲 蹖讴 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵诏 亘丕 賳胤賯鈥屬囏й� 賳賴 趩賳丿丕賳 讴賵鬲丕賴 馗丕賴乇 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 丕賲丕 乇蹖鬲賲 讴賵亘賳丿賴 賵 賳賲丕蹖卮蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賲禺丕胤亘 乇丕 讴丕賲賱丕 亘丕 禺賵丿 賴賲乇丕賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賵 丿乇 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 賳賯丕胤 賳賮爻 賲禺丕胤亘 乇丕 亘賳丿 賲蹖鈥屫①堌必� . 賲孬賱丕 丨蹖賳 禺賵丕賳丿賳 讴鬲丕亘 亘丕乇賴丕 倬蹖卮 丌賲丿 讴賴 亘丕 賲卮鬲鈥屬囏й� 诏乇賴 讴乇丿賴 賲賱鬲爻賲丕賳賴 夭賲夭賲賴 賲蹖鈥屭┴必� : 丕賲囟丕 賳讴賳 賱丕賲匕賴亘! 丕夭 丕蹖賳 賱丨丕馗貙 爻賴 賯爻賲鬲 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 亘乇丕蹖 賲賳 亘爻蹖丕乇 賳賮爻鈥屭屫� 亘賵丿. 賳禺爻鬲 丌賳噩丕 讴賴 乇賮蹖賯 賵 賴賲乇夭賲 賯丿蹖賲蹖 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮貙 賲蹖禺丕卅蹖賱 亘賵诏乇賵賮貙 賮乇賲丕賳丿賴 賳丕賵诏丕賳 卮乇賯 賵 丿丕乇賳丿賴 賲丿丕賱 丕賳賯賱丕亘 亘賴 倬丕蹖 趩賵亘賴鈥屰� 丿丕乇 亘乇丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵 夭賳丿丕賳蹖賳 爻賱賵賱 丕賳賮乇丕丿蹖貙 亘丕 亘丕 囟乇亘賴 亘乇 丿蹖賵丕乇 爻賱賵賱 讴賳丕乇蹖 亘賴 蹖讴丿蹖诏乇 倬蹖丕賲鈥屫必池з嗃� 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁嗀�
夭賳丿丕賳蹖 402 亘賴 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮: 丌賳鈥屬囏� 賲蹖鈥屫③屬嗀� 亘乇丕蹖 卮賲丕乇賴 380. 禺亘乇 乇丕 乇丿 讴賳
乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 亘賴 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 406: 卮賲丕乇賴 380 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫ㄘ辟嗀� 丕毓丿丕賲 讴賳賳丿貙 禺亘乇 乇丕 乇丿 讴賳
夭賳丿丕賳蹖 402 亘賴 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮: 丨讴賲 乇丕 亘乇丕蹖卮 賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗁嗀� 禺亘乇 乇丕 乇丿 讴賳
夭賳丿丕賳蹖 402 亘賴 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮: 丕賵 亘丕 賮乇蹖丕丿 讴賲讴 賲蹖鈥屫堌з囏�
夭賳丿丕賳蹖 402 亘賴 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮: 丕賵 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫①堌辟嗀� 賮乇蹖丕丿 賲蹖鈥屭┴簇� 賵 讴鬲讴 賲蹖鈥屫堌必� 禺亘乇 乇丕 乇丿 讴賳
氐丿丕蹖 禺賮賴 賵 亘賲 囟乇亘賴鈥屬囏й� 蹖讴賳賵丕禺鬲 鬲賵蹖 乇丕賴乇賵 倬蹖趩蹖丿. 丕蹖賳 氐丿丕蹖 讴賵亘蹖丿賳 亘賴 丿乇 賵 丿蹖賵丕乇 賳亘賵丿貙 亘賱讴賴 賲乇丿丕賳 爻賱賵賱鈥屬囏й� 380 鬲丕 402 亘丕 夭賳噩蹖乇 氐賵鬲蹖鈥屫й� 讴賴 丕蹖噩丕丿 讴乇丿賴 亘賵丿賳丿 倬卮鬲 丿乇 爻賱賵賱鈥屬囏й屫簇з� 丕爻鬲丕丿賴 賵 诏丕乇丿 丕丨鬲乇丕賲 鬲卮讴蹖賱 丿丕丿賳丿. 賳賵丕蹖蹖 爻賳诏蹖賳貙 禺賮賳賴 賵 賮乇蹖亘賳丿賴 賴賲丕賳賳丿 乇倬鈥屫辟举団€屰� 胤亘賱貙 诏賵蹖蹖 丿乇 亘丕丿 亘賱賳丿 卮丿賴 丕夭 乇丕賴 丿賵乇 亘賴 诏賵卮 賲蹖鈥屫必驰屫�. 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 胤亘賱 讴賵亘蹖丿. 亘賴 鬲丿乇蹖噩 丕丨爻丕爻 夭賲丕賳 賵 賲讴丕賳 乇丕 丕夭 丿爻鬲 丿丕丿貙 賮賯胤 氐丿丕蹖 鬲賵禺丕賱蹖 鬲丕賲鈥屫з� 噩賳诏賱 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫促嗃屫� 诏賵乇蹖賱鈥屬囏й屰� 倬卮鬲 賲蹖賱賴鈥屬囏й� 賯賮爻 禺賵丿 丕蹖爻鬲丕丿賴 亘賵丿賳丿 賵 囟乇亘 賲蹖鈥屭辟佖嗀�
丿賵賲 丿乇 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 丌禺乇 讴賴 讴賴 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 丕鬲賴丕賲鈥屬囏� 乇丕 亘賳丿 亘賴 亘賳丿 賲蹖鈥屬矩佰屫必� 賵 丕賲囟丕 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賵 爻賵賲貙 亘禺卮 倬丕蹖丕賳蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 讴賴 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 乇丕 亘乇丕蹖 丕毓丿丕賲 賲蹖鈥屫ㄘ辟嗀� 賵 丿賵 鬲蹖乇 蹖讴蹖 亘乇 倬卮鬲 诏乇丿賳 賵 丿蹖诏乇蹖 丿乇 卮賯蹖賯賴鈥屫ж� 卮賱蹖讴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁嗀�. 丿乇 賱丨馗賴鈥屰� 倬蹖卮 丕夭 賲乇诏貙 丕賵 亘賴鈥屫簇� 亘丿賳亘丕賱 鬲賵噩蹖賴蹖 亘乇丕蹖 賲毓賳丕 讴乇丿賳 賲乇诏卮 丕爻鬲貙 蹖丕賮鬲賳 倬丕爻禺蹖 丿乇禺賵乇 亘乇丕蹖 賮丿丕讴丕乇蹖鈥屬囏й屰� 讴賴 丿乇 乇丕賴 丨夭亘 丕賳噩丕賲 丿丕丿賴 讴賴 丌禺乇蹖賳卮貙 倬匕蹖乇賮鬲賳 丕鬲賴丕賲丕鬲 爻丕禺鬲诏蹖 賵 诏賳丕賴讴丕乇 丿丕賳爻鬲賳 禺賵丿 亘賵丿
賲蹖鈥屫堌ж池� 賯亘賱 丕夭 丌賳讴賴 禺蹖賱蹖 丿蹖乇 卮賵丿 倬丕爻禺蹖 亘蹖丕蹖丿. 賲賵爻蹖 賴賲 丕噩丕夭賴 賵乇賵丿 亘賴 爻乇夭賲蹖賳 賲賵毓賵丿 乇丕 賳蹖丕賮鬲貙 丕賲丕 丕賵 丿爻鬲 讴賲 丕夭 亘丕賱丕蹖 讴賵賴 讴賴 亘賴 夭蹖乇 倬丕蹖卮 賳诏丕賴 賲蹖鈥屭┴必� 丌賳 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫屫�. 丌丿賲 賵賯鬲蹖 賴丿賮 乇丕 亘亘蹖賳丿 賲乇丿賳 乇丕 爻丕丿賴鈥屫� 賲蹖鈥屬矩佰屫必�. 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 乇丕 亘賴 亘丕賱丕蹖 讴賵賴 賳亘乇丿賳丿 賵 賲賵賯毓蹖 賴賲 讴賴 趩卮賲丕賳卮 乇丕 亘丕夭 讴乇丿 噩夭 亘蹖丕蹖丕賳 賵 馗賱賲鬲 卮亘 趩蹖夭蹖 賳蹖丕賮鬲. 丌賳诏丕賴 囟乇亘賴鈥屫й� 爻賳诏蹖賳 亘賴 倬卮鬲 爻乇卮 禺賵乇丿. 夭丕賳賵丕賳卮 禺賲 卮丿 賵 亘丿賳卮 鬲丕亘 禺賵乇丿 賵 亘賴 夭賲蹖賳 丕賮鬲丕丿. 丿賵賲蹖賳 囟乇亘賴 禺乇丿讴賳賳丿賴 亘蹖禺 诏賵卮 丕賵 賳卮爻鬲. 賴賲賴 趩蹖夭 鬲賲丕賲 卮丿. 亘丕夭 丿乇蹖丕 亘賵丿 賵 氐丿丕賴丕蹖卮. 賲賵噩蹖 亘賴 丌乇丕賲蹖 丕賵 乇丕 亘賱賳丿 讴乇丿. 丕亘丿蹖鬲 亘蹖鈥屫ж关嗀� 丕夭 丿賵乇 丌賲丿 賵 賲鬲蹖賳 賵 賲賵賯乇 爻賮乇 禺賵丿 乇丕 丕丿丕賲賴 丿丕丿
倬蹖鈥屬嗁堌簇� 1: 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 丿乇 賯爻賲鬲鈥屬囏й屰� 亘賴 丕賳噩蹖賱 诏乇蹖夭 賲蹖鈥屫操嗀�. 賳禺爻鬲 丿乇 毓賳賵丕賳 讴賴 丕卮丕乇賴 賵丕賯毓賴 鬲氐賱蹖亘 丿丕乇丿: {倬爻 丕夭 亘賴 氐賱蹖亘 讴卮蹖丿賳 毓蹖爻蹖} 丕夭 爻丕毓鬲 卮卮賲 鬲丕 爻丕毓鬲 賳賴賲貙 鬲丕乇賷賰賷 鬲賲丕賲 夭賲賷賳 乇丕 賮乇賵 诏乇賮鬲 {馗賱賲鬲 丿乇 賳蹖賲乇賵夭} 賵 賳夭丿賷賰 亘賴 爻丕毓鬲 賳賴賲貙 毓蹖爻蹖 亘賴 丌賵丕夭 亘賱賳丿 氐丿丕 夭丿賴 诏賮鬲: "丕賷賱賷 丕賷賱賷 賱賻賲丕 爻賻亘賻賯賿鬲賽賳賷責" 賷毓賳賷 丕賱賴賷 丕賱賴賷 趩乇丕 賲乇丕 賵丕诏匕丕乇丿賴鈥屫й屫� (賲鬲蹖 24 : 45 賵 46) 丿賵賲 丌賳噩丕 讴賴 亘丕夭噩賵 丕蹖賵丕賳賵賮 亘賴 爻賱賵賱 丕賳賮乇丕丿蹖 丌賲丿賴 賵 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 乇丕 亘賴 賲噩丕丿賱賴 賵 趩丕賱卮 賲蹖鈥屭┴簇� 賵 亘丕 胤毓賳賴 丕夭 夭亘丕賳 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 賲蹖鈥屭堐屫� " 丿賵乇 卮賵 丕夭 賲賳 丕蹖 卮蹖胤丕賳" 丕夭 丕蹖賳 亘禺卮 毓賴丿 噩丿蹖丿 诏乇賮鬲賴 卮丿賴 丕爻鬲: 倬胤乇爻 丕賵 乇丕 诏乇賮鬲賴貙 卮乇賵毓 賰乇丿 亘賴 賲賳毓 賳賲賵丿賳 賵 诏賮鬲: 丨丕卮丕 丕夭 鬲賵 丕賷 禺丿丕賵賳丿 賰賴 丕賷賳 亘乇 鬲賵 賴乇诏夭 賵丕賯毓 賳禺賵丕賴丿 卮丿 {亘賴 氐賱蹖亘 讴卮蹖丿賴 卮丿賳}! 丕賲丕 毓蹖爻蹖 亘乇诏卮鬲賴貙 倬胤乇爻 乇丕 诏賮鬲: 丿賵乇 卮賵 丕夭 賲賳 丕賷 卮賷胤丕賳 夭賷乇丕 賰賴 亘丕毓孬 賱睾夭卮 賲賳 賲賷 亘丕卮賷. (賲鬲蹖16: 22 賵 23)
倬蹖鈥屬嗁堌簇� 2: 亘賳馗乇賲 囟乇賵乇蹖 丕爻鬲 賲禺丕胤亘 鬲乇鬲蹖亘 夭賲丕賳蹖 賳诏丕乇卮 丌孬丕乇 讴爻鬲賱乇 乇丕 乇毓丕蹖鬲 讴賳丿 賵 倬蹖卮 丕夭 賲胤丕賱毓賴 馗賱賲鬲 丿乇 賳蹖賲乇賵夭貙 诏賮鬲诏賵 亘丕 賲乇诏 乇丕 亘禺賵丕賳丿. 讴鬲丕亘蹖 讴賴 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 亘乇 丕爻丕爻 鬲噩乇亘蹖丕鬲 賵丕賯毓蹖 禺賵丿 丕夭 爻賱賵賱 丕賳賮乇丕丿蹖 賳诏丕卮鬲賴 賵 丨丕賱丕鬲 乇賵亘丕卮賵賮 丿乇 爻賱賵賱 丕賳賮乇丕丿蹖 乇丕 丕夭 丌賳 賵丕賲 诏乇賮鬲賴 丕爻鬲
April 13, 2021
This is most appropriately classified as an autobiographical novel. The author, Arthur Koestler, became a member of the German Communist Party in 1931. In 1938, disillusioned by Stalin鈥檚 Moscow show trials and indiscriminate purges of the so-called counter-revolutionaries, he left the Party. In 1940 came his critique--Darkness at Noon--a novel sharply critical of Communism.
Both the author and the central protagonist of the novel, Rubashov, begin with a strong belief in Communism. Both become disillusioned. Thus, both the positive and the negative are illuminated, allowing one to see Communism鈥檚 potential as well as its weaknesses.
Rubashov, brimming with the merits and ideals of Communism, has dedicated his life to the Party. Now, he is imprisoned and psychologically tortured by the very same Party he had so fervently worked to establish. I appreciate that the book is not filled with excruciating depiction of physical abuse. The psychological torture, as depicted in the book, is adequate. Sleep deprivation, blazing lights, extended interrogations, threats and mock killings. Rubashov is confined to an isolation cell, but prisoners have a means of communicating by tapping. Tension inexorably mounts in the book.
The beginning is confusing. The events spoken of are true, but in that they are described in generic terms, confusion arises. The setting is 1938 Russia during the Great Purge, and yet Russia is never once mentioned! Stalin is spoken of as 鈥淣umber One鈥�. The Soviet government is spoken of as 鈥渢he Party鈥�. Nazi Germany is spoken of as 鈥渢he Dictatorship鈥�. As you come to understand how the story is told, the confusion clears.
How does the story end? It ends as it must end, as it should end.
The audiobook I listened to is narrated by Frank Muller. At the beginning I disliked it immensely. As I continued, I grew accustomed to his manner of speaking. By the end it felt OK, but I never grew to like it. I have thus given the audio performance two stars. What I dislike, but which may not disturb others, is Muller鈥檚 tendency to progressively speak faster and faster, to increase suspense and tension. First, the speed increases more and more and more. Then he concludes the sentence by drawing out the end interminably, with a long drawn out whisper. This drove me nuts. It is more prominent at the beginning than at the end of the audiobook. I do not like narrators to artificially exaggerate suspense.
Both the author and the central protagonist of the novel, Rubashov, begin with a strong belief in Communism. Both become disillusioned. Thus, both the positive and the negative are illuminated, allowing one to see Communism鈥檚 potential as well as its weaknesses.
Rubashov, brimming with the merits and ideals of Communism, has dedicated his life to the Party. Now, he is imprisoned and psychologically tortured by the very same Party he had so fervently worked to establish. I appreciate that the book is not filled with excruciating depiction of physical abuse. The psychological torture, as depicted in the book, is adequate. Sleep deprivation, blazing lights, extended interrogations, threats and mock killings. Rubashov is confined to an isolation cell, but prisoners have a means of communicating by tapping. Tension inexorably mounts in the book.
The beginning is confusing. The events spoken of are true, but in that they are described in generic terms, confusion arises. The setting is 1938 Russia during the Great Purge, and yet Russia is never once mentioned! Stalin is spoken of as 鈥淣umber One鈥�. The Soviet government is spoken of as 鈥渢he Party鈥�. Nazi Germany is spoken of as 鈥渢he Dictatorship鈥�. As you come to understand how the story is told, the confusion clears.
How does the story end? It ends as it must end, as it should end.
The audiobook I listened to is narrated by Frank Muller. At the beginning I disliked it immensely. As I continued, I grew accustomed to his manner of speaking. By the end it felt OK, but I never grew to like it. I have thus given the audio performance two stars. What I dislike, but which may not disturb others, is Muller鈥檚 tendency to progressively speak faster and faster, to increase suspense and tension. First, the speed increases more and more and more. Then he concludes the sentence by drawing out the end interminably, with a long drawn out whisper. This drove me nuts. It is more prominent at the beginning than at the end of the audiobook. I do not like narrators to artificially exaggerate suspense.
April 23, 2023
亘賴 賴賳诏丕賲 賳蹖賲乇賵夭貙 馗賱賲鬲 賴賲賴 噩丕 乇丕 賮乇丕 诏乇賮鬲 賵 鬲丕 爻丕毓鬲 鄢 亘毓丿丕夭馗賴乇 丕丿丕賲賴 蹖丕賮鬲. 丿乇 丕蹖賳 賵賯鬲 毓蹖爻蹖 亘丕 氐丿丕蹖 亘賱賳丿 賮乇蹖丕丿 夭丿: 丕蹖賱賵卅蹖貙 丕蹖賱賵卅蹖 賱賲丕爻亘賯鬲賳蹖責
丕蹖賳 賮乇丕夭蹖 丕爻鬲 丕夭 丕賳噩蹖賱. 馗賱賲鬲 丿乇 賳蹖賲乇賵夭 丕氐胤賱丕丨蹖 丕爻鬲 爻蹖丕爻蹖 讴賴 丕夭 讴鬲丕亘 毓賴丿蹖賳 诏乇賮鬲賴 卮丿賴 賵 亘賴 賲賵賯毓蹖鬲蹖 丕胤賱丕賯 賲蹖卮賵丿 讴賴 丿乇 丌賳 讴爻蹖 亘賴 诏賳丕賴 賳丕讴乇丿賴 丿賲 鬲蹖睾 亘乇賵丿.
讴鬲丕亘 丕爻賲蹖 丕夭 夭賲丕賳 賵 賲讴丕賳 賳賲蹖亘乇賴 丕賲丕 賲卮禺氐丕 丿乇 賲賵乇丿 卮賵乇賵蹖 賵 倬丕讴爻丕夭蹖 亘夭乇诏 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳 賴爻鬲 讴賴 丿乇 丕賵賳 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 賲禺丕賱賮蹖賳 賵 亘賱卮賵蹖讴鈥屬囏й� 丕賵賱蹖賴 乇賵 亘賴 丿丕丿诏丕賴鈥屬囏й� 賳賲丕蹖卮蹖 讴卮賵賳丿賳 賵 亘丕 丕毓鬲乇丕賮鈥屬囏й� 丕噩亘丕乇蹖 賵 丕毓丿丕賲 丕夭 丿賲 鬲蹖睾 诏匕乇賵賳丿賳. 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丕夭 噩丕蹖蹖 卮乇賵毓 賲蹖卮賴 讴賴 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 丕毓囟丕蹖 丕氐賱蹖 讴賴 賴賲蹖卮賴 毓讴爻卮 讴賳丕乇 卮禺氐 丕賵賱 亘賵丿賴 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇 賲蹖卮賴 賵 丕賵賳噩丕 賲賵乇丿 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 賵 卮讴賳噩賴 賯乇丕乇 賲蹖诏蹖乇賴 賵 囟賲賳 丕蹖賳 亘賴 讴丕乇賴丕蹖蹖 讴賴 讴乇丿賴 丿乇 丕蹖賳 賲丿鬲 賮讴乇 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁� 賵 丕賮乇丕丿蹖 讴賴 亘丕賴丕卮賵賳 丿乇 丕乇鬲亘丕胤 亘賵丿賴 賵 亘賴 趩蹖夭蹖 讴賴 賲丿鬲鈥屬囏� 亘賴卮 丕毓鬲賯丕丿 丿丕卮鬲賴貙 丕氐賵賱 丨夭亘.
蹖讴 乇賲丕賳 爻蹖丕爻蹖 禺蹖賱蹖 禺賵亘 賵 丿乇 賳賯丿 讴賲賵賳蹖爻賲 賵 丿乇賵睾鈥屬囏й屰� 讴賴 亘賴 禺賵乇丿 噩丕賲毓賴 丿丕丿 賵 丕蹖賳讴賴 賴丿賮 賵爻蹖賱賴 賵 賲爻蹖乇 乇賵 鬲賵噩蹖賴 賳禺賵丕賴丿 讴乇丿.賴
丕蹖賳 賮乇丕夭蹖 丕爻鬲 丕夭 丕賳噩蹖賱. 馗賱賲鬲 丿乇 賳蹖賲乇賵夭 丕氐胤賱丕丨蹖 丕爻鬲 爻蹖丕爻蹖 讴賴 丕夭 讴鬲丕亘 毓賴丿蹖賳 诏乇賮鬲賴 卮丿賴 賵 亘賴 賲賵賯毓蹖鬲蹖 丕胤賱丕賯 賲蹖卮賵丿 讴賴 丿乇 丌賳 讴爻蹖 亘賴 诏賳丕賴 賳丕讴乇丿賴 丿賲 鬲蹖睾 亘乇賵丿.
讴鬲丕亘 丕爻賲蹖 丕夭 夭賲丕賳 賵 賲讴丕賳 賳賲蹖亘乇賴 丕賲丕 賲卮禺氐丕 丿乇 賲賵乇丿 卮賵乇賵蹖 賵 倬丕讴爻丕夭蹖 亘夭乇诏 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳 賴爻鬲 讴賴 丿乇 丕賵賳 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 賲禺丕賱賮蹖賳 賵 亘賱卮賵蹖讴鈥屬囏й� 丕賵賱蹖賴 乇賵 亘賴 丿丕丿诏丕賴鈥屬囏й� 賳賲丕蹖卮蹖 讴卮賵賳丿賳 賵 亘丕 丕毓鬲乇丕賮鈥屬囏й� 丕噩亘丕乇蹖 賵 丕毓丿丕賲 丕夭 丿賲 鬲蹖睾 诏匕乇賵賳丿賳. 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丕夭 噩丕蹖蹖 卮乇賵毓 賲蹖卮賴 讴賴 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 丕毓囟丕蹖 丕氐賱蹖 讴賴 賴賲蹖卮賴 毓讴爻卮 讴賳丕乇 卮禺氐 丕賵賱 亘賵丿賴 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇 賲蹖卮賴 賵 丕賵賳噩丕 賲賵乇丿 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 賵 卮讴賳噩賴 賯乇丕乇 賲蹖诏蹖乇賴 賵 囟賲賳 丕蹖賳 亘賴 讴丕乇賴丕蹖蹖 讴賴 讴乇丿賴 丿乇 丕蹖賳 賲丿鬲 賮讴乇 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁� 賵 丕賮乇丕丿蹖 讴賴 亘丕賴丕卮賵賳 丿乇 丕乇鬲亘丕胤 亘賵丿賴 賵 亘賴 趩蹖夭蹖 讴賴 賲丿鬲鈥屬囏� 亘賴卮 丕毓鬲賯丕丿 丿丕卮鬲賴貙 丕氐賵賱 丨夭亘.
蹖讴 乇賲丕賳 爻蹖丕爻蹖 禺蹖賱蹖 禺賵亘 賵 丿乇 賳賯丿 讴賲賵賳蹖爻賲 賵 丿乇賵睾鈥屬囏й屰� 讴賴 亘賴 禺賵乇丿 噩丕賲毓賴 丿丕丿 賵 丕蹖賳讴賴 賴丿賮 賵爻蹖賱賴 賵 賲爻蹖乇 乇賵 鬲賵噩蹖賴 賳禺賵丕賴丿 讴乇丿.賴
May 27, 2024
蹖讴 卮丕賴讴丕乇 賵丕賯毓蹖...
爻丕賱蹖丕賳蹖 丕夭 丕賳賯賱丕亘 亘夭乇诏 賵 賲乇丿賲蹖 亘乇 囟丿 丕爻鬲亘丿丕丿 丨丕讴賲 诏匕卮鬲賴貙 丨夭亘 倬蹖乇賵夭鈥屬呚池з嗁� 亘賴 丌賳趩賴 讴賴 爻丕禺鬲賴 丕爻鬲 賲蹖鈥屬嗂必� 丕賲丕 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴. 乇卅蹖爻 丨夭亘貙 卮禺氐 丕賵賱 丨讴賵賲鬲貙 丕蹖賳 亘丕乇 賱賵賱賴 丕爻賱丨賴 乇丕 亘賴 爻賲鬲 禺賵丿 丨夭亘 趩乇禺丕賳丿賴. 賴乇 诏賵賳賴 賲禺丕賱賮鬲 卮賲丕 亘丕 賲爻蹖乇 鬲丕乇蹖禺蹖 丕蹖 讴賴 丨夭亘 丿乇 丨丕賱 胤蹖 讴乇丿賳 丌賳 丕爻鬲貨 亘賴 賲毓賳丕蹖 丕蹖爻鬲丕丿賳 噩賱賵蹖 丕乇丕丿賴 亘夭乇诏 丨夭亘 丕爻鬲. 賱丕噩乇賲貙 賴乇 丿诏乇鈥屫з嗀屫篡� 亘丕蹖丿 賲丨丕讴賲赖 卮賵丿 賵 亘賴 丕卮丿 賲噩丕夭丕鬲 亘乇爻丿...
丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賲丕 乇丕噩毓 亘賴 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕爻鬲. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 蹖讴 丕賳賯賱丕亘蹖 鬲賲丕賲 毓蹖丕乇. 賯賴乇賲丕賳 賳丕賲鈥屫⒇促嗀�. 丿乇 乇丿蹖賮 丕賵賱 毓讴爻鈥屬囏й� 賳馗丕賲蹖 丕卮禺丕氐 乇丿賴 丕賵賱 丨夭亘貙 趩賴乇賴 乇賵亘丕卮賮 讴賴 賲氐賲賲 亘賴 噩賱賵 賳诏丕賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賲卮禺氐 丕爻鬲. 丕賲丕 丿诏乇 丕賳丿蹖卮蹖 賴丕蹖 丕禺蹖乇 丕賵 賵 爻禺賳乇丕賳蹖鈥屬囏й屫� 丕賵 乇丕 鬲亘丿蹖賱 亘賴 氐蹖丿 噩丿蹖丿 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴 讴乇丿賴.
丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丕夭 丕蹖賳噩丕 卮乇賵毓 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 丨丕賱丕 亘蹖卮 丕夭 賴乇 夭賲丕賳 丿蹖诏乇蹖 賮乇氐鬲 丿丕乇丿 讴賴 丿乇 丕賳賮乇丕丿蹖 乇丕賴 亘乇賵丿 賵 亘賴 诏匕卮鬲賴 禺賵蹖卮 亘賳诏乇丿. 亘賴 丌賳趩賴 讴賴 丕夭 爻乇 诏匕乇丕賳丿賴...
讴賵爻鬲賱乇 丕夭 丿賵诏丕賳賴 毓噩蹖亘蹖 爻禺賳 賲蹖鈥屭堐屫�. 丿賵诏丕賳賴 丕蹖 讴賴 卮丕蹖丿 亘鬲賵丕賳 丌賳 乇丕 丿賵诏丕賳賴 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵跇蹖 賵 賵噩丿丕賳 賳丕賲蹖丿. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丿乇 诏賮鬲诏賵蹖蹖 亘丕 鬲賳賴丕蹖蹖 賵 囟賲蹖乇 賳丕禺賵丿丌诏丕賴 賵 賵噩丿丕賳 禺賵蹖卮鬲賳 丿乇 丨丕賱 賲賳丕夭毓賴 丕蹖 爻賴賲诏蹖賳 丕爻鬲. 丌賳趩賴 讴賴 乇賵 亘賴 乇賵蹖 丕賵爻鬲貨 丕賳賯賱丕亘 賵 賲爻蹖乇蹖 趩賳丿蹖賳 爻丕賱賴 丕爻鬲. 賳賴丕賱蹖 讴賴 亘丕 禺賵賳 賴賲 乇丿蹖賮丕賳 賵 賴賲讴蹖卮丕賳 賵 乇賮蹖賯丕賳卮貙 丌亘蹖丕乇蹖 卮丿賴. 賳賴丕賱蹖 讴賴 丕賲乇賵夭 丿乇禺鬲 爻鬲亘乇蹖 卮丿賴 讴賴 賲蹖賵賴鈥屫ж� 亘賴 丌賳趩賴 讴賴 亘丕蹖丿 孬賲乇 丌賳 賳賴丕賱 賲蹖鈥屫簇� 卮亘丕賴鬲蹖 賳丿丕乇丿.
乇賵亘丕卮賮 丌賳賯丿乇 丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳 賮乇氐鬲 丿丕乇丿 讴賴 賱丨馗賴 賱丨馗賴 诏匕卮鬲賴 乇丕 倬蹖卮 乇賵蹖 禺賵蹖卮 亘亘蹖賳丿 賵 賲乇賵乇 讴賳丿. 丌蹖丕 丌賳趩賴 讴賴 亘乇 爻乇 乇賮蹖賯 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賲蹖鈥屫③屫� 噩夭 鬲丕賵丕賳 丕卮鬲亘丕賴丕鬲 賵 爻讴賵鬲卮 丕爻鬲... 趩賴 讴爻蹖 賲蹖鈥屫з嗀�...
丕賲丕 丌蹖丕 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 賯賴乇賲丕賳蹖 禺賱賱 賳丕倬匕蹖乇 賲蹖鈥屫池ж藏� 賲乇丿蹖 讴賴 亘丕 蹖讴 丕爻鬲丨丕賱賴 鬲丕乇蹖禺蹖 亘賴 賳丿丕蹖 丿乇賵賳 禺賵蹖卮 诏賵卮 賲蹖鈥屫囏� 賵 胤丕睾蹖 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 丕賲丕 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 亘賴 丕蹖賳 爻丕丿诏蹖 賴丕 賴賲 賳蹖爻鬲. 丕賵 賴賳賵夭 賲賯賴賵乇 賵 睾乇賯 丿乇 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵跇蹖 賴丕蹖 丨夭亘 丕爻鬲 賵 丨丕賱丕 賴賲蹖賳 乇賮蹖賯 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕爻鬲貙 讴賴 亘丕蹖丿 丿爻鬲 亘賴 丕賳鬲禺丕亘 亘夭賳丿. 丌蹖丕 丕蹖賳 丌禺乇蹖賳 丕賳鬲禺丕亘 丕賵爻鬲責 丌蹖丕 丕蹖賳 丌禺乇蹖賳 禺丿賲鬲蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 亘賴 丨夭亘 禺賵丕賴丿 讴乇丿責...
丕賳賯賱丕亘蹖賵賳賽 丿蹖乇賵夭貙 倬蹖乇賲乇丿丕賳 丨夭亘貙 丿乇 丨氐丕乇 丿蹖賵丕乇鈥屬囏й� 禺賵丿 爻丕禺鬲賴 丕賳賯賱丕亘 卮丕賳 亘丕賯蹖 賲丕賳丿賴鈥屫з嗀� 賵 丨丕賱丕 賳爻賱蹖 乇賵 亘賴 乇賵蹖 丌賳 賴丕 丕蹖爻鬲丕丿賴 讴賴 亘丕 丕蹖賳 讴賴 丕賳賯賱丕亘 賵 噩賳诏 丿丕禺賱蹖 乇丕 賳丿蹖丿賴貨 丕賲丕 趩賳丕賳 丿賱 爻倬乇丿賴 丌乇賲丕賳 賴丕 賵 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵跇蹖 賴丕蹖 賳爻賱 倬蹖卮蹖賳 卮丿賴 讴賴 乇賵 亘賴 乇賵蹖 乇賴亘乇丕賳 賮讴乇蹖 禺賵蹖卮 賲蹖鈥屫й屫池�. 賵 丕蹖賳 賳爻賱 噩丿蹖丿貙 讴賴 爻丕禺鬲賴 丿爻鬲 賳爻賱 賯亘賱 讴丕賳賴 鬲丕賵丕賳 丕卮鬲亘丕賴丕鬲 鬲丕乇蹖禺蹖 诏匕卮鬲诏丕賳 賵 鬲噩爻賲 賮蹖夭蹖讴蹖 丕毓賲丕賱 丌賳 賴丕 賴蹖趩 乇丨賲蹖 丿乇 亘乇禺賵乇丿 亘丕 倬蹖卮蹖賳蹖丕賳 禺賵丿 賳丿丕乇丿. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賳丕賲 丕蹖賳 賳爻賱 乇丕 丕賳爻丕賳 賳卅丕賳丿乇鬲丕賱 賲蹖鈥屭柏ж必�...
丿乇 丌蹖賳賴 賳賵卮鬲賴 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 丕蹖賳噩丕 乇丕 丿蹖丿賲. 禺賵丿賲丕賳 乇丕 丿蹖丿賲. 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴 乇丕 丿蹖丿賲. 禺蹖賱蹖 丕夭 鬲賵噩蹖賴丕鬲 讴鬲丕亘 亘賴 诏賵卮賲 丌卮賳丕 亘賵丿 賵 丕夭 丕蹖賳 鬲乇蹖亘賵賳 賵 丌賳 鬲乇蹖亘賵賳 夭蹖丕丿 卮賳蹖丿賴 亘賵丿賲. 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 亘賴 賯丿乇蹖 賯賵蹖 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵跇蹖 乇丕 鬲賵囟蹖丨 賲蹖 丿賴丿 讴賴 噩丕賱亘 丕蹖賳噩丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕蹖賳 爻讴賴 丿賵 乇賵 賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗀� 亘乇丕蹖 賲爻鬲亘丿蹖賳 賴賲 亘賴 爻丕賳 丕賳噩蹖賱蹖 亘卮乇 賳賵卮鬲 毓賲賱 讴賳丿. 丕乇噩丕毓丕鬲 賮賵賯鈥屫з勜关ж� 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 賳卮丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫囏� 讴賴 丕賳賯锟斤拷丕亘 賴丕蹖 爻賵爻蹖丕賱蹖爻鬲蹖 賵 丨讴賵賲鬲 賴丕蹖蹖 讴賴 丕夭 丿賱 丕蹖賳 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵跇蹖 賴丕 鬲賵賱蹖丿 卮丿賳丿 趩賴 胤賵乇 丿乇 賳賴丕蹖鬲 賯乇丕卅鬲 鬲丕夭賴 丕蹖 丕夭 賴賲丕賳 賮賱爻賮賴 賴丕蹖 爻蹖丕爻蹖 賲丕讴蹖丕賵賱蹖爻鬲蹖 賴爻鬲賳丿.
丿乇 亘丕夭蹖 爻蹖丕爻鬲 丌賳趩賴 讴賴 賳丕賲卮 乇丕 丕禺賱丕賯 賲蹖鈥屬嗁囒屬� 賲丨賱蹖 丕夭 丕毓乇丕亘 賳丿丕乇丿. 讴丕乇 禺賵亘 賵 亘丿 丿乇 爻蹖丕爻鬲 亘蹖 賲毓賳丕爻鬲. 丿乇爻鬲 賵 睾賱胤蹖 賵噩賵丿 賳丿丕乇丿. 賲丕 丿乇 爻蹖丕爻鬲 鬲賳賴丕 讴丕乇 賲賮蹖丿 賵 賲囟乇 丿丕乇蹖賲... 賴賲蹖賳...
爻丕賱蹖丕賳蹖 丕夭 丕賳賯賱丕亘 亘夭乇诏 賵 賲乇丿賲蹖 亘乇 囟丿 丕爻鬲亘丿丕丿 丨丕讴賲 诏匕卮鬲賴貙 丨夭亘 倬蹖乇賵夭鈥屬呚池з嗁� 亘賴 丌賳趩賴 讴賴 爻丕禺鬲賴 丕爻鬲 賲蹖鈥屬嗂必� 丕賲丕 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴. 乇卅蹖爻 丨夭亘貙 卮禺氐 丕賵賱 丨讴賵賲鬲貙 丕蹖賳 亘丕乇 賱賵賱賴 丕爻賱丨賴 乇丕 亘賴 爻賲鬲 禺賵丿 丨夭亘 趩乇禺丕賳丿賴. 賴乇 诏賵賳賴 賲禺丕賱賮鬲 卮賲丕 亘丕 賲爻蹖乇 鬲丕乇蹖禺蹖 丕蹖 讴賴 丨夭亘 丿乇 丨丕賱 胤蹖 讴乇丿賳 丌賳 丕爻鬲貨 亘賴 賲毓賳丕蹖 丕蹖爻鬲丕丿賳 噩賱賵蹖 丕乇丕丿賴 亘夭乇诏 丨夭亘 丕爻鬲. 賱丕噩乇賲貙 賴乇 丿诏乇鈥屫з嗀屫篡� 亘丕蹖丿 賲丨丕讴賲赖 卮賵丿 賵 亘賴 丕卮丿 賲噩丕夭丕鬲 亘乇爻丿...
丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賲丕 乇丕噩毓 亘賴 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕爻鬲. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 蹖讴 丕賳賯賱丕亘蹖 鬲賲丕賲 毓蹖丕乇. 賯賴乇賲丕賳 賳丕賲鈥屫⒇促嗀�. 丿乇 乇丿蹖賮 丕賵賱 毓讴爻鈥屬囏й� 賳馗丕賲蹖 丕卮禺丕氐 乇丿賴 丕賵賱 丨夭亘貙 趩賴乇賴 乇賵亘丕卮賮 讴賴 賲氐賲賲 亘賴 噩賱賵 賳诏丕賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賲卮禺氐 丕爻鬲. 丕賲丕 丿诏乇 丕賳丿蹖卮蹖 賴丕蹖 丕禺蹖乇 丕賵 賵 爻禺賳乇丕賳蹖鈥屬囏й屫� 丕賵 乇丕 鬲亘丿蹖賱 亘賴 氐蹖丿 噩丿蹖丿 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴 讴乇丿賴.
丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丕夭 丕蹖賳噩丕 卮乇賵毓 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 丨丕賱丕 亘蹖卮 丕夭 賴乇 夭賲丕賳 丿蹖诏乇蹖 賮乇氐鬲 丿丕乇丿 讴賴 丿乇 丕賳賮乇丕丿蹖 乇丕賴 亘乇賵丿 賵 亘賴 诏匕卮鬲賴 禺賵蹖卮 亘賳诏乇丿. 亘賴 丌賳趩賴 讴賴 丕夭 爻乇 诏匕乇丕賳丿賴...
讴賵爻鬲賱乇 丕夭 丿賵诏丕賳賴 毓噩蹖亘蹖 爻禺賳 賲蹖鈥屭堐屫�. 丿賵诏丕賳賴 丕蹖 讴賴 卮丕蹖丿 亘鬲賵丕賳 丌賳 乇丕 丿賵诏丕賳賴 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵跇蹖 賵 賵噩丿丕賳 賳丕賲蹖丿. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丿乇 诏賮鬲诏賵蹖蹖 亘丕 鬲賳賴丕蹖蹖 賵 囟賲蹖乇 賳丕禺賵丿丌诏丕賴 賵 賵噩丿丕賳 禺賵蹖卮鬲賳 丿乇 丨丕賱 賲賳丕夭毓賴 丕蹖 爻賴賲诏蹖賳 丕爻鬲. 丌賳趩賴 讴賴 乇賵 亘賴 乇賵蹖 丕賵爻鬲貨 丕賳賯賱丕亘 賵 賲爻蹖乇蹖 趩賳丿蹖賳 爻丕賱賴 丕爻鬲. 賳賴丕賱蹖 讴賴 亘丕 禺賵賳 賴賲 乇丿蹖賮丕賳 賵 賴賲讴蹖卮丕賳 賵 乇賮蹖賯丕賳卮貙 丌亘蹖丕乇蹖 卮丿賴. 賳賴丕賱蹖 讴賴 丕賲乇賵夭 丿乇禺鬲 爻鬲亘乇蹖 卮丿賴 讴賴 賲蹖賵賴鈥屫ж� 亘賴 丌賳趩賴 讴賴 亘丕蹖丿 孬賲乇 丌賳 賳賴丕賱 賲蹖鈥屫簇� 卮亘丕賴鬲蹖 賳丿丕乇丿.
乇賵亘丕卮賮 丌賳賯丿乇 丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳 賮乇氐鬲 丿丕乇丿 讴賴 賱丨馗賴 賱丨馗賴 诏匕卮鬲賴 乇丕 倬蹖卮 乇賵蹖 禺賵蹖卮 亘亘蹖賳丿 賵 賲乇賵乇 讴賳丿. 丌蹖丕 丌賳趩賴 讴賴 亘乇 爻乇 乇賮蹖賯 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賲蹖鈥屫③屫� 噩夭 鬲丕賵丕賳 丕卮鬲亘丕賴丕鬲 賵 爻讴賵鬲卮 丕爻鬲... 趩賴 讴爻蹖 賲蹖鈥屫з嗀�...
丕賲丕 丌蹖丕 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 賯賴乇賲丕賳蹖 禺賱賱 賳丕倬匕蹖乇 賲蹖鈥屫池ж藏� 賲乇丿蹖 讴賴 亘丕 蹖讴 丕爻鬲丨丕賱賴 鬲丕乇蹖禺蹖 亘賴 賳丿丕蹖 丿乇賵賳 禺賵蹖卮 诏賵卮 賲蹖鈥屫囏� 賵 胤丕睾蹖 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 丕賲丕 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 亘賴 丕蹖賳 爻丕丿诏蹖 賴丕 賴賲 賳蹖爻鬲. 丕賵 賴賳賵夭 賲賯賴賵乇 賵 睾乇賯 丿乇 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵跇蹖 賴丕蹖 丨夭亘 丕爻鬲 賵 丨丕賱丕 賴賲蹖賳 乇賮蹖賯 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕爻鬲貙 讴賴 亘丕蹖丿 丿爻鬲 亘賴 丕賳鬲禺丕亘 亘夭賳丿. 丌蹖丕 丕蹖賳 丌禺乇蹖賳 丕賳鬲禺丕亘 丕賵爻鬲責 丌蹖丕 丕蹖賳 丌禺乇蹖賳 禺丿賲鬲蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 亘賴 丨夭亘 禺賵丕賴丿 讴乇丿責...
丕賳賯賱丕亘蹖賵賳賽 丿蹖乇賵夭貙 倬蹖乇賲乇丿丕賳 丨夭亘貙 丿乇 丨氐丕乇 丿蹖賵丕乇鈥屬囏й� 禺賵丿 爻丕禺鬲賴 丕賳賯賱丕亘 卮丕賳 亘丕賯蹖 賲丕賳丿賴鈥屫з嗀� 賵 丨丕賱丕 賳爻賱蹖 乇賵 亘賴 乇賵蹖 丌賳 賴丕 丕蹖爻鬲丕丿賴 讴賴 亘丕 丕蹖賳 讴賴 丕賳賯賱丕亘 賵 噩賳诏 丿丕禺賱蹖 乇丕 賳丿蹖丿賴貨 丕賲丕 趩賳丕賳 丿賱 爻倬乇丿賴 丌乇賲丕賳 賴丕 賵 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵跇蹖 賴丕蹖 賳爻賱 倬蹖卮蹖賳 卮丿賴 讴賴 乇賵 亘賴 乇賵蹖 乇賴亘乇丕賳 賮讴乇蹖 禺賵蹖卮 賲蹖鈥屫й屫池�. 賵 丕蹖賳 賳爻賱 噩丿蹖丿貙 讴賴 爻丕禺鬲賴 丿爻鬲 賳爻賱 賯亘賱 讴丕賳賴 鬲丕賵丕賳 丕卮鬲亘丕賴丕鬲 鬲丕乇蹖禺蹖 诏匕卮鬲诏丕賳 賵 鬲噩爻賲 賮蹖夭蹖讴蹖 丕毓賲丕賱 丌賳 賴丕 賴蹖趩 乇丨賲蹖 丿乇 亘乇禺賵乇丿 亘丕 倬蹖卮蹖賳蹖丕賳 禺賵丿 賳丿丕乇丿. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賳丕賲 丕蹖賳 賳爻賱 乇丕 丕賳爻丕賳 賳卅丕賳丿乇鬲丕賱 賲蹖鈥屭柏ж必�...
丿乇 丌蹖賳賴 賳賵卮鬲賴 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 丕蹖賳噩丕 乇丕 丿蹖丿賲. 禺賵丿賲丕賳 乇丕 丿蹖丿賲. 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴 乇丕 丿蹖丿賲. 禺蹖賱蹖 丕夭 鬲賵噩蹖賴丕鬲 讴鬲丕亘 亘賴 诏賵卮賲 丌卮賳丕 亘賵丿 賵 丕夭 丕蹖賳 鬲乇蹖亘賵賳 賵 丌賳 鬲乇蹖亘賵賳 夭蹖丕丿 卮賳蹖丿賴 亘賵丿賲. 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 亘賴 賯丿乇蹖 賯賵蹖 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵跇蹖 乇丕 鬲賵囟蹖丨 賲蹖 丿賴丿 讴賴 噩丕賱亘 丕蹖賳噩丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕蹖賳 爻讴賴 丿賵 乇賵 賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗀� 亘乇丕蹖 賲爻鬲亘丿蹖賳 賴賲 亘賴 爻丕賳 丕賳噩蹖賱蹖 亘卮乇 賳賵卮鬲 毓賲賱 讴賳丿. 丕乇噩丕毓丕鬲 賮賵賯鈥屫з勜关ж� 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 賳卮丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫囏� 讴賴 丕賳賯锟斤拷丕亘 賴丕蹖 爻賵爻蹖丕賱蹖爻鬲蹖 賵 丨讴賵賲鬲 賴丕蹖蹖 讴賴 丕夭 丿賱 丕蹖賳 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵跇蹖 賴丕 鬲賵賱蹖丿 卮丿賳丿 趩賴 胤賵乇 丿乇 賳賴丕蹖鬲 賯乇丕卅鬲 鬲丕夭賴 丕蹖 丕夭 賴賲丕賳 賮賱爻賮賴 賴丕蹖 爻蹖丕爻蹖 賲丕讴蹖丕賵賱蹖爻鬲蹖 賴爻鬲賳丿.
丿乇 亘丕夭蹖 爻蹖丕爻鬲 丌賳趩賴 讴賴 賳丕賲卮 乇丕 丕禺賱丕賯 賲蹖鈥屬嗁囒屬� 賲丨賱蹖 丕夭 丕毓乇丕亘 賳丿丕乇丿. 讴丕乇 禺賵亘 賵 亘丿 丿乇 爻蹖丕爻鬲 亘蹖 賲毓賳丕爻鬲. 丿乇爻鬲 賵 睾賱胤蹖 賵噩賵丿 賳丿丕乇丿. 賲丕 丿乇 爻蹖丕爻鬲 鬲賳賴丕 讴丕乇 賲賮蹖丿 賵 賲囟乇 丿丕乇蹖賲... 賴賲蹖賳...
March 16, 2025
匕賵亘 卮丿賴
賲丕锟斤拷乇丕蹖 馗賱賲鬲 丿乇 賳蹖賲乇賵夭貙 乇賲丕賳 禺賵丕賳丿賳蹖 丌乇鬲賵乇 讴爻鬲賱乇 亘賴 爻乇賳賵卮鬲 賮乇丿蹖 亘賴 賳丕賲 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賲蹖鈥屬矩必ж操� 讴賴 乇賵夭诏丕乇蹖 禺賵丿卮 丕夭 趩賴乇賴鈥屬囏й� 賲賴賲 賵 丕賳賯賱丕亘蹖賵賳 丕氐蹖賱 賲丨爻賵亘 賲蹖鈥屫簇� 賵 丨丕賱丕 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 賴賲丕賳 賳馗丕賲蹖 卮丿賴 讴賴 讴賱蹖 亘乇丕卮 夭丨賲鬲 讴卮蹖丿賴. 賴賲丕賳 丕氐胤賱丕丨 賲毓乇賵賮 亘賱毓蹖丿賴 卮丿賳 丕賳賯賱丕亘蹖賵賳 鬲賵爻胤 丕賳賯賱丕亘 蹖丕 丕賳賯賱丕亘 賮乇夭賳丿丕賳 禺賵丿 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫堌必�. 倬爻 丕夭 讴丕亘賵爻 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇蹖 讴賴 诏乇蹖亘丕賳诏蹖乇 乇賵亘丕卮賮 卮丿賴 亘賵丿貙亘丕賱丕禺乇賴 丕賵 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇 賲蹖卮賴 賵 亘賴 夭賳丿丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫з佖�.丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳 賲丕 爻賴 噩賱爻賴 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 丿丕乇蹖賲 賵 丿乇 賳賴丕蹖鬲 丿乇 賮氐賱 丕賳鬲賴丕蹖蹖 丕毓賱丕賲 丨讴賲. 丿乇 胤賵賱 夭賳丿丕賳 乇賵亘丕卮賮 乇賵 賲蹖丕乇賴 亘賴 禺丕胤乇丕鬲 禺賵丿卮. 丕蹖賳讴賴 趩賴 丕賯丿丕賲丕鬲蹖 亘乇丕蹖 丨夭亘 讴乇丿賴 賵 趩賴 丨賯鈥屬囏й屰� 乇賵 賳丕丨賯. 趩賴 丕賳爻丕賳鈥屬囏й屰� 乇賵 賱賴 讴乇丿賴 賵 丿乇 乇丕爻鬲丕蹖 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵跇蹖 趩賴 爻鬲賲鈥屬囏й屰� 讴賴 讴乇丿賴. 賮囟丕蹖 夭賳丿丕賳 賵 丕賳賮乇丕丿蹖 丕蹖賳 賮乇氐鬲 乇賵 亘賴卮 賲蹖丿賴 讴賴 亘賴 诏匕卮鬲賴 禺賵丿卮 乇噩賵毓 讴賳賴 賵 丿乇 丕蹖賳 亘蹖賳 賲禺丕胤亘 賴賲 亘丕 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丕賵 亘蹖卮鬲乇 賵 亘賴鬲乇 丌卮賳丕 賲蹖卮賴. 鬲乇爻蹖賲 賮囟丕蹖 爻乇丿 賵 禺賮賯丕賳 丌賵乇 夭賳丿丕賳 丕夭 賳讴丕鬲 賲孬亘鬲 賲賴賲 讴鬲丕亘 卮賲乇丿賴 賲蹖卮賴. 亘賴 胤賵乇 讴賱蹖 鬲乇讴蹖亘 賯賱賲 賯賵蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 亘丕 鬲噩乇蹖賴 夭蹖爻鬲賴 丕賵貙 賲毓賲賵賱丕 亘賴 賳鬲蹖噩賴 丿乇禺卮丕賳蹖 賲賳噩乇 賲蹖卮賴. 禺賵丿 讴爻鬲賱乇 丿乇 夭賳丿诏蹖 卮禺氐蹖鈥屫ж� 丿賵乇賴 丕蹖 丿乇诏蹖乇 夭賳丿丕賳 賵 丕賳賮乇丕丿蹖 亘賵丿賴 賵 鬲賵賳爻鬲賴 丕夭 丕蹖賳 鬲噩乇亘賴 賴賵賱賳丕讴 丿乇 賳诏丕乇卮 丕蹖賳 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 讴丕賲賱 乇賵 亘亘乇賴. 噩賱爻丕鬲 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 鬲賵爻胤 賴賲讴丕乇丕賳 爻丕亘賯 禺賵丿卮 丕賳噩丕賲 賲蹖卮賴.丕賵賱 丕蹖賵丕賳賮 賵 爻倬爻 诏賱鬲讴蹖賳. 賲亘丕丨孬 賲禺鬲賱賮蹖 賲賵乇丿 亘丨孬 賯乇丕乇 賲蹖诏蹖乇賴 賵 氐乇賮丕 丕蹖賳胤賵乇 賳蹖爻鬲 讴賴 丕鬲賴丕賲丕鬲蹖 乇賵 亘賴 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賳爻亘鬲 亘丿賳丿. 賲孬賱丕 丿乇 噩賱爻賴 丿賵賲 賲亘丕丨孬 噩丕賱亘 賵 鬲丕賲賱 亘乇丕賳诏蹖夭蹖 丿乇 賲賵乇丿 鬲丕乇蹖禺 賵 爻蹖丕爻鬲 賵 爻丕蹖乇 賲爻丕卅賱 亘蹖賳 卮禺氐蹖鬲 賴丕 诏賮鬲賴 賲蹖卮賴. 乇賵賳丿 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 賵 鬲睾蹖蹖乇丕鬲 丨丕賱 賵 丕丨賵丕賱 乇賵亘丕卮賮 亘賴 丕蹖賳 卮讴賱 賴爻鬲 讴賴 丕亘鬲丿丕 賲賳讴乇 丕鬲賴丕賲丕鬲 賲蹖卮賴 賵 丕蹖賳賲 亘诏賲 蹖賴 爻乇蹖 噩乇賲鈥屬囏й� 賳丕讴乇丿賴 亘賴卮 賳爻亘鬲 丿丕丿賴 亘賵丿賳丿 丕賲丕 丿乇 賳賴丕蹖鬲 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丨鬲蹖 讴丕乇賴丕蹖 賳讴乇丿賴 乇賵 賴賲 诏乇丿賳 賲蹖鈥屭屫辟�! 賲爻丕賱賴 丨丕卅夭 丕賴賲蹖鬲 趩乇丕蹖蹖 丕蹖賳 賲爻丕賱賴 丕爻鬲.亘賴 賳馗乇賲 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕夭 乇賵夭蹖 讴賴 毓囟賵 丨夭亘 卮丿 賵 毓讴爻卮 讴賳丕乇 亘夭乇诏丕賳 亘賴 丿乇 賵 丿蹖賵丕乇 趩爻亘蹖丿賴 亘賵丿 賵 亘乇賵 亘蹖丕蹖蹖 丿丕卮鬲 賵 爻賵丕乇 丕爻亘 賱噩丕賲 诏爻蹖禺鬲賴 賯丿乇鬲 亘賵丿 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 卮丿賴 亘賵丿. 丕賵 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 丨夭亘 賵 鬲賮讴乇丕鬲 倬賵爻蹖丿賴 丨夭亘 卮丿賴 亘賵丿. 丕賵 亘賴 賲毓賳蹖 賵丕賯毓蹖 丿乇 丨夭亘 匕賵亘 卮丿賴 亘賵丿. 夭賳丿丕賳 賵 蹖讴 爻乇蹖 賲爻丕卅賱 亘丕毓孬 鬲賱賳诏乇賴丕蹖蹖 丿乇 丕賵 卮丿賴 亘賵丿 丕賲丕 乇賵賳丿蹖 乇賵 鬲睾蹖蹖乇 賳丿丕丿. 鬲賱賳诏乇 丕蹖噩丕丿 卮丿賴 丌賳趩賳丕賳 賯賵蹖 賳亘賵丿 讴賴 賲賳噩乇 亘賴 蹖讴 鬲睾蹖蹖乇 賲毓賳蹖 丿丕乇 亘卮賴. 丕賵 夭賲丕賳蹖 亘賴 夭賳丿丕賳 丕賮鬲丕丿 讴賴 丿乇 賵丕賯毓 賯亘賱卮 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 卮丿賴 亘賵丿. 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 丌乇賲丕賳賴丕蹖 丨夭亘. 夭賳丿丕賳 賲丨賱 鬲賳亘賴 丕賵 賳卮丿. 夭賳丿丕賳 賲丨賱 鬲丨賵賱 丕賵 賳卮丿 讴賴 丌丿賲蹖 讴賴 趩賳丕賳 匕賵亘 丿乇 蹖讴 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵跇蹖 亘卮賴 貙 噩丕蹖蹖 亘乇丕蹖 鬲丨賵賱 賳禺賵丕賴丿 丿丕卮鬲. 丕賵 亘賴 噩乇賲 賴丕蹖 賳讴乇丿賴 賴賲 丕毓鬲乇丕賮 讴乇丿 賵 亘賴 诏乇丿賳 诏乇賮鬲 貙 趩賵賳 賲蹖鈥屫堌ж池� 丌禺乇蹖賳 禺丿賲鬲 禺賵丿卮 賴賲 亘賴 丨夭亘 賵 丕賳賯賱丕亘 賵 丌乇賲丕賳鈥屬囏ж� 亘讴賳賴. 丕賵 賳賮賴賲蹖丿. 賳賴 丿乇 夭賲丕賳蹖 讴賴 丿乇 賯丿乇鬲 亘賵丿 賵 賳賴 丿乇 夭賲丕賳蹖 讴賴 丿乇 讴賳噩 夭賳丿丕賳. 賳賮賴賲蹖丿貙 趩賵賳 乇丕賴鈥屬囏й� 賮賴賲蹖丿賳 乇賵 亘爻鬲賴 亘賵丿. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 讴蹖 亘賵丿責趩蹖 亘賵丿責 亘賴 賳馗乇 賲賳 亘蹖趩丕乇賴.亘賴 賳馗乇 賲賳 鬲乇丨賲 亘乇丕賳诏蹖夭. 丕賵 丨讴賲 禺賵丿卮 乇賵 丕夭 夭賲丕賳蹖 讴賴 亘賴 毓囟賵蹖鬲 丨夭亘 丿乇 丕賵賲丿賴 亘賵丿 丿乇蹖丕賮鬲 讴乇丿賴 亘賵丿....
賲丕锟斤拷乇丕蹖 馗賱賲鬲 丿乇 賳蹖賲乇賵夭貙 乇賲丕賳 禺賵丕賳丿賳蹖 丌乇鬲賵乇 讴爻鬲賱乇 亘賴 爻乇賳賵卮鬲 賮乇丿蹖 亘賴 賳丕賲 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賲蹖鈥屬矩必ж操� 讴賴 乇賵夭诏丕乇蹖 禺賵丿卮 丕夭 趩賴乇賴鈥屬囏й� 賲賴賲 賵 丕賳賯賱丕亘蹖賵賳 丕氐蹖賱 賲丨爻賵亘 賲蹖鈥屫簇� 賵 丨丕賱丕 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 賴賲丕賳 賳馗丕賲蹖 卮丿賴 讴賴 讴賱蹖 亘乇丕卮 夭丨賲鬲 讴卮蹖丿賴. 賴賲丕賳 丕氐胤賱丕丨 賲毓乇賵賮 亘賱毓蹖丿賴 卮丿賳 丕賳賯賱丕亘蹖賵賳 鬲賵爻胤 丕賳賯賱丕亘 蹖丕 丕賳賯賱丕亘 賮乇夭賳丿丕賳 禺賵丿 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫堌必�. 倬爻 丕夭 讴丕亘賵爻 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇蹖 讴賴 诏乇蹖亘丕賳诏蹖乇 乇賵亘丕卮賮 卮丿賴 亘賵丿貙亘丕賱丕禺乇賴 丕賵 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇 賲蹖卮賴 賵 亘賴 夭賳丿丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫з佖�.丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳 賲丕 爻賴 噩賱爻賴 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 丿丕乇蹖賲 賵 丿乇 賳賴丕蹖鬲 丿乇 賮氐賱 丕賳鬲賴丕蹖蹖 丕毓賱丕賲 丨讴賲. 丿乇 胤賵賱 夭賳丿丕賳 乇賵亘丕卮賮 乇賵 賲蹖丕乇賴 亘賴 禺丕胤乇丕鬲 禺賵丿卮. 丕蹖賳讴賴 趩賴 丕賯丿丕賲丕鬲蹖 亘乇丕蹖 丨夭亘 讴乇丿賴 賵 趩賴 丨賯鈥屬囏й屰� 乇賵 賳丕丨賯. 趩賴 丕賳爻丕賳鈥屬囏й屰� 乇賵 賱賴 讴乇丿賴 賵 丿乇 乇丕爻鬲丕蹖 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵跇蹖 趩賴 爻鬲賲鈥屬囏й屰� 讴賴 讴乇丿賴. 賮囟丕蹖 夭賳丿丕賳 賵 丕賳賮乇丕丿蹖 丕蹖賳 賮乇氐鬲 乇賵 亘賴卮 賲蹖丿賴 讴賴 亘賴 诏匕卮鬲賴 禺賵丿卮 乇噩賵毓 讴賳賴 賵 丿乇 丕蹖賳 亘蹖賳 賲禺丕胤亘 賴賲 亘丕 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丕賵 亘蹖卮鬲乇 賵 亘賴鬲乇 丌卮賳丕 賲蹖卮賴. 鬲乇爻蹖賲 賮囟丕蹖 爻乇丿 賵 禺賮賯丕賳 丌賵乇 夭賳丿丕賳 丕夭 賳讴丕鬲 賲孬亘鬲 賲賴賲 讴鬲丕亘 卮賲乇丿賴 賲蹖卮賴. 亘賴 胤賵乇 讴賱蹖 鬲乇讴蹖亘 賯賱賲 賯賵蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 亘丕 鬲噩乇蹖賴 夭蹖爻鬲賴 丕賵貙 賲毓賲賵賱丕 亘賴 賳鬲蹖噩賴 丿乇禺卮丕賳蹖 賲賳噩乇 賲蹖卮賴. 禺賵丿 讴爻鬲賱乇 丿乇 夭賳丿诏蹖 卮禺氐蹖鈥屫ж� 丿賵乇賴 丕蹖 丿乇诏蹖乇 夭賳丿丕賳 賵 丕賳賮乇丕丿蹖 亘賵丿賴 賵 鬲賵賳爻鬲賴 丕夭 丕蹖賳 鬲噩乇亘賴 賴賵賱賳丕讴 丿乇 賳诏丕乇卮 丕蹖賳 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 讴丕賲賱 乇賵 亘亘乇賴. 噩賱爻丕鬲 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 鬲賵爻胤 賴賲讴丕乇丕賳 爻丕亘賯 禺賵丿卮 丕賳噩丕賲 賲蹖卮賴.丕賵賱 丕蹖賵丕賳賮 賵 爻倬爻 诏賱鬲讴蹖賳. 賲亘丕丨孬 賲禺鬲賱賮蹖 賲賵乇丿 亘丨孬 賯乇丕乇 賲蹖诏蹖乇賴 賵 氐乇賮丕 丕蹖賳胤賵乇 賳蹖爻鬲 讴賴 丕鬲賴丕賲丕鬲蹖 乇賵 亘賴 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賳爻亘鬲 亘丿賳丿. 賲孬賱丕 丿乇 噩賱爻賴 丿賵賲 賲亘丕丨孬 噩丕賱亘 賵 鬲丕賲賱 亘乇丕賳诏蹖夭蹖 丿乇 賲賵乇丿 鬲丕乇蹖禺 賵 爻蹖丕爻鬲 賵 爻丕蹖乇 賲爻丕卅賱 亘蹖賳 卮禺氐蹖鬲 賴丕 诏賮鬲賴 賲蹖卮賴. 乇賵賳丿 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 賵 鬲睾蹖蹖乇丕鬲 丨丕賱 賵 丕丨賵丕賱 乇賵亘丕卮賮 亘賴 丕蹖賳 卮讴賱 賴爻鬲 讴賴 丕亘鬲丿丕 賲賳讴乇 丕鬲賴丕賲丕鬲 賲蹖卮賴 賵 丕蹖賳賲 亘诏賲 蹖賴 爻乇蹖 噩乇賲鈥屬囏й� 賳丕讴乇丿賴 亘賴卮 賳爻亘鬲 丿丕丿賴 亘賵丿賳丿 丕賲丕 丿乇 賳賴丕蹖鬲 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丨鬲蹖 讴丕乇賴丕蹖 賳讴乇丿賴 乇賵 賴賲 诏乇丿賳 賲蹖鈥屭屫辟�! 賲爻丕賱賴 丨丕卅夭 丕賴賲蹖鬲 趩乇丕蹖蹖 丕蹖賳 賲爻丕賱賴 丕爻鬲.亘賴 賳馗乇賲 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕夭 乇賵夭蹖 讴賴 毓囟賵 丨夭亘 卮丿 賵 毓讴爻卮 讴賳丕乇 亘夭乇诏丕賳 亘賴 丿乇 賵 丿蹖賵丕乇 趩爻亘蹖丿賴 亘賵丿 賵 亘乇賵 亘蹖丕蹖蹖 丿丕卮鬲 賵 爻賵丕乇 丕爻亘 賱噩丕賲 诏爻蹖禺鬲賴 賯丿乇鬲 亘賵丿 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 卮丿賴 亘賵丿. 丕賵 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 丨夭亘 賵 鬲賮讴乇丕鬲 倬賵爻蹖丿賴 丨夭亘 卮丿賴 亘賵丿. 丕賵 亘賴 賲毓賳蹖 賵丕賯毓蹖 丿乇 丨夭亘 匕賵亘 卮丿賴 亘賵丿. 夭賳丿丕賳 賵 蹖讴 爻乇蹖 賲爻丕卅賱 亘丕毓孬 鬲賱賳诏乇賴丕蹖蹖 丿乇 丕賵 卮丿賴 亘賵丿 丕賲丕 乇賵賳丿蹖 乇賵 鬲睾蹖蹖乇 賳丿丕丿. 鬲賱賳诏乇 丕蹖噩丕丿 卮丿賴 丌賳趩賳丕賳 賯賵蹖 賳亘賵丿 讴賴 賲賳噩乇 亘賴 蹖讴 鬲睾蹖蹖乇 賲毓賳蹖 丿丕乇 亘卮賴. 丕賵 夭賲丕賳蹖 亘賴 夭賳丿丕賳 丕賮鬲丕丿 讴賴 丿乇 賵丕賯毓 賯亘賱卮 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 卮丿賴 亘賵丿. 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 丌乇賲丕賳賴丕蹖 丨夭亘. 夭賳丿丕賳 賲丨賱 鬲賳亘賴 丕賵 賳卮丿. 夭賳丿丕賳 賲丨賱 鬲丨賵賱 丕賵 賳卮丿 讴賴 丌丿賲蹖 讴賴 趩賳丕賳 匕賵亘 丿乇 蹖讴 丕蹖丿卅賵賱賵跇蹖 亘卮賴 貙 噩丕蹖蹖 亘乇丕蹖 鬲丨賵賱 賳禺賵丕賴丿 丿丕卮鬲. 丕賵 亘賴 噩乇賲 賴丕蹖 賳讴乇丿賴 賴賲 丕毓鬲乇丕賮 讴乇丿 賵 亘賴 诏乇丿賳 诏乇賮鬲 貙 趩賵賳 賲蹖鈥屫堌ж池� 丌禺乇蹖賳 禺丿賲鬲 禺賵丿卮 賴賲 亘賴 丨夭亘 賵 丕賳賯賱丕亘 賵 丌乇賲丕賳鈥屬囏ж� 亘讴賳賴. 丕賵 賳賮賴賲蹖丿. 賳賴 丿乇 夭賲丕賳蹖 讴賴 丿乇 賯丿乇鬲 亘賵丿 賵 賳賴 丿乇 夭賲丕賳蹖 讴賴 丿乇 讴賳噩 夭賳丿丕賳. 賳賮賴賲蹖丿貙 趩賵賳 乇丕賴鈥屬囏й� 賮賴賲蹖丿賳 乇賵 亘爻鬲賴 亘賵丿. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 讴蹖 亘賵丿責趩蹖 亘賵丿責 亘賴 賳馗乇 賲賳 亘蹖趩丕乇賴.亘賴 賳馗乇 賲賳 鬲乇丨賲 亘乇丕賳诏蹖夭. 丕賵 丨讴賲 禺賵丿卮 乇賵 丕夭 夭賲丕賳蹖 讴賴 亘賴 毓囟賵蹖鬲 丨夭亘 丿乇 丕賵賲丿賴 亘賵丿 丿乇蹖丕賮鬲 讴乇丿賴 亘賵丿....
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 4, 2018
I need reminders from time to time, like those in this novel, of psychological and moral atrocities, of the hyper-viciousness of a pack lead by unstable maniacs and sociopaths.
Darkness at Noon is a chilling novel about Nicholas Salmanovitch Rubashov, an old Bolshevik, formerly Commissar of the People, and a leader in the 1917 Russian REVolution, who is imprisoned during Stalin's purges after he speaks out against the tyranny of his former comrades. These former comrades torture Rubashov and break him psychologically until he confesses to "crimes" he did not commit.
A powerful political classic.
Darkness at Noon is a chilling novel about Nicholas Salmanovitch Rubashov, an old Bolshevik, formerly Commissar of the People, and a leader in the 1917 Russian REVolution, who is imprisoned during Stalin's purges after he speaks out against the tyranny of his former comrades. These former comrades torture Rubashov and break him psychologically until he confesses to "crimes" he did not commit.
A powerful political classic.
August 26, 2022
This book is oddly relevant to the current political climate of our world. As I have been trying my best to escape that over the past few years, maybe this book was not the best one to read right now!
However, it is a very interesting and thought-provoking book with the theater of politics at its core. Friends become enemies and enemies become friends all depending on which leader is saying what is right and what is wrong at the time. We watch one of the fathers of a political philosophy become one of its victims as a new rank of ideas comes to power. In the process, he becomes jailed with the very people he was responsible for putting there. Also, people he knows become guilty by association even though they really haven鈥檛 done anything at all.
Really it is all just one big chess match where nothing has really changed except for perceptions and which people decide which ideas are going to be executed. It would almost be funny if it is not so scary in its consequences.
4 stars for this interesting exploration into political folly. But not something to read if you don鈥檛 want to be frustrated and possibly angered by the futility of people killing each other over who has the 鈥渞ight鈥� political idea at the time.
However, it is a very interesting and thought-provoking book with the theater of politics at its core. Friends become enemies and enemies become friends all depending on which leader is saying what is right and what is wrong at the time. We watch one of the fathers of a political philosophy become one of its victims as a new rank of ideas comes to power. In the process, he becomes jailed with the very people he was responsible for putting there. Also, people he knows become guilty by association even though they really haven鈥檛 done anything at all.
Really it is all just one big chess match where nothing has really changed except for perceptions and which people decide which ideas are going to be executed. It would almost be funny if it is not so scary in its consequences.
4 stars for this interesting exploration into political folly. But not something to read if you don鈥檛 want to be frustrated and possibly angered by the futility of people killing each other over who has the 鈥渞ight鈥� political idea at the time.
June 1, 2020
蹖讴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 爻蹖丕爻蹖 毓丕賱蹖 丿乇亘丕乇賴 蹖 乇賵亘丕卮賮 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 賮乇賲丕賳丿賴丕賳 丨夭亘 讴賲賵賳蹖爻賲 卮賵乇賵蹖. 讴爻蹖 讴賴 毓讴爻卮 賴賲蹖卮賴 丿乇 讴賳丕乇 卮禺氐 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴 亘賵丿賴 賵賱蹖 蹖讴 乇賵夭 氐亘丨 賲孬賱 鬲賲丕賲 讴丕亘賵爻賴丕蹖蹖 讴賴 賲蹖丿蹖丿賴 亘賴 噩乇賲 禺蹖丕賳鬲 亘賴 丨夭亘 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇 賲蹖卮賵丿 賵 亘賴 夭賳丿丕賳 賲蹖 丕賮鬲丿. 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 卮乇丨 賲丕噩乇丕蹖 夭賳丿丕賳 賵 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 賴丕 賵 賴賲 趩賳蹖賳 卮乇丨 禺丕胤乇丕鬲蹖 丕夭 诏匕卮鬲賴 蹖 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳 亘賴 禺丕胤乇 賲蹖 丌賵乇丿.
禺賵丿 卮禺氐 讴賵爻鬲賱乇貙 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 蹖 讴鬲丕亘貙 賳蹖夭 賯亘賱丕 丿乇 丨夭亘 讴賲賵賳蹖爻鬲 亘賵丿賴 賵 亘毓丿 丕夭 丨夭亘 禺丕乇噩 賲蹖卮賵丿.
賯爻賲鬲 賴丕蹖蹖 丕夭 賲鬲賳 讴鬲丕亘:
"讴爻蹖 讴賴 亘丕 丨讴賵賲鬲 丿蹖讴鬲丕鬲賵乇蹖 賲禺丕賱賮 丕爻鬲貙 亘丕蹖丿 噩賳诏 丿丕禺賱蹖 乇丕 亘賴 毓賳賵丕賳 乇丕賴 丨賱 亘倬匕蹖乇丿. 讴爻蹖 讴賴 丕夭 噩賳诏 丿丕禺賱蹖 诏乇蹖夭丕賳 丕爻鬲貙 亘丕蹖丿 賲禺丕賱賮鬲 乇丕 讴賳丕乇 亘诏匕丕乇丿 賵 丨讴賵賲鬲 丿蹖讴鬲丕鬲賵乇蹖 乇丕 亘倬匕蹖乇丿."
丨夭亘 賲賳讴乇 丕乇丕丿賴鈥屰� 賮乇丿 亘賵丿 賵 丿乇 毓蹖賳 丨丕賱 丕夭 丕賵 鬲賵賯毓 丿丕卮鬲 讴賴 丿丕賵胤賱亘丕賳賴 禺賵丿 乇丕 賯乇亘丕賳蹖 讴賳丿貨 賲賳讴乇 鬲賵丕賳丕蹖蹖 丕賳鬲禺丕亘 丕賵 亘蹖賳 丿賵 乇丕賴 賲鬲賮丕賵鬲 亘賵丿 賵 丿乇 毓蹖賳 丨丕賱 丕夭 丕賵 賲蹖禺賵丕爻鬲 讴賴 賴賲賵丕乇賴 乇丕賴 丿乇爻鬲 乇丕 丕賳鬲禺丕亘 讴賳丿貨 賲賳讴乇 鬲賵丕賳丕蹖蹖 丕賵 丿乇 鬲卮禺蹖氐 禺賵亘 丕夭 亘丿 亘賵丿 賵 丿乇 毓蹖賳 丨丕賱 亘賴 胤乇夭 乇賯鬲 丕賳诏蹖夭蹖 丕夭 诏賳丕賴 賵 禺蹖丕賳鬲 爻禺賳 賲蹖诏賮鬲. 賮乇丿 丿乇 賲毓乇囟 賲氐丕卅亘 丕賯鬲氐丕丿蹖 亘賵丿貨 趩乇禺蹖 亘賵丿 丿乇 賲蹖丕賳 趩乇禺 賵 丿賳丿賴 賴丕蹖 讴賵讴蹖 讴賴 蹖讴爻乇賴 鬲丕 丕亘丿蹖鬲 讴賵讴 卮丿賴 亘賵丿 賵 丨乇讴鬲卮 乇丕 賳賲蹖卮丿 賲鬲賵賯賮 讴乇丿 蹖丕 亘乇 丌賳 鬲丕孬蹖乇 诏匕丕卮鬲 賵 丨夭亘 賲蹖禺賵丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕蹖賳 趩乇禺 亘乇 丌賳 讴賵讴 卮賵乇卮 讴賳丿 賵 賲爻蹖乇 丨乇讴鬲卮 乇丕 鬲睾蹖蹖乇 丿賴丿. 蹖讴 噩丕蹖 丕蹖賳 賲丨丕爻亘賴 丕卮鬲亘丕賴 亘賵丿貨 丕蹖賳 賲毓丕丿賱賴 丿乇爻鬲 丕夭 讴丕乇 丿乇賳賲蹖 丌賲丿.
禺賵丿 卮禺氐 讴賵爻鬲賱乇貙 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 蹖 讴鬲丕亘貙 賳蹖夭 賯亘賱丕 丿乇 丨夭亘 讴賲賵賳蹖爻鬲 亘賵丿賴 賵 亘毓丿 丕夭 丨夭亘 禺丕乇噩 賲蹖卮賵丿.
賯爻賲鬲 賴丕蹖蹖 丕夭 賲鬲賳 讴鬲丕亘:
"讴爻蹖 讴賴 亘丕 丨讴賵賲鬲 丿蹖讴鬲丕鬲賵乇蹖 賲禺丕賱賮 丕爻鬲貙 亘丕蹖丿 噩賳诏 丿丕禺賱蹖 乇丕 亘賴 毓賳賵丕賳 乇丕賴 丨賱 亘倬匕蹖乇丿. 讴爻蹖 讴賴 丕夭 噩賳诏 丿丕禺賱蹖 诏乇蹖夭丕賳 丕爻鬲貙 亘丕蹖丿 賲禺丕賱賮鬲 乇丕 讴賳丕乇 亘诏匕丕乇丿 賵 丨讴賵賲鬲 丿蹖讴鬲丕鬲賵乇蹖 乇丕 亘倬匕蹖乇丿."
丨夭亘 賲賳讴乇 丕乇丕丿賴鈥屰� 賮乇丿 亘賵丿 賵 丿乇 毓蹖賳 丨丕賱 丕夭 丕賵 鬲賵賯毓 丿丕卮鬲 讴賴 丿丕賵胤賱亘丕賳賴 禺賵丿 乇丕 賯乇亘丕賳蹖 讴賳丿貨 賲賳讴乇 鬲賵丕賳丕蹖蹖 丕賳鬲禺丕亘 丕賵 亘蹖賳 丿賵 乇丕賴 賲鬲賮丕賵鬲 亘賵丿 賵 丿乇 毓蹖賳 丨丕賱 丕夭 丕賵 賲蹖禺賵丕爻鬲 讴賴 賴賲賵丕乇賴 乇丕賴 丿乇爻鬲 乇丕 丕賳鬲禺丕亘 讴賳丿貨 賲賳讴乇 鬲賵丕賳丕蹖蹖 丕賵 丿乇 鬲卮禺蹖氐 禺賵亘 丕夭 亘丿 亘賵丿 賵 丿乇 毓蹖賳 丨丕賱 亘賴 胤乇夭 乇賯鬲 丕賳诏蹖夭蹖 丕夭 诏賳丕賴 賵 禺蹖丕賳鬲 爻禺賳 賲蹖诏賮鬲. 賮乇丿 丿乇 賲毓乇囟 賲氐丕卅亘 丕賯鬲氐丕丿蹖 亘賵丿貨 趩乇禺蹖 亘賵丿 丿乇 賲蹖丕賳 趩乇禺 賵 丿賳丿賴 賴丕蹖 讴賵讴蹖 讴賴 蹖讴爻乇賴 鬲丕 丕亘丿蹖鬲 讴賵讴 卮丿賴 亘賵丿 賵 丨乇讴鬲卮 乇丕 賳賲蹖卮丿 賲鬲賵賯賮 讴乇丿 蹖丕 亘乇 丌賳 鬲丕孬蹖乇 诏匕丕卮鬲 賵 丨夭亘 賲蹖禺賵丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕蹖賳 趩乇禺 亘乇 丌賳 讴賵讴 卮賵乇卮 讴賳丿 賵 賲爻蹖乇 丨乇讴鬲卮 乇丕 鬲睾蹖蹖乇 丿賴丿. 蹖讴 噩丕蹖 丕蹖賳 賲丨丕爻亘賴 丕卮鬲亘丕賴 亘賵丿貨 丕蹖賳 賲毓丕丿賱賴 丿乇爻鬲 丕夭 讴丕乇 丿乇賳賲蹖 丌賲丿.
February 9, 2025
The biblical book of Genesis depicts God creating humanity in an idyllic garden, where they were intended to live in loving community with himself and each other. It also depicts the disobedience of the first human pair, which estranged them from God, perverted their moral nature, and brought down the curse of death, disease, and general uncooperativeness on the part of created nature. Throughout the rest of the Old and New Testaments, with increasing clarity, the biblical writers promise that God is bringing about moral transformation in responsive individuals, and that at the climax of history He will act to bring about a New Earth for this new community, with sin removed, the curse lifted, and idyllic life forever restored. What, you might ask, does any of that have to do with reviewing a book published in 1941 by a writer who, though ethnically Jewish, apparently had no particular religious beliefs? Well ...more than you might think.
In the "civilized" parts of the Western world, for some 12 centuries starting in the reign of the Roman Emperor Constantine, those with political and economic power at least nominally believed in the vision described above. Although those centuries saw great changes in socio-political and material culture, they were so gradual that most people didn't take account of change as a social factor. But by the early 1500s, change was becoming fast enough that, in a world still very marred by sin and suffering, both wealthy and poor commoners began to get the idea that changes in their lot might be possible. 16th-century Europe saw some bloody insurrections of both peasants and the urban poor, who had the basic idea that by taking up the sword against their oppressors, they could force God's hand to bring the climactic deliverance NOW!
Those attempts to jump-start the New Earth were still traditionally theistic. By the late 1700s, though, disbelief in the biblical God was more widespread. Among the wealthy commoners, the intellectuals they supported, and any of the poor who took ideological cues from them, more and more people either jettisoned the concept of God, or replaced Him with a neutered facsimile who revealed himself only through (their own) infallible Reason. But rather than giving up on the New Earth, they concluded that they could usher it in themselves. The curse wouldn't be miraculously lifted, but rather Science would conquer death, disease and uncooperative nature; humans wouldn't require moral reformation one by one, but the whole collective nature of the race would be forcibly changed in mass. If the True Believers could just centralize all levers of political and economic power, ensure a permanent grip on those levers, eradicate all vestiges of past human culture, indoctrinate the world with their own values, and if necessary kill off enough of the recalcitrant, then the Utopian New World would come forever. The French Revolution represented the first grand-scale effort to actually put that program into practice (it's not a coincidence that some of the characters in this novel are so interested in comparing/contrasting themselves to the leaders of that revolution!), and the conflict between the adherents of that vision vs. the one described in the first paragraph above underlies all of the political and cultural issues of the modern West.
It's also the indispensable backdrop against which to understand Darkness at Noon, which is very much a "novel of ideas." Hungarian-born, German-speaking Arthur Koestler --disillusioned ex-Communist, with first-hand experience both of life in Stalin's U.S.S.R. and of being on the run from the Nazis under his belt-- provides us here with a peephole into what was then the most recent, and most widely admired, of the incarnations of the purely human-made approach to Utopia. It's a peephole, not a panorama; our setting is the claustrophobic confines of Moscow's Lubyanka Prison, though we sometimes range farther afield in the protagonist's flashbacks. But although it's fiction, it's based very solidly on the milieu of the real-life 1930s Stalinist purge trials, which Stalin used to solidify his absolute dictatorship over Soviet society against those critics within the Party who questioned the necessity for the horrors he visited on a lot of human beings (all, of course, in the process of building a supposed wonderful new world). The all-purpose justification that "the end justifies the means" (which is common to all hard-Left parties in all countries then and now, not just the former U.S.S.R.) gets trotted out a lot here; and it even has traction with protagonist Rubashov, who's himself a Communist and former "Commissar of the People". But the countervailing idea is that "only purity of means can justify the ends."
IMO, Koestler (who I think put a lot of himself into Rubashov's character!) doesn't go quite deep enough into his philosophical analysis of the moral failure of the Soviet experience. He still imagines that the end result of a man-made Utopia is good, and do-able; he just no longer imagines that you can get there faster by throwing away ethical considerations in how you treat human beings, and by vesting absolute power in a supposedly infallible leader. But as long as you operate with the assumption that humanity is alone in an accidental and purposeless universe, with no reference point outside itself, and that ethical considerations are themselves all subjective, you have an inevitable ratchet towards the idea that the end justifies the means, which is why it's so pervasive in "Utopian" thinking. To my mind, only the biblical vision provides a convincing alternative. But the author deserves credit for presenting one of the 20th-century's most powerful critiques of totalitarian Utopianism. I read it not very long after graduating from high school, and it made an impression on me that endures to this day.
As a trigger-warning note, one of the flashbacks here has a horrific description of animal cruelty, which will be particularly harrowing for cat lovers!
In the "civilized" parts of the Western world, for some 12 centuries starting in the reign of the Roman Emperor Constantine, those with political and economic power at least nominally believed in the vision described above. Although those centuries saw great changes in socio-political and material culture, they were so gradual that most people didn't take account of change as a social factor. But by the early 1500s, change was becoming fast enough that, in a world still very marred by sin and suffering, both wealthy and poor commoners began to get the idea that changes in their lot might be possible. 16th-century Europe saw some bloody insurrections of both peasants and the urban poor, who had the basic idea that by taking up the sword against their oppressors, they could force God's hand to bring the climactic deliverance NOW!
Those attempts to jump-start the New Earth were still traditionally theistic. By the late 1700s, though, disbelief in the biblical God was more widespread. Among the wealthy commoners, the intellectuals they supported, and any of the poor who took ideological cues from them, more and more people either jettisoned the concept of God, or replaced Him with a neutered facsimile who revealed himself only through (their own) infallible Reason. But rather than giving up on the New Earth, they concluded that they could usher it in themselves. The curse wouldn't be miraculously lifted, but rather Science would conquer death, disease and uncooperative nature; humans wouldn't require moral reformation one by one, but the whole collective nature of the race would be forcibly changed in mass. If the True Believers could just centralize all levers of political and economic power, ensure a permanent grip on those levers, eradicate all vestiges of past human culture, indoctrinate the world with their own values, and if necessary kill off enough of the recalcitrant, then the Utopian New World would come forever. The French Revolution represented the first grand-scale effort to actually put that program into practice (it's not a coincidence that some of the characters in this novel are so interested in comparing/contrasting themselves to the leaders of that revolution!), and the conflict between the adherents of that vision vs. the one described in the first paragraph above underlies all of the political and cultural issues of the modern West.
It's also the indispensable backdrop against which to understand Darkness at Noon, which is very much a "novel of ideas." Hungarian-born, German-speaking Arthur Koestler --disillusioned ex-Communist, with first-hand experience both of life in Stalin's U.S.S.R. and of being on the run from the Nazis under his belt-- provides us here with a peephole into what was then the most recent, and most widely admired, of the incarnations of the purely human-made approach to Utopia. It's a peephole, not a panorama; our setting is the claustrophobic confines of Moscow's Lubyanka Prison, though we sometimes range farther afield in the protagonist's flashbacks. But although it's fiction, it's based very solidly on the milieu of the real-life 1930s Stalinist purge trials, which Stalin used to solidify his absolute dictatorship over Soviet society against those critics within the Party who questioned the necessity for the horrors he visited on a lot of human beings (all, of course, in the process of building a supposed wonderful new world). The all-purpose justification that "the end justifies the means" (which is common to all hard-Left parties in all countries then and now, not just the former U.S.S.R.) gets trotted out a lot here; and it even has traction with protagonist Rubashov, who's himself a Communist and former "Commissar of the People". But the countervailing idea is that "only purity of means can justify the ends."
IMO, Koestler (who I think put a lot of himself into Rubashov's character!) doesn't go quite deep enough into his philosophical analysis of the moral failure of the Soviet experience. He still imagines that the end result of a man-made Utopia is good, and do-able; he just no longer imagines that you can get there faster by throwing away ethical considerations in how you treat human beings, and by vesting absolute power in a supposedly infallible leader. But as long as you operate with the assumption that humanity is alone in an accidental and purposeless universe, with no reference point outside itself, and that ethical considerations are themselves all subjective, you have an inevitable ratchet towards the idea that the end justifies the means, which is why it's so pervasive in "Utopian" thinking. To my mind, only the biblical vision provides a convincing alternative. But the author deserves credit for presenting one of the 20th-century's most powerful critiques of totalitarian Utopianism. I read it not very long after graduating from high school, and it made an impression on me that endures to this day.
As a trigger-warning note, one of the flashbacks here has a horrific description of animal cruelty, which will be particularly harrowing for cat lovers!
August 9, 2018
Nothing is worse in prison than the consciousness of one's innocence; it prevents acclimatization and undermines one's morale...
Comrade Rubashov has been arrested. But this is nothing. He's been around this block before. He knows, for instance, this truth about the consciousness of innocence - as the unseen man in the neighboring cell clearly does not. The unseen man who taps at the pipe...who is in many ways not unlike the conscience Comrade Rubashov put into storage some forty years before; the internal saboteur he's energetically barred from congress with the rest of his psyche; the empathetic weakness that tap-tap-taps so foolishly against the hardened steel of his intellect's door. It's a tap-tap-tap one indulges, but fails to politically profit by.
Koestler's classic, Darkness at Noon, follows the aging Rubashov through the days and nights of this imprisonment. His time on the political stage is coming to a close. His peers within the regime, once lions of Communist might, have been picked off by the younger cubs of the Revolutionary State. Philosophical Neanderthals, he calls them, and yet they are the future. And in the weeks that follow we will watch him come to terms with this reality in the same manner, it has long been suspected, Arthur Koestler was forced to come to terms with his own socialist past. It is a stark and unforgiving light he shines on Communist Party politics. When coupled with the blinding pain of a man whose incarceration shifts, splits and mutates through the physical, the intellectual, the emotional...well, let's just say I thought the comparisons to Kafka and Dostoevsky were both accurate and deserved.
Comrade Rubashov has been arrested. But this is nothing. He's been around this block before. He knows, for instance, this truth about the consciousness of innocence - as the unseen man in the neighboring cell clearly does not. The unseen man who taps at the pipe...who is in many ways not unlike the conscience Comrade Rubashov put into storage some forty years before; the internal saboteur he's energetically barred from congress with the rest of his psyche; the empathetic weakness that tap-tap-taps so foolishly against the hardened steel of his intellect's door. It's a tap-tap-tap one indulges, but fails to politically profit by.
Koestler's classic, Darkness at Noon, follows the aging Rubashov through the days and nights of this imprisonment. His time on the political stage is coming to a close. His peers within the regime, once lions of Communist might, have been picked off by the younger cubs of the Revolutionary State. Philosophical Neanderthals, he calls them, and yet they are the future. And in the weeks that follow we will watch him come to terms with this reality in the same manner, it has long been suspected, Arthur Koestler was forced to come to terms with his own socialist past. It is a stark and unforgiving light he shines on Communist Party politics. When coupled with the blinding pain of a man whose incarceration shifts, splits and mutates through the physical, the intellectual, the emotional...well, let's just say I thought the comparisons to Kafka and Dostoevsky were both accurate and deserved.
June 27, 2015
Darkness at Noon is one of the classics of anti-totalitarian literature, often mentioned alongside novels such as Brave New World and 1984. While both these novels are fictions based on an idea of a totalitarian state, Darkness at Noon is a clear allegory of Soviet Russia during the 1930's - the time of the Moscow show trials and the Great Purge.
Although the author openly acknowledges this in the preface, the country in which the book is set is never named - though he includes specific details regarding it, so there never is any doubt. Character are less people than ideas and themes they represent - the main protagonist, Rubashov, is an amalgamation of all of the Old Bolsheviks who were persecuted by Stalin in the 30's. The plot focuses on Rubashov's imprisonment in an unnamed facility, his interaction with fellow inmates and ongoing interrogation. Koestler does a great job with presenting a convincing portrait of a man trying to endure oppression and isolation - he apparently drew inspiration from his own experiences from Spain, where he was imprisoned by Franco's forces during the civil war.
It is interesting to note that contrary to many protagonists of anti-totalitarian novels, Rubashov is not an ordinary and innocent citizen persecuted by the overwhelming regime - he is one of the people who have actively participated in bringing this very regime into being, causing suffering and misery for fellow citizens along the way. This question begins to haunt Rubashov - what, exactly, is he fighting for? What is the weight of individual human life when measured against a possibility of prosperity and contentment for generations to come? Can we sacrifice tens, thousands and even millions of such lives if we will ultimately eliminate suffering for all in the future? Does the nobility of the goal excuse the means used to obtain it, and sacrifices required by it? While we might sympathize with Rubashov because of how he is treated and the conditions that he is in, we must also remember that he is reaping exactly what he has sown with his own hands - something that he begins to understand and ultimately accept throughout the novel.
It is also important to see the book in its historical context. At the time of publication (1940), it was not uncommon to find many foreigners who were sympathetic to Stalin and his rule of the Soviet Union, praising his achievements of industrializing the country and bettering life for his people - and either ignoring what reports there were of his tyranny, or excusing them as historically inevitable. One of the more famous examples is the American journalist and correspondent for the New York Times Walter Duranty, who in the 1930's not only tried to justify Stalin's government but openly denounced in his reporting that any famine was taking place in the Ukraine - a result of Stalin's policy of collectivizing agriculture, which took several million lives in an area with some of the world's richest farmland. Many other foreigners - both intellectuals who never worked physically in their life, and laborers who never rested - romanticized the Soviet Union, in which they saw hope for a real and viable alternative to the unfair capitalist order - their memories of the Great Depression were still fresh and strong - but, unlike Duranty, they believed in the ideas of fairness, equality and prosperity for all, which the Soviet government claimed to stand for; as they learned of how a real revolution was hijacked and twisted into a totalitarian nightmare, they denounced it. Walter Duranty was fully aware of the fact that hunger victims could have extended well into millions, but nonetheless continued to report that there was no famine - did he believe in the Soviet vision? Did he believe that Stalin's actions were justified by what he claimed to be his intent - an utopia? Inexplicably, one can find people with views very similar to his decades after Stalin's policy was proven to be a deadly failure, ready to defend him and excuse his actions. What are they defending? A paradise which never arrived?
Koehler's book has the distinction of being probably the first book of fiction to address Stalin's brand of totalitarianism almost by name - but in historical context it puts it slightly below novels 1984 and Brave New World, as it is inseparably tied to one particular regime and period in history which has since been analyzed by countless scholars - while both Orwell and Huxley had visions of future for the entire world. Still, it is certainly worth reading if you are at all interested in the topic of an individual living in a totalitarian system - and I also have to absolutely recommend Czes艂aw Mi艂osz's The Captive Mind, which is a terrific analysis of the very topic and has the bonus of being non-fiction.
Although the author openly acknowledges this in the preface, the country in which the book is set is never named - though he includes specific details regarding it, so there never is any doubt. Character are less people than ideas and themes they represent - the main protagonist, Rubashov, is an amalgamation of all of the Old Bolsheviks who were persecuted by Stalin in the 30's. The plot focuses on Rubashov's imprisonment in an unnamed facility, his interaction with fellow inmates and ongoing interrogation. Koestler does a great job with presenting a convincing portrait of a man trying to endure oppression and isolation - he apparently drew inspiration from his own experiences from Spain, where he was imprisoned by Franco's forces during the civil war.
It is interesting to note that contrary to many protagonists of anti-totalitarian novels, Rubashov is not an ordinary and innocent citizen persecuted by the overwhelming regime - he is one of the people who have actively participated in bringing this very regime into being, causing suffering and misery for fellow citizens along the way. This question begins to haunt Rubashov - what, exactly, is he fighting for? What is the weight of individual human life when measured against a possibility of prosperity and contentment for generations to come? Can we sacrifice tens, thousands and even millions of such lives if we will ultimately eliminate suffering for all in the future? Does the nobility of the goal excuse the means used to obtain it, and sacrifices required by it? While we might sympathize with Rubashov because of how he is treated and the conditions that he is in, we must also remember that he is reaping exactly what he has sown with his own hands - something that he begins to understand and ultimately accept throughout the novel.
It is also important to see the book in its historical context. At the time of publication (1940), it was not uncommon to find many foreigners who were sympathetic to Stalin and his rule of the Soviet Union, praising his achievements of industrializing the country and bettering life for his people - and either ignoring what reports there were of his tyranny, or excusing them as historically inevitable. One of the more famous examples is the American journalist and correspondent for the New York Times Walter Duranty, who in the 1930's not only tried to justify Stalin's government but openly denounced in his reporting that any famine was taking place in the Ukraine - a result of Stalin's policy of collectivizing agriculture, which took several million lives in an area with some of the world's richest farmland. Many other foreigners - both intellectuals who never worked physically in their life, and laborers who never rested - romanticized the Soviet Union, in which they saw hope for a real and viable alternative to the unfair capitalist order - their memories of the Great Depression were still fresh and strong - but, unlike Duranty, they believed in the ideas of fairness, equality and prosperity for all, which the Soviet government claimed to stand for; as they learned of how a real revolution was hijacked and twisted into a totalitarian nightmare, they denounced it. Walter Duranty was fully aware of the fact that hunger victims could have extended well into millions, but nonetheless continued to report that there was no famine - did he believe in the Soviet vision? Did he believe that Stalin's actions were justified by what he claimed to be his intent - an utopia? Inexplicably, one can find people with views very similar to his decades after Stalin's policy was proven to be a deadly failure, ready to defend him and excuse his actions. What are they defending? A paradise which never arrived?
Koehler's book has the distinction of being probably the first book of fiction to address Stalin's brand of totalitarianism almost by name - but in historical context it puts it slightly below novels 1984 and Brave New World, as it is inseparably tied to one particular regime and period in history which has since been analyzed by countless scholars - while both Orwell and Huxley had visions of future for the entire world. Still, it is certainly worth reading if you are at all interested in the topic of an individual living in a totalitarian system - and I also have to absolutely recommend Czes艂aw Mi艂osz's The Captive Mind, which is a terrific analysis of the very topic and has the bonus of being non-fiction.
December 15, 2024
-爻乇亘丕夭丕賳 毓蹖爻蹖 乇丕 亘賴 丿丕禺賱 賲丨賵胤賴贁 賰丕禺 賮乇賲丕賳丿丕乇蹖 亘乇丿賳丿 賵 鬲賲丕賲 诏乇賵賴丕賳 乇丕 噩賲毓 賰乇丿賳丿. 丌賳賴丕 乇丿丕蹖 丕乇睾賵丕賳蹖 乇丕 亘賴 丕賵 倬賵卮丕賳蹖丿賳丿 賵 鬲丕噩蹖 丕夭 禺丕乇 亘丕賮鬲賴 乇賵蹖 爻乇卮 诏匕丕卮鬲賳丿 賵 亘賴 丕賵 丕丿丕蹖 丕丨鬲乇丕賲 賰乇丿賴 賲蹖鈥屭佖嗀�: 芦爻賱丕賲貙 丕蹖 倬丕丿卮丕賴 蹖賴賵丿.禄 賵 亘丕 趩賵亘 亘乇 爻乇卮 賲蹖鈥屫藏嗀� 賵 亘賴 乇賵蹖卮 丌亘 丿賴丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫з嗀ж嗀�. 亘毓丿 倬蹖卮 丕賵 夭丕賳賵 夭丿賴 賵 鬲毓馗蹖賲 賲蹖鈥屭┴必嗀�. 賵賯鬲蹖 賲爻禺乇诏蹖鈥屬囏� 鬲賲丕賲 卮丿貙 丌賳賴丕 賱亘丕爻 丕乇睾賵丕賳蹖 乇丕 丕夭 鬲賳卮 丿乇丌賵乇丿賴 賵 賱亘丕爻鈥屬囏й� 禺賵丿卮 乇丕 亘賴 丕賵 倬賵卮丕賳蹖丿賳丿 賵 丕賵 乇丕 亘蹖乇賵賳 亘乇丿賳丿 鬲丕 賲氐賱賵亘 賰賳賳丿. [..]
-丿乇 賵賯鬲 馗賴乇貙 鬲丕乇蹖讴蹖 鬲賲丕賲 丌賳 爻乇夭賲蹖賳 乇丕 賮乇丕诏乇賮鬲 賵 鬲丕 爻賴 爻丕毓鬲 丕丿丕賲賴 丿丕卮鬲. 丿乇 爻丕毓鬲 爻賴 亘毓丿 丕夭 馗賴乇貙 毓蹖爻蹖 亘丕 氐丿丕蹖 亘賱賳丿 诏賮鬲: 芦丕蹖賱蹖貙 丕蹖賱蹖 賱賲丕 爻亘賯鬲賳蹖責禄 蹖毓賳蹖 芦禺丿丕蹖 賲賳貙 禺丿丕蹖 賲賳貙 趩乇丕 賲乇丕 鬲乇讴 賰乇丿蹖責禄
丕賳噩蹖賱 賲乇賯爻 亘丕亘 倬丕賳夭丿賴賲 郾鄱-鄄郯 賵 鄢鄢-鄢鄣
賲乇孬蹖賴鈥屰� 蹖讴 乇賵蹖丕
乇賵亘丕卮賮 讴賲蹖爻乇 禺賱賯 丿乇 丕賲賵乇 丿丕禺賱蹖 丕鬲丨丕丿 噩賲丕賴蹖乇 丕夭 讴丕亘賵爻 賵丨卮鬲賳丕讴蹖 倬乇蹖丿. 禺賵丕亘 賲蹖鈥屫屫� 讴賴 丿賵 賳賮乇 丕夭 丕毓囟丕蹖 丨讴賵賲鬲 丿蹖讴鬲丕鬲賵乇蹖 丌賱賲丕賳 亘丕 蹖賵賳蹖賮賵乇賲 賲禺氐賵氐 賵 賳卮丕賳鈥� 賲毓乇賵賮 氐賱蹖亘 卮讴爻鬲賴 亘乇 亘丕夭賵 亘乇丕蹖 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇蹖 丕賵 丌賲丿賴 丕賳丿. 丿乇 倬丕诏乇丿 鬲丕乇蹖讴 爻丕禺鬲賲丕賳 丕蹖爻鬲丕丿賴 賵 亘賴 丿乇 賲蹖鈥屭┵堌ㄙ嗀�. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 爻毓蹖 賲蹖鈥屭┴必� 丿乇 夭賲賴乇蹖乇 丕爻鬲禺賵丕賳鈥屫迟堌� 丕鬲丕賯卮 乇賵亘丿賵卮丕賲亘乇卮 乇丕 亘倬賵卮丿 賵賱蹖 丌爻鬲蹖賳卮 倬卮鬲 賵 乇賵 卮丿賴 丕爻鬲 賵 丿爻鬲卮 丿乇 丌爻鬲蹖賳 賳賲蹖鈥屫辟堌�. 丕夭 丕蹖賳 丿乇賲丕賳丿诏蹖 毓匕丕亘鈥屫①堌� 毓乇賯 爻乇丿蹖 亘乇 倬蹖卮丕賳蹖 丕賵 賲蹖鈥屬嗀篡屬嗀�. 氐丿丕蹖 胤亘賱鈥屬堌ж� 讴賵亘卮 丿乇 亘賴 诏賵卮 賲蹖鈥屫必池�. 爻乇丕賳噩丕賲 丕夭 丨爻 丿乇丿賳丕讴 囟乇亘賴鈥屫й� 亘賴 倬卮鬲 爻乇 亘蹖丿丕乇 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 丨爻蹖 亘賴 丿乇丿賳丕讴蹖 爻賯賵胤 丕夭 丕乇鬲賮丕毓蹖 亘賱賳丿. 丨丕賱丕 亘蹖丿丕乇 丕爻鬲貙
賵賱蹖 賴賳賵夭 亘賴 丿乇 賲蹖鈥屭┵堌ㄙ嗀�.
倬丕讴爻丕夭蹖 亘夭乇诏
丕賵賱 丕夭 賴賲賴 亘诏賲 讴賴 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 亘賴 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 乇賲丕賳鈥屬囏й� 爻蹖丕爻蹖鈥屫й� 鬲亘丿蹖賱 卮丿 讴賴 鬲丕 亘賴 丨丕賱 禺賵賳丿賴鈥屫з�. 爻賵丕蹖 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬矩必ж槽屸€� 賮賵賯鈥屫з勜关ж� 賵 倬賱丕鬲 丿丕爻鬲丕賳蹖 鬲讴乇丕乇卮賵賳丿賴鈥屰� 噩匕丕亘 賵 乇賵蹖丕诏賵賳賴鈥屫� 讴賴 賴賲蹖卮賴 爻賵丕賱丕鬲 夭蹖丕丿蹖 乇賵 丿乇賵賳 匕賴賳 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 丕蹖噩丕丿 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁� 賵 丕賵賳 乇賵 亘賴 丨丕賱鬲 禺賱爻賴 賮乇賵 賲蹖鈥屫ㄘ辟囏� 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 禺賵亘 鬲賵賳爻鬲賴 禺卮賵賳鬲 賲禺氐賵氐蹖 讴賴 賱丕夭賲賴鈥屰� 賲丨蹖胤 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴 乇賵 亘賴 賲禺丕胤亘 丕賱賯丕 亘讴賳賴. 丌乇鬲賵乇 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴鈥屰� 丌賱賲丕賳蹖 夭亘丕賳 賲噩丕乇貙 讴鬲丕亘 馗賱賲鬲 丿乇 賳蹖賲乇賵夭 乇賵 丿乇 爻丕賱 郾酃鄞郯 賵 倬爻 丕夭 丕爻鬲毓賮丕 丕夭 丨夭亘 讴賲賵賳蹖爻鬲 賵 賮乇丕乇 丕夭 讴卮賵乇 卮賵乇賵蹖 賵 倬賳丕賴 诏乇賮鬲賳 亘賴 賮乇丕賳爻賴 賵 爻倬爻 丕賳诏賱爻鬲丕賳 丿乇 丨蹖賳 噩賳诏鈥屫囏з嗃屸€� 丿賵賲 賳賵卮鬲. 丕爻賲 讴鬲丕亘 鬲賱賲蹖丨蹖 丕爻鬲 亘賴 乇賵夭 賲氐賱賵亘 卮丿賳 賲爻蹖丨 賵 鬲丕乇蹖讴鈥屫簇� 乇賵夭 丿乇 賴賳诏丕賲 馗賴乇. 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賯乇亘丕賳蹖丕賳 丿賵乇賴鈥屰� 倬丕讴爻丕夭蹖 亘夭乇诏 蹖丕 賵丨卮鬲 讴亘蹖乇 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳 亘蹖賳 爻丕賱鈥屬囏й� 郾酃鄢鄱 鬲丕 郾酃鄢鄹 賲蹖賱丕丿蹖 乇賵 丕爻鬲丕丿丕賳賴 亘賴 鬲氐賵蹖乇 讴卮蹖丿賴. 丿乇 丿賵乇賴鈥屸€屰� 倬丕讴爻丕夭蹖 亘夭乇诏貙 丨丿賵丿 蹖讴 賵 賳蹖賲 賲蹖賱蹖賵賳 賳賮乇 丕夭 賲賯丕賲丕鬲 丿賵賱鬲蹖 賵 讴卮賵乇蹖 賵 賱卮讴乇蹖 丨讴賵賲鬲 卮賵乇賵蹖 亘賴 賴賲乇丕賴 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴鈥屬囏й屫簇з� 亘賴 丕鬲賴丕賲 鬲賵胤卅賴貙 禺蹖丕賳鬲 賵 噩丕爻賵爻蹖貙 亘賴 丿爻鬲賵乇 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 賵 賯乇蹖亘 亘賴 賳氐賮 丌賳賴丕 丕毓丿丕賲 卮丿賳丿. 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 亘毓丿 丕夭 丕毓丿丕賲 亘賵禺丕乇蹖賳 賵 乇丕丿賽讴 丕夭 鬲卅賵乇蹖爻蹖賳鈥屬囏й� 亘賱卮賵蹖蹖讴蹖 丕賳賯賱丕亘 乇賵爻蹖赖 亘賵丿 讴賴 亘丕 丨夭亘 丕鬲賲丕賲 丨噩鬲 讴乇丿.
賲丨丕讴賲赖
讴鬲丕亘 丕夭 趩賴丕乇 亘禺卮 毓賲丿賴 鬲卮讴蹖賱 卮丿賴: 爻賴 丿丕丿乇爻蹖 賵 蹖讴 亘禺卮 亘賴 賳丕賲 賵賴賲 丿爻鬲賵乇蹖. 丕亘鬲丿丕蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 亘丕 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賲丕賲賵乇 丨夭亘 讴賲賵賳蹖爻鬲 卮賵乇賵蹖 賲賵丕噩賴 賲蹖鈥屫篡屬� 讴賴 丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳 丨夭亘 亘賴 爻乇 賲蹖鈥屫ㄘ辟囏� 賵 亘毓丿 丕夭 禺丕乇噩 卮丿賳 丕夭 蹖讴 丨丕賱鬲 禺賱爻賴 賵 乇賵蹖丕 賵 禺丕胤乇賴 賵囟毓蹖鬲 禺賵丿卮 乇賵 丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫迟嗀囏� 噩蹖乇賴鈥屰� 睾匕丕蹖蹖 丕賳丿讴蹖 丿丕乇賴貙 爻蹖诏丕乇卮 乇賵鈥屫ㄙ� 丕鬲賲丕賲賴貙 丿賳丿丕賳 丿乇丿 丿丕乇賴貙 乇丕賴乇賵鈥屬囏й� 夭賳丿丕賳 爻乇丿 賵 爻丕讴鬲 賵 禺丕賱蹖 丕賳丿 賵 丕夭 倬賳噩乇賴鈥屰� 夭賳丿丕賳 賮賯胤 賯爻賲鬲蹖 丕夭 丨蹖丕胤 倬乇 丕夭 亘乇賮 丿蹖丿賴鈥� 賲蹖鈥屫促�. 亘賴 賲乇賵乇 夭賲丕賳 賮賱丕卮鈥屫ㄚ┾€屬囏й屰� 丕夭 禺丕胤乇丕鬲 诏匕卮鬲賴 丿乇賵賳 匕賴賳 乇賵亘丕卮賮 倬禺卮 賲蹖鈥屫促� 讴賴 丿賵爻鬲丕賳 賵 賴賲讴丕乇丕賳卮 丿乇 丕賵賳 賳賯卮 倬乇乇賳诏蹖 乇賵 丕蹖賮丕 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁�. 丕蹖賳 丿賵爻鬲丕賳 賵 賴賲讴丕乇丕賳 讴爻丕賳蹖 亘賵丿賳丿 讴賴 鬲賵爻胤 禺賵丿 丕賵 賲賵乇丿爻賵鈥屫ж池佖ж� 賯乇丕乇 诏乇賮鬲賳丿貙 賵爻蹖賱賴鈥屫й� 亘乇丕蹖 乇爻蹖丿賳 亘賴 丕賴丿丕賮 賵 賲賳丕賮毓 爻蹖丕爻蹖 賵 丕賯鬲氐丕丿蹖 賲丨爻賵亘 賲蹖鈥屫簇� 賵 乇賵亘丕卮賮 亘賴鈥屬堌驰屬勝団€� 丕賵賳鈥屬囏� 倬賱賴鈥屬囏й� 鬲乇賯蹖 丿乇 乇爻蹖丿賳 亘賴 賲賯丕賲鈥屬囏й� 亘丕賱丕蹖 丿賵賱鬲蹖 賵 爻蹖丕爻蹖 賵 賳夭丿蹖讴 卮丿賳 亘賴 卮禺氐 卮禺蹖氐 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴 -蹖毓賳蹖 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳- 乇賵 蹖讴蹖鈥屰屭┷� 胤蹖 賲蹖鈥屭┴必�. 賵賱蹖 丨丕賱丕 丕賵囟丕毓 禺蹖賱蹖 賮乇賯 讴乇丿賴. 丨丕賱丕 禺賵丿 丕賵 亘賴 丕蹖賳 鬲賱賴 丕賮鬲丕丿賴 賵 丿乇 賲馗丕賳 丕鬲賴丕賲 賯乇丕乇 诏乇賮鬲賴. 丕蹖賳讴賴 丌蹖丕 乇賵亘丕卮賮 胤蹖 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 賵 丿乇賳賴丕蹖鬲 亘賴 噩乇賲 鬲賵胤卅賴 賵 禺蹖丕賳鬲 丕毓鬲乇丕賮 禺賵丕賴丿 讴乇丿 蹖丕 賳賴貙 丌蹖丕 丕毓鬲乇丕賮丕鬲 丕賵 賳丕賮匕 賵 丨賯蹖賯蹖 亘賵丿賴 賵 蹖丕 賮賯胤 夭蹖乇 卮讴賳噩賴 亘賴 噩賳丕蹖丕鬲蹖 賲賵賴賵賲 丕毓鬲乇丕賮 讴乇丿賴 蹖丕 賳賴貙 丕蹖賳讴賴 亘丕乇 鬲賲丕賲 噩賳丕蹖丕鬲 乇賵 賲孬賱 賲爻蹖丨 賲氐賱賵亘 亘賴 丿賵卮 禺賵丕賴丿 讴卮蹖丿 賵 亘丕 卮乇丕賮鬲 禺賵丕賴丿 賲乇丿 蹖丕 丕蹖賳讴賴 亘賴 爻夭丕蹖 丕毓賲丕賱卮 丿乇 诏匕卮鬲賴 禺賵丕賴丿 乇爻蹖丿 丕夭 爻賵丕賱丕鬲 丕爻丕爻蹖鈥屫й� 禺賵丕賴丿 亘賵丿 讴賴 賲禺丕胤亘 乇賵 亘丕賴丕卮 丿乇诏蹖乇 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁�.
丕鬲賮丕賯丕鬲 丿乇賵賳 夭賳丿丕賳 丕夭 噩賲賱賴 亘乇賯乇丕乇蹖 丕乇鬲亘丕胤 賲禺賮蹖丕賳賴 亘丕 夭賳丿丕賳蹖鈥屬囏й� 丿蹖诏賴貙 鬲卮賵蹖卮鈥屬囏й� 匕賴賳蹖貙 禺丕胤乇丕鬲 诏匕卮鬲賴鈥屸€屸€屰� 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賵 爻賴 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖鈥屸€屫й� 讴賴 鬲賵爻胤 賴賲讴丕乇丕賳 丕賵 亘賴 丕賳噩丕賲 賲蹖鈥屫必迟� 賯爻賲鬲 丕毓馗賲 乇賲丕賳 乇賵 鬲卮讴蹖賱 賲蹖鈥屫�.
丿丕丿乇爻蹖 丿賵賲 亘賴 丿賱蹖賱 禺丕氐蹖鬲 鬲卅賵乇蹖 賲亘丕丨孬蹖 讴賴 倬蹖乇丕賲賵賳 鬲丕乇蹖禺貙 爻蹖丕爻鬲貙 丕禺賱丕賯貙 丕賳爻丕賳蹖鬲 賵... 亘蹖賳 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賵 賴賲讴丕乇 诏匕卮鬲賴鈥屬囏й� 丿賵乇 丕賵貙 丕蹖賵丕賳賮 丿乇 丨蹖賳 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 乇丿 賵 亘丿賱 賲蹖卮賴 丕夭 噩匕丕亘鈥屫臂屬� 亘禺卮 賴丕蹖 讴鬲丕亘賴.
倬丕蹖丕賳 蹖讴 乇賵蹖丕 - 丨丕賵蹖 丕爻倬賵蹖賱
乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕亘鬲丿丕 爻乇爻禺鬲蹖 賳卮賵賳 賲蹖鈥屫�. 鬲賲丕賲 丕鬲賴丕賲丕鬲 乇丕 乇丿 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁� 賵賱蹖 丿乇 丕賳鬲賴丕 鬲賲丕賲 丌賳賴丕 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屬矩佰屫辟�. 爻乇賳賵卮鬲 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕夭 夭賲丕賳 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇蹖 丕賵 亘乇丕蹖 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 丌卮讴丕乇 賵 賵丕囟丨 亘賵丿. 賵賱蹖 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 爻賵丕賱丕鬲 丕爻丕爻蹖 讴鬲丕亘 賴賲蹖賳噩丕爻鬲. 丿賯蹖賯丕 趩乇丕 乇賵亘丕卮賮 亘賴 賴賲賴 趩蹖夭 丕毓鬲乇丕賮 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 丕賵 讴賴 賳賴 鬲賵胤卅賴 趩蹖丿賴 亘賵丿 賵 賳賴 噩賳丕蹖鬲蹖 讴乇丿賴 亘賵丿. 丿乇 賲賯丕賲 倬丕爻禺貙 毓丕賲賱 卮讴賳噩賴 鬲丕孬蹖乇诏匕丕乇 賳蹖爻鬲. 鬲丕亘丕賳丿賳 賳賵乇 卮丿蹖丿 賵 禺蹖乇賴鈥屸€屭┵嗁嗀団€屰� 蹖讴 趩乇丕睾 乇賵蹖 氐賵乇鬲 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賵 讴賲鈥屫堌жㄛ� 鬲丕孬蹖乇 夭蹖丕丿蹖 亘乇 丕賵 賳诏匕丕卮鬲賴 亘賵丿. 賳丕夭蹖鈥屬囏� 亘賱丕賴丕蹖 亘丿鬲乇蹖 爻乇 丕賵 丌賵乇丿賴 亘賵丿賳丿. 爻賵丕賱蹖 讴賴 賱丕亘賴鈥屬勜й� 爻胤賵乇 讴鬲丕亘 倬乇爻蹖丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫促� 賵 噩賵丕亘 賴賲 丿丕丿賴 賲蹖卮賴 賴賲蹖賳賴. 丕夭 丿蹖丿 乇賵亘丕卮賮 毓丿丕賱鬲 賵 丨賯蹖賯鬲 賲丿鬲鈥屬囏ж池� 賲毓賳蹖 禺賵丿卮賵賳 乇賵 丕夭 丿爻鬲 丿丕丿賴鈥屫з嗀�. 趩蹖夭蹖 讴賴 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕賵賱 賴乇 丿丕丿乇爻蹖 亘丕 賳賵卮鬲賳 賳賵毓蹖 丿賮丕毓蹖賴 爻毓蹖 丿丕乇賴 亘賴 賴賲賴 丕毓賱丕賲 讴賳賴 賴賲蹖賳賴. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 亘乇丿賴鈥屰� 丨夭亘 亘賵丿. 亘丕 丌賳 夭賳丿诏蹖 讴乇丿賴 賵 亘夭乇诏 卮丿賴 亘賵丿 賵 丨丕賱丕 鬲賵爻胤 丨夭亘 亘賱毓蹖丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫簇�. 丿乇 賵丕賯毓 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丌賳賯丿乇 倬賵趩 亘賵丿 讴賴 亘賴 噩賳丕蹖丕鬲 賲賵賴賵賲 賲賵乇丿 賳馗乇 丕毓鬲乇丕賮 讴賳丿. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕夭 丿乇賵賳 鬲賵爻胤 丨夭亘 倬賵爻蹖丿賴 亘賵丿.
鬲讴賴鈥屬囏й屰� 丕夭 讴鬲丕亘 乇賵 亘丕賴賲 賲蹖鈥屫堎嗃屬�:
-丿乇 賵賯鬲 馗賴乇貙 鬲丕乇蹖讴蹖 鬲賲丕賲 丌賳 爻乇夭賲蹖賳 乇丕 賮乇丕诏乇賮鬲 賵 鬲丕 爻賴 爻丕毓鬲 丕丿丕賲賴 丿丕卮鬲. 丿乇 爻丕毓鬲 爻賴 亘毓丿 丕夭 馗賴乇貙 毓蹖爻蹖 亘丕 氐丿丕蹖 亘賱賳丿 诏賮鬲: 芦丕蹖賱蹖貙 丕蹖賱蹖 賱賲丕 爻亘賯鬲賳蹖責禄 蹖毓賳蹖 芦禺丿丕蹖 賲賳貙 禺丿丕蹖 賲賳貙 趩乇丕 賲乇丕 鬲乇讴 賰乇丿蹖責禄
丕賳噩蹖賱 賲乇賯爻 亘丕亘 倬丕賳夭丿賴賲 郾鄱-鄄郯 賵 鄢鄢-鄢鄣
賲乇孬蹖賴鈥屰� 蹖讴 乇賵蹖丕
乇賵亘丕卮賮 讴賲蹖爻乇 禺賱賯 丿乇 丕賲賵乇 丿丕禺賱蹖 丕鬲丨丕丿 噩賲丕賴蹖乇 丕夭 讴丕亘賵爻 賵丨卮鬲賳丕讴蹖 倬乇蹖丿. 禺賵丕亘 賲蹖鈥屫屫� 讴賴 丿賵 賳賮乇 丕夭 丕毓囟丕蹖 丨讴賵賲鬲 丿蹖讴鬲丕鬲賵乇蹖 丌賱賲丕賳 亘丕 蹖賵賳蹖賮賵乇賲 賲禺氐賵氐 賵 賳卮丕賳鈥� 賲毓乇賵賮 氐賱蹖亘 卮讴爻鬲賴 亘乇 亘丕夭賵 亘乇丕蹖 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇蹖 丕賵 丌賲丿賴 丕賳丿. 丿乇 倬丕诏乇丿 鬲丕乇蹖讴 爻丕禺鬲賲丕賳 丕蹖爻鬲丕丿賴 賵 亘賴 丿乇 賲蹖鈥屭┵堌ㄙ嗀�. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 爻毓蹖 賲蹖鈥屭┴必� 丿乇 夭賲賴乇蹖乇 丕爻鬲禺賵丕賳鈥屫迟堌� 丕鬲丕賯卮 乇賵亘丿賵卮丕賲亘乇卮 乇丕 亘倬賵卮丿 賵賱蹖 丌爻鬲蹖賳卮 倬卮鬲 賵 乇賵 卮丿賴 丕爻鬲 賵 丿爻鬲卮 丿乇 丌爻鬲蹖賳 賳賲蹖鈥屫辟堌�. 丕夭 丕蹖賳 丿乇賲丕賳丿诏蹖 毓匕丕亘鈥屫①堌� 毓乇賯 爻乇丿蹖 亘乇 倬蹖卮丕賳蹖 丕賵 賲蹖鈥屬嗀篡屬嗀�. 氐丿丕蹖 胤亘賱鈥屬堌ж� 讴賵亘卮 丿乇 亘賴 诏賵卮 賲蹖鈥屫必池�. 爻乇丕賳噩丕賲 丕夭 丨爻 丿乇丿賳丕讴 囟乇亘賴鈥屫й� 亘賴 倬卮鬲 爻乇 亘蹖丿丕乇 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 丨爻蹖 亘賴 丿乇丿賳丕讴蹖 爻賯賵胤 丕夭 丕乇鬲賮丕毓蹖 亘賱賳丿. 丨丕賱丕 亘蹖丿丕乇 丕爻鬲貙
賵賱蹖 賴賳賵夭 亘賴 丿乇 賲蹖鈥屭┵堌ㄙ嗀�.
倬丕讴爻丕夭蹖 亘夭乇诏
丕賵賱 丕夭 賴賲賴 亘诏賲 讴賴 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 亘賴 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 乇賲丕賳鈥屬囏й� 爻蹖丕爻蹖鈥屫й� 鬲亘丿蹖賱 卮丿 讴賴 鬲丕 亘賴 丨丕賱 禺賵賳丿賴鈥屫з�. 爻賵丕蹖 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬矩必ж槽屸€� 賮賵賯鈥屫з勜关ж� 賵 倬賱丕鬲 丿丕爻鬲丕賳蹖 鬲讴乇丕乇卮賵賳丿賴鈥屰� 噩匕丕亘 賵 乇賵蹖丕诏賵賳賴鈥屫� 讴賴 賴賲蹖卮賴 爻賵丕賱丕鬲 夭蹖丕丿蹖 乇賵 丿乇賵賳 匕賴賳 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 丕蹖噩丕丿 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁� 賵 丕賵賳 乇賵 亘賴 丨丕賱鬲 禺賱爻賴 賮乇賵 賲蹖鈥屫ㄘ辟囏� 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 禺賵亘 鬲賵賳爻鬲賴 禺卮賵賳鬲 賲禺氐賵氐蹖 讴賴 賱丕夭賲賴鈥屰� 賲丨蹖胤 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴 乇賵 亘賴 賲禺丕胤亘 丕賱賯丕 亘讴賳賴. 丌乇鬲賵乇 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴鈥屰� 丌賱賲丕賳蹖 夭亘丕賳 賲噩丕乇貙 讴鬲丕亘 馗賱賲鬲 丿乇 賳蹖賲乇賵夭 乇賵 丿乇 爻丕賱 郾酃鄞郯 賵 倬爻 丕夭 丕爻鬲毓賮丕 丕夭 丨夭亘 讴賲賵賳蹖爻鬲 賵 賮乇丕乇 丕夭 讴卮賵乇 卮賵乇賵蹖 賵 倬賳丕賴 诏乇賮鬲賳 亘賴 賮乇丕賳爻賴 賵 爻倬爻 丕賳诏賱爻鬲丕賳 丿乇 丨蹖賳 噩賳诏鈥屫囏з嗃屸€� 丿賵賲 賳賵卮鬲. 丕爻賲 讴鬲丕亘 鬲賱賲蹖丨蹖 丕爻鬲 亘賴 乇賵夭 賲氐賱賵亘 卮丿賳 賲爻蹖丨 賵 鬲丕乇蹖讴鈥屫簇� 乇賵夭 丿乇 賴賳诏丕賲 馗賴乇. 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賯乇亘丕賳蹖丕賳 丿賵乇賴鈥屰� 倬丕讴爻丕夭蹖 亘夭乇诏 蹖丕 賵丨卮鬲 讴亘蹖乇 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳 亘蹖賳 爻丕賱鈥屬囏й� 郾酃鄢鄱 鬲丕 郾酃鄢鄹 賲蹖賱丕丿蹖 乇賵 丕爻鬲丕丿丕賳賴 亘賴 鬲氐賵蹖乇 讴卮蹖丿賴. 丿乇 丿賵乇賴鈥屸€屰� 倬丕讴爻丕夭蹖 亘夭乇诏貙 丨丿賵丿 蹖讴 賵 賳蹖賲 賲蹖賱蹖賵賳 賳賮乇 丕夭 賲賯丕賲丕鬲 丿賵賱鬲蹖 賵 讴卮賵乇蹖 賵 賱卮讴乇蹖 丨讴賵賲鬲 卮賵乇賵蹖 亘賴 賴賲乇丕賴 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴鈥屬囏й屫簇з� 亘賴 丕鬲賴丕賲 鬲賵胤卅賴貙 禺蹖丕賳鬲 賵 噩丕爻賵爻蹖貙 亘賴 丿爻鬲賵乇 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 賵 賯乇蹖亘 亘賴 賳氐賮 丌賳賴丕 丕毓丿丕賲 卮丿賳丿. 讴賵爻鬲賱乇 亘毓丿 丕夭 丕毓丿丕賲 亘賵禺丕乇蹖賳 賵 乇丕丿賽讴 丕夭 鬲卅賵乇蹖爻蹖賳鈥屬囏й� 亘賱卮賵蹖蹖讴蹖 丕賳賯賱丕亘 乇賵爻蹖赖 亘賵丿 讴賴 亘丕 丨夭亘 丕鬲賲丕賲 丨噩鬲 讴乇丿.
賲丨丕讴賲赖
讴鬲丕亘 丕夭 趩賴丕乇 亘禺卮 毓賲丿賴 鬲卮讴蹖賱 卮丿賴: 爻賴 丿丕丿乇爻蹖 賵 蹖讴 亘禺卮 亘賴 賳丕賲 賵賴賲 丿爻鬲賵乇蹖. 丕亘鬲丿丕蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 亘丕 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賲丕賲賵乇 丨夭亘 讴賲賵賳蹖爻鬲 卮賵乇賵蹖 賲賵丕噩賴 賲蹖鈥屫篡屬� 讴賴 丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳 丨夭亘 亘賴 爻乇 賲蹖鈥屫ㄘ辟囏� 賵 亘毓丿 丕夭 禺丕乇噩 卮丿賳 丕夭 蹖讴 丨丕賱鬲 禺賱爻賴 賵 乇賵蹖丕 賵 禺丕胤乇賴 賵囟毓蹖鬲 禺賵丿卮 乇賵 丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫迟嗀囏� 噩蹖乇賴鈥屰� 睾匕丕蹖蹖 丕賳丿讴蹖 丿丕乇賴貙 爻蹖诏丕乇卮 乇賵鈥屫ㄙ� 丕鬲賲丕賲賴貙 丿賳丿丕賳 丿乇丿 丿丕乇賴貙 乇丕賴乇賵鈥屬囏й� 夭賳丿丕賳 爻乇丿 賵 爻丕讴鬲 賵 禺丕賱蹖 丕賳丿 賵 丕夭 倬賳噩乇賴鈥屰� 夭賳丿丕賳 賮賯胤 賯爻賲鬲蹖 丕夭 丨蹖丕胤 倬乇 丕夭 亘乇賮 丿蹖丿賴鈥� 賲蹖鈥屫促�. 亘賴 賲乇賵乇 夭賲丕賳 賮賱丕卮鈥屫ㄚ┾€屬囏й屰� 丕夭 禺丕胤乇丕鬲 诏匕卮鬲賴 丿乇賵賳 匕賴賳 乇賵亘丕卮賮 倬禺卮 賲蹖鈥屫促� 讴賴 丿賵爻鬲丕賳 賵 賴賲讴丕乇丕賳卮 丿乇 丕賵賳 賳賯卮 倬乇乇賳诏蹖 乇賵 丕蹖賮丕 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁�. 丕蹖賳 丿賵爻鬲丕賳 賵 賴賲讴丕乇丕賳 讴爻丕賳蹖 亘賵丿賳丿 讴賴 鬲賵爻胤 禺賵丿 丕賵 賲賵乇丿爻賵鈥屫ж池佖ж� 賯乇丕乇 诏乇賮鬲賳丿貙 賵爻蹖賱賴鈥屫й� 亘乇丕蹖 乇爻蹖丿賳 亘賴 丕賴丿丕賮 賵 賲賳丕賮毓 爻蹖丕爻蹖 賵 丕賯鬲氐丕丿蹖 賲丨爻賵亘 賲蹖鈥屫簇� 賵 乇賵亘丕卮賮 亘賴鈥屬堌驰屬勝団€� 丕賵賳鈥屬囏� 倬賱賴鈥屬囏й� 鬲乇賯蹖 丿乇 乇爻蹖丿賳 亘賴 賲賯丕賲鈥屬囏й� 亘丕賱丕蹖 丿賵賱鬲蹖 賵 爻蹖丕爻蹖 賵 賳夭丿蹖讴 卮丿賳 亘賴 卮禺氐 卮禺蹖氐 卮賲丕乇賴 蹖讴 -蹖毓賳蹖 丕爻鬲丕賱蹖賳- 乇賵 蹖讴蹖鈥屰屭┷� 胤蹖 賲蹖鈥屭┴必�. 賵賱蹖 丨丕賱丕 丕賵囟丕毓 禺蹖賱蹖 賮乇賯 讴乇丿賴. 丨丕賱丕 禺賵丿 丕賵 亘賴 丕蹖賳 鬲賱賴 丕賮鬲丕丿賴 賵 丿乇 賲馗丕賳 丕鬲賴丕賲 賯乇丕乇 诏乇賮鬲賴. 丕蹖賳讴賴 丌蹖丕 乇賵亘丕卮賮 胤蹖 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 賵 丿乇賳賴丕蹖鬲 亘賴 噩乇賲 鬲賵胤卅賴 賵 禺蹖丕賳鬲 丕毓鬲乇丕賮 禺賵丕賴丿 讴乇丿 蹖丕 賳賴貙 丌蹖丕 丕毓鬲乇丕賮丕鬲 丕賵 賳丕賮匕 賵 丨賯蹖賯蹖 亘賵丿賴 賵 蹖丕 賮賯胤 夭蹖乇 卮讴賳噩賴 亘賴 噩賳丕蹖丕鬲蹖 賲賵賴賵賲 丕毓鬲乇丕賮 讴乇丿賴 蹖丕 賳賴貙 丕蹖賳讴賴 亘丕乇 鬲賲丕賲 噩賳丕蹖丕鬲 乇賵 賲孬賱 賲爻蹖丨 賲氐賱賵亘 亘賴 丿賵卮 禺賵丕賴丿 讴卮蹖丿 賵 亘丕 卮乇丕賮鬲 禺賵丕賴丿 賲乇丿 蹖丕 丕蹖賳讴賴 亘賴 爻夭丕蹖 丕毓賲丕賱卮 丿乇 诏匕卮鬲賴 禺賵丕賴丿 乇爻蹖丿 丕夭 爻賵丕賱丕鬲 丕爻丕爻蹖鈥屫й� 禺賵丕賴丿 亘賵丿 讴賴 賲禺丕胤亘 乇賵 亘丕賴丕卮 丿乇诏蹖乇 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁�.
丕鬲賮丕賯丕鬲 丿乇賵賳 夭賳丿丕賳 丕夭 噩賲賱賴 亘乇賯乇丕乇蹖 丕乇鬲亘丕胤 賲禺賮蹖丕賳賴 亘丕 夭賳丿丕賳蹖鈥屬囏й� 丿蹖诏賴貙 鬲卮賵蹖卮鈥屬囏й� 匕賴賳蹖貙 禺丕胤乇丕鬲 诏匕卮鬲賴鈥屸€屸€屰� 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賵 爻賴 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖鈥屸€屫й� 讴賴 鬲賵爻胤 賴賲讴丕乇丕賳 丕賵 亘賴 丕賳噩丕賲 賲蹖鈥屫必迟� 賯爻賲鬲 丕毓馗賲 乇賲丕賳 乇賵 鬲卮讴蹖賱 賲蹖鈥屫�.
丿丕丿乇爻蹖 丿賵賲 亘賴 丿賱蹖賱 禺丕氐蹖鬲 鬲卅賵乇蹖 賲亘丕丨孬蹖 讴賴 倬蹖乇丕賲賵賳 鬲丕乇蹖禺貙 爻蹖丕爻鬲貙 丕禺賱丕賯貙 丕賳爻丕賳蹖鬲 賵... 亘蹖賳 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賵 賴賲讴丕乇 诏匕卮鬲賴鈥屬囏й� 丿賵乇 丕賵貙 丕蹖賵丕賳賮 丿乇 丨蹖賳 亘丕夭噩賵蹖蹖 乇丿 賵 亘丿賱 賲蹖卮賴 丕夭 噩匕丕亘鈥屫臂屬� 亘禺卮 賴丕蹖 讴鬲丕亘賴.
倬丕蹖丕賳 蹖讴 乇賵蹖丕 - 丨丕賵蹖 丕爻倬賵蹖賱
乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕亘鬲丿丕 爻乇爻禺鬲蹖 賳卮賵賳 賲蹖鈥屫�. 鬲賲丕賲 丕鬲賴丕賲丕鬲 乇丕 乇丿 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁� 賵賱蹖 丿乇 丕賳鬲賴丕 鬲賲丕賲 丌賳賴丕 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屬矩佰屫辟�. 爻乇賳賵卮鬲 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕夭 夭賲丕賳 丿爻鬲诏蹖乇蹖 丕賵 亘乇丕蹖 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 丌卮讴丕乇 賵 賵丕囟丨 亘賵丿. 賵賱蹖 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 爻賵丕賱丕鬲 丕爻丕爻蹖 讴鬲丕亘 賴賲蹖賳噩丕爻鬲. 丿賯蹖賯丕 趩乇丕 乇賵亘丕卮賮 亘賴 賴賲賴 趩蹖夭 丕毓鬲乇丕賮 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 丕賵 讴賴 賳賴 鬲賵胤卅賴 趩蹖丿賴 亘賵丿 賵 賳賴 噩賳丕蹖鬲蹖 讴乇丿賴 亘賵丿. 丿乇 賲賯丕賲 倬丕爻禺貙 毓丕賲賱 卮讴賳噩賴 鬲丕孬蹖乇诏匕丕乇 賳蹖爻鬲. 鬲丕亘丕賳丿賳 賳賵乇 卮丿蹖丿 賵 禺蹖乇賴鈥屸€屭┵嗁嗀団€屰� 蹖讴 趩乇丕睾 乇賵蹖 氐賵乇鬲 乇賵亘丕卮賮 賵 讴賲鈥屫堌жㄛ� 鬲丕孬蹖乇 夭蹖丕丿蹖 亘乇 丕賵 賳诏匕丕卮鬲賴 亘賵丿. 賳丕夭蹖鈥屬囏� 亘賱丕賴丕蹖 亘丿鬲乇蹖 爻乇 丕賵 丌賵乇丿賴 亘賵丿賳丿. 爻賵丕賱蹖 讴賴 賱丕亘賴鈥屬勜й� 爻胤賵乇 讴鬲丕亘 倬乇爻蹖丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫促� 賵 噩賵丕亘 賴賲 丿丕丿賴 賲蹖卮賴 賴賲蹖賳賴. 丕夭 丿蹖丿 乇賵亘丕卮賮 毓丿丕賱鬲 賵 丨賯蹖賯鬲 賲丿鬲鈥屬囏ж池� 賲毓賳蹖 禺賵丿卮賵賳 乇賵 丕夭 丿爻鬲 丿丕丿賴鈥屫з嗀�. 趩蹖夭蹖 讴賴 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕賵賱 賴乇 丿丕丿乇爻蹖 亘丕 賳賵卮鬲賳 賳賵毓蹖 丿賮丕毓蹖賴 爻毓蹖 丿丕乇賴 亘賴 賴賲賴 丕毓賱丕賲 讴賳賴 賴賲蹖賳賴. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 亘乇丿賴鈥屰� 丨夭亘 亘賵丿. 亘丕 丌賳 夭賳丿诏蹖 讴乇丿賴 賵 亘夭乇诏 卮丿賴 亘賵丿 賵 丨丕賱丕 鬲賵爻胤 丨夭亘 亘賱毓蹖丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫簇�. 丿乇 賵丕賯毓 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丌賳賯丿乇 倬賵趩 亘賵丿 讴賴 亘賴 噩賳丕蹖丕鬲 賲賵賴賵賲 賲賵乇丿 賳馗乇 丕毓鬲乇丕賮 讴賳丿. 乇賵亘丕卮賮 丕夭 丿乇賵賳 鬲賵爻胤 丨夭亘 倬賵爻蹖丿賴 亘賵丿.
鬲讴賴鈥屬囏й屰� 丕夭 讴鬲丕亘 乇賵 亘丕賴賲 賲蹖鈥屫堎嗃屬�:
賲丕 亘乇丕蹖 鬲兀賲蹖賳 賲賳丕賮毓 賳爻賱鈥屬囏й� 丌蹖賳丿賴 趩賳丕賳 賲丨乇賵賲蹖鬲賴丕蹖 賵丨卮鬲賳丕讴蹖 亘賴 賳爻賱 丨丕囟乇 鬲丨賲蹖賱 讴乇丿蹖賲 讴賴 蹖讴 趩賴丕乇賲 丕夭 胤賵賱 毓賲乇 賲鬲賵爻胤卮 讴賲 卮丿賴. 亘乇丕蹖 丿賮丕毓 丕夭 賲賵噩賵丿蹖鬲 讴卮賵乇 賳丕诏夭蹖乇 丕夭 丕賯丿丕賲丕鬲 丕爻鬲孬賳丕蹖蹖 賵 鬲氐賵蹖亘 賯賵丕賳蹖賳 賵蹖跇賴 賲乇丨賱賴贁 诏匕丕乇 卮丿蹖賲 讴賴 丕夭 賴乇 賳馗乇 亘丕 丕賴丿丕賮 丕賳賯賱丕亘 賲賳丕賮丕鬲 丿丕乇丿. 爻胤丨 夭賳丿诏蹖 賲乇丿賲 丕夭 賯亘賱 丕夭 丕賳賯賱丕亘 倬丕蹖蹖賳 鬲乇 丕爻鬲貨 卮乇丕蹖胤 讴丕乇 爻禺鬲鈥屫� 囟賵丕亘胤 賵 賯賵丕賳蹖賳 睾蹖乇丕賳爻丕賳蹖鈥屫必� 賵 亘賴乇賴鈥屭┴篡� 丕夭 賳蹖乇賵蹖 讴丕乇賽 讴丕乇賲夭丿蹖 丕夭 卮乇丕蹖胤 讴丕乇 亘丕乇亘乇賴丕蹖 亘賵賲蹖 丿乇 賲爻鬲毓賲乇丕鬲 亘丿鬲乇 丕爻鬲. 賲丕 爻賳 賲噩丕夭丕鬲 丕毓丿丕賲 乇丕 倬丕蹖蹖賳 丌賵乇丿蹖賲 賵 亘賴 丿賵丕夭丿賴 爻丕賱 乇爻丕賳丿蹖賲. 賯賵丕賳蹖賳 噩賳爻蹖 賲丕 丕夭 賯賵丕賳蹖賳 噩賳爻蹖 丕賳诏賱爻鬲丕賳 賴賲 爻賮鬲 賵 爻禺鬲鈥屫� 丕爻鬲. 倬乇爻鬲卮 乇賴亘乇 丿乇 讴卮賵乇 賲丕 丕夭 丨讴賵賲鬲鈥屬囏й� 丿蹖讴鬲丕鬲賵乇蹖 丕乇鬲噩丕毓蹖 亘蹖夭丕賳爻 賴賲 卮丿蹖丿鬲乇 丕爻鬲. 賲胤亘賵毓丕鬲 賵 賲丿丕乇爻 賲丕 賲蹖賴賳鈥屬矩必池� 讴賵乇讴賵乇丕賳賴貙 賳馗丕賲蹖鈥屭臂屫� 噩夭賲鈥屫з嗀屫篡屫� 讴賳賮賵乇賲蹖爻賲 賵 噩賴賱 乇丕 倬乇賵乇卮 賲蹖丿賴賳丿. 賯丿乇鬲 賲胤賱賯賴 丨讴賵賲鬲 賳丕賲丨丿賵丿 丕爻鬲 賵 丿乇 鬲丕乇蹖禺 賳馗蹖乇 賳丿丕乇丿. 丌夭丕丿蹖 賲胤亘賵毓丕鬲貙 丌夭丕丿蹖 毓賯蹖丿賴 賵 丌夭丕丿蹖 賮毓丕賱蹖鬲 爻蹖丕爻蹖 趩賳丕賳 乇蹖卮賴鈥屭┵� 卮丿賴 讴賴 丕賳诏丕乇 丕毓賱丕賲蹖賴 丨賯賵賯 亘卮乇 賴乇诏夭 賵噩賵丿 賳丿丕卮鬲賴. 賲丕 毓馗蹖賲 鬲乇蹖賳 丿賲 賵 丿爻鬲诏丕賴 倬賱蹖爻 乇丕 乇丕賴 丕賳丿丕禺鬲蹖賲 讴賴 亘賴 倬蹖卮乇賮鬲賴鈥屫臂屬� 爻蹖爻鬲賲 毓賱賲蹖 亘乇丕蹖 卮讴賳噩賴 噩爻賲丕賳蹖 賵 乇賵丕賳蹖 賲噩賴夭 丕爻鬲貙 亘丕 禺亘乇趩蹖賳鈥屬囏й屰� 讴賴 亘賴 蹖讴 爻丕夭賲丕賳 爻乇丕爻乇蹖 鬲亘丿蹖賱 卮丿賴 丕賳丿. 賲丕 鬲賵丿賴 賴丕蹖 賳丕乇丕囟蹖 讴卮賵乇 乇丕 亘賴 囟乇亘 卮賱丕賯 亘賴 爻賵蹖 爻毓丕丿鬲 丕賳鬲夭丕毓蹖 丌蹖賳丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫ㄘ臂屬� 讴賴 賴蹖趩鈥屭┴� 睾蹖乇 丕夭 禺賵丿賲丕賳 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗀� 丌賳 乇丕 亘亘蹖賳丿. 趩賵賳 賳蹖乇賵蹖 丕蹖賳 賳爻賱 亘賴 倬丕蹖丕賳 乇爻蹖丿賴貙 丿乇 噩乇蹖丕賳 丕賳賯賱丕亘 亘賴 倬丕蹖丕賳 乇爻蹖丿賴 亘賵丿貨 趩賵賳 禺賵賳 丕蹖賳 賳爻賱 乇丕 賲讴蹖丿賴 丕賳丿 賵 睾蹖乇 丕夭 蹖讴 鬲讴賴 诏賵卮鬲 賯乇亘丕賳蹖 賳丕賱丕賳 賵 讴乇禺鬲 賵 丿賱鈥屬呚必� 趩蹖夭蹖 丕夭 丌賳 亘丕賯蹖 賳賲丕賳丿賴.... .
噩賳亘卮 亘丿賵賳 賴蹖趩 賳丕乇丕丨鬲蹖 賵噩丿丕賳蹖 賲蹖鈥屫辟堌篡屫� 賵 亘賴鈥屫迟堐� 賴丿賮 禺賵丿 倬蹖卮 賲蹖鈥屫辟佖� 賵 噩賳丕夭賴 睾乇賯鈥屫簇団€屬囏� 乇丕 丿乇 倬蹖趩 賵禺賲 賲爻蹖乇卮 亘丕賯蹖 賲蹖鈥屭柏ж簇�. 丕诏乇 讴爻蹖 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗀池� 丿乇 丌賳 賲爻蹖乇 倬購乇倬蹖趩 賵 禺賲 賴賲乇丕賴卮 卮賵丿貙 丕賲賵丕噩 丕賵 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫簇池嗀� 賵 亘賴 爻丕丨賱 賲蹖鈥屫ㄘ必嗀� 趩賵賳 賯丕賳賵賳 噩賳亘卮 賴賲蹖賳 亘賵丿. 丕賳诏蹖夭賴鈥屬囏й� 賮乇丿 亘乇丕蹖卮 丕賴賲蹖鬲蹖 賳丿丕卮鬲貨 賵噩丿丕賳 丕賵 亘乇丕蹖卮 賲賴賲 賳亘賵丿貨 丕賴賲蹖鬲蹖 賴賲 賳賲蹖鈥屫ж� 讴賴 丿乇 賯賱亘 賵 賲睾夭卮 趩賴 賲蹖鈥屭柏必�. 丕夭 賳馗乇 丨夭亘貙 鬲賳賴丕 蹖讴 噩乇賲 賵噩賵丿 丿丕卮鬲: 丕賳丨乇丕賮 丕夭 賲爻蹖乇 鬲毓蹖蹖賳鈥屫簇囏� 賵 鬲賳賴丕 蹖讴 賲噩丕夭丕鬲: 賲乇诏. 賲乇诏 丿乇 丕蹖賳 噩賳亘卮 丕氐賱丕 毓噩蹖亘 賵 乇丕夭丌賱賵丿 賳亘賵丿貙 賲賵囟賵毓蹖 賲賴賲 賵 賲鬲毓丕賱蹖 賴賲 賳亘賵丿貨 乇丕賴鈥屫� 賲賳胤賯蹖 丕賳卮毓丕亘鈥屬囏й� 爻蹖丕爻蹖 亘賵丿.
亘乇丕蹖 爻乇讴賵亘 丌賳 噩賳亘卮鈥屬囏й� 丕賳賯賱丕亘蹖 讴賴 丿乇 夭賲丕賳 賳丕賲賳丕爻亘蹖 乇賵蹖 賲蹖鈥屫ж嗀� 丕夭 賴賲讴丕乇蹖 亘丕 賳蹖乇賵賴丕蹖 倬賱蹖爻 讴卮賵乇賴丕蹖 丕乇鬲噩丕毓蹖 爻乇 亘丕夭 賳夭丿蹖賲. 亘乇丕蹖 丨賮馗 丕蹖賳 丿跇貙 丿乇 禺蹖丕賳鬲 亘賴 丿賵爻鬲丕賳 賵 爻丕夭卮 亘丕 丿卮賲賳丕賳賲丕賳 讴賵鬲丕賴蹖 賳讴乇丿蹖賲. 丕蹖賳 賵馗蹖賮賴鈥屫й� 亘賵丿 讴賴 鬲丕乇蹖禺 亘賴 賲丕 賳賲丕蹖賳丿诏丕賳 丕賵賱蹖賳 丕賳賯賱丕亘 倬蹖乇賵夭賲賳丿 賲丨賵賱 讴乇丿賴 亘賵丿. 讴賵鬲賴鈥屫ㄛ屬嗏€屬囏ж� 賴賳乇丿賵爻鬲鈥屬囏ж� 賵 丕禺賱丕賯鈥屭必з囏� 丌賳 乇丕 丿乇讴 賳賲蹖鈥屭┴必嗀�. 賵賱蹖 乇賴亘乇 丕賳賯賱丕亘 賲蹖鈥屫з嗀池� 讴賴 賴賲賴 丕蹖賳鈥屬囏� 亘賴 蹖讴 趩蹖夭 亘爻鬲诏蹖 丿丕乇丿: 丕蹖賳鈥屭┵� 亘蹖卮鈥屫� 丕夭 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 丿賵丕賲 亘蹖丕賵乇蹖.
July 10, 2019
Written in the 1930's as Stalin purged the previous politburo members, Darkness at Noon offers a taste of the dark dreary Soviet world where the truth changes depending on who is now in power. In a visionary passage, there is talk about how the books were purged from the library and how the job would only be complete if they had taken the old newspapers and changed the news of the day. Other passages are eerie as well as the individual will is subordinated to the will of the party, whatever that will presently is. For those who think that socialism is paradise, this story is an abrupt awakening. Ultimately it may start out as well-meaning but it becomes all about power.
The protagonist has been a party member his whole life, once important, now that tastes has changed, he is accused of being a traitor. And he is Imprisoned along with thousands of other political prisoners, each one by one walked down the hall to confess their sins before execution.
Not a normal structured novel. It traces the descent from party boss to prisoner to turncoat to conviction. Dark, haunting, a society been turned upside down. Republished with a new translation based on the original newly discovered manuscript. A classic that is being rediscovered.
The protagonist has been a party member his whole life, once important, now that tastes has changed, he is accused of being a traitor. And he is Imprisoned along with thousands of other political prisoners, each one by one walked down the hall to confess their sins before execution.
Not a normal structured novel. It traces the descent from party boss to prisoner to turncoat to conviction. Dark, haunting, a society been turned upside down. Republished with a new translation based on the original newly discovered manuscript. A classic that is being rediscovered.
December 16, 2023
A masterpiece of world literature, this novel takes a necessary look at Soviet, particularly Stalinist totalitarianism. The little father of the people has killed or had killed more men than Hitler, a sad record that does not forgive the previous one. Based on facts extracted from reality, this novel explains the lack of value of man in totalitarian systems that annihilate him in the name of a so-called cause, which is often none other than the priority of their interests.
Read
August 28, 2017An interesting novel but I find it pale in comparison with real prison literature, I'd recommend Evgenia Ginzburg's memoir above this without hesitation, not on account of literary merit but simply because of the author's sense of surprise at the unlikeliness of it all. Koestler's fiction is a work of the imagination. Something designed to serve the purposes of the author, that gives insight into their opinions and not into (save perhaps accidentally) the situation they are describing. It is I suppose in that way more akin to in its insights into the mind of somebody inside a totalitarian system than memoirs written inside the Soviet Union.
It was written in 1940, perhaps the way to think about it is the search of an intellectual outside the Soviet Union to understand the treason trials and the shocking confessions of old Bolsheviks and trying to make sense of that and explain it in fictional form to the reading public. The date is interesting. Within a year Stalin was due to become the great friend and ally of the Western powers. The show trials and executions that the hero of the story is caught up in occurred some years earlier.
Koestler was Hungarian and had experience of living under the Right-Wing regime of Admiral Horthy (Hungary doesn't have a sea coast, Horthy kept the rank as a souvenir from his days in the service of the Austro-Hungarian empire before the First World War, technologically he ruled Hungary as regent on behalf of the Emperor Charles, but on both occasions when Charles turned up in Hungary Horthy persuaded him that the time wasn't right for him to assume the throne and sent him back into exile again).
Whether Koestler ever had any contacts with any Bolsheviks, old or young is questionable, along with and this book is part of an exploration of the (extreme or normal by 30s standards?) politics of the 1920s and 30s much of which must have seemed absurd and incomprehensible to outside observers - something which we see in the figure of the old professor in , either pretending to himself or driven mad with the cognitive dissonance, still holding to the idea of the Soviet Union as a promised land.
It is the response of someone whose faith has been shaken searching for meaning in their world. It is Doestoevsky's story of the Grand Inquisitor from adapted and applied to a contemporary situation in an attempt to make comprehensible alien states of mind and foreign political situations.
It was written in 1940, perhaps the way to think about it is the search of an intellectual outside the Soviet Union to understand the treason trials and the shocking confessions of old Bolsheviks and trying to make sense of that and explain it in fictional form to the reading public. The date is interesting. Within a year Stalin was due to become the great friend and ally of the Western powers. The show trials and executions that the hero of the story is caught up in occurred some years earlier.
Koestler was Hungarian and had experience of living under the Right-Wing regime of Admiral Horthy (Hungary doesn't have a sea coast, Horthy kept the rank as a souvenir from his days in the service of the Austro-Hungarian empire before the First World War, technologically he ruled Hungary as regent on behalf of the Emperor Charles, but on both occasions when Charles turned up in Hungary Horthy persuaded him that the time wasn't right for him to assume the throne and sent him back into exile again).
Whether Koestler ever had any contacts with any Bolsheviks, old or young is questionable, along with and this book is part of an exploration of the (extreme or normal by 30s standards?) politics of the 1920s and 30s much of which must have seemed absurd and incomprehensible to outside observers - something which we see in the figure of the old professor in , either pretending to himself or driven mad with the cognitive dissonance, still holding to the idea of the Soviet Union as a promised land.
It is the response of someone whose faith has been shaken searching for meaning in their world. It is Doestoevsky's story of the Grand Inquisitor from adapted and applied to a contemporary situation in an attempt to make comprehensible alien states of mind and foreign political situations.
November 28, 2018
賲賳 賳爻禺賴贁 讴賵鬲丕賴 卮丿賴贁 讴鬲丕亘 乇賵 讴賴 亘乇丕蹖 乇丕丿蹖賵 鬲賳馗蹖賲 卮丿賴 亘賵丿 诏賵卮 丿丕丿賲. 丕賲丕 丕賵賳 賯丿乇 禺賵亘 亘賵丿 讴賴 賲蹖 禺賵丕賲 讴丕賲賱卮 乇賵 賴賲 亘禺賵賳賲.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,331 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.