> Solzhenitsyn's Greater Russian, Orthodox-driven nationalism, Elder notes, "once made him appear sorely out of touch, but today has become increasingly fashionable." Although he is best known for his exposure of the Soviet Gulag system and his staunch anti-communism, Solzhenitsyn welcomed Putin's rise to power in 1999 and praised him for restoring Russia's national pride. In 2007, Putin visited the ailing Solzhenitsyn at home to award him a state prize for his humanitarian work. In "Rebuilding Russia," published in the dying days of the U.S.S.R., Solzhenitsyn criticized the Soviet government's haphazard border policies that he said carved up traditional "Rus." He advocated a "Russian Union" encompassing Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, and the ethnic Russian parts of Kazakhstan.
From here: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/09/ho...
I can only vouch for the realism of his description of a hospital in his Cancer Ward (published in 1966), and for a scene of phonetic spectral speech analysis in In the First Circle (1968). Both unusually lifelike and showing first-hand experience.
Cant disagree more. To understand modern day Russia one needs to have read Solzchenitsyn's books. The country today is a product of decades of strong negative selection favouring the immoral and strongly discouraging moral acts. Those who live in Moscow and make up the modern Russia are the descendants of those who successfully navigated the communist opressions. The westerners should read the books to understand what that meant. There would be far less surprises at the deeply immoral acts of russian govt had the likes of Merkel bothered to read and reflect. Boycotting such books would do Russia a favor.
Me too :-) I don't accept anyone's authority to tell me what I should or shouldn't read (watch, listen to, etc.); and I wonder at anyone who would.
However, I couldn't help noticing that the vocabulary of your comment ("negative selection", "descendants") was rather biological. As I am sure you know, it isn't just the Moscovites who have navigated their way through the communist times, but the populations of the former Soviet republics as well. I also think I won't be too far off the mark if I say that superficial social adaptations or morality aren't hereditary, and people are very malleable creatures.
Surely you can understand why it matters to Ukrainians?
Solzhenitsin is one of the best literary chroniclers of repressions in the Soviet Russia (One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, The Gulag Archipelago, In the First Circle), with the degree of earnestness and realism that approaches Tolstoy's. How does his compassion to Ukranians, or lack thereof, change that? Why do people want writers of fiction to be impeccable moral leaders?