1. Why does Solzhenitsyn call the protagonist by the name “Ivan Denisovich” in the title but by the name “Shukhov” almost everywhere else in the narrative?
One result of Solzhenitsyn’s calling Shukhov by two different names is an emphasis on the power and importance of names in human relationships. The difference between “Shukhov” and “Ivan Denisovich” is the difference between cold official talk and cordial familiarity. The family name “Shukhov” connotes bureaucracy and government information files. The first and middle names “Ivan Denisovich,” by contrast, evoke trusting and confidential conversations in which people care for each other and in which information is revealed without fear that it will be misused.
The use of these different types of names can show solidarity or imply mistrust. The camp inmates tend to address each other in the friendly “Ivan Denisovich” manner, with the Christian name first and the patronymic, or father’s name, second. This form of address creates a sense of equality. However, the prisoners do not trust Fetyukov, and therefore call him only by his family name. Tyurin, who outranks the other characters, is also known exclusively by his last name, emphasizing his distanced official status.
These variations in naming show the various ways in which the characters relate to each other. They interact alternately as random strangers and close friends. Shukhov’s struggle in the novel can be described as a conflict between being known officially as the government statistic “Shcha-854” or “Shukhov,” and being known familiarly and lovingly as “Ivan Denisovich.”
one day in the life of ivan denisovich is one of the most famous political novels of the twentieth century. Yet its protagonist never voices any political opinions. What is so political about this novel?
One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich was politically significant because of what it depicted rather than for the opinions it expressed. Solzhenitsyn wrote about situations and people that the Soviet state had not previously allowed authors to describe. The fact that One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich discusses the problems with communists’ conception of labor made its publication a landmark political event in Soviet history. The labor camps themselves had never been mentioned in Soviet literature. Everyone knew they existed, if only because so many people had family members who had been sent there. But no one was allowed to talk about the camps. The idea of publishing a work set in a Stalinist labor camp would have been unheard of in Stalin’s regime (Stalin died in 1953, and the novel is set in 1951). It took the softening of Soviet Communism in the early 1960s, a period known as the “thaw,” to enable public discussion of the unjust camp system and even an official admission that they were a mistake. The publication of Solzhenitsyn’s novel was another major step toward a public government admission of Stalin’s errors.
Why does Solzhenitsyn describe only a single day of Shukhov’s life?
Solzhenitsyn’s one-day plot emphasizes the fact that Shukhov’s days belong to the Soviet government rather than to Shukhov himself. A day for a free citizen may be just a unit of time in the flow of life. But a day for Shukhov is part of his sentence, and thus has a powerful political significance. His day is not planned out according to his individual desires and whims, like the lives of many novelistic protagonists. Rather, his day is strictly dictated from above, by the high Soviet powers that be. By focusing on one governmentally regulated day in the sentence of a political prisoner, Solzhenitsyn shows the weariness and tedium of the life of a labor camp inmate.
The focus on the events of a single day corresponds to the way Shukhov lives his life in camp. He thinks only of the present and immediate concerns, not of the future. In most novels, the events of a single day are important because their consequences carry over into the future. Time is essentially meaningless for Shukhov, however. In such a limited life, little affects the future. Shukhov may get an extra ration of bread one day, but that ration has nothing to do with how much bread he will get the next day. This limitation compels Shukhov to pay attention to minute experiences and not worry about the future.
1. Solzhenitsyn’s realistic narrative style provides us with a lot of detail about Shukhov’s everyday life in the labor camp. By contrast, there are huge areas of Shukhov’s life that are not detailed at all. We never learn his wife’s name, for example. Why does Solzhenitsyn provide so many details about some areas of Shukhov’s life and so few about others?
2. Readers disagree about whether camp life has made Shukhov a more humane person or a more selfish and inconsiderate one. He is hardworking, faithful, and reliable. But he is remarkably uncharitable toward the old prisoner at dinner and unsympathetic toward Buynovsky when Buynovsky gets thrown in the hole. How would you characterize Shukhov’s moral state?
3. At first, Tyurin is depicted as a tough, cold official, a mask of authority with little humanity. But after the storytelling session at the Power Station when he narrates the crime that got him into the camp, Tyurin seems much more human. Why does Solzhenitsyn show this change? What does this transition suggest about Soviet attitudes toward authority?
4. Shukhov is the envy of the camp because his sentence is almost over, yet he does not rejoice at his impending freedom. In fact, he appears almost indifferent to his upcoming release. Why is Shukhov so unconcerned with his day of liberation from the labor camp?
5. Solzhenitsyn’s authorial voice is simple. He uses few abstract nouns and few complex sentence structures. Why does Solzhenitsyn choose to narrate in such a basic style?