3 ms·

Ironically, a lot of artists who made reputations as dissidents chafing against a totalitarian regime, ultimately repudiated those dissident political views or

Ironically, a lot of artists who made reputations as dissidents chafing against a totalitarian regime, ultimately repudiated those dissident political views or even came to feel nostalgic for the Soviet regime specifically. Solzhenitsyn himself is famous for becoming a reactionary in later life and wanting heavy-headed leadership over his country, only this time it would supposedly be OK because it would be rooted in ancient Christian Russian culture and not the "godless, foreign" regime that was Communism for him.

ceilingcorner 6y ago
Czarist Russia and the Soviet Union were very different beasts and to label them both as simply heavy-handed is to paint with far too wide a brush.
- Mediterraneo10 6y ago
  I didn’t mention Tsarist Russia, because Solzhenitsyn wasn’t quite pining for that specifically, at least not in the form it took in its last few centuries. But the elderly Solzhenitsyn did see post-USSR Russia as beleaguered by enemies of the people, and he wanted those enemies dealt with decisively, even if it came to mass imprisonment and a return of censorship. This seemed to contradict the more open values that many saw in his early work.
  - vkou 6y ago
    He was also quite an anti-semite, so I don't think he's a great moral guide for anyone, despite the quality, and the importance of his work. His books are worth reading for everyone - not to take a piss on the USSR, but to think about the ways we are different, and more importantly, the ways we are similar to it.
Viliam1234 6y ago
I have noticed a similar thing, and I wonder why it is. I have a few possible explanations, but no idea which one is correct. Maybe it's a combination: First option is that communist regimes ruin characters of many people, including those who try to fight against them. If you live a few decades in an oppresive regime where many things are forbidden... you get used to it, and then freedom feels scary. Even things that you hate can become a habit, and habits are difficult to change. When people leave a cult, they are also disoriented, and life outside feels scary. Second option is that fighting against the regime becomes a part of their identity. When the regime is over, for a short moment they feel like winners... and then life goes on, and they don't have new impressive things to offer, they are like monuments of history, irrelevant for today. So some of them try to criticize the new system, because "criticizing a system" is what they are famous for, but now it's awkward... because some people realize what they are doing, and others are just confused. Third option is that while in the West there seems to be mostly a linear political scale from conservatism to liberalism, in communist countries it becomes a triangle, with communism, religious conservatism, and liberalism/libertarianism as three deeply incompatible options. During the communist regime, the differences between conservatives and libertarians feel unimportant, because the first priority is to survive and hopefully overthrow their common enemy. Only after the victory, the former allies notice the deep differences between them, and both sides feel betrayed.

ceilingcorner 6y ago

Czarist Russia and the Soviet Union were very different beasts and to label them both as simply heavy-handed is to paint with far too wide a brush.

Mediterraneo10 6y ago
I didn’t mention Tsarist Russia, because Solzhenitsyn wasn’t quite pining for that specifically, at least not in the form it took in its last few centuries. But the elderly Solzhenitsyn did see post-USSR Russia as beleaguered by enemies of the people, and he wanted those enemies dealt with decisively, even if it came to mass imprisonment and a return of censorship. This seemed to contradict the more open values that many saw in his early work.
- vkou 6y ago
  He was also quite an anti-semite, so I don't think he's a great moral guide for anyone, despite the quality, and the importance of his work. His books are worth reading for everyone - not to take a piss on the USSR, but to think about the ways we are different, and more importantly, the ways we are similar to it.

Viliam1234 6y ago

I have noticed a similar thing, and I wonder why it is. I have a few possible explanations, but no idea which one is correct. Maybe it's a combination: First option is that communist regimes ruin characters of many people, including those who try to fight against them. If you live a few decades in an oppresive regime where many things are forbidden... you get used to it, and then freedom feels scary. Even things that you hate can become a habit, and habits are difficult to change. When people leave a cult, they are also disoriented, and life outside feels scary. Second option is that fighting against the regime becomes a part of their identity. When the regime is over, for a short moment they feel like winners... and then life goes on, and they don't have new impressive things to offer, they are like monuments of history, irrelevant for today. So some of them try to criticize the new system, because "criticizing a system" is what they are famous for, but now it's awkward... because some people realize what they are doing, and others are just confused. Third option is that while in the West there seems to be mostly a linear political scale from conservatism to liberalism, in communist countries it becomes a triangle, with communism, religious conservatism, and liberalism/libertarianism as three deeply incompatible options. During the communist regime, the differences between conservatives and libertarians feel unimportant, because the first priority is to survive and hopefully overthrow their common enemy. Only after the victory, the former allies notice the deep differences between them, and both sides feel betrayed.