Radishchev Summary And Analysis

During his childhood, he was blessed with an individual spirit and the intelligence to understand the knowledge of the world. In spite of this, he reckoned his abilities as transgressions. He acknowledged that the way of life was that “Everything which comes from the many is good. Everything which comes from the one is evil” (Rand 85). Equality strives to accept the totalitarian society and consequently, he desperately struggles to disregard his abilities and subdue his desires. The grisly effects of society are portrayed immensely through the profound sense of guilt he suffers while committing the Sin of Preference. He continually recites that, “We are nothing. Mankind is all. By the grace of our brothers are we allowed our lives. We exist through, by, and for our brothers who are the State. Amen” (Rand 21). Gradually, his aspirations contradict with the dogma of society. He discovers that he finds more joy committing the Sin of Preference rather than restraining himself from happiness, which ultimately, allows him to elude his conscious premises. Equality’s belief that “[he] [has] torn [himself] from the truth which is [his] brother men… [he] knows [this], but [he] [does] not care” (Rand 76) marks his complete triumph over collectivism. Prior to his transformation, he belonged to a society in which the Sin of Preference revoked all rights for any desire, which ultimately disallowed citizens to think for freely. If permitted to do so, no

cannot accept that some people speak to him without having the intention of hurting him in

During the 18th century, a group of philosophers also known as philosophes had come up with reasons on why the common people were allowed to speak up to the absolute ruler. There were many philosophers during this Age of Enlightenment but a few of them here John Locke, Adam Smith, and Voltaire. These three philosophers had emerged with philosophies and a few of them was that was no legitimate government under kings with divine right, another is that there should be not one or two religions in a government but multiple, and that man (women as well) should be allowed to pursue his own interests.

When he heard of the critical conditions of his sister and Sveta’s boy respectively, he did not hesitate to use his first two wishes to save them respectively. His sister had a fatal lung cancer; “The fish undid it in an instant-the words barely out of Sergei's mouth.”.(lines 135-137) And

One main character of this film is Sergey Kotov, is a Russian civil war hero and an idol of the many. He worked side by side with Stalin during the revolution and formed a close relationship with him. He now lives with his wife Marussya and daughter Nadya in a country house. When tanks are about to crush the wheat field, he stops them immediately all by himself. He has great leadership and speaking skills, as well as great respect from others. Another main character of this film, Mitya, previously fought on the White Army against the new soviet regime. He was Marussya’s lover over a decade ago, but then left Russia for unknown reasons. Now he is recruited by the secret police and work as a secret agent. He came to Kotov’s house primarily for his personal reasons, one being revenge. He detests Kotov for taking his lover Marussya, conscripting him into the NKVD, and causing him to lose his love and faith to Mother Russia. The other main character, Marussya, bounces back and forth between Mitya and Kotov. She initially loves Mitya dearly, but Kotov conscripted Mitya into the NKVD, forcing him to leave Marussya, so that Kotov can get closer to her. When she found out that Kotov had done this, she wants to commit suicide by jumping from the top floor of the house. But she gradually accepts that fact after Kotov’s brilliant speaking skills.

The text “A Family Romanov” weaves the facts about the last Tsar of Russia, Nicholas II, into a detailed story of the decisions he made, his family life, and those who were affected by his choices, the common people of Russia. Beginning his life as a neglected child, Nicholas II was born into a family who had been at the top of the autocracy for hundreds of years. After his father was murdered, Nicholas was thrown into this leadership position with no experience whatsoever. After reading this historical piece, I believe the author wanted us to know how the Tsar’s decisions affected the peasant class citizens of Russia, how the autocracy and

The “Search for justice” is a common characteristic of all of our lives, but it is perhaps best represented by the struggle with which Rakolnikov must face in Crime and Punishment. Faced with a bleak situation in his life, Raskolnikov must come to understand not the definition of justice in societal terms, but rather who is eligible to determine the meaning of justice and carry it out in the first place. Through his killing of the pawnbroker and her sister, Raskolnikov comes to realize that he is ineligible to deliver justice himself and must rely on the will of God to define his set of morals and standards.

Rubashov’s character vacillates between embracing the individualistic traits of his nature to the pull exerted on him by the indoctrination of the ideology of the greater good, even at the expense of individual liberty and freedom. Rubashov, during his time in prison though shows a propensity to acknowledge the failure of the glorious tenets of the Revolution, for he has seen the horror of the totalitarian system in the purges carried out by the party leaders under the pretext of filtering traitors. In an acknowledgement of the folly of his and the Party’s ways, Rubashov states “…we are doing the work of prophets without their gift. We replaced vision by logical discussion…” and it is this acceptance of their shortcomings that shows the transformation of Rubashov.

For example, when Vladimir the first, ordered the nation to go find water and submerge themselves to be Christianized through baptism, they found water and did as they were told. Catherine merely adapts the system of a monarchy to the Russian standard of ruling. one historian expresses that, “Montesquieu insisted that a nation’s laws and political constitution should arise from the "nature of things," in other words, that they be consistent with a people's climate, population size, moeurs, religious traditions and with the education, values, and social structures needed to support them.” With this in mind, Catherine believed the population size called for an autocratic monarchy, for any type of oligarchical group would cause disunity amongst the people. She even claims that “ The Sovereign is absolute; for there is no other authority but that which centers in his single Person that can act with a Vigour proportionate to the Extent of such a vast Dominion.”

It is critical that the rulers are philosophers – that they are capable of knowledge, because

In Darkness at Noon, Rubashov struggles with the continuous battle of attempting to reconcile his own moral ideals with those forced upon him by

Popular descriptions of Alexei Karenin label him as a cold and passionless government official who doesn’t care about his wife or family. Indeed, he is viewed as the awful husband who is holding Anna hostage in a loveless marriage. However, this is a highly exaggerated description, if not completely false, analysis of Karenin. Upon careful analysis of Karenin’s character and his actions, it is clear that he is not the person Anna makes him out to be. In fact, with thorough examination of the passage on pages 384 and 385 of Anna Karenina, it is clear that Alexei Karenin can be considered the hidden tragic hero of the novel.

The confusion at the lack of freedom in Russia despite the success the country has experienced through newly built cities, construction sites, and military victories, is exemplified by Grossman early in the novel through the use of Ivan Grigoryevich, a Russian citizen recently released from the Gulag (49). As daunting as that is, it is understandable why it is so. Freedom gives those who have it the opportunity to choose as they wish, do as they wish, think as they wish, and say as they wish, but to Grossman, that is not

One of the themes of Tolstoy’s story of The Death of Ivan Ilych is detachment from life, considering that all material things can substitute the true meaning of life: compassion and care for others. “Everywhere in the novel, Tolstoy speaks of Iván Ilych's desire for propriety, decorous living, and pleasantness all while making this his first and most important priority. This motivation is a poor

The liberation allows for the opportunistic middle class who prioritizes these new values and thus, are on the precursor of success, evoking change, taking fate into their own hands and controlling the fate of those around them. Although Trofimov does not take action to make changes, he is able to illustrate and set the grounds and rules of success and the how to adapt in this time of flux and change. Trofimov states that “Mankind marches forward, perfecting its strength. Everything that is attainable for us now will one day be near and clear, but we must work we must help with will all our force those we seek for truth. At present only a few men work in Russia. The vast majority of the educated people that I know seek after nothing, do nothing and are as incapable of work.” Trofimov is talking about the aristocrats who are “educated” but do things with it and are born into power but do nothing with that power. Thus, explaining one of the of pillars of capitalism which is practicality, and thus, Trofimov suggests life should not be stagnant and humans must be pressured to work harder and be motivated to succeed. Therefore, mirroring the lack of pressure on Russian society which leads to a fall in social and economic progress. Furthermore, Pishchik, another middle-class man