One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich is set in a prison labor camp Seeing how Solzhenitsyn himself spent time in such prison camps, he could write from self-experience, which would mean that he recreated the atmosphere to the finest detail. Zamyatin, on the other hand worked from imagination creating a fictitious perfect world of the future. However, in order to show this utopia is not perfect Zamyatin introduced some elements of life in confinement. A feature of prison life used by both authors is the application of number names to the characters. The use of number names automatically creates a mental association with a prison, something which seems obvious in One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, while strange and unusual in the society described as utopian in We.
The reason that number names are assigned in prison is because of the desired effect on the inmates. Number names are meant to destroy identity and individuality. Solzhenitsyn’s novel portrays the actual facts of prison life, in which number names were allocated to each prisoner. The purpose of Zamyatin assigned number names in We was to show the society’s attempt at creating total equality. However, the use of number names gives the reader a strange feeling, and creates a parallel to prison life which is an obvious indicator of something wrong in the utopia. Do number names work to destroy individuality, personality and identity in the created societies of these novels?
In both systems all the ‘inmates’ have number names and there are strict rules on their use. In One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich the inmates had a well developed practice of keeping the number visible but not too bright, as shown in the following passage:
“They spelled nothing but trouble, those numbers: if they were distinct the guards could identify you from any distance, but if you neglect to have them repainted in time you’d be sure to land in the lock up for not taking care of your number.”
However, number names in One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich are a form of address used only by the authorities, while the inmates, unofficially, do not use number names while communicating amongst themselves. There are also distinctions in how characters address each other depending on their status and their level of respect. For example Ivan Denisovich is never addressed in any way other than by his first name followed by his patronymic which in the Russian language is a very formal manner of address showing respect, while less respected characters are addressed solely by their first name. Solzhenitsyn shows the prisoners as having former identities, which are reflected in their names and nicknames (e.g. Alyosha, a delicate form of address for someone named Alexei used to display his kind hearted nature, while Tsesar, from Caesar, showed that he was dignified and held a high position). This stands as proof that these men retained their dignity in prison and did not allow the disgraceful assignment of number names to affect their mentality.
In We on the other hand the number names are the only form of address, with the exception of the Benefactor. Although in both novels the number names are assigned in the same random automatic process, in We they ‘work’ differently. In Zamyatin’s novel each character’s number name, although allocated in an unpredictable manner, in some way reflects both the physical characteristics and personality of the actual character. For every character that D-503 comes into contact with there is usually a common feature, which the character tends to be associated with, this is something which can easily be spotted in their name. For example, every time D-503 describes his first lover O-90 he focuses on her round mouth and her plump, round and chubby figure, usually using the previously listed adjectives, thus stressing the resemblance between her number name, which is very curvy and round, and her appearance. Moreover, at times he referred to her “simple circular mind,” and her “round and rosy laugh” In the example of S, even before D-503 was familiar with his name he said he physically resembled an S. However, in several cases including this one the descriptors go beyond appearance. The name, S-4711, can easily be associated with a snake: it includes an S, which resembles a snake, and has a long number following it, which when explained creates the mental image of a snake. Thus typically, D-503 writes in his journal, “S gave me a double smile, nodded and slithered to the exit.” Later on it turned out he was a double agent.
As visible from these examples the attempt to rid the characters of thier personal identity and individuality by assigning number names was not successful. Ironically the randomly assigned names managed, nevertheless, to reflect the personalities of the characters thus underlining the theme of the indestructibility of human nature.
Another method used by both authors in order to convey the same idea was the actual explanation and chronology of the events. While each author used somewhat different techniques a similar ultimate effect was achieved. In We the development of D-503’s humanity is closely followed by the reader; whereas, there is something mysterious and unknown about Ivan Denisovich, his past and his feelings. In We the gradual change of D-503’s character is described, he goes through an ‘evolution’ in which his thoughts and opinions change drastically between the beginning, middle and end of the novel. Solzhenitsyn on the other hand makes it clear that Ivan Denisovich is not in development, but instead shows how he retains his initial dignity and pride in a setting created to destroy them throughout the novel. These novels both present the theme of Human Nature and how it will never be defeated by any institution no matter how ‘good’ or ‘bad’ it may be, the difference being that while one shows the process of it coming to existence by escaping and overcoming oppression, the other shows how if retained it can never be broken.
Bibliography
1. Zamyatin, Evgeny. We. 1999. Raduga Publishers. Mozhaisk. Russia.
2. Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr. One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. 1963. Penguin Press.
Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr. One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. 1963. Penguin Press. Pg 27
Zamyatin, Evgeny. We. 1999. Raduga Publishers. Mozhaisk. Russia. Pg 41
Zamyatin, Evgeny. We. 1999. Raduga Publishers. Mozhaisk. Russia. Pg 46
4 Zamyatin, Evgeny. We. 1999. Raduga Publishers. Mozhaisk. Russia. Pg 40