The Rhetoric o-F D i s i l l u s i o n m e n t : O r w e l l , Koestler and t h e Spanish
C i v i l War
by
F r a n c e s Lynne H o r w i t z
B.A.
U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a ,
1983
A T H E S I S SUBMITTED I N P A R T I A L F U L F I L L M E N T OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE DEGREE O F MASTER O F A R T S
in
the D e p a r t m e n t o f E n g l i s h
@Frances
Lynne H o r w i t z
SIMON FRASER U N I V E R S I T Y
June 27, 1990
A l l r i g h t s reserved.
T h i s w o r k m a y n o t be r e p r o d u c e d i n w h o l e o r
i n p a r t , by photocopy o r other m e a n s , w i t h o u t p e r m i s s i o n o f t h e
author.
APPROVAL
Name:
Frances Lynne Horwitz
Degree:
Master o f A r t s (English)
T i t l e o f Thesis:
The Rhetoric o f Disillusionment: Orwell,
K o e s t l e r and t h e Spanish C i v i l War
Examining Commit tee:
Chair: Kathy Mezei
Graduate C h a i r
----
L
- . .
------.-----------------------
Mason H a r r i s
Associate P r o f e s s o r
Senior Supervisor
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-_ _ _ _-__----___-_--
Geoffrey D u r r a n t
P r o f e s s o r Emeritus
Department o f English
U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia
E x t e r n a l Examiner
PARTIAL COPYRIGHT LICENSE
I hereby g r a n t t o Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y t h e r i g h t t o l e n d
my t h e s i s ,
p r o j e c t o r e x t e n d e d essay ( t h e t i t l e o f w h i c h i s shown below)
t o u s e r s o f t h e Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r y , and t o make p a r t i a l o r
s i n g l e c o p i e s o n l y f o r such u s e r s o r i n response t o a r e q u e s t f r o m t h e
l i b r a r y o f any o t h e r u n i v e r s i t y , o r o t h e r e d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n , on
i t s own b e h a l f o r f o r one o f i t s u s e r s .
I f u r t h e r agree t h a t permission
f o r m u l t i p l e c o p y i n g o f t h i s work f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d
by me o r t h e Dean o f Graduate S t u d i e s .
I t i s understood t h a t copying
o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s work f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t be a l l o w e d
w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n .
T i t l e o f Thesis/Project/Extended
The Rhetoric of Disillusionment:
Author:
( s igna t u r e )
Frances Lynne Horwi t z
(name)
Essay
Orwell, Koestler and t h e S n a n i z h
.
C I.V ? !
War
iii
ABSTRACT
The s u b j e c t of
ideological
t h i s work i s t h e connection between
disillusionment
George Orwell and A r t h u r
political
and i t s w r i t t e n expression--how
Koestler
came t o abandon o r
i d e a l s t h e y once cherished--as
reject
i l l u s t r a t e d i n Orwell's
Spanish C i v i l War t e x t and K o e s t l e r ' s autobiography.
S p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e work argues t h a t Orwell and K o e s t l e r
inspired more by
their
were
d i s i l l u s i o n m e n t , i n t h e end, t h a n by t h e
war i t s e l f , t o w r i t e about t h e i r
experiences.
Orwell and K o e s t l e r ' s disillusionment
t h e l i e s about t h e r o l e o f
c e n t e r e d , i n p a r t , on
d i s s e n t and r e v o l u t i o n i n t h e Spanish
War, l i e s r e q u i r e d by Russia t o maintain i t s f o r e i g n policy.
K o e s t l e r , e s p e c i a l l y , was t r o u b l e d by t h a t same government's
expedient e t h i c s which n o t only permitted
t r u t h but also t h e s a c r i f i c e of
As t h e y r e v e a l t h e i r
another
human l i f e , t o f u r t h e r
the
i t s aims.
i l l u s i o n s b o t h w r i t e r s a r e aware t h a t t h e y
have t o prove t h a t t h e i r
not just
t h e d i s t o r t i o n of
new v i s i o n - - t h e i r
disillusionment--is
i m p e r f e c t v i s i o n , another i l l u s i o n .
And
they
develop c e r t a i n s t r a t e g i e s t o demonstrate t h a t t h e i r
disillusionment
i s not just
b o t h , t h e process
of
more smoke and m i r r o r s .
rejecting their
But f o r
i d e a l s led t o an
a f f i r m a t i o n : t h i s process expedited t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of
Blair
i n t o George Orwell; and f o r
more personal
K o e s t l e r , t h e process
Eric
led t o a
ideology and humane e t h i c .
Through a comparative a n a l y s i s , t h i s work explores t h e
i l l u s i o n s and disillusionments of t h e s e two w r i t e r s .
A 5 well, a
b r i e f p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l context i s provided f o r Orwell and
K o e s t l e r ' s t e x t u a l expression o f t h e i r old imperfect visions and
new c l e a r e r visions.
The t h e s i s closely examines t h e s t r a t e g i e s
both men u s e t o convince t h e i r r e a d e r s t h a t t h e i r
disillusionments a r e valid.
Table O f Contents
INTRODUCTION
The Spanish C i v i l War,
fought i n t h e f i r s t t h i r d o f t h i s
c e n t u r y , was v e r y much a r a l l y i n g p o l n t f o r w r i t e r s and
intellectuals,
and a l s o v e r y much a l i t e r a r v phenomemon.
t e n y e a r s b e f o r e t h e War,
~
European
i n t h e 1 9 2 0 ' ~many
i n t e l l e c t u a l s and a r t i s t s - - s u c h
German Dadaists--had
t h e i r own.
About
as t h e French S u r r e a l i s t s and t h e
come t o g e t h e r
t o foment a r e v o l u t i o n o f
Coming o u t o f t h e F i r s t World War, t h e y wanted t o
smash t r a d i t i o n a l a r t i s t i c , r e l i g i o u s , p o l i t i c a l , and s o c i a l
i n s t i t u t i o n s , which t h e y f e l t
had c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e War.
The
young a r t i s t s and i n t e l l e c t u a l s derided e s t a b l i s h e d t r a d i t i o n s
and i n s t i t u t i o n s :
t h e y condemned t h e b i g o t r y t h e s e i n s t i t u t i o n s
manifested t h r o u g h m i l i t a r i s t i c u l t r a - n a t i o n a l i s m .
condemned t h e s h o r t - s i g h t e d n e s s
provoked u l t r a - n a t i o n a l i s m
writers,
They
o f t h e p o l i t i c a l l e a d e r s who
r e s u l t i n g i n war and death.
The
poets, p a i n t e r s , and musicians would a t t e m p t t o change
t h e p o l i t i c a l m o r a l i t y t h a t had l e d t o t h e F i r s t World War by
e s t a b l i s h i n g new v a l u e s t h r o u g h t h e c r e a t i o n o f new a r t forms.
To many o f t h e a r t i s t s and i n t e l l e c t u a l s ,
was r e v o l u t i o n i n action.
t h e Spanish C i v i l War
This r e v o l u t i o n promised a clean break
w i t h t h e p a s t and a p o s s i b l e u t o p i a n f u t u r e .
I n t h i s revolution
t h e f i q h t was f o r t h e s u r v i v i a l o f a r t and c u l t u r e i n a f r e e
society.
Literacy for
revolution.
a l l Spaniards was a c t u a l l y p a r t o f t h e
The Spanish Republican Government, as Raymond Carr
s a y s i n h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n t o a p i c t o r i a l h i s t o r y o f t h e C i v i l War,
honoured i n t e l l e c t u a l s , i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e N a t i o n a l i s t s '
d i s t r u s t o f them, and paid g r e a t a t t e n t i o n t o t h e education
o f children.
The commissars a t t a c h e d t o army u n i t s
d i s t r i b u t e d n e w s l e t t e r s and conducted a campaign against
illiteracy.
There were a l s o l i t e r a c y campaigns i n t h e
( T h e S p a n l s h C l v l l War: A H l s t o r y I n P l c t u r e s ,
countryside
15).
So, much o f t h e Spanish p o p u l a t i o n hoped t h a t l e a r n i n g t o r e a d
and t o w r i t e ,
t h a t becoming l i t e r a t e , would be one o f t h e
outcomes o f t h e war
f o r them.
B u t a s t h e war became, t h r o u g h t h e p o l i t i c s o f nonintervention,
p a r t o f t h e power c o n f l i c t s o f Europe,
so t h i s
involvement, o r lack o f it, gave Spanish i s s u e s an i n t e r n a t i o n a l
importance.
F o r many i n t e l l e c t u a l s t h e war became a c o n t e s t
between t h e i d e o l o g i e s t h a t divided t h e c o n t i n e n t , a c o n t e s t
between fascism and democracy.
F o r e x i l e d o r a l i e n a t e d German
i n t e l l e c t u a l s on t h e L e f t , f o r example, who were seeing t h e r i s e
o f t h e Nazis i n t h e i r own c o u n t r y ,
way t o s t o p fascism,
country.
t h e war i n Spain seemed one
s o t h e y could e v e n t u a l l y r e t u r n t o t h e i r own
And, a s Carr says,
a generation o f i n t e l l e c t u a l s i n
England, who were "beaten down by t h e depression,
unemployment
and t h e N a t i o n a l Government" f e l t " t h e s e n s a t i o n o f e f f e c t i v e
a c t i o n " i n helping t h e Spanish r e s i s t a n c e ( T h e S p a n l s h C l v l l W a r :
A H i s t o r y I n P l c t u r e s , 21).
Writers i n other countries, i n the
p r o c e s s o f i d e n t i f y i n g w i t h one o r t h e o t h e r o f t h e two main
combatants o f t h e war,
t r a n s f o r m e d t h e war i n t o i n t e l l e c t u a l
d i s c o u r s e t h r o u g h t h e i r writings.
Their w r i t i n g s could s e r v e
e i t h e r a r t o r propaganda.
No m a t t e r what t h e d i v i s i v e n e s s o f sides r e v e a l e d by t h e
Spanish war,
huge.
t h e war's impact on w r i t e r s and i n t e l l e c t u a l s was
Those w r i t e r s who were broadly l i b e r a l , saw t h e i r s u p p o r t
i n t h e Republic a t war a s " t h e l a s t cause".
The f a c t t h a t t h e i r
commitment was o f t e n r u t h l e s s l y organized and e x p l o i t e d by
Communists n o t j u s t i n Spain, b u t i n many c o u n t r i e s ,
t h e i r w r i t i n g could be self-centered,
or that
should n o t p r e v e n t u s from
recognizing t h e genuine n a t u r e o f t h e w r i t e r s ' commitment.
Carr
t e l l s u s t h a t people a l l o v e r t h e world responded t o t h e " l a s t
chance" c a l l " p r e c i s e l y because t h e y were l i b e r a l s o f one s o r t o r
another,
shocked a t t h e o v e r t h r o w o f a ' p r o g r e s s i v e ' government.
. . . Intellectuals
f e l t on t h e s i d e o f h i s t o r y f o r once; t h e y
i d e n t i f i e d w i t h Spaniards ' f i q h t i n g f o r freedom'" ( T h e S p a n l s h
C i v l l War, 21).
B u t t h e consequences o f t h e i r involvement
r e s u l t e d i n many l e f t - w i n g
disillusioned.
i n t e l l e c t u a l s f e e l i n q a p o l i t i c a l and
Having t o abandon c e r t a i n ideals, some w r i t e r s
f e l t renewed: t h e y had new ideas t o w r i t e about; o t h e r s f e l t a
terror:
t h e y had t o f a c e an emptiness l e f t by t h e r e j e c t i o n o f
ideology, b u t t h e y could w r i t e about t h a t emptiness.
writers,
Some
i n t h e end, were compelled more by t h e i r disillusionment
t h a n by t h e war i t s e l f t o w r i t e about t h e i r disillusionment.
such w r i t e r s were George Orwell and A r t h u r K o e s t l e r .
I n Orwell and K o e s t l e r we have d i s i l l u s i o n e d polemicists;
and b o t h a r e aware t h a t t h e r e v e l a t i o n o f t h e i r i l l u s i o n i s
double-edged.
Coming o u t o f t h e i r disillusionment, t h e y show
themselves as c l e a r - s i g h t e d
illusions.
now b u t p r e v i o u s l ~b l i n d i n t h e i r
As t h e y w r i t e about t h e i r o l d i m p e r f e c t
visions--their
illusions--they
a r e aware t h a t t h e y have t o
Two
demonstrate t h a t t h e i r new v i s i o n s - - t h e i r
n o t j u s t more mirages.
strategies:
non-partisan
second,
disillusionments--are
To check such c r i t i c i s m s , Orwell u s e s two
f i r s t , he c r e a t e s , t h r o u g h h i s n a r r a t i v e , a naive,
persona who i s l e a r n i n g t h r o u g h h i s experiences;
he i n t e r r u p t s t h e n a r r a t i v e t o c r e a t e a highly informed
persona who, w i t h g r e a t logic, analysizes h i s experiences.
K o e s t l e r i s Orwell's s t r a t e g i c c o u n t e r p a r t when he c r e a t e s h i s
alternative t o a past t h a t betrayed his t r u s t :
a private,
p e r s o n a l cosmology and humane e t h i c s which impress h i s new
vision.
F o r K o e s t l e r , who was a Communist t o beqin with,
and f o r
Orwell, who was and remained an unorthodox S o c i a l i s t , t h e
Communist P a r t y ' s d o c t r i n e s concerning dissent,
revolution,
and
t h e t r u t h about t h e s e m a t t e r s were a main s o u r c e o f
disillusionment.
D i c t a t e d by Moscow's f o r e i g n policy, t h e
Communist P a r t y p o l i c y maintained t h a t d i s s e n t and r e v o l u t i o n i n
Spain were t r a i t o r o u s a c t s ,
and t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l who b o r e
witness t o such d i s s e n t and r e v o l u t i o n was a l s o a t r a i t o r .
But
having been i t s e l f t h e c h i l d o f d i s s e n t and r e v o l u t i o n , t h e
Communist P a r t y could n o t denounce t r a i t o r o u s a c t s and persons
aloud.
So, w i t h t w i s t e d reasoning, t h e P a r t y a l s o maintained
t h a t t o l i e about such e v e n t s was v i r t u o u s .
These mandated l i e s
c o n t r i b u t e d t o K o e s t l e r ' s l o s s o f h i s i l l u s i o n s because, as a
member o f t h e P a r t y , he was r e q u i r e d t o u s e h i s w r i t i n g t o c r e a t e
such l i e s .
These l i e s d i s i l l u s i o n e d Orwell t o o , which, i n t u r n ,
moved him t o w r i t e t h e t r u t h .
Orwell was a l s o d i s i l l u s i o n e d w i t h
t h e lack o f u n i t y i n t h e f i q h t a g a i n s t Fascism; i n Spain, he saw
through t h e Popular Front.
B u t , in t h e e n d , Orwell would b e
r e a f f i r m e d In h i s Socialism.
Unlike Q r w e l l , K o e s t l e r w a s
d i s i l l u s i o n e d with p o l i t i c s a s a whole: h l s i l l u s i o n s had
i n v o l v e d a w h o l e world view,
profound--he
K o e s t l e r ' s d i s i l l u s i o n m e n t w a s more
had m o r e t o lose.
B u t , a s w e s h a l l see, t h e i s s u e s of illusions a n d
d i s i l l u s i o n m e n t s , o f p a r t i s a n s a n d nonnon-dogma,
p a r t i s a n s , of dogma a n d
o-F t r a i t o r o u s a c t s a n d v i r t u o u s a c t s , o f w r i t i n g l i e s
a n d t r u t h s are too complex t o b e d e a l t w i t h o n l y i n o u t l i n e .
The
cornplexxties of s u c h i s s u e s a r e c o v e r e d 3n t h e c h a p t e r s which
follow.
The f i r s t c h a p t e r examines Qrwell's disillusionment, a s
e x p r e s s e d i n Homage t o Catalonra.
B u t I d o n o t a n a l y z e t h e whole
text: only t h o s e s e c t i o n s of text: t h a t r e v e a l D r w e l l ' s imperfect
v i s i o n coming o u t o f h i s e x p e r i e n c e s w l t h t h e PDUM militiamen at.
t h e f r o n t a r e examined,
I a l s o l o o k i n t o C h a p t e r E l e v e n , which
c o u n t e r s a n y p o s s l b l e criticism o f t h e new v i s i o n coming f r o m h i s
e x p e r i e n c e s o f t h e riots i n B a r c e l o n a a n d d i s t o r t e d p r e s s r e p o r t s
about those riots.
C h a p t e r Two b r i e f l y c o m p a r e s t h e social a n d p o l i t i c a l
c o n t e x t s f o r Q r w e l l ' s o n e t e x t : a n d f u r Koestler's S i r s t t h r e e
8
S p a n i s h C i v i l War t e x t s , L'Espagne Enranglantea, Spanish
T e s t a m e n t , a n d Dialogue wrth Death.
T h i s c h a p t e r also d e s c r i b e s
s o m e o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n Koestler's t h r e e t e x t s b u t w e
w i l l find t h a t t h e s e t e x t s cannot account f o r Koestler's
i d e o l o g i c a l abandonment o f Communism.
The t h i r d s e c t i o n does e x a m m e K a e s t l e r ' s d i s ~ l l u s i o n m e n t ,
whlch i s more complex and reflexive than Orwell's r e j e c t i o n o f
ideals, as expressed n o t i n h i s Spanish C i v i l War t e x t s but,
r a t h e r , i n h i s autobiography The I n v r s z b l e W v ~ t r n g .W e w l l l see
t h a t K o e s t l e r ' s ideological i l l u s i o n s l a s t e d .for seven years, and
t h a t he had more t o l o s e than Orwell, whose illusions endured f o r
l e s s than a year.
P a r t o f t h e complexity n o t only has t o do w l t h
t h e d u r a t i o n and s t r e n g t h o f K o e s t l e r ' s ideological commitment,
b u t also with h i s imprisonment i n a Spanish death cell.
And
whenever possible, I compare K o e s t l e r ' s abandonment o f h i s
i l l u s i o n s t o Orwell's.
But b e f o r e we t u r n t o t h e thesis,
sources which provlded
c r u c l a l and i n s p i r i n g information must be acknowledged.
A.
Murray
Sperber's essay "Looking Back on K o e s t l e r ' s Spanish War" seems
t o be t h e only work t h a t acknowledges and compares a l l t h r e e of
K o e s t l e r ' s Spanish C i v i l War texts.
The f i r s t two t e x t s a r e o u t
o f p r i n t , and Sperber's essay brings t o l i g h t t h e existence o f a
purely propagandistlc French t e x t .
Bernard Crick's excellent
biography o f OrweI1, G e o r g e O r w e l l : A L l f e has informed t h e whole
o f t h e s e c t i o n on Cfrwell and provlded some perceptive and
s e n s i t i v e i n s i g h t s on Orwell and h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e Spanish
War,
And v a r i o u s w r i t l n g s o f Raymond Carr, acknowledqed I n t h e
t e x t , have been u s e f u l I n c e r t a i n p o l i t i c a l and h i s t o r i c a l
aspects of thxs work,
I am indebted t o Octavio Paz and h i s
C h l l d r c l n o f t h e M l r e , which mcreased my understanding of t h e
"void", and t o Helmuth Plessner's essay "On The Relation Of Tlme
To Death", which demonstrated t h e timelessness o f a t o t a l i t a r i a n
world.
To these scholars i n p a r t i c u l a r , I express q r a t i t u d e .
CHAPTER ONE
O r w e l l and Homage to Catalonia
Orwell's primary disillusionment was h i s discovery t h a t t h e
t r u t h i n t h e Spanish p r e s s and t h e press o u t s i d e o f Spain was
d i s t o r t e d o r repressed t o s e r v e t h e p o l i t i c s o f t h e p r o v i n c i a l
Catalan government, t h e c e n t r a l Republican government i n Madrid,
and governments o u t s i d e o f Spain.
So when he discovered t h e
d i s t o r t i o n o r r e p r e s s i o n o f t h e t r u t h i n t h e press about t h e r o l e
o f t h e Anarchists and t h e dissident POUM m i l i t i a , Orwell was
determined t o present t h e t r u t h based on t h e a u t h e n t i c i t y o f h i s
own experiences, a t r u t h which would c o n t r a d i c t t h e p r e s s
And he does present t h e t r u t h through a p a r t i c u l a r l y
reports.
intense analysis o f press d i s t o r t i o n s .
I n order t o appear
n e u t r a l and non-partisan himself, Orwell warns t h e reader o f
Homage t o C a t a l o n i a t h a t i t i s n o t easy f o r him t o a r r i v e a t t h e
truth.
Futhermore, i n t h e i n t e r e s t o f o b j e c t i v i t y ,
Orwell a l s o
warns t h e reader n o t t o accept everything he says, t h a t h i s
account i s bound t o include d i s t o r t i o n s .
I n order t o be disillusioned i n t h e f i r s t place, however,
Orwell had t o hold illusions.
Therefore t o b e t t e r understand
Orwell's disillusionments--his
abandonment o r r e j e c t i o n o f
c e r t a i n ideals, p o l i t i c a l and otherwise--let
illusions.
u s f i r s t look a t h i s
Orwell says t h a t he went t o Spain "simply t o f i g h t
Fascism", and t h a t i s how he saw t h e Spanish C i v i l War
initially--simply
as a f i g h t against Fascism.
And along with an
over-simplified
idea o f what t h e war was about,
Orwell a l s o
brought t o Spain h i s unconscious "lower-upper-middle-class"
prejudices o f s u p e r i o r i t y and condescension,
as well as a
romantic and idealized v i s i o n o f socialism r e c e n t l y formulated i n
h i s w r i t i n g of
T h e Road t o Wigan P i e r .
Furthermore, t h e
c o n t r a d i c t i o n between Orwell's middle-class
prejudices and h i s
simplistic v i s i o n o f socialism may have been t h e cause o f h i s
i l l u s i o n s about p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s on t h e L e f t being u n i t e d i n
their fight
against Fascism i n Spain.
His p o l i t i c a l idealism and
romanticism caused him a t f i r s t t o see t h e p a r t i e s on t h e L e f t
acting i n concert f o r equality.
When Orwell f i n a l l y saw t h a t
t h e r e was no concerted e f f o r t f o r e q u a l i t y , b u t r a t h e r t h e
Communist P a r t y f i g h t i n g with o t h e r Left-wing groups f o r power,
he r e j e c t e d t h e idea o f a u n i t e d L e f t ; he was compelled t o expose
t h e d i s t o r t i o n s o f t h e t r u t h by t h e Communist press.
Moreover,
p a r t o f h i s expression o f disillusionment w i t h partisanship can
be seen i n h i s own e f f o r t s t o appear neutral.
I n exposing t h e p r e s s d i s t o r t i o n s , and as p a r t o f h i s
persuasive s t r a t e g y , Orwell does n o t always present an exact
r e p l i c a o f h i s experiences.
For example, Orwell attempts t o
appear n e u t r a l i n t h e circumstances o f h i s joining t h e POUM.
He
says t h a t he joined t h e POUM m i l i t i a q u i t e by accident, t h a t he
had r e a l l y wanted t o j o i n t h e Communist P a r t y ' s I n t e r n a t i o n a l
Brigade.
He does n o t t e l l u s t h a t he couldn't g e t sponsorship
from t h e English Communist P a r t y because it d i s t r u s t e d him as t h e
r e s u l t o f h i s c r i t i q u e of t h e P a r t y i n T h e Road t o W i g a n P l e r .
However, he does t e l l u s t h a t he was sent t o t h e headquarters of
POUM by t h e s o c i a l i s t Independent Labor P a r t y (ILP) i n England,
which considered i t s e l f a s i s t e r - p a r t y
t o POUM.
And again,
he
does n o t mention t h a t while he was antagonistic t o t h e Communist
P a r t y i n England, he was somewhat sympathetic t o t h e ILP.
Even
though t h e ILP was s o c i a l i s t i c , i t was n o t p a r t o f t h e English
Communist P a r t y which s t r i c t l y adhered t o policy d i c t a t e d by t h e
Russian Communist Party.
So, given Orwell's sympathy f o r t h e ILP, and given t h e ILP's
i n t r o d u c t i o n o f Orwell t o POUM, i t r e a l l y was n o t accidental t h a t
he joined t h e POUM a f t e r all, as he claims.
He was predisposed
t o f a v o r and j o i n t h e POUM i n t h e f i r s t place.
When Orwell
conceals h i s p r e d i s p o s i t i o n t o t h e POUM, t h e reader concludes
t h a t Orwell's assessment o f t h e POUM i s objective, n o t t h e
judgement o f a f r i e n d o f t h e POUM, and t h a t Orwell's p a r t i a l i t y
and partisanship f o r t h e POUM during t h e May r i o t s i n Barcelona
a r e only t h e r e s u l t o f unprejudiced experience.
But Orwell's
partisanship f o r t h e POUM i s n o t j u s t t h e r e s u l t o f unprejudiced
experience i n Spain as he leads h i s readers t o believe.
Orwell
was sympathetic t o t h e ILP, t h e POUM's s i s t e r p a r t y , even b e f o r e
he l e f t England f o r Spain.
Orwell's sympathy f o r t h e English
ILP, however, does n o t mean t h a t he accepted, o r understood t h e
POUM, b e f o r e he a r r i v e d i n Spain.
Still,
when Orwell does n o t
r e v e a l h i s predisposition t o t h e ILP, i t i s f a i r t o say t h a t some
o f Orwell's claims and p a r t s o f h i s n a r r a t i v e a r e n o t exact
r e p l i c a t i o n s o f what a c t u a l l y happened, but, r a t h e r , persuasive
t a c t i c s i n t h e i n t e r e s t o f appearing impartial.
Such l i b e r t i e s with t h e f a c t s o f h i s l i f e a r e p a r t o f
10
Orwell's s t r a t e g y o f persuasion, and t h e case j u s t
mentioned i s a
t a c t i c t o enhance h i s appeal t o h i s readers: he wants t o
demonstrate t h a t he i s n e u t r a l and has no investment i n showing
t h e POUM i n a good l i g h t .
Orwell b e n e f i t s from h i s readers'
v i s i o n of him as neutral.
By establishing h i s n e u t r a l i t y , he
establishes h i s r e l i a b i l i t y ; he wards o f f any expressions o f
doubt, such as, " a r e you s u r e t h i s disillusionment o f your i s n o t
j u s t another i l l u s i o n ? "
Throughout t h e f i r s t p a r t o f t h e t e x t
(up t o Chapter Five) Orwell appears t o be uncommitted; here he
c o n s i s t e n t l y claims he i s ignorant o f and u n i n t e r e s t e d i n
p o l i t i c s , which i s n o t so.
Thus he appeals t o those r e a d e r s who
a r e also possibly ignorant of and u n i n t e r e s t e d i n p o l i t i c s , b u t
he also shows those already suspicious o f p a r t i s a n w r i t e r s t h a t
he i s n o t a partisan, n o t predisposed t o one side o r t h e other.
This way he can appear, a t times, t o be revealing what he i s
learning r a t h e r than what he already knows.
He can appear t o
have had no prejudgement, no t e x t i n mind b e f o r e he l e f t England
f o r Spain.
I n o t h e r words, he can appear t o be non-partisan through
inexperience t o r e a d e r s who a r e a l s o non-partisan,
and t o disarm
r e a d e r s who a r e suspicious o f partisanship, f i r s t t o g e t t h e i r
sympathy,
and then t o persuade them o f h i s v i s i o n o f socialism
because o f t h e a u t h e n t i c i t y o f h i s experiences o f socialism i n
Spain.
This persuasive device i s what Kenneth Burke, i n h i s
R h e t o r i c o f Motives,
c a l l s "identification"--a
s t r a t e g y used " t o
persuade a man by i d e n t i f y i n g your cause with h i s i n t e r e s t s " , and
by i d e n t i f y i n g h i s cause with your i n t e r e s t s (p. 24).
If it
works such a persuasive t a c t i c r e s u l t s i n s o l i d a r i t y with t h e
reader.
Moreover, Orwell uses r h e t o r i c based on t h e undeniable
a u t h e n t i c i t y o f experience.
I n Chapter Eleven, which o u t l i n e s
t h e events o f t h e Barcelona r i o t s and t h e l i e s about t h e events,
he uses t h e a u t h e n t i c i t y o f h i s experiences t o b o l s t e r h i s
argument against t h e d i s t o r t i o n and suppression o f t h e t r u t h
about t h e r i o t s .
But more w i l l be said about t h i s p a r t i c u l a r
persuasive t a c t i c l a t e r on.
S t i l l , despite t h e assumptions and sympathies he c a r r i e d
with him t o Spain, Orwell r e a l l y did n o t know much about Spain
and i t s p o l i t i c a l factionalism.
Lacking such knowledge, Orwell
n o t only believed t h a t a l l p a r t i e s on t h e L e f t were anarchistic,
b u t he a l s o believed t h a t they were u n i t e d i n t h e i r f i g h t against
Fascism, and t h i s r e s u l t e d i n h i s f i r s t disillusionment.
Orwell
says t h a t what he thought was t y p i c a l i n t h e a t t i t u d e s o f
POUM--in
t h e i r p r a c t i c e o f e q u a l i t y as he saw i t i n Barcelona
when he f i r s t a r r i v e d i n January 1937 f o r training, and among t h e
POUM militiamen a t t h e front--was
t y p i c a l o f t h e r e s t o f Spain.
A t t h e f r o n t , Orwell saw t h e militiamen exercise e q u a l i t y when
they r e f u s e d m i l i t a r y ranking and made decisions as a group
A f t e r h i s four-month
i s o l a t i o n a t t h e f r o n t with t h e POUM
m i l i t i a , Orwell was shocked t o discover t h a t n o t a l l o f Spain was
s o c i a l i s t i c o r anarchistic i n t h e sense t h a t t h e POUM were.
He
says, using h i s innocence t o give t h e reader a sense o f h i s
neutrality:
A l l t h i s time I was a t t h e f r o n t , and a t t h s f r o n t t h e
I was
s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l atmosphere did n o t change.
breathing t h e a i r o f equality, I was simple enough t o
imagine t h a t i t existed a l l over Spain.
I did n o t r e a l i z e
...
12
t h a t more o r l e s s by chance I was i s o l a t e d among t h e most
r e v o l u t i o n a r y s e c t i o n o f t h e Spanish working class. (Homage
t o C a t a l o n i a , 66)
His r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t POUM's p r a c t i c e o f ~ o c i a l i s mwas n o t t h e
general r u l e came during h i s second v i s i t t o Barcelona, during
h i s leave i n May, 1937.
Orwell says:
No doubt t o anyone who had been t h e r e i n August, when t h e
blood was scarcely d r y i n t h e s t r e e t s and m i l i t i a were
quartered i n t h e smart hotels, Barcelona i n December [when
he f i r s t a r r i v e d ] would have seemed bourgeois; t o me, f r e s h
from England, i t was l i k e r t o a workers' c i t y than anything
I had conceived possible. Now [during h i s second v i s i t 3 t h e
t i d e had r o l l e d back.
Once again i t was an ordinary c i t y , a
l i t t l e pinched and chipped by war, b u t with no outward sign
o f working-class predominance. (Homage t o C a t a l o n l a , 106)
Orwell, with h i s i d e a l i s t i c v i s i o n o f socialism i n f r o n t o f him,
was wearing "rose-colored
glasses" when he a r r i v e d i n Barcelona
i n December, and saw only what he wanted t o see.
realize,"
"He did n o t
as Bernard Crick says i n h i s biography o f Orwell,
i n f a c t , t h a t t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y phase o f t h e r e d f l a g s o r
t h e anarchist r e d and black f l a g s was nearly
over--republican normality was about t o be r e s t o r e d by t h e
c e n t r a l government f o r t h e sake o f a u n i t e d war e f f o r t and
t o placate f o r e i g n opinion, p a r t i c u l a r l y t h a t o f t h e B r i t i s h
and French governments. (George Orwell: A L i f e , 3 2 0 )
As witness t o and p a r t i c i p a n t i n t h e Barcelona c o n f l i c t , Orwell
f i n a l l y had t o r e j e c t h i s b e l i e f t h a t a l l p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s on
t h e L e f t would u n i t e i n t h e i r f i g h t against Fascism, a
misconception which may have a r i s e n through h i s f i r s t i l l u s i o n
t h a t t h e Spanish C i v i l War was only a f i g h t against Fascism.
Now, more than t h r e e months a f t e r h i s a r r i v a l i n Spain, Orwell
knew t h a t t h e Spanish C i v i l War was a war-within-a-war,
where t h e
v a r i o u s p o l i t i c a l f a c t i o n s on t h e L e f t were n o t only f i g h t i n g t h e
F a s c i s t s b u t a l s o each o t h e r f o r p o l i t i c a l dominance.
But i t was
n o t only t h e factionalism t h a t disillusioned Orwell when he
r e t u r n e d t o Barcelona; he also had t o r e v i s e h i s confidence i n
t h e s o c i a l i s t i c c a p a b i l i t i e s o f human nature--as
t h e POUM m i l i t i a a t t h e front--and
demonstrated by
t h e c a p a b i l i t y o f socialism t o
change human nature.
The s t r e e t - f i g h t i n g
factionalism,
i n Barcelona, tangible evidence o f t h e
was followed by unauthentic press r e p o r t s o f
f i g h t i n g which shocked Orwell even more than h i s discoveries t h a t
n o t a l l o f Republican Spain was s o c i a l i s t i c , o r t h a t t h e v a r i o u s
p o l i t i c a l f a c t i o n s were n o t united.
Orwell was h o r r i f i e d t o
l e a r n t h a t almost a l l o f t h e press r e p o r t s o f t h e f i g h t i n g i n
Barcelona were d i s t o r t e d t o s u i t t h e p o l i t i c a l a f f i l i a t i o n s o f
t h e newspapers r e p o r t i n g t h e Barcelona events.
His discovery
t h a t t h e p r e s s was l y i n g t o s u i t i t s own p o l i t i c a l ends would
influence him more profoundly than h i s o t h e r disillusionments,
because he, a j o u r n a l i s t himself, was already aware o f h i s own
power t o d i s t o r t t h e t r u t h .
Orwell, moreover, warns us t h a t
because no one can be completely objective, t h e r e a r e necessarily
mistakes even i n what he himself
i s writing:
I have t r i e d t o w r i t e o b j e c t i v e l y
...
though, obviously,
no one can be completely o b j e c t i v e on a question o f t h i s
kind.
One i s p r a c t i c a l l y obliged t o take sides, and it must
Again, I must i n e v i t a b l y have
be c l e a r which side I am on.
made mistakes o f f a c t .
It i s v e r y d i f f i c u l t t o w r i t e
accurately about t h e Spanish War, because o f t h e lack o f
I warn everyone against my
non-propagandist documents.
bias, and I warn everyone against my mistakes. (Homage t o
...
C a t a l o n l a , 153)
Especially because he was aware o f t h e power a j o u r n a l i s t
wield,
can
Orwell had nothing b u t contempt f o r those j o u r n a l i s t s who
knowingly used t h a t power t o t w i s t t h e t r u t h .
With h i s i d e a l i s t i c b e l i e f i n socialism, Orwell thought t h a t
t h e Left-wing
Right-wing
press should challenge t h e crusade o f t h e
press, a crusade which was authorized by t h e
conservative power e l i t e .
Dominant conservative elements,
as t h e Church and t h e landowners,
such
supported Franco's i n s u r r e c t i o n
by using t h e p r e s s as a vehicle f o r s e l f - s e r v i n g
distortions.
These d i s t o r t i o n s served t h e power e l i t e i n maintaining i t s
f e u d a l i s t i c dominance.
Thus Orwell assumed t h a t t h e p r e s s on t h e
L e f t had t h e special job o f r e f u t i n g t h e d i s t o r t i o n s on t h e
Right, and t h a t by being magnanimous toward one another r a t h e r
than self-serving,
t h e elements o f t h e Left-wing p r e s s would
encourage t h e s o c i a l change necessary t o d e f e a t t h e predominant
c o n s e r v a t i v e elements.
were j u s t
But Orwell implies t h a t those on t h e L e f t
as bad i f n o t worse than t h e insurgents a t t w i s t i n g t h e
t r u t h t o s u i t t h e i r own purposes.
More than once he expresses
h i s contempt, u s u a l l y t y p i f y i n g war-time
"racket."
journalism as a
For example, he condemns t h e Left-wing p a r t i e s f o r
being more v i n d i c t i v e towards one another than towards t h e i r
enemy:
One o f t h e d r e a r i e s t e f f e c t s o f t h e war has been t o teach me
t h a t t h e Left-wing p r e s s i s every b i t as spurious and
As f a r as t h e
dishonest as t h a t o f t h e Right.
j o u r n a l i s t i c p a r t o f i t went, t h i s war was a r a c k e t l i k e a l l
o t h e r wars.
But t h e r e was t h i s difference, t h a t whereas t h e
j o u r n a l i s t s u s u a l l y r e s e r v e t h e i r most murderous i n v e c t i v e
f o r t h e enemy, i n t h i s case, as time went on, t h e Communists
and t h e POUM came t o w r i t e more b i t t e r l y about one another
than about t h e Fascists. (Homage t o C a t a l o n i a , 6 4 - 6 5 )
...
I n h i s loathing f o r t h e "spurious and dishonest" press, and t o
d i s s o c i a t e himself from o t h e r s who wrote about t h e events o f t h e
war, Orwell warns t h e reader t o "beware" because a l l p o l i t i c a l
w r i t i n g i s p a r t i s a n writing.
Orwell's warnings t o t h e reader n o t
15
only s e r v e t o acknowledge t h e dangers o f t h e tremendous powers o f
the text--that
i s , how t h e t e x t can stand-in
f o r experience and
become t h e reader's experience of t h e Spanish C i v i l War--but
also
acknowledge t h e dangers inherent i n t h e suppression o r d i s t o r t i o n
o f t h e t r u t h , suppressions o r d i s t o r t i o n s which can erase o r
r e w r i t e history.
Orwell a l e r t s u s t o t h e danger o f an extreme p o l i t i c a l
s i t u a t i o n where no one b u t those i n a u t h o r i t y can discern t h e
d i f f e r e n c e between an a c t u a l experience and an untrue, authorized
v e r s i o n o f t h a t experience,
where no one b u t those i n a u t h o r i t y
can say what i s a c t u a l and what i s not, who can, i n f a c t , c o n t r o l
our r e a l i t y .
And when Orwell sees t h i s happening i n democratic
c o u n t r i e s t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t an unreliable, and sometimes
c o r r u p t , press i s knowingly o r unknowingly serving t o t a l i t a r i a n
aims, he i s p a r t i c u l a r l y concerned about those r e a d e r s who do n o t
know t h e t r u t h and who accept t h e authorized v e r s i o n o f an
experience as t h e r e a l i t y .
But he i s also concerned about those
r e a d e r s who know about and p r o t e s t t h e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e
untrue, authorized v e r s i o n o f an experience and t h e t r u e
experience, and who a r e punished--and
silenced--by
authority.
On t h e one hand, Orwell knows t h a t h i s inexperienced r e a d e r s
have no way of knowing what was t r u e and what was n o t t r u e .
He
knows t h a t such r e a d e r s a r e g u l l i b l e and credulous enough t o
accept t h e authorized versions o f r e a l i t y represented by
inaccurate texts.
On t h e o t h e r hand, Orwell also knows t h a t
t h e r e a r e r e a d e r s who do know t h e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e
authorized version and r e a l i t y .
He knows t h a t these people a r e
16
o f t e n silenced when they oppose t h e denial o r t h e t w i s t i n g o f
reality.
A f t e r a l l , Orwell saw t h a t i n Spain those who
challenged t h e authorized version o f an experience were
considered t o be p o l i t i c a l l y unorthodox, and p o l i t i c a l l y
dangerous, and were o f t e n j a i l e d without charge, o r murdered.
Moreover, he would soon know about t h e Moscow t r i a l s where people
who were i n a p o s i t i o n t o question a u t h o r i t y confessed t o sins o f
p o l i t i c a l wrong-doing
were t o r t u r e d ,
t h a t they had n o t committed, a f t e r they
and before they were executed.
Orwell's warnings s e r v e t o renounce t h e power o f t h e t e x t t o
duplicate r e a l i t y because n e i t h e r he nor h i s r e a d e r s could be
absolutely s u r e of t h e a u t h e n t i c i t y o f h i s t e x t .
For Orwell t o
assume t h i s power, moreover, would be t o implicate himself i n
what he considered t h e corruption,
journalism.
t h e "racket" o f war-time
To avoid contamination by association,
Orwell n o t
only warns t h e reader o f t h e c o r r u p t i o n i n h i s own t e x t .
He also
exposes and denounces t h e c o r r u p t i o n o f t h e t r u t h i n news
accounts through t h e s t r u c t u r e o f h i s t e x t .
Orwell s t r u c t u r e s h i s t e x t on two levels.
The f i r s t l e v e l
i s comprised o f t h e n a r r a t i v e , where we see t h e p o l i t i c a l l y naive
Orwell learning through h i s experience.
"lower-upper-middle-class"
boy-scout
Here we have t h e
Orwell who i s t h e o r i g i n a l English
i n h i s enthusiasm t o seek o u t t h e a c t i o n o f t h e war,
and who i s l e t down when he finds t h e r e i s l i t t l e a c t i o n t o be
had.
Here we a l s o have Orwell t h e condescending, middle-class
t o u r i s t complaining t o t h e f o l k s back home about t h e lack of
m i l i t a r y efficiency, basic equipment, and c r e a t u r e comforts.
The
f i r s t l e v e l o f t h e t e x t r e p r e s e n t s Orwell's s u p e r f i c i a l
experience o f t h e war, an experience which i s au courant: as
another w r i t i n g - t o u r i s t ,
Simone Weil says, i t was
fashion t o go on a t o u r down there,
". . . i n
t o take i n a spot o f
r e v o l u t i o n , and t o come back with a r t i c l e s b u r s t i n g o u t o f your
pen" ( S p a n i s h Front: W r i t e r s O n The C i v i l War, xxx).
A t this
l e v e l o f h i s t e x t Orwell i s almost a character i n h i s own
n a r r a t i v e , a character who i s ignorant o f and u n i n t e r e s t e d i n
p o l i t i c s , a character s t r a t e g i c a l l y c r e a t e d by Orwell t o persuade
h i s r e a d e r s t h a t h i s partisanship i s t h e r e s u l t o f unprejudiced
experience.
But a t t h e second, l e s s s u p e r f i c i a l l e v e l o f t e x t another
Orwell i s revealed; here we have t h e p o l i t i c a l Orwell with h i s
g r e a t e r knowledge gained from
experience.
Here we have Orwell
t h e s o c i a l i s t who p r e s e n t s a h i s t o r i c a l and p o l i t i c a l analysis o f
h i s experience o f t h e war.
And with t h i s p r e s e n t a t i o n o f g r e a t e r
knowledge, Orwell almost becomes an omniscient n a r r a t o r i n t h e
re-telling
o f h i s experiences.
He i n t e r r u p t s o r breaks i n t o h i s
more personal and naive n a r r a t i v e with h i s g r e a t e r knowledge a t
l e a s t twice, once i n t h e f i f t h chapter,
and again i n t h e eleventh
chapter; these two chapters r e p r e s e n t d i s t i n c t breaks i n t h e
n a r r a t i v e p a t t e r n o f t h e t e x t as whole, b u t Orwell w i l l o f t e n
break i n t o h i s n a r r a t i v e a t other p o i n t s within a chapter t o
analyze t h e events.
On t h i s second l e v e l Orwell i s able t o expose and denounce
t h e c o r r u p t i o n o f t h e t r u t h i n news accounts by revealing h i s
individual discoveries and t h e process o f how he acquired t h i s
knowledge--a
s t r u c t u r e which counters t h e "Party Line".
t h i s f i r s t i n Chapter F i v e t o r e - t e l l
He does
t h e s t o r y from a p o l i t i c a l
r a t h e r than a personal p o i n t o f view, from t h e time he a r r i v e d i n
January 1937.
And he goes even f u r t h e r back i n time t o r e v e a l
how t h e War began i n July o f 1936.
As well, Orwell gives b o t h
h i s t e x t and t h e War i t s e l f a context by moving beyond t h e
boundaries o f Spain t o examine t h e " r i s i n g t i d e o f Fascism" i n
so-called
democratic countries.
By revealing t h e p o l i t i c a l and h i s t o r i c a l genesis o f t h e
C i v i l War, and giving i t a context, Orwell exposes issues
important t o understanding t h e War as a whole, and especially h i s
argument f o r socialism.
Here he r e v e a l s what he has learned
through h i s experiences--through
h i s disillusionments--and
what
he hopes can happen i n England.
He would l i k e t o see t h e same
kind o f e g a l i t a r i a n and cooperative e f f o r t s from English workers
t h a t he saw among t h e POUM, and was disgruntled n o t t o see among
t h e r e s t o f Republican Spaniards.
But, r a t h e r than s t a r t with t h e worker, Orwell begins h i s
context a t t h e top, with t h e heads o f government.
He p o i n t s o u t
t h a t Franco "was n o t s t r i c t l y comparable with H i t l e r and
Mussolini" because Franco's " r i s i n g was a m i l i t a r y mutiny backed
up by t h e a r i s t o c r a c y and t h e Church, and i n t h e beginning, i t
was an attempt n o t so much t o impose Fascism as t o r e s t o r e
feudalism."
Orwell goes on t o say:
This means t h a t Franco had against him n o t only t h e working
c l a s s b u t a l s o v a r i o u s sections o f t h e l i b e r a l
bourgeoisie--the v e r y people who a r e t h e s u p p o r t e r s o f
Fascism when i t appears i n a more modern form.
More
important than t h i s was t h e f a c t t h a t t h e Spanish working
c l a s s did not, as we might conceivably do i n England, r e s i s t
19
Franco i n t h e name o f "democracy' and t h e s t a t u s q u o ; t h e i r
r e s i s t a n c e was accompanied by--one might almost say i t
consisted of--a d e f i n i t e r e v o l u t i o n a r y outbreak. (Homage t o
Catalonia, 48)
Twice more Orwell makes t h e point t h a t t h e Spanish working c l a s s
was f i g h t i n g f o r something more than t h e s t a t u s quo and
c a p i t a l i s t democracy so t h a t he can distinguish t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y
Spanish working c l a s s from t h e complacent English working class.
He r e p e a t s t h i s p o i n t t o b o l s t e r h i s argument against English
Capitalism i n f a v o r o f t h e Spanish Socialism he wanted t o see i n
England.
But Orwell misleads h i s r e a d e r s when he connects
Spanish democracy with a s t a t u s quo because, i n favoring
Socialism against Capitalism, he neglects t o mention t h a t t h e
Spaniards' democracy was s t i l l a f r a g i l e i n f a n t (only f o u r y e a r s
o l d a t t h e time o f h i s writing), and t h a t a f t e r 300 y e a r s o f
feudal monarchy and t e n y e a r s o f a d i c t a t o r s h i p under Primo de
Rivera from 1923 t o 1933, t h e r e had n o t been time t o firmly
e s t a b l i s h a c a p i t a l i s t democracy and i t s concomitant s t a t u s q u o ,
which was c e r t a i n l y n o t t h e case i n England.
So even someone
with as much i n t e l l e c t u a l i n t e g r i t y as Orwell i s n o t above
concealing c e r t a i n f a c t s t o make h i s argument more persuasive.
One o f h i s most glaring inconsistencies occurs i n t h i s r e v e l a t o r y
chapter when Orwell t a l k s about t h e impossibility o f making a
"large-scale
appeal f o r working-class
aid abroad."
He l i n k s t h e
impossibility t o t h e c o l l u s i o n between t h e Russian and Spanish
governments t o check t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y aspect o f t h e war,
which
was also p a r t o f h i s disillusionment.
A t t h i s p o i n t i n Chapter Five, he has j u s t described how
every r e v o l u t i o n a r y tendency was checked t o make t h e war a5 much
l i k e an "ordinary" war as possible.
t h e l o s s of
These measures r e s u l t e d i n
s t r a t e g i c o p p o r t u n i t i e s when t h e improperly armed
Anarchists could n o t take proper o f f e n s i v e a c t i o n against t h e
F a s c i s t s i n c e r t a i n areas o f Spain.
But, he says,
the fact that
t h e poorly armed Anarchists could n o t move against t h e F a s c i s t s
was a small matter compared t o t h e more important f a c t t h a t t h e
working classes o f democratic c o u n t r i e s would n o t a s s i s t t h e i r
Spanish comrades once t h e c o n f l i c t became "ordinary" r a t h e r than
"revolutionary".
What was more important was t h a t once t h e war had become
narrowed down t o a 'war f o r democracy' i t became impossible
t o make any large-scale appeal f o r working-class aid abroad.
I f we face f a c t s we must admit t h a t t h e working c l a s s o f t h e
world has regarded t h e Spanish war with detachment.
Tens o f
thousands o f individuals came t o f i g h t b u t t e n s o f millions
behind them remained apathetic.
During t h e f i r s t year o f
t h e war t h e e n t i r e B r i t i s h public i s thought t o have
subscribed t o v a r i o u s 'aid Spain' funds about a q u a r t e r o f a
million pounds--probably l e s s than h a l f o f what they spend
i n a single week on going t o t h e pictures.
The way i n which
t h e working c l a s s i n t h e democratic c o u n t r i e s could r e a l l y
have helped her Spanish comrades was by i n d u s t r i a l
a c t i o n - - s t r i k e s and boycotts.
No such thing ever happened.
(Homage t o C a t a l o n l a , 67-68)
Even though Orwell's need t o s o l i c i t aid f o r those Spaniards
f i g h t i n g against Franco and h i s f a s c i s t f o r c e s i s understandable,
h i s s o l i c i t a t i o n i s polemic based on flawed reasoning.
He
a t t r i b u t e s t h e f a i l u r e o f workers i n o t h e r c o u n t r i e s t o support
t h e Spanish working c l a s s not t o t h e i r own i n a b i l i t i e s (such as
n a t u r a l divisiveness and groupings among humans t h a t prevented
them from being aware o f t h e problems o f workers i n o t h e r
countries) b u t t o high-level
governmental s t r a t e g i e s , such as t h e
p o l i c i e s o f t h e Russian and Republican Spanish governments,
took t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y edge o f f t h e war.
that
But Orwell did know t h a t t h e f a i l u r e o f English workers t o
support Spanish workers had t o do with more than governments
suppressing t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y aspect o f t h e war.
written,
He had j u s t
t h e year b e f o r e i n The Road t o W i g a n P i e r , a damning
r e p o r t on t h e appalling working conditions o f t h e miners i n t h e
Northern England, a r e p o r t on how t h e y spend t h e i r money, whether
i t be earned o r from t h e "dole", on junk food and entertainment
t o "escape" t h e dreariness o f t h e i r lives.
Given t h i s , how can
he then expect these same workers t o be aware o f o r c a r e enough
about t h e i r fellow workers i n Spain?
Moreoever, i n h i s
condemnation o f t h e apathy o f t h e English worker i n aiding t h e
Spanish worker, Orwell ignores t h e world-wide
economic depression
which would n o t allow many o f those i n t h e working c l a s s t o
c o n t r i b u t e f i n a n c i a l l y t o t h e i r Spanish counterparts.
But Orwell's avoidance o f important f a c t s i n t h i s chapter o f
r e v e l a t i o n , even though i t leads t o flawed reasoning, i s n o t so
much concealment t o d i s t o r t t h e t r u t h b u t concealment t o simplify
t h e t r u t h i n t o a persuasive tool.
He simplifies t h e t r u t h so
t h a t h i s arguments f o r a r e v o l u t i o n a r y socialism against s t a t i c
c a p i t a l i s t democracy, and h i s arguments f o r aid t o t h e Spanish
anarchists,
a r e more accessible t o those non-partisan r e a d e r s who
a r e n o t i n t e r e s t e d i n , p o l i t i c s and h i s t o r y .
He simplifies t h e
t r u t h t o persuade those p a r t i s a n readers--especially
Communists--to
English
change t h e i r minds i n f a v o r o f t h e s o c i a l i s t cause
Orwell saw i n Spain and would l i k e t o have seen i n England.
Orwell does not, however, j u s t promote a u n i f i e d s o c i a l i s t
cause.
Out of h i s disillusionment--especially
with t h e press--he
needs equally t o expose and blame those who would s p l i n t e r o r
suppress o r d e s t r o y a u n i t e d s o c i a l i s t cause through lies; t h i s
he does most c l e a r l y i n Chapter Eleven.
He knew t h a t when l i e s
a r e used t o s e r v e a group's need f o r p o l i t i c a l power, t h e group
seeking power w i l l fragment according t o pockets o f special
interests.
He a l s o knew t h a t t h e group which uses l i e s t o gain
power w i l l expel t h e t r u t h - t e l l e r s
who see r e a l i t y independently,
and t h a t f o r such a group n e i t h e r r e a l i t y nor common i n t e r e s t can
be t h e source o f t h e group's meaning o r t e x t s .
He attempts t o
expose a l l t h i s i n Chapter Eleven which i s a climax t o t h e
preceeding n a r r a t i v e chapters.
Orwell explains t h a t he must c u t i n t o h i s personal n a r r a t i v e
w i t h Chapter Eleven so t h a t he can counter t h e l i e s o f t h e press,
and t h a t he w i l l use t h e a u t h e n t i c i t y o f h i s own experiences t o
do so.
He says,
as he has said b e f o r e and w i l l say again,
It w i l l never be possible t o g e t a completely accurate and
unbiased account of t h e Barcelona fighting, because t h e
necessary r e c o r d s do n o t exist.
F u t u r e h i s t o r i a n s w i l l have
nothing t o go upon except a mass o f accusations and p a r t y
propaganda.
I myself have l i t t l e data beyond what I saw
with my own eyes and what I have learned from o t h e r
eye-witnesses whom I believe t o be reliable.
I can,
however, c o n t r a d i c t some of t h e more f l a g r a n t l i e s and help
t o get t h e a f f a i r i n t o some kind o f perspective.
(Homage t o
Catalonla, 1 4 4 )
I n t h e above, Orwell p r e s e n t s h i s reader with a both an e t h i c a l
appeal--an
image o f himself as sincere--and
i n t e r p r e t i n g Chapter Eleven.
a guide f o r
F i r s t he l e t s t h e reader know t h a t
t h e r e a r e few r e l i a b l e sources on t h e events i n Barcelona.
But
then he assures t h e reader t h a t , unlike o t h e r accounts, h i s
m a t e r i a l i s r e l i a b l e because i t i s based on what he and o t h e r s
a c t u a l l y saw i n Barcelona, and t h a t with these r e l i a b l e data he
w i l l counter t h e unreliable press material.
With t h i s i n mind
t h e reader i s bound t o accept t h a t what follows w i l l be b o t h
even though it i s n o t t h e whole p i c t u r e
authentic and accurate,
o f t h e Barcelona events.
But i t i s more t h e chapter's s t r u c t u r e as a whole t h a t gives
t h e chapter s t r o n g c r e d i b i l i t y .
To organize h i s exposition f o r
c l a r i t y , t o give i t cohesiveness, and t o e s t a b l i s h t h e grounds
f o r h i s argument, Orwell uses t h e r h e t o r i c a l p r i n c i p l e o f
d i v i s i o n i n t h e f i r s t h a l f o f h i s chapter.
Instead o f
chronological n a r r a t i v e , Orwell uses d i v i s i o n t o give Chapter
Eleven t h e appearance o f reason o r logic so t h a t he can more
e f f e c t i v e l y r e f u t e t h e unreasonable o r i l l o g i c a l polemic o f t h e
press.
He divides t h e f i r s t h a l f o f t h e chapter i n t o f o u r
numbered sections: t h e f i r s t d i v i s i o n c o n s i s t s o f an explanation
o f what happened i n Barcelona; t h e second d i v i s i o n attempts t o
c l a r i f y t h e a f t e r - e f f e c t s o f t h e fighting;
the t h i r d division
comprises t h e "why", t h e purpose o f t h e outbreak, and t h e f o u r t h
division, which leads i n t o t h e second h a l f o f t h e chapter,
c o n s i s t s o f Orwell's judgement o f t h e events--what
he c a l l s t h e
" r i g h t s and wrongs o f t h e a f f a i r " .
I n c l a r i f y i n g t h e Barcelona s i t u a t i o n , Orwell's r h e t o r i c a l
appeal i s , i n c l a s s i c a l terms, t o reason (logos) r a t h e r than t o
sentiment o r ethics.
Using c l a s s i f i c a t i o n as h i s appeal t o
reason, Orwell can appear t o be unfolding t h e t o p i c (topes)--the
Barcelona s i t u a t i o n - - i n
a l o g i c a l and r a t i o n a l manner.
But i t i s only i n t h e t h i r d d i v i s i o n o f t h e c h a p t e r - - a f t e r
he has l a i d t h e groundwork f o r h i s r e f u t a t i o n o f t h e press and
c l a s s i f i e d t h e Barcelona s i t u a t i o n i n h i s own terms--that
begins t o a t t e n d t o t h e misleading p r e s s accounts.
Orwell
Here he
exposes t h e t r u e motivation of t h e POUM i n t h e p a r t they played
i n t h e Barcelona r i o t s , and then he r e v e a l s how t h e press, t o
s u i t t h e i r own ends, t w i s t e d t h e motivations o f t h e POUW.
And t o make s u r e t h a t no one w i l l misunderstand h i s i n t e n t
i n exposing t h e press, Orwell explains why he discusses t h e
accusations against t h e POUM a t such length, which takes u s back
t o an e a r l i e r point: t h e disillusioned speaker has t o work hard
t o demonstrate t h a t he has n o t simply f a l l e n victim t o another
s e t o f illusions.
When Orwell explains h i s lengthy discussion o f
t h e p r e s s accusations,
he wards o f f possible c r i t i c i s m t h a t he i s
deluded about t h e POUM while t h e Press sees t h e POUM clearly.
Orwell says t h a t t h e accusations--"libels
press-campaigns",
as he c a l l s them--and
and
t h e h a b i t s o f mind they
indicate, a r e capable o f doing t h e most deadly damage t o t h e
anti-Fascist
cause.
The l i b e l o u s accusations a r e capable o f
doing deadly damage because such lying, "press-smears",
"frame-ups",
and
i f they continue, w i l l make t h e s p l i t between t h e
Left-wing p a r t i e s "irreconcilable.
. . . The
only hope", against
an i r r e c o n c i l a b l e s p l i t , he says, " i s t o keep p o l i t i c a l
c o n t r o v e r s y on a plane where exhaustive discussion i s possible."
Between t h e Communists and those who stand o r claim t o stand
t o t h e L e f t o f them t h e r e i s a r e a l difference.
The
Communists hold t h a t Fascism can be beaten by an alliance
with sections o f t h e c a p i t a l i s t c l a s s (Popular Front); t h e i r
opponents hold t h a t t h i s maneouvre simply gives Fascism new
breeding-grounds.
The question has g o t t o be s e t t l e d ; t o
make t h e wrong decision may be t o land ourselves i n f o r
c e n t u r i e s o f semi-slavery.
But so long as no argument is
produced except a scream o f 'Trotsky-Fascist!' t h e
discussion cannot even begin. (Homage t o Catalona, 170-71).
Orwell knew t h a t t h e l i e s promulgated by t h e Communists on behalf
o f a u n i t e d Popular F r o n t were an attempt t o silence dissident
elements such as t h e POUM.
The Communists wanted t o silence t h e
dissidents f o r two reasons: t h e dissidents had no d e s i r e t o u n i t e
with e i t h e r t h e Communists o r with "sections o f t h e c a p i t a l i s t
class" i n t h e Popular Front; and what i s more, t h e dissidents
believed t h a t only a t o t a l l y r e v o l u t i o n a r y r e s t r u c t u r i n g o f
s o c i e t y would defeat Fascism.
But Orwell r e a l i z e d t h a t unless
t h e v a r i o u s f a c t i o n s on t h e L e f t s e t t l e d t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e s
through frank and r h e t o r i c a l l y u n d i s t o r t e d discussion--especially
t h e Communists and t h e POUM--the
F a s c i s t s could n o t be defeated.
Orwell c l e a r l y saw t h a t i n t h e p o l i t i c a l arena--especially
i n Spain--the
use o f d e c e i t f u l and accusatory language could n o t
only silence b u t could also "conquer and divide".
Each convinced
o f i t s own cause, and some wanting power, t h e v a r i o u s f a c t i o n s on
t h e L e f t used manipulative language t o convince o t h e r s t h a t
t h e i r s was t h e b e t t e r cause.
Nonetheless, Orwell recognized t h a t
t h e use o f l i e s and accusations by one f a c t i o n would n o t convince
a second f a c t i o n t h a t i t s cause was b e t t e r .
Rather, he saw t h a t
t h e use o f l i e s and accusations encouraged silence more than
discussion, and divisiveness more than unity.
With t h i s i n mind,
Orwell encouraged t h e use o f a d i f f e r e n t kind o f language i n t h e
p o l i t i c a l arena through h i s own exposition.
I n s t e a d o f t h e evasive and accusatory language o f p o l i t i c a l
factionalism which bred silence and divisiveness, Orwell sought
p o l i t i c a l u n i t y through t h e use o f clear and t r u t h f u l language
which he hoped would encourage argument and discussion.
The use
o f c l e a r and t r u t h f u l language t o promote open p o l i t i c a l dialogue
was t o be a r e c u r r i n g theme, i f n o t a preoccupation, i n Orwell's
f u t u r e writings.
Perhaps one o f t h e most famous f u t u r e examples
o f h i s preoccupation with c l e a r and t r u t h f u l language appears i s
h i s essay " P o l i t i c s And The English Language" w r i t t e n nine year
l a t e r , i n 1946, a f t e r h i s fable Animal Farm and two years b e f o r e
h i s even more famous N ~ n t e e n Eighty-Four.
t h e Spanish C i v i l War--with
Almost a decade a f t e r
t h e occurrence o f e v e n t s such as
Auschwitz and Hiroshima and Nagasaki--0rwell
i s even more
concerned about language used n o t only t o accuse and deceive, b u t
a l s o t o defend what i s indefensible.
He says:
I n our time, p o l i t i c a l speech and w r i t i n g a r e l a r g e l y t h e
defence o f t h e indefensible.
Things l i k e t h e continuance o f
B r i t i s h r u l e i n India, t h e Russian purge and deportations,
t h e dropping o f t h e atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be
defended, b u t only by arguments which a r e t o o b r u t a l f o r
most people t o face, and which do n o t square with t h e
professed aims o f p o l i t i c a l parties.
Thus p o l i t i c a l
language has t o c o n s i s t l a r g e l y o f euphemism,
question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. ( " P o l i t i c s And
The English Language" 135)
A t t h e end o f t h i s essay Orwell reminds h i s readers, as he does
e a r l i e r i n Homage t o Catalonia, t h a t he has been considering t h e
use o f language n o t f o r l i t e r a r y purposes b u t merely "as an
instrument f o r expressing and n o t concealing o r preventing
thought".'
Now, we r e t u r n t o t h a t e a r l i e r work where, with h i s
own exposition, Orwell t r i e s t o f r e e t h e p o l i t i c a l f a c t i o n s from
t h e i r narrow views and d e c e i t f u l language.
Chapter Eleven, i n Homage t o C a t a l o n i a , i s an attempt t o
l i b e r a t e t h e arguments o f t h e v a r i o u s Left-wing f a c t i o n s from t h e
d i s t o r t i n g c a p t i v i t y o f t h e i r p a r t i s a n aims so t h a t t h e f a c t i o n s
could discuss t h e i r aims r a t i o n a l l y , r a t h e r than h u r l l i e s and
accusations a t one another.
T o promote such discussion, Orwell
exposes t h e s t r a t e g y o f l i e s t h e Communist Press used t o silence
t h e POUM.
And he n o t only exposes t h e l i e s , b u t a l s o exposes how
each l i e c o n t r a d i c t s t h e other, t h a t is, t h e inconsistency o f t h e
lies.
When Orwell d e t e c t s such f a l l a c i e s i n t h e Communists'
argument, he appeals t o logic by making h i s own r e f u t a t i o n , i n
contrast,
seem v e r y r a t i o n a l .
On t h e one hand, Orwell t e l l s us, when t h e Communists
defined t h e event i n Barcelona as a coup d ' g t a t o r a r e v o u t i o n a r y
outbreak, they made more o f t h e event than a c t u a l l y occurred.
But, on t h e o t h e r hand, t h e Communists circumscribed and
minimized t h e cause o f t h e event when they accused t h e "disloyal"
Anarchists and " T r o t s k y i s t s " (read POUM) o f "stabbing t h e Spanish
Government i n t h e back".
I n e i t h e r case--by
p u f f i n g up t h e cause
o f t h e event i n Barcelona o r by l i m i t i n g t h e cause--the
Communists were o u t t o make t h e POUM look bad.
And when t h e
d
Communists i n f l a t e d t h e event i n t o a c o u p d ' e t a t , t h e y could then
use over-blown
and inflammatory terms such as "disloyal" and
" t r a i t o r o u s " t o describe those they accused o f causing t h e event.
But when t h e Communists conveniently overlooked t h e r o l e s o f t h e
o t h e r factions, they could severely l i m i t t h e cause o f t h e event
by placing t h e blame s o l e l y on t h e shoulders o f t h e POUM and by
using slogan-like
e p i t h e t s such as "Trotskyist".
Yet,
even
though t h e Communists appeared t o c o n t r a d i c t themselves through
t h e language they used t o both enlarge and t o reduce t h e i r
d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e event, they also used powerful deductive logic
behind t h e c o n t r a d i c t o r y language.
Orwell n o t only p o i n t s o u t
t h e apparent c o n t r a d i c t i o n s i n t h e Communists' use o f over-blown
and l i m i t i n g language, b u t he i s a l s o able t o grasp t h e reasoning
underlying t h e c o n t r a d i c t i o n s and t o prove t h e Communists wrong.
Through r e l e n t l e s s logic, i n Chapter Eleven Orwell i s able
t o prove t h a t t h e Communists' arguments a r e n o t only wrong b u t
also crude.
Orwell a t t a c k s t h e crude deductions o f t h e
Communists with inductions, notably copious i n detail.
He
a t t a c k s t h e deeply r o o t e d major premise o f t h e Communists'
argument which i s d e l i b e r a t e l y b u r i e d below t h e s u r f a c e reasoning
o f t h e argument,
and which i s d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d t o t h e foreign
policy o f t h e Soviet Union.
And with h i s logic, Orwell also
a t t a c k s t h e v e r y lexicon o f t h e Communists' argument through t h e
r h e t o r i c a l topic o f definition.
Orwell's r e l e n t l e s s and complex
logic i s a d i r e c t c o n t r a s t t o t h e crude and simple reasoning of
t h e Communists.
He counters t h e Communists' l i e s with t h e f a c t s
o f h i s personal experiences.
With t h e absolute c l a r i t y o f h i s
discourse Orwell exposes t h e muddiness o f t h e Communists'
assertions:
argument,
while Orwell l a y s bare t h e v e r y foundations o f h i s
t h e Communists, i n c o n t r a s t , conceal c e r t a i n
assumptions i n t h e i r argument.
When t h e Communists conceal t h e i r
e f f o r t s t o quash t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y aspect o f t h e war, t h e y a r e
well on t h e way t o being dogmatic.
Underneath b o t h t h e i r over-blown
and r e d u c t i v e language, t h e
Communists use a form o f s y l l o g i s t i c reasoning t o promote t h e i r
argument about t h e e v e n t s i n Barcelona.
s y l l o g i s t i c reasoning--an
enthymeme--which
They use t r u n c a t e d
would look l i k e this:
Minor Premise: The event i n Barcelona was a r e v o l u t i o n a r y
outbreak.
Conclusion: The event i n Barcelona was t r a i t o r o u s .
What t h e Communists' suppress i n t h e i r argument i s t h e major
premise--that
r e v o l u t i o n a r y outbreaks a r e t r a i t o r o u s .
Given t h a t
t h e Communist P a r t y was born through r e v o l u t i o n , t h e P a r t y could
hardly s t a t e openly t h a t r e v o l u t i o n a r y outbreaks a r e t r a i t o r o u s .
But even though t h e major premise i s n o t openly s t a t e d i n t h e
argument,
i t i s implied.
Orwell, l i k e t h e POUM, disagreed with t h e Communists' major
premise, t h a t r e v o l u t i o n a r y outbreaks a r e t r a i t o r o u s ,
because he
and t h e POUM believed t h a t s o c i a l change, such as eliminating
capitalism and defeating Fascism, could n o t take place through
t h e United Front, a movement t h a t n o t only included c a p i t a l i s t s
b u t was not, i n r e a l i t y , united.
Social change could only take
place through a u n i t e d r e v o l u t i o n a r y movement t h a t brought t h e
workers c o n t r o l o f t h e i r work and equal f o o t i n g with o t h e r
classes.
On t h e o t h e r hand, t h e Communists thought t h a t
p o t e n t i a l a l l i e s against Fascism, such as France and B r i t a i n ,
would be alienated i f they saw continuing r e v o l u t i o n i n
Spain--especially
a f t e r t h e Soviet Union became involved i n t h e
War.
Furthermore, Russian Communists under Stalin, who had
already c a r r i e d o u t t h e i r own revolution,
wanted t o consolidate
t h e gains they had made r a t h e r than fomenting f u r t h e r r e v o l u t i o n
i n o t h e r countries.
So t h e Communists, b e t r a y i n g t h e i r own f i r s t
principles, made s u r e t h a t any continuing r e v o l u t i o n a r y e f f o r t s
i n Spain were seen as t r a i t o r o u s t o t h e cause against Fascism:
hence t h e Communists' major premise--that
are traitorous--in
r e v o l u t i o n a r y outbreaks
t h e i r arguments about t h e event i n Barcelona.
Orwell was n o t j u s t disillusioned with t h e Communists'
dogmatic and a n t i - r e v o l u t i o n a r y
stand, he was more disillusioned
t o discover t h e factionalism among those who dissented with t h e
Communists and t h e C a p i t a l i s t s , i n what should have been a united
effort
against t h e Fascists.
As a r e s u l t o f h i s disillusionment
with t h e i r dogmatic stance, Orwell attempts b o t h t o expose t h e
Communists' s t r a t e g y o f l y i n g and t o f r e e t h e dissidents from
t h e i r own d i s t o r t e d partisanship so t h a t they could u n i t e t o
discuss t h e i r aims i n a c l e a r and t r u t h f u l manner.
Orwell i s so successful i n disputing t h e Communists' major
premise--that
r e v o l u t i o n a r y outbreaks a r e traitorous--because
works back from t h e Communists' minor premise--that
a r e v o l u t i o n a r y outbreak--and
traitorous--to
t h e conclusion--that
he
t h e event was
t h e event was
prove t h e minor premise and t h e conclusion false.
Orwell uses t h e s p e c i f i c s of i n d u c t i v e reasoning i n h i s
disputation, which e n t a i l s numerous details,
t o counter t h e
g e n e r a l i t i e s o f t h e deductive reasoning i n t h e Communists'
argument.
The Communists work from t h e general t o t h e specific
i n t h e i r argument; t o counter t h i s , Orwell works from t h e d e t a i l s
o f h i s s p e c i f i c experiences i n Barcelona back t o t h e g e n e r a l i t i e s
o f t h e minor premise and conclusion o f t h e Communists' argument.
F i r s t Orwell explains t h e Barcelona event could n o t be
defined i n such puffed-up
r e v o l u t i o n a r y out-break,
event.
8
terms as a coup d'etat, o r a
as t h e Communist Press defined t h e
Then he explains t h a t t h e Barcelona event was n o t caused
s o l e l y by any one group, such as t h e POUM, as t h e Communists
Press would have u s believe i n t h e i r constraining accounts o f t h e
event.
Orwell a t t a c k s t h e Communists' simplistic i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
o f t h e events through h i s own more complex i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .
He
t e l l s u s t h a t along with t h e POUM, t h e Anarchists and o t h e r
f a c t i o n s were also involved i n t h e events.
To counter t h e
Communists' a s s e r t i o n t h a t t h e event was a r e v o l u t i o n a r y u p r i s i n g
caused solely by t h e POUM, Orwell n o t only r e v e a l s t h a t t h e
Communists themselves played a p a r t i n t h e events,
b u t he also
r e v e a l s t h a t t h e p a r t t h e Communists played was d i c t a t e d by t h e
foreign policy o f Russia, a policy t h a t could n o t allow t h e
dissident POUM and t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y Anarchists t o be armed.
Consequently, t h e POUM and t h e Anarchists were f i g h t i n g n o t t o
overthrow t h e Republican Government b u t j u s t t o keep t h e i r arms.
I n revealing t h e complex motives o f t h e factions, Orwell
t e l l s u s t h a t even though t h e members o f t h e Anarchist Trade
Union P a r t y , t h e workers, came o u t i n t o t h e s t r e e t s , t h e o f f i c i a l
and more conservative leaders o f t h e p a r t y "disowned t h e whole
a f f a i r " from t h e beginning f o r t h r e e reasons: they did n o t want
t o antagonize t h e Catalan p r o v i n c i a l government because they had
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n there;
t h e y wanted t o form an alliance with t h e
S o c i a l i s t Trade Union P a r t y and t h e f i g h t i n g would have f u r t h e r
s p l i t t h e two groups;
l a s t l y , they q u i t e r i g h t l y f e a r e d foreign
intervention.
The leaders o f t h e POUM, i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e Anarchist
leaders, encouraged t h e i r followers t o s t a y a t t h e barricades i n
Barcelona. "But,"
Orwell says, "in r e a l i t y t h e a t t i t u d e o f t h e
POUM leaders was hesitating."
The leaders o f t h e POUM were n o t i n favour o f i n s u r r e c t i o n
u n t i l t h e war against Franco was won; on t h e o t h e r hand, t h e
workers had come i n t o t h e s t r e e t s , and t h e POUM leaders took t h e
r a t h e r pedantic Marxist l i n e t h a t when t h e workers a r e on t h e
s t r e e t s i t i s t h e duty o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y p a r t i e s t o be with
them.
Hence, i n s p i t e of u t t e r i n g r e v o l u t i o n a r y slogans about
t h e 'reawakening of t h e s p i r i t o f 19 July' [ r e c a l l i n g t h e day t h e
War began i n 19361, and so f o r t h , t h e y did t h e i r b e s t t o l i m i t
t h e workers' a c t i o n t o t h e defensive. (Homage t o Catalonia, 148)
By seeming t o approve t h e uprising by encouraging t h e i r followers
t o s t a y a t t h e barricades, Orwell says, t h e POUM leaders made i t
easy f o r t h e Communist p r e s s t o say t h a t they were f i g h t i n g a
kind o f i n s u r r e c t i o n i n s t i g a t e d only by t h e POUM.
But Orwell i s
c e r t a i n t h a t t h e Communist press would have said t h i s i n any
event, and t h a t i t "was nothing compared with t h e accusations
t h a t were made b o t h b e f o r e and a f t e r w a r d s on l e s s evidence"
(Homage t o Catalonia,
149).
I n s p i t e o f t h e accusations o f t h e Communist press, Orwell
t e l l s u s t h a t what occurred i n Barcelona was n o t an i n s u r r e c t i o n
on t h e p a r t o f t h e POUM, but, r a t h e r , what occurred was a " r i o t ' ,
because " t h e r e was no r e a l r e v o l u t i o n a r y i n t e n t i o n anywhere,"
t h e people behind t h e barricades, ordinary workers,
and
were
attempting "not t o overthrow t h e government b u t t o r e s i s t what
t h e y regarded, r i g h t l y o r wrongly,
(p. 149).
as an a t t a c k by t h e police"
Furthermore, he says, "Their a c t i o n was e s s e n t i a l l y
defensive,
and I doubt whether i t should be described, as i t was
i n n e a r l y a l l t h e f o r e i g n newspapers, as a 'rising'" (Homage t o
Catalonia,
149).
Orwell says t h a t t h e foreign a n t i - F a s c i s t
press made more o f
t h e events i n Barcelona than a c t u a l l y occurred, t h a t what was a
" r i o t " was p o r t r a y e d by t h e press as an i n s u r r e c t i o n by d i s l o y a l
Anarchists and T r o t s k y i s t s who were "stabbing t h e Spanish
Government i n t h e back."
But t h e i s s u e was n o t q u i t e so simple
as t h e p r e s s made it, Orwell says, and he explains t h a t t h e r e
were complexities n o t considered by t h e f o r e i g n press, especially
t h e f o r e i g n Communist Press.
The complexities a r i s e from t h e f a c t t h a t , as p a r t o f t h e i r
foreign policy, t h e Russian Government did n o t want continuing
r e v o l u t i o n i n Spain, and, even though i t was n o t spoken aloud,
t h i s became t h e major premise o f t h e i r argument about t h e events
i n Barcelona.
Because t h e Russians were t h e major supplier o f
arms, they were able t o coerce t h e Spanish Government i n t o
ordering t h e Anarchists t o surrender t h e i r arms.
The English press conveniently ignored t h e cause o f t h e
order.
The p r e s s i n t e r p r e t e d t h e order t o surrender arms t o mean
t h a t t h e Anarchists were being d i s l o y a l i n holding back arms
desperately needed on t h e Aragon f r o n t .
But t h e press'
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e Government's order t o surrender arms,
according t o Orwell, n o t only ignores t h e cause o f t h e order, b u t
also ignores a c t u a l conditions i n Spain.
The p r e s s ignored t h e
f a c t t h a t b o t h t h e Anarchists and t h e Catalan Communist P a r t y
were huarding arms, and t h e f a c t t h a t Communist P a r t y members
would r e t a i n t h e i r arms even if t h e Anarchists surrendered
theirs.
The p r e s s also did n o t r e v e a l t h a t t h e arms were
r e t a i n e d by t h e Anarchists n o t o u t o f d i s l o y a l t y t o t h e
Government b u t as a defense against 'non-political'
police f o r c e s
i n t h e r e a r who wanted t o suppress t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y a c t i v i s t s .
Nor did t h e p r e s s r e v e a l t h a t underneath a l l o f t h i s were t h e
"irreconcilable differences" between t h e Communists and t h e
Anarchists, d i f f e r e n c e s which were bound t o lead t o a struggle.
But Orwell exposes t h e struggle:
Since t h e beginning of t h e war t h e Spanish Communist P a r t y
had grown enormously i n numbers and captured most o f t h e
p o l i t i c a l power, and t h e r e had come i n t o Spain thousands o f
f o r e i g n Communists, many o f whom were openly expressing
t h e i r i n t e n t i o n o f 'liquidating' Anarchism as soon as t h e
war against Franco was won.
I n t h e circumstances one could
hardly expect t h e Anarchists t o hand over t h e weapons which
t h e y had g o t possession o f i n t h e summer o f 1936. (Homage t o
Catalonia, 152)
Given t h e h i s t o r y o f t h i s internecine c o n f l i c t , Orwell says t h a t
t h e f i r s t event o f t h e r i o t . t h e seizure o f t h e Barcelona
Telephone Exchange by t h e c i v i l police from t h e hands o f t h e
anarchists, was "simply t h e match t h a t f i r e d an already e x i s t i n g
bomb" (Homage t o Catalonia, 152). The "already e x i s t i n g bomb,"
t h e s i t u a t i o n i n Barcelona, however, was n o t j u s t a simple binary
opposition, nor a spontaneous and treacherous "uprising" as t h e
p r e s s made it o u t t o be.
Rather, t h e Barcelona s i t u a t i o n was an
element i n a long-standing
paradigm o f both concealed and open
forces,
among them i n t e r n a t i o n a l aims o f a f o r e i g n
government--the
expo&
Government of t h e Soviet Union.
And Orwell's
o f t h e s i t u a t i o n i n Barcelona i s an a t t a c k on t h e
Communists' dogmatic policy of non-revolution,
a policy which,
although unspoken, i s t h e major premise o f t h e Communists
argument about t h e events i n Barcelona.
A f t e r he exposes t h e complexities o f t h e events i n Barcelona
t o counter t h e simplified press accounts, Orwell r e t u r n s t o t h e
subject of press bias t o say t h a t t h e reason a "one-sided version
has been accepted i s simply t h a t t h e Spanish r e v o l u t i o n a r y
p a r t i e s have no f o o t i n g i n t h e f o r e i g n press,"
especially i n t h e
English p r e s s where one would have t o search a long time b e f o r e
finding any favorable r e f e r e n c e t o t h e Spanish Anarchists.
The
Communist Press outside o f Spain, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n England, was
guided by t h e foreign policy o f t h e Soviet Union, and so argued
against r e v o l u t i o n i n Spain.
t o t h e non-Communist
The idea o f r e v o l u t i o n , moreover,
English Press was unspeakable: r e v o l u t i o n i n
Spain would mean t h e end o f t h e l a r g e English investments i n
Spanish companies, and r e v o l u t i o n would f u r t h e r shake an unstable
Republican Government which could lead t o anarchy.
Orwell's discussion o f t h e p r e s s b i a s against t h e Spanish
r e v o l u t i o n a r y p a r t i e s leads u s i n t o t h e f o u r t h and f i n a l d i v i s i o n
i n Chapter Eleven, t o t h e " r i g h t s and wrongs o f t h e a f f a i r , "
as
Orwell c a l l s it, and t o t h e second h a l f o f h i s account where
Orwell r e f u t e s l i n e by l i n e as many as t e n specific q u o t a t i o n s
from t h e (mostly English) press.
He makes t h i s lengthy e f f o r t t o
r e f u t e t h e Communist p r e s s i n t h e second h a l f o f t h i s chapter
because, he says,
t h e Communist account o f t h e events i n
Barcelona was published world-wide
widely accepted version--a
and was probably t h e most
version t h a t i s completely d i f f e r e n t
from Orwell's account, which i s , a t l e a s t , based on t h e
a u t h e n t i c i t y o f h i s experiences o f t h e r i o t s .
The Communist
press, as Orwell has informed us, n o t only blamed t h e Barcelona
r i o t s on t h e Anarchists, b u t also blamed t h e POUM, c a l l i n g t h e
r i o t a "Fascist r i s i n g engineered by t h e POUM".
The accounts of
t h e r a i d on t h e Telephone Exchange, t h e r a i d which p r e c i p i t a t e d
t h e fighting,
a r e completely d i f f e r e n t from one another.
Orwell
p r e s e n t s a summary o f a l l t h e d i f f e r e n t versions t o demonstrate
j u s t how c o n t r a d i c t o r y and manipulative,
and t a c t i c a l r a t h e r than
informative, they are.
The occupation o f t h e Telephone Exchange by 50 POUM members
i s what one might c a l l a pictureseque cirmcumstance, and one
Yet
would have expected somebody t o n o t i c e it a t t h e time.
i t appears t h a t i t was discovered only t h r e e o r f o u r weeks
later.
I n another i s s u e o f t h e Imprecor [a Spanish
Communist newspaper3 t h e 50 POUM members become 50 POUM
It would be d i f f i c u l t t o pack t o g e t h e r more
militiamen.
c o n t r a d i c t i o n s than a r e contained i n these few s h o r t
A t one moment t h e CNT [ t h e Anarchists3 a r e
passages.
attacking t h e Telephone Exchange, t h e next they a r e being
attacked there; a l e a f l e t appears b e f o r e t h e seizure o f t h e
Telephone Exchange and i s t h e cause o f it, or,
a l t e r n a t i v e l y , appears a f t e r w a r d s and i s t h e r e s u l t o f it;
t h e people i n t h e Telephone Exchange a r e a l t e r n a t i v e l y CNT
members and POUM members--and so on. (pp. 157-8)
Orwell says he has taken only t h e r e p o r t s o f one incident f o r
reasons o f space b u t t h a t t h e same discrepancies r u n a l l through
t h e accounts o f t h e Communist press, and some statements a r e
out-and-out
lies.
F i n a l l y Orwell shows u s j u s t how t h e Communist press, i n i t s
d e s i r e t o suppress dissident tendencies, t a r g e t s t h e POUM with
t h e i r accusation t h a t t h e POUM i s " T r o t s k y i s t " , and t h e r e f o r e
Fascist, an accusation which Orwell believes i s doing t h e most
damage t o t h e a n t i - F a s c i s t
cause.
By narrowing t h e focus of h i s
argument f i n a l l y t o one word, and t o counter t h e "press-smears,"
Orwell demonstrates how one word alone can be used b o t h
indiscriminately and, often, misleadingly.
He r e f u t e s t h e press
accusation t h a t t h e POUM i s T r o t s k y i s t - F a s c i s t ,
by presenting
t h r e e d i s t i n c t d e f i n i t i o n s o f t h e word T r o t s k y i s t :
(i)
One who, l i k e Trotsky, advocates 'world r e v o l u t i o n ' as
More loosely, a
against 'Socialism i n a single country.'
r e v o l u t i o n a r y extremist.
(ii)A member o f t h e a c t u a l organization o f which T r o t s y i5
a head.
(iii)
A disguised F a s c i s t posing a s a r e v o l u t i o n a r y who a c t s
especially by sabotage i n t h e U.S.S.R.,
but, i n general, by
s p l i t t i n g and undermining t h e Left-wing forces. (p. 169)
When Orwell focuses i n on one word, he gives u s a glimpse o f h i s
obsession with unequivocal utterance.
But t h e focus on one word
i s more than j u s t Orwell's obesession with unambiguous language.
He uses h i s d e f i n i t i o n s t o s p e c i f i c a l l y focus t h e t o p i c o f t h e
events i n Barcelona on t h e accusations t h e Communists made
against t h e POUM and t h e r o l e t h e POUM played i n t h e r i o t s .
And
then he uses h i s d e f i n i t i o n s t o counter t h e accusations.
Orwell uses t h e s p e c i f i c s o f each d e f i n i t i o n t o show u s how
t h e d e f i n i t i o n e i t h e r does o r does n o t f i t t h e a c t u a l f a c t s
concerning t h e POUM.
He uses h i s d e f i n i t i o n s t o show us how t h e
Communists l i e when they define t h e POUM f i r - s t as T r o t s k y i s t ,
i.e.,
as "advocates o f world revolution", and then as as Fascist,
because t h e POUM a r e " s p l i t t i n g and undermining Left-wing forces"
which i n t u r n i s t r a i t o r o u s .
The POUM could probably be
described as T r o t s k y i s t i n t h e f i r s t sense, Orwell says, t h a t i s ,
as advocates o f 'world revolution', as he would define them.
But t h e POUM could n o t be described as T r o t s k y i s t i n t h e second
o r t h i r d sense, as t h e Communists define them, t h a t i s , as
members o f an organization headed by Trotsky, o r as F a s c i s t s i n
disguise "posing" as r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s who a c t "especially by
sabotage i n t h e U.S.S.R.,
undermining t h e Left-wing
but, i n general, by s p l i t t i n g and
forces."
To expose l i e s i n t h e Communists' definition,
Orwell
explains t h a t t h e POUM was i n no way connected with Trotsky as
t h e Communists assert.
h i s followers,
He r e v e a l s t h a t Trotsky himself ordered
a small number o f whom had come t o Spain before
t h e war t o work f o r POUM, t o a t t a c k POUM policy, a f t e r which t h e
T r o t s k y i s t s were purged from POUM.
/
Andres Nin, t h e leader o f t h e
POUM, had a t one time been s e c r e t a r y t o Trotsky, but, as Orwell
explains, Nin had l e f t Trotsky t o form t h e dissident POUM through
an amalgamation o f Left-wing groups opposed t o t h e Communist
Party.
Orwell says t h a t "Nin's one-time
association with Trotsky
has been used i n t h e Communist p r e s s t o show t h a t POUM was r e a l l y
T r o t s k y i s t " (p. 169).
But t h e Communists did n o t j u s t use l i e s
i n t h e i r attempts t o suppress and silence t h e dissident POUM:
Nin, as leader o f t h e POUM, was enough f e a r e d by t h e Communists
i n Russia t o be murdered by an agent o f t h e i r s e c r e t police who
came t o Spain t o commit t h e a c t i n 1937.
Orwell also uses h i s d e f i n i t i o n s t o f u r t h e r
r e f u t e the
Communists' accusation t h a t t h e POUM was n o t j u s t
Trotskyist but
a l s o Fascist: he says t h a t t h e POUM was n o t T r o t s k y i s t i n t h e
second sense (a member o f an organization headed by Trotsky)
which i s t h e only "exactly defined sense o f t h e word,"
and t h a t
"it i s important t o make t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n because t h e m a j o r i t y of
Communists take i t f o r granted t h a t "a T r o t s k y i s t i n sense (ii)
i s i n v a r i a b l y a T r o t s k y i s t i n sense (iii))"
-i.e.
t h a t t h e whole T r o t s k y i s t organization i s simply a
F a s c i s t spying-machine.
'Trotskyism' only came i n t o public
n o t i c e i n t h e time o f t h e Russian sabotage t r i a l s , and t o
c a l l a man a T r o t s k y i s t i s p r a c t i c a l l y equivalent t o calling
But a t t h e same
him a murderer, agent p r o v o c a t e u r , etc.
time anyone who c r i t i c i z e s Communist policy from a Left-wing
standpoint i s l i a b l e t o be denounced a s a T r o t s k y i s t .
I s it
then a s s e r t e d t h a t everyone professing r e v o l u t i o n a r y
extremism i s i n F a s c i s t pay? (p. 170)
Orwell answers h i s r h e t o r i c a l question by saying t h a t whether one
professing r e v o l u t i o n a r y extremism i s o r i s n o t accused o f being
i n F a s c i s t pay depends e n t i r e l y upon t h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e l i b e l
laws o f t h e country.
I n Spain he saw t h e Spanish Communist Press
make such accusations,
"several sharp lessons",
b u t t h e Communist Press i n England, a f t e r
came t o dread t h e law o f l i b e l , and
t h e r e f o r e no longer made such accusations.
So, t h e Communists,
i n t h e i r attempt a t suppression, could accuse dissidents o f being
Trotskyist-Facist
sanctioned.
only i n c o u n t r i e s where such l i e s were l e g a l l y
2
I n concluding h i s eleventh chapter, Orwell again touches t h e
source o f h i s disillusionment--the
t h e p r e s s distortions--when
factionalism as indicated by
he advises t h e warring f a c t i o n s on
t h e L e f t t o s t o p t h e i r smear campaigns, which w i l l lead t o an
i r r e p a r a b l e breach i f continued.
As a solution,
he suggests,
perhaps naively b u t i n good f a i t h , t h a t t h e Communists and t h e
o t h e r LeSt-wing
discussion.
p a r t i e s s e t t l e t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e s through
That i s , Orwell suggests t h a t t h e Left-wing
factions
f i n d some common ground through frank and r h e t o r i c a l l y
u n d i s t o r t e d discussion.
And when he p r e d i c t s t h e outcome i f
Left-wing p a r t i e s do n o t s e t t l e t h e i r differences,
naive b u t prescient.
Orwell i s not
He says t h a t t h e Left-wing factionalism
could lead t o a F a s c i s t v i c t o r y and "semi-slavery"
possibly under
a t o t a l i t a r i a n dictatorship.
Because we know from h i s w r i t i n g s following Homage t o
Catalonia t h a t Orwell's concern about t h e d i s t o r t i o n o r
suppression o f t h e t r u t h was on-going,
we can assume t h a t h i s
expressed h o r r o r , h i s disillusionment, was real.
But some o f h i s
o t h e r disillusionments did n o t a f f e c t him so deeply; r a t h e r , they
a r e c r e a t e d t o add specific r h e t o r i c a l elements t o h i s n a r r a t i o n
about t h e a c t u a l fighting--of
which he saw v e r y l i t t l e .
Such
disillusionments a r e c r e a t e d by Orwell as appeals t o ethos and
pathos.
They allow Orwell t o seem uninformed and non-partisan.
These disenchantments balance Orwell's appeal t o reason (logos)
c r e a t e d through h i s p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e omniscient
narrator--0rwell
t h e socialist--who
p r e s e n t s t h e extensive
p o l i t i c a l analyses, which come o u t o f deeply-felt
disillusionments.
political
The more personal disllusionments balance what
might otherwise be d r y p o l i t i c a l and h i s t o r i c a l analyses, and
hard-going f o r t h e reader.
These disillusionments take place on
t h e f i r s t l e v e l o f Orwell's t e x t , t h e l e v e l which r e p r e s e n t s
Orwell's s u p e r f i c i a l experience o f t h e war, and which r e p r e s e n t s
t h e middle-class,
p o l i t i c a l l y naive character,
learning through
h i s experiences.
By c r e a t i n g t h e naive character,
Orwell can
appear t o be p o l i t i c a l l y uncommitted and t h u s appeal t o t h e
sentiment o f those r e a d e r s who a l s o have no commitment t o
politics.
A t t h e same time, he can demonstrate t o those readers
who a r e suspicious o f p a r t i s a n w r i t e r s t h a t he i s n o t partisan,
n o t predisposed t o one side o r t h e other, and t o these readers,
Orwell's appeal i s ethical.
Orwell's more minor disillusionments begin when he a r r i v e s
a t the front.
Being ignorant o f t h e a c t u a l topography, he was
disillusioned t o discover t h a t such landscape would n o t permit
t h e kind o f a c t i v e and dangerous f i g h t i n g he had hoped f o r .
And
he was dismayed t o discover t h a t t h e POUM militiamen and t h e
Anarchists were n o t as m i l i t a r i l y e f f i c i e n t o r a s competent as
B r i t i s h f i g h t i n g forces.
Here Orwell appeals t o h i s r e a d e r s b o t h
e t h i c a l l y and sentimentally: n o t only does he present t h e
middle-class,
p o l i t i c a l l y naive character, b u t he also p r e s e n t s a
character who i s a s s e r t i v e l y masculine i n h i s desire f o r some
a c t i o n on t h e f r o n t ,
and a character who has some knowledge and
experience o f e f f i c i e n t m i l i t a r y t a c t i c s .
and m i l i t a r y efficiency,
tedious,
comforts.
terrain,
Orwell found t h a t being on t h e f r o n t was
lacking i n necessary basic equipment and c r e a t u r e
The tedium came from t h e f a c t t h a t t h e mountainous
t h e g r e a t distances between t h e POUM m i l i t i a and t h e
Facists, didn't permit hand-to-hand
battles.
But i n s t e a d o f a c t i o n
These, then,
combat o r major o f f e n s i v e
a r e some o f Orwell's minor
disillusionments, which form t h e content o f t h e n a r r a t i v e
sections o f h i s t e x t .
And even though Orwell t e l l s h i s r e a d e r s t o skip t h e
expository sections o f h i s t e x t i f they a r e n o t i n t e r e s t e d i n
h i s t o r y o r p o l i t i c s , i t i s t h e r e v e l a t o r y exposition o f Chapters
F i v e and Eleven, r a t h e r than t h e n a r r a t i v e - - t h e
disillusionments--that
minor
n o t only r e v e a l s h i s more profoundly f e l t
disillusionment, b u t also r e v e a l s h i s argument f o r socialism.
But Orwell i s a l s o using t h e s t r a t e g y o f persuasion when he
advises h i s r e a d e r s t o ignore t h e expository sections o f h i s
text.
When he says: " I f you a r e n o t i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e h o r r o r o f
p a r t y p o l i t i c s , please skip; I am t r y i n g t o keep t h e p o l i t i c a l
p a r t s o f t h i s n a r r a t i v e i n separate chapters f o r p r e c i s e l y t h a t
purpose", he i s appealing b o t h t o h i s p a r t i s a n and non-partisan
r e a d e r s (p. 46).
J u s t b e f o r e he asks h i s readers t o skip t h e
" p a r t y p o l i t i c s " he says, "At t h e beginning I had ignored t h e
p o l i t i c a l side o f t h e war,
and i t was only about t h i s time t h a t
i t began t o f o r c e i t s e l f upon my a t t e n t i o n " (Homage t o C a t a l o n i a ,
p. 4 6 ) .
With t h i s statement he appeals t o those o f h i s r e a d e r s
who a r e non-partisan by i d e n t i f y i n g with them through h i s lack o f
p o l i t i c a l knowledge.
A t t h e same time, he appeals t o those
p a r t i s a n readers who might be suspicious o f a p a r t i c u l a r bias:
Orwell l e t s them know t h a t h i s exposition w i l l n o t r e v e a l a bias,
but, r a t h e r , what he has learned through a c t u a l experience.
S t i l l , Orwell's exposition i s biased, as we come t o f i n d out,
because h i s exposition a c t s as c o u n t e r - t e x t
t o the bias o f the
d i s t o r t e d t e x t s which so h o r r i f y , d i s i l l u s i o n and anger him.
To sum up then, we can say t h a t through h i s experiences
Owell r e j e c t s h i s e a r l i e r idea t h a t t h e Spanish C i v i l War was
simply a war against Fascism.
Furthermore, once Orwell leaves
t h e i s o l a t i o n o f t h e f r o n t t o r e t u r n t o Barcelona, he n o t only
abandons h i s conception t h a t a l l o f Spain was s o c i a l i s t i c i n t h e
sense t h a t t h e POUM were s o c i a l i s t i c , b u t when he begins t o r e a d
t h e p r e s s accounts o f t h e Barcelona r i o t s he a l s o abandons any
i l l u s i o n s he has t h a t t h e t r u t h would be t o l d about t h e r o l e of
t h e Anarchists and t h e dissident POUM and t h e i r d e s i r e f o r
revolution.
Moreover, when he saw t h e misleading accounts,
Orwell a l s o had t o r e j e c t h i s i d e a l i s t i c i l l u s i o n t h a t t h e p r e s s
on t h e L e f t , which represented v a r i o u s p o l i t i c a l factions, would
a l t r u i s t i c a l l y u n i t e t o challenge t h e crusade o f t h e Right-wing
press.
I n h i s disillusionment, Orwell i s compelled t o warn t h e
reader o f t h e power o f t h e t e x t , how t h e t e x t can stand i n f o r
experience,
and sometimes d i s t o r t o r r e j e c t t h e a c t u a l meaning o f
t h e experience.
I n warning t h e reader, Orwell r e j e c t s such power
and removes himself from possible contamination by a c o r r u p t
But, a t t h e same time,
Orwell i s compelled t o r e f u t e t h e
l i e s about t h e dissident POUM.
T o counter t h e s t r a t e g y o f l i e s
press.
used t o silence t h e dissidents, he promotes t h e idea o f f u r t h e r
discussion.
And he does successfully r e f u t e t h e vagueness of t h e
l i e s through t h e s p e c i f i c s o f h i s exposition which,
through i t s
organization, s t r o n g l y appeals t o t h e reader's sense o f reason.
CHAPTER TWO
Historical And Social Contexts for Orwell and Koestlor's Journey
t o Spain
The whole process o f p o l i t i c a l commitment, disillusionment,
and r e a f f i r m a t i o n was s h o r t e r f o r Orwell than f o r Koestler.
For
Orwell t h e process occurred over a period o f about e i g h t
months--from
December 1936 t o June 1937; whereas f o r K o e s t l e r t h e
process took from 1931 t o 1938--seven
years.
Orwell became
committed t o Socialism during t h e months he spent w i t h t h e POUM
militiamen a t t h e Front.
While on leave from t h e F r o n t i n
Barcelona, and during t h e r i o t s t h e r e i n May 1937, Orwell became
disillusioned with t h e p o l i t i c a l i n - f i g h t i n g o f t h e L e f t , and
with t h e t a c t i c s t h e Communists used t o eliminate dissidents.
However, when he had r e t u r n e d t o England and had time t o reassess
h i s experiences i n Spain, Orwell r e a f f i r m e d h i s b e l i e f i n
Socialism.
And once he had done so, he maintained t h a t b e l i e f
u n t i l h i s death i n 1950.
Rather than experience commitment, disillusionment and
r e a f f i r m a t i o n i n succession, as Orwell did, K o e s t l e r went through
a s e r i e s o f disillusionments,
and h i s f i r s t disillusionment came
v e r y soon a f t e r he had committed himself t o t h e Communist Party.
Furthermore, from t h e time he adopted Communism u n t i l he r e j e c t e d
h i s f a i t h i n it, K o e s t l e r v a c i l l a t e d between commitment and
disillusionment, hanging on t o h i s f a i t h l i k e a l o v e r unwilling
t o give up a soured l o v e a f f a i r .
K o e s t l e r became disillusioned with t h e Communist P a r t y
s h o r t l y a f t e r he had a f f i l i a t e d himself t o t h e P a r t y when H i t l e r
r o s e t o power i n B e r l i n i n 1931.
And from t h a t point on,
K o e s t l e r was i n a s t a t e o f constant v a c i l l a t i o n , except during
t h e e a r l y months o f t h e Spanish C i v i l War and t h e formation o f
t h e Common Front, b o t h occasions momentarily causing him t o f e e l
reaffirmed i n h i s b e l i e f t h a t Communism could d e f e a t Fascism.
But i n s p i t e of h i s constant v a c i l l a t i o n , Koester clung t o h i s
p o l i t i c a l ideals and took a long time t o abandon them--seven
years, i n fact--and
when he f i n a l l y did abandon them, he did so
f o r good.
When K o e s t l e r adopted Communism i n 1931, during H i t l e r ' s
r i s e t o power i n Berlin, Orwell was "down and o u t " i n London and
Paris--choosing
periodical1y t o l i v e among t h e d e s t i t u t e .
At
t h i s time Orwell had n o t y e t embraced any specific p o l i t i c a l
ideology.
His a n t i - a u t h o r i t a r i a n ,
gained during h i s five-year
anti-imperialistic
attitudes,
s t i n t as an imperial policeman i n
Burma (1922-27), "took a 'Tory anarchist' form r a t h e r than
anything s p e c i f i c a l l y o r even l a t e n t l y socialist",
as Bernard
Crick says i n h i s biography o f Orwell (George O r w e l l : A L i f e ,
211).
It wasn't u n t i l t h e e a r l y 1930's t h a t Orwell began t o
i n v e s t i g a t e basic S o c i a l i s t tenets,
and although he had adopted
Socialism t h e o r e t i c a l l y , Orwell did n o t become a confirmed
S o c i a l i s t u n t i l he experienced t h e Socialism p r a c t i s e d by t h e
POUM m i l i t i a during t h e Spanish C i v i l War i n 1936.
K o e s t l e r t e l l s u s i n h i s autobiography t h a t he joined t h e
German Communist P a r t y i n B e r l i n as "the only apparent
a l t e r n a t i v e t o Nazi rule."
His commitment t o Communism was more
than j u s t a p o l i t i c a l a f f i l i a t i o n , as was Orwell's commitment t o
Socialism,
and both became attached t o t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e p o l i t i c a l
doctrines o u t o f a sense o f middle-class
guilt.
But K o e s t l e r ' s
commitment had a s p i r i t u a l dimension, a metaphysical dimension,
t h a t was absent i n Orwell's case.
The s p i r i t u a l dimension f o r
K o e s t l e r came through h i s p r e d i s p o s i t i o n t o search f o r t h e
i n f i n i t e , f o r t h e "arrow i n t h e blue", as he c a l l s it, a search
which t h e more pragmatic Orwell would have rejected.
But more
must be said about what motivated each o f them t o become
p o l i t i c a l l y involved i n t h e f i r s t place.
When H i t l e r came t o power i n 1931, K o e s t l e r f e l t he had no
choice b u t t o j o i n t h e German Communist P a r t y because he f e l t
betrayed by t h e S o c i a l i s t s and t h e L i b e r a l s when they, each i n
t h e i r own way, c o n t r i b u t e d t o H i t l e r ' s power.
Koestler f e l t
p a r t i c u l a r y betrayed by h i s employers, who were Liberals. He had
simultaneously been employed as science and f o r e i g n a f f a i r s
e d i t o r f o r two B e r l i n newspapers i n t h e U l l s t e i n group.
The
U l l s t e i n chain o f newspapers was one o f t h e l a r g e s t i n Western
Europe, and t h e owners o f t h e chain o f papers were L i b e r a l Jews
who expediently became pro-Nazi
as H i t l e r ' s power grew.
As a
r e s u l t , those employees o f t h e U l l s t e i n group who were Jews o r
Communists o r b o t h became a l i a b i l i t y t o t h e Ullsteins.
Koestler, who was b o t h a Jew and a Communist, was f i r e d from h i s
job with U l l s t e i n i n 1932.
So when L i b e r a l s such as t h e
U l l s t e i n s betrayed t h e i r own cause, and when t h e German
S o c i a l i s t s competed with t h e Communists f o r power i n s t e a d o f
joining with them t o f i g h t t h e Nazis, K o e s t l e r f e l t t h a t he had
no choice b u t t o become a member o f t h e German Communist P a r t y t o
combat t h e Nazis.
The U l l s t e i n s a r e a good example o f what Orwell talked about
when he compared Spain with more modern c o u n t r i e s and
characterized t h e " l i b e r a l bourgeoisie" o f those c o u n t r i e s as
being "the very people who a r e t h e s u p p o r t e r s o f Fascism when i t
appears i n a more modern form" ( H o m a g e t o C a t a l o n i a , 13).
Many
Liberals, such as t h e Ullsteins, c a p i t u l a t e d t o Fascism i n
Germany, abandoning t h e i r principles and values.
no hope f o r t h e German S o c i a l i s t s either.
But t h e r e was
K o e s t l e r says t h a t t h e
r e c o r d o f t h e S o c i a l i s t s f o r t h e preceding q u a r t e r - c e n t u r y
was
one o f "unprincipled opportunism and spineless compromise".
K o e s t l e r r e c a l l s t h a t two years b e f o r e World War I t h e S o c i a l i s t s
had promised t o make it impossible f o r t h e i r government t o go t o
war, b u t two y e a r s l a t e r , i n 1914, they " e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y
supported Kaiser Wilhelm's war o f conquest" ( A r r o w i n t h e B l u e ,
295).
Talking about t h e German S o c i a l i s t s ' b e t r a y a l t h a t l e d t o
t h e r i s e o f Fascism, K o e s t l e r goes on t o say,
I n t h e 1932 p r e s i d e n t i a l elections, t h e i r candidate was
doddering o l d F i e l d Marshall Hindenburg, t h e Petain o f
Germany.
They g o t him elected, and six months l a t e r he
c a l l e d Adolf H i t l e r i n t o power.
Their only f i r m and
It
uncompromising stand was taken against t h e Communists.
was i n s p i r e d n o t so much by questions o f principle as by
jealousy o f t h e r i v a l who had dared t o challenge t h e
S o c i a l i s t monopoly i n representing t h e working class. ( A r r o w
i n t h e B l u e , 295).
...
So +or Koestler, and o t h e r "progressive i n t e l l e c t u a l s " i n
Germany, t h e o n l y p o l i t i c a l a l t e r n a t i v e t o t h e Nazis was
Communism, because t h e remaining two p o l i t i c a l options,
Liberalism and Socialism,
once available t o those i n t e l l e c t u a l s ,
were no longer available.
The i s s u e o f no choice b u t Communism c e r t a i n l y was n o t an
i s s u e f o r Orwell i n England.
While Germany was p o l i t i c a l l y
v o l a t i l e during t h e f i r s t u n s e t t l e d years o f t h e 1930's, England
remained p o l i t i c a l l y s t a b l e a t t h a t time, and even more so
through t h e y e a r s o f World War 11.
Because o f England's
p o l i t i c a l m a t u r i t y and s t a b i l i t y , n e i t h e r L i b e r a l s nor S o c i a l i s t s
ever had t h e opportunity, on a l a r g e scale,
principles and values t o Facism.
t o abandon t h e i r
Nor was anyone o v e r t l y
persecuted because o f h i s o r her p o l i t i c a l a f f i l i a t i o n .
And
Socialism i n England was obviously n o t t h e same as Socialism i n
Germany: English S o c i a l i s t s did n o t b e t r a y t h e i r p r i n c i p l e s t o
Fascism, so "progressive i n t e l l e c t u a l s " i n England, l i k e Orwell,
could and did choose t o a f f i l i a t e with Socialism.
Therefore,
unlike Orwell, K o e s t l e r didn't have t o i d e n t i f y sympathetically
and imaginatively with t h e oppressed--he
and endangered.
was himself oppressed
Koestler, unlike Orwell, didn't have t o "go down
and o u t " t o obtain a more l i t e r a l experience o f oppression.
Orwell d e l i b e r a t e l y searched f o r t h e l i t e r a l experience of
oppression--he
chose t o l i v e among t h e poor from time t o time,
and he chose, on commission, t o t o u r and l i v e among t h e
unemployed miners o f Northern England t o gather m a t e r i a l f o r The
Road t o W i g a n P i e r ,
r e a l oppression,
I n c o n t r a s t t o Orwell, K o e s t l e r had t o face
and, i n r e a c t i o n t o t h e oppression, K o e s t l e r ' s
s t r a t e g y was t o j o i n t h e German Communist Party.
K o e s t l e r ' s new commitment t o t h e Communist P a r t y was n o t i n
any w a y f r i v o l o u s :
a f t e r he was f i r e d from h i s job as e d i t o r f o r
t h e U l l s t e i n s i n 1931, K o e s t l e r was committed enough t o t h e
Communist P a r t y t o t r a v e l i n t h e Soviet Union from 1932 t o 1933
under t h e sponsorship o f Russia's Agitprop Cornintern, which
commissioned him t o w r i t e a book on t h e f i r s t Five-year
Plan.
K o e s t l e r completed h i s book i n 1934, b u t i t was r e j e c t e d by
Soviet censors.
authority.
So K o e s t l e r too, l i k e Orwell, was silenced by
But i n t h e case o f h i s book on t h e f i r s t Five-Year
Plan, K o e s t l e r was silenced by a u t h o r i t i e s with whom he
supposedly agreed p o l i t i c a l l y .
r e q u i r e d of him self-censorship
He was learning t h a t h i s ideology
and s e l f - r u l e ,
whereas Orwell was
u s u a l l y censored by a u t h o r i t i e s who disagreed with h i s p o l i t i c s
as he expressed them i n Homage t o C a t a l o n i a , and h i s a r t i c l e s
against Communist propaganda i n Spain.
When K o e s t l e r finished
h i s t r a v e l s i n t h e Soviet Union, he knew t h a t he would s u f f e r
more than t h e censorship o f h i s t e x t s i f he r e t u r n e d t o Germany
so he f l e d t o Paris, which had become t h e center f o r anti-Nazi
exiles, and where he eked o u t a living.
Orwell, on t h e o t h e r
hand, did n o t have t o f l e e from England because o f r e l i g i o u s o r
p o l i t i c a l persecution.
I n England Orwell could choose t o
r e c r e a t e and i m i t a t e p o v e r t y f o r himself.
Unlike K o e s t l e r i n
Germany, and l a t e r i n France, Orwell i n England could choose t h e
means t o earn a l i v i n g o r not.
Koestler's t e x t s came d i r e c t l y
o u t o f h i s experiences o f oppression and persecution, a f t e r h i s
disillusionment, b u t Orwell had t o c r e a t e t h e experience of
oppression before r e c r e a t i n g t h e experience i n t o t e x t .
And Orwell was aware o f t h i s d i f f e r e n c e i n experience
between English w r i t e r s l i k e himself and European w r i t e r s l i k e
Koestler.
When Orwell r e t u r n e d t o England from Spain i n 1937 he
found t h a t ,
on t h e whole, t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l w r i t e r s on t h e l e f t
(usually members o f t h e Communist P a r t y ) were l y i n g about o r were
ignorant o f t h e b e t r a y a l o f t h e workers' r e v o l u t i o n by t h e
Communist P a r t y i n Spain.
They e i t h e r knew t h e t r u t h and chose
t o l i e believing t h a t they were helping t h e f i g h t against Facism,
o r they were ignorant o f t h e t r u t h and r e f u s e d t o believe t h e
t r u t h when confronted with it.
Orwell thought t h a t t h e English
w r i t e r s d i s t o r t e d t h e t r u t h o r simply r e f u s e d t o believe t h e
t r u t h because t h e i r r e a l p o l i t i c a l experience was narrow:
they
simply couldn't imagine themselves as victims o f t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m .
And Orwell s t i l l believed t h i s seven years l a t e r i n 1944
when he reviewed K o e s t l e r ' s writings.
I n England, Orwell f e l t
t h e lack o f t h e kind o f p o l i t i c a l w r i t i n g he defines as a
"special c l a s s o f l i t e r a t u r e t h a t has a r i s e n o u t o f t h e European
p o l i t i c a l s t r u g g l e since t h e r i s e o f Fastism" ("Arthur Koestler",
i n C o l l e c t e d Essays,
J o u r n a l i s m o f George O r w e l l , V o l 3 , 271)-
I n hi5 a r t i c l e on Koestler, Orwell goes on t o say t h a t t h e
w r i t e r s o f t h e European p o l i t i c a l s t r u g g l e against Fascism a r e
" a l l alike
. . . in
t r y i n g t o w r i t e contemporary h i s t o r y , b u t
u n o f f i c i a l h i s t o r y , t h e kind t h a t i s ignored i n t h e t e x t books
and l i e d about i n newspapers" (CEJOGO, Vol. 3,
o f t h i s "special c l a s s o f l i t e r a t u r e " ,
271).
The w r i t e r s
Orwell says, a r e a l s o
a l i k e i n being c o n t i n e n t a l Europeans, and i n having been o r being
able t o think o f themselves being victims o f t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m .
Orwell p o i n t s o u t t h a t t h e middle-class
European w r i t e r has had
things happen t o him t h a t would never happen t o working-class
Englishmen.
He i s t a l k i n g about t h e f a c t t h a t European w r i t e r s
have had t o "break t h e law" t o be p o l i t i c a l ; i.e.,
some have
"thrown bombs, fought i n s t r e e t b a t t l e s , many have been i n
concentration camps, f l e d across f r o n t i e r s with f a l s e name and
forged passports" ("Arthur Koestler", 272).
Koestler, o f course,
i s one o f these w r i t e r s .
And Koestler, a v i c t i m o f t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m i n F a s c i s t form,
chose a c t i o n over contemplation, p o l i t i c s over a r t .
He loaned
h i s a r t t o t h e Communist P a r t y where he worked f o r t h e
anti-Fascist
movement by w r i t i n g propaganda pamphlets and t h e
4
f i r s t o f h i s Spanish C i v i l War t e x t s , L'Espagne Ensanglantee f o r
t h e Comintern i n Paris.
Yet,
a t t h e same time, t h e process o f
K o e s t l e r ' s disillusionment began almost as soon has he had
committed himself t o t h e Communist Party.
During t h e time t h a t
K o e s t l e r was l i v i n g i n P a r i s and working f o r Comintern there, he
began t o w r i t e The Gladiators, a novel t h a t c o v e r t l y expresses
h i s doubts about t h e end j u s t i f y i n g t h e means--a
policy t h a t had
become an a c t i v e p a r t o f t h e Communist P a r t y ' s doctrine.
K o e s t l e r took f o u r y e a r s t o w r i t e The Gladiators because o f lack
o f money and because he was, as he so mildly s t a t e s , "under
p r e s s u r e o f p o l i t i c a l events".
He finished t h i s book during t h e
months before and a f t e r h i s break with t h e Communist Party, and
he says t h a t t h e w r i t i n g o f i t f i l l e d him "with peace and
relief".
The w r i t i n g o f i t became an "occupational therapy":
I t gave me a sense o f c o n t i n u i t y which t i d e d me over t h a t
period o f o u t e r loneliness and inner emptiness.
Before t h e
break, 1 had thought of myself as a servant o f t h e Cause,
and o f w r i t i n g as a means of serving it. Now I began t o
r e g a r d myself as a professional w r i t e r , and w r i t i n g as a
purpose i n i t s e l f . (The Invisible Writlng, 478)
Writing t o s e r v e t h e Cause, K o e s t l e r says he was t h e Pavlovian
"barking dog", r e a c t i n g n e u r o t i c a l l y by censoring and c o n t r o l l i n g
himself.
But when he doubted t h e Cause, and f i n a l l y broke from
it, he began t o w r i t e only f o r t h e sake o f writing, without t h e
c o n t r o l of
self-censorship.
Koestler, i n o t h e r words, stopped
producing one form o f "political",
commissioned text--propaganda,
which i s " p u b l i c i t y " and has a short-term
effect--to
produce
another form o f " p o l i t i c a l " , non-commissioned t e x t - - a r t ,
c r e a t i v e and personal, and has a long-term
which i s
and u n i v e r s a l e f f e c t .
S t i l l , Koestler's doubts had begun even e a r l i e r than h i s
f i r s t expression o f them i n t h e w r i t i n g o f The Gladlators i n
1934.
His disillusionment began i n 1932, s h o r t l y a f t e r h i s
commitment t o Communism, during h i s t r a v e l s i n t h e Soviet Union
when "by a strange hazard,"
he says he "stumbled upon t h e f i r s t
g r e a t show t r i a l i n Central Asia--a
(The Invisible Writlng, 148).
f o r e t a s t e o f things t o come"
This "show t r i a l " ,
along with t h e
o t h e r s held l a t e r i n Moscow, was also a form o f propaganda, o f
"publicity",
t h a t r e q u i r e d censorship o f t h e s e l f , a censorship
t h a t u s u a l l y r e q u i r e d t h e accused t o admit t o deeds he o r she had
n o t committed.
I n t u r n , t h i s f a l s e admission usually l e d t o t h e
u l t i m a t e form o f censorship--to
t h e silencing o f words and t e x t s
through t h e silencing, t h e murder, o f speaker and writer.
K o e s t l e r says t h e " f i r s t g r e a t show t r i a l " took place i n
Ashkabad, which i s l o c a t e d i n t h e Republic o f Turkmanistan.
Koestler, who had been i n v i t e d as a v i s i t i n g d i g n i t a r y t o s i t
with t h e judges,
r e c a l l s t h a t t h e defendants "wore expressions o f
complete i n d i f f e r e n c e and apathy".
So did t h e s p e c t a t o r s behind t h e guards.
In fact, the
expressions of t h e s p e c t a t o r s were t h e same as those o f t h e
accused.
I must have vaguely f e l t , even then, t h a t they
were a l l one--the defeated victims, t h e people down t h e r e
b e f o r e us; and t h a t we who faced them from t h e r a i s e d
platform were t h e i r conquerors and r u l e r s .
Not t h e
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e Workers' S t a t e and t h e People's
Court; b u t simply t h e r u l e r s .
They did n o t h a t e us.
They
were t o o apathetic and resigned even f o r t h a t .
How much o f
I am unable
t h i s did I consciously understand a t t h e time?
t o decide; b u t I do v i v i d l y remember feeling, while I s a t
exposed on t h a t r a i s e d platform, t h a t n o t t h e accused b u t I
was being p i l l o r i e d . ( T h e Invisible W r i t i n g , 148)
A t t h i s t r i a l t h e apathetic victims o f Koestler's chosen
ideology--the
accused and t h e s p e c t a t o r s alike--were
self-censorship:
being taught
even "hate" as form o f f r e e expression had been
eliminated through apathy and resignation.
K o e s t l e r goes on t o say t h a t while he was on t h e p l a t f o r m
with t h e judges he f e l t t h a t he was on t h e wrong side, t h a t he
should have been with t h e accused r a t h e r than with t h e judges:
It gave me t h e same g u i l t y f e e l i n g t h a t I had experienced
t h e common people who had no access t o
towards
p r i v i l e g e d co-operative s t o r e s , no p r i o r i t i e s f o r food,
housing, clothing and living.
They were t h e powerless and I
was on t h e side o f Power, and so i t went wherever I t u r n e d
i n Russia.
A r e v o l u t i o n a r y can i d e n t i f y himself with Power,
a r e b e l cannot; b u t I was a rebel, n o t a r e v o l u t i o n a r y . ( T h e
I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 148)
...
So K o e s t l e r r e a l i z e d e a r l y on t h a t t h e r o a d t o r e v o l u t i o n , a t
l e a s t t h e Russian Revolution, l e d n o t t o b e t t e r conditions f o r
t h e oppressed b u t t o power f o r f u r t h e r oppressing t h e oppressed.
And because he was n o t seeking power when he committed himself t o
Communism b u t r a t h e r t h e i n f i n i t e , t h e "arrow i n t h e blue",
K o e s t l e r became disillusioned when he found t h a t those i n power
sought only t o maintain t h e i r power, and did so mainly by
oppression.
And he, who had been persecuted by Nazi sympathizers
and who had joined t h e Communist P a r t y t o f i g h t such persecution,
now f e l t g u i l t y because he found t h a t t h e P a r t y was committing
similar a c t s o f persecution instead o f f i g h t i n g against such
acts.
Orwell also had become p o l i t i c i z e d because he had f e l t g u i l t
when he witnessed t h e persecution, t h e b r u t a l i z a t i o n o f t h e
n a t i v e s of Burma by t h e Imperial B r i t i s h police o f which he was a
member.
When Orwell r e t u r n e d t o England he did n o t immediately
adopt a p a r t i c u l a r p o l i t i c a l ideology, b u t r a t h e r he chose t o go
"down and o u t " among t h e working c l a s s and t h e d e s t i t u t e t o
expiate h i s g u i l t .
Orwell says:
When I came home on leave i n 1927 I was already h a l f
determined t o throw up my job [with t h e Imperial Burmese
I was n o t
Policel, and one s n i f f o f English a i r decided me.
going back t o be a p a r t o f t h a t e v i l despotism.
But I
wanted much more than merely t o escape from my job.
For
f i v e years I had been p a r t o f an oppressive system, and i t
had l e f t me with a bad conscience.
I was conscious o f
an immense weight o f g u i l t t h a t I had g o t t o expiate.
I f e l t t h a t I had g o t t o escape n o t merely from imperialism
I wanted
b u t from e v e r y form o f man's domination over man.
t o submerge myself, t o g e t r i g h t down among t h e oppressed,
t o be one o f them and on t h e i r side against t h e i r t y r a n t s .
A t t h a t time f a i l u r e seemed t o me t o be t h e only v i r t u e .
Every suspicion o f s e l f -advancement, even t o 'succeed' i n
l i f e t o t h e e x t e n t o f making a few hundred a year, seemed t o
me s p i r i t u a l l y ugly, a species o f bullying. ( T h e Road t o
W i g a n Pier, 129-30)
...
...
.
..
Both Orwell and K o e s t l e r experienced being on t h e l e v e l o f
oppressors, Orwell as an Imperial Policeman i n Burma, K o e s t l e r as
a minor Communist P a r t y o f f i c i a l .
p a r t of an oppressive regime.
And b o t h f e l t g u i l t y f o r being
But here t h e s i m i l a r i t e s between
t h e two men end: unlike Koestler, Orwell never f e l t constrained
t o j o i n one p o l i t i c a l p a r t y because another was persecuting him.
Nor did Orwell ever f i n d himself i n K o e s t l e r ' s p o s i t i o n o f
p r a c t i s i n g self-censorship
because h i s chosen ideology
oppressive1y demanded it.
But i n s p i t e o f t h e oppression K o e s t l e r f e l t , and i n s p i t e
o f h i s being o f two minds, and whether o r n o t he was a
r e v o l u t i o n a r y o r a rebel, he determinedly hung on t o h i s f a i t h
and remained an a c t i v e member o f t h e Communist P a r t y f o r seven
years.
And, i n f a c t ,
i t was t h e formation and s t r e n g t h o f t h e
Popular F r o n t against Fascism, especially i n Spain, t h a t l u r e d
doubters o f t h e f a i t h , l i k e Koestler, firmly back t o t h e
Communist f o l d - - f o r
a while.
The formation o f t h e Popular F r o n t
i n Spain as a r e a c t i o n t o t h e insurgence o f Fascism was, i n a
way, a r e p l i c a o f t h e s i t u a t i o n i n Germany, a s i t u a t i o n which had
caused Koestler, and o t h e r s l i k e him, t o j o i n t h e Communist P a r t y
i n t h e f i r s t place.
Once again Fascism was on t h e r i s e , and if
Fascism could n o t be defeated i n Germany perhaps i t could be
defeated i n Spain--through
t h e Popular Front.
I n short, the r i s e
o f Fascism i n Spain and t h e formation o f t h e Popular F r o n t was
another " c a l l t o arms" t o those f i g h t i n g Fascism i n Continental
Europe.
But i n s t e a d o f defeating Fascism, t h e Popular F r o n t became a
t o o l o f Soviet f o r e i g n policy: t h e Popular F r o n t became an
instrument o f suppression.
The Communists used t h e Popular F r o n t
t o suppress t h e i r p o l i t i c a l enemies--anti-Stalinists,
r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s , those who were against t h e Popular F r o n t
itself--accusing
them o f being i n league with t h e Fascists.
Thus
t h e Communists n o t only attempted t o render i n e f f e c t u a l
dissidents who might have been e f f e c t i v e i n t h e f i g h t against
Fascism, b u t i n t h e i r attempts t o suppress t h e dissidents, t h e
56
Communists also f u r t h e r
Fascism.
s p l i n t e r e d t h e L e f t i n i t s f i g h t against
And i t was such a c t s o f suppression i n t h e name o f a
Common F r o n t t h a t disillusioned b o t h Orwell and Koestler.
I n his
disillusionment, Orwell would expose and denounce t h e l i e s used
by t h e Communist Press t o d e s t r o y i t s enemies.
And he would
attempt, through t h e example o f h i s writing, t o demonstrate how
t h e t r u t h could be obtained through frank and r h e t o r i c a l l y
u n d i s t o r t e d discussion, which he hoped would lead t o a
u n i f i c a t i o n o f t h e v a r i o u s Left-wing
factions.
Koestler, i n h i s
disillusionment, would eventually renounce h i s f a i t h i n t h e
Communist Party.
And he t o o would expose t h e expediency and
c o r r u p t i o n o f t h e Communist P a r t y while r e t u r n i n g t o liberalism,
r a t h e r than remaining Left-wing.
Because t h e Communists'
manipulation o f t h e Popular F r o n t n o t only played a c r u c i a l r o l e
i n t h e p o l i t i c a l l i f e and t h e writings o f Orwell and Koestler,
b u t i s a l s o r a t h e r complicated and n o t e a s i l y understood, i t
r e q u i r e s a b r i e f explanation.
The Popular F r o n t i n Spain, and i n o t h e r countries, became
f o r t h e Comintern an instrument o f Soviet diplomacy, t h e means by
which France and B r i t a i n might be aligned against Germany i n a
common defence o f "democracy" against Fascism.
Thus, t h e Popular
F r o n t n o t only consisted o f bourgeois democrats b u t a l s o
S o c i a l i s t s and Communists.
It was t h e Communist aim t o
manipulate t h e f r o n t s i n t h e diplomatic i n t e r e s t s o f t h e Soviet
Union--an
understandable strategy--and
t o hunt o u t as h e r e t i c s
a l l who sought t o r e s i s t such manipulation.
This manipulation was f i r s t evident i n Spain.
The Popular
F r o n t p a r t i e s had won a m a j o r i t y i n t h e e l e c t i o n o f February
1936.
And i t was against t h e Popular Front-supported,
non-socialist
Republican Government, harassed by e x t r e m i s t s o f
t h e Right and L e f t , t h a t t h e army c o n s p i r a t o r s r o s e i n t h e name
of order i n July 1936.
Because t h e workers' organizations had
played an important p a r t i n defeating t h e m i l i t a r y r i s i n g , above
a l l i n Madrid and Barcelona, t h e S o c i a l i s t s and t h e Communists,
and t h e anarcho-syndicalist
CNT entered t h e Government, during
t h e 1936 September-November election, and remained t h e r e a l f o r c e
o f t h e Republic a t war.
The h i s t o r i a n Raymond Carr t e l l s u s i n h i s essay on Orwell
and t h e war, t h a t t h e policy o f t h e Communists and t h e purpose o f
Cornintern propaganda was t o present t h e Republican Government as
s t r i c t l y a bourgeois democratic concern ("Orwell and The Spanish
C i v i l War",
64). A "Red Spain" supported by t h e Soviet Union,
Carr goes on t o say, would scare France and Great B r i t a i n away
from becoming a n t i - F a c i s t
allies.
With s u b s t a n t i a l f i n a n c i a l
investments i n Spain, t h e l a s t thing t h e governments o f France
and England wanted t o see was a Spain r e v o l u t i o n i z e d by t h e
workers,
with t h e workers i n c o n t r o l o f t h e means o f production.
But t h e workers' organizations which were long-standing,
p a r t i c u l a r l y i n Catalonia, had fomented a spontaneous s o c i a l
revolution: farms and f a c t o r i e s had been "collectivized", i.e.,
brought under v a r i o u s forms o f workers' control.
Communist
f o r e i g n policy could n o t allow f o r such r e v o l u t i o n a r y tendencies
and demanded t h a t t h i s r e v o l u t i o n be suppressed, i f n o t reversed.
The Communists and t h e Spanish Government could j u s t i f y
t h e i r suppression o f t h e workers' r e v o l u t i o n a r y tendencies as a
demand f o r
an e f f i c i e n t war e f f o r t ,
i f non-workers,
and as an e s s e n t i a l process
ie. t h e bourgeois democrats and t h e s o c i a l i s t s ,
were t o be kept l o y a l t o t h e Republic.
And t h e suppression o f
t h e r e v o l u t i o n was a l s o presented as t h e condition f o r t h e supply
o f arms t o a weapon-starved
West.
Republic by t h e respectable bourgeois
But t h e r e were groups i n t h e Republic, especially t h e
m i l i t a n t s o f t h e CNT and t h e POUM, who watched these goings-on
with suspicion.
They became uneasy because they saw t h e
d e s t r u c t i o n o f t h e workers' r e v o l u t i o n implied i n t h e Communist
p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e Popular F r o n t as a bourgeois democratic
government.
But t h e m i l i t a n t s could n o t contend with t h e Soviet
Union's r e l a t i v e l y undimmed prestige.
And they could n o t f i g h t
t h e leverage t h e Soviet Union had with t h e Spanish Government, a
leverage t h a t was gained through t h e supply o f arms ( t h e only
supplier o f arms, except f o r Mexico, as i t t u r n e d out).
With
t h e i r prestige, and using t h e i r leverage as arms supplier, t h e
Communists s e t o u t t o d e s t r o y those who opposed t h e Popular
Front.
And most o f t h e European L e f t supported t h e Communists
uncritically.
The f a i l u r e o f t h e pro-Communist L e f t t o p r o t e s t against t h e
p o l i t i c a l persecution o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y A n t i - S t a l i n i s t s
Spain had disillusioned Orwell.
in
P a r t y members l i k e K o e s t l e r a t
l e a s t had a t h e o r y t o j u s t i f y t h e i r d i s t o r t i o n o f t h e t r u t h - - t h a t
t r u t h i t s e l f was class-conditioned
and o b j e c t i v e t r u t h was a
bourgeois v i r t u e t o be superseded by h i s t o r i c a l l y c o r r e c t
proletarian truth.
And P a r t y members l i k e K o e s t l e r had a
psychological need f o r t h e emotional support o f P a r t y l i f e a t
whatever cost.
But Raymond Carr believes t h a t Orwell i s u n f a i r t o i n s i s t so
much t h a t t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l s on t h e L e f t l i e d more because they
were a t t r a c t e d t o power r a t h e r than because they wanted t o u n i t e
t h e e f f o r t against Fascism.
Orwell, Carr says,
does n o t consider
enough t h e a l l u r e t h e Popular F r o n t had f o r i n t e l l e c t u a l s l i k e
Koestler.
Carr says t h a t Orwell
underestimates t h e almost hypnotic q u a l i t i e s o f t h e Popular
Front.
It was no doubt morally reprehensible and profoundly
mistaken t o swallow t h e Communist v e r s i o n o f t h e Spanish
War, entailing, as i t did, t h e d e l i b e r a t e d e s t r u c t i o n o f
convinced a n t i - F a s c i s t s whose views were inconvenient t o
Stalin. But i t was easy.
Only i n Spain was Fascism being
r e s i s t e d and only t h e Soviet Union was supplying t h a t
resistance, f o r whatever purposes o f i t s own, with arms. To
c r i t i c i z e t h e r o l e o f t h e Communists i n t h e Popular F r o n t
was t o weaken i t and t h u s help t h e v i c t o r y o f t h e Fascists.
t h e mystique o f t h e Popular F r o n t was tremendous.
Many Communist intellectuals--Koestler, Regler and
Muenzenberg among them--who knew more about t h e purposes o f
S t a l i n than did t h e i r left-wing a l l i e s , were on t h e point of
leaving t h e Party.
The prospect o f a v i c t o r y over Fascism
i n Spain brought them back f o r a s h o r t second honey-moon.
S t a l i n was a l e s s e r e v i l than H i t l e r .
To
Communists i n
doubt and t o t h e L e f t i n general--even a f t e r t h e Moscow
t r i a l s - - t h i s was t h e fundamental p o l i t i c a l equation o f t h e
l a t e thirties.
("Orwell And The Spanish C i v i l War", T h e
W o r l d o f G e o r g e O r w e l l , 64-65).
...
..
But among t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l s on t h e L e f t , as Carr p o i n t s out,
Orwell was one o f t h e few "strong souls" t o summon up enough
courage t o f i g h t t h e tone o f a whole l i t e r a r y establishment and
t h e influence o f t h e Communists within i t i n England.
As a
r e s u l t , Orwell was b o y c o t t e d by c e r t a i n publishers who r e f u s e d t o
publish h i s a r t i c l e s on Spain, such as t h e publisher o f t h e New
S t a t e s m a n , and Orwell's own publisher V i c t o r Gollancz who
r e j e c t e d Homage t o C a t a l o n i a even b e f o r e he had seen i t (CEJOGO,
Vol. 1, 312).
Koestler, on t h e o t h e r hand, who was working f o r those who
had abandoned t h e t r u t h , would have h i s f i r s t Spanish C i v i l War
#
account, L'Espagne Ensanglantee,
commissioned and published i n
1936 f o r French and German consumption by E d i t i o n s d u C a r r e f o u r ,
t h e Comintern's P a r i s publishing company.
Moreover, and
i r o n i c a l l y , V i c t o r Gollancz, who had r e f u s e d t o publish Orwell's
Homage t o C a t a l o n i a , would ask t o publish K o e s t l e r ' s second
Spanish C i v i l War t e x t , Spanish T e s t a m e n t , i n 1937 f o r t h e L e f t
Book Club.
And K o e s t l e r would have no problem i n finding a
publisher i n 1942 f o r Dialogue With Death, h i s t h i r d Spanish
C i v i l War t e x t .
So while Orwell was b o y c o t t e d i n h i s attempt t o
t e l l t h e t r u t h , K o e s t l e r was encouraged t o l i e - - a t
f i r s t o f h i s three texts.
least f o r the
And being encouraged t o l i e was one o f
t h e f a c t o r s t h a t caused K o e s t l e r t o v a c i l l a t e i n h i s commitment
t o t h e Communist Party.
As a member o f t h e Communist P a r t y
K o e s t l e r n o t only witnessed t h e f a l s e testimony o f o t h e r members
o f t h e P a r t y b u t he himself also l i e s on behalf o f t h e "cause".
Such l y i n g c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e long process o f K o e s t l e r ' s
disillusionment with t h e Communist Party.
And while Orwell e s s e n t i a l l y wrote only one t e x t about h i s
p o l i t i c a l disillusionment during t h e Spanish C i v i l War, K o e s t l e r
could n o t f u l l y admit t o h i s l o s s o f f a i t h u n t i l he came t o w r i t e
his f o u r t h text.
Orwell did n o t need t o say more about t h e
Spanish C i v i l War a f t e r he had w r i t t e n Homage t o C a t a l o n i a .
He
had been changed by h i s experience o f t h e Spanish C i v i l War, b u t
r a t h e r than experiencing a l o s s o f belief, Orwell experienced an
a f f i r m a t i o n o f h i s belief i n Socialism,
t e n t a t i v e l y b e f o r e he a r r i v e d i n Spain.
a b e l i e f he had held
Koestler, who had begun
t o l o s e h i s f a i t h i n Communism b e f o r e he a r r i v e d i n Spain, a l s o
experienced a r e a f f i r m a t i o n with t h e formation o f t h e Common
Front.
But K o e s t l e r ' s r e a f f i r m a t i o n did n o t l a s t .
He, l i k e
Orwell, r e a l i z e d t h a t t h e Common F r o n t had become a weapon i n t h e
hands o f t h e Communists, a weapon used t o demolish
r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s who were inconvenient t o Stalin's f o r e i g n policy
b u t who could have e f f e c t i v e l y fought t h e Facists, given t h e
proper t r a i n i n g and arms.
For K o e s t l e r t h e manipulation o f t h e
Common F r o n t n o t only meant t h e l o s s o f e f f e c t i v e anti-Fascists;
t h i s l o s s also meant t h e b e t r a y a l o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n - - t h e
cause o f Communism.
original
When K o e s t l e r f i n a l l y understood t h e
b e t r a y a l , he was l e f t with no i l l u s i o n s t h a t Communism would be
t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y f o r c e t o equal and b e s t Fascism.
Finally, painfully, K o e s t l e r had t o abandon h i s f a i t h i n
Communism.
But h i s b r i e f "second honeymoon" with Communism and
t h e p a i n f u l l o s s o f h i s i l l u s i o n s were such complex and
wide-ranging
experiences t h a t K o e s t l e r had t o w r i t e more than one
t e x t t o account f o r them.
Koestler was compelled t o w r i t e a t
l e a s t t h r e e documents--plus
chapters i n h i s autobiography--before
he was finished going through t h e s h a t t e r i n g psychological
upheavals necessary t o shed h i s p o l i t i c a l i l l u s i o n s and h i s f a i t h
o f seven years.
K o e s t l e r ' s t h r e e t e x t s , however,
e d i t i o n s o f one another.
a r e n o t merely
As Professor Sperber says i n h i s essay
on K o e s t l e r ' s t h r e e t e x t s , Koester had made
c r u c i a l changes from t e x t t o t e x t : t h e f i r s t h a l f o f Spanish
over a hundred
T e s t a m e n t [second text3 consisted o f
...
...
pages more than t h e e a r l i e r
L'Espagne, and t h e
"Dialogue" s e c t i o n of Spanish Testament was s i g n i f i c a n t l y
a l t e r e d f o r Dlalogue wlth Death Cthird t e x t ] - - t h e r e
are
hundreds o f major and minor deletions and additions.
The
revisions, i n f a c t , p o i n t t o important changes i n K o e s t l e r ' s
p o l i t i c s , p e r s o n a l i t y , purposes, and l i t e r a r y skills.
("Looking Back on K o e s t l e r ' s Spanish War", 109).
Because o f t h e c r u c i a l changes K o e s t l e r made from t e x t t o t e x t
and t h e f a c t t h a t t h e t e x t s r e p r e s e n t t h e changes Koestler
himself went through,
i t i s t o t h e analyst's advantage t o see a l l
t h r e e t e x t s as one t e x t ,
representing t h e psychological,
p o l i t i c a l , h i s t o r i c a l and l i t e r a r y l i f e o f one man. To f u l l y
understand each t e x t , each must be seen i n t h e l i g h t o f t h e other
two.
But we w i l l s t o p only b r i e f l y t o look a t t h e t h r e e Spanish
C i v i l War t e x t s because none r e a l l y deals with Koestler's
disillusionment.
text--to
The next s e c t i o n w i l l be devoted t h e f o u r t h
p a r t s o f those chapters from K o e s t l e r ' s autobiography
The I n v i s i b l e Writing--that
grapple with h i s r e j e c t i o n o f h i s
ideology. The next s e c t i o n w i l l a l s o present a comparative
analysis similar t o t h e analysis o f Orwell's expression o f h i s
disillusionment.
Now, however, we w i l l go on t o look a t t h e
f i r s t three texts.
Each o f K o e s t l e r ' s Spanish C i v i l War t e x t s r e p r e s e n t s a
stage i n h i s l i f e .
As Sperber says i n h i s essay, "The t h r e e
d i f f e r e n t b u t complementary t e x t s form a kind o f modern
Bildungsroman:
t h e hero's character emerges from t h e t r i a l s and
temptations o f p o l i t i c s t o discover s p i r i t u a l meaning and t o be
barn anew" ("Luuking Pack an K u e s t l e r ' s Spanish War", 110).
The t h r e e t e x t s ,
however, do n o t e x i s t i n a l i n e a r
r e l a t i o n s h i p t o one another: t h a t i s , t h e t e x t s do n o t represent
a s t r a i g h t progression from t h e f i r s t t e x t (which r e p r e s e n t s
K o e s t l e r ' s commitment t o Communism) t o t h e t h i r d t e x t (which
r e p r e s e n t s K o e s t l e r ' s r e j e c t i o n o f Communism), because K o e s t l e r ' s
l o s s o f f a i t h was i t s e l f n o t a l i n e a r progression.
Rather,
K o e s t l e r v a c i l l a t e d i n h i s commitment almost from t h e moment he
joined t h e Communist Party.
And h i s v a c i l l a t i o n r e s u l t s i n a
c e r t a i n amount o f over-lapping
from t e x t t o t e x t .
But f i n a l l y ,
t h e new "Dialogue with Death" m a t e r i a l i n t h e second t e x t ,
Spanish Testament t o t a l l y displaces t h e over-lapping
t h e f i r s t and second t e x t s ,
t h i r d and f i n a l t e x t ,
contents o f
f
L'Espagne Ensanglantee t o become t h e
Dialogue with Death.
So by t h e time t h e
t h i r d and f i n a l t e x t i s composed, t h e r e i s nothing a t a l l l e f t o f
the f i r s t text.
The f i r s t o f K o e s t l e r ' s t h r e e t e x t s was w r i t t e n i n t h e l a s t
months o f 1936 a f t e r he had gone from P a r i s t o Spain as a
Communist spy t o gather information against t h e Fascists.
f i r s t Spanish C i v i l War record--
This
4
L'Espagne Engsanglantee--is
e s s e n t i a l l y a Comintern propaganda book, r e p l e t e with a t r o c i t y
s t o r i e s about t h e F a s c i s t s and h o r r i f y i n g photographs o f t h e
corpses of children,
orphanage.
some l y i n g i n ranks on t h e f l o o r o f t h e i r
This f i r s t t e x t r e f l e c t s K o e s t l e r ' s doomed
i n f a t u a t i o n with t h e Communist P a r t y as well as h i s dependence
upon Willy Muenzenberg who, as t h e head o f Cornintern's
West-European
Agitprop Department, was i n charge o f t h e
propaganda campaign f a v o r i n g t h e Spanish Republic.
And i n h i s
autobiography w r i t t e n nearly twenty years a f t e r t h e event,
K o e s t l e r says t h a t he was n o t serving a r t , b u t r a t h e r " t h e Cause"
/
when he wrote L'Espange Engsanglantee.
/
L'Espagne Ensanglantee i s w r i t t e n i n a hectic, s c a t t e r e d , a t
times almost b l o o d t h i r s t y s t y l e , a s t y l e which r e f l e c t s b o t h
K o e s t l e r ' s and Muenzenberg's obsession with t h e War. Take f o r
example K o e s t l e r ' s d e s c r i p t i o n o f Franco's bombing o f Madrid from
October 2 4 t h t o November 20th, 1936, e n t i t l e d ,
sub-section,
under a
" Q u a t r e semaines d ' e n f e r " , ("Four Weeks o f Hell");
here K o e s t l e r uses specific l o c a t i o n t o a u t h e n t i c a t e and
highlight t h e slaughtering o f innocent victims during t h e bombing
o f civilians:
Dans l a C a l l e d e Luna, une bombe tombe au milieu d e
35
p l u s i e u r s femmes qui f o n t l a queue d e v a n t un l a i t e r i e ,
4
femmes avec l e u r s e n f a n t s sur l e s b r a s , sont m a s s a c r e e s . En
f a c e , i l y a une b o u c h e r i e .
Le boucher a &t6 t u g au milieu
d e s b e o u f s e t d e s veaux a c c r o c h e s au murs. A une femme qui
e t a i t en t r a i n d ' e n t r e r c h e z l e boucher, son be(b$ s u r l e
b r a s , l a bornbe a r r a c h a l a t $ t e (L'Espagne, 155). (In t h e
Calle de Luna a bomb f e l l i n t h e midst o f a queue o f women
waiting o u t s i d e a dairy.
T h i r t y - f i v e women, some with
children i n t h e i r arms, were killed.
The butcher was k i l l e d
amongst h i s hanging carcases o f sheep and calves.
A woman
who had j u s t . entered t h e shop holding a child by t h e hand
was beheaded.
My translation.)
K o e s t l e r also, with l i t t l e s u b t l e t y , uses t h e k i l l i n g o f t h e
butcher o f innocent sheep and calves t o highlight t h e g r e a t e r
butchery by Franco o f innocent civilians--women
and children--in
h i s bombing r a i d s on Madrid.
K o e s t l e r n o t only r e p e a t s such g r i s l y d e t a i l s time and time
again throughout t h e chapter on t h e bombing o f Madrid, b u t he
a l s o laces t h e whole t e x t with d e t a i l s o f a t r o c i t i e s .
This
constant d e t a i l i n g o f a t r o c i t i e s r e f l e c t s Koestler's and
Muenzenberg's preoccupation with t h e war, a preoccupation which
K o e s t l e r describes i n h i s autobiography:
Willy was impatient t o g e t t h e books out.
He would b u r s t
i n t o my f l a t - - a thing which he never used t o
65
do b e f o r e - - t o see how mine was g e t t i n g on.
The Spanish War
had become a personal obsession with him as w i t h t h e r e s t o f
us.
He would pick up a few sheets o f t h e t y p e s c r i p t , scan
through them, and shout a t me: 'Too weak.
Too objective.
H i t them! H i t them hard! T e l l t h e world how t h e y r u n over
t h e i r p r i s o n e r s with tanks, how they pour p e t r o l over them
and burn them alive.
Make t h e world gasp with h o r r o r .
Make them w a k e up
He was
Hammer it i n t o t h e i r heads.
I had never seen
hammering on t h e t a b l e with h i s f i s t s .
Willy i n a similar s t a t e . ( T h e I n v l s i b l e W r i t i n g , 407)
...'
K o e s t l e r goes on t o t e l l u s t h a t Muenzenberg believed i n using
t h e s t r a t e g y o f a t r o c i t y propaganda r a t h e r than using t h e
s t r a t e g y of mundane, f a c t u a l , f u n c t i o n a l information because
Muenzenberg had so successfully used a t r o c i t y propaganda against
H i t l e r i n t h e f i r s t B r o w n B o o k , a book which "had c r e a t e d a world
sensation through t h e h o r r o r s i t disclosed" ( T h e I n v i s i b l e
W r i t i n g , 407).
And Muenzenberg wanted K o e s t l e r t o use t h e same
kind o f propaganda.
Koestler, however, argued with Muenzenberg
t h a t " H i t l e r ' s was a one-sided
t e r r o r , whereas i n a war t h e
a t r o c i t y s t o r i e s o f both sides cancel each o t h e r o u t " (The
I n v i s i b l e U r i t i n g , 407).
But, Muenzenberg was hard t o argue with, according t o
Koestler; Muenzenberg also i n s i s t e d on adding a supplement o f
"horror-photographs
on glossy paper".
Among o t h e r a t r o c i t i e s ,
K o e s t l e r says t h a t t h e photos showed " c i v i l i a n p r i s o n e r s being
l e d t o execution,
shooting.
roped t o g e t h e r on a cord, and then t h e a c t u a l
When I myself became a prisoner a few weeks l a t e r , I
had those photographs b e f o r e my mind's eye" ( T h e I n v l s i b l e
W r i t i n g , 407).
Even though Koestler could n o t convince
Muenzenberg t o leave those photographs o u t o f t h e t e x t , he says
t h a t he "cut down t h e p a r t dealing with t h e a t r o c i t i e s t o a dozen
pages", and t h a t
I n t h e main, t h i s p a r t was based on t h e memorandum o f
Franco's deeds o f t e r r o r during t h e f i r s t days o f t h e
i n s u r r e c t i o n drawn up by t h e Madrid F a c u l t y o f Law, and
published by i t s President, Ortega y Gasset.
But t h e r e were
also some l e s s well authenticated items from d o u b t f u l o r
u n i d e n t i f i e d sources which Willy had received through t h e
apparat and passed on t o me.
My misgivings about these were
brushed aside by him with t h e argument t h a t , as we b o t h knew
t h e allegations t o be t r u e , t h e d e t a i l s did n o t matter and
had sometimes t o be 'interpolated'--I remember t h i s
conversation v i v i d l y , f o r Willy otherwise never used such
s c i e n t i f i c expressions.
I f I s t i l l r e t a i n e d scruples, these
were dispelled by t h e unscrupulousness o f Franco's
propaganda.
I n England and France, Franco r e l i e d on t h e
hoary s t o r y t h a t t h e i n s u r r e c t i o n had s t a r t e d j u s t i n time
t o f o r e s t a l l a Communist rising.
I n Germany, t h e l i n e taken
was simply t h a t i t was t h e Spanish Government who began t h e
C i v i l War by bombarding t h e Army's barracks i n Madrid
without provocation. Compared with t h e enormity of these
l i e s , our propaganda was, i n t h e e a r l y stages o f t h e war,
r e l a t i v e 1y honest. (The I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 407-408)
So even though K o e s t l e r believed t h a t "in a war t h e a t r o c i t y
s t o r i e s o f both sides cancel each o t h e r out",
he was n o t above
f i g h t i n g l i e s with l i e s , h i s r a t i o n a l e being t h a t t h e l i e s o f t h e
F a s c i s t s were more unscrupulous and much l a r g e r than h i s l i e s f o r
t h e Communists.
And by w r i t i n g t o s e r v e t h e Cause, r a t h e r than
w r i t i n g only f o r t h e sake o f writing,
o r from personal scruples,
Koestler, unlike Orwell, was s t i l l censoring and c o n t r o l l i n g h i s
self-expression.
Now we pause i n our b r i e f examination o f
K o e s t l e r ' s t e x t s t o compare t h e functions K o e s t l e r and Orwell
were performing as w r i t e r s - - K o e s t l e r
non-partisan,
as a Communist, Orwell as a
b u t with S o c i a l i s t leanings.
Self-censorship
and s e l f - c o n t r o l
over personal scruples t o
s e r v e a p o l i t i c a l cause were never p a r t o f Orwell's r h e t o r i c a l
s t r a t e g y i n t h e composition o f Homage t o C a t a l o n i a .
Orwell,
unlike Koestler, was more concerned with exposing t h e t r u t h
behind t h e l i e s , b u t n o t t h e l i e s o f t h e Right-wing
factions--the
German and Spanish Facists--so
factions--the
much as t h e l i e s o f t h e Left-wing
Communists i n Spain and England.
Orwell knew t h a t
t o w r i t e only t o s e r v e a cause was t o become a s l a v e t o t h a t
cause, j u s t as K o e s t l e r had become a slave t o Communist
propaganda.
But Orwell, unlike Koestler, was never engaged i n
t h e f i g h t against Spanish and German Right-wing
propaganda.
Fascist
Orwell never attempted, as did Koestler, t o expose,
f o r example, t h e German connection t o t h e Spanish C i v i l War.
Exposure o f Right-wing
F a s c i s t s t r a t e g i e s by people on t h e L e f t ,
l i k e Koestler, was n o t unusual.
Orwell, however, was unusual
even though he t o o was on t h e L e f t : f i r s t o f a l l he belonged t o
no specific p o l i t i c a l p a r t y , and was, consequently,
more
o b j e c t i v e than many on t h e L e f t ; secondly, n o t only did Orwell
a t t a c k Communist propaganda, he was also more unbiased i n h i s
a t t a c k because o f h i s d e s i r e t o u n i t e and strengthen t h e L e f t ,
especially a f t e r he saw t h e Communists i n Spain d e l i b e r a t e l y
d i s t o r t t h e t r u t h i n t h e i r attempt t o f u r t h e r divide Left-wing
factions.
Unlike t h e p o l i t i c a l l y a t y p i c a l Orwell, K o e s t l e r was t h e
more t y p i c a l Communist f i g h t i n g against Right-wing
propaganda t a c t i c s .
Fascist
Talking about those t a c t i c s , K o e s t l e r says
t h a t he was "astonished" n o t only by t h e "malignity o f Franco's
propaganda", b u t also by
t h e abyss of ignorance and s t u p i d i t y t h a t i t revealed.
Gclebbels was a formidably i n t e l l i g e n t opponent, b u t t h e
s t u f f t h a t Burgos t u r n e d o u t looked as i f it were concocted
by i l l i t e r a t e s .
To show up t h e c o n t r a d i c t i o n s i n t h e
enemy's propaganda was a task I enjoyed, and thought more
e f f e c t i v e than l i s t i n g a t r o c i t i e s .
Willy held t h e opposite
opinion; and i n t h e medium o f mass propaganda he was, o f
course, r i g h t .
'Don't argue with them', he kept repeating,
'Make them s t i n k i n t h e nose of t h e world.
Hake people
curse and abominate them, make them shudder w i t h horror.'
(The I n v i s i b l e Writing, 408)
Here K o e s t l e r i s arguing t h a t mass propaganda can have a s t r o n g
emotional e f f e c t on i t s audience, an appeal t h a t i s q u i t e
d i f f e r e n t from Orwell's appeal t o reason i n Chapter Eleven o f
Homage t o Catalonia, where he concentrates so heavily on
dissecting t h e Communist propaganda t h a t appeared i n t h e
newspapers.
K o e s t l e r goes on t o say t h a t what i n f u r i a t e d them most about
t h e F a s c i s t propaganda was t h a t "Franco,
l i k e H i t l e r b e f o r e him,
pretended t h a t he had staged h i s coup j u s t
i n time t o f o r e s t a l l a
r e v o l u t i o n o f ours".
A s we were openly advocating r e v o l u t i o n , we had no reason t o
wax indignant, except on t h e technical grounds t h a t we had
n o t been planning a r e v o l u t i o n i n t h a t p a r t i c u l a r c o u n t r y a t
t h a t p a r t i c u l a r time.
But a p r o f e s s i o n a l burglar would, I
imagine, be equally indignant i f charged with a b u r g l a r y he
did n o t happen t o commit.
It was humiliating t o s e r v e as an
i n v o l u n t a r y midwife a t t h e b i r t h o f one F a s c i s t d i c t a t o r s h i p
a f t e r another. ( I n v i s i b l e Writing, 408)
It i s n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t propagandists K o e s t l e r and Muezenberg
were i n f u r i a t e d : n o t only were t h e Communists not planning a
r e v o l u t i o n i n Spain, they were doing everything they could t o
a c t u a l l y sabotage any r e v o l u t i o n a r y e f f o r t i n Spain, as Orwell so
ably p o i n t s o u t i n Homage t o Catalonia.
The a n t i - r e v o l u t i o n a r y
stance o f t h e Soviet Government and t h a t Government's sabotage o f
r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s were two f a c t o r s o f t e n b u r i e d under c o n t r a d i c t o r y
and d i s t o r t i n g r h e t o r i c .
Orwell enjoyed being able t o c u t
through such c o n t r a d i c t i o n s and d i s t o r t i o n s t o expose t h e
i n t e r v e n t i o n o f t h e Soviet Government, j u s t as K o e s t l e r enjoyed
c u t t i n g through t h e proganda o f t h e Fascists.
But unlike Orwell who wrote f o r no p o l i t i c a l sponsor,
Koestler, under t h e aegis o f Willy Muenzenberg and t h e P a r i s
Comintern o f f ice, produced h i s f i r s t and s e n s a t i o n a l i s t i c t e x t ,
0
L'Espagne E n s a n g l a n t e e , t o counter t h e s e n s a t i o n a l i s t i c
propaganda t e x t s o f t h e Right-wing
German and Spanish Facists.
K o e s t l e r had t o make h i s enemies "stink i n t h e nose o f t h e
world",
and K o e s t l e r was able t o do t h i s i n L'Espagne
Y
E n s a n g l a n t e e when he documented F a s c i s t a t r o c i t i e s i n Seville.
Under t h e influence o f Muenzenberg and h i s " h i t them hard"
a t r o c i t y campaigns, Koestler, i n L'Espagne, r e p o r t s h i s v i s i t t o
t h e S e v i l l e headquarters o f t h e r a b i d Rebel general, Queipo de
Llano.
He quotes from t h e general's famous r a d i o broadcasts from
from July 23, 1936:
Seville, i.e.,
0
4
\
Nos b r a v e s l e g i o n n a r i e s e t R e g u l a r e s o n t montre a c e s l a c h e s
d e Rouges c e q u e c ' e s t qu'un homme. D ' a i l l e u r s , i l s l ' o n t
C e s femmes communistes
montre( a u s s i a u x femmes d e s Rouges.
e t a n a r c h i s t e s , par l e u r d o c t r i n e d e l'amour l i b r e , s e s o n t
6
4
\
e l l e s - m g m e s d e c l a r e e s p r e t e s a a p p a r t e n i r a u premier venu.
Maintenant, e l l e s v i e n n e n t d u mojns d e c o n n a i t r e , au l i e u d e
c e s g r i n g a i e t s d e m i l i c e s , d e v e r i t a b l e s hommes; e l l e s o n t
/
b e a u s e demener pour l e u r e,chapper, c e l a ne l e u r s e r t a
rien.
(L'Espagne E n s a n g l a n t e e , 23). (Our brave Legionaries
and Regulars have shown t h e Red cowards what i t means t o be
a man.
And i n c i d e n t a l l y t h e women o f t h e Reds too.
These
Communist and Anarchist women, a f t e r all, have made
themselves f a i r game by t h e i r d o c t r i n e o f f r e e love.
And
now they have a t l e a s t made t h e acquaintance o f r e a l men,
Kicking t h e i r legs about
and n o t milksops o f militiamen.
My translation.)
and s t r u g g l i n g won't save them.
A
R
And from August 12th, 1936: " L e s m a r x i s t s s o n t d e s betes f e r o c e s ,
/
mais n o u s , n o u s sommes d e s c a b a l l e r o s .
h
/
Le s e n o r Companys m e r i t e
0
d ' e t r e e g o r g e comme un chochon" (L'Espagne E n s a n g l a n t e e , 23).
("The Marxists a r e ravening beasts, b u t we a r e gentlemen.
Companys deserves t o be stuck l i k e a pig".)
Senor
By quoting General
de Llano's v i r u l e n t Right-wing
rhetoric, Koestler i s t r y i n g t o
counter more s u b t l e propaganda.
Koestler, n o t y e t having undergone h i s c r i s i s o f f a i t h ,
was
s t i l l under t h e influence o f Muenzenberg, and he s t i l l believed
t h a t Communism could d e f e a t Fascism i n Spain.
K o e s t l e r was s t i l l
w r i t i n g t o s e r v e t h e Cause r a t h e r than t o r e v e a l h i s personal
feelings when he wrote L ' E s p a g n e
I
Ensanglantee.
Yet,
as Sperber
says, K o e s t l e r does "suggest h i s confusion and pessimism", and
He f e a r s lying--and according t o h i s l a t e r memoirs, he f e l t
t h a t h i s l i f e i n t h e Communist P a r t y was mainly a lie--and
he says o f t h e propagandists [ i n L'Espagne3:'Un a g l t a t e u r
q u i c o n n a l t s o n &tier p e u t r g p a n d r e d a n s le m o n d e , e n d i x
m i n u t e s , p l u s d e s m e n s o n g e s que l ' o n p o u r r a r g f u t e r a u
c o u r s e d ' u n e annge.' ['An a g i t a t o r who knows h i s work w i l l
introduce more l i e s i n t o t h e world i n t e n minutes than one
can r e f u t e i n one year'.]
He i s r e f e r r i n g t o H i t l e r , and,
i n d i r e c t l y , Goebbels and Franco, b u t because he and
Muenzenberg were engaged i n Comintern propaganda, he implies
a s e l f - d e s c r i p t i o n as well. (Sperber, 111)
But i n s p i t e o f h i s confusion and h i s pessimism about t h e
Communist Party, and i n s p i t e o f h i s f e a r o f l y i n g f o r t h e cause
o f Communism, K o e s t l e r was able t o overcome h i s doubts t o compose
0
L ' E s p a g n e E n s a n g l a n t e e t o counter what he f e l t were t h e more
vicious l i e s o f t h e Facists.
The second t e x t ,
S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t , was w r i t t e n i n t h e
summer and f a l l o f 1937 f o r Gollancz's L e f t Book Club, a f t e r
K o e s t l e r d e l i b e r a t e l y allowed himself t o be captured by t h e
Fascists, was released from h i s Spanish death-cell
r e t u r n e d t o France.
by Franco, and
This second t e x t i n c o r p o r a t e s some o f t h e
impersonal propagandistic h i s t o r i c a l and p o l i t i c a l analyses o f
t h e f i r s t t e x t because K o e s t l e r could n o t y e t f u l l y admit t o t h e
loss o f his t a t t e r e d faith,
a l o s s which had f i n a l l y occurred
during h i s imprisonment.
The book i s divided i n t o two parts: t h e
f i r s t p a r t i n t o nine chapters, t h e second p a r t i n t o two chapters.
K o e s t l e r says, i n t h e Foreword, t h a t i n t h e f i r s t chapter he
describes how he, "wishing t o see t h e war from t h e r e b e l side
. . . went
i n t h e f i r s t month o f t h e outbreak, t o S e v i l l e by way
o f Portugal;"
he t e l l s what he saw i n Lisbon, gives an account o f
h i s i n t e r v i e w with Quiepo de Llano, and t r i e s t o convey t h e
atmosphere a t r e b e l headquarters ( S p a n l s h T e s t a m e n t , 11).
He
i n t e r r u p t s h i s "personal n a r r a t i v e " with t h e next f i v e
chapters--two
through six--with
r o o t s o f t h e struggle,
. . . the
what he c a l l s "the h i s t o r i c a l
i t s outbreak and background, a s well as
complicated problem o f t h e Spanish church" ( S p a n i s h
T e s t a m e n t , 11).
I n t h e following chapters, six through nine,
K o e s t l e r says t h a t he takes up h i s "personal n a r r a t i v e again,
describing successively t h e siege o f t h e Alcazar, t h e bombardment
o f Madrid, t h e l a s t days o f Republican Malaga, and Chis1 a r r e s t "
when Malaga f e l l i n t o r e b e l hands ( S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t , 11).
What
K o e s t l e r c a l l s "personal n a r r a t i v e " i s n o t personal i n t h a t he
seldom r e v e a l s thoughts and feelings.
Rather, as he says, he,
t e l l u s about t h e events o f t h e War.
But t h i s t e x t now also
contains P a r t 11, called "Dialogue with Death", which does r e v e a l
t h e personal and profoundly d i s t u r b i n g psychological experience
o f K o e s t l e r ' s imprisonment i n a Spanish death-cell,
from
Februrary t o June o f 1937.
/
Both L'Espagne E n s a n g l a n t e e and S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t a r e
documents o f pro-Communist
and anti-Fascist
propaganda.
L'Espagne i s s t r i c t l y impersonal Comintern propaganda t h a t
But
c e n t e r s on F a s c i s t h o r r o r s , whereas S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t i s l e s s
propagandistic and more personal because i t also begins t o r e v e a l
K o e s t l e r ' s r e j e c t i o n o f h i s f a i t h i n Communism.
Furthermore,
these two t e x t s were aimed a t d i f f e r e n t audiences.
L ' E s p a g n e was
published i n 1936 i n France and Germany ( i n i n t r a n s l a t i o n ) where
Fascism had taken a s t r o n g hold, and where t h e r e were even
s t r o n g e r p o l a r i t i e s between Fascists, Communists, and S o c i a l i s t s
K o e s t l e r wrote L ' E s p a g n e t o r e a f f i r m
than i n Orwell's England.
t h e Communist presence i n i t s stance against Fascism i n France,
Germany, and Spain.
j u s t a pro-Communist
/
But L ' E s p a g n e E n s a n g l a n t e e was more than
document.
K o e s t l e r a l s o wanted t o convince
those n o t committed t o Communism o r Fascism t h a t Fascism under
Franco had indeed taken hold i n Spain.
And K o e s t l e r also wanted
t o warn those who were p o l i t i c a l l y n e u t r a l t h a t Franco's Spanish
Fascism was no l e s s b r u t a l than H i t l e r ' s German Fascism.
Koestler, moreover, was so s t r o n g l y anti-Fascist
t h a t he r i s k e d
h i s l i f e t o f i g h t Fascism: he went t o Spain as Communist spy t o
prove t h a t H i t l e r was aiding and a b e t t i n g Franco's r i s e t o power
i n Spain by supplying Franco with German m i l i t a r y supplies and
personnel.
And even though S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t , published i n 1937,
contains a n t i - F a s c i s t
propaganda taken d i r e c t l y from L ' E s p a g n e ,
K o e s t l e r was commissioned t o w r i t e S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t f o r an
audience q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from those i n France and Germany who
/
read L ' E s p a g n e E n s a n g l a n t e e .
The English publisher V i c t o r
Gollancz had commissioned K o e s t l e r t o w r i t e S p a n l s h T e s t a m e n t f o r
members o f t h e L e f t Book Club who were,
f o r t h e most p a r t ,
Communists and S o c i a l i s t s - - t h e
v e r y people Orwell o f t e n
confronted f o r t h e i r narrow p o l i t i c a l experience and f o r t h e i r
p o l i t i c a l ignorance.
But i n s p i t e of t h e f a c t t h a t V i c t o r
Gollancz's p o l i t i c a l experience was a l s o narrow, especially when
compared t o t h e p r a c t i c a l p o l i t i c a l experiences o f K o e s t l e r and
Orwell, Gollancz was n o t ignorant of t h e b e t r a y a l o f t h e workers
r e v o l u t i o n i n Spain by t h e Communist Party.
s t r o n g l y believed i n t h e Communists' f i g h t
Still,
Gollancz
against Fascism, and
was eager, t h e r e f o r e , t o publish K o e s t l e r ' s S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t ,
which was a pro-Communist,
anti-Nazi
text.
For people on t h e
L e f t i n England, f o r people l i k e V i c t o r Gollancz, t h e Communists'
f i g h t against Fascism i n Spain was more important than t h e i r
b e t r a y a l o f t h e workers' revolution.
Any condemnation o f t h e
Communists i n Spain was seen as t r a i t o r o u s t o t h e Republican
f i g h t against Fascism--hence
Gollancz's r e f u s a l t o publish
Orwell's H o m a g e t o C a t a l o n i a , b e f o r e he had even seen t h e t e x t .
K o e s t l e r had n o t y e t gone through t h e harrowing experience
o f being imprisoned i n a F a s c i s t death-cell
when he wrote h i s
#'
f i r s t t e x t L ' E s p a g n e E n s a n g l a n t e e , b u t he had already been
imprisoned and released back t o France when he wrote S p a n i s h
T e s t a m e n t f o r V i c t o r Gollancz's L e f t Book Club.
And even though
he had become i r r e v o c a b l y disillusioned with Communism, he could
n o t y e t publicly admit t o t h e l o s s o f a f a i t h t h a t he had kept
f o r seven years.
But because he s t i l l f i r m l y believed t h a t
Fascism must be fought, and as a compromise t o h i s ideological
r e j e c t i o n , he incorporated whole p o r t i o n s o f t h e propagandistic
L ' E s p a g n e i n t o t h e t e x t o f S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t , especially those
p o r t i o n s t h a t d e a l t with F a s c i s t a t r o c i t i e s ,
b u t he e i t h e r toned
these down o r excluded t h e s t o r i e s t h a t could n o t be proved.
Charts i n L ' E s p a g n e , f o r example, a r e p u t i n t o words i n S p a n i s h
T e s t a m e n t , and English references a r e added; t h e appendix o f
photographs e n t i t l e d "Photographies Documentaires de l a Barbarie
F a s c i s t e En Espagne" i n L ' E s p a g n e ,
photographs o f t h e wreckage o f
bombed cathedrals and rows o f t h e corpses o f school children,
longer appears i n S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t .
no
But what i s more important
i s t h a t Koestler added a second p a r t t o h i s S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t
t e x t t h a t could n o t have been p a r t of t h e L ' E s p a g n e text.
added a s e c t i o n called "Dialogue with Death".
He
And by adding t h a t
section, K o e s t l e r began t o r e v e a l t h e cracks i n t h e remaining
s h e l l o f h i s f a i t h i n Communism.
Thus S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t now contains r h e t o r i c a l devices n o t
4
found i n L ' E s p a g n e E n s a n g l a n t e e .
By adding h i s more personal
p r i s o n experience t o t h e impersonal propaganda, K o e s t l e r ' s second
t e x t contains an authentic and u n i v e r s a l emotional appeal n o t
found i n t h e f i r s t t e x t .
So now t h e second t e x t n o t only
includes t h e appeal t o reason through t h e r h e t o r i c o f propaganda,
b u t also a s t r o n g personal appeal t o emotion based on K o e s t l e r ' s
experience o f being imprisoned i n a death-cell.
This appeal t o
emotion does n o t use t h e same kind o f s t r a t e g y t h a t K o e s t l e r
talked about when he argued f o r t h e e f f e c t i v n e s s o f mass
propaganda, although t h e feelings aroused i n b o t h cases might be
t h e same.
As Sperber says i n h i s essay on Koestler:
...
I n t h e f i r s t half o f S p a n l s h T e s t a m e n t
he CKoestlerl
f a l l s i n t o v a r i o u s didactic s t y l e s : sometimes he i s t h e echo
o f Comintern propaganda, o f t e n he q u i e t s t o passages o f
l i b e r a l reason, and f r e q u e n t l y he t u r n s Marxist analysis
i n t o apocalyptic vision.
But
i n t h e second o r "Dialogue
with Death" h a l f o f t h e book, he allows h i s individualism t o
emerge ("Looking Back on K o e s t l e r ' s Spanish War", 110).
K o e s t l e r ' s second t e x t i s more authentic than h i s f i r s t t e x t
because he begins t o r e v e a l h i s personal feelings.
His second
t e x t , however, i s n o t as r h e t o r i c a l l y c o n s i s t e n t as h i s f i r s t
t e x t because h i s r h e t o r i c a l purpose i s n o t as consistent: i n h i s
f i r s t account, K o e s t l e r c o n s i s t e n t l y t r i e s t o convince h i s
r e a d e r s o f t h e a t r o c i t i e s o f Fascism i n Spain and t o show them
how Communism f i g h t s t h e a t r o c i t i e s - - K o e s t l e r
mouthpiece f o r t h e Comintern.
i s just a
I n h i s second t e x t , K o e s t l e r s t i l l
wants t o convince h i s audience o f F a s c i s t a t r o c i t i e s , b u t now he
tones down t h e Communist r h e t o r i c , and, by also including t h e
r e v e l a t i o n of h i s personal experiences i n a death-cell,
he i s no
longer a Comintern mouthpiece.
Without p o l i t i c a l i l l u s i o n s , K o e s t l e r f i n a l l y published h i s
t h i r d t e x t , now called Dialogue wlth Death,
i n 1942.
Koestler
chose t h e t i t l e o f t h e new s e c t i o n o f t h e second t e x t , "Dialogue
with Death" f o r t h e t i t l e o f t h e t h i r d t e x t , Dialogue wlth Death,
and he eliminated t h e propagandistic h i s t o r i c a l and p o l i t i c a l
analyses o f t h e f i r s t and t h e second t e x t s t o concentrate only on
h i s personal experiences i n prison.
For him p a r t i s a n p o l i t i c s
and Marxist h i s t o r i c a l analyses, even t h e Spanish C i v i l War
i t s e l f , paled i n significance t o h i s wait i n a death-cell
where,
night a f t e r night, he heard o t h e r s taken from t h e i r c e l l s and
placed b e f o r e a f i r i n g squad, and where he waited f o r h i s
execution b e f o r e t h e same f i r i n g squad.
But a f t e r h i s seven-year
commitment t o Communism, Koestler
had d i f f i c u l t i e s i n admitting h i s l o s s o f f a i t h ;
he took a long
time t o publicly admit t o and w r i t e about h i s Dialogue w i t h
Death.
The assimilation o f h i s experience with death and t h e
subsequent l o s s o f h i s f a i t h i n Communism was p r o t r a c t e d and
painful.
And even though he had r e j e c t e d h i s f a i t h i n Communism
during h i s s t a y i n t h e Spanish death-cell
i n 1937, he did n o t
publicly admit t o h i s l o s s o f f a i t h u n t i l two years l a t e r , i n
1939, under t h e impact o f t h e mass a r r e s t s and t h e show t r i a l s i n
t h e Soviet Union.
But by t h e time h i s t h i r d t e x t ,
Dlalogue w i t h D e a t h , was published i n 1942, K o e s t l e r had
assimilated h i s traumatic p r i s o n experience t o t h e p o i n t where he
could r e c r e a t e t h e experience through t h e composition o f h i s
text.
But K o e s t l e r ' s commitment t o Communism had been o f
s u f f i c i e n t s t r e n g t h t h a t he had willingly placed h i s l i f e i n
jeopardy every time he went t o Spain t o gather m a t e r i a l against
t h e Fascists.
K o e s t l e r was always a t r i s k o f being captured by
t h e N a t i o n a l i s t s as a Communist spy, which i s , i n f a c t , what he
was.
K o e s t l e r claims t h a t when h i s s i t u a t i o n eventually became
intolerable--when
he could no longer stand t h e l i e s and h i s
subsequent feelings o f guilt--he
d e l i b e r a t e l y allowed himself t o
be captured by Rebel t r o o p s on February 9, 1937, during t h e f a l l
o f Malaga. Koestler's s t a y and capture i n Malaga forms p a r t o f
h i s second and t h i r d t e x t s S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t and D l a l o g u e w i t h
/
Death, b u t n o t h i s f i r s t t e x t , because L'Espagne E n s a n g l a n t e e was
w r i t t e n b e f o r e he v i s i t e d Malaga and was captured there.
However, K o e s t l e r f i n a l l y f u l l y r e v e a l s h i s feelings o f g u i l t and
h i s disillusionment only i n t h e f o u r t h document o f h i s war
experiences, i n p a r t s o f h i s autobiography,
The I n v i s i b l e
W r i t i n g , which we w i l l examine i n t h e next section.
CHAPTER THREE
Koestler and The I n v i s i b l e U r i t i n g
K o e s t l e r t e l l s u s t h a t h i s decision t o remain i n t h e doomed
c i t y of
Malaga was "due t o a v a r i e t y o f reasons".
The primary
reason he chose t o remain i n Malaga was h i s newly acquired
friendship with t h e seventy-two
Chalmers-Mitchell,
year o l d Englishman, S i r Peter
who, a f t e r a distinquished career i n zoology,
had r e t i r e d t o Malaga i n 1934.
K o e s t l e r allowed himself t o be
captured by Franco's troops, and t o be imprisoned i n a death-cell
because o f h i s sense o f l o y a l t y t o Chalmers-Mitchell.
was an e x t e r n a l motive.
But t h i s
K o e s t l e r ' s motives were more complex
than t h a t o f l o y a l t y t o a friend.
K o e s t l e r says t h a t he chose t o
s t a y because o f h i s feelings o f " i n v e r t e d cowardice" and "the
f e a r o f being afraid",
and because he had also experienced " t h e
t o r t u o u s ways o f t h e death-wish"
( T h e Invisible Writing, 413)
K o e s t l e r had paid two previous v i s i t s t o Spain--to
and S e v i l l e specif ically--on
Madrid
behalf o f t h e P a r i s Comintern o f f i c e
t o c o l l e c t evidence against Nazis; during t h e second v i s i t , he
was almost apprehended as a Communist spy b u t he managed t o
escape and r e t u r n t o Paris.
I n spite of the risks, Koestler
agreed t o go back t o Spain f o r a t h i r d and l a s t time because, he
says, t h e Republican Government had " a t l a s t managed t o s e t up an
i n t e r n a t i o n a l news agency--a
thing which should have been done
months e a r l i e r , b u t had been delayed by t h e e t e r n a l wrangling
between t h e v a r i o u s p a r t i e s " ( T h e Invisible Writing, 409).
The
Government news agency was called A g e n c e E s p a g n e i n France.
European head-office
second-in-command
Department.
The
i n P a r i s was d i r e c t e d by O t t o Katz,
o f t h e Comintern's West-European
AGITPROP
As one o f t h e f i r s t correspondents f o r t h e newly
formed news agency, K o e s t l e r was sent from P a r i s by Katz t o cover
t h e southern f r o n t o f t h e War from Malaga.
i n Spain o f h i s own v o l i t i o n ,
Unlike Orwell who was
Koestler, once again, was serving
t h e Cause, acting on behalf o f a Communist-sponsored agency.
F i r s t , K o e s t l e r went t o Valencia t o discuss m a t t e r s r e l a t e d
t o t h e Spanish News Agency with v a r i o u s Government departments;
then he went on t o Malaga.
He a r r i v e d i n Malaga on January 27th,
1937, where he s t a y e d f o r t e n days while he v i s i t e d v a r i o u s
front-lines,
a l l a few miles away.
K o e s t l e r t e l l s u s t h a t Malaga
"was c u t o f f from supplies o f food and ammunition, half-starved,
i n a s t a t e o f near-chaos,
I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 412).
and p r a c t i c a l l y defenceless" ( T h e
When asked by K o e s t l e r how long Malaga
could hold o u t against a r e b e l offensive,
t h e aide-de-camp
M i l i t a r y Commander o f Malaga replied, "Three days."
t o the
The
o f f e n s i v e began on February 4th; Malaga f e l l on February 8th, and
K o e s t l e r was a r r e s t e d on February 9th.
K o e s t l e r f u l l y describes
these c a t a s t r o p i c events i n h i s second and t h i r d C i v i l War t e x t s ,
S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t and D i a l o g u e w i t h D e a t h , b u t o f f e r s only a
p a r t i a l account of h i s reasons f o r remaining i n Malaga as i t
fell.
As we s h a l l see, however, f i f t e e n y e a r s l a t e r , i n h i s
fourth--and
s t r i c t l y autobiographical--text,
The Invisible
W r i t i n g , K o e s t l e r completely r e v e a l s h i s reasons f o r remaining,
which n o t only included h i s friendship with S i r P e t e r
Chalmers-Mitchell,
b u t a l s o h i s sense o f g u i l t f o r being a member
o f t h e Communist P a r t y and, a t t h e same time, f o r no longer
wanting t o be a member.
He was experiencing deep d i s t r e s s a t
Equally
knowing what was wrong y e t doing nothing about it.
important, f o r t h e f i r s t time K o e s t l e r t e l l s u s t h a t while he was
i n p r i s o n he experienced, i n turn,
a sense o f peace, a s p r i t u a l
awakening, and a sense o f self-affirmation.
But b e f o r e we look
a t h i s personal r e v e l a t i o n s , l e t us t u r n back t o h i s account o f
Malaga's f a l l , and h i s recognition t h a t h i s reasons f o r s t a y i n g
a r e n o t easy t o pin down.
K o e s t l e r says he had decided t o remain i n t h e "doomed c i t y
f o r a v a r i e t y o f confused reasons", one o f t h e reasons being S i r
Peter Chalmers-Mitchell
( T h e I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 413).
On t h e
s i x t h o f February a l l t h e h o t e l s i n Malaga closed and K o e s t l e r
moved t o t h e v i l l a o f S i r Peter Chalmers-Mitchell,
an eminent
English zoologist who had r e t i r e d t o Malaga i n 1934.
Earlier,
K o e s t l e r had presented a l e t t e r o f i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e
seventy-two-year-old
zoologist, who immediately befriended
K o e s t l e r and whom K o e s t l e r begged t o leave.
When he a r r i v e d a t
S i r P e t e r ' s v i l l a , K o e s t l e r says t h a t i t was S i r P e t e r ' s t u r n t o
beg K o e s t l e r t o leave, b u t he did so i n a tone o f voice t h a t
K o e s t l e r imagined expressed "an undertone o f hope t h a t he would
n o t be l e f t t o face t h e ordeal alone" ( T h e I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g ,
413).
The v i l l a , K o e s t l e r says, had a l a r g e Union Jack f l y i n g
from i t s r o o f , and b o t h sides had so f a r avoided i n t e r f e r i n g with
B r i t i s h c i t i z e n s and B r i t i s h property.
And although K o e s t l e r was
n o t a B r i t i s h citizen,
t h e house, t h e flag,
and t h e dignified o l d
man l i v i n g i n i t gave K o e s t l e r "a spurious sense o f security."
But beyond K o e s t l e r ' s friendship with S i r Peter, and beyond t h e
sense o f s e c u r i t y he f e l t under S i r P e t e r ' s Union Jack, K o e s t l e r
was motivated t o s t a y f o r
a journalistic
scoop.
Moreover, he
says he f e l t t h a t as non-partisan witnesses t o t h e insurgent
take-over,
possibly he and S i r P e t e r could save l i v e s , which i s
v e r y curious indeed because a t t h e time o f t h e insurgents'
take-over
o f Malaga K o e s t l e r was n o t a " n e u t r a l observer" a t all.
He was i n Malaga as a Communist spy.
But he says:
Never b e f o r e had a f o r e i g n j o u r n a l i s t i n Spain witnessed
what happened when t h e insurgents took over a town; from t h e
point o f view o f t h e newly-founded 'Agence Espagne', t h i s
prospect seemed worth t h e risk.
Besides i n view o f General
Oueipo's repeated t h r e a t s o f a ' t e r r i b l e r e t r i b u t i o n against
t h e Anarchist stronghold' (which Malaga i n f a c t was), we
CKoestler and S i r Peter1 b o t h had t h e i r r a t i o n a l and r a t h e r
s i l l y conviction t h a t t h e presence o f two ' n e u t r a l
observers' would have a r e s t r a i n i n g influence on t h e
behavior o f t h e insurgents when they e n t e r e d t h e town. (The
I n v i s i b l e U r i t i n g , 414)
Even though K o e s t l e r was a Communist a t t h e time o f Malaga's
f a l l , i t i s possible t h a t because he was n o t d i r e c t l y involved i n
t h e c o n f l i c t i n a physical sense, and because he was i n t h e
process o f l e t t i n g go o f h i s ideology a t t h e time, he f e l t more
l i k e a " n e u t r a l observer" than a p a r t i s a n member o f a p o l i t i c a l
party.
But i n s p i t e o f h i s s t r o n g j o u r n a l i s t i c and humanistic
reasons f o r remaining i n Malaga, t h e day b e f o r e t h e c i t y f e l l
K o e s t l e r almost changed h i s mind about staying.
To see what
c o n t r i b u t e d t o h i s v e r y d e l i b e r a t e and dangerous choice, i t i s
necessary t o examine i n some d e t a i l t h e circumstances of
K o e s t l e r ' s aborted attempt t o leave t h e c i t y , and why he changed
h i s mind about leaving.
By examining h i s decision t o s t a y and
p u t himself a t g r e a t r i s k , we w i l l see t h a t t h e f a l l o f Malaga
n o t only c o n t r i b u t e d t o K o e s t l e r ' s feelings o f disillusionment
and " s p i r i t u a l c r i s i s " , b u t also conspired t o allow K o e s t l e r t o
atone f o r h i s feelings o f g u i l t .
On February 8th, t h e day b e f o r e Malaga f e l l ,
b e f o r e he was arrested,
f o r t h e l a s t time.
and t h e day
K o e s t l e r v i s i t e d m i l i t a r y headquarters
There he heard t h a t Rebel army tanks were
l e s s than f i v e miles from t h e town's center and t h a t r e s i s t a n c e
had collapsed.
Valencia,
The M i l i t a r y Commander promptly l e f t f o r
where he was l a t e r c o u r t m a r t i a l l e d and shot f o r
desertion.
The s t a f f o f f i c e r , with whom K o e s t l e r was friendly,
v i r t u a l l y forced K o e s t l e r i n t o h i s car, a car which K o e s t l e r says
was "already crammed f u l l o f weeping women".
To Koestler, these
weeping women symbolized t h e town's f i n a l chaos and panic.
K o e s t l e r hoped t h a t they might d r i v e up t o S i r P e t e r ' s v i l l a t o
g e t S i r Peter t o change h i s mind, b u t t h e d r i v e r pretended t h a t
t h e r o a d leading up t o t h e v i l l a was c u t o f f .
They drove on with
t h e stream o f refugees heading toward Valencia.
K o e s t l e r says t h a t a l l during t h e h a s t y e x i t he was reminded
o f Madrid, which he had also l e f t i n a panic, believing t h e town
l o s t , even though i t was l a t e r saved.
Then, a t l e a s t , he had
accomplished h i s mission, which was t o o b t a i n proof o f German aid
t o Franco.
But now, leaving Malaga,
K o e s t l e r says,
I was running away without having said good-bye t o S i r
Peter, leaving even my t y p e - w r i t e r and manuscripts behind
I n t h e end, as we approached t h e c i t y b a r r i e r , I
jumped o u t o f t h e moving car which A l f r e d r e f u s e d t o s t o p
When I
and walked back on f o o t t o S i r P e t e r ' s house
t o l d him t h e news, he said t h a t I had been a p e r f e c t f o o l
....
....
83
n o t t o leave.
He was o f course, r i g h t .
There could be no doubt t h a t
Nalaga was l o s t , t h a t a f t e r my S e v i l l e a d v e n t u r e s [where he
was almost a r r e s t e d as a Communist spy3 I would n o t have
much o f a chance i f caught, and t h a t my presence i n
Chalmers-Mitchell's house, i n s t e a d o f being a help, would
merely endanger h i s s a f e t y .
(The I n v l s l b l e Writlng, 415)
So K o e s t l e r chose t o remain i n Malaga, even though he knew t h a t
t h e c i t y was about t o f a l l i n t o t h e hands o f t h e i n s u r g e n t s , and
t h a t h i s chances o f being a r r e s t e d were v e r y g r e a t i f he were
caught.
B u t K o e s t l e r s a y s t h a t when he was w r i t i n g h i s t h i r d C i v i l
War account, Dialogue w i t h Death,
h i s explanation o f t h e r e a s o n s
f o r h i s decision t o s t a y i n Malaga a r e " s l u r r e d o v e r " because a t
t h e time he w r o t e t h e t e x t he was s t i l l n o t able t o understand
h i s reasons.
K o e s t l e r goes on t o say:
"I could n o t y e t f a c e t h e
f a c t t h a t i n v e r t e d cowardice, t h e f e a r o f being a f r a i d , had
played a major p a r t i n my actions;
ways o f
t h e death-wish"
nor understand t h e t o r t u o u s
(The Invisible Writing,
415).
Subconsciously K o e s t l e r wanted t o be caught--he
pay f o r h i s f e e l i n g s o f g u i l t .
wanted t o
L i k e Orwell, K o e s t l e r was f e e l i n g
g u i l t y f o r being p a r t o f an oppressive regime, a l b e i t a regime
much d i f f e r e n t from t h e one Orwell had been p a r t o f , and a s
Orwell had f e l t t h e need t o a t o n e f o r h i s g u i l t ,
f e l t he must atone.
so t o o Koestler
K o e s t l e r ' s method o f atonement, however, was
n o t t h e same a s Orwell's:
Orwell had chosen t o go "down and out",
t o l i v e among t h e oppressed and t h e poor;
K o e s t l e r chose t o s t a y
i n Malaga as i t f e l l t o F a s c i s t s , who would imprison him.
And i f K o e s t l e r f e l t unprepared t o r e v e a l h i s f e e l i n g s i n
his t h i r d text,
he c e r t a i n l y could n o t r e v e a l h i s sense o f g u i l t
and h i s need t o atone, nor could he r e v e a l h i s disillusionment i n
h i s second t e x t , S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t , i f indeed he was conscious o f
these feelings a t t h e time.
But as much as K o e s t l e r wanted t o be caught, h i s a c t u a l
U n t i l he r e t u r n e d t o S i r
a r r e s t was an i r o n i c coincidence.
Peter's, K o e s t l e r did n o t know t h a t t h e house next door t o S i r
f
P e t e r ' s belonged t o Don Tomas Bolin, uncle o f Captain Louis
/
Bolin, t h e man i n S e v i l l e who had wanted t o shoot K o e s t l e r f i v e
months e a r l i e r .
U n t i l Malaga f e l l ,
t h e house had been used as a
hospital, so K o e s t l e r did n o t know i t was Tomas Bolin's house;
otherwise he might n o t have remained i n Malaga as he did.
K o e s t l e r explains t h e coincidence o f S i r Peter's neighbor being
r e l a t e d t o t h e man who wanted t o a r r e s t K o e s t l e r i n Seville.
He
goes on t o say t h a t S i r P e t e r had saved t h e l i v e s o f h i s neighbor
and h i s family while r i s k i n g h i s own l i f e :
It w i l l be remembered t h a t t h e head o f Franco's Press
Department, who I had fooled i n Seville and had promised t o
shoot me ' l i k e a mad dog' i f he ever l a i d /hands on me, was
an army Captain by t h e name o f Louis Bolin.
By a remarkable
coincidence t h e house neighbouring S i r P e t e r ' s belonged t o
Captain Bolin's uncle, Don Tomas ~ o l i n . A t t h e outbreak o f
t h e C i v i l War, Don Tomas, who was a Monarchist, had taken
refuge with h i s whole family i n S i r P e t e r ' s house.
For a while Don Tomas had been imprisoned by t h e L o y a l i s t
a u t h o r i t i e s i n Malaga, b u t S i r Peter obtained h i s release,
and i n t h e end he had smuggled o u t t h e whole Bolin clan, a t
t h e p e r i l o f h i s own l i f e , t o Gibraltar. ( T h e I n v i s i b l e
W r i t i n g , 416)
...
K o e s t l e r and S i r P e t e r hoped t h a t Don Tomas would r e t u r n from
e x i l e soon and i n t e r c e d e with t h e Rebel a u t h o r i t i e s on behalf o f
t h e man who had saved h i s l i f e and t h e l i v e s o f h i s family.
Dun Tomas did i n f a c t r e t u r n t h e day a f t e r t h e Rebel Army
entered Malaga, and he did intercede f o r S i r Peter, b u t n o t f o r
Koestler.
On February 9th, t h e morning a f t e r t h e insurgents
took over Malaga, t h r e e uniformed men c a r r y i n g r e v o l v e r s rushed
S i r P e t e r ' s house.
/
The man i n command was Louis Bolin, who
recognized K o e s t l e r from t h e i r e a r l i e r encounter i n Seville.
He
again accused K o e s t l e r o f being a spy, and called f o r a rope i n a
voice so threatening t h a t K o e s t l e r thought he was immediately t o
be hanged, t h e f i r s t o f t h r e e times t h a t day t h a t he thought he
was t o die.
But t h e rope was used only t o t i e K o e s t l e r ' s hands.
S i r Peter, hoping t h a t t h e presence o f Don Tomas might m i t i g a t e
t h e s i t u a t i o n , asked one o f h i s s e r v a n t s t o r u n across f o r him.
When Don Tomas a r r i v e d he had a few whispered words with h i s
nephew Louis, and then he l e f t .
Both K o e s t l e r and S i r P e t e r f e l t
t h a t those words saved S i r P e t e r ' s l i f e .
K o e s t l e r and S i r Peter
were then taken i n t o t h e center o f Malaga where they were made t o
wait i n t h e car f o r hours.
Finally, S i r P e t e r was released t o go
t o England; K o e s t l e r was imprisoned, f i r s t i n Malaga f o r f o u r
days, and then i n S e v i l l e f o r t h r e e months.
K o e s t l e r o f f e r s a much f u l l e r d e s c r i p t i o n o f h i s a r r e s t and
t h e events following i n h i s e a r l i e r two t e x t s ,
Spanish Testament
and D i a l o g u e w i t h D e a t h , than i n h i s f i n a l t e x t T h e I n v i s i b l e
W r i t i n g , because he f e e l s t h a t t o f u l l y describe h i s a r r e s t and
h i s imprisonment f o r a t h i r d time would be r e p e t i t i o u s .
Instead,
he describes h i s psychological s t a t e , which he does n o t f e e l f r e e
t o account f o r i n t h e e a r l i e r two t e x t s .
I n h i s b r i e f chronology
o f a r r e s t and imprisonment K o e s t l e r says t h a t even though he w a s
only held i n Malaga b r i e f l y compared t o h i s s t a y i n Seville's
prison, he was kept i n s o l i t a r y confinement i n both places.
i n b o t h prisons, he says he heard fellow p r i s o n e r s being
And
executed, which l e d him t o believe t h a t he t o o would die:
I was a r r e s t e d on February 9 C19371, kept f o r f o u r days
incommunicado i n t h e p r i s o n o f Nalaga, and was t r a n s f e r r e d
I was kept
on February 13 t o t h e Central Prison o f Seville.
i n s o l i t a r y confinement f o r t h r e e months, and during t h i s
period was on hunger s t r i k e f o r twenty-six days.
For t h e
f i r s t s i x t y - f o u r days, I was kept incommunicado i n my c e l l
and n o t permitted exercise.
A f t e r t h a t I remained i n
s o l i t a r y confinement b u t was permitted two hours exercise a
day i n t h e company o f t h r e e o t h e r prisoners.
I was
exchanged against a hostage held by t h e Valencia Government
on May 14, a f t e r n i n e t y - f i v e days o f imprisonment.
I was n e i t h e r t o r t u r e d nor beaten, b u t was a witness t o
t h e beating and execution o f my fellow p r i s o n e r s and, except
f o r t h e l a s t f o r t y - e i g h t hours, l i v e d i n t h e expectation of
sharing t h e i r f a t e . ( T h e I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 421)
Even though he was n o t physically harmed i n any way, t h e
combination o f being i n s o l i t a r y confinement f o r t h r e e months and
hearing o t h e r s being l e d t o t h e i r death during t h a t time so
thoroughly convinced K o e s t l e r t h a t he t o o was going t o be
executed, t h a t he held t h e b e l i e f r i g h t up t o t h e time he was
released.
Living so closely with death caused K o e s t l e r t o
question and examine f o r t h e f i r s t time t h e value o f l i f e i n
general and h i s l i f e i n p a r t i c u l a r , b u t he r e v e a l s t h i s only i n
his f o u r t h text.
What K o e s t l e r does f e e l bound t o r e p e a t i n a l l t h r e e t e x t s
a r e t h e s t a t i s t i c s o f death: he r e i t e r a t e s t h e numbers o f men
being shot,
how o f t e n men were shot, when they were shot, and t h e
procedures leading up t o t h e shooting f o r those r e a d e r s who might
n o t have r e a d S p a n i s h T e s t a m e n t o r Dialogue w i t h Death.
These
d e t a i l s o f death a r e s i g n i f i c a n t t o K o e s t l e r n o t only because
they were burned i n t o h i s memory and were t h e reason why he
thought he t o o would be shot, b u t a l s o because these deaths
v a l i d a t e f o r K o e s t l e r h i s experiences o f t h e War i n a way t h a t
h i s ideology could not.
K o e s t l e r had joined t h e Communist P a r t y
i n Germany i n 1931 when H i t l e r came t o power, hoping t h a t t h e
P a r t y could reckon with t h e f o r c e s o f Fascism.
But six y e a r s
l a t e r i n Spain i n 1937, he was n o t only disillusioned t o f i n d
t h a t Communism could n o t equal o r b e s t Fascism, b u t he was also
h o r r i f i e d t o f i n d t h a t Communists i n Spain used t h e same b r u t a l
t a c t i c s as t h e F a s c i s t s i n eliminating enemies o f t h e Cause.
And
as he was t o learn, t h e u l t i m a t e p r i c e o f war i s n o t t h e triumph
o f one ideology over another; r a t h e r , t h e u l t i m a t e p r i c e o f war
i s death.
Koestler, l i k e s o many o t h e r a r t i s t s ,
came t o know
t h a t t h e Spanish C i v i l War as a manifest programme o f ideology
enacted, i n r e a l i t y , turned o u t t o have a t i t s h e a r t t h e nulling
f a c t o f death, which d e s t r o y s t h e b i r t h o f idea.
But even though they both paid a p r i c e f o r t h e i r experiences
o f t h e war, n e i t h e r K o e s t l e r nor Orwell paid t h e u l t i m a t e p r i c e
o f war.
K o e s t l e r did n o t go t o war as a f o o t - s o l d i e r ,
a t most die f i g h t i n g man-to-man,
who could
o r a t l e a s t pay p a r t o f t h e
p r i c e by g e t t i n g d i r t y , o r lousy, o r wounded, as did Orwell.
The
d i r t , t h e lice, and t h e wound Orwell s u f f e r e d were t h e p r i c e he
paid f o r being i n t h e War.
What Orwell s u f f e r e d i n t h e War
f i n a l l y allowed him t o atone f o r
regime i n Burma.
being p a r t o f an oppressive
Orwell s u f f e r e d physically more than he did
psychologically, whereas K o e s t l e r s u f f e r e d more psychologically.
Koestler, unlike Orwell, went t o War as a confirmed ideologue,
f i g h t i n g only words with words, and l i e s with l i e s , armed only
with an ideology t h a t would f a i l him i n t h e end.
Thus, K o e s t l e r
did n o t have a complete acquaintance with death--he
did n o t die
on t h e f r o n t - l i n e s
o f t h e War, nor w a s he executed i n prison.
did n o t have t o pay t h e u l t i m a t e price.
He
He did pay a v e r y high
price, nonetheless, when he had h i s "dialogue with death" i n
prison, where he did see men l e d t o t h e i r deaths, heard them
being shot, and waited f o r h i s own death.
And because t h e deaths
were so important t o Koestler, i t i s worth looking a t h i s d e t a i l s
o f them i n f u l l .
He r e c a l l s t h e numbers o f death, t h e "smooth"
and q u i e t procedures, and t h e i n s c r u t a b l e system o f choosing t h e
p r i s o n e r s f o r death:
During t h e f i r s t few days a f t e r t h e f a l l o f Malaga,
p r i s o n e r s i n t h a t town were taken o u t i n batches and shot a t
any hour o f t h e day; l a t e r on i n Seville, things s e t t l e d
down t o a more o r d e r l y r o u t i n e , and executions were c a r r i e d
o u t t h r e e o r f o u r times a week between midnight and 2 a.m.
During March, a l t o g e t h e r f o r t y - f i v e men from our p r i s o n were
shot.
During t h e f i r s t t h i r t e e n days o f April, t h e r e were
no executions, b u t during t h e next six nights, between
Tuesday, A p r i l 13 and Monday t h e 19th, f i f t y men were
executed, t h e g r e a t e s t number i n a single night being
seventeen (on A p r i l 13).
A f t e r t h a t I l o s t count as I had
worked o u t a technique of sleeping through t h e c r i t i c a l
hours.
The proceedings were as a r u l e smooth and subdued.
The
victims were n o t forewarned, and mostly t o o dazed o r proud
t o make a scene when they were l e d o u t o f t h e i r c e l l s by t h e
guards, accompanied by t h e p r i e s t , t o t h e waiting l o r r y .
A
few o f them sang, some wept, muffled c r i e s o f 'madre' and
'scorro' were frequent. Sometimes I saw t h e whole
procession--the p r i e s t , t h e guards and t h e victim--quickly
pass i n f r o n t o f my spyhole, b u t mostly I only heard them,
ear pressed against t h e c e l l door.
Sometimes t h e victims
were fetched from t h e mass d e t e n t i o n c e l l s on t h e second
f l o o r , o r from a d i f f e r e n t wing; sometimes from among t h e
lncommunicados o f t h e death row where I was housed; i t w a s
impossible t o discover t h e system.
On one night, Thursday,
A p r i l 15, t h e inmates o f c e l l s 39, 41 and 42 on my l e f t and
r i g h t were a l l marched o f f , with only my own c e l l No. 40
spared, a f t e r t h e warder had p u t h i s key, no doubt by
mistake, i n t o my own lock, and then withdrawn. ( T h e
Invisible Writing, 422, 423)
A f t e r we have looked a t these s p e c i f i c s o f death--the
t h e procedures o f execution--it
numbers and
becomes c l e a r why K o e s t l e r n o t
only believed t h a t he t o o would be shot, b u t a l s o why these
executions validated h i s C i v i l War experiences.
His growing
knowledge o f death was t h e high p r i c e K o e s t l e r had t o pay f o r h i s
experiences.
Furthermore, when K o e s t l e r r e c a l l s these deaths he
a c t s as a witness f o r t h e victims and gives t h e i r deaths
significance:
h i s r e c a l l i s both testimonial t o and memorial o f
t h e men who died.
But t h e r e i s more t o be said f o r K o e s t l e r ' s
experiences o f death.
Equally important i s t h e f a c t t h a t by being f o r c e d t o l i v e
almost d a i l y with t h e executions o f o t h e r s and with t h e
p o s s i b i l i t y o f h i s own execution, K o e s t l e r f e l t f r e e o f g u i l t and
(amazingly) o f anxiety f o r t h e f i r s t time since h i s childhood.
The d a i l y executions n o t only f o r c e d K o e s t l e r t o consider death,
b u t also forced him t o examine l i f e i n general, and h i s l i f e i n
p a r t i c u l a r . I n t h e face o f death, K o e s t l e r had t o r e v i s e h i s
vision of life.
And so he was l e d t o a new vision--to
s p i r i t u a l awakening--that
ideology.
a
would f i l l t h e void l e f t by h i s l o s t
Thus, with a new v i s i o n i n place, K o e s t l e r was s a f e
and f r e e t o review h i s ideology c r i t i c a l l y ,
and then t o l e t
Communism go.
But even b e f o r e K o e s t l e r r e c a l l s h i s t r i p t o Malaga, h i s
a r r e s t and imprisonment, and t h e d e t a i l s o f t h e executions,
and
even b e f o r e he documents t h e subsequent s p r i r i t u a l experiences,
he explains why he did n o t include i n h i s second and t h i r d t e x t s
t h e s p i r i t u a l feelings which so profoundly changed him.
He has a
problem with h i s c u r r e n t t e x t , I n v i s i b l e Writing, h i s
autobiography, he says, because o f t h e p a s t two t e x t s : having
already w r i t t e n Spanish T e s t a m e n t and Dialogue w l t h Death, he
believes t h a t he has l o s t h i s r i g h t s t o w r i t e h i s own l i f e .
Expressing a t t i t u d e s o f obligation and c o n s t r a i n t - - " I
"I have no o t h e r choice,"
must ask,"
"I must confine myselfu--Koestler
r e f e r s t h e reader t o t h e book he published f i f t e e n y e a r s e a r l i e r ,
Dialogue w i t h Death.
He says:
A t t h i s p o i n t a major d i f f i c u l t y a r i s e s with t h i s
autobiography, f o r which I must ask t h e reader's indulgence.
The next six months formed t h e most decisive p e r i o d i n my
l i f e , i t s s p i r i t u a l c r i s i s and turning-point.
Yet t h e
d e t a i l e d s t o r y o f t h a t period I have already w r i t t e n and
published f i f t e e n y e a r s ago under t h e t i t l e o f Dlalogue w l t h
Death; and I have no o t h e r choice b u t t o r e f e r t h e reader t o
it. I n t h i s book I must confine myself t o a summary o u t l i n e
o f events, and t o t h e elaborations o f c e r t a i n aspects o f t h e
experience which could n o t be t r e a t e d i n t h e e a r l i e r book.
(The I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 422)
Even though t h e period he wants t o w r i t e about--his
and t h e months following--was
imprisonment
t h e most important o f h i s l i f e , he
i s obliged and constrained by t h e p a s t t e x t s t o w r i t e only a
summary o f some events while elaborating o t h e r events i n h i s
current text.
And he found t h a t he could n o t i n c o r p o r a t e t h e p a s t t e x t
i n t o h i s c u r r e n t t e x t because o f t h e v a s t d i f f e r e n c e s i n s t y l e
and perspective between Draloque w i t h Death and The I n v i s i b l e
Writing.
When I s t a r t e d t h i s autobiography, I intended t o i n c o r p o r a t e
Dialogue w l t h Death, with a few c u t s i n t o t h e present
volume.
But t h i s did n o t prove feasible.
The book i s
w r i t t e n i n a d i f f e r e n t s t y l e , and from an e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t
perpsective, by a man f i f t e e n y e a r s younger, s t i l l under t h e
impact o f a s h a t t e r i n g experience, and while t h e Spanish War
was on.
The last-mentioned circumstance was responsible f o r
a d e l i b e r a t e under-playing o f t h e s p i r i t u a l side o f t h e
experience, as i t would have been f r i v o l o u s t o indulge i n
i n t r o s p e c t i v e r e f l e c t i o n s while my comrades fought and died
i n Spain--or
so a t l e a s t i t seemed t o me a t t h e time.
Also
t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n t h a t I underwent during t h a t experience
was a t f i r s t an unconscious one, and i t took some time
before i t seeped through and a l t e r e d my conscious outlook;
thus, f o r instance, I only broke with t h e Communist P a r t y
nine months l a t e r . (The I n v i s i b l e Writlng, 422, 422)
K o e s t l e r had t o take t h e s i t u a t i o n s o f war and death i n t o
consideration when he wrote h i s e a r l i e r t e x t - - t o
w r i t e about h i s
s p i r i t u a l c r i s i s when o t h e r s were s t i l l dying during t h e War
would have been inappropriate.
And K o e s t l e r needed some time t o
absorb t h e s p i r i t u a l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n he had undergone b e f o r e he
could p u t it i n t o p r a c t i c e t o o f f i c a l l y eliminate Communism from
his life.
Yet he does n o t r e v e a l t h a t he had a c t u a l l y given up t h e
r i g h t s t o account f o r a c e r t a i n p a r t of h i s l i f e because o f t h e
r h e t o r i c a l n a t u r e o f t h e previous two texts.
He does n o t t e l l us
t h a t he could n o t document h i s psychological changes i n Spanish
Testament,
and Dialoque with Death because they a r e both so much
more r h e t o r i c a l than The I n v i s i b l e Writing, which i s mostly
r e f l e x i v e and personal.
Spanish Testament i s a combination o f
propaganda, h i s t o r y , and personal n a r r a t i v e ; Dialoque with Death
i s a cut-and-dried
account o f t h e previous t e x t ' s n a r r a t i v e - - t h e
e x t e r n a l s o f K o e s t l e r ' s imprisonment--without
any o f t h e e a r l i e r
t e x t ' s h i s t o r y and without much o f i t s propagandistic r h e t o r i c .
Besides being unable t o r e v e a l h i s psychological changes i n
h i s previous t e x t s because o f t h e i r r h e t o r i c a l nature, Koestler
also needed a long time t o absorb t h e " s p i r i t u a l c r i s i s and
turning-point",
t o become conscious o f what t h e c r i s e s would mean
t o him i n t h e long run.
It took him f i f t e e n years b e f o r e he
could f u l l y illuminate t h e event i n Volume I 1 o f h i s
autobiography, The I n v i s i b l e Writing,
a t e x t so much more
92
personal and i n t i m a t e than t h e previous two documents t h a t
K o e s t l e r does n o t even e n t e r t a i n t h e p o s s i b i l t y t h a t t h i s t e x t i s
y e t another r h e t o r i c .
This r e f l e x i v e t e x t i s by i t s v e r y n a t u r e
l i t e r a r y : i t i s w r i t t e n i n a "confessional" mode, and i t i s no
longer i d e n t i f i a b l e with a p o l i t i c a l s i t u a t i o n - - t h e
politics are
f i f t e e n years i n t h e past.
But The l n v l s i b l e Writing i s a l s o r h e t o r i c a l : t h e r h e t o r i c a l
dimension o f K o e s t l e r ' s autobiography a r i s e s o u t o f t h e v e r y a c t
o f publishing t h e t e x t .
When K o e s t l e r publishes h i s t e x t , he
moves i t from t h e p r i v a t e and personal realm i n t o t h e public and
r h e t o r i c a l world.
And as personal as K o e s t l e r ' s t e x t seems t o be
when he r e v e a l s h i s psychological crises, it i s s t i l l r h e t o r i c a l
because h i s r e v e l a t i o n a l s o has t h e appeal o f pathos,
s t r a t e g i c appeal t o feelings t o achieve an end.
a
But even though
K o e s t l e r ' s r e f l e c t i o n s by t h e i r v e r y n a t u r e w i l l arouse s t r o n g
feelings o f sympathy and antipathy i n h i s reading public, those
r e f l e c t i o n s a r e n o t r e a l l y documented with a l a r g e public i n
mind, but, r a t h e r , f o r p r i v a t e redemption.
So, i n a sense, even
though a l l published t e x t s a r e r h e t o r i c a l , some a r e more l i t e r a r y
than r h e t o r i c a l and some more r h e t o r i c a l than l i t e r a r y .
Compared
t o Koestler's f i n a l t e x t on h i s C i v i l War experiences, Orwell's
Homage t o Catalonia i s more r h e t o r i c a l than l i t e r a r y , on t h e
whole, because i t does i d e n t i f y so s t r o n g l y with a p o l i t i c a l
situation.
element,
But Orwell's document a l s o contains a l i t e r a r y
because i t i s autobiographical t o a c e r t a i n extent:
for
example, he does express a t some length h i s personal
disappointment i n n o t seeing more a c t i o n a t t h e f r o n t ;
and he
does v i v i d l y r e c a l l h i s f e e l i n g s when he f i n a l l y sees some
action.
Compared t o K o e s t l e r ' s autobiographical t e x t , however,
Orwell's t e x t i s n o t n e a r l y as r e f l e x i v e .
i n Orwell's
The "I"
account i s a f a b r i c a t i o n o f t h e s t r a n g e combination o f t h e
omniscient n a r r a t o r and t h e innocent non-partisan.
n a r r a t i n g s e l f i s "suspect":
Orwell's
t h i s s e l f i s impersonal a s well a s
l i m i t e d and e v a s i v e compared w i t h K o e s t l e r ' s more r e v e a l i n g and
r e f l e x i v e n a r r a t i v e . The personas Orwell presents,
i n his text,
could be s o l i m i t e d perhaps because, o u t s i d e t h e t e x t and i n
r e a l i t y , t h e more p r i v a t e and p e r s o n a l E r i c B l a i r was becoming
t h e more public and r h e t o r i c a l George Orwell.
With h i s Spanish C i v i l War expriences, and w i t h h i s t e x t ,
Orwell f i n a l l y moved o u t o f t h e p r i v a t e , f o r m a t i v e realm o f E r i c
B l a i r , where he needed t o "go down and o u t " t o c r e a t e c o n t e x t s
f o r h i s t e x t s , and where he needed t o assuage h i s g u i l t ,
guilt-free,
i n t o the
public world and t h e formed persona o f George Orwell.
As h i s biographer, Bernard Crick,
s a y s a t t h e end o f h i s chapter
on Orwell i n Spain:
A f t e r t h e o r d e a l s o f Spain and w r i t i n g t h e book about it,
most o f Orwell's f o r m a t i v e experiences were over.
His
f i n e s t w r i t i n g , h i s b e s t e s s a y s and h i s g r e a t fame l a y
ahead.
From 1937 onwards he knew where he stood, what he
was capable o f doing and he was able t o g i v e o u t g r e a t
r i c h e s from t h e s t o r e o f h i s expriences, he no longer needed
f o r the necessities of
t o seek o u t new experiences
writing.
( G e o r g e O r w e l l : A L i f e , 352)
...
L i k e Orwell, K o e s t l e r t o o used t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e war f o r h i s
texts.
B u t u n l i k e Orwell, K o e s t l e r would move i n t h e o p p o s i t e
d i r e c t i o n : K o e s t l e r would move from t h e public and p o l i t i c a l
arena o f spying and w r i t i n g propaganda f o r t h e Cause, and f e e l i n g
g u i l t y about it, i n t o t h e p r i v a t e and personal, i n t o t h e
psychological world o f w r i t i n g f o r t h e sake o f w r i t i n g and
w r i t i n g t o confess and r e l i e v e h i s g u i l t .
Koestler had been feeling g u i l t y f o r a long time because he
was working f o r an oppressive regime; f o r t h a t regime, he had
lied, w r i t t e n propaganda, and he had spied.
He also knew t h a t
t h e Soviet Union's f o r e i g n policy was playing a r o l e i n t h e
denial o f arms t o Anarchists and members o f POUM,
many o f whom
were imprisoned l i k e Koestler, b u t unlike K o e s t l e r were executed,
and had fought and died i n f r o n t - l i n e s
against t h e Fascists.
And
even though he f e l t g u i l t y f o r being a Communist, he also f e l t
g u i l t y because he was withdrawing from Communism.
g u i l t K o e s t l e r f e l t he must be punished--he
"justice".
For a l l h i s
had a craving f o r
So he n o t only s a t i s f i e d h i s craving f o r j u s t i c e by
o f f e r i n g up himself--by
imprisoned--but
allowing himself t o be caught and
a l s o by confessing t h e psychological c r i s e s i n
t h e r e v e l a t i o n o f h i s autobiography.
When K o e s t l e r i s imprisoned
and p u t i n t o s o l i t a r y confinement, he no longer f e e l s g u i l t y .
He
f i n a l l y f e e l s t h a t " j u s t i c e " i s being met.
The f i r s t o f t h e " i n t e r n a l developments" Koestler r e v e a l s i s
t h a t a l l during h i s s o l i t a r y confinement i n Seville,
anxiety-neurosis
suspended".
"the
and t h e accompanying feeling o f g u i l t were
He goes on t o say t h a t he "was, o f course,
apprehensive and f e a r f u l ,
often
b u t it was a r a t i o n a l and, as i t were,
healthy f e a r , n o t t h e obsessional and morbid v a r i e t y " ( T h e
Invisible Writlng, 424).
K o e s t l e r f e l t so q u i l t - f r e e
he say5
t h a t he even s l e p t well, except on those n i g h t s when he could
hear h i s fellow p r i s o n e r s being l e d t o t h e i r execution,
and even
then he found sleep l a t e r .
despair, but,"
He does admit t o "hours o f acute
he says, "these were hours, and i n between were
e n t i r e days o f a newly discovered peace and happiness" ( T h e
K o e s t l e r explains t h e "paradox" o f h i s sense o f "peace and
happiness" while imprisoned as "the e f f e c t o f a s a t i s f i e d craving
f o r punishment".
law-breaking
Being g u i l t y o f espionage o r o f any
crime does n o t bother Koestler, b u t he i s t r o u b l e d
about working f o r an oppressive regime.
about t h e deceits o f t h e regime--even
these "crimes".
And he does f e e l g u i l t y
though he does n o t mention
So he agrees with h i s punishment.
He says t h a t
t h e n e u r o t i c t y p e o f anxiety i s t h e i r r a t i o n a l a n t i c i p a t i o n
o f an unknown punishment f o r an unknown crime.
Now
r e t r i b u t i o n had come i n a concrete, tangible form f o r a
concrete tangible offence; t h e cards were on t h e table.
Whether I was technically g u i l t y o f espionage o r any o t h e r
crime b e f o r e t h e law was beside t h e point; I had gained
e n t r y t o t h e enemy camp through deception, and I had done
everything i n my power t o damage t h e i r cause.
My condition
was thus a l o g i c a l consequence o f a consciously taken r i s k ,
t h e whole s i t u a t i o n was clean, proper and equitable. (The
I n v i s i b l e Writing, 425)
The f a c t t h a t he f e e l s and says t h a t h i s punishment i s "logical",
i s "clean, proper and equitable" shows t h a t he f e e l s g u i l t y ,
whether he i s o r not.
And he goes on t o say t h a t h i s
" r e f l e c t i o n s " on h i s crime and ~ u n i s h m e n thave been on "the
r a t i o n a l l e v e l " and form only one p a r t o f t h e psychological
process he's been discussing, and i t s most s u p e r f i c i a l one.
But
now, K o e s t l e r warns h i s readers, what i s t o follow i s even more
personal, b u t l e s s l o g i c a l and more c o n t r a d i c t o r y , than h i s
previous r e f l e c t i o n s .
As a guide t o i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ,
K o e s t l e r warns u s t h a t as he
96
moves t o o t h e r p a r t s o f t h e process "in an inward direction,
they
w i l l become more embarrassing and more d i f f i c u l t t o p u t i n t o
words."
These p a r t s o f t h e process w i l l become l e s s logical, and
" w i l l c o n t r a d i c t each o t h e r - - f o r
we a r e moving here through
s t r a t a t h a t a r e held t o g e t h e r by t h e cement o f c o n t r a d i c t i o n "
( T h e I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 427).
But f i r s t K o e s t l e r must r e v e a l
what l e d t o t h i s "new type" o f experience b e f o r e he t e l l s us
about it.
F i r s t , he i s obliged t o t e l l us about c e r t a i n
incidents t h a t caused such a psychic shake-up,
a t such a
fundamental l e v e l within him, t h a t he was u n r e s i s t i n g and l a i d
open t o t h e new experiences.
K o e s t l e r took p a r t i n f o u r
incidents t h a t shook him t o t h e core.
The f i r s t t h r e e occurred on t h e day o f h i s a r r e s t when, he
says, t h r e e times he believed he was about t o be executed.
The
f i r s t time occurred a t S i r P e t e r ' s v i l l a when Bolin called f o r a
rope; t h e second time when t h e car t r a n s p o r t i n g K o e s t l e r and S i r
P e t e r from t h e v i l l a i n t o Malaga stopped on an improvised
execution s i t e ; and t h e t h i r d time when,
a f t e r Bolin had t o l d
K o e s t l e r t h a t he would be shot a t night, K o e s t l e r was taken from
t h e Malaga p o l i c e - s t a t i o n
a t night, and p u t i n t o a t r u c k with
f i v e men who had r i f l e s on t h e i r knees, so t h a t K o e s t l e r thought
t h a t he was being d r i v e n t o t h e cemetery t o be shot by a five-man
firing-squad,
i n s t e a d of being driven only t o t h e prison.
Each
time he thought he was t o be executed, K o e s t l e r experienced, he
"benefited from",
a separation o f consciousness, where one p a r t
of t h e s e l f i s observing t h e s e l f i n action, and where t h e
active-self
i s l i k e a robot.
As he says:
I benefited from t h e well know phenomenon o f a s p l i t
consciousness, a dream-like, dazed self-estrangement which
separated t h e conscious s e l f from t h e acting s e l f - - t h e
former becoming a detached observer, t h e l a t t e r an
automaton, while t h e a i r hums i n one's e a r s as i n t h e hollow
o f a seashell.
It i s n o t bad a t all; t h e unpleasant p a r t i s
t h e subsequent reunion o f t h e s p l i t halves, bringing t h e
f u l l impact o f r e a l i t y i n i t s wake.
(The lnvlslble Writlng,
427).
As bad as those t h r e e episodes were,
and as unpleasant as t h e
r e t u r n t o r e a l i t y from each episode was, K o e s t l e r also
experienced t h a t day a f o u r t h episode which he says was "much
worse" than t h e o t h e r t h r e e episodes.
The f o u r t h episode occurred on t h e same day when K o e s t l e r
was being photographed f o r ,
as t h e says,
"the rogue's gallery",
standing against a wall with h i s hands tied,
a h o s t i l e crowd.
anaesthetic of
This time,
and i n t h e midst o f
instead o f being r e l i e v e d by "the
self-estrangement",
he r e c a l l e d a p a i n f u l
childhood memory because he was feeling t h e same kind o f h o r r o r
and powerlessness t h a t he had f e l t during an operation when he
was a child.
feeling.
And as a child, he invented t h e word "Ahor" f o r t h e
He says:
I f e l t as helpless as a t t h e age o f f i v e when, i n a doctor's
surgery, I was without preliminary warning t i e d with l e a t h e r
s t r a p s t o t h e operating chair, then held down and gagged by
way o f p r e p a r a t i o n f o r a tonsillectomy.
I have described
t h i s scene i n A r r o w i n t h e B l u e , [ p a r t one o f h i s
autobiography] and have explained how t h e sensation o f u t t e r
helplessness and abandonment t o a h o s t i l e , malign power had
f i l l e d me with a kind o f cosmic t e r r o r .
It had been my
f i r s t conscious acquaintance with 'Ahor', and a main cause
o f t h e anxiety-neurosis.
As I s t o o d against t h e wall i n t h a t s t r e e t i n Halaga,
equally defenceless and exposed, obediently t u r n i n g my head
a t t h e bellowed commands o f t h e photographer, t h a t trauma
was revived.
This, together with t h e o t h e r events o f t h e
same day, and t h e next t h r e e days with t h e i r mass
executions, had apparently caused a loosening up and
displacement o f psychic s t r a t a close t o rock-bottom--a
softening o f r e s i s t a n c e s and rearrangement o f s t r u c t u r e s
98
which l a i d them t e m p o r a r i l y open t o t h a t new t y p e o f
experience t h a t I am leading up t o .
( T h e Invisible Writlng,
427, 428)
The f o u r t r a u m a t i c incidents--combined
K o e s t l e r was soon t o witness--so
w i t h t h e mass executions
p i e r c e d and s h a t t e r e d h i s
psychological defences t h a t he s a y s he was rendered open t o a new
conciousness, a new way o f experiencing h i s world.
B u t he could
n o t have t h i s "new t y p e o f experience" u n t i l he had a chance t o
r e c o v e r from t h e trauma o f h i s f o u r experiences o f h o r r o r , a
r e c o v e r y which came when he f i n a l l y s e t t l e d down i n t o t h e
contemplation t h a t comes as a c o r o l l a r y o f s o l i t a r y confinement.
Once he had h i s new vision, K o e s t l e r could go on t o
re-examine
and t h e n t o renounce t h e o l d e r v i s i o n t h a t he had kept
i n f r o n t o f him.
Communism--or,
He was able t o r e l i n q u i s h h i s f a i t h i n
more a c c u r a t e l y , Marxism v i a Lenin v i a
Stalin--Communism
nineteen-thirties.
a s an i n t e r n a t i o n a l power i n t h e
Moreover, h i s new v i s i o n p r o v i d e d t h e means
n o t j u s t t o a change o f mind, K o e s t l e r says, b u t , more important,
t o "a change o f p e r s o n a l i t y " .
D i s i l l u s i o n e d w i t h Zionism,
K o e s t l e r had t u r n e d t o t h e Communist P a r t y t o g i v e h i s l i f e
meaning, i n h i s s e a r c h f o r t h e absolute, f o r t h e "arrow i n t h e
blue."
But, a s we s h a l l see, when t h e Communist P a r t y demanded
t h a t t h e end j u s t i f y t h e means, and t h a t P a r t y was more i m p o r t a n t
than t h e individual--that
i n the Party--Koestler
i n d i v i d u a l i t y had no meaning, no place
could no longer s t a n d t h e means t o t h e
end, n o r could he c o n t i n u e t o g i v e up h i s i n d i v i d u a l i t y f o r t h e
Cause.
Yet K o e s t l e r could n e i t h e r l i v e i n t h e v o i d c r e a t e d when
he l e t go o f t h e o l d world-order
t h a t was Communism, n o r could he
l i v e i n t h e v o i d t h a t was t h e u l t i m a t e nothingness t h a t he
considered death t o be.
I n order t o f i l l t h e void,
and give h i s
l i f e new meaning, K o e s l t e r was compelled t o c r e a t e a new
cosmology f o r
himself, a cosmology which i s f a i n t l y reminiscent
o f t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e r i n g s o f t h e Ptolemaic universe o f
c l a s s i c a l Greece.
K o e s t l e r t e l l s u s t h a t he f i r s t met with t h e new experience
a few days a f t e r he been t r a n s f e r r e d from t h e p r i s o n i n Malaga t o
c e l l No. 40 and s o l i t a r y confinement i n Seville's prison.
To
pass t h e time and t o exercise h i s mind, K o e s t l e r scratched
mathematical formulae on t h e white-washed
r e s u r r e c t i n g a long-neglected,
wall o f h i s cell,
f a v o r i t e hobby o f h i s youth.
He
had been p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t e r e s t e d i n a n a l y t i c a l geometry and was
r e c a l l i n g "Euclid's proof t h a t t h e number o f primes i s i n f i n i t e "
( T h e I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 428).
He goes on t o explain t h e theory,
and he says t h a t since he had become acquainted with Euclid's
proof a t school,
i t had always f i l l e d him with a deep a e s t h e t i c
r a t h e r than an i n t e l l e c t u a l s a t i s f a c t i o n .
method and scratched t h e symbols [ o f
As he "recalled t h e
t h e formula1 on t h e wall",
he " f e l t t h e same enchantment" again ( T h e Invisible W r i t i n g ,
429).
Then K o e s t l e r understands, f o r t h e f i r s t time, why he was
always enchanted, and from t h e understanding comes h i s glimpse o f
"eternity."
But t h i s glimpse o f e t e r n i t y i s expressed i n a manner t h a t
precludes any examination o f a c o n t i n u i t y and a s i m i l a r i t y
between i t and i t s predecessor--between
h i s new-found glimpse o f
e t e r n i t y through a Euclidian formula and h i s old search f o r t h e
e t e r n a l though t h e world-order
o f Communism.
K o e s t l e r does n o t
100
himself seem t o see c e r t a i n s i m i l a r i t i e s between h i s old v i s i o n
and t h e "new" vision.
What i s similar between t h e two visions i s
l o s s o f self: K o e s t l e r gave himself--mind
and body--to
the
Communist P a r t y , an organization t h a t demanded he s a c r i f i c e h i s
i n d i v i d u a l i t y , h i s a r t , t o t h e greater,
common good o f t h e Party;
and again K o e s t l e r l o s e s h i s sense o f s e l f i n h i s contemplation
o f t h e i n f i n i t e number o f primes.
For K o e s t l e r t o see t h e s i m i l a r i t i e s between t h e two
experiences would i n v a l i d a t e t h e new experience--if
there are
s i m i l a r i t e s between t h e o l d experience o f Communism and t h i s new
v i s i o n o f t h e i n f i n i t e , then t h e new v i s i o n i s n o t so new, not
unique a f t e r a l l , and K o e s t l e r i s l e f t with l e s s than nothing.
For K o e s t l e r t o negate t h e negative once again--to
again--the
f i l l t h e void
experience has t o be new, has t o be unique t o give h i s
l i f e meaning.
And when he c r e a t e s new meaning he can then occupy
t h e void t h a t i s c r e a t e d f i r s t by t h e l o s s o f Communist ideology,
and second by facing t h e nothingness o f death.
But even though K o e s t l e r cannot recognize it, a c a r e f u l
reader, a l a t e - 2 0 t h c e n t u r y reader, who i s long-adapted
t o living
i n t h e void, can recognize a c o n t i n u i t y between t h e new v i s i o n
and Communism.
A reader who i s used t o l i v i n g without a higher
a u t h o r i t y , a god-head,
t o give meaning t o l i f e can see c o n t i n u i t y
and s i m i l a r i t i e s between K o e s t l e r ' s old world-order
and t h e new
cosmology he creates, especially when K o e s t l e r uses images o f
water o r images connected with water t o describe and c r e a t e h i s
new vision.
Note, f o r example, h i s use o f t h e words "wave",
"evaporate",
and "wake" when he t a l k s about h i s unprecedented
understanding o f h i s enchantment with Euclid's formula:
we w i l l
see t h a t these images a r e continuous with those he uses t o
describe h i s f a i t h i n Communism, images such as "a spring o f
f r e s h water", "a poisoned r i v e r " , and "flooded" c i t i e s " .
And then f o r t h e f i r s t time, I suddenly understood t h e
reason f o r t h i s enchantment: t h e scribbled symbols on t h e
wall represented one o f t h e r a r e cases where a meaningful
and comprehensive statement about t h e i n f i n i t e i s a r r i v e d a t
by a precise and f i n i t e means.
The i n f i n i t e i s a mystical
mass shrouded i n a haze; y e t i t was possible t o gain some
knowledge o f i t without losing oneself i n t r e a c l y
ambiguities.
The significance o f t h i s swept over me l i k e a
wave.
The wave had o r i g i n a t e d i n an a r t i c u l a t e verbal
insight; b u t t h i s evaporated a t once, leaving i n i t s wake
only a wordless essence, a fragrance o f e t e r n i t y , a quiver
o f t h e arrow i n t h e blue.
(The Invisible Uriting, 429)
K o e s t l e r has caught a glimpse o f t h e "arrow i n t h e blue" through
a f i n i t e means o f expressing t h e i n f i n i t e .
But i n t h e above
passage, K o e s t l e r ' s use o f t h e "arrow i n t h e blue" image p o i n t s
t o a c o n t i n u i t y t h a t orginates even e a r l i e r , even deeper than t h e
episodes linked by t h e water images: K o e s t l e r ' s images o f water
connect only h i s "new" death-cell
P a r t y experiences;
v i s i o n and t h e r e c e n t Communist
t h e arrow begins i t s f l i g h t much e a r l i e r i n
his l i f e story.
The "arrow i n t h e blue" image goes back n o t only t o h i s more
r e c e n t Communist P a r t y experiences as an adult, b u t also (unlike
t h e water images) t o t h e days o f h i s adolescence and childhood,
days much f u r t h e r back, days which he c o v e r s o n l y i n t h e f i r s t
p a r t o f h i s autobiography.
That K o e s t l e r makes t h e connection
between h i s joining t h e Communist P a r t y and h i s quest f o r t h e
"arrow" only i n t h e f i r s t p a r t o f h i s autobiography i s
s i g n i f i c a n t because he cannot consciously,
l a t t e r two experiences--his
o v e r t l y connect t h e
e a r l y quest f o r t h e "arrow" and h i s
102
Communist P a r t y membership--to
t h e c u r r e n t death-cell
he i s describing i n p a r t two o f h i s autobiography.
experience
For i f
K o e s t l e r were t o see t h e s i m i l a r i t i e s between t h e Communist P a r t y
and h i s "new" experience i n t h e death-cell,
death-cell
experience "new", as he does.
he could n o t c a l l t h e
And he could n o t then
c a l l himself a "new" person, a person who cannot be held
responsible f o r t h e actions o f t h e old person--the
Communist
P a r t y member.
But now, b e f o r e we go on with K o e s t l e r ' s account o f h i s most
recent, h i s 1937 and "new" v i s i o n o f t h e "arrow",
we must t u r n
back eighteen y e a r s t o look b r i e f l y a t K o e s t l e r ' s 1919 adolescent
experiences with t h e "arrow" t o see how he does connect t h e e a r l y
"arrow" experiences t o h i s joining t h e Communist Party.
In this
b r i e f glance a t K o e s t l e r ' s past, we w i l l see t h a t h i s y o u t h f u l
i n t e r e s t i n (now outdated) science l e d him t o f e e l confident t h a t
science had solved t h e "riddles o f t h e universe"--the
life--but,
meaning o f
t h a t a t t h e same time, he was t r o u b l e d t h a t t h e
questions o f i n f i n i t y and e t e r n i t y had n o t been included i n t h e
riddles.
And so when he examines t h e question o f i n f i n i t y
himself, he meets t h e "arrow i n t h e blue" f o r t h e f i r s t time.
Next, we w i l l see how K o e s t l e r himself connects h i s quest f o r t h e
i n f i n i t e , t h e "arrow", t o h i s membership i n t h e Communist Party.
K o e s t l e r a c t u a l l y t i t l e d t h e f i r s t volume o f h i s two-volume
autobiography Arrow
I n T h e B l u e , a t i t l e t h a t stands f o r h i s
continuing quest f o r t h e absolute, f o r t h e i n f i n i t e , f o r
eternity.
He t e l l s u s t h a t he once caught a glimpse o f t h e
i n f i n i t e during a p e r i o d o f solitude,
when he was a child, and
then again as an adolescent who was fascinated with mathematics
and science i n t h e days b e f o r e t h e t h e o r i e s o f E i n s t e i n and
Freud, when i t was easy t o believe t h a t "these disciplines
[geometry, algebra, and physics3 contained t h e clue t o t h e
mystery o f existence" ( A r r o w I n T h e Blue, 65).
K o e s t l e r goes on
t o t e l l us t h a t when he was a youth t h e r e were considered t o be
"seven r i d d l e s o f t h e universe".
O f these riddles, he says, "six
appeared ' d e f i n i t e l y solved' (including t h e Nature o f M a t t e r and
t h e Origin o f Life); while t h e seventh, "the question o f Freedom
of the W i l l ,
was declared t o be 'a pure dogma, based on an
i l l u s i o n and having no r e a l existence'" ( A r r o w I n T h e Blue, 67).
He was reassured t o know, a t t h e age o f fourteen,
r i d d l e s o f t h e universe had a l l been solved.
that the
A doubt remained i n
h i s mind, however, because t h e "paradox o f i n f i n i t y and e t e r n i t y
had by some o v e r s i g h t n o t been included i n t h e l i s t " o f r i d d l e s
o f t h e universe.
K o e s t l e r f i r s t came t o t h e idea o f t h e b e a t i f i c "arrow i n
t h e blue", while he was puzzling over t h e "paradox o f i n f i n i t y " ,
during t h e summer o f h i s f o u r t e e n t h year, i n 1919.
He was l y i n g
on h i s back, he says, "under a blue sky on a h i l l slope i n Buda"
contemplating t h e "unbroken, unending, transparent, complacent,
s a t u r a t e d blue" sky above him when he " f e l t a mystic elation--one
o f those s t a t e s o f spontaneous illumination which a r e so frequent
i n childhood and become r a r e r and r a r e r as t h e years wear on. I n
t h e middle of t h e beatitude", he says,
t h e paradox o f s p a t i a l i n f i n i t y suddenly pierced my b r a i n as
You could shoot a
i f i t had been stung by a wasp.
super-arrow i n t o t h e blue with a super-force which could
c a r r y i t beyond t h e p u l l o f e a r t h ' s g r a v i t y , p a s t t h e moon,
104
p a s t t h e sun's a t t r a c t i o n - - a n d what then?
It would t r a v e r s e
i n t e r - s t e l l a r space p a s t o t h e r suns, o t h e r galaxies.
and t h e r e would be nothing t o s t o p it, no l i m i t and no end,
i n space o r i n time--and t h e worst o f i t was t h a t a l l t h i s
was n o t fanatasy b u t l i t e r a l l y true.
Such an arrow could be
made real; i n f a c t t h e comets which moved i n open space were
such n a t u r a l arrows, r i s i n g i n space t o i n f i n i t y - - o r f a l l i n g
i n t o i n f i n i t y ; it came t o t h e same thing, and i t was sheer
t o r t u r e t o t h e brain.
( A r r o w I n The B l u e , 63)
..
So as we can see, K o e s t l e r ' s image o f t h e "arrow i n t h e blue", i s
analogous t o h i s search f o r t h e i n f i n i t e , a search which goes
back a t l e a s t t o h i s adolescence.
i s a longer-continuing
Hence, t h e "arrow i n t h e blue"
image than t h e c u r r e n t water images of the
i n f i n i t e , which he connects only t o h i s much more r e c e n t
Communist P a r t y experiences as an adult.
And j u s t
a f t e r K o e s t l e r has talked about h i s adolescent
search f o r t h e i n f i n i t e and h i s v i s i o n o f t h e arrow i n t h e blue,
he does go on t o make t h e connection between h i s search f o r t h e
i n f i n i t e , h i s v i s i o n o f t h e arrow,
Party.
and h i s joining t h e Communist
But he makes t h i s connection only i n t h e f i r s t volume o f
autobiography, n o t i n t h e second volume where he i s then able t o
t a l k about h i s experience o f t h e i n f i n i t e as being "new",
and
where he i s able t o c r e a t e a new cosmology f o r himself.
I n t h e f i r s t volume, where he connects t h e i n f i n i t e t o t h e
arrow, what he says i s important because here he openly
acknowledges h i s continuing need t o f i l l t h e void l e f t by t h e
absence o f a higher a u t h o r i t y , an a u t h o r i t y who would have given
h i s l i f e meaning.
And he also c l e a r l y recognizes t h a t h i s need
has l e d him t o commit himself t o f a l s e a u t h o r i t i e s promising
f a l s e u t o p i a s which, i n t u r n , have l e d t o h i s disillusionment.
He says:
M y obsession with t h e arrow was merely t h e f i r s t phase o f
t h e quest.
When i t proved s t e r i l e , t h e I n f i n i t e as a t a r g e t
was replaced by U t o p i a s o f one kind o r another.
It was t h e
same q u e s t and t h e same a l l - o r - n o t h i n g m e n t a l i t y which d r o v e
me t o t h e Promised Land CPalestinel and i n t o t h e Communist
Party.
I n o t h e r ages a s p i r a t i o n s o f t h i s kind found t h e i r
n a t u r a l f u l f i l l m e n t i n God.
Since t h e end o f t h e e i g h t e e n t h
c e n t u r y t h e place o f God has been vacant i n o u r
c i v i l i z a t i o n ; b u t d u r i n g t h e ensuing c e n t u r y and a h a l f s o
many e x c i t i n g t h i n g s were happening t h a t people were n o t
aware of it. Now, however, a f t e r t h e s h a t t e r i n g
c a t a s t r o p h e s which have brought t h e Age o f Reason and
P r o g r e s s t o a close, t h e v o i d has made i t s e l f f e l t .
The
epoch i n which I grew up was an age o f disillusionment and
an age o f longing.
(Arrow I n t h e B l u e , 69)
As we can see, K o e s t l e r connects h i s q u e s t f o r t h e i n f i n i t e t o
h i s j o i n i n g t h e Communist P a r t y .
He admits a p r e d i l i c t i o n t o
searching o u t u t o p i a s and a s p i r i n g t o a god-head.
same time,
But a t the
he a l s o admits t h a t "God is Dead" and t h a t t h i s d e a t h
makes t h e v o i d f e l t .
When t h e vacancy o f God i s n o t being f i l l e d
by " u t o p i a s o f one kind o r another" o r by t h e Communist P a r t y ,
K o e s t l e r i s d r i v e n t o seek a new utopia.
B u t when he experiences
h i s "new" v i s i o n i n t h e Spanish death-cell,
he does n o t admit t o
t h e c o n t i n u i t y between h i s being d r i v e n i n t o t h e Communist P a r t y
and h i s "new" v i s i o n a s he l e a v e s Communism behind him.
t h a t we have seen t h a t t h e r e i s a c o n t i n u i t y ,
t h e Spanish d e a t h - c e l l
which,
i n turn,
So now
l e t us return t o
where K o e s t l e r has h i s "new" experiences
w i l l remind t h e r e a d e r o f h i s s i m i l a r y o u t h f u l
summertime experience.
K o e s t l e r has been s c r i b b l i n g t h e Euclidian formula which
p r o v e s t h a t t h e number o f primes i s i n f i n i t e .
And a s he
understands f o r t h e f i r s t time t h e r e a s o n f o r h i s long-time
enchantment w i t h t h e formula--that
t h e formula " r e p r e s e n t e d one
o f t h e r a r e cases where a meaningful and comprehensive statement
about t h e i n f i n i t e i s a r r i v e d a t by a p r e c i s e and f i n i t e
meansH--he i s able t o d e t e c t a "fragrance o f e t e r n i t y ,
o f t h e arrow i n t h e blue" ( T h e I n v ~ s z b l e W r i t i n g , 429).
a quiver
With
t h a t b r i e f d e t e c t i o n o f t h e arrow, he stood entranced f o r some
minutes, he says, with a wordless feeling o f " t h i s i s
perfect--this
i s p e r f e c t " u n t i l he became s l i g h t l y uncomfortable.
There was a " s l i g h t nagging discomfort" a t t h e back o f h i s
mind, K o e s t l e r goes on t o say, "some t r i v i a l circumstance t h a t
marred t h e p e r f e c t i o n o f t h e moment"
Then he remembered "the
n a t u r e o f t h a t i r r e l e v a n t annoyance":
I was, o f course, i n p r i s o n and might be shot.
But t h i s was
immediately answered by a f e e l i n g whose v e r b a l t r a n s l a t i o n
would be: 'So what? i s t h a t a l l ? have you got nothing more
s e r i o u s t o worry about?'--an answer so spontaneous, f r e s h
and amused as i f t h e i n t r u d i n g annoyance had been t h e l o s s
o f a collar-stud.
Then I was f l o a t i n g on my back i n a r i v e r
o f peace, under bridges o f silence.
It came from nowhere
The
and flowed nowhere.
Then t h e r e was no r i v e r and no I.
I had ceased t o exist.
( T h e I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 429)
But t h i s time, i n s t e a d o f l y i n g on h i s back on a h i l l i n Buda
contemplating t h e sky above him and t h e "paradox o f s p a t i a l
infinity",
K o e s t l e r i s now contemplating a "precise and f i n i t e
means" o f s t a t i n g t h e i n f i n i t e when he r e c a l l s t h a t he has a
s t r o n g reason t o be d i s s a t i s f i e d with t h e " r e l a t i v e world o f t h e
now and here".
So n o t being able t o l i v e i n t h e present moment, Koestler
wipes t h e moment o u t and finds himself " f l o a t i n g on h i s back" i n
a place where a l l time--past,
exist.
present, and future--has
ceased t o
As Communism l o s e s i t s promise o f s a l v a t i o n and i t s hold
on him, and as he faces t h e d i s t i n c t p o s s i b i l i t y o f death without
salvation,
o r end--no
K o e s t l e r c r e a t e s a place where t h e r e i s no beginning
time and no death.
K o e s t l e r has found a u t o p i a again,
107
as he did when he was a youth, and as he hoped t o do when he
joined t h e Communist Party.
Now K o e s t l e r p r o f e s s e s extreme embarrassment a t having j u s t
w r i t t e n "The I had ceased t o exist",
especially because, among
o t h e r things, he aims a t "verbal precision", and he does n o t l i k e
"nebulous gushing".
But such "mystical" experiences, he says,
a r e only devalued i f p u t i n t o words.
He must use words, however,
t o communicate what cannot be communicated.
So then he moves i n
a "vicious circle".
But i n s p i t e o f h i s p r o t e s t s of embarrassment and lack of
v e r b a l precision, when he generates h i s own words and t e x t ,
K o e s t l e r becomes t h e author and a u t h o r i t y who c r e a t e s t h e meaning
of l i f e .
He no longer needs t h e words and t e x t s o f others--of
Weizmann about Zionism, o r o f Marx, Lenin, and S t a l i n about
Communism--to
give meaning t o l i f e and t o promise a utopia.
has c r e a t e d h i s own meaning and h i s own utopia.
He
About t h i s "new"
experience, he goes on t o say:
When I say ' t h e I had ceased t o exist', I r e f e r t o a
concrete experience t h a t i s verbally as incommunicable as
t h e feeling aroused by a piano concerto, y e t j u s t as
real--only much more real.
I n f a c t , i t s primary mark i s t h e
sensation t h a t t h i s s t a t e i s more r e a l than any o t h e r one
has experienced b e f o r e - - t h a t f o r t h e f i r s t time t h e v e i l has
f a l l e n and one i s i n touch with ' r e a l r e a l i t y ' , t h e hidden
order o f things, t h e X-ray t e x t u r e o f t h e world, normally
obscured by l a y e r s o f irrelevancy.
(The I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g ,
429-430)
Even though what K o e s t l e r has experienced--this
realityH--cannot
anyway.
be explained verbally,
"real
he explains and defines,
Thus, he composes new meaning t o replace Communism,
which had given meaning t o h i s l i f e previously.
I n h i s definition,
he f i r s t says t h a t h i s experience o f "The
I had
ceased t o e x i s t " i s unlike o t h e r "emotional
entrancements", such as music, landscapes, o r love, i n t h a t i t
has d e f i n i t e i n t e l l e c t u a l , o r r a t h e r "noumenal" content.
That
i s , t h e experience has meaning i n i t s e l f , b u t n o t v e r b a l meaning.
Then K o e s t l e r compares h i s experience t o what it is like, and
ends up using psychoanalytic terms,
"catharsis",
such a s "oceanic feeling" and
r a t h e r than p o l i t i c a l o r r e l i g i o u s terms,
attempting
t o remove t h e experience from t h e realms o f f a n a t i c a l p o l i t i c s o r
religion.
irrational.
He does n o t want t h e experience t o be seen as
He says t h a t t h e "verbal t r a n s c r i p t i o n s t h a t come
n e a r e s t " t o h i s sensations are:
t h e u n i t y and i n t e r l o c k i n g o f everything t h a t exists, an
inter-dependence l i k e t h a t o f g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d s o r
communicating vessels.
The 'I'ceases t o e x i s t because it
has, by a kind o f mental osmosis, established communication
with, and been dissolved in, t h e u n i v e r s a l pool.
It i s t h i s
process o f d i s s o l u t i o n and l i m i t l e s s expansion which i s
sensed as t h e 'oceanic feeling', as t h e draining o f a l l
tension, t h e absolute c a t h a r s i s , t h e peace t h a t passeth a l l
understanding.
(The I n v i s i b l e w r i t i n g , )
A f t e r h i s d i s s o l u t i o n and expansion i n t o t h e "universal pool",
K o e s t l e r would f i n d himself r e t u r n i n g t o t h e "lower order o f
r e a l i t y " gradually, painlessly, and never knowing i f t h e
experience had l a s t e d f o r a minute o r an hour.
t h a t t h e a f t e r - e f f ect, which dispelled fear,
i n v i g o r a t i o n and s e r e n i t y ,
But he did know
and sustained
l a s t e d f o r "hours and days".
never v o l u n t a r i l y induce t h i s "new type" o f experience.
first,
He could
And,
at
he would have such experiences two o r t h r e e times a week,
he t e l l s us, then with l e s s frequency.
A f t e r K o e s t l e r was released from prison, t h e special
experiences occurred only once o r twice yearly.
"But", K o e s t l e r
says, "by t h a t time t h e groundwork f o r a change o f p e r s o n a l i t y
was completed" ( T h e I n v l s l b l e W r l t l n g , 4 3 0 ) .
Koestler i s t e l l i n g
us t h a t these new sensations have c r e a t e d n o t j u s t
mind but, r a t h e r , a new person.
a change o f
Then K o e s t l e r could say t h a t t h e
old person, who was a Communist, no longer exists; consequently,
t h e "new" K o e s t l e r cannot be held responsible f o r h i s actions on
behalf o f t h e Communist Party.
Nonetheless,
when K o e s t l e r describes h i s "new" (death-cell)
experience o f t h e "I"
ceasing t o e x i s t f o r him, he dare n o t admit
t h a t he knows t h a t one can have a similar experience through
dedication t o a t o t a l i t a r i a n regime, such as t h e Communist regime
o f which he was a member.
He has admitted t o t h e connection
between h i s e a r l i e r adolescent search f o r t h e "arrow", f o r t h e
i n f i n i t e , and h i s l a t e r joining o f t h e Communist Party.
But,
even though he uses some of t h e same words t o describe t h e t h r e e
experiences--his
adolescent search,
and h i s death-cell
sensations--he
h i s search through Communism,
does n o t openly admit t o a
similar c o n t i n u i t y between h i s search f o r t h e i n f i n i t e i n
Communism and h i s l a t e s t death-cell
K o e s t l e r c a l l s h i s death-cell
experiences o f t h e i n f i n i t e .
experiences o f t h e i n f i n i t e "new"
because, faced with t h e l o s s of an ideology, and faced with t h e
nothingness o f death, he has t o f i l l t h e void again--he
negate t h e negative--to
give h i s l i f e meaning.
has t o
He has t o see t h e
experience as new so t h a t he can c r e a t e a new person o u t o f t h e
experience, one who i s blameless, one t o whom t h e crimes/sins of
S t a l i n i s t Marxism w i l l n o t attach.
Others have also considered how t h e idea o f timelessness, o r
t h e i n f i n i t e , and t h e meaning o f l i f e and o f death, have been
found i n p o l i t i c a l i d e o l o g i e s - - p a r t i c u l a r 1 y t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m s l i k e
Nazism and Stalinism--which
became s u b s t i t u t e s f o r t r a d i t i o n a l
r e l i g i o u s ideas o f t h e i n f i n i t e and t h e meaning o f l i f e and
death. I n an essay "On The R e l a t i o n o f Time t o Death", t h e
philosopher Helmut Plessner considers how one might l o s e one's
s e l f t o a t o t a l i t a r i a n regime such a s N a t i o n a l Socialism o r t o
t h e "mythology o f t h e c l a s s struggle",
which b o t h p r o v i d e a
"common d i r e c t i v e f o r t h o u g h t and action",
m a t e r i a l salvation:
just
and which promise
a s K o e s t l e r gave himself up t o t h e
promises o f Communism, and used h i s a r t f o r t h e propaganda o f
mass c o n t r o l .
Plessner s a y s t h a t when people invoked " t h e d i s i n t e g r a t i o n
o f God-ordained
authority",
t h e i r i n v o c a t i o n brought about " t h e
continuous s e a r c h f o r new i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s and e r s a t z religions".
B u t even though,
"God-ordained
o r perhaps because, t h e r e was no longer a
authority",
t h e s e new i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s and i m i t a t i o n
r e l i g i o n s , according t o Plessner, could a l l e v i a t e t h e i n d i v i d u a l
f e a r o f d e a t h and t h e l o s s o f a god-head.
i d e o l o g i e s promise utopia--a
These p o l i t i c a l
timelessness--here
and now, a
promise which r e l i e v e s t h e f e a r o f t h e "meaninglessness of
empty f u t u r e " and, i n t u r n ,
t h e " f e a r o f death".
the
Such f e a r s a r e
f u r t h e r reduced when t h e n a t i o n o r t h e P a r t y i s placed ahead o f
t h e individual: t h e n t h e i n d i v i d u a l f i n d s meaning i n f u r t h e r i n g
t h e e x i s t e n c e and f u t u r e o f t h e n a t i o n o r t h e P a r t y .
Future
e x i s t e n c e f o r t h e individual, f i l l e d by t h e n a t i o n o r t h e P a r t y ,
i s no longer meaningless o r empty.
As Plessner says, t h e s e
imitation religions
s t r i v e t o e x t r a c t a promise o f s a l v a t i o n from t h e m a t e r i a l
o f experience, a promise t h a t may p r o v i d e a common d i r e c t i v e
f o r thought and action.
As we can see from Nietzche's
t h e o r y o f e t e r n a l r e t u r n , t h e r e i s something v i o l e n t about
these directives.
I n order t o exorcise t h e f a t a l
meaninglessness o f t h e empty f u t u r e , t h e y must i n h i b i t
c r i t i c i s m - - t h a t i s , s e t themselves up a s dogma.
The
ideology o f N a t i o n a l Socialism was a p r o d u c t o f such f e a r .
I t s r e g r e s s i v e mythology banished c o l l e c t i v e h i s t o r i c a l f e a r
and a l s o i n d i v i d u a l f e a r o f d e a t h a s l i f e grown meaningless.
I f t h e i n d i v i d u a l i s nothing and t h e n a t i o n i s e v e r y t h i n g
(though possessing v a l u e because o f i t s r a c i a l q u a l i t y ) , t h e
p r a c t i c a l s u r v i v a l o f t h e individual i n t h e nation
guarantees t h e f u l f i l l m e n t o f h i s e x i s t e n c e and p r e s c i b e s
h i s p o l i t i c a l line.
The same, w i t h a p p r o p r i a t e
t r a n s p o s i t i o n s , i s t r u e o f t h e mythology o f c l a s s s t r u g g l e .
(Man A n d Time, 244-245)
This i s n o t Plessner's c r i t i q u e o f Marxism--or
matter--but,
Fascism, f o r t h a t
r a t h e r , h i s explanation f o r t h e enthusiasm f o r
t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m i n t h e f i r s t t h i r d o f t h e Twentieth Century.
L i k e one o f many, K o e s t l e r had been a t t r a c t e d t o t h e t o t a l i t y o f
Communism.
B u t a s an i n s i d e r he would be deprived o f h i s
i l l u s i o n s about t h e Communist P a r t y : he knew, a s Plessner s t a t e s ,
t h a t t h e "I"
can disappear t h r o u g h t h e c o l l e c t i v e t h o u g h t and
a c t i o n r e q u i r e d b y h i s o l d ideology.
He even comes c l o s e t o
expressing some t h o u g h t s s i m i l a r t o Plessner's when he t a l k s
about h i s "obsessive" q u e s t f o r t h e I n f i n i t e d r i v i n g him f i r s t t o
t h e Promised Land and t h e n i n t o t h e Communist P a r t y a f t e r h i s
disillusionment w i t h Zionism.
And when he reminds u s t h a t h i s
s e a r c h f o r t h e I n f i n i t e i s l i k e t h e a s p i r a t i o n o f o t h e r ages,
a s p i r a t i o n s which found " t h e i r n a t u r a l f u l f i l l m e n t i n God",
r a t h e r t h a n i n Zionism o r Communism, K o e s t l e r ' s and Plessner's
t h o u g h t s r u n along p a r a l l e l lines.
Also,
l i k e Plessner, K o e s t l e r
s a y s t h a t " t h e place o f God has been vacant",
and t h e " v o i d has
made i t s e l f f e l t " .
But K o e s t l e r cannot know what he knows--he
cannot
acknowledge t h a t every time he i s faced with t h e meaninglessness
o f l i f e , he searches f o r meaning i n t h e same way, replacing,
he says, one u t o p i a f o r
t h e nineteenth-century
another.
as
F i r s t he believes t h e claims o f
s c i e n t i s t s when they demonstrate t h a t they
have solved t h e r i d d l e s o f t h e
universe.
Next he looks t o t h e
words o f Weizmann who promises u t o p i a i n Palestine; and, l a s t l y ,
he takes t h e canons o f Marx, Lenin, and S t a l i n t o h e a r t while he
heads f o r t h e "new Jerusalem" i n t h e Soviet Union.
I f he were t o admit t o t h e s i m i l a r i t i e s between h i s search
f o r u t o p i a i n Communism and h i s own c u r r e n t c r e a t i o n o f a utopia,
K o e s t l e r would then have t o see t h a t h i s "new" experience was n o t
so new.
And he would n o t be able so c l e a r l y t o disassociate
himself from t h e o l d ideology and what it r e q u i r e d o f him f o r i t s
d i r e c t i v e o f c o n t r o l l e d common thought and action.
Nor would he
so e a s i l y be able t o overcome h i s disillusionment w i t h t h e f a l s e
u t o p i a o f Communism.
When he does n o t admit t o s i m i l a r i t i e s
between h i s old experience o f u t o p i a through Communism and h i s
"new" death-cell
experience,
K o e s t l e r can now c r e a t e h i s own
t e x t s o r canons, t e x t s which describe a "new" utopia, and which
replace t h e t e x t s and canons o f Weizmann and Marx.
K o e s t l e r does want t o disassociate himself from t h e o l d
ideology o f Communism.
When he t e l l s u s t h a t h i s "new"
experiences i n t h e death-cell
had l a i d t h e groundwork f o r a
"change o f p e r s o n a l i t y M - - r a t h e r than j u s t a change o f mind--he
saying t h a t he i s a new person.
is
He wants u s t o believe, as much
he needs t o believe, t h a t t h i s new person sees t h e world i n a new
way, i n a way t h a t i s philosophical and s p i r i t u a l r a t h e r t h a n
religious or political.
He needs t o d i s a s s o c i a t e himself from
any kind o f f a n a t i c i s m - - r e l i g i o u s
or political--that
would l e a d
him t o search f o r t h e absolute, and t o end up a c t i n g i n an
unsavory manner, a s he seems t o t h i n k he d i d f o r t h e Communist
Party.
He explains t h a t h i s "new" experience i s n o t a r e l i g i o u s
conversion.
Rather, he d e f i n e s h i s experience i n philosophical
and s c i e n t i f i c t e r m s i n o r d e r t o seem l o g i c a l and r a t i o n a l .
He
does n o t want t o be seen a s a p e r s o n who has l o s t h i s senses.
i s making a l o g i c a l appeal,
as a careful,
He
and c o n s t r u c t i n g an image o f himself
even s c e p t i c a l thinker.
He knows t h a t h i s r e a d e r s
would n o t admire and perhaps even be s u s p i c i o u s o f another
" r e l i g i o u s " experience, given h i s p r e v i o u s searches f o r a u t o p i a
i n Zionism and Communism.
So, t h i s time, he needs t o be seen as
a person who i s i n c o n t r o l o f himself, r a t h e r t h a n a s a p e r s o n
who i s c o n t r o l l e d ,
a s he goes t h r o u g h h i s "new" experience
because he needs t h e s e s e n s a t i o n s t o be v a l i d i n o u r e y e s a s well
a s his.
He i s c o u n t e r i n g any p o s s i b l e c r i t i c i s m t h a t t h i s new
v i s i o n i s j u s t a mirage, j u s t another d i s t o r t e d v i s i o n o r
disillusionment.
Yet K o e s t l e r does admit t h a t " r e l i g i o u s conversion" on t h e
deathbed or, a s i n h i s case, t h e d e a t h - c e l l
i r r e s i s t i b l e temptation",
i s "an almost
a t e m p t a t i o n t h a t can p l a y on "crude
f e a r " and l e a d t o a l o s s o f t h e c r i t i c a l f a c u l t i e s .
O r the
t e m p t a t i o n t o r e l i g i o u s conversion can be more s u b t l e and open a
person t o a "mystic" experience.
K o e s t l e r s a y s t h a t when a
person has t o face nothingness, no-thing
(as he did), t h e person
may be open t o a "mystic" experience, r a t h e r than t o fear, which
may lead t o a genuine conversion.
And by t e l l i n g u s t h a t he did
have a "mystic" experience r a t h e r than t h e more comforting--and
less rational--"religious
conversion" through fear,
and by using
l i t e r a l r a t h e r than metaphorical terms t o systematize t h e
experience t o c r e a t e a timeless cosmology, K o e s t l e r appears t o
have remained i n c o n t r o l and kept h i s reasoning powers.
I n fact,
with h i s reasoning he has c r e a t e d something o u t o f nothing.
Deprived of h i s i l l u s i o n s , he has c r e a t e d a new vision.
f i l l e d t h e void w i t h h i s t e x t .
He has
He has become h i s own author and
a u t h o r i t y and now can give t o l i f e h i s own meaning, r a t h e r than
t h e meaning o f Weizmann o r Marx.
When he faced death and
meaninglessness, when he faced t h e void, he did n o t give i n t o
terror.
Now t h a t he has no e x t e r n a l c o n t r o l l e r , no o u t s i d e
a u t h o r i t y , K o e s t l e r needs t o convince himself, more than us, t h a t
he i s i n c o n t r o l o f himself.
His t e x t here i s r e f l e x i v e and
confessional r a t h e r than r h e t o r i c a l and p o l i t i c a l .
And t h e
confessional mode o f t h e t e x t makes K o e s t l e r h i s own reader--a
reader i n search o f redemption: we can assume t h i s from t h e
l a y e r s o f concession and defense he w r i t e s i n t o h i s t e x t .
t h i s writing, K o e s t l e r does n o t j u s t
himself.
With
c r e a t e a s t a t e o f mind f o r
He a l s o c r e a t e s a s t a t e o f being.
And so he needs t o
exercise c o n t r o l over h i s mind and h i s beinq i n t h e c r e a t i o n o f
his text--his
meaning--because
he does n o t want t o see himself as
some kind o f i r r a t i o n a l f a n a t i c who has c r e a t e d another u t o p i a
and more dogma t o j u s t i f y
it.
Thus, when he says t h a t h i s
experience was "mystical" r a t h e r t h a n r e l i g i o u s - - t o
r e a d e r ' s r e s p e c t and t o a l l a y any suspicions--he
t o himself as t o h i s reader.
gain h i s
appeals,
a s much
He explains:
Faced w i t h t h e Absolute, t h e u l t i m a t e nada, t h e mind may
become r e c e p t i v e t o m y s t i c experiences.
These one may
r e g a r d as ' r e a l ' i n t h e sense o f t h e s u b j e c t i v e p o i n t e r s t o
an o b j e c t i v e r e a l i t y i p s o f a c t o eluding comprehension.
But
because t h e experience i s i n a r t i c u l a t e , has no s e n s o r y
shape, c o l o u r o r words, it lends i t s e l f t o t r a n s c r i p t i o n i n
many forms, including v i s i o n s o f t h e C r o s s o r o f t h e goddess
Kali; t h e y a r e l i k e t h e dreams o f a p e r s o n b o r n blind, and
may assume t h e i n t e n s i t y o f a r e v e l a t i o n .
Thus, a genuine
mystic experience may mediate a bona f i d a c o n v e r s i o n t o
p r a c t i c a l l y any creed, C h r i s t i a n i t y , Buddhism, o r
Fire-Worship.
(The I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g 431)
And when K o e s t l e r t e l l s u s t h a t because h i s s e n s a t i o n s c u t a c r o s s
a l l r e l i g i o n s and could be applied t o any c r e e d r a t h e r t h a n t o a
p a r t i c u l a r r e l i g i o n , he wants u s t o see t h a t he was l e d t o
t r a n s f o r m a t i o n r a t h e r t h a n back t o doctrine.
He wants u s t o
b e l i e v e t h a t h i s experience was a s p i r i t u a l r e v e l a t i o n - - u n i q u e
and u n i v e r s a l - - r a t h e r
t h a n a c o n v e r s i o n t o u n o r i g i n a l and
s i n g u l a r r e l i g i o u s dogma.
He wants t o b e l i e v e t h a t he i s now t h e
c r e a t o r i n c o n t r o l and no longer t h e c o n t r o l l e d follower.
Now armed w i t h h i s new experience o f " r e a l r e a l i t y " , he
f o u g h t t h e comfort he might f i n d i n a r e l i g i o n , tempting as t h e
c o m f o r t might be.
And n o t only would h i s new m y s t i c a l
experiences p r e p a r e him t o f i g h t a c o n v e r s i o n t o a p a r t i c u l a r
r e l i g i o n , b u t now he was a l s o armed a g a i n s t h i s e a r l y r a t i o n a l
and m a t e r i a l i s t i c t r a i n i n g - - a
t r a i n i n g which had a t t r a c t e d him t o
t h e ideology o f Communism i n t h e f i r s t place--and
now he a l s o
could f a c e h i s disillusionment w i t h and r i d himself o f t h e
d o c t r i n e o f Communism.
He says:
I was t h u s waging a t w o - f r o n t
war a g a i n s t t h e concise,
r a t i o n a l , m a t e r i a l i s t i c way o f thinking which, i n t h i r t y - t w o
y e a r s o f t r a i n i n g i n mental cleanliness, had become a h a b i t
and a n e c e s s i t y l i k e b o d i l y hygiene--and a g a i n s t t h e
t e m p t a t i o n t o s u r r e n d e r and creep back i n t o t h e p r o t e c t i v e
womb o f f a i t h .
With t h o s e n i g h t l y m u f f l e d ' m a d r e s ' and
' s o c o r r o s ' i n one's ear, t h e l a t t e r s o l u t i o n appeared a s
a t t r a c t i v e and n a t u r a l as t a k i n g cover from a p o i n t e d gun.
( T h e Invisible H r i t i n g , 431)
K o e s t l e r won h i s " t w o - f r o n t "
" p r o t e c t i v e womb o f f a i t h " ,
war: he n e i t h e r c r e p t i n t o t h e
a t t r a c t i v e a s t h a t might have been i n
t h e f a c e o f death, n o r d i d he succumb t o h i s former way o f
m a t e r i a l i s t i c thinking.
Instead, he would have u s b e l i e v e t h a t
t h r o u g h h i s new experiences he a r r i v e d a t a new way o f seeing t h e
world t h a t was more s p i r i t u a l and philosophical t h a n r e l i g i o u s o r
political.
A s h i s own a u t h o r i t y , he was able t o c r e a t e a new system, a
new world-order
f o r himself.
He replaced t h e o l d m a t e r i a l ,
r a t i o n a l system o f Communism w i t h a new system t h a t ,
at its
h i g h e s t l e v e l , i s s p i r i t u a l r a t h e r t h a n m a t e r i a l o r r a t i o n a l , he
says.
And t h i s system,
a s he describes it, reminds one o f t h e
cosmology o f Ptolemy w i t h i t s o r d e r o f spheres.
much o l d e r t h a n Marxist-Leninismy:
This i s a system
t h i s system harks back t o t h e
e t e r n a l r e t u r n o f c y c l i c a l time, where time,
i n a sense,
is
timeless.
K o e s t l e r needed t o s t o p time.
He was uncomfortable w i t h t h e
p a s t because he was g i v i n g up p a s t meaning--past
ideology.
And
he could n o t l i v e e a s i l y i n t h e p r e s e n t because he was expecting
h i s execution.
Nor could he look f o r w a r d t o t h e f u t u r e because
he thought death waited t h e r e ,
t h a t he had no f u t u r e .
K o e s t l e r c r e a t e d a cosmology where,
So
a t t h e highest l e v e l o f
r e a l i t y , t h e r e was no time.
nature, t h i s world-view
But, i n s p i t e o f i t s s p i r i t u a l
i s n o t r e l i g i o u s because i t i s more a
cosmology than a theology,
and i t contains no doctrine.
view, moreover, demands n e i t h e r adherents--it
proselytize--nor
This
does n o t
a moral imperative.
K o e s t l e r c r e a t e d a world consisting o f t h r e e o r d e r s o f
r e a l i t y , with each order over-lapping
t h e others.
When he t a l k s
about t h e f i r s t two orders, which a r e perceptual and conceptual,
K o e s t l e r tends t o speak l i t e r a l l y .
order--the
highest order--which
metaphorically.
doctrinal.
When he describes t h e t h i r d
i s spiritual,
he speaks
Yet even when Koestler i s l i t e r a l , he i s n o t
And when he i s metaphorical, he i s n o t religious.
He describes t h e f i r s t order as t h e "narrow world o f sensory
perception".
And t h e "perceptual world",
K o e s t l e r says, "was
enveloped by a conceptual world which contained phenomena n o t
d i r e c t l y perceivable,
fields,
such as g r a v i t a t i o n , electromagnetic
and curved spaceu--here
he speaks l i t e r a l l y .
The second
order o f r e a l i t y f i l l e d i n t h e gaps and gave meaning t o t h e
absurd patchiness o f t h e sensory world" ( T H e lnvlslble Writlng,
431).
The highest order--"the
t h i r d order o f realityu--was
r e a l i t y he had experienced i n h i s death-cell
the
a f t e r he had f i r s t
r e f l e c t e d t h a t f i n i t e statements about t h e i n f i n i t e were
possible; and, f o r Koestler, t h e highest order "alone i n v e s t e d
existence with meaning."
The t h i r d order o f r e a l i t y , K o e s t l e r goes on t o say,
"enveloped,
order.
interpenetrated,
The t h i r d ,
and gave meaning t o t h e second"
and t h e highest, order o f r e a l i t y contained
118
"occult phenomena" which could n o t be understood o r explained on
t h e f i r s t and second levels, on t h e l e v e l o f t h e senses o r on t h e
conceptual level.
And y e t , K o e s t l e r says, t h e t h i r d l e v e l
occasionally invades t h e sensory and t h e conceptual l e v e l " ike
s p i r i t u a l meteors piercing t h e p r i m i t i v e ' s vaulted sky."
But
i n s t e a d o f continuing i n a metaphorical vein, he goes on t o speak
o f t h e second and t h i r d o r d e r s o f r e a l i t y i n l i t e r a l r a t h e r than
metaphorical terms,
except when he t a l k s about t h e t h i r d order's
"ultimate r e a l i t y " as "a t e x t w r i t t e n i n i n v i s i b l e ink".
This
i n v i s i b l e t e x t i s a metaphor, a f i g u r a t i v e r a t h e r than a l i t e r a l
expression.
K o e s t l e r says:
J u s t as t h e conceptual order showed up t h e i l l u s i o n s and
d i s t o r t i o n s o f t h e senses, so t h e ' t h i r d order' disclosed
t h a t time, space and causality, t h a t t h e i s o l a t i o n ,
separateness and spatio-temporal l i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e s e l f
were merely o p t i c a l i l l u s i o n s on t h e next higher l e v e l
J u s t as one could n o t f e e l t h e p u l l o f a magnet with one's
skin, so one could n o t hope t o grasp i n cognate terms t h e
nature of ultimate r e a l i t y .
It was a t e x t w r i t t e n i n
i n v i s i b l e ink; and though one could n o t r e a d it, t h e
knowledge t h a t i t e x i s t e d was s u f f i c i e n t t o a l t e r t h e
t e x t u r e o f one's existence, and make one's a c t i o n s conform
t o the text.
(The I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 4 3 2 )
...
So--facing
death and t h e absence o f God--from
has c r e a t e d a new r e a l i t y ,
t h i s void,
Koestler
a new meaning, a new t e x t f o r himself.
Dctavio Paz, Mexican poet, e s s a y i s t , and social philosopher,
has looked a t how o t h e r modern w r i t e r s ( f o r example, t h e French
S u r r e a l i s t s ) used t h e absence o f God t o r e b e l against t r a d i t i o n a l
l i t e r a r y forms with t h e i r n a r r a t i v e logic and r e f e r e n t i a l
language.
Paz demonstrates how these w r i t e r s r e j e c t orthodox
C h r i s t i a n cosmogony where one monolithic authority--one
prevails.
book--
K o e s t l e r t o o had r e j e c t e d t h e prevalence o f a
monolithic r e l i g i o u s a u t h o r i t y and one t e x t .
But, l i k e so many
o t h e r modern w r i t e r s on t h e L e f t , he d i d embrace,
e r s a t z r e l i g i o n and a u t h o r i t y o f Communism.
f o r a time,
the
Now, i n s t e a d o f
Communist d o c t r i n e , t h e s e w r i t e r s made analogy t h e c e n t e r o f
their texts,
as does K o e s t l e r o f h i s t e x t .
Paz says t h a t " a t t h e h e a r t o f analogy l i e s emptiness: t h e
m u l t i p l i c i t y o f t e x t s implies t h e r e i s no o r i g i n a l t e x t .
Into
t h i s v o i d t h e r e a l i t y o f t h e world and meaning o f language
t o g e t h e r r u s h headlong and disappear" (Children o f t h e Hlre,
The "emptiness",
t h e "void" t h a t Paz t a l k s about i s t h e
absorption of t h e w r i t e r
texts".
71).
and t h e r e a d e r i n t o t h e " m u l t i p l i c i t y o f
The v o i d i s t h e absence o f an o r i g i n a l c r e a t o r (God) and
o f a single r e a l i t y o r text.
The absence assumes many c r e a t o r s
each r e s p o n s i b l e f o r h i s o r her own r e a l i t y o r t e x t .
And i f each
i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e c r e a t i o n s o f h i s o r h e r own r e a l i t y ( t e x t )
t h e n only he o r she can know i t s meaning, t h u s becoming t h e
"decipherer" o r " t r a n s l a t o r " o f t h e meaning o f i n d i v i d u a l
reality.
creator,
So, faced w i t h t h e void,
K o e s t l e r t o o became h i s own
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r h i s own t e x t , h i s own r e a l i t y .
But a t centre o f h i s text--his
meaning--lies
f o r K o e s t l e r t h e analogue i s t h e metaphor.
t h e h e a r t o f analogy l i e s emptiness",
analogy.
And
I f , as Paz says, " a t
then ironically Koestler's
metaphors are, a s Paz would a l s o say, " t h e mask o f nothingness".
And Paz goes on:
The u n i v e r s e r e s o l v e s i t s e l f i n a book: an impersonal C t e x t l
n o r o f anyone
which i s n o t t h e work o f t h e C w r i t e r l
else.
It i s language which speaks t h r o u g h t h e [ w r i t e r ] , who
i s now only a transparency.
C r y s t a l l i z a t i o n o f language i n
an impersonal work i s n o t only t h e double o f t h e u n i v e r s e
b u t also i t s abolition.
The nothinqness which i s t h e
world t u r n s i t s e l f i n t o a book: the book.
CBlut t h e
book does n o t e x i s t ; i t was never w r i t t e n .
Analogy ends i n
...
...
...
silence.
(Children
o f t h e M l r e , 76-77)
The e a r l y t w e n t i e t h - c e n t u r y
w r i t e r knew t h a t t h e book i s
illegible--there
B u t even though K o e s t l e r would
i s no book.
agree t h a t t h e book cannot be read, he would n o t agree t o t h e r e
being no book.
Where Paz t a l k s about t h e "impersonal" t e x t which
speaks t h r o u g h t h e w r i t e r who i s now only a "transparency",
K o e s t l e r u s e s t h e metaphor o f "a t e x t w r i t t e n i n i n v i s i b l e
ink"-- t h e i n v i s i b l e w r i t i n g - - t h a t
one cannot read.
And where Paz
t a l k s about "an impersonal t e x t " which i s n o t t h e work o f one
author(ity)--because
when we each become o u r own a u t h o r ( i t y ) , t h e
r e s u l t can only be t h e " c r y s t a l l i z a t i o n o f language" which i s
" n o t only t h e double o f t h e u n i v e r s e
abolitionu--Koestler
. . . but
also i t s
u s e s t h e metaphor o f t h e c a p t a i n o f a ship
s e t t i n g o u t t o sea w i t h a "sealed order",
t o be opened only a t
sea.
And K o e s t l e r c o n t i n u e s w i t h t h e metaphor: t h e c a p t a i n looks
f o r w a r d t o ending " a l l u n c e r t a i n t y " by opening h i s orders.
he does open t h e order,
When
however, he f i n d s t h a t t h e t e x t i s
i n v i s i b l e and t h a t no chemical t r e a t m e n t w i l l make t h e t e x t
visible.
B u t sometimes "a word", o r "a f i g u r e denoting a
meridian",
becomes v i s i b l e ,
only t o fade again.
The c a p t a i n of
t h e ship can never know t h e exact wording o f t h e order,
whether o r n o t he has complied w i t h t h e order.
says,
"But",
nor
Koestler
t h e c a p t a i n ' s "awareness o f t h e o r d e r i n h i s pocket, even
though i t cannot be deciphered, makes him think and a c t
d i f f e r e n t l y from t h e c a p t a i n o f a p l e a s u r e - c r u i s e r
or of a pirate
ship" ( T h e I n v l s r b l e W r l t l n g , 4 3 2 ) .
Thus,
we can see t h a t K o e s t l e r might agree w i t h Paz about
the crystalline nature of the text.
u n l i k e Paz and t h e S u r r e a l i s t s ,
invisible, t h e r e i s a text.
B u t we can a l s o see t h a t
Koestler believes that,
although
And even though K o e s t l e r would agree
t o t h e c r y s t a l l i n e t e x t a s t h e "double o f t h e universe", he would
n o t agree t h a t t h e " c r y s t a l l i z a t i o n o f language" i s a l s o " t h e
a b o l i t i o n o f t h e universe".
F o r K o e s t l e r needs t h e t e x t ,
needs a higher meaning, an u l t i m a t e r e a l i t y .
twentieth-century
writers,
he
Unlike o t h e r e a r l y
K o e s t l e r cannot l i v e i n t h e void;
cannot l i v e i n a world w i t h o u t meaning.
he
B u t K o e s t l e r does n o t
propose t h a t he and h i s t e x t a r e replacements f o r a t r a d i t i o n a l
monolithic r e l i g i o u s a u t h o r i t y and a single t e x t .
On t h e
c o n t r a r y , whether o r n o t K o e s t l e r speaks metaphorically o r
l i t e r a l l y , he i s c a r e f u l t o remove himself and h i s t e x t from any
p o s s i b l e r e l i g i o u s dogma o r doctrine.
K o e s t l e r l i k e s t o s p i n o u t t h e metaphor o f t h e i n v i s i b l e
w r i t i n g changing t h e c o u r s e o f one's existence,
a c t i o n s conform t o t h e text".
and making "one's
He a l s o l i k e s t o believe, he says,
t h a t v a r i o u s r e l i g i o u s founders had been able,
f o r a moment, t o
r e a d small p a r t s o f t h e i n v i s i b l e t e x t , b u t had r e v i s e d t h o s e
p a r t s s o much t h a t t h e y can no longer say what i s genuine.
K o e s t l e r implies t h a t b e f o r e t h e y became s t a t i c ,
organized,
and
i n a u t h e n t i c , t h e o r i g i n s o f t h e t r a d i t i o n a l r e l i g i o n s were
probably much l i k e h i s genuine,
spontaneous and i n d i v i d u a l
s p i r i t u a l revelations.
I a l s o l i k e d t o think t h a t t h e founders o f r e l i g i o n s ,
prophets, s a i n t s and s e e r s had a t moments been able t o r e a d
a fragment o f t h e i n v i s i b l e t e x t ; a f t e r which t h e y had s o
much padded, dramatised and ornamented it, t h a t t h e y
themselves could no longer t e l l what p a r t s o f i t were
authentic.
( T h e Invisible W r i t i n g , 432)
122
K o e s t l e r i s saying t h a t t h e kind of s p i r i t u a l r e a l i t y t h a t he has
been t a l k i n g about, t h a t he has experienced, could be considered
r e l i g i o u s too.
But t h e more t r a d i t i o n a l s p i r i t u a l
revelations--and
Communists--were
t h e newer r e v o l u t i o n a r y p o l i t i c s o f t h e
spoiled by those who made a creed o u t o f t h e
experience and c u l t i v a t e d a following.
A f t e r having been
a t t r a c t e d t o t h e d o c t r i n e s o f Zionism and Communism, K o e s t l e r now
needs t o been seen as a person who can no longer become t h e
follower o r t h e c r e a t o r o f a t e x t t h a t i s dogma.
Clearly K o e s t l e r repudiates any r e l i g i o u s connection t h a t
might be made with h i s newly-created cosmology.
He t r i e s t o
remove h i s s p i r i t u a l sensations from dogmatism o f any kind,
p o l i t i c a l o r religious.
He wants t o remove h i s new world-view
from t h e kind o f dogmatism t h a t t u r n e d t h e Communist P a r t y i n t o a
f a i t h f o r him and many o t h e r s l i k e him, a f a i t h he now r e j e c t s .
He does n o t want h i s death-cell
experience t o be i n v a l i d a t e d by
association with any kind o f organized, c o l l e c t i v e r e l i g i o u s o r
p o l i t i c a l experience,
o r with any kind o f i l l o g i c a l r e l i g i o u s
mysticism, o r with any kind o f i n t o l e r a n t r e l i g i o u s o r p o l i t i c a l
fanaticism.
To v a l i d a t e himself and h i s experience he needs t o
be seen as a l o g i c a l and t o l e r a n t person--as
o f h i s own faculties--who
a person i n c o n t r o l
has experienced a special kind o f
s p i r i t u a l r e a l i t y , r a t h e r than as an unreasonable and i n t o l e r a n t
r a v i n g f a n a t i c who has experienced an incomprehensible r e l i g i o u s
o r p o l i t i c a l fantasy.
J u s t as Orwell b e n e f i t s from h i s readers'
v i s i o n o f him as non-partisan,
so t o o K o e s t l e r wards o f f t h e
possible accusation t h a t what l e d from h i s disillusionment--his
new non-dogmatic
cosmology--is
just
another illusion.
Nonetheless, K o e s t l e r ' s appeal i s a f a l s e move,
rhetorically.
His appeal t o logic does n o t completely work f o r a
l a t e twentieth-century
reader, one who i s used t o l i v i n g i n t h e
void without any one t e x t o r canon t o give l i f e meaning.
And
even though he has used t h e metaphors connected with water and
t h e metaphor of " t h e i n v i s i b l e writing" t o stand i n f o r h i s
i n e f f a b l e experience, when he systematizes h i s sensations, h i s
r h e t o r i c a l s t r a t e g y does n o t work f o r him.
feelings i n t o a system,
world-order,
When he organizes h i s
and when he t u r n s t h e system i n t o a new
a new cosmology, one cannot help b u t wonder i f he
has n o t j u s t replaced t h e more p o l i t i c a l and dogmatic world-order
o f Communism with h i s own a p o l i t i c a l , non-dogmatic,
metaphysical system.
more
B u t dogmatic o r not, h i s c r e a t i o n o f a
"new" cosmology s t i l l s i g n i f i e s t h a t he needs t o f i l l t h e void
l e f t by t h e absence o f a higher a u t h o r i t y - - h e
i n a world without meaning--or,
s t i l l cannot l i v e
without a c e r t a i n t y p e o f meaning
and, especially, i t s practice.
Disillusioned with t h e ideology, K o e s t l e r can no longer look
f o r meaning i n Communism.
He i s no longer s a t i s f i e d with t h e
higher a u t h o r i t y and t e x t Communism o f f e r s .
faced with death, with t h e u l t i m a t e nada--the
Then when he i s
u l t i m a t e void--he
i s f o r c e d once again t o search f o r and f i n d "the arrow i n t h e
blue" which n o t only provides a "new" meaning f o r h i s l i f e , b u t
also allows him t o systematize t h e meaning.
c r e a t o r o f h i s own world,
own meaning.
He has become t h e
t h e author o f h i s own t e x t , and o f h i s
Consequently, even though t h e system might be
124
"new",
h i s need t o c r e a t e meaning i s t h e same need t h a t drove him
f i r s t t o Zionism and then t o t h e Communist Party.
In other
words, when K o e s t l e r t a l k s about why he joined t h e Commmunist
P a r t y and about why he l e f t it--why
he was disillusioned--he
maintains t h e same s a t o f assumptions, images, and p r o p o s i t i o n s
f o r b o t h occasions.
t h e world-view
So i t i s n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t when he leaves
o f Communism behind him he needs t o replace t h a t
system with one o f h i s own, j u s t
as he replaced Zionism with
Communism when he became disillusioned with t h e former.
Still,
even though h i s need might be t h e same, t h e new v i s i o n i s n o t t h e
same as t h e old, as K o e s t l e r so painstakingly pointed out.
Perhaps K o e s t l e r ' s new world-view
i s a progessive one, f o r him,
because with h i s c r e a t i o n o f i t he i s no longer censoring
himself.
Like Koestler, and t h e w r i t e r s Paz t a l k s about, Orwell i s a
twentieth-century
writer.
But unlike Koestler--and
s o many o t h e r
i n t e l l e c t u a l s on t h e L e f t who became Communists between t h e two
World Wars t o combat t h e r i s e o f Fascism and t h e decaying
i n s t i t u t i o n s and t r a d i t i o n s i n religion, government, and
art--0rwell
institution.
attached himself t o no one p a r t i c u l a r ideology o r
Unlike K o e s t l e r who searched f o r t h e Absolute i n
Zionism and i n Communism, and then i n h i s own system, Orwell was
an agnostic and humanist.
experience,
explanation.
For Orwell meaning came through
n o t through some higher power o r comprehensive
But Orwell was s t i l l informing himself p o l i t i c a l l y
when he joined t h e Spanish C i v i l War, unlike K o e s t l e r who had
been a knowledgeable and confirmed ideologue f o r
a t least four
y e a r s p r e v i o u s t o t h e War.
The war would be a f o r m a t i v e
experience f o r Orwell i n a way t h a t i t was n o t f o r K o e s t l e r .
fact,
f o r K o e s t l e r t h e war was a s h a t t e r i n g experience.
unlike Orwell, K o e s t l e r , an i n s i d e r - - a
factions--knew
In
And
member o f one o f t h e
a l l t o o well about t h e f a c t i o n a l i s m on t h e L e f t ;
he knew t h e r e was no " u n i t e d f r o n t " .
K o e s t l e r knew t h a t t h e
s o c i a l redemption o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l was i r r e l e v a n t t o t h e cold,
a l o o f purposes o f s y s t e m a t i c Stalinism.
Unlike K o e s t l e r , Orwell
had t o go t o Spain t o see t h e war w i t h i n t h e war,
t o realize the
d e v a s t a t i o n o f t h e i n t e r n e c i n e warf a r e o f t h e L e f t - w i n g
on any u n i t e d f r o n t a g a i n s t Franco.
factions
The f a c t i o n a l bickering and
t h e r e s u l t i n g l i e s gave Orwell an i d e o l o g i c a l purpose he had n o t
had b e f o r e t h e war,
from him.
and drained K o e s t l e r ' s i d e o l o g i c a l purpose
But, a t t h e same time, Orwell found o u t t h a t he could
never g i v e himself o v e r t o any one doctrine.
He had t o be able
t o w r i t e f r e e l y about l y i n g and t r u t h - t e l l i n g .
He no longer had
t o go down and o u t t o p r o v i d e t h e m a t e r i a l necessary f o r h i s
writing:
t h e war p r o v i d e d Orwell w i t h enough o f t h e kinds o f
experiences he had t o p r e v i o u s l y seek o u t t o p r o v i d e f o r h i s
texts.
So disillusionment
d i r e c t i v e experience;
f o r Orwell was a c o n s t r u c t i v e ,
a
f o r K o e s t l e r , i t was a d e s t r u c t i v e ,
d i s o r i e n t i n g experience.
As Orwell's biographer Bernard Crick says,
"from 1937
onwards", Orwell "knew where he stood" and "what he was capable
o f doing".
The war had provided Orwell w i t h h i s g r e a t e s t
meaning; i t had g i v e n him a sense o f purpose he had n o t
previously felt.
F o r K o e s t l e r , t h e war had d e s t r o y e d any meaning
he had hoped t o f i n d i n t h e ideology o f Communism.
With t h a t
meaning destroyed, K o e s t l e r t h e n had t o c o n f r o n t t h e yawning
void, o r ,
a s he says, " t h e u l t i m a t e n a d a " .
Then, while t h e
persona o f George Orwell was being formed by t h e war,
was having t o re-form,
and metaphorically,
Koestler
psychologically, i d e o l o g i c a l l y , l i t e r a l l y ,
o r s o he t e l l s us.
We saw how K o e s t l e r ' s c a p t u r e and imprisonment i n a Spanish
death-cell
a f f e c t e d him, how t h e s e e v e n t s allowed him t o c r e a t e
new meaning f o r himself i n t h e f a c e o f h i s disillusionment w i t h
Communism, and i n t h e f a c e o f death.
Now we w i l l consider what
K o e s t l e r has t o say about h i s disillusionment,
beginning o f T h e I n v i s l b l e U r i t i n g .
f i r s t a t the
Then we w i l l t u r n back t o
t h e end o f h i s book t o r e v i e w t h e p r o c e s s o f h i s disillusionment:
we w i l l see t h a t K o e s t l e r t o o k a long time--almost
years--to
l e t go o f h i s ideology,
alone when he f i n a l l y d i d l e t go.
seven
and t h a t he would f e e l t e r r i b l y
Yet, he would a l s o begin t o
f e e l t h a t he was no longer w r i t i n g t o s e r v e t h e Cause b u t t h a t he
was w r i t i n g f o r himself and perhaps f o r t h e sake o f A r t .
O u t of
h i s disillusionment, K o e s t l e r no longer f e l t t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r
self-censorship,
world-view,
and s o he was able t o c r e a t e n o t j u s t a new
b u t a l s o new t e x t s t h a t were a r t l s t i c r a t h e r t h a n
propagandistic.
When,
a t t h e s t a r t o f The I n v i s l b l e
W r i t l n g , Koestler
p r e s e n t s h i s assumptions and images about j o i n i n g and l e a v i n g t h e
Communist P a r t y , he q u o t e s Picasso--"I
goes t o a s p r i n g o f f r e s h water".
went t o Communism a s one
Then he begins h i s d i s c u s s i o n
about j o i n i n g and l e a v i n g t h e P a r t y w i t h t h e same words.
At
f i r s t K o e s t l e r u s e s remarkable images connected w i t h water--both
life-giving
and life-destroying--when
he discusses ideology
gained and l o s t ; n e x t he u s e s images o f an open t e x t and v i s i b l e
ink t o connect t o t h e e a r l i e r p o l i t i c a l and dogmatic ideology o f
h i s youth.
And f i n a l l y he connects h i s image o f t h e i n v i s i b l e
w r i t i n g t o h i s c u r r e n t open-ended
and non-dogmatic
faith.
I went t o Communism a s one goes t o a s p r i n g o f f r e s h water,
and I l e f t Communism a s one clambers o u t o f a poisoned r i v e r
s t r e w n w i t h t h e wreckage o f flooded c i t i e s and t h e corpses
o f t h e drowned.
This, i n sum, i s my s t o r y from 1931 t o
1938, from my t w e n t y - s i x t h t o my t h i r t y - t h i r d year.
The
r e e d s t o which I clung and which saved me from being
swallowed up were t h e o u t g r o w t h o f a new f a i t h CCommunisml,
r o o t e d i n mud, s l i p p e r y , e l u s i v e , y e t tenacious.
The
q u a l i t y o f t h a t f a i t h I cannot d e f i n e beyond saying t h a t i n
my y o u t h I regarded t h e u n i v e r s e as an open book, p r i n t e d i n
t h e language o f p h y s i c a l equations and s o c i a l determinants,
whereas now i t appears t o me a s a t e x t w r i t t e n i n i n v i s i b l e
ink, o f which, i n o u r r a r e moments o f grace, we a r e able t o
decipher a small fragment.
This volume, then, i s t h e
account o f a j o u r n e y from specious c l a r i t y t o obscure
groping. ( T h e I n v i s i b l e w r i t i n g , 19)
When K o e s t l e r s a y s t h a t he f e l t t h a t Communism--the
t h e t w e n t i e t h century--"saved
new f a i t h f o r
him from being swallowed up", i t i s
i m p o r t a n t t o r e c a l l t h e c o n t e x t f o r t h e s e words.
K o e s t l e r was a
p o l i t i c a l l i b e r a l and a n o n - p r a c t i s i n g Jew who was l i v i n g i n
B e r l i n i n 1931--the
same time and place t h a t H i t l e r and t h e Nazi
P a r t y r a p i d l y ascended t o power.
People l i k e K o e s t l e r ' s
employers, who were b o t h L i b e r a l s and Jews, b e t r a y e d t h e i r
L i b e r a l and Jewish p r i n c i p l e s , n o t only by f i r i n g t h e i r Jewish o r
Communist employees, l i k e K o e s t l e r who was both, b u t a l s o by
becoming Nazis themselves.
The German S o c i a l i s t s , moreover, were
competing w i t h t h e Communists f o r power i n s t e a d o f j o i n i n g them
t o f i g h t t h e Nazis.
Given t h e s e p o l i t i c a l circumstances,
it i s
no wonder t h a t K o e s t l e r f e l t t h e Communist P a r t y t o be a
128
life-saving
i f n o t a l i f e - g i v i n g force, and t h a t he had no choice
b u t t o become a Communist.
But when he v i s i t e d t h e Soviet Union i n 1932 and saw t h e
a u t h o r i t a r i a n n a t u r e o f t h e P a r t y i n a c t i o n against non-Russian
peoples, and when he saw " e a r l y " show t r i a l s , he began t o have
s e r i o u s doubts about Communism, t h i s "new f a i t h " which was
" r o o t e d i n mud", and was "slippery, elusive, y e t tenacious".
But, i n s p i t e o f h i s e a r l y doubts, K o e s t l e r clung t o h i s f a i t h
f o r seven years,
even a f t e r h i s disquieting v i s i t t o t h e Soviet
Union.
When K o e s t l e r joined t h e P a r t y , he was s t i l l under t h e
influence o f t h e s c i e n t i f i c materialism and s o c i a l determinism
t h a t was p a r t o f h i s education.
He found a p o l i t i c a l c o u n t e r p a r t
t o t h a t materialism and determinism i n Communism.
But t h e
important point i s t h a t as p a r t o f h i s disillusionment,
he would
come t o recognize, as we s h a l l soon see, t h a t under t h e p o l i t i c a l
system o f Communism t h e individual meant nothing, t h e P a r t y
everything, and t h a t t h e End j u s t i f i e d t h e Means.
I f one l i f e or
thousands o f l i v e s were needed f o r t h e g r e a t e r good o f t h e P a r t y ,
then so be it.
K o e s t l e r would come t o f i n d t h e lack o f r e s p e c t
f o r individual l i f e and freedom t o be intolerable.
I n t h e end he
would find, i n f a c t , t h a t Communism was l i t e r a l l y l i f e - d e s t r o y ing; hence h i s images o f t h e "poisoned r i v e r " and o f t h e "flooded
c i t i e s " strewn w i t h "the corpses of t h e drowned".
important, however,
devalued life--and
What i s more
i s t h a t with h i s r e a l i z a t i o n of h o w t h e P a r t y
with h i s facing death through t h e executions
o f o t h e r s and t h e expectation o f h i s own execution--he
also came
t o r e a l i z e j u s t how p r e c i o u s i s an i n d i v i d u a l l i f e .
Also w i t h
t h i s r e a l i z a t i o n came a sense o f e t h i c s .
After his sixty-four
days o f s o l i t a r y confinement was
discontinued s o t h a t he could e x e r c i s e i n t h e c o u r t - y a r d
outside
h i s c e l l w i t h t h r e e o t h e r p r i s o n e r s , K o e s t l e r began t o consider
t h e v a l u e o f a s i n g l e human l i f e .
Soon he r e a l i z e d j u s t how much
t h e Communist P a r t y discounted a single human l i f e .
He t e l l s u s
t h a t when he went o u t t o e x e r c i s e t h e second day, one o f t h e
o t h e r t h r e e he had met t h e f i r s t day, a young Andalusian peasant,
a former Anarchist militiaman, was n o t i n t h e c o u r t - y a r d .
had been s h o t during t h e night,"
K o e s t l e r says;
"He
and from t h e n on
K o e s t l e r " l i v e d i n c o n s t a n t f e a r " t h a t t h e o t h e r two "would have
a l s o vanished" ( T h e I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 433).
...
As
t h e hour o f e x e r c i s e drew n e a r e r , I would become
more and more anxious and worried.
CI3n a completely
i r r a t i o n a l manner, I f e l t convinced t h a t t h e i r f a t e p a r t l y
depended on me, and t h a t my willingness f o r s a c r i f i c e could
somehow p r o t e c t them
( T h e I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 433).
...
K o e s t e r t h e n began t o "probe" i n t o himself " t o d i s c o v e r t h e exact
amount o f s a c r i f i c e " he was w i l l i n g t o make; and such probing l e d
K o e s t l e r t o some "groteseque r e f l e c t i o n s " .
He found,
f o r example, t h a t he "was w i l l i n g t o g i v e one limb
f o r each, b u t only i n t h e form o f one l e g and one arm and n o t
b o t h o f t h e same kind", and he goes on t o t e l l u s t h a t t h e s e
" s t r a n g e preoccupations" were n o t new t o him:
Already i n Malaga I had become prone t o s t r a n g e
preoccupations o f a s i m i l a r kind.
There, people had been
marched o f f t o e x e c u t i o n a t any hour o f t h e day; and when I
heard t h e f a m i l i a r o i l y voice r e a d o u t t h e l i s t s , I f e l t an
obsessive u r g e t o s h a r e i n imagination t h e f a t e o f t h o s e who
were taken o u t , t o l i v e and r e - l i v e t h e scene o f t h e
execution i n e v e r y d e t a i l - - f o r
I was convinced t h a t t h a t a c t
oS s o l i d a r i t y and i d e n t i f i c a t i o n would make d e a t h e a s i e r f o r
(The Invisible
them.
W r i t l n g , 433-34)
And e v e n t u a l l y , K o e s t l e r found he could g i v e h i s l i f e f o r e i t h e r
o f t h e two p r i s o n e r s , "one f o r one",
as he says, r a t h e r t h a n j u s t
one limb; b u t n e i t h e r a s a "noble act", nor a s a " s a c r i f i c e " .
He found,
instead, t h a t he could g i v e h i s l i f e a s e a s i l y and
as n a t u r a l l y as t h e sharing o f l a s t cigarettes.
Now he could no
longer understand how he had e v e r f e l t otherwise.
the truth--of
a l i f e f o r a life--came
t h e i l l i t e r a t e , Andalusian militiaman,
day.
For K o e s t l e r
from h i s experience w i t h
who was executed t h e n e x t
The f a c t t h a t t h e lowly Andalusian militiaman,
Nicholas,
had demonstrated concern f o r and understanding o f h i s fellowmen,
was p r o o f enough f o r K o e s t l e r t h a t a l l o f
one another.
From t h e s e experiences--of
u s a r e responsible f o r
t h e death o f t h e
militiaman, o f h i s f e a r o f t h e death o f t h e o t h e r two p r i s o n e r s ,
o f h i s coming t o v a l u e a s i n g l e l i f e - - K o e s t l e r
would become
preoccupied w i t h t h e procedures o f t h e u t i l i t a r i a n s o c i a l and
p o l i t i c a l e t h i c s w i t h i n Communism.
From t h i s preoccupation,
K o e s t l e r would develop a s e t o f more humane e t h i c s f o r himself.
K o e s t l e r goes on t o say t h a t even though he and h i s fellow
p r i s o n e r s were i n s o l i t a r y confinement, which he r e a l i z e s i s a
" s p i r i t u a l hothouse",
t h e i r predicament was only an extreme form
o f t h e predicament i n h e r e n t i n t h e human condition.
difference,
"whether measured i n terms o f freedom,
t h e l e n g t h o f a l i f e , was a d i f f e r e n c e i n degree,
The
o r fear" o r
n o t i n kind.
F o r K o e s t l e r t h e "metaphysical problem o f t h e n a t u r e o f t h e
bonds" which u n i t e d him w i t h h i s f e l l o w p r i s o n e r s r e f l e c t e d
--"though
i n a more naked, c o n c e n t r a t e d formM--the basic problem
from which a l l systems o f s o c i a l e t h i c s a r e derived.
And he f e l t
t h a t h i s "seemingly absurd and o v e r s t r u n g preoccupations", w i t h
t h e bonds t h a t u n i t e people, had a "desperately
d i r e c t bearing on
t h e s t a t e o f o u r s o c i e t y and on applied p o l i t i c s . "
K o e s t l e r t h e n examines how t h e Communist P a r t y determines
t h e v a l u e o f human l i f e .
When he r e t o g n i z e s t h a t t h e v a l u e o f a
person's l i f e i s determined by t h e u s e f u l n e s s o f t h e p e r s o n t o
t h e P a r t y , he touches t h e h e a r t o f h i s disillusionment.
And when
he sees t h a t t h e P a r t y can demand t h e s a c r i f i c e o f t h e l e s s
u s e f u l person o v e r t h e p e r s o n more u s e f u l t o t h e P a r t y , i f t h e r e
i s a q u e s t i o n about which i s t h e more valuable l i f e , t h e n
K o e s t l e r sees t h a t f o r t h e P a r t y t h e End j u s t i f i e s t h e Means.
As
K o e s t l e r says:
...
would say t h a t t h e q u e s t i o n whether
My p a r t y comrades
A should s a c r i f i c e h i s l i f e f o r B, depended e n t i r e l y on t h e
r e l a t i v e s o c i a l v a l u e o f A and B.
I f Comrade A r t u r o was
more u s e f u l i n t h e s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t Fascism t h a n l i t t l e
Nicholas Cthe Andalusian militiaman], then, i n a c o n c r e t e
s i t u a t i o n , i t would be f o r Nicholas t o l a y down h i s l i f e f o r
A r t u r o , b u t n o t t h e o t h e r way round. Moreover, i f t h e
l a t t e r , l e d by mystic s e n t i m e n t a l i t y , were t o s a c r i f i c e
himself f o r Nicholas, t h i s would weaken t h e cause he was
serving, and would c o n s t i t u t e an o b j e c t i v e l y harmful,
a n t i - s o c i a l act.
From t h e r e i t followed t h a t n o t only one,
b u t a thousand o r a hundred thousand Nicholases could and
would be s a c r i f i c e d i f t h e cause was supposed t o demand it.
F o r i n t h i s view Nicholas e x i s t e d merely as a s o c i a l
a b s t r a c t i o n , a mathematical u n i t , obtained by d i v i d i n g a
mass o f t e n thousand Militiamen by t e n thousand.
(The
I n v i s i b l e W r i t l n g , 432)
B u t t h e e q u a t i o n does n o t work f o r K o e s t l e r , because an e q u a t i o n
t h a t r e l i e s on s o c i a l determinism i s s u b j e c t t o manipulation, t o
c o n t r o l and t o propaganda: t h e f i g u r e s can always be changed t o
s u i t t h e needs o f t h e cause.
And,
more i m p o r t a n t l y ,
t h e equation
does n o t work because i f i n t h i s e q u a t i o n one human l i f e i s
merely a " s o c i a l a b s t r a c t i o n " ,
o r a mathematical u n i t , t h e n t e n
thousand human l i v e s a r e merely a b s t r a c t i o n s too,
value.
One l i f e , o r t e n thousand l i v e s - - t h e
difference,
and have no
numbers make no r e a l
as long a s t h o s e l i v e s s e r v e t h e Cause.
Koestler's death-cell
t h e w o r t h o f human l i f e ,
experiences, which f o r c e d him t o see
and which f i n a l l y deprived him o f any
remnants o f i l l u s i o n s he might have had about Communism, allowed
him t o see f a l l a c i e s i n o t h e r s i m i l a r p o l i t i c a l movements
--historical
and contemporary--that
had become dogmatic.
Without
h i s i l l u s i o n s , K o e s t l e r i s now f r e e t o c r e a t e h i s own ideology
which c o n t a i n s no doctrine.
His system i s n e i t h e r contemporary
nor h i s t o r i c a l , b u t i s , r a t h e r , apolitical, ahistorical,
beyond any l i f e - t i m e .
t h e eternal,
and
A t i t s h i g h e s t l e v e l , which encompasses
t h e arrow i n t h e blue, K o e s t l e r ' s new system i s
beyond t h e concerns o f l i f e and death.
This highest l e v e l ,
moreover, cannot be e a s i l y grasped because i t s u l t i m a t e r e a l i t y
i s w r i t t e n i n i n v i s i b l e ink.
vision.
His disillusionment had widened h i s
Now he can see t h a t any system t h a t devalues and makes
an o b j e c t o u t o f human l i f e i s a l s o a system t h a t can j u s t i f y
mass murder.
Not o n l y Communism, b u t any p o l i t i c a l movement which
i m p l i c i t l y r e l i e s on p u r e l y u t i l i t a r i a n e t h i c s , must become
It i s a f a l l a c y a s n a i v e
a v i c t i m t o t h e same f a t a l e r r o r .
a s a mathematical t e a s e r , and y e t i t s consequences l e a d
s t r a i g h t t o Goya's D i s a s t e r s , t o t h e r e i g n o f t h e
g u i l l o t i n e , t h e torture-chambers o f t h e I n q u i s t i o n , o r t h e
c e l l a r s o f t h e Lubianka.
Whether t h e r o a d i s paved w i t h
q u o t a t i o n s from Rousseau, Marx, C h r i s t o r Mohammed, makes
l i t t l e difference. ( T h e I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 4 3 6 )
I n h i s disillusionment w i t h Communism, which has allowed him t o
r e a l i z e t h e dangers o f p o l i t i c a l systems t h a t a r e based on
u t i l i t a r i a n ethics,
K o e s t l e r i s r e l u c t a n t t o become committed
again t o any one p o l i t i c a l system.
He says t h a t i t would have been e a s i e r , more comfortable,
f o r him t o t a k e up a "whole packet o f ready-made
beliefs",
but
w i t h o u t t h e c o m f o r t o f h i s i l l u s i o n s , K o e s t l e r can now say t h a t
t o r e p l a c e one s e t o f dogmas f o r another would "hardly be an
i n s p i r i n g example t o t h o s e who c l i n g t o a minimun o f i n t e l l e c t u a l
honesty" ( T h e I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 4 3 6 ) .
Thus, wanting t o be
i n t e l l e c t u a l l y honest and t o redeem himself, K o e s t l e r ,
while
r e p l a c i n g t h e Communist system w i t h one o f h i s own, a t l e a s t
c r e a t e d a system t h a t was n e i t h e r p o l i t i c a l n o r dogmatic.
- Koestler
a-political,
admits t h a t h i s " s p i r i t u a l c r i s i s " and t h e new
non-dogmatic
system he c r e a t e d - - t h e
changes t h a t
came about t h r o u g h t h e profound s e n s a t i o n s experienced i n t h e
death-cell,
over-night.
where e v e r y day was "judgment day"--did
n o t occur
But, r a t h e r , t h o s e s e n s a t i o n s took many y e a r s f o r
him t o assimilate.
He says: " I t was e a s i e r t o r e j e c t t h e
u t i l i t a r i a n concept o f e t h i c s t h a n t o f i n d a s u b s t i t u t e f o r i t " ,
and i t was tempting " t o change from Lenin's way t o Gandhi's way",
b u t f i n d i n g a s u b s t i t u t e f o r t h e u t i l i t a r i a n concept would have
been "another
short-cut,
a t o p p l i n g o v e r from one extreme t o t h e
other" (The I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 437).
K o e s t l e r c o u l d n o t go from being a r e v o l u t i o n a r y t o being a
pacifist;
being a r e v o l u t i o n a r y had l e d him t o experience l i e s
and murder, t o disillusionment.
would l e a d him t o "quietism,
B u t being a p a c i f i s t , he says,
stagnation,
and resignation".
s o l u t i o n f o r K o e s t l e r l a y i n "a new form o f synthesis",
The
he says,
"between s a i n t and r e v o l u t i o n a r y , between t h e a c t i v e and t h e
contemplative l i f e " (The Invisible Writlng, 437).
Actually,
the
s o l u t i o n f o r K o e s t l e r was t o w r i t e a number o f books i n an
a t t e m p t t o a s s i m i l a t e h i s disillusionment and h i s experiences o f
C e l l No. 40.
To w r i t e t h e s e books, moreover, was n o t only a
contemplative a c t b u t a l s o a necessary psychological act--an
o f a s s i m i l a t i o n and redemption--for
Orwell a l s o r e j e c t e d "quietism".
act
Koestler.
I f w e t u r n , once more, t o
t h e l a s t paragraph o f h i s essay " P o l i t i c s And The English
Language",
we see t h a t Orwell b e l i e v e s t h a t t o claim a b s t r a c t
words a s meaningless i s a " p r e t e x t f o r advocating a kind o f
p o l i t i c a l quietism".
F o r Orwell, a l l p o l i t i c a l language i s
"designed t o make l i e s sound t r u t h f u l and murder r e s p e c t a b l e , and
t o g i v e an appearance o f s o l i d i t y t o p u r e wind" ( " P o l i t i c s And
The English Language,"
157).
So t o a v o i d " p o l i t i c a l quietism"
f o r Orwell and f o r K o e s t l e r , t h e a c t u a l meaning o f words,
t e x t , must be considered;
t h a n t o conceal;
of the
words must be used t o r e v e a l r a t h e r
and t h e simpler t h e language, t h e l e s s l i k e l y
one i s t o c r e a t e s t u p i d i t i e s ,
t o l i e , and t o j u s t i f y
u n j u s t i f i a b l e acts.
I n t h e y e a r s following h i s experiences i n t h e S e v i l l e
death-cell,
K o e s t e r c r e a t e d t e x t s which had " e t h i c a l problems" as
t h e i r c e n t r a l concern.
Such problems, K o e s t l e r t e l l s us, had
played no p a r t i n h i s p r e v i o u s writings.
longer w r o t e f o r t h e Cause--for
self-censor,
Thus, K o e s t l e r no
Communism--he
no longer a c t e d as
and under another's a u t h o r i t y , t o c r e a t e t h e P a r t y ' s
meaning, t o c r e a t e l i e s and propaganda.
F r e e o f i l l u s i o n s , K o e s t l e r i s a l s o now f r e e t o c r e a t e works
o f a r t r a t h e r t h a n works o f propaqanda.
Koestler t e l l s us t h a t
i n a t t e m p t i n q t o come " t o i n t e l l e c t u a l terms with t h e intuitive
qlimpses" o f t h e e t e r n a l t h a t he qained i n C e l l No. 40,
he w r o t e
The G l a d l a t o r s and Darkness a t Noon: "Both books were v a r i a t i o n s
on t h e same theme:
t h e problem o f t h e Ends and t h e Means, t h e
c o n f l i c t between t r a n s c e n d e n t a l m o r a l i t y and s o c i a l expediency"
(The Invisible W r i t l n g , 437).
The n e x t book he wrote,
Arrlval
and D e p a r t u r e , was, he says, "a r e j e c t i o n o f t h e e t h i c a l
n e u t r a l i t y o f science a s expressed i n t h e p s y c h i a t r i s t ' s claim t o
be able t o 'reduce' courage,
d e d i c a t i o n and s e l f - s a c r i f i c e
n e u r o t i c motives" (The I n v l s l b l e W r l t l n u , 4 3 7 ) .
to
And f i n a l l y ,
in
The Yogl and t h e Commlsar. K o e s t l e r t r i e d one l a s t time t o
" d i g e s t " t h e meaninq o f h i s s o l i t a r v dialogue with death i n C e l l
No. 40.
"This book", he says, " w r i t t e n I n 1943, closed t h e
i t had taken f i v e y e a r s t o d i g e s t t h e h o u r s b y t h e window"
cycle;
o f h i s c e l l (The I n v l s l b l e W r l t l n g , 437).
B u t even as he worked t h r o u q h h i s disillusionment w i t h t h e
u t i l i t a r i a n e t h i c s o f Communism i n h i s writing,
i n l i f e Koestler
was n o t ready t o completely disenqaqe himself from t h e Communist
Party.
K o e s t l e r s a y s t h a t t h e s t o r v o f h i s " f i n a l break w i t h t h e
Communist P a r t y i s a s t o r y o f
confusions",
last-minute
a s t o r y which he finds
(The Invisible W r l t l n q , 465).
h e s i t a t i o n s and
" d i f f i c u l t t o qet i n t o focus"
P a r t o f K o e s t l e r ' s s t o r y about h i s
r e s i g n a t i o n from Communism includes h i s r e c o l l e c t i o n s o f h i s
month's l e c t u r e t o u r
L e f t Book Club--which
Durinq t h e t o u r ,
o f England i n 1938 f o r V i c t o r Gollancz's
had j u s t
~ u b l i s h e dSpanlsh T e s t a m e n t .
ne f i n d s himself st111 followinq t h e P a r t y l i n e ,
b u t a l s o f o r t h e f i r s t time speakinq o u t aqainst Communist
p o l i c i e s i n Spain.
Gollancz had published K o e s t l e r ' s S p a n i s h
T e s t a m e n t because i t d i d f a l l i n t o l i n e w i t h t h e Communist
P a r t y ' s view o f t h e war,
u n l i k e Orwell's H o m a g e t o C a t a l o n i a .
which was n o t sympathetic t o Communism o r t h e Spanish Communist
P a r t y , and would n o t s i t well w i t h t h e members o f
Most o f t h e 65,000
Communist P a r t y , "but",
first,
t h e Book Club.
Book Club members were sympathetic t o t h e
K o e s t l e r says,
Communists i n t h e second place",
d i f f i c u l t y t a k i n g them s e r i o u s l y .
" t h e y were English i n t h e
and K o e s t l e r had
K o e s t l e r goes on t o d e s c r i b e
t h e i r meetings as " t e a p a r t i e s i n t h e vicarage" compared t o
Communist P a r t y meetings on t h e Continent.
K o e s t l e r says,
A t t h e s e meetinqs,
t h e English
p u t decency b e f o r e d i a l e c t i c s and, even more bewilderingly,
t h e y tended t o indulge i n humour and e c c e n t r i c i t y - - b o t h of
which were dangerous d i v e r s i o n s from t h e c l a s s s t r u g q l e
A f t e r two weeks o f l e c t u r i n g up and down t h e c o u n t r y
I came t o t h e conclusion t h a t t h e m a j o r i t y o f English
Communists were n o t r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s b u t cranks and
e c c e n t r i c s , and t h a t t h e y were c e r t a i n l y c l o s e r t o t h e
( T h e Invisible
Pickwick Club t h a n t o t h e Comintern.
....
...
W r i t i n g , 465)
K o e s t l e r ' s d e s c r i p t i o n o f goings-on
meetings, while tonque-in-cheek,
a t English Communist P a r t y
a l s o accounts f o r p a r t o f h i s
disillusionment w i t h European Communist P a r t i e s , which could
permit members a sense n e i t h e r o f
o f u t i l i t a r i a n ethics,
decency n o r humor i n t h e f a c e
nor could i t allow any deviance from t h e
class struggle throuqh "eccentricity".
Even though,
f o r t h e f i r s t time,
he sometimes speaks o u t
p u b l i c l y against c e r t a i n a c t i o n s i n Spain, a t t h i s time, K o e s t l e r
i s s t i l l t o o c l o s e t o t h e e v e n t s o f t h e Spanish death-cell;
he 1 5
n o t w i l l i n g t o make public t h e s e experiences.
Koestler t e l l s us
t h a t h i s l e c t u r e s were about t h e p o l i t i c a l and m i l i t a r y s i t u a t i o n
i n Spain, and never about h i s p e r s o n a l experiences i n t h e C e l l
No. 40, which he f e l t "were n o t t h e proper s u b j e c t f o r t h e L e f t
Book Club".
Not only was K o e s t l e r t o o c l o s e t o t h e e v e n t s t o
r e v e a l them, b u t he a l s o f e l t t h a t t h e Book Club members lacked
t h e p o l i t i c a l knowledge necessary t o understand h i s d e a t h - c e l l
experiences.
In this,
K o e s t l e r conf irms Orwell's condemnation o f t h e
members o f t h e L e f t Book Club, although he does n o t condemn them
a s h a r s h l y as does Orwell.
B o t h w r i t e r s f e l t t h a t t h e s e Enqlish
Communists e i t h e r would n o t have known what K o e s t l e r o r Orwell
were t a l k i n g about i f t h e y had r e v e a l e d t h e i r disillusionments,
o r would have c a t e q o r i c a l l y denied any sabotaqe on t h e p a r t o f
t h e Communists i n Spain.
K o e s t l e r s a y s t h a t he was moved by t h e
"innocence and eagerness" o f t h e audiences who had come t o r e g a r d
t h e Spanish L o y a l i s t Army w i t h "passionate sympathy" and a s " t h e
r e a r g u a r d o f European democracy" ( T h e I n v r s r b l e
W r i t i n g , 466).
B u t any mention o f Moscow's e x p l o i t a t i o n o f t h e War -For i t s o w n
purposes, o r o f t h e a c t i v i t i e s o f t h e GPU and S I M i n c i v i l i a n
l o c a t i o n s i n Spain would have "met w i t h i n c r e d u l i t y and
indignation" ( T h e Invisible W r i t r n g , 466).
What K o e s t l e r f i n d s i n t h e English Communist a s ( a t t h e v e r y
w o r s t ) crankishness and e c c e n t r i c i t y ,
innocence and eagerness,
and ( a t t h e v e r y l e a s t )
Orwell found,
t r e n d i n e s s and expedience,
a t the very least.
and a t t h e v e r y worst,
and lack o f imagination about t h e kind o f
ignorance o f
hardships Europeans
l i k e K o e s t l e r had t o go t h r o u g h t o f i g h t
Fascism.
In fact,
unlike K o e s t l e r , who says he was moved by t h e "innocence" o f h i s
audiences o f English Communists, Orwell was appalled a t t h e i r
ignorance and unwillingness t o see how t h e Commununists,
Spanish
and Russian, were u s i n q t h e Spanish C i v i l War f o r t h e i r own
p o l i t i c a l ends, even committing murder t o j u s t i f y
t h o s e ends.
Orwell d i d n o t h e s i t a t e t o r e v e a l h i s d i s i l l u s i o n m e n t s t o
o t h e r English people, e s p e c i a l l y t o people l i k e t h e members o f
t h e L e f t Book Club.
B u t K o e s t l e r could n o t do t h i s .
I f these
people were more English t h a n Communist, a s K o e s t l e r says,
then
maybe Orwell could speak f r e e l y as one Enqlishman t o o t h e r s ,
f r e e l y enough t o t e l l them how i g n o r a n t t h e y r e a l l y were.
Orwell, who owed no allegiance t o t h e Communist P a r t y ,
felt
free
t o educate o t h e r English people about t h e f a l l a c i e s i n t h e
P a r t y ' s l i n e o f thought.
K o e s t l e r could n o t speak s o f r e e l y
then, however, because, even though he was an " i n s i d e r " as f a r as
Communism was concerned,
a guest,
So, a s
he was s t i l l a q u e s t i n England.
he could n o t r e v e a l t o h i s h o s t s t h e i r ignorance. even
i f , i r o n i c a l l y , he was speaking as one Communist t o o t h e r
Communists.
B u t what i s even more i m p o r t a n t i s t h a t ,
s t i l l being
a member o f t h e P a r t y i n good standing, K o e s t i e r knew n o t t o
d e v i a t e from t h e P a r t y line.
Because a good Communist d i d n o t q u e s t i o n P a r t y policy,
K o e s t l e r s a y s t h a t he was taken completely by s u r p r i s e ,
and t h a t
h i s w o r s t moments durinq t h e l e c t u r e t o u r came when someone i n
t h e audience asked him a q u e s t i o n about t h e deviant group,
POUM.
the
For t h o s e o f h i s r e a d e r s who miqht be unfamiliar w i t h t h e
POUM, K o e s t l e r p r o v i d e s a b r i e f h i s t o r y o f t h i s Spanish s p l i n t e r
group,
and i n terms remarkably s i m i l a r t o Drwell's explanation o f
t h e a c t i o n s o f t h e same qroup i n Homage t o C a t a l o n l a .
But
K o e s t l e r was n o t f r e e t o r e v e a l t o h i s 1938 audience what he i s
exposing t o h i s 1952 p o s t - C i v i l
War audience.
War, post-Second
World War, Cold
To h i s e a r l i e r "innocent" audience, n o t only could
he n o t r e v e a l h i s disillusionments, b u t he a l s o could n o t r e v e a l
t h a t he thought t h e accusations h u r l e d a t t h e POUM were wrong.
K o e s t l e r explains why q u e s t i o n s about t h e POUM were so d i f f i c u l t
f o r him.
The men o f t h e P.O.U.M.
had fought w i t h g r e a t b r a v e r y and
s e l f - s a c r i f i c e a t t h e f r o n t i n Aragon (George Orwell had
been wounded while s e r v i n g as a volunt-eer i n t h e i r ranks),
and t h e r e was no doubt i n my mind t h a t t h e a c c u s a t i o n s
against them were absurd and p e r f i d i o u s .
But f o r a P a r t y
member t o say t h i s i n public meant expulsion, w i t h t h e
i n e v i t a b l e sequel o f being himself denounced a s a T r o s k y i s t
agent o f Franco o r t h e Gestapo.
That i s why q u e s t i o n s
r e f e r r i n g t o P.O.U.M.
p u t me i n a c r i t i c a l p o s i t i o n .
(The
I n v i s l b l e W r l t i n g , 466-467)
K o e s t l e r knew t h a t t h e accusations aqainst t h e POUM were n o t
t r u e , b u t f o r him t o speak t h e t r u t h t o h i s 1938 audience o f
English Communists meant being expelled from t h e Communist P a r t y
as a t r a i t o r .
K o e s t l e r goes on t o r e v e a l t h e workings o f t h e P a r t y t h a t
c o n t r i b u t e d t o h i s disillusionment, workings t h a t do n o t allow
any d e v i a n t p e r s o n a l behavior, b u t do demand absolute, unthinking
l o y a l t y ; s o i t would have been unthinkable f o r German o r French
Cammunists t o ask a u e s t i o n s about t h e PDUN i n Barcelona, as t h e
English Communists were asking.
K o e s t l e r c l e a r l y d e l i n e a t e s how
he would have a u t o m a t i c a l l y answered t h e question--what
a convoluted d i a l e c t i c a l "catechism",
t h e P a r t y line.
would be
And he
t e l l s u s t h a t any d e v i a t i o n i s t action, even i f c a r r i e d o u t bv t h e
l o y a l i s t s o f t h e " o l d quard" such as Hadek, has t o be seen
o b j e c t i v e l y as a t r a i t o r o u s action, no m a t t e r what
motives were.
t h e personal
He says:
The c o r r e c t l i n e t o be applied t o t h i s and s l m i l a r cases was
t h a t any f a c t i o n o r group t h a t cause a s p l i t i n
r e v o l u t i o n a r y u n i t y played i n t o t h e enemy hands, and t h a t
accordingly Nin ( o r Trotsky, o r Zinoviev, o r Hadek, as t h e
case may be) must objectively be regarded as an agent o f
Franco ( o r H i t l e r , o r t h e B r i t i s h I n t e l l i g e n c e Service),
whereas t h e subjective motives o f h i s a c t i o n s were
historically irrelevant.
This answer was p a r t o f t h e
catechism f o r t h e advanced classes, and I had used i t a d
nauseam i n arguments w i t h o t h e r s and myself.
( T h e Invisible
Writlng, 467)
When K o e s t l e r u s e s t h e word "catechism" t o d e s c r i b e t h e P a r t v ' s
answer t o t h e question,
he i s being c o n s i s t e n t w i t h h i s
c o n t e n t i o n t h a t Communism became dogmatism f o r him, and o t h e r s
l i k e him.
Moreover, when K o e s t l e r connects t h e names o f T r o t s k y
and Radek, who,
l i k e Stalin,
were l o y a l old-guard
revolutionaries, with factions,
he i s beinq somewhat i r o n i c
because people l i k e Radek w e r e p a r t o f t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y
vanguard.
But t h i s did n o t p r e v e n t t h e paranoid S t a l i n , a l s o a
comrade-in-arms
w i t h T r o t s k y and Zinoviev during t h e e a r l y days
o f the revolution.
from having t h e s e men brought t o t r i a l ( t h e
"show" t r i a l s ) , where t h e y were "purged".
men--who
That i s , t h e s e
were as l o y a l a s anyone t o t h e r e v o l u t i o n - - w e r e
made t o
confess t o crimes t h e y had n o t committed, and t h e n t h e y were
executed f o r t h e s e same crimes, crimes such a s belng t r a i t o r s ,
agents o f Franco o r H i t l e r , as K o e s t l e r says.
So i f t h e s e men
were l i a b l e t o execution f o r any kind o f deviation,
t h a t h i s t u r n would s u r e l y come as well,
Koestler f e l t
f o r speaking o u t i n
favor
o f t h e POUM.
Even so, K o e s t l e r departed from t h e P a r t y
l i n e when asked about t h e POUM.
He was astonished, t h e r e f o r e ,
when nothing happened, b u t he was c o n s t a n t l v looking o v e r h i s
shoulder a f t e r he r e t u r n e d t o France when h i s l e c t u r e t o u r
was
over.
K o e s t l e r s a y s t h a t when he was f i r s t asked t h e q u e s t i o n
about t h e POUM, " t h e f a m i l i a r answeru--the
n o t occur t o him.
"catechism"--just
I n s t e a d o f following t h e P a r t y line,
"took a plunge" and s a i d what he thought.
did
Koestler
He s a i d t h a t he
disagreed w i t h t h e p o l i c y o f t h e POUM f o r a number o f r e a s o n s
/
which he would be glad t o explain, b u t i n h i s "opinion Andres Nin
and h i s comrades had been a c t i n g i n good f a i t h ,
and t o c a l l them
t r a i t o r s was b o t h s t u p i d and a d e s e c r a t i o n o f t h e i r dead" ( T h e
I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 467).
B u t even though K o e s t l e r spoke o u t against c e r t a i n P a r t y
p o l i c i e s , and r i s k e d h i s l i f e i n doing so,
any kind o f l e a v e - t a k i n g
from t h e P a r t y .
he did n o t i n i t i a t e
Yet he f e l t t h a t h i s
days were numbered, and was s u r p r i s e d when he was n o t c a l l e d t o
account.
To h i s "astonishment" he was " s t i l l a l i v e and a valued
comrade o f t h e Communist Pary" ( T h e I n v ~ s l b l e W r ~ t l n g ,468).
K o e s t l e r had mixed f e e l i n g s o f disappointment and r e l i e f .
He
s a y s t h a t he l i v e d t h r o u g h h i s l a s t months as member o f t h e P a r t y
" l i k e a person who knows t h a t t h e r e i s a p a i n f u l and c r i t i c a l
o p e r a t i o n waiting f o r him which i s being postponed from week t o
week.
The l e s s one t h i n k s about i t t h e b e t t e r " ( T h e Invisible
W r i t l n g , 468).
And,
s t r a n g e as i t may seem, K o e s t l e r s a y s t h a t
he did n u t g i v e much conscious thought to t h e m a t t e r .
He reminds
u s t h a t he had ceased t o be a Communist long b e f o r e he was
conscious o f h i s defection,
t h a t as he had faced death, he l e t go
o f Communism when he r e a l i z e d how l i t t l e an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l i f e
meant i n t h e f a c e o f t h e u t i l i t a r i a n e t h i c s o f t h e Communist
Party.
"Now,"
he says,
" t h e inner change t h a t had taken place i n
I
c e l l No. 4 0 was g r a d u a l l y p e r c o l a t i n g t h r o u g h t o t h e surface.
no longer needed t o w o r r y about my a t t i t u d e t o t h e P a r t y ;
i t was
t a k i n g c a r e o f i t s e l f " ( T h e Invisible W r l t i n g , 468).
So f o r t h e f i r s t time,
Koestler
f i n d s t h a t he can speak o u t
p u b l i c l y against t h e P a r t y , t o a c e r t a i n extent.
B u t only t o a
c e r t a i n e x t e n t , because he was n o t w i l l i n g t o be expelled from
t h e P a r t y as a t r a i t o r ,
murdered.
n o r was he w i l l i n g t o r i s k being
Moreover, even though he says t h a t he was now
i n d i f f e r e n t as f a r a s t h e P a r t y was concerned, he does n o t
account f o r t h e c o n t r a d i c t o r y
f a c t t h a t he was conscious o f and
w o r r i e d about t h e d i s t i n c t p o s s i b i l i t y o f h i s murder because o f
h i s a t t i t u d e t o t h e Party.
But what i s even more i m p o r t a n t i s
t h a t K o e s t l e r could n o t w i l l i n g l y excise himself from t h e
Communist P a r t y ; he was n o t y e t ready t o l e t go o f a commitment
o f seven years.
He had t o s u f f e r s e v e r a l more p a i n f u l
d i s i l l u s i o n m e n t s b e f o r e he would r e s i g n from t h e P a r t y .
And,
as
we s h a l l see, t h e s e e v e n t s n o t only added t o K o e s t l e r ' s growing
disenchantment w i t h Communism, b u t a l s o allowed him f u r t h e r
e x p i a t i o n and redemption from t h e g u i l t he s t i l l f e l t f o r h i s
p a s t a c t i o n s as a member o f t h e Communist a p a r a t .
The f i r s t o f two e v e n t s which o c c u r r e d i n P a r i s had t o do
w i t h f a l s e accusations.
Throuqh a s e r i e s o f mistakes and
143
misunderstandings, a member o f t h e German Communist P a r t y and h i s
Anglo-German
well-known
circle,
wife,
b o t h l i v i n q i n P a r i s a t t h e time and
t o K o e s t l e r and o t h e r s o f t h e Communist w r i t e r s '
were denounced as Gestapo spies i n t h e German Communist
P a r t y ' s weekly paper which appeared i n France.
K o e s t l e r , aware
o f t h e misunderstandings, s a y s t h a t he knew t h a t t h e s e people
were n o t Nazi spies.
A f t e r t h e falsely-accused
appealed t o t h e
P a r t y , demanding t h a t t h e C e n t r a l Committee ( i n Moscow)
i n v e s t i g a t e t h e i r case, and were ignored, K o e s t l e r was f h e i r onlv
f r i e n d who did n o t t u r n h i s back on them.
He s a y s t h a t he " w r o t e
a l e t t e r t o t h e C e n t r a l Committee p r o t e s t i n g a g a i n s t t h e public
denunciation o f two comrades w i t h o u t g i v i n g them a hearing,
s t a t i n g Chis3 c o n v i c t i o n t h a t t h e y were innocent" ( T h e l n v l s i b l e
W r i t l n g , 470).
K o e s t l e r goes on t o say t h a t he r e c e i v e d no
answer, " o f course",
b u t t h a t t h e P a r t y t o o k no f u r t h e r a c t i o n
against him o r h i s friends.
The r i s k K o e s t l e r took f o r h i s
f r i e n d s , h i s speaking o u t on t h e i r behalf, was a way t o atone f o r
h i s p a s t a c t i o n s and t o redeem himself i n h i s own eyes.
K o e s t l e r c a l l s h i s e f f o r t on behalf o f h i s f r i e n d s - - " h i s
siding w i t h alleged Gestapo agentsu--"another
t h a t had gone o f f a t half-cock"
suicidal gesture
( T h e Invisible W r l t l n q , 470).
He
a l s o f i g u r e s t h a t h i s " s u i c i d a l g e s t u r e " d i d n o t work because
r e c e n t Communist propaganda had used him a s a m a r t y r while he had
been i n j a i l ,
and he could n o t so soon go from beinq c a l l e d a
m a r t y r t o being "denounced as an agent o f Franco o r t h e Mikado".
Some months would have t o elapse b e f o r e he could be c a l l e d a
traitor.
Rather t h a n waiting f o r such an occurrence, K o e s t l e r
says, t h e sensible a c t i o n would have been t o q u i t t h e P a r t y .
But
t h i s he d i d n o t think t o do because one does n o t e a s i l y walk away
from such a long-term
commitment.
The l o g i c a l c o u r s e would have been simply t o r e s i g n from t h e
Party.
B u t t h i s i d e a d i d n o t occur t o me f o r q u i t e a while.
I knew t h a t sooner o r l a t e r I would be expelled, and t h i s
was t o me t h e only conceivable manner o f l e a v i n g t h e P a r t y ;
t o t a k e t h e i n i t i a t i v e seemed unimaginable.
One may cease
being a p r a c t i s i n g Catholic, b u t one does n o t send a l e t t e r
o f r e s i g n a t i o n t o t h e Church. ( T h e I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g , 470)
With h i s u s e o f r e l i g i o u s anologies here, K o e s t l e r i s s t i l l being
c o n s i s t e n t i n h i s c o n t e n t i o n t h a t Communism was no longer
r e v o l u t i o n a r y b u t dogmatic.
Being a h e r e t i c , moreover, a l s o
meant explusion i n b o t h cases.
Or,
even worse,
being a
Communistic h e r e t i c could mean being executed--as
i t once meant
i n t h e case o f Catholicism.
The second e v e n t which f u r t h e r compounded K o e s t l e r ' s
disillusionment had t o do w i t h t h e w r i t i n g o f t r u t h s ,
half-truths,
and l i e s .
W r i t e r s ' Caucus,
Party.
The event was a meeting o f t h e P a r i s
and one o f K o e s t l e r ' s l a s t memories o f t h e
The meeting was t o d i s c u s s a new slogan o f t h e S o v i e t
W r i t e r s ' Federation: "Write t h e Truth".
says,
They knew, K o e s t l e r
t h a t t h e t r u t h w a s t h a t "day a f t e r day t h e l e a d e r s o f t h e
Revolution" and t h e w r i t e r s ' own "comrades i n Russia were being
s h o t a s spies,
W r i t i n g , 471).
o r vanished w i t h o u t a t r a c e " ( T h e Invisible
Yet, i n s p i t e o f t h i s t e r r i b l e knowledge, t h e
w r i t e r s " e a r n e s t l y discussed how t o w r i t e t h e t r u t h w i t h o u t
writing the truth".
K o e s t l e r goes on:
With o u r t r a i n i n g i n d i a l e c t i c a l a c r o b a t i c s i t was n o t even
d i f f i c u l t t o p r o v e t h a t a l l t r u t h was h i s t o r i c a l l y
class-conditioned, t h a t so-called subjective t r u t h was a
bourgeois myth, and t h a t ' t o w r i t e t h e t r u t h ' meant t o
s e l e c t and emphasise t h o s e items and a s p e c t s o f a given
s i t u a t i o n which s e r v e d t h e p r o l e t a r i a n r e v o l u t i o n , and was
therefore 'historically correct'.
( T h e I n v l s l b l e Writing,,
471)
The manipulation o f t h e t r u t h t o s u i t t h e Cause--the
history--that
rewriting of
o c c u r r e d a t t h e w r i t e r s ' meeting i s t h e kind o f
manipulation t h a t Orwell t a l k s about i n H o m a g e t o C a t a l o n l a ,
p a r t i c u l a r l y when he r e f e r s t o t h e l i e s promulgated by t h e
Communists about t h e a c t i o n s o f t h e POUN during t h e Barcelona
riots.
B u t what i s e s p e c i a l l y i m p o r t a n t i s t h a t b o t h K o e s t l e r ' s and
Orwell's p o l i t i c a l disillusionment r o s e here, a t t h i s spot,
in
t h e s e occasions where w r i t i n g b e t r a y e d i t s e l f and d i s t o r t e d
e v e n t s t h e y had a c t u a l l y witnessed.
Orwell would have completely
agreed w i t h K o e s t l e r when K o e s t l e r s a i d t h a t t h i s meeting o f
Communist w r i t e r s was "a document o f o u r times".
But Koestler
was no longer s e r v i n g t h e P a r t y : he was no longer lying.
Nor was
he t o e i n g t h e P a r t y line, a s t h e t h i r d and l a s t e v e n t
demonstrates.
I n fact,
K o e s t l e r was t o become a h e r e t i c .
K o e s t l e r t e l l s u s t h a t t h e end o f h i s a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h
Communism "came a s another anti-climax"
472).
The end occurred, he says,
(The I n v z s i b l e
Writing,
some time during t h e s p r i n g o f
1938, when he gave a t a l k on Spain t o t h e A s s o c i a t i o n o f Exiled
German Writers,
most o f whom were Communists.
When a
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e P a r t y approached him b e f o r e h i s t a l k and
asked him t o denounce t h e POUN a s agents o f Franco, K o e s t l e r
refused.
And K o e s t l e r r e f u s e d again when he was p o l i t e l y asked
t o show t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e a t e x t oS h i s speech and " t o discuss
i t i n f o r m a l l y " ( T h e I n v l s l b l e W r l t l n g , 472).
The meeting was K o e s t l e r ' s f i r s t public appearance i n P a r i s
since h i s r e t u r n from Spain,
o f t h e Party.
and i t would be h i s l a s t as a member
K o e s t l e r s a y s t h a t he would n o t a t t a c k t h e P a r t y
while t h e Spanish C i v i l War was going on.
nor would he a t t a c k
Russia i n public because t h a t idea " s t i l l c a r r i e d t h e h o r r o r o f
blasphemy".
he says,
Yet,
he " f e l t t h e need t o d e f i n e where Che7 stood,"
"and n o t t o remain a p a s s l v e accomplice o f Chis1
f r i e n d s ' executions" i n Spain and i n Russia ( T h e I n v i s i b l e
W r ~ t r n g ,4 7 2 ) .
So K o e s t l e r had t o be c a r e f u l i n choosing h i s
ground, he says,
and he decided t o end h i s speech w i t h what he
c a l l s " t h r e e simple phrases" each o f which was "a p i o u s
and y e t a c a p i t a l h e r e s y f o r
platitude,
heresies,
a Stalinist".
The t h r e e
w i t h t h e t h i r d being a q u o t a t i o n from Thomas Mann, a r e
a s follows:
No movement, p a r t y o r person can claim t h e p r i v i l e g e o f
It i s a s f o o l i s h t o appease t h e enemy, a s it
infallibility.
i s t o p e r s e c u t e t h e f r i e n d who pursues t h e same end as you
by a d i f f e r e n t road.
I n t h e long run, a harmful t r u t h i s
( T h e I n v ~ s l b l e W r i t ~ n g ,4 7 2 )
b e t t e r than a u s e f u l lie.
Even though K o e s t l e r t e l l s u s t h a t he would n o t a t t a c k t h e P a r t y
while t h e War was going on,
w i t h t h e s e "heresies",
v e r y s p e c i f i c a l l y c e r t a i n p r a c t i c e s o f Stalinism.
he did a t t a c k
This a t t a c k
was g r e e t e d by h i s audience e i t h e r w i t h d e l i b e r a t e " s t o n y
silence" i f t h e y were Communists, o r w i t h applause i f t h e y were
non-Communists.
The " c a p i t a l " h e r e s i e s a r e K o e s t l e r ' s public
expression o f h i s disillusionment w i t h t h e ideology o f Communism,
b u t a s p a i n f u l as h i s disillusionment was,
t h e l o n e l i n e s s he
s u f f e r e d a f t e r q u i t t i n g t h e P a r t y was e q u a l l y p a i n f u l , i f n o t
more so.
The loneliness, which began r i g h t a f t e r t h i s meeting,
a l s o became p a r t o f K o e s t l e r ' s disenchantment.
K o e s t l e r t e l l s u s t h a t from t h i s meeting he went home alone,
and t h a t while he was w a i t i n q f o r
a t r a i n i n a metro s t a t i o n ,
group o f h i s comrades, who had a t t e n d e d t h e meeting,
a
entered the
s t a t i o n and walked p a s t him w i t h o u t looking a t him, as i f he were
" t h e i n v i s i b l e man".
o r a country,
a man whose c u l t u r e was beinq destroyed--a
l i v i n g i n exile--had
culture",
K o e s t l e r , who was a man w i t h o u t a r e l i q i o n
found "a r e l i q i o n " , "a country",
refugee
"a
and "a r e f u g e " i n Communism and t h e Communist P a r t y .
These a r e t h e a s p e c t s he would miss when he q u i t t h e P a r t y ,
r a t h e r t h a n i n d i v i d u a l friendships.
He says:
That journey home i n t h e metro was a f o r e t a s t e o f months and
y e a r s o f l o n e l i n e s s t o come.
It was n o t a p h y s i c a l
loneliness, f o r a f t e r t h e break w i t h t h e P a r t y I found more
But individual friendships
f r i e n d s t h a n I have had before.
could never r e p l a c e t h e knowledge t h a t one belonged t o an
i n t e r n a t i o n a l b r o t h e r h o o d embracing t h e whole globe; n o r t h e
warming, r e a s s u r i n g f e e l i n g o f a c o l l e c t i v e s o l i d a r i t y which
gave t o t h a t huge, amorphous mass t h e coherence and intimacy
(The I n v l s l b l e W r l t l n g , 4 7 3 )
o f small family.
As h a r d t o bear as t h e abuse was from former f r i e n d s w h o were
s t i l l Communists,
and as h a r d t o bear a s t h e s p i r i t u a l and
i n t e l l e c t u a l l o n e l i n e s s was, K o e s t l e r found t h e contempt o f
f r i e n d s who were non-Communists
equally unbearable.
He s a y s t h a t
a f t e r he l e f t t h e P a r t y , t h e abuse he s u f f e r e d from t h e
Communists "conformed t o a p a t t e r n " , b u t t h e resentment he f e l t
from t h o s e who had never been Communists was a " d i f f e r e n t kind o f
unvoiced reproach".
uses, once again,
When K o e s t l e r analyses t h e resentment, he
r e l i g i o u s analogies,
comparing Communism t o
Catholicism.
K o e s t l e r compares ex-Communists
(and ex-Nazi
refugees) t o
148
"tiresome Cassandras" and " f a l l e n angels" who,
he says,
"have had
t h e bad t a s t e t o r e v e a l t h a t heaven i s n o t t h e place i t i s
supposed t o be"; t h a t i s ,
Communism and Fascism a r e n o t t h e
u t o p i a s as promised by t h o s e God-heads
Everyone, K o e s t l e r says,
S t a l i n and H i t l e r .
respects t h e convert,
Catholic o r
Communist, b u t h a t e s "unfrocked p r i e s t s o f a l l f a i t h " .
He goes
on:
This a t t i t u d e is r a t i o n a l i s e d a s a d i s l i k e o f renegades.
Yet t h e c o n v e r t , t o o , i s a renegade from h i s former b e l i e f s
o r d i s b e l i e f s , and q u i t e prepared t o p e r s e c u t e t h o s e who
s t i l l p e r s i s t i n them.
He i s n e v e r t h e l e s s forgiven, f o r he
has 'embraced' a f a i t h , whereas t h e ex-Communist o r t h e
has t h e r e b y become
unfrocked p r i e s t has ' l o s t ' a faith--and
a menace t o i l l u s i o n and a reminder o f t h e abhorrent,
(The Invlslble Wrltlng, 476)
t h r e a t e n i n g void.
Even though K o e s t l e r has i t a l i c i z e d two words i n t h i s passage,
perhaps t h e key word i s n e i t h e r o f these.
could be " i l l u s i o n " and "void":
Communism, h i s non-Communist
s t o o d f o r disillusionment.
The key words h e r e
when K o e s t l e r v o l u n t a r i l y l e f t
f r i e n d s r e s e n t e d him because he
He was "a menace" t o t h e " i l l u s i o n "
t h a t Communism r e p r e s e n t e d a new utopia,
a new "heaven".
Without
t h a t i l l u s i o n , t h a t "abhorrent, t h r e a t e n i n g void" i s f e l t again.
I f we,
Koestler's l a t e twentieth-century
s k e p t i c a l of
readers, a r e
K o e s t l e r ' s a n a l y s i s o f t h e resentment o f h i s
non-Communist
friends,
reminds h i s e a r l i e r
we only need t o be reminded,
as K o e s t l e r
1954 readers, t h a t "Socialism" i n a "vague
and undefined way" was t h e hope o f t h e e a r l y t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y .
"So much so",
K o e s t l e r says,
t h a t German 'National S o c i a l i s t s ' , French 'HadicalSocialists', I t a l i a n 'Christian-Socialists' a l l f e l t the
need t o include t h e f e t i s h - w o r d i n t o t h e i r names.
In the
Union o f S o c i a l i s t S o v i e t Republics t h i s hope seemed t o have
found i t s incarnation; and t h e magic worked, and s t i l l works
149
w i t h v a r y i n g degrees o f i n t e n s i t y , on a considerable p o r t i o n
o f mankind.
The r e a l i z a t i o n o f t h e f u l l t r u t h about t h e
regime which now r u l e s o n e - t h i r d o f t h e world: t h a t i t i s
t h e most inhuman regime i n human h i s t o r y and t h e q r a v e s t
challenge t h a t mankind has as y e t encountered, i s
psychologically as d i f f i c u l t t o f a c e f o r most o f u s as an
empty heaven was f o r Gothic man. (The l n v z s l b l e W v l t i n g ,
475)
K o e s t l e r goes on t o remind u s t h a t t h e d i f f i c u l t y i n g i v i n g up
t h e hope o f
Socialism (by which he means Marxist-Stalinism) was
almost t h e same f o r t h e i l l i t e r a t e I t a l i a n peasant ( w i t h whom
K o e s t l e r shared a c i g a r e t t e i n t h e c o u r t y a r d o u t s i d e d e a t h - c e l l
No. 40) a s i t was f o r "highly l i t e r a t e " people l i k e S a r t r e , and
t h e "highly r e a l i s t i c p o l i t i c i a n " ,
s i n c e r e l y believed,
kind o f uncouth,
P r e s i d e n t Roosevelt, who
K o e s t l e r says,
A s i a t i c New Deal".
could b e l i e v e s o p o s i t i v e l y ,
t h a t " S t a l i n ' s regime was a
That people l i k e Roosevelt
K o e s t l e r says,
''in s p i t e o f a l l t h e
a v a i l a b l e evidence about Communist t h e o r y and S o v i e t p r a c t i c e
. . . is
an i n d i c a t i o n o f t h e deep, myth-producing
were and s t i l l a r e a t work" (The I n v l s l b l e
W r l t l n g , 475).
even though t h e y might have been non-Communists,
p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f s o f t h e time,
forces that
So,
given t h e
i t i s easy t o understand why such
f r i e n d s might have abused K o e s t l e r f o r q u i t t i n g t h e Communist
Party.
B u t even though he had resigned,
is i t any wonder t h a t
K o e s t l e r was s t i l l n o t r e a d y t o g i v e up hope, and t h a t he would
only shed h i s l a s t i l l u s i o n a year
and a h a l f a f t e r h i s a c t u a l
r e s i g n a t i o n from t h e P a r t y ?
Some days a f t e r K o e s t l e r ' s l a s t meeting w i t h Communists, i n
t h e Spring o f 1938, he a c t u a l l y s a t down t o w r i t e a l e t t e r o f
resignation.
This a c t , t o o , was an "anti-climax"
f o r Koestler
because he could n o t make a complete break: he only had t h e
"courage" t o go half-way
"farewell",
he says,
S t a l i n regime";
i n leaving.
His l e t t e r was a
" t o t h e German C.P.,
t h e Cornintern, and t h e
b u t he ended h i s l e t t e r w i t h a " d e c l a r a t i o n o f
l o y a l t y t o t h e S o v i e t Union" ( T h e Invisible Writing.
473).
Even
though he opposed t h e system w i t h i t s u n c o n t r o l l e d growth o f
bureaucracy, and t h e " t e r r o r
and suppression" o f c i v i l l i b e r t i e s ,
he declared h i s
b e l i e f t h a t t h e foundations o f t h e Workers'and Peasants'
S t a t e had remained s o l i d and unshaken, t h a t t h e
n a t i o n a l i s a t i o n o f t h e means o f p r o d u c t i o n was a guarantee
o f h e r e v e n t u a l r e t u r n t o t h e r o a d o f Socialism; and t h a t ,
i n s p i t e o f e v e r y t h i n g , t h e S o v i e t Union s t i l l r e p r e s e n t e d
(The
o u r l a s t and only hope on a p l a n e t i n r a p i d decay.
Invisible W r i t i n g , 473-474)
K o e s t l e r held on t o t h e s e b e l i e f s f o r
u n t i l S t a l i n signed a non-aggression
The pact, K o e s t l e r says,
illusion".
another year
and a h a l f ,
p a c t w i t h H i t l e r i n 1939.
" d e s t r o y e d t h i s l a s t shred o f t h e t o r n
K o e s t l e r t h e n goes on t o t a l k about h i s i l l u s i o n - - t h e
l i f e and death o f h i s f a i t h ,
which he compares t o t h e l i f e and
death o f a b u t t e r f l y .
The b i r t h o f a f a i t h ,
act,
like the bursting of
he says,
i s "apparently a spontaneous
a b u t t e r f l y from i t s cocoon";
death o f a f a i t h i s "gradual and slow;
l a s t f l u t t e r o f t h e t i r e d wings,
but the
even a f t e r t h e seemingly
t h e r e i s y e t another t w i t c h ,
another f d i n t convulsion" ( T h e lnvlsi b l e W r l t i n g , 474).
and
Koestler
goes on t o t e l l u s t h a t e v e r y t r u e f a i t h s t u b b o r n l y r e f u s e s t o
die;
i t does n o t m a t t e r i f t h e f a i t h i s i n a "Church, a Cause, a
f r i e n d o r a woman".
This r e f u s a l t o die, moreover, has t o do
w i t h t h e f a i t h f u l ' s h o r r o r o f t h e void:
t h e f a i t h f u l w i l l do
almost anything r a t h e r t h a n f a c e t h a t h o r r o r .
He w i l l delude h i s
senses.
He w i l l deny b e t r a y a l .
He w i l l even change t h e shape o f
h i s illusion.
N a t u r e ' s h o r r o r o f t h e v o i d applies a l s o t o t h e s p i r i t u a l
sphere.
To avoid t h e t h r e a t e n i n q emptiness, t h e t r u e
b e l i e v e r i s r e a d y t o deny t h e evidence o f h i s senses, t o
excuse e v e r y b e t r a y a l l i k e a cuckold o u t o f Boccacio; and i f
t h e i l l u s i o n can no longer be maintained i n ' i t s o r i q i n a l
i n t e g r i t y , he w i l l adapt and modify i t s shape, o r t r y t o
That i s what I did, i n t h e
save a t l e a s t p a r t o f it.
(The
company o f m i l l i o n s o f o t h e r s i n t h e same predicament.
Invisible Writing, 474)
K o e s t l e r hung on t o t a t t e r e d i l l u s i o n s f o r a s long a s he
could--until
l e t go f o r
S t a l i n shook hands w i t h H i t l e r - - a n d
good.
t h e n he had t o
Even a s he was l e t t i n g go i n c e l l No. 40,
even
a s he was c r e a t i n g a new f a i t h f o r himself, w i t h h i s u n i v e r s e o f
t h r e e l e v e l s , he was s t i l l hanging on.
new meaning f o r himself,
Even a s K o e s t l e r c r e a t e d
he could n o t q u i t e l e t go o f t h e o l d
meaning u n t i l t h e S t a l i n - H i t l e r
p a c t o f 1939 b l a t a n t l y and
f i n a l l y b e t r a y e d a l l t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f t h e Russian Revolution.
I n s p i t e o f t h e pain o f disillusionment
and o f loneliness,
K o e s t l e r would come t o f i n d t h a t h i s y e a r s as a member o f t h e
Communist P a r t y held more meaning f o r him t h a n t h e y e a r s p r e v i o u s
t o h i s membership and t h e y e a r s a f t e r he resigned h i s membership.
He was a young man f u l l o f i l l u s i o n s when he joined t h e Communist
P a r t y ; h i s d e p a r t u r e from t h e P a r t y c o n t r i b u t e d t o h i s m a t u r a t i o n
and adulthood.
This r i t e o f passage l e f t him f e e l i n g t h a t t h e
most meaninful p a r t o f h i s l i f e was over,
a f t e r t h e event,
even f o u r t e e n y e a r s
i n 1953, when he wrote:
I was twenty-six when I joined t h e Communist P a r t y , and
t h i r t y - t h r e e when I l e f t it. The y e a r s between had been
d e c i s i v e years, b o t h by t h e season o f l i f e which t h e y
f i l l e d , and t h e way t h e y f i l l e d i t w i t h a s i n ~ l e - m i n d e d
purpose.
Never b e f o r e o r a f t e r had l i f e been s o b r i m t u l of
meanmg a s during t h o s e seven years.
They had t h e
152
superiority
o f a b e a u t i f u l e r r o r o v e r a shabbv t r u t h .
(The
I n v l s l b l e W r l t l n g , 477).
So, now we know t h a t K o e s t l e r ' s "new" v i s i o n does n o t q u i t e
supplant t h e o l d vision.
The new v i s i o n does n o t hold as much
meaning f o r K o e s t l e r as d i d t h e o l d vision.
With t h e r e j e c t i o n
o f h i s p o l i t i c a l i d e a l s ( t h e o l d vision), K o e s t l e r f i n d s t h e
moral c u t t i n g edge gone--the
significant
clear.
f u t u r e no longer holds promlse.
The
d i f f e r e n c e s between e v i l and good a r e no lonqer so
With t h e abandonment o f h i s p o l i t i c a l ideals, K o e s t l e r
found t h a t old, p a s t e v i l s , being fought i n t h e p r e s e n t , do n o t
seem s o e a s i l y eliminated f o r t h e f u t u r e .
We a l s o r e a l i z e t h a t
when K o e s t l e r f o r m a l l y l e f t t h e Communist P a r t y w i t h h i s l e t t e r
o f r e s i g n a t i o n , t h i s was n o t t h e l a s t staqe.
It took S t a l i n ' s
making a p a c t w i t h H i t l e r t o shake K o e s t l e r f r e e o f h i s l a s t
t a t t e r e d illusions.
B u t t h e m a t t e r does n o t even end t h e r e , f o r
K o e s t l e r i s compelled t o consider h i s i l l u s i o n s and
disillusionments
a t l e a s t one more time,
he w r i t e s T h e I n v l s l b l e W r i t l n g .
f o u r t e e n y e a r s l a t e r , as
Conclusion
The Spanish C i v i l War was v e r y much a l i t e r a r y phenomenon,
as K o e s t l e r knew and Orwell was t o f i n d out.
One o f t h e main
l i t e r a r y aspects o f t h i s c o n f l i c t had t o do with language and
power, language and commitment.
Not only were w r i t e r s
transforming t h e war i n t o i n t e l l e c t u a l discourse through t h e i r
'
i
i
writing, b u t some were a l s o allowing t h e p o l i c i e s o f governments
t o d i c t a t e what they should write.
The foreign policy o f Russia
under S t a l i n demanded t h a t t h e t h e expression o f dissent and
r e v o l u t i o n i n t h e Spanish War be silenced o r discredited;
and
Russia, being t h e main supplier o f arms t o t h e Republican
Government, was i n a p o s i t i o n t o make such a demand stick.
So,
t h e Republican Government demanded t h a t t h e anarchists and
r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s t u r n i n t h e i r arms.
And, t o a s s i s t Russia's
foreign policy, t h e Communist P a r t y d i s t o r t e d t h e t r u t h about
dissenting and r e v o l u t i o n a r y a c t i v i t i e s , mainly through p r e s s
reports.
Orwell, with no s t r o n g commitment t o any ideology and with
h i s experience o f t h e anarchistic POUM a t t h e f r o n t and t h e
Barcelona r i o t s , was able t o recognize t h a t t h e two
governments--Republican
Spain and Communist Russia--were
halting
t h e r e v o l u t i o n , by withholding arms and by lying.
Koestler, a member o f t h e Communist Party, already knew
about t h e two governments' attempts t o check t h e r e v o l u t i o n .
As
a r e s u l t of h i s s o j o u r n I n t h e Soviet Union, he had already
expended abundant l i t e r a r y energy f a b r i c a t i n g a deceptively
f l a t t e r i n g p o r t r a i t o f Soviet Russia, a p o r t r a i t t h a t he knew was
n o t a t r u e likeness, as he t e l l s u s i n T h e I n v ~ s ~ b lWer i t ~ n g .
And being r e q u i r e d by Comintern t o w r i t e l i e s about t h e F a s c i s t s
i n Spain, he also knew about t h e l i e s being t o l d i n t h e p r e s s
about t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s and dissidents.
Unlike Orwell, he did
n o t have t o go t o Spain t o f i n d o u t about t h e government
policies
and t h e lies--with
h i s long commitment t o t h e Communist Party, he
was an insider, and he already knew about t h e l i e s b e f o r e he went
t o Spain.
But h i s inside knowledge did n o t make h i s
disillusionment with such p o l i c i e s and l i e s any e a s i e r t o bear
than Orwell's lack o f knowledge made h i s disillusionment e a s i e r
t o bear.
I n fact,
seven-year
K o e s t l e r ' s inside knowledge, due t o h i s
commitment t o t h e Communist ideology, made h i s
disillusionment harder t o r e v e a l through h i s writing.
In
c o n t r a s t , Orwell with no s t r o n g ideological t i e s was eager t o
r e v e a l h i s disillusionments: he did so almost immediately upon
leaving Spain and i n one t e x t .
K o e s t l e r had t o w r i t e f o u r t e x t s
b e f o r e he could f i n a l l y and f u l l y r e v e a l h i s disillusionments.
When we examine K o e s t l e r ' s r e v e l a t i o n o f disillusionment,
moreover, we find K o e s t l e r feeling t h a t he has l o s t t h e r i g h t t o
c e r t a i n aspects o f h i s l i f e because h i s own voice--his
writing--had,
i n t h e s e r v i c e o f commitment and power, betrayed
him.
Orwell, unlike Koestler, was n o t constrained by a s t r o n g
p a s t ideological commitment from revealing h i s disillusionments,
155
so he could use h i s voice--his
writing--as
he pleased.
He did
n o t h e s i t a t e t o r e v e a l h i s r e j e c t i o n o f governments and press
t h a t were capable of suppressing r e v o l u t i o n , and l y i n g i n t h e
s e r v i c e of t h e suppression. He was quick t o expose t h e
suppression and t h e lies.
I n fact,
I think i t i s f a i r t o say
t h a t t h e use o f language as a d i v i s i v e t o o l and a method o f
suppression became an obssesslon with Orwell.
He would spend t h e
r e s t of h i s s h o r t l i f e promoting language as a means o f
c l a r i f y i n g thought and revealing t h e t r u t h s o t h a t people could
come together f o r discussion o f ideas, r a t h e r than being divided
by them.
It i s a l s o f a i r t o say, I think, t h a t o u t o f t h e
obsession with language, t h e r a t h e r t e n t a t i v e E r i c B l a i r grew t o
become t h e assured George Orwell.
K o e s t l e r was n o t so quick t o r e v e a l h i s abandonment o f h i s
ideology.
He had a long s t r u g g l e t o f r e e himself from h i s own
writing, which he had used i n t h e p a s t t o s e r v e t h e Cause, by
c r e a t i n g propaganda i n s t e a d o f a r t .
K o e s t l e r had o r i g i n a l l y
joined t h e German Communist P a r t y n o t j u s t t o f i g h t Nazi
oppression, b u t also t o give meaning t o h i s l i f e .
he had hoped t o f i n d t h e Absolute,
blue".
I n Communism
t o f i n d t h e "arrow i n t h e
B u t he soon became disillusioned by t h e oppressiveness of
Communism--in
i t s ideology as well as i t s practice.
f o r him, as f o r
Nonetheless,
many o t h e r disappointed Communists, t h e Spanish
C i v i l War and i t s Common F r o n t seemed l i k e a second chance,
another c a l l t o arms against fascism.
imperfect vision--his
illusions--just
So K o e s t l e r hung on t o his
a l i t t l e longer.
But t h e l a s t remnants o f h i s i l l u s i o n were swept away i n t h e
face o f death.
The ideology o f Communism could n e i t h e r stand up
t o nor f i l l t h e t e r r i f y i n g void t h a t was c r e a t e d by t h e idea o f
what K o e s t l e r c a l l s " t h e u l t i m a t e nada", t h e nothingness t h a t
comes with death.
Out o f h i s disillusionment with t h e p r a c t i c e
and ideology o f Communism, and t o f i l l t h e void, K o e s t l e r c r e a t e d
a "new" a p o l i t i c a l and non-doctrinal
world view.
Released f o r
t h e moment from a p a r t i s a n i d e n t i t y on which he had depended, and
facing death a t t h e same time, K o e s t l e r was able t o recognize
t h a t a human l i f e was i n s t r i n s i c a l l y valuable,
even i f t h e l i f e
was n o t u s e f u l t o t h e Cause o f t h e Communist Party.
I n that
recognition he was a l s o deprived of h i s i l l u s i o n s about Communist
ethics.
He was able t o see c l e a r l y t h a t t h e u t i l i t a r i a n e t h i c s
and t h e p r a c t i c e o f Communism devalued l i f e , t h a t l i f e was only
good when i t was u s e f u l t o t h e Communist Cause.
While he was
waiting t o die, while hearing o t h e r s die, K o e s t l e r recognized
t h a t l i f e i t s e l f was precious.
From t h i s recognition,
t h i s new
vision, K o e s t l e r c r e a t e d a more humane s e t o f e t h i c s by which he
could l i v e and was free, he t e l l s us, t o c r e a t e a r t r a t h e r than
propaganda.
Considering t h e i r differences, i t i s s u r p r i s i n g t h a t Orwell
and K o e s t l e r shared aspects o f t h e i r p o l i t i c a l disillusionment a t
all.
But what may be a s u r p r i s e i s j u s t what they do have i n
common i n t h e i r r e j e c t i o n o f t h e i r ideals.
Both
o f them came t o
-- .
Spain with feelings o f g u i l t a t having served an oppressive
regime, Orwell as an i m p e r i a l i s t i c B r i t i s h police o f f i c e r i n
Burma, K o e s t l e r as a minor functionary i n t h e Communist Party.
Both f e l t a need t o expiate t h e i r g u i l t .
But Orwell never used
h i s w r i t i n g i n t h e s e r v i c e o f B r i t i s h imperialism,
as K o e s t l e r
used h i s t o s e r v e t h e i m p e r i a l i s t i c Communist Party.
Both
w r i t e r s were disillusioned with t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e r o l e t h e
Communist P a r t y played i n t h e Spanish C i v i l War: t h e l i e s being
t o l d about t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y aspects of t h e War,
t h a t t h e l i e s were t o l d t o prevent f u r t h e r
and t h e f a c t
revolution.
Perhaps
such s i m i l a r i t i e s a r e n o t unexpected a f t e r a l l , b u t what may be
s u r p r i s i n g i s b o t h w r i t e r s ' need t o prove t h a t t h e i r
disillusionment i s n o t j u s t
another i l l u s i o n , and t h e similar
t a c t i c s they use t o demonstrate t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h e i r new vision.
To show t h e i r r e a d e r s t h a t t h e i r voice i s t h e i r own, t h a t
they--and
what they say, both men
n o t some o t h e r force--command
f e e l they must prove t h e n e u t r a l i t y o f t h e i r new visions.
attempts t o demonstrate t h a t he was non-partisan
Orwell
b e f o r e he went
t o Spain, t h a t he was learning by experience;/ so t h a t we, h i s
readers, can f e e l reassured t h a t h i s new and c l e a r e r v i s i o n i s
n o t being d i s t o r t e d by a p a r t i s a n bias.
K o e s t l e r takes g r e a t
c a r e t o i l l u s t r a t e t h a t t h e new world-view
he has experienced i s
without dogma and without a moral imperative.
The n e u t r a l i t y o f
h i s new cosmology prevents any possible suggestion t h a t he has
c r e a t e d another i l l u s i o n which i s d o c t r i n a l o r , even worse,
dogma'tic.
party.
visions,
And n e i t h e r w r i t e r i s t r y i n g t o found a d o c t r i n e o r a
Both Orwell and K o e s t l e r do demonstrate t h a t t h e i r new
t h e i r disillusionments coming o u t o f t h e Spanish C i v i l
War a r e n o t j u s t more illusions, b u t a r e v a l i d r e j e c t i o n s o f
c e r t a i n ideals they once cherished.
more than Orwell.
Although K o e s t l e r loses f a r
A s we e n t e r t h e l a s t decade o f t h i s century, we a r e i n a
p o s i t i o n t o see t h a t s i x t y years ago Orwell and K o e s t l e r ' s
concerns with p o l i t i c s and language, and with t h e repressiveness
o f t h e Soviet Union under Communist rule, were j u s t i f i e d - - t h o s e
i s s u e s a r e s t i l l o f concern a t t h e end o f t h e century.
W
e f i n d t h a t Orwell was r i g h t t o warn u s n o t only about t h e
tremendous powers o f t h e text--how
t h e t e x t can stand i n f o r
experience and become t h e reader's experience o f events--but
also
about t h e dangers inherent i n t h e suppression o r d i s t o r t i o n of
t h e t r u t h , suppressions o r d i s t o r t i o n s which can e r a s e o r r e w i t e
history.
For example, only now, f i f t y years l a t e r , does t h e
Russian government admit t o having suppressed o r d i s t o r t e d t h e
a t r o c i t i e s committed against people o f i t s s a t e l l i t e c o u n t r i e s i n
t h e name o f t h e Cause.
W
e have come t o find, moreover, t h a t i n
t h e l a t e Twentieth Century we s t i l l have Orwell's " t i r e d hack on
t h e p l a t f o r m mechanically repeating t h e familiar phrases
some kind o f dummy.
...a
machine.
...."
...
who i s making t h e
"appropriate noises" b u t n o t using h i s b r a i n t o choose h i s words
f o r himself,
-
and repeating t h e words so o f t e n t h a t he i s no
longer conscious o f what he says ( " P o l i t i c s And The English
Language", 152).
Not only i s t h e hack-machine
s t i l l making t i r e d
noises, what i s even more dangerous i s t h a t t h e same hack can
s t i l l defend. t h e indefensible.
For example, t h e newspaper
columnist Allan Fotheringham t e l l s us t h a t Orwell's Doublespeak
i s s t i l l a t work when t h e U.S.
S t a t e Department "no longer uses
t h e word 'killing' i n i t s o f f i c a l r e p o r t s on t h e s t a t u s o f human
r i g h t s i n c o u n t r i e s around t h e world".
I n place o f t h e word
"killing",
t h e phrase "unlawful o r a r b i t r a r y d e p r i v a t i o n o f l i f e "
i s t o be used ( T h e Province, Nov. 2 2 , 1984).
Fotheringham goes
on t o r e c a l l t h e Pentagon's "celebrated d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e
neutron bomb: 'an e f f i c i e n t nuclear weapon t h a t eliminates t h e
enemy with a minimum degree o f damage t o f r i e n d l y t e r r i t o r y " ' ,
and President Reagan's naming t h e MX i n t e r - c o n t i n e n t a l
ballistic
misile t h e "Peacekeeper" (The P r o v i n c e , Nov. 22, 1984).
So, as
we can see, we s t i l l have with us Orwell's t i r e d p o l i t i c a l hack
defending i n Doublespeak what i s indefensible.
As we come t o t h e close o f t h i s century, we find--almost
our disbelief--the
crumbling and t h e dissolving o f a c r u e l and
oppressive regime.
This regime, t h e Union o f Soviet S o c i a l i s t
Republics, r u l e d one-third
t h i s century.
to
o f t h e world f o r more than h a l f o f
And as t h i s massive and monolithic governing body
decays, we a r e n o t s u r e what w i l l take i t s place.
But, as
h o r r o r s a r e being acknowledged, we a r e s u r e t h a t f o r t y - f o u r
ago, when he voiced h i s on-going
called "the most inhuman
also a voice o f t r u t h .
. . . in
years
concern about a regime which he
human h i s t o r y " , K o e s t l e r ' s was
Notes
l o r w e l l ' s preoccupation with t h e use and abuse o f language
grew o u t o f h i s Spanish C i v i l war experiences.
And a l i n e of
descent can be t r a c e d from t h e f i r s t expression o f h i s concerns
with language and power i n Homage t o Catalonia through some of
h i s essays such as "Looking Back on t h e Spanish War" (1942) and
"The Prevention o f L i t e r a t u r e " (1946) t o h i s l a s t expression of
concern i n h i s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, which he wrote i n
1948.
I n h i s essay "Looking Back on t h e Spanish War" Orwell deals
with what he c a l l s t h e "fantasy" and "propaganda" o f t h e German
Nazis and Spanish F a s c i s t s concering I t a l i a n and German
i n t e r v e n t i o n i n Spain.
The propaganda, he says, f r i g h t e n s him
because i t gives him "the feeling t h a t t h e v e r y concept o f
o b j e c t i v e t r u t h i s fading o u t o f t h e world", and t h a t t h e l i e s
t o l d by t h e Right-wing p a r t i e s " w i l l pass i n t o h i s t o r y " (295).
Orwell i s concerned t h a t " l i e w i l l have become t h e t r u t h " , and he
says: "Iknow i t i s t h e fashion t o say t h a t most o f recorded
h i s t o r y i s l i e s anyway.
I am willing t o believe t h a t h i s t o r y i s
f o r t h e most p a r t inaccurate and biased, b u t what i s p a r t i c u l a r
t o our own age i s t h e abandonment o f t h e idea t h a t h i s t o r y could
be t r u t h f u l l y w r i t t e n " (296).
Four years l a t e r , Orwell i s concerned with s o c i e t y ' s
treatment o f t h e w r i t e r o f l i t e r a t u r e .
I n h i s essay "The
Prevention o f L i t e r a t u r e " he says: "Everything i n o u r age
conspires t o t u r n t h e w r i t e r , and every o t h e r kind o f a r t i s t as
well, i n t o a minor o f f i c i a l , working on themes handed t o him from
above and never t e l l i n g what seems t o him t h e whole o f t h e t r u t h "
(84). Orwell goes on t o say t h a t i n England i n 1946 one has t o
defend freedom o f t h e i n t e l l e c t against Communists and
fellow-travellers.
Then he moves from analysing t h e s i t u a t i o n o f
t h e i n t e l l i g e n t s i a i n England t o t h e i r s i t u a t i o n i n t o t a l i t a r i a n
s t a t e s where, he says, "organized l y i n g
i s not, as i s
sometimes claimed, a temporary expedient o f t h e same n a t u r e as
m i l i t a r y deception.
It i s something i n t e g r a l t o t o t a l i t a r i a n i s m ,
something t h a t would s t i l l continue even i f concentration camps
and s e c r e t police f o r c e s had ceased t o be necessary" (85).
Orwell i s t a l k i n g about t h e t o t a l i t a r i a n s t a t e o f Russia where
"history", he says, " i s something t o be c r e a t e d r a t h e r than
learned", and where t h e p a s t i s continuously being a l t e r e d ( 8 6 ) .
...
I n h i s novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four, Orwell has c r e a t e d t h e
u l t i m a t e t o t a l i t a r i a n state--what England might become i n t h e
161
future--where, with Newspeak, n o t only language b u t also t h e a c t
o f thought i s controlled.
More specifically, Orwell describes
t h e purpose o f t h i s agent o f word and thought control: " The
purpose o f Newspeak was n o t only t o provide a medium o f
expression f o r t h e t h e world-view and mental h a b i t s proper t o t h e
devotees o f Ingsoc, b u t t o make a l l o t h e r modes o f thought
impossible" (241).
20ther sources c o r r o b o r a t e Orwell's eye-witness experiences
o f t h e Barcelona r i o t s and t h e subsequent persecution o f t h e
POUM.
Oral h i s t o r i a n Ronald Fraser supports Orwell's view t h a t
t h e POUM wanted immediate r e v o l u t i o n and suspected t h a t t h e new
army being formed by t h e Popular F r o n t was counterrevolutionary.
F r a s e r says t h a t "For t h e dissident Communist
POUM i n Barcelona, t h e war and r e v o l u t i o n were 'inseparable'."
Fraser goes on t o r e c a l l t h e words o f Ignacio Iglesias, p o l i t i c a l
e d i t o r o f t h e POUM's paper L a B a t a l l a , who expresses t h e p a r t y ' s
position:
There could be no triumphant r e v o l u t i o n unless t h e war were
won; b u t t h e war could n o t be won unless r e v o l u t i o n
triumphed.
The POUM's opposition t o t h e Popular Army was
based on r e v o l u t i o n a r y postulates: i t was wrong t o c r e a t e a
r e g u l a r army since t o do so was t o pose t h e war i n t h e same
terms as t h e enemy.
Fraser also reminds us t h a t t h e POUM was ousted from t h e Catalan
government, and t h a t i t s leaders were a r r e s t e d by Stalin's s e c r e t
police ( R e v o l u t i o n And War I n S p a i n 1931-1936, 238).
E. H. Carr, h i s t o r i a n o f Soviet Russia, c o r r o b o r a t e s
Orwell's argument t h a t t h e Spanish Communist P a r t y and l e s s
d i r e c t l y t h e Republican Government were being d i c t a t e d t o by t h e
Comintern i n Moscow.
I n h i s book T h e C o m l n t e r n a n d T h e S p a n ~ s h
C l v l l W a r , Carr says t h a t Moscow believed t h a t t h e c o l l e c t i v i z i n g
o f land and i n d u s t r y could wait because " v i c t o r y over Fascism was
a t stake" (Carr, 21).
Carr supports Orwell's analysis t h a t , on
t h e Republican side, s t r a t e g y and t a c t i c s were determined by
those who c o n t r o l l e d t h e flow o f arms and equipment, and t h e
Soviet Union was i n control.
But t h e process o f take-over, Carr
says, was "complicated
by t h e s i t u a t i o n i n Catalonia, where t h e
PCE [Spanish Communist P a r t y 1 had t o contend with t h e newly
formed POUM" which "appealed successfully t o t h e more r a d i c a l
sections o f t h e L e f t " (Carr, 31).
Carr says t h a t t h e Communists
r e t a l i a t e d against t h e POUM's t o t a l r e j e c t i o n o f t h e a u t h o r i t y o f
Moscow by branding t h e POUM as T r o t s k y i s t , and t h a t " I t i s
d i f f i c u l t t o d i s s o c i a t e t h e savage persecution o f POUM i n Spain,
which began a t t h i s time, from t h e purge t r i a l s o f August o f 1936
and January 1937 i n Moscow" when c e r t a i n high-ranking and "old
guard" p a r t y members "were arraigned as agents o f Trotsky" (Carr,
35).
And Hugh Thomas i n h i s prodigious h i s t o r y , T h e S p a n i s h C i v i l
162
War, a l s o r e i n f o r c e s Orwell's d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e Barcelona r i o t s .
Thomas, l i k e Orwell, d e s c r i b e s t h e attempted take-over o f t h e
Telephone Exchange by t h e c h i e f o f p o l i c e and t h e c i v i l guard
from t h e a n a r c h i s t CNT workers, a f t e r i m p o r t a n t government c a l l s
were i n t e r r u p t e d by a n a r c h i s t telephone o p e r a t o r s (Thomas, 654).
Thomas a l s o s a y s t h a t t h e Communists were o u t t o r e a p " t h e
f u l l e s t adavantage from what was happening--in p a r t i c u l a r t o
d i s c r e d i t t h e POUM, whom t h e y proposed no doubt t o d e s t r o y one
day i f t h e could" (Thomas, 655).
Thomas' d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e
Communist P a r t y l a t e r a l l e g i n g " t h a t t h e c r i s i s had been caused
by t h e agents o f Franco i n t h e CNT and, above a l l , t h e POUM",
moreover, c o r r o b o r a t e s Orwell's d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e a c c u s a t i o n s
t h a t t h e Communists l e v e l e d a t t h e POUM (Thomas, 656).
Works C i t e d
Burke, Kenneth.
A R h e t o r i c O f Motives.
California Press, 1962, 1969.
Berkeley: U n i v e r s i t y o f
Carr, E. H.
T h e Cornintern And T h e S p a n i s h C i v i l Mar.
Ed. Tamara
Deutscher.
New York: Pantheon Books-Random House, Inc.,
1984.
The World o f
"Orwell And The Spanish War."
Ed. Miriam Gross.
London: Weidenfeld &
Nicolson, 1971.
Carr, Raymond.
G e o r g e Orwell.
Corbett, Edward P. J.
Second Edition.
Crick, Bernard.
1982.
C l a s s i c a l R h e t o r i c f o r t h e Modern S t u d e n t .
New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1971.
George Orwell A L i f e .
New York: Penguin Books,
Fotheringham, Allan. " T r u t h doesn't win election."
CVancouver, B.C.I.
22 Nov. 1984.
Province
Fraser, Ronald.
"The popular experience o f war and r e v o l u t i o n
1936-39 R e v o l u t i o n And War I n S p a i n 1931-1939.
Ed. Paul
Preston.
New York: Methuen and Co., 1984.
225-242.
Arrow i n t h e Blue: T h e F i r s t P a r t O f An
New York: S t e i n and Day Pub.,
A u t o b i o g r a p h y : 1905-31.
Koestler, Arthur.
---. Dialogue
York:
---
. The
w i t h Death. Trans. Trevor & Edith Blewitt.
The MacMillan Co.,
New
4 t h printing.
I n v i s i b l e W r i t i n g : T h e Second P a r t O f An A u t o b i o g r a p h y :
1932-1940.
---.
1952.
1984.
London: Hutchinson o f London, 1974.
L'Espagne E n s a n g l a n t e/e : Un L i v r e n o l r s u r 1'Espagne. Paris:
Editions Du Carrefour, 1937.
---
. Spanish
Testament.
London: V i c t o r Gollancz Ltd.,
1937.
"Looking Back on t h e Spanish War." T h e C o l l e c t e d
6 t h ed. 4
E s s a y s , J o u r n a l i s m and L e t t e r s o f G e o r g e Orwell.
Markham, Ont.: Penguin
Vols.
Eds. S. Orwell and I. Angus.
Orwell, George.
Books, 1982.
. Nineteen
---
2: 286-306.
Elghty-Four.
Markham, Ont.:
Penguin Books, 1977.
--- .
164
" P o l i t i c s And The English Language."
The Collected Essays,
J o u r n a l i s m , and L e t t e r s o f G e o r g e O r w e l l .
6 t h ed.
4 Vols.
Markham, Ont.: Peguin Books,
Eds. S. Orwell and I.Angus.
1982.
4: 156-70.
--- .
"The Prevention o f L i t e r a t u r e . "
The Collected Essays,
6 t h ed. 4 Vols.
J o u r n a l ~ s m , and L e t t e r s o f G e o r g e O r w e l l ,
Markham, Ont.: Penguin Books,
Eds. S. Orwell and I Angus.
1982.
4: 81-94.
.
---. T h e
--- Homage T o C a t a l o n i a .
Markham, Ont.:
Road T o Wigan P i e r .
Penguin Books, 1980.
Markham, Ont.:
Paz, Octavio.
Children O f T h e Mire.
Romanticism T o T h e Avant-Garde.
U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1974.
Penguin Books, 1962.
Modern P o e t r y From
Cambridge: Harvard
Plessner, Helmuth. "On The Relation Of Time To Death."
Ed.
Joseph Campbell.
Man A n d T i m e .
New York: Pantheon Books,
1959. 244-245.
Sperber, Murray A.
"Looking Back On K o e s t l e r ' s Spanish War."
Arthur Koestler: A C o l l e c t i o n o f C r i t i c a l Essays.
Ed.
Murray A. Sperber.
Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.:
Prentice-Hall,
Inc., 1977.
190-121.
Thomas, Hugh.
T h e S p a n i s h C i v i l War.
Ont.: Penguin Books, 1984.
Third Edition.
Markham,
Bibliography
Abrahams, W.
& Stansky, P.
"Part Four: An Education i n Spain."
Orwell: T h e T r a n s f o r m a t i o n . London: Constable & Co. Ltd.,
1977.
187-226.
T h e Making O f George Orwell: An E s s a y I n
New York: S t . Martin's Press, 1969.
Literary History.
A l l d r i t t , Keith.
Hannah.
B e t w e e n P a s t And F u t u r e . E i g h t E x e r c i s e s zn
P o l i t i c a l T h o u g h t . New York: Penguin Books, 1980.
Arendt,
Ben-Ami, Shlomo.
"The Republican 'take-over': prelude t o
i n e v i t a b l e catastrophe?" Revolution And War I n S p a i n
1931-1939.
Ed. Paul Preston.
New York: Methuen and Co.,
1984.
14-33.
W r i t e r s i n Arms: T h e L i t e r a r y Impact o f t h e
S p a n i s h C i v i l War. New York: New York U n i v e r s i t y Press,
Benson, Frederick R.
1967.
A R h e t o r i c O f Motives.
Burke, Kenneth.
California Press, 1962, 1969.
Berkeley: U n i v e r s i t y o f
C h r o n i c l e s Of Conscience: A S t u d y o f George
London: Secker & Warburg, 1968.
Orwell and A r t h u r K o e s t l e r .
Calder, Jenni.
T h e Comintern And T h e S p a n i s h C i v i l War. Ed. Tamara
Carr, E. H.
Deutscher.
New York: Pantheon Books-Random House, Inc.,
1984.
"Orwell And The Spanish War."
T h e World o f
Ed. Miriam Gross.
London: Weidenfeld &
Nicolson, 1971.
63-73.
Carr, Raymond.
G e o r g e Orwell.
Coe, Richard W.
Form And S u b s t a n c e : An Advanced
York: John Wiley & Sons, 1961.
Corbett, Edward P. J.
Second Edition.
Crick, Bernard.
1982.
C l a s s i c a l R h e t o r i c f o r t h e Modern S t u d e n t .
New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1971.
George Orwell A Life.
New York: Penguin Books,
Arthur
"The Ex-Communist's Conscience."
Ed. Murray A.
Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.:
Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1977.
Deutscher, Isaac.
Koestler: A Collection o f Critical Essays.
Sperber.
92-99.
R h e t o r i c . New
Eagleton, Terry. L i t e r a r y T h e o r y : An I n t r o d u c t i o n U n i v e r s i t y o f Minnesota Press, 1985.
Fotheringham, Allan. " T r u t h doesn't win election."
CVancouver, B.C.I.
22 Nov. 1984.
Foulkes, A. P.
Co. Ltd.,
L i t e r a t u r e and Propaganda.
1983.
Minneapolis:
Province
London: Methuen and
C i v i l i z a t i o n And I t s D i s c o n t e n t s .
Trans. & Ed.,
Freud, Sigmund.
Norton & Company, 1961.
James Strachey.
New York: W.W.
"Arthur K o e s t l e r and George Orwell."
A s t r i d e Two
Fyvel, T. R.
C u l t u r e s : A r t h u r K o e s t l e r a t 70,
2nd. ed. London:
Hutchinson & Co. Ltd., 1975.
149-161.
/
Gide, Andre. T h e G o d T h a t F a i l e d .
Publishers, 1963.
165-195.
Hodges, Sheila.
1928-1978.
New York: Harper & Row,
Gollancz: T h e S t o r y o f a P u b l i s h i n g House
London: V i c t o r Gollancz Ltd.. 1978.
Jones, Norman.
"Regionalism and r e v o l u t i o n i n Catalonia."
R e v o l u t i o n And War I n S p a i n 1931-1939.
Ed. Paul Preston.
New York: Methuen & Co., 1984.
85-112.
"A Rebel's Progress: To George Orwell's
Koestler, Arthur.
Death."
T h e T r a i l o f t h e D i n o s a u r / R e f l e c t i o n s On H a n g i n g .
London: Hutchinson & Co., Ltd., 1970. 47-50.
---
. Arrow
i n t h e Blue:
1905-31.
---. A r r i v a l
---.
T h e F i r s t P a r t O f An A u t o b i o g r a p h y :
New York: S t e i n and Day Pub.,
and D e p a r t u r e .
D a r k n e s s A t Noon,
---. D i a l o g u e
New York:
Markham, Ont.:
w i t h Death.
The Gladiators.
by t h e author.
---. T h e
---. T h e
---
New
4 t h printing.
MacMillan Co.,
1939, 1965, 1967.
Ed. Richard Crossman.
1952.
N e w York:
The
15-75.
T h e S e c o n d P a r t O f An A u t o b i o g r a p h y :
Lcmdcln: Hutchinson uf Lclndcln, 1974.
. L'Espagne
---.
1952.
New York:
Invisible Writing:
1932-1940.
Penguin Books, 1983.
Ed. Edith Simons, and with a new p o s t s c r i p t
God T h a t F a i l e d .
MacMillan Co.,
Penguin Books, 1984.
Trans. Trevor & Edith Blewitt.
York: The MacMillan Co.,
---.
1984.
/
E n s a n g l a n t e e : U n L i v r e n o i r s u r 1 ' E s p a g n e . Paris:
Editions Du Carrefour, 1937.
Scum o f t h e E a r t h .
New Y o r k : T h e MacMillan Co.,
1968.
---.
Spanish Testament.
London: V i c t o r Gollancz Ltd.,
1937.
Red Spanish Notebook.
The F i r s t S i x
Low, Mary & Brea, Juan.
San Francisco:
Months o f t h e R e v o l u t i o n and t h e C i v i l War.
C i t y L i g h t s Books, 1979.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice.
"Koestler's Dilemmas." A r t h u r K o o s t l e r :
A C o l l e c t i o n of C r i t i c a l Essay.
Ed. Murray R. Sperber.
Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.:
Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1977.
69-85.
Muste, John M. S.
Say T h a t We Saw Spain Die: The L i t e r a r y
Seattle: U n i v e r s i t y
Consequences o f t h e Spanish C i v i l War.
o f Washington Press, 1966.
Animal farm.
Markham, Ont.:
Penguin Books,
F r o n t i e r s O f A r t and Propaganda."
The C o l l e c t e d
Orwell, George.
1974.
---. "The
Eds. S.
Essays, L e t t e r s and J o u r n a l i s m o f George O r w e l l .
Orwell and I.Angus.
6 t h ed.
4 Vols.
Markham, Ont.:
Penguin Books, 1982.
2: 149-53.
. Homage T o C a t a l o n i a .
---. "Inside The Whale."
---
Markham, Ont.:
Penguin Books, 1980.
The C o l l e c t e d Essays, J o u r n a l i s m , and
6 t h ed.
4 Vols.
Eds. S. Orwell
L e t t e r s o f George O r w e l l .
and I.Angus.
Markham, Ont.: Peguin Books, 1982.
1:
540-78.
---. " L i t e r a t u r e
and Totalitarianism."
The C o l l e c t e d Essays,
Jounalism and L e t t e r s o f George O r w e l l .
6 t h ed.
4 Vols.
Eds. S. Orwell and I.Angus.
Markham, Ont.: Penguin Books,
1982.
2: 161-64.
---.
"Looking Back on t h e Spanish War."
The C o l l e c t e d Essays
6 t h ed.
4 Vols.
Journalism, and L e t t e r s o f George O r w e l l .
Markham, Ont. : Pengin Books,
Eds. S. Orwell and I.Angus.
1982.
2: 286-306.
---. "Notes
on t h e Spanish Militias."
The C o l l e c t e d Essays.
Markham, Ont.: Penguin Books, 1982.
1: 350-64.
---. " P o l i t i c s
And The English Language"
The C o l l e c t e d Essays,
Journalism, and L e t t e r s o f George O r w e l l .
6 t h ed.
4 Vols.
Eds. S. Orwell and I. Angus.
Markham, Ont.: Peguin Books,
1982.
4: 156-70.
---.
Nineteen E i g h t y - f o u r .
---. "The
Markham, Ont.:
Prevention o f L i t e r a t u r e . "
Penguin Books, 1977.
The C o l l e c t e d Essays,
J o u r n a l i s m , and L e t t e r s o f George O r w e l l .
6 t h ed. 4 Vols.
Markham, Ont.: Penguin Books,
Eds. S. Orwell and I Angus.
1982.
4: 81-94.
---.
168
"Red Spanish Notebook, A Review."
Markham, Ont.:
---.
Penguin Books, 1982.
T h e Road T o Wigan P i e r .
---. "Shooting
Ont.:
T h e C o l l e c t e d Essays.
an Elephant."
Markham, Ont.:
.
I Write."
Penguin Books, 1982.
T h e C o l l e c t e d Essays.
Penguin Books, 1982.
Markham,
1: 265-72.
--- "Wells, H i t l e r and t h e World State."
---. "Why
Penguin Books, 1962.
T h e C o l l e c t e d Essays.
Penguin Books, 1982.
Markham, Ont.:
1: 320-22.
T h e C o l l e c t e d Essays.
2: 166-72.
Markham, Ont.:
1: 23-30.
C h i l d r e n O f T h e Mire.
Paz, Octavio.
Romanticism T o T h e Avant-Garde.
U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1974.
Modern P o e t r y From
Cambridge: Harvard
Ed.
Plessner, Helmuth. "On The Relation O f Time To Death."
Joseph Campbell.
Man And T i m e ,
New York: Pantheon Books,
1959. 244-245.
Preston, Paul.
"War o f Words: t h e Spanish C i v i l War and t h e
R e v o l u t i o n A n d War I n S p a i n : 1939-1936. Ed.
historians."
1-3.
Paul Preston.
New York: Methuen & Co. Ltd., 1984.
P r i t c h e t t , V. S.
"Koestler: A Guilty Figure."
Arthur Koestler:
A C o l l e c t i o n O f C r i t i c a l Essays,
Ed. Murray R. Sperber.
Englewood CLiffs, N.J.:
Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1977. 53-68.
Red F l a g s , B l a c k F l a g s : C r i t i c a l E s s a y s o n t h e L i t e r a t u r e o f
S p a n i s h C i v i l War, Ed. John Beals Romiser.
Potomac,
Maryland: Studia Humanitatis, 1982.
the
Shubert, Adrian.
"The epic f a i l u r e : t h e Asturian r e v o l u t i o n o f
R e v o l u t i o n And War I n S p a i n 1931-1939.
Ed.
October 1934."
113-136.
Paul Preston.
New York: Metheun & Co., 1984.
Souvaraine, Boris.
"Ideology o f Soviet Communism." D i c t i o n a r y
4 Vols.
New York: Charles
o f t h e Hzstory o f Ideas.
Scribner's Sons, 1973.
S p a n i s h F r o n t : W r i t e r s On T h e C i v i l War.
Ed. Valentine
Cunningham.
New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1986.
Sperber, Murray A.
"Looking Back On K o e s t l e r ' s Spanish War."
A r t h u r K o e s t l e r : A C o l l e c t i o n o f C r i t i c a l Essays,
Ed.
Murray A. Sperber.
Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.:
Prentice-Hall,
Inc., 1977.
190-121.
The S p a n i s h C i v i l War.
Thomas, Hugh.
Ont.: Penguin Books, 1984.
Third Edition.
Markham,
169
Warburg, Frederic. A l l A u t h o r s A r e E q u a l .
The Publishing L i f e of
F r e d e r i c W a r b u r g 1936-1971.
New York: St. Martin's Press,
Inc., 1973.
---.
An O c c u p a t i o n f o r G e n t l e m e n .
Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n Co.,
1960.
A s t r i d e Two
Webberly, Paul.
"An Attempt a t an Overview."
2nd ed.
C u l t u r e s : A r t h u r K o e s t l e r A t 70. Ed. Harold H a r r i s .
London: Hutchinson & Co., Ltd., 1975. 1-18.
T h e L a s t G r e a t C a u s e : T h e intellectuals a n d
Weintraub, Stanley.
New York: Weybright & Talley, Inc.,
t h e S p a n i s h C i v i l War.
1968.
Arthur
West, Rebbeca.
"The Road t o Communism and Back."
Ed. Murray A.
Koestler: A C o l l e c t i o n o f C r i t i c a l EssaysSperber. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1977.
92-99.
Orwell.
London: Fontana Paperbacks,
Williams, Raymond.
Flamingo e d i t i o n , w i t h Afterword, 1979.
The C r y s t a l S p i r i t : A Study o f George
Woodcock, George.
Orwell.
Montreal:
Book Center Inc., 1984.
.
--- T h e W r i t e r And P o l i t i c s .
London: The Porcupine Press, 1948.
Reprinted 1970 by t h e F o l c r o f t Press.
Dictionary o f t h e
Rosen, Edward.
"Cosmology Since 1850".
Vol. I.
New York: Charles Scribner's
History o f Ideas.
Sons, 1973.