Your first choice is George Orwell’s 1984.
I read this, like most people do, when I was in my mid-teens. At that stage I was a classicist and I had no thought of doing anything about Russian history. I think, looking back, this was the book which influenced me more than any other when I came to take up historical study, because of its astonishing insight into totalitarian regimes.
And I think that one of the great things about Orwell’s account of totalitarianism is not just the tremendous power that 20th-century dictatorships have exercised, but also how sordid and squalid the living conditions are for many of the people there. And I’m impressed by how individuals, with any independence of mind, still managed to survive those conditions. In other words, the book looks at how order and disorder co-habit. And I think Orwell, without ever having gone to the USSR, really did understand it from the outside brilliantly.
How do you think he managed that?
I think he did that probably from a lot of his personal experiences, particularly in Spain where he saw how the Spanish Communist Party acted on the orders of the International Communist Party. At the time they were going about exterminating their Communist and Socialist enemies. And he applied this knowledge to what he understood about Soviet foreign, and indeed internal, policy.
And have you seen any examples of what he wrote about in your own research?
When I read depictions of what a perfect Communist order would look like, written by Communists, all of the nasty underbelly of Communism is kept back. But, over the 1960s and 1970s, more and more accounts came out of the USSR concerning this picture that Orwell drew. People lived cheek by jowl with each other, and there was this extraordinary central power along with sordid demoralising social conditions. Most notably, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s book The Gulag Archipelago went in the same direction. This almost became the main theme of Soviet literature.
Read full interview
Robert Service is Professor of Russian Studies at St Antony’s College, Oxford. His research interests cover Russian history from the late 19th century to the present day and he has written numerous books on the subject. Nowadays he is focusing on Russia in its international framework. He is currently working on the geopolitics of the Russian Revolution as well as a study of the end of the Cold War.
By Fyodor Dostoevsky
Buy
By Alexander Blok
Buy
By Leon Trotsky
Buy
By Thucydides
BuyFinally you have chosen a classic, 1984 by George Orwell.
I think torture is not just the physical torture that we all associate with the word. It is also several forms of psychological and mental torture that can happen even on a massive scale.
Of course 1984 came and went and we didn’t have the kind of dramatic tyranny George Orwell predicted. But, perhaps we didn’t have it in 1984 because of his book 35 years earlier. I think it does alert us to the danger of unfettered state power, which under any circumstance always ends up committing violations against individuals and particularly the kind of violation that we associate with the word torture.
Read full interview
Juan E Méndez is a visiting professor of law at the American University, Washington College of Law, and the UN special rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. He was an adviser on crime prevention to the prosecutor, International Criminal Court in 2009 and 2010. He is also co-chair of the Human Rights Institute of the International Bar Association. A native of Argentina, Mr Méndez has dedicated his legal career to the defence of human rights and has a long and distinguished record of advocacy throughout the Americas. As a result of his involvement in representing political prisoners, the Argentinean military dictatorship arrested him and subjected him to torture and administrative detention for more than a year
By Nigel S Rodley
Buy
By Alicia Partnoy
Buy
By Ariel Dorfman
Buy
By Philippe Sands
Buy