When the German army sped across the Soviet border in June 1941 in a double-cross that left the more-than-adequately forewarned Stalin shocked and a few of his most prominent generals conveniently scapegoated and summarily shot, Vasily Grossman, too, was caught unawares. The Ukrainian novelist was fat, brainy, and Jewish, credentials that were more counter than revolutionary and that earned him a nyet at the nearest recruiting station. He was, it turns out, fortunate just to have had the opportunity.
In the introduction to their new collection of Grossman’s wartime writings, A Writer at War, translators and editors Antony Beevor and Luba Vinogradova describe the pre-Barbarossa Grossman as “truthful and politically naïve,” “gauche and ingenuous.” “He was an extremely kind and devoted friend,” insisted the poet Ilya Ehrenburg, “but could sometimes say giggling to a 50-year-old woman: ‘You have aged a lot in the last month.’ I knew about this trait in him and did not get offended when he would remark suddenly: ‘You’ve started to write so badly for some reason.’”
Stalin’s purges rendered such a character ripe for the Gulag. “It was a miracle that he survived,” the authors remark dryly. A miracle he survived the Gulag, but what about the war? After all, this was before the invasion, before Grossman eventually signed on with the Red Army newspaper and logged a thousand days at the front, before the prolonged horrors of Stalingrad and Kursk, before Majdanek, before Treblinka, before Berdichev, where the SS shot Grossman’s elderly mother and tossed her into a trench. If giggly Vasily was raised in a famine-plagued country where “parents crazed by hunger ate their own children,” he finally came of age in a world where a son couldn’t save his mom.
A Writer at War is an important book because it provides a piercing look into the author of Life and Fate, a 1960 novel about the siege of Stalingrad and an undisputed masterpiece of 20th-century Russian literature. But, perhaps more importantly, it’s important for the necessary emphasis it places on the barbarity of the Eastern Front. We Americans know or care little about this part of the Second World War. It exists for us as a vague threat hurled by Colonel Klink at Sergeant Schultz, not as the venue for perhaps the bloodiest battle in human history.
We have always been taught that Omaha Beach is where the war turned, where so many brave GIs fell that Spielberg was forced to make a film. In last year’s The War Complex: World War II in Our Time, Marianna Torgovnick asks her readers to estimate Allied and American losses on D-Day. A hundred thousand? Fifty thousand? Try 3,581. By contrast, more than three-quarters of a million Soviets fell at Stalingrad, and many more Germans than that. Torgovnick is quick to add that it’s not a contest; it’s just that, for reasons both cultural and political, D-Day looms much larger in our imagination. *
Grossman’s account of the war comes from censored stories he wrote for Krasnaya Zvedzda, the official Red Army newspaper, as well as letters to his wife and parents, and uncensored notes that he concealed from Communist Party authorities. These sources are skillfully threaded together by clean and consistently understated prose from the editors, who periodically explain, fact check, or contextualize Grossman without ever getting in his way. When Grossman describes his first battle, his writing—no more than a few scribbled notes—nevertheless betrays the eye of an artist, the dedication of a journalist, and the nose of a critic:
The picture of burning Gomel in the eyes of a wounded cow.
The colors of smoke. Typesetters had to set their newspaper by the light of burning buildings.
We stay the night with a tyro journalist. His articles aren’t going to join a Golden Treasury of Literature. I’ve seen them in the Front newspaper. They are complete rubbish, with stories such as “Ivan Pupkin has killed five Germans with a spoon.”
By Stalingrad, however, his concerns had become considerably less aesthetic: “Soldiers burned to death in the houses. Their charred corpses were found. Not one of them had fled. They burned holding out.”
A Writer at War is also important because it reminds us that Grossman bore powerful witness to the Holocaust. In particular, he wrote about Treblinka, a camp he visited shortly after its liberation by the Red Army. He found only about 40 survivors there, huddled and hiding in the surrounding pine forests, and he immediately began interviewing them all. Approximately 800,000 Jews had been gassed and burned at Treblinka in the previous year, an operation presided over by a mere 25 SS men and about a hundred of their Ukrainian flunkies. How was such a thing possible logistically, never mind morally? Providing the answer to one, if not both, Grossman’s essay, “The Hell Called Treblinka,” is a far more detailed explanation than the average reader may be prepared for.
“Now we know the whole story . . .” he wrote. “We know about death from starvation, about the swollen people who were taken outside the barbed wire on wheelbarrows and shot.” Grossman’s words are all the more powerful for their irony in the wake of David Irving’s recent conviction on charges of Holocaust denial. He spares no detail, even describing the men assigned to sweep up the camp square after the “heaps of letters, photographs of new-born babies, brothers, fiancées, yellowed wedding announcements” had been gathered, sorted, and trashed. His psychological insights, meanwhile, are devastating: “When stripped,” he notes, “a person immediately loses the . . . instinct to live and one accepts one’s destiny like a fate. A person who used to have an intransigent thirst for life becomes passive and indifferent.”
It is no wonder that this essay was read at Nuremburg.
It is a wonder that Grossman himself does not get lost in such a book, overwhelmed by the enormity of the events he lived and wrote about. Instead, he gently reminds us of how unlikely it is that he should ever have survived Stalin; how unlikely it is that a man who walked with a cane and wore round, college-professor spectacles should so quickly toughen up and turn into what the Russians called a frontovik, or front-line soldier; how unlikely it is that a Jew, even a non-observant one, should be able to so easily insinuate himself into the lives of peasants and generals alike. At one point during the siege of Stalingrad, grossman even coaxed his divisional commander, a battle-hardened and reserved Siberian, to talk with him for six uninterrupted hours.
It is through stories like this that Grossman becomes a man we grow to know and care about over the course of this patchwork volume. We know, for instance, of the guilt he felt in not working hard enough to save his mother, but when, near the end, we are presented with two letters he wrote to her after her death, it makes for difficult and emotional reading.
Grossman’s Life and Fate will be republished by New York Review Books later this year. It is a book to be eagerly awaited. Until then, however, A Writer at War provides an unflinching and uncommon look into the last century’s heart of darkness.
———
* For those of you who might object that D-Day—apart from the full Normandy campaign—was but 24 hours while Stalingrad lasted 199 days, here’s some quick math: At a rate of 3,581 casualties per day over 199 days, you still end up with 712,619 killed and wounded, or about ten days of slaughter short. But imagine it: 209 consecutive D-Days!
The latest posts at the blog of The Quarterly Conversation
I’ve been thinking a lot about heat waves. The thick summer weather has felt like a wall of fire that must be bravely pushed through to order to exit from an air conditioned office building and make my way to the corner to board a bus crowded with sweaty citizens. So perhaps it’s no surprise that [...]
"What’s not so up for dispute is that Markson accomplished what, by all rights, should be a literary impossibility." (Colin Marshall for The Millions)
"Ich liebe dich. No sentence pronounced by a judge could be more threatening. It means that you are about to receive a gift you may not want." Via Dylan Suher, Greg Gerke's sort-of review of William H. Gass's Reading Rilke in BIG OTHER.
A fan of Herman Melville must have patience. He must appreciate digression and the dissolution of pattern or plan. He must enjoy the sheer rush of words, a proper Biblical torrent of them. And he must be able to find pleasure in philosophical dialogue as much as in wild anecdote. But must he read Clarel? Can [...]
This is just one small example.
Thomas Bernhard is certainly one of the major, titanic writers of any era, any country. Enormously influential, unremittingly bleak and pessimistic but never without a sense of humor, his style evolved into single-paragraphed philosophical rants extending hundreds of pages, the best of which are Woodcutters, ‘Walking’ (from Three Novellas), and Gathering Evidence. I have finally [...]
Ever since Penguin's 75th Anniversary roadtrip I have intended to address the somewhat simultaneous release of Penguin 75, a sort of vanity book of Penguin covers. This book is delightful, but flawed. Delightful, but misleading.
In The Unicorn Hunt (1993), the fifth book of Dorothy Dunnett’s cycle of historical novels of early Renaissance Europe, the House of Niccolo, Dunnett tells of the deficiencies of wealthy merchant Anselm Adorne’s relations with women thus: His wife Margriet could have warned him. He was familiar with motherly wives and the skittish ways of other [...]
Janet Holmes, director of Ahsahta Press, based at Boise State University in Idaho, took the time this week to share her thoughts on poetry publishing as part of my ongoing series of publisher profiles. Ahsahta publishes seven full-length collections of poetry a year, including recent works by Kate Greenstreet, Lisa Fishman, Rusty Morrison, and Julie Carr. Like some other small presses, Ahsahta offers a yearly subscription option, which is one of my favorite ways to buy poetry and encounter the work of many poets who are new to me, as well as poets whose newest books I always look forward to reading. Janet says more about this and what it's like to craft a press's identity and consistent aesthetic.
An unfortunate side effect to the lengthy transition of print to digital is our long suffering endurance of stale articles in mainstream media rehashing the same points as every other article in mainstream media.
The latest articles published in between issues
In Ransom, Malouf satisfyingly gives us a meeting between Priam and Achilles that builds from the interiority of Priam. The novel seems to want to teach the importance of doing something human to those who might never get around to picking up Homer or who, if they do, might wish they could get into the character's heads.
Winterson has always told and retold the same fictions: of parents and children; of origins, and adoptions; of differences, of margins; of love; of passion; she has always manipulated rhythm and language as an excavation of sources. Much of her fiction mirrors what we know of Winterson's own story, but she agitates against the idea that her work has to be considered as fiction or autobiography, laying claim to both. In Art Objects she writes: "The question put to the writer 'How much of this is based on your own experience?' is meaningless. All or nothing may be the answer. The fiction, the poem, is not a version of the facts, it is an entirely different way of seeing"; a "separate reality." At every turn she eludes the critic, the interviewer, the reader; she offers truth, but not the truth. "I'm telling you stories. Trust me."
It's difficult to pin down exactly why books as objects mean so much to me. I wasn't alive when William Goyen's excellent Come, The Restorer was published, but owning an original printing with the dust jacket—as it would have been purchased at the time of its release—makes the book more special to me than some beat-up paperback reissue. If it's signed, even more so. I'm only really interested in modern first editions (say, post-1950 or so)—before that books get quite expensive, but also I don't think they look as nice, since many were issued without dust jackets, and at that time the dust jacket wasn't considered a permanent part of the book, so they're often missing. So why the obsession and collecting, and why is it so important?
Wood can be harsh, yes, but he is seldom unfair. Wyatt Mason was wrong to accuse him of having suggested, by dint of a string of negative reviews, that no good contemporary literature exists. (He has written favorably of McEwan, Bolaño, Robinson, Ozick, Kirsch, Sebald, Roth, Saramago, Swift, Carey.) He never simply dismisses a writer (in the manor of, say, Dale Peck); on the contrary, his criticism, even at its most polemical and uncompromising, is inexplicably bound to larger concerns about the direction of contemporary fiction. Two major concerns have dominated James Wood's writing: realism and religion. In The Broken Estate: Essays on Literature and Belief, his first collection, newly available in paperback from Picador, these two concerns are beautifully imbricated, resulting in what is surely among the finest achievements in recent literary journalism.
To say that Mark McMorris's Entrepôt is about writing poetry is to do a huge disservice to this beautiful and penetrating book, whose ostensible subject of contemplation is how to live, love, and make do in a time of war, if not cultural crisis. On the other hand, the book's greatest service, at least to my eye, is in its exploration of just what it means to be a poet—I should be more specific and say a lyric poet—amid our contemporary terrors.