We the Living

Everything Ayn Rand has written transcends time. This book even more so. If people wonder what the "first free country" will look like if they continue to elect political leaders who have a "death premise",such as they have, all they need to do is read this book and they'll know. I just hope it's not too late. I truly believe if We The Living and Atlas Shrugged had been mandatory reading for JR/Senior High school students, respectively,even as short a time as 10-13 Yrs ago, our country would be going in an entirely different direction. Or at the least we'd be in better position to turn it around. Unfortunately, I believe our children and grandchildren have an unimaginably more difficult fight ahead of them because of the socialistic ideals of the "God-Fearing Mystics" and "Selfless Humanitarians", leaders our generation voted into power,who's ideals are being spread like a plague across this amazing country and turned into policy as this is being written. I wish I could go back in time to show my parents, and my younger self, the warning signs to look for. But as a Romantic Realist, I know I can only try to change what happens tomorrow and the day after that. And the only way to do that is by spreading the philosophical ideals, the morals and the Life Premise that I learned from Ayn Rand. This story is about as close to an autobiographical account of Ayn Rands life in the USSR as we will ever know. The ideals, the values of our young heroine are all here in young Kira. Her younger sister drew caricatures just as Irena did. The physical description of her Uncle Vasili is based on her father. The young character Leo, the man Kira loves, is fashioned after AR's first love in college. A character who became so entwined with the real Leo that even though she disliked the name, she couldn't separate the two and couldn't change the name. The Russia she sees...you see. The Russia she lived...you live.This Russia is not a character, but the real backdrop to her story and played a big role in who the person Ayn and "Kira" became. It is a love story. Two totally different men with different lives and seemingly two very different philosophies on life. The only thing they have in common is their "soul" (not a spiritual soul"). These two men, the way the act, react, and how they see life is what draws Kira to them. When the country takes away everything you own, uses you as an example of the worst of humanity, takes away your freedom to be who you are, say what you think, do what you want, live as you want to live ...what do you do? This is the premise of the story. What does communism do to your soul? What will it do to any country and to its people. It crushes their spirit. Destroys the individual with their hopes an dreams and desires. None of these things are allowed in a collective society. Every idea, thought, desire, anything that makes you an individual is stomped out of you. Every breath you take is not your own. It belongs to your comrades, your brothers and sisters. There is no "I" in socialism, communism, totalitarianism, whatever label you give it. There is only We. Spoiler alert..... Ayn Rand takes you from the beginning to the ending of the lives of these 3 young people. You will feel what they feel: joy, pain, disbelief, helplessness, hope, defiance, hopelessness, bitter cold, disgust, fear, courage beyond imagination, love without limits and the utter dispair when everything is lost and you are totally and completely alone. You will go through the ups and downs of the lives they lived, will understand who they are and what they believe in. Will wonder WHY did she do that to a beloved character, cry if you are anything like me at the loss of life and be completely in shock at how the story ends. This is no fairytale, so there is no fairytale ending. You will understand when you read her epilogue why she had to end it as she did. But you will still cry for Kira. For everything she lost and, at the very end, what she found. You only have 3 Choices when you live in a world that crushes who you are. When there's nothing left. 1. suicide- it finally breaks you 2. close off your mind completely. The only thing you have that they can't take is your mind. So you drown who you are with alcohol, parties, do anything to make yourself forget what you can never have. You don't compromise, you don't bend but you break. Who you are disappears and you become an empty shell of a human being. It is like a drawn out suicide. 3. You run away, try to escape. You neither compromise what you believe, bend or break. You don't lose hope or give in to the Life you know is out there for you. You run until you can't run anymore and you escape or die trying. Either way you remain unconquered. Each of these 3 characters took a different road. Each made a different choice and each has a different ending. AR explains why each of the 3 had to go down the road they did. This is a tragic love story but more importantly, it is a tragic "Life" story. A tragedy that seems more and more possible in the country that our original leaders created to be free, one in which we believe the promise that "Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness" can not be taken from us. We need to open our eyes. Open our neighbors eyes, the World's eyes because this could easily become America if we stay on the path we are on. We outlawed slavery a long time ago. We can't permit it to come back for the sake of the collective. "I" must always remain the most important word in our society. AYN RAND taught me that.

The only other novel I have read from Ayn Rand is Atlas Shrugged. I believe this novel was written at the start of her writing career. The difference in style, characterization and approach is notable compared to Atlas. Even though it focuses on life in Soviet Russia, this is very much a book for our time. For this reason alone it is worth reading. We The Living centers around Kira Argounova as she and her family are coming to grips with leading a new life in Soviet Russia. Two other characters also come into focus as Kira becomes romantically involved with both - Leo and Andrei. I was quite surprised with Rand's treatment of her characters in this novel. While they felt like symbols and mouthpieces for Rand's objectivism philosophy in Atlas Shrugged, here they feel authentic and relatable i.e. real human beings. She does an excellent job highlighting the insidiousness of the Communist collectivist philosophy and how it slowly changes or outright destroys the individual and his/her individuality and humanity. The three main characters all deal with the oppressiveness of life in Soviet Russia in different ways all leading to losing something precious. Not even love or the simple need for honest human interaction and emotional bonding can survive. This is not only apparent with Kira and Leo but Sonia and Pavel as well. Even family bonds are destroyed. See Victor as an example. Reading this novel, one should be able to see the parallels between the communist approach to free speech and egalitarianism and today’s smothering political correctness and quest for equality. The chilling result of all this is the sacrifice of morals and values in the name of a greater good. Sonia says the following in the novel: “Science is in our own calloused hands. We have outgrown that old bourgeois prejudice about the objective impartiality of science. Science is not impartial. Science is a weapon of the class struggle.” Today we see this reflected in Environmentalism and the many scandals surrounding tampering of data used to advocate for global warming. A friend was said to me: “Does it matter whether we know global warming is true? We have to do something!” Truth and or evidence for a course of action is no longer necessary if the action is deemed noble in and of itself. Another example from Sonia: “Hearty proletarian greetings to all! And particularly to our comrade women. There’s no sight I like better than a new woman student, a woman emancipated from the old slavery of dishes and diapers.” The parallels to some aspects of modern day feminism should be readily apparent. In summary, those who disliked Rand’s characterizations and excessive monologues on philosophy in Atlas Shrugged should give this book a whirl. It is far more nuanced and in the vein of a traditional literary work of fiction. For those who enjoyed Atlas Shrugged, this book is well worth visiting to witness Rand’s first baby steps in attempting to understand and articulate her beliefs. The difference in style, expression and characterization is fascinating.

It was hard to rate this book because I really didn't like it. Why? Because truthfully it was too depressing--there was nothing about it that made me want to turn the next page. I even had to put it down and read something light and refreshing because I would never find it in this book. Having said all that, giving it four stars has to do with the contents, the writer's message, and the idea that she experienced the aftermath of the Russian Revolution first hand. This book was written in 1936. The Revolution is long passed, Lenin is long dead, and life isn't as glorious as those proletariats had imagined. Unless you are an official with the Communist Party your life is bleak at the most. There is little if no food available, everyone has ration tickets to get bread, and for the most part meals consist of potatoes and gruel. It's like a page out of a Dickens novel only this is the twentieth century. The main character of this novel is Kira, a young woman whose father once owned a factory so at one time, life was pretty good for them. Then there is Leo, an anti-revolutionary guy whose father was once an admiral in the Czar's navy and has been executed. The other male dominant figure is Andrei who is in love with Kira and is himself dedicated to the new order of Communism. Their lives become intertwined in various ways. In the forward of this book, Ayn Rand describes Kira as a replica of herself. Kira dreams of becoming an engineer and studies at the Institute. Rand in her book Atlas Shrugged celebrates the individual---the drive to success, love of your work and profession and the desire to do good things. In the new Russia this is not acceptable. And Kira being of a previously well to do family that owned a business and property does not fit into this new world order. Granted this is fiction, but it's interesting that the writer experienced this life before she escaped and eventually got to the United States. To appreciate her most controversial book Atlas Shrugged, I think it's important to read this first endeavor. If one feels that Atlas Shrugged promotes greed, this book describes how those in power under a system that oppresses any free thought and free enterprise are even greedier as they exert more power and control over everyone and everything!

I read 'Gentleman in Moscow.' It was a good book as it was set in the Metropol, best hotel in Moscow, which reminded me of my week's stay there in 1973. This book, We the Living, by Ayn Rand, is the 'rest of the story,' as told by someone who actually lived in Russia during those first few years after the Bolsheviks took over. Rand was 12 yo in 1917, and wasn’t able to emigrate to the US until 9 years later when she was 21. Rand has said that this book is as close to an autobiography as she will ever write. In 1926, just before she left for America, a young Russian said to her at a party: “When you get there, tell them that Russia is a huge cemetery and that we are all dying.” We the Living certainly told them that! On its completion, AR wrote, this is “the first story written by a Russian who knows the living conditions of the new Russia and who has actually lived under the Soviets in the period described … the first one by a person who knows the facts and also, having escaped, can tell them.” Unfortunately, the book was released in 1933 during the world's ‘Red Decade’ when most viewed the ‘Russian Communist Experiment’ as a possible solution to all the social problems brought about by the Great Depression. I know my dad and brother thought so (as did all Union folks). Also, none of the liberal intelligentsia in this country wanted to believe what Rand wrote, and so the book didn’t sell (only 3000 copies). But it did well in England, the Scandinavian countries, and especially in Italy who, as Europeans before WWII, knew what was happening in the East. In 1958, Rand re-released the book and I think it has now sold over 3,000,000 copies. In the middle of WWII, Italy even produced two movies based on the book (quite a feat under wartime conditions). Shortly after the movie was released, however, Mussolini banned the movie and ordered all copies destroyed including the film negatives. Fortunately, the producers were able to hide the original negatives by submitting a different one to the police for destruction. Much later, in the 80's I think, the negatives of two movies were resurrected, restored and combined into one and re-released. I watched it last night (with subtitles). It’s a very powerful movie … based on a very powerful book. The movie necessarily downplays the political, to emphasize the powerful love story between the female heroine and her Bourgeoise lover on the one hand and a Communist GPU Officer (secret police) on the other. The way that Communism destroys the three is a major part of the story … spoiler alert ... it doesn’t end well. I suppose the reason I’m so fascinated by the story is that we seem to be going through another ‘Red Decade’ where socialism and communism are coming back in favor. If you get the book, I’m guessing you’ll find it hard to read. It’s pretty depressing but it helped me to answer some of the questions I had when in Moscow in 1973 and later (2004) when touring Eastern Europe where the suffering under Communism was much worse than under the Nazis. The lesson is clear: the ideals espoused by Communism (and Socialism as the gateway) can’t be realized as they violate basic human nature. That’s the book's 'very powerful' lesson.

One of the problems with any class-based revolution is that the resentful are put in charge leading to distracted and arbitrary administration. Ayn Rand's first novel, "We the Living" gives a vivid account of this phenomenon. I listened to the reading on cd by Mary Wood whose manner, approaching cold and hard, suited the overall tone of this narrative. Rand states that the story is based on her experiences, though it is not a thinly veiled autobiography. [SPOILER ALERT] Kira, the 18-year-old daughter of a furnishings merchant who had included the Tsar among his customers, returns to Petrograd with her parents, and older sister, seeking help from her aunt's family, about 1922 after the Revolution has died down. Unlike her parents and uncle who cling to the hope that the Bolshevik control cannot last, Kira is indifferent to politics and ignores the restraints of both the old regime and the new party ideology. She is young, attractive without much effort, and unafraid. Unlike many women who feel for others and seemingly want to please everyone, Kira has a strong sense of boundaries and seeks to please only herself. Admitted to the university with the intent to study engineering, she rubs elbows with her cousin Viktor, a womanizer whom she rebuffs, who pragmatically embraces the Communist Party in order to secure advancement and the perquisites membership entails. She attracts the local party commissar, in part, by her lack of fear of him. She is attracted to him as they exchange conversations here and there, though his commitment to the party and its ideal, and her indifference and bourgeois background is a barrier. Then she meets a mysterious stranger whom she agrees to meet clandestinely , and subsequently leave the country with. As she makes love to him for the first time on the boat, they are arrested by Communist police. He turns out to be Leo, the son of an admiral who opposed the revolution. She is let off as being a naive girl, and he gets a light sentence. When he returns, they move in together. In a purge of the university, Kira is expelled, and must find a job, Andrei, the commissar uses his influence to help her. When Leo needs treatment at a sanitarium to head off tuberculosis, she eventually becomes Andrei's mistress, accepting financial help to make this possible. When Leo returns, she continues living with Leo, though seeing Andrei from time to time. Having lived off of charity breaks down Leo's self-respect and, unable to secure a job due to his record and background, he participates with a corrupt party official to front a shop that sells produce stolen from the state bureaucracy. Andrei pursues the corruption, makes enemies among the party higher ups, and when the he discovers that it is Kira's lover who is scapegoated so that the corrupt party official can escape, he decides to take his own life. Leo gets off because Andrei pulls some strings, and determines to leave Kira to go on vacation with a wealthy woman with connections. Kira attempts to escape to Latvia, but ends up shot by a boarder guard and dying in the snow. Kira's character exhibits the confident self-possession that we often find so compelling, especially in sexual attraction. This is a double-edged sword as she fearlessly treads where danger awaits. Other characters, notably her sister, are portrayed as simpering, confused, and helpless. Still others, Viktor and Kira's mother, forfeit their integrity by adapting to the new social realities, the former by calculation, the latter more by attrition. Andrei the true believer is eventually disillusioned, and Leo goes his own selfish way, yet despising himself for it. It is a tragic story in which there are no winners. Perhaps that is the point- the society based on impossible ideals robs everyone of freedom. Presumably the West, with its heritage of individual freedom, will allow the individual's pursuit of happiness. The indictment of Communist society recalls Orwell's classic, "Animal Farm." Those who sincerely believe in the ideals end up being exploited by the cynical manipulators of power. The Marxist interpretation of religion is applied to his own ideology- an opiate to persuade the exploited to put up with what they otherwise would not tolerate, Rand seems to be saying that it is better to embrace the selfish greed of capitalism than the hypocritical pretense of communism. Yet, the traditional Christian must recognize that the tragedy lies less with the Communist state that Rand (rightly) abhors, but with that despair of transcendence, of meaning beyond oneself, that she embraces along with the Communists and every secularist. Her view of selfishness embraces some good and admirable things- integrity, responsibility for self, respect for other selves. But even her heroine falls prey to the irrational, forfeits integrity by trading sex for money, as well as by old-fashioned two-timing. She wants with Leo a dependable relationship and even suggests marriage at one point. But those who insist that they are free are not free to make commitments that transcend the present moment.

Ayn Rand was a good writer and a great storyteller. That I have always had trouble with the far reaches of her philosophy does not take away from that. In We the Living, her first book, the philosophy is much clearer and more understandable than in most of her other books. The real crux of it was that she hated life in Soviet Russia, and in this book, she clearly details what it was like there in the 1920’s. The point is made in the introduction that: The basic cause of totalitarianism is two ideas: men’s rejection of reason in favor of faith, and of self-interest in favor of self-sacrifice. If this is a society’s philosophical consensus, it will not be long before an all-powerful Leader rises up to direct the faith and sacrifice that everyone has been extolling. Rand, Ayn. We the Living . Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition. But what I see in this story is a lot of people who only pay lip-service to the so-called faith (in communism or socialism, or whatever) that they are supposed to have. And they quickly learn how to work the system to their own advantage. It is not only the dictator, or the very high government officials who are the oppressors. A large body of lesser officials and just everyday folks, having already cynically given up on the supposed ideals of the system, have figured out how to manipulate things to their own advantage, all while piously spouting the platitudes about sacrifice and so on that are the official opinion. These people, who profess to have the strongest faith – in this instance, in the sacred value of the people – are certainly not giving up their self-interest in favor of self-sacrifice, no matter how many speeches they make to the contrary. Against this background, there is the love triangle of Kira and Leo and Andrei. Kira, the protagonist of the story, falls in love with Leo, the son of a disgraced admiral. Because he sees himself as too good to sink to the level of the Communists, she regards him as the ideal man. They attempt to flee the country together but are caught and sent back before they really get anywhere. Andrei is a serious Communist – a member of the G.P.U. Kira meets him at the technical institute she attends in the beginning. She keeps trying to convince him that the idea that people must live for the state is evil. It is not until much later that he becomes convinced. Leo becomes ill with tuberculosis and needs to go to a sanatorium out of the city. The only way Kira can afford to send him is to agree to become Andrei’s lover in exchange for money. When he returns from the sanatorium, Leo has changed, and not for the better. He becomes involved in a shady business deal since he can get no legitimate work. Eventually, the precarious network of corruption behind Leo’s business is exposed by other people trying to forward their own interests, and Andrei comes to his apartment to arrest him. After Kira goes to Andrei’s apartment and yells at him, Leo is released yet again, and his partners are blackmailed into keeping quiet about the whole affair. Andrei commits suicide, earning himself a massive Party funeral, where shortly before everyone was warning him he would not survive the next purge. Leo, too timid to commit suicide directly, continues to invite disaster by drinking, gambling, and going off on vacation with his partner’s wife. And Kira makes serious plans to leave the country alone since she can’t get Leo interested in coming with her.

This was the first book by Rand i have ever read, and after reading it, i ordered two more, the Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged and i look forward to reading them as well. We the Living is a powerful story, reflecting life in soviet Russia and the struggles the average person faces living under sucha strict regime. the main charachter of the stor, Kira is easy to relate to and Ayn Rand does such a wonderful job bringing her to life, along with Kira's coomon-law husband, Leo. I do not want to spoil the ending, but i will say that it left me almost in tears. Rand does a wonderful job and drawing the reader into the story, making one feel like they are literally there, experiencing the hardships, frustrations and fears of the characters. I highly recoomend this book to anyone

This is very good story about life in the early Soviet Union. It's quite interesting to see how hellish it increasingly becomes when the promised paradise is lost, as we are witnessing in Venezuela in our own time. Other than that, it's a novel with great potential which Ayn failed to deliver fully. It's hard to sympathize with the characters, especially the secondary ones, who are completely unidimensional. Though the prose has some quality to it, in the way of Hemingway's, the failure to convey the source of the motivations of the characters limits their human depth. Then again, it's a powerful story, with strong themes and elements, even if it leaves the reader as a merely passive spectator in its rendition. Now, if only the Randians were not so much like those they opposed. Which world do they live in and which book did they preface? For, though this book is not about religion, the president of the Rand Institute does nothing more than to repeat Marx's accusation against it. Seemingly Randians have spent too much time observing Communism and contemporary statism and internalized some of their tenets. Yet this book and the history of the last century demonstrate that the state is the true opiate of the masses, forcibly so, through economic oppression and physical violence.