Rubashov and Ivanov essay
|← Financial Analysis of Pearson||Analysis of ICS →|
Rubashov and Ivanov. Custom Rubashov and Ivanov Essay Writing Service || Rubashov and Ivanov Essay samples, help
The novel focuses on revolutionary leaders in the society who try to bring the required change in the country. Rubashov is the main character in the novel. In addition, he has a formidable enemy who even interrogates him when he is imprisoned. The enemy is known as Ivanov, he is also; unfortunately, short dead by a friend. The two leading characters have numerous similarities and differences in their character. For instance, they are both inhuman, intellectuals, and they are both revolutionaries. On the other hand, Rubashov is revolutionary while Ivanov is a supporter of the present regime. On the other hand, Rubashov is a courageous while Ivanov is weak.
This essay explicates the main similarities between Rubashov and Ivanov in the novel “Darkness at Noon”
Both of these characters are inhuman. Koestler (2008) observes that they participate in acts of murder and torture of the people. For instance, Rubashov murders his lover and friend Arlova. This is an inhuman act because he sacrifices the lover because due to his priority of achieving personal satisfaction from the revolution. He is heavy-handed and does not necessarily care about the murders. In addition, Ivanov is involved in inhuman activities. He exposes prisoners to immense sufferings. They do not get enough breathing space to speak their minds. He exposes individuals to sufferings such as denial of sleep. The brutality and inhuman character are motivated by the need to get all the relevant issues relating to various matters. He uses force to extract information from the victims who are perceived as the enemies of people. He also employs matters such as Rubashov, is also only committed to making some individuals as his sacrifices for success. These actions depict the inhuman nature in both of these characters.
Both Ivanov and Rubashov are intellects. According to Bloom (2004), they are brilliant people who expect to deliver results using their intellectual ability. The author says that Ivanov applied his intelligence in questioning Rubashov who was indeed also highly intelligent. Ivanov pretends to use softer means to get the required information from Rubashov. He asks questions more eloquently pretending that there is no malice in his actions. This is an outright display of his intelligence in dealing with investigatory matters. Rubashov is also supremely intelligent. He responds to issues in a manner that depicts his intelligence. He does not answer all the questions that he is asked as a sign of trying to keep secret his commitment to the party and ultimate revolution. He is an intellect that does not allow anyone to trace his steps from any point of view. He brilliantly fights faces the interrogators and brilliantly answers the asked questions. Rubashov further displays his intellect by replacing the plural, first person with a singular form. He does not want to use general terms but only wants to refer to his individuality as a fighter for revolution. This was an intellects way of tackling issues relating to the party and the state.
Rubashov and Ivanov are revolutionists. They both wish to bring change into the country. Rubashov fights so had that he only dreams of leaving in a country where he has achieved independence. Ivanov is a member and agitator for revolution before he finally breaks ranks with Rubashov and joined the revolutionary investigators. He intentionally joined the investigatory committee for the sake of showing his displeasure at Rubashov. According to Koestler (2008), they initially try to liberate the country through a common spirit driven towards change and revolution. This act is what labels them enemies of citizens. This is what leads to the death of Ivanov while interrogating the case relating to revolution. He is perceived to hold a soft stance and pursue weak courses of actions. He is thus shot dead and replaced by another investigator. This was due to the perception that his revolutionary heart would lead to sympathetic actions against the enemies that were being fought. He only defends his position by pretending that he does not support revolutionary authorities in any way but he actually considerably sympathizes with them due to his soft stance in addressing matters relating to them.
They differ in courage. Rubashov takes on to courageous courses of actions compared to Ivanov. Bloom (2004) asserts that he continues with the revolutionary acts even when others are called before the investigators, to answer questions relating to their activities. He does not fear to face any one, and he is motivated to achieve even more. He goes before the investigators, but he is unwilling to stop his immense support for a revolution. In fact, he is labeled an enemy of citizens, but this does not scare him. Ivanov is less courageous in his actions. He was a revolutionist but goes ahead to answer the asked questions and eventually bows out due to the fear of facing adverse consequences. He thus joins the investigatory side of the country to probe individuals associated with these activities. He only takes the opportunity for self-gain and interest. The fear to continue fighting for a better regime motivates him to join the fairer side where he ultimately meets his death through a gunshot. He feared to face the dire consequences relating to being involved in revolutionary activities. He thus moves to the safer zone where he knows he would be under the protection.
Rubashov is an optimist while Ivanov is a formidable pessimist. Rubashov believes that the revolution would come through and be successful. He still has committed hope for the success of the revolution. According to Koestler (2008), he refuses to betray his ambition and adherence to the party that is gradually revolutionizing the country. He further volunteers to die because of fighting for the coveted revolution and new authorities. He is optimistic about the future of the country. He still believes that a revolutionary government would come into place with better policies for effective and required levels of governance. On the other hand, Ivanov is pessimistic about the change. He describes Rubashov as an individual who lacks green matter in his brain. This is with reference to the revolutionary actions he has taken. He does not want to associate with revolution again though he is a great sympathizer of revolutionists.
In conclusion, Rubashov is the main character in the book, “Darkness at Noon” He is a great enemy of Ivanov. They both have some similar characteristics, but differ in some areas. For instance, they are both intellects. This is depicted by their way of reasoning and responding to issues. In addition, both of them have a revolutionary characteristic. Both of them are participants in the formidable revolution. Ivanov was a traitor who decides to move to the investigative side. This was due to the hatred that had come up between him and Rubashov. They both have inhuman behavior. For instance, Rubashov kills his lover and friend as a sacrifice. Immense suffering among people due to the harshness he portrayed also drives his regime. On the other hand, they differ in terms of courage. Rubashov is a more courageous and determined leader ready to deliver his country while Ivanov is light-hearted thus joining investigation. Rubashov is an optimist and is focused on future achievements while Ivanov is a pessimist who opposes these future prospects but eventually dies.