MORAL IMAGINATION

Reflections on Solzhenitsyn, Russell Kirk, & the Moral Imagination By Edward Ericson|June 7th, 2023

Long read, but good (link to original article at the end) 

Three parts stand out for me.

EXTRACT NO 1. In One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich (1963) the emphasis is on the physical suffering endured by a simple peasant whose only “crime” was to have escaped from the Nazis... Forced to lay bricks all day in sub-zero temperatures, he takes satisfaction in doing his work well, not to please the bosses but to please himself. Constructive work brings out in him the ennobling quality of self-validation through creative effort. He lays his bricks straight and fast. A day that seems to readers unbearably bad ends with his feeling contented and happy; for him it has been almost a good day. “There’s nothing you can’t do to a man,” the author notes, except that you cannot do away with his humanity altogether.

If life is passing at 60 minutes per hour, should we focus upon "being" or "doing" is our purpose productivity, and if so for whom? In this context "doing" is satisfying Denisovich's "being". Maybe somewhere in this is the distinction between work as productivity (for gain) and work as purpose (for satisfaction)

EXTRACT NO 2. After rejecting the totalitarian-excusing collectivism of one friend, Lev Rubin, and the elitist individualism of another, Dimitri Sologdin, he tries what he calls “going to the people.” He observes that the peasants, often depicted in Russian literature as mute fonts of wisdom, are often susceptible to the tricks of informers and the blandishments of the camp bosses and in general have not shown themselves of superior firmness of spirit in resisting dehumanization. So his only alternative, Nerzhin concludes, is to “be himself,” to develop his own “personal point of view,” which he says is “more precious than life itself.” The mature level of spiritual independence that he attains yields the insight that “[e]veryone forges his inner self year after year. One must try to temper, to cut, to polish one’s soul so as to become a human being.” It could be said that as Ivan Denisovich transcends physical suffering, so Gleb Nerzhin transcends psychological suffering. But it would be better to say that Nerzhin transcends spiritual suffering. It is the soul that, for Solzhenitsyn, is the unique faculty of human beings.

I am interested in the extent to which we are individuals or a product of social and cultural circumstances. This is a bit like the nature v nurture argument but different in so far as I am not thinking so much about what has made us, but instead who we are: a soul, a spirit, a bundle of responses or a product of conditioning. When the crowd / community / population give-up, give-on, comply or concede what drives someone to transcend this, and both suffer as a consequence and not be in distress as a result.

EXTRACT NO 3. Perhaps at this particular point we can best formulate the question this way: Can the moral imagination affect actual events? Or, can the act of writing out of a moral vision have consequences in the realm of society and politics? Or, can a writer with a free mind, who mostly writes fiction, make a real contribution to bringing down a totalitarian government that disallows free expression? And the answer is yes. Yes, it is now widely acknowledged, Solzhenitsyn’s writings had their effect. They played an undeniable role in delegitimizing Soviet Communism at home and discrediting it abroad.

I am interested because I am not sure of the fixed nature of morality. Morality refers to the principles or rules that govern an individual's behavior, particularly in terms of distinguishing between right and wrong or good and bad. These principles are often influenced by cultural, social, and personal beliefs. Since all of these factors are liable to change what is cause and what is effect? The phrase "History is written by the victors" is often attributed to Winston Churchill. Perhaps morality also is simply a prevailing construct and if so, it does not bringing down a totalitarian government, but is the result of one having brought down.

Full article
https://theimaginativeconservative.org/2023/06/solzhenitsyn-russell-kirk-moral-imagination-edward-ericson.html