Tag Archives: Alexievich

Voices of Reflection

Though we have studied many dire historical situations throughout this course, such as the flood at St. Petersburg or time spent imprisoned at the Gulag, Voices From Chernobyl is the first time I noticed any serious intrapersonal reflections on death. I think that this reflection on death is shown in conjunction with the repeated theme throughout the testimony about any lack of choice. Whether it be the lack of choice of when to live or die or whether or not to stay in the town despite the numerous warnings, having choice removed seems to encourage deep self reflection.

The loss of control that many near Chernobyl felt is first described in the “Monologue on Why We Remember:” “I’ve been there many times now. And understood how powerless I am. I’m falling apart. My past no longer protects me. There aren’t any answers there. They were there before, but now they’re not. The future is destroying me, not the past” (27). Instead of focussing on description of the events at hand, this novel focuses more on how the events affected the people involved. In a situation as dire as that at Chernobyl it seemed that “death is the fairest thing in the world. No one’s ever gotten out of it. The earth takes everyone—the kind, the cruel, the sinners” (27). The testimonies continue to beg these big questions: ones that question how to move forward when you have no choice but to run away. Leaving homes is described as emotionally and physically disruptive, but staying put is dangerous and isolating.

The presentation of testimony in retrospect is striking and different than much of the literature we have read so far. It is also important that the novel uses so much evidence from different perspectives. Within the first two sections countless testimony are introduced from both those who fled Chernobyl and those who returned. I am interested to see all the other angles that Alexievich introduces throughout the rest of the novel.

A shift in fear

A reoccurring theme I picked up on in Alexievich’s Voices from Chernobyl was the greater fear humans had of fellow humans than of the natural environment and creatures within it. The quote that captured my attention initially was the following: “Any animal is afraid of a human. If you don’t touch him, he’ll walk around you. Used to be, you’d be in the forest and you’d hear human voices, you’d run toward them. Now people hide from one another. God save me from meeting a person in the forest!” (44). The first part, “any animal is afraid of a human” seems accurate and nondebatable to me – humans typically sit above most animals on the food chain and have historically displayed dominance over lesser species. The last part of this quote is what I found most striking. The voice of this quote claims that where humans were once unbothered by, and maybe even comforted by, the sound of human voice, we now fear it. Not only do we fear fellow humans in this situation, but we also retreat from them, which is the opposite, this quote claims, from what used to be true of mankind. The last part, “God save me from meeting a person in the forest!” really shows the fear of this person, and others in his situation, have of other humans. Considering the context of this time and their experiences in Chernobyl, fear of others humans can be understood.

Another woman discusses her level of comfort with humans in the forest, explaining that upon leaving home each day she dressed in “clean clothes, a freshly laundered blouse, skirt, underthings” (60) in preparation for if she were to be killed that day. She explains further, “Now I walk through the forest by myself and I’m not afraid of anyone. There aren’t any people in the forest, not a soul” (60). We have seen in some of the past literature we’ve read a fear of the elemental forces of nature, the sublimity, and the unknown; however, the fear this woman refers to regards humans, those of her very own species. We further learn, “I can’t be afraid of the earth, the water. I’m afraid of people” (60). This clearly shows the shift from a fear of nature to the fear of humans. She did not expand on what fear of the earth, water, and nature more generally entails, but we might speculate that fear of these things might have to do with their vastness, elemental force, unpredictability, etc.

Another man shares, “And I’ll say this: birds, and trees, and ants, they’re closer to me now than they were. I think about them, too. Man is frightening. And strange” (66). His current relationship with nature – what he defines as birds, trees, and ants – is more evident than it was before, in part to do with the decline in his relationship with humans. More broadly we might consider society as a whole and how this decline in human-to-human relations may be applicable more broadly. Lastly, one man states, “I am afraid of man. And also I want to meet him. I want to meet a good person. Yes” (67). This quote has a different tone than the rest. The ones discussed previously more directly point out the fear of humans and lack of fear of nature. However, the tone of the latter quote is more hopeful – while the man fears humans, he does want to meet someone that can disprove his fear of humans. The experiences of the people in this book are horrifying and the trauma and terrible mistreatment they have endured under the supervision and leadership of fellow humans makes it abundantly clear why they may be conditioned to fear humans. This last quote, while more hopeful, reinforces that idea.