Scan barcode
A review by dark_matter88
Компромисс by Sergei Dovlatov
4.0
The books represent a kind of a compilation of various sketches (called compromises in the book) that depict life in Estonia when it was a part of the Soviet Union. Dovlatov with cynism and specific humor describes how he as a journalist tries to succeed in his work but his honesty, inability to be bent by regime and bureaucracy stay on his way. Some situations seemed to be absurd and grotesque but they perfectly describe how even talented people cannot achieve much because nothing really matters as much as abiding by the ideology of the Soviet Communist party.
Dovlatov has a personal style of describing all the events in short sharp phrases with a bunch of dialogues that draw characters' unique features - how they express their feelings, their opinions about the regime, behavioral patterns, how they drink, how other people treat them.
A friend of mine compared Dovlatov style to Haruki Murakami's and I saw some similarities too. Dovlatov writes everything down as he is just a distant observer, not the participant of those events and this is something I noticed Murakami's books as well.
Although I'm not actually a fan of Russian literature probably because I studied it in school and sometimes school programs worsen the impressions of the works but I like this book. It is different in comparison to the works of classic Russian literature which describe the same time period. Maybe because Dovlatov does not restrain himself in expressing the actual opinions of the people about the Soviet ideology. Or maybe because he describes the life of the intelligentsia as it was - poor, dangerous and full of alcohol - with no embellishments and flattery.
Dovlatov has a personal style of describing all the events in short sharp phrases with a bunch of dialogues that draw characters' unique features - how they express their feelings, their opinions about the regime, behavioral patterns, how they drink, how other people treat them.
A friend of mine compared Dovlatov style to Haruki Murakami's and I saw some similarities too. Dovlatov writes everything down as he is just a distant observer, not the participant of those events and this is something I noticed Murakami's books as well.
Although I'm not actually a fan of Russian literature probably because I studied it in school and sometimes school programs worsen the impressions of the works but I like this book. It is different in comparison to the works of classic Russian literature which describe the same time period. Maybe because Dovlatov does not restrain himself in expressing the actual opinions of the people about the Soviet ideology. Or maybe because he describes the life of the intelligentsia as it was - poor, dangerous and full of alcohol - with no embellishments and flattery.