128 Bettina Kaibach
the Germans are still murdering Jewish children, he himself may be helping
prepare the way for turning the world into a “galactic concentration camp.” 91
Interestingly, Grossman has Shtrum’s “Jewish accent” become more prominent, when he talks about his quandary, 92 thus linking the qualms of his
protagonist even more tightly to the Jewish catastrophe of the Holocaust then
still unfolding, and the persecution of Soviet Jewry looming ahead. In Life
and Fate, Grossman leaves no doubt that his protagonist is indeed witnessing
the beginning of what ten years later could have become a Soviet genocide
of the Jews, had Stalin not died. In a chapter that depicts Stalin at the height
of his power, he implies that with his regime based on the suppression and
murder of ever new contingents of alleged enemies, the Soviet leader may
not be so far apart from Hitler. Alluding to both the doctors’ plot and the
anti-cosmopolitan campaign of the 1950s, the narrator predicts that only ten
years after the triumph of Stalingrad, “Stalin would be wielding against the
Jews the sword of annihilation that he had ripped away from Hitler.” 93
Grossman makes it clear that once the mechanism of dissociation has broken
down, there is but one way for the nuclear scientist to resolve his moral quandary without lapsing into cynicism, namely, to refrain from participation in
what could amount to mass murder. In Life and Fate, Shtrum’s fellow physicists
discuss the fact that Rutherford allegedly refused to collaborate with research
on the neutron because of its potentially destructive consequences, and they
suspect the colleague with whom Shtrum shares his innermost doubts of
doing the same. While most of the men easily dismiss such high-mindedness
as noble, but absurd and ultimately egotistical puritanism, Shtrum is secretly
sympathetic to his renegade colleague. Eventually, however, his scientific zeal
takes the upper hand over his moral reservations. When Stalin personally
invites him to take part in the development of a Soviet nuclear bomb, he agrees
and for the sake of his career even signs a document denouncing his Jewish
colleagues. Grossman subtly exposes the mechanisms of self-delusion with
which his protagonist attempts to justify his behavior. 94 While the repentant
pilot in Abel (August 6th) by one pressing of a button becomes irrevocably and
monstrously guilty, Shtrum, however, is granted a second chance to act in
accordance with his convictions. As in The Sistine Madonna, in Life and Fate,
too, Grossman presents the maternal principle as counterforce to the mechanisms that lead humanity on its path to potential omnicide. For Shtrum, the
letter of his mother works like a moral compass that leads him to reconsider his
decision. At the height of his scientific success, the mere thought of this letter
awakens Shtrum to the realization that he can still revise his involvement in
Stalin’s nuclear weapons program and thus preserve his moral integrity.
Conclusion
The comparison of official Soviet literature on nuclear war with Vasilii
Grossman’s writings has shown that while official writers had very limited
leeway in dealing with the topic, there was an undercurrent of independent
the Germans are still murdering Jewish children, he himself may be helping
prepare the way for turning the world into a “galactic concentration camp.” 91
Interestingly, Grossman has Shtrum’s “Jewish accent” become more prominent, when he talks about his quandary, 92 thus linking the qualms of his
protagonist even more tightly to the Jewish catastrophe of the Holocaust then
still unfolding, and the persecution of Soviet Jewry looming ahead. In Life
and Fate, Grossman leaves no doubt that his protagonist is indeed witnessing
the beginning of what ten years later could have become a Soviet genocide
of the Jews, had Stalin not died. In a chapter that depicts Stalin at the height
of his power, he implies that with his regime based on the suppression and
murder of ever new contingents of alleged enemies, the Soviet leader may
not be so far apart from Hitler. Alluding to both the doctors’ plot and the
anti-cosmopolitan campaign of the 1950s, the narrator predicts that only ten
years after the triumph of Stalingrad, “Stalin would be wielding against the
Jews the sword of annihilation that he had ripped away from Hitler.” 93
Grossman makes it clear that once the mechanism of dissociation has broken
down, there is but one way for the nuclear scientist to resolve his moral quandary without lapsing into cynicism, namely, to refrain from participation in
what could amount to mass murder. In Life and Fate, Shtrum’s fellow physicists
discuss the fact that Rutherford allegedly refused to collaborate with research
on the neutron because of its potentially destructive consequences, and they
suspect the colleague with whom Shtrum shares his innermost doubts of
doing the same. While most of the men easily dismiss such high-mindedness
as noble, but absurd and ultimately egotistical puritanism, Shtrum is secretly
sympathetic to his renegade colleague. Eventually, however, his scientific zeal
takes the upper hand over his moral reservations. When Stalin personally
invites him to take part in the development of a Soviet nuclear bomb, he agrees
and for the sake of his career even signs a document denouncing his Jewish
colleagues. Grossman subtly exposes the mechanisms of self-delusion with
which his protagonist attempts to justify his behavior. 94 While the repentant
pilot in Abel (August 6th) by one pressing of a button becomes irrevocably and
monstrously guilty, Shtrum, however, is granted a second chance to act in
accordance with his convictions. As in The Sistine Madonna, in Life and Fate,
too, Grossman presents the maternal principle as counterforce to the mechanisms that lead humanity on its path to potential omnicide. For Shtrum, the
letter of his mother works like a moral compass that leads him to reconsider his
decision. At the height of his scientific success, the mere thought of this letter
awakens Shtrum to the realization that he can still revise his involvement in
Stalin’s nuclear weapons program and thus preserve his moral integrity.
Conclusion
The comparison of official Soviet literature on nuclear war with Vasilii
Grossman’s writings has shown that while official writers had very limited
leeway in dealing with the topic, there was an undercurrent of independent