For more than half of the book, I was undecided whether I liked it or not. The presence of an excessive number of characters (with complicated Russian names) confused me and made the reading scattered, which mostly bored me, except for some happy and exciting passages that coincided with the appearance of the female literary character who is one of the most disturbing I have ever met. Lara is a woman full of life, a "mixture of virgin timidity and bold grace", a light that illuminates the pages with her refined simplicity, her intelligence and beauty, a woman who, with her mere presence, "fills with light and air" the world. Jurij Zivago, a doctor and poet, an intellectual on the verge between reason and passion, remains a character with the most blurred contours, struggling in the indecision between embracing the communist theory and rejecting the terrible effects that the revolution causes in his beloved country.

Jurij and Lara: a meeting destined by fate, an absolute love, an extreme refuge from the tempests of History that, between 1905 and 1929, sweep Russia. Love understood as the harmony of two chosen souls that long for the Absolute, in a spiritual communion with the whole universe. "Oh what a love theirs had been, free, extraordinary, like nothing else! They thought, as others sing; they had not loved each other because it was inevitable, they had not been "burned by passion" as is usually said. They had loved each other because everything around them wanted it: the earth beneath their feet, the sky above their heads, the clouds and the trees. Their love pleased everything around them, perhaps even more than themselves."

The final part, in which the novel focuses on the two protagonists, is so full of emotions that it redeems the previous boredom: and every word, look, gesture is perfect to touch the heart of the reader. And stay there.

The story told in "Doctor Zhivago" begins in 1905 and ends in the middle of the 20th century. Therefore, within its pages, we will encounter the greatest upheavals that Russia suffered in the first half of this century: the Revolutions, the overthrow of the last Tsar, the Civil War between the Reds and the Whites, the two World Wars, and Stalinism.

At the beginning, there is a flurry of characters, but soon the development of the novel focuses on two of them and some secondary ones, making this classic very easy to follow and very enjoyable. Through the eyes of these few characters who people the novel, who cross paths, meet and part over the years, we will be witnesses to all these conflicts and revolutions, the consequent poverty and misery, and a most epic story, that of the life of Doctor Yuri Zhivago and his associates.

If someone wants to start with Russian classics, is afraid and doesn't know where to begin, this book seems to me a very good option for that first contact. After having read several of those fearsome volumes (and having liked them), this one has given me the feeling that it practically read itself. I want to emphasize that it is not a very descriptive novel in terms of the war themes, which are sometimes treated even subtly, not like in "War and Peace", where Tolstoy went on too long for my taste in this aspect. Nevertheless, "Doctor Zhivago" reminds a little of Tolstoy in the literary style: poetic, realistic, philosophical, ethical, critical, and with many levels of depth. It has passages that are to be framed and it is a great pleasure to read, sad ones that speak of nature, the twists and turns of life, and solitude in a sense and with a beauty that I hadn't read for a long time.

I liked it and I enjoyed it very much. Perhaps the last part has had for me some bumps in rhythm and a little something that didn't completely convince me, but it has undoubtedly been a great read, a great novel.

There are books that achieve resounding success for reasons not strictly literary. And Doctor Zhivago is one of these. It's not that it's a bad novel; quite the opposite. But it didn't give me the impression of being the great masterpiece that is talked about today.

It is a deeply Russian novel, both because of the continuous references to Russian literature scattered throughout the novel itself, especially in the poetic-literary reflections of the protagonist, Doctor and writer Zhivago, and because of what I consider to be the great models that the novel is inspired by: the Tolstoyan epic, and the Dostoevskian dialogue. The first model is surely better interpreted; the dialogues, especially those of a philosophical nature, are very forced and anonymous.

The novel indeed deals with the events not only of Doctor Zhivago but also of all the characters who revolve around the protagonist, from the period of the first anti-tsarist uprisings at the beginning of the 20th century to the Russian Civil War (with the few pages of the epilogue focused instead on World War II). What deeply attracted me to the novel is the centripetal model tested by Pasternak: all the characters present in the novel flee and escape from the revolutionary and civic chaos of Moscow to inevitably meet again in the most disparate situations and places.

The plot lives mainly on the amorous tribulations of Doctor Zhivago, a protagonist who is truly a bit anonymous and gray, torn between love for Tonia and her family and love for Lara, two opposite and excellent women in their own way, and who become a metaphor for the complicated political situation in Russia. Tonia, a practical and comfortable woman, cannot equal the charm of Lara's freedom and naturalness, and the carefree life she offers the protagonist. As long as the novel is focused on this split, it is also attractive. But when Zhivago begins to live with Lara, it becomes as soft and pathetic as has ever been written.

Far more exciting are in fact the adventures lived by Zhivago first as a doctor on the front of World War I, then in the journey that takes him to Siberia to escape the reprisals against the Moscow bourgeoisie, and then kidnapped by the Siberian partisans. It is not only an important snapshot of the Russian history of this bloody period but also a continuous and, I must admit, splendid description of the nature of inner Russia. Pasternak indeed shows himself to be what he really is, a poet in love with nature, not a novelist.

Obviously, the subject treated involves addressing the complex political issue and taking a stance. If at least in the first part of the novel Pasternak shows himself to be balanced and objective in judging the work of the revolutionary government, and the criticisms made are justifiable and discerning, in the second part it is a continuous denigration of the Soviet government in the most hasty and casual way possible. And then yes, one understands the Nobel Prize.

In 1956, two men got off the train at the Kiev station in Moscow and headed for the town of Peredelkino, a town specifically for Soviet writers where personal villas had been built for them by Stalin's order. One of these two men was named Danilo and was the representative of an Italian publisher in Milan. He intended to obtain the publishing and translation rights of Pasternak's book by visiting him in the town. The novel Doctor Zhivago, which had not yet obtained the publishing right in its own country due to its excessive sensitivity, was thus translated and published abroad for the second time in the history of Russian literature, after Pilnyak's work.

Doctor Zhivago was a novel that, in the form of a physical body or a collection of bound pages, was able to record a very profound and influential life experience for itself. The novel, which Pasternak began to write on the white papers that the Georgian poet Titsian Tabidze, who had been executed by Stalin, had given to him, was not originally intended to have this title. After considering several other titles, Pasternak finally settled on this one.

Although Zhivago has a Siberian name, it is actually taken from an Orthodox Christian prayer. Pasternak told Varlam Shalamov, a survivor of the Gulag and a writer, that when he read the prayer "Thou art truly Christ, the living God" in his childhood, he always paused after the word "God" when it came to the word "Zhivago" (alive).

When the novel Doctor Zhivago and the news of its publication abroad became complicated in the world, about ten years had passed since the beginning of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. During these years, the US intelligence agency was ready to do anything to damage the Soviet system. In 1956, the intelligence agency sent large packages of books to the countries of Eastern Europe, and it was in this context that the publishing company Bodford was established in New York. It is said that once in Bavaria, Germany, near the border with Czechoslovakia, on July 27, 1951, the Committee for a Free Europe launched thousands of leaflets into the air at an altitude of 30,000 feet, which then fell to the ground and across the border.

Thus, the novel Doctor Zhivago became a tool for struggle. The Soviet government's fierce opposition to the publication of this book contributed to the greater popularity of the novel abroad. Eisenhower, the then president of the United States, gave the intelligence agency full authority to use Pasternak's novel. Now, this agency was trying to translate, distribute, and promote the novel among Russian speakers and make it more prominent in order to show that Pasternak was worthy of winning the Nobel Prize.

During these events, Pasternak was very unhappy that his novel had become a political tool. The novel, which according to Pasternak himself was representative of his school - if he had one. At that time, he would read parts of the novel to his friends and acquaintances, to the poets and writers of his generation, and to the guests who came to visit him in the Soviet Union. It is said that Pasternak gave readings of his novel at underground meetings in the middle of the night, and the secret police of the Soviet Union monitored these meetings from a distance and created notes for future use.

However, the readings of Pasternak's novel did not bring the responses he expected. Akhmatova, after listening to the initial parts of the novel, called it a "failed masterpiece." Later, after reading the entire novel, she still did not consider it a remarkable work and believed that the novel, apart from some descriptions of the environment and society, had nothing profound in itself. Many other critics who had no close relationship with the political system of the government also made sharp criticisms: an unbalanced mixture of styles - the progression of the story based on random events - countless characters that were even excessive for a Russian novel.

These criticisms also reached Pasternak's ears, and he was also aware of some of the limitations of the criticisms. It was said that a friend to whom he had given the book to read was so lazy that he could not even finish it. On the other hand, there were also people who highly praised the novel. Ilya Ehrenburg, who had come to the Soviet Union for a short time and met with Pasternak, praised the novel after reading it.

Days passed one after another, and the Nobel Academy announced that Pasternak was the winner of the Nobel Prize. Alberto Moravia was one of the writers who had worked hard on this issue and the awarding of the prize to Pasternak, and the correspondence between these two friends and their distant relationship still exists today.

The Soviet government did not give Pasternak permission to receive the Nobel Prize and, through heavy pressures, threats, and other intimidations, forced him to reject the award. But one might ask why the Soviet government did not oppose the publication of the book abroad? This is not the case. Pasternak had sent many compulsory letters to the publishers in Milan, Italy, asking them to stop the publication of his book, but this did not happen. The novel had already left the borders of the Soviet Union and the hands of its political dark forces.

My personal criticisms:

The novel Doctor Zhivago is a medical story about a man named Yuri, and the storyline covers his life from childhood to the end of his life. Part of the novel shows a facet of Soviet society in the early days of the Soviet Union, and a small part of the book is also about love relationships. The rhythm of the book is very fast and fragmented, and the chapters of the book do not exceed two or three pages, and we are constantly jumping back and forth in time. In my opinion, the time jumps are very inappropriate and cause the novel to be transformed into a chaotic and fragmented collection of events and descriptions. Pasternak himself admitted in an interview that he was more influenced by Chekhov than Tolstoy. In my opinion, the influence of this book by Chekhov is below zero. The writing of the novel is completely the opposite of Chekhov's concise, organized, and calculated writing style without fragmentation, and Pasternak has not been successful in this regard at all.

The novel begins with the scene of the death and burial of Yuri's mother. I remember a long time ago, in the presence of Atashbarab in the health promotion program, Atashbarab claimed that the burial of the coffin and the beginning of the description of death in the novel was a symbol of the death of Russia, the death of the mother of the children of this land, the fall into the darkness of autocracy. This interpretation seems to me to be appropriate and correct.

Pasternak had many weaknesses in writing the novel. The overall story does not have an attractive plot and narrative. The charm of the novel, which is about 700 pages long, does not even reach that of a part of the narrative of war and peace - a novel that, in my opinion, Pasternak tried to be more influenced by. The characters in Doctor Zhivago have weak portrayals. Even after reading half of the novel, the spirit, character, and tone of speech of the main character, Yuri, are not clear. The secondary characters are like nameless and faceless shadows that flit through the story. The chapters of the novel are full of descriptions of scenes that do not lead anywhere. Instead of deepening the sense of the story along with the narrative, they only remain as beautiful and painted tableaus that are randomly put together without any benefit. Pasternak was a great poet, and in some of the descriptions, one can see his skill in using words. However, the novel is very weak in terms of prose. Throughout the book, I could not pick out a single beautiful sentence or a unique phrase to write down as a souvenir of Pasternak for myself.

At the end of the novel, Pasternak places a collection of his own poems over the years as the poems of the main character in the story, Yuri, for the reader to read. Personally, I don't like Pasternak's poetic style, and I consider his contemporaries such as Akhmatova, Mandelstam, and Tsvetaeva to be superior to him. However, after all, Pasternak's poems will surely be liked by some people. It is said that in the labor camp of Vorkuta near the White Sea, the prisoners had a competition among themselves to see who could recite more poems of Pasternak from memory and win. Or in the gatherings and poetry readings of Soviet poets, the people's reception of Pasternak's poems was always extraordinary, and they had a lot of respect for him. In addition to his poems, Pasternak was also very famous in the Soviet Union for his excellent translations of plays such as Hamlet and Faust, and his income and reputation mainly came from these translations.

The novel has a very dangerous political aspect, but in my opinion, it does not have any sharp and effective criticism in itself. Even Khrushchev said many years after the publication of Doctor Zhivago that the struggle against this book was in vain and it had nothing in it. Pasternak's skill was in creating that atmosphere and casting a shadow under the skin of the novel, a style and writing that perhaps Esma'il Kadare also used in his realistic works. Pasternak was able to make an artistic blend and project the current situation and the repression of the Stalinist period onto the early years of the revolution - the historical point at which the novel is set - in such a way that Pasternak suggests that the tyranny of the Stalinist period is the result of the same Bolshevism of the Leninist period.

Regarding the Persian translations of this book:

In fact, there are three translations of this book in the Iranian market. The translation by Khobrehzadeh is not worth mentioning. Regarding the translations by Nashr-e Thalath and Nashr-e Now, I have had some discussions, but I will summarize my criticisms:

1. The translation by Nashr-e Now has turned the dialogues into common Persian, and the translation by Nashr-e Thalath is better in this regard. In many comments, I saw that some people complained about the vulgarity of the language of the dialogues in the translation by Nashr-e Now. The appropriate language choice in this regard is the vulgar language of the translation by Nashr-e Now. Pasternak's book is by no means literary in its dialogues. The characters have accents and speaking mistakes, and to convey this, it should be translated into common language.

2. The translation by Nashr-e Now is not without mistakes, and after a few brief comparisons, some problems were found in it. The translation by Nashr-e Thalath did not have any problems with word reversal, but I witnessed some deletions in it. In the process of word reversal, Mrs. Nazerian had placed a word in the wrong place.

3. Although a lot of advertising has been done on the layout of the translation by Nashr-e Now, it has many problems. I noticed about five or six printing errors in the book, and unfortunately, I don't understand why. But in some cases, the translation by Nashr-e Now violates the half-spacing rule of "mi + verb".

4. In my opinion, the Persian of the translation by Nashr-e Now is better than that of Nashr-e Thalath, and the choice of words and the rhythm of the translation by Mrs. Fakhami-Zadeh are much better than those of Mrs. Nazerian.

In conclusion, this book is not something that I feel obliged to read or even want to recommend to anyone. In my opinion, it is a prefabricated work, and the political advertising aspect behind it has led to its popularity and being read. By looking at the positive or negative reviews in English available on Goodreads, it can be seen that the novel Doctor Zhivago is at best an average literary work. However, if for any reason you want to study this book, wait for the translation by Mr. Abedin Golkar from Chashmeh Publications; although this novel is not to the extent that one would regret reading its translation.

As far as I know, Doctor Zhivago has its appeals for three main reasons.

Firstly, it is an epic work that is both created by and focuses on a man who is deeply immersed in the tumultuous era of Russian enlightenment and revolution. This provides a rich backdrop for the story to unfold.

Secondly, similar to many other epics, it follows the romantic entanglements between a man and a woman (or in this particular book, three women). Their love is made unattainable due to the political circumstances in which they exist.

Thirdly, and lastly, it was bravely published in the 1950s. Although it was immediately censored by the Soviets, it was heralded by non-Red literary circles around the world.

Regarding this third point, I have no argument. Pasternak is indeed a courageous writer, and his Zhivago is a courageous novel. However, when it comes to its aspects as an epic and a romance, the book falls short. The historical events are only loosely referenced, which means that only those who have seriously studied Russian history can truly follow them. Much of the time, I, like the characters, found myself lost in the rapid transitions between different governments and enforced political philosophies. And what about the romance? Zhivago proclaims his love for his women, yet he constantly abandons one for another. Pasternak tells us that the love between Zhivago and Lara is strong, but I believe it only because he says so, not because I can sense it through the characters' dialogue or actions. I suppose that Zhivago's movement between women is intended to mirror Russia's transition between different regimes, but even about this, I remain unclear.

Anyway, it is important to read this book, but don't anticipate falling in love with it.

3.5 stars

“You have always been in others and you will remain in others. And what does it matter to you if later on it is called your memory? This will be you - the you that enters the future and becomes a part of it.”

Pasternak's novel offers a captivating chronicle of the moments in the life of Zhivago. He endures the tumultuous years of Russian history, and the novel takes a bird's eye view, soaring over vast stretches of time. At times, it swoops down to provide a closer look at the lives of specific individuals.

Pasternak masterfully interweaves profound philosophical questions with the ordinary struggles of daily life. The writing poetically captures both lofty thoughts and those mired in the grime of reality.

However, given the extensive historical period covered, I sometimes felt that the character studies lacked depth. The novel presented multiple glimpses into the characters' lives, but they lacked substantial exploration. As a result, I struggled to form strong attachments to them.

Nevertheless, the novel manages to be both ambitious and down-to-earth in its portrayal of Russian life during a time of seismic change. It offers a unique perspective on a nation in flux, and Pasternak's prose is both beautiful and thought-provoking. Overall, it is a worthwhile read for those interested in Russian history and literature.

If I had read this in my 20s, I would have detested it.

In my early 30s, I might have misinterpreted it.

Now, I truly appreciate it.

We are all familiar with a Doctor Zhivago – either he is a relative or a close friend. The archetypal character of Doctor Yuri Andreievich Zhivago was flawed and complex. This was vividly expressed through the author's skillful use of interchangeable Russian names and diminutives, which often mirrored the mental states and interactions of the many characters.

Our main character was known by four names:

1. Doctor Zhivago, the medical professional and the upholder of the Hippocratic oath.

2. Yuri, the adult who interacted with the world in a responsible manner, made sound choices, and provided for his family.

3. Yura, the immature adult, the lover, the aesthete, and the poet. However, on the darker side, Yura was emotionally guarded, depressed, and distant.

4. Yurochka, the little boy within – sad, meditative, indecisive, and haunted by loss. Doctor Zhivago's character evolved throughout the book, always torn between what he was and what he could be.

Secondly, the book lacks a traditional plot. It feels as if the numerous characters are simply moving through their lives, colliding with each other at times. The story spans from the early 1900s to World War II, with many subtle remarks about the early years of the Soviet Union and the negative consequences of Marxist-Leninist ideology.

I had the opportunity to read both the 1958 translation by Max Hayward and Manya Harari (H&H) and the 2010 version by Richard Peavear & Larissa Volokhonsky (P&V). In my opinion, I prefer the 1958 H&H translation for its smoother and more elegant style. Here is an example to illustrate the difference:

H&H: A clear, frosty night. Unusual brilliance and perfection of everything visible. Earth, sky, moon, and stars, all seemed cemented, riveted together by the frost. Shadows of the trees lie across the paths, so sharp that they endlessly crossed the road at various places. Big stars hang in the woods between branches like blue lanterns. Small ones are strewn all over the sky like daisies in the summer field.

P&V: A clear, frosty night. Extraordinary brightness and wholeness of the visible. Earth, air, moon, stars, fettered together, riveted by frost. In the park, the distinct shadows of trees lie across the alleys, seeming carved in relief. It seems all the time as if some dark figures are ceaselessly crossing the path in various places. Big stars like blue mica lamps hang in the forest among the branches. The whole sky is strewn with little stars like a summer meadow of chamomile.

I recently watched the long movie adaptation, which focused mainly on the romance aspect. I thought both the book and the movie were excellent in their own ways. I would recommend both if you have the time. Thanks!

Ever since his schooldays, he had dreamed of writing a book in prose.

It was to be a book of impressions of life, in which he could conceal, like buried sticks of dynamite, the most striking things he had so far seen and thought about.

Zhivago dreamed. Pasternak did it. The sticks of dynamite are here. Yet, in common with the real thing, not all go off.

This story of a flawed marriage, a flawed love affair, and a flawed system of government perhaps could not be otherwise. As with Persian carpets, the flaws may be necessary.

Reading it can be like trudging through snow drifts at times. It's slow going. Hard to see where it's leading. The sentences are weighted with a weariness as it moves along. I nearly gave up more than once.

Then, something that Yury, Tonya, or Lara said drew me back. I couldn't leave them.

I still haven't. Not entirely. Snowflakes cling to my eyelashes, and I am still held captive by the story, unable to fully break free from its grip.

The characters and their struggles continue to haunt me, making me reflect on the complex nature of life, love, and society.

Despite the difficulties in reading, the beauty and depth of the narrative keep pulling me back, making me appreciate the power of literature to touch our hearts and minds.

It snowed, it snowed over all the world. From one end to the other, a blanket of white covered everything.

A candle burned on the table, a solitary light in the darkness.

I have spent hours painstakingly writing down my bookmarks in the text. In the end, I realized that all I needed was this small stanza from one of Zhivago's poems at the end of the novel. We require art to brighten our bleak existence, to offer comfort during those cold, lonely hours when sleep eludes us and the abyss stares back. Pasternak was like a bright candle in my life. However, I was somewhat afraid to revisit the novel that had so charmed me in my mid-twenties with the more mature and cautious eyes of an over-fifty-year-old.

Since joining Goodreads, I often feel like a child in a candy store, eager to explore all the new offerings. So many new authors have captured my attention that I have almost stopped re-reading my old favorites. The impetus to change this, especially regarding Boris Pasternak, came from three sources: Dostoevsky last year, Dickens and his French Revolution epic this year, and curiously, the poetry/prose of Tarjei Vesaas, also recently. It turns out that all three are relevant, at least to me, in understanding Pasternak's work. Dickens is the easier connection, as both authors focus on how revolutions can be understood at the societal and historical levels, yet they often have a destructive impact on the individual. The link to Dostoevsky was something I overlooked in the early 90s, but now I have discovered numerous references to Orthodox mystical revelations and the ongoing significance of the life of Christ. And from Vesaas, I was attuned in advance to the deep connection between the artist and the greater rhythms of nature.

So, if someone were to ask me what this book is about, there is no simple answer. It is about "Life, The Universe, and Everything," to quote Douglas Adams, encompassing the ambitious scope of the story, the large cast of characters, and the intricacies of the plot. Iuri Antonovich Zhivago is a doctor and a poet, caught up in the turmoil of the Russian Revolution of 1918 and the subsequent Civil War. Throughout the novel, Zhivago is torn between the need to survive and his artistic integrity. His emotional and intellectual world is encapsulated in one word:

Lara, I'm afraid to name you, so as not to breathe out my soul along with your name.

To understand the importance of Larissa Fyodorovna in the novel, we must look at Pasternak's early association with the Symbolist movement. She represents Earth Mother, Goddess, Mother Russia, womanhood, and peace in a world ravaged by class warfare. To love her is to love life in all its glory for Zhivago, his raison d'être, his strength, and his inspiration. The two other men in Larissa's life are also symbolic: Khomarovsky is an opportunistic libertine, a corrupt, egotistical character, while Pasha Antipov is the idealistic puritan who becomes an instrument of terror.

I don't want to downplay the anti-communist aspect of the novel or ignore the religious fervor that drives Iuri Zhivago. However, ever since I first saw David Lean's movie and later read the novel, I have been more interested in what the artist believes in rather than what he condemns. This is one of the reasons the chapters on Lara are so significant to me, along with my love for Julie Christie's portrayal in the movie.

The rest of my review is a bit of a cop-out, as I find the task of delving into the different themes and characters overwhelming. The novel deserves better than a list of quotes taken out of context, but I'm going on holiday in a week and still have ten reviews to write.

Nikolai Nikolaevich (Uncle Kolya) is another alter-ego of the author, an old-school intellectual with an interest in religion and an elitist worldview. He has some profound thoughts on Christianity and symbolism as an artistic tool. Zhivago, as a young man, is a romantic waiting for a means of expression. He is initially caught up in the revolutionary spirit, but later experiences disillusionment.

My favorite scene comes when Zhivago's enthusiasm for the revolution is translated into a declaration of love. The question of whether Zhivago is talking about Larissa or Russia adds an interesting layer of symbolism. The times of trouble bring forward the "accursed questions" that Dostoevsky was so fond of. In his exile in the Urals, Zhivago struggles to put his thoughts into words.

Nature takes on anthropomorphic qualities through the eyes of the poet. We also get a glimpse of Lara's thoughts and feelings, showing that she is not just a mystery or a closed door. Her wisdom and love are more instinctive than Zhivago's intellectual flame, but no less true. However, their love is not destined to have a happy ending.

In the end, this is a sprawling epic that prioritizes symbolism over plot coherence and character motivations. The condemnation of a corrupted value system is more evident now than in my previous readings. Zhivago's tragic end, Lara's disappearance, and their child's anonymous life all add to the sense of loss. But Pasternak's poems endure, like the famous theme by Maurice Jarre, reminding us that there is still beauty in the world if we are willing to look for it.

DNF @ 10%

I firmly believe that the audiobook was a rather ill-conceived notion. I have only delved 10% into the book, and yet there has been an overwhelming number of characters introduced. It has become extremely challenging for me to keep track of them all.

However, I'm not entirely convinced that reading the physical book would have been of much assistance either. The main culprit behind this is the long and unfamiliar (at least to me) Russian names. These names seem to blend together in my mind, making it difficult to distinguish one character from another.

Perhaps if there had been some sort of visual aid or a more comprehensive character guide provided along with the audiobook, it might have made the experience more enjoyable and less confusing. As it stands now, I'm left feeling rather frustrated and disillusioned with this particular audiobook.

Russia is a country that, as was initially said about the Balkans, has far more history than it can consume, at the cost of human suffering and blood. It constantly moved on the threshold between East and West, oscillating according to the will of those in power at times on one side and at times on the other, more often falling under Asian despotism and the yoke, and more rarely under the western waves of the Enlightenment.

Surely, the deeply rooted Orthodox consciousness also contributed to this, but also the undeniable fact that at times the ruling classes of the country (starting from the Tsars, continuing "scientifically" with the Bolsheviks, culminating in Stalinist totalitarianism) preached war to the citizens of their country.

Obviously, most of the above is known, and inevitably left its mark on the spiritual life of Russia - this life presents a particular interest, as it was usually forced to move underground and obliquely, contrary to the main current, in order to deceive the rulers and protect itself from state interference in all phases of history (even today). Great poets (Pushkin, Mayakovsky) and writers (Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky) created in adverse conditions, leaving works that have not yet been surpassed.

Boris Pasternak, a spiritual child of these, wrote in an extremely difficult period, when the might of Soviet totalitarianism took away even from the most ardent supporters of the regime the hopes that the first years of the Revolution had awakened. Martyrs of the new era, believing that they identified with the cheerful spirit of freedom (essentially with the liberal program of the Enlightenment that socialism brought within it), gradually saw the Idea being subordinated to its totalitarian/Asian version, dispelling any illusions.

"Doctor Zhivago" is a work of that era. A work of a writer-thinker who grew up in a purely urban/artistic environment and matured in a period of significant rearrangements and upheavals, a descendant of a heavy literary tradition.

Although many characters pass through the pages of this voluminous text (perhaps more than the author can handle), in the middle we understand that the main hero is Dr. Zhivago and his tragic journey from childhood to the grave. The doomed hero carries his shadowy existence in the empty and frozen landscapes of Russia, while at the same time full of rural figures, with ghosts of the Revolution or the counter-revolution (it doesn't matter in the least) that all parade together without hope, except with the speed that the zeitgeist gives them, combustible material in the fire of the great Idea of the Revolution.

But even the urban landscapes, the cities (Moscow, among others), seem uninhabited, empty of people, but full of the army, of committees, of Soviets, of that magic that ended up in concentration camps or was pushed to the periphery of history. And Zhivago in the middle of these, with his great love for Lara, two human figures, not at all contemporary with their era, seem as if they have been blown off the pages of those great novels that Pasternak loved variously. Unstable, erratic, resembling dancers in an empty palace (which was once Russia), they rotate silently in the empty halls, with the ghosts of the past accompanying them, without any other anchor except that of the brotherhood of souls, imprisoned in the endless cycle of historical necessity, of fratricidal civil war and of frustrated hopes.

The bipolar Love/Art takes the reins towards the end of the book, when the lyricism (at times melodramatic) prepares the ground for the conclusion. Dreams and expectations will collide with the life that follows its own rules, demanding flesh and blood to move its mechanisms. Not a single ray of light can escape from the black hole of the revolutionary era (as the author himself experienced), as the individual fates are subordinated to the collective - witnesses also of a past from which they were violently cut off, a mortal generation, a sacrifice to an unknown god who thirsts for blood, promising once again the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth. Zhivago, as the last Russian thinker (continuing a long chain of spiritual people), will submit to totalitarianism.

Rightly, the critics of the Soviet regime considered the work counter-revolutionary. Rightly, they banned it, as Zhivago is clearly nostalgic - not, however, of the Tsarist era, but of a tolerant, artistically revolutionary, individual-centered socialist, Tolstoyan Christian, but ultimately utopian and unattainable. The bureaucrats of the mechanism did not deny the literary value of the book. What they correctly distinguished in these pages was the cry of a thinker (identifying with the doctor/poet Yuri Zhivago), who sought peace, love, art and found it nowhere from Moscow to Siberia - a stranger in a country that did not tolerate him, did not cherish him, a Russia that now lived only in its memories.

And if there is any significant objection on my part, it is based on the inevitable comparison with the archetypal narrative of the great Tolstoy, to whom Pasternak himself swears. Besides Zhivago, I had the feeling that the other characters simply moved around the pages, supporting characters coming in and out whenever the moment required, one-dimensional figures, complementary to the action. The result was that for most of the work I remained relatively indifferent to their fate. I also had the impression, at times, that suddenly nature became the main character, since Pasternak filled page after page with admirable descriptions. The interaction of nature and people, although of rare poetic beauty, was at the expense of the characters.

I believe, ultimately, that the author submitted to the poet, resulting in an unbalanced work, of great spiritual power, of much courage, but clearly disproportionate in literary value, compared to complete masterpieces such as "War and Peace".

Art has two constants, two unending preoccupations. It is always meditating on death and thereby creating life. One mark of a truly great author is the ability to break all the "rules" of "good" writing and still create something greater than the sum of its parts. Pasternak does this in his vast, often elliptical novel set against the Russian Revolution.

Don't expect the lush romance of the famous David Lean film. While the love story between Lara and Yuri is at the center, it's oddly opaque. Lara is as much a symbol for Zhivago as a real woman.

This book has no qualms about bombarding us with names and characters, skipping between scenes, leaving out important parts we must understand retrospectively, and telling rather than dramatizing. Yet, beneath the surface confusion, there is a deep cohesion, a way of capturing historical moments and detaching from them to offer something fundamental and satisfying.

One cornerstone of Pasternak's vision is a sense of fatefulness, epitomized by Yuri's feeling at the end that his life was ordained from the moment he saw the candle burning in Lara's window. There is much harshness in this book, but also moments of serenity and peace.

Politically, it moves from the excitement of radical change to the betrayal of revolutionary ideals. It's a vast and rich book that deserves re-reading.