Alekséi's life changes radically when he is taken care of by his grandparents and has to move to a strange city. In this way, he faces the difficulties of orphanhood and experiences the domestic cruelty prevalent in the rural society of that time. As a result, the protagonist learns (the hard way) to depend on himself to survive. This book narrates the events that occurred between the father's funeral and the expulsion from his second home. As the reader can imagine, the present is a rather harsh testimony about the end of childhood (or the death of innocence, if preferred).
I have evaluated North American novels with a very similar theme, such as "The Road of the Loser" by Charles Bukowski or "Wait Until Spring, Bandini" by John Fante (whose search for literary antecedents necessarily leads us to "Infancia"). And, to be fair, Máksim Gorki's world can be dirtier than Bukowski's because it belongs to a more ignorant and obscurantist rural environment, alien to any modernity of thought. What irony; I have discovered in Gorki one of the great influences on modern North American literature.
The beginning of the book is very powerful. There, the difficult days that followed the child's relocation are recalled, being poorly accepted by relatives he vaguely knew, and suffering the consequences of an absent and depressed mother. The new household rules are jealously watched under the latent threat of the whip, in order to avoid any mischief that could lead him astray from the "right path". The reader will encounter the raw experiences of someone who has been deprived of his security from the beginning. But he will also observe the folklore, customs, and chaos of the forgotten and disoriented Russian people; always facing the adversities of the climate and poverty.
The style is extremely simple and direct, full of plain sincerity in the first person and with a great abundance of dialogues. We will rarely find overly elaborate descriptions and deep psychological examinations. In fact, it is not necessary to describe the psychology of the characters when the narrator is a child and when the meanness that exists in them is obvious.
Let's take the character of the grandfather as an example: a selfish, stingy, and violent man who does not provide the paternal model that Alekséi considers worthy of being imitated. For this reason, the child clings to the idealized memory of his deceased father, and such memories are nourished by the character of the grandmother; a much more sensitive and kind being (but at the same time so superstitious and servile that she inevitably succumbs under patriarchal domination).
It is precisely the grandmother who, at times, positions herself as a second narrator, telling (in her own way) everything that Alekséi did not see. In such a way that the readers will not know if what she affirms is the truth, or if, on the contrary, she distorts and embellishes the facts in order to make her grandson happy. These supposed inconsistencies in the narration make us see the characters in a more human way and place us in a context of pure realism; the Russian realism so celebrated by critics.
The only "strange" element for the reader is that we will often come across poems, songs, and extracts from literary works written in verse; characteristics that give the book the feeling of being older than it really is, reinforcing the impact of an orthodox and conservative environment. The key chapter is the one in which the marked differences in the religious practice of the grandparents (particularly their personal vision of the Creator) are described: the grandfather's God is distrustful and vengeful; while the grandmother's God is understanding and merciful. Facing this dilemma, the child concludes that they are two different gods. It should be said that this comparison is approached from a child's perspective and without adopting a combative position. However, it embodies a very severe criticism in itself.
The author insists on a point that Charles Dickens was very clear about; children are excluded from family discussions because they are considered emotionally weak or intellectually inferior beings. In front of them, adults avoid uncomfortable topics. Therefore, the motivations that cause conflicts remain in mystery, and the consequences can be much worse than the knowledge of the truth. Another element of Dickens present in this novel is the monstrous description of abject characters; a child is unable to perceive ugliness unless adults make it evident through their actions.
To create good literature, it is not enough to write a raw and dramatic story; our novel must be endowed with artistic, spiritual, or intellectual substance. In this case, Gorki achieves it thanks to his frankness and his compassionate sensitivity (the appearance of endearing characters like that of the mysterious alchemist who shows the child that one can go beyond the mediocrity of the common man helps a lot).
These fictionalized memoirs have left me surprised and satisfied. I still cannot find a single trace of that supposed political element that so many readers fear in Máksim Gorki; in the two books I have read, I have not found a hint of ideology. To know the real Gorki (and eliminate prejudices against him), we will have to undertake a rather simple mission; read some of his books.