IInnokenty has been unfrozen from a time when he was in the Gulag in order to be frozen for future resurrection. I loved Part I of this novel, even jotting down memorable phrases -- "Perhaps Voronin (his Gulag tormentor whom he calls a "cannibal.") became a part of me by remaining in my memory and I hate him within myself." There are other such gifts in this fine novel. The passages describing his recolleciton of the gulag are memorable. His relations with his doctor -- Gieger -- work superlatively. Innokenty believes that anyone who was an artist in their youth, as he was, cannot become a brutal dictator -- "A drawing person is somehow loftier, gentler, than a non-drawing person." Answering his direct question about his theory, Geiger responds (via narrative): "he does know one univeresal villain who was an artist in his youth." Thank you Eugene. Such passages cannot help generate reflection, the best kind of fiction, imho.

Part II changes abruptly from Innokenty's journal to a journal written by all three main characters. Anastasia's granddaughter, Nastya. The doctor, Geiger. And Innokenty. This second part offers a different reading experience from Part I when only Innokenty is our narrator. Innokenty's recollections of the Gulag move us deeply. As a reviewer-writer who knows Soviet history, I have read Shalamov, who Vodolazkin refers to by name. Good. The author has read a writer who even Solzhenitsyn praised. When the author describes the rape of a young woman, now in the gulag, who he knew in Petrograd, you join Innokenty -- also in the gulag -- in his plan to kill the perpetrator.

Vodolazkin illustrates how Innokenty simply cannot integrate himself into contemporary society.
The interiority of Innokenty's narrative is enthralling. Innokenty's resistance -- and later acquiescence -- to offers to commercialize his past life sadden. One firm calls to ask if he will do an advertizement for them. Innokenty hangs up. The call was from a frozen food company. His later paraticiplation in a filmed advertizement for this company is described with heart-breaking brevity.

Later in the novel, the name of the character making a journal entry disappears, leaving us with only -- () -- for identification. If it requires some effort to identify who is the narrator of a given entry, so be it. Far from a weakness, I find it an illustration of how the author respects the intelligence of the reader enough to know she/he can figure the narrator out for themselves. This would not be the case among American editors and publishers. One light criticism. The voice of the narrator blends to such an extent that all three narrator's voice begin to sound the same. A more distinctive narrative voice for each character would have helped.

Part II develops in a direction which parallel precisely the same as Flowers for Algernon (Daniel Keyes). That is fine, though expected.
The multifold ambiguity of the novel's close may be difficult for some American readers, though not (I suspect) for American outliers for whom multiple ambiguity is not only acceptable, but welcome. Alas, in America, big publishers and small ones would almost certainly demand that such ambiguiy be re-writen and replaced by a definitive conclusion.
Eugene Vodolazkin warrants praise to conclude his novel with this ambiguity. Though, if you read about Vodolazkin in the New York Review of Books, you will understand that the author's conception of non-linear time directs elements of his novels. This applies to Laurus, also. But then writing and publishing works with such ambiguity is one reason to read Russian novels. And other foreign novels. Their publishers respect their readers enough to allow for... ambiguity.

A fine novel worth the reading. ( )

My review for 'The Aviator' can be read here: http://thermidormag.com/aviator-review/ ( )

My second reading adventure with Eugene Vodolazkin (BRISBANE was the first), THE AVIATOR is a deep dive into the differences between the early days of the old USSR and the modern Russia of 1999. There is also an element of science fiction here with a protagonist, Innokenty Platonov, an early inhabitant of the first gulags, the Solovetsky Islands in the White Sea, who is cryogenically frozen in the 1920s, then successfully revived in 1999. Born in 1900, his memories of an idyllic childhood, followed by post-revolution upsets, betrayal and imprisonment clash drastically with his experiences in the final months of the Yeltsin years. There is a time-tangled love story here too, as the 'thawed,' still-young Innokenty is reunited briefly with his first love, Anastasia, now 94 years old and nearly comatose, then meets and falls in love with her 19 year-old granddaughter, Nastya. These two, together with Geiger, the doctor who revived Innokenty, are the principal characters - and narrators - of his story, as he tries to come to grips with his unique situation and his young-old body.

It's complicated, but its a damn good story. Very highly recommended.

- Tim Bazzett, author of the memoir, BOOKLOVER ( )

speechless

ok, several hours later, I'll try now.

As with Vodolazkin's last glorious novel [b:Laurus|24694092|Laurus|Evgenij Vodolazkin|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1429675607s/24694092.jpg|24667251], The Aviator has at its beating-heart center the story of an ordinary man who is (chosen to) (forced to) lead an extraordinary life. Although God is vividly present in Laurus, and nearly absent in The Aviator, both novels are deeply concerned with right and wrong; with sin and forgiveness. These novels are fictional inquiries into how a person is to live, and how a person is to make moral choices, in a world where life is uncertain, events are chaotic, and justice frequently non-existent.

These themes build moment by moment, not through exposition, but through scenes that fully engage the senses, and that are full of observations that surprise and delight and feel just right in their details. Both of these novels are full of life and moment. Each manages to arrive at a point in the story where a revelatory bursts of understanding came over me, moments both heartbreaking and hopeful. The feeling these novels gave me reflects those life moments I've experienced that are most important to me, and most memorable. That Vodolazkin could write not one but two books that could affect me this way is such a gift. It is the reason to read.

I've been vague on purpose about the actual events that take place here. It's a journey best done without a map. ( )

I loved Vodolzakin's [b:Laurus|24694092|Laurus|Evgenij Vodolazkin|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1429675607s/24694092.jpg|24667251] so much that I read this book without first reading any reviews, or any info beyond the first paragraph of the publisher's blurb. Not typical for me, but I'm so glad I did - it let me experience all of Innokenty's discoveries along with him, in 'real time'. Although time is not a simple concept in this novel, and neither is memory, history, justice, and just generally how to live. Which makes this sound like a novel of ideas, which it is, but it also has strong plot and characters and is very readable. And it's left me with an urge to read [b:Robinson Crusoe|2932|Robinson Crusoe|Daniel Defoe|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1403180114s/2932.jpg|604666] asap. Kudos to the translator too! ( )