Solzhenitsyn: The Moral Vision by Edward E. Ericson, Jr. (review)

164ROCKY MOUNTAIN REVIEW studying adolescent literature, reminding teachers that an appreciation of literature is a skill which must be developed over years of reading. Their book is effective partly because of the exhaustive list of books which they discuss and the extensive research, which is evident on each page, and partly because of their entertaining and witty writing style, often including acidic attacks; they note of Pollyana: "So sickeningly sweet is the heroine that countless adults and young people could rightfully credit her with their diabetes." Students of adolescent literature courses will find this book a treasure of information and helpful advice. Moreover, teachers of those courses will be delighted by the suggested activities at each chapter's end, the thoughtful discussion of the field's issues and concerns, the literary and theoretical focus, and the five appendices which include an honor sampling and selection guides. Keeping in mind the avalanche of adolescent books available today, the authors provide evaluation guides for the types of books discussed such as science fiction, historical fiction, nonfiction, and the problem novel, just a few of the more than dozen types mentioned. Obviously, Donelson and Nilsen have left much work to be done in this vast and constantly changing area, but it seems they have touched on every possible topic; a book covering every concern would be gargantuan. Thus, Donelson and Nilsen have provided students and teachers with a thorough, lively, and practical sourcebook and guide, an immense asset to the profession on a subject which is exciting, worthwhile study. JOYCE K. MOYERS, Pittsburg State University Edward E. Ericson, Jr. Solzhenitsyn: The Moral Vision. Foreword by Malcolm Muggeridge. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1980. 239p. When Solzhenitsyn was still in the Soviet Union writing works boldly critical of an oppressive government, he was lionized in the western press as an enlightened liberal. But when he arrived in the west and soon set about to criticize western culture for its lack of spiritual courage, many journalists began to describe him as a mystic and an archconservative. Ericson's account of this change of perception shows well that Solzhenitsyn made no substantive change whatever. The apparent conversion was, in fact, only in the eyes of those beholders who were determined to measure him with a political yardstick. This was, Ericson explains, an error in judgment. Solzhenitsyn is now and always has been a literary moralist, concerned primarily with "that line dividing good and evil which cuts through the heart of every human being." In presenting each of Solzhenitsyn's works, Ericson reveals over and again the basic moral concern , the impassioned call for a god-centered ethos of civilization. His argument that Solzhenitsyn, there or here, has not wavered in this concern or in this call is convincing, and the implication is clear, especially in chapter 10 on the polemical writings: We should listen to Solzhenitsyn with other ears. This is a fine critical study of Solzhenitsyn. There is, however, one quibble. Solzhenitsyn's moral views are repeatedly characterized as "Christian" when there is little or no argument given that they can be so restricted in the religious sense. Solzhenitsyn's orthodox baptism surely does not by itself render his morality exclusively "Christian." LEE B. CROFT, Arizona State University ...