The comparison may seem bold. Between the Algerian Boualem Sansal, born in 1944, and the Russian Alexandre Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008), the historical, political and cultural contexts differ profoundly. However, when reading The Legend of the first and rereading The Gulag Archipelago of the second, the same figure emerges: that of the writer who makes oppression and confinement the revealer of a superior human truth.
Their destinies thus present striking similarities. Both have seen the inside of the systems they denounce. Solzhenitsyn was an officer in the Red Army before being arrested in 1945 for some criticism of Stalin in a private correspondence. Eight years in camps followed, to which were added internal exile and then constant surveillance by the Soviet regime.
Confinement, a school of lucidity
Sansal, a senior Algerian civil servant, was a long-time member of the state apparatus before becoming one of the harshest critics of authoritarianism, corruption and political Islamism. His arrest in 2024 gave his work a particular resonance: that of a writer whose warnings suddenly seem to resonate with his own destiny.
For both, the experience of confinement produced neither resignation nor resentment; it has become a school of lucidity. In The Gulag Archipelago, Solzhenitsyn shows how the Soviet concentration camp system is based less on violence alone than on lies elevated to the rank of political principle. “We know that they lie, they know that we know that they lie,” he wrote in substance in several of his texts devoted to the Soviet regime.
In The Legend, Sansal explores, in a more symbolic and romantic form, the mechanisms of the domination of consciences and the creation of collective myths: “We are taught above all not to name things. Naming is a seditious act. » For a long time now, he had been warning against societies that substitute imposed belief for free thought. In 2084, his most famous novel, he wrote: “Religion makes God more necessary than ever. » Behind the irony of the formula lies a criticism of the systems which exploit the sacred to better enslave men.
Another relationship appears in their relationship to time. For the prisoner, it becomes an almost physical matter. In the Soviet camps, Solzhenitsyn discovered a temporality stripped of all distractions. The days are similar, but this monotony paradoxically becomes a space for inner reflection. Prison time ceases to be that of official history and once again becomes that of conscience. It is in this bare duration that he forges his conviction that the truth survives the most powerful regimes.
The vision of history
The Legend is crossed by the idea that contemporary societies live in a perpetual present where history is constantly rewritten. The powers that be seek to erase memory to better control the future. This confiscation of historical time, he experiences in prison as in an insurmountable analogy: “The infinitely painful (…) is the dispossession of time. » And what do we do to hide it? : “Repetition is without perspective. » His work can thus be read as a fight against collective amnesia. Like Solzhenitsyn, he makes memory an act of resistance.
This proximity is no less evident in their vision of history. Solzhenitsyn considers that the great catastrophes of the 20th century arise from the pretension of ideologies to replace all transcendence. Soviet communism appeared as a secular religion demanding total submission. In his famous Harvard speech in 1978, he already denounced the ravages of a world that had “forgotten God”.
Sansal, for his part, observes how contemporary totalitarianisms, whether political or religious, thrive on the same terrain: the erasure of the individual and the confiscation of critical spirit. One fights Marxist-Leninist dogma, the other the excesses of political Islamism; but both face the same totalitarian temptation.
Their religious references, although different, nevertheless have a form of kinship. Solzhenitsyn, returned to the Orthodox faith after the ordeal of the camps, sees in the spiritual dimension of existence the ultimate condition of interior freedom. Evil is never only in institutions; it is also a possibility inscribed in each consciousness.
A spiritual conception of human dignity
Sansal, without belonging to the same theological universe, also defends a spiritual conception of human dignity. In this regard, the resonances, both metaphorical and sacred, are strong: “I wrote this book in forty days” as in a biblical desert finally crossed. Several evangelical verses are magnified, the Christ allusions are transparent. His fight does not, however, affect faith as such, it concerns its political instrumentalization.
The two men share the courage to say no, fidelity to the truth against official narratives and the conviction that literature remains one of the last refuges of freedom. Their kinship appears less as a literary analogy than as a true moral filiation. What’s more, something mystical inhabits their writing.
About opinions
This text is signed by a guest author. He expresses his opinion and not that of the editorial staff. Our Live section aims to allow the expression of pluralism on religious, social and current affairs subjects, and to encourage dialogue, according to the criteria set by our editorial charter.
Share your opinion in comments or by writing to us at: readers.lacroix@groupebayard.com
