Darkness At Noon Analysis

Words: 446
Pages: 2

Generally, people come to realizations taking a long time to think about what they have done in the past. Usually, the most part of these realizations is the regrets to what had occurred. Regret also can be represented as a form of battle between one’s conscience and his or her self.
In the book, “Darkness at Noon”, Koestler used Rubashov to represent a study of a human being as to how to cross the hazy lines between one conscience and his beliefs. Rubashov seems to struggle to accept some of the aspects of moralities, while at the same time this struggle is filling him with the questions of guilt. He doubted whether the life of the human is worth more than the humanity. He figured that his ideas on communism were fogged by his dedication to the Soviet regime, which eventually compromised his life. In many other ways Rubashov was an
…show more content…
“The Party denied the free will of the individual – and at the same time it extracted his willing self-sacrifice… There was somewhere an error in the calculation”. (p.263) Rubashov’s confession suggests that his attitude towards a larger purpose is obedient, and he questions himself whether it is worth it. The ideas that he had were not his own, but rather they were forced into his mind by the very people he served to. Moreover, Rubashov had a great ability to think logically in every situation; he follows every idea “...down to its final consequence.” (p.100) Although Rubashov reflects a true genius and an elite intellectual, he is not capable of answering on his own questions, whereas it leaves Ivanov and Gletkin to wonder what he is up to. The main character justifies his actions by reminding himself that he is working for a more perfect society, no matter what the cost. As it was mentioned in the first part of his confession, he heard only those being sacrificed, and forgot or ignored why they were being