Darkness at Noon

Like Part Two, Part Three opens with an excerpt from Rubashov’s diary, in which he theorizes the “swing” of the pendulum of human history. He reframes Bogrov’s death as his falling “out of the swing” (170) of history a hundred and fifty years after the pendulum began its most recent upswing “towards the blue sky of freedom” (170) with the storming of the Bastille. The last fifty years have occurred on the other side of that swing up toward freedom, taking people back “to tyranny again” (170). Rubashov theorizes that the “amount of individual freedom which a people may conquer and keep, depends on the degree of its political maturity” (170), which “does not follow a continuous rising curve, as does the growing up of an individual” (170), and that “every technical improvement creates a new complication” (171) in response to which it takes many years for “a people’s level of understanding” (171) to catch up. Rubashov goes on to compare this process to the “lifting of a ship through a lock with several chambers” (171). This theory suggests that capitalism will eventually collapse and accounts for the brutality of the political machinery in the “Fatherland of the Revolution” (173). The excerpt ends with Rubashov’s theorizing of three options for “the opposition”: to oust the existing leadership by force, to “die in silence,” or to continue with “the denial and suppression of one’s own conviction when there is no prospect of materializing it” (174). He notes that because the Party’s morality is utilitarian, the third option is the only real option, and the personal must be “cut off root and branch” (174).

In Chapter 2 we see Rubashov writing with discipline, stopping only to be brought to the exercise yard, where he walks with “a thin peasant with bast-shoes” (174); Rip Van Winkle has apparently been taken away. The peasant tries to talk with Rubashov about being a “reactionary,” but Rubashov is preoccupied with his writing and only murmurs in response, anxious to get back to his cell and finish his treatise, which he finishes just before lunch. He naps afterward and wakes up to engage in a tapped out conversation with No. 402, telling him that he is capitulating. No. 402 says that he’d rather be hanged than capitulate, and they argue about what constitutes honor. According to No. 402, honor is to die for one’s beliefs, while Rubashov thinks it is to be useful. No. 402 counters by saying that honor is decency, and Rubashov’s response is that “WE HAVE REPLACED DECENCY BY REASON” (178). No. 402 does not respond. Rubashov reads through his statement, signs it, and sends it to Ivanov.

Chapter 3 begins two days after Rubashov sent his statement to Ivanov. He is puzzled by the delay in Ivanov’s response but imagines with amusement how it will be received by the “higher authorities” (179). This thought , in turn, launches his reflection on the “present-day ‘theorists’ of the Party […] whose only task was to dress up No. 1’s jumps and sudden changes of course as the latest revelations of philosophy” (180). As he waits for Ivanov to see him, he continues pacing and working through his new theory; by the third night he cannot sleep, and No. 402 refuses to talk with him. As he lies in bed, imagining Arlova beside him, two officers come to take him. He fears he is being taken to his death, but is instead brought to Gletkin’s office. The light is blinding, making Rubashov’s eyes water and he is unable to look at Gletkin. He demands that the light be turned down so that he can make a statement. Gletkin refuses and Rubashov reins in his temper by reminding himself that “[h]onour was to service without vanity, without sparing oneself, until the last consequence” (189).

Rubashov asks that the charges against him be read in full. Gletkin obliges in a monotone voice. While he reads, Rubashov asks himself repeatedly whether Gletkin believes he is guilty and reflects on Gletkin’s nature and character, wondering if he had “gone mad” (192). Rubashov notices the stenographer in the corner of the room, wondering if she, too, believed he was guilty of the charges against him. The final charge against him is that he instigated an attempt on No. 1’s life. Gletkin asks Rubashov if he pleads guilty to the charges. In a lengthy response, Rubashov pleads guilty to having had oppositional views, but not to the charges brought against him. He goes onto acknowledge that the logical result of his oppositional view would have been dangerous, but that he had nothing to do with any of the criminal activities he is accused of and renounces his oppositional views.

Gletkin’s response is to point out that Rubashov has previously made such statements, and calls his most recent “mere eye-wash” (195). He turns up the light, blinding Rubashov and forces him to admit that his previous declarations were made insincerely and “for tactical purposes” (195). Rubashov has difficulty keeping his eyes open and finds himself falling asleep. Gletkin mentions Arlova, noting that Rubashov’s insincere declaration caused her death. Rubashov’s toothache returns and he thinks to himself that Gletkin is speaking “the naked truth” (197).

Rubashov says that his only desire is to “prove his devotion to the Party” (198). Gletkin tells him that a “complete confession” is the only way for him to do so. Then he has Hare-lip brought into the room. When questioned, Rubashov admits that he knows Hare-lip from seeing him in the yard, but not otherwise. Gletkin asks Hare-lip how he knows Rubashov, and it gradually becomes apparent that Hare-lip is “the son of [Rubashov’s] unfortunate friend Kieffer” (203), one of the men whose likeness was captured in the photograph of the Party founders and who has already been executed for oppositional activities. Hare-lip tells the story of a time when he and his father came to see Rubashov, on the “day of the celebration of the Revolution” (204), and they drank together and discussed the state of the Party and the expediency of remaining within it, waiting until No. 1 was deposed. Hare-lip admits that their conversation “made a deep impression” (208) on him and made him amenable to participating in the plot to assassinate the leader.

Rubashov argues that it is logically impossible for him to have known what job Hare-lip would have at the time of the alleged assassination attempt and how this job would be conducive to poisoning No. 1. But Gletkin counters by saying that Rubashov did not plan how it was to be done, only that it would be done. Rubashov is certain that the charges against him include details of how the assassination would be achieved—“by poison”—but he realizes that it is beside the point—that he bears responsibility for what has happened to Hare-lip, if not for the assassination attempt. Rubashov’s silence concedes Gletkin’s point, and Hare-lip is escorted out. He turns to look at Rubashov again before he leaves, but Rubashov avoids his eyes.

After he is gone, Rubashov agrees with the accusation “in the essential points” (212), and Gletkin turns down the light a bit so that Rubashov can look at his face. Rubashov then argues that by “violence” he meant mass political action rather than individual assassination as the means to his oppositional ends. Gletkin asks whether this distinction is worthwhile, and Rubashov realizes that it does not matter to him anymore. He is conscious of his “complete defeat” (214) and for a moment he thinks he sees No. 1 sitting across the desk from him instead of Gletkin. He remembers a cemetery gate inscription—“Dormir—to sleep” (214) and then dozes off, only to be awakened by Gletkin asking him to sign his statement. He is taken back to his cell, where he falls asleep immediately. An hour later, he is awakened and returned to Gletkin.