Arthur Koestler in Darkness At Noon, explores the utility of totalitarianism through the fictional life of Nicholas Rubashov, a lifelong, loyal member of The Party who has recently been hauled into jail under dubious charges. Rubashov has spent his entire life promoting the Utilitarian and Machiavellian ideals espoused by No. 1, the enigmatic leader of The Party. But now, ironically, Rubashov is being subjected to the same methods he used to use out of fervent devotion to The Party, a devotion that is not only questioned by officials of The Party, but Rubashov himself. He is now the current target of tactics he has previously used, including intense interrogation techniques, fear mongering, and manipulation. As he sits in jail, awaiting his hearing, Rubashov is forced to examine the decisions he has made in the name of promoting The Party ideals through a combination of flashbacks, journal entries, self-reflection, and interactions with his fellow prisoners. Utilitarianism and Machiavellianism are two theories that are both explicitly and implicitly explored throughout the text in Darkness At Noon. Through the various flashbacks, actions, and thoughts of Rubashov, Koestler wrestles with the myriad aspects of these two theories, which outline the proper ways in which a society should be constructed. Koestler's novel confirms the idea that the Utilitarianism is a principle which can be learned, yet only through the complete annihilation of the first generation of this supposedly evolved society, an idea explored in John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism.
[...] In order to avoid the emergence of questioning the morality of one's actions as Rubashov does, the Party advocates the use of deductive reasoning, blind faith, and self-deception, which supports the Party's emphasis on the “collective to ensure that its members both support and carry out it's goals. These three methods of control are achieved by promoting the Utilitarian ideal of the ends justifying the means through the utilization of Machiavellian means; cruelty, the beastly arts, and deception. Yet, in the end, Rubashov, like Raskolnikov, the principle character in Crime and Punishment realizes “that twice two are not four when the mathematical units are human beings.”[1] Koestler explores and struggles with the two ideologies he examines in Darkness At Noon. [...]
[...] Rubashov spends a portion of the novel denying the importance of the “singular submitting himself to the “collective of the Party and the logic of deductive reasoning through an attempt of the application of the technique of self-deception.[24] Self-deception is the idea that Rubashov can convince himself that he believes whatever it is he needs in order to remain within the Party lines. Self-deception is the answer to the dilemma of how to avoid questioning the morality of one's actions, a question the Party attempts to suppress in all of its members. [...]
[...] In his letter to Lorenzo de' Medici, Machiavelli explains that the classical definition of virtue is not applicable to today's society[2], due to the flawed nature of humans, a thought shared by the leaders of The Party in Darkness At Noon.[3] Machiavelli stipulates that the classical cardinal virtues of wisdom, justice, courage and temperance along with honesty, magnanimity and liberality are impractical.[4] Therefore, it is necessary for a prince, or in the case of Darkness At Noon, No to utilize the Machiavellian qualities of a “virtuous” leader, cruelty in place of justice and magnanimity, and deception instead of honesty. [...]
[...] It denied his to power to distinguish good and evil and at the same time it spoke pathetically of guilt and treachery.”[31] This denial of Rubashov's free will, his powerlessness to choose what he believes to be the correct choice, and suppression of his ability to determine good actions from bad are tactics that the Party has utilized to suppress Rubashov's exploration of the “oceanic feeling” discussed in the grammatical fiction. The “oceanic feeling” has remained elusive throughout the entirety of Rubashov's life because it allows the mind to wander to whatever conclusion it comes to, regardless of considerations such as joy or pain[32] an exercise dangerous to the linear and strict methodology of the deductive reasoning used by the Party. [...]
[...] The Party justifies deceptive actions such as this because “history has taught us often that lies serve her better than the truth.”[12] This is a lesson that Machiavelli believes to be true, and it is this utilization of deception through an application of the beastly arts, in conjunction with cruelty which promote the Utilitarian ends which the Party is attempting to achieve. While the Machiavellian principles of cruelty and deception are integral parts of The Party's philosophy, these two methods of governance support the Party's Utilitarian belief that Party's line was sharply defined. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
