Darkness at Noon

Part Two opens with an extract from Rubashov’s diary in which he meditates on historical “truth” and the inability to know who is “right” and who is “wrong” in the present. He makes reference to Machiavelli’s The Prince, noting that a copy of the book lies next to No. 1’s bedside and that the Movement has replaced “the nineteenth century’s liberal ethics of ‘fair play’ by the revolutionary ethics of the twentieth century” (98), which are based on “universal reason” or “consequent logic” (98). As Rubashov explains, in the context of this revolutionary ethics, “subjective good faith is of no interest. He who is in the wrong must pay; he who is in the right will be absolved” (99), regardless of their virtue; wrong ideas must be punished with death lest they be carried over to the succeeding generation. At the end of the excerpt, however, Rubashov reveals that even strict adherence to an ethic of consequent logic is itself an act of “faith” (101), and that he no longer has faith in his own logical deductions.

Chapter 2 narrates a conversation between Ivanov and his colleague Gletkin about Rubashov, over whom they disagree. In particular, Gletkin disagrees with Ivanov’s methods—of allowing Rubashov the time and materials with which to come to a logical conclusion so he will capitulate. Gletkin believes that “physical pressure” is a more effective route. The two men also disagree on the ideals of the Revolution, with Gletkin calling Ivanov a “cynic” for believing that those ideals are “all humbug” (103). Gletkin believes that revolutionary labor—and the brutal regime it gave rise to— will ultimately be successful. Gletkin also tells a story about his early years as an examiner, during which he learned the importance of sleep deprivation in interrogations. He also recalls that the prisoners were never beaten, but they were subject to “accidental” witnessing of executions. These are his primary methods of “physical pressure,” and he is able to follow through with them by keeping “in mind the logical necessity of it all” (107) in furthering the goals of the Party. Their conversation ends when Gletkin leaves the canteen and Ivanov stays to watch a game of chess being played by two other officers.

Chapter 3 finds Rubashov with paper, pencil, soap, a towel, cigarettes, and extra food. His task is to “work his thoughts to conclusion, to come to terms with the past and future, with the living and the dead” (109). In the process, Rubashov comes to discover his “I,” which he calls “the silent partner” (110) and he realizes that “there was a thoroughly tangible component in this first person singular, which had remained silent through all these years and now had started to speak” (110). He also discovers, though, that “the silent partner” was not present in his “logical meditations” (111) and that its “utterances occurred without visible cause and, strangely enough, always accompanied by a sharp attach of toothache” (111-112). He names his “first person singular” or “silent partner” the “grammatical fiction” (112) and blames its guerilla tactics for inducing him to spend “the entire seventh day of his imprisonment […] reliving […] his relation with the girl Arlova, who had been shot” (112).

The remainder of Chapter 3 narrates Arlova’s relationship with Rubashov, a relationship which results in her death. She is his secretary at the Trade Delegation, where Rubashov worked immediately following “the incident with Little Loewy” (113). Eventually, they become lovers as well. Rubashov remembers Arlova in persistently physical terms—the “peculiarly familiar odor of [… her] big, well-formed and sluggish body, […] the curve of her bowed neck over the white blouse, […] and her round eyes following his wanderings” (113). During their first night together, Rubashov recalls, she “pronounced that sentence which could no more leave Rubashov’s memory than the folded hands of the Pieta, and the smell of seaweed in the harbour town: ‘You will always be able to do what you like with me’” (116).

After they become lovers, Rubashov begins to say “dangerous” things to her, usually sarcastic jokes or “heretical witticisms” (118) about the Party or No. 1. She reproaches him once, telling him he ought to be more careful, as they were witnessing the preparations for a second round of opposition trials. Arlova is appointed head of the new library, then criticized for not having the correct volumes shelved there, though she “followed every instruction given to her” (12). Though Rubashov finally stops making sarcastic remarks, he has a “curious feeling of guilt” in relation to Arlova, and they stop sleeping together. Shortly afterwards, Arlova is fired at a Party meeting that Rubashov declines to attend. Days later, Arlova is “recalled” to their home country to be tried as a member of the opposition.