Hide this

Results from Google Books

Click on a thumbnail to go to Google Books.

We by Yevgeny Zamyatin

We (original 1924; edition 1993)

by Yevgeny Zamyatin, Clarence Brown (Introduction)

MembersReviewsPopularityAverage ratingMentions
4,4701171,086 (3.91)273
Authors:Yevgeny Zamyatin
Other authors:Clarence Brown (Introduction)
Info:Penguin Twentieth Century Classics (1993), Paperback, 225 pages
Collections:Your library
Tags:dystopia, russian, politics

Work details

We by Yevgeny Zamyatin (1924)

1001 (39) 1001 books (20) 20th century (93) classic (44) classics (33) dystopia (499) dystopian (91) dystopian fiction (19) fiction (562) literature (92) novel (118) paperback (21) politics (22) read (70) Russia (132) Russian (229) Russian fiction (29) Russian literature (207) science fiction (584) sf (105) sff (22) Soviet Union (32) speculative fiction (21) to-read (125) totalitarianism (58) translated (25) translation (53) unread (44) utopia (28) Zamyatin (24)
  1. 240
    1984 by George Orwell (soylentgreen23, roby72, timoroso, MEStaton, 2810michael)
    timoroso: Zamyatin's "We" was not just a precursor of "Nineteen Eighty-Four" but the work Orwell took as a model for his own book.
  2. 220
    Brave New World by Aldous Huxley (tehran)
    tehran: Brave New World was largely inspired by Zamyatin's We.
  3. 50
    Red Star: The First Bolshevik Utopia by Alexander Bogdanov (leigonj)
    leigonj: As We (1920) is anti-communist Russian science fiction, Red Star (1908) is pro-communist Russian science fiction. They are equally superb.
  4. 20
    Aelita by Alexei Tolstoy (DuneSherban)
    DuneSherban: While thematically distinct from We, Aelita shares its problematic view of early Soviet society, and can also be read as a discourse on totalitarian society, revolution and Bolshevism (published originally in 1923).
  5. 20
    Lord of the World by Robert Hugh Benson (hippietrail)
    hippietrail: an even earlier dystopia novel from 1908
  6. 20
    This Perfect Day by Ira Levin (myshelves, VictoriaPL)
    myshelves: Dystopian novel.
  7. 00
    Kallocain by Karin Boye (Oct326)
  8. 00
    Day of the Oprichnik by Vladimir Sorokin (2810michael)
  9. 311
    Anthem by Ayn Rand (myshelves)
    myshelves: Dystopian novel. Wikipedia says: "Ayn Rand's Anthem (1938) has several major similarities to We, although it is stylistically and thematically different."

Sign up for LibraryThing to find out whether you'll like this book.

No current Talk conversations about this book.

» See also 273 mentions

English (113)  Dutch (2)  German (1)  Hungarian (1)  All languages (117)
Showing 1-5 of 113 (next | show all)
In this dystopian far future, people have become like cogs in a machine, identified by number rather than name, performing the same rote tasks at the same time every day, and believing that happiness only comes from giving up freedom.

We is a Russian novel written in the 1920s in response to the two Russian revolutions, as well as to the author's experiences working in the Tyne shipyards and witnessing the collectivization of labor on a large scale. It is one of the earliest examples of the dystopian novel, and it influenced both George Orwell's 1984 and Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. For readers interested in the history of dystopian literature, it is a must-read.

However, it's a bit of a frustrating read, especially for readers more interested in a riveting story. Zamyatin writes in an almost poetic style, often bordering on the surreal, and it can be difficult at times to figure out exactly what is happening. (He also has an annoying quirk of letting his sentences trail off into ellipses.) When I find myself reading a book like this, one more concerned with words and images than sense and story, I read it almost like poetry. I just let the images flow over me and absorb what I can, without bothering to parse the story too much. That's why I'm hard put to describe the plot of We.

The novel takes place in a city made entirely of glass and separated from the natural world by an immense glass wall. This in itself is an overwhelming image: a city bathed in sunlight, where everyone can see everyone else at almost all times, except for the once-weekly allowed sex visits when the blinds can come down. Zamyatin plays with this juxtaposition of the sunny, beautiful city as the place of oppression. When the winds and storms come, we sense that revolution is brewing, and when the mass flocks of birds break through, we know that the walls preserving this totalitarian regime are crumbling.

While We lacks the coherent, straightforward plot we're used to in contemporary dystopias, and sometimes teeters on the edge of the absurd, it is still a powerful read. It's not difficult to spot the tropes that have been appropriated and expanded upon by later authors who tackled the dystopian form. I think it's always interesting to take a look at a genre's roots, if only to realize how old, but still powerful, these ideas are.

Reading the classics (2014). ( )
  sturlington | Apr 23, 2014 |
Published in 1924 this dystopian novel is now firmly fixed as a classic of 20th century literary science fiction ranking alongside George Orwell's [1984] and Aldous Huxley's [Brave New World]. [We] predates both these novels and while Huxley claimed not to have read it Orwell admitted that his idea of a modern dystopia was written following a reading of [We]. Curiously Huxley's stable, safe drug induced and happy[Brave New world] is much more like [We] than Orwell's claustrophobic shabby world of spies informers and shortages.

Zamtatin's We is set in the far future and follows the near annihilation of the human race following the catastrophic 200 years war. The One State is ruled by the Benefactor; the inhabitants have numbers instead of names and live in a modern city almost entirely made of glass surrounded by the green wall that excludes the anarchic fecund world of nature. No privacy is required in a city whose inhabitants work and play according to a rigid timetable, everyone getting up at the same time and having the same hours of recreation. Within the timetable are generous amounts of sex days according to need and every number(person) has the right of availability to any other person on the production of a pink ticket; blinds can be lowered for 15 minutes while sexual intercourse takes place. Nothing is concealed from the guardians and it is a citizens duty to report any law breakers; conversations out of doors are carefully monitored. The story focuses on D-503 who has the misfortune to fall in love and suffer a mental breakdown; he is an important mathematician and builder of the INTEGRAL the first rocket ship designed to export the One State culture to other worlds. The object of his affection I-330 is the leader of an underground group who are intent on stealing the INTEGRAL to link up with the natural outside world.

The One State is by no means an unhappy society; although it aims to eradicate individuality numbers like D-503 revel in its safety, its conformity, its productiveness and its feeling of companionability. The freedom of past civilizations is seen as disorganised wildness and in D-503's opinion does not compare to the harmonious, clean and carefree world in which he lives. D503's story is told in a series of records that he imagines he is writing for someone to read in the twentieth century and so he extolls the virtues of his society and the reader feels the poetry of the mathematically structured world of the future. D-503 is excited by his world and so his doubts and fears as he becomes a sick number (person) through his mental breakdown are scatter shots of the wildness that he fears.

The ability to create a world that entices and fascinates the reader is a pre-requisite of much dystopian/science fiction writing, but to make the novel have literary merit the author has to go further. Zamyatin does this by his ambiguity about the merits of the One State and the reader asks himself the question: is all the conformity as bad as it first appears; seduced perhaps by some fine writing full of images that convey the beauty that D-503 sees in his world. The reader also is witness to the disintegration of this world through the thoughts of a man losing his grip on reality, what is real and what is not becomes a question that hovers over this book. The language is certainly dreamlike and perhaps a little druggy like the reflections in the glass that surround everything in the One State. The book has a feel and an atmosphere all of it's own and the writing would appeal to those who like the work of [[Cordwainer Smith]]

I found myself re-reading parts of this novel in appreciation of its imagery and its flow, always a good sign. Here is D-503 falling in love and discovering his soul;

The two of us walked along as one . Somewhere a long ways off through the fog you could hear the sun singing, everything was supple. pearly, golden, pink, red,. The whole world was one immense woman and we were in her very womb, we hadn't yet been born, we were enjoying ripening. And it was clear unshakeably clear, that all of this was for me: the sun, the fog, the pink, the gold - for me. I didn't ask where we were going, going, ripening, burgeoning and supple.

As a dystopian science fiction novel it ranks along with the very best and so deserves 5 stars, as literature I suppose it is a four star read, hence my rating of 4.5 stars. (I will never think of a pink ticket in quite the same way again) ( )
5 vote baswood | Apr 22, 2014 |
A man starts a journal. He sits in a glass armchair, at a glass desk, in a glass room. Around him, thousands of other men and women sit in their own glass rooms, in glass buildings in a huge megalopolis entirely made of glass.

Set in the 26th century, in an urban civilization that has reorganized itself after a nuclear Armageddon, the engineer named D-503, starts his journal to celebrate the “Integral”, a spaceship he helped to design and which will soon leave Earth to conquer and civilize the inhabitants of other planets and other galaxies.

OneState, a dictatorial regime led by the “Benefactor”, rules the city. Private property does not exist. Nameless citizens have been denied any individuality and are just "numbered cogs” in an immense urban machine. Their life is regulated around the clock, up to the minute, according to strict efficiency rules laid out in “The Table” and enforced by sinister Guardians. The transparency of the glass city has rendered all privacy impossible with the exception of their 15 minutes of emotion-less weekly sex, when couples are briefly allowed to lower the blinds of the windows of their dwellings.

When D-503 wakes up, we get a strange “endless reflection” effect, like the one we get when we stand between two mirrors facing each other :

[…] time to get up. To the right and the left through the glass walls I see something like my own self, my own room, my own clothes, my own movements, and all repeated a thousand times. It cheers you up ; You see yourself as part of an immense , powerful single thing. And such a precise beauty it is : not a wasted gesture, bend , turn.

While the intention of his writings is to laud the society he serves, D-503, will unintentionally record in his journal, his own progressive mental and social breakdown. Two women, more brave than himself, will tempt him into rebellious acts of love, transgressions that will bring him face to face with the repressive forces of the most brutal of tyrannies.

As the novel is written by Yevgeny Zamyatin, a Russian living in the beginning of the 20th century, (1884 – 1937), a reader could easily misunderstand “We” as a reaction against the Soviet and Stalinist dictatorial horrors. But, to be really that, the book was written a decade too early. The draft of the novel dates from 1919 and by 1921 it was already censored, well before the Stalinists purges of the 1930’s. Rather than an indictment of the Soviet rule, “We” is in fact an eerie accurate prophecy of things still to come. The true genius of Zamyatin, an engineer by profession, was that he merged the several societal developments he witnessed, into a credible Monster of the future societies.

Partly inspired by HG.Wells’ scientific socialist utopias, but himself a huge inspiration for Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World and George Orwell’s 1984, Zamyatin in his novel links the dots between the collectivization, he witnessed on a large scale at the Tyne Shipyards in England, Lenin and Stalin’s attempts to incorporate Taylorism into Soviet manufacturing and Bentham’s architectural theories of how to control inmates by the very shape of their prison.

Notwithstanding its intellectual scope, We still is an agreeable read. The novel exudes some kind of thirties charm, the charm of the old Buck Rogers - Flash Gordon comics, with its descriptions of men and women dressed alike, in a Uniform with a numbered badge on their heart and the girls in the control room of the space ship launch wearing cute winged helmets.

The novel has its funny details too. In this world of excessive egalitarianism, as said, man and woman do not have a proper name and are recognized by a given number. Males have odd numbers prefixed by consonants; females have even numbers prefixed by vowels. The narrator for instance is D-530. While critics insist that these numbers were inspired by the technical specifications of the icebreaker Saint Alexander Nevsky, on which Zamyatin was working, I rather think that the writer amused himself and later his readers with a few jokes. The adventurous femme fatale who disturbs and infringes on the narrator’s life is called I – 330. She is indeed svelte like an I and the twist and turns of the double threes stand for the sexy curves of both boobs and buttocks. The woman who is designed to D-503's for his cavorting on command is named O-90. She is shorter and more rotund and wants to have a child. The nine is easily recognized as the shape of a fetus in an early stage. Onestate has forbidden O-90 to get pregnant for she does not fit the right profile of length. The double agent S-4711 has a snaky double curved twist and stinks like a cheap foreign perfume. And maybe the D of D-530 stands for Durak or fool, a man failing to recognize his destiny.

On top of the charm and the fun, Russianness too, seeps through the lines of this dystopia. Not only is there a Babushka guarding the door of the only opaque building in the city, other and more literary allusions abound. There are for instance the negroid lips of the narrator’s poet friend who remind us of Pushkin, there is the Gogolian obsession with noses, but the work that comes most to mind is Dostoyevsky’s Brothers Karamazov novel. Indeed, Onestate, the society build on rational principles and scientific laws is Ivan Karamazov’s progressive dream turned into a social nightmare. The figure of the “Benefactor” reminds us strongly of the Grand Inquisitor and his creation of a society meaning to do good, to eliminate war, hunger and poverty, but ending by being bad, for having cut out its social and religious value systems, to have lacerated itself from its citizens. And finally, OneState’s worse enemies are those individuals, who like Misha, the other Karamazov Brother, have freed their so-called Karamazovian force, that crude unbridled earthly force which sits in the center of our soul, a passionate animal lust of freedom.

A dystopia, even a Russian dystopia like the one written by Zamyatin, is a middle-class fiction. An idea is worked out to such an extreme level, that it becomes a warning of things to come for those people, affluent enough, to lose something if things further develop along the predicted lines. It always strikes me that even in the bleakest of dystopian novels, the Maslowian levels of physiological and security needs are never at the core of the problem. This obviously stands in stark contrast with the real, war drenched, 20th century in which they were written. Even today, for the more than 800 million people suffering of chronic undernourishment and the many more, homeless and war affected wretches, Zamyatin’s story (if only they could read ) would be a fairy-tale rather than a nightmare.

One man’s Dystopia can be another one’s Utopia.

What makes “We” particularly interesting is that Zamyatin is identifying the two real underlying mechanics that still push us onward to what we consider today dystopian, but which might well be our everyday life in a very near future.

Depicting OneState, this future world of terror, as a clear transparent urban nation, almost entirely constructed out of glass, is a stroke of genius. One can easily follow Zamyatin’s reasoning why the use of transparent building block is the most efficient tool for dictatorial oppression. For people living under the oppressive State - control often have the impression that the secret police can see right through the walls of their private dwellings behind which they hide.

In all its glass and steel architectural modernism OneState is nothing more than a huge prison for its citizens. Such real constructions existed already when Zamyatin wrote his book. One thinks about the Panopticon prison design developed along the ideas of the 18th century English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham. In a Panopticon (observe – all), a single person can watch a greater number of people without that they, say the inmates of a prison, can see who is watched or not. Bentham boasted that his concept was “a new mode of obtaining power of mind over mind, in a quantity hitherto without example.” And indeed, while people realize that they cannot be all watched all the time, they start to act as if they are watched constantly, effectively controlling their behavior.

The panopticon concept is outdated nowadays. Electronics and IT have replaced it more effectively in ways even Zamyatin could not foresee. The enthusiasm with which we adopt the blinking new technologies like mobile phones and GPS, home computers and Internet is hurling us at neck breaking pace towards the world Zamyatin is warning us for.

The use of Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Foursquare, Linkedin, Snapchat, private blogs, email, electronic membership cards, user registrations, mobile and electronic banking, have effectively replaced glass transparency and allows to any “Great Benefactor” out there, to “see”all we do and get control over our private lives.

The second and more important mechanism exposed by Zamyatin is Taylorianism.

Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856 – 1915), is the so - called father of scientific management and industrial efficiency. He was the fine gentleman who debased the manual worker to the level of the machine cog, by stating that if they were so stupid as to do manual work, they were certainly too stupid to understand the simple tasks they were doing.

For the implementation of his efficiency methods, Taylor was equally clear that it could only happen through enforced standardization of methods, enforced adoption of the best working conditions, and enforced cooperation.

While a greater efficiency was certainly attained through its methods, people like Mintzberg correctly warned that an obsession with efficiency would overshadow less quantifiable social benefits and social values and degrade work into monotonous and skill-reducing tasks that would alienate workers from what they were doing.

Still in We, Taylor is a God and his efficiency methods a mantra.

D-503 somewhere enthusiastically exclaims:

“No doubt about it, that Taylor was the genius of antiquity. […] How could they write whole libraries on Kant and hardly even notice Taylor – that prophet that could see ten centuries ahead?”

And in the immense hangar, the engineer holds his breath when he observes the teams at work on the Integral, that immense spaceship:

“I watched the men below, how they would bend over, straighten up, turn around, all in accordance with Taylor, smoothly and quickly, keeping in time, like the levers of a single immense machine.”

Again, information technology today has brought Zamyatin’s world closer. While Robotics and more efficient – computer steered machinery have made the problems on the work floor less acute, the developments of IT have also allowed to apply Taylorism to white collar jobs. Embedded in a wrong company culture, IT and the possibility to apply draconic efficiency rules to office jobs, has turned employees and clerks into the new salary slaves.

With all that in mind, one starts to understand that Zamyatin’s book is by far superior to Orwell’s dystopia. While Orwell just had to glance over the iron wall to see what he predicted, Zamyatin’s not only foresaw much earlier what was going to happen in his mother country, but he also identified for us the mechanics on which a modern rational authoritarian society could be build. Zamyatin’s warning still stands , more acute than ever I would say, and in his short but brilliant little book, he also advices on the stance to take:

"There is no final revolution. Revolutions are infinite.",one character says.

Nothing less than a paraphrase of Karl Marx’s famous world-shaking concept of the “Permanent Revolution” ( )
13 vote Macumbeira | Apr 10, 2014 |
When you're trying to create a compelling dystopia for the reader (or for yourself, or whoever man), it strikes me, there are no easy choices. Do you go for lazy accessibility, a la Aldous Huxley in Brave New World, where everybody's kind of aaaaalmost a lower upper middle class British technocrat only with the sexual mores that we know all those lower upper middle class British technocrats would adopt for their own if they thought they were either attractice or iconoclastic enough to get away with it? Do you go for radical camp, like George Orwell in 1984, where psychological plausibility takes second place to totalitarian gothic? (Many of us will have seen that thing that points out how Airstrip One is a fever dream but London 632 After Ford is already here.)

Or do you take the path less chosen, the face less boottrod, the hole of obstacle golf less played? Zamyatin, whose status as the major source for both Huxley and Orwell is so obvious as to be beyond dispute (a feat in itself! though Huxley did deny it) gives us a disjointed, inaccessible, but oh-so-real insider's view of a thousand-year reich where simultaneously all that is solid is melting into air (fittingly, given that humans are "numbers") through the eyes of one of its more brilliant and poetic denizens (D-503 he gets the chance to be because he's the designer of the spaceship, the Integral, through which the One State is going to enslave the other planets of the galaxy. This state, conceived at the beginning of the Soviet era, still needs people in such creative genius roles; I suspect that if it ever actually comes to this kind of frank totalitarianism the invasion fleet'll be built by a million sleepy dudes screwing together a billion widgets). It's an extraordinary book and I have no idea how to review it except to say that I read it like a tone-diary of fears and curiosity-never-stamped-out and the tender shoots of humanity, protected anxiously by tender humans not even equipped to realize that their actions constitute rebellion (but none the less subject to liquidation for that).

Our one right is the right to punishment. What is the last number? Horrifying and heady thoughts, and this book's full of 'em. It's psychologically real--a veritable Gormenghast in the gleaming machine of our more awful possibilities as a planet--and for that, from outside the bad future with no bad future brain, it's hard to follow where Zamyatin goes at times. I didn't always understand what kind of neural bloodflowers were bursting forth from D-503's head, but I will always remember this book and you should too. ( )
11 vote MeditationesMartini | Apr 6, 2014 |
Before I didn’t know this, but now I know, and you’ll know it too: laughter comes in different colours. It is only the distant echo of an explosion occurring inside you: it might be festive rockets of red, blue, gold, or it might be shreds of human bodies flying upward…

Never was a dystopian novel so brightly coloured, so jangled and vivid, so like a kaleidoscope. Never has a dystopian world been brighter – sparkling with glass and blue sky. And has any other dystopian hero (or anti-hero) been so turbulent, so vivid, so uncertain?

We is of course a political satire. It attacks the Soviet Union as Zamyatin knew it, and the idea of the police state. Part of the philosophy of the One State is: Freedom leads to desire which leads to unhappiness; therefore the sure path to happiness is to remove freedom. So there in a sealed, controlled glass world, every cipher obeys the Table of Hours, doing almost absolutely everything in unison. There is no longer any concept of ‘the unknown’. Everything is clear, precise, mathematically predictable.

But our (anti)hero, D-503, falls in love with a rebel and develops a sickness, diagnosed with horror as ‘a soul’. And so begins the turmoil. We is in fact not only a political satire, it is more universal than that. It’s a kind of personal, every-person satire as well. This business of being a ‘person’ is at the heart of what We is all about. The uncontainable, painful, colourful, explosiveness of being alive, with an imagination, a heart, desires. Logic and reason, so clear-cut, so cool and composed, hits the white-heat of illogical humanity, and the fizz it makes is uncontrollable.

Sometimes what’s actually happening isn’t quite clear, but the sense of being there in it is. Emotions and reactions are full of colour here, through Zamyatin’s eyes. It’s supposed that Zamyatin had synaesthesia – I am sure of it. That’s what makes his writing so apt and vivid, even when it doesn’t make much sense.

We shouldn’t forget that the novel itself was a courageous political act. The manuscript was smuggled to New York, translated into English and published there in 1924, to the outrage of the Soviet State. According to Wikipedia, (forgive the blandness of that), Zamyatin apparently wrote to Stalin himself, pleading for permission to leave the Soviet Union in 1931. (Incredibly, permission was granted!) In that letter he wrote: “True literature can only exist when it is created, not by diligent and reliable officials, but by madmen, hermits, heretics, dreamers, rebels and sceptics.” We can let that sentence stand as the ultimate description of this novel.
16 vote ChocolateMuse | Apr 2, 2014 |
Showing 1-5 of 113 (next | show all)
no reviews | add a review

» Add other authors (54 possible)

Author nameRoleType of authorWork?Status
Zamyatin, Yevgenyprimary authorall editionsconfirmed
Aplin, HughTranslatorsecondary authorsome editionsconfirmed
Brown, ClarenceTranslatorsecondary authorsome editionsconfirmed
Chesterman, AdrianCover artistsecondary authorsome editionsconfirmed
Drohla, GiselaTranslatorsecondary authorsome editionsconfirmed
Glenny, MichaelIntroductionsecondary authorsome editionsconfirmed
Guerney, Bernard GuilbertTranslatorsecondary authorsome editionsconfirmed
Lo Gatto, EttoreTranslatorsecondary authorsome editionsconfirmed
Mills, RussellCover artistsecondary authorsome editionsconfirmed
Randall, NatashaTranslatorsecondary authorsome editionsconfirmed
Siegel, HaroldCover artistsecondary authorsome editionsconfirmed
Sillitoe, AlanForewordsecondary authorsome editionsconfirmed
Zilboorg, GregoryTranslatorsecondary authorsome editionsconfirmed


You must log in to edit Common Knowledge data.
For more help see the Common Knowledge help page.
Series (with order)
Canonical title
Original title
Alternative titles
Information from the Italian Common Knowledge. Edit to localize it to the English one.
Original publication date
Important places
Important events
Related movies
Information from the German Common Knowledge. Edit to localize it to the English one.
Wir (1981IMDb)
Awards and honors
First words
I am merely copying out here, word for word, what was printed today in the State Gazette: In 120 days from now the building of the INTEGRAL will be finished.
The effect of that woman on me was as unpleasant as a displaced irrational number that has accidentally crept into an equation.
There is no final revolution.  Revolutions are infinite.
I do not want anyone to want for me--I want to want for myself.
I shall attempt nothing more than to note down what I see, what I think - or, to be more exact, what we think (that's right: we, and let this WE be the title of these records). But this, surely, will be a derivative of our life, of the mathematically perfect life of OneState, and if that is so, then won't this be, of its own accord, whatever I may wish, an epic?
A human being is like a novel: until the last page you don't know how it will end. Or it wouldn't be worth reading...."
Last words
(Click to show. Warning: May contain spoilers.)
Disambiguation notice
Publisher's editors
Publisher series

References to this work on external resources.

Wikipedia in English (4)

Book description
The first dystopia ever, it started asking uncomfortable questions about individuals, collectives, revolutions, progress — and the collectives’ rights to individuals’ souls in the name of revolutions and progress.
Haiku summary

Amazon.com Product Description (ISBN 0140185852, Paperback)

A seminal work of dystopian fiction that foreshadowed the worst excesses of Soviet Russia, Yevgeny Zamyatin's "We" is a powerfully inventive vision that has influenced writers from George Orwell to Ayn Rand. This "Penguin Classics" edition is translated from the Russian with an introduction by Clarence Brown. In a glass-enclosed city of absolute straight lines, ruled over by the all-powerful 'Benefactor', the citizens of the totalitarian society of OneState live out lives devoid of passion and creativity - until D-503, a mathematician who dreams in numbers, makes a discovery: he has an individual soul. Set in the twenty-sixth century AD, "We" is the classic dystopian novel and was the forerunner of works such as George Orwell's "1984" and Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World". It was suppressed for many years in Russia and remains a resounding cry for individual freedom, yet is also a powerful, exciting and vivid work of science fiction. Clarence Brown's brilliant translation is based on the corrected text of the novel, first published in Russia in 1988 after more than sixty years' suppression. Yevgeny Zamyatin (1884-1937) was a naval engineer by profession and writer by vocation, who made himself an enemy of the Tsarist government by being a Bolshevik, and an enemy of the Soviet government by insisting that human beings have absolute creative freedom. He wrote short stories, plays and essays, but his masterpiece is "We", written in 1920-21 and soon thereafter translated into most of the languages of the world. It first appeared in Russia only in 1988. If you enjoyed "We", you might like George Orwell's "1984", also available in "Penguin Classics". "The best single work of science fiction yet written". (Ursula K. LeGuin, author of "The Left Hand of Darkness"). "It is in effect a study of the Machine, the genie that man has thoughtlessly let out of its bottle and cannot put back again". (George Orwell, author of "1984").

(retrieved from Amazon Mon, 30 Sep 2013 13:50:38 -0400)

(see all 5 descriptions)

"Written in 1921, We is set in the One State, where all live for the collective good and individual freedom does not exist. The novel takes the form of the diary of mathematician D-503, who, to his shock, experiences the most disruptive emotion imaginable: love. At once satirical and sobering - and now available in a powerful new translation - We is both a rediscovered classic and a work of tremendous relevance to our own times."--BOOK JACKET.… (more)

(summary from another edition)

» see all 5 descriptions

Quick Links

Swap Ebooks Audio
5 avail.
427 wanted
20 pay4 pay

Popular covers


Average: (3.91)
1 10
1.5 5
2 50
2.5 22
3 191
3.5 82
4 364
4.5 85
5 271


An edition of this book was published by Audible.com.

See editions

Penguin Australia

An edition of this book was published by Penguin Australia.

» Publisher information page

Is this you?

Become a LibraryThing Author.


Help/FAQs | About | Privacy/Terms | Blog | Contact | LibraryThing.com | APIs | WikiThing | Common Knowledge | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | 89,560,943 books! | Top bar: Always visible