Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical source
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
Vesa Karonen, who criticizes the war books in Helsingin Sanomat, and has written a biography about Pentti Haanpää and co-authored a biography about Yrjö Jylhä, writes in his article “Jatkosota kirjoissa” (in Kohtalon päivät, 2011, p. 178).
When The Unknown Soldier was published, the front-line soldiers’ general opinion was that Linna’s description of the war was "true". It was, however, the novel which describes how the war was handled in the subsequent years. It tells what the front-line men felt, thought and talked about, but the background of the writing situation was the new relationship with another party, the Soviet Union. One had to adjust to the fact that Finland came only “a good second".
Karonen has earlier shown how even before, truthful, realistic description of the war was demanded in the writings of Yrjö Jylhä and then his poems about the Winter War, Purgatory: hollow and showy words are not allowed to use, nor to despise the enemy, the heaviness of the battle and ethical disputes are dealt with honestly. Propaganda did not belong to the Finnish literature. Pentti Haanpää had cleared the field in his short stories about the pre-war army Kenttä ja kasarmi. Jylhä and Linna described how people could in the middle of very inhumanity of war do great things.
Linna’s men were critical towards their superiors as Haanpää’s men. Also Haanpää used humor, though not the description of the Winter War Korpisotaa.
Karonen loans (p. 177) the beginning of the novel which Linna wrote during the war, Kahden rajan yli (Over Two borders). It has first been published by Jaakko Syrjä in Muistissa Väinö Linna):
“It was the army, which did perhaps not outwardly stand comparison with the major powers’ armies, but whose every heart was beating for freedom of his country and each fist clenched his arms aware of the fact that they were hope of the hard-hit people and the instrument in obtaining refund from the bloody injustice that had been made towards it. Most of them had gone through the desperate struggle of the Winter War, and experienced the bitterness of the ensuing peace, and that is why they marched towards the east in order to take back what the injustice and violence was robbed of them. "
it seems that in the beginning of The Unknown Soldier, Linna was ironizing himself.
When The Unknown Soldier was published, the front-line soldiers’ general opinion was that Linna’s description of the war was "true". It was, however, the novel which describes how the war was handled in the subsequent years. It tells what the front-line men felt, thought and talked about, but the background of the writing situation was the new relationship with another party, the Soviet Union. One had to adjust to the fact that Finland came only “a good second".
Karonen has earlier shown how even before, truthful, realistic description of the war was demanded in the writings of Yrjö Jylhä and then his poems about the Winter War, Purgatory: hollow and showy words are not allowed to use, nor to despise the enemy, the heaviness of the battle and ethical disputes are dealt with honestly. Propaganda did not belong to the Finnish literature. Pentti Haanpää had cleared the field in his short stories about the pre-war army Kenttä ja kasarmi. Jylhä and Linna described how people could in the middle of very inhumanity of war do great things.
Linna’s men were critical towards their superiors as Haanpää’s men. Also Haanpää used humor, though not the description of the Winter War Korpisotaa.
Karonen loans (p. 177) the beginning of the novel which Linna wrote during the war, Kahden rajan yli (Over Two borders). It has first been published by Jaakko Syrjä in Muistissa Väinö Linna):
“It was the army, which did perhaps not outwardly stand comparison with the major powers’ armies, but whose every heart was beating for freedom of his country and each fist clenched his arms aware of the fact that they were hope of the hard-hit people and the instrument in obtaining refund from the bloody injustice that had been made towards it. Most of them had gone through the desperate struggle of the Winter War, and experienced the bitterness of the ensuing peace, and that is why they marched towards the east in order to take back what the injustice and violence was robbed of them. "
it seems that in the beginning of The Unknown Soldier, Linna was ironizing himself.
- John Hilly
- Member
- Posts: 2618
- Joined: 26 Jan 2010, 10:33
- Location: Tampere, Finland, EU
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
Thanks, Anne!
Regards
Juha-Pekka
Regards
Juha-Pekka
"Die Blechtrommel trommelt noch!"
-
- Member
- Posts: 1113
- Joined: 06 Jan 2011, 18:44
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
Why?it seems that in the beginning of The Unknown Soldier, Linna was ironizing himself.
Let's not forget that the "good second" remark is also highly ironic.One had to adjust to the fact that Finland came only “a good second".
- Panssari Salama
- Member
- Posts: 449
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 18:42
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
All this Linna analysis is a bit too much for me. It is not like he is the only honest novelist who writes about his own experiences. One of these days I will start a thread Yrjö Keinonen's Veriset Lumet (Blood-red Snow) as a critical source.
In my mid-forties I am too young to have been there to experience the shock value Linna's book had when it came out, turning a new fresh page from patriotic literature to this new, grunt-centered dis-illusioned view. When I read it, it was "just a book", albeit of course a classic.
The first two Finnish war novels I read were Unknown Soldier and Blood-red Snow, at ripe age of ten or thereabouts. I can't remember which one I read first, but there was not much time in between. And Palolampi's Kolla Kestää (Kollaa Holds) the third one.
All three very, very good novels in their own way.
While I was immensely impressed by it, I was also able to see the quite stereotypic world Linna was painting. He was the first Finnish novelist to paint the picture of Finnish grunts doing their jobs while cursing the world around them, I give him that of course.
At the same time, there was something genuinely more honest with Keinonen's work, as he in turn painted a world where the reserve officers truly tried to do a professional job, caring for their men, and stopping the enemy. He did not save his thought on bad officers either afterall one such officer had his brother killed (if I recall correctly), or bad grunts who panicked or otherwise were found lacking leaving their comraded in trouble.
I have read other Keinonen books and they do not impress me to that level at all, as they are too self-centered. Propably they should be as well, given Keinonen was a motivated reserve officer, and now with some experience of Winter War in his belt as well.
So from my point of view, Unknown Soldier is a classic. But it is a some what one-sided story on the other hand, with some hind sighted wisdom added to it as well. And when comparing it to other well written novels - and there are not that many around - I do find it less than a perfection it is painted in this discussion.
In my mid-forties I am too young to have been there to experience the shock value Linna's book had when it came out, turning a new fresh page from patriotic literature to this new, grunt-centered dis-illusioned view. When I read it, it was "just a book", albeit of course a classic.
The first two Finnish war novels I read were Unknown Soldier and Blood-red Snow, at ripe age of ten or thereabouts. I can't remember which one I read first, but there was not much time in between. And Palolampi's Kolla Kestää (Kollaa Holds) the third one.
All three very, very good novels in their own way.
While I was immensely impressed by it, I was also able to see the quite stereotypic world Linna was painting. He was the first Finnish novelist to paint the picture of Finnish grunts doing their jobs while cursing the world around them, I give him that of course.
At the same time, there was something genuinely more honest with Keinonen's work, as he in turn painted a world where the reserve officers truly tried to do a professional job, caring for their men, and stopping the enemy. He did not save his thought on bad officers either afterall one such officer had his brother killed (if I recall correctly), or bad grunts who panicked or otherwise were found lacking leaving their comraded in trouble.
I have read other Keinonen books and they do not impress me to that level at all, as they are too self-centered. Propably they should be as well, given Keinonen was a motivated reserve officer, and now with some experience of Winter War in his belt as well.
So from my point of view, Unknown Soldier is a classic. But it is a some what one-sided story on the other hand, with some hind sighted wisdom added to it as well. And when comparing it to other well written novels - and there are not that many around - I do find it less than a perfection it is painted in this discussion.
Panssari Salama - Paying homage to Avalon Hill PanzerBlitz and Panzer Leader board games from those fab '70s.
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
During the war he had himself written an novel using patriotic phrases, whereas Jylhä or Haanpää never did.Philip S. Walker wrote:Why?it seems that in the beginning of The Unknown Soldier, Linna was ironizing himself.
In a way it is, in another way it isn't. "Tuli maaliin" means that Finland finished the race, contrary to many nations that didn't.Philip S. Walker wrote:Let's not forget that the "good second" remark is also highly ironic.One had to adjust to the fact that Finland came only “a good second".
-
- Member
- Posts: 1113
- Joined: 06 Jan 2011, 18:44
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
You're right. A very interesting read. Thanks for that.During the war he had himself written an novel using patriotic phrases, whereas Jylhä or Haanpää never did.
Are you sure that is what Linna means? Remember that the quote comes from Vanhala, a man who hasn't said one single serious sentence throughout the entire book and who is constantly mocking the authorities by making up phony and laughable propaganda statements. Not only does he say this thing about Finland coming in as a "good second", he also laughs out loud.Phil: Let's not forget that the "good second" remark is also highly ironic.
Anne G: In a way it is, in another way it isn't. "Tuli maaliin" means that Finland finished the race, contrary to many nations that didn't.
I believe what Linna says here is: "In future, the authorities will try to make this defeat look like half a victory as well, just like they did with the Winter War." I'm not aware that Linna felt the Continuation War had saved Finland's independence, not even the very important Tali-Ihantala defensive victory, which the novel almost pretends never happened.
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
Maybe because the unit referred to in the novel (JR 8 - though it is never stated) never operated on Karelian Isthmus - and neither does any of the fighting it discusses about... But it seems facts wont matter.
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
It's not important what Linna means (and that nobody can't know for sure). Many a times a novel disagrees with the author's opinion (see Lukács about Balzac).Philip S. Walker wrote:Are you sure that is what Linna means? Remember that the quote comes from Vanhala, a man who hasn't said one single serious sentence throughout the entire book and who is constantly mocking the authorities by making up phony and laughable propaganda statements. Not only does he say this thing about Finland coming in as a "good second", he also laughs out loud.Phil: Let's not forget that the "good second" remark is also highly ironic.
Anne G: In a way it is, in another way it isn't. "Tuli maaliin" means that Finland finished the race, contrary to many nations that didn't.
I believe what Linna says here is: "In future, the authorities will try to make this defeat look like half a victory as well, just like they did with the Winter War." I'm not aware that Linna felt the Continuation War had saved Finland's independence, not even the very important Tali-Ihantala defensive victory, which the novel almost pretends never happened.
There is a scene in Here Under a Northern Star, when the teacher, a caricature of militarism and chauvinism. comes from the war. A Communist tries to humble him by asking whether he will again sing his former songs, but the teacher answers: "''Hear you a holy vow' has been kept." This one time he is not comic character. Whatever else, he has been brave in the war.
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
I haven't read it, but I must say that if one wants to read an objective version about the 30ies, then I recommend Jumalan myllyt by Toivo Pekkanen. He was a former smith but could undestand representatives of all parties - something that Linna never even tried.PBlitz wrote: At the same time, there was something genuinely more honest with Keinonen's work,
That doesn't mean that I don't like Linna, on the contrary. But one must never adore anybody so much that one forgets that all had limitations.
- Panssari Salama
- Member
- Posts: 449
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 18:42
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
Thanks Anne, that was my point more or less (bold text my addition). The excellent closing of the book is a case in point.Anne G, wrote:I haven't read it, but I must say that if one wants to read an objective version about the 30ies, then I recommend Jumalan myllyt by Toivo Pekkanen. He was a former smith but could undestand representatives of all parties - something that Linna never even tried.PBlitz wrote: At the same time, there was something genuinely more honest with Keinonen's work,
That doesn't mean that I don't like Linna, on the contrary. But one must never adore anybody so much that one forgets that all had limitations.
On one hand, it has some of the most witty dialogue in the book.
One of the protagonist first calling the opponents with the old derogative term puskaryssä, 'Russky-in-bushes', then instantly correcting himself to a politically correct term "A Soviet Union Citizen in a shrubbery."
And Vanhala of course making his famous quote on how the contest ended, "second to cross the finish line was small and brave Finland". Very sharp dialogue, as the grunts wash the whole damned war from their shoulders, laughing at it.
Then on another hand, all this sounds like Linna couldn't resist putting in some hindsight into book. While the dialogue is excellent, here we have a band of brothers immediately using the post war language once the guns fall silent.
Linna at his worst and best at the same time?
As for Vanhala quote, I have personally never read anything more into it than what the original text literally says. "Second to cross the finish line...". He seems to imply that finally everything is over, and even if the race turned out to be not the 100 meters dash some expected in the beginning of the book (and some others strongly opposed!), the marathon is finally over.
Edit: corrected a few typos
Panssari Salama - Paying homage to Avalon Hill PanzerBlitz and Panzer Leader board games from those fab '70s.
- Panssari Salama
- Member
- Posts: 449
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 18:42
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
In my opinion something is lost in translation here.Philip S. Walker wrote: Are you sure that is what Linna means? Remember that the quote comes from Vanhala, a man who hasn't said one single serious sentence throughout the entire book and who is constantly mocking the authorities by making up phony and laughable propaganda statements. Not only does he say this thing about Finland coming in as a "good second", he also laughs out loud.
I believe what Linna says here is: "In future, the authorities will try to make this defeat look like half a victory as well, just like they did with the Winter War." I'm not aware that Linna felt the Continuation War had saved Finland's independence, not even the very important Tali-Ihantala defensive victory, which the novel almost pretends never happened.
Maybe if we could have the original text in Finnish, Swedish and English for comparison, that would be helpful to second guess Linna's thoughts here.
From wiki citates: "Sosialististen Neuvostotasavaltojen liitto voitti, mutta hyvänä kakkosena tuli maaliin pieni ja sisukas Suomi."
My translation: "USSR won, but as a good second the finish line was crossed by small and gritty Finland"
Does someone have access to original translations? Mind you, the English translation has many liberties taken by whoever did the translation, in my opinion...
As for Vanhala, he seems to laugh at everything. Any absurdities taking place, he seems to find a funny spot in them...
Panssari Salama - Paying homage to Avalon Hill PanzerBlitz and Panzer Leader board games from those fab '70s.
-
- Member
- Posts: 1113
- Joined: 06 Jan 2011, 18:44
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
@ Anne G
@ PBlitz
I don't think it is particularly difficult to get a good idea of what he meant if you try to look at his books openly, carefully and logically, and I can't imagine many others whose opinions on these matters I would value to the same extent.It's not important what Linna means (and that nobody can't know for sure).
That would depend on what you mean by "opinion". If you mean "political opinion" you're right, but that only means that Linna sees the real person behind his formal opinions.Many a times a novel disagrees with the author's opinion (see Lukács about Balzac).
I don't think any book could tell everything about the Continuation War. Linna left spaces open for Meri, Rintala and Tuuri. But I still think it is essential to understand Linna properly.But one must never adore anybody so much that one forgets that all had limitations.
@ PBlitz
I believe you're making a very valid observation, but I don't have any problem at all with what Linna is doing here. The novel is ending and he is directing things towards its aftermath, letting Vanhala make one of his usual ironical remarks to show how little people have actually learned from this war. The kind of opinions we often see on this forum shows just how spot on Linna was in predicting this. Even though his own book became massively popular, people were still closing their eyes to what he was trying to tell them.Then on another hand, all this sounds like Linna couldn't resist putting in some hindsight into book. While the dialogue is excellent, here we have a band of brothers immediately using the post war language once the guns fall silent.
Vanhala is the joker in this story. There are no indications that he should suddenly become some kind of spokesman for right-wing revisionist opinions on the very last page, and in any case the remark is followed by him laughing at it. I can't see there is anything to misunderstand. Like in your own example, Linna is directing things towards his own time now.As for Vanhala quote, I have personally never read anything more into it than what the original text implies. "Second to cross the finnish line...". He seems to imply that finally everything is over, and even if the race turned out to be not the 100 meters dash some expected in the beginning of the book (and some others strongly opposed!), the marathon is finally over.
- Panssari Salama
- Member
- Posts: 449
- Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 18:42
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
I do not know if you have had a chance to read Sotaromaani, the original manuscript of Linna's. It paints distinctively more pathetic picture of Linna's opinion and the artistic work he put together.Philip S. Walker wrote: I believe you're making a very valid observation, but I don't have any problem at all with what Linna is doing here. The novel is ending and he is directing things towards its aftermath, letting Vanhala make one of his usual ironical remarks to show how little people have actually learned from this war. The kind of opinions we often see on this forum shows just how spot on Linna was in predicting this. Even though his own book became massively popular, people were still closing their eyes to what he was trying to tell them.
The word pathetic is borrowed from this thesis, comparing Sotaromaani and Unknown Soldier to each other, and analysing various reasons as why some certain Linna text was not put forwards. I hope you can translate it to a readable format with e.g. google, as it is a fundamentally good read.
"Analysing the identity of the two twins (Sotaromaani and Unknown Soldier)"
http://www.ennenjanyt.net/3-02/sotaromaani.htm
The interpretation Vanhala's quotes are targeted against right-wing revisionism is yours. I am, at the moment at least, not agreeing with that interpretation.Philip S. Walker wrote: Vanhala is the joker in this story. There are no indications that he should suddenly become some kind of spokesman for right-wing revisionist opinions on the very last page, and in any case the remark is followed by him laughing at it. I can't see there is anything to misunderstand. Like in your own example, Linna is directing things towards his own time now.
Panssari Salama - Paying homage to Avalon Hill PanzerBlitz and Panzer Leader board games from those fab '70s.
-
- Member
- Posts: 1113
- Joined: 06 Jan 2011, 18:44
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
@ PBlitz
Thanks for the link. Unfortunately, I have given up on using google for translations from Finnish as it threatens my already dubious sanity. Perhaps you or someone else can at least translate the introduction and then we can discuss that.
Several of my friends in Finland have read the unedited version of the novel and they tell me that what the editor took out was mainly a) Examples of language that was considered too strong at the time (mainly sexually related), b) Anti-militaristic statements, and c) Scenes where Letho was portrayed more clearly as a psychopath (kind of diluting the ironic remark were his death is described as "the end of a heroic Finnish legend").
It is extremely rare for any novel to be published without first going through a thorough, lengthy and highly critical editing process. In fact, that is exactly why publishing companies have editors and pay them money to do their jobs. On top of that there are usually two proofs done by different professional proof readers.
Most writers are grateful for this process and couldn't live without it. However, I am told that Linna disagreed with his editor on certain points. We obviously need to know exactly what he disagreed on before we can judge if he or the editor was right, but even at the point we are at now I think most of us today would agree with Linna that there was no need to take bits out for the reasons stated in categories a) and c). With regard to b) I doubt that Linna disagreed with his editor for literary reasons, but he must have suspected it would be all too easy for a Finnish audience to misunderstand his novel unless the anti-militarism in it was presented with extreme clarity. In this he was right as well.
Thanks for the link. Unfortunately, I have given up on using google for translations from Finnish as it threatens my already dubious sanity. Perhaps you or someone else can at least translate the introduction and then we can discuss that.
Several of my friends in Finland have read the unedited version of the novel and they tell me that what the editor took out was mainly a) Examples of language that was considered too strong at the time (mainly sexually related), b) Anti-militaristic statements, and c) Scenes where Letho was portrayed more clearly as a psychopath (kind of diluting the ironic remark were his death is described as "the end of a heroic Finnish legend").
It is extremely rare for any novel to be published without first going through a thorough, lengthy and highly critical editing process. In fact, that is exactly why publishing companies have editors and pay them money to do their jobs. On top of that there are usually two proofs done by different professional proof readers.
Most writers are grateful for this process and couldn't live without it. However, I am told that Linna disagreed with his editor on certain points. We obviously need to know exactly what he disagreed on before we can judge if he or the editor was right, but even at the point we are at now I think most of us today would agree with Linna that there was no need to take bits out for the reasons stated in categories a) and c). With regard to b) I doubt that Linna disagreed with his editor for literary reasons, but he must have suspected it would be all too easy for a Finnish audience to misunderstand his novel unless the anti-militarism in it was presented with extreme clarity. In this he was right as well.
Then you are a good example of why Linna felt it was necessary to keep in the anti-militaristic bits that his editor wanted to take out.The interpretation Vanhala's quotes are targeted against right-wing revisionism is yours. I am, at the moment at least, not agreeing with that interpretation.
Re: Väinö Linna's novel "Unknown Soldier" as a critical sour
One needed to be quite dense even when reading the 'diluted' version not to see Lehto as a psychopath.Several of my friends in Finland have read the unedited version of the novel and they tell me that what the editor took out was mainly a) Examples of language that was considered too strong at the time (mainly sexually related), b) Anti-militaristic statements, and c) Scenes where Letho was portrayed more clearly as a psychopath (kind of diluting the ironic remark were his death is described as "the end of a heroic Finnish legend").
Linna's representation of Suojeluskunta and/or Lotta Svärd was purely black and white. To be blunt, quite typical for left wing writers. As for women (and how he depicts Lottas) if anything the 'Sotaromaani' paints Linna pretty much as a male chauvinist. Edited version is at least in that respect better than the one Linna wrote. As 'anti-militarism' I'm not quite sure what you refer to, Linna presented different face for the Finnish military, distant from the strict 'Prussian' discipline.Most writers are grateful for this process and couldn't live without it. However, I am told that Linna disagreed with his editor on certain points. We obviously need to know exactly what he disagreed on before we can judge if he or the editor was right, but even at the point we are at now I think most of us today would agree with Linna that there was no need to take bits out for the reasons stated in categories a) and c). With regard to b) I doubt that Linna disagreed with his editor for literary reasons, but he must have suspected it would be all too easy for a Finnish audience to misunderstand his novel unless the anti-militarism in it was presented with extreme clarity. In this he was right as well.
As for that matter it is acknowledged that Linna intentionally set out to dismantle the image of Finnish soldier painted in Runeberg's works. Not that he would set out to paint a balanced or truthful view of it. I do hope you can appreciate the difference.
Again you are presenting your own personal views as something setting the baseline for further study.Then you are a good example of why Linna felt it was necessary to keep in the anti-militaristic bits that his editor wanted to take out.The interpretation Vanhala's quotes are targeted against right-wing revisionism is yours. I am, at the moment at least, not agreeing with that interpretation.