Asher Sisneros

One writing technique that you’ll see occasionally is contrasts. Contrasts are used to display two or more views on a subject, or in fictional writing, they can show the gradual character arc of a protagonist. Sergei Kourdakov masterfully uses contrasts in his autobiography. In this essay, I will break down one of those contrasts and why it’s beautiful. 

The most notable contrast in the autobiography is that of the two religious factions. But before diving into that, I will provide some context. 

Sergei was an orphan child who grew up in the Soviet Union. He excelled in his communist schooling and received favor from the Communist Party. After graduation, he joined the Navy and got a job working for the Communist Party’s secret police. His original mission was to break up bar fights and arrest prostitutes and drunkards, but him his true mission was to crush the Christians in Russia. His supervisor explained that while they could deal with criminals with the sword, Christians were resilient. Christians seemed harmless, but Nikiforov said that they poisoned the minds of Russians.

Through his many raids, Sergei encountered many Christian leaders. All of them were curiously strong in their principles, but Sergei didn’t see how they were dangerous. They didn’t fight back against the police when being arrested. Sometimes, the Christians would try to defend themselves, but they always avoided violence if they could. Also, every Christian received stunning recommendations from their employers. They had great reputations and nobody could accuse them of having poor character. Nobody except the Communist Party. 

One day, when Sergei was attending a Communist conference, the party leaders invited him into a back room. He walked into the room reluctantly, and to his dismay, all of the leaders were drunk lying on the table. Instead of being examples of character, they were gorging themselves like pigs with vodka and sausage. They invited Sergei to join their feast. Orlov, the highest local official in the communist party, got drunk and started cursing communism and slandering Stalin. In his drunken state, he lost control of his words and revealed why communism had, and would never work. Shocked, Sergei ran from their presence.

Over the next twenty-four hours, Sergei went from being a firm believer in Communism to rejecting it inside. They lied to him. Clearly, Communist leaders didn’t even believe in the system. The only reason they were publicly loyal was for personal gain. He learned one thing from that meeting; if he wanted to get on top, communism was the way to do it. He would milk the system and satisfy his own wealth. Instead of supporting communism as a humanitarian, he would use it to advance himself.

The contrast here is between the two factions: Communism and the Christianity. At the beginning of the book, Sergei leads the reader to believe that communism supported Christianity. However, over time, he reveals that they directly challenge each other. Also, the initial impressions he got from each faction flipped. He was told that communism was best for the health of the people, and Christianity opposed communism. In reality, Christians didn’t challenge Communism, but the Communists persecuted the Christians.

He also contrasts the leaders. The Christian leaders believed in what they were preaching and didn’t hold to Christianity because of personal benefit; they lived terrible lives of persecution. Meanwhile, the Communists were only faithful to their system because of personal gain. 

By showing you this contrast, Sergei is taking the reader through his thoughts. He could have told the reader that the Communists were lying from the beginning, but that wouldn’t explain his actions. By taking the reader through the events with a gradual contrast, he is revealing his slow shift in beliefs. This enables the reader to understand his motives at the moment. Since he reveals instead of saying, the reader can sympathize with his actions throughout the book. 

That is why I appreciate this style of writing. By taking the reader through the events slowly, he is writing it like a novel instead of a history book. It’s more exciting that way and makes his autobiography a true page turner.