Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Logospathosinwe 2
Logospathosinwe 2
Logospathosinwe 2
Broox Anderson
Professor Buhler
HUM 3070
3 April 2016
What is logic and emotion?—are they different things, really? Using the Freudian
model of thought, we can separate these polarizing aspects of humanity into singular,
stable entities. As we know, Freud’s theory divides the human psyche into three layers:
the id, ego, and superego (unconscious, subconscious, and conscious). It’s helpful to
if you will—stemming from basal instinct in the id and carried through the ego to
two-thirds of our cerebral strata, but essentially irrepressible by our superego. In near
natural opposition, logic, then, is espoused to the conscious mind and resides within its
bounds. These forces, one primeval and another steeped in cultural evolution, serve to
help us live, but are implemented rather clumsily. Much like fitting a square peg in a
round hole, it leaves gaps, synapses; and, in these inevitable chasms rises poetic
angst, over-thought, and fissured thoughts. This warring conflict between logic and
emotion is a recurring event in D-503’s life, and an inherent theme in Zamyatin’s novel,
We.
Humor me for a moment while I hone this broad idea of logic and emotion to fit
Aristotle’s observation of “logos” and “pathos.” These two concepts form a tandem,
Anderson 2
along with “ethos,” to explain the major forms of rhetoric or persuasion: logos being an
appeal to reason and pathos being an appeal to empathy (notice the Greek root). While
Aristotle described these innately human traits through the “rhetor’s” perspective, we
must think about them in terms of the audience. By this, we can understand the
“‘He harnessed fire in the machine, in steel, / And bound chaos in the chains of
Law’” (47). D-503 singles out this stanza in a sea of inspiring iambic verse offered at a
liturgy of the One State by a State Poet. It is not mere coincidence that Zamyatin
penned such a symbolic line. Fire is often equated to emotion, and steel to logic
(“kindling your inner fire,” or being “machine-like”). Thus, the One State, conflictingly
theory, this can be read almost analogously as, “He bound the id in the chains of the
superego.”
These iambic lines poetically define the status of existing in the One State, but
also serve to foreshadow an integral component of the book: the Operation, which can
be seen as the ultimate triumph of logos over pathos. However, there is a hint at an
even more overt theme in the immediately following lines: “And everything was new,
everything was steel—a steel sun, steel trees, steel men. But suddenly, a madman
‘unchained the fire’ and everything would perish again...” (47). It is fitting that D-503
chose to reflect on these lines, because he seems to embody the sentiments of the
engineer whose livelihood and mind is based in mathematics, in total logic: “I was the
boy who had once wept on [the Day of Unanimity] over a tiny spot on his unif, visible to
no one but himself” (140). To him, we can ascertain that if she is as Prometheus, he is a
lightless mortal; and, from above the gods of Olympus, of the One State, she descends,
and understanding of self, but also to war, conflict, and death, like that of R-13; and, just
as Prometheus is punished, I-330 is brought to suffer for her complicity by torture and
On page 185, in reference to the Operation and inherent risk in hijacking the
Integral, I-330 states, “Well, you are sick, you have committed crimes because of
me—has it not been a torment to you? And now, the Operation—and you will cure
yourself of me. And that means—farewell.” It was easy to pass over this without seeing
the symbolism the first time. However, we can infer from these lines that I-330
represents, among other things, emotion and imagination. Undergoing the Operation
would “cure” him of her, because we know the Operation is a procedure to remove
imagination or emotion.
Having known I-330 for a time, D-503 recounts: “The spears of her eyelashes
spread open, they let me in—and… How describe what it does to me—this ancient,
absurd, miraculous ritual, when her lips touch mine? What formula can express the
Anderson 4
storm that sweeps everything out of my soul but her? Yes, yes, my soul—laugh if you
will” (154). This statement is a culmination of two of Zamyatin’s recurring themes: the
with this “incurable soul” in Chapter Sixteen. Zamyatin provides this imagery of the
human soul:
Well, then, take a plane, a surface—this mirror, say. And on this surface are you
and I, you see? We squint against the sun. And here, the blue electric spark
inside that tube, and there—the passing shadow of an aero. All of it only on the
some fire; and nothing slides across it any more, everything enters into it, into
this mirror world that we examined with such curiosity when we were children.
Children are not so foolish, I assure you. The plane has acquired volume, it has
become a body, a world, and everything is now inside the mirror—inside you: the
sun, the blast of the whirling propeller, your trembling lips, and someone else’s.
Do you understand? The cold mirror reflects, throws back, but this one absorbs,
face—and it remains in you forever. Once you heard a drop fall in the silence,
That one small word, fire, is taken, again, to mean emotion. Thus, Zamyatin holds, in
mathematics—until now the only firm and immutable island in my entire dislocated
world—has also broken off its moorings, is also floating whirling. Does it mean, then,
that this preposterous “soul” is as my unif, as my boots, although I do not see them at
the moment? (They are behind the mirrored closet door.) And if the boots are not a
equates the soul to his boots which are behind the mirror, another reference to the
metaphor of the soul. Yet, again, D-503 is conflicted by the idea of the soul and its
incalculability. Even mathematics, his forte, has become ungrounded to him. This is a
Zamyatin seems to link the idea of the soul and irrationality throughout the book.
These are both manifestations of logos and pathos, as each are founded in logic and
“[A]n extremely odd chain of logic unwound itself in my mind. Every equation,
every formula in the surface world has its corresponding curve or body. But for
never seen them…. But the horror of it is that these invisible bodies exist, they
mathematics nor death ever makes a mistake. So that, if we do not see these
bodies in our world, there must be, there inevitably must be, a whole vast world
Again, I associate “beyond the surface” with the mirror metaphor. D-503 has logically
concluded that irrationality lies within the Z-axis of the mirror, within the soul. This can
be considered less abstractly, though, and again with our Freudian concepts.
Disregarding the mirror metaphor, if the superego is the surface, then Zamyatin is
In reference to his desire for I-330, D-503 laments, “But why does this ‘I don’t
want’ exist within me together with this ‘I want’?” (135), and thus we see that he is torn
between his unreasonable attraction to her and his devotion to the One State. This
logos and pathos, but there are many other moments of symbolism and subtle
After walking along the Green Wall to fulfill a doctor’s prescription to alleviate his
“soul,” D-503 writes, “But fortunately between me and the wild green ocean was the
glass of the Wall. Oh, great, divinely bounding wisdom of walls and barriers! They are,
perhaps, the greatest of man’s inventions. Man ceased to be a wild animal only when
he built the first wall. Man ceased to be a savage only when we had built the Green
Anderson 7
Wall, when we had isolated our perfect mechanical world from the irrational, hideous
world of trees, birds, animals…” (93). Does the wall represent the synapse, the gap
between reason and visceral desire? I believe so. It is a fitting assumption to think of the
wall as a symbol for logos. Moreover, the next paragraph in the description states:
Through the glass the blunt snout of some best stared dully, mistily at me; yellow
we stared into each other’s eyes—those mine-wells from the surface world into
another, subterranean one. And a question stirred within me: What if he, this
Here, D-503 staring at a beast through the Green Wall is analogous to perceiving his
primeval emotions through the lens of logic. He ponders whether the beast, an entirely
instinctual creature, is happier than the constituents of the One State who strive for logic
One of my favorite passages when thinking of logos and pathos is in Chapter 24,
when D-503 states, “I am like a machine set at excessive speed: the bearings are
overheated; another minute, and molten metal will begin to drip, and everything will turn
to naught. Quick—cold water, logic. I pour it by the pailful, but logic hisses on the
red-hot bearings and dissipates into the air in whiffs of white, elusive steam” (135). This
Anderson 8
imagery is an absolute parallel to our focus, as Zamyatin all but enunciates this human
phenomenon of logos and pathos. D-503 is portrayed as a machine, a logical being who
is heated by fiery emotion and is set to rupture. He craves “cold water, logic,” as though
it is the antithesis of heat and emotion, but, when in contact with emotion, the cold logic
dissipates like steam. We can apply this imagery throughout the book, especially with
he tries to apply logic to her, or his feelings for her, his attempts are frustrated. The
same can be said for broader themes like freedom, nature, primitivism, and happiness.
Ultimately, though, as D-503 undergoes the Great Operation and loses his
imagination, it seems as though logic prevails. From the last chapter, we read: “... in the
western parts of the city there is still chaos, roaring, corpses, beasts,
hope that we shall conquer. More than that—I am certain we shall conquer. Because
Reason must prevail” (232). While this is a solemn resolution to an admirable war
betwixt logos and pathos, I believe this ending truly forces the reader to comprehend
the gravity of the themes presented in Zamyatin’s novel. Tracing our theme, it can be
from the cerebrum in order for pure logic and reason to overcome it; this is a powerful
Epicureanism, and Stoicism. I closely associate logic, and Zamyatin’s One State with
Stoicism. The Google dictionary describes Stoicism: “... The school taught that virtue,
Anderson 9
the highest good, is based on knowledge, and that the wise live in harmony with the
divine Reason ... that governs nature, and are indifferent to the vicissitudes of fortune
and to pleasure and pain.” We can derive from this definition a tendency of Stoics to
favor logos over pathos. Conversely, Hedonism is “the ethical theory that pleasure (in
the sense of the satisfaction of desires) is the highest good and proper aim of human
emotion and pleasure. However, between these radical schools lies the philosophy of
seems society tends toward Hedonism, and with the advent of social technology this is
readily apparent. For those not concerned with chasing highs, though, this can be
In the book, D-503 so eloquently expressed, “My head was splitting; two logical
trains collided, climbing upon each other, crashing, splintering...” (185); and, as human
emotion, logos and pathos. Together, these concrete and fictional examples are
evidence that logos and pathos are tangible facets of the human experience as
Works Cited
Cook, Vincent. "Epicurus & Epicurean Philosophy." Epicurus and Epicurean Philosophy.
Zamyatin, Yevgeny. We. Trans. Mirra Ginsburg. New York: Harper Voyager, 2012.
Print.