The Captive Mind (Polish: Zniewolony umysà Â) is a 1953 work of nonfiction by Polish writer, poet, academic and Nobel laureate Czesà Âaw Mià Âosz. It was first published in English in a translation by Jane Zielonko in 1953.
The Captive Mind was written soon after the author's defection from Stalinist Poland in 1951. In it, Mià Âosz drew upon his experiences as an illegal author during the Nazi Occupation and of being a member of the ruling class of the postwar People's Republic of Poland. The book attempts to explain the allure of Stalinism to intellectuals, its adherents' thought processes, and the existence of both dissent and collaboration within the postwar Soviet Bloc. Mià Âosz described that he wrote the book "under great inner conflict".
The book begins with a discussion of the dystopian novel Insatiability by Stanisà Âaw Ignacy Witkiewicz. In the novel, a new Mongol Empire conquers Poland and introduces Murti-Bing pills as a cure for independent thought. At first, the pills create contentment and blind obedience, but ultimately lead those taking them to develop dual personalities. Mià Âosz compares the pills to the intellectually deadening effects of Marxism-Leninism in the USSR and the Soviet Bloc.
Mià Âosz describes how Western democracies were perceived with a mixture of contempt and fascination by Stalinist Central and Eastern Europe among intellectuals. Constraints put on politicians and policemen by the rule of law struck them as incomprehensible and inferior to the police states of the Communist world. Mià Âosz noted, however, that the same intellectuals who denounced Western consumerism in print would often read Western literature in search of something more worthy than in books published behind the Iron Curtain.
This chapter draws upon the writings of Arthur de Gobineau, a 19th-century French diplomat assigned to present-day Iran. In his Religions and Philosophies of Central Asia, Gobineau describes the practice of Ketman, the act of paying lip service to Islam while concealing secret opposition. Describing the practice as widespread throughout the Islamic World, Gobineau quotes one of his informants as saying, "There is not a single true Moslem in Persia." Gobineau further describes the use of Ketman to secretly spread heterodox views to people who believe that they are being taught Islamic orthodoxy.
Mià Âosz describes seven forms of Ketman applied in the People's Republics of the 20th century:
Under the alias of Alpha, Mià Âosz describes the life of Polish author Jerzy Andrzejewski and how he came to collaborate with Stalinism in Poland. Before the Second World War, Andrzejewski had been widely admired as the author of Catholic novels and considered himself a follower of Jacques Maritain. Mià Âosz expresses a belief, however, that Andrzejewski's Catholic faith was only skin deep.
Under Nazi Occupation of Poland, Andrzejewski was a leader of the literary wing of the Polish underground state. In this capacity, he wrote many short stories and gave many underground literary readings that won many recruits and strengthened the morale of the Polish Home Army. Mià Âosz also describes how, upon returning to Poland's capital after the Warsaw uprising, he and Andrzejewski walked together through the rubble and ruins of the city. Mià Âosz then expresses a belief that Andrejewski's belief in the values of honor, patriotism, and loyalty had been destroyed by the horrors of the Uprising.
After the war, Andrzejewski began writing and, as the new Polish state began slowly demanding blind obedience from him, he obeyed without question. Andrzejewski even publicly denounced his past writing for deviating from Socialist Realism. Despite having once written Catholic novels, Andrzejewski willingly accepts a position making speeches that denounce the Vatican. After that, other intellectuals began calling Andrzejewski, "the respectable prostitute."
In 1942 Mià Âosz first encountered Tadeusz Borowski at an underground literary reading in occupied Warsaw. At the time, Borowski was writing poetry striking for its Nihilistic tone. In 1943 Borowski was arrested by the Gestapo and ultimately imprisoned in Auschwitz.
With extensive quotations from Borowski's short stories, Mià Âosz describes how the former poet survived by being assigned to help unload the transports of Jews who were bound for the gas chambers. In return, Borowski was allowed to keep their food and clothing for himself. Mià Âosz expresses a belief that Borowski's stories should be required reading for anyone who wishes to understand totalitarianism.
After the war, Borowski returned to Poland and, like Andrzejewski, became a propagandist for the ruling party. Eventually, however, he became disillusioned and fell into a crippling depression. After making several statements about the 1930 suicide of disillusioned Soviet poet Vladimir Mayakovsky, Borowski took his own life. Despite his doubts, his funeral was exploited for propaganda by Poland's Stalinist government.
This chapter discusses the life of Jerzy Putrament in particular.
This chapter describes the life of Konstanty Ildefons Gaà Âczyà Âski.
The book elaborates the idea of "enslavement through consciousness" in the penultimate chapter, and closes with a pained and personal assessment of the fate of the Baltic nations in particular.
The Captive Mind was an immediate success that brought Mià Âosz international renown.
Reviewing the work in 1953 for The New York Times upon the publication of the bookâÂÂs English translation, Peter Viereck wrote âÂÂThe Captive Mind is the most important soul-searching ever published about⦠[the] love-hate ambivalence between communism and uprooted intellectuals.âÂÂ
While reading The Captive Mind, Polish author Witold Gombrowicz, who had been living in Buenos Aires since before the Second World War, had known most of the writers whom Mià Âosz described in the coffeehouses and literary cafes of Pre-War Warsaw. As he read, Gombrowicz confided in his diary, "Mià Âosz tells the history of the bankruptcy of literature in Poland smoothly, and I ride his book straight through that streamlined cemetery, just as, two days ago, I rode the bus along the asphalt highway."
Gombrowicz further commented, "I am not aghast at the change in living conditions, the fall of states, the annihilation of cities and other surprise geysers spurting out of the womb of History, but the fact that a fellow whom I knew as X suddenly becomes Y, changes his personality like a jacket and begins to act speak, think, and feel contrary to himself fills me full of fear and embarrassment. What a terrible shamelessness! What a ridiculous demise! To become a gramophone onto which is put a record with the label, 'His Master's Voice'? What a grotesque fate for these writers!"
The book is described by historian Norman Davies as a "devastating study" which "totally discredited the cultural and psychological machinery of Communism". The book has been compared to Arthur Koestler's Darkness at Noon and George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four in that it, too, represents the view of an insider who draws on extensive analysis.
But upon the book's reissue in paperback in 1982, Linda Ray Pratt, writing in The Boston Phoenix, declared that the book "ought to be an anachronism": "The Captive Mind makes a narrow and simplistic argument that tends to see all writers who followed a path different from MiloszâÂÂs as acting out of literary ambition and all communists as neurotics who evolved into unfeeling bureaucrats and then cracked up⦠The Captive Mind is not worthy of Milosz⦠[It's] a book that divides and distorts⦠Propaganda mills need whole logs to fuel them, but readers looking to understand the history of postwar Europe will look to other sources for enlightenment."
In 2017 MiloszâÂÂs biographer Andrzej Franaszek said in an essay in The New York Times: âÂÂPerhaps a decade ago, it would have been easy to pass off The Captive Mind as a relic of the totalitarian 20th century: However, the last decade has demonstrated how the mechanisms of mind control Milosz exposed continue to be deployed throughout the globe.âÂÂ
Mià Âosz said of the book: "It was considered by anti-communists as suspect because I didn't attack strongly enough the communists. I tried to understand the processes and they didn't like that. And it also created the idea, particularly in the West, that I was a political writer. This was a misunderstanding because my poetry was unknown. I have never been a political writer and I worked hard to destroy this image of myself."