Ian Sansom

Four dangerous visionary writers

Simon Ings examines the lives of Maxim Gorky, Maurice Barrès, Gabriele D’Annunzio and Ding Ling, whose propagandism helped shape – and misshape – the 20th century

The Chinese activist Ding Ling with young pioneers, c. 1950. [Bridgeman Images] 
issue 17 February 2024

‘The production of souls is more important than the production of tanks… And therefore I raise my glass to you, writers, the engineers of the human soul.’ The quote is usually attributed to Stalin, though the phrase ‘engineers of human souls’ most likely came from someone else. Who’s to argue? Purges, executions, deportations – what’s a little light plagiarism in comparison? Whoever coined the phrase, it certainly struck a chord and indeed continues to ring various alarm bells whenever one comes across writers who deliberately set out to influence politics and ideas – and not just the big beasts, the Nobel Prize winners, say, or the shopfront-filling non-fiction authors hawking their wares, or the endless novelists with their little axes to grind. What now is Twitter/X but a global furnace and forge for those frantically tapping out their hot takes in the hope of making an impact? Social media, like all media, ain’t just entertainment: it’s in the business of taking souls.

In Engineers of Human Souls, Simon Ings examines the lives of four writers – Auguste-Maurice Barrès, the French ‘novelist, politician and grouch’; Gabriele D’Annunzio and Maxim Gorky, who probably need no introduction; and Ding Ling, who probably does – ‘whose political visions shaped and misshaped their century’.

Although awarded the Stalin prize for Literature, Ding Ling was eventually  denounced, purged and exiled

Ings is a pretty unusual individual and the perfect guide to this peculiar selection of odd and ambitious writers. The arts editor of the New Scientist, he writes science fiction, journalism and non-fiction, most notably Stalin and the Scientists (2016). He has tremendous range and moves at speed: he’s the sort of writer so bursting with energy and ideas that it’s sometimes difficult to keep up. He tosses out incidental remarks and insights at an extraordinary rate – the right-wing in politics is ‘split between reactionaries, who never believed in the democratic impulse in the first place, and romantics, who believe that there has to be more to democracy than just a contest between rival intellectuals’ – and there are brilliant novelistic flourishes throughout as he frantically blurs the boundaries between fiction and non-fiction.

Illustration Image

Disagree with half of it, enjoy reading all of it

TRY 3 MONTHS FOR $5
Our magazine articles are for subscribers only. Start your 3-month trial today for just $5 and subscribe to more than one view

Comments

Join the debate for just £1 a month

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.

Already a subscriber? Log in