The Suitcase by Sergei Dovlatov

How hard is The Suitcase to read?

The Suitcase scores 60 out of 100 for difficulty on ReadingRate, making it quite demanding. The score is a weighted composite of nine measures: four of how hard the prose is to parse, five of how hard the meaning is to extract.

Vocabulary: 40 out of 100

Dovlatov employs a generally accessible vocabulary, reflecting a conversational and anecdotal style. While there are specific Soviet-era terms and Russian proper nouns (e.g., "nomenklatura," "roubles," "Zaporozhets"), these are often clarified by context or are common enough to not impede understanding. The text avoids archaic words, specialized jargon, or invented language, making it more straightforward than works like "Moby-Dick."

Sentence structure: 45 out of 100

The prose features sentences of moderate length, predominantly employing clear, direct grammatical structures. While paragraphs can extend, the individual sentences rarely contain deeply nested clauses or complex inversions that would challenge comprehension. This straightforward syntax makes the narrative flow easily, contrasting sharply with the demanding hypotaxis found in works like "The Golden Bowl."

Abstraction: 50 out of 100

The narrative is primarily concrete, unfolding through a series of personal anecdotes and observations rooted in Soviet reality. While the author reflects on themes of freedom, human nature, and societal absurdities (e.g., Fred's philosophy on life, the narrator's thoughts on marriage), these philosophical musings are consistently tied to specific events and characters. This approach keeps the content grounded in tangible experience, making it less abstract than works like "Brothers Karamazov" and more akin to social observation through storytelling.

Information density: 55 out of 100

The book is structured as a series of distinct, episodic narratives, each centered on a specific object and its associated memories. While rich in character and situational detail, information is presented linearly without extensive layering, complex symbolism, or multiple concurrent plotlines requiring intense cross-referencing. This moderate density allows for clear comprehension, making it less demanding than encyclopedic works like "Ulysses" but more textured than purely plot-driven fiction.

Narrative indirection: 50 out of 100

The narrator frequently states his feelings, observations, and lessons learned directly, such as his self-assessment of being 'meddlesome and stupid' or his explicit reflections on his marriage. While readers infer the broader critique of Soviet society from the absurd anecdotes, the narrator's voice is generally clear and explicit about his personal experiences and cynical worldview. This approach is more direct than works with deeply unreliable narrators like 'Lolita' (72), but less so than purely expository texts.

Symbolic density: 75 out of 100

The entire book is structured around the central metaphor of a suitcase, with each chapter dedicated to a specific item symbolizing a period or aspect of the narrator's life in the Soviet Union. The 'Instead of an Afterword' explicitly states, 'every book... is shaped like a suitcase,' directly revealing the overarching symbolic intent. While pervasive, these symbols are generally clear and directly tied to the narrative, making them accessible rather than obscure or multi-layered like in 'Finnegans Wake' (99).

Ironic distance: 78 out of 100

Dovlatov employs pervasive ironic distance through a deadpan, understated tone that highlights the absurdity and corruption of Soviet life and human nature. The narrator's cynical humor, evident in observations like the 'Heroine Mother' search or the Peter the Great film shoot, creates a clear gap between the literal events and the author's critical commentary. This consistent, accessible irony places it higher than 'Moby-Dick' (45) but below the extreme satire of 'The Sellout' (85).

Resolution withholding: 65 out of 100

The book's episodic structure, presenting a series of self-contained vignettes rather than a single continuous plot, inherently resists traditional narrative closure. While individual anecdotes often have clear outcomes, the overall 'story' of the narrator's life is presented as a collection of experiences, with the final 'Afterword' offering thematic reflection rather than a definitive resolution of his future in America. This creates more open meaning than 'Beloved' (40) but less extreme ambiguity than 'Waiting for Godot' (95).

Structural complexity: 60 out of 100

The primary structural complexity stems from the book's non-linear, thematic organization, where each chapter is dedicated to an item from a suitcase rather than strict chronology. Within these chapters, the narrative is generally linear, though it includes flashbacks and digressions. The consistent first-person point of view and lack of experimental prose keep it from the high end of complexity, making it less disorienting than works like 'Flights' (88) but more intricate than a straightforward linear narrative.

How The Suitcase is regarded

The Suitcase holds a literary regard score of 61 out of 100, weighing its place in the canon, its critical reception, its influence on other writers, and the standing of its author. Regard is measured separately from difficulty: a demanding book is not necessarily an admired one.

About the author

Sergei Dovlatov