Author : Keti Kurdovanidze
‘A strong doubt arose in his heart. Now his only concern was to find out where he had gone wrong: was it really a pretence and a false execution, or was it a real execution? To tell the truth, what upset his heart most was that in the first case he had been deceived: “How could a pretence show me a lie as the truth, to a man of my age and experience?” But if the truth itself turned out to be a lie, it would be nothing; our Petre could somehow come to terms with it much more easily.’
This is the internal monologue of elderly Petre, a character from Ilia Chavchavadze’s story ‘On the Gallows’. He has come to the square to watch a man being hanged, yet he refuses to believe he is attending an execution. To him, what is happening on the square seems like a theatrical performance—an idea reinforced by the ordinary, everyday, and even cheerful mood of the bustling crowd gathered there. However, Petre is not entirely convinced of this either; he cannot be certain whether what he sees is merely a pretence.
Thus, Petre faces a dilemma: if this is a pretence, then why does it resemble the truth so closely? And if it is the truth, why does he take it as a pretence? This is the question to which ‘our Petre’ can find no answer. Instead, he knows what he prefers—to accept pretence as reality and be ashamed if what he thinks is a lie turns out to be the truth. Therefore, he prefers the denial of truth over the prospect of being shamed.
By generalizing ‘Petre’s Dilemma’, Ilia Chavchavadze creates not merely an infantile character, but an ‘infantile citizen’—a socio-cultural trend that remains alive and relevant even today.
Distinguishing truth from falsehood is Petre’s central problem in the story; in our present reality, it has become the problem of the ‘proud Georgian’ who fears that the truth might dismantle his very persona. For Petre, the denial of truth functions as a form of self-defence, while the acceptance of falsehood provides psychological comfort. Truth loses its meaning because it does not correspond emotionally to the reality he perceives, whereas the lie is embraced as reality precisely because it does not contradict Petre’s own ‘truth’—his personal illusion. The more evident objective reality becomes, the stronger his impulse to deny it grows. Petre is most convinced that he is watching a performance, and not an execution, at the very moment when the dying man writhes agonizingly on the gallows: ‘Even if you swing your legs like that until morning, I still won’t believe you,’ says Petre. Yet, despite this, doubt still flickers within him: ‘What if they really did hang him?!‘
The noncommittal citizen has no answers to these questions; therefore, he constantly strives to shift responsibility onto another, seeking answers to his own thoughts from others.
Petre, who seemingly believes he is watching a theatrical performance, nevertheless requires confirmation from outsiders. For the old man, their opinion is more significant than his own judgment or the dictates of his conscience—a conscience that tells him that watching a human being hang is an act of extreme immorality. The bustling, chatting, laughing, and sighing crowd around Petre represents that social and propagandistic pressure which, today, erases the last traces of conscience in individuals and turns them into accomplices in the lethal verdict of the Russian regime on that very gallows. And this happens for only one reason: if they were to admit their mistake, it would mean acknowledging that for fourteen years they have been clinging to a lie. Therefore, they prefer to deny reality and continue living in a dream.
The problem of perceiving reality stems from a weakness of judgment and, consequently, a constant fear of being deceived. This mental attitude remains alive today. Infantile individuals strive to conform to collective emotional standards and stubbornly reject self-reflection because the imaginary reality of the infantile citizen is based not on facts, but on collective narratives that provide emotional solace.
Whereas Petre’s consciousness is conditioned by the crowd assembled in the square, his contemporary counterpart’s perception of reality is structured by social media ecosystems, propaganda-driven outlets, and persistent ideological clichés.
The most difficult issue to resolve in ‘Petre’s Dilemma’ is taking responsibility. Therefore, he prefers to harbour doubt rather than clarify anything; he chooses to mistake a lie for truth and remains loyal to his own error. This is an infantile defence mechanism, as such a citizen lacks firm moral criteria and lives instead by a situational morality. For example, while the execution of a human being is an unpleasant fact for him, he nevertheless attends the hanging because no one around him reacts to it.
Situational morality, on the one hand, protects him from the pangs of conscience, but on the other hand, does not oblige him to admit his own mistakes.
Petre considers himself a ‘seasoned man’—likely believing he is experienced, insightful, and intelligent. If he were to accept pretence as truth, his self-esteem would collapse; his old age would become an object of judgment and ridicule, and he himself would stand exposed as deceived. Therefore, he prefers to invent and believe in a fairy tale rather than call his own authority into question.
This is precisely the tolerance for false negatives, that is the falsification of truth that creates complete comfort for the ‘infantile citizen’, who can no longer see the threat because it contradicts the pre-formed picture in his mind. For example, he can no longer perceive the occupation because it disrupts the ‘idyll of peace’ pre-constructed for him by propaganda and makes systemic evil invisible because it is normalized in everyday life. Hanging is perceived by those gathered in the square as an ordinary event, much like the daily beating, arrest, and sentencing of innocent people.
For many, the existence of the Russian regime is not perceived as reality, whereas the illusion constructed by government propaganda is accepted as truth, simply because it is less disruptive to their personal perceptions. Such people are perpetually defeated—and this is their own choice, for shame is more painful to them than failure.
Such is the social perception of the traditional Georgian even today. Society strictly defines a moral standard: if someone is deceiving society, it is not considered a problem, nor does anyone have any claims against the author of a falsified reality. The priority is simply not to get deceived, to remain comfortable; and so, they no longer care about the reality they actually live in or will live in the future.
Historically, a culture of moral suspicion was highly prevalent within Georgian society; people strived to avoid being deceived by those close to them, by their community, or by their kin. Accepting a lie as truth was considered a grave social threat, whereas mistaking the truth for a lie was seen as a far less risky endeavour. This is precisely why the infantile Georgian still refuses to believe that for fourteen years, the Russian regime has been attempting to level Georgia to the ground. Instead, they prefer to believe this is merely a tactical game played by the government to avoid war through a ‘reasonable compromise’.
Much like Petre, the psychological fear of the infantile Georgian is that the ‘pretence’ of the opposition might leave them deceived, thereby destroying their self-esteem, social status, and their authority as a seasoned man, or a wise man of experience. Consequently, they stubbornly resist acknowledging the bitter truth: that in 2012, with a single stroke of a pen, they handed their homeland over to the Russians. For many, admitting this still signifies not a recognition of political reality, but the total fiasco of their personal life choices. Therefore, they cannot face this harsh reality and prefer to vacillate between the truth and conformist illusion.
Petre’s Dilemma is not the past, nor is it mere literature; it is our current psychological state—one that will not change as long as we have a ‘hideous dream’ standing guard over the truth.
