The general scholarly and scientific consensus is that the work is not rigorous, objective, or scientific. If you challenge this take it up with the scholars.
Funny how literature suddenly needs to be "rigorous, objective, scientific" when it criticizes communism, even though it's a first hand account written by a political prisoner.
Keep believing that propaganda.
Who's believing propaganda? I'm getting my info from several sources before I make up my mind, you apparently get yours from hearsay that says what you already want to belive. Am I missing something here?