Why Every Man Dies Alone is such a dark, bleak novel

It was interesting and heartening to read the afterword to "Every Man Dies Alone" and see that the professor who wrote it had many of the same observations as I had: The heroes are not exactly heroic or noble, the resistance is totally ineffective, the Nazi regime ultimately topples because of outside assault not inside resistance. This observation is not meant to belittle the characters in this novel or make light of their bravery - very few stood up to Hitler in any way, and few stand up to tyrants in any society. But you have to notice that the Quangels take action only because their son is killed in battle - they don't rise up against the regime until it hurts them personally (much like so many right-wing Republicans who take up the one single progressive cause that affects their family: gay rights/Cheney, gun control/Brady, stem cells/Reagan, e.g.). In that sense this book, though about resistance, is incredibly bleak and dark. Also interesting to read about Fallada's life - he killed a friend when he was a teenager, in and out of mental hospitals, various addictions, occasional complicity with the Nazis - and through it all a highly productive writer, and he wrote this (500+page) book in less than two months, and knew it was great! What a gift to have such fluency, and what a tragic, short life. Also interesting to read about and see reprints of the documents about the actual couple who distributed past cards attacking Hitler throughout Berlin for years - and having no effect. Interesting as well to note how Fallada changed the details of the story - inspiring the action by the death of a son (not a brother), making them more literate and intelligent, and most of all connecting them to the young revolutionary couple who also pay with their lives.