Tolstoy: The Death of Ivan Ilych (1886)

Lev Tolstoy

Because I spent so much time in St. Petersburg, I recently decided to move further south to remain in Moscow for a time. Here in Moscow, I have heard of the great author, Lev Tolstoy. I have read his major works, Anna Karenina and War and Peace, but I have since heard that his literary works have taken a turn in a different direction. I have decided to take a tour down to his estate south of Moscow in order to meet the him and become more acquainted with his current philosophy. Before I take my journey, I have decided to review one of his most recent stories, "Смерть Ивана Ильича" or "The Death of Ivan Ilych."

In "The Death of Ivan Ilych," Tolstoy has fashioned his characters in a different way. Rather than making Ivan Ilych an individual character, he has made him an "everyman" (Terras 452). I remember the beautiful details he included in Anna Karenina and War and Peace, but this novella includes details that only further the plot or message of the story (452). Essentially, the story seems to be a vehicle for Tolstoy's condemnation of upper-class society, modern medicine, and insincere living.

A cover for the novel.

The story follows the life of Ivan Ilych from his childhood into adulthood. However, the first chapter of the novella provides a contrast to the rest of the novel, yet it probably provides another way for Tolstoy to frame his novella. The first chapter follows Ivan Ilych's colleagues as they discuss his recent death, attend his funeral, and promptly forget him and his misfortune (Tolstoy 87-95). Ivan Ilych goes to school, gets married, and gets a job working in the state. He and his wife gradually become consumed with receiving promotions and advancing in society. They have children, and while their marriage is not entirely happy, they continue to tolerate each other and participate in society. Eventually, Ivan Ilych becomes ill with something no doctor can treat. He undergoes extreme pain and discomfort and eventually dies.

This bleak story emphasizes the shallowness and selfishness of Ivan Ilych and his wife. As Ivan Ilych is dying, his wife remains concerned with appearances and seems disconnected from Ivan Ilych’s needs (140-141) Even at Ivan Ilych’s funeral, his wife is more concerned with money than with mourning (93-4). In this way, Tolstoy satirizes the lives of the upper-class. He calls attention to how absurd material and societal gain is when death and pain threaten. 

A sketch of Ivan Ilych

Towards the end of Ivan Ilych’s life, the religious elements of the novel become more clear. Gerasim, his manservant seems to be the only selfless character, and Gerasim is the only peasant character (Donnelly 81). Additionally, Ivan Ilych begins to wonder if he had been wrong all along with his life choices (Tolstoy 140). He undergoes a painful death, but at the last moment, he sees a light (143). I believe this life alludes to a Christianity symbolically (Donnelly 86). Tolstoy seems to be using satire to condemn the rationalist way of thinking that dismisses a higher power (80).

Tolstoy’s change in style has surprised me with its contrast. A story like “The Death of Ivan Ilych” alludes to a huge shift in ideology when compared to his previous stories. However, I still admire his skill.

Works Cited

Donnelly, Jerome. "Tolstoy's the Death of Ivan Ilych: Satire, Religion, and the Criticism of Denial." Logos: A Journal of Catholic Thought and Culture, no. 2, 2013, p. 73. EBSCOhost, ezproxy.uvu.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edspmu&AN=edspmu.S1533791X13200039&site=eds-live.

Terras, Victor. A History of Russian Literature. Yale University Press, 1991.

Tolstoy, Leo. The Death of Ivan Ilych and Other Stories. Barnes and Noble Classics, edited by George Stade, 2004.

Chekhov: Ward no. 6 (1892)

Anton Chekhov

I must write about Tolstoy's estate soon because there is much to tell! On the way back, Ford and I did find that time had, yet again, born us into the future. I will soon write of my trip to Tolstoy's estate, but am much more interested in writing about an important writer named Anton Chekhov. My usual perusal of the book shops here in Moscow has produced a great short story called, "Ward no. 6." 

Since I have caught up with Chekhov's published works, I have noticed some trends in his writing that "Ward no. 6" follows and, in some cases, differs. He often disrupts the expectations of the reader and switches plots or narratives, introduces new characters, or ends the story without getting to the point of the story (Terras 469). I cannot place him with other writers because of his contrariness to what I understand to be the general morality of our time. Even though he despises sin, he only seems to condemn the pettier sins like dishonesty and selfishness rather than adultery (468). He embraces how random life can be and does not write deep psychological stories like Dostoevsky. I see him, instead, following what Turgenev did by presenting a situation rather than analyzing it (470). Chekhov can also resemble Turgenev in that they both write “slice of life” stories (370). Without a doubt, Chekhov defies classification.

While discussing Chekhov with some friends in literary circles, I was told that Chekhov once identified with Tolstoy's philosophies of "quietism and doctrine of nonresistance to evil" (Terras 467). He has recently changed, and I was told evidence of this could be found in "Ward no. 6." After reading the story, I can also see places where Chekhov seems to be responding to Dostoevsky (Durkin 51).

An artist's interpretation of Ward no. 6

The first half of the short story is told from the point of view of a narrator who describes the town as if he too is a resident. He leads the reader through a description of the characters and who they are. Two of the five patients in Ward no. 6 hospital are the Jew Moseika and Ivan Dmitrich Gromov (Chekhov 172-3). They are supervised by Nikita, a retired soldier who beats the mentally unstable patients (171-2). The narrator describes Gromov’s descent into madness, unfolding the death of his father and brother and his eventual obsession with the degeneracy of humankind (174-9). Next the doctor of the town hospital, Andrei Yefimych Ragin, is introduced to the reader as a passive lover of intellect who begins to visit Ward no. 6. Ragin becomes fascinated with his intellectual debates with Gromov who attended university before his illness.

It is during the philosophical debates between Gromov and Ragin that I can see the parallels between how Chekhov structures the discourse and how Dostoevsky structure his discourse in novels like Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov, but the parallels extend beyond that (Durkin 51-2). Gromov’s cynicism and disgust for humanity echoes back to Ivan Karamazov’s attitude about humanity in that humans are hopeless and will tend to degenerate (52). Ragin’s passive stoicism begins to change as he ruminates on his discussions with Gromov, and soon, he begins to despair over the faults of humanity too and descend into insanity (58). Both Gromov and Ragin allow themselves to become so defined by their philosophies and literature that they soon despair because they cannot approach the ideals of philosophy and literature (Durkin 59).

Chekhov does not completely follow Dostoevsky’s philosophical patterns, however. “Ward no. 6” can also exist as commentary of the state of Russia. Russian literature, for a long time now, has voiced the wider societal and political issues in literature. This story can be a cautionary tale about over-internalizing philosophy instead of gaining real-life experience. Both Gromov and Ragin read extensively and conceptualize so much in their minds that they lose track of reality.

Here I really commend Chekhov for his dynamic and unpredictable writing. I still haven’t uncovered all the layers of “Ward no.6,” but I look forward to re-reading this text to admire his mastery.

Works Cited:

Chekhov, Anton. Ward no. 6. Bantam Books, translated by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky, November 2000, pp. 171-221. Stories. Bantam Books, translated by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky, November 2000.

Durkin, Andrew R. “Chekhov's Response to Dostoevskii: The Case of ‘Ward Six.’” Slavic Review, vol. 40, no. 1, 1981, pp. 49–59., www.jstor.org/stable/2496427.

Terras, Victor. A History of Russian Literature. Yale University Press, 1991.

"A Sportsman's Sketches" by Turgenev (1852)

A cover for Turgenev's "Notes of a Hunter"

 Ford has been able to make the acquaintances of many country estate owners in his state service and was recently invited on a hunting trip on the estate of Privy Councilor Vladimir Vladimirovich Popov's estate in Oryol. Popov knew of Ford's acquaintance with me and invited me as well. In preparation for the trip, I have decided to study Ivan Sergeyevich Turgenev's "Записки охотника" or "Notes of a Hunter." The book is less about hunting and more about other topics, but Turgenev has received quite a bit of attention and fame from this book, making me extremely interested.

Turgenev published these stories in succession between 1847 and 1850 in The Contemporary. I took a while to get around to reading the stories, so before I knew it, the who set of stories we now have was published as a whole in 1852 (Terras 273). As I noted in my previous entry, Turgenev is part of the natural school. “Notes of a Hunter” fits many of the natural school traits because it has many elements that highlight the realness of the lower classes (Hoisington 49). The sketches’ form reflects the plotless structure and emphasis on character that naturalist literature often follows (49).

"Kasyan from the Beautiful Lands" an
illustration by Turgenev of
one of his stories.

I feel deceived in a way because of the title of the book. While each story contains a hunter of some sort, the title led me to believe the novel would contain stories that speak of the sport of hunting explicitly, but the stories contain far more elements of more importance (Newlin 366). “Notes of a Hunter” includes serfs and landowners in various positions, personalities, and virtues. The hunter in each sketch might be considered a fringe character who interacts minimally with the main characters of each story (366).

The language of the stories could also give a clue as to some of the weightier themes Turgenev introduces. The idea of the hunted and the hunter turning into the desired and the desirer arises is many of the stories, not only in regard to the hunter himself (368). For example, many of the sketches, “Yermolai and the Miller’s Wife” and “My Neighbor Radilov,” explore themes of adultery (Hoisington 53-4). Intimacy and adultery are strongly tied to desire psychologically, so Turgenev’s purpose here could be to explore human desire in all forms whether it is virtuous or not.

Another important element of these stories seems to be the symbolism of birds, the hunter’s prey. In Bezhin Meadow, a bird flies away as the peasant boys speak of life and death, as if to symbolize a spirit fleeing (Hoisington 51). The bird in “A Living Relic” appears to represent freedom amidst a story that explores liberty and captivity (52).

Structurally, the stories seem to balance each other out because they can be paired with one another. The first twelve stories encompass the peasant experience, and the last twelve focus on landowners as characters (Hoisington 53). Even though the first half of the sketches is focused on the peasants, the stories still mention the landowners though not in a good light. The second half also shows the landowners in a poor light even though the focus is on them (53-4).

An illustration of "Khor and Kalynich"

To give a better idea of what the sketches generally look like, I will describe the first story in Turgenev’s oeuvre, “Khor and Kalynich,” for you here:

The story begins with a grand description of the countryside to which the narrator, a hunter, has traveled for sport. The narrator takes time to describe the type of people who live in this district of people (Turgenev).

The narrator begins to frame his story by telling of his acquaintance with a petty landlord called Polutikin who he then describes as a fellow hunter and an excellent man prone to repeat anecdotes. When the narrator stays at Polutikin’s the first time, they try to meet Khor, a neighbor of Polutikin’s. Though they meet some other neighbors at Khor’s, they do not meet him, and the narrator begins to ask more about Khor at supper (Turgenev).

Polutikin tells a story of the serf, Khor, and Khor’s characteristics as a shrewd businessman. Even though Khor is illiterate, he is capable. He has a skeptical view on life and knows how to handle people, even his owner (Terras 273).

The narrator and Polutikin continue their hunting the next day and come across another peasant, Kalynich. The narrator describes Kalynich as good-natured and merry, almost the opposite of Khor. Even though Kalynich is a pleasant man and is literature, however, Polutikin informs the narrator that Kalynich is incapable of caring for his land (Turgenev).

Ivan Turgenev

The narrator spends more time in the district and is able to draw some conclusion from his acquaintance with both Khor and Kalynich. He emphasizes how he listened to Khor, though an illiterate serf, and states how wise he considers Khor to be because he is willing to learn from Germans even though they are different (Turgenev).

The contrast of these two character, Khor and Kalynich, contains the contrast between the Westernizer philosophy and the Slavophile philosophy as well. Kalynich can read and dreamily stays in touch with nature like the romantics, and Khor represents a more Western mindset of progress.

With this analysis, I will conclude that Turgenev’s “Notes of a Hunter,” while a misleading title, explores the nuances of peasant and landowner life in remote Russia. His use of the natural school of thought helps him shed light on the social issues we are experiencing as Russian now.

Works Cited

Hoisington, Thomas H. "The Enigmatic Hunter of Turgenev's Zapiski Ochotnika." Russian Literature, Vol. 42. No. 1, 1 July 1997, pp. 47-64, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3479(97)82574-4.

Newlin, Thomas. "The Thermodynamics of Desire in Turgenev's Notes of a Hunter." Russian Review, vol. 72, no. 3, July 2013, pp. 365-389. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/russ.10696.

Terras, Victor. A History of Russian Literature. Yale University Press, 1991.

Turgenev, Ivan. “A Hunter's Sketches”. London: W. Heinemann, translated by Constance Garrett, 1897, http://www.eldritchpress.org/ist/hunt.htm.

Dostoevsky: Notes from the Underground (1864)

A painting of Fyodor Dostoevsky in St. Petersburg

When Ford and I returned from our hunting trip, we found time had jolted again. This time, we traveled a little over a decade in the future. Despite my best attempts, I have not been able to figure out why this happens to me. Luckily, I had informed my solicitors such a thing might happen periodically, so I was able to restore myself to my estate with little trouble. Once all had settled down, I sought to catch up on all the goings on in literature. My most recent read is a book by a young and remarkable author named Fyodor Dostoevsky. The book is called "Записки из подполья" or "Notes From Underground." 

A cover for "Notes from the Underground"

"Notes from the Underground" is told from the narrator's point of view, though this might pose some difficulties for the reader right away. The immediately discredits himself by describing himself as "a sick man.... I am a spiteful man. I am an unattractive man. I believe my liver is diseased. However, I know nothing at all about my disease, and do not know for certain what ails me" (Dostoevsky 1). The rest of the narrator's description of himself continues to indicates his instability and anger towards some unnamed gentlemen. The narrator of the novel might be described as an “anti-hero” because of his unlikeable and reprehensible behavior (Terras 347).

 In an almost incoherent rambling, he expounds on his philosophies and opinions in the first nine chapters (Dostoevsky). The second half of the book contains a plot instead of philosophical exposition. The narrator recollects some experiences he finds traumatic and which illustrate why his life philosophy has evolved a particular way (Terras 347).

Even though the narrator is in many ways unlikeable because of how he condemns society and acts in a defeated way, I found many of the philosophies in the beginning of the novel to be interesting and poignant. The narrator expounds on ideas such as free will and choice (Dostoevsky 14). He often refers to the mathematical equation of two plus two equals four to illustrate his ideas about free will and human nature (22). Additionally, he critiques philosophy that would say that men only act in a way that correlates with their rational self-interest (Terras 347). The narrator professes his stubbornness in choosing the strange and the difficult in the face of determinism, which would claim that any event happens regardless of choice (Robert 399). So, even though the narrator writes in a whirlwind of self-loathing and cynicism, he might be more insightful and relatable after further examination (398).

The second half of the novel is made up of memoirs from when the narrator was 24 years old. He tells the reader that he is writing this for himself and no one else at the end of the first part and ends or begins with a poem by Nekrasov (Dostoevsky 29-30). The narrator describes himself as a solitary, unfriendly workaholic at twenty-four. He then recounts some experiences. In one experience, he tries to get revenge for what he considers a slight on him. In another, he talks about an experience he has with some former school fellows in which he displays poor social conduct. When his school fellows leave to go to a brothel, he follows them in frustration to confront them but ends up meeting Liza, a prostitute whom he takes to (Robert 400).

The narrator interacts with Liza and asks about her life. He relates to the reader that he feels the desire to be cruel to her and tell her how awful her life will be and leaves her in tears when he gives in to that desire. He immediately feels guilty and asks Liza to visit him (Dostoevsky 86-90). The narrator, agitated, waits for Liza, and when she finally comes, he finds himself in an argument with his servant and yells at her. Instead of leaving, she responds kindly and leaves. As she is leaving, he puts money in her hand as if to pay her for their night together in a cruel gesture. He never sees Liza again and regrets his actions, which were counter to his actual desires (91-94).

This episode with Liza illustrates what the narrator expounds upon in the first part of the novel: a man will not always act in his own self-interest despite knowing what he must do.

In this novel, the psychological examination of character and unflinching critique of human character shows how far literature has come since the natural school. If the natural school desired to show the realness of life, Dostoevsky’s realism represents the full shift in literature since the 1840s.

Works Cited

Dostoevsky, Feodor. Notes From the Underground. Project Gutenberg, 13 September 2008, http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/600#.

Roberts, Peter. "The Stranger Within: Dostoevsky’s Underground." Educational Philosophy & Theory, vol. 45, no. 4, Apr. 2013, pp. 396-408. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/00131857.2012.718146.

Terras, Victor. A History of Russian Literature. Yale University Press, 1991.

The Natural School (mid-1840s)

Faddei Bulgarin

Since I can't seem to get away from literature and it represents much of the political and philosophical environment of Russia, I continue to subject my readers to more exploration of literature.Ford and I have been discussing the debate between the Slavophiles and the Westernizers. He sympathizes with the Slavophiles while I tend toward the Westernizers. Some of this debate comes to bear in the discussion of the "natural school" of literature. I will here delve into the transitional nature and effects of the natural school. As far as I understand, the natural school is what Belinsky describes as the tale of real life. Although Belinsky describes the natural school positively, Bulgarin speaks of it deprecatingly (Terras 263). The works in the natural school have not had a unanimous acceptance in the literary world as of late.

Belinsky and Bulgarin are both authors and literary critics who identify with opposite sides of the Westernizer and Slavophile debate. Slavophiles seem to oppose the ideas explored in the natural school because they claim it gives Russia a negative image and adopts foreign ideas (Terras 188).

Vissarion Belinsky

As far as I can tell, the natural school has appeared among the literature of the Romantics. In many ways, the literature of the natural school resembles and contains elements from Romantic literature. For example, just as the Romantics tend to include a hero the "individual" who clashes with society (Terras 175) so too do the writers in the natural school include a hero, poet, or dreamer who clashes with society (264). Literature of the natural school also includes romantic irony.

However, the two schools do differ in very key ways, especially with regards to the political ideologies conveyed and the effort used to make the literature closer to true nature in the natural school. The natural school focuses on the lower-classes in a way that does not spare gruesome details about the virtues of the characters (Harper 402). While some writers who oppose the naturalists write about the serfs and lower-classes, they do not enter into as much detail of the negative aspects of that life (404). I have read some refutations from Belinskii against the conservatives who oppose the naturalist literature. He argues in part that this exploration of the real details of life is part of the responsibility of literature (408). This is in opposition to the argument of the opposition who argue that art's purpose is to help people lose themselves in the aethetic experience rather than be reminded of what they are trying to escape (405).

Nikolai Gogol

Nikolai Gogol, a great writer of absurd and strange tales, might be the instigator of the naturalist way of thinking (Harper 400). His story, "The Overcoat," highlights social injustice and inequality. His satire seems to be echoed in other works by naturalist authors like Turgenev. Gogol creates characters who are deeply flawed and effectively calls attention to and condemns human errors (Cruise 42). Indeed, a key characteristic of the natural school seems to revolve around the nature in which characters are selected and treated (Harper 413). 

In addition to Gogol, the natural school and its tendency to satirize society seems to reflect the vaudeville comedy of France (Cruise 42). It stands to reason that the Westernizers who are part of the natural school would embrace a comedic form from the west and copy the French vaudeville. 

Another recognized writer of the natural school is Dmitry Grigorovich. He wrote a sketch I found particularly interesting called "The Organ Grinders of Saint Petersburg" (Terras 268). The tales he tells in the story of peasant life are rather depressing and note needless suffering and brutality (268). Since I live in St. Petersburg, I recognize the reality of his description to a degree because I have walked through poor districts before. 

Dmitry Grigorovich

Even though the opposition to the natural school is intense, with staunch opposition to its "polemical" and excessively "social" themes, naturalist literature has continued. I tend to agree with Belinskii (maybe because I am from the West?") that like Shakespeare was once considered distasteful and soon accepted, the natural school will soon be accepted (Harper 404).

Works Cited

Cruise, Edwina Jannie. “THE NATURAL SCHOOL IN SATIRICAL CRITICISM.” Ulbandus Review, vol. 2, no. 2, 1982, pp. 39–51., www.jstor.org/stable/25748070.

Harper, Kenneth E. “Criticism of the Natural School in the 1840's.” American Slavic and East European Review, vol. 15, no. 3, 1956, pp. 400–414., www.jstor.org/stable/3001102.

Terras, Victor. A History of Russian Literature. Yale University Press, 1991.

Pushkin: "The Bronze Horseman" (1837)

The famous statue of Peter the Great or "The Bronze Horseman."

A few years ago, I received word that my brother and sister-in-law passed away and that their estate was to either go into my hands or their son’s hands. I decided I had more or less become a citizen of Russia because of my long stay here, so I opted to let my nephew, Marvin, take over the estate until I returned (if ever) as long as he supplied me with the means to continue writing about Russia in Russia. Life has since become much more comfortable, and I was able to purchase an estate just outside of St. Petersburg. My friends often invite me to lecture at the university, so I have opportunities to associate with educated people and even receive some extra income.

Ford has become quite educated, and I often hesitate to call him my butler because I allow him so much independence. He recently expressed interest in acquiring a rank in the state service, so I encouraged him to pursue that and relay to me any interesting information I might be able to use for my research. I have plenty of other servants to help me at my estate.

In my never-ending perusal of literature, I have of course become familiar with the lauded Aleksandr Pushkin. He has recently published a narrative poem I find of particular significance. The poem is called “Медный всадник” or “The Bronze Horseman,” which refers to the famous statue of Peter the Great here in St. Petersburg. Because I was privileged to see the statue put in place and because of the controversy the poem has urged, I feel compelled to make a study of the poem.

A painting of Aleksandr Sergeyevich Pushkin.

The poem itself is written in a way with which I am not familiar. The poem has an introduction and two subsequent parts. The introduction seems to be praising St. Petersburg and Tsar Peter the Great in an ode-like way, but the end of the introduction seems to be satirizing the ode-like attitude by pointing out the dangers of living in St. Petersburg, both from military and natural forces. Throughout the two parts after the introduction, Pushkin appears to be both noting how glorious St. Petersburg is and how tragic its history (Terras 212). This is all present along with the plot of the story that tells a story of a young man name Yevgeny who loses his love in a terrible flood and subsequently seems to encounter the supernatural (Terras 212).

Yevgeny loses his mind after experiencing the trauma of the flood and the loss of his beau and wanders through St. Petersburg (Pushkin and Dewey 67-68). After waking from a violent dream, Yevgeny makes his way back to the statue of Peter the Great (69). He remembers seeing the statue during the flood, above all the turmoil and curses the statue as if he were cursing Tsar Peter for forcing Russians to live in St. Petersburg (70). Yevgeny runs away and imagines he hears the bronze hooves of the horse sounding on the street as it follows him (70-1).

The poem follows a haphazard rhyme scheme because Pushkin seems to choose a different rhyme scheme for each stanza. For example, he writes:

A wave-swept shore, remote, forlorn: Here stood he, rapt in thought and drawn To distant prospects. Broad and chartless The river ran, along it borne A lonely skiff, rough-hewn and artless. Darke against the marshy green Of moss-grown banks appeared some mean Log huts: the poor Finns’ habitation; And forests which had never seen The mist-veiled sun’s illumination Were live with whispers. (Pushkin and Dewey 59)

На берегу пустынных волн Стоял он, дум великих полн, И вдаль глядел. Пред ним широко Река неслася; бедный чёлн По ней стремился одиноко. По мшистым, топким берегам Чернели избы здесь и там, Приют убогого чухонца; И лес, неведомый лучам В тумане спрятанного солнца, Кругом шумел. (Пушкин)

The English translation I have here does not follow Pushkin’s original rhyme scheme, but both resemble each other because of the lack of consistent rhyme. This lack of predictable rhyme persists throughout the rest of the stanzas in the poem (Pushkin and Dewey 59-71; Пушкин).

Pushkin’s poem is unique besides the fact that his rhyming scheme is unconventional. He uses quite a bit of contrast in this poem in order to make points about the history of St. Petersburg and about the character, Yevgenii (Zekulin 229). The fact that Yevgeii curses the statue of long-dead Peter the Great seems to indicate that the poem is blaming Tsar Peter for the misfortunes inherent with living in St. Petersburg (229). Additionally, the poem highlights the nature of Yevgenii as a small man who is up against the forces of nature and history. Yevgenii’s madness seems to come as a result of injustice and a realization of his powerlessness, but his madness seems to in part stem from the maddeningly treacherous experience of living in a place like St. Petersburg.

When reading this poem, I found it has some similarities to what Lomonosov has done in his poetry before as well. Pushkin wrote this poem as if he was allowing the narrator, who jumps through time to describe St. Petersburg and forward to describe Yevgenii’s misfortune, to speak on behalf of the Russians (Zekulin 235). This poem shows Pushkin allowing his narrator to be the mouthpiece for Russia experience in St. Petersburg. He followed another convention of Lomonosov’s when he used Church-Slavonic language. However, Pushkin diverted from Lomonosov’s pattern because he maintained some Russian conversational language as well.

Overall, I greatly appreciate Pushkin’s clear and enjoyable poetry that sheds light on some of the common issues of living in St. Petersburg. While the poem has a touch of the mythical, it still catches the imagination in a way that voices a common experience.

Works Cited

Pushkin, A.S. and John Dewey. "The Bronze Horseman: A St Petersburg Story." Translation & Literature, vol. 7, no. 1, May 1998, p. 59. EBSCOhost, ezproxy.uvu.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=prf&AN=4019686&site=eds-live.

Terras, Victor. A History of Russian Literature. Yale University Press, 1991.

Žekulin, Gleb. “On Rereading ‘The Bronze Horseman.’” Canadian Slavonic Papers / Revue Canadienne Des Slavistes, vol. 29, no. 2/3, 1987, pp. 228–240., www.jstor.org/stable/40868750.

The Decembrists, Karamzin, and Their Literature

These days in St. Petersburg I have been trying to keep up with the burgeoning intellectual and political climate. The Kunstkammer definitely represents quite a bit of the Westernization of Russia as far as science is concerned, but noticed that certain journals resembling English journals circulated after Alexander opened the presses, so to speak (Massie 154). Obviously, political turmoil abroad and here because of the Napoleonic wars. With the recent Decembrist uprising, the literature regarding the national identity has definitely become a deeper matter, though the new tsar, Nicholas, has placed stricter censorship on publications (Terras 169).

A Painting of the Decembrist Revolt, December 14, 1825

The late Nikolai Karamzin’s work in particular seems to contrast with much of what the young Decembrists have to say (his more politically charged works, that is). Because of his recent death and the political turmoil right now, I think contrasting the different sides here would be helpful. The nuances to the different sides are, of course, many-layered, yet I will attempt to outline some of the differences between the Decembrists’ Romantic ideas and Karamzin’s more conservative western ideals.

Nikolai Karamzin

Nikolai Karamzin had quite the literary career even before he was commissioned by Tsar Alexander to write the History of the Russian State. From the writings I have read by him, he seems conservative and talented.  Though it was a fiction, he wrote a sort of travelogue like mine called Letters of a Russian Traveler (Terras 156). Reading his history, I noticed his support of the westernization the Russian’s have taken since Peter the Great first came to power (163). This could be because a monarch from Peter’s line commissioned him to write the book, but many of his previous writings have been in support of Westernization (163). For example, Karamzin wrote an essay called “On the Love of the Fatherland and National Pride,” which asserted that the language of the upper class, with its westernized vocabulary, was the language that should be spoken to express the highest of emotions (162). Later, a man name Shishkov argued with Karamzin’s assertion about language in an essay called “Discourse on the Old and New Style of the Russian Language” (164). Shishkov took the stance that the Russian language had become corrupted by the influence of western ideals (164).

Though Karamzin might have become increasingly sympathetic to those who are considered now to be conservative, his writings influenced people to become “Westernizers” (Terras 163). These Westernizers have ideas which are opposed to some of the ideas of the Decembrists, who Romanticize the Russian past and believe literature should have a civic and national duty (171).  The Decembrists, are primarily young aristocracy and upper class men who saw or heard about the progressive politics in the West and desired to implement the same in Russia, as demonstrated by their recent uprising (168-9). Even though they primarily sympathize as slavophiles, however, they often see Karamzin’s work as relevant to their cause. Many of them have read Karamzin’s History and appreciate history for the way it instills a nationalistic feeling, but they don’t agree with the way the Russian ruler or prince is glorified (Ziolkowski 29-30).

"Pole Star", a Decembrist journal.

After examining the Decembrists general ideas in some of their current works and in their works before their revolt in "The Polar Star", they seem to like Karamzin’s writings because of the opportunity the history gave them to learn from historical figures (Terras 173; Ziolkoski 31-32). They seem to see Slavophilic ideas that support a communal way of living to be quite similar to the constitutional and democratic countries to the west, but they oppose a certain version of Westernization at the same time that would allow the monarch to stay in power (Rabow-Edling 369-70).  

The Decembrist’s quick defeat about a year ago seems to have permanently alienated that group of intellectuals from the tsar and his government, yet in some of the literary works I have read recently, I can see their ideas showing up in a subtle way (Terras 169;  171).

Works Cited

Massie, Suzanne. Land of the Firebird: The Beauty of Old Russia. Heart Tree Press, 1996.

Rabow-Edling, Susanna. "The Decembrists and the Concept of a Civic Nation." Nationalities Papers, vol. 35, no. 2, May 2007, pp. 369-391. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/00905990701254391.

Ziolkowski, Margaret. “Hagiography and History: The Saintly Prince in the Poetry of the Decembrists.” The Slavic and East European Journal, vol. 30, no. 1, 1986, pp. 29–44., www.jstor.org/stable/307276.

Terras, Victor. A History of Russian Literature. Yale University Press, 1991.