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.