Westernism andSlavophilism
In 1856, the year Rudin was published, and for several years thereafter, Turgenev, though basically a westerner, was at his Slavophile (or Russophile) best. In fact, both concepts can be found in all of Turgenev's novels. Therefore, we should clarify Westernism and Slavophilism.
These two intellectual movements took form around 1840. Both had roots in German idealist philosophy, and both were animated by the spirit of romanticism and liberalism. Around 1845, however, the two groups split over the question of Russia's relation to the West, i.e., to western Europe.
Westernism
The "Westerners (or "Westernizers ), sharply opposing the official ideology of Nicholas I, contended that Russia was an integral part of European civilization and that her cultural progress had been delayed by the "Tartar Yoke, 1240-1480. Her present task, therefore, was to catch up with the West. Russia must assimilate not only European technology but the fruits of Western culture and the progressive forms of government and social organization developed by Western political thought as well.
Unfortunately for them, the "Westerners could not express their ideas openly under the reactionary regime of Nicholas I, and the complete formulation of "Westernism” came only with Alexander Herzen's emigration to the West in 1847. Herzen founded Kolokol (The Bell) in 1857, a weekly paper published in London that at once acquired an enormous influence. Herzen's later views, however, represent a synthesis of Slavophile and Western ideas in the form of agrarian socialism.
Slavophilism
The Slavophile Movement flourished for three decades, the 1840s through the 1860s. Slavophiles held that Russia's strength lay in her indigenous cultural roots and in her adherence to tradition. They idealized her autocratic form of government, Orthodox religion, and the patriarchal organization of her peasant society.
They attacked Western Europe for its rationalism, materialism, and parliamentary democracy dominated by capitalism. They saw the self-governing body of the Russian peasants, the village commune as an example of true democracy and a bulwark against a peasant revolution. Anti-rationalists and romantic idealists, they believed that Russia's religion and culture were better because they were infused with true spirituality and deep feeling, while materialism dominated all phases of life In the West. They were NOT opposed to but supported, the introduction of Western technology.
In the 1860s, the Slavophile groups fell apart. The liberation of the serfs and other reforms of this decade, however, brought a partial fulfillment of their demands.
Turgenev's Slavophilism
In the case of Turgenev, we see that toward the conclusion of Rudin he causes a character to make a strong statement against Westernism and to define the source of Rudin's unhappiness as his ignorance of Russia. "Russia can get along without us,” he says, "but none of us can get along without her. Woe to him who thinks he can, and double woe to him who actually does!”
Turgenev continued to develop this line of thought in A Nest of Gentlefolk (1859). You should not take this to mean that he abandoned his Western leanings at this time, but he did look most sympathetically on the Russian traits of his heroes and most unfavorably upon certain aspects of Western culture.
He reveals his sympathies through characterization. The father of Lavretsky, the book's hero, is a scatter-brained Anglophile who tries to bring up his son as a rootless European. His mother, a gentle peasant woman, influences him in the other direction, even though she dies when he is only ten years old. The result is a mix. Lavretsky does not become a Slavophile in a dogmatic sense, but he moves away from the modish, cosmopolitan Westernism of the time toward a more mature understanding of the significance of nationality.
Turgenev devotes a great deal of attention in this novel to the problem of the family as the foundation stone of society (the "nest” in the title).
Fedor Lavretsky is trapped between two women who represent the poles of womankind in Turgenev's fiction. Lavretsky's wife, Varvara, exploits her husband, is unfaithful to him, makes demands upon him when she has nowhere else to turn, and generally blights his life. She is one of several female characters in Turgenev who feed their egos by exercising power over men. For a time, misled by a false report of her death in Paris where he has left her in order to return to Russia, Lavretsky is deceived into thinking he can find true happiness with the books' heroine, Liza, the most memorable and strongest-willed of Turgenev's women. Intensely religious, Liza is disturbed by the notion of loving a man promised to another woman, even though the latter be dead. But in a brief scene of suppressed passion, she is on the verge of finding happiness with Lavretsky. Then Varvara returns to destroy their prospects. Liza interprets this return as divine punishment for her own spiritual insolence and resolves to take up life as a nun in a distant convent. Meanwhile, Lavretsky is abandoned by his wife once again and is left with only one consolation, work on his estate.
In summary, A Nest of Gentlefolk is one of Turgenev's most successful artistic achievements and one of the best examples of his brand of psychological realism.
Basically, a Westerner
Turgenev was basically a Westerner, but his last two novels show that he took a rather negative view of post-reform Russia. In Smoke (1867), his fifth novel, he satirizes both the Russian political Immigrants in Heidelberg and the Russian aristocrats summering in Baden-Baden.
This work Is built around a love affair in which the hero Litvinov, is determinedly apolitical. Turgenev masterfully develops the conflict around whether Litvinov will succeed in wrenching his beloved Irma, a married woman, from the stifling world of Russian high society in which she lives, or whether she will enslave him with chains of passion and make of him a kept man. In the end, Irma proves too weak, too permeated by the poisons which have circulated about her for so many years, to leave her husband and his social milieu and follow her beloved.
Note that Litvinov Is exceptionally strong among Turgenev's male characters; that for once it is the woman in Turgenev who misses her opportunity and becomes embittered (while Litvinov is able to renew his relationship with his former fiancée); and that the title of the novel is ironic: all is smoke without fire: the love affair, the Slavophile/Westerner controversy.
As you read Fathers and Sons, keep the following suggestions in mind and think about how you would respond to the following questions:
1. One of Turgenev's devices is to extend his narrative plane. He does so in two ways: (1) by giving prehistories of his characters (extension in time); (2) by giving descriptions of the milieu (extension in ~
The prehistories usually contain important characterizing material. Nikolai Kirsanov's past, for example, reveals his propensity to act emotionally (his marriage against the wishes of his parents) and to love deeply and romantically (his ten years of happy, married life). Nikolai remains true to his nature throughout the course of the novel (especially revealing is chapter XI). His brother Pavel, whose past is revealed by Arkady in chapter VII, is different, i.e., his actions do not conform to his past. A former military man and basically a rational and practical person, Pavel creates an illusion of "eternal love” for Princess R.
The two Kirsanov brothers are representatives of the older generation. They adhere to certain ideals and standards which form the basis of their existence. What are these values? Do you feel that they are important values? Why do you think Bazarov rejects them so violently?
2. Turgenev's descriptions of the milieu also contain important characterizing material. His details often suggest not only the material situation but also the interests and personality of a character. The poorly managed Kirsanov estate, Marino, is a reflection of Nikolai's lack of practical and organizational abilities, while the well-managed Odintsova estate, Nikolskoe, conveys the idea that Anna has these abilities to a high degree.
You will find that gestures, facial expressions, and the appearances of characters are also pertinent, for Turgenev also uses these details to reveal the psychology of his characters.
3. Characterization is structurally integrated with four love stories. These stories (1) supply the plot of the novel, (2) illustrate its ideological issues, and (3) reveal the personal qualities of its characters.
Nikolai Kirsanov's love for Fenichka supplies the material for one plot. What it reveals about Nikolai Is most personal and touching. And such a relationship between landowner and peasant girl takes us into ideology, calling to mind the social scene in Russia on the eve of Emancipation. (Remember, the serfs were emancipated by royal decree in 1861.) Moreover, the wedding between these two suggests Turgenev's optimism for Russia's future.
Do not overlook the fact that Pavel Kirsanov and Bazarov are also involved with Fenichka. Is their involvement psychological and ideological as well, i.e., does It reveal anything meaningful about their characters or about the social issues of the day? To push this question a little further, how would you explain the duel between Bazarov and Pavel?
4. The structure of the novel is perfectly balanced. It is based on the principle of thesis and antithesis (for and against). In other words, Turgenev always proceeds in two’s. There are two groups of characters which represent the older and the younger generation with their specific ideas and ideas. Within each group, there are four pairs of characters, or four sets of two's: two fathers, two young friends (the sons), two brothers, and two sisters. The two friends, Bazarov and Arkady, are the organizational focus of the novel, for the journey together to the four main settings of the novel, where they (and we) discover the different oppositions (or comparisons).
As you look at this structuring device, do not forget the points made above. Observe, for instance, how Turgenev uses the different pairs of characters to Illuminate certain aspects of Bazarov's personality.
If you wish to gain a more comprehensive view of the novel's structure and thematic development, read the following studies:
Richard Freeborn, "The Structure of Fathers and Sons (available In your text).
Gary Jahn, "Character and Theme in Fathers and Sons, College Literature, II, No. 1 (Winter, 1977), 80-91.
5. The love theme is important in all of Turgenev's novels. He believed that life offers the possibility of mutual self-fulfillment through love between a man and woman. This theme is slightly varied in Fathers and Sons. Bazarov's dislike of romanticism and sentimentality has led him to dismiss any suggestion that there can be anything "mysterious” between a man and woman. But he changes his tune when he meets Anna Odintsova, for he comes to realize that his relationship with her emphasizes the "romantic in his own nature. Of course, we are not talking about mutual self-fulfillment in this case. What this relationship has to offer Bazarov is self-realization.
I suggest that you analyze in detail the Bazarov/Odintsoya relationship, observing the similarities and differences in their characters and the various stages in Bazarov's path to self-realization. (Especially important are chapters 22, 25, 26, and 27.)
What kind of person is Anna Odintsova? In what ways could Bazarov be viewed as superior in comparison with Anna and the other characters? (By the way, the name "Odintsova derives from Odin, which means "one or "alone .)
6. How do you understand the terms "self-fulfillment and "self-realization? Are they operable in the relationships between Nikolai and Fenichka and Arkady and Katya? What do you have to say about these four characters?
7. The relationship between the two friends, Arkady and Bazarov, is solid in the first portion of the novel. But when it becomes clear thereafter that Arkady regards himself as the pupil and Bazarov the master, the solidarity greatly diminishes. Look closely at this issue as they visit Nikolskoe and the estate of Bazarov's parents. What are the basic differences between Bazarov and Arkady?
8. Some critics think that Bazarov has a cold attitude toward his loving parents and therefore reveals himself as an extreme egotist. But in chapter 21 he says to Arkady that he loves his parents and is concerned about their happiness; and in chapter 27 he says to Anna Odintsova: "...be kind to mother. People like (her] aren't to be found in your great world if you look by daylight with a candle. What do you remember about Bazarov's parents? How would you describe the relationship between Bazarov and his parents?
9. In chapter 13 Bazarov and Arkady meet two nihilists, Mrs. Kukshin and Sitnikov, the characterization of whom is obviously satirical. What is the purpose of this satire? What is the basic difference between Bazarov and the two "emancipated” comrades?
10. There are many comments in the novel about peasant life and ways. Are they primarily positive? Any negative suggestions? Why does Turgenev make Nikolai Kirsanov liberate his peasants before the official emancipation in 1861? Does anything in this material imply that Turgenev idealizes the Russian peasantry? Do you think the liberated peasants take advantage of Nikolai? What are Bazarov's attitudes toward peasant life and ways?
11. When Bazarov dies of typhus, his great dreams come to nothing. Is his death therefore ironic? Are the critics right who find fault with this ending, who blame Turgenev for not knowing what to do with his hero?
Or do you feel that Turgenev had something bigger in mind? Does pantheism clarify the meaning of Bazarov's death (Turgenev's worldview is generally pantheistic)?
Does his death have some other symbolic meaning? Is it at least consistent with his character?
12. After its publication, the novel was criticized for its presentation of Bazarov. Dmitri Plsarev, the most radical critic of the 1860s and a nihilist like Bazarov, reviewed the novel within a month of its publication and was in part responsible for the controversy. He "recognized himself” in Bazarov, criticized Turgenev for presenting Bazarov in an unpleasant light, and used his review to promote his own nihilist Ideas.
No comments:
Post a Comment