Nikolai Alexandrovich Dobrolyubov
When will the real day come?
(The day before. The story of I.S. Turgenev.
"Russian Messenger", 1860, No. 1-2.)
Schlage die Trommel und furchte dich nicht.
* Beat the drum and don't be afraid. Heine[*] (German).
Aesthetic criticism has now become the property of sensitive young ladies. From conversations with them, servants of pure art can draw many subtle and true remarks and then write criticism in the following way: “Here is the content of Mr. Turgenev’s new story (a story of content). Already from this pale essay it is clear how much life and poetry of the freshest but only reading the story itself can give an idea of that flair for the subtlest poetic nuances of life, of that sharp mental analysis, of that deep understanding of the invisible jets and currents of social thought, of that friendly and at the same time bold attitude towards reality, which constitute distinctive Turgenev's talent traits.Look, for example, how subtly these mental traits are noted (repetition of one part from the story of the content and then an extract); read this wonderful scene, full of such grace and charm (extract); remember this poetic living picture (extract ) or this tall, bold image (extract) Isn't it true that this penetrates into the depths of the soul, makes your heart beat faster, enlivens and decorates your life, elevates human dignity and the great, eternal significance of the holy ideas of truth, goodness before you and beauty! Comme c "est joli, comme c" est delicieux!
* How beautiful it is, how charming it is! (French).
We are indebted to a small acquaintance with sensitive young ladies because we do not know how to write such pleasant and harmless critics. Frankly admitting this and refusing the role of "educator of the aesthetic taste of the public", we choose another task, more modest and more commensurate with our forces. We simply want to sum up the data that are scattered in the writer's work and which we accept as a fait accompli, as a vital phenomenon that stands before us. The work is simple, but necessary, because, after many occupations and recreations, rarely will anyone want to peer into all the details of a literary work, to disassemble, check and put in their place all the figures that make up this complex account of one of the sides of our social life. life, and then think about the outcome and what it promises and obliges us to do. And this kind of verification and reflection is very useful with regard to Mr. Turgenev's new story.
We know that pure aesthetics[*]* will immediately accuse us of striving to impose their opinions on the author and assign tasks to his talent. Therefore, we will make a reservation, even though it is boring. No, we do not impose anything on the author, we say in advance that we do not know for what purpose, as a result of what preliminary considerations, he depicted the story that constitutes the content of the story "On the Eve". For us, what is important is not so much what the author wanted to say, but what was said to them, even if unintentionally, simply as a result of a truthful reproduction of the facts of life. We value every talented work precisely because in it we can study the facts of our native life, which is already so little open to the gaze of a simple observer. There is still no publicity in our life, except for the official one; everywhere we come across not living people, but officials serving in one department or another: in public places - with pen-writers, at balls - with dancers, in clubs - with gamblers, in theaters - with hairdressing patients, etc. Everyone buries further his spiritual life; everyone looks at you like that, as if saying: “After all, I came here to dance or to show my hair; well, be pleased that I am doing my job, and please don’t try to extort my feelings and ideas from me ". And indeed, no one is tormenting anyone, no one is interested in anyone, and the whole society goes apart, annoyed that it should converge on official occasions, like a new opera, a dinner party, or some kind of committee meeting. Where is there to learn and study the life of a person who has not devoted himself exclusively to the observation of social mores? And then what diversity, what even opposition in the various circles and classes of our society! Thoughts that have become vulgar and backward in one circle are still hotly contested in another; what is considered by some to be insufficient and weak, to others it seems too harsh and bold, and so on. What falls, what wins, what begins to take root and prevail in the moral life of society - we have no other indicator of this than literature, and mainly its artistic works. The writer-artist, not caring about any general conclusions regarding the state of social thought and morality, is always able, however, to capture their most essential features, brightly illuminate and directly place them before the eyes of thinking people. That is why we believe that as soon as talent is recognized in a writer-artist, that is, the ability to feel and depict the vital truth of phenomena, then, by virtue of this very recognition, his works give a legitimate reason for reasoning about that environment of life, about that era , which caused this or that work in the writer. And the yardstick for a writer's talent here will be the extent to which life is widely captured by him, the extent to which the images that he creates are strong and voluminous.
* For notes on words marked with [*], see the end of the text.
We considered it necessary to state this in order to justify our method of interpreting the phenomena of life itself on the basis of a literary work, without, however, imposing on the author any preconceived ideas and tasks. The reader sees that for us it is precisely those works that are important in which life has affected itself, and not according to a program thought up in advance by the author. About "A Thousand Souls"[*], for example, we did not talk at all, because, in our opinion, the entire social side of this novel is forcibly fitted to a pre-composed idea. Therefore, there is nothing to talk about here, except for the extent to which the author deftly composed his essay. It is impossible to rely on the truth and living reality of the facts stated by the author, because his inner attitude to these facts is neither simple nor true. We do not see such an attitude of the author to the plot in the new story of Mr. Turgenev, as in most of his stories. In "On the Eve" we see the irresistible influence of the natural course of social life and thought, to which the very thought and imagination of the author involuntarily submitted.
Setting the main task of literary criticism - the explanation of those phenomena of reality that caused a well-known work of art, we must note, moreover, that in the application to the stories of Mr. Turgenev, this task also has its own meaning. G. Turgenev can rightly be called a painter and singer of that morality and philosophy that has dominated our educated society in the last twenty years. He quickly guessed new needs, new ideas introduced into the public consciousness, and in his works he certainly drew (as circumstances allowed) attention to the question that was on the queue and was already vaguely beginning to excite society. We hope, on another occasion, to trace the entire literary activity of Mr. Turgenev, and therefore we will not expand on this now. Let's just say that to the author's instinct for the living strings of society, to this ability to immediately respond to every noble thought and honest feeling that is just beginning to penetrate the minds of the best people, we attribute a significant share of the success that Mr. Turgenev constantly enjoyed in the Russian public . Of course, literary talent in itself contributed a lot to this success. But our readers know that Mr. Turgenev's talent is not one of those titanic talents that, by the sole force of a poetic presentation, amaze, captivate you and draw you to sympathy for such a phenomenon or idea with which you are not at all disposed to sympathize. Not a stormy, impetuous force, but, on the contrary, softness and some kind of poetic moderation serve as the characteristic features of his talent. Therefore, we believe that he could not arouse the general sympathy of the public if he dealt with questions and needs that are completely alien to his readers or have not yet been raised in society. Some would notice the charm of poetic descriptions in his stories, the subtlety and depth in the outlines of various persons and positions, but, without any doubt, this would not be enough to make the writer a lasting success and glory. Without a lively attitude to the present, every, even the most sympathetic and talented narrator, must suffer the fate of Mr. Fet, who was once praised, but from whom now only a dozen lovers remember a dozen of the best poems. A lively attitude to the present saved Mr. Turgenev and strengthened his constant success in the reading public. Some thoughtful critic[*] once even reproached Mr. Turgenev for the fact that "all the fluctuations of social thought" were so strongly reflected in his activities. But, despite this, we see here precisely the most vital side of Mr. Turgenev's talent, and with this side we explain why every work of his has hitherto been met with such sympathy, almost with enthusiasm.
When will the real day come
Nikolai Alexandrovich Dobrolyubov
When will the real day come?
(The day before. The story of I.S. Turgenev.
"Russian Messenger", 1860, No. 1-2.)
Schlage die Trommel und furchte dich nicht.
Heine*.
______________
* Beat the drum and don't be afraid. Heine[*] (German).
Aesthetic criticism has now become the property of sensitive young ladies. From conversations with them, servants of pure art can draw many subtle and true remarks and then write criticism in the following way: “Here is the content of Mr. Turgenev’s new story (a story of content). Already from this pale essay it is clear how much life and poetry of the freshest but only reading the story itself can give an idea of that flair for the subtlest poetic nuances of life, of that sharp mental analysis, of that deep understanding of the invisible jets and currents of social thought, of that friendly and at the same time bold attitude towards reality, which constitute distinctive Turgenev's talent traits.Look, for example, how subtly these mental traits are noted (repetition of one part from the story of the content and then an extract); read this wonderful scene, full of such grace and charm (extract); remember this poetic living picture (extract ) or this tall, bold image (extract) Isn't it true that this penetrates into the depths of the soul, makes your heart beat faster, enlivens and decorates your life, elevates human dignity and the great, eternal significance of the holy ideas of truth, goodness before you and beauty! Comme c "est joli, comme c" est delicieux!
______________
* How beautiful it is, how charming it is! (French).
We are indebted to a small acquaintance with sensitive young ladies because we do not know how to write such pleasant and harmless critics. Frankly admitting this and refusing the role of "educator of the aesthetic taste of the public", we choose another task, more modest and more commensurate with our forces. We simply want to sum up the data that are scattered in the writer's work and which we accept as a fait accompli, as a vital phenomenon that stands before us. The work is simple, but necessary, because, after many occupations and recreations, rarely will anyone want to peer into all the details of a literary work, to disassemble, check and put in their place all the figures that make up this complex account of one of the sides of our social life. life, and then think about the outcome and what it promises and obliges us to do. And this kind of verification and reflection is very useful with regard to Mr. Turgenev's new story.
We know that pure aesthetics[*]* will immediately accuse us of striving to impose their opinions on the author and assign tasks to his talent. Therefore, we will make a reservation, even though it is boring. No, we do not impose anything on the author, we say in advance that we do not know for what purpose, as a result of what preliminary considerations, he depicted the story that constitutes the content of the story "On the Eve". For us, what is important is not so much what the author wanted to say, but what was said to them, even if unintentionally, simply as a result of a truthful reproduction of the facts of life. We value every talented work precisely because in it we can study the facts of our native life, which is already so little open to the gaze of a simple observer. There is still no publicity in our life, except for the official one; everywhere we come across not living people, but officials serving in one department or another: in public places - with pen-writers, at balls - with dancers, in clubs - with gamblers, in theaters - with hairdressing patients, etc. Everyone buries further his spiritual life; everyone looks at you like that, as if saying: “After all, I came here to dance or to show my hair; well, be pleased that I am doing my job, and please don’t try to extort my feelings and ideas from me ". And indeed, no one is tormenting anyone, no one is interested in anyone, and the whole society goes apart, annoyed that it should converge on official occasions, like a new opera, a dinner party, or some kind of committee meeting. Where is there to learn and study the life of a person who has not devoted himself exclusively to the observation of social mores? And then what diversity, what even opposition in the various circles and classes of our society! Thoughts that have become vulgar and backward in one circle are still hotly contested in another; what is considered by some to be insufficient and weak, to others it seems too harsh and bold, and so on. What falls, what wins, what begins to take root and prevail in the moral life of society - we have no other indicator of this than literature, and mainly its artistic works. The writer-artist, not caring about any general conclusions regarding the state of social thought and morality, is always able, however, to capture their most essential features, brightly illuminate and directly place them before the eyes of thinking people. That is why we believe that as soon as talent is recognized in a writer-artist, that is, the ability to feel and depict the vital truth of phenomena, then, by virtue of this very recognition, his works give a legitimate reason for reasoning about that environment of life, about that era , which caused this or that work in the writer. And the yardstick for a writer's talent here will be the extent to which life is widely captured by him, the extent to which the images that he creates are strong and voluminous.
______________
* For notes on words marked with [*], see the end of the text.
We considered it necessary to state this in order to justify our method of interpreting the phenomena of life itself on the basis of a literary work, without, however, imposing on the author any preconceived ideas and tasks. The reader sees that for us it is precisely those works that are important in which life has affected itself, and not according to a program thought up in advance by the author. About "A Thousand Souls"[*], for example, we did not talk at all, because, in our opinion, the entire social side of this novel is forcibly fitted to a pre-composed idea. Therefore, there is nothing to talk about here, except for the extent to which the author deftly composed his essay. It is impossible to rely on the truth and living reality of the facts stated by the author, because his inner attitude to these facts is neither simple nor true. We do not see such an attitude of the author to the plot in the new story of Mr. Turgenev, as in most of his stories. In "On the Eve" we see the irresistible influence of the natural course of social life and thought, to which the very thought and imagination of the author involuntarily submitted.
Setting the main task of literary criticism - the explanation of those phenomena of reality that caused a well-known work of art, we must note, moreover, that in the application to the stories of Mr. Turgenev, this task also has its own meaning. G. Turgenev can rightly be called a painter and singer of that morality and philosophy that has dominated our educated society in the last twenty years. He quickly guessed new needs, new ideas introduced into the public consciousness, and in his works he certainly drew (as circumstances allowed) attention to the question that was on the queue and was already vaguely beginning to excite society. We hope, on another occasion, to trace the entire literary activity of Mr. Turgenev, and therefore we will not expand on this now. We will only say that to this intuition of the author for the living strings of society, to this ability to immediately respond to every noble thought and honest feeling that is just beginning to penetrate the minds of the best people, we attribute a significant share of the success that Mr. Turgenev constantly enjoyed in the Russian public . Of course, literary talent in itself contributed a lot to this success. But our readers know that Mr. Turgenev's talent is not one of those titanic talents that, by the sole force of a poetic presentation, amaze, captivate you and draw you to sympathy for such a phenomenon or idea with which you are not at all disposed to sympathize. Not stormy, impetuous strength, but on the contrary - softness and some kind of poetic moderation are the characteristic features of his talent. Therefore, we believe that he could not arouse the general sympathy of the public if he dealt with questions and needs that are completely alien to his readers or have not yet been raised in society. Some would notice the charm of poetic descriptions in his stories, the subtlety and depth in the outlines of various persons and positions, but, without any doubt, this would not be enough to make the writer a lasting success and glory. Without a lively attitude to the present, every, even the most sympathetic and talented narrator, must suffer the fate of Mr. Fet, who was once praised, but from whom now only a dozen lovers remember a dozen of the best poems. A lively attitude to the present saved Mr. Turgenev and strengthened his constant success in the reading public. Some thoughtful critic[*] once even reproached Mr. Turgenev for the fact that "all the fluctuations of social thought" were so strongly reflected in his activities. But, despite this, we see here precisely the most vital side of Mr. Turgenev's talent, and with this side we explain why every work of his has hitherto been met with such sympathy, almost with enthusiasm.
So, we can safely say that if Mr. Turgenev has already touched on some question in his story, if he has depicted some new side of social relations, this serves as a guarantee that this question is really being raised or will soon be raised in consciousness of educated society, that this new side of life is beginning to stand out and will soon show itself sharply and brightly before the eyes of everyone. Therefore, every time Mr. Turgenev's story appears, the question becomes curious: what aspects of life are depicted in it, what questions are raised?
This question appears even now, and in relation to Mr. Turgenev's new story it is more interesting than ever. So far, Mr. Turgenev's path, in accordance with the path of development of our society, has been rather clearly outlined in one direction. He proceeded from the realm of higher ideas and theoretical strivings and aimed to bring these ideas and strivings into the rough and vulgar reality, which deviated far from them. The fees for the struggle and suffering of the hero, who was busying himself with the victory of his principles, and his fall before the overwhelming force of human vulgarity, were usually the interest of Mr. Turgenev's stories. Of course, the very foundations of the struggle, that is, ideas and strivings, changed in each work or, with the passage of time and circumstances, showed themselves more definitely and sharply. Thus, the Superfluous Man was replaced by Pasynkov, Pasynkov by Rudin, Rudin by Lavretsky[*]. Each of these faces was bolder and fuller than the previous ones, but the essence, the basis of their character and their entire existence, was the same. They were the bringers of new ideas to a certain circle, educators, propagandists - for at least one female soul, but propagandists. For this they were greatly praised, and for sure - in their time, apparently, they were very needed, and their work was very difficult, respectable and beneficial. Not without reason did everyone greet them with such love, so sympathize with their spiritual suffering, so pity their fruitless efforts. No wonder no one then thought to notice that all these gentlemen are excellent, noble, intelligent, but in essence idle people. Drawing their images in different positions and collisions, Mr. Turgenev himself usually treated them with touching participation, with heartache about their suffering, and constantly aroused the same feeling in the mass of readers. When one motive for this struggle and suffering began to seem insufficient, when one trait of nobility and loftiness of character seemed to be covered with some vulgarity, Mr. Turgenev was able to find other motives, other traits, and again fell into the heart of the reader and again aroused to himself and his heroes enthusiastic sympathy. The item seemed inexhaustible.
But lately, in our society, quite noticeably demands have been revealed that are completely different from those by which Rudin and all his brethren were called to life. In relation to these persons, a fundamental change took place in the concepts of the educated majority. The question was no longer about the modification of this or that motive, this or that beginning of their aspirations, but about the very essence of their activity. During that period of time, while all these enlightened champions of truth and goodness, eloquent sufferers of lofty convictions, have grown up before us, new people have grown up, for whom the love of truth and honesty of aspirations are no longer a wonder. From childhood, inconspicuously and constantly, they were imbued with those concepts and aspirations for which the best people had to fight, doubt and suffer in adulthood*. Therefore, the very nature of education in today's young society has taken on a different color. Those concepts and strivings that previously gave the title of an advanced person are now considered the first and necessary attribute of the most ordinary education. From a high school student, from a mediocre cadet, even sometimes from a respectable seminarian, you will now hear the expression of such convictions, for which, in the old days, Belinsky, for example, had to argue and get excited. And a schoolboy or a cadet expresses these concepts - so difficult, they got it before with a fight - completely calmly, without any excitement and complacency, as a thing that cannot be otherwise and is even unthinkable otherwise.
______________
* We have already been reproached once for having an addiction to the younger generation and pointed out the vulgarity and emptiness that it indulges in most of its representatives. But we never even thought of defending all young people indiscriminately, and this would not be in accordance with our goal. Vulgarity and emptiness are the property of all times and all ages. But we spoke and now we are talking about the chosen people, the best people, and not about the crowd, since both Rudin and all the people of his temper did not belong to the crowd, but to the best people of their time. However, we will not be wrong if we say that in the mass of society the level of education has risen in recent times. (Note by N.A. Dobrolyubov.)
** Titlo (title) - an honorary title.
When meeting a person of the so-called progressive direction, no one of decent people now indulges in surprise and delight, no one looks into his eyes with dumb reverence, no one mysteriously shakes his hand and invites him in a whisper to himself, to a circle of chosen people - to talk about that injustice and slavery are disastrous for the state. On the contrary, now, with involuntary, contemptuous amazement, they stop before a person who shows a lack of sympathy for publicity, disinterestedness, emancipation*, etc. Now even people who do not like progressive ideas at heart must show that they love them in order to have access to a decent society. It is clear that in this state of affairs, the former sowers of good, people of Rudin's temper, are losing a significant share of their former credit. They are respected like old mentors; but it is rare that, having entered into his mind, he is disposed to listen again to those lessons that were accepted with such greed before, at the age of childhood and initial development. You need something else, you need to go further **.
______________
* Emancipation, or emancipation (from French) - liberation from dependence, in particular the liberation of women from their state of economic and legal oppression and equalization of their rights with men.
** Against this idea, apparently, the extraordinary success that the publications of the works of some of our writers of the forties can testify to. A particularly striking example is Belinsky[*], whose works quickly sold out, they say, in the amount of 12,000 copies. But, in our opinion, this very fact serves as the best confirmation of our thought Belinsky was the foremost of the foremost, none of his peers went further than him, and where 12,000 copies of Belinsky were snapped up in a few months, Rudin simply had nothing to do. Belinsky's success proves not at all that his ideas are still new to our society and require great effort to spread, but precisely that they are now dear and sacred to the majority and that their preaching no longer requires heroism or special efforts from new leaders. talents. (Note by N.A. Dobrolyubov).
“But,” we will be told, “after all, society has not reached the extreme point in its development; further mental and moral improvement is possible. Therefore, society needs leaders, and preachers of the truth, and propagandists, in a word, people of the Rudin type. the former is accepted and entered into the general consciousness - let's suppose. But this does not exclude the possibility that new Rudins will appear, preachers of new, higher tendencies, and again they will fight and suffer, and again arouse the sympathy of society. This subject is, indeed, inexhaustible in its content and can constantly bring new laurels to such a likeable writer as Mr. Turgenev.
It would be a pity if such a remark were justified right now. Fortunately, it seems to be refuted by the latest movement in our literature. Reasoning abstractly, one cannot but admit that the idea of perpetual motion and eternal change of ideas in society, and consequently of the constant need for preachers of these ideas, is quite fair. But after all, one must also take into account the fact that societies do not live only to reason and exchange ideas. Ideas and their gradual development have their significance only because they, being born from already existing facts, always precede changes in reality itself. A certain state of affairs creates a need in society, this need is recognized, after the general consciousness of it there must be an actual change in favor of satisfying the need recognized by all. Thus, after a period of awareness of certain ideas and aspirations, a period of their implementation should appear in society; deeds must follow reflections and conversations. Now the question is: what did our society do in the last 20-30 years? For now, nothing. It studied, developed, listened to the Rudins, sympathized with their failures in the noble struggle for convictions, prepared for the task, but did nothing ... So much beauty accumulated in my head and heart; so much absurd and dishonorable has been noticed in the existing order of affairs; the mass of people "who are aware of themselves being above the reality around them" is growing every year - so that soon, perhaps, everyone will be above reality ... consolations. It seems clear that what we need now is not people who would "elevate us even more above the surrounding reality", but people who would raise - or we were taught to raise - reality itself to the level of those reasonable demands that we have already realized. In a word, we need people of action, and not abstract ones, always a little bit of Epicurean reasoning*.
______________
* Epicureanism (from Greek) - a tendency to sensual pleasures, to pampered life; here: reasoning, far from life, from the requirements of reality.
The consciousness of this, although vaguely, was already expressed in many with the appearance of the "Noble Nest". Mr. Turgenev's talent, together with his faithful tact to reality, this time also carried him triumphantly out of a difficult situation. He knew how to stage Lavretsky in such a way that it is embarrassing to be ironic over him, although he belongs to the same kind of idle types that we look at with a smile. The drama of his position no longer lies in the struggle with his own impotence, but in the clash with such concepts and morals, with which the struggle, indeed, should frighten even an energetic and courageous person. He is married and has deserted his wife; but he fell in love with a pure, bright being, brought up in such concepts, in which the love of a married man is a terrible crime. And yet she loves him too, and his claims can continually and terribly torment her heart and conscience. You will inevitably think bitterly and painfully over such a situation, and we remember how painfully our hearts sank when Lavretsky, saying goodbye to Liza, said to her: "Ah, Liza, Liza! how could we be happy!" and when she, already a humble nun in her soul, answered: "You yourself see that happiness does not depend on us, but on God," and he began: "yes, because you ..." and did not finish ... Readers and critics of The Noble Nest, I remember, admired many other things in this novel. But for us, his most essential interest lies in this tragic collision of Lavretsky, whose passivity, in this particular case, we cannot but excuse. Here Lavretsky, as if betraying one of the generic traits of his type, is hardly even a propagandist. Beginning with the first meeting with Liza, when she was going to mass, throughout the novel he timidly bows before the inviolability of her concepts and never dares to approach her with cold reassurances. But even this, of course, because here propaganda would be the very thing that Lavretsky, like all his brethren, is afraid of. For all that, it seems to us (at least it seemed when reading the novel) that the very position of Lavretsky, the very collision chosen by Mr. Turgenev and so familiar to Russian life, should serve as strong propaganda and lead each reader to a number of thoughts about the significance of a whole huge Department of concepts that run our lives. Now, according to various printed and verbal reviews, we know that we were not quite right: the meaning of Lavretsky's position was understood differently or not at all clarified by many readers. But that there was something legitimately tragic in it, and not illusory, it was understandable, and this, together with the merits of execution, attracted the unanimous enthusiastic participation of the entire reading Russian public to the "Nest of Nobles".
After "The Noble Nest" one could fear for the fate of the new work of Mr. Turgenev. The path of creating sublime characters, forced to submit to the blows of fate, has become very slippery. In the midst of the enthusiasm for the "Nest of Nobles" voices were heard expressing displeasure at Lavretsky, from whom more was expected. The author himself considered it necessary to introduce Mikhalevich into his story, then for him to curse Lavretsky with a bastard. And Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, who appeared at the same time, finally and sharply explained to the entire Russian public that now it’s better for a powerless and weak-willed person not to make people laugh, it’s better to lie on his sofa than to run, fuss, make noise, reason and pour from an empty empty for years and decades. After reading Oblomov, the public understood his kinship with the interesting personalities of "superfluous people" and realized that these people were now really superfluous and that they were exactly as useful as the kindest Ilya Ilyich. "What will Mr. Turgenev create now?" - we thought, and with great curiosity began to read "On the Eve".
The sense of the present moment did not deceive the author this time either. Realizing that the former heroes had already done their job and could not arouse the former sympathy in the best part of our society, he decided to leave them and, catching in a few fragmentary manifestations the breath of the new demands of life, he tried to take the road along which the advanced movement of the present time is being made. ..
In the new story of Mr. Turgenev, we meet other positions, other types than we are used to in his works of the previous period. The social need for a cause, a living cause, the beginning of contempt for dead, abstract* principles and passive virtues was expressed in the entire structure of the new story. Without a doubt, everyone who will read our article has now read "On the Eve". Therefore, instead of telling the content of the story, we will present only a short sketch of the main characters.
______________
* Abstract (from Latin) - abstract.
The heroine of the novel is a girl with a serious mindset, with an energetic will, humane aspirations of the heart. Its development took place in a very peculiar way due to special family circumstances.
Her father and mother were very limited people, but not evil; her mother was even positively distinguished by her kindness and softness of heart. From childhood, Elena was delivered from family despotism, which destroys in the bud so many beautiful natures. She grew up alone, without girlfriends, completely free; no formalism constrained her. Nikolai Artemyich Stakhov, her father, a dull-witted man, but posing as a philosopher of a skeptical tone and keeping away from family life, at first only admired his little Elena, in whom unusual abilities were early revealed. Elena, while she was small, also, for her part, adored her father. But Stakhov's relationship with his wife was not entirely satisfactory: he married Anna Vasilievna for her dowry, did not have any feelings for her, treated her almost with disdain and moved away from her in the company of Augustina Khristianovna, who robbed and fooled him. Anna Vasilyevna, a sick and sensitive woman, like Marya Dmitrievna of the Noble Nest, humbly endured her position, but could not help complaining about it to everyone in the house, and incidentally even to her daughter. Thus, Elena soon became the confidant of her mother's sorrows and became involuntarily a judge between her and her father. With the impressionability of her nature, this had a great influence on the development of her internal forces. The less she could act in practice on this occasion, the more work seemed to her mind and imagination. Forced from an early age to peer into the mutual relations of people close to her, participating both with her heart and head in explaining the meaning of these relations and pronouncing judgment on them, Elena early accustomed herself to independent reflection, to a conscious look at everything around her. The family relations of the Stakhovs are outlined very briefly by Mr. Turgenev, but in this essay there are deeply correct indications that explain quite a lot the initial development of Elena's character. By nature, she was an impressionable and intelligent child; her position between her mother and father prompted her early serious reflections, early raised her to an independent, to a domineering role. She became on a level with the elders, made them defendants before her. And at the same time, her thoughts were not cold, her whole soul merged with them, because it was about people too close, too dear to her, about relationships with which the most sacred feelings, the most vital interests of the girl were connected. That is why her reflections were directly reflected in her heartfelt disposition: from the adoration of her father, she passed to a passionate attachment to her mother, in whom she began to see a being oppressed, suffering. But in this love for the mother there was nothing hostile to the father, who was neither a villain, nor a positive fool, nor a domestic tyrant. He was only a very ordinary mediocrity, and Elena lost interest in him - instinctively, and then, perhaps, consciously, deciding that there was nothing to love him for. Yes, she soon saw the same mediocrity in her mother, and in her heart, instead of passionate love and respect, only a feeling of regret and condescension remained: Mr. Turgenev very successfully outlined her relationship to her mother, saying that she "treated her mother as with a sick grandmother. The mother recognized herself as inferior to her daughter; the father, as soon as the daughter began to outgrow him mentally, which was very easy, lost interest in her, decided that she was strange, and retreated from her.
N. A. Dobrolyubov
When will the real day come?
("On the Eve", a story by I. S. Turgenev. "Russian Messenger", 1860, No 1--2)
N. A. Dobrolyubov. Russian classics. Selected literary-critical articles.
The publication was prepared by Yu. G. Oksman.
Series "Literary Monuments"
M., "Science", 1970
OCR Bychkov M.N.
Schlage die Trommel und furchte dich nicht! (*)
(* Beat the drum and do not be afraid! (German). - Ed.)
Aesthetic criticism has now become the property of sensitive young ladies. From conversations with them, ministers of pure art can draw many subtle and true remarks and then write criticism of this kind. “Here is the content of Mr. Turgenev’s new story (the story of the content). Already from this pale sketch it is clear how much life and poetry of the freshest and most fragrant is here. But only reading the story itself can give an idea of that flair for the subtlest poetic shades of life, of sharp mental analysis, about that deep understanding of the invisible currents and currents of social thought, about that friendly and at the same time bold attitude towards reality, which constitute the distinguishing features of Mr. Turgenev's talent.See, for example, how subtly these mental traits are noticed content and then - extract); read this wonderful scene, full of such grace and charm (extract); remember this poetic, lively picture (extract) or this lofty, bold image (extract). Isn't it true that it penetrates into the depths of your soul, makes your heart beat faster, enlivens and adorns your life, elevates before you human dignity and the great, eternal significance of the holy ideas of truth, goodness and beauty! Comme c "est joli, comme c" est delicieux!" (How beautiful, how charming! (French). - Ed.)
We are indebted to a small acquaintance with sensitive young ladies because we do not know how to write such pleasant and harmless critics. Frankly admitting this and refusing the role of "educator of the aesthetic taste of the public", we choose another task, more modest and more commensurate with our forces. We simply want to sum up the data that are scattered in the writer's work and which we accept as a fait accompli, as a vital phenomenon that stands before us. The work is simple, but necessary, because, after many occupations and recreations, rarely will anyone want to peer into all the details of a literary work, to disassemble, check and put in their place all the figures that make up this complex account of one of the sides of our social life. life, and then think about the outcome and what it promises and obliges us to do. And this kind of verification and reflection is very useful in connection with Mr. Turgenev's new story.
We know that pure aesthetics will immediately accuse us of striving to impose our opinions on the author and assign tasks to his talent. Therefore, we will make a reservation, even though it is boring. No, we do not impose anything on the author, we say in advance that we do not know for what purpose, as a result of what preliminary considerations, he depicted the story that constitutes the content of the story "On the Eve". For us, what is important is not so much what the author wanted to say, but what was said to them, even if unintentionally, simply as a result of a truthful reproduction of the facts of life. We value every talented work precisely because in it we can study the facts of our native life, which is already so little open to the gaze of a simple observer. There is still no publicity in our life, except for the official one; everywhere we come across not living people, but officials serving in one department or another: in public places - with pen-writers, at balls - with dancers, in clubs - with gamblers, in theaters - with hairdressing patients and etc. Everyone further buries his spiritual life; everyone looks at you like that, as if saying: “After all, I came here to dance or to show my hair; well, be pleased that I am doing my job, and please don’t try to extort my feelings and ideas from me ". And indeed, no one is tormenting anyone, no one is interested in anyone, and the whole society goes apart, annoyed that it should converge on official occasions, like a new opera, a dinner party, or some kind of committee meeting. Where is there to learn and study the life of a person who has not devoted himself exclusively to the observation of social mores? And then what diversity, what even opposition in the various circles and classes of our society! Thoughts that have already become vulgar and backward in one circle are still hotly contested in another; what is considered insufficient and weak by some, by others it seems too sharp and bold, and so on. predominantly her works of art. The writer-artist, not caring about any general conclusions regarding the state of social thought and morality, is always able, however, to capture their most essential features, brightly illuminate and directly place them before the eyes of thinking people. That is why we believe that as soon as talent is recognized in a writer-artist, that is, the ability to feel and depict the vital truth of phenomena, then, by virtue of this very recognition, his works give a legitimate reason for reasoning about that environment of life, about that era , which caused this or that work in the writer. And the yardstick for a writer's talent here will be the extent to which life is widely captured by him, the extent to which the images that he creates are strong and voluminous.
We considered it necessary to state this in order to justify our method of interpreting the phenomena of life itself on the basis of a literary work, without, however, imposing on the author any preconceived ideas and tasks. The reader sees that for us it is precisely those works that are important in which life has affected itself, and not according to a program thought up in advance by the author. About "A Thousand Souls", for example, we did not speak at all, because, in our opinion, the entire social side of this novel is forcibly fitted to a pre-composed idea. Therefore, there is nothing to talk about here, except for the extent to which the author deftly composed his essay. It is impossible to rely on the truth and living reality of the facts stated by the author, because his inner attitude to these facts is neither simple nor true. We do not see such an attitude of the author to the plot in Mr. Turgenev's new story, as in most of his stories. In "On the Eve" we see the irresistible influence of the natural course of social life and thought, to which the very thought and imagination of the author involuntarily submitted.
Setting the main task of literary criticism to be the explanation of those phenomena of reality that gave rise to a well-known work of art, we must note, moreover, that in application to Mr. Turgenev's stories this task also has a special meaning. G. Turgenev can rightly be called the representative and singer of that morality and philosophy that has dominated our educated society in the last twenty years. He quickly divined new needs, new ideas introduced into the public consciousness, and in his works he usually drew (as far as circumstances allowed) attention to the question that was on the queue and was already vaguely beginning to excite society. We hope, on another occasion, to trace the entire literary activity of Mr. Turgenev, and therefore we will not now expand on this. We will only say that to this intuition of the author for the living strings of society, to this ability to immediately respond to every noble thought and honest feeling that is just beginning to penetrate the consciousness of the best people, we attribute a significant share of the success that Mr. Turgenev constantly enjoyed in the Russian public . Of course, literary talent in itself contributed a lot to this success. But our readers know that Mr. Turgenev's talent is not one of those titanic talents which, by the sole force of poetic representation, amaze, captivate you and draw you to sympathy for such a phenomenon or idea with which you are not at all disposed to sympathize, not a stormy, impetuous force, but on the contrary, softness and a kind of poetic moderation are the characteristic features of his talent. Therefore, we believe that he could not arouse the general sympathy of the public if he touched on issues and needs that are completely alien to his readers or not yet aroused in society. Some would notice the charm of poetic descriptions in his stories, the subtlety and depth in the outlines of various persons and positions, but, without any doubt, this would not be enough to make the writer a lasting success and glory. Without a lively attitude to the present, every, even the most likeable and talented narrator, must suffer the fate of Mr. Fet, who was once praised, but now only a dozen amateurs remember a dozen of the best poems. A lively attitude to the present saved Mr. Turgenev and secured his permanent success among the reading public. Some thoughtful critic even once reproached Mr. Turgenev for the fact that "all the fluctuations of social thought" were so strongly reflected in his activities. But despite this, we see here precisely the most vital side of Mr. Turgenev's talent, and with this side we explain why every work of his has hitherto been met with such sympathy, almost with enthusiasm.
So, we can safely say that if Mr. Turgenev has already touched on some question in his story, if he has depicted some new aspect of social relations, this serves as a guarantee that this question is really being raised or will soon be raised. in the consciousness of educated society that this new side of life is beginning to stand out and will soon show itself sharply and brightly before the eyes of everyone. Therefore, every time Mr. Turgenev's story appears, the question becomes curious: what aspects of life are depicted in it, what questions are touched upon?
This question presents itself even now, and in relation to Mr. Turgenev's new story it is more interesting than ever. So far, Mr. Turgenev's path, in accordance with the path of development of our society, has been rather clearly outlined in one direction. He proceeded from the realm of higher ideas and theoretical strivings and aimed to bring these ideas into strivings into the rough and vulgar reality, which deviated far from them. The collections for the struggle and suffering of the hero, who was busying himself with the victory of his principles, and his fall before the overwhelming force of human vulgarity - and usually constituted the interest of Mr. Turgenev's stories. Of course, the very foundations of the struggle, that is, ideas and strivings, changed in each work or, with the passage of time and circumstances, showed themselves more definitely and sharply. Thus, the superfluous person was replaced by Pasynkov, Pasynkov by Rudin, Rudin by Lavretsky. Each of these faces was bolder and fuller than the previous ones, but the essence, the basis of their character and their entire existence, was the same. They were the bringers of new ideas to a certain circle, educators, propagandists - at least for one woman's soul, but propagandists. For this they were greatly praised, and for sure - in their time, apparently, they were very needed, and their work was very difficult, respectable and beneficial. Not without reason did everyone greet them with such love, so sympathize with their spiritual suffering, so pity their fruitless efforts. No wonder no one then thought to notice that all these gentlemen are excellent, noble, intelligent, but, in essence, idle people. Drawing their images in various positions and collisions, Mr. Turgenev himself usually treated them with touching participation, with heartache about their sufferings, and constantly aroused the same feeling in the mass of readers. When one motive for this struggle and suffering began to seem insufficient, when one trait of nobility and loftiness of character seemed to be covered with some vulgarity, Mr. Turgenev was able to find other motives, other traits, and again fell into the heart of the reader, and again aroused and enthusiastic sympathy for their heroes. The item seemed inexhaustible.
But lately, in our society, quite noticeably demands have been revealed that are completely different from those by which Rudin and all his brethren were called to life. In relation to these persons, a fundamental change took place in the concepts of the educated majority. The question was no longer about the modification of this or that motive, this or that beginning of their aspirations, but about the very essence of their activity. During that period of time, while all these enlightened champions of truth and goodness, eloquent sufferers of lofty convictions, have grown up before us, new people have grown up, for whom the love of truth and honesty of aspirations are no longer a wonder. From childhood, inconspicuously and constantly, they were imbued with those concepts and aspirations for which the best people had to fight, doubt and suffer in adulthood (We were once reproached for being addicted to the younger generation and pointed out the vulgarity and emptiness to which it indulges in most of our representatives. But we never thought of defending all young people indiscriminately, and this would not be in accordance with our goal. Vulgarity and emptiness are the property of all times and all ages. But we spoke and are now talking about the chosen people, people the best, and not about the crowd, since Rudin and all the people of his temper did not belong to the crowd, but to the best people of their time. However, we will not be wrong if we say that in the mass of society the level of education in recent times still rose.) Therefore, the very nature of education in today's young society has taken on a different color. Those concepts and aspirations that previously gave the title of an advanced person are now considered the first and necessary accessory of the most ordinary education. From a high school student, from a mediocre cadet, even sometimes from a respectable seminarian, you will now hear the expression of such convictions, for which, in the old days, Belinsky, for example, had to argue and get excited. And a schoolboy or a cadet expresses these concepts - so hard, they got it before with a fight - completely calmly, without any excitement and self-satisfaction, as a thing that cannot be otherwise, and even unthinkable otherwise.
When meeting a person of the so-called progressive direction, now none of the decent people indulge in surprise and delight; that injustice and slavery are disastrous for the state. On the contrary, now, with involuntary, contemptuous amazement, one stops before a man who shows a lack of sympathy for publicity; disinterestedness, emancipation, etc. Now even people who do not like progressive ideas at heart must show that they love them in order to have access to a decent society. It is clear that in this state of affairs, the former sowers of good, people of Rudin's temper, are losing a significant share of their former credit. They are respected like old mentors; but it is rare that, having entered into his mind, he is disposed to listen again to those lessons that were accepted with such greed before, at the age of childhood and initial development. We need something else, we need to go further (Against this thought, the extraordinary success that the publications of the works of some of our writers of the forties meet can testify. A particularly striking example is Belinsky, whose works quickly dispersed, they say, in the amount of 12,000 copies. But, in our opinion, this very fact serves as the best confirmation of our thought. Belinsky was the foremost of the foremost, none of his peers went further than him, and where 12,000 copies of Belinsky were snapped up in a few months, Rudin simply had to do Belinsky's success proves not at all that his ideas are still new to our society and require great efforts to spread, but precisely that they are dear and holy now for the majority and that their preaching no longer requires heroism from new leaders , no special talents.).
“But, they will tell us, after all, society has not reached the extreme point in its development; further mental and moral improvement is possible. Therefore, society needs both leaders, preachers of the truth, and propagandists, in a word, people of the Rudin type. and entered the general consciousness—let's say.But this does not exclude the possibility that new Rudins will appear, preachers of new, higher tendencies, and again they will fight and suffer, and again arouse the sympathy of society.This subject is really inexhaustible in its content. and can constantly bring new laurels to such a likeable writer as Mr. Turgenev.
It would be a pity if such a remark were justified right now. Fortunately, it seems to be refuted by the latest movement in our literature. Reasoning abstractly, one cannot but admit that the idea of perpetual motion and the eternal change of ideas in society - and, consequently, of the constant need for preachers of these ideas - is quite fair. But after all, one must also take into account the fact that societies do not live only to reason and exchange ideas. Ideas and their gradual development have their significance only because they, being born from already existing facts, always precede changes in reality itself. A certain state of affairs creates a need in society, this need is recognized, after the general consciousness of it there must be an actual change in favor of satisfying the need recognized by all. Thus, after a period of awareness of certain ideas and aspirations, a period of their implementation should appear in society; deeds must follow reflections and conversations. The question now is: what did our society do in the last 20-30 years? For now, nothing. It studied, developed, listened to the Rudins, sympathized with their failures in the noble struggle for convictions, prepared for the task, but did nothing ... So much beauty accumulated in my head and heart; so much absurd and dishonorable has been noticed in the existing order of affairs; the mass of people “who are aware of themselves being above the surrounding reality” is growing every year - so that soon, perhaps, everyone will be above reality ... It seems that there is nothing to wish for us to continue forever along this weary path of discord, doubt and abstract sorrows and consolations. It seems clear that what we need now is not people who would "rise us above the surrounding reality" even more, but people who would raise - or we were taught to raise - reality itself to the level of those reasonable requirements that we have already recognized. . In a word, we need people of action, and not abstract, always a little epicurean reasoning.
The consciousness of this, although vaguely, was already expressed in many with the appearance of the "Noble Nest". Mr. Turgenev's talent, together with his faithful tact to reality, this time also carried him triumphantly out of a difficult situation. He knew how to stage Lavretsky in such a way that it is embarrassing to be ironic over him, although he belongs to the same kind of idle types that we look at with a smile. The drama of his situation no longer lies in the struggle with his own impotence, but in the clash with such concepts and morals, with which the struggle should really frighten even an energetic and courageous person. He is married and has deserted his wife; but he fell in love with a pure, bright being, brought up in such concepts, in which the love of a married man is a terrible crime. And yet she loves him too, and his claims can continually and terribly torment her heart and conscience. You will inevitably think bitterly and heavily over such a situation, and we remember how painfully our hearts sank when Lavretsky, saying goodbye to Liza, said to her: "Ah, Liza, Liza! how could we be happy!" - and when she, already a humble nun at heart, answered: "You yourself see that happiness does not depend on us, but on God," and he began: "Yes, because you ...", and did not finish. .. Readers and critics of "The Nest of Nobles", I remember, admired many other things in this novel. But for us, his most essential interest lies in this tragic collision of Lavretsky, whose passivity in this particular case we cannot but excuse. Here Lavretsky, as if betraying one of the generic traits of his type, is hardly even a propagandist. Beginning with the first meeting with Liza, when she was going to mass, throughout the novel he timidly bows before the inviolability of her concepts and never dares to approach her with cold reassurances. But even this, of course, because here propaganda would be the very thing that Lavretsky, like all his brethren, is afraid of. For all that, it seems to us (at least it seemed when reading the novel) that the very position of Lavretsky, the very collision chosen by Mr. Turgenev and so familiar to Russian life, should serve as strong propaganda and lead each reader to a number of thoughts about the significance of a whole huge department concepts that govern our lives. Now, according to various printed and verbal reviews, we know that we were not quite right: the meaning of Lavretsky's position was understood differently or not at all clarified by many readers. But that there was something legitimately tragic in it, and not illusory—this was understood, and this, together with the merits of its execution, attracted the unanimous, enthusiastic participation of the entire Russian reading public to The Nest of Nobles.
After The Nest of Nobles one could fear for the fate of Mr. Turgenev's new work. The path of creating sublime characters, forced to submit to the blows of fate, has become very slippery. In the midst of the enthusiasm for the "Nest of Nobles" voices were heard expressing displeasure at Lavretsky, from whom more was expected. The author himself considered it necessary to introduce Mikhalevich into his story so that he would curse Lavretsky with a bobak. And Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, who appeared at the same time, finally and sharply explained to the entire Russian public that now it’s better for a powerless and weak-willed person not to make people laugh, it’s better to lie on his sofa than to run, fuss, make noise, reason and pour from an empty empty for years and decades. After reading Oblomov, the public understood his kinship with the interesting personalities of "superfluous people" and realized that these people were now really superfluous and that they were exactly as useful as the kindest Ilya Ilyich. "What will Mr. Turgenev create now?" - we thought, and with great curiosity began to read "On the Eve".
The sense of the present moment did not deceive the author this time either. Realizing that the former heroes had already done their job and could not arouse the former sympathy in the best part of our society, he decided to leave them and, catching in a few fragmentary manifestations the breath of the new demands of life, he tried to take the road along which the advanced movement of the present time is being made. ..
In Mr. Turgenev's new story we encounter other situations, other types than we are accustomed to in his works of the previous period. The social need for a cause, a living cause, the beginning of contempt for dead, abstract principles and passive virtues was expressed in the entire structure of the new story. Without a doubt, everyone who will read our article has now read "On the Eve". Therefore, instead of telling the content of the story, we will present only a short sketch of its main characters.
The heroine of the novel is a girl with a serious mindset, with an energetic will, with humane aspirations of the heart. Its development took place in a very peculiar way due to special family circumstances.
Her father and mother were very limited people, but not evil; her mother was even positively distinguished by her kindness and softness of heart. From childhood, Elena was delivered from family despotism, which destroys in the bud so many beautiful natures. She grew up alone, without girlfriends, completely free; no formalism constrained her. Nikolai Artemyich Stakhov, her father, a dull man, but posing as a philosopher of a skeptical tone and keeping away from family life, at first only admired his little Elena, in whom extraordinary abilities were early revealed. Elena, while she was small, also adored her father. But Stakhov's relationship with his wife was not entirely satisfactory: he married Anna Vasilyevna because of her dowry, did not have any feelings for her, treated her almost with disdain and moved away from her in the company of Augustina Khristianovna, who robbed and fooled him. Anna Vasilievna, a sick and sensitive woman, like Marya Dmitrievna of the Noble Nest, meekly endured her position, but could not help complaining about it to everyone in the house, and incidentally even to her daughter. Thus, Elena soon became the confidant of her mother's sorrows and became involuntarily a judge between her and her father. With the impressionability of her nature, this had a great influence on the development of her internal forces. The less she could act in practice on this occasion, the more work seemed to her mind and imagination. Forced from an early age to peer into the mutual relations of people close to her, participating both with her heart and head in explaining the meaning of these relations and pronouncing judgment on them, Elena early accustomed herself to independent reflection, to a conscious look at everything around her. The family relations of the Stakhovs are outlined very briefly by Mr. Turgenev, but in this essay there are deeply correct indications that explain quite a lot the initial development of Elena's character. By nature, she was an impressionable and intelligent child; her position between her mother and father prompted her early serious reflections, early raised her to an independent, to a domineering role. She became on a level with the elders, made them defendants before her. And at the same time, her thoughts were not cold, her whole soul merged with them, because it was about people too close, too dear to her, about relationships with which the most sacred feelings, the most vital interests of the girl were connected. That is why her reflections were directly reflected in her heartfelt disposition: from the adoration of her father, she passed to a passionate attachment to her mother, in whom she began to see a being oppressed, suffering. But in this love for the mother there was nothing hostile to the father, who was neither a villain, nor a positive fool, nor a domestic tyrant. He was only a very ordinary mediocrity, and Elena lost interest in him - instinctively, and then, perhaps, consciously, deciding that there was nothing to love him for. Yes, she soon saw the same mediocrity in her mother, and in her heart, instead of passionate love and respect, there was only a feeling of regret and condescension. G. Turgenev very well outlined her relationship to her mother, saying that she "treated her mother like a sick grandmother." The mother recognized herself as inferior to her daughter; the father, as soon as the daughter began to outgrow him mentally, which was very easy, lost interest in her, decided that she was strange, and retreated from her.
Meanwhile, in her, a compassionate, humane feeling grew and expanded. The pain of someone else's suffering was aroused in her childish heart by the murdered appearance of her mother, of course, even before she began to understand properly what was the matter. This pain made her feel constantly, accompanied her at every new step in her development, imparted a special, thoughtfully serious turn to her thoughts, little by little called out and determined active strivings in her, and directed them all to a passionate, irresistible search for good and happiness for everyone. These searches were still vague, Elena's strength was weak when she found new food for her thoughts and dreams, a new object of her participation and love - in a strange acquaintance with the poor girl Katya. In her tenth year, she made friends with this girl, secretly went to see her in the garden, brought her delicacies, gave her scarves, kopeck pieces (Katya did not take toys), sat with her for whole hours, ate her stale bread with a feeling of joyful humility; listened to her stories, learned her favorite song, listened with secret respect and fear as Katya promised to run away from her evil aunt in order to live in God's will, and she herself dreamed of how she would put on a bag and run away with Katya. Katya soon died, but acquaintance with her could not but leave sharp traces in Elena's character. To her pure, human, compassionate dispositions, it added another side: it inspired in her that contempt, or at least that strict indifference to the unnecessary excesses of a rich life, which always penetrates the soul of a person who is not completely corrupted due to helpless poverty. Soon, Elena's whole soul was on fire with a thirst for active goodness, and this thirst began for the first time to be satisfied with the usual deeds of mercy, which were possible for Elena. "The poor, the hungry, the sick occupied her, disturbed, tormented; she saw them in a dream, asked all her friends about them." Even "all oppressed animals, thin yard dogs, kittens condemned to death, sparrows that fell out of the nest, even insects and reptiles found patronage and protection in Elena: she herself fed them, did not disdain them." Her father called it all vulgar tenderness; but Elena was not sentimental, because sentimentality is precisely characterized by an excess of feelings and words with a complete lack of active love, and Elena's feeling constantly strove to manifest itself in deeds. She did not tolerate empty caresses and tendernesses and in general did not attach any importance to idle words and respected only practically useful activity. She didn’t even like poetry, she didn’t even know any sense in the arts.
N. A. Dobrolyubov
When will the real day come?
("On the Eve", a story by I. S. Turgenev. "Russian Messenger", 1860, No 1--2)
N. A. Dobrolyubov. Russian classics. Selected literary-critical articles. The publication was prepared by Yu. G. Oksman. Series "Literary monuments" M., "Science", 1970
Schlage die Trommel und furchte dich nicht! (*)
HEINE. 1
(* Beat the drum and don't be afraid! (German).-- Ed.}
Aesthetic criticism has now become the property of sensitive young ladies. From conversations with them, ministers of pure art can draw many subtle and true remarks and then write criticism of this kind. “Here is the content of Mr. Turgenev’s new story (the story of the content). Already from this pale sketch it is clear how much life and poetry of the freshest and most fragrant is here. But only reading the story itself can give an idea of that flair for the subtlest poetic shades of life, of sharp mental analysis, about that deep understanding of the invisible currents and currents of social thought, about that friendly and at the same time bold attitude towards reality, which constitute the distinguishing features of Mr. Turgenev's talent.See, for example, how subtly these mental traits are noticed content and then - extract); read this wonderful scene, full of such grace and charm (extract); remember this poetic, lively picture (extract) or this lofty, bold image (extract). Isn't it true that it penetrates into the depths of your soul, makes your heart beat faster, enlivens and adorns your life, elevates before you human dignity and the great, eternal significance of the holy ideas of truth, goodness and beauty! Comme c "est joli, comme c" est delicieux!" (How beautiful, how charming! (French).-- Ed. We are indebted to a small acquaintance with sensitive young ladies by the fact that we do not know how to write such pleasant and harmless critics. Frankly admitting this and refusing the role of "educator of the aesthetic taste of the public", we choose another task, more modest and more commensurate with our forces. We simply want to sum up the data that are scattered in the writer's work and which we accept as a fait accompli, as a vital phenomenon that stands before us. The work is simple, but necessary, because, after many occupations and recreations, rarely will anyone want to peer into all the details of a literary work, to disassemble, check and put in their place all the figures that make up this complex account of one of the sides of our social life. life, and then think about the outcome and what it promises and obliges us to do. And this kind of verification and reflection is very useful in connection with Mr. Turgenev's new story. We know that pure aesthetics will immediately accuse us of striving to impose our opinions on the author and assign tasks to his talent. Therefore, we will make a reservation, even though it is boring. No, we do not impose anything on the author, we say in advance that we do not know for what purpose, as a result of what preliminary considerations, he depicted the story that constitutes the content of the story "On the Eve". It is not so important for us that wanted tell the author how much, what affected them, even if unintentionally, simply as a result of a faithful reproduction of the facts of life. We value every talented work precisely because in it we can study the facts of our native life, which is already so little open to the gaze of a simple observer. There is still no publicity in our life, except for the official one; everywhere we come across not living people, but officials serving in one department or another: in public places - with pen-writers, at balls - with dancers, in clubs - with gamblers, in theaters - with hairdressing patients and etc. Everyone further buries his spiritual life; everyone looks at you like that, as if saying: “After all, I came here to dance or to show my hair; well, be pleased that I am doing my job, and please don’t try to extort my feelings and ideas from me ". And indeed, no one is tormenting anyone, no one is interested in anyone, and the whole society goes apart, annoyed that it should converge on official occasions, like a new opera, a dinner party, or some kind of committee meeting. Where is there to learn and study the life of a person who has not devoted himself exclusively to the observation of social mores? And then what diversity, what even opposition in the various circles and classes of our society! Thoughts that have already become vulgar and backward in one circle are still hotly contested in another; what is considered insufficient and weak by some, by others it seems too sharp and bold, and so on. predominantly her works of art. The writer-artist, not caring about any general conclusions regarding the state of social thought and morality, is always able, however, to capture their most essential features, brightly illuminate and directly place them before the eyes of thinking people. That is why we believe that as soon as talent is recognized in a writer-artist, that is, the ability to feel and depict the vital truth of phenomena, then, by virtue of this very recognition, his works give a legitimate reason for reasoning about that environment of life, about that era , which caused this or that work in the writer. And the yardstick for a writer's talent here will be the extent to which life is widely captured by him, the extent to which the images that he creates are strong and voluminous. We considered it necessary to state this in order to justify our method of interpreting the phenomena of life itself on the basis of a literary work, without, however, imposing on the author any preconceived ideas and tasks. The reader sees that for us it is precisely those works that are important in which life has affected itself, and not according to a program thought up in advance by the author. About "A Thousand Souls", for example, we did not speak at all, because, in our opinion, the entire social side of this novel is forcibly fitted to a pre-composed idea. Therefore, there is nothing to talk about here, except for the extent to which the author deftly composed his essay. It is impossible to rely on the truth and living reality of the facts stated by the author, because his inner attitude to these facts is neither simple nor true. We do not see such an attitude of the author to the plot in Mr. Turgenev's new story, as in most of his stories. In "On the Eve" we see the irresistible influence of the natural course of social life and thought, to which the very thought and imagination of the author involuntarily submitted. Setting the main task of literary criticism to be the explanation of those phenomena of reality that gave rise to a well-known work of art, we must note, moreover, that in application to Mr. Turgenev's stories this task also has a special meaning. G. Turgenev can rightly be called the representative and singer of that morality and philosophy that has dominated our educated society in the last twenty years. He quickly divined new needs, new ideas introduced into the public consciousness, and in his works he usually drew (as far as circumstances allowed) attention to the question that was on the queue and was already vaguely beginning to excite society. We hope, on another occasion, to trace the entire literary activity of Mr. Turgenev, and therefore we will not now expand on this. We will only say that to this intuition of the author for the living strings of society, to this ability to immediately respond to every noble thought and honest feeling that is just beginning to penetrate the consciousness of the best people, we attribute a significant share of the success that Mr. Turgenev constantly enjoyed in the Russian public . Of course, and literary talent in itself contributed much to this success. But our readers know that Mr. Turgenev's talent is not one of those titanic talents which, by the sole force of a poetic presentation, amaze, captivate you and draw you to sympathy for such a phenomenon or idea with which you are not at all disposed to sympathize, not stormy, impetuous strength, but on the contrary - softness and some kind of poetic moderation are the characteristic features of his talent. Therefore, we believe that he could not arouse the general sympathy of the public if he touched on issues and needs that are completely alien to his readers or not yet aroused in society. Some would notice the charm of poetic descriptions in his stories, the subtlety and depth in the outlines of various persons and positions, but, without any doubt, this would not be enough to make the writer a lasting success and glory. Without a lively attitude to the present, every, even the most likeable and talented narrator, must suffer the fate of Mr. Fet, who was once praised, but now only a dozen amateurs remember a dozen of the best poems. A lively attitude to the present saved Mr. Turgenev and secured his permanent success among the reading public. Some thoughtful critic even once reproached Mr. Turgenev for the fact that "all the fluctuations of social thought" were so strongly reflected in his activities. But despite this, we see here precisely the most vital side of Mr. Turgenev's talent, and with this side we explain why every work of his has hitherto been met with such sympathy, almost with enthusiasm. So, we can safely say that if Mr. Turgenev has already touched on some question in his story, if he has depicted some new aspect of social relations, this serves as a guarantee that this question is really being raised or will soon be raised. in the consciousness of educated society that this new side of life is beginning to stand out and will soon show itself sharply and brightly before the eyes of everyone. Therefore, every time Mr. Turgenev's story appears, the question becomes curious: what aspects of life are depicted in it, what questions are touched upon? This question is presented even now, but in relation to Mr. Turgenev's new story it is more interesting than ever. So far, Mr. Turgenev's path, in accordance with the path of development of our society, has been rather clearly outlined in one direction. He proceeded from the realm of higher ideas and theoretical strivings and aimed to bring these ideas into strivings into the rough and vulgar reality, which deviated far from them. The collections for the struggle and suffering of the hero, who was busying himself with the victory of his principles, and his fall before the overwhelming force of human vulgarity - and usually constituted the interest of Mr. Turgenev's stories. Of course, the very foundations of the struggle, that is, ideas and strivings, changed in each work or, with the passage of time and circumstances, showed themselves more definitely and sharply. Thus, the superfluous person was replaced by Pasynkov, Pasynkov by Rudin, Rudin by Lavretsky. Each of these faces was bolder and fuller than the previous ones, but the essence, the basis of their character and their entire existence, was the same. They were the bringers of new ideas to a certain circle, educators, propagandists - at least for one woman's soul, but propagandists. For this they were greatly praised, and for sure - in their time, apparently, they were very needed, and their work was very difficult, respectable and beneficial. Not without reason did everyone greet them with such love, so sympathize with their spiritual suffering, so pity their fruitless efforts. No wonder no one then thought to notice that all these gentlemen are excellent, noble, intelligent, but, in essence, idle people. Drawing their images in various positions and collisions, Mr. Turgenev himself usually treated them with touching participation, with heartache about their sufferings, and constantly aroused the same feeling in the mass of readers. When one motive for this struggle and suffering began to seem insufficient, when one trait of nobility and loftiness of character seemed to be covered with some vulgarity, Mr. Turgenev was able to find other motives, other traits, and again fell into the heart of the reader, and again aroused and enthusiastic sympathy for their heroes. The item seemed inexhaustible. But lately, in our society, quite noticeably demands have been revealed that are completely different from those by which Rudin and all his brethren were called to life. In relation to these persons, a fundamental change took place in the concepts of the educated majority. The question was no longer about the modification of this or that motive, this or that beginning of their aspirations, but about the very essence of their activity. During that period of time, while all these enlightened champions of truth and goodness, eloquent sufferers of lofty convictions, have grown up before us, new people have grown up, for whom the love of truth and honesty of aspirations are no longer a wonder. From childhood, inconspicuously and constantly, they were imbued with those concepts and aspirations for which the best people had to fight, doubt and suffer in adulthood (We were once reproached for being addicted to the younger generation and pointed out the vulgarity and emptiness to which it indulges in most of our representatives. But we never thought of defending all young people indiscriminately, and this would not be in accordance with our goal. Vulgarity and emptiness are the property of all times and all ages. But we spoke and are now talking about the chosen people, people the best, and not about the crowd, since Rudin and all the people of his temper did not belong to the crowd, but to the best people of their time. However, we will not be wrong if we say that in the mass of society the level of education in recent times still rose.) Therefore, the very nature of education in today's young society has taken on a different color. Those concepts and aspirations that previously gave the title of an advanced person are now considered the first and necessary accessory of the most ordinary education. From a high school student, from a mediocre cadet, even sometimes from a respectable seminarian, you will now hear the expression of such convictions, for which, in the old days, Belinsky, for example, had to argue and get excited. And a schoolboy or a cadet expresses these concepts - so hard, they got it before with a fight - completely calmly, without any excitement and self-satisfaction, as a thing that cannot be otherwise, and even unthinkable otherwise. When meeting a person of the so-called progressive direction, now none of the decent people indulge in surprise and delight; that injustice and slavery are disastrous for the state. On the contrary, now, with involuntary, contemptuous amazement, one stops before a man who shows a lack of sympathy for publicity; disinterestedness, emancipation, etc. Now even people who do not like progressive ideas at heart must show that they love them in order to have access to a decent society. It is clear that in this state of affairs the former sowers of good, people Rudinsky temper, lose a significant share of their previous credit. They are respected like old mentors; but it is rare that, having entered into his mind, he is disposed to listen again to those lessons that were accepted with such greed before, at the age of childhood and initial development. We need something else, we need to go further (Against this thought, the extraordinary success that the publications of the works of some of our writers of the forties meet can testify. A particularly striking example is Belinsky, whose works quickly dispersed, they say, in the amount of 12,000 copies. But, in our opinion, this very fact serves as the best confirmation of our thought. Belinsky was the foremost of the foremost, none of his peers went further than him, and where 12,000 copies of Belinsky were snapped up in a few months, Rudin simply had to do Belinsky's success proves not at all that his ideas are still new to our society and require great efforts to spread, but precisely that they are dear and holy now for the majority and that their preaching no longer requires heroism from new leaders , no special talents.). “But, they will tell us, after all, society has not reached the extreme point in its development; further mental and moral improvement is possible. Therefore, society needs both leaders, preachers of the truth, and propagandists, in a word, people of the Rudin type. and entered the general consciousness—let's say.But this does not exclude the possibility that new Rudins will appear, preachers of new, higher tendencies, and again they will fight and suffer, and again arouse the sympathy of society.This subject is really inexhaustible in its content. and can constantly bring new laurels to such a likeable writer as Mr. Turgenev. It would be a pity if such a remark were justified right now. Fortunately, it seems to be refuted by the latest movement in our literature. Reasoning abstractly, one cannot but admit that the idea of perpetual motion and the eternal change of ideas in society - and, consequently, of the constant need for preachers of these ideas - is quite fair. But after all, one must also take into account the fact that societies do not live only to reason and exchange ideas. Ideas and their gradual development have their significance only because they, being born from already existing facts, always precede changes in reality itself. A certain state of affairs creates a need in society, this need is recognized, after the general consciousness of it there must be an actual change in favor of satisfying the need recognized by all. So after a period consciousness well-known ideas and aspirations should appear in society during the period of their implementation; deeds must follow reflections and conversations. The question now is: what did our society do in the last 20-30 years? For now, nothing. It studied, developed, listened to the Rudins, sympathized with their failures in the noble struggle for convictions, prepared for the task, but did nothing ... So much beauty accumulated in my head and heart; so much absurd and dishonorable has been noticed in the existing order of affairs; the mass of people “who are aware of themselves being above the surrounding reality” is growing every year - so that soon, perhaps, everyone will be above reality ... It seems that there is nothing to wish for us to continue forever along this weary path of discord, doubt and abstract sorrows and consolations. It seems clear that what we need now is not people who would "rise us above the surrounding reality" even more, but people who would raise - or we were taught to raise - reality itself to the level of those reasonable requirements that we have already recognized. . In a word, we need people of action, and not abstract, always a little epicurean reasoning. The consciousness of this, although vaguely, was already expressed in many with the appearance of the "Noble Nest". Mr. Turgenev's talent, together with his faithful tact to reality, this time also carried him triumphantly out of a difficult situation. He knew how to stage Lavretsky in such a way that it is embarrassing to be ironic over him, although he belongs to the same kind of idle types that we look at with a smile. The drama of his situation no longer lies in the struggle with his own impotence, but in the clash with such concepts and morals, with which the struggle should really frighten even an energetic and courageous person. He is married and has deserted his wife; but he fell in love with a pure, bright being, brought up in such concepts, in which the love of a married man is a terrible crime. And yet she loves him too, and his claims can continually and terribly torment her heart and conscience. You will inevitably think bitterly and heavily over such a situation, and we remember how painfully our hearts sank when Lavretsky, saying goodbye to Liza, said to her: "Ah, Liza, Liza! how could we be happy!" - and when she, already a humble nun at heart, answered: "You yourself see that happiness does not depend on us, but on God," and he began: "Yes, because you ...", and did not finish. .. Readers and critics of "The Nest of Nobles", I remember, admired many other things in this novel. But for us, his most essential interest lies in this tragic collision of Lavretsky, whose passivity in this particular case we cannot but excuse. Here Lavretsky, as if betraying one of the generic traits of his type, is hardly even a propagandist. Beginning with the first meeting with Liza, when she was going to mass, throughout the novel he timidly bows before the inviolability of her concepts and never dares to approach her with cold reassurances. But even this, of course, because here propaganda would be the very thing that Lavretsky, like all his brethren, is afraid of. For all that, it seems to us (at least it seemed when reading the novel) that the very position of Lavretsky, the very collision chosen by Mr. Turgenev and so familiar to Russian life, should serve as strong propaganda and lead each reader to a number of thoughts about the significance of a whole huge department concepts that govern our lives. Now, according to various printed and verbal reviews, we know that we were not quite right: the meaning of Lavretsky's position was understood differently or not at all clarified by many readers. But that there was something legitimately tragic in it, and not illusory—this was understood, and this, together with the merits of its execution, attracted the unanimous, enthusiastic participation of the entire Russian reading public to The Nest of Nobles. After The Nest of Nobles one could fear for the fate of Mr. Turgenev's new work. The path of creating sublime characters, forced to submit to the blows of fate, has become very slippery. In the midst of the enthusiasm for the "Nest of Nobles" voices were heard expressing displeasure at Lavretsky, from whom more was expected. The author himself considered it necessary to introduce Mikhalevich into his story so that he would curse Lavretsky with a bobak. And Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, who appeared at the same time, finally and sharply explained to the entire Russian public that now it’s better for a powerless and weak-willed person not to make people laugh, it’s better to lie on his sofa than to run, fuss, make noise, reason and pour from an empty empty for years and decades. After reading Oblomov, the public understood his kinship with the interesting personalities of "superfluous people" and realized that these people were now really superfluous and that they were exactly as useful as the kindest Ilya Ilyich. "What will Mr. Turgenev create now?" - we thought, and with great curiosity began to read "On the Eve". The sense of the present moment did not deceive the author this time either. Realizing that the former heroes had already done their job and could not arouse the former sympathy in the best part of our society, he decided to leave them and, catching in a few fragmentary manifestations the breath of the new demands of life, he tried to take the road along which the advanced movement of the present time is being made. .. In the new story of Mr. Turgenev, we meet other situations, other types than we are used to in his works of the previous period. The social need for a cause, a living cause, the beginning of contempt for dead, abstract principles and passive virtues was expressed in the entire structure of the new story. Without a doubt, everyone who will read our article has now read "On the Eve". Therefore, instead of telling the content of the story, we will present only a short sketch of its main characters. The heroine of the novel is a girl with a serious mindset, with an energetic will, with humane aspirations of the heart. Its development took place in a very peculiar way due to special family circumstances. Her father and mother were very limited people, but not evil; her mother was even positively distinguished by her kindness and softness of heart. From childhood, Elena was delivered from family despotism, which destroys in the bud so many beautiful natures. She grew up alone, without girlfriends, completely free; no formalism constrained her. Nikolai Artemyich Stakhov, her father, a dull man, but posing as a philosopher of a skeptical tone and keeping away from family life, at first only admired his little Elena, in whom extraordinary abilities were early revealed. Elena, while she was small, also adored her father. But Stakhov's relationship with his wife was not entirely satisfactory: he married Anna Vasilyevna because of her dowry, did not have any feelings for her, treated her almost with disdain and moved away from her in the company of Augustina Khristianovna, who robbed and fooled him. Anna Vasilievna, a sick and sensitive woman, like Marya Dmitrievna of the Noble Nest, meekly endured her position, but could not help complaining about it to everyone in the house, and incidentally even to her daughter. Thus, Elena soon became the confidant of her mother's sorrows and became involuntarily a judge between her and her father. With the impressionability of her nature, this had a great influence on the development of her internal forces. The less she could act in practice on this occasion, the more work seemed to her mind and imagination. Forced from an early age to peer into the mutual relations of people close to her, participating both with her heart and head in explaining the meaning of these relations and pronouncing judgment on them, Elena early accustomed herself to independent reflection, to a conscious look at everything around her. The family relations of the Stakhovs are outlined very briefly by Mr. Turgenev, but in this essay there are deeply correct indications that explain quite a lot the initial development of Elena's character. By nature, she was an impressionable and intelligent child; her position between her mother and father prompted her early serious reflections, early raised her to an independent, to a domineering role. She became on a level with the elders, made them defendants before her. And at the same time, her thoughts were not cold, her whole soul merged with them, because it was about people too close, too dear to her, about relationships with which the most sacred feelings, the most vital interests of the girl were connected. That is why her reflections were directly reflected in her heartfelt disposition: from the adoration of her father, she passed to a passionate attachment to her mother, in whom she began to see a being oppressed, suffering. But in this love for the mother there was nothing hostile to the father, who was neither a villain, nor a positive fool, nor a domestic tyrant. He was only a very ordinary mediocrity, and Elena lost interest in him - instinctively, and then, perhaps, consciously, deciding that there was nothing to love him for. Yes, she soon saw the same mediocrity in her mother, and in her heart, instead of passionate love and respect, there was only a feeling of regret and condescension. G. Turgenev very well outlined her relationship to her mother, saying that she "treated her mother like a sick grandmother." The mother recognized herself as inferior to her daughter; the father, as soon as the daughter began to outgrow him mentally, which was very easy, lost interest in her, decided that she was strange, and retreated from her. Meanwhile, in her, a compassionate, humane feeling grew and expanded. The pain of someone else's suffering was aroused in her childish heart by the murdered appearance of her mother, of course, even before she began to understand properly what was the matter. This pain made her feel constantly, accompanied her at every new step in her development, imparted a special, thoughtfully serious turn to her thoughts, little by little called out and determined active strivings in her, and directed them all to a passionate, irresistible search for good and happiness for everyone. These searches were still vague, Elena's strength was weak when she found new food for her thoughts and dreams, a new object of her participation and love - in a strange acquaintance with the poor girl Katya. In her tenth year, she made friends with this girl, secretly went to see her in the garden, brought her delicacies, gave her scarves, kopeck pieces (Katya did not take toys), sat with her for whole hours, ate her stale bread with a feeling of joyful humility; listened to her stories, learned her favorite song, listened with secret respect and fear as Katya promised to run away from her evil aunt in order to live for all God's sakeOle, and she herself dreamed of how she would put on a bag and run away with Katya. Katya soon died, but acquaintance with her could not but leave sharp traces in Elena's character. To her pure, human, compassionate dispositions, it added another side: it inspired in her that contempt, or at least that strict indifference to the unnecessary excesses of a rich life, which always penetrates the soul of a person who is not completely corrupted due to helpless poverty. Soon, Elena's whole soul was on fire with a thirst for active goodness, and this thirst began for the first time to be satisfied with the usual deeds of mercy, which were possible for Elena. "The poor, the hungry, the sick occupied her, disturbed, tormented; she saw them in a dream, asked all her friends about them." Even "all oppressed animals, thin yard dogs, kittens condemned to death, sparrows that fell out of the nest, even insects and reptiles found patronage and protection in Elena: she herself fed them, did not disdain them." Her father called it all vulgar tenderness; but Elena was not sentimental, because sentimentality is precisely characterized by an excess of feelings and words with a complete lack of active love, and Helena's feelings constantly strove to manifest themselves in practice. She did not tolerate empty caresses and tendernesses and in general did not attach any importance to idle words and respected only practically useful activity. She didn’t even like poetry, she didn’t even know any sense in the arts. But the active strivings of the soul ripen and grow stronger only through spacious and free activity. One must try one's strength several times, experience failures and conflicts, find out what different efforts are worth and how different obstacles are overcome - in order to acquire the courage and determination necessary for an active struggle, in order to know the measure of one's strength and be able to find for them corresponding work, Elena, with all the freedom of her development, could not find enough means to actively exercise her strength and satisfy her aspirations. Nobody bothered her to do what she wants; but there was nothing to be done. It was not hampered by the pedantry of systematic study, and therefore it had time to develop itself without having taken into itself many prejudices that are inseparable from systems, courses, and, in general, from the routine of education. She read a lot and with participation; but one reading could not satisfy her; it only had the effect that the rational side developed in Elena more strongly than others, and mental exactingness began to overpower even the living aspirations of the heart. Giving alms, caring for puppies and kittens, protecting a fly from a spider - also could not satisfy her: when she became bigger and smarter, she could not help but see the poverty of this activity; and besides, these occupations demanded very little effort from her and could not fill her existence. She needed something more, something higher; but what - she did not know, and if she knew, she did not know how to get down to business. Because of this, she was constantly in some kind of agitation, she kept waiting and looking for something; from this her appearance took on such a special character. "In her whole being, in the expression of her face, attentive and a little timid, in a clear but changeable look, smiling as if tensenNoah, in voice quiet and uneven there was something nervous, electrical, something impetuous and hasty "... It is clear that she is still in vague doubts about herself, she has not yet defined her role. She has understood what she does not need, and looks proudly and independently at the ordinary surroundings of her life; but what she needs, and most importantly, what to do in order to achieve what she needs, she still does not know, and therefore her whole being is tense, uneven, impetuous. She is still waiting, she is always living on the eve of something... She is ready for the most lively, energetic activity, but she does not dare to start the work on her own, alone. This timidity, this practical passivity of the heroine, with the wealth of internal forces and with a languishing thirst for activity, involuntarily strikes us in Elena's very face, makes us see something unfinished. But in this unfinished personality, in the lack of a practical role, we see the living connection of Mr. Turgenev's heroine with our entire educated society. According to the way Elena’s character is conceived, at its core she is an exceptional phenomenon, and if in fact she were everywhere the expression of her views and aspirations, she would turn out to be alien to Russian society and would not have - she would have such a meaning for us as now . She would be a fictional person, a plant unsuccessfully transplanted into our soil from somewhere else. But a true instinct for reality did not allow Mr. Turgenev to give his heroine a complete correspondence of practical activity with its theoretical concepts and inner impulses of the soul. Our social life does not yet give the writer of materials for this. In our entire society, there is now a just awakened desire to get down to the real thing, a consciousness of the vulgarity of various beautiful toys, sublime reasoning and motionless forms with which we have been amusing ourselves and fooling ourselves for so long. But we still haven’t left the sphere in which we could sleep so peacefully, and we don’t know well where the way out is; and if anyone finds out, he is still afraid to open it. This difficult, agonizing transitional state of society necessarily puts its stamp on the work of art that has emerged from its environment. In a society there may be individual strong natures, individuals may achieve a high development of morality; such personalities appear in literary works as well. But all this remains only in the outline of the nature of the face, and is not transferred to life; supposed to be possible, but actually not done. In Olga "Oblomova" - we saw an ideal woman, far removed in her development from the rest of society; but where is its practical activity? She is capable, it seems, of creating a new life, and yet she lives in the same vulgarity as all her friends, because she has nowhere to escape from this vulgarity. She likes Stolz as an energetic, active person; meanwhile, he, with all the skill of the author of "Oblomov" in depicting characters, appears before us only with his abilities and does not allow us to see how he uses them; he has no ground under his feet and floats before us as if in some kind of fog. Now in Mr. Turgenev's Elena we see a new attempt to create an energetic, active character, and we cannot say that the author's depiction of the character itself failed. If it was rare for anyone to meet women like Elena, then, of course, many had to notice in the most ordinary women the germs of one or another essential trait of her character, the possibility of developing many of her aspirations. As an ideal person made up of the best elements that develop in our society, Elena is understandable and close to us. Her very aspirations are very clearly defined for us; Elena seems to be the answer to the questions and doubts of Olga, who, having lived with Stolz, languishes and yearns and cannot give herself an account of what. The image of Elena explains the reason for this longing, which necessarily strikes every decent Russian person, no matter how good his own circumstances are. Elena longs for active good, she is looking for opportunities to arrange happiness around herself, because she does not understand the possibility of not only happiness, but even her own peace, if she is surrounded by grief, misfortune, poverty and humiliation of her neighbors. But what kind of activity, consistent with such internal requirements, could Mr. Turgenev give to his heroine? It is difficult to answer this even in an abstract way; and artistically creating this activity is probably also impossible for a Russian writer of the present time. There is nowhere to get activities, and involuntarily the author forced his heroine to cheaply show her high aspirations in giving alms and in saving abandoned kittens. For activities that require more effort and struggle, she does not know how and is afraid to take up. She sees in everything around her that one crushes the other, and therefore, precisely as a result of her humane, cordial development, she tries to keep aloof from everything, so as not to somehow begin to crush others. In the house, her influence is not noticeable in anything: her father and mother are like strangers to her; they are afraid of her authority, but she will never turn to them with advice, instructions or demands. For her, a companion Zoya lives in the house, a young good-natured German woman; Elena avoids her, hardly speaks to her, and their relationship is very cold. Shubin, a young artist, whom we will now talk about, lives here. Elena destroys him with her severe sentences, but she does not even think of trying to gain any influence over him that would be very useful to him. In the whole story there is not a single case where the thirst for active good would make Elena intervene in the affairs of her environment and show her influence in some way. We do not think that this depends on the author's accidental error; no, in our society until very recently, and not among women, but among men, a special type of people rose and shone, proud of their removal from their environment. “Here it is impossible to keep oneself clean,” they said, “and besides, this whole environment is so shallow and gone that it is better to move away from it.” And they certainly left without making a single energetic attempt to correct this vulgar environment, and their removal was considered the only honest way out of their situation, and was glorified as a feat. Naturally, with such examples and concepts in mind, the author could not better illuminate Elena's home life than by placing her completely apart from this life. However, as we said, Elena’s impotence is given a special motive in the story, arising from her feminine, humane feelings: she is afraid of any clashes - not due to lack of courage, but out of fear of offending and harming someone. Having never experienced a full, active life, she still imagines that her ideals can be achieved without struggle, without harming anyone. After one incident (when Insarov heroically threw a drunken German into the water), she wrote in her diary: “Yes, you can’t joke with him, and he knows how to intercede. But why this malice, these trembling lips, this poison in the eyes? Or "Maybe it's impossible otherwise? You can't be a man, a fighter, and remain meek and gentle?" This simple thought came into her head only now, and even then in the form of a question, which she still does not resolve. In this uncertainty, in this inaction, with the incessant agonizing expectation of something, Elena lives up to the twentieth year of her life. At times it is very difficult for her; she realizes that her strength is wasted, that her life is empty; she says to herself: "If only I could become a maid somewhere, really; it would be easier for me." This heavy disposition is increased in her by the fact that she does not find a response to her feelings in anyone, she does not see support for herself in anyone. "Sometimes it seems to her that she wants something that no one wants, that no one thinks about in the whole of Russia" ... She becomes frightened, and the need for sympathy develops stronger, and she tensely and anxiously waits for another soul, which would she knew how to understand her, to respond to her holy feelings, to help her, to teach her what to do. There was a desire in her to give herself to someone, to merge her being with someone, and even this independence with which she stood so alone in the circle of people close to her became unpleasant to her. “From the age of sixteen, she lived her own life, but a lonely life. Her soul flared up and went out lonely, she fought like a bird in a cage, but there was no cage; no one constrained her; no one held her back, but she was torn and languished. sometimes she did not understand herself, she was even afraid of herself. Everything that surrounded her seemed to her either senseless or incomprehensible. "How can one live without love, and there is no one to love," she thought, and she became terrified of these thoughts, from these sensations. "In such a mood of her heart, in the summer, at the dacha in Kuntsovo, she finds the action of the story. In a short period of time, three people appear before her, one of whom attracts her whole soul to him. There is, however, and the fourth, episodically introduced, but also not superfluous gentleman, whom we will also consider. Three of these gentlemen are Russians, the fourth is Bulgarians, and Elena found her ideal in him. Let's look at all these gentlemen. One of the young people, passionately in love with Elena in his own way - the artist Pavel Yakovlich Shubin, a pretty and graceful young man of about 25, good-natured and witty, cheerful and passionate, carefree and talented. He is the second cousin of Anna Vasilievna, Elena's mother, and therefore is very close to the young girl and hopes to earn her serious affection. But she constantly looks down on him and considers him an intelligent but spoiled child who should not be taken seriously. However, Shubin says to his friend: "There was a time, she liked me," and indeed, he has many conditions for being liked; no wonder that Elena for a moment attached more importance to his good sides than to his shortcomings. But soon she saw artnness of this nature, I saw that everything here depends on the minute, nothing is permanent and reliable, the whole organism is made up of contradictions: laziness drowns out abilities, and then wasted time causes fruitless repentance, raises bile, arouses contempt for oneself, which in turn serves as a consolation in failures and makes one proud and admire oneself. Elena understood all this instinctively, without the heavy torments of bewilderment, and therefore her decision regarding Shubin was completely calm and without malice. "You imagine that everything in me is feigned; you do not believe my repentance, you do not believe that I can sincerely cry!" - once Shubin says to her in a desperate impulse. And she doesn’t answer: “I don’t believe it,” but simply says: “No, Pavel Yakovlich, I believe in your repentance, and I believe in your tears, but it seems to me that your very repentance amuses you, and tears too.” Shubin trembled at this simple sentence, which really should have sunk deep into his heart. He himself never imagined that his impulses, contradictions, sufferings, throwing from side to side could be understood and explained so simply and correctly. With this explanation, he even ceases to be an "interesting person." And indeed, as soon as Elena formed an opinion about him, he no longer interests her. She doesn't care whether he's here or not, remembers her or forgot, loves her or hates her; she has nothing in common with him, although she is not averse to sincerely praising him if he does something worthy of his talent ... Another begins to occupy her thoughts. This one is completely different; he is clumsy, old-fashioned, his face is ugly and even somewhat funny, but expresses the habit of thinking and kindness. Moreover, according to the author, some "an imprint of decency was noticed in all his clumsy being. "This is Andrei Petrovich Bersenev, a close friend of Shubin. He is a philosopher, scientist, reads the history of the Hohenstaufen and other German books and is full of modesty and selflessness. To Shubin's exclamations:" We need happiness, happiness! We will win happiness for ourselves!" - he incredulously objects: "As if there is nothing higher than happiness?" - and then such a conversation takes place between them: And for example? - asked Shubin and stopped. - Yes, for example, you and I "we are young, as you say, we are good people, suppose each of us wants happiness for himself. But is this the word "happiness" that would unite, inflame us both, make us shake hands with each other? Isn't it selfish, I want to say, isn't this a separating word? - Do you know such words that unite? - Yes; and there are quite a few of them; and you know them. - Well, what are these words? - Yes, at least art, since you are an artist, motherland, science, freedom, justice." "And love?" Shubin asked. "And love is a connecting word; but not the love that you now crave: not love-pleasure, love "Sacrifice." Shubin frowned. "That's good for the Germans; I want to love for myself; I want to be number one." "Number one," repeated Bersenev. . “If everyone does as you advise,” Shubin said with a plaintive grimace, “no one on earth will eat pineapples; everyone else will provide them. - So, pineapples are not needed; but don’t be afraid: there will always be lovers even to take bread from someone else’s mouth. From this conversation it is clear what noble principles Bersenev has and how his soul is capable of what is called self-denial. He expresses a sincere readiness to sacrifice his happiness for one of those words which he calls "connecting". By this he should attract the sympathy of a girl like Elena. But here one can also see why he cannot take possession of her whole soul, all the fullness of her life. This is one of the heroes of the passive virtues, a man who knows how to endure a lot, to sacrifice a lot, to show noble behavior in general, when the case leads to it; but he will not be able and will not dare to define himself for broad and bold activity, for free-style wrestling, for an independent role in some business. He himself wants to be number two, because he sees in this the purpose of all living things; and indeed, his role in the story is partly reminiscent of Bizmenkov in "The Superfluous Man" and even more of Krupitsyn in "Two Friends". He, in love with Elena, becomes an intermediary between her and Insarov, whom she has fallen in love with, generously helps them, takes care of Insarov during his illness, renounces his happiness in favor of a friend, although not without embarrassment of heart, and even not without grumbling. His heart is kind and loving, but from everything it is clear that he will always do good, not so much according to the inclination of his heart, but because necessary to do good. He finds that he must sacrifice his happiness for the homeland, science, etc., and by this he condemns himself to be the eternal slave and martyr of the idea. He separates his happiness, for example, from his homeland; he, the poor man, does not know how to rise to the point of understanding the good of the motherland not separately from his own happiness and not understanding happiness for himself otherwise than in the prosperity of the motherland. On the contrary, he seems to be afraid that his personal happiness will interfere with the good of the motherland, the triumph of justice, the success of science, etc. That is why he is afraid to wish happiness for himself and, in the nobility of his principles, decides to sacrifice it for the ideas he has designated, considering this, Of course, a big favor on their part. It is clear that such a person is only enough for passive nobility. But it is not for him to merge his soul with some great deed, it is not for him to forget the whole world for his beloved thought, it is not for him to be inflamed by it and fight for it, as for his joy, his life, for his happiness ... He does that; what duty commands him, strives for what he recognizes as just by principle; but his actions are sluggish, cold, uncertain, because he constantly doubts his own strength. He did an excellent job at the university, loves science, studies constantly and wants to be a professor: it seems, what could be easier? But when Elena asks him about the professorship, he considers it necessary to make a reservation with commendable modesty: “Of course, I know very well All, what do I lack in order to be worthy of such a high ... I want to say that I am too little prepared; but I hope to get permission to go abroad" ... Just like the introduction to an academic speech: "I hope, mm. that you will graciously excuse the dryness and pallor of my exposition," etc. ... Meanwhile, the professorship, about which Bersenev speaks so, is his cherished dream! To Elena's question, will he be completely satisfied with his position if he receives a chair, - he answers: “Quite, Elena Nikolaevna, quite. What better calling could there be? Think about following in the footsteps of Timofei Nikolayevich... 3 The mere thought of such an activity fills me with joy and embarrassment... yes, embarrassment that... which comes from the consciousness of my small forces. "The same consciousness of his small forces makes him stubbornly not believing that Elena fell in love with him, and then lamenting that she had become indifferent to him. This same consciousness is also visible when he recommends his friend Insarov, among other things, by the fact that he does not borrow money. even his reasoning about nature. He says that nature arouses in him some kind of anxiety, anxiety, even sadness, and asks Shubin: "What does this mean? Are we more conscious in front of her, in front of her face, of all our incompleteness, our obscurity, or, moreover, of the satisfaction with which she is content, while she does not have another, that is, I want to say - what we need? "In this empty-romantic kind, most of Bersenev's reasoning. Meanwhile, in one place of the story it is mentioned that he talked about Feuerbach: it would be interesting to hear what he says about Feuerbach! .. So, Bersenev is a very good Russian a gentleman, brought up in the principles of duty, and then embarking on learning and philosophy. He is much more efficient and reliable than Shubin, and if he is led along some path, he will go willingly and directly. But he himself cannot lead not only others, but even and himself: he has no initiative in nature, and he did not have time to acquire it either in his upbringing or in later life. Elena at first felt sympathy for him because he was kind and talked about business. She was even ashamed of her ignorance, on the occasion that he keeps bringing her books, which she cannot read. But she cannot become completely attached to him, give him her soul, her fate: even before she saw Insarov, she instinctively realized that Bersenev was not what she needed. And indeed, it can be asserted with certainty that Bersenev would have chickened out if Elena had taken it into her head to impose herself on his neck, and would certainly have run away under various, very plausible pretexts. However, in the wilderness in which Elena lived, she was carried away for a moment by Bersenev and was already asking herself: was he not the one whom her soul had been waiting for so long and so eagerly, who was supposed to lead her out of all perplexities and show her the path of activity? But Bersenev himself brought Insarov to her, and the charm disappeared... Strictly speaking, there is nothing extraordinary in Insarov. Bersenev and Shubin, and Elena herself, and, finally, even the author of the story characterize him with increasingly negative qualities. He never lies, does not change his word, does not borrow money, does not like to talk about his exploits, does not postpone the execution of the decision made, his word does not disagree with the deed, etc. In a word, he does not have those features for which he must every person who has a claim to consider himself decent reproaches himself bitterly. But, in addition, he is a Bulgarian, who has in his soul a passionate desire to liberate his homeland, and he gives himself up to this thought, openly and confidently, it is the ultimate goal of his life. He does not think of putting his personal good in opposition to this end; such a thought, so natural in the Russian learned nobleman Bersenev, cannot even enter the mind of a simple Bulgarian. On the contrary, he is busy with the freedom of his homeland because he sees in this his personal peace, the happiness of his whole life; he would leave his enslaved homeland in peace if he could only find satisfaction for himself in something else. But he cannot understand himself apart from his homeland. “How can one be contented and happy when one’s countrymen are suffering?” he thinks. “How can a person calm down while his homeland is enslaved and oppressed? And what occupation can be pleasant for him if it does not lead to relief the fate of the poor countrymen? Thus, he does his intimate work quite calmly, without exaggeration and fanfare, as simply as he eats and drinks. In the meantime, he still has little work to do to directly carry out his idea; but what to do? Now he has to eat badly and little, and sometimes he even goes hungry; but still food, though meager, is a necessary condition for its existence. So is the liberation of the motherland: he studies at Moscow University in order to fully educate himself and get closer to the Russians, and during the course of the story he is content for the time being with translating Bulgarian songs into Russian, compiling Bulgarian grammar for Russians and Russian for Bulgarians, corresponding with his fellow countrymen and is going to go home - to prepare an uprising, at the first outbreak of the Eastern war (the story takes place in 1853). Of course, this is meager food for Insarov's active patriotism; but he does not yet consider his sojourn in Moscow to be real life, he does not consider his feeble activity to be satisfactory even for his personal feelings. He also lives the day before the great day of freedom, on which his being will be illumined with the consciousness of happiness, life will be filled and will already be real life. He is waiting for this day like a holiday, and that is why it does not occur to him to doubt himself and coldly calculate and weigh how much he can do and what a great man he will have time to catch up with. Whether he will be Timofey Nikolaitch or Ivan Ivanitch, he absolutely does not care about that; whether he will have to be number one or number two, he does not even think about it. He will do what his nature leads him to do; if his nature is such that there are no others better, he will become the first number, will go at the head; if there are people stronger and bolder than him, he will follow them, and in both cases he will remain unchanged and true to himself. Where to stand and what to reach - this will be determined by the circumstances: but he wants to go, he cannot , not because he was afraid to violate some duty, but because he would die if he could not move from his place. This is a huge difference between him and Bersenev. Bersenev is also capable of sacrifices and deeds; but at the same time he looks like a generous girl who, in order to save her father, decides on a hated marriage. With hidden pain and heavy resignation to fate, she waits for the wedding day and would be glad if something interfered with her. Insarov, on the contrary, waits passionately and impatiently for his exploits, for the onset of his selfless activity, just as a young man in love waits for the day of his wedding with his beloved girl. It is only fear that worries him: no matter how something upsets him, delays the desired moment. Insarov’s love for the freedom of the motherland is not in his mind, not in his heart, not in his imagination: he has it in his whole organism, and whatever enters it, everything is transformed by the power of this feeling, obeys it, merges with it. That is why, for all the ordinaryness of his abilities, with the howling lack of brilliance in his nature, he stands immeasurably higher, acts on Elena incomparably stronger and more charmingly than the brilliant Shubin and intelligent Bersenev, although both of them are also noble people. that loving. Elena makes a very apt remark about Bersenev in her diary (on which the author did not regret his profundity and wit at all): “Andrei Petrovich, perhaps more learned than he (Insarov), perhaps even smarter ... But, I don’t know, -- He's so small in front of him." Should I tell the story of Edena's rapprochement with Insarov and their love? It doesn't seem to be necessary. Probably - our readers remember this story well; yes, you can't tell that. We are afraid to touch this tender poetic creature with our cold and hard hand; With a dry and insensitive retelling, we are afraid even to profane the reader's feelings, which are certainly aroused by the poetry of Turgenev's story. The singer of pure, ideal female love, Mr. Turgenev looks so deeply into the young, virginal soul, embraces it so completely, and with such inspired awe, with such fervor of love, depicts her best moments, which we can feel in his story - and hesitation virgin breasts, and a quiet sigh, and a moistened look, every beat of an excited heart is heard, and our own heart trembles and freezes from a languid feeling, and graceful tears come to our eyes more than once, and something like this is torn from the chest - as if we have reunited with an old friend after a long separation, or we are returning from a foreign land to our native places. And this feeling is sad and cheerful: there are bright memories of childhood, irretrievably coppered, there are proud and joyful hopes of youth, there are ideal, friendly dreams of a pure and powerful imagination, not yet humble, not humiliated by the trials of worldly experience. All this has passed and will be no more; but a person has not yet disappeared who, even in memory, can return to these bright dreams, to this pure, infantile ecstasy of life, to these ideal, majestic ideas - and then shudder at the sight of that dirt, vulgarity and pettiness in which his present life. And it’s good for someone who knows how to evoke such memories in others, to evoke such a mood of the soul ... Mr. Turgenev’s talent was always strong in this side, his stories constantly made such a clear impression with their general structure, and this, of course, is their essential significance. for society. Not alien to this meaning and "On the Eve" in the image of Elena's love. We are sure that even without us, readers will be able to appreciate all the charm of those passionate, tender and languishing scenes, those subtle and deep psychological details that depict the love of Elena and Insarov from beginning to end. Instead of any story, we will only recall Elena's diary, her expectation when Insarov was supposed to come to say goodbye, the scene in the chapel, Elena's return home after this scene, her three visits to Insarov, especially the last (There are people whose imagination is so greasy and corrupted, that in this charming, pure and deeply moral scene of the complete, passionate fusion of two loving beings, they will see only material for voluptuous ideas. Judging everyone by themselves, they will even cry out that this scene can have a bad influence on morality, because it excites impure thoughts. But let them cry out: after all, there are people who, even at the sight of the Venus de Milo, feel only sensual irritation and, when looking at the Madonna, say with a priapic smile: “But she ... is ... good for that ... But not for these people - - arts and poetry, but not for them and true morality. In them, everything turns into something disgustingly unclean. But let an innocent, pure-hearted girl read these same scenes, and, believe me, she will get nothing but the brightest and noblest thoughts from this reading.), then farewell to her mother, to her homeland, departure, finally her last walk with Insarov on the Canal Grande, listening to "La Traviata" and returning. This last image had a particularly strong effect on us with its strict truth and infinitely sad beauty; for us, this is the most sincere, most sympathetic place in the whole story. Leaving the readers themselves to enjoy the recollection of the whole development of the story, we will turn again to the character of Insarov, or, better, to the attitude in which he stands to the Russian society surrounding him. We have already seen that he hardly acts here to achieve his main goal; only once do we see that he goes 60 miles away to reconcile quarreling fellow countrymen who lived in Troitsky Posad, and at the end of his stay in Moscow it is mentioned that he traveled around the city and saw different people on the sly. Yes, of course - he had nothing to do while living in Moscow; for this activity he had to go to Bulgaria. And he went there, but on the road death overtook him, and we never see his activities in the story. From this it is clear that the essence of the story does not at all consist in presenting us with a model of civil, that is, public prowess, as some would like to assure. There is no reproach to the Russian younger generation, no indication of what a civilian hero should be like. If this were part of the author's plan, then he would have to put his hero face to face with the very thing - with the parties, with the people, with a foreign government, with his like-minded people, with the enemy force ... But our author did not want to , yes, as far as we can judge from all his previous works, and would not be able to write a heroic epic. His business is completely different: from the entire Iliad and Odyssey, he appropriates only the story of Ulysses' stay on the island of Calypse and beyond this does not extend. Having made us understand and feel what Insarov is and what kind of environment he fell into,- Mr. Turgenev is completely given over to the image of how Insarov loves and how he is loved. Where love must finally give way to living civic activity, he ends the life of his hero and ends the story. What, then, is the meaning of the appearance Bulgarian in this story? What does Bulgarian mean here, why not Russian? Are there no such natures among Russians anymore, are Russians not capable of loving passionately and resolutely, are they not capable of headlong marriage for love? Or is it just a whim of the author's imagination, and there is no need to look for any special meaning in it? "He took, they say, a Bulgarian for himself, and it's over; but he could have taken both a gypsy and a Chinese, perhaps" ... The answer to these questions depends on the outlook on the whole meaning of the story. It seems to us that the Bulgarians really could have been replaced here, perhaps, by another nationality - a Serb, a Czech, an Italian, a Hungarian - only not a Pole or a Russian 4 . Why not a Pole, of course, there can be no question about this; and why not the Russians - that is the whole question, and we will try to answer it as best we can. The fact is that in "On the Eve" the main person is Elena. She expressed that vague yearning for something, that almost unconscious but irresistible need for a new life, new people, which now encompasses the whole of Russian society, and not even only the so-called educated. In Elena, the best aspirations of our modern life are so vividly reflected, and in those around her, all the failure of the usual order of the same life comes out so clearly that one involuntarily takes a desire to draw an allegorical parallel. Here everything would have to be in place: not the evil, but empty and stupidly self-important Stakhov, in conjunction with Anna Vasilievna, whom Shubin calls a chicken, and the German companion, with whom Elena is so cold, and the drowsy, but at times thoughtful Uvar Ivanovich, who cares only about the news of the counter-bombardment, and even the unseemly lackey who denounces Elena to her father when the whole thing is over ... But such parallels, undoubtedly proving the playfulness of the imagination, become strained and ridiculous when they go into great detail. Therefore, we will refrain from details and make only a few very general remarks. Elena's development is not based on great learning, not on extensive life experience; the best, ideal side of her being revealed, grew and matured in her at the sight of the meek sadness of her native face, at the sight of the poor, sick and oppressed, whom she found, and saw everywhere, even in a dream. Wasn't it on such impressions that all the best in Russian society grew and was educated? Is not every truly decent person in our country characterized by hatred for any violence, arbitrariness, oppression and a desire to help the weak and oppressed? We do not say: "the struggle in defense of the weak from the offense of the strong," because this is not there, but precisely desire just like Elena. We, too, are glad to do a good deed when it contains only the positive side, that is, it does not require any struggle, does not involve any third-party opposition. We will give alms, we will put on a charity performance, we will donate even a part of our wealth in case of need; but only that the matter be limited to this, so that we do not have to bother and struggle with various troubles because of some poor or offended. "The desire for active goodness" is in us and we have the strength; but fear, lack of self-confidence and, finally, ignorance: what to do? - they constantly stop us, and we ourselves, not knowing how - suddenly find ourselves aloof from public life, cold and alien to its interests, just like Elena in her environment. Meanwhile wish is still boiling in the chest (we are talking about those who do not try to artificially drown out this desire), and we are all looking, thirsting, waiting ... waiting for at least someone to explain to us what to do. With pain of bewilderment, almost with despair, Elena writes in her diary: “Oh, if someone told me: this is what you should do! Being kind is not enough; doing good ... yes, this is the main thing in life. How to do good? Who among the people of our society, conscious of a living heart in themselves, has not painfully asked himself this question? Who did not recognize as pitiful and insignificant all those forms of activity in which his desire for good was manifested, to the best of his ability? Who hasn't felt that there is something else, something higher, that we could even do, but we don't know how to start... And where is the solution of doubts? We languidly, greedily search for it in the bright moments of our existence and do not find it anywhere. Everything around us, it seems to us, is either languishing in the same bewilderment as we are, or has ruined the human image in itself and narrowed itself down to the pursuit of only its petty, selfish, animal interests. And so, day by day, life passes until it dies in the heart of a person, and day by day a living person waits: won’t tomorrow be better, won’t doubt be resolved tomorrow, won’t someone come who will tell us how to do it? good... This melancholy of expectation has long been tormenting Russian society, and how many times have we been mistaken, like Elena, thinking that the awaited one has appeared, and then we have cooled off. Elena became passionately attached to Anna Vasilievna; but Anna Vasilievna turned out to be insignificant, spineless... She felt a disposition towards Shubin, just as our society at one time was carried away by artistry; but in Shubin there was no sensible content, only sparkles and whims, and Elena was not in the mood to admire the toys in the midst of her searches. For a moment she was carried away by serious science in the person of Bersenev; but serious science turned out to be modest, doubtful, waiting for the first number to follow him. And Elena just needed a man to appear, not numbered and not waiting for his appointment, but independently and irresistibly striving for his goal and drawing others to it. That was how Insarov finally appeared before her, and in him she found the realization of her ideal, in him she saw the possibility of answering the question: how should she do good. But why couldn't Insarov be Russian? After all, he does not act in the story, but is only going to work; it can be Russian. Its character is also possible in Russian skin, especially in such manifestations. He loves strongly and decisively; but is it really impossible for a Russian person? All this is true, and yet the sympathy of Elena, such a girl, as we understand her, could not turn on a Russian person with the right, with that naturalness, as it turned on this Bulgarian. All the charm of Insarov lies in the greatness and holiness of the idea that pervades his entire being. Elena, longing for active good, but not knowing how to do it, is instantly and deeply amazed, having not yet seen Insarov, by the story of his plans. “To liberate your homeland,” she says, “it’s scary to utter these words - they are so great!” And she feels that the word of her heart has been found, that she is satisfied, that she cannot set herself higher than this goal, and that for her whole life, for her whole future, there will be enough active content, if only she will follow this man. And she tries to peer into him, she wants to penetrate into his soul, share his dreams, go into the details of his plans. And in him there is only a constant, merged with him, the idea of the motherland and its freedom; and Elena is pleased, she likes in him this clarity and certainty of aspirations, calmness and firmness of the soul, the power of the very idea, and she herself soon becomes an echo of the idea that animates him. “When he talks about his homeland,” she writes in her diary, “he grows, grows, and his face becomes prettier, and his voice is like steel, and it seems that there is no such person in the world, before whom he would have eyes lowered. And he not only says, he did and will do. I will question him "... A few days later she again writes:" But it's strange, however, that until now, up to twenty years, I have not loved anyone! it seems that D. (I will call him D., I like this name: Dmitry) is so clear in his soul that he devoted himself completely to his work, his dream. Why should he worry? Who gave himself all ... all ... ... all ... grief is not enough for him, he is not responsible for anything. That wants." And, realizing this, she herself wants to merge with him so that not she wanted and He And That, which inspires him. And we understand her position very well; we are sure that the whole of Russian society, although it will not yet be carried away, like her, by the personality of Insarov, will understand the possibility and naturalness of Elena's feelings. We say that society will not get carried away by itself, and we base this assumption on the fact that this Insarov is still a stranger to us. Mr. Turgenev himself, who has studied the best part of our society so well, did not find an opportunity to make it nAshim. Not only did he take him out of Bulgaria, he did not bring this hero close enough to us, even just as a person. This, if you want to look even at the literary side, is the main artistic shortcoming of the story. We understand one of the important reasons for it, which do not depend on the author, and therefore do not reproach Mr. Turgenev. But, nevertheless, the pallor of Insarov's outlines is reflected in the very impression made by the story. The greatness and beauty of Insarov's ideas are not displayed before us with such force that we ourselves are imbued with them and exclaim in proud animation: we follow you! Meanwhile, this idea is so holy, so sublime... Much less human, even just false ideas, hotly carried out in artistic images, had a feverish effect on society; Karl Moors, Werthers, Pechorins caused a crowd of imitators. Insarov won't call them. It is true that it was wise for him to come out in full with his idea, living in Moscow and doing nothing: after all, it is not to practice in rhetorical rantings! But we hardly recognize him as a person from the story either: his inner world is not accessible to us; it is closed to us what he does, what he thinks, what he hopes, what changes he experiences in his relations, how he looks at the course of events, at life rushing before his eyes. Even his love for Elena remains not fully revealed to us. We know that he fell in love with her passionately; but how this feeling entered into him, what attracted him in her, to what extent this feeling was when he noticed it and decided to leave - all these internal details and many others that Mr. Turgenev, remain dark in Insarov's personality. As a living image, as a real person, Insarov is extremely far from us. Elena could love him with all the strength of her soul, because she saw him in life, and not in a story, for us he is close and dear only as a representative of an idea that strikes us, like Elena, with instant light and illuminates the darkness of our existence. . That is why we understand the whole naturalness of Elena’s feelings for Insarov, that’s why we ourselves, satisfied with his uncompromising fidelity to the idea, do not notice, for the first time, that he is indicated to us only in pale and general outlines. And they also want him to be Russian! “No, he could not be Russian,” Elena herself exclaims in response to the regret that he was not Russian. Indeed, such Russians do not exist, should not and cannot exist, at least at the present time. We do not know how new generations develop and will develop, but those that we now see active did not develop at all in such a way that they could become like Insarov. The development of each individual person is influenced not only by his private relations, but also by the whole social atmosphere in which he is destined to live. One develops heroic tendencies, the other peaceful inclinations; one irritates, the other lulls. Russian life has turned out so well that everything in it calls for a calm and peaceful sleep, and every sleepless person seems, not without reason, restless and completely superfluous for society. Compare, in fact, the circumstances under which Insarov's life begins and passes with the circumstances that meet the life of every Russian person. Bulgaria is enslaved, she suffers under the Turkish yoke. We, thank God, are not enslaved by anyone, we are free, we are a great people who have more than once decided the fate of kingdoms and peoples with their weapons; We we own others, but no one owns us... There are no public rights and guarantees in Bulgaria. Insarov says to Elena: “If only you knew how fertile our land is. And meanwhile they are trampling on it, they are tormenting it, everything has been taken from us, everything: our churches, our rights, our lands; the filthy Turks are chasing us like a herd, they are slaughtering us. .." Russia, on the contrary, is a well-organized state, it has wise laws that protect the rights of citizens and determine their duties, justice reigns in it, benevolent publicity flourishes. Churches are not taken away from anyone, and faiths are not constrained by absolutely anything, but on the contrary, they encourage the zeal of preachers in denouncing the erring; rights and lands are not only not taken away, but they are still given to those who did not have hitherto; no one is driven in the form of a herd. "In Bulgaria," says Insarov, "the last muzhik, the last beggar, and I, we want the same thing: everyone has one goal." There is no such monotony at all in Russian life, in which each class, even each circle, lives its own separate life, has its own special goals and aspirations, its own established purpose. With the social improvement that exists in our country, it remains only for everyone to strengthen their own well-being, for which it is not at all necessary to unite with the whole nation in one common idea, as is the case in Bulgaria. Insarov was still a baby when the Turkish Agha kidnapped his mother and then stabbed him to death, and his father was shot because, wanting to take revenge on the Agha, struck him with a dagger. When and which of the Russian people could meet such impressions in life? Has anything similar been heard in Russian soil? Of course, criminal offenses are possible everywhere, but in our country, if any yeah and kidnapped and killed or later killed someone else's wife, so the husband would not have been allowed to take revenge, for we have laws that are equal for all and impartially punish the crime. In a word, Insarov, with his mother's milk, sucks up hatred for the enslavers, dissatisfaction with the real order of things. He does not need to strain himself, he does not need to go through a long series of syllogisms to determine the direction of his activity. As soon as he is not lazy and not a coward, he already knows what to do and how to behave; there is nowhere for him to scatter. Yes, and he has a task comfy-ponyaTnaya, as Shubin says: "One has only to drive out the Turks - a great thing!" And Insarov knows, moreover, that he is right in his activities, not only before his own conscience, but also before the people's court: his plans will find sympathy in every decent person. Imagine now something like this in Russian society: it is unimaginable... In the Russian translation, Insarov will come out as nothing more than a robber, a representative of an "anti-social element", about whom the Russian public knows very well from the eloquent studies of Mr. Solovyov, reported by "Russian messenger" 5 . Who, you ask, can love this? What well-bred and intelligent girl will not run from him with all her might, crying: quelle horreur! Is it clear now why there can't be a Russian in Insarov's place? Natures like him will, of course, be born in Russia in considerable numbers, but they cannot develop so freely and show themselves so shamelessly as Insarov. Russian, modern Insarov will always remain timid, ambivalent, will lurk, express himself with various covers and equivocations ... and this is what reduces confidence in him. It will turn out, perhaps even sometimes, that he lies and contradicts himself; but it is known that people usually lie either out of advantage or out of cowardice. What kind of sympathy can one have for a greedy person and a coward, especially when the soul is languishing with a thirst for work and is looking for a powerful head and hand that would lead it? True, we also have small heroes who are somewhat similar to Insarov in courage and sympathy for the oppressed. But in our midst they are funny Don Quixotes. The hallmark of Don Quixote - the lack of understanding of either what he is fighting for or what will come of his efforts - is surprisingly vivid in them. For example, they suddenly imagine that the peasants must be saved from the arbitrariness of the landlords: and they don’t want to know that there is no arbitrariness here, that the rights of the landlords are strictly defined by law and should be inviolable as long as these laws exist, and that the peasants themselves should be restored against this arbitrariness, which means that without delivering them from the landowner, they must still be punished according to the law. Or, for example, they will set themselves the task of saving the innocent from judicial untruth, as if our judges, of their own arbitrariness, do what they want. Everything we do, as you know, is done according to the law, and in order to interpret the law in one way or another, this does not require heroism, but the habit of judicial twists and turns. Here are our Don Quixotes and they are busy in vain ... Otherwise, they will suddenly come up with - to eradicate bribes - and what kind of flour will go to the poor officials who take a dime for some kind of certificate! Our heroes will drive them out of the world, taking upon themselves the protection of the afflicted. It is, of course, noble and lofty; Is it possible to sympathize with these unreasonable people? And after all, we are not talking about those cold servants of duty who act in this way simply out of duty, we mean Russian people who really sincerely sympathize with the oppressed and are ready even to fight for their defense. And these come out useless and ridiculous, because they do not understand the general significance of the environment in which they operate. And how can they understand when they themselves are in it, when their tops stretch upwards, and the root is still attached to the same soil? They want to drive away the grief of their neighbors, and it depends on the arrangement of the environment in which both the grieving and supposed comforters live. How to be here? To turn this whole environment upside down - so it will be necessary to turn yourself over; and go sit in an empty box, and try to turn it over with you. What an effort this will require of you!-- meanwhile, approaching from the side, you could deal with this box with one push. Insarov takes it precisely because he does not sit in a box; the oppressors of his fatherland are the Turks, with whom he has nothing in common; he has only to approach, and push them, as far as his strength is enough. The Russian hero, who usually comes from an educated society, is himself intimately connected with what he must rebel against. He is in the same position as, for example, one of the sons of a Turkish Agha would be if he decided to liberate Bulgaria from the Turks. It is difficult even to imagine such a phenomenon; but if it happened, then in order for this son not to appear to us as a stupid and funny fellow, it is necessary that he renounce everything that connected him with the Turks: - both from faith, and from nationality, and from the circle of relatives and friends , and from the worldly benefits of his position. One cannot but agree that this is terribly difficult and that such decisiveness requires a slightly different development than what the son of a Turkish Agha usually receives. Heroism is not much easier for a Russian person. That is why we have sympathetic, energetic natures and satisfy themselves with petty and unnecessary bravados, without reaching real, serious heroism, that is, to the renunciation of a whole mass of concepts and practical relations by which they are connected with the social environment. Their timidity in the face of the enormity of opposing forces is even reflected in their theoretical development: they are afraid or do not know how to get to the root and, thinking, for example, to punish evil, they only rush to some petty manifestation of it and become terribly tired before they even have time to think about it. its source. They do not want to raise their hands on the tree on which they themselves grew up; so they try to assure themselves and others that all its rot is only outside, that it is only worth cleaning it off, and everything will be fine. To expel several bribe-takers from service, to impose guardianship on several landowner estates, to expose a kisser who sold bad-quality vodka in one tavern - that's justice will reign, the peasants throughout Russia will prosper, and the ransom will become an excellent thing for the people. So many sincerely think, and really spend all their strength on such feats, and for that they seriously consider themselves heroes. We were told about one such hero, a man who was said to be extremely energetic and talented. While still at the gymnasium, he started a case with one tutor, on the grounds that he was hiding the paper assigned for issuance to pupils. Things went somehow awkwardly; our hero knew how to offend both the inspector and the director and was expelled from the gymnasium. He began to prepare for the university, and meanwhile began to give lessons. At one of his first lessons, he noticed that the mother of the children he taught hit her maid on the cheek. He flared up, raised an uproar in the house, brought the police and formally accused the mistress of the house of mistreating the servants. The investigation dragged on, in which, of course, he could not prove anything, and he was almost sentenced to severe punishment for false testimony and slander. After that, he couldn't get any lessons. With great difficulty, he decided, by someone's special favor, into the service: they gave him to rewrite some decision of a very absurd nature; he could not bear it and argued; he was told to be silent, he did not obey; he was told to get out. Having nothing to do, he accepted the invitation of one of his former comrades - to go with him to the tree for the summer; arrived, saw what was being done there, and began to talk - to his comrade, and to his father, and even to the steward and peasants - about how it is illegal to drive peasants to corvee for more than three days, how it is impermissible to flog them without any trial and reprisals, how dishonorably to drag peasant women to the manor house at night, etc. It ended with the peasants who listened to him with participation, flogged, and the old master ordered him to ban the horses and asked him not to appear again in their area, if he wanted purpose to stay. Having somehow managed to beat the summer, our hero entered the university by the autumn due to the fact that at the exam he came across all the questions that were not provocative, on which it was impossible to roam and argue. He entered the medical faculty and did really well; but in the practical course, when the professor was explaining his wisdom at the bedside of the sick man, he could never refrain from cut off backward or charlatan professor; as soon as he lies something, so he will go to prove to him that this is nonsense. As a result of such tricks, our hero was not left at the university, was not sent abroad, but was assigned to some distant hospital. Here, at the very first stages, he caught the superintendent and threatened to complain about him; then, another time, he caught and complained, for which he received a reprimand from the chief doctor; receiving a reprimand, he, of course, spoke very large and was soon transferred from the hospital ... He got to see off some party after that; he began to make noise for the soldiers with the head of the party and with the official in charge of food. Seeing that words did not help, he wrote a report that the soldiers were malnourished and underdrinking at the mercy of the official, and that the head of the party condoned this. Upon arrival at the place - a consequence; soldiers are interrogated, they say: they are satisfied; our hero becomes indignant, speaks impudence to the general staff doctor, and a month later is demoted to the assistant assistant. After spending two weeks in this position and unable to withstand the deliberately brutal treatment of him, he shoots himself 6 . Isn't it an unusual phenomenon, a strong, impulsive nature? In the meantime, look at what he is dying on. In all his actions there is nothing that would not constitute the direct duty of every honest person in his place; and he needs, however, a lot of heroism, in order to act in this way, he needs a self-sacrificing determination to die for good. The question now is: if he already has this determination, wouldn’t it be better to use it for a great cause, which would actually achieve something essentially useful? But that's the trouble, that he does not realize the need and possibility of such a thing and does not understand what surrounds him. He does not want to see mutual responsibility in everything that happens before his eyes, and imagines that every evil he has noticed is nothing more than an abuse of a beautiful institution, possible only as a rare exception. With such concepts, Russian heroes can only, of course, limit themselves to meager particulars, not thinking about the general, while Insarov, on the contrary, always subordinates the particular to the general, in the confidence that "even that will not go away." So, in response to Elena's question, did he take revenge on the murderer of his father, Insarov says: "I did not look for him. I did not look for him, not because I could not kill him - I would very calmly kill him - because there is no time for private revenge when it comes to the liberation of the people. One would interfere with the other. In due time, even that will not go away." It is in this love for a common cause, in this foreboding of it, which gives strength to calmly endure individual insults, that the great superiority of the Bulgarian Insarov over all Russian heroes, who have no common cause at all, lies. However, we have very few such heroes, and most of them do not stand up to the end. Much more numerous in our educated society is another class of people who are engaged in reflection. Of these, too, there are many who, although they meditate, are unable to understand anything; but we don't talk about those. We want to point out only those really bright-headed people who, through long doubts and searches, have reached the same unity and clarity of idea with which Insarov appears before us, without any special effort. These people understand where the root of evil is, and they know what must be done to stop the evil; they are deeply and sincerely imbued with the thought they have finally reached. But - they no longer have the strength for practical activity; they broke themselves so much that their nature somehow got tired and weakened. They look with sympathy at the approach of a new life, but they themselves cannot meet it, and they cannot satisfy the fresh feeling of a person who longs for active goodness and is looking for a leader. None of us takes ready-made human concepts, in the name of which one must then wage a life struggle. That is why no one has that clarity, that integrity of views and actions that are so natural, if only, for example, in Insarov. For him, the impressions of life that act on the heart and awaken its energy are constantly reinforced by the demands of reason, by all the theoretical education that he receives. We have quite the opposite. One of our acquaintances, who adheres to advanced opinions and is also burning with a thirst for active goodness, but the meekest and most harmless person in the world, this is what he told us about his development, in order to explain his current inactivity. “By my nature,” he said, “I was a very kind and impressionable boy. I used to cry and rush about, listening to a story about some kind of misfortune, I suffered at the sight of someone else’s suffering. I remember that I did not sleep at night , lost his appetite and could not do anything when someone in the house was ill, I remember that more than once I went into a kind of rage at the sight of the tortures that one of my relatives inflicted on his son, my friend. , everything I heard developed in me a heavy feeling of discontent; the question began to stir in my soul early: why does everyone suffer so much, and is there really no way to help this grief, which seems to have overcome everyone? I eagerly sought answers to these questions, and soon they gave me an answer, reasonable and systematic. I started to study. The first prescription I wrote was: "True happiness lies in peace of mind." In response to my questions about conscience, they explained to me that it punishes us for bad deeds and rewards for good ones. All my attention was directed now to discovering which deeds are good and which are bad. It was not difficult: the moral code was ready - both in copybooks, and in home instructions, and in a special course. “Honor your elders”, “Do not rely on your own strength, for you are nothing”, “Be satisfied with what you have and do not wish for more”, “Patience and humility acquire common love”, etc. I wrote in this way in copybooks. At home and from everyone around me I heard the same thing; and in various courses I learned that there can be no perfect happiness on earth, but that, as far as it is possible, it is so achieved in well-organized states, of which the best is my fatherland. I learned that Russia is now not only great and plentiful, but that the most perfect order reigns in it; that one has only to fulfill the laws and orders of the elders and be moderate, and then complete well-being awaits a person, no matter what his rank and status. I was pleased with all these discoveries, and I greedily seized on them as the best solution to all my doubts. I took it into my head to verify them with my inexperienced mind, but I had to do a lot beyond my strength, and what turned out to be available, it turned out that way, right. And so I devoted myself trustingly and enthusiastically to the new-discovered system, in it I concluded all my aspirations, and for about twelve years I was already a little philosopher and a terrible partisan of legality. I have come to the conclusion that the person himself is to blame for any misfortune - either because he did not take care, did not beware, or because he did not want to be content with little, or because he did not have sufficient respect for the law and the will of elders. As a matter of fact, I did not yet have a very good idea of the law, but it personified for me in every boss and seniority. Therefore, during this period of my life, I constantly stood for teachers, bosses, etc., and was very loved by the authorities and the senior classes. Once my comrades almost threw me out the window: one teacher said to the whole class: "You are pigs!"; everyone got excited at the end of the class, and I began to defend the teacher and prove that he had every right to say this. On another occasion, one of our comrades was expelled for being rude to his superiors; everyone felt sorry for him, because he was the best among us, but I asserted that he fully deserved the punishment, and I was very surprised how, being such a smart boy, he could not understand that obedience to elders is our first duty and the first condition of happiness . Thus every day I became stronger in my concepts of legality and gradually got used to looking at the majority of people only as an instrument for carrying out higher orders. In this way I severed my living connection with the soul of man, I stopped worrying about the misfortunes of my fellows, I stopped looking for an opportunity to alleviate them. "It's their own fault," I said to myself, and I even began to feel something like malice, something like contempt for them, as for people who do not know how to enjoy calmly and humbly the benefits that are offered to them by the power of public improvement. Everything that was good in my nature turned in the other direction - to maintain the rights of elders over us. I felt that this was self-denial, a renunciation of my own independence, I was convinced that I was doing this in the interests of the common good, and I considered myself almost a hero. I know that many people remain at this degree, while others modify it slightly and assure that they have completely changed. But fortunately I did have to change my direction quite early. At the age of fourteen, I myself already had seniority over something - both in the classroom and in the house, and, of course, turned out to be very bad at the same time. I knew how to do everything that was demanded of me, but I did not know what and how to demand it. For all that, I was stern and unapproachable. But soon I felt ashamed, and I began to verify my former notions about the authorities. The reason for this was one incident that awakened again living sensations in my dead heart. As an older brother and a smart girl, I taught one of my sisters by the way. I was given the right to punish her for laziness, disobedience, etc. Since she was somehow distracted and did not want to understand my interpretations; I told her to get on her knees. She immediately collected her thoughts and, assuming an attentive air, began to ask me to repeat my words once more. But I demanded that she first obey the order - - got on her knees; she stiffened. Then I grabbed her hands, lifted her up, then put my elbows on her shoulders and pressed down with all my might. The poor girl sank to her knees and yelped: her leg went mad with this movement. I was very scared; but when my mother began to scold me for such treatment of my sister, I very calmly tried to prove that she herself was to blame, that if she had immediately obeyed my order, none of this would have happened. However, I was secretly tormented, especially since I loved my sister very much. At that time, the thought came to me that even elders can be wrong and do absurdities, and that it is necessary to respect the law itself, as it is, and not as it manifests itself in the interpretations of this or that person. Here I began to criticize the actions of individuals, and from conservative irresponsibility I quickly jumped into opposition legale (legal opposition (French).-- Ed. ). But for a long time I attributed everything bad to private abuses alone and attacked them - not in the name of the urgent needs of society, not out of compassion for the unfortunate brothers, but simply in the name of a positive law. At that time, of course, I would have begun to speak with passion against the cruel treatment of Negroes, but, like a certain Moscow publicist, I would have blamed Brown with all my heart, who completely illegally took it into his head to free Negroes 7 . However, I was still very young then (probably younger than the venerable publicist), my thought moved and wandered; I could not stop at this, and after many considerations, I finally came to the realization that laws can be imperfect, that they have a relative, temporary and particular significance and must be subject to change with the passage of time and according to the requirements of circumstances. But again, in the name of what did I reason like that? In the name of a higher, abstract law of justice, and not at all by instilling a living feeling of love for fellow men, not at all by the consciousness of those direct, urgent needs that are indicated by life going before us. And what? So I took the last step: from the abstract law of justice, I passed on to a more real demand for human welfare; I finally brought all my doubts and reasoning to one formula: man and his happiness. But after all, this formula was in my soul as a child, before I began to study various sciences and write instructive prescriptions. And - shall I say? - now I understand it better and can prove it more thoroughly; but then I felt her more strongly, she was more connected with my being, and even, it seems, I was ready then to do more for her than now. I now try not to do anything that contradicts the law I have realized, I try not to deprive people of happiness; but I confine myself to this passive role. To rush in search of happiness, to bring it closer to people, to destroy everything that hinders it - I could do this only if my childhood feelings and dreams developed and grew stronger without hindrance. Meanwhile, they have been deafening and dying in me for fifteen years, and only now I return to them again and find them pale, thin, weak. I still need to restore them before putting them to use; and who knows if it will be possible to restore it?"... It seems to us that in this story there are features that are far from exceptional, but, on the contrary, that can serve as a general indication of the obstacles that a Russian person encounters on the path of independent development. Not everyone is the same they are bound by force to the morality of prescriptions, but no one escapes its influence, and it acts in a paralyzing way on everyone. To get rid of it, a person must lose a lot of strength and a lot of faith in himself in this incessant fuss with an ugly confusion of doubts; contradictions, concessions, twists and turns, etc. Thus, whoever has retained our strength for heroism has no need to be a hero; And whoever understands what is needed and how it is needed, he has already put his whole self into this understanding, and in practical activity he does not know how to take a step, and eschews any interference, like Elena, in the home environment. Moreover, Elena is still bolder and freer, because only the general atmosphere of Russian life influenced her, but, as we have already said, the routine of school education and discipline did not leave its mark. It turns out that our best people, which we have seen so far in modern society, are only just able to understand the thirst for active good that burns Elena, and can show her sympathy, but they will not be able to satisfy this thirst. And these are still advanced, they are also called "public figures" among us. Otherwise, most of the smart and impressionable people run away from civil virtues and devote themselves to various muses. If only the same Shubin and Bersenev in "On the Eve": glorious natures, both of them know how to appreciate Insarov, even strive with their souls after him, if they had a slightly different development and a different environment, they would not sleep either. But what are they to do here, in this society? Rebuild it your way? Yes, they don’t have any, and they don’t have any strength. Repair something in it, cut off and discard little by little various squabbles of the social structure? But isn’t it disgusting to pull out the teeth of a dead person, and where will this lead? Only heroes like the Panshins and the Kurnatovskys are capable of this. By the way, here we can say a few words about Kurnatovsky, also one of the best representatives of Russian educated society. This is a new kind of Panshin, only without secular and artistic talents and more businesslike. He is very honest and even generous; as proof of his generosity, Stakhov, who counts him as a suitor for Elena, cites the fact that, as soon as he reached the opportunity to live comfortably on his salary, he immediately renounced in favor of the brothers the annual amount that his father assigned him. In general, there is a lot of good in him: even Elena, who portrays him in a letter to Insarov, admits this. Here are her judgments, according to which alone we can form the concept of Kurnatovsky: he does not participate in the course of the story. Elena’s story, however, is so full of marks that we don’t need anything else, and therefore, instead of a paraphrase, we will directly quote her letter to Insarov: “Congratulate me, dear Dmitry, I have a fiancé. He dined with us yesterday; papa met him, I think, in an English club and invited him. Of course, he did not come yesterday as a groom. But the kind mother, to whom papa had communicated his hopes, whispered in my ear what kind of guest this was. His name is Yegor Andreevich Kurnatovsky; - he serves as chief secretary to the Senate. I will describe to you first his appearance. He is short, smaller than you, well built; his features are regular, he has short hair, wears large sideburns. His eyes are small (like yours), brown, quick, lips flat, wide; in the eyes and on the lips a constant smile, some kind of official one; she's definitely on duty. He keeps himself very simply, speaks distinctly, and everything is clear with him: he walks, laughs, eats, as if doing business. "How she learned it!" - you think, maybe at this moment. Yes, to describe it to you. And how not to study your fiancé! There is something iron in him... and dull and empty, at the same time - and honest; they say he's really honest. I have you, too, iron, but not like this one. At the table he was sitting next to me, and Shubin was sitting opposite us. At first, they talked about some commercial enterprises; they say he knows a lot about them and almost quit his job to take over a big factory. I didn't guess! Then Shubin spoke of the theatre: Mr. Kurnatovsky announced, and I must confess, without false modesty, that he knew nothing about art. It reminded me of you ... but I thought: no, Dmitry and I still don’t understand art differently. This one seemed to want to say: I do not understand it, and it is not necessary, but in a well-organized state it is allowed. To Petersburg and to comme il faut (secular propriety (French).-- Ed.) he, however, is rather indifferent; he once even called himself a proletarian. We, he says, are laborers. I thought: if Dmitry said this, I would not like it. Let this one talk to himself! Let boast! He was very polite to me; but it always seemed to me that a very, very condescending boss was talking to me. When he wants to praise someone, he says that such and such there are rules is his favorite word. He must be self-confident, industrious, capable of self-sacrifice (you see, I am impartial), that is, of sacrificing his own benefits, but he is a great despot. Trouble, fall into his hands! At the table they started talking about bribes ... - I understand, - he said, - that in many cases the one who takes the bribe is not to blame: he could not have done otherwise. And yet, if he is caught, he must be crushed. I screamed: "Crush the innocent!" Yes, for the sake of principle. - What? - asked Shubin. Kurnatovsky was either confused, or surprised, and said: there is no need to explain this. Papa, who seems to be in awe of him, picked up that, of course, there was nothing, and, to my annoyance, this conversation stopped. In the evening Bersenev came and entered into a terrible dispute with him. Never before have I seen our good Andrey Petrovich in such a state of agitation. Mr. Kurnatovsky did not at all deny the usefulness of science, universities, etc. Meanwhile, I understood Andrey Petrovich's indignation. He looks at all this as some kind of gymnastics. Shubin came up to me after the table and said: this one and someone else (he can’t pronounce your name) are both practical people, but look what a difference: there is a real, living, life-given ideal, and here there’s not even a sense of duty, but simply official honesty and efficiency without content. - Shubin is smart, and I memorized his clever words for you; What do you think you have in common? You Verish, but he is not, because only in himself believe Elena immediately understood Kurnatovsky and spoke of him not entirely favorably. Meanwhile, delve into this character and remember your acquaintances business people who work with honor for the common good; probably many of them will turn out to be worse than Kurnatovsky, but will there be better - it is difficult to vouch for this. It is no wonder that after this difficult work the heart grows cold, all life in a person freezes, and he turns into an automaton, steadily and steadily doing what he should. There, behind them, another layer begins: on the one hand, the completely sleepy Oblomovs, who have completely lost even the charm of eloquence that captivated the young ladies in the old days, on the other, the active Chichikovs, vigilant, tireless, heroic in achieving their narrow and nasty interests . And the Bruskovs, Bolshovs, Kabanovs, Ulanbekovs 8 rise even further, and all this evil tribe lays claim to the life and will of the Russian people ... Where does heroism come from, and if a hero is born, so where can he gain light and reason for that? so as not to be lost to his power in vain, but to serve good and truth? And if he finally gets enough, then where can the broken and torn hero be heroic, where can the toothless squirrel gnaw nuts? It’s better not to flatter yourself in vain, it’s better to choose some specialty for yourself, and dig into it, drowning out the unworthy feeling of involuntary envy for people who live and know why they live. This is what Shubin and Bersenev did in "On the Eve". Shubin was at a loss when he learned about Elena's wedding with Insarov, and began: "Insarov... Insarov... Why false humility? Am I really rubbish? Has God really offended me with everything?" and so on .... And the poor man immediately turned to art: "Maybe, - he says, - and I will eventually become famous for my works" ... And for sure - he began to work on his talent, and from him a wonderful sculptor comes out ... And Bersenev, the kind, selfless Bersenev, who so sincerely and cordially went after the sick Insarov, who so generously served as an intermediary between him, his rival, and Elena - and Bersenev, this heart of gold, as Insarov put it, - is not can refrain from poisonous reflections, finally convinced of the mutual love of Insarov and Elena. “Let them!” he says. your leather apron, hard worker, stand at your working machine, in your dark workshop! And let the sun shine on others. And in our deaf life there is its own pride and its own happiness! " What a hell of envy and despair these unfair reproaches blow - no one knows who and for what! ... Who is to blame for everything that happened? Isn't Bersenev himself? No, Russian life is to blame: "If we had good people, in Shubin's words, this girl, this sensitive soul, would not have escaped us like a fish into water." And it is life, its general structure, at a certain time and in a certain place, that makes people worthwhile or unworthy. The structure of our life turned out to be such that only one means of salvation remained for Bersenev: "To dry up the mind with fruitless science." He did just that, and scholars highly praised, according to the author, his writings: "On some features of ancient German law in the matter of judicial punishments" and "On the significance of the urban principle in the question of civilization." And it’s also good that at least in this he could find salvation ... Here is Elena - there was no resource left in Russia after she met Insarov and understood a different life. That is why she could neither remain in Russia nor return to it alone, after the death of her husband. The author knew how to understand this very well and preferred to leave her fate unknown rather than return her to her parents' roof and force her to live out her days in her native Moscow, in anguish of loneliness and inaction. The call of her own mother, which reached her almost at the very moment she lost her husband, did not soften her disgust at this vulgar, colorless, inactive life. "Return to Russia! Why? What to do in Russia?" - she wrote to her mother and went to Zara to get lost in the waves of the uprising. And how good that she accepted this determination! What really awaited her and Russia? Where is the purpose of life for her, where is life? To return again to the unfortunate kittens and flies, to give the poor money that was not worked out by her and God knows how and why she got it, to rejoice at the successes in Shubin's art, to talk about Schelling with Bersenev, to read the mother's "Moskovskie Vedomosti" and to see how they labor in the public arena rules in the form of various Kurnatovskys - and nowhere to see the real thing, not even hear the breath of a new life ... and gradually, slowly and painfully wither, wither, freeze ... No, if once she tried another life, breathed another air , then it is easier for her to rush into any kind of danger. rather than condemn herself to this severe torture, to this slow execution ... And we are glad that she escaped our life and did not justify on herself these hopelessly sad, soul-rending forebodings of the poet, so constantly and mercilessly justified against the best, chosen natures in Russia: Far from the sun and nature, Far from light and art, Far from life and love Your young years will flash, Living feelings will die, Your dreams will vanish... And your life will pass unseen In a deserted, nameless land, On an unnoticed land, -- How a cloud of smoke disappears In a dull and foggy sky, In an endless autumn haze... 9 It remains for us to bring together the individual features scattered in this article (for the incompleteness of which we apologize to readers), and draw a general conclusion. Insarov, as a person consciously and completely imbued with the great idea of the liberation of the motherland and ready to take an active role in it, could not develop and manifest himself in modern Russian society. Even Elena, who knew how to love him so fully and so merge with his ideas, and she cannot remain among Russian society, although there are all her relatives and relatives. So, great ideas, great sympathies still have no place among us?.. Everything heroic, active must flee from us if it does not want to die from inaction or perish in vain? Is not it? Isn't that the meaning of the story that we have analyzed? We think not. True, we do not have an open field for broad activity; True, our life is spent in trifles, in tricks, intrigues, gossip and meanness; it is true that our civic leaders are heartless and often strong-willed; our wise men will not lift a finger to bring triumph to their convictions, our liberals and reformers set off in their projects from legal subtleties, and not from the groans and wails of unfortunate brothers. All this is so. But we still think that Now in our society there is already a place for great ideas and sympathies, and that the time is not far off when these ideas can be manifested in practice. The fact is that no matter how bad our life is, the possibility of such phenomena as Elena has already turned out to be in it. And not only have such characters become possible in life, they are already embraced by artistic consciousness, introduced into literature, elevated to a type. Elena is an ideal face, but her features are familiar to us, we understand her, we sympathize with her. What does it mean? The fact that the basis of her character is love for the suffering and oppressed, the desire for active good, the tedious search for someone who would show how to do good - all this is finally felt in the best part of our society. And this feeling is so strong and so close to realization that it is no longer seduced, as before, by either a brilliant but fruitless mind and talent, or a conscientious but abstract scholarship, or service virtues, or even a kind, magnanimous, but passively developed heart. To satisfy our feelings, our thirst, we need more: we need a man like Insarov, but Russian Insarov. What is he to us? We ourselves said above that we do not need heroes-liberators, that we are a domineering people, and not an enslaved people ... Yes, we are protected from the outside, but even if there was an external struggle, then we can be calm. We have always had enough heroes for military exploits, and in the delight that young ladies still experience from officer uniforms and mustaches, one can see indisputable proof that our society knows how to appreciate these heroes. But do we have few internal enemies? Isn't it necessary to fight against them, and isn't heroism required for this struggle? And where are the people who are capable of doing business? Where are whole people, from childhood embraced by one idea, accustomed to it in such a way that they need to either bring triumph to this idea, or die? There are no such people, because our social environment has not yet been conducive to their development. And it is from her, from this milieu, from its vulgarity and pettiness, that new people must free us, for whose appearance all the best, all freshness in our society is so eagerly and passionately awaited. It is still difficult for such a hero to appear: the conditions for his development, and especially for the first manifestation of his activity, are extremely unfavorable, and the task is much more complicated and difficult than that of Insarov. An external enemy, a privileged oppressor, can be caught and defeated much more easily than an internal enemy, scattered everywhere in a thousand different forms, elusive, invulnerable, and yet disturbing you everywhere, poisoning your whole life and not giving you either rest or look around in the struggle. . You can't do anything with this internal enemy with ordinary weapons; it can only be got rid of by changing the damp and foggy atmosphere of our life in which it was born, grown and strengthened, and by fanning ourselves with such air that it cannot breathe. Is it possible? When it's possible? Of these questions, only the first can be answered categorically. Yes, it's possible, and here's why. We spoke above about how our social environment suppresses the development of personalities like Insarov. But now we can make an addition to our words: this environment has now reached the point where it itself will help the appearance of such a person. Eternal vulgarity, pettiness and apathy cannot be the lawful destiny of man, and the people who make up our social environment and are shackled to its conditions have long understood the full gravity and absurdity of these conditions. Some are bored, others are rushing with all their might somewhere, just to get rid of this oppression. Different outcomes were devised, different means were used in order to somehow revive the deadness and rottenness of our life; but all this was weak and invalid. Finally, concepts and demands such as we see in Elena now appear; these demands are accepted by society with sympathy; moreover, they strive for active realization. This means that the old social routine is becoming obsolete; a few more hesitation, a few more strong strata and favorable facts, and the workers will appear! We noted above that the determination and energy of a strong nature kills in us at the very beginning that idyllic admiration for everything in the world, that disposition to lazy complacency and sleepy peace that each of us, as a child, meets in everything around him and to which he too trying to accustom all sorts of advice and instructions. But recently this condition has changed a lot. Everywhere and in everything self-consciousness is noticeable, everywhere the inconsistency of the old order of things is understood, everywhere reforms and corrections are expected, and no one any longer lulls his children with a song about what incomprehensible perfection the modern order of affairs in Russia represents. On the contrary, now everyone is waiting, everyone is hoping, and children are now growing up, imbued with the hopes and dreams of a better future, and not being forcibly attached to the corpse of the obsolete past. When it is their turn to get down to business, they will already bring into it that energy, consistency and harmony of heart and thought, about which we could hardly acquire a theoretical concept. Then the full, sharply and vividly outlined image of the Russian Insarov will appear in literature as well. And we do not have to wait long for him: this is vouched for by the feverish, painful impatience with which we await his appearance in life. It is necessary for us, without it our whole life is somehow not counted, and every day means nothing in itself, but serves only as the eve of another day. He will come, finally, this day! And, in any case, the eve is not far from the day following it: only some kind of night separates them! ..
NOTES
First published in Sovremennik, 1860, No III, ed. III, pp. 31--72, unsigned, under the title "The New Story of Mr. Turgenev" ("On the Eve", a story by I. S. Turgenev, "Russian Messenger", 1860, No 1--2). Reprinted under the title "When will the real day come?", with significant additions and changes to the main text, especially in the second part of the article, in the Works of N. A. Dobrolyubov, vol. III. SPb., 1862, pp. 275--331. Autograph unknown. Published in this edition according to the text of 1862, established by N. G. Chernyshevsky on the basis of a manuscript that has not come down to us and pre-censored printing proofs. This text contains some clarifications of the stylistic order, made by Dobrolyubov in the process of editing the proofs of the journal edition of the article. The original version of the article was banned by the censor V. Beketov around February 19, 1860 in proofreading (See V. N. Beketov’s letter to Dobrolyubov dated February 19, 1860 with a refusal to “let it pass in the form in which it was composed.”-- "The Testaments", 1913, No 2, p. 96.). Dobrolyubov was forced to greatly revise the article, but even in a softened form it did not satisfy the new censor F. Rachmaninov, who looked through it from March 8 to March 10, 1860 in proofs (These proofs were preserved in the papers of A. N. Pypin (Institute of Russian Literature of the USSR Academy of Sciences Their detailed description is given by N. I. Mordovchenko in the options section of the Complete collection of works by N. A. Dobrolyubov in six volumes, vol. 2. M., 1935, pp. 652--657 text of 1862, see our considerations in the article "Old and New Editions of Dobrolyubov's Works" (current ed. pp. 555--556), as well as M. Ya. will the real day come?" (Russian Literature, 1965, No 1, pp. 90-97).). Dobrolyubov had to re-adapt his article to censorship requirements. Despite all these revisions, the article after printing attracted the attention of the Main Directorate censorship, which qualified it on July 18, 1860; the appointment of a woman, the spiritual side of a person and arousing hatred of one class for another" (N. A. Dobrolyubov. Full coll. soch., vol. 2. M., 1935.). The censor F. Rachmaninov, who let the article through, received a reprimand. I. S. Turgenev, who got acquainted with Dobrolyubov’s article on “On the Eve” in its pre-censored edition, strongly opposed its publication: “She can’t do anything to me except trouble,” Turgenev wrote around February 19, 1860. N. A. Nekrasov - it is unfair and harsh - I won’t know where to run if it is printed "(I. S. Turgenev. Full. Collected works. Letters, vol. IV. M., 1962, 41.). Nekrasov tried to persuade Dobrolyubov to make some concessions, but he did not agree. Turgenev also persisted in his demand. Faced with the need to make a choice, Nekrasov published Dobrolyubov's article, and this served as the closest reason for Turgenev's already imminent break with Sovremennik. Reprinted after the death of Dobrolyubov in the third volume of the first edition of his works with a new title and with significant changes in the text, the article "When will the real day come?" It was in the edition of 1862 that was perceived by contemporaries and entered the minds of generations of readers as a document that reflected the aesthetic But even in the journal text, Dobrolyubov's article stood out sharply against the general background of critical reviews of contemporaries about "On the Eve" (For an overview of the reviews about "On the Eve" see I. G. Yampolsky's notes to Dobrolyubov's article: N. A. Dobrolyubov. Full coll. cit., vol. 2, 1935, pp. 685-688. Wed G. V. Kurlyandskaya. Novels of I. S. Turgenev of the 50s - early 60s. - "Scientific Notes of Kazan University", vol. 116, book. 8, 1956, pp. 107--113.). In analyzing the novel, Dobrolyubov proceeds primarily from the need to clarify objective meaning of a literary work and considers it impossible to reduce its content to a reflection of the author's ideas and intentions. At the same time, as the article under consideration shows, the critic is not at all inclined to ignore the idea of the work and the ideological position of the author. However, the focus of his attention is not so much "what wanted say author; how much is that affected them, even unintentionally, simply as a result of the truthful reproduction of the facts of life. "Dobrolyubov treats with full confidence the ability of a realist writer to subordinate his artistic imagination to the course of life itself, the ability to" feel and depict the life truth of phenomena. "This principle of criticism therefore cannot be applied to writers who didactically subordinate the image of modern reality not to the logic of life facts, but to a “pre-conceived program". Turgenev's novel opened up a wide opportunity for formulating political tasks that objectively followed from the picture of Russian life created by the author, although they might not coincide with his personal public aspirations. The critic saw the main political task of our time in the need to change the "damp and foggy atmosphere of our life" with the help of the Russian Insarovs, fighters not against external oppression, but against internal enemies. In these transparent allegories, it was easy to see a call for a popular revolution, headed by become courageous among convinced leaders, like Turgenev's Insarov. But not only in "On the Eve" did Dobrolyubov see Turgenev's "living attitude to modernity." Sensitivity "to the living strings of society" and "the right tact of reality" Dobrolyubov found in all of Turgenev's work - in particular, in his interpretation of "superfluous people." Passive, bifurcated, reflective, not knowing "what to do", with all their negative properties, they were for him (as for Turgenev) "enlighteners, propagandists - at least for one woman's soul, but propagandists" (M. Gorky's lines about Rudine: "A dreamer - he is a propagandist of revolutionary ideas ..." (M. Gorky. History of Russian Literature. M., GIHL, 1939, p. 176). Dobrolyubov sympathetically noted the diversity of these faces, each of which "was bolder and fuller than the previous ones." Particularly interesting in this regard is the interpretation of the image of Lavretsky, in which Dobrolyubov saw "something legally tragic, not ghostly," because this hero faced the deadly force of religious dogmas or, in Dobrolyubov's Aesopian language, "a whole huge department of concepts that govern our lives." At the same time, not only the program side of Turgenev's work attracted Dobrolyubov, but also what he called the "general structure" of Turgenev's narrative, the "pure impression" made by his stories, the complex and subtle combination of motives of disappointment, falling with "infantile ecstasy of life" in them. , their special feeling, which was both "sad and fun" (M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, in a letter to P. V. Annenkov dated February 3, 1859, stated about the "Nest of Nobles": "And what can be said about all the works of Turgenev in general? Whether it is easy to breathe after reading them, easy What do you feel clearly, how the general level rises in you, that you mentally bless and love the author?<...> I have not been so shocked for a long time, but what exactly - I can not give myself an account. I think that neither one, nor the other, nor the third, but the general structure of the novel "(M. E. Saltykov (N. Shchedrin). Complete collection of works, vol. 18. L., GIHL, 1937, p. 144 Dobrolyubov imagined the novel about "new people" not only as a lyrical narration about their personal lives... According to Dobrolyubov's idea, the personal life of the heroes should be an integral element in such a narrative, where the hero would appear to the reader at the same time as a private person and as a civil fighter, standing face to face "with the parties, with the people, with a foreign government, with his like-minded people, with the enemy force. " Dobrolyubov imagined such a novel as a "heroic epic" and considered Turgenev incapable of creating it. His sphere - not a fight, but only "gatherings for a fight" - Dobrolyubov said this at the very beginning of the article. Meanwhile, in Insarov's personality, in his character, in his nature, he found precisely those traits that have become a true hero of a modern epic. It is curious that Dobrolyubov himself outlined these features long before the publication of "On the Eve", and he did this in a polemic with Turgenev. So, in the article "Nikolai Vladimirovich Stankevich" ("Contemporary", 1858, No IV), Dobrolyubov spoke out against Turgenev's morality of "duty" and "renunciation", expressed in the story "Faust" (On this, see: N. I. Mordovchenko. Dobrolyubov in the fight against liberal-noble literature.-- "Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR" Department of Social Sciences, 1936, No. 1-2, pp. 245-250.) People of the old generation, who understand duty as moral chains, as following " abstract principle, which they accept without inner heartfelt participation", Dobrolyubov contrasted the supporters of the new morality, those who "care to merge the demands of duty with the needs of their inner being." In another article - "Literary little things of the past year" ("Contemporary", 1859 , No I) Dobrolyubov again deployed the antithesis of "abstract principles" and living, inner attraction, and again laid it at the basis of a comparative description of the old and young generations. Developing an ideological and psychological portrait of the "new people" who replaced the knights of "abstract principles", Dobrolyubov I saw in modern leaders people "with strong nerves and a healthy imagination", distinguished by calmness and quiet firmness. “In general,” he wrote, “the young active generation of our time cannot shine and make noise. It seems that there are no screaming notes in his voice, although there are very strong and hard sounds.” Now, in the article "When will the real day come?", Characterizing Insarov, Dobrolyubov found in him the very features that he wrote about in his time, speaking of the "young active generation", Insarov's love for the motherland and freedom "does not in the mind, not in the heart, not in the imagination, it is in his body", "he will do what his nature leads to", moreover, "quite calmly, without exaggeration and fanfare, as simply as eating and drinking" etc. Noting with deep sympathy the new features of Turgenev's hero, Dobrolyubov clearly saw that in this case "covered by artistic consciousness, brought into literature, elevated to a type" of phenomena and characters that really exist in life, previously recognized by him and seen on Russian soil. In Turgenev, Insarov is only friendly close to the Russian people, but he did not develop as a type in the conditions of Russian life. This was associated with Turgenev's understanding of the relationship between man and environment, and this question again led Dobrolyubov to polemics with the author of "On the Eve". In the article "Good intention and activity", published four months after the article "When will the real day come?", Dobrolyubov opposed the "Turgenev school" with its constant motive "environment seizes a person." In Turgenev, a person is powerless against historical circumstances, he is suppressed by the harsh power of the social environment and therefore is not capable of fighting the conditions that oppress the progressive people of Russia. Criticism of Turgenev's fatalism of the environment, detailed in the article "Goodwill and Activity", is evident in the commented work. Dobrolyubov poses the question of the relationship between man and environment dialectically: the same conditions that make the appearance of "new people" impossible, at a certain stage of development, will make their appearance inevitable. Now this stage has been reached in Russia: "We said above that our social environment suppresses the development of personalities like Insarov. But now we can make an addition to our words: this environment has now reached the point that it itself will help the appearance of such a person," - with these words, Dobrolyubov hinted at the fact that in Russia the ground had already been prepared for revolutionary action. Dobrolyubov considered any other tactics in the conditions of 1860 to be liberal quixoticism, and this again sounded polemical in relation to Turgenev, who, in the speech "Hamlet and Don Quixote", published two months before Dobrolyubov's article on "On the Eve", saw the features of quixoticism in people of struggle and selfless conviction, in "enthusiasts" and "servants of the idea." No matter how highly Turgenev placed people of a quixotic warehouse, he still believed that they were fighting windmills and did not achieve their goals. Therefore, Dobrolyubov rejected the nickname Don Quixote from himself and his like-minded people and returned it to Turgenev and the supporters of the "seizing environment" theory (See Yu. Saratov University. Faculty of Philology, 1958, section III, pp. 25-29, and also: Yu. D. Levin. Article by I. S. Turgenev "Hamlet and Don Quixote". To the question of the controversy between Dobrolyubov and Turgenev. - "N. A. Dobrolyubov. Articles and materials. Answered by editor G. V. Krasnov. Gorky, 1965, pp. 122--163.). Perhaps it was precisely the polemical orientation of Dobrolyubov's article against many of Turgenev's views that was perceived by the writer as injustice and harshness. In any case, neither a general analysis of the novel nor a high assessment of the realistic power of Turgenev's art gave rise to such an understanding of Dobrolyubov's article. As for the "troubles" that Turgenev was afraid of, then, apparently, according to his assumption, they could arise for him because of the revolutionary conclusions that Dobrolyubov drew from the analysis of "On the Eve". In the original version of the article, these conclusions were even sharper and clearer. But even in the journal text, and even more so in the text of the collected works, the revolutionary meaning of the article was clearly understood both by contemporaries and by readers of subsequent generations, primarily by leaders of the liberation movement. So, P. L. Lavrov in the article "I. S. Turgenev and Russian Society", placed in the "Bulletin of Narodnaya Volya", 1884, No. 2, speaking of the growth of the revolutionary movement in the seventies, compared with the previous period, stopped at article by Dobrolyubov. “The Russian Insarovs,” he wrote, “people “consciously and wholly imbued with the great idea of the liberation of the motherland and ready to take an active role in it,” got the opportunity to “prove themselves in modern Russian society” (Soch. Dobrolyubova, III, 320). The new Helens could no longer say: "What to do in Russia?" They filled the prisons. They went to hard labor" (See "I. S. Turgenev in the memoirs of the revolutionaries of the seventies", M.--L., "Academia", 1930, pp. 31-32.). V. I. Zasulich, in an article on the fortieth anniversary of Dobrolyubov’s death (Iskra, 1901, No. 13), noted that in a critical analysis of The Eve, Dobrolyubov managed to “write with clarity beyond doubt his revolutionary testament to the rising youth of the educated classes” (V. I. Zasulich, Articles on Russian Literature, M., GIHL, 1960, p. 262. See ibid., p. 249 about the article "When will the real day come?" , his mood, his unsatisfied need for new people and the anxious hope of their appearance. The same issue of Iskra carried an article by V. I. Lenin entitled "The Beginning of the Demonstrations." In it, V. I. Lenin, touching on Dobrolyubov, said that "the whole of educated and thinking Russia is dear to a writer who passionately hated arbitrariness and passionately awaited a popular uprising against the "internal Turks" - against the autocratic government" (V. I. Lenin . Complete collection of works, vol. V, p. 370.). It is important that in this general characterization of Dobrolyubov as a revolutionary writer, V. I. Lenin relied on the article “When will the real day come? ", from where the formula "internal Turks" is taken. 1 The epigraph to the article is the first line of G. Heine's poem "Doktrin", which was supposed to remind the reader of the whole poem. We quote it in the translation of A. N. Pleshcheev (1846): Take the drum and Don't be afraid, Kiss the canteen more loudly! This is the deepest meaning of art, This is the meaning of all philosophy) Knock harder, and with anxiety You awaken the sleepers from sleep! This is the deepest meaning of art... And march ahead yourself! Here is Hegel! I learned this secret a long time ago, I became a drummer long ago! Dobrolyubov greatly appreciated this translation and quoted its last two stanzas in a review of "Heine's Songs translated by M. L. Mikhailov" ("Contemporary", 1858, No V). 2 This is apparently a criticism of S. S. Dudyshkin, who, in connection with the publication of "Tales and Stories" by I. S. Turgenev (1856), wrote that the analysis of these stories "explains, first of all, all fluctuations and changes in the very outlook on life"("Otech. Notes", 1857, No 1, Criticism and Bibliography, p. 2. Our italics). A. V. Druzhinin also reproached Turgenev for being excessively fond of the living issues of the present: “Perhaps,” he wrote, “Mr. Turgenev even weakened his talent in many respects, sacrificing modernity and the practical ideas of the era” (“Library for Reading” , 1857, No 3. Criticism, p. 30). The words quoted in Dobrolyubov's text are a generalization of the judgments about Turgenev by critics of the liberal-gentry camp, and not an exact quote. 3 Bersenev meant T. N. Granovsky. 4 Dobrolyubov alludes to the fact that, under the conditions of censorship, one can speak of the national liberation struggle of any people, except for those who, like the Poles, are oppressed by the Russian autocracy. 5 S. M. Solovyov in his historical writings always negatively assessed popular movements, seeing them as a threat to the integrity of the Russian state. Obviously, here Dobrolyubov has in mind the article by S. M. Solovyov "Little Russian Cossacks before Khmelnitsky" ("Russian Bulletin", 1859, No 2). 6 This story reflected some facts of the turbulent biography of I. I. Parzhnitsky, Dobrolyubov's comrade at the Pedagogical Institute. exiled as a paramedic to a distant outskirts. Then he entered Kazan University, but was expelled from there too. He went abroad, entered the University of Berlin. Information about his participation in the Polish uprising of 1863 has been preserved. See M. I. Shemanovsky. Memories of life in The main pedagogical institute of 1853-1857.-- In the book: "N. A. Dobrolyubov in the memoirs of contemporaries". M.--L., 1961, pp. 59--69, as well as in the comments of S. A. Reiser, ibid., pp. 427--428. 7 Dobrolyubov uses here an anonymous political review in the Moscow Gazette, January 9, 1860, No. 1: "In the North American States, the antagonism between North and South, abolitionists and adherents of slavery, played out over Brown's enterprise, which outraged the slaves in Virginia. This violent and illegal attempt to resolve the issue of slavery was not successful; Brown was executed, and the abolitionists expressed their disapproval of his act, recognized the need to support Negro slavery for the sake of the unity of the federation. In this way, Brown rather damaged the cause to which he sacrificed his life and which can only be resolved legally "(p. 9). 6 Dobrolyubov names the characters in A. N. Ostrovsky's comedies: - "We'll settle our people", Kabanova - "Thunderstorm", Ulanbekova - "Pupil". 7 Dobrolyubov cites a poem by F. I. Tyutchev "To a Russian woman" (original title - "To my countrywoman"). In the edition of F. Tyutchev's Poems (1854), which was used by Dobrolyubov, this text had no title.
Nikolai Alexandrovich Dobrolyubov
When will the real day come?
(“On the Eve”, a story by I. S. Turgenev. “Russian Messenger”, 1860, No. 1–2)
Schlage die Trommel und furchte dich nicht!
Aesthetic criticism has now become the property of sensitive young ladies. From conversations with them, ministers of pure art can draw many subtle and true remarks and then write criticism of this kind. “Here is the content of Mr. Turgenev's new story (a story of content). Already from this pale sketch it is clear how much life and poetry of the freshest and most fragrant is here. But only reading the story itself can give an idea of that flair for the subtlest poetic nuances of life, of that sharp mental analysis, of that deep understanding of the invisible jets and currents of social thought, of that friendly and at the same time bold attitude towards reality, which constitute the distinctive features of Mr. Turgenev. See, for example, how subtly these mental traits are noted (repetition of one part of the story of the content and then an extract); read this wonderful scene, full of such grace and charm (extract); remember this poetic, lively picture (extract) or this tall, bold image (extract). Isn't it true that it penetrates into the depths of your soul, makes your heart beat faster, enlivens and decorates your life, elevates human dignity and the great, eternal significance of the holy ideas of truth, goodness and beauty! Comme c "est joli, comme c" est delicieux!
We are indebted to a small acquaintance with sensitive young ladies because we do not know how to write such pleasant and harmless critics. Frankly admitting this and refusing the role of "educator of the aesthetic taste of the public", we choose another task, more modest and more commensurate with our forces. We simply want to sum up the data that are scattered in the writer's work and which we accept as a fait accompli, as a vital phenomenon that stands before us. The work is simple, but necessary, because, after many occupations and recreations, rarely will anyone want to peer into all the details of a literary work, to disassemble, check and put in their place all the figures that make up this complex account of one of the sides of our social life. life, and then think about the outcome and what it promises and obliges us to do. And this kind of verification and reflection is very useful in connection with Mr. Turgenev's new story.
We know that pure aesthetics will immediately accuse us of striving to impose our opinions on the author and assign tasks to his talent. Therefore, we will make a reservation, even though it is boring. No, we do not impose anything on the author, we say in advance that we do not know for what purpose, as a result of what preliminary considerations, he depicted the story that constitutes the content of the story “On the Eve”. It is not so important for us that wanted tell the author how much, what affected them, even if unintentionally, simply as a result of a faithful reproduction of the facts of life. We value every talented work precisely because in it we can study the facts of our native life, which is already so little open to the gaze of a simple observer. There is still no publicity in our life, except for the official one; everywhere we come across not living people, but officials serving in one department or another: in public places - with pen-writers, at balls - with dancers, in clubs - with gamblers, in theaters - with hairdressing patients, etc. Everyone buries further his spiritual life; everyone looks at you like that, as if saying: “After all, I came here to dance or to show my hair; well, be satisfied that I am doing my job, and please don’t try to extort my feelings and ideas from me. And indeed, no one is tormenting anyone, no one is interested in anyone, and the whole society goes apart, annoyed that it should converge on official occasions, like a new opera, a dinner party, or some kind of committee meeting. Where is there to learn and study the life of a person who has not devoted himself exclusively to the observation of social mores? And then what diversity, what even opposition in the various circles and classes of our society! Thoughts that have already become vulgar and backward in one circle are still hotly disputed in another; what is recognized by some as insufficient and weak, by others it seems too sharp and bold, etc. , her artistic works. The writer-artist, not caring about any general conclusions regarding the state of social thought and morality, is always able, however, to capture their most essential features, brightly illuminate and directly place them before the eyes of thinking people. That is why we believe that as soon as talent is recognized in a writer-artist, that is, the ability to feel and depict the vital truth of phenomena, then, by virtue of this very recognition, his works give a legitimate reason for reasoning about that environment of life, about that era , which caused this or that work in the writer. And the yardstick for a writer's talent here will be the extent to which life is widely captured by him, the extent to which the images that he creates are strong and voluminous.
