Ivan Turgenev (e-book) Translation by Constance Garnett.
Turgenev is funny. Not Jane Austen funny, but definitely funnier than Tolstoy. If I had to elevator pitch this book, I would actually think of it as a mash-up of Austen and Tolstoy. Bazarov’s admiration of Madame Odintsov’s figure and his declaration that he would love to see her on the dissecting table must have been shocking and funny to the readers of that age. Likewise, Turgenev’s characterization of Bazarov’s father Vassily as a wannabe intellectual and European sophisticate in their relatively humble estate (only 15 serfs!) is as loving and amusing as Austen’s portrayal of Mrs. Bennet and her social climbing airs.
It is remarkable how modern this novel feels especially with the main themes of societal change and generational attitudes and how to deal appropriately. Issues of inequality, modernity and freedom are also major issues that are touched upon in this pretty short book. Apparently, this is one of the first books that popularized the term nihilism in general use. I guess the nihilists would have been as shocking and counter cultural as the 60’s hippie movement and a book that had a nihilist put up as a main protagonist would have maybe been similar to Catcher in the Rye. I do not know how popular Turgenev was in his lifetime and I need to research where he is in the historical record. I know he is after Austen but pretty contemporaneous with Tolstoy. Halfway through the book, I was sort of expecting a narrative of manners where everybody ends up with the right person after some hijinks, some declarations of love and a couple of obstacles overcome. So I was pretty shocked when the end of the book took a dark turn and ended up with Bazarov randomly dying of typhus with all the outstanding issues between him and Madame Odintsov unresolved. There is even a postscript where Turgenev describes all the pragmatic decisions that the main characters take with their lives.
People make compromises, people live and die, love comes and goes and a happy ending is not guaranteed for anyone. I should have been better prepared after reading Anna Karenina, but the lighter tone of Turgenev’s style threw me for a loop. I guess this is the Russian vision of life. Essentially dark and fatalistic and happiness, when it comes, is unexpected and to be appreciated. Contrasted with the English mindset, where good and love generally prevail. I am currently listening to the audiobook of Middlemarch – so it will be interesting to track these nationalistic biases in literature.
Russian society through the lens of Turgenev and Tolstoy is very interesting. An evolution from serfdom towards more modern ideas about individual liberty and basic human dignity. One eye toward Europe as the epitome of culture of society, while still remaining fiercely proud of being Russian. As part of this schism, the upper classes spoke French or sprinkled French phrases in their conversation to signal their sophistication (or lack thereof). It reminds me of society in the Philippines, where use of English in language is a signifier that carries a lot of additional meaning. Another quirk in Russian literature is the different use of names and nicknames for everybody. It seems similar to Japanese manga or anime when characters use different honorifics and titles to signal different shadings of meaning to an interaction or situation. I feel like I do not understand the full subtlety of either example but you can feel it in the background. It is like going to a party in a foreign country and you are only dimly aware of the social convention and relationships flying around you and you can only hope not to make too big an ass of yourself.
Following up with Tolstoy as well, the role of women in Russian society seems subtly different than English society. I couldn’t see strong independent women who have agency of their own being such major characters in English novels. Anna Karenina or Madame Odintsov do not have any parallel figures in English literature of that age. Lady Catherine deBourgh is the only figure that I can think of (in my limited memory bank) that is even close to any comparison and she is a harridan who jealously guards her privilege and is mocked by Austen for lack of true understanding and false sophistication. Russian women seem to have more latitude to establish themselves as people in their own right, whereas English women are almost always in the shadows of their male kin.
This is a very good book. I can see why it is generally in the lists of classics or at the very least in the second tier of great books. Even a week after, I am still thinking about some the issues and themes that were raised in the book. Turgenev is especially good at drawing out character with just a few lines and actions. The book does have a narrator but their voice is not intrusive. For the most part, the actions and motivations seem very natural and logical to the characters. The sudden challenge of a duel by Arkady’s uncle Pavel of Bazarov after he catches him kissing his brother’s mistress seemed a little extreme to my modern sensibility but it seemed like a reasonable course for Pavel’s overly punctilious and correct character.
Bazarov flirting and kissing Fenitchka did seem somewhat reckless, but given his stated rejection of social norms and authorities, not out of character. Despite his professions of not caring about titles and nobility, he obviously does feel somewhat inferior to the upper class represented by Madame Odintsov and this was a major reason for not pressing his suit beyond his declaration of love. His actions with Fenitchka could have been an attempt to salve his pride and attempt a romantic liaison with someone more in line with his station.
Even Bazarov recklessly examining the corpse of a typhus patient and subsequently getting sick and dying reflects the mindset of a young man who believes that rules do not apply to him.
Even though Arkady’s father Nikolai is presented as part of the older generation and already old at the tender age of only 44, the themes of the book do mirror our contemporary issues. It is a study about the different roles of modernity and tradition in Russia and the social changes and turmoil inherent in the change. Bazarov is defined by throwing off all the shackles of the past and the authority of tradition, but he is rootless and without a center to ground his actions. Arkady is smitten with Bazarov’s commitment to the nihilistic ideal, but he only really finds actual happiness when he settles down to his estate and marries Katya.
The fathers in the book are in favor of the changes overall but do not understand their place in it. They imperfectly understand and try to make the best of it, like grandparents using Instagram, but they look to their sons to forge the path to the new age.
This must have been a turbulent age in Russia for archetypes and themes to be repeated and explored so much by their great writers. The disaffected young man with ideas at odds with traditional life in Mother Russia. The independent woman trying to navigate their way in the world. The older landowner trying to maintain the work of generations. The peasant, suddenly told that their life is worth more than they had been led to believe.
But in the end this is a book about a man who tries to create himself anew in the fires of his mind and is brought down through his actions. It is not even really a tragedy – it is like watching a moth die in a flame.
Takeaways:
I should dissect Turgenev’s character and scene descriptions. Every character is three dimensional and real. The world is real. He is a master who makes it seem easy.
Apparently, this is the second novel in a series. Apparently, this was a big success and definitely captured the zeitgeist of its time. I should try to read the other ones and see how they work together.
The year of reading 