Russia has to deplore the loss of one of her most distinguished literary stars, Theodore Dostoievski. He died quite suddenly and unexpectedly, after a short illness, which was not considered dangerous. The proof of the great popularity this writer enjoyed, and of the affection with which he was regarded by the Russian youth, was testified by the honours tendered to his remains. St. Petersburg never witnessed the like of his funeral. Literally, the whole town followed him to the grave. Several members of the Imperial Family were present at the ceremony, an honour never before accorded to any one. The coffin was carried by professors of the University and other distinguished persons, and the procession was 2 ½ versts long.
Dostoïevski was born in 1833 and exiled to Siberia in the reign of the Emperor Nicholas, he passed ten years in exile, and his most popular work is a book in which he describes the life of the exiled people. He has written a great many novels, remarkable for a minute analysis of the human heart and its passions, indeed, this very minuteness renders his books somewhat tedious to the superficial reader, for it cannot be said that the merit of Dostoïevski lies in the form of his productions. His style is heavy and often obscure; and he repeats himself a good deal. But going deeper into his thoughts, and passing over these purely exterior deficiencies, ii will be seen that Dostoievski is not only one of the greatest writers, but one of the greatest poets and philosophers of the time, he must have suffered much during his exile, for his whole being seems to melt with love and tenderness for the poor and oppressed of the earth. His chief idea is to prove that in every human creature, however lost, however guilty, there remains a good and a bright spot—something divine, if it can only be awakened. He selects his types from among the most wretched outcasts of society, and invests them with a poetical interest exceedingly attractive ; but, at the same time, his descriptions are terribly realistic—not of the vulgar realism of the new French school, where all that is repulsive and base in human nature is perversely put before the reader, but of that which consists in the pourtraying of truth by the hand of a genius, and not of a worthless and slavish copyist—such realism as that of Dickens in " Oliver Twist," or in some parts of " Bleak House." Dostoievski has indeed many points in common with our immortal novelist, of whom he was a passionate admirer.
Dostoïevski has written a great many novels, the most celebrated of which are, " Memoirs of the Dead House," "The Crime and its Expiation," and "The Oppressed." His last work, " The Brothers Karazinn," is a rather strange composition, and not easy to be understood. The author has fallen into a kind of mysticism which renders this book difficult to ordinary readers. It has had success only in a certain circle of persons initiated into Dostoievski's somewhat fantastic views upon religious subjects; still there are sublime pages. All Russia has deeply mourned the death of this distinguished man. The Emperor wrote a letter of condolence to Madame Dostoïevski with his own hand, and has settled upon her a pension of 2000 roubles a year. Her two little children will be educated at the expense of the Crown.
It is to be regretted that so few Russian books are translated into English, for there can be no doubt that much of the modern light literature of Russia would give real pleasure to the English novel reader. Some authors are difficult, almost impossible, to translate ; but this is the exception, and Dostoievski, Tolstoi, Shedrin, and many others, would read as well in English as in Russian if carefully translated. the Russians are great translators both in prose and in verse. All the English authors are translated with more or less success, but the Russian translations of Dickens are an utter failure. Several exist, but none come near the mark. Walter Scott reads as well in Russian as in English. A most beautiful translation of Byron's " Don Juan " has just appeared. It is absolute perfection.
At the present moment there are no very prominent talents among the Russian litterateurs, if you except Tourgueneff and Shedrin. Unfortunately the realistic tendency taken by literature in France has had a pernicious effect upon the young Russian writers. The works of Zola especially, being widely spread in Russia, have greatly contributed to deprave the taste as well as the morals of the youth of this country. Boys of 17 at the gymnasiums, and young girls at the institutes, read such productions as Zola's " Curee " and " Nana." When a young author tries his forces he is sure to present to the public a very bad imitation of those French abominations. These novels are often simply descriptions of living persons, and accounts of their private lives, so transparent as to be clear to all who know them. Just now all St. Petersburg is in excitement about one of these novels, printed originally in the feuilleton of the Novaia Vrenia (New Times), and which has given rise to a most scandalous trial coming off at this moment. I will give a short account of it, as it bears upon the question of woman's rights in Russia.
The author of the novel, a certain Sir. Policarpoff, having lived some time in intimate relations with Madame Roudnieff, the doctress (the first lady in Russia who has received the right to practice medicine), and having been coldly treated by Madame Roudnieff, who refused to marry him, wrote an account of his "liaison " with this lady, in which he represented her in the most unfavourable light, not only attacking her honour as a woman, but insinuating that she had received her diploma by intrigues, and that in reality she knew nothing of medicine. The whole of this infamous production, entitled "The Doctress: Self-lauder, Self-lover," is nothing but a mean attack against women of science in general, and in particular against a woman known and respected in all Russia for the perseverance and industry she has shown for years to attain her purpose, and the extent and solidity of whose instruction no one doubts. As to Madame Roudnieffs private life, it is possible that it may not be irreproachable, as the lady is of a materialist cast of mind; but if the private life of every woman could be exposed with impunity in the public papers, what would become of society ? Madame Roudnioff, who is a very energetic person, began a process against her calumniator for "defamation," and against Mr. Bourenia, the redacteur of the New Times, for daring to print such a thing in his paper. The society of St. Petersburg is divided into two parties, one for, and one against Madame Roudnieff. It may be wondered at that there should be a party against the plaintiff, but so it is ! Men grudge a woman her hardly-earned rights to be on a par with themselves, and women loudly exclaim against Madame Roudnieff's supposed immorality.
Madame Roudnieff was defended by the celebrated Alexandroff, the defender of Vera Zasoulitch, who during the trial has contrived to do a good deal of harm to the New Times and its collaborators, the productions of which he termed " the literature of taverns, and houses of perdition." The young advocate was several times called to order by the president ; but he said his say nevertheless, and gained the cause. Policarpoff and Bourenia were condemned to three months in prison, and fined heavily. Unfortunately this affair has thrown a shade over the cause of the female students ; it is now loudly asserted that the study of medicine and anatomy only leads women to their perdition, that it is not possible to respect a woman one meets at the dissecting table, and other such like nonsense. Madame Roudnieff is the only lady-doctor in St. Petersburg, but many have been sent into the remote governments, where their activity is acknowledged to be most useful, and even precious. The unladylike manners and strange appearance of the Russian female students do not so much arise from the studies they pursue or the society they frequent, as from the nihilistic and materialistic tendencies of their minds. A woman without any religious belief is an anomaly, and without religion there can hardly be solid principles of morality. Such is the conclusion to which every foreigner must inevitably come, on considering the present young generation in Russia. Nihilism is not only adopted by political agitators, it has more or less, and in different forms, permeated the whole of the youth of this country. The remedy lies in a totally different elementary education, and this seems at last to be understood !
The Sydney Morning Herald 25 April 1881,
No comments:
Post a Comment