My Country Is Russian Literature : History and Literary Development in the Golden Age

Transcription

1 My Country Is Russian Literature : History and Literary Development in the Golden Age Kathleen Conti History and literature intertwine so that it is impossible to explore one without an understanding of the other. Russia s nineteenth century saw a time of unsurpassed literary genius. Truly, literary critic Maksim Antonovich wrote in 1863, it was the Golden Age of our literature (Antonovich 85). From then on, this era s literature became united under the banner of the Golden Age, which saw the development of Pushkin, Gogol, Dostoevsky, and Tolstoy. Authors of this era rose to an unparalleled prominence not only for their artistic skills in crafting narratives, but because of the social and political conditions of the time. Their work created an atmosphere in which literature became a central conduit for discourse about what Russia was and what it would be. Due to the government s censorship of newspapers, it was literature that developed into an outlet for addressing the great questions facing society even sparking social change. In this way, Russian literature became the voice of social conscience for the Russian people. Russia s Golden Age emerged on foundations laid during the reign of Peter the Great. His thirty-year reign fundamentally changed the course of Russia over the preceding five centuries. Even today, Peter the Great remains one of the most popular figures in the Russian consciousness. Previous centuries of relative isolation from Europe meant that Russia had not substantially contributed to the great intellectual debates occurring there; many writers of the Golden Age would later subscribe to this belief of Russia s perceived backwardness in comparison to the West. Peter introduced his subjects to a broad range of Western culture and technology, which promoted a flourishing in Russia s arts, natural sciences, and philosophy. Dedicated to opening the country to Europe, Peter s efforts allowed European culture to more effectively blow into Russia through the newly-built city and port of St. Petersburg, his window on the West, in Pushkin s phrase. Peter understood the History and Literary Development in the Golden Age 3

2 necessity of a port city to better facilitate European connections. Despite the inhospitable terrain and weather, St. Petersburg faced the Baltic Sea and thus allowed easier access to the European continent. Peter s political, economic, and technological reforms touched all areas of life. The most influential reform was his cultural revolution, for it profoundly changed the the architecture, the visual, and the verbal (Cracraft 77). A verbal revolution required more printing presses, as well as the paper to feed them. Peter oversaw the expansion of the printing industry and the construction of local paper mills so that Russia would no longer rely upon costly imports. These changes also included the standardization of the alphabet, numerals, spelling, and syntax, which had not been revised since the development of the written language more than six centuries earlier (Cracraft 97 99). Authors embraced these modifications and adapted to new styles and genres brought from Europe, including plays, satire, new prose forms, and poetry. When Catherine the Great took the throne in 1762, she expanded upon Peter s reforming legacy. Peter and Catherine s Westernoriented cultural and political reforms fueled Russia s rise to a status of global power. Catherine the Great doubled the size of the army and navy and expanded Russia s territory into such areas as presentday Poland, Lithuania, and Belarus, along with parts of present-day Ukraine, Romania, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Siberia, Alaska, and even an encampment north of San Francisco. Catherine s dedication to the arts generated many distinctive architectural landmarks that define the Petersburg landscape. A distinctive, if disturbed, aristocratic culture flourished from the mid-eighteenth century to the mid-nineteenth (Billington 208). This allowed for new architectural styles and performance arts, such as theatre, opera, and ballet, in addition to the establishment in 1755 of Russia s first university by poet and scholar Mikhail Lomonosov, among others. Yet Catherine the Great also imposed strict control on works she perceived as dangerous. Alexander Radishchev s 1790 Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow illuminated many of the problems facing Russian society, such as serfdom, corruption, and economic decay. In response, Catherine sentenced him to death, but 4 Critical Insights

3 eventually decided to exile him to Siberia instead (Riasanovsky, History of Russia 295). Similar veins of criticism did not reemerge until the later years of the Golden Age, particularly in the works of Gogol, Belinsky, Herzen, and Dostoevsky. If writers of the nineteenth century recognized Peter s revolution as an important part of their history, they also argued that few truly outstanding Russian works of literature existed before the nineteenth century. Critic Vissarion Belinsky claimed we have no literature (Maguire 4). Others termed the eighteenth century as the Age of Imitation, in describing Russian reception of the new art forms introduced by Peter and his successors (Rzhevsky 79). Indeed, classic Russian literature did not truly come into its own until the years following the Great Patriotic War of 1812, during the reign of Catherine s grandson Alexander I. Tsar Alexander I ascended the throne in 1801; the Golden Age dawned during his reign. Unlike his tyrannical predecessor (and father) Paul I, Alexander I seemed to represent the best of the Enlightenment that humanness, progressiveness, affirmation of human dignity, and freedom, which educated Russians, one way or another, feverishly desired, (Riasanovsky, History of Russia 302). Russia, still a developing empire, required reforms to adapt to the rapidly changing times, such as the issues raised by the French Revolution and the growth of the industrial revolution. The question of serfdom and how to manage it, if it should continue gained importance, especially as much of Europe had already abolished feudal forms of social control. Pursuing reform, Alexander I reversed some of Paul s laws, such as bans on foreign books, international travel, and private publishing houses (Wachtel and Vinitsky 57). These developments, along with a dramatically expanding education system, fostered a growing literary culture. It was a paradoxical time, embodying an admiration for Western culture along with an eagerness to define and establish a distinctly Russian literary style. Within this paradox lay other contradictions, such as the generational and political struggle between Romanticism and Realism, and equal fascination with stories of traditional folk culture alongside grand History and Literary Development in the Golden Age 5

4 military tales of modern heroes and the cult of genius surrounding figures such as Shakespeare and Goethe (Wachtel and Vinitsky 58). While Alexander I intended to undertake great reforms, his reign was defined more by Russia s foreign relations than by domestic matters. Russia s relationship with revolutionary France had become complicated. Sometimes they allied ( ), other times they were adversaries ( and ). Within Russia, some questioned the wisdom of absorbing French culture, particularly in light of the bloodshed in France s multiple revolutions. Let Russians be Russian, not copies of the French, wrote Princess Dashkova, an influential intellectual and the only female president of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Let us remain patriots and retain the character of our ancestors (Figes 68). Nevertheless, the French models heavily influenced Russia s politics and culture, for many of Alexander s reforms often borrowed from French legislation. Yet the French, so admired by the Russians, invaded under Napoleon s command in Napoleon hoped to introduce ideals of liberty at bayonet point and abolish autocratic rule in Russia. Napoleon thought he needed to swiftly defeat the Russians in order to succeed in his plans for European domination (Wachtel and Vinitsky 132). They must be thrown back into their icy wastes, Napoleon announced to his staff in July of that year, so that they do not meddle in the affairs of civilized Europe for the next twenty-five years at least (Zamoyski 159). Neither swift, nor victorious, Napoleon s summer invasion did not go according to plan. Napoleon assumed his armies would crush Alexander s within three weeks, and thus they did not carry supplies to sustain them for the winter (Zamoyski 144). When the news of the intrusion of Napoleon s countless hordes spread through Russia, Russian officer Prince N. V. Golitsyn wrote, one can truly say that one feeling inspired every heart, a feeling of devotion to the Tsar and fatherland (Zamoyski 200). Patriotic fervor spread throughout Russia, rallying allegiance around Alexander I and the empire. The characterization of Alexander as a benevolent angel became more pronounced once Napoleon s troops invaded. At the insistence of his advisors, Alexander I soon 6 Critical Insights

5 left St. Petersburg for Moscow to rouse support, morale, and funds for the coming battles. His presence there became a central episode in the myth of national sacrifice and unity woven around the events of 1812 (Wortman 109). This myth proved especially important since Napoleon stormed over the border with an army of extraordinary size, totaling over half a million men (Zamoyski 140). The Russians soon adopted a policy of strategic retreat, luring Napoleon s troops deeper into the empire s interior, where they would be further from supply lines. Meanwhile, the Russians followed a scorched earth policy, burning their own towns and fields to eliminate any potential supplies and fodder that the French might obtain or loot. A bloody battle at Borodino on September 7 maimed Napoleon s army but did not check its advance Napoleon and his forces soon arrived in Moscow, only to find the city in flames. Such terrible tactics have no precedent in the history of civilization, Napoleon wrote, To burn one s own cities!... What savage determination! What a people! What a people! (Massie 158). Napoleon s initial hope for a swift victory upon his June invasion had not materialized. He fled to Paris in October with winter rapidly approaching, leaving his men to trudge back to France. Less than one-twentieth of his men returned home, leaving the Russians victorious despite substantial losses (Milner-Gulland and Dejevsky 116). Although 1812 s main events are known, the specifics and significance of the year remained shrouded in mystery and nationalist narratives. Many accounts by British, French, and German historians significantly diminish Russia s involvement in Napoleon s downfall (Lieven 283). For Russians at the time, the war s savagery, suffering, and sacrifice remained incomprehensible and much of the literature and historical study produced in the subsequent years and decades sought to explain it (Zamoyski xv). Even today, the 1812 Napoleonic invasion resonates within Russia. Historians have studied these events more than any other moment in Russia s millennium of pre- Soviet history, and much of Russia s literature, particularly at the outset of the Golden Age, took inspiration from it (Troitskii 6). Following the war, leading scholars and philosophers examined what it meant to be Russian. This mission to define the Russian History and Literary Development in the Golden Age 7

6 nation carried an intrinsic threat to the Tsar and to autocratic rule. Following the defeat of Napoleon, many felt that they owed loyalty and love to the nation, rather than the autocratic state. A state is a political, governing entity in Russia s case, the tsar and his government. A nation is a group of people who feel united by perceived commonalities, whether by language, history, religion, culture, or ethnicity. This distinction allowed writers to criticize the state and the Tsar s rule, while still remaining devoted to the Russian nation. This divide still exists between terms russkij and rossijskij (русский and российский) where the former refers to those things that are national, purely, ethnically Russian, and the latter refers to the state, the federation, and the agents of government. After the Great Patriotic War, many came to see that Alexander I had largely abandoned his previous course of reform. Although adored by the Russian people during the war years, Alexander s popularity later waned among the educated elites. Characterized by the division between the promise of reform and the failure to do so, Alexander I s regime set the stage for unrest. In pursuing the fleeing French after 1812, Russians had witnessed the striking contrast between Europe and their own Russia, where serfdom remained and the exchange of ideas struggled under government restrictions (Crankshaw 28). Prior to the war, Alexander I had encouraged many of these men to ponder how Russia might undergo radical and necessary reforms. Yet true to his contradictory nature, Alexander I s focus on the necessity of reforming Russia soon shifted to advocating for imposing order in the rest of Europe. Engineering the Holy Alliance of European Christian monarchs to restore conservatism, Alexander I s enthusiasm for reforms faded for Russia. Recognizing this, political societies critical of the regime soon emerged, organizing secretly. Those who had fought in the war specifically young officers from elite families could not easily return to life as it had been. Although having been raised to see both peasants and serfs as morally and intellectually inferior, the officers had fought alongside the peasants and serfs, and discovered a common humanity and nation. We had taken part in the greatest events of history, one veteran wrote, and it was unbearable to... 8 Critical Insights