Article by Dobrolyubov when will the real day come. Dobrolyubov. When will the real day come?

NOTES

First published in Sovremennik, 1860, No III, dep. III, pp. 31--72, without signature, under the title "New story of Mr. Turgenev" ("On the Eve", 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. St. Petersburg, 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 reached us and pre-censorship proofs. This text contains some stylistic clarifications made by Dobrolyubov in the process of editing the proofs of the journal edition of the article.

The original edition of the article was banned by the censor V. Beketov around February 19, 1860 in proof (See the letter of V.N. Beketov to Dobrolyubov dated February 19, 1860 with a refusal to “pass it in the form in which it was compiled.” - "Testaments", 1913, No. 2, p. 96.). Dobrolyubov was forced to greatly rework 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 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 characteristics given by N.I. Mordovchenko in the options section Full. collection Op. N. A. Dobrolyubov in six volumes, vol. 2. M., 1935, pp. 652--657 "On the debatability in this case of the text of 1862, see our considerations in the article "Old and new editions of Dobrolyubov's works" (present . ed. pp. 555-556), as well as notes by M. Ya. Elinchevskaya “Article by N. A. Dobrolyubov “When will the real day come?”” (Russian Literature, 1965, No. 1, p. 90 --97). Dobrolyubov had to again adapt his article to censorship requirements. Despite all these revisions, the article, after publication, attracted the attention of the Main Directorate of Censorship, which qualified it on July 18, 1860, as well as Dobrolyubov’s other work, “Foreign debates on the situation.” Russian clergy" and "Anthropological principle in philosophy" by N. G. Chernyshevsky as works that "shock the basic principles of monarchical power, the meaning of unconditional law, the family purpose of a woman, the spiritual side of man and arousing hatred of one class for another" (N. A. Dobrolyubov . Complete collection of works, vol. 2. M., 1935.) Censor F. Rachmaninov, who missed the article, was reprimanded.

I. S. Turgenev, who became acquainted with Dobrolyubov’s article about “On the Eve” in its pre-censorship edition, resolutely spoke out against its publication: “It can’t cause me anything except trouble,” wrote Turgenev around February 19, 1860. N. A . Nekrasov, - it is unfair and harsh - I will not know where to run if it is published" (I. S. Turgenev. Complete collection of works. Letters, vol. IV. M., 1962, p. 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 choose, Nekrasov published Dobrolyubov’s article, and this served as the immediate reason for Turgenev’s already overdue break with Sovremennik.

Reprinted after Dobrolyubov’s death in the third volume of the first edition of his works with a new title and with significant changes to the text, the article “When will the real day come?” It was in the 1862 edition that it was perceived by contemporaries and entered the consciousness of reading generations as a document that reflected the aesthetic code and political platform of revolutionary democracy. 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 a review of reviews about “On the Eve”, see I. G. Yampolsky’s notes to Dobrolyubov’s article: N. A. Dobrolyubov. Complete collection of works ., 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 the 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 intention of the work and the ideological position of the author. However, his focus is not so much on “what wanted say author; how much is that affected to them, even if unintentionally, simply as a result of the truthful reproduction of the facts of life." Dobrolyubov has complete confidence in the ability of a realist writer to subordinate his artistic imagination to the course of life itself, the ability to "feel and depict the vital truth of phenomena." Such a principle of criticism therefore cannot exist. applied to writers who didactically subordinate the depiction of modern reality not to the logic of life facts, but to a “preconceived program.”

Turgenev's novel opened up a wide opportunity for the formulation of political tasks that objectively flowed from the picture of Russian life created by the author, although they might not coincide with his personal social 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 forces of the Russian Insarovs, fighters not against external oppression, but against internal enemies. In these transparent allegories it was not difficult to see a call for a people's revolution, headed by courageous and convinced leaders like Turgenev's Insarov.

But it was not only in “On the Eve” that Dobrolyubov saw Turgenev’s “living attitude towards modernity.” Dobrolyubov found sensitivity “to the living strings of society” and the “true tact of reality” in all of Turgenev’s work - in particular, in his interpretation of “superfluous people.” Passive, divided, reflective, not knowing “what to do”, despite all their negative properties, they were for him (as for Turgenev) “educators, propagandists - at least for one female soul, and propagandists” (Characteristic are 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 noted with sympathy 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 Lavretsky’s image, in which Dobrolyubov saw “something legitimately tragic, and not ghostly,” because this hero was faced with the deadening power of religious dogmas or, in Dobrolyubov’s Aesopian language, “a whole huge department of concepts that govern our lives." At the same time, it was not only the programmatic side of Turgenev’s creativity that 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 in them of the motives of disappointment, fall with “infantile rapture of life.” , 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 “ Noble nest": "And what can be said about all the works of Turgenev in general? Is it that after reading them it’s easy to breathe, easy to believe, and feels warm? What do you clearly feel, how the general level in you rises, that you mentally bless and love the author?<...>I haven’t been so shocked for a long time, but I can’t give myself an idea of ​​what exactly. 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 narrative about their personal life. The personal life of the heroes, according to Dobrolyubov’s idea, should be an integral element in such a narrative, where the hero would appear before the reader at the same time as a private person and as a civil fighter, standing face to face “with parties, with people, with someone else’s government, with his like-minded people.” , with enemy force." Dobrolyubov imagined such a novel as a “heroic epic” and Turgenev considered him incapable of creating it. His sphere is not wrestling, but only “training for the fight” - Dobrolyubov said this at the very beginning of the article. Meanwhile, in Insarov’s personality, in his character, in his nature, he found exactly those traits that befitted 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 polemics with Turgenev. Thus, 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” (For this see: N. I. Mordovchenko. Dobrolyubov in the fight against liberal-noble literature. - "News of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR" Department of Social Sciences, 1936, No. 1-2, pp. 245-250.) To people of the old generation who understand duty as moral chains, as following " abstract principle, which they accept without internal heartfelt participation," Dobrolyubov contrasted 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 trifles of the past year" ("Contemporary", 1859 , No I) Dobrolyubov again developed the antithesis of “abstract principles” and living, internal attraction and again laid it as the basis for 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,” wrote he is young The current generation of our time does not know how to shine and make noise. There seem to be no screaming notes in his voice, although there are sounds that are very strong and firm.”

Now, in the article “When will the real day come?”, characterizing Insarov, Dobrolyubov found in him the very traits that he wrote about in his time, speaking about the “young active generation”; love for the homeland and for freedom in Insarov “is not in his mind, not in his heart, not in his imagination, she is in his body,” “he will do what his nature leads him to,” moreover, “completely calmly, without pretense or fanfare, as simply as he eats and drinks.” etc. Noting with deep sympathy the new features of Turgenev’s hero, Dobrolyubov clearly saw that in this case, “the phenomena and characters that actually exist in life, previously recognized by himself and seen in Russian soil. In Turgenev, Insarov is only friendly and close to the Russian people, but he did not develop as a type in the conditions of Russian life.

This was connected 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 intentions and activity,” published four months after the article “When will the real day come?”, Dobrolyubov spoke out against the “Turgenev school” with its constant motive “the environment eats a person.” In Turgenev, man 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. The criticism of Turgenev's fatalism of the environment, developed in detail in the article “Benevolence and Activity,” is also evident in the commented work. Dobrolyubov poses the question of the relationship between man and environment dialectically: the same conditions that make the emergence of “new people” impossible will, at a certain stage of development, 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 add to our words: this environment has now reached the point that it itself will help the emergence of such a person,” - with these words Dobrolyubov hinted 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 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 nature, 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 supporters of the theory of a “seizing environment” (See Yu. G. Oksman. Turgenev and Herzen in the polemic about political essence images of Hamlet and Don Quixote. - "Scientific Yearbook of Saratov University." Faculty of Philology, 1958, dept. III, pp. 25--29, and also: Yu. D. Levin. Article by I. S. Turgenev "Hamlet and Don Quixote". On the issue of the controversy between Dobrolyubov and Turgenev. - "N.A. Dobrolyubov. Articles and materials." Answer. editor G.V. Krasnov. Gorky, 1965, pp. 122--163.).

Perhaps it was precisely the polemical nature of Dobrolyubov’s article against many of Turgenev’s views that was perceived by the writer as unfair and harsh. 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 feared, 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 by both contemporaries and readers of subsequent generations, primarily by figures of the liberation movement.

Thus, P. L. Lavrov in the article “I. S. Turgenev and Russian Society”, published in “Bulletin of the People’s Will”, 1884, No. 2, speaking about the growth of the revolutionary movement in the seventies, in comparison with the previous period, focused on Dobrolyubov's article. “Russian Insarovs,” wrote he - people“consciously and completely imbued with the great idea of ​​​​the liberation of the homeland and ready to take an active role in it,” they received the opportunity to “prove themselves in modern Russian society” (Works of Dobrolyubova, III, 320). The new Elenas 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 “On the Eve,” Dobrolyubov managed to “write with clarity that does not allow doubt his revolutionary testament to the growing youth of the educated classes” (V. I. Zasulich. Articles on Russian literature. M., GIHL, 1960, p. 262. See in the same place, p. 249 about the article “When will the real day come?” better work Dobrolyubova, “who most fully describes the author himself, his mood, his unsatisfied need for new people and the anxious hope for their appearance.”). In the same issue of Iskra, V. I. Lenin’s article “The Beginning of Demonstrations” was published. In it, V.I. Lenin, touching on Dobrolyubov, said that “all educated and thinking Russia cherishes a writer who passionately hated tyranny 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 description of Dobrolyubov as a revolutionary writer, V.I. Lenin relied on the article “When will the real day come?”, from which the formula “internal Turks” was taken.

1 The epigraph to the article is taken from the first line of G. Heine’s poem “Doktrin”, which was supposed to remind the reader of the entire poem. We present it in translation by A. N. Pleshcheev (1846):

Take the drum and don't be afraid
Kiss the sutler more loudly!
This is the deepest meaning of art,
This is the meaning of all philosophy)

Knock harder and worry
Awaken the sleeping ones from their sleep!
This is the deepest meaning of art...
And march ahead yourself!

Here is Hegel! Here is book wisdom!
This is the spirit of philosophical principles!
I learned this secret a long time ago,
I've been a drummer for a long time!

Dobrolyubov greatly appreciated this translation and quoted its last two stanzas in a review of “Heine’s Songs translated by M. L. Mikhailov” (Sovremennik, 1858, No. V).

There was no epigraph in the journal text.

2 We are talking, apparently, about the 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 the fluctuations and changes in the very outlook on life"("Otech. Notes", 1857, No. 1, Criticism and Bibliography, p. 2. Our italics).

Turgenev was also reproached by A.V. Druzhinin for his excessive passion for the living issues of our time: “Perhaps,” he wrote, “Mr. Turgenev even weakened his talent in many ways, sacrificing modernity and the practical ideas of the era” (“Library for Reading” , 1857, No. 3. Criticism, p. 30). The words taken in quotation marks in Dobrolyubov’s text are a generalization of judgments about Turgenev by critics of the liberal-noble camp, and not an exact quote.

3 Bersenev meant T. N. Granovsky.

4 Dobrolyubov hints that, under censorship conditions, one can talk about the national liberation struggle of any people, except those who, like the Poles, are oppressed by the Russian autocracy.

5 S. M. Soloviev in his historical works 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 stormy biography of I. I. Parzhnitsky, Dobrolyubov’s friend at the Pedagogical Institute. From the institute he moved to the Medical-Surgical Academy, from where he was exiled as a paramedic to a distant outskirts for violating discipline. Then he entered Kazan University, but was expelled from there too. He went abroad and entered the University of Berlin. Information has been preserved about his participation in the Polish uprising of 1863. See M. I. Shemanovsky. Memories of life at the Main Pedagogical Institute in 1853-1857. - In the book: "N. A. Dobrolyubov in the memoirs of his contemporaries." M. --L., 1961, pp. 59--69, as well as in the comments of S. A. Reiser, ibid., pp. 427--428.

7 Dobrolyubov here uses an anonymous political review in the Moscow Bulletin of January 9, 1860, No. 1: “In the North American States, the antagonism of North and South, abolitionists and supporters of slavery played out over Brown’s enterprise, which outraged slaves in Virginia. This violent and the illegal attempt to resolve the issue of slavery was unsuccessful; Brown was executed, and the abolitionists expressed their disapproval of his action, recognizing the need to support the slavery of blacks for the sake of the unity of the federation. Thus, 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: Bruskov - “There’s a hangover at someone else’s feast”, Bolshov - “We’re our own people - we’ll be numbered”, Kabanova - “The Thunderstorm”, Ulanbekova - “The Pupil”.

7 Dobrolyubov cites F. I. Tyutchev’s poem “To a Russian Woman” (the original title was “To My Countrywoman”). In the edition of "Poems by F. Tyutchev" (1854), which Dobrolyubov used, this text did not have a title.

Nikolai Alexandrovich Dobrolyubov

When will the real day come?

(“On the Eve”, story by I. S. Turgenev. “Russian Bulletin”, 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 pure art can pick up many subtle and correct remarks and then write criticism of this kind. “Here is the content of Mr. Turgenev’s new story (story content). Already from this pale sketch it is clear how much life and poetry is the freshest and most fragrant. But only reading the story itself can give an idea of ​​that instinct for the subtlest poetic shades of life, that acute mental analysis, that deep understanding of the invisible streams and currents of social thought, that friendly and at the same time courageous attitude towards reality that make up distinctive features talent of Mr. Turgenev. 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, filled with 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 your soul, makes your heart beat stronger, enlivens and decorates 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!”

We owe our little acquaintance with sensitive young ladies the fact that we do not know how to write such pleasant and harmless criticism. Frankly admitting this and refusing the role of “educator” aesthetic taste public,” we choose another task, more modest and more commensurate with our strengths. We simply want to summarize the data that is scattered in the writer’s work and which we accept as an accomplished fact, as a vital phenomenon standing before us. The work is simple, but necessary, because, with a lot of activities and rest, rarely does anyone want to look closely at all the details of a literary work, disassemble, check and put in their place all the figures from which this complex report is compiled about one of the aspects of our life. public life, and then think about the outcome and what it promises and commits us to. And this kind of verification and reflection is very useful regarding the new story of Mr. Turgenev.

We know that pure aestheticians will immediately accuse us of trying to impose their opinions on the author and assign tasks to his talent. So let’s make a reservation, even though it’s boring. No, we are not imposing anything on the author, we say in advance that we do not know for what purpose, due to what preliminary considerations, he depicted the story that makes up the content of the story “On the Eve.” For us it is not so important that wanted tell the author how much, what affected 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 lives other than the official one; Everywhere we encounter not living people, but officials serving in one department or another: in public places - with neat writers, at balls - with dancers, in clubs - with gamblers, in theaters - with hairdressing patients, etc. Everyone continues to bury his spiritual life; everyone looks at you as if saying: “After all, I came here to dance or to show off my hair; Well, be happy that I’m doing my job, and please don’t try to extort my feelings and concepts from me.” And indeed, no one is asking anyone, no one is interested in anyone, and the whole society goes apart, annoyed, that should converge on official occasions, like new opera, a dinner party or some committee meeting. Where can a person learn and study life who has not devoted himself exclusively to observing social mores? And then there is 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, seems too harsh and bold to others, etc. What falls, what wins, what begins to settle and prevail in moral life society - we have no other indicator for this except literature, and mainly its artistic works. The writer-artist, not caring about any general conclusions regarding the state of social thought and morality, always knows how to grasp their most essential features, brightly illuminate and directly place them before the eyes of reflective 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, already by virtue of this very recognition, his works provide a legitimate reason for reasoning about that environment of life, about that era , which evoked this or that work in the writer. And the measure of a writer’s talent here will be the extent to which he has captured life, the extent to which the images he has created are durable and vast.

(The day before. The story of I.S. Turgenev.

"Russian Bulletin", 1860, N 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 glean many subtle and true remarks and then write criticism like this: “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 there is of the freshest and fragrant. But only reading the story itself can give an idea of ​​that instinct for the subtlest poetic shades of life, that keen mental analysis, that deep understanding of the invisible streams and currents of social thought, that friendly and at the same time courageous attitude towards reality, which make up the distinctive features. traits of Mr. Turgenev's talent. 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, filled with such grace and charm (extract); ) or this lofty, bold image (extract). Isn’t it true that this penetrates into the depths of your soul, makes your heart beat stronger, enlivens and decorates your life, elevates before you human dignity and the great, eternal significance of the holy ideas of truth and goodness. and beauty! Comme c"est joli, comme c"est delicieux!"*.

____________________

* How beautiful it is, how charming it is! (French).

We owe our little acquaintance with sensitive young ladies the fact that we do not know how to write such pleasant and harmless criticism. 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 strengths. We simply want to summarize the data that is scattered in the writer’s work and which we accept as an accomplished fact, as a vital phenomenon standing before us. The work is simple, but necessary, because, with a lot of activities and rest, rarely does anyone want to look closely at all the details of a literary work, to disassemble, check and put in their place all the figures from which this complex report is compiled about one of the aspects of our social life. life, and then think about the outcome and what it promises and what it obliges us to. And this kind of verification and reflection is very useful regarding the new story of Mr. Turgenev.

We know that pure aestheticians[*]* will immediately accuse us of trying to impose their opinions on the author and assign tasks to his talent. So let’s make a reservation, even though it’s boring. No, we are not imposing anything on the author, we say in advance that we do not know for what purpose, due to what preliminary considerations, he depicted the story that makes up 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 he said, 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 lives other than the official one; Everywhere we encounter not living people, but officials serving in one department or another: in public places - with neat writers, at balls - with dancers, in clubs - with gamblers, in theaters - with hairdressing patients, etc. Everyone continues to bury his spiritual life; everyone looks at you as if saying: “after all, I came here to dance or to show off my hair; well, be happy that I’m doing my job, and please don’t try to extort my feelings and ideas from me.” ". And indeed, no one is asking anyone, no one is interested in anyone, and the whole society goes apart, annoyed, that should converge on official occasions, like a new opera, a dinner party or some committee meeting. Where can a person learn and study life who has not devoted himself exclusively to observing social mores? And then there is 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 some consider insufficient and weak, others consider too harsh and bold, etc. What falls, what wins, what begins to establish itself and prevail in the moral life of society - we have no other indicator for this except literature, and mainly its artistic works. The writer-artist, not caring about any general conclusions regarding the state of social thought and morality, always knows how to grasp their most essential features, brightly illuminate and directly place them before the eyes of reflective 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, already by virtue of this very recognition, his works provide a legitimate reason for reasoning about that environment of life, about that era , which evoked this or that work in the writer. And the measure of a writer’s talent here will be the extent to which he has captured life, the extent to which the images he has created are durable and vast.

____________________

* For notes on words marked [*], see the end of the text.

We considered it necessary to express this in order to justify our technique - to interpret the phenomena of life itself on the basis of a literary work, without, however, imposing on the author any pre-conceived ideas and tasks. The reader sees that for us it is precisely those works that are important in which life manifested itself, and not according to a program previously invented by the author. For example, we didn’t talk about “A Thousand Souls” [*], because, in our opinion, the entire social side of this novel was forced into a preconceived idea. Therefore, there is nothing to discuss here, except to what extent the author cleverly composed his essay. It is impossible to rely on the truth and living reality of the facts presented by the author, because his inner attitude towards these facts is not simple and truthful. We see a completely different attitude from the author to the plot in 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 author’s very thought and imagination involuntarily submitted.

Supplying main task literary criticism - an explanation of those phenomena of reality that caused the known piece of art, we should note that when applied to the stories of Mr. Turgenev, this task still has its own meaning. G. Turgenev can rightly be called a painter and singer of the 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 paid attention (as much as circumstances allowed) to the issue that was on the agenda and was already vaguely beginning to worry society. We hope on another occasion to trace all literary activity Turgenev and therefore now we will not dwell on this. Let’s just say that this author’s instinct for the living strings of society, this ability to immediately respond to every noble thought and honest feeling that is just beginning to penetrate into consciousness the best people, we attribute a significant share of the success that Mr. Turgenev constantly enjoyed among the Russian public. Of course, literary talent itself contributed a lot to this success. But our readers know that Mr. Turgenev’s talent is not one of those titanic talents that, solely by the power of poetic representation, amazes, captivates you and draws you to sympathy for a phenomenon or idea with which you are not at all inclined to sympathize. Not stormy, impetuous force, but on the contrary - softness and some kind of poetic moderation serve as characteristic features of his talent. Therefore, we believe that he could not arouse the general sympathy of the public if he dealt with issues and needs that were completely alien to his readers or had not yet been aroused in society. Some would notice the charm of the poetic descriptions in his stories, the subtlety and depth in the outlines different persons and provisions, but, without any doubt, this would not be enough to make lasting success and fame for the writer. Without a living attitude towards modernity, everyone, even the most sympathetic and talented narrator, must suffer the fate of Mr. Fet, who was once praised, but of whom now only a dozen amateurs remember a dozen best poems. A lively attitude towards modernity saved Mr. Turgenev and strengthened his constant success among the reading public. Some thoughtful critic[*] even once reproached Mr. Turgenev for the fact that his activities so strongly reflected “all the fluctuations of social thought.” But, despite this, we see here precisely the most vital side of Mr. Turgenev’s talent, and with this side we explain why each of his works has been met with such sympathy, almost enthusiasm, until now.