Wither Russia? The image of Russia in the fiction of the nineteenth and twentieth century Essay title: The image of St. Petersburg in the context of the development of Russian literature. (Discuss Dostoevsky’s treatment of the city in Crime and Punishment) ”At the beginning of July, during a spell of exceptionally hot weather, towards evening, a certain young man came down the street from a little room he rented from some tenants in Stolyarny Lane and slowly, almost hesitantly, set off towards Kokushkin Bridge. (…) Outside the heat was terrible, with humidity to make it worse; and the crowds of people, the slaked lime everywhere, the scaffolding, the bricks, the dust and that distinctively summer aroma, so familiar to every inhabitant of St. Petersburg who has not the means to rent a dacha in the country - all these things had a chattering effect on the young man’s already jangled nerves. The unbearable stench from the drinking dens, of which there are in this quarter of the city inordinately many, and the drunks he kept running into every moment or two, even though it was still working hours, completed the sad and loathsome colouring of the scene. An emotion of the most profound repugnance flickered for a moment in the young man’s features. (…) But soon he appeared to fall into a deep brooding, which might more correctly have been described as a kind of oblivion, and now, as he walked along, he ceased to be aware of his surroundings, nor had he any desire to be aware of them.” (Crime and Punishment, p.1/2) The are, in a somewhat condensed form, the opening pages of Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment. These lines et the tone and atmosphere for the novel, giving the reader many clues about the content of the novel. They also show Dostoevsky’s great skill at paying attention to minute details, his skill in describing city life in its most basic environment, at its most poetic. Crime and Punishment, published in 1866, is the story of a young, impoverished (ex-) student named Raskalnikov living in St. Petersburg. The plot is very simple: it evolves around Raskalnikov’s murder of an old pawnbroker and her unfortunate sister. The subplots are linked to Raskalnikov’s justification for the murders. On the one hand he hopes to save his sister Dunya from an arranged marriage with Luzhin, of which he himself is supposed to benefit. On the other, there is his attachment to the young prostitute Sonya, to whom he first confesses the murders. Through her Dostoevsky voices his idea on suffering. Torment is necessary in the sense that only through it one can reach happiness. Surrounding the plot are a number of different characters such as Svidrigailov (Raskalnikov’s evil double), Razumikhin (a fellow student and friend) and Marmeladov (a drunk civil servant). I shall talk in more detail about Dostoevsky’s writing of Crime and Punishment, but first I would like to show Dostoevsky’s origins and how he formed his views on the city. Finally, I will discuss his portrayal of St. Petersburg in Crime and Punishment. To discuss the origin’s of the theme of the city, especially St. Petersburg one has to go as far back as 1833, namely to Pushkin. Alexander Pushkin then wrote the poem of The Bronze Horseman, subtitled A Petersburg Tale. Its setting is that of the great flood of 1824 and its protagonist is the lowly government clerk Yevgeny. The choice of the leading role is already an interesting point to note, as Pushkin choose someone from the lower classes rather than someone from the upper echelons of society, which was the more accepted thing to do. In this tale the clerk is considering getting married when the flood occurs. After the flood have subsided again, he goes in search of his beloved, only to discover that her house has been washed away and that she is probably dead. This send Yevgeny over the edge and he becomes insane. He alienates himself from his environment and finally turns his back on society. The poem ends with Yevgeny standing by the statue of the bronze horseman and whispering to the statue of Peter the Great: ”All right then, wonder-worker, you just wait” (The Bronze Horseman, p.257) He then flees in total fright, pursued by the sounds of hooves. His body is finally found on a small island by the washed up house of his beloved. Out of respect he is buried there. The above mentioned quotation was a vicious dig at the current underlying political mood in Russia. The story itself is not a political one. It is the underlying tone and often, almost in passing, used metaphors. Pushkin was like many Russians disappointed with the way things were going in Russia. For him Petersburg was the symbol of progress, of modernisation. It’s building by Peter 1st was a challenge to the elements and an opening to the West. He criticises the Tsar in his poem for lacking the vision and the strength to defeat the problems. His symbolism is that of the weather: ”In that dread year the late Tsar in his glory >Still ruled Russia. He came out on to the balcony, Sad, troubled, and said: ‘Tsars cannot master The divine element’…” (The Bronze Horseman, p.251) This is a sad reference to the fact that the Tsars used to be able to master the elements. Petersburg is the obvious proof, as it was built on the surrounding swamps. Puskin also continues this metaphor to illustrate how detached the Tsar has become from the rest of his country, as is shown on page 252 of The Bronze Horseman: ”The squares like lakes; broad rivers of streets Pouring into them. The palace a sad island.” One can now see how Pushkin employed the city, its streets, its people and its weather to convey a subtle message. The poem went further than just expressing a political opinion and mood. By using the city as a mean, as a backdrop, as a setting, Pushkin encompassed the whole of Petersburg, voicing not only the opinion of the intelligentsia, but also that of the ordinary people. He demonstrated the will of the people that the Tsar so often regarded as his property. The next step in this “literary revolution” was Gogol. Whereas Pushkin’s setting was the outlying districts of Petersburg and Senate Square, Gogol now moves into the town centre. Furthermore is his treatment of the city not realistic, but rather fantastic and supernatural. Even though many of his St. Petersburg Tales focus on Nevsky Prospect, his most famous short story The Overcoat (1842) does not mention any part of town directly. This demonstrates the seclusion of the lonely individual in this fantastic city. The short story deals with the dilemma faced by Akaky Akakievich when the need arises to acquire a new overcoat. He decides to purchase the new overcoat and his work colleagues throw a party in honor of this acquisition. For a short while Akaky breaks with his secluded and lonely life, and he enters the fantastic world of St. Petersburg. His joy, however, is short-lived as he is attacked and his overcoat is stolen on his way back from the party. Some critics, such as M. Berman, suggested that his overcoat actually got stolen on Nevsky Prospect. At that time Nevsky Prospect was the place for all the classes to mingle. It was the only place where politics could be discussed a little, hence it was something of a cultural center, a place of marvels. This tale also gives a small insight into Russian world order (hierarchy). Upon having his coat stolen, Akaky tries to enlist the help of one of his friends, who has just been promoted to the rank of general. This attempt all but annihilates Akaky. The promotion has gone to his friend’s head and he throws the lesser Akaky out. Gogol raises the issue of social standing quite often in his stories. He demonstrated the self-effacing inequality of the ranks. This was very much the same line of thinking as that of Chernichevksy, who wrote What is to be done? in 1863 while in prison. Even though many critics believed this work to be inferior it did contain one vital element. It is the tale of Lopukhov, a student, who on his way back from giving a lesson on the outskirts of Petersburg, literally bumps into a man of a higher rank. Instead of making way for him, Lopukhov picks the man up and dumps him the gutter. Now this was quite a bold move as it could result in a jail sentence. Surprisingly though, people around him do not seem to take any notice of this action. On the contrary he gets encouraging smiles from his equals. Chernichevsky’s political point is obvious. Summarising one can say that Pushkin started the trend of using the city as a backdrop for urban life and its opinions. Gogol tool it a step further by placing the problems into the city centre, yet rendering the surroundings supernatural. Chernichevsky was the boldest of them all (probably why he was improsined). So where does Dostoevsky come into all this? Dostoevsky came to fame in the early ’40s, he did so by publishing the novel Poor Folk (1846), so in between Gogol and Chernichevsky. It is during this period that we find Dostoevsky trying out different genres and developing his theme of the city. This initial fame he acquired was somewhat short lived and his next publication The Double was a great disappointment and the following publication Mr Pokharchin nearly ruined his named. It is after these unsuccessful publications that he finds himself out of pocket and therefore turns to journalism and to a very popular style of the time: the feuilleton. This style of writing first originated in Paris and brought overnight success to Eugène Sue, who published Les mystère de Paris. The feuilletons had started out by reporting on the social events. It soon gained more depth and turned into a roman feuilleton discussing the city life in general. The French regarded the feuilleton as: ”The literary equivalent of the sketch painting”. (D. Fanger; Dostoevsky and Romantic Realism, p.134) Dostoevsky who already enjoyed walking the streets aimlessly, looking at people and buildings, enjoyed his new job as a Feuilletonist all the more as it got him out in search of subjects. Now I feel is also the time to talk about Dosoevsky’s approach to literature. His stories are set in the middle to lower classes, he enjoyed the down trodden neighbourhoods, in contrast he portrayed the upper class ones ”singularly uncharacterised” (D. Fanger, p.133). His world was that of the poor and lowly. He was looking for a new “word” in Russian literature. For him the literature so far was that of the gentry and landowners, which were so frequently portrayed by Tolstoy and Turgenev. His new “word” was that of the: ”… the de-classed gentry, the petty government official and the urban intelligentsia, struggling, helpless and without roots, to find their way in the chaos of the indifferent city.” (D. Fanger, p.134) What was so special about his feuilletons? His approach was different in that he moved away from reporting on social events, and whenever he did mention them, he did so in passing, reducing their importance considerably, almost ridiculing them in contrast to his detailed report of his stroll around town. During these strolls he would use the encounters with some of the most striking character he had met. In his first feuilleton (27th April 1847), he talks about the encounters on has on Nevsky Prospect, only to conclude that they are empty and futile. The second feuilleton shows a different approach to writing. There he uses the method of personification, commonly used by Balzac. Published on 11th May, he compares Petersburg to a son whose father is wealthy and established, and who has just heard about Enlightenment. Not knowing what it is, he wants his son to educated in that manner. His son learns and starts living his own life and starts being critical. Naturally his father is upset by son’s behaviour and blames the West and its Enlightenment. Dostoevsky’s point is that Petersburg being built as a window to the West, is of course the Russian centre for free thinking and progressive thought. The father, i.e. the Tsar is disappointed and angry with these trends and attempts to put an end to free thought. ”…(papa) grumbles, gets angry, accuses both Enlightenment and the West, and is vexed chiefly that ‘her own eggs are starting to teach the chicken’.” (Dostoevsky, Saint Petersburg News [SPN] 1847) His third paper, published June 1st, takes yet another stance. This time Dostoevsky considers the architecture of Petersburg. From it he draws conclusions about the state of mind of the people in Russian. Seeing that Petersburg is constantly growing and changing according to the plan of Peter the Great. He sees its diversity of buildings, its unity of thought, in the sense that every period was related to the West. Therefore the city is forever linked with progress and change. ”Even all this diversity testifies to a unity of thought and a unity of movement. This row of buildings of Dutch architecture recalls the time of Peter the Great. This building in the style of Rastrelli recalls the century of Catherine; (…) but all together recalls the history of European life of Petersburg and of all Russia.” (Dostoevsky, SPN 1847) It is noteworthy that while his views on the future remained positive, so did the image of Petersburg. Yet as his visions started disintegrating, as is seen in his later works: Notes from the Underground, Crime and Punishment; the city became more and more gloomy. His last feuilleton, published 15th June, is the last example of his dreamy contemplation of Petersburg. Here the city is compared to a sickly girl, and even though she is ill, her eyes radiate warmth and beauty. This girl is symbol not only for the town, but also for its nature. Dostoevsky never spent much time with nature, his environment is urban, i.e. man made. The critic Fanger concluded therefore that it was not surprising at all to compare the city’s nature to a sickly child (Dostoevsky and Romantic Realists, p.145). Here another of Dostoevky’s talents become apparent, his use of one symbol to entwine, in this case, two themes. ”There is something unutterably naïve, even touching in our St. Petersburg when it suddenly displays all its might, all its force, puts on green, becomes covered with young leaves, dresses up, turns motley with flowers… I don’t know why it reminds me of that young girl, sickly and ailing, on whom you sometimes look with pity, sometimes with compassionate love, and sometimes don’t notice, but who suddenly, in one instant and somehow unexpectedly, becomes marvellous, unutterably beautiful, …” (Dostoevsky, SPN 1847) Concluding the period of his writing feuilletons, one can notice that he used it to try out different literary techniques and to develop his city themes: isolation, the dreamer and native/urban environment. This period showed some of Dostoevsky’s great talent. Though his views on the city darkened more and more, his sensitivity for his environment never faded. This is exemplary of his vision, be it before his exile in 1849 or after it, of the Neva. After his exile in 1854, for participating in the Petrachevsky Circle (a revolutionary circle in the eyes of the government), began the period of his great novels. I shall only talk about Crime and Punishment. As mentioned previously it was published in 1866, after The Notes from the Underground (1865), a novel which re-established him as one of the great Russian novelists. Many critics regarded Dostoevsky’s work as the direct continuation from Chernichevsky, only more matured and structured. Crime and Punishment was remarkable in many ways. Predominantly, because of its treatment of the themes of transgression, suffering and alienation from humanity. However it was also remarkable because of its setting. A recent Soviet critic summarised it best: ”The first great Russian novel in which the climactic moments of the action are played out in dirty taverns, on the street, in the sordid back rooms of the poor” (Mochulsky, Dostoevsky). Not only the climactic moments are played out in those areas, but the entire novel is set in the seediest parts of town. The choice of setting is one of the most important elements of the tragedy. It is all the more important in Dostoevsky’s work, because the setting and the atmosphere really hint at the action. In the same way that the murder that Raskalnikov commits is base, foul and disgusting, so the town is also portrayed. One just has to look at the opening pages of the novel and the whole wickedness of the deed is all too apparent (see opening quotation on page 1). For Dostoevsky the city was an agglomeration of its people, its buildings, its streets, its atmosphere and its weather. How was his portrayal of the city? The people in this novel all live wretched lives in isolation, in tiny rooms, which are in a deplorable state of disrepair. One critic once remarked that the state of mind of an individual is reflected in his room. Raskalnikov’s room is described in Chapter 3 of the novel. Raskalnikov’s mother compared this room to a coffin when she first set foot in it (p.282). ”It was a tiny cell about six paces long, and it presented a most pitiful aspect with its grimy, yellow wallpaper that was everywhere coming off the walls; it was so low-ceilinged that to a person of even slightly above average height it felt claustrophobic. The furniture was commensurate with it’s surroundings:…” (Crime and Punishment, p.60) Svidrigailov, Raskalnikov’s evil double, lives in a similar environment. These rooms are stifling, they do not offer any space to breathe. The only other room described in the novel is that of the suffering Sonya. Her room even though it is oddly shaped, is seemingly enormous, like a desert. This highlights all the more her loneliness in this cruel world. The rooms are a medium to express Dostoevsky’s themes of poverty and isolation. The image evoked by the rooms is that of many small stifling cells in which the individuals live completely isolated from the world. Raskalnikov who feels trapped in his room, does not feel any freer on the streets, for they are just as hot and foul as his room. The streets though represent his link to life. Throughout the novel, whenever Raskalnikov appears, nature changes around him, his symbol is that of aridity, dryness and dust. Svidriagilov’s is the opposite, his is that of humidity and the colour green. It is difficult to speak about the people without talking about the environment. The streets are the next point I would like to raise. Dostoevsky’s descriptions are so accurate that tourist groups are nowadays able to follow in the footsteps of Raskalnikov. Hence there is a great deal of realism, though the surroundings are distorted, but more about that in a moment. The encounters on the streets are also quite symbolic, whereas Svidrigailov rarely ever encounters anybody, Raskalnikov’s streets are bustling with activity. This only serves to heighten our awareness of his detachment from his social environment. Another item of interest, are the staircases, which help to link the streets with the apartments. The critic Frank noted that these link the public life with the private life, yet even this environment is dark and secluded. So what image of the city is Dostoevsky conveying? The settings, its tone and atmosphere is gloomy, at times even dark, reflecting the sombreness of the protagonists soul. Another critic pointed out a symbolism common to many of Dostoevsky’s works, namely that of the sun., which in turn symbolises life. Raskalnikov is predominantly a nocturnal type, who spends his days lying in bed. The other image portrayed is that of loneliness and isolation brought on by the desolate conditions in which the characters live. This is reflected in the rooms, that seem like coffins and cells, or the detachment of the main character on the bustling streets of St. Petersburg. The question that now needs answering is: what was Dostoevsky’s intent in portraying the city on such a manner? Was he indicating that because of the main character’s wicked state of mind, his perception of the city was clouded? Or maybe was he trying to express that because of the city’s vile state, Raskalnikov was conditioned, through his environment, to carry out the murders? I believe it is a combination of both. Due to his lack of funds, Raskalnikov found himself in this desolate state. The poverty and loneliness of his life had a profound depressing effect on his mind and it severely troubled him. Therefore his perception of the city got more and more obscured, even though geographically correct, the environment became twisted. Raskalnikov in his confused and bewildered state, believed he was doing humanity a favour by ridding it of a “louse” and this allowed him to save his sister, aided him in getting an education and stopped him from being a burden on his mother. He also hoped to go abroad and in turn build a better environment, a better world for many of these wretched individuals that urban life creates, due to the process of modernisation. The themes of the city all converge in this novel, the city being the embodiment of progress, Petersburg offering a window to the West and hence an opening of the mind to such progress. Dostoevsky was right to choose his “new word” in the city, because it was the new way of life, the new centres of polarisation, no where else were the contrasts between rich and poor greater. St. Petersburg a window to the West, indeed! Bibliography: Joseph Frank, Dostoevsky (1821-1849) Joseph Frank, Dostoevsky (1860-1865) D. Fanger, Dostoevsky and Romantic Realism Mochulsky, Dostoevsky D. Machiewicz, Dostoevsky Marshall, Everything that is solid melts into air