Skip to main content

Literature and ideas in Russia after the Crimean War: the ‘Plebeian’ writers

  • Chapter
Ideology in Russian Literature

Part of the book series: Studies in Russia and East Europe ((SREE))

  • 30 Accesses

Abstract

Even within the magnificent ‘golden age’ of Russian culture, which spans roughly the period 1820 to 1880, the decade that follows the death of Nicholas I in 1855 and the end of the Crimean War in 1856 stands out by virtue of the abundance, richness and intensity of its art and publicism. All of Turgenev’s major novels, Goncharov’s Oblomov, Dostoevsky’s Notes from the Underground and Crime andPunishment, Tolstoy’s Sebastopol Tales, Youth, and The Cossacks, Ostrovsky’s Thunderstorm and other plays, Nekrasov’s The Peddlars, Red-nosed Frost and much other poetry, Saltykov-Shchedrin’s Provincial Sketches, the best work of Pisemsky, almost all of Chernyshevsky’s publicism, all of Dobroliubov’s, and much of Pisarev’s, were written and published in these years. A new school of painters, the peredvizhniki, established itself in 1863. The major journals, such as Sovremennik, Otechestvennye zapiski, Russkii vestnik, and Russkoe slovo, in which most works of literature and thought were in the first instance published, flourished and achieved a circulation which, though infinitesimal by modern standards, was nevertheless unprecedented. Artists and thinkers inspired, stimulated, provoked and responded to one another in a debate about social, political, moral, and ultimately religious and philosophical questions that was more animated and far-reaching than that conducted in any earlier period, with the possible exception of the 1840s.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

NOTES

  1. Uspensky, Levitov and Sleptsov all continued writing in the second half of the 1860s (Pomyalovsky died in 1863), but their later work is not examined here since it is my intention to discuss their relationship to the intellectual life of the immediate pre-reform and post-reform periods rather than to survey their oeuvre as a whole.

    Google Scholar 

  2. There are various editions of the works of these four writers. The editions used here are: Nikolai Uspensky, Povesti, rasskazy i ocherki (Moscow, 1957) hereafter referred to as ‘Uspensky’; A.I. Levitov, Sochineniia v odnom tome (Moscow, 1956) hereafter referred to as ‘Levitov’; N.G. Pomyalovsky, Sochineniia (Moscow-Leningrad, 1951) hereafter referred to as ‘Pomyalovsky’; V.A. Sleptsov, Izbrannye proizvedeniia (Leningrad, 1970) hereafter referred to as ‘Sleptsov’. All references to the works of these authors are to these editions unless otherwise stated.

    Google Scholar 

  3. For material on these writers, see esp. the introductory articles to the above editions of their works by E. Pokusaev, N.I. Sokolov, I.G. Iampol’sky, and M. Semanova respectively. See also I.A. Bunin, ‘K budushchei biografii N.V. Uspenskogo’, in his Sobranie sochinenii v deviati tomakh (Moscow, 1965–7) pp. 495–501; K. Chukovsky’s articles, ‘Zhizn’ i smert’ Nikolaia Uspenskogo’, ‘Vasilii Sleptsov’, ‘Tainopis’ “Trudnogo vremeni”’, and ‘Istoriia sleptsovskoi kommuny’, in his book Liudi i knigi shestidesiatykh godov (Leningrad, 1934); vol. LXXI of Literaturnoe nasledstvo (Moscow, 1963), which is devoted to Sleptsov; I.G. Iampol’sky, N.G. Pomialovskii. Lichnosti tvorchestvo (Moscow-Leningrad, 1968); L.M. Lotman, ‘Dinamika vzaimodeistviia romana i povesti. Uglublenie kontseptual’nosti v povestvovanii’, in Russkaia povest’ xx veka, ed. B.S. Meilakh, (Leningrad, 1973) pp. 382–423; and N.I. Prutskov, ‘Shkola belletristov-raznochintsev 60-kh godov’ in Istoriia russkoi literatury (Leningrad, 1980–3) III, pp. 48–79.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Very little has been written on these authors in English, but see especially D.S. Mirsky, A History of Russian Literature (London, 1949) pp. 284–6; Rose Glickman, ‘An Alternative View of the Peasantry: The Raznochintsy Writers of the 1860s’ (Slavic Review, xx, 4, 1973, pp. 693–704); William C. Brumfield, ‘Sleptsov Redivivus(California Slavic Studies, Ix , 1976, pp. 27–70); idem, ‘Bazarov and Rjazanov: The Romantic Archetype in Russian Nihilism’ (Slavic and East European Journal, xxi, 4, 1977, pp. 495–505); the chapter by Eva Kagan-Kans in The Russian Short Story: A Critical History, ed. Charles A. Moser (Boston, Mass., 1986) pp. 50–102, esp. 77–86; and the entries in Victor Terras, ed., Handbook of Russian Literature (New Haven, 1985).

    Google Scholar 

  5. See Pokusaev’s introduction to Uspensky’s works, p. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  6. N.A. Dobroliubov, Sobranie sochinenii (Moscow-Leningrad, 1961–4 (hereafter SS))II, pp. 142–6.

    Google Scholar 

  7. ‘Starukha’, in Uspensky, pp. 25–46.

    Google Scholar 

  8. ‘Porosënok’, ibid., pp. 47–57.

    Google Scholar 

  9. ‘Khoroshee zhit’, ibid., pp. 58–72.

    Google Scholar 

  10. ‘Sel’skaia apteka’, ibid., pp. 115–26.

    Google Scholar 

  11. ‘Noch’ pod svetlyi den, ibid., pp. 108–14.

    Google Scholar 

  12. ‘Koldun’ia, ibid., pp. 235–9.

    Google Scholar 

  13. ‘Oboz’, ibid., pp. 165–72.

    Google Scholar 

  14. F.M. Dostoevsky, ‘Rasskazy N.V. Uspenskogo’ in his Polnoe sobranie sochinenii v tridtsati tomakh (Leningrad, 1972-) XiX, p. 185.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Uspensky, p. 25.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Dostoevsky, op. cit. (note 11), p. 180.

    Google Scholar 

  17. N.G. Chernyshevsky, ‘Ne nachalo li peremeny?’, in his Polnoe sobranie sochinenii (Moscow, 1939–50 (hereafter PSS)) vu, pp. 855–89; see esp. pp. 855–7, 860–2, 873–4, 876.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ibid., pp. 863–6, 877–8, 882–9.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Dobroliubov, ‘stepeni uchastiia narodnosti v razvitii russkoi literatury’, SS, II, pp. 218–72; Narodnoe delo’, ibid., v, pp. 246–85; ‘Povesti i rasskazy S.T. Slavutinskogo’, ibid., v, 49–64; ‘Cherty dlia kharakteristiki russkogo prostonarod’ia, ibid., VI, pp. 221–88.

    Google Scholar 

  20. A.P. Shchapov, Russkii Raskol Staroobriadstva ... (Kazan’, 1859); I.G. Pryzhov, Nishchie na Svyatoi Rusi: Materialy dlia istorii obshchestvennogo i narodnogo byta v Rossii (Moscow, 1862).

    Google Scholar 

  21. See Literaturnoe nasledstvo, LXXI, op. cit. (note 1), p. 395.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Moskovskie nory i trushchoby, 2 vols (St Petersburg, 1866).

    Google Scholar 

  23. ‘Tipy i stseny sel’skoi iarmarki’, in Levitov, pp. 7–42.

    Google Scholar 

  24. ‘Stepnaia doroga noch’iu’, ibid., pp. 43–60. This work was first published under the title ‘Proezzhaia stepnaia doroga. (Noch’.) Ocherk.’

    Google Scholar 

  25. ‘Stepnaia doroga dnëm’ (first published as ‘Stepnaia doroga’), ibid., pp. 61–106.

    Google Scholar 

  26. ‘Rasprava’ (first published as ‘Mirskoi sud’), ibid., pp. 127–37.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Levitov, pp. 96, 8, 12, 4, 54, 129–30, 42, 137.

    Google Scholar 

  28. ‘Brusilov’, in Uspensky, pp. 173–82.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Levitov, pp. 72ff.

    Google Scholar 

  30. See Pokusaev’s introduction to Uspensky’s works, p. 5; and Peterburgskii sluchai’, in Levitov, p. 411.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Levitov, p. 83.

    Google Scholar 

  32. ‘Vecher’, in Uspensky, pp. 158–64.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Pryzhov, Istoriia kabakov v Rossii v sviazi s istoriei russkogo naroda (St Petersburg-Moscow, 1868).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Alfred Kuhn, in his introduction to his translation of Pomyalovsky’s Seminary Sketches (Ithaca and London, 1973) p. Xi. The introduction as a whole gives an excellent sketch of the mood of the popovichi and the background from which they came.

    Google Scholar 

  35. See esp. pp. 194–5. 190, 150 in Kuhn’s translation of the Seminary Sketches cited above. The Russian title of the work is Ocherki bursy.

    Google Scholar 

  36. D.I. Pisarev, ‘Pogibshie i pogibaiushchie’, in his Sochineniia (Moscow, 1955–6) iv, pp. 86–139.

    Google Scholar 

  37. ‘Meshchanskoe schast’e’, in Pomyalovsky, pp. 61–150; see esp. pp. 81, 119–20, 123, 136–7.

    Google Scholar 

  38. ‘Molotov’, in Pomyalovsky, pp. 153–307; see esp. pp. 214, 278, 306–7, 288–90, 307, 206–9. ‘Stratum’, in the first quotation of this paragraph, is my translation of the Russian soslovie, which I have rendered as ‘estate’ elsewhere - a translation which in this instance might be confused with the property denoted by pomeste.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Ibid., pp. 188, 236–42, 276, 257.

    Google Scholar 

  40. ‘Brat i sestra’, in Pomyalovsky, pp. 483–548; the quotations are from pp. 485 and 545. The fragments were ordered and published after Pomyalovsky’s death by his friend N.A. Blagoveshchensky, who also inserted between the extant fragments some explanatory passages based on his personal knowledge of Pomyalovsky’s conception of the work and on a plan found among Pomyalovsky’s papers (see ibid., pp. 483ff., 626–9). On Potesin see also Richard Peace, Dostoyevsky: An Examination of the Major Novels (Cambridge, 1971) pp. 27–8.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Pomyalovsky, p. 133.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Ibid., pp. 212–13, 201.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Ibid., pp. 537, 485–6.

    Google Scholar 

  44. See e.g. Chernyshevsky, Antropologicheskii printsip v filosofii’, PSS, vi, p. 266.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Pomyalovsky, p. 485.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Pisarev, ‘Roman kiseinoi devushki’, Sochineniia, in, pp. 189–90. When he refers to a fakir, Pisarev doubtless has in mind the Hindu mystic rather than the Muslim on his bed of nails.

    Google Scholar 

  47. ‘Vladimirka i Kliaz’ma’, in Sleptsov, pp. 29–151; see esp. pp. 62, 43, 93, 131–42.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Ibid., pp. 30, 50–1, 80–1, 107–8, 91–2, 137, 33.

    Google Scholar 

  49. ‘Pitomka’, in Sleptsov, pp. 330–44. See also L.N. Tolstoy, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, (Moscow-Leningrad, 1928–58) LXXXVI, p. 177.

    Google Scholar 

  50. See Literaturnoe nasledstvo, LXXI, op. cit. (note 1), pp. 280–5.

    Google Scholar 

  51. ‘Pis’ma ob Ostashkove’, in Sleptsov, pp. 152–264; see esp. pp. 169, 163–4, 154.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Chukovsky, ‘Tainopis’ “Trudnoqo vremeni”’, op. cit. (note 1), p. 191.

    Google Scholar 

  53. ‘Trudnoe vremia’, in Sleptsov, pp. 447–602; see esp. pp. 500–2, 531, 474, 469–71. On the enthusiastic assessment of Shchetinin by a writer of the 1880s, see Chukovsky, ‘Tainopis’ ‘Trudnogo vremeni’, op. cit. (note 1), p. 188.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Ibid., pp. 529, 523–4.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Ibid., pp. 490–1, 507ff., 602, 558, 560.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Pisarev, ‘Podrastaiushchaia gumannost’. (Sel’skie kartiny)’, Sochineniia, IV, pp. 50–85; see esp. pp. 50ff.

    Google Scholar 

  57. P.N. Tkachev, ‘Podrastaiushchie sily’, in his Izbrannye sochineniia na sotsialno politicheskie temy (Moscow, 1932-) I, pp. 274–323; see esp. pp. 281–96 (quotations are from pp. 288–9).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 1990 School of Slavonic and East European Studies, University of London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Offord, D. (1990). Literature and ideas in Russia after the Crimean War: the ‘Plebeian’ writers. In: Freeborn, R., Grayson, J. (eds) Ideology in Russian Literature. Studies in Russia and East Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-10825-1_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics