One of Andreev's books is indeed a whole commentary on the remark of

Merezhkovski quoted above. The English title of the translation is "A

Dilemma," but as the translator has explained, the name of the story

in the original is "Thought (Mysl)." The chief character is a

physician, Kerzhentsev, who reminds one constantly of Dostoevski's

Raskolnikov, but whose states of mind are even more subtly analysed.

No one should read this story unless his nerves are firm, for the

outcome of the tale is such as to make almost any reader for a time

doubt his own sanity. It is a curious study of the border-line between

reason and madness. The physician, who rejoices in his splendid

health, bodily vigour, and absolute equilibrium of mind, quietly

determines to murder his best friend--to murder him openly and

violently, and to go about it in such a way that he himself will

escape punishment. He means to commit the murder to punish the man's

wife because she had rejected him and married his friend, whom she

loves with all the strength of her powerful nature. His problem,

therefore, is threefold: he must murder the man, the man's wife must

know that he is the murderer, and he must escape punishment. He

therefore begins by feigning madness, and acting so well that his

madness comes upon him only at long intervals; at a dinner-party he

has a violent fit; but he waits a whole month before having another

attack. Everything is beautifully planned; he smashes a plate with his

fist, but no one observes that he has taken care previously to cover

the plate with his napkin, so that his hand will not be cut. His

friends are all too sorry for him to have any suspicion of a sinister

intention; and his friend Alexis is fatuously secure. Not so the wife;

she has an instinctive fear of the coming murder. One evening, when

all three are together, the doctor picks up a heavy iron paper-weight,

and Alexis says that with such an instrument a murderer might break a

man's head. This is interesting. "It was precisely the head, and

precisely with that thing that I had planned to crush it, and now that

same head was telling how it would all end." Therefore he leads Alexis

into a dispute by insisting that the paper-weight is too light. Alexis

becomes angry, and actually makes the doctor take the object in his

hand, and they rehearse his own murder. They are stopped by the wife,

who, terror-stricken, says that she never likes such jokes. Both men

burst into hearty laughter.

A short time after, the doctor crushes the skull of Alexis in the

presence of his wife. In the midst of the horror and confusion of the

household, the murderer slips out, goes home, and is resting calmly,

thinking with intense delight of the splendid success of the plan, and

of the extraordinary skill he had shown in its conception and

execution; when, just as he was dropping off to sleep in delicious

drowsiness, there "languidly" entered into his head this thought: it

speaks to his mind in the third person, as though somebody else had

actually said it: It is very possible that Dr. Kerzhentsev is really

insane. He thought that he simulated, but he is really insane--insane

at this very instant.

After this poison has entered his soul, his condition can be easily

imagined. A terrible debate begins in his own mind, for he is fighting

against himself for his own reason. Every argument that he can think

of to persuade himself of his sanity he marshals; but there are plenty

of arguments on the other side. The story is an excellent example of

what Merezhkovski must mean by the passion of thought.

Another illustration of Andreev's uncanny power is seen in the short

story "Silence." A father does not understand his daughter's silence,

and treats her nervous suffering with harsh practicality. She commits

suicide; the mother is stricken with paralysis; silence reigns in the

house. Silence. The father beseeches his wife to speak to him; there

is no speculation in her wide-open eyes. He cries aloud to his dead

daughter. Silence. Nothing but silence, and the steady approach of

madness.

Andreev is an unflinching realist, with all the Russian power of the

concrete phrase. He would never say, in describing a battle, that the

Russians "suffered a severe loss." He would turn a magnifying glass on

each man. But, although he is a realist and above all a psychologist,

he is also a poet. In the sketch "Silence" there is the very spirit of

poetry. The most recent bit of writing by him that I have seen is

called a Fantasy*--"Life is so Beautiful to the Resurrected." This is

a meditation in a graveyard, written in the manner of one of

Turgenev's "Poems in Prose," though lacking something of that master's

exquisite beauty of style. It is, however, not sentimentally

conventional, but original. The poetic quality in Andreev animates all

his dramas, particularly "To the Stars."

*Translated in "Current Literature," New York, for September 1910.

X

KUPRIN'S PICTURE OF GARRISON LIFE

As Tolstoi, Garshin, and Andreev have shown the horrors of war, so

Kuprin* has shown the utter degradation and sordid misery of garrison

life. If Russian army posts in time of peace bear even a remote

resemblance to the picture given in Kuprin's powerful novel "In

Honour's Name,"** one would think that the soldiers there entombed

would heartily rejoice at the outbreak of war--would indeed welcome

any catastrophe, provided it released them from such an Inferno. It is

interesting to compare stories of American garrisons, or such clever

novels as Mrs. Diver's trilogy of British army posts in India, with

the awful revelations made by Kuprin. Among these Russian officers and

soldiers there is not one gleam of patriotism to glorify the drudgery;

there is positively no ideal, even dim-descried. The officers are a

collection of hideously selfish, brutal, drunken, licentious beasts;

their mental horizon is almost inconceivably narrow, far narrower than

that of mediaeval monks in a monastery. The soldiers are in worse

plight than prisoners, being absolutely at the mercy of the alcoholic

caprices of their superiors. A favourite device of the officer is to

jam the trumpet against the trumpeter's mouth, when he is trying to

obey orders by sounding the call; then they laugh at him derisively as

he spits out blood and broken teeth. The common soldiers are beaten

and hammered unmercifully in the daily drill, so that they are all

bewildered, being in such a state of terror that it is impossible for

them to perform correctly even the simplest manoeuvres. The only

officer in this story who treats his men with any consideration is a

libertine, who seduces the peasants' daughters in the neighbourhood,

and sends them back to their parents with cash payments for their

services.

*Kuprin was born in 1870, and was for a time an officer in the Russian

army.

**Translated by W. F. Harvey: the French translation is called "Une

Petite Garnison Russe;" the German, "Das Duell," after the original

title.

If Kuprin's story be true, one does not need to look far for the utter

failure of the Russian troops in the Japanese war; the soldiers are

here represented as densely ignorant, drilling in abject terror of

their officers' fists and boots, and knowing nothing whatever of true

formations in attack or defence. As for the officers, they are much

worse than the soldiers: their mess is nothing but an indescribably

foul alcoholic den, where sodden drunkenness and filthy talk are the

steady routine. They are all gamblers and debauchees; as soon as a sum

of money can be raised among them, they visit the brothel. The

explanation of the beastly habits of these representatives of the Tsar

is given in the novel in this wise: "Yes, they are all alike, even the

best and most tender-hearted among them. At home they are splendid

fathers of families and excellent husbands; but as soon as they

approach the barracks they become low-minded, cowardly, and idiotic

barbarians. You ask me why this is, and I answer: Because nobody can

find a grain of sense in what is called military service. You know how

all children like to play at war. Well, the human race has had its

childhood--a time of incessant and bloody war; but war was not then

one of the scourges of mankind, but a continued, savage, exultant

national feast to which daring bands of youths marched forth, meeting

victory or death with joy and pleasure. . . . Mankind, however, grew

in age and wisdom; people got weary of the former rowdy, bloody games,

and became more serious, thoughtful, and cautious. The old Vikings of

song and saga were designated and treated as pirates. The soldier no

longer regarded war as a bloody but enjoyable occupation, and had

often to be dragged to the enemy with a noose round his neck. The

former terrifying, ruthless, adored atamens* have been changed into

cowardly, cautious tschinovnih,** who get along painfully enough on

never adequate pay. Their courage is of a new and quite moist kind,

for it is invariably derived from the glass. Military discipline still

exists, but it is based on threats and dread, and undermined by a

dull, mutual hatred. . . . And all this abomination is carefully

hidden under a close veil of tinsel and finery, and foolish, empty

ceremonies, in all ages the charlatan's conditio sine qua non. Is not

this comparison of mine between the priesthood and the military caste

interesting and logical? Here the riassa and the censer; there the

gold-laced uniform and the clank of arms. Here bigotry, hypocritical

humility, sighs and sugary, sanctimonious, unmeaning phrases; there

the same odious grimaces, although its method and means are of another

kind--swaggering manners, bold and scornful looks--'God help the man

who dares to insult me!'--padded shoulders, cock-a-hoop defiance. Both

the former and the latter class live like parasites on society, and

are profoundly conscious of that fact, but fear--especially for their

bellies' sake--to publish it. And both remind one of certain little

blood-sucking animals which eat their way most obstinately into the

surface of a foreign body in proportion as it is slippery and steep."

*Officers.

**Officials.

Apart from the terrible indictment of army life and military

organisation that Kuprin has given, the novel "In Honour's Name" is an

interesting story with living characters. There is not a single good

woman in the book: the officers' wives are licentious, unprincipled,

and eaten up with social ambition. The chief female character is a

subtle, clever, heartless, diabolical person, who plays on her lover's

devotion in the most sinister manner, and eventually brings him to the

grave by a device that startles the reader by its cold-blooded,

calculating cruelty. Surely no novelists outside of Russia have drawn

such evil women. The hero, Romashov, is once more the typical Russian

whom we have met in every Russian novelist, a talker, a dreamer, with

high ideals, harmlessly sympathetic, and without one grain of

resolution or will-power. He spends all his time in aspirations,

sighs, and tears--and never by any chance accomplishes anything. The

author's mouthpiece in the story is the drunkard Nasanski, who

prophesies of the good time of the brotherhood of man far in the

future. This is to be brought about, not by the teachings of Tolstoi,

which he ridicules, but by self-assertion. This self-assertion points

the way to Artsybashev's "Sanin," although in Kuprin it does not take

on the form of absolute selfishness. One of Nasanski's alcoholic

speeches seems to contain the doctrine of the whole book: "Yes, a new,

glorious, and wonderful time is at hand. I venture to say this, for I

myself have lived a good deal in the world, read, seen, experienced,

and suffered much. When I was a schoolboy, the old crows and jackdaws

croaked into our ears: 'Love your neighbour as yourself, and know that

gentleness, obedience, and the fear of God are man's fairest

adornments.' Then came certain strong, honest, fanatical men who said:

'Come and join us, and we'll throw ourselves into the abyss so that

the coming race shall live in light and freedom.' But I never

understood a word of this. Who do you suppose is going to show me, in

a convincing way, in what manner I am linked to this 'neighbour' of

mine--damn him! who, you know, may be a miserable slave, a Hottentot,

a leper, or an idiot? . . . Can any reasonable being tell me why I

should crush my head so that the generation in the year 3200 may

attain a higher standard of happiness? . . . Love of humanity is burnt

out and has vanished from the heart of man. In its stead shall come a

new creed, a new view of life that shall last to the world's end; and

this view of life consists in the individual's love for himself, for

his own powerful intelligence, and the infinite riches of his feelings

and perceptions. . . Ah, a time will come when the fixed belief in

one's own Ego will cast its blessed beams over mankind as did once the

fiery tongues of the Holy Ghost over the Apostles' heads. Then there

shall be no longer slaves and masters; no maimed or cripples; no

malice, no vices, no pity, no hate. Men shall be gods. How shall I

dare to deceive, insult, or ill-treat another man, in whom I see and

feel my fellow, who, like myself, is a god? Then, and then only, shall

life be rich and beautiful.... Our daily life shall be a pleasurable

toil, an enfranchised science, a wonderful music, an everlasting

merrymaking. Love, free and sovereign, shall become the world's

religion."

In considering Russian novelists of to-day, and the promise for the

future, Andreev seems to be the man best worth watching--he is the

most gifted artist of them all. But it is clear that no new writer has

appeared in Russia since the death of Dostoevski in 1881 who can

compare for an instant with the author of "Anna Karenina," and that

the great names in Russian fiction are now, as they were forty years

ago, Gogol, Turgenev, Tolstoi, and Dostoevski. Very few long novels

have been published in Russia since "Resurrection" that, so far as we

can judge, have permanent value. Gorki's novels are worthless; his

power, like that of Chekhov and Andreev, is seen to best advantage in

the short story. Perhaps the younger school have made a mistake in

studying so exclusively the abnormal.

End of Project Gutenberg's Essays on Russian Novelists, by William Lyon Phelps

Essays on Russian Novelists · 第 15 / 15 段