when she goes marketing. “It’s no joke,--in the first class yesterday
they had a fable to learn by heart, a Latin translation, and a sum as
well.... How is a little fellow to do it all?”
And she begins talking about teachers, lessons, and the lesson-books,
saying just what Sásha says about them.
After two o’clock they dine together, and in the evening they do
Sásha’s home work and cry together. When tucking him up in bed,
she spends a long time making the sign of the cross over him and
whispering a prayer; then, when she goes to bed, she dreams of the
dim and distant future when Sásha, having finished the course and
become a doctor or an engineer, will have a big house of his own with
a carriage and horses, and will marry, and children will be borne to
him.... She falls asleep still thinking of the same thing, and the
tears roll down her cheeks from under her closed eye-lids. The black
cat lies at her side and purrs. “Prr ... prr ... prr....”
Suddenly there is a loud knock at the gate. Olenka wakes up
breathless with fear, and her heart beats violently. Half-a-minute
passes and the knocking is repeated.
“It’s a telegram from Khárkov,” she thinks, beginning to tremble
all over. “His mother demands that Sásha should be sent to her in
Khárkov.... Oh, God!”
She is in despair. Her head, her feet and hands, grow cold; there is
nobody in the world more unhappy than she. But another minute passes,
voices are heard: it is the veterinary surgeon returning from the
club.
“Well, thank God!” she thinks.
The weight is gradually lifted from her heart, and it feels light
again. She lies down and thinks about Sásha, who is fast asleep in
the next room and sometimes mutters in his dream:
“I’ll give it you! Be off! Don’t fight!”
THE END
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Oxford University Press, “World’s Classics” series, London and
New York.
[2] Oxford University Press, “World’s Classics” series, London and
New York.
[3] In Russian the word ‘poet’ is used not only of writers of verse,
but also of writers of fiction and poetic prose.
[4] Oxford University Press, “World’s Classics” series, London and
New York.
[5] The _Viy_ is an Earth-Spirit, and Gógol’s tale is gruesome.
[6] A daring leader of the hill-tribes, who was prominent at the time
Tolstoy was serving in the Caucasus.
[7] Some details of this crime are given in “Why do Men Stupefy
Themselves?” in _Essays and Letters_, published in the _World’s
Classics_.
[8] From _The Life of Tolstoy_ Vol II, by Aylmer Maude.
[9] That is, Márya Lvóvna, Tolstoy’s second daughter, who was devoted
both to her father and to his teachings.
[10] A reliable man.
[11] By Zola.
[12] Stories by Georges Sand.
[13] Hips and throats.
[14] The old hag.
[15] Deceived and ridiculous.
[16] “Console me, amuse me, sadden me, touch my heart, make me dream,
make me laugh, make me tremble, make me weep, make me think. Only a
few chosen spirits bid the artist compose something beautiful, in the
form that best suits his temperament.”
[17] The defect of Christianity is clearly seen in this. It is too
exclusively moral; it quite sacrifices beauty. But in the eyes of a
complete philosophy beauty, far from being a superficial advantage,
a danger, an inconvenience, is a gift of God, like virtue. It is
worth as much as virtue; the beautiful woman expresses an aspect of
the divine purpose, one of God’s aims, as well as a man of genius
does, or a virtuous woman. She feels this, and hence her pride. She
is instinctively conscious of the infinite treasure she possesses in
her body; she is well aware that without intellect, without talent,
without great virtue, she counts among the chief manifestations of
God. And why forbid her to make the most of the gift bestowed upon
her, or to give the diamond allotted to her its due setting? By
adorning herself woman accomplishes a duty; she practises an art, an
exquisite art, in a sense the most charming of arts. Do not let us be
misled by the smile which certain words provoke in the _frivolous_.
We award the palm of genius to the Greek artist who succeeded in
solving the most delicate of problems, that of adorning the human
body, that is to say, adorning perfection itself, and yet some people
wish to see nothing more than an affair of _chiffons_ in the attempt
to collaborate with the finest work of God--woman’s beauty! Woman’s
toilette with all its refinements is a great art in its own way. The
epochs and countries which can succeed in this are the great epochs
and great countries, and Christianity, by the embargo it laid on
this kind of research, showed that the social ideal it had conceived
would only become the framework of a complete society at a much later
period, when the revolt of men of the world had broken the narrow
yoke originally imposed on the sect by a fanatical pietism.
[18] The schools for training ballet-dancers, as well as the theatres
where the chief ballets were performed, were State institutions in
Russia.
[19] The most usual and widely diffused definition of art is that
art is a particular activity not aiming at material utility, but
affording pleasure to people; a pleasure, it is usually added,
“ennobling and elevating to the soul.”
This definition corresponds to the conception of art held by the
majority of people; but it is inexact and not quite clear, and admits
of very arbitrary interpretation.
It is not clear, for it fuses in one conception art as a human
activity producing objects of art, and also the feelings of the
recipient; and it admits of arbitrary interpretation, because it does
not define wherein lies the pleasure that “ennobles and elevates the
soul.” So that one person may declare that he receives such pleasure
from a certain production from which another does not receive it at
all.
And therefore to define art it is necessary to define the peculiarity
of that activity, both in its origin in the soul of the producer and
in the peculiarity of its action on the souls of the recipients. This
activity is distinguished from any other activity of craftsmanship,
or trade, or even science (though it has great affinity with this
last), in that it is not evoked by any material need, but supplies
to both producer and recipient a special kind of so-called “artistic
satisfaction.” To explain to oneself this characteristic we must
understand what impels people to this activity--that is, how artistic
production originates.
[20] The division of the results of man’s mental activity into
scientific, philosophic, theological, hortatory, artistic, and other
groups, is made for convenience of observation. But such divisions
do not exist in reality; just as the divisions of the River Volga
into the Tver, Nizhigorod, Simbirsk and Saratov sections, are not
divisions of the river itself, but divisions we make for our own
convenience.
[21] Half-a-century ago no explanation would have been needed of the
words “important”, “good”, and “moral”, but in our time nine out
of ten educated people, at these words, will ask with a triumphant
air: “What _is_ important, good or moral?” assuming that these words
express something conditional and not admitting of definition and
therefore I must answer this anticipated objection.
That which unites people, not by violence but by love: that which
serves to disclose the joy of the union of men with one another, is
“important”, “good”, or “moral”. “Evil” and “immoral” is that which
divides them, which leads men to the suffering that is produced by
disunion. “Important” is that which causes people to understand and
to love what they previously did not understand or love.
[22] Ireland’s _Vortigern_.
[23] I leave this as it stood in the first edition, but after it was
written I heard from Tolstoy twice on the subject. First, my friend
Paul Boulanger wrote from Yásnaya Polyána (24th June 1901, O.S.),
during an illness of Tolstoy’s as follows:--
“You ask why Tolstoy did not mention Ruskin in _What is Art?_ He asks
me to reply that he did not do so: first, because Ruskin attributes a
special moral importance to beauty in art; and, secondly, because all
his writings, rich as they are in depth of thought, are yet not bound
together by any one ruling idea.”
After Tolstoy’s recovery, a letter (undated) reached me on 17th
August 1901, in which he wrote:--
“I have forgotten what I wrote you about Ruskin, and fear it was not
correct. I have lately read an excellent book about him, _Ruskin et
la Bible_, I think by Brunhes. Ruskin’s chief limitation was that he
could never quite free himself from the Church-Christian outlook upon
life. At the time he commenced his work on social questions, when he
wrote _Unto this Last_, he freed himself from the dogmatic tradition,
but a cloudy Church-Christian understanding of the demands of
life--which made it possible for him to unite ethical with esthetical
ideals--remained with him to the end and weakened his message. It was
also weakened by the artificiality, and consequent obscurity, of his
poetic style. Do not imagine that I deny the work of this great man,
who has quite rightly been called a prophet. I always was charmed and
am charmed by him, but I point out spots which exist even on the sun.
He is specially good when a wise writer, in accord with him, makes
extracts from him, as is done in _Ruskin et la Bible_ (which read),
but to read all Ruskin consecutively, as I did, greatly weakens his
effect.”
[24] _Boyhood, Childhood and Youth_ were published in 1851–7.
_Sevastopol_ 1855–6. _Family Happiness_ 1859. _The Cossacks_ and
_Polikushka_ in 1863. _War and Peace_ 1864–9, and _Anna Karénina_
1875–7.
[25] As the term “mystic” is used in more than one sense in English,
I must explain that I use it to denote one who believes in a wisdom
“sacredly obscure or secret” (_Chambers’s Dictionary_), or “not
discriminated or tested by the reason” (_Century Dictionary_). This
is the sense in which it would generally be used in Russian, and in
which Tolstoy uses the word.
[26] Both of which were written in the interval between _War and
Peace_ and _Anna Karénina_ (1869–1872) and are included in the volume
of _Twenty-three Tales_.
[27] Indeed, in the earlier period of his literary activity he
devoted much attention to style, and spent great pains upon it. About
the period at which he wrote _Three Deaths_ (1859), it is said, the
style of his great artistic contemporary, Turgénev, exercised much
influence on his own.
[28] Tolstoy’s remarks on Church religion were re-worded so as to
seem to relate only to the Western Church, and his disapproval of
luxurious life was made to apply not, say, to Queen Victoria or
Nicholas II, but to the Cæsars or the Pharaohs.
[29] The Russian peasant was usually a member of a village commune,
and had therefore a right to share in the land belonging to the
village. Tolstoy disapproved of the order of society which allows
less land for the support of a whole village full of people than was
sometimes owned by a single landed proprietor. The Censor did not
allow disapproval of this state of things to be expressed, but was
prepared to admit that the laws and customs, say, of England--where
a yet more extreme form of landed property existed and the men who
actually labour on the land usually possessed none of it--deserved
criticism.--A. M.
[30] Only two, or at most three, senses are generally held worthy
to supply matter for artistic treatment, but I think this opinion
is only conditionally correct. I will not lay too much stress on
the fact that our common speech recognises many other arts, as, for
instance, the art of cookery.
[31] And yet it is certainly an esthetic achievement when the art of
cooking succeeds in making of an animal’s corpse an object in all
respects tasteful. The principle of the Art of Taste (which goes
beyond the so-called Art of Cookery) is therefore this: All that is
eatable should be treated as the symbol of some Idea, and always in
harmony with the Idea to be expressed.
[32] If the sense of touch lacks colour, it gives us, on the other
hand, a notion which the eye alone cannot afford, and one of
considerable esthetic value, namely, that of _softness_, _silkiness_,
_polish_. The beauty of velvet is characterised not less by its
softness to the touch than by its lustre. In the idea we form of
a woman’s beauty, the softness of her skin enters as an essential
element.
Each of us probably, with a little attention, can recall pleasures of
taste which have been real esthetic pleasures.
[33] M. Schasler, _Kritische Geschichte der Aesthetik_, 1872, Vol. I,
p. 13.
[34] There is no science which more entirely than esthetics has been
handed over to the dreams of the metaphysicians. From Plato down to
the received doctrines of our day, people have made of art a strange
amalgam of quintessential fancies and transcendental mysteries, which
find their supreme expression in the conception of an absolute ideal
Beauty, immutable and divine prototype of actual things.
[35] See on this matter Bernard’s admirable book, _L’esthétique
d’Aristote_, also Walter’s _Geschichte der Aesthetik im Altertum_.
[36] Schasler, p. 361.
[37] Schasler, p. 369.
[38] Schasler, pp. 388–390.
[39] Knight, _Philosophy of the Beautiful_, Vol. I, pp. 165, 166.
[40] Schasler, p. 289. Knight, pp. 168, 169.
[41] R. Kralik, _Weltschönheit, Versuch einer allgemeinen Aesthetik_,
pp. 304–306.
[42] Knight, p. 101.
[43] Schasler, p. 316.
[44] Knight, pp. 102–104.
[45] R. Kralik, p. 124.
[46] Schasler, p. 328.
[47] Schasler, pp. 331–333.
[48] Schasler, pp. 525–528.
[49] Knight, pp. 61–63.
[50] Schasler, pp. 740–743.
[51] Schasler, pp. 769–771.
[52] Schasler, pp. 786, 787.
[53] Kralik, p. 148.
[54] Kralik, p. 820.
[55] Schasler, pp. 828, 829, 834–841.
[56] Schasler, p. 891.
[57] Schasler, p. 917.
[58] Schasler, pp. 946, 1085, 984, 985, 990.
[59] Schasler, pp. 966, 655, 956.
[60] Schasler, p. 1017.
[61] Schasler, pp. 1065, 1066.
[62] Schasler, pp. 1097–1100.
[63] Schasler, pp. 1124, 1107.
[64] Knight, pp. 81, 82.
[65] Knight, p. 83.
[66] Schasler, p. 1121.
[67] Knight, pp. 85, 86.
[68] Knight, p. 88.
[69] Knight, p. 88.
[70] Knight, p. 112.
[71] Knight, p. 116.
[72] Knight, pp. 118, 119.
[73] Knight, pp. 123, 124.
[74] “The most divine and especially the most perfect beauty contains
the secret of the world,” _La philosophie en France_, p. 232.
[75] “The whole world is the work of an absolute beauty, which is
only the cause of things by the love it puts into them.”
[76] “Let us not fear to say that a truth which is not beautiful,
is but a logical play of our intelligence, and that the only truth
that is solid and worthy of the name is beauty.” _Du fondemont de
l’induction._
[77] _Philosophie de l’art_, Vol. I, 1893, p. 47.
[78] Knight, pp. 139–141.
[79] Knight, p. 134.
[80] There is no other Reality than God, there is no other Truth than
God, there is no other beauty than God.
[81] _L’esthétique_, p. 106.
[82] Knight, p. 238.
[83] Knight, pp. 239, 240.
[84] Knight, pp. 240–243.
[85] Knight, pp. 250–252.
[86] Knight, pp. 258, 259.
[87] Knight, p. 243.
[88] “The foundling of Nuremberg,” found in the market-place of that
town on 23rd May 1828, apparently some sixteen years old. He spoke
little, and was almost totally ignorant even of common objects. He
subsequently explained that he had been brought up in confinement
underground, and visited by only one man, whom he saw but seldom.
[89] Eastern sects well known in early Church history, who rejected
the Church’s rendering of Christ’s teaching and were cruelly
persecuted.--A. M.
[90] Peter of Chelczic, a Bohemian, was one of the successors of John
Huss. In 1457 he was leader of the non-resistants called the United
Brethren. He was the author of a remarkable book, _The Net of Faith_,
directed against Church and State. It is mentioned in Tolstoy’s _The
Kingdom of God is Within You_.--A. M.
[91] Anyone examining closely may see that the theory of beauty and
that of art are quite separated in Aristotle as they are in Plato and
in all their successors.
[92] Die Lücke von fünf Jahrhunderten welche zwischen den
Kunst-philosophischen Betrachtungen des Plato und Aristoteles und
die des Plotins fällt, kann zwar auffällig erscheinen; dennoch kann
man eigentlich nicht sagen, dass in dieser Zwischenzeit überhaupt
von ästhetischen Dingen nicht die Rede gewesen; oder dass gar ein
völliger Mangel an Zusammenhang zwischen den Kunst-anschauungen
des letztgenannten Philosophen und denen dei ersteren existire.
Freilich wurde die von Aristotle begründete Wissenschaft in Nichts
dadurch gefördert! immerhin aber zeigt sich in jener Zwischenzeit
noch ein gewisses Interesse für ästhetische Fragen. Nach Plotin
aber, die wenigen, ihm in der Zeit nahestehenden Philosophen,
wie Longin, Augustin, u. s. f. kommen, wie wir gesehen, kaum in
Betracht und schliessen sich übrigens in ihrer Anschauungsweise an
ihn an,--vergehen nicht fünf, sondern _fünfzehen Jahrhunderte_, in
denen von irgend einem wissenschaftlichen Interesse für die Welt des
Schönen und der Kunst nichts zu spüren ist.
Diese anderthalbtausend Jahre, innerhalb deren der Weltgeist durch
die mannigfachsten Kämpfe hindurch zu einer völlig neuen Gestaltung
des Lebens sich durcharbeitete, sind für die Aesthetik, hinsichtlich
des weiteren Ausbaus dieser Wissenschaft verloren.--Kritische
Geschichte der Aesthetik, von Max Schasler. Berlin, 1872, p. 253, §
25.
* * * * *
The gap of five hundred years, which occurred between the
artistic-philosophic observations of Plato and Aristotle and those of
Plotinus, may indeed appear striking, but one cannot exactly say that
in this interval of time there was absolutely no mention of esthetic
matters; or even that a complete lack of correspondence exists
between the art-views of the last-named philosopher and that of the
former. It is true that the science founded by Aristotle was not in
any way advanced thereby; but, for all that, during this interval
a certain interest in esthetic questions still appears. But after
Plotinus (the few philosophers near him in time, such as Longinus,
Augustinus and so forth, hardly come into question as we have seen,
and moreover they adhere to him in their views) there passed not
five, but _fifteen_ centuries in which there is no indication of any
sort of scientific interest for the world of the beautiful and of art.
These one-and-a-half-thousand years, within which the world-spirit
worked out a completely new foundation of life, are lost for
esthetics as regards any further construction of this science.
[93] The fate of books depends on the head of the reader.
[94] _What is Art?_ was translated by me from Tolstoy’s MSS., which
he sent me chapter by chapter as he wrote it. He revised his work
to such an extent that some chapters were re-written three times
over after he first sent them to me for translation. The following
passages belonging to an early version of this chapter, though he did
not retain them in his final revision, seem worth preserving, so I
give them here in a foot-note:
We only need escape for a moment from the habit of considering this
trinity of Goodness, Beauty and Truth, presented to us by Baumgarten,
to be as true as the Trinity of religion, and need only ask ourselves
what we all have always understood by the words which make up this
triad, in order to be convinced of the utterly fantastic nature
of the union into one, of three absolutely different words and
conceptions which are not even commensurable in meaning.
Goodness, Beauty, and Truth are put on one level, and all three
conceptions are treated as though they were fundamental and
metaphysical. Whereas in reality such is not at all the case.
Goodness is the eternal, the highest, aim of our life. However we may
understand goodness, our life is nothing but a striving towards the
good, that is, towards God.
Goodness is really the fundamental metaphysical perception which
forms the essence of our consciousness: a perception not defined by
reason.
Goodness is that which cannot be defined by anything else, but which
defines everything else.
But Beauty--if we do not want mere words but speak about what we
understand--beauty is nothing but what pleases us. The notion of
beauty not only does not coincide with goodness, but rather is
contrary to it; for the good most often coincides with victory over
the passions, while beauty is at the root of all our passions.
The more utterly we surrender ourselves to beauty the farther we
depart from goodness. I know that to this people always reply
that there is a moral and spiritual beauty, but this is merely
playing with words, for by spiritual and moral beauty nothing else
is understood but goodness. For the most part, beauty of soul,
or goodness not only does not coincide with what is ordinarily
understood as beauty, but is contrary to it.
As to truth--still less can we attribute to this member of the
trinity identity with goodness, or even any independent existence at
all.
By truth we merely mean the correspondence of an expression, or of
the definition of an object, with reality, or with an understanding
of the object common to everyone, and therefore it is a means of
arriving at the good. But what is there in common between the
conceptions of beauty and truth on the one hand, and of goodness on
the other? Truth spoken expressly to cause annoyance certainly does
not harmonise with goodness.
Not only are beauty and truth not conceptions equivalent to goodness,
and not only do they not form one entity with goodness, but they do
not even coincide with it. For instance, Socrates and Pascal as well
as many others, considered that learning the truth about unnecessary
things does not accord with goodness. With beauty, truth has not
even anything in common, but for the most part is in contradiction
with it, for truth generally exposes the deception and destroys the
illusion which is a chief condition of beauty.
And lo and behold! the arbitrary conjunction into one, of these three
conceptions which are not commensurable but foreign to one another,
has served as the basis for that amazing theory according to which
the difference between good art, transmitting good feeling, and bad
art, transmitting bad feeling, is completely obliterated, and one of
the lowest manifestations of art, art merely for enjoyment--that art
against which all the teachers of humanity have warned mankind--has
come to be considered the highest art.
[95] The contrast made is between the classes and the masses: between
those who do not and those who do earn their bread by productive
manual labour; the middle classes being taken as an offshoot of the
upper classes.--A. M.
[96] Duelling was still customary among the higher circles in Russia,
as in other Continental countries when this was written.--A. M.
[97] ... it is weariness of life, contempt for the present epoch,
regret for another age seen through the illusion of art, a taste for
paradox, a desire to be singular, a sentimental aspiration towards
simplicity, an infantile adoration of the marvellous, a sickly
tendency towards reverie, a shattered condition of nerves,--and,
above all, the exasperated demand of sensuality.
[98]
Music, music before all things!
The eccentric still prefer,
Vague in air, and nothing weighty,
Soluble. Yet do not err,
Choosing words; still do it lightly,
Do it with contemptuous mind:
Dearest are grey songs where mingle
The Defined and Undefined!
* * * * * * *
Music always, now and ever!
Be thy verse the thing that flies
From a soul that’s gone, escaping,
Gone to other loves and skies.
Gone to other loves and regions,
Following fortunes that allure,
Mint and thyme and morning crispness ...
All the rest’s mere literature.
[99] I think there should be nothing but allusions. The contemplation
of objects, the flying image of reveries evoked by them, make the
song. The Parnassians state the thing completely, and show it, and
thereby lack mystery; they deprive the mind of that delicious joy
of imagining that it creates. To _name an object is to take away
three-fourths of the enjoyment of the poem, which consists in the
happiness of guessing little by little: to suggest it, that is the
dream_. It is the perfect use of this mystery that constitutes the
symbol: little by little to evoke an object in order to show a state
of the soul; or inversely, to choose an object, and from it to
disengage a state of the soul by a series of decipherings.
... If a being of mediocre intelligence and insufficient literary
preparation chances to open a book made in this way and pretends to
enjoy it, there is a misunderstanding--things must be returned to
their places. _There should always be an enigma in poetry_, and the
aim of literature--it has no other--is to evoke objects.
[100] It were time also to have done with this famous “theory of
obscurity,” which the new school has practically raised to the height
of a dogma.
[101] For translation, see Appendix I.
[102] For translation, see Appendix I.
[103] For translation, see Appendix I.
[104] For translation, see Appendix I.
[105] For translation, see Appendix I.
[106] For translation, see Appendix I.
[107] For translation, see Appendix I.
[108]
I do not wish to think any more, except about my mother Mary,
Seat of wisdom and source of pardon,
Also Mother of France, _from whom we_
_Steadfastly expect the honour of our country_.
[109] This sonnet seems too unintelligible for translation.--Trans.
[110] For translation, see Appendix I.
[111] It was Tolstoy’s eldest daughter, Tatiana, Mme. Sukhotin; who
was herself a talented art-student.--A. M.
[112] Ibsen’s _The Master-Builder_.--A. M.
[113] Ibsen’s _Little Eyolf_.--A. M.
[114] Maeterlinck’s _Les Aveugles_.--A. M.
[115] G. Hauptmann’s _Die versunkene Glocke_.--A. M.
[116] “The quicker it goes the longer it lasts.”
[117] All styles are good except the wearisome style.
[118] All styles are good except that which is not understood, _or_
which fails to produce its effect.
[119] By G. Hauptmann.
[120] An apparatus exists by means of which a very sensitive arrow,
in dependence on the tension of a muscle of the arm, will indicate
the physiological action of music on the nerves and muscles.--L. T.
[121] There is in Moscow a magnificent “Cathedral of our Saviour,”
erected to commemorate the defeat of the French in the war of
1812.--A. M.
[122] “That they may be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I
in Thee, that they also may be in us.”
[123] In this picture the spectators in the Roman Amphitheatre are
turning down their thumbs to show that they wish the vanquished
gladiator to be killed.--A. M.
[124] While offering as examples of art those that seem to me the
best, I attach no special importance to my selection; for, besides
being insufficiently informed in all branches of art, I belong to the
class of people whose taste has, by false training, been perverted.
And therefore my old, inured habits may cause me to err, and I may
mistake for absolute merit the impression a work produced on me in
my youth. My only purpose in mentioning examples of works of this
or that class is to make my meaning clearer, and to show how, with
my present views, I understand excellence in art in relation to
its subject-matter. I must moreover mention that I consign my own
artistic productions to the category of bad art, excepting the story
_God sees the Truth but Waits_, which seeks a place in the first
class, and _The Prisoner of the Caucasus_, which belongs to the
second.--L. T.
(Both the stories mentioned are included in _Twenty-Three Tales_ in
the Maude Tolstoy “World’s Classics” series.--A. M.)
[125] In Russian it is customary to make a distinction between
literate and illiterate people, that is, between those who can and
those who cannot read. _Literate_ in this sense does not imply that
the man would speak or write correctly.--A. M.
[126] Sténka Rázin was by origin a common Cossack. His brother was
hanged for a breach of military discipline, and to this event Sténka
Rázin’s hatred of the governing classes has been attributed. He
formed a robber band, and subsequently headed a formidable rebellion,
declaring himself in favour of freedom for the serfs, religious
toleration, and the abolition of taxes. Like the Government he
opposed, he relied on force, and though he used it largely in defence
of the poor against the rich he still held to
“The good old rule, the simple plan,
That they should take who have the power,
And they should keep who can.”
Like Robin Hood he is favourably treated in popular legends.--A. M.
[127] Robert Macaire is a modern type of adroit and audacious
rascality. He was the hero of a popular play produced in Paris
in 1834, and of one written by R. L. Stevenson and W. E. Henley,
1897.--A. M.
[128] Tolstoy’s doctrine of Non-Resistance to “him that is evil” by
any use of physical force has caused much perplexity and is accepted
in its completeness by but few people in the Western world. In this
passage however he states it in a form to which it would be hard to
raise any objection. Never before had the doctrine of Non-Resistance
been put so briefly, persuasively, and attractively.--A. M.
[129] The translation in Appendices I, II and IV are by my wife,
Louise Maude. The aim of these renderings has been to keep as close
to the originals as the obscurity of meaning allowed. The sense (or
absence of sense) has therefore been more considered than the form of
the verses.--A. M.
[130] The existence of such editions was a factor in inducing one
hundred and twenty very distinguished English and American writers,
dramatists, critics, and publicists, to endorse a letter written by
G. Bernard Shaw to the press, in 1922, asking the public to support
the “Maude Tolstoys,” in the Oxford University Press edition, and
thus make commercially possible the completion of a reliable and
satisfactory rendering of Tolstoy’s works in English.
[131] Written soon after the Rowntrees had been attacked by a
patriotic mob, whose feelings were harrowed by an attempt to hold a
peace-meeting.
[132] _Essays and Letters_, “World’s Classics” series.
[133] _Essays and Letters_, “World’s Classics” series.
[134] _The Function of Criticism at the Present Time_, in _Essays in
Criticism_.
[135] E. H. Crosby was for some time a member of the New York State
Legislature; subsequently he went to Egypt as a judge in the Mixed
Tribunals. While there he began reading the works of Tolstoy, which
had a great influence upon him. He visited Tolstoy, and afterwards
co-operated with him in various ways. In a remarkable essay on
“Shakespeare and the Working Classes” E. H. Crosby drew attention to
the consistently anti-democratic tendency of that poet’s plays. It is
to this essay that Tolstoy here refers.--A. M.
[136] Tolstoy was born in 1828. This essay appeared in 1906, so that
Tolstoy began his re-reading of Shakespeare three years before he
published the article.
[137] “Lear is the occasion for Cordelia. The daughter’s maternity
towards the father; profound subject; maternity venerable among all
other maternities, so admirably rendered by the legend of that Roman
girl, nurse, in the depths of a prison, of her old father. The young
breast near the white beard, there is no spectacle more holy. That
filial breast is Cordelia.
“Once this figure was dreamed and found Shakespeare created his
drama.... Shakespeare carrying Cordelia in his thoughts, created
that tragedy as a god, who having an aurora to place makes a world
expressly for it.”
[138] “A Declaration of egregious popish impostures, etc.,” by Dr.
Samuel Harsnet, London 1603, which contains almost all that Edgar
says in his feigned madness.--A. M.
[139] “One sees the intention and one is put off.”
[140] This and the quotations in English that follow are taken from
_Shakespeare’s Commentaries_, by Dr. G. G. Gervinus, translated by F.
G. Bennett, London, 1877.
[141] _Shakespeare_, Von G. G. Gervinus, Leipzig, 1872. Vol. II, pp.
550–51.
[142] Tolstoy’s essay _Non-acting_ (see _Essays and Letters_ in the
“World’s Classics” series) deals with a controversy that occurred in
1893 between Zola and Dumas. In it Tolstoy controverts the opinion
that activity in itself, lacking moral guidance, is beneficial.
[143] _William Shakespeare_, by Georges Brandes, translated by
William Archer and Miss Morison. London, 1898, p. 921.
[144] A Russian poet of much delicacy of feeling, for many years a
great friend of Tolstoy’s. He is frequently referred to in my _Life
of Tolstoy_.--A. M.
INDEX
Academy, Royal, of 1897, 271.
_Albert_, a story by Tolstoy, 8
Alison, _Essay on the Nature and Principles of Taste_, 157–8
American publications, 385
Amiel’s _Journal_, 18, 38–42
Andre, Père, _Essai sur le Beau_, 146
“Animal of unspoilt scent,” 268
Appraisement of feelings made by religious perception, 278
Approval, a matter of degree, 113
Aristotle, 141, 184
Arnold, Matthew, _The Function of Criticism_, 382
Art
artisans of, 237
basis of action of, 171
blind alley, 313
“can evoke reverence for the dignity of every man,” 332
canon of, 164
Christian, 285, 288, 293–4
a. Religious, 296
b. Universal, 296, 333
of Church Christianity, 179
“comprehensible to men less educated than our labourers,” 226
content of, 85
definition of, 80–1, 171, 173, 362–3
experimental, 169
physiological evolutionary, 169, 170
metaphysical, 169, 170
destiny of, 333
dramatic form, qualifications needed to produce in, 239
effect on children, 198
empty and vicious, 283
essence of, 237
essential organ, 298
for art’s sake, 77, 87
for enjoyment, first esteemed by whom, 182
future, 313, 318, 320, 368
good of two kinds, 286
impoverishment of subject-matter of, 199
indestructible spiritual organ, 309
indispensable means of communication, 175
infection by, 171
influence of, 287
limited sphere of our, 193
means of intercourse, 170
means of union, 173
and Science: the difference, 225
of Middle Ages, 179–81
neo-esthetic theories of, 170
organ of human progress, 297
organ transmitting man’s reasonable perceptions into feelings, 331
patriotic, 285
productions that were “a temporary pastime,” 195
prostitute of our circle, 311
realistic, 87
recognized by early Christians, 178
should cause violence to be set aside, 331
simple feelings, 318
subject matter of, 197, 287
task to make feeling of brotherhood customary, 332
tendencious, 87
vehicle to draw men towards perfection, 320
which has left no trace, 166
“will lay in the souls of men the rails along which their actions
will naturally pass,” 333
will be an organ co-equally important with science for the life
of mankind, 331
Artist of the future, 318, 368
Artistic impression, when produced, 231
productions that are “as unintelligible as Sanskrit,” 194
sects exclude one another, 130
Bach, J. S., 269, 292
Ballet-dancers receive more honour than the Saints, 301
Barge with kedge-anchors, 322
Bastien-Lepage, 310
Batteux, 146
Baudelaire, P. C., 207–214, 334–6
_Duellum_, 208, 334–5
_Fleur du mal_, 207, 302, 334
_La Soupe et les nuages_, 209, 335–6
_Le Galant Tireur_, 210, 336
_L’étranger_, 209, 335
_Petits poemes en prose_, 204, 335
Baumgarten, A. G., 143, 187–8
Bayreuth, performances at, 260, 262
Bazin, Réné, _La Terre qui meurt_, 380
Beauty, 83–5, 143, 148–163, 166–8, 182, 186–7, 189–90, 196, 293,
303, 361, 369
definition of, 163–4
furnishes no criterion of art, 112
is “that which pleases,” 163
Truth and Goodness, 143–7, 156, 189–90
Beecher-Stowe, Harriet, _Uncle Tom’s Cabin_, 373
Beethoven, L. von, 14, 245–6, 292
Ninth Symphony, 294–5
Opus 101, 269
Benard’s, _L’esthétique d’Aristote_, 142, 185, 187
Bergmann, J., _Ueber das Schöne_, 154
Boccaccio, 201
Bodkin Art Gallery (Moscow), 92
Booby Trap, 17, 18
Books for the people, 6
Brandes, Georges, 396, 444
Brevity, clearness and simplicity, 314, 320
Bryulov, K. P., “Art begins where the wee bit begins,” 247
Burke, Edmund: _The Sublime and Beautiful_, 146
_Büttnerbauer, Der_, by W. von Polenz, 18, 378–87
Byron, 201
Caine, Hall, _The Christian_, 384–5
Caricatures, 293
Cathedral of Victory, 284
_Cause of it All, The_, by Tolstoy, 7
Cervantes, _Don Quixote_, 290
Chamber music, 294
Chékhov, A. P., 18–19
_Darling_, 18, 388–92, 474–89.
Cherbuliez, C. V., 156
Children perverted in service of art, 298
Choir of peasant women, 268
Chopin, F. F., 269
_Nocturne in E flat major_, 292
Christianity, a turning point, 284
Christ, the teaching of, 308
Church music and ritual, 91
Classification (usually accepted) of writers is harmful, 386
Cloudy conceptions “usually presented with _aplomb_,” 137, 361
Coins that “resemble real money,” 234
Cold-drawn works of art, 238
Comte, Auguste, 450–1
Condemnation of new art unjust, 222
Conditions of production of art, 238
counterfeit art, 237–40
tragedy, 420
Cone of art, the, 228
_Confession_, Tolstoy’s, 8–12
Confusion of religious cult with religious perception, 280
Corruption of class nourished by false art, 192
Coster, G. H. de, 156
Counterfeits of art, how manufactured, 237–240
caused by:
a) Professionalism ⎫
b) Art Criticism ⎬ 241–6
c) Schools of Art ⎭
Cousin, Victor, 154
Criticism, 382, 386–7
great importance of, 387
Critics, 242
Crosby, Ernest H., _Shakespeare on the Working Classes_, 393
Dancer, 248
Dante, 296
_Darling_, by A. P. Chekhov, 18, 388–92, 474–89.
Darwin, Charles, 169, 450–1
_Descent of Man_, 158
Darwin, Erasmus, 158
Dealers in the temple of art, 316
Decadent art, 233
Decadents, 207, 214, 217, 221–2, 228
Definition of art, 80–81, 171, 173, 362–3
needed, of art, 133
of any human activity, 166
Diamonds differ from paste, 267
selecting by touch, 455
Dickens, Charles, 7, 288, 310, 385
_Christmas Carol_, 7, 107
_David Copperfield_, 290
_Pickwick Papers_, 290
Diderot, D., 146
Dostoevski, F. M., 288–9, 310
_Memoirs from the House of Death_, 289
Doumic, René, _Les Jeunes_, 201, 206–7
Dragon, the, in _Siegfried_, 257–8
Drama, 219, 232, 247, 452–5
physiological effects in, 235
Dreyfus affair, 449–450
Druzhínin, A. V., 46
Durand-Ruel, art gallery, 218
Elementary Schools, 314–5
Eliot, George, 385
_Adam Bede_, 289
Emerson, Ralph Waldo, 385
Erections of lies obstruct study of life, 324
_Essays and Letters_, Tolstoy’s, 8
Essence of art: “that simple feeling compelling us to mingle souls
with another,” 273
Esthetic theory, the, of indifference of art to good or evil,
456–7, 460
Euphuism, 203, 438
Exclusive art, 365
Fairy-tale, lullaby, riddle, jest, or sketch, 318
Falstaff, 431–2
Fashionable art depends on the slavery of the masses, 194
Feelings, the highest, 367
conveyed, quality of feelings, 107
simple, 362
three, the subject-matter of upper-class art, 200
Fichte, J. G., 148–9
_First Distiller, The_, by Tolstoy, 7
Folgeldt, on art, 165
Folk-art and children’s art, 7, 318
Food, 223–4, 369
for body and mind, 93
question, the, 166–7
Form of art, 364–5
Fourier, F. M. C., phalansteries, 450–1
Francis of Assisi, 181, 183
French drama, 454
Gárshin, V. M., 46
Gautier, Théophile, 204
Gay, N. N., _The Last Supper_, 17, 29–32
_What is Truth?_, 36–7
_Judgment_, 289
_Genesis_, “the epic of,” 224
George, Henry, 104
Gérôme, Leon, _Pollice Verso_, 290
Gervinus, Dr. G. G., 438–444
Gevaert, Fierens, _Essay sur l’art contemporain_, 157
Goethe, J. W., 296, 455, 458, 461
_Wilhelm Meister_, 165
_Faust_, 234
Goncharev, I. A., 199
“Good art pleases everyone,” 224
Gospel parables, 224, 226
Gourmont, Rémy de, _Les Chevaux de Diomède_, 202
Grant Allen, 169
_Physiological Æsthetics_, 159
Greeks, ancient, 184, 187, 279–80, 367
a small, semi-savage, slaveholding people, 188
Grot, Professor, 117, 118
Guyau, _Les Problèmes de l’esthétique contemporaine_, 136, 156
Habituation to bad art, 224, 366
Hallam, Henry, 395
Hamlet, 272, 394, 432–5, 444
lack of character, 432–4
Harsnet, Dr. Samuel, 409
Hartmann, Edward von, 153
Hauptmann, G., _Hanneles Himmelfahrt_, 235
_Die versunkene Glocke_, 220
Hauser, Kaspar, 174
Hazlitt, William, 395
Hebrew art, 280
prophets, 198, 203
Hegel, G. W. F., 150–1, 450–1
Heine, Heinrich, 201
Helmholz, H. von, 154
Hemsterhuis, Frans, 147
Herbart, J. F., 152
Herder, J. G. von, 144
Hero, with hat _à la Guillaume Tell_, 230, 257
Home, Henry (Lord Kames), 146
Homer, 102, 198, 438–9
_Iliad_ and _Odyssey_, 226
and Shakespeare, 438
_How to Read the Gospels_, 376
Hugo, Victor, 50, 310, 288, 396
_Les Misérables_, 50, 310, 396
_Les Pauvres Gens_, 288
Human life filled with art, 363
Humboldt, W., 148
Hungarian _csárdäs_, 269
Huret, Jules, 206
Hutcheson, Francis, _Inquiry into the Original of our Ideas of
Beauty and Virtue_, 145
Huysmans, J. K., _Là-Bas_, 221
Hypnotic and epidemic suggestions, 263, 448–51, 453–9
Ibsen, Henrik: _The Master Builder_ and _Little Eyolf_, 219–220
Imitation art, methods of producing:
a. Borrowing ⎫
b. Imitating ⎪
c. Action on nerves ⎬ 230–6, 261
d. Interesting ⎭
Important what feelings spread, 366–7
Impressionist and Neo-impressionist art, 218–9
Infectiousness of art, 364–8
Injurious effect of security and luxury on artist, 316
Internal test of art, 365
Japanese art, 365
Jest, riddle, fairy-tale, lullaby, or sketch, 318
Johnson, Dr. Samuel, 395
Joseph, the story of, 225, 290
Jouffroy, T. S., 154–5
Jungmann, J., 154
Kant, I., 145, 147–8
Karr, Alphonse, 220
Ker, W. P., _Essay on the Philosophy of Art_, 159
_King Lear_, 394 et seq.
_King Leir_, superior to Shakespeare’s _King Lear_, 424–429
Kipling, Rudyard, 221, 270, 385
Kirchmann, Julius von, 153–4
Knight, Wm., _Philosophy of the Beautiful_, 159–160, 185
Knight, R., _An Analytical Enquiry into the Principles of Taste_,
158
Kralik, R., _Weltschönheit_, 134–6, 140
Kramskoy, I. N., 289
Krause, K. C. F., 150
_Krasota_ (Russian word)--how used, 138
_Kreutzer Sonata_, 14–16
Labour, enormous, expended on art, 125 et seq.
La Bruyère, Jean de, 466
Lachelier, J., 155
Langley, W., 272, 289
Language of art understood by all, 225
La Rochefoucauld, F., Duc de, 466
Latin grammar, 299
Lear’s inappropriate talk with fool, 401
unnatural credulity and distrust, 399, 420
verbose absurdities, 405–6
Leopardi, J., 201
Lepage, Bastien, 310
Lérmontov, M. Yu., 384
Lessing, G. E., 144
Lévêque, C., 138, 140, 154–5
Lhermitte, Léon, 310
Life, understanding of, 176
Loss of capacity to be infected by art, 298
Lowell, J. R., 385
_Lucern_, by Tolstoy, 8
Lullaby, fairy-tale, riddle, jest, or sketch, 318
Lyric poetry, 251–2
_Macbeth_, 394
Maeterlinck, Maurice, 214
_Les Aveügles_, 220
Mallarmé, S., 205–6, 214–5
_Devagations_, 215
Malthus, T. R., 188
“Man sieht die Absicht und man wird verstimmt,” 422
Marcus Aurelius, 66
Marx, Karl, 188
Materialism, 109
Maupassant, Guy de, 17, 46–71, 290
_Bel-ami_, 52, 54, 55, 57, 59, 64
_Fort comme le mort_, 55–8
_Histoire d’une fille de ferme_, 48, 50
_Horla_, 67
_La Femme de Paul_, 48, 50
_La Maison Tellier_, 46
_La Petite Roque_, 66
_L’armoire_, 66
_Le champ d’oliviers_, 66
_Le papa de Simon_, 50
_L’ermite_, 66
_Miss Harriet_, 66
_Monsieur Parent_, 66
_Mont Oriol_, 54–5, 58
_Notre cœur_, 55–6, 58, 65
_Pierre et Jean_, 55, 58, 60
_Solitude_, 67
_Sur l’eau_, 50, 66
_Un cas de divorce_, 66
_Une vie_, 50–2, 54, 57, 64
_Une partie de campagne_, 48, 50
_Yvette_, 58–9, 65
Mayer, von Liesen, _Signing the Death Warrant_, 289
Melody, 291–2
Men seldom recognise truth that exposes falsity of their pet
beliefs, 265
Mendelssohn, 144
Middle Ages, 86, 198
Millet, Jean Francois, 310
_The Man with a Hoe_, 289
Mithalter, Julius, _Rätsel des Schönen_, 137
Molière, 290
Montaigne, M. E. de, 466
Montesquieu, C. de S., Baron de la Brèda, et de, 466
Montesquiou-Fezensac, le comte Robert de, 207, 217, 350–2
Moralities (plays), 452
Morality regarded as “an antiquated affair,” 303
Morality and art, 364, 371–2
Morel, E., _Terre Promise_, 221
Morris, William, 94–6
Moscow, performance of _Siegfried_, 253–60
Mozart, W. A. C., 269, 292
_Magic Flute_, 250
Müller, Adam, 149
Muratori, L. A., 147
Music, 6, 13, 14–16, 17, 220, 232–3, 235–6, 245, 247–8, 291–2, 294–5
Musical art, qualifications needed to produce, 239
Muther, Richard, _The History of Art in the Nineteenth Century_, 165
Mysteries (plays), 452
Mysticism, 109
Mythological allusions, 203
Nadson, S. Ya., 385
Natasha Rostova (in _War and Peace_), 8
Negro melodies, 102
Nekrásov, N. A., 385
Nicholas Rostov, (in _War and Peace_), 8, 16
Nietzsche, F. W., 206, 303, 385, 451
Obscurity in art esteemed, 203–4
_On Art_, 75–90
“One touch of nature,” 362
Opera, rehearsal of an, 125–9
_Siegfried_, 253–60
Orators, 362, 370–1
Ornaments, 293
Ostróvski, A. N., 461
_Minin_, 244
_Othello_, 429–31
powerful movement of feeling in, 430
Pagano, F. M. S. A. C. P., 147
Painting, 232, 244, 292
and sculpture, qualifications necessary to produce, 239, 293
Paris exhibitions, 218
Parnassians, 205–6, 213
Pascal, Blaise, 40, 190, 466
Pastime for the idle crowd of rich, some art merely a, 366
Patti, Adelina, 302
Peasant art, 277
labourers, 105
Péladan, Joséphin, 157, 207
Perplexity of plain folk, 300
Peter of Chelczic, 183
Petersburg, 9
Pleasure of art, 82
_Pickwick Papers, The_, 435
Pictet, Adolph, 155
Pierre Louÿs, _Aphrodite_, 202
Pilate, Pontius, 36–7
Pilo, Mario, _La Psychologie du Beau et de l’Art_, 156–7
Pissarro, Camille, 218
Plato, 92, 141, 183–7
_The Republic_, 175, 307
Poems, qualifications needed to write, 238
Poetic, “means borrowed,” 234
subjects, 261
Polenz, W. von, _Der Büttnerbauer_, 18, 378 et seq.
Popularity, 103
Pózdnyshev (in _The Kreutzer Sonata_), 12–15
Predetermination (an author’s) evokes distrust, 259
Prévost, Marcel, 201
Printed matter a vast obstacle to enlightenment, 383
the necessity of, 73
Printing, 383
Purpose of art, the, 278
Pushkin, 301–2, 384, 461
_Tales_, 290, 384, 461
_Borís Godunóv_, 244
_Evgéni Onégin_, 244
_The Gipsies_, 244
Puvis de Chavannes, P. C., 218
Qualities, Three--of works of art
a) Content ⎫
b) Beauty ⎬ 445–6
c) Sincerity ⎭
Ragnar Redbeard, 303
Raphael, 296
Ravaisson, F., _La Philosophie en France_, 155
Realism in art, 77–8, 234
Re-appraisement of knowledge needed, 330
Reformers’ objection to art, 91
Reid, Thomas, 157
_Religion and Morality_, by Tolstoy, 375
Religious art, 310
Religious perception, 108, 176–8, 197–200, 278, 281–5, 310, 317,
322, 367, 372, 374–5
lack of, 182
the consciousness of the brotherhood of man, 331
Renaissance, The, 182, 200, 282, 453, 460
Renan, Ernest, _Marc Aurèle_, 61, 62, 134
_L’Abbesse de Jouarre_, 62
_Resurrection_, by Tolstoy, 111
Riddle, fairy-tale, lullaby, jest, or sketch, 318
Rider Haggard, 385
Romanticists, 221
_Romeo and Juliet_, 394
Rossi, Ernesto, 272
Royal Academy of 1897, 271
Ruge, Arnold, 151
Ruskin, John, 94–5, 378
Russian poetry, 384
_St. Anthony, The Temptation of_, 271
Sand, George, 49, 450–1
_La petite Fadette_, 49
_La mère aux diables_, 49
Schasler, M., _Kritische Geschichte der Aesthetik_, 140–1, 186–7
Schelling, F. W. J., 149, 150
Schiller, J. C. F. von, 148, 169, 288, 295
Schlegel, F., 149
Schnaase, Karl, _Geschichte der bildenden Künste_, 153
Schopenhauer, A., 153, 246
Science, 30, 321–29
and art closely united, 322
for science’s sake, 324
inventions in natural, 324
of esthetics has failed, The, 361
purpose of real and pretended, 325–6
Sexual relations, 305
Shaftesbury, A. A. C., third Earl of, 145
Sketch, fairy-tale, lullaby, riddle, jest, 318
Shakespeare, William, 18, 19, 393–463
devoid of sense of proportion, 437
his apt use of gestures, 435
his characters are borrowed from earlier works, 424
do not accord with their period or place, 421
lack individuality of language, 422
talk as real people never could talk, 423
his delineation of character, 422
effect on the young of laudation of Shakespeare, 462–3
his exaggeration, 438
his fame: first cause of, 456
_King Lear_, 394–429, 436–7
Albany’s unnatural speech, 410
Edgar and Kent not recognized by people who knew them well, 406
Gloucester’s unnatural credulity, 400, 403, 412
his Kings, 399, 423
his masterly development of scenes, 455
movement of feeling powerfully expressed by, 435
not an artist, 438
his patriotism, 445
his practical mastery of stage-craft, 19
_Romeo and Juliet_, 165
“The end justifies the means,” 445
Thoughts arising from sound of words, 409
Shaw, Bernard, 17
Shelley, P. B., 395
“Sick send the hale to bed, the,” 227
Simple direct artistic impression, 455
Sincerity in Art, 84–5
Socrates, 141, 184, 186, 190
Solger, K. W. F., _Vorlesungen über Æsthetik_, 150
Spaletti, _Saggio sopra la bellessa_, 147
Spectrum Analysis of Milky Way, lecture on, 318
Speech, 170, 173–4, 224, 297
Spencer, Herbert, 158, 169
Spiritual Censor (Russian), 119
Spiritualists, 262
Stead, W. T., 7
Sténka Rázin, 304
Story of an Easter Cake, 270
Story or novel, qualifications needed to write, 238
Subject, and subject-matter, 369
Subject-matter of art, 364
Sue, Eugène, 450–1
Sully, James, _Sensation and Intuition_, 160, 169, 170
Sulzer, George, 144
“Supremacy of Artistic Element in Literature,” 4
Swinburne, A. C., 396
Symbolic pictures, 294
Symbolists, 207, 218, 219
Taglioni, Maria, 302
Taine, Henri, 156
Tasso, Torquato, _Jerusalem Delivered_, 296
Tatiana Lvóvna (Mme. Sukhotin), 218
“Tendencious art,” 77
Test of great philosophy, 369
Thackeray, W. M., 385
Three religions, 375
“To be or not to be,” 433
Todhunter, John, _Theory of the Beautiful_, 158–9
Tolstoy’s final conclusions on art, 377
fitness to deal with the problem, 97, 98, 373
lecture on literature, 4
view of life, 367
Tolstoy, Alexey, 385, 461
_Tsar Borís_, 244
Truth, 190
Turgénev, K. S., _The Quail_, 271
_A Sportsman’s Notebook_, 199
_Twenty-three Tales_, by Tolstoy, 7, 8
“Two live leaves cannot be exactly alike,” 251
Tyútchev, Th. I., 384
_Uncle Tom’s Cabin_, 288, 373
“Understand the error we are involved in,” 307
Understood by men less educated than our labourers, art was, 226,
365
Unintelligible art, 223
Union with men of the past and the future, through art, 287
Universal art, 106, 229, 310, 365
Vasnetsov, V. M., 271
Vauvenargues, Marquis de, 466
Vedas, hymns of the, 226
Verbal art, 232
Verlaine, Paul, 207, 210–4, 302, 336–7
_Ariettes oubliées_, 211, 212
_La Sagesse_, 212, 213
Veron, _L’esthétique_, 157, 169, 170
Versifiers, with broken tongues, 253
Villiers de l’Isle Adam, _Contes Cruels_, _L’Annonciateur_, 221
View of life, 9
View of life unconsciously permeating artistic work, 457
Vischer, Theodor, 152
Vogüé, C. J. M. Marquis de, 394
Vogul play, 272
Voltaire, F. M. A. de, 147, 227
Wagner, Richard, 206, 233, 250–64
“a limited self-opinionated German of bad taste,” 259
explanation of his success, 260–262
his great ability, 261
his “model work of counterfeit art,” 253
Walkley, A. B., 18
Walter, _Geschichte der Æsthetik im Altertum_, 142
on Plato, 187
_War and Peace_, 8, 16
Weisse, C. H., 151
Welfare lies in union, 309
_What is Art_, 1, 91–377
premature publication of in Paris, 3
_What Then Must We Do?_, 12
Whittier, J. G., 385
Wilde, Oscar, 303
Winckelmann, J. J., 144
Wolf, encounter with a, 172
Yakútsk ornaments, 293
Yásnaya Polyána, 4, 21
Yawning, 171
Zola, Émile, 270
_La Terre_, 49
Concerning the Proposed Centenary Edition of Tolstoy’s Works
In February 1922, Mr. Bernard Shaw addressed the following letter
to the Press and it appeared in _The Times_, _Daily Telegraph_,
_Manchester Guardian_ and many other papers, receiving, then and
subsequently, the endorsement of the numerous distinguished people,
here and in America, whose signatures are appended.
10 ADELPHI TERRACE,
W.C.2.
_28 February 1922._
SIR,
We desire to call public attention, especially in circles
interested in literature and in general cultural questions,
to the lack of a complete edition of the works of Leo Tolstoy
in the English language. Unfortunately the means adopted by
Tolstoy to secure the widest possible circulation for his
books had just the opposite effect. He invited all publishers
in all countries to take the fullest advantage of the
absence of international copyright between Russia and other
countries by publishing his writings in such translations
as they could procure without any reference to his moral or
legal rights. In the case of any less famous author this
step would have prevented his works being translated at all,
as it is practically impossible to engage modern capital in
publishing, or any other enterprise, without property rights.
In Tolstoy’s case it led to the appearance of a great number
of translations, including some very incompetent ones, of a
few of his books which were considered specially interesting
as stories, or were capable of being turned to account for
propaganda. These few books have consequently become more or
less well known; but the profits of their publication have
been so divided that they have in no instance been able to
carry a complete edition on their backs. Accordingly, no
complete edition has yet appeared; and the one projected for
the Tolstoy Centenary of 1928 by the Oxford University Press,
translated by Aylmer Maude, whose competence and acceptance
by Tolstoy himself are unquestionable, may prove commercially
impossible unless the public, by spontaneously giving it the
privileges of a copyright edition, both by subscribing for
complete sets and specifying this edition in their purchases
of separate volumes, makes up for the absence of legal rights
and for the miscarriage of Tolstoy’s public-spirited intention
in the matter.
The Oxford Press translation will be complete and unique,
and certain to remain so, as it is not now possible for any
new English writer to bring to a translation of Tolstoy’s
works the personal knowledge of the author, and the peculiar
experience of Russian life and of the Tolstoyan social
experiments that followed the first publication of his
writings, enjoyed by Mr. Aylmer Maude and his wife and
collaborator, who is a native of Russia. We feel that its
failure to appear would be a grave loss to our national
literary equipment; and we earnestly hope that the opportunity
of completing the nineteenth-century bookshelf both of our
public and private libraries by a complete edition of his
works in English will not be missed.
Yours truly,
G. BERNARD SHAW.
LIST OF SIGNATORIES TO SHAW’S LETTER.
Henry Ainley (Fedya of _Reparation_)
Meggie Albanesi (Alexandra of _Reparation_)
Rev. Cyril Alington, D.D., Head Master of Eton
William Archer
Lena Ashwell (Katusha of _Resurrection_)
J. F. Baddeley
John Bailey
Hon. Maurice Baring, O.B.E.
Dr. Ernest Barker, Principal, King’s College
Sir Alfred Bateman, K.C.M.G.
H. Wansey Bayly, M.R.C.S.
Ian Hay Beith, C.B.E.
Marie Belloc-Lowndes
Arnold Bennett
J. D. Beresford
Rt. Hon. Sir Geo. W. Buchanan, P.C., G.C.B., C.V.O., formerly
Ambassador, Petrograd
Rt. Hon. Lord Carnock, P.C., G.C.B., K.C.V.O., formerly
Ambassador, Petrograd
Sir Hall Caine, K.B.E.
Edward Carpenter
Clementine S. Churchill (Mrs. Winston Churchill)
A. Clutton Brock, B.A.
W. L. Courtney, L.L.D., Editor of _Fortnightly Review_
A. Emil Davies, L.C.C.
H. Walford Davies, F.R.C.O.
Brig.-Gen. Guy Payan Dawnay, C.M.G., M.V.O., D.S.O.
James Douglas, Editor of _Sunday Express_
J. D. Duff, Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, LL.D.
Havelock Ellis, L.S.H.
Nevill Forbes, Ph.D., Reader in Russian, Oxford
J. L. Garvin, Editor of _Observer_
G. P. Gooch, D.Litt.
L. Haden Guest, M.R.C.S., M.P.
Cicely Hamilton
Austin Harrison
Sir Anthony Hope Hawkins
John H. Hobson, M.A.
Silas K. Hocking
E. A. Brayley Hodgetts, Chairman of Russian Section, London Chamber
of Commerce
Sonia E. Howe, Authoress of _A Thousand Years of Russian History_
W. W. Jacobs
Edgar Jepson, B.A.
Jerome K. Jerome
Henry Arthur Jones
Commander Oliver Locker-Lampson, C.M.G., D.S.O., M.P.
Sir Oliver Lodge, F.R.S., D.Sc.
Lady Constance Lytton
Sir Lynden Macassey
Justin Huntly MᶜCarthy
Miles Malleson
Hugh Macnaughten, Vice-Provost of Eton
W. Somerset Maugham, M.R.C.S.
Dorothy Massingham
H. W. Massingham
Cyril Maude
W. B. Maxwell
P. E. Meadon
Baron A. Meyendorff
Eustace Miles, M.A.
Gilbert Murray, D.Litt., Regius Professor, Oxford
Cathleen Nesbitt
Henry W. Nevinson
Sir Sidney Olivier
Sir Bernard Pares, K.C.B., Professor of Russian History, University
of London
Rt. Hon. Sir Gilbert Parker, P.C., D.S.L.
Geo. Paston
Edw. R. Pease
John Pollock, M.A.
H. Hesketh Prichard, D.S.O.
Sir Henry Penson, K.B.E.
Arthur Rackham
Rt. Hon. Lady Rhondda
Rt. Hon. G. H. Roberts, J.P.
Sir E. Denison Ross, Ph.D.
Hon. Bertrand Russell, F.R.S.
St. John Ervine
May Sinclair
Rt. Hon. Lady Sybil Smith
A. B. Stodart, Hon. Sec. British Russia Club
Marie C. Stopes, D.Sc., Ph.D.
Lord Treowen, C.M.G.
Mrs. Alec-Tweedie, F.R.G.S.
Leslie Urquhart
Sir Paul Vinogradoff, Professor of Jurisprudence, Oxford
Graham Wallas
A. B. Walkley, F.R.S.L., Dramatic Critic of _The Times_
Hugh Walpole
Lt.-Col. John Ward, C.B., M.P.
Rt. Hon. Lord Weardale
H. G. Wells
Rebecca West
Rt. Hon. J. H. Whitley, P.C.
Norman Wilks
Harold Williams
C. Hagberg Wright, LL.D., Librarian, London Library
AMERICAN
Jane Addams
James Lane Allen
Sherwood Anderson
James Branch Cabell
George W. Cable
Theodore Dreiser
Horace Howard Furness
Hamlin Garland
Ellen Glasgow
Robert Underwood Johnson
Robert Morse Lovett
Edwin Markham
H. L. Mencken
Harriet Monroe
Eugene O’Neill
William Lyon Phelps
Chas. Ed. Russell
Booth Tarkington
Lucy E. Textor
Hon. Henry Vandyck
Owen Wister
Beside those who have signed Shaw’s letter, Thomas Hardy wrote:--
‘Although I have no first-hand knowledge of the details mentioned in
Mr. Bernard Shaw’s letter on translations of Tolstoy, I agree with
the opinion that a good rendering of his works into English--so far
as that is possible--should be made practicable by the concentration
of effort on one production; and I believe that Mr. Aylmer Maude’s
competence for the task is special and trustworthy.’
Sir Edmund Gosse wrote to Mr. Aylmer Maude:--
‘I wish to express my appreciation of your admirable labours
and those of Mrs. Maude.’
Mr. Joseph Hergesheimer wrote:--
‘I fully agree with contents of the letter.’
Professor Gilbert Murray wrote:--
‘I am in the most cordial agreement with Shaw’s letter and
will most gladly sign it. It is a great public service that
you and the Oxford Press between you are undertaking. The
wonder to me has always been how Tolstoy contrived to make
such a tremendous and characteristic impression through such
an opaque and distorting medium as the average Anglo-American
translation.’
* * * * *
A score of letters containing Tolstoy’s very emphatic authorization
and endorsement of the Maude versions of his work (such as he gave to
no other translator) have been deposited with the Oxford University
Press. These expressions of approval begin in 1897, when Mr. Maude
translated _What is Art_, and were continued till 1910, the year of
Tolstoy’s death. The following are a few extracts from these letters
of Tolstoy’s:
5 Sept. 1897. ‘I have written to Tchertkoff asking him to leave it to
you to do the translation. That will give me more satisfaction.’
18 Oct. 1897. ‘You have filled in correctly the word omitted on p.
31. In general I see that you are doing the translation with great
care, for which I am very grateful. I am almost certain I shall be
in accord with all your comments, but still send them to me. I, too,
will examine them carefully.’
Nov. 1897. ‘I will begin to reply in sequence to your admirable
remarks, which are of great use to the undertaking.... With all the
rest of your remarks I quite agree, and prompted by them I have made
alterations in my (Russian) text. Please make more such.’
Dec. 1897. ‘I yesterday received both your letters, dear friend, and
hasten to answer them. I also received the translation. I have gone
through it and have not found anything that held me up, except the
words “admirable book of Verm” (p. 22). It should be “very good” and
not “admirable”. The translation seems to me to be very good.’
Dec. 1898. ‘I have received your letter, dear friend Maude, and
am very glad that you are again in England and wish to work at
translating my writings. I do not desire a better translator, both on
account of your knowledge of the two languages and of your strictness
with yourself in everything.’
Jan. 1899. ‘I am very glad that your dear wife is doing the
translation of _Resurrection_.’
May 1900. ‘Your translations are very good because you have an
admirable mastery of both the languages, and besides that, to my
great pleasure, you love the thoughts you transmit.’
Sept. 1900. ‘To lose such translators as you and your wife would be
very, very unpleasant. Better translators, both in your knowledge of
both languages and in your penetration into the very meaning of the
matter translated, could not be invented.’
Feb. 1901. ‘I think that your and your wife’s splendid translation of
what has previously been published and badly translated should find a
publisher.’
Nov. 1901. (From a letter written by the Countess Olga Tolstoy.) ‘I
am writing instead of Leo Nikolaevich, who sends many excuses for not
having sooner replied to your two letters, and about the fine book,
_Sevastopol_, you have sent. All this time Leo Nikolaevich has been
very unwell.... He asks me to convey to you his great gratitude for
the letters and for _Sevastopol_. He finds both the translation and
the edition excellent, and that one could not desire anything better.’
23 Dec. 1901. ‘I think I have already written you how unusually
pleased I was with the first volume of your edition. All is
excellent--the edition, the notes, and chiefly the translation, and
even more the conscientiousness with which all this has been done. I
opened it accidentally at the _Two Hussars_ and read on to the end
just as if it were something new and had been written in English.’
6 Oct. 1903. _A common friend in replying to an inquiry Mr. Maude
made concerning his re-translation of a work, the previously
published (Free Age Press) edition of which appeared faulty._ ‘L.
N. (Tolstoy) asks me to reply to your inquiry about the exactness
of your translation of _What is Religion?_ that your translation
expresses his meaning more exactly, and he is quite satisfied.’
11 Dec. 1903. ‘Thank your kind friend Maude for sending me the volume
of _Essays and Letters_ (World’s Classics series). The edition is
very good.’
1 Aug. 1909. ‘I am always glad to hear news of you and of your
occupation, so closely connected with me, on excellent translations
of my writings. Your loving Leo Tolstoy.’
18 Jan. 1910. ‘I am better now and add a line to say a few words,
namely that the edition of your translations of my writings can only
give me pleasure, because your translations are very good and I do
not desire better ones.... My approval of your translations in my
letters, you can, of course, publish.’
* * * * *
The Tolstoy Centenary occurs in 1928, and the form the projected
complete Maude-Tolstoy Centenary Edition may take has not yet been
decided, but the material for it is being prepared and a pocket
edition of as much of it as is quite ready is appearing in the
World’s Classics series, which already contains the following twelve
volumes.
THE ‘MAUDE’ TOLSTOY
THE ‘WORLD’S CLASSICS’ SERIES
Pocket size, 6 by 4 inches. On thin opaque paper. Cloth, 2s. net;
sultan-red leather, 3s. 6d. net.
=The Cossacks= _and_ =Tales of the Caucasus.=
Including: _The Raid_, _The Wood-Felling_ and _Meeting a Moscow
Acquaintance in the Detachment_.
‘The best story that has been written in our
language.’--_Turgenev._
=War and Peace= (3 vols.).
‘We feel that we were ourselves there; that we knew those
people; that they are a part of our very own past.’--_Maurice
Baring._
‘It is among the greatest works ever made by man, and the
country is under a debt to Louise and Aylmer Maude for
rendering it into English.’--_New Labour Leader._
=Anna Karénina= (2 vols.).
‘Anna Karénina as an artistic production is perfection ...
a thing to which European literature of our epoch offers no
equal.’--_Dostoevski._
=Confession _and_ What I Believe= (1 vol.).
One of the sincerest and most remarkable confessions in all
literature.
=Twenty-Three Tales.=
Containing: _God Sees the Truth_, _A Prisoner in the Caucasus_, _What
Men Live By_, _Two Old Men_, _Where God is Love is_, _Ivan the Fool_,
_The Three Hermits_, _The Imp and the Crust_, _How Much Land does a
Man Need?_ _The Empty Drum_, _Too Dear_, etc.
‘I regard them as the most perfect tales ever
written.’--_Carmen Sylva, Queen of Roumania._
=The Kreutzer Sonata, Family Happiness, _and_ Polikushka= (1 vol.).
The first full translation, giving the passages suppressed by the
censor. It is the most powerful and the most widely discussed of
Tolstoy’s shorter novels.
=Plays.=
A complete edition (including the posthumous plays): _The First
Distiller_, _The Power of Darkness_, _The Fruits of Enlightenment_,
_The Live Corpse_, _The Cause of it All_, _The Light Shines in
Darkness_.
‘Nothing in the whole range of drama fascinated me more than
the old soldier in _The Power of Darkness_.’--_Bernard Shaw._
=Essays and Letters.=
Including: _Why Do Men Stupefy Themselves? Afterword to the Kreutzer
Sonata_, _The First Step_, _Non-Acting_, _Religion and Morality_,
_Shame!_, _Letters to Verigin_, _Non-Resistance_, _How to Read the
Gospels_, _Letters on Henry George_, _Modern Science_, _Patriotism
and Government_, ‘_Thou Shalt Not Kill_’, _Reply to Synod’s
Excommunication_, _What is Religion? An Appeal to the Clergy_, and
fifteen other articles.
‘Gives an excellent idea of the vast range of Tolstoy’s
intellectual activities.’--_Daily News._
=Resurrection.=
‘Undoubtedly the most important novel that has appeared in
Europe for many years.’--_Edward Garnett._
_Ready Shortly._
=What then must we do?=
Tolstoy’s remarkable study of social conditions.
_Other Volumes in Preparation_
* * * * *
WHAT IS ART?
(Now included in the volume, _Tolstoy on Art_.)
‘This book is a most effective booby trap. It is written
with so utter a contempt for the objections which a
routine critic is sure to allege against it, that many a
dilettantist reviewer has already accepted it as a butt set
up by Providence.... Whoever is really conversant with Art,
recognizes in it the voice of the master.’--_G. Bernard Shaw_
in _The Daily Chronicle_.
‘This calmly and cogently reasoned effort to put Art on a new
basis is a literary event of the first importance.... I have
never come across anything so good in its way as Mr. Maude’s
version of Tolstoy. The translation reads like an original:
you feel that Tolstoy has lost nothing in transit. And what a
wonderful artist in prose this Tolstoy is! How vigorous and
succinct! How persuasive!’--_A. B. Walkley._
‘Tolstoy’s book is the most important essay in pure
criticism of recent years, and it is destined to become a
classic.’--_Star._
‘The powerful personality of the author, the startling
originality of his views, grips the reader, and carry him,
though his deepest convictions be outraged, protesting through
the book.’--_Pall Mall Gazette._
‘Mr. Aylmer Maude’s translation is admirable--a better piece
of work has rarely been performed; and Mrs. Maude’s English
renderings of the French poems, whether as to meaning, spirit
or rhythm, are so felicitous that they amount to a _tour de
force_.’--_M. H. Spielmann_ in _Literature_.
Oxford University Press, Amen House, London, E.C.4.
THE LIFE OF TOLSTOY.
=First Fifty Years.= By AYLMER MAUDE. Seventh Edition. 8
Illustrations. Demy 8vo. 12s. 6d. net.
‘Will stand, I think, among the big biographies of our
literature.’--_G. Bernard Shaw._
‘The book is no sooner opened than it begins to
exercise a sort of charm from which it is impossible to
escape.’--_Westminster Gazette._
(The Second Volume: LATER YEARS is out of print, and will be revised.)
THE ‘MAUDE’ TOLSTOY.
=Resurrection.= With 14 Illustrations by Pasternak. 7s. 6d. net.
‘A special word of praise must be given to the illustrations.
They illustrate the author with a sympathy and an insight
which Tolstoy has never before enjoyed.’--_Glasgow Herald._
=Plays.= (Complete Edition. Six Plays.) 7 Illustrations. 7s. 6d. net.
‘A vivid picture of life, full of light and colour and
contrast; full, too, of wisdom and the wit that knows just
where to hold its hand.’--_The Times_ on ‘Fruits of Culture.’
=Sevastopol and Other Stories= (including TWO HUSSARS, etc.).
Photogravure Portrait and Map. 1s. 6d. net.
‘In these thrilling “Letters from the Front” Tolstoy
realizes war ... as no other writer has ever done before or
since.’--_Contemporary Review._
Constable and Co., 10 Orange Street, W.C.2.
* * * * *
=Leo Tolstoy.= By AYLMER MAUDE. 8vo. 7 Illustrations. 6s. net.
A complete biography, with an account of Tolstoy’s home-leaving and
death, and an explanation of what led to it.
‘Mr. Maude is our best English authority on Tolstoy, not
alone because he knew Tolstoy intimately, but because,
whilst admiring and loving him for his genius and his
sincerity, he judges calmly, and is not carried away by
hero-worship.’--_Yorkshire Post._
Methuen and Co., 36 Essex Street, London, W.C.2.
* * * * *
=The Life of Marie C. Stopes.= By AYLMER MAUDE. With 14
Illustrations. 5s. net.
An authorized biography giving, for the first time, the story of her
childhood, academic life, marriage, writings, opponents and inner
life.
Williams and Norgate, 14 Henrietta Street, W.C.2.
Transcriber’s Note:
Words and phrases in italics are surrounded by underscores, _like
this_. Those in bold are surrounded by equal signs, =like this=.
Words may have multiple spelling variations or inconsistent
hyphenation in the text. These have been left unchanged, as were
obsolete and alternative spellings. Obvious printing errors, such as
backwards, upside down, or partially printed letters and punctuation,
were corrected. Final stops missing at the end of sentences and
abbreviations were added. One excess semi-colon was deleted.
Use of accents on Russian names is inconsistent. Diacriticals in
French were corrected.
In the index, surnames were added to ‘Darwin, Erasmus’ and ‘Knight,
R.’ Accents missing on words and names in the index were adjusted to
agree with related text.
Footnotes were renumbered sequentially and were moved to the end of
the book. There are four anchors for footnote [2].
The following were changed:
‘hynotist’ to ‘hypnotist’
‘divisons’ to ‘divisions’
‘auszudrückendem’ to ‘auszudrückenden’
‘Wohlegefallen’ to ‘Wohlgefallen’
‘Asthetisches’ to ‘Aesthetisches’
‘-ziet’ to ‘-zeit’ (several instances)
‘Kunsc’ to ‘Kunst’
‘letztgenamten’ to ‘letztgenannten’
‘einer’ to ‘einem’
‘benfit’ to ‘benefit’
‘Rémy de Gourment’ to ‘Remy de Gourmont’
‘Le soir’ to ‘Le sais’
‘Himmelfaht’ to ‘Himmelfahrt’
‘Byulóv’ to ‘Bryulóv’
‘staking’ to ‘shaking’
‘abnominably’ to ‘abominably’
‘infectuous’ to ‘infectious’
‘Lontainement’ to ‘Lointainement’
‘Hagan’ to ‘Hagen’ (twice)
‘indued’ to ‘imbued’
‘enlightment’ to ‘enlightenment’
‘transcendant’ to ‘transcendent’
‘make’ to ‘makes’
‘maligant’ to ‘malignant”
‘Schonheit’s’ to ‘Schönheit’s’
‘thatfräftigen’ to ‘thatkräftigen’
‘Trojons’ to ‘Trojans’
‘Shakepeare’ to ‘Shakespeare’
‘Turgéney’ to ‘Turgénev’
‘accidently’ to ‘accidentally’
‘irrefragible’ to ‘irrefragable’
‘unbashed’ to ‘unabashed’
‘Sanscrit’ to ‘Sanskrit’
‘Pissaro’ to ‘Pissarro’
‘Tyúchev’ to ‘Tyútchev’
‘Geschicht’ to ‘Geschichte’
‘Olgo’ to ‘Olga’