Peter, with his peculiar blending of political supremacy and democratic

fancifulness, built for himself a little house on the fortress island,

where the furniture made by himself is still preserved by the side of

the miracle-working image of the Redeemer which the despot always

carried with him. His spirit soars over this city and this land. What he

did not entirely trust to his unscrupulous fist he left in honest

bigotry to the bones of the holy Alexander Nevski, which he had brought

to his capital soon after its establishment. Autocracy and popocracy

still reign in the Russian empire. The Peter-and-Paul fortress, in the

subterranean vaults of which many of the noblest hearts and heads of

Russia have found their grave, the Isaac cathedral, with its barbarian

pomp of gold and precious stones, and the mighty monoliths--these are

the symbols of the city of St. Petersburg and of its régime. If there is

in Russia, even among the enlightened minds, something like a fanatical

hatred of civilization and of the West, it is due to the manner in which

the half-barbarian Peter imposed Western ideas and civilization on a

harmless and good-natured people.

What brutal power of will may do in defiance of unfriendly nature has

been done on the banks of the Neva. Indeed, its green waters are now

hidden by an ice-crust three feet thick, over which the sleighs run a

race with the little cars of the electrical railway. Yet even without

the restless shimmer of the water the view of the river-bank is still

very impressive. The golden glitter of the great cupolas of the Isaac

cathedral, the long red front of the Winter Palace, the pale yellow

columns of the admiralty, between Renaissance structures, stand out

from among the rest.

Palaces and palaces stretch along the stream right up to the Field of

Mars. The gilded spire of the Peter-and-Paul cathedral pierces the

white-blue sky and greets, with its angel balanced on the extreme spire,

the equally grotesque high spire of the admiralty. Great stone and iron

bridges span the broad stream, its opposite shore almost faded in the

light mist of the wintry day. Walking towards the middle of the bridge,

whence a splendid view may be obtained, one sees the long row of

buildings on the farther islands standing out of the mist. One row of

columns is followed by another--the Academy of Arts, the Academy of

Sciences, the house of Menschikov, which Catherine built for her

favorite, come into view. Towards the west the hulls of vessels stand

out from among the docks. Still farther out the mist hides the shoals of

the Neva, together with those of the Gulf of Finland, in an impenetrable

gray. Towards the north stretch the endless lanes with their bare

branches which lead to the islands. This is the Bois de Boulogne of St.

Petersburg, where the gilded youth race in brightly decorated "troikas,"

and hasten to squander in champagne, at cards, and in gypsy

entertainments, the wages of the starved muzhik. It is a magnificent

picture of power, of self-conscious riches, the better part of which is

furnished by the mighty stream itself.

It is easy now to realize that St. Petersburg was originally planned

for a seaport, and that it therefore presents its glittering front to

the sea. The railroads which conduct the traffic to-day could no longer

penetrate with their stations into the city proper; hence the visitors

must first pass through the broad, melancholy suburban girdle which

gives one the impression of a giant village. When access to the city was

still by boat from the Gulf of Finland, the landing at the "English

quay," with its view of all these colossal structures, golden domes and

spires, must have created a powerful impression. Nothing less was

contemplated by this massing of palaces. The capital and residence city

was not intended to facilitate the access of the West but rather to

inspire it with awe.

The splendor of the city naturally becomes gradually diminished from the

banks of the Neva towards the vast periphery. The main artery of traffic

in St. Petersburg, the "Nevski Prospect," and its continuation, the

"Bolshaya Morskaya," remain stately and impressive to their very end. A

peculiar feature of St. Petersburg is the numerous canals which begin

and end at the Neva, and which once served to drain the swampy soil of

the city. They are now to be filled, for they do not answer the purpose.

Nevertheless, they offer meanwhile an opportunity for pretty bridge

structures, as, for instance, the one leading over the Fontanka,

ornamented with the four groups of the horse-tamers by Baron Klodt. A

comparison with the lagoon city, Venice, would really be a flattering

hyperbole, for one does not get the impression here of being on the sea,

as in the case of the "Canal-Grande." The city rather reminds one of the

models that were nearer to its founder, the canal-furrowed cities of

Holland. Still, these canals are a pleasant diversion in the otherwise

monotonous pictures of the city streets.

Should it be mentioned here that St. Petersburg has its "millionnaya"

(millionaire's street)? It is well known that hither and towards Moscow

flow the treasures of a country squeezed dry. The great wealth of the

one almost presupposes the nameless misery of the other. The

indifference with which the shocking famine conditions of entire

provinces and the threatening economic collapse of the whole empire are

regarded here finds its explanation only in the bearing of these

boyar-millionaires, who consider themselves Europeans because their

valets are shaved in the English fashion.

The eye of the stranger who wishes to understand, and not merely to

gaze, will rather turn to other phenomena more characteristic than

splendid buildings of the country and its people.

There is, in the first place, the pope (priest), and then the policeman.

The priests and the policemen are the handsomest persons in St.

Petersburg. Although the flowing hair of the bearded priest, reaching to

his shoulders, is not to be regarded as a characteristic peculiarity,

since every third man in Russia displays long hair or profuse locks that

would undoubtedly draw to their fortunate possessor in our land the

attention of the street boys, still they are carefully chosen human

material, tall, graceful men with handsome heads and proud mien.

Notwithstanding this they are accorded but little reverence even among

the bigoted Russians, for no matter how often and copiously these may

cross themselves before every sacred image, they quite often experience,

behind the priest, a sort of salvation which compels them suddenly to

empty their mouths in a very demonstrative manner. This may be due to

various kinds of superstition, which regard the meeting with a priest as

very undesirable, but it finds its explanation also in the not always

exemplary life of this servant of the Lord. He is especially accredited

with a decided predilection for various distilled liquors that at times

exert a doubtful influence on a man's behavior. One may see in St.

Petersburg men wrapped in costly sable furs make the acquaintance of the

street pavements, especially during the "butter-week," yet for spiritual

garments the gutter is even less a place of legitimate rest, and, at any

rate, it is difficult to acknowledge as the appointed interpreter of

God's will a man whose mouth savors of an entirely different spirit than

the "spiritus sanctus."

For all this, however, the Russian is filled, outwardly at least, and

during divine services, with a devotion which, to us, is scarcely

comprehensible. With fanatical fervor he kisses in church the hand of

the same priest behind whose back he spat at the church door. His body

never rests. As with the orthodox Jew and the howling dervish, his

praying consists in an almost unceasing bowing, and a not at all

inconsiderable application of gymnastics. He is perpetually crossing

himself. Particularly fervent suppliants, of the female gender

especially, can hardly satisfy themselves by kissing again and again the

stone flags of the floor, the hem of the priest's coat, the sacred

images, and the numberless relics. But how effective and mind-ensnaring

is the orthodox church service. The glimmer of the innumerable small and

large wax candles brought by most of the congregants fills the golden

mist of the place with an unearthly light. Rubies, emeralds, and

diamonds shine from the silver and gold crowns on the sacred images. The

gigantic priest in his gold-embroidered vestments lets sound his deep,

powerful, bass voice, and wonderful choirs answer him from both sides of

the "ikonostas." Clouds of incense float through the high nave. The

faithful, ranged one after another, intoxicate and carry one another by

their devotion--a huge general hypnosis in which education and priestly

art are equally concerned. The orthodox cult is not to be compared, at

least in my opinion, with that of the Roman Catholics in the depth and

nobility of the music and in the artistic arrangement of the service.

But in its archaic monotony, in its use of the coarsest material

stimuli, it is perhaps even more suggestive for the Eastern masses than

is the other for the civilized peoples of the West. The quantity of

gold, silver, and precious stones offered up, especially in the Isaac

cathedral and in the Kazan cathedral--fashioned after that of St.

Peter's in Rome--to give the faithful a conception of the just claims of

Heaven on treasure and reverence, is beyond the belief of Europeans. The

artistically excellent silver ornaments of the Isaac cathedral weigh not

less than eleven thousand kilograms. A single copy of the New Testament

is bound in twenty kilograms of gold. The sacred image made in

commemoration of the catastrophe of Borki is almost entirely covered

with diamonds. These endowments came, for the most part, from members of

the imperial house. The union of church and state is more intimate here

than elsewhere, and, apparently, even more profitable for the guardians

of the altar. Among all the sacred relics and trophies of the St.

Petersburg church, one impresses the foreigner above the others. It is a

collection of silver gifts from the French, ranged along the wall of the

Peter-and-Paul cathedral. By the side of the coffins of the Russian

emperors and empresses, from Peter the Great to Alexander III., which

one cannot pass without a peculiar feeling of historical respect, under

innumerable flags and war trophies, there stand, as the greatest triumph

that the despotic barbarian state has won from civilized Europe, the

silver crowns and the shields of honor which Félix Faure,

Casimir-Périer, the senate, the chamber, and the Parisian press

presented to the Russian ally of France.

"You see here the greatest misfortune that has befallen us in this

century," said my companion, an orthodox Russian of nothing less than

radical views. "Until then, until this alliance, with all our

boastfulness we still felt some shame before Europe for our barbarous

and shameful rule. But since the most distinguished men and corporations

of the most enlightened republic have begun prostrating themselves

before us, the knout despotism has received the consecration of Europe

and has thrown all shame to the winds."

"But the French have lent you eight milliards for it," I replied.

"A part of which has gone into Heaven knows whose pockets; the other

supports our police against us, and the remainder was sunk in a

worthless railroad, while we, in order to provide the interest, must

take the horse from our peasant's plough and the cow from its stable,

until even that shall come to an end, for nothing else will be left for

the executor."

"A Jesuit trick," I said. "You owe the alliance to the diplomacy of

Rampolla."

"The sword and the holy-water sprinkler," answered the Russian, as he

pointed his hand in a circle from the war trophies to the "ikonostas,"

"they go everywhere hand-in-hand and enslave and plunder the nations."

The leaden, snowy skies looked down on us oppressively as with a deep

shudder at the prison gratings of the Peter-and-Paul fortress we

hastened back to the city. I heard in my mind the notes of the

"Marseillaise," and before my eyes there stood the gifts of honor from

the French nation brought to the despot of the fortress. They are very

near each other, cathedral and prison. In the still of the night the

watchman of the French offerings may often hear the groans and the

despairing cries of the poor souls who had dreamed of freedom and

brotherhood and had paid for their dreams behind the heavy iron bars,

deep under the mirror-like surface of the Neva, in the dungeons of the

Peter-and-Paul fortress.

VI

ARTIST AND PROFESSOR--ILYA RYEPIN

Should some one assert that there is a great artist in a European

capital, honored by an entire nation as its very greatest master, yet,

nevertheless, not even known by name among the great European public, we

should shake our heads unbelievingly, for such a phenomenon is

impossible in our age of railroads and printer's-ink. And yet this

assertion would be literally true. There is such a great artist living

in a city of a million inhabitants, and recognized by millions, yet of

his works even art-students outside of Russia have seen but one or two.

To make this even more incomprehensible, it should be stated that this

artist had attained renown in his country not merely a few years ago,

but has created masterpiece after masterpiece for more than thirty

years; indeed, his first picture at the world's fair in Vienna in 1873

was generally recognized as startling. Nevertheless, the name of the

master has long been forgotten on our side of the Vistula; it may be

because no one found it to his interest to advertise him and thus to

create competition for others, but more probably because Russia is a

separate world and isolates itself from the rest of Europe with almost

barbaric insolence.

There is, however, some advantage for Russia in this isolation from the

"rotten West." They are not obliged to pass through all the various

phases of our so-called art movement, and therefore are not carried from

one extreme to the other, but calmly pursue their own quiet way. They

also had the good-fortune, while the rest of Europe was in a state of

conflict over unfruitful theories, to possess really great creative

artists, always the best antidote against doctrinarianism. When the

one-sided, methodically proletarian naturalism reigned in the West,

itself a protest against the shallow idealistic formalism of the

preceding decades, Russian literature possessed its greatest realistic

poets, Tolstoï, Turgenyev, Dostoyevski, who never overlooked the inner

process, the true themes of poetical creation, for the sake of outward

appearances, and have thereby created that incomparable, physiological

realism that we still lack. And because their great realists were poets,

great poets and geniuses, they felt no need of a new drawing-room art,

which of necessity goes to the other extreme, the romantic,

aristocratic, catholic. They had no Zola, and therefore they needed no

Maeterlinck. And it was exactly so with their painting. Their great

artists did not lose themselves, like Manet and his school, in problems

purely of light and air without poetical contents; hence to rediscover

poetry and to save it for art there was no need for Preraphaelites or

Decadents. The great painter is artist, man, and poet, a phenomenon like

Leo Tolstoï, therefore the few symbolists who believe they must imitate

European fashions make no headway against them.

Imitators can only exist among imitators, by the side of nature's

imitators, imitators of Raphael's predecessors.

A single true artist frightens away all the ghosts of the night, and

thus decadence plays an insignificant rôle alongside of Tolstoï and

Ryepin, whether it be the decadent literature of Huysmans and

Maeterlinck, or the decadence of the Neoromanticists and of the

Neoidealists.

It is time, however, to speak of the artist himself, an artist of sixty,

still in the fulness of power, who, besides wielding the brush, occupies

a professor's chair at the St. Petersburg Academy. I have just called

him professor. He is more than that, he is, like Leo Tolstoï, a

revolutionist, the terrible accuser of the two diabolical forces that

keep the nation in its course, the church and the despotism of

government. But, to the honor of the Russian dynasty be it said, this

artist, acknowledged to be the greatest of his country, was never

"induced" to cast aside the criticism of the prevailing system he made

by his painting and to engage in the decorative court art. His so-called

nihilist pictures, reproduction of which has been prohibited by the

police, are for the most part in the possession of grand-dukes, and,

notwithstanding his undisguised opinions, he was intrusted with the

painting of the imperial council representing the Czar in the midst of

his councillors. The czars have always been more liberal than their

administrators. Nicholas I. prized Gogol's "Revizor" above all else, and

Nicholas II. is the greatest admirer of Tolstoï. And so Ryepin may paint

whatever and however he will. And we shall see that he makes proper use

of this opportunity. He is Russian, and nothing but Russian. At

twenty-two he received for his work, "The Awakening of Jairus's Little

Daughter," an academic prize and a travelling fellowship for a number of

years. But before the expiration of the appointed time spent by him in

Berlin and Paris he returned to Russia, and produced in 1873 his

"Burlaks" (barge-towers), which attracted great attention at the Vienna

exposition. The thirty years that have passed since then have detracted

nothing from the painting. How far surpassed do Manet's

"revolutionizing" works already appear to us, and still how indelibly

fresh these "barge-towers." That is so. The reason is simple--it is no

painting of theory but of nature represented as the individual sees it,

the masterly impression of an artist, the most concentrated effect of

landscape, light, and action. The purely technical problem is

subordinated to the whole, to the unity of action and mood, solved

naturally and easily. The problem of the artist to tell us what we

cannot forget, to give us something of his soul, his sentiments, his

thoughts, is of first importance, just as geniuses of all ages cared

less to be thought masters of technique than to win friends,

fellow-thinkers, and comrades, to share their joys and feelings. From

the purely technical stand-point, where is there a painting that

presents in a more masterly manner the glimmer of sunlight on the

surface of a broad stream--as in this case--and where, nevertheless, the

landscape is treated merely as the background? And again, where is the

action of twelve men wearily plodding onward, drawing with rhythmic step

the boat against the stream, seized more forcibly, more suggestively

than in this plaintive song of the Russian people's soul?

The youth of barely twenty-four years had at one leap placed himself at

the head of all contemporary artists. Analogies between him and the

artistic career and method of Leo Tolstoï force themselves on us again

and again. Tolstoï's _Sketches from the Caucasus_, _Sevastopol_,

_Cossacks_, are his early works, yet they are the most wonderful that

the entire prose of all literature can show. And so it is in this

lifelike picture of a twenty-four-year-old youth. Had we no other work

of his than the "Barge-towers," we should yet see in him a great master.

It is but necessary to look at the feet of these twelve wretched toilers

to realize with wonder the characterization, the full measure of which

is given only to genius. How they strain against the ground and almost

dig into the rock! How the bodies are bent forward in the broad belt

that holds the tow-line! What an old, sad melody is this to which these

bare-footed men keep step as they struggle up along the stream? In all

his barefoot stories of the ancient sorrow of the steppe children, Gorki

has not painted with greater insight. A sorrowful picture for all its

sunshine, and the more sorrowful because no tendency is made evident. It

means seeing, seeing with the eyes and with the heart, and, therefore,

it is art.

It would be wrong, however, to say that Ryepin--in his works as a whole

if not in a given instance--has introduced a "tendency" in his choice of

solely sorrowful subjects. Such is not the case. There is nothing more

exuberant, more convulsing than his large painting, "Cossacks Preparing

a Humorous Reply to a Threatening Letter of Mohammed III." The answer

could not have been very respectful. That may be seen from the sarcastic

expression of the intelligent scribe as well as from the effect that his

wit has on the martial environment. A be-mustached old fellow in a white

lamb-skin cap holds his big belly for laughing; another almost falls

over backward, his bald pate quite jumping out of the canvas. One snaps

his fingers; another, old and toothless, grins with joy; a third pounds

with clinched fist on the almost bare back of his neighbor; another

shuts his right eye as if perceiving a doubtful odor; one with a great

tooth-gap shouts aloud, while others smile in quiet joy through the

smoke of their short pipes. All these are crowded around a primitive

wooden table scarcely a metre wide; twenty figures, a natural group, one

head hiding another, and with all you have an unobstructed view of the

camp lying bright in the sunshine and dust and full of horses and men.

The effect of the picture is so overpowering that at the mere

recollection of it you can scarcely refrain from joining in the hearty

laughter of these sturdy, untutored natures. In the entire range of

modern painting there is no other picture so full of the strong joy of

living.

"The Village Procession," preserved in the Tretyakov Gallery in

Moscow--the finest collection of the master's works--is not gloomy like

the mournful song of the "Barge-towers," nor exuberant with serf

arrogance and vitality like the Cossack camp, but a fragment of the

colorless Russian national life as it really is, a sorrowful human

document for the thoughtful observer alone. Tattered muzhiks in fur

coats are carrying on poles a heavy sacred image, and behind them crowds

the village populace with flags and crucifixes. I will not again

emphasize how masterfully everything is noted here, from the gold border

of the sacred image to the last bit of dusty sunshine on the village

street. Absolute mastery is self-evident in Ryepin's work. We are again

attracted in this picture by the great intensity of mood. What harmony

there is in it--the mounted gendarme who pitilessly strikes with his

knout into the peasant group to make room for the priests and the local

officials; the half-idiotic, greasy sexton; the well-fed, bearded

priest; the crowd of the abandoned, the crippled, and the maimed, the

brutalized peasants, the old women. A long procession of folly,

brutality, official darkness, ignorance; a chapter from the might of

darkness; the crucifix misused as an aid to the knout, a symbol of the

Russian régime that could not be held up to scorn more passionately by

any demagogue; and yet only a street-scene which would hardly strike the

Moscow merchant when strolling in the gallery of a Sunday, because of

its freedom from any "tendency."

The Land of Riddles (Russia of To-day) · 第 2 / 18 段