Learning to Fish for Yourself

     "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime". This well known quote by Lao Tzu (6^th Century BC) expresses the reality of life in the countries which made up the Soviet Union quite nicely.  It has been twenty years since the breakup of the Soviet Union and many people are still looking to the government to do things for them.

      A Russian physician in his forties expresses the frustration of many when he says, "The Soviet system deliberately kept us as dependent children," he said. "They told us when to sit, when to stand, what to say, what to think, what to do — we were punished severely if we ever tried to think for ourselves or to show any initiative. Then when the Soviet system fell in 1991, we were like 3-year-olds who someone had thrown out into the snow, saying, 'Here, now you go take care of yourselves!'"

      His right arm thrust upward with flexed muscles and clenched fist as he declared: "We are not stupid! We are not lazy! We just don't know how!" Both his arm and his voice dropped as he softly said, "Please help us. Please teach us how to be good husbands and wives, fathers and mothers, sons and daughters, friends and lovers, employers and employees. No one has ever role-modeled to us how to become these people in a healthy, balanced way." ¹

      Most Americans would be astonished to read this, especially since we were raised to be very independent, self-reliant, and taught not to rely upon the government for assistance unless absolutely necessary.  The United States is more of a "left-brained culture" that respects and encourages: logical and analytical thinking, rationality, objectivity, responsibility, initiative, independence, honesty, dependability, trustworthiness and punctuality; and an active work ethic that emphasizes quality workmanship and accomplishing objectives in a timely manner. While there are many people in the United States who are innately more right-brained, the country as a whole still remains a left-brained culture in education, business and government. Emphasis is placed on "doing."

    Russia is more of a "right-brained culture" that respects and encourages: communication, connections, spirituality, philosophy, subjectivity, adaptability, flexibility, survival, communal concepts, formality, and tradition; and emotions that are deep and passionate. Relationships with friends and family are a high priority, and most Russians have a wide knowledge and love of the arts and culture. They are more reactive than active. While there also are many people in Russia who have left-brained personalities, the country as a whole still remains a right-brained culture, and this affects all aspects of life. Emphasis is placed upon "being." ²

    What is true of people in Russia is also true of people from the other nations that comprised the Soviet Union.  There are some individuals in these countries who have taken personal initiative to improve their own personal surroundings, but the number of people who have done so is very limited. There are also cases where people get together with the intention of improving their surroundings, but they lack the necessary funds to accomplish this goal. 

     Overall, the people are very kind, but they feel helpless because they lack the necessary resources to bring about the changes that they want and need.  Public roads and buildings are the responsibility of the government, but taking pride in one’s neighborhood or home is a matter of personal initiative.  

    One of the major differences between the American and Russian people is the influence of the Orthodox Church on Russia.  The Russian soul has been described as: sensitive, imaginative, compassionate, patient, strong (well-known for survival in unbearable circumstances), poetic, mystical, fatalistic, introspective, mistrusting of rational thought, trusting intuition, fascinating, having ability to feel a wide array of extreme human emotions (from absolute joy and peace to the darkest despair) — the list goes on. Russians maintain their integrity in a way that conforms to their inner notion of what a human being should be, with a blatant honesty and integrity seldom seen elsewhere in the world. Above all they have an appreciation for wholeness or complete commitment and faith, no matter what that faith might be related to.³  

    The Russian soul evolved and entered into Western consciousness in the 1860s and 1870s, most famously through the work of Fyodor Dostoevsky. In his novels and stories, Dostoevsky often exhibited an anti-European nationalism and frequently suggested a “people’s spirit” held together by “unexpressed, unconscious ideas which are merely strongly felt.” By the time of Dostoevsky's death in 1881, the “Russian soul” had completed its evolution in Russia.⁴  

     From about 1880 to 1930, largely thanks to Dostoevsky, the “Russian soul” concept spread to other countries and began to affect foreign perception of the Russian people. For many Europeans the idea offered a positive alternative to the typical view of Russians as backward, instead depicting the Russian people as an example of the innocence the West had lost. The popularity of the “Russian soul” continued into the 20th century but faded as Soviet power increased. By the 1930s the concept was slipping into obscurity, but it would survive in the work of the numerous writers who devised it.⁵

     The concept of the “Russian soul” may have gone out of fashion as Soviet power increased; however, now that the Soviet Union is no longer a reality, it is my contention that this concept is returning.  Even among those who do not profess a faith in the Orthodox Church, the ethos of Orthodox spirituality is very much a part of the daily life of the Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian people.      

   Since the fall of the Soviet Union, life has been very challenging in these various countries; however, there is hope that things will improve over time. What has helped the people to deal with these major changes is their Russian soul which is their source of inner strength allowing them to cope with so many things that would have probably destroyed them, had it not been for their soul.

   The impact that men such as Fyodor Dostoevsky, Nikolai Gogol, Leo Tolstoy, and others have had on Russian culture has been profound.  These men were certainly products of their generation, but they also influenced and continue to influence countless generations that have come after them. 

    As long as the spirit of these men remains alive in the East the “Russian soul” will also remain alive.  Suffering for its own sake makes no sense, but since suffering is a part of human life it is easier to suffer knowing that one’s suffering is united to the suffering of Jesus than believing that it has no point at all.  This is one of the aspects of a Russian soul.  It is an indication of the resilience of the human spirit and confirmation of the words of Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) who said, “Anything which does not kill you, will only make you stronger.” ⁶

     Hopefully, the younger generation of people from the former USSR will be able to learn to fish for themselves so they will not be so dependent upon the government.  This is necessary for the survival of the nation and the culture.  Imposing Western ideas on the Slavic people is not the answer because their thought process is different from the West; however, it is important to introduce such ideas so that they can be understood and adapted into an Orthodox mindset.

                                                   End Notes

1)    “Left Brained Americans, Right Brained Russians” http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/left-brained-americans-right-brained-russians/455021.html#ixzz2DVzitDT  

2)    “Left Brained Americans, Right Brained Russians”

3)    “Russian Soul” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_soul

4)    Robert C. Williams, "The Russian Soul: A Study in European Thought and Non-European Nationalism," Journal of the History of Ideas 31 (1970): 573-588, accessed November 28, 2012.

5)    Robert C. Williams, “The Russian Soul…”

6)    “The Beauty of the Russian Soul” http://heideggerm1.blogspot.com/2011/10/beauty-of-russian-soul.html

 

Страдание и сообщества в "Братьях Карамазовых"

     В своей статье об Анне Карениной Льва Tолстого я писал о том, что одна из вещей, которые отличают православную культуру от западной культуры является понимание важности семьи и семейных отношений. С моих первых дней в школе, я был воспитан, чтобы быть полностью самостоятельным человеком. Мой отец, в частности, не раз говорил мне, что я никогда не должнен полагаться на кого угодно и с того времени, когда мои родители были только детьми, придет день, когда мне не к кому будет  обратиться, так что мне нужно  стать полностью самостоятельной, самодостаточной личностью.      Это понятие личной независимости и полной самостоятельности является продуктом эпохи Просвещения и уникальной западной идеи. Полная самостоятельность  предполагает не только наши отношения с другими людьми, но и с Богом. В детстве я был очарован  религией и религиозными идеями. Когда я представил эти идеи моим родителям, мой отец сказал: «Бог слишком занят, чтобы возиться с тем, что происходит в нашей жизни." Поэтому, я не должен даже думать о том, чтобы обращаться  к Богу, потому что он мне не поможет.
     То, что я рассказал о том времени, как был ребёнком, конечно, не уникальная ситуация для меня и моей семьи. Со времени эпохи Просвещения, которая началась в конце семнадцатого века, эти идеи были живы на Западе и, наконец, добрались до России в то время, что описал  Федор Михайлович Достоевский (1821-1881). В своем самом знаменитом романе, "Братья Карамазовы", мы знакомимся с тремя братьями, которые живут своей жизнью в соответствии с определенной идеей и личной философией.
     В одной из сцен в романе, у двух братьев, Алеши и Ивана , возникли дискуссии о Боге. Иван -  воплощение идей Просвещения. Он не верит в Бога и считает себя полностью независимым человеком, который не должен полагаться на кого-либо. Тем не менее, он также глубоко возмущен своим отцом, потому что понимает, что в определенной степени зависит от него,  и эта зависимость идет вразрез с его понятием личной автономии. Алеша -  новичок в местном монастыре. Он считает, что мы полностью зависим от Бога и находит чувство принадлежности и цели своей жизни, будучи членом религиозной общины.
Иван рассказывает Алеше историю об Иисусе, который прибывает, чтобы быть известным как легенда о "Великом Инквизиторе". Основная борьба Ивана -  с миром Божьим. Он не может разобраться в том, что дети страдают и почему, если Бог рассматривается как источник порядка во Вселенной, как представляется, как случайности и абсурдности.
     Тем не менее, прежде чем устроить его «бунт» против Божьего мира, Иван восклицает Алеше "Вы пытаетесь спасти меня, но, возможно, я не потерял», и призывы к Карамазовым "Жажда жизни несмотря ни на что", можно сделать логический вывод. Иван называет Достоевского "смешным человеком", он говорит о его способности к иррациональной любви ", "любить всеми внутренностями, со всеми кишками», и провозглашает: "Даже если бы я не верил в жизнь, если я потерял веру в порядке вещей, были убеждены в том, что все это беспорядочно, проклятый и, возможно, черт охваченной хаосом, если бы я был поражен каждым ужасом разочарования человека - еще я хотел бы жить, и, однажды попробовав чашу, я бы не стал отворачиваться от неё, пока не выпил. "   В конце своей поэмы, однако, Иван определяет "избежать чаши" один раз в возрасте прошедшей  юности, обращаясь к другой, более темной, "ошибке, как  сторона "Жажда жизни" - "Карамазовы подлости". Таким образом,  "Жажда жизни" Карамазовых как  можно увидеть, коррелирует с контрастными силами  внутри Ивана. Великий инквизитор, как создание Ивана, воплощает эту же внутреннюю борьбу, он тоже когда-то  верил в христианскую веру. "Я тоже был в пустыне, я тоже ел на корни и саранчу, я тоже ценил свободу, с которой Ты благословил нас, я тоже стремился выделиться среди Твоих избранных, среди сильной и мощной ... Но я проснулся и не буду служить безумию ". Великий инквизитор также отверг мир Бога,  он является отражением желаний Ивана восстановить мир таким образом, лишенным горя и страдания в источнике его отказа.
     Легенда о Великом Инквизиторе -  Христос находится на ступеньках Севильского кафедрального собора во время испанской инквизиции, восстановливает зрение старика и девушку из мертвых. Обнаруженный кардиналом великим инквизитором, он арестован и приговорен к сожжению на костре.Великий Инквизитор считает присутствие Христа как шаг назад в своей работе, в отказе Христа из трех искушений дьявола, он видит отказ от счастья для всего человечества, ради свободы.Великий Инквизитор, отмечая ошибки Христа, спрашивает: "Ты либо забываешь, что человек предпочитает мир, и даже смерть, свободе выбора в познании добра и зла? Нет ничего более соблазнительного для человека, чем его свобода совести, но ничего большего причиной страданий "Великого инквизитора и его церкви" исправить это дело твое, и основана она на чуде, тайне и авторитете ".  Соответствующие трем искушениям дьявола,  под фальшивым прикрытием самого Христа, человечество никогда не может быть свободным, потому что оно "слабое, порочное, ничтожное и мятежное ". Таким образом, среди членов церкви  мало мудрецов, способных  пожертвовать собой за счастье других, в то время лишенный свободы Христос очень хотел, чтобы обеспечить их.
     Несмотря на декларирование Инквизитор быть атеистом, Иван также, как  Инквизитор говорит, что католическая церковь  "мудрость духа, страшного духа смерти и разрушения", то есть дьявол, сатана. Он говорит: "Мы не с Тобой, а с ним, и это наш секрет! На протяжении веков мы отказались тебя следовать за ним?" Он, по принуждению, если средства, чтобы закончить все человеческие страдания и для человечества объединиться под знаменем Церкви.Множество затем направляется через Церковь на тех немногих, кто достаточно силен, чтобы взять на себя бремя свободы.Инквизитор говорит, что по его словам, все человечество будет жить счастливо и умрет в неведении. Хотя он приводит их только к "смерти и разрушений", они будут счастливы на своем пути.Инквизитор будет самомучеником, проводя свою жизнь держа выбору из человечества. Он утверждает, что "Тот, кто может успокоить совесть человека, может занять свою свободу от него."
Инквизитор для достижения этого аргумента, объяснял почему Христос был неправ,  отвергая каждое искушение сатаны. Христос превратил камни в хлеб, а мужчины всегда будут следовать за теми, кто будет кормить их животы.Инквизитор напоминает о том, как Христос отверг это сказал: «Человек не может жить хлебом единым", и объясняет, ко Христу "люди поток, а затем спросить их добродетели! Это то, что они напишут на знамени они будут выдвигать против тебя». Повергаясь из храма, чтобы попасть на ангелов укрепит его божественности в сознании людей, которые будут следовать за ним навсегда. Правило над всеми царствами Земли обеспечивала бы их спасение, Великий Инквизитор утверждает,
    Сцена заканчивается, когда Христос, который молчал , целует Инквизитора в его "бескровные, от возрасте губы", а не отвечаяет ему. Об этом, инквизитор Христа-но говорит ему, чтобы никогда не вернуться. Христос, по-прежнему молчит, уходит в "темных переулках города". Мало того, что поцелуй неоднозначно, но его влияние на Инквизитор, а также. Иван делает вывод: «Поцелуй горит в его сердце, но старик придерживается его идеи".
    В остальной части романа Иван борется с идеей человеческой жестокости и той роли, которую он играет в сохранении такой жестокости. На самом деле, он доведен до точки безумия, когда он появляется на его брата, Дмитрия, суде и исповедует, что именно он, а не Дмитрий,  ответственен за смерть своего отца. Иван не мог физически убить своего отца, но убеждает, что его желание, что его отец умрет, стало толчком, который привел к смерти его отца от рук  повара семьи, который также является незаконным братом  из этих трех мужчин.
    Именно в этотом  обмен с братом Иваном, который показывает его потребность в отношениях. Хотя его взгляды не полностью приняты Алешей, Иван по-прежнему хочет знать, что его младший брат не отвергает его, потому что его взгляды и спрашивает его,  напрямую. Алеша говорит Ивану, что он не отвергает его, и это можно рассматривать как источник комфорта Иван.  Важность этого диалога между Алешей и Иваном в два раза. Это помогает лучше понять процесс мышления Ивана и быть в состоянии понять его мировоззрение, которое влияет как он взаимодействует с другими, и это дает читателю возможность понять, насколько важна роль диалога в отношении личной философии Достоевского и сочинений.
     Великий Инквизитор Достоевского способ показать, что утилитаризм будет выглядеть, если оно было принято как жили философии. Джереми Бентам (1748-1832) и Джон Стюарт Милль (1806-1873) предложил называть утилитаризм философии, которая учит, что этический принцип, которым необходимо следовать был "величайшее благо для наибольшего числа людей". Если бы больше людей выиграют от определенного действия, чем пострадали от этого, то это допустимо и, по сути, поощряется.     Ивана Великого Инквизитора поставил себя в качестве судьи определяют, кто будет страдать и будет ли это страдание в наибольший общественный интерес. Он считает, что страдания неизбежны, так что он мог бы также использовать его в своих интересах. Это включает в себя сжигание людей на кострах, что он считает еретиками и даже сжигание Иисуса на костре. Такие философские идеи могут быть некоторые немедленного положительного эмоционального обращения, однако, когда последствия этих идей были приняты во внимание, которого они часто теряют свою привлекательность.     Федор Достоевский, глубоко религиозным человеком, верил, что мы созданы по образу и подобию Божию и, следовательно, связаны друг с другом на очень глубоком уровне. Эта идея не была принята многими людьми, которые стали сторонниками идей Просвещения в России и не принимать много людей сегодня. Что патриарх это семья? Федор Карамазов изображается как довольно эгоцентричным человеком, который верит в том, что он является автономным человеческим существом, однако, он тоже жаждет внимание окружающих. Однако, вместо того чтобы получать такое внимание в положительную сторону, он выбирает для себя как клоун. Как уже было сказано, что не существует такого понятия, как "негативное внимание", поскольку никакого внимания на все это лучше, чем отсутствие внимания для тех, кто жаждет так плохо.  Дмитрий очень похож на своего отца, однако, вместо того, чтобы на роль клоуна, он берет на себя роль негодяя. На протяжении всего романа, единственное, что важно для Дмитрия является его собственное благополучие и счастье. Тем не менее, все меняется,  пока он находится в тюрьме. По обвинению в убийстве своего отца, Дмитрия сажают в тюрьму, и однажды вечером он видит сон, в котором он сталкивается с маленьким ребенком, страдающим. Дмитрию жалко этого ребенка и он хочет найти способ, чтобы облегчить его страдания, а, наоборот, маленький ребенок целует Дмитрия,гладит по голове и утешает, а не Дмитрий его.
Дмитрий рассказывает о своем сне Алеше и заявляет, что он готов страдать в тюрьме, если это означает, что другие могут быть счастливы. Достоевский задаёт  глубокий вопрос. Есть ли кто-то счастлив,  должно ли это  происходить за счет чьих-то страданий? Дмитрий всю жизнь думает только о себе, и теперь он готов предложить себя в качестве "мученика за счастье".   Алеша пережил   новое  сострадание за воего брата, сказал, что есть альтернатива этой идее.Роман заканчивается сценой на могиле Илюши Снегирева, ребенка,с которым плохо обращались, осуществляли  эмоциональное насилие, его одноклассниками. Отец Илюши, капитан Снегирев, ранее был публично унижен Дмитрем и это принесло позор всей семье.
    С одной стороны, Илюша убеждается, что он убил маленькую собачку. Его смотритель, который знал правду, отказался сообщить Илюше, что собака поправилась. Однако, так как Илюша  был близок к смерти других мальчиков в деревне, он испытал чувство преобразования. Вместо того, чтобы исключить Илюшу, они решили включить его в свое «сообщество» и его сторож принес к нему собачку. Видя, как это сделало счастливым Илюшу, это было источником радости для этих мальчиков.   На могиле, Алеша говорит, этим мальчикам, что они никогда не забудут Илюшу. Илюша был хорошим, заботливым, любящим, маленьким мальчиком, который хотел быть счастливым. Он рассказывает ребятам, что они должны любить друг друга и что они всегда должны это помнить на этом могильном камне. Двенадцать мальчиков, теперь в слезах, берут друг друга за руки и возвращаются в родную семью Снегирева.     Илюша был исключен из любого  «сообщества», созданного ребятами в своей деревне, и его страдания стали источником развлечения для них. Все это способствовало растущей болезни Илюши.
     Вопросы, обсуждавшиеся  Достоевским в этом романе, очень глубокие. Написанный в 1870 году, этот роман мог бы просто, легко быть написан в 2000 году. Его последний и, возможно, величайший, роман поднимает многие важные вопросы, которые зададут поколениям. От того, как мы ответим на эти вопросы, зависит, будем ли мы хотим жить в изоляции друг от друга и относиться к другим, как к средству для достижения цели,  или будем  видеть друг друга источником поддержки и поощрения, так как мы продолжаем свой ​​жизненный путь.
     Еще одна важная точка зрения, что у Достоевского была потребность в прощении. Великий инквизитор не видит никакой ценности в прощении и это верно для многих людей сегодня. Прощение это единственная вещь, которая восстанавливает отношения и позволяет нам жить в гармонии. Страдание является частью человеческой жизни, и важно, что мы не только не стали источником страданий для других, но и были вместе с другими в их страданиях и разделяли с ними  их бремя.
 
Примечания:

1) «Все делается во имя любви" http://heideggerm1.blogspot.com/2011/08/things-done-in-name-of-love.html
2) "" Легенда о Великом инквизиторе »: Моральная трансформации в Karamozov Брат" (по состоянию на 8/17/11) http://www.lurj.org/article.php/vol3n2/karamazov.xml
3) «Великого инквизитора» (по состоянию на 8/17/11) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Inquisitor

Parodying as a Form of Flattery

   One famous American idiom is “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.”  The same can also be said of a parody.  A parody is defined as a humorous or satirical imitation of a serious piece of literature or writing.1 This has been done numerous times over the years in both literature and film. 
    In order for such a parody to be successful it is important that a well-known piece of literature should be chosen.   This piece of literature can be representative of a particular culture or is so well known that its content transcends a particular culture. The transcending of a given culture is largely based upon the theme of a given novel. 
    One theme which transcends a given culture is the hero’s journey or quest.  Joseph Campbell (1904-1987) spoke about this in a series on the Public Broadcasting Company (PBS) which aired the year after Campbell died. He initially wrote about this The Hero with a Thousand Faces (1949). 
    This theme is present in numerous novels and such films as Star Wars (1977) which was directed by George Lucas.  One classic novel where this theme is present was Virgil’s Aeneid. Considered one of the classics of Western literature, The Aeneid has been read by countless generations of students. 
   The summary of this classic tale is as follows.  On the Mediterranean Sea, Aeneas and his fellow Trojans flee from their home city of Troy, which has been destroyed by the Greeks. They sail for Italy, where Aeneas is destined to found Rome. As they near their destination, a fierce storm throws them off course and lands them in Carthage. Dido, Carthage’s founder and queen, welcomes them. Aeneas relates to Dido the long and painful story of his group’s travels thus far.
   Aeneas tells of the sack of Troy that ended the Trojan War after ten years of Greek siege. In the final campaign, the Trojans were tricked when they accepted into their city walls a wooden horse that, unbeknownst to them, harbored several Greek soldiers in its hollow belly. He tells how he escaped the burning city with his father, Anchises; his son, Ascanius; and the hearth gods that represent their fallen city. Assured by the gods that a glorious future awaited him in Italy, he set sail with a fleet containing the surviving citizens of Troy. Aeneas relates the ordeals they faced on their journey. Twice they attempted to build a new city, only to be driven away by bad omens and plagues. Harpies, creatures that are part woman and part bird, cursed them, but they also encountered friendly countrymen unexpectedly. Finally, after the loss of Anchises and a bout of terrible weather, they made their way to Carthage.
    Impressed by Aeneas’s exploits and sympathetic to his suffering, Dido, a Phoenician princess who fled her home and founded Carthage after her brother murdered her husband, falls in love with Aeneas. They live together as lovers for a period, until the gods remind Aeneas of his duty to found a new city. He determines to set sail once again. Dido is devastated by his departure, and kills herself by ordering a huge pyre to be built with Aeneas’s castaway possessions, climbing upon it, and stabbing herself with the sword Aeneas leaves behind.
   As the Trojans head to Italy, bad weather blows them to Sicily, where they hold funeral games for the dead Anchises. The women, tired of the voyage, begin to burn the ships, but a downpour puts the fires out. Some of the travel-weary stay behind, while Aeneas, reinvigorated after his father visits him in a dream, and takes the rest on toward Italy. Once there, Aeneas descends into the underworld, guided by the Sibyl of Cumae, to visit his father. He is shown a pageant of the future history and heroes of Rome, which helps him to understand the importance of his mission. Aeneas returns from the underworld, and the Trojans continue up the coast to the region of Latium.
   The arrival of the Trojans in Italy begins peacefully. King Latinus, the Italian ruler, extends his hospitality, hoping that Aeneas will prove to be the foreigner whom, according to a prophecy, his daughter Lavinia is supposed to marry. However, Latinus’ wife, Amata, has other ideas. She means for Lavinia to marry Turnus, a local suitor. Amata and Turnus cultivate enmity toward the newly arrived Trojans. Meanwhile, Ascanius hunts a stag that was a pet of the local herdsmen. A fight breaks out, and several people are killed. Turnus, riding this current of anger, begins a war.
    Aeneas, at the suggestion of the river god Tiberinus, sails north up the Tiber to seek military support among the neighboring tribes. During this voyage, his mother, Venus, descends to give him a new set of weapons, wrought by Vulcan. While the Trojan leader is away, Turnus attacks. Aeneas returns to find his countrymen embroiled in battle. Pallas, the son of Aeneas’s new ally Evander, is killed by Turnus. Aeneas flies into a violent fury and many more are slain by the day’s end.
   The two sides agree to a truce so that they can bury the dead, and the Latin leaders discuss whether to continue the battle. They decide to spare any further unnecessary carnage by proposing a hand-to-hand duel between Aeneas and Turnus. When the two leaders face off, however, the other men begin to quarrel, and full-scale battle resumes. Aeneas is wounded in the thigh, but eventually the Trojans threaten the enemy city. Turnus rushes out to meet Aeneas, who wounds Turnus badly. Aeneas nearly spares Turnus but, remembering the slain Pallas, slays him instead.2
     It is interesting that the first literary work ever published in the modern Ukrainian language was a 1798 epic poem entitled, Eneyida, which was parody of Virgil’s classic story.  This epic poem was written by Ivan Petrovych Kotlyarevsky (1769-1838), who is considered the first modern Ukrainian author.  In Kotlyarevsky’s poem, the main characters are no longer Trojans, but Zaporozhian Cossacks.3 These men had a profound impact upon Ukrainian history prior to being disbanded in 1775.  It seems only fitting that a Ukrainian author would choose such a group of men for his parody.  They were as meaningful to his culture as Aeneus was to the Greek speaking world.
    An example of an American parody is the novel, The Wind Done Gone (2001) by Alice Randall. This novel is based upon Margaret Mitchell’s 1936 classic novel, Gone with the Wind, but is written from the standpoint of Scarlett O’Hara’s slaves.  This is a very interesting approach to addressing the issue of slavery during the Civil War. 
    Ms. Randall wrote a book based upon a novel which went on to become an Academy Award winning film (1939) and gave a voice to those who would have been nameless, faceless people in their own time period.  In fact, since they were slaves, they would not have been considered people, but property. 
    One of the most remarkable aspects of the Ukrainian language is the fact that it exists at all in the modern world. It has been banned and discouraged several times by non-Ukrainian regimes, but always maintained its existence somehow, even by using informal methods of keeping the tongue alive, such as songs, folklore, and Ivan Kotlyarevsky’s Eneyida, which was the first book to be published in Ukrainian and has become a classic.
    The Ukrainians have seen periods of substantial unrest and the current version of the Ukrainian language reflects the periods of trouble in the country. However, tracing the language back over time has often proved problematic, as until the 18th century, the spoken and written forms of Ukrainian differed immensely from one another. Before the 18th century the contemporary form of Ukrainian was a vernacular language which existed alongside Church Slavonic. It was mostly peasants and the bourgeoisie, who spoke this language, and there was also something of a linguistic hierarchy at the time, as a lot of literature, scientific texts, or any other sort of important writing was being produced in different languages, for example, Greek, Latin, or Polish. This is not to say that Ukrainian was in danger of dying out, for it was still widely spoken in Ukraine, but in terms of a written language, it was overlooked in favor of other tongues.4 
  The fact that Kotlyarevsky was able to publish his epic poem in the Ukrainian language actually help to maintain this Slavic language and likely served as an inspiration for future authors like Nikolai Gogol (1809-1852) who would have been able to read this poem in his native language.  The Ukrainian language is still spoken in modern day Ukraine, but it seems to be much more popular in western Ukraine than eastern Ukraine where many people speak Russian. 
   Parody certainly can be a sincere form of flattery, especially when it is based upon a classic piece of literature.  Kotlyarevsky’s Eneyida has become a classic piece of literature and the people of Ukraine own him a debt of gratitude for helping to keep their beautiful language alive for future generations.
                                                           End Notes
1) “Parody” http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/parody (accessed 6/3/12)
2) “The Aeneid”  http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/aeneid/summary.html (accessed 6/3/12) 
3) “Ivan Kotlyarevsky” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Kotlyarevsky  (accessed 6/3/12) “The Highest Manifesto Zaporozhian Sich Destruction” http://www.museum-ukraine.org.ua/index.php?go=News&file=print&id=1418 (written 12/14/06, accessed 6/2/12)  
4) “The Ukrainian Language” http://www.kwintessential.co.uk/language/about/ukrainian.html  (accessed 6/4/12)

A Ukrainian in Russian Society

   A great Russian novelist, dramatist, satirist, founder of the so-called critical realism in Russian literature, is best-known for his novel Мертвые Души I-II (1842, Dead Souls). Gogol's prose is characterized by imaginative power and linguistic playfulness. As an exposer of grotesqueness in human nature, Gogol could be called the Hieronymus Bosch (1450-1516)1 of Russian literature.
  "The moon is made by some lame cooper, and you can see the idiot has no idea about moons at all. He put in a creosoted rope and some wood oil; and this has led to such a terrible stink all over the earth that you have to hold your nose. Another reason the moon is such a tender globe it that people just cannot live on it anymore, and all that is left alive there are noses. This is also why we cannot see our own noses - they're all on the moon." (from Diary of a Madman, 1835)
    Nikolai Gogol (1809-1852) was born in Sorochintsi, Ukraine, and grew up on his parents' country estate. His real surname was Ianovskii, but the writer's grandfather had taken the name 'Gogol' to claim a noble Cossack ancestry. Gogol's father was an educated and gifted man who wrote plays, poems, and sketches in Ukrainian.
    Gogol started writing while in high school. He attended Poltava boarding school (1819-21) and then Nezhin High School (1821-28). In 1828 Gogol, an aspiring writer, settled in St. Petersburg with a certificate attesting his right to 'the rank of the 14th class'. In an effort to support himself, Gogol worked at minor governmental jobs and wrote occasionally for periodicals. Although he was interested in literature, he also dreamed of becoming an actor. However, the capital of Russia did not welcome him with open arms and his early narrative poem, Hans Küchelgarten (1829), turned out to be a disaster.
    Between the years 1831 and 1834 Gogol taught history at the Patriotic Institute and worked as a private tutor. In 1831 he met Alexander Pushkin (1799-1837) who greatly influenced his choice of literary material, especially his "Dikinka Tales", which were based on Ukrainian folklore. Their friendship lasted until the great poet's death. Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka was Gogol's breakthrough work.  It showed his skill in mixing the fantastic with the macabre and, at the same time, saying something very essential about the Russian character.
    After failing as an assistant lecturer of World History at the University of St. Petersburg (1834-35), Gogol became a full-time writer. Under the title Mirgorod (1835) Gogol published a new collection of stories, beginning with 'Old-World Landowners', which described the decay of the old way of life. The book also included the famous historical tale Taras Bulba, which showed the influence of Sir Walter Scott (1771-1832). The protagonist is a strong, heroic character, not very typical of the author's later cavalcade of bureaucrats, lunatics, swindlers, and humiliated losers. One hostile critic described his city dwellers as the "scum of Petersburg". In his short stories, Gogol fully utilized the St. Petersburg mythology, in which the city was treated "both as 'paradise', a utopian ideal city of the future, the embodiment of Reason, and as the terrible masquerade of Antichrist." (Yuri Lotman in Universe of the Mind, 1990) Gogol was also the first to publish an extended literary comparison between Moscow and St. Petersburg, concluding, "Russia needs Moscow; St. Petersburg needs Russia."
    "I am destined by the mysterious powers to walk hand in hand with my strange heroes," wrote Gogol once, "viewing life in all its immensity as it rushes past me, viewing it through laughter seen by the world and tears unseen and unknown by it." St. Petersburg Stories (1835) examined social relationships and disorders of mind; Gogol's influence can be seen among others in Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground (1864) and The Crime and the Punishment (1866). Gogolian tradition continued also among others in the stories of Franz Kafka (1883-1924).
    The Nose from this period was about a man who loses his nose, which tries to live its own life. Gogol himself had a long nose, but the motifs in the story were borrowed from other writers. According to V. Vinograd's study (1987), these kind of surrealistic images were popular the 1820-1830s. It is still a puzzle since there no explanation has been found to explain why Collegiate Assessor Kovalev's nose transforms into civil servant and back into nose. The central plot circles around Kovalev's quest to recapture his runaway organ – he has arrived in Moscow to climb up the social ladder, but without a proper face it is impossible. Without an arm or leg it is not unbearable, thinks the Major, but without a nose a man is, the devil knows what...'In the outwardly crazy story lurks a serious idea: what matters is not the person but one's rank.’
    In 'Nevsky Prospect' a talented artist falls in love with a tender poetic beauty. She turns out to be a prostitute and the artist commits suicide when his romantic illusions are shattered.  The Diary of a Madman asked why is it that "all the best things in life, they all go to the Equerries or the generals?" 'Пальто' (1842, The Overcoat), one of Gogol's most famous short stories, contrasted a person’s humility and meekness with the rudeness of the 'important personage'. The central character is Akakii Akakievich, a lowly government clerk. When winter begins he notices that his old overcoat is beyond repairing. He manages to save money for a new, luxurious coat. His colleagues at the office arrange a party for his acquisition. However, his happiness proves to be short-lived. On the way home he is attacked by thieves and robbed of his coat. To recover his lost possession, Akakievich asks help from an Important Person, a director of a department with the rank of general. He treats Akakievich harshly and Akakievich dies of fright within three days. One night when the Important Person is returning home, he is attacked by a ghost, the late Akakii, who steals his overcoat. The stealing of outer garments continue, even though now the ghost is a big man with a moustache and enormous fists.
   In 1836, Gogol published several stories in Pushkin's journal Sovremennik, and in the same year appeared his famous play, The Inspector General. It told a simple tale of a young civil servant, Khlestakov, who finds himself stranded in a small provincial town. By mistake, he is taken by the local officials to be a government inspector, who is visiting their province incognito. Khlestakov happily adapts to his new role and exploits the situation. His true identity is revealed, but then the real inspector arrives. Gogol masterfully creates with a few words people, places, things, and lets them disappear into the flow of the story. Vladimir Nabokov (1899-1977) wrote: "Who is that unfortunate bather, steadily and uncannily growing, adding weight, fattening himself on the marrow of a metaphor? We never shall know – but he almost managed to gain a footing."
    Its first stage production was in St Petersburg, given in the presence of the tsar. The tsar, as he left his box after the première, dropped the comment: "Hmm, what a play! It gets to everyone and, most of all, me!" Gogol, who was always sensitive about reactions to his work, fled Russia for Western Europe. He visited Germany, Switzerland, and France, and settled then in Rome. He also made a pilgrimage to Palestine in 1848.
    While in Rome Gogol wrote his major work, Dead Souls. "The prophet finds no honor in his homeland," he said. Gogol claimed that the story was suggested by Pushkin in a conversation in 1835. Wishing to embrace the whole Russian society in the work, Gogol regarded the first volume merely as 'a pale introduction to the great epic poem which is taking shape in my mind and will finally solve the riddle of my existence'. The story depicted the adventures Pavel Ivanovich Chichikov, who arrives in a provincial town to buy 'dead souls', dead serfs. As a character, he is the opposite of starving Akakii Akakievich. By selling these 'souls' with cheaply-bought lands, Chichikov planned to make a huge profit. He meets local landowners and departs the in a hurry, when rumors start spread about him. During the last decade of his life, Gogol struggled to continue the story and depict Chichikov's fall and redemption.
    Except for two short visits to Russia in 1839-40 and 1841-42, Gogol was abroad for twelve years. The first edition of Gogol's collected works was published in 1842. It made him one of the most popular Russian writers. Two years before his return, Gogol had published Selected Passages from Correspondence with Friends (1847), in which he upheld the autocratic czarist regime and the patriarchal Russian way of life. The book brought about disappointment among radicals who had seen Gogol's works as examples of social criticism. In the play ZHENITBA (1842) nearly everybody lies and the protagonist, Podgolesin, cannot make up his mind about marriage. He hesitates, agrees, then withdraws his promise.  Life is full of cheating, but when people jeer at each other, they actually tell the truth. Игроки (The Gamblers), a play about professional card-sharps, was first staged in 1843; Dmitri Shostakovich (1906-1975) based his unfinished opera upon this comedy.
  In his later life Gogol came under influence of a fanatical priest, Father Konstantinovskii, and burned sequels for Dead Souls, just 10 days before he died on the verge of madness on the 4th of March 1852. Gogol had refused to take any food and various remedies were employed to make him eat – spirits were poured over his head, hot loaves applied to his person and leeches attached to his nose. Rumors arise from time to time that Gogol was buried alive, a situation familiar from the story 'The Premature Burial', of the contemporary writer Edgar Allan Poe (1809-1849).2  
   It was not until Bernard Guilbert Guerney's 1942 translation, a century after the novel's first publication, that English-language readers acquired Dead Souls that took the full measure of Nikolai Gogol's satire, with its linguistic playfulness and phantasmagoric invention. In Vladimir Nabokov's idiosyncratic 1944 study of Gogol, he forever linked  Dead Souls to the Russian word poshlost, a noun that defies easy translation but suggests the vulgar and commonplace -- ''the falsely important, the falsely beautiful, and the falsely clever.'' In this regard, Dead Souls is a novel that has less to do with Russia than with the defects of human character.3 
   In The Nose and Diary of a Madman, Gogol addressed the issues of St. Petersburg bureaucracy.  These are interesting stories.  In The Nose, the main character attempts to confront his nose which had taken on a life of its own. In Diary of a Madman, the main character slowly descends into madness and becomes convinced that he is the reigning king of Spain.  By the end of his life, Gogol appears to have also slowly descended into madness.  This can easily be seen as an example of art imitating life. 
   In both of these stories, we meet two men who are rather insignificant.  They are pieces in a machine and have lost their own identity.  In Dead Souls he has the main character say, “They don’t listen to me, they don’t hear me, and they don’t see me.”  This is very sad commentary.  He is an insignificant person whose job is sharpening pencils.  Is it surprising that they don’t listen to, hear, or see him?
    Gogol is considered one of the greatest Russian authors, but he was also dedicated to keeping his Ukrainian culture alive.  These two nations have many common factors before and after the rise of the Soviet Union; however, they also have their own histories.  In his novels, he spends a great deal of time describing life in Ukraine. His father even changed his surname in order to reflect the family’s Ukrainian Cossack background. 
   He was buried at the Donskoy Monastery, close to his fellow Slavophile Aleksey Khomyakov (1804-1860). In 1931, when Moscow authorities decided to demolish the monastery, his remains were transferred to the Novodevichy Cemetery. His body was discovered lying face down, which gave rise to the story that Gogol had been buried alive. One of the Soviet critics even cut a part of his jacket to use as a binding for his copy of the Dead Souls. A piece of rock which used to stand on his grave at the Donskoy was reused for the tomb of Gogol's admirer Mikhail Bulgakov (1891-1940).4 
   Gogol’s impact on Russian literature was astounding.  After writing Poor Folk, Fyodor Dostoevsky (1821-1881) was referred to as “the next Gogol” by Nikolai Nekrasov, editor of A Petersburg Collection.5   He was a product of the same generation as Mikhail Lermontov (1814-1841) and Alexander Pushkin, and made an equally valuable contribution to literature. He certainly was a Ukrainian in Russian society and his stories will be read for generations to come.
                                                           End Notes
1) “Hieronymus Bosch” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hieronymus_Bosch (accessed 5/27/12)
2) “Nikolay Gogol”  http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/gogol.htm (accessed 5/27/12) 
3) “Nikolai Gogol” http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/g/nikolai_gogol/index.html (written 8/4/96, accessed 5/28/12)
4) “Nikolai Gogol” http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Nikolai_Gogol (accessed 5/28/12)
5) “The Poor Will Always Be With Us” http://heideggerm1.blogspot.com/2012/05/poor-will-always-be-with-us.html (accessed 5/28/12)

Life Can Be Challenging

   Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy was born at Yasnaya Polyana, his family's estate outside of Moscow, on August 28, 1828, in Russia's Tula Province, the youngest of four sons. His mother died when he was two years old, whereupon his father's distant cousin Tatyana Ergolsky took charge of the children. In 1837 Tolstoy's father died, and an aunt, Alexandra Osten-Saken, became legal guardian of the children. Her religious dedication was an important early influence on Tolstoy. When she died in 1840, the children were sent to Kazan, Russia, to another sister of their father, Pelageya Yushkov.
   Tolstoy was educated at home by German and French tutors. He was not a particularly exceptional student but he was good at games. In 1843 he entered Kazan University. Planning on a diplomatic career, he entered the faculty of Oriental languages. Finding these studies too demanding, he switched two years later to studying law. Tolstoy left the university in 1847 without taking his degree.
    He returned to Yasnaya Polyana, determined to become a model farmer and a "father" to his serfs (unpaid farmhands). His charity failed because of his foolishness in dealing with the peasants (poor, working class) and because he spent too much time socializing in Tula and Moscow. During this time he first began making amazingly honest diary entries, a practice he maintained until his death. These entries provided much material for his fiction, and in a very real sense the collection is one long autobiography.
   In September 1862, Tolstoy married Sofya Andreyevna Bers (or Behrs), a woman sixteen years younger than himself. Daughter of a prominent Moscow doctor, Bers was beautiful, intelligent, and, as the years would show, strong-willed. The first decade of their marriage brought Tolstoy the greatest happiness; never before or after was his creative life so rich or his personal life so full. In June 1863 his wife had the first of their thirteen children.
   The first portion of War and Peace was published in 1865 (in the Russian Messenger) as "The Year 1805." In 1868, three more chapters appeared and in 1869 he completed the novel. His new novel created a fantastic out-pouring of popular and critical reaction.
    Tolstoy's War and Peace represents a high point in the history of world literature, but it was also the peak of Tolstoy's personal life. His characters represent almost everyone he had ever met, including all of his relations on both sides of his family. Balls and battles, birth and death, all were described in amazing detail. In this book the European realistic novel, with its attention to social structures, exact description, and psychological rendering, found its most complete expression.
   From 1873 to 1877 Tolstoy worked on the second of his masterworks, Anna Karenina, which also created a sensation upon its publication. The concluding section of the novel was written during another of Russia's seemingly endless wars with Turkey. The novel was based partly on events that had occurred on a neighboring estate, where a nobleman's rejected mistress had thrown herself under a train. It also contained great chunks of disguised biography, especially in the scenes describing the courtship and marriage of Kitty and Levin. Tolstoy's family continued to grow, and his royalties (money earned from sales) were making him an extremely rich man.1
     After finishing Anna Karenina, Tolstoy renounced all his earlier works. "I wrote everything into Anna Karenina," he later confessed, "and nothing was left over." Voskresenia (1899, Resurrection) was Tolstoy's last major novel, and affirmed his belief in the individual over the collective. Prince Dmitrii Ivanovich Nekhliudov has abandoned the prostitute Ekaterina Maslova with their child as a young man. The novel begins when Maslova is called to court on charges of murdering a client. Nekhliudov is a member of the jury. He realizes that he also is accused but in the court of his own conscience. Maslova is wrongly sentenced to four years' penal service in Siberia. Nekhliudov follows her convoy to Siberia and manages to obtain commutation of her sentence from hard labor with common criminals to exile with the "political prisoners". Before the emergence of the gulag fiction, the novel enjoyed vast popularity during the reign of Joseph Stalin (1878-1953) as Soviet premier. It has been claimed, that while writing the story Tolstoy relived some of his guilt-ridden memories of his youth about a girl he had seduced and abandoned. 
    In the 1880s Tolstoy wrote such philosophical works as A Confession and What I Believe, which was banned in 1884. He started to see himself more as a sage and moral leader than an artist. In 1884 occurred his first attempt to leave home. He gave up his estate to his family, and tried to live as a poor, celibate peasant. Attracted by Tolstoy's writings, Yasnaya Polyana was visited by hundreds of people from all over the world. Pilgrims and his disciples enjoyed a smooth ride on a tarmac road, which the Czarist government ordered to be built down to Tula.  In 1901 the Russian Orthodox Church excommunicated the author. Tolstoy became seriously ill and he recuperated in Crimea, Ukraine.
    In his study, What is Art? (1898) Tolstoy condemned Shakespeare, Beethoven, and Dante, but not really convincingly; his misreading of Shakespeare is deliberate. Tolstoy states that art is a conveyor of feelings, good and bad, from the artist to others. Through feeling, the artist 'infects' another with the desire to act well or badly. "Art is a human activity having for its purpose the transmission to others of the highest and best feelings to which men have risen." Tolstoy used ordinary events and characters to examine war, religion, feminism, and other topics. He was convinced that philosophical principles could only be understood in their concrete expression in history. All of his work is characterized by uncomplicated style, careful construction, and deep insight into human nature. His chapters are short, and he paid much attention to the details of everyday life. Tolstoy also refused to recognize the conventional climaxes of narrative – War and Peace begins in the middle of a conversation and ends in the first epilogue in the middle of a sentence.
   Tolstoy's form of Christianity was based on the Sermon on the Mount and crystallized in five leading ideas: human beings must suppress their anger, whether warranted or not; no sex outside marriage; no oaths of any sort; renunciation of all resistance to evil; and love of enemies. "The main feature, or rather the main note which resounds through every page of Tolstoi, even the seemingly unimportant ones, is love, compassion for Man in general (and not only for the humiliated and the offended), pity of some sort for his weakness, his insignificance, for the shortness of his life, the vanity of his desires... Yes, Tolstoi is for me the dearest, the deepest, and greatest of all artists. But this concerns the Tolstoi of yesterday, who has nothing in common with the exasperating moralist and theorizer of today." (The composer Peter Tchaikovsky in Vladimir Volkoff's biography Tchaikovsky: A Self-portrait, 1975) 2
       Throughout his life, Tolstoy struggled with the issue of the meaning of life.  This question became even more of an issue for him as he matured.  One of the most interesting statements he made was in 1875.  He wrote, “I am 47….And so I have reached old age, that inner spiritual condition to which nothing from the outer world has any interest, in which there are no desires and one sees nothing but death ahead of one.  Life really is a stupid and empty joke…and so I began to search for a view of life that could do away with its apparent senselessness.  That is the aim and content of what I am writing at present….I would like to expound this whole mass of religions and scientific views of our time, to show the gaps and—forgive my boldness—without denying anything, to fill these gaps.”3
     It is interesting that I am 47.  I do not believe that I have reached old age; however, I do understand Tolstoy’s interest regarding the meaning of life.  I try not to reflect upon this issue on a constant basis, but it is definitely part of my thoughts.  I can understand Tolstoy’s comment regarding the apparent senseless of life.  At time there seems to be no rhyme or reason to making things which take place in our lives.  I also turned to religion in order to find meaning in my life, but became somewhat discontented over time.
    His later life seemed to be consumed by his newly created religion.   In fact, he had many “Tolstoyites” who chose to follow his belief system.  His classic novels had become a thing of the past and he devoted his writing talent to works of religion and/or philosophy.  He became so dedicated to his religious beliefs that be walked away from his estate, left his family, and began a spiritual journey. 
     Russians love few things better than a good anniversary — any excuse to celebrate the country’s rich cultural history gives rise to festivals and forums, concerts and commemorative films.
     As 2010 marked the 150th anniversary of the birth of Anton Chekhov, President Dmitry Medvedev flew to the playwright’s small southern hometown and laid a bouquet of white roses. One hundred years after his death in 1837, poet Alexander Pushkin was celebrated across the country — a city was even named after him.
    Why, then, the silence in Russia around Leo Tolstoy, widely considered to be one of the greatest writers who ever lived?
   November 20, 2010 will mark 100 years since Tolstoy’s dramatic death. Having achieved world fame and acclaim with "War and Peace" and "Anna Karenina," Tolstoy turned later in life to the spiritual treatises that would lead to his excommunication from the Russian Orthodox Church. In 1910, at the age of 82, he abandoned his family and his estate in Yasnaya Polyana, outside Moscow, dying days later at a nearby train station, never having recovered from the pneumonia that had long plagued him.
    It’s a dramatic end befitting a novelist who explored, with poetic realism, life’s greatest thrills: family, war, love.
    At least, that’s how he is remembered in the West. In Russia, Tolstoy’s writing is always and everywhere linked with his work as a philosopher, one who preached principles of nonviolence, simple living and brotherly love. That may be where the problem lies.
    “Lev Nikolayevich posed very uncomfortable questions,” said Fyokla Tolstaya, a great-great-granddaughter of the writer, using his Russian name and patronymic. “He is a very difficult author for today’s leadership,” she said.
    Perhaps that is why, on a government level, the anniversary is being entirely ignored.
    “We’ve received no orders to prepare for the anniversary,” said a woman who answered the phone at the Culture Ministry’s anniversaries committee, but declined to provide her name. For anniversaries honoring many of Russia’s other great writers, less well-known in the West but celebrated here, the department is given years to plan and organize. The department first received an order in 2007 to prepare for this year’s celebrations marking 150 years since Chekhov’s birth, she said by way of example.
     “The government, which is normally very proactive in organizing anniversaries seems to have put Tolstoy away on the shelf,” said Catherine Tolstoy, a 22-year-old member of the abundant Tolstoy clan.
     “He is very well respected, but he’s not useful and hasn’t got the right views,” she said. “He’s got very different values from the current government.”
     Yet other celebrated writers, including Chekhov and the great satirist Nikolai Gogol, also criticized the country for issues that remain little changed today: officials’ corruption, their countrymen’s love of vodka, treatment of prisoners.
     The government’s decision to ignore Tolstoy’s centenary is something that has surprised some of his greatest champions, yet is something they overwhelmingly choose to explain away by saying that it is births, not deaths, that should be celebrated.
   “There hasn’t been one television program dedicated to him, but that doesn’t mean we don’t value him,” said Marina Tikhonycheva, the head of the Tolstoy Institute. All 10th graders in Russia, she noted, are required to plow through "War and Peace." (She later noted that Russia’s Kultura channel recently aired a celebrated film adaptation, failing to note that it was Tolstoy’s centenary but celebrating the fact that it was the 90th anniversary of director and star Sergei Bondarchuk’s birth.)
    Others see something more deliberate in the Tolstoy void, blaming his relationship with the Orthodox Church, which expelled him in 1901 citing his repudiation of Jesus Christ and the church.
    “The church’s position to Tolstoy has not changed,” said a source inside the Orthodox Church’s committee on culture. “Tolstoy is anti-Christian. He is excommunicated and therefore presents no interest for the church.”
    Tolstoy’s family has put in several requests to have the church re-examine the writer’s excommunication. However, it categorically refuses to do so.
    “The order can only change if a person himself repents. This can’t happen after a person is dead,” the church source said.
     “The church does pressure culture, but not to such a degree,” said Boris Felikov, an associate professor of religion at the Russian State University for the Humanities.
     Some members of Tolstoy’s family disagree. “The government is very friendly with the church, as it was in pre-revolutionary times, and puts a lot of pressure on the state,” said Tolstaya. In Soviet times, his views against organized religion and in support of the country’s peasantry made him a hero of the communist regime (Lenin even published an essay titled “Tolstoy as Mirror of the Revolution”).
   “Now there’s a different approach,” Tolstaya said. “He isn’t comfortable and he isn’t needed.”
   That may be true of the Russian government and its powerful church, but not so in the West. To mark the centenary of Tolstoy’s death, new translations of his novels have been issued. A film about his last days, “The Last Station,” was released to critical acclaim, its lead actors (Helen Mirren and Christopher Plummer) both nominated for Oscars. New biographies of Tolstoy’s wife, Sophia, were released, as well as her letters.
    Inside Russia, the Tolstoy estate, as well as a handful of museums and institutes in Moscow, are organizing forums. On November 20, they will open a small museum at Ostankino, the provincial railway station where Tolstoy met his death.
    “Tolstoy is still relevant,” said Tolstaya, his great-great-granddaughter. “The question becomes: what have the people in Russia done in the 100 years since he left us? Have we managed to answer his questions? The answer is no.” 4
     There is no denying that Tolstoy is one of the greatest authors of all time.  His classic novels, War and Peace and Anna Karenina are not only read by today’s students in the former USSR, but they were even made into films in the United States.  “Anna Karenina” was also made into a miniseries by the British Broadcasting Company (BBC). These novels have been translated into several different languages and are definitely worth reading.   I would also recommend reading A Confession and Resurrection in order to understand his views regarding the meaning of life.
      Life certainly can be challenging.  The fact that Russia made no formal effort to mark the one hundredth anniversary of the death of this great novelist is proof of that.  It is true that some of his writings were considered controversial; however, how will any of us be judged one hundred years after we die?
                                                           End Notes
1) “Leo Tolstoy: Biography” http://www.notablebiographies.com/St-Tr/Tolstoy-Leo.html   (accessed 5/26/12)
2) “Leo Tolstoi” http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/ltolstoi.htm  (accessed 5/26/12) 
3) R.F. Christian (trans.) Tolstoy’s Letters (NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1978) Vol. 1, p. 288
4) “Russia Snubs Tolstoy” http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/russia/101011/leo-tolstoy-death (written 10/12/10, accessed 5/26/12)

The Desire to Overcome Loneliness

   Loneliness is an unpleasant affect, combining sadness and anxiety, a felt response to the absence of sufficient relational contact. Isolation is the condition of being separated from all important persons, things, and relationships.

   The relationship between loneliness and isolation is often stated simply, “If a person is isolated, that person will experience loneliness.”  The reality is more complex, as different conditions are required to produce loneliness in different people.¹ 

    What makes us happiest in life? Some people may point to fabulous fame and fortune. However, hands down, surveys show that friends and family are the real prize. Yet even though our need to connect is innate, some of us always go home alone. You may have people around you throughout the day or you may even be in a lifelong marriage, yet you may feel a deep down loneliness. Not surprisingly, isolation can affect one's mental and physical health to great detriment.²

   This is a very common theme in our modern culture, especially in light of the fact that many more people are living alone than ever before.  This theme also played a major role in the novel, Doctor Zhivago by Boris Pasternak (1890-1960).  The novel begins with the death of Yuri Zhivago’s mother, who dies when Yuri is a young man.  He goes to live with Alexander and Anna and their daughter, Tonya.  Eventually, Yuri becomes a medical doctor, he marries Tonya, and they have two children together, a son, Alexander, and a daughter, Anna. 

   Another major figure is Larissa Feodorovna Guishar. Born the daughter of a Belgian factory owner, Larissa's family, like Zhivago's, has fallen upon hard times. She ultimately becomes engaged to Pavel "Pasha" Antipov, an idealistic student who sympathizes with Lenin's Bolsheviks. Lara simultaneously has a discreet affair with her mother's lover, Viktor Komarovsky. A deeply corrupt lawyer, Komarovsky's connections extend to senior figures in both the Tsarist State and its revolutionary opponents. Despite her intense resentment of Komarovsky, Lara becomes very adept at using her sensuality to manipulate her besotted lover. Suspecting the worst, Lara's mother, Amalia Guishar, attempts suicide. Zhivago, along with his fellow medical student Misha Gordon, visit with a doctor and successfully save Amalia's life.

   Ultimately, Pasha Antipov is declared missing in action during World War I, but is captured by the Austro-Hungarian Army. After escaping from a POW camp, Antipov joins the new Red Army. He becomes notorious as General Strelnikov ("The Hangman"), a fearsome commander who summarily executes both captured Whites and many civilians. Meanwhile, Larissa becomes a battlefield nurse in order to search for her husband.

    Following the February Revolution, Larissa and Yuri serve together in a makeshift field hospital and fall in love. Neither, however, is willing to admit their feelings for the other. As he prepares to return to his wife and children in Moscow, Yuri expresses dismay to Larissa that, "the roof has been ripped off," the nation he loves.

    After the October Revolution and the subsequent Russian Civil War, Yuri and his family flee by train to their estate at Varykino, in the Ural Mountains. During the journey, he meets with General Strelnikov, who informs him that Larissa has returned to their daughter in the village of Yuriatin. Soon after, Larissa and Yuri meet and consummate their relationship.

    While returning from an encounter with Larissa, Yuri is abducted by Liberius, commander of the "Forest Brotherhood", the Bolshevik guerilla band. Liberius is a dedicated Bolshevik and highly effective leader of his men. However, Liberius is also a cocaine addict, loud-mouthed, and narcissistic. He repeatedly bores Yuri with his longwinded lectures about the glories of socialism and the inevitability of its victory.

    Subsequently, Yuri deserts and returns to Larissa; however, Komarovsky reappears. Having used his influence within the government, Komarovsky has been appointed Minister of Justice of the Far Eastern Republic, a Soviet puppet state in Siberia. He offers to smuggle Yuri and Larissa outside Soviet soil. They initially refuse, but Komarovsky states that Pasha Antipov is dead, having fallen from favor with the Party. Stating that this will place Larissa in the crosshairs of the Secret Police, he persuades Yuri that it is in her best interests to leave for the West. Yuri convinces Lara to go with Komarovsky, telling her that he will follow her shortly.

    Meanwhile, the hunted General Strelnikov returns for Larissa, who has already left with Komarovsky. After having a lengthy conversation with Yuri, Antipov commits suicide. Yuri finds his body the following morning.

    After returning to Moscow, Zhivago's health declines. He then lives with another woman and fathers two children with her. He also plans numerous writing projects which he never finishes. Meanwhile, Larissa returns to Russia for Yuri Zhivago's funeral. She persuades General Yevgraf Zhivago, Yuri illegitimate half-brother, to assist in her search for her daughter by Yuri. Ultimately, however, Larissa is arrested during Joseph Stalin's Great Purge and dies in the Gulag.

    During World War II, Zhivago's old friends Nika Dudorov and Misha Gordon meet up. One of their discussions revolves around a local laundress named Tanya, a Civil War orphan, and her resemblance to both Yuri and Lara. Much later, they meet over the first edition of Yuri Zhivago's poems.

    Yuri is a sensitive man with a poetic nature which is nearly to the point of mysticism. Zhivago's idealism and principles stand in contrast to the brutality and horror of World War I, the Russian Revolution, and the subsequent Russian Civil War.  The contrasts between his poetic nature and the events which have destroyed his country have led to a sense of loneliness and isolation. 

    Even though Yuri married Tonya and had two children with her, there is very little passion in their relationship.  This is in stark contrast to his relationship with Larissa.  He has a very deep connection with Larissa which seems to help him deal with his loneliness; however, this relationship eventually comes to an end also. 

    While fathering children out of wedlock might not be the ideal way to deal with overcoming loneliness, the need for human companionship is a very strong natural desire and if it is not met within a marital relationship it will be met somewhere else.  A major theme of the novel is how mysticism and idealism are destroyed by both the Bolsheviks and the White Army alike, as both sides commit horrible atrocities.³

    This is a novel that must be read not only because of Pasternak's unmistakable talent to depict the conflicts in the human mind, the suffering of doing something that largely contradicts your personal ethical norms, and the great love between two souls, but also because it questions the validity of the Communist revolution. At first it was a struggle for social equality and justice. Politically, this became a perverse struggle for power and control over the body, mind, and soul.⁴ Even though the Soviet government would not allow him to accept the award; Boris Pasternak won the 1958 Nobel Prize for Literature for this novel.

                                                     End Notes

1)    Rodney J. Hunter (ed.) Dictionary of Pastoral Care and Counseling (TN: Abingdon Press, 1990), p. 663

2)    “Loneliness” http://www.psychologytoday.com/basics/loneliness 

3)    “Doctor Zhivago” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_Zhivago

4)    “The Loneliness of the Individual in the Collective Society: Doctor Zhivago, The Russian Revolution, and Civil War” http://readwithstyle.blogspot.com/2011/07/loneliness-of-individual-in-collective.html

The Belief in Something Rather than Nothing

  In the past few weeks we have seen demonstrations on Wall Street and a certain amount of political unrest on the part of a number of people in the United States.  The Federal government has caused various financial problems in this country, either directly or indirectly, and the people are annoyed that little, if anything, is being done to correct these problems.  The housing market was completely undermined by the approval of mortgages by the banks to people who had no hope of ever being able to pay that loan back.  Unemployment is still very high and the “recovery” which the government has been touting for months seems more like a pipedream than a reality.  

   The Wall Street bankers were bailed out by taxpayers’ money and they continue to get richer while the average person continues to wonder how long it will be before they lose their job and they will not be able to pay their bills and will lose their health benefits.  The people are disgusted by what is going on in Washington and they are demanding answers. 

    This lack of confidence in authority is nothing new.  In the 1860s a movement known as nihilism developed in Russia.  This term first appeared in Fathers and Sons by Ivan Turgenev (1818-1883).  Nihilists favored the destruction of human institutions and laws, based on the idea that such institutions and laws are artificial and corrupt. At its core, Russian nihilism was characterized by the belief that the world lacks comprehensible meaning, objective truth, or value. For some time many Russian liberals had been dissatisfied by what they regarded as the empty discussions of the intelligentsia. The Nihilists questioned all old values and shocked the Russian establishment. They moved beyond being purely philosophical to becoming major political forces after becoming involved in the cause of reform. Their path was facilitated by the previous actions of the Decembrists, who revolted in 1825, and the financial and political hardship caused by the Crimean War, which caused large numbers of Russian people to lose faith in political institutions.¹   

    This novel discusses the divide between two generations.  The “generation gap” is not a new concept.  Almost every generation believes that the younger generation is too impulsive and too prone to rash judgment.  Almost every younger generation believes that the previous generation caused all of the problems that they are facing and it is their job to correct these problems.  It is quite common for members of the older generation to offer advice to the younger generation and it is also common that the younger generation does not follow such advice.

    In an interview with Andrei Tarkovsky (1932-1986) he discussed this very issue.  He stated that it is impossible to inherit one’s experience.  It must be lived.  We often hear it said that we should use our fathers’ experience.  This is too easy.  However, once we have acquired the experience we no longer have time to use it.  The next generation rightly refuses to listen to this.  They want to experience life for themselves.  He says that the real meaning of life is that we cannot pass on our own experience to others or force them to feel suggested emotions.  It is only through personal experience that we understand life. ² He made this point in his film “Andrei Rublev”. 

   This point is also addressed in Fathers and Sons.  The younger generation is open to the idea of Western ideas and would like to introduce these ideas into Russian culture as a way of bringing about social change.  The older generation believes that what is needed is a return to traditional Orthodox spirituality.  This is completely unacceptable to the younger generation, especially since they have lost confidence it traditional institutions. 

    Another factor is the sense of the loss of meaning and truth which was infecting Russia at this time.  Without a sense of meaning or purpose it is very difficult for people to go on.  In his book, Man's Search for Meaning, Dr. Viktor E. Frankl, the father of Logotherapy, reflects upon his experiences as a prisoner at the Auschwitz death camp during World War II. Frankl makes the point that a person can suffer a great deal if he or she can make some sense out of their suffering. He said, "We can endure a great deal of what if we understand the why." He found that when rumors were spread through the concentration camp that the prisoners were going to be freed on a particular day that the prisoners mental and physical state actually improved. However, once that day came and went and there was no release their condition deteriorated.

    One of the ways that the prisoners were given some sense of hope was by helping them to focus on fact that there was life beyond the death camp. He writes, "When we spoke about attempts to give a man mental courage, we said that he had to be shown something to look forward to in the future. He had to be reminded that life still waited for him, that a human being waited for his return." ³

     It is this same sense of hopelessness which inspires people to take to the streets today in protest.  They have lost faith in traditional institutions and no longer believe that life will be better for them than it was for their parents. It is important to inspire hope in such people, otherwise they will become desperate and desperate people take desperate measures.  The nihilist movement eventually began to encourage the use of violence to bring about change and there is no reason to doubt that this will happen again.

    The main character in Fathers and Sons is Yevgeny Barazov, a medical student who has accepted the philosophy of nihilism.  He is mentor and friend to Arkady Nikolaevich Kirsanov.  Yevgeny falls in love with a wealthy widow named, Anna Sergeevna Odintsova, who entertains nihilists at her estate. However, his love is unrequited and this painful emotion to too much for him to bear.  He turns to his parents for support; however, when he receives no support his despair grows worse.

   Conversely, Turgenev shows us Arkady’s traditional happiness in marriage and estate management as the solution to Bazarov's cosmic despair and Anna's life of loveless comfort. (Arkady marries Anna Odintsova's sister, Katya, though he was also originally in love with Anna). The height of the conflict between Bazarov and the older generation comes when Bazarov wounds Pavel, Arkady’s brother, in a duel. Finally, Turgenev also refutes Bazarov's "insignificance principle", i.e., the nihilist idea that life is utterly insignificant and that nothing remains after death: after leaving and then returning again to his parents, Bazarov dies of typhus. The final passage of the book portrays Bazarov's parents visiting his grave.

They walk with a heavy step, supporting each other; when they approach the railing, they fall on their knees and remain there for a long time, weeping bitterly, gazing attentively at the headstone under which their son lies buried: they exchange a few words, brush the dust off the stone, move a branch of the pine tree, and pray once again; they can’t forsake this place where they seem to feel closer to their son, to their memories of him… Can it really be that their prayers and tears are futile? Can it really be that love, sacred, devoted love is not all powerful? Oh, no!

Their love causes them to remember Bazarov: he has transcended death, but only through the love of other people.

   Ivan Turgenev does not find meaning in traditional institutions, such as politics, but in love.  It is love with transformed Arkady’s life and allowed Barazov to transcend death.  Love gives meaning and purpose to life.  It is also something that we cannot understand based upon someone else’s experience, but something which we must experience ourselves. 

                                                       End Notes

1)    “History of Russia” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Russia#Nihilism

2)    “Tarkovsky on Art: Part One” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V27XlEDLdtE&feature=related

3)    Frankl, Viktor E. Man's Search for Meaning: An Introduction to Logotherapy (NY: Washington Square Press, 1969), p. 146