Fathers and Sons by Turgenev

[Led Zeppelin]

I finished reading Fathers and Sons a week ago, and really liked it (although it was certainly a step down from Anna Karenina), I was wondering if anyone else here had read it?

The book is about a nihilist called Bazarov and his fellow student friend called Arkady, I'm going to write a lengthy synopsis of the book in this thread in my next post.

[The Grey Blur]

I can't wait ;)

[Led Zeppelin]

Keep your trashy one-liners in Chit-Chat please, thank you.

[Djehuti]

I have read it, it was quite a while ago though.

[Mariam]

I'd really like to read your synopsis...I'm still looking for a copy of this novel.

[Scars]

I've read it, I quite like Russian authors, particularly Turgenev.

One of its strengths, in my opinion, was the fact that it was not an open polemic, which would have made the book fairly tedious. The way that it was written meant that it was a good read and if you cared to think about what Bazarov (described as 'the first Bolshevik') you'd learn a lot about teh mentality of the Nihilist movement in Russia.

It's also quite interesting (and shocking) to see how the Russian artistocracy lived.

[The Grey Blur]

Originally posted by Marxism-[email protected] 18 2006, 05:57 PM
Keep your trashy one-liners in Chit-Chat please, thank you.
Never!

[Led Zeppelin]

Originally posted by Adonis+--> (Adonis)I'd really like to read your synopsis...I'm still looking for a copy of this novel.[/b]

Depending on where you live I could pass my copy on to you, I've read it and it's just laying around now.


Scars
I've read it, I quite like Russian authors, particularly Turgenev.

One of its strengths, in my opinion, was the fact that it was not an open polemic, which would have made the book fairly tedious. The way that it was written meant that it was a good read and if you cared to think about what Bazarov (described as 'the first Bolshevik') you'd learn a lot about teh mentality of the Nihilist movement in Russia.

It's also quite interesting (and shocking) to see how the Russian artistocracy lived.

If you haven't read Anna Karenina already I highly recommend it, it was way better than Fathers and Sons.

Here's my synopsis:

When I started reading the book I was expecting another story in the same writing style as Tolstoy's Anna Karenina, but instead I noticed Turgenev used a different writing style, which didn't really help the book. Turgenev instead of just "telling the story" also interfered in the story, giving his own opinion on what happened, and even addressing the reader at times. This resulted in the book having a moralistic undertone at times, an aspect of the book I certainly didn't appreciate.

The story starts with a father waiting for his son to arrive from St. Petersburg, where he attended the university. The father is named Nikolai, and the son Arkady. When Arkady arrives his father sees that he is accompanied by a friend, or rather, his personal teacher; Bazarov. The father represents the old conservative views of his times, but a conservative who has sinned himself, and is therefore willing to change his views. Arkady represents the rebellious youth of his times, looking for a guide in his life, his views on morals and what is right and wrong are not perfectly balanced out, he therefore needs help from his personal teacher (Bazarov) to know what is right and what is wrong, and throughout most of the story he turns to him for advice. Only at the end of the story is he able to make up his own mind about what is right and what is wrong, and they collide with what his teacher had taught him earlier.

The father, son and friend move to Nikolai's house in the country, where they meet Pavel, Nikolai's brother, Arkady's uncle. Pavel represents the old conservative views of his times and is not willing to change, as opposed to his brother Nikolai. Even though he is surrounded by "modern events", like his brother starting a relationship with a young girl --and having a child with her-- after his wife died, or himself also being in love with the same young girl.

Bazarov is a nihilist, friend, and personal teacher of Arkady, he became his personal teacher because he was older and more knowledgeable than him. He represents the new modern views; he doesn't care about morals, rejects religion, and is for complete equality between men and women. The central theme of the story is the collision between his views and Pavels' views, the old versus the new. This reaches extreme proportions when Pavel challenges Bazarov to an actual duel, the battle of thoughts then materializes into the physical.

At the end of the story Bazarov leaves a trace of modern views on every other character, especially on the ones who started out as conservative. I believe Turgenev's aim was to prove that the modern views were logical, but if taken to the extreme will not do good but harm.

[Mariam]

Depending on where you live I could pass my copy on to you, I've read it and it's just laying around now.

Thanks alot...I'm sure I'll find one..


I've read it, I quite like Russian authors, particularly Turgenev.

I like russian literature in general, but I prefer Pushkin, Lermantov and Dostoevsky.


This reaches extreme proportions when Pavel challenges Bazarov to an actual duel, the battle of thoughts then materializes into the physical.


At the end of the story Bazarov leaves a trace of modern views on every other character, especially on the ones who started out as conservative. I believe Turgenev's aim was to prove that the modern views were logical, but if taken to the extreme will not do good but harm.

So it was mainly about the clash of old\new thoughts, and how the society rejects the new ideas and its holding on to the old... Or even the clash of generations.

Bazarov is the first nihilist literary character...I think, right??

Anyway...good work... keep it up...
^_^

[Led Zeppelin]

Originally posted by Adonis
So it was mainly about the clash of old\new thoughts, and how the society rejects the new ideas and its holding on to the old... Or even the clash of generations.


Exactly. :)


Bazarov is the first nihilist literary character...I think, right??

I think so, don't know for sure.


Anyway...good work... keep it up...

Glad you liked it. :)

[Severian]

I didn't much like it. I couldn't really care about any of the characters - they all seemed pretentious. Especially when they were speaking French.

A couple Russian novels I did really like: Crime and Punishment by Dostoevsky and Dead Souls by Gogol.

[JimFar]

Concerning Turgenev's Fathers and Sons, it is said that he based the character of Bazarov on a young Russian doctor that Turgenev had met in London. On the other hand, when Bazarov spouts off his views on philosophy, religion, morals, politics etc., most of what he says was taken by Turgenev from the writings of his sometime friend, Nikolai Chernyshevsky, who was a major Russian radical thinker of the mid-19th century, a father of revolutionary socialism in Russia, who ultimately suffered years of imprisonment and internal exile under the czarist regime. In fact Chernyshevsky's own novel What is to be done?, while hardly comparable, in terms of literary merits, to the novels of Turgenev, Dostoyevsky or Tolstoy, was very widely read in the 19th century, providing inspiration to several generations of Russian revolutionaries, including the young Lenin. It inspired in reaction to several novels by the great Russian masters. Some of Dostoyevsky's own novels including Crime and Punishment, Notes from the Underground, and The Possessed, were all written in reaction against Chernyshevsky's novel as well as against the broader Nihilist movement, which both fascinated and appalled Dostoyevsky.

Fathers and Sons inspired much controversy in its day. Many of the young radicals were dismayed by the novel, viewing it as a slander on the younger generation. Many conservatives praised it precisely because they read it much the same way. On the other hand, Pisarev, who was one of the leading Nihilist writers, praised the novel. Much of the controversy I think came because Turgenev saw himself as an an English-style liberal who quite consciously attempted to position himself midway between the conservative and revolutionary camps, while attempting to keep good relations with both sides. He sought to move Russia towards a consitutional monarchy with a parliamentary government and Western style legal institutions. He, of course, supported the abolition of serfdom, and dreamed of industrializing Russia. Turgenev, at least partially shared some of the philosophical views attributed to Bazarov. Like his fictional character, Turgenev was an atheist and a phillosophical materialist. Unlike him though, Turgenev was more inclined to take a benign view of religion, while remaining a disbeliever. So for him, someone like Bazarov would be seen as having sound ideals but as having a propensity to push things too far and too fast for Russia, which in Turgenev's view could only be expected to change slowly. Given the nature of Turgenev's politics, it is not surprising that he, at times, experienced distrust from one side or the other, and a reading of his letters that he wrote to various correspondents, especially after the outbreak of controversy over Fathers and Sons, suggests that he was quite capable of talking out of both sides of his mouth. Thus when writing to conservatives, he was likely to play up the criticisms of Bazarov, while writing to radicals, Turgenev would express his admiration for the character, and would say that he regarded him as a hero.

[JimFar]

Concerning Chernyshevsky, I am sure many people here will perceive that the title of his novel, What is to be done? bears the same name as a famous tract that Lenin wrote. That, of course, was no accident, since Lenin was a great admirer of Chernsyshevsky. And it should be noted, that earlier on, Karl Marx had expressed admiration for Chernyshevsky, with whom he had corresponded with.

[encephalon]

read it, along with dead souls. It's okay. It offers a glimpse into the contempt that the next generation had for the decembrists for "giving up," and possibly illuminates some of the circumstances that led up to the Bolshevik coup. I liked it more than dead souls, but it isn't something I'd read again without a specific purpose in mind.