I do hope the deadline for completing our posts was today... I don't have the syllabus and internet is finicky at our house, (we have to go to the library), and I'm in the midst of another final, but I'll try to finish this today :)
The character of Pozdnyshev himself is a cast off of Dicken's own two-dimensional characters, ridden with caricatured facial tics, twitching arms, and corporeal agitation, (thank you Professor McWeeny for describing Dickens like that, lol). The man does not breathe. Pozdnyshev's words rush out as he confesses not out of a desire to seek forgiveness for murder, but for his failure to be that “terrible” figure that succeeds in removing carnality from life.
This is another reason why I did not find Hadji Murat as compelling or likable as others. It's “framed” construction seemed almost chosen because Tolstoy grew tired of his creativity. That was not worded very clearly nor does it allude to what I found at fault with the novella, but the story did not seem to know really what it was saying. Yes, the outside, religious Other happened to be more civilized and moral than the Russian aristocracy, but other than that, what was Hadji Murat? If it was a stance against sexuality like Pozdnyshev, then wouldn't the polygamous Murat be condemned also?
It is sad that as Tolstoy descends deeper and deeper into this neurotic assault against what it means to be human, he displays the very tragic flaw he desperately hoped to root out: his own human imperfection, his “sins” as it were. Tolstoy seemed to feel as if a lack of perfection, perfection being the ability not only to think what is “right” but to ALWAYS “do” what is right,”`was equatable with a death sentence as we see in The Devil where the man kills himself in ending one, and then his mistress in ending two. Death becomes a way of evasion. Death becomes a deceptive savior... Tolstoy is at the end of his rope as he dreamt in The Confessions and I fear that his tightrope snapped.
He was right to condemn conjugal relations when they were based out of lust and a selfish desire for stimulation and physical pleasure. But the essence of conjugal union is not selfish but wholly self-less. It is the image of sacrifice when respected and revered as both the physical but simultaneously spiritual and mysterious union it is.
1 comment:
Love the photo, Stella! What would be worse, I wonder, having to speak with the manic Pozdnyshev in the flesh? or picking up the receiver and having to listen to his shrill voice? I suppose it would be easier to hang up (that's if caller ID had not already stopped us from picking up in the first place), but the very possibility of him having concentrated access to our minds by way of the ear is truly off-putting.
The comparison to one of Dickens's characters is a very useful one, I think. As we know from "What is Art, Tolstoy greatly admired the English author and frequently turned to him for artistic solace. But, once again, why present issues he found so important through such a caricature?
Post a Comment