What did you think of Tolstoy's portrayal of the Russians, in general? Do you think it's odd considering that Tolstoy himself fought on their side in the Caucasus?
It seemed like all the Russians were corrupt to the degree that they were "civilized" — with the czar being the most corrupt — like they had lost touch with the primitive human spirit. They were more concerned with finery, prestige, social advancement, speaking dainty French, etc. War for material gain was just a way of life for them, whereas for Hadji it seemed like a necessary defensive posture.
Yes, Erin, that same thought struck me - here's a Russian novelist portraying his own people in a very unflattering light. I thought that took some insight and courage on Tolstoy's part.
I agree with kc's assessment. The czar especially sparked every kind of loathing whenever he appeared - like a Russian version of the dissipated French kings, as they were viewed.
I wondered about Tolstoy's portrayal of Nicholas I and how it was received in Russia. "Hadji Murad" was written long after Nicholas's reign, of course, but I wondered if such harsh criticism of the emperor was considered OK.
It definitely seemed like a social criticism of war in the same manner we might find today. I mean, it holds up to modern scrutiny. Maybe the exception would be the opulence in which the Russians conducted camp -- messages on silver platters! -- and caviar and champagne at camp. Gambling and vodka for the lower classes.
Something I loved was the panoramic view Tolstoy took so we had so many viewpoints from Hadji's -- like the young soldier, Avdeev, who volunteered to go in his brother's place and died from a stomach wound. I like what KC said about how the higher in rank, it seemed the more brutish the behavior.
Tolstoy was tough on the women, too, except for Marya. Like they were power-hungry, too, just resorting to low-cut dresses and feminine wiles to get in on the action.
It seemed like all the Russians were corrupt to the degree that they were "civilized" — with the czar being the most corrupt — like they had lost touch with the primitive human spirit. They were more concerned with finery, prestige, social advancement, speaking dainty French, etc. War for material gain was just a way of life for them, whereas for Hadji it seemed like a necessary defensive posture.
ReplyDeleteYes, Erin, that same thought struck me - here's a Russian novelist portraying his own people in a very unflattering light. I thought that took some insight and courage on Tolstoy's part.
ReplyDeleteI agree with kc's assessment. The czar especially sparked every kind of loathing whenever he appeared - like a Russian version of the dissipated French kings, as they were viewed.
I wondered about Tolstoy's portrayal of Nicholas I and how it was received in Russia. "Hadji Murad" was written long after Nicholas's reign, of course, but I wondered if such harsh criticism of the emperor was considered OK.
ReplyDeleteIt definitely seemed like a social criticism of war in the same manner we might find today. I mean, it holds up to modern scrutiny. Maybe the exception would be the opulence in which the Russians conducted camp -- messages on silver platters! -- and caviar and champagne at camp. Gambling and vodka for the lower classes.
ReplyDeleteSomething I loved was the panoramic view Tolstoy took so we had so many viewpoints from Hadji's -- like the young soldier, Avdeev, who volunteered to go in his brother's place and died from a stomach wound. I like what KC said about how the higher in rank, it seemed the more brutish the behavior.
Tolstoy was tough on the women, too, except for Marya. Like they were power-hungry, too, just resorting to low-cut dresses and feminine wiles to get in on the action.