||сделать стартовой||добавить в избранное|
Искусство, Культура, Литература Литература, Лингвистика
Bazarov: a lunatic or visionary?
Vlad Elkis MOL 316-101 Dr. Elizabe h Gi zburg Oc ober 5, 2003Bazarov: a lu a ic or a visio ary?“A d he cas le made of sa d Mel s i o he sea, Eve ually.”- James Marshall He drix Iva urge ev’s a emp a crea i g a ew Russia co emporary “hero” has yielded a figure of ex remely high complexi y, co radic io , a d diverge ce. his charac er, a ma amed Evge y Bazarov a d he e igma of his perso have fueled limi less deba es o he rue esse ce of his figure, as i was i e ded by he au hor. As Socra es said, “Amid he argume a io , he ru h is fou d”, so le his modes co ribu io o he seemi gly e dless discussio of Bazarov bri g us perhaps o e small s ep closer o he ru h abou his mys erious ma a d his rue esse ce. Wha is Bazarov? Was he doomed o purga io of his heories, or was he a lumi ary wor hy of respec a d crede ce? Evge y Bazarov was bor i o a family of a modes provi cial doc or. urge ev provides o i forma io abou Bazarov’s life before his arrival i Maryi o, bu i ca be guessed ha he life of a less- ha -richly e dowed medical s ude i S . Pe ersburg mus have i volved i umerable hardships. Fyodor Dos oyevsky’s Crime a d Pu ishme has provided co siderable i sigh i o he life of you g scholars a ha ime, a d i is more ha reaso able o suspec ha Bazarov’s life was o less of a challe ge ha i was for Dos oyevsky’s Rodio Raskol ikov. his aus eri y of lifes yle, combi ed wi h his dedica ed academic pursui s, has made Bazarov i o a s ric empiricis , a s au ch prac icia , a d a merciless skep ic. Perso al experie ce became his o ly accep able form of discovery. His ac io s were gover ed by o hi g o her ha ra io al reaso i g; se ime s a d passio s were rampled by he iro fis ed behemo h of his u yieldi g i ellec . U for u a ely, he power of Bazarov’s mi d played a rude joke o he you g pseudo-philosopher. His refusal o ack owledge a y au hori y also mea his failure o recog ize ha perhaps he was o he wises perso i he world. “Whe I mee a ma who ca hold his ow beside me, he I’ll cha ge my opi io of myself,”- says Bazarov. Clearly, he is bli dly i fa ua ed wi h he idea of his ow grea ess. Pavel Kirsa ov remarks his rai i Bazarov’s charac er as “Sa a ic pride”. Perhaps, his super-ego is ic obsessio wi h self-righ eous ess was fueled by his compa io , Arkady. he you g Kirsa ov, barely we y- hree years of age, appare ly had o ye formed a sou d sys em of morals a d values a d was draw i o discipleship of ihilism primarily by he power of Bazarov’s charisma a d he “fresh ess” of he ihilis s’ ideas, ra her ha heir se sibili y. Arkady is a perso lacki g charac er a d devoid of a i depe de i ellec ual backbo e. He co s a ly eeds someo e’s suppor a d Bazarov jus happe s o be vivid e ough a perso ali y o a rac such a simple life form as Arkady. Over he course of heir frie dship, Arkady brea hes every word spoke by his se sei, seldom displayi g sig s of i depe de hough . He deligh fully rejec s au hori y, bu his ihilis ic fervor is o si cere; Arkady semi-co sciously follows his frie d, who sof ly a d ambiguously ridicules him as a pho y, for Bazarov k ows ha Arkady’s subscrip io o ihilism is very s ro gly co radic ed by his demea or, a d his freque displays of feeli gs a d emo io s.
Bu why does Bazarov o re ou ce his frie dship? Why does he olera e he compa y of Arkady, his dim hypocri e, a d why does he agree o ravel o Maryi o? Well, here was o reaso o o. As devo ed o work a d scie ce as Bazarov was, he saw o harm i spe di g a li le ime i he mellow a d pleasa cou ry es a e of his you g frie ds’ pare . Moreover, Bazarov ye agai pursues a selfish mo ive by agreei g o ravel o Maryi o: he dreads boredom, which would probably co sume him a his rue des i a io , his ow pare s’ homes ead. Al hough i appears o be u ders a dable why such a i ellige a d developed figure as Bazarov would ry o avoid ex e ded periods of exclusive co ac wi h simpler people – hey bore him. Bu i also seems ha Bazarov, i ge eral, feels mos comfor able arou d people who i here ly have o capabili y o co fro him a d ques io his maximalis ic sloga s. He e joys he compa y of he local kids i Maryi o a d deligh fully explai s his work i dissec i g frogs; Arkady is his frie d because he is harmless; he eve ries o seduce Fe echka, ha shy a d imid woma , duri g his fi al visi a he Kirsa ovs’. O e way o explai hese gravi a io al e de cies is by a hypo hesis ha Bazarov fel vul erable as a ihilis . he ordi ary people arou d him co s a ly challe ged his ideas, a d Bazarov’s wo rudime ary reac io s were o ei her wi hdraw a d avoid hese deba es, as i usually was i his e cou ers wi h Pavel Kirsa ov, or o e gage i all-ou verbal melees wi h his a ackers, who of e imes sou d more reaso able ha he belligere ihilis . Bazarov becomes co sumed by his ow lies. By so fiercely re ou ci g au hori y, pri ciples, a d orms, he co radic s himself. Accordi g o him, poe ry is a o hi g bu roma ic o se se, music is a was e of ime, admira io of a ure is ex o halluci a i g. Co sumed by his fic i ious heories, Bazarov fails (or refuses) o realize ha by arbi rarily de yi g hese a d o her a urally exis i g a ribu es of he socie y a d people, he disaffirms his ow dedica io o empiricism. Bazarov’s belief i chemis ry a es s o he exac opposi e of wha he asser s. Chemis ry is merely a scie ce ha exami es he i erac io be wee a oms; i does o wri e he laws of hese i erac io s. Similarly, he world is co s ruc ed wi h i s pri ciples of i erac io s be wee people wi hi he socie y. herefore, by refusi g o recog ize he u derlyi g order of he socie y a d becomi g a ihilis , Bazarov pu s himself i da ger of someday faci g a pai ful revela io . His rele less s ruggle agai s he ideals a d he idealis s has ra sformed his very self i o a idealis . By a acki g all pri ciples already so solidly embedded i he socie y, he makes himself a au hor of jus a o her se of ideals, values, a d pri ciples. “ hou shal o e joy he a ure, music, poe ry, or love! hou shal e joy S off u d Kraf a d chemis ry!” is a possible quo e rela able o Bazarov hrough paraphrasi g of his loud claims. Bu i is s ra ge ha such a i ellige ma as Bazarov could o u ders a d ha by deprivi g people of heir commo sources of e joyme a d happi ess, he was sermo izi g abou a world bou d for self-des ruc io .
For i is qui e clear ha he more harmless sources of happi ess every perso fi ds i his or her life, he be er a d safer he world will be for he socie y as a whole. S ro gly i oxica ed by his ow brillia ce a d wi hou u ders a di g his mis ake, Bazarov fou d he audaci y a d emeri y o ques io a d ridicule he a ural order of his socie y a he ime. His ques for reform esse ially was a rip o he daw of huma race, o he prehis oric imes of laissez-faire e hics (or abse ce hereof) a d a a emp o redesig he law of he world, he law ha co s ruc ed i self over he ce uries a d evolved as a e viro me al force much oo s ro g for a simple idealis like Bazarov o e gage. “Fa hers a d So s” is similar o a Sophoclea ragedy, i which he mai charac er, Bazarov, follows a li e ha i volves mos of he a ribu es of a real ragic hero, as ou li e i Greek drama: hubris, a a ag orisis, a d a ca harsis. His hubris was he i a ic pride a d co emp for oo ma y of he world’s pri ciples. His u successful rela io ship wi h Odi sova, however, forced him o ack owledge he foolish ess of his rash eva geliza io s. Co sis e wi h his ow previous s a eme ha “he will review his ow perso whe he fi ds someo e who ca face him”, Bazarov experie ces his a ag orisis whe he u dergoes a radical cha ge of philosophy af er all of his ihilis ic ideas are pu o doub . Bazarov he Empiricis wi esses empirically he disma li g of his lo g ime heories whe he falls i love wi h he firs perso capable of s a di g up o him, A a Odi sova. Bu ragically, he revela io comes o Bazarov o ly whe he is o his dea hbed, losi g grip of his migh y i ellec . oo la e! he ack owledges he ru h abou his feeble “cas le made of sa d ha mel ed i o he sea” whe he co fessed love o A a. Eve af er ye a o her versio of he i erpre a io of Bazarov’s s ory is prese ed, i is s ill u clear whe her Bazarov’s dea h was a accide or he u shakable ihilis ’s delibera e depar ure from he world he refused o respec a d recog ize as his. Bu wha would happe if he doc or whom Bazarov was assis i g duri g ha au opsy did have he a ibio ic o save Bazarov from he yphus i fec io ? Would he aba do his audacious ihilis ic ideals? he a swer, I believe, is yes. Bazarovism is a absolu ely u sus ai able school of hough i huma socie y, a d Bazarov’s ow example serves as solid evide ce for ha . hrough ex rapola io of Evge y’s perso a o o he backgrou d of he we ie h ce ury, i becomes eve clearer ha eleme s like Mr. Bazarov would fi d hemselves dysfu c io al a d rejec ed by he socie y. Moreover, a Bazarov-like perso who believes i o hi g bu he empirical would be exposed o oo ma y adverse a d des ruc ive i flue ces ha o ly our pare s’ guida ce ca help avoid: drugs, u pro ec ed sex, e c. herefore, if urge ev allowed Euge y o live as a equal member of he socie y, he jus like Dos oyevsky’s Raskol ikov, he, oo, would have aba do ed his you hful rage a d joi ed he socie y of reaso able people.
For people communicating "sideways" вЂ“ i.e., to others at approximately the same level of organization вЂ“ behave differently, operate under very different pressures, than those who must communicate up and down a hierarchy. To illustrate, let us look at a typical work setting in which a traditional bureaucratic hierarchy operates. While still a young man I worked for a couple of years as a millwright's helper in a foundry. Here, in a great dark cavern of a building, thousands of men labored to produce automobile crankcase castings. The scene was Dantesque вЂ“ smoke and soot smeared our faces, black dirt covered the floors and filled the air, the pungent, choking smell of sulphur and burnt sand seared our nostrils. Overhead a creaking conveyor carried red hot castings and dripped hot sand on the men below. There were flashes of molten iron, the yellow flares of fires, and a lunatic cacophony of noises: men shouting, chains rattling, pug mills hammering, compressed air shrieking. To a stranger the scene appeared chaotic
1. Bazarov: a lunatic or visionary?
2. Subjunctive (or conditional) mood
3. Should be press liable or not
4. “The Role of Smallpox Vaccination in Mortality Decline in the Great Britain through Eradicating the Disease between XVIII-XX centuries – Facts or a Political Arithmetick?”
5. Двенадцатая ночь, иди Что угодно (Twelfth Night; or, What You Hill)
9. RP/BBC English or British English as a standard language