L. Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky is a literary essay written by Dmitry Merezhkovsky, comparing the creativity and worldview of the Russian authors Leo Tolstoy and Fyodor Dostoevsky. Published between 1900 and 1901 in Mir Iskusstva magazine, it was based on research Merezhkovsky conducted from 1898 to 1902. Its publication coincided with Leo Tolstoy's excommunication by Most Holy Synod and drew wide public response. L. Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky is considered the most significant work of Merezhkovsky in the genre of literary research and was subsequently recognized as the most detailed and accurate study of Leo Tolstoy's work.
The essay is partly devoted to the history of Russian literature, but also reflects Merezhovsky's changing perception of the world. The ideological basis for the essay was founded upon the dilemma between Christianity and Paganism. Alexander Men noted that Tolstoy was described as a pagan "a secret seer of flesh", which was contrary to the "seer of spirit" of Fyodor Dostoyevsky. In his research, Merezhovsky continued to look for a synthesis between the Old Testament, which spoke of the flesh, and the New Testament, which spoke of the spirit.
Merezhovsky was not the first author to analyse the work of Tolstoy. In 1856, Nikolay Chernyshevsky wrote the article "Childhood and Adolescence. War Stories by Count Leo Tolstoy". Dmitry Pisarev wrote the articles "Lapses into Immature Thought" about the narratives "Childhood", "Adoloscence", "Youth"; and "Old Nobility" regarding the novel "War and Peace". Analyses of Tolstoy were also carried out by contemporaries Nikolay Nekrasov, Saltykov-Schedrin, Nikolay Mikhaylovsky, Maxim Gorky, and Veresaev, however Merezhovsky was later recognized by many as providing the most detailed and thorough analysis of them all.
Background By the beginning of the 20th century, Merezhkovsky was heavily engaged in getting to grips with issues related to Christianity and the Church Cathedral. G. Adamovich, in his article “Merezhkovsky”, recalled that “if a conversation was really lively and if there was tension present, then sooner or later Merezhovsky would fall back on his favourite subject — the significance and meaning of the Gospel. Up until the word 'Gospel' was uttered, a dispute remained superficial and the interlocutors had the sense they were playing hide and seek." Having determined the course of his philosophical quest for the history of Russian literature, Merezhkovsky decided to articulate it by contrasting Russian literature's two classics.
In the meantime, the "Determination of the Holy Synod No. 557 with a message to the faithful children of the Orthodox Greek-Russian Church about Count Leo Tolstoy" was published on 23 February 1901, at which point Tolstoy's fierce conflict with the church unfolded. As a whole, the Russian Intelligentsia sympathized with the writer. The press published satiric essays and pamphlets directed against the Synod and parodies of Pobedonostsev.
"His name was on everyone's lips, all eyes were turned on Yasnaya Polyana: the existence of Leo Tolstoy was felt in every fiber of the spiritual life of the country, every minute of the day", recalled P.P. Pertsov. "We have two Tsars: Nicolas II and Leo Tolstoy. Which of them is stronger? Nicholas II cannot harm Tolstoy in any way and can't steal away his throne, whereas Tolstoy undoubtedly shakes the foundations of Nicholas II's throne and dynasty", wrote Aleksey Suvorin.
After the deterioration of Tolstoy's health at the address of "Torquemada"-Pobedonostsev, definitive threats were uttered within the radical student community. "At the present time, students' heads are spinning with the anticipated death of Tolstoy. Under such circumstances, prudence requires me to vacate Moscow, where it is impossible to hide," wrote Pobedonostsev.
Merezhkovsky very openly expressed support for the church's position, however, he noted in a letter to the Chairman of the Neophilological Society, Alexander Veselovsky, "My attitude towards Tolstoy, although entirely censored, is not hostile, rather sympathetic."
Content
Merezhovsky formulated the main concept behind the essay in the preface to the Collected Works. The book, he said, was dedicated to the struggle between the two principles in Russian literature, the opposition of the two truths — the Divine Truth and the Human Truth. The author considers Tolstoy to be the successor of the "earthly principal, the Human Truth" in Russian literature, and Dostoevsky to be the bearer of the spiritual principle, the Divine Truth. When comparing the two writers, Merezhovsky tracks the origins of their work back to Alexander Pushkin: "He [Tolstoy] and Dostoevsky are both akin and opposite to each other, just as the most powerful branches of a tree are; diverging in opposite directions at the top, while fused into one trunk at their base. "Four of the seven chapters of the book contain an assessment of Tolstoy the artist, in which Merezhovsky provides a detailed appraisal of the writer's art. Merezhovsky defines Tolstoy's main artistic technique as a transition "from visible to invisible, from external to internal, from physical to spiritual" or at the very least, "instinctual".Мережковский Д. С. «Л. Толстой и Достоевский». Мережковский Д. С. Полн. собр. соч: В 24 т. Т. 10. стр.8. М.
The author believed that only by revealing the "secrets of the flesh", Tolstoy approaches an understanding of the "secrets of the spirit." Dostoevsky, on the other hand, moves from the inner to the outer, from spiritual to physical. As a substantiation of his thesis, Merezhkovsky developed the idea that Tolstoy offers the reader a lot of artistic details which help to reveal the inner essence of each hero. Dostoevsky's portraits appear rigid, however they take flight in a reader's imagination thanks to their spiritual content.
Merezhovsky scrutinized Tolstoy's relationship with nature, deeming it to be "divided" — for the Christian Tolstoy, nature is "something dark, evil, bestial, even demonic...", however from his unconscious Pagan tendencies he believed that "man blends in with nature, disappears in it like a drop in the ocean".Мережковский Д. С. «Л. Толстой и Достоевский». Мережковский Д. С. Полн. собр. соч: В 24 т. Т. 10. стр.36. М.
On exploring the "hidden acts" within Tolstoy's works, Merezhovsky notes that the author perceives his craft to be "imperceptible, too ordinary" to present as unusual. The author believes that Tolstoy was the first to uncover a revelation which had escaped the attention of other writers Мережковский Д. С. «Л. Толстой и Достоевский». Мережковский Д. С. Полн. собр. соч: В 24 т. Т. 10. стр.22. М." that a smile is reflected not only upon the face, but also in the sound of a voice; a voice, just like a face, can smile".
Merezhovsky considers yet another strength of Tolstoy's to be his extraordinary ability to reinvent himself, his ability to feel what others feel "in respect of their personality, age, unbringing, class...".Мережковский Д. С. «Л. Толстой и Достоевский». Мережковский Д. С. Полн. собр. соч: В 24 т. Т. 10. стр.24. М. "His emotional experience is inexhaustible, it is as if he has lived a hundred of lives in other peoples' and animals' bodies," writes the author. According to Merezhovsky, it is thanks to Tolstoy's great "emotional experience" that he has an extraordinary ability to portray "that part of flesh which is inclined towards the spirit, and that part of the spirit which is inclined towards the flesh - that mysterious area where Beast and God struggle together".Мережковский Д. С. «Л. Толстой и Достоевский». Мережковский Д. С. Полн. собр. соч: В 24 т. Т. 10. стр.26-27. М.
"Leo Tolstoy's attitude towards Christianity"
Originally "aesthetic" complaints were made against Merezohvsky, however these soon gave way to "social and ideological complaints". This came about after February 6, 1901 (shortly before the publication of "Definition"), when Merezhovsky read the paper "Leo Tolstoy's attitude towards Christianity" at the Philosophical Society of Saint Petersburg Imperial University. The reading, which took place in the Council Hall of the Saint Petersburg Imperial University, lead to a heated debate that dragged on well past midnight. Yuri Zobnin noted that among the intelligentsia, Merezhovsky clearly "swam against the tide of opinion, it was learned of immediately and caused an immediate negative reaction," as a result no-one delved further into the nuances of his critique of "Tolstoy's religion".
Immediately after Merezhovsky's paper "Leo Tolstoy's attitude towards Christianity", an angry rebuke from the populist publicist Alexander Protopopov appeared in the press: "This paper makes a bad impression. You can love and hate Tolstoy, you can agree and disagree with him, but butchering Tolstoy "like a fool"... is akin to...a nursery rhyme about an elephant and a pug..." he wrote. In addition to this, Protopopov gave Merezhovsky the following characterization: "Merezhkovsky was born a mere 35 years ago. After graduating from a historical and philological course, Mr. Merezhkovsky quickly assimilates himself into "good society" - he publishes his poems in the "Bulletin of Europe" and other reputable magazines. The original and translated versions are followed by critical articles and historical novels. Thanks to the copycat Nadson, Mr. Merezhkovsky becomes a populist, then a symbolist, and finally - an admirer of "pure beauty" and a Nietzschean, and most recently, clearly also consigns himself to Nietzscheism ... S. A. Vengerov characterizes Mr. Merezhkovsky as someone who is especially prone to "bookish moods": "Whatever the last book says to his soul, will remain uppermost ..." Such is Tolstoy's butcher. - "Odessa News". 1901. No. 5241The liberal press launched a campaign against Merezhovsky; for example, Merezhkovsky's paper was deemed an invocation of "St. Bartholomew's Night" ("Eastern Review" 1901, No. 85). Protesting, Merezhkovsky penned a letter to the editorial offices of the capital's newspapers, in which he pointed out the unacceptable pressure being exerted on him - condemning it as the "oppression of public opinion." The letter merely caused a fresh wave of mockery: “In one of Garshin's stories, a lizard hatches, whose tail has been torn off 'for her beliefs.' With G. Merezhkovsky's protest he likens himself to this lizard, the only difference is that the “tail” of Mr. Merezhkovsky is intact: there is not one who thinks it worthwhile in tearing it off”, - wrote the newspaper“ Novosti ”(1901. № 149).
Reviews from Critics