Problems with the Preaching (1)
Over the 150 years that people have been reading “The Death
of Ivan Ilyich,” what probably has bothered most about the story is the morally
edifying tone. As if Tolstoy were shouting out not only to those of the Russian
upper classes of the 1880s—Ivan Ilyich, his colleagues, his family, all of
aristocratic and bureaucratic Russia—but also to anyone else within listening
distance, including a multitude of readers in countries all over the world: “Repent!”
Of course, nobody in the story hears the shouts, and one
reason the story is effective is that no one in the story is listening. None of
the characters stops and says, “Well, yes, I’m leading a dull bourgeois
existence, just as Ivan Ilyich did, and if I don’t change my ways soon, when I’m
dead and gone my life will count for nothing.” But what if we could take a
survey of all readers of the story over the past 150 years. How many of them
would have taken heed of the shouting? I suspect very few. Didactic writing, I
suspect, only very infrequently brings about the changes in the moral fabric of
humanity that the didactic writer hopes for.
Tolstoy is hoping for the impossible. Not only does he aim
at making people transform their lives, become more moral; he also wants us to
look our own death in the face, and practically no one wants to do that (see
discussion in previous blog notes). One thing that this story does is make your
side hurt. My side always hurts when I read about the pain in Ivan Ilyich’s floating
kidney. Fortunately, the side stops hurting when I put down the book. But after
countless readings of this story over the years, it still never makes me want
to embrace rectitude and live a better life.
Then again, there is the
degree of moral corruption in most of the characters. The people in “Ivan
Ilyich” are bad, bad people, terrible hypocrites, totally selfish egotists. One
of Tolstoy’s strong points as a writer is his ability to delve into mundane
human acts of hypocrisy. We look at the way, say, that Ivan Ilyich’s wife,
Praskovya Fyodorovna, behaves at the funeral, in her interactions with Pyotr
Ivanovich. The way she weeps as if insincerely, the way she is largely
concerned with financial matters that will play upon her future. We think, Yes,
that is human nature. It’s despicable, of course, but people do behave like
that. Even in the scene when she finds herself wishing her husband’s death,
wishing herself rid of him, we think, Well, yes. Not many writers have the
daring to speak of such things, but Tolstoy is right. People do have that kind
of thoughts. The pure hatred that is exchanged between husband and wife at
several points in the story, is that what marriage is like? Unfortunately,
sometimes it is, and the creative artist in Tolstoy brilliantly portrays that
sad truth.
But are people really as bad as they are shown to be in this
story? On our deathbed is this what we have to look forward to on the part of
our family and friends? Total abandonment? Maybe so, but, then again, maybe
not. Praskovya Fyodorovna is a despicable person, is so portrayed throughout
the whole story, but readers may hope to find a better, nicer wife. They must
be out there somewhere, such wives. Seldom in life, one hopes, do we come upon
characters as rebarbative as Praskovya Fyodorovna.
The only positive character in the story is the peasant
servant Gerasim. Not only here, but also in many other works Tolstoy holds up
peasant morality, the peasant’s simple, wholesome attitude toward life as
exemplary. But in so doing he consistently downplays another aspect of the Russian
peasant mentality—the propensity, throughout Russian history, to engage in
merciless bloody violence. For that side of the peasant, read the stories of
Isaak Babel.
For a better balance between good and bad characters, Tolstoy
could have chosen to feature Ivan Ilyich’s schoolboy son in more scenes. The
boy obviously loves his father, he could be another positive character, but he
is featured in only two brief appearances. And each time he appears the moral
preacher Tolstoy cannot resist throwing in a disapproving, and totally
gratuitous insinuation about the evils of masturbation.
In a word, Tolstoy’s negative views of humanity sometimes
verge on hyperbole. At times the writer, methinks, doth protest too much.
No comments:
Post a Comment