Thumb Up Thumb Down Attach media
  • in the 18th century, under the personal initiatives of peter the great, a significant wave of westernization swept through russia. the country began adapting western ideas in philosophy, art, and science. russia pursued urbanization and industrialization through a top-down, state-led approach, and these changes significantly influenced art and literature, offering these fields new opportunities.

    the unique conditions of russia blended with western thought to create a distinctive synthesis, carrying both material and spiritual elements. the most striking urban symbol of this synthesis is st. petersburg. it is no coincidence that many of russia's most iconic works of art and literature were created by artists and novelists living in this city, built entirely on a swamp with distinctly western architecture. writers like pushkin, gogol, and dostoevsky produced their extraordinary works in st. petersburg, not only because it was a center of the russian empire but because it represented the intersection of local russian culture and western influence. for the same reason, st. petersburg played a pivotal role in the literary careers of turgenev and tolstoy.

    the "virtuous yet free" 19th century

    in short, russian literature, which produced some of the world's greatest novelists and classics, achieved these feats in just one century and within almost a single city: 19th-century st. petersburg. the 20th-century russian novelist vladimir nabokov, himself born in st. petersburg, attributed another reason to this concentration of literary brilliance: the "incompetence" of 19th-century russian censors.

    according to nabokov, the state censors of 19th-century russia were quick to ban obscene works but often failed to understand subtle political allusions, leaving such writings untouched. while this forced russian authors to write their novels in a "chaste" manner, it also granted them considerable freedom to explore political and social ideas.

    the decline in the 20th century

    the inability of this great literary tradition to sustain itself in the 20th century was largely due to the changing political system. the new soviet regime adopted a highly intrusive and pragmatic approach, controlling nearly every aspect of society.

    following the 1917 revolution, the censorship mechanisms of the ussr became far more sophisticated, complex, and educated compared to those of the russian empire. literature was now subordinated to the needs of the system, and the idea of "art for art's sake" was wholly replaced by the motto "art for the people." any attempt to challenge this new motto was harshly banned or exiled.

    in such a stifling environment, the only widely recognized 20th-century russian authors were system opponents like boris pasternak and vladimir nabokov, who wrote their works abroad. as a result, when most readers think of russian literature today, they typically refer to its 19th-century achievements.

    "the best" in 23,000 pages

    nabokov, who taught literature for many years at cornell university in the u.s. and achieved fame with his novel lolita, focused exclusively on the 19th century in his lectures on russian literature. he claimed that the finest examples of russian prose and poetry collectively amounted to only 23,000 pages—a relatively small volume compared to european and american literature, yet substantial enough to stand alongside them. in his book lectures on russian literature, nabokov's canon includes pushkin, gogol, turgenev, dostoevsky, tolstoy, chekhov, and gorky, suggesting that russian literature is essentially defined by these figures.

    admiration and resentment

    nabokov ranked these authors in order of greatness: tolstoy as the greatest, followed by gogol, chekhov, and turgenev. dostoevsky, conspicuously absent from this list, was the subject of nabokov's peculiar disdain. throughout his lectures, nabokov referred to dostoevsky as a mediocre writer whose works, in his view, lacked artistic value. he famously wrote, "i can't wait to debunk dostoevsky," and described crime and punishment as a "cheap literary trick," notes from underground as "100% banal," the idiot as a "series of clumsy blows rather than an artist's touch," demons as a "play disguised as a novel," and the brothers karamazov as a "detective story in the guise of a novel" or a "peculiar vaudeville script."

    dostoevsky's "best" work is his "worst"

    ironically, nabokov considered dostoevsky's the double—widely regarded as one of his weakest works—to be his best, though he dismissed it as a mere imitation of gogol. nonetheless, many literary critics have argued that nabokov's lolita owes much to dostoevsky's a gentle creature, and that characters like humbert humbert in lolita were inspired by stavrogin in demons and svidrigailov in crime and punishment. this dynamic suggests that nabokov's complex relationship with dostoevsky, marked by both admiration and resentment, may have shaped his personal bias against him.

    nabokov's genius

    despite nabokov's overt hostility toward dostoevsky, the other sections of his lectures on russian literature, recently published in english, offer valuable insights and commentary. his brilliance permeates much of the book, captivating readers and igniting their curiosity. for seasoned readers of russian literature, the book provides a compelling perspective on the trajectory of 19th-century russian authors within the interplay of state, critics, and audiences. however, beginners may find its depth more challenging to navigate.