Russian literature -- 19th century -- History and criticism
convicts behaved in many ways like schoolboys; in fact, in one place
Dostoievsky says that in many respects they were exactly like children.
He quotes, for instance, their delight in spending the little money
they could get hold of on a smart linen shirt and a belt, and walking
round the whole prison to show it off. They did not keep such finery
long, and nearly always ended by selling it for almost nothing; but
their delight while they possessed it was intense. There was, however,
one curious item in their code of morals, which is singularly unlike
that of schoolboys in England, in Russia, or in any other country:
they had no horror of a man who told tales to the authorities, who, in
schoolboy language, was a sneak. “The Sneak” did not expose himself
to the very smallest loss of caste. Indignation against him was an
unthinkable thing: nobody shunned him, people were friends with him;
and if you had explained in the prison the whole odiousness of his
behaviour, they would not have understood you at all.
“There was one of the gentlemen prisoners, a vicious and mean fellow,
with whom from the first moment I would have nothing to do. He made
friends with the major’s orderly, and became his spy; and this man
told everything he heard about the prisoners to the major. We all knew
this, and nobody ever once thought of punishing or even of blaming the
scoundrel.”
This is the more remarkable from the fact that in Russian schools,
and especially in those schools where military discipline prevails,
sneaking is the greatest possible crime. In speaking of another man
who constantly reported everything to the authorities, Dostoievsky
says that the other convicts despised him, not because he sneaked, but
because he did not know how to behave himself properly.
The convicts, although they never showed the slightest signs of remorse
or regret for anything they had done in the past, were allowed by
their etiquette to express, as it were officially, a kind of outward
resignation, a peaceful logic, such as, “We are a fallen people. We
could not live in freedom, and now we must break stones.... We could
not obey father and mother, and now we must obey the beating of the
drum.” The criminals abused each other mercilessly; they were adepts
in the art, more than adepts, artists. Abuse in their hands became a
science and a fine art; their object was to find not so much the word
that would give pain, as the offensive thought, the spirit, the idea,
as to who should be most venomous, the most razor-like in his abuse.
Another striking characteristic which also reminds one of schoolboys,
was that the convict would be, as a rule, obedient and submissive in
the extreme. But there were certain limits beyond which his patience
was exhausted, and when once this limit was overstepped by his warders
or the officer in charge, he was ready to do anything, even to commit
murder, and feared no punishment.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account