Letters of Anton Chekhov to His Family and FriendsChekhov, Anton Pavlovich
General
Letters of Anton Chekhov to His Family and Friends
Chekhov, Anton Pavlovich
Authors, Russian -- 19th century -- Correspondence; Chekhov, Anton Pavlovich, 1860-1904 -- Correspondence
What writers belonging to the upper class have received from nature for
nothing, plebeians acquire at the cost of their youth. Write a story of how
a young man, the son of a serf, who has served in a shop, sung in a choir,
been at a high school and a university, who has been brought up to respect
everyone of higher rank and position, to kiss priests’ hands, to reverence
other people’s ideas, to be thankful for every morsel of bread, who has
been many times whipped, who has trudged from one pupil to another without
goloshes, who has been used to fighting, and tormenting animals, who has
liked dining with his rich relations, and been hypocritical before God and
men from the mere consciousness of his own insignificance--write how this
young man squeezes the slave out of himself, drop by drop, and how waking
one beautiful morning he feels that he has no longer a slave’s blood in his
veins but a real man’s....
March 5, 1889.
... Last night I drove out of town and listened to the gypsies. They sing
well, the wild creatures. Their singing reminds me of a train falling off a
high bank in a violent snow-storm: there is a lot of turmoil, screeching
and banging.
... I bought Dostoevsky in your shop and am now reading him. It is fine,
but very long and indiscreet. It is over-pretentious.
* * * * *
SUMY,
LINTVARYOVS’ ESTATE,
May, 1889.
... Among other things I am reading Gontcharov and wondering. I wonder how
I could have considered Gontcharov a first-rate writer. His “Oblomov” is
not really good. Oblomov himself is exaggerated and is not so striking as
to make it worth while to write a whole book about him. A flabby sluggard
like so many, a commonplace, petty nature without any complexity in it: to
raise this person to the rank of a social type is to make too much of him.
I ask myself, what would Oblomov be if he had not been a sluggard? And I
answer that he would not have been anything. And if so, let him snore in
peace. The other characters are trivial, with a flavour of Leikin about
them; they are taken at random, and are half unreal. They are not
characteristic of the epoch and give one nothing new. Stoltz does not
inspire me with any confidence. The author says he is a splendid fellow,
but I don’t believe him. He is a sly brute, who thinks very well of himself
and is very complacent. He is half unreal, and three-quarters on stilts.
Olga is unreal and is dragged in by the tail. And the chief trouble is that
the whole novel is cold, cold, cold. I scratch out Gontcharov from the list
of my demi-gods.
But how direct, how powerful is Gogol, and what an artist he is! His
“Marriage” alone is worth two hundred thousand roubles. It is simply
delicious, and that is all about it. He is the greatest of Russian writers.
In “The Inspector General” the first act is the best, in “The Marriage” the
third act is the worst. I am going to read it aloud to my people.
* * * * *
May 4, 1889.
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