Generalization before the midterm that most 19th
century thinkers believers in progress. Belief in progress
widespread throughout the 19th century/reflected also in
the Art, Music, and Literature, produced during that period.
Most 19th century European artists, musicians writers shared
that century's faith in inevitable progress. Most--but not all.
One exception, Dostoyevsky. Dostoyevsky's writings offer
convincing evidence that faith in progress is often
misguided, and show that real progress can only be made by
changing people's hearts.
Now to understand Dostoyevsky, its important to look
at the main trends in art, music, and literature in the 19th
century--first of all, Romanticism. Romanticism dominant
trend in first half of the 19th century.
Romanticism developed in large part as a reaction to the
18th century's over-emphasis of reason. Romantics thought
that real progress came, not through reason, but through
the release/expression of our emotions. For the Romantic,
nature was good, and man's natural impulses were good. What
was bad was that which was artificial, that which inhibited
the emotions and destroyed nature.
Particularly this was so for the type of individual the
romantic called the genius. The restraint of one's natural
impulses was bad in general, but for the genius in particular,
restraint of natural emotions was bad.
Now what was the result of all this emphasis on
emotion/love of nature? Some of the most impressive works of
art, music, and literature ever created.
In music, Romantic movement produced Chopin, Wagner,
Tschakovsky, Liszt, Schumann, Schubert--any movement that
produces a Chopin has to be doing something right!
Romantic movement really does affect our emotions. (Scary
scene/sense of danger? Romantic music. Love scene?
Romantic
music. Sense of mysterious? The romantics.
In literature too Romantic movement produced some
exceedingly impressive stuff, particularly in poetry: Keats,
Byron, Shelley, Tennyson--some of finest poetry in English
language: "I am Ozymandias, king of kings, look on me ye
mighty and despair." "Beauty is truth, truth beauty--that is
all
ye know on earth or need to know." "A thing of beauty is a joy
forever:its loveliness increases; it will never pass into
nothingness." "But O for the touch of a vanished hand, and
the sound of a voice that is still."
Feelings of sadness, joy, mystery, and especially love of
beauty--expressed as well as the human tongue can manage.
Very impressive.
Painting, too, Romantics very impressive--Constable,
Turner, Gericault--very impressive.
But some problems with romantic world view. Remember,
romantics viewed emotion as good, especially the greatest of
all emotions love. Now even the apostle Paul would agree
that love is the most important thing of all--but what the
Romantics had in mind was not the agape love described by
Paul--but eros--sexual love. The romantics regarded sexual
love as the answer to all one's problems, the main thing in
life.
Now this is plausible enough at first, and I suppose that
most people have some times in their lives when this does seem
to be the truth. But there are some real problems here.
Suppose one finds the love of one's life--has that passionate
love affair. All of life's problems over? Not by a long
shot!
So most of us would conclude: well, maybe sexual love
isn't really the answer--but not the romantics. Sexual love
must be answer, and so, if this particular relationship doesn't
meet all my needs, then... And of course the new partner
supplies everything you need to make life happy? And...
Romantics constantly flitting from partner to partner.
Didn't make them happy--quite the reverse. I've told you
several times that one of the keys to human happiness is a
stable marriage--and the romantics deliberately chose not to
form stable marriages. Marriage bad--artificial--people should
need artificial contracts to hold them together. Maybe the
shouldn't--but they do--and the romantics, strong as their
emotions were, went through broken relationship after
broken relationship after broken relationship. And of course
the emphasis on emotion only made things worse. Because
what do you feel like when the love of your life leaves you?
(Shooting yourself? A natural impulse. An emotion.
Societal
taboo against suicide? Artificial restraint on the emotion.
And so if you feel like shooting yourself (or more likely
drinking yourself to death--do it.) I don't exaggerate: this
is
what really happened often enough among the Romantics.
(Sorrows of Young Werther.)
In the latter part of the 19th century, Romanticism began
to give way to another trend, Realism. The realists,
interestingly enough, based their ideas on the work of
Charles Darwin and his increasingly popular idea of natural
selection.
The realists, then, believers in inevitable progress. The
human species had emerged as a result of natural selection.
Each individual, although selfish to the core and looking
out for solely for his own interests, was at the same time
doing something that, in the long run, was good for the
species as a whole. The key to human progress, then, was simply
to act selfishly.
Now there is something a bit strange about this. Most of
the time selfishness looks like it does far more harm than
good. Now the realists were no fools. They knew that, quite
often enough, people acting selfishly brought about nothing
good at all, either for themselves or other people. Why is
this? The realists argued that this was because people simply
did not know where their real interests lay. It wasn't the
selfishness that was the problem: it was the fact that people
often did not see, or at least did not see fully, the
consequences of their actions. The key, then, to getting
selfishness to work properly for the advancement of the
human species was to get people to understand more
completely the real consequences of their actions. What was
needed: "enlightened self interest."
Now how do you enlighten people? Education? Well,
that's a start. But for realists it was the artists and writers
who could do the best job showing people what reality was
really like--and this was the task they took on themselves.
Realist writers did their best to depict life as it actually is in
their short stories and novels. They did to present realistic
situations in their plays and paintings. Most frequently,
depictions were of the seemier side of life--showing the affect
of drunkeness, poverty, etc. They idea was that by showing
these things, by showing unpleasant realities, people would
face up to the true consequences of their actions. They
would continue to act selfishly--but their selfishness would
be directed along more constructive lines.
Interestingly enough, the realists believed that people
would have to become better once they understood the true
state of reality. They did not believe in free will--they believed
that everyone simply took whatever course seemed most
advantageous to them--and that once you showed them that
the true advantage lay in acting well--they would have to do
what's right.
Now the Realist movement did not produce the great
works of art that the Romantic movement did. The works of
the great "realist" writers, people like Chernechevsky and
Gerhart Hauptmann, aren't very entertaining. But Realist
ideas have had a great deal of impact on modern world,
standing behind all sorts of reform movements. And many
people today still advocate the realist solution to problems.
An example of this: values clarification, some of you familiar.
Where does Dostoyevsky fit in to all this? Much in
common with both the Romantics and the Realists. And in his
younger days, he shared their faith in invevitable progress.
Further, he was determined to do his own part in helping his
own country, Russia, along the road to progrees. Partly
through his writing: his first book, "Poor Folk" is a
sentimental tear jerker, combining a realist depiction of the
conditions of working class people with the romantics
insights into their feelings and emotions. But Dostoyevsky
going to do more than write: take action. Joined a radical
socialist movement that was determined to bring about major
changes in Russian society. Didn't get very far. Imprisoned.
Sentenced to death--reprieved--but 10 years in Siberia. The
experience changed him completely. Emerged from prison a
bitter man--but not so much bitter against the Tsar--bitter
against the ideas that he felt were destroying him and those
around him--the ideas of men like Hegel, Darwin, Comte, the
Realists.
And he began to write again--producing probably the
finest novels ever written. The Possessed, The Idiot, the
Brothers Karamazov, Crime and Punishment. I really would
like to have had you read some of these books--unfortunately,
average about 500 pages--few of you would have read. So
instead, I assign a couple of shorter works. Not Dostoyevsky
at his best, but works in which his ideas come across clearly
enough.
First "Dream of Ridiculous Man." Simple enough story.
The
nameless narrator describes a transforming event in his life--
a dream. But a dream that came about in a rather odd way.
Before the dream, he had a meaningless, unhappy life--so
meaningless and unhappy he wanted to kill himself. But he
couldn't bring himself even to do that--no motivation at all
for anything. Until one day, he sees a star: today's the day.
Why? No reason--we act illogically. But something stops
him.
Little girl crying out about her mommy. He doesn't help her--
but it bothers him that he doesn't: if he's going to be dead,
what dif. does it make whether he helps her or not? Can't kill
himself until he figures this one out. And while thinking it
over, he falls asleep--and dreams.
First--dreams that he has shot himself: but not in the
head, as he intended, but in the heart: Dostoyevsky suggesting
to us that our real problems are heart problems, not head
problems. Then another surprise. He's still aware--suicide
didn't end it all. And this annoys him--he wanted
annihilation, to cease to be, for everything to cease to be: but
it doesn't work that way. And then a pleasant surprise: taken
to another world, where he is happy: where everyone is happy.
Why? Because of advanced technology? No--simply because
everyone loves one another. That, says Dos. would be a truly
wonderful world.
But next comes the typical Dostoyevsky twist: the
Ridiculous Man ends up corrupting this marvelous new
world. Note the progress of evil:
People begin to lie/and love lies
Then sensuality, a pref. of physical desire over doing
right
Then jealousy
Then cruelty
Then bloodshed
Then disunity among people
Then and estrangement of animals and people
Then people beginning to speak different languages
And finally a world filled with despair/death/misery
Does all this sound familiar? Where have you seen this
sequence of events before? (Genesis)
But not the end of story. Ridiculous man wakes up with
an answer: simple answer that he thinks would solve whole
problem. Answer: love others as you love yourself. Simple!
But
response? People laugh at him. Dostoyevsky's message: yes
their could be progress, we could lead happy lives. The answer
is simple enough, but we just won't put it into practice. And
if anyone tells us what the answer is and tries to put it into
practice, if anyone truly tries to love others as themselves, we
treat him like a fool, we mock him, and we ridicule him. And
if
that doesn't work, of course, we crucify him.
See you next time.
(Pp. 140-203 of Notes enough).