The First Biography of N.G. Černyševskij: An Exercise in Canonization

Russian Literature XL VIII (2000) 333-350 North-Holland

www.elsevier.nl/Iocate/ruslit

THE FIRST BIOGRAPHY OF N.G. CERNYSEVSKIJ: AN EXERCISE IN CANONIZATION

JONATHAN HILL BROWN, STEPHAN KUPPER, CLAUDIA ROTH, CORNELIA SOLDAT

This is how Fyodor Godunov-Cherdyntsev, the fictitious author of Nikolaj Gavrilovi~ Cemy~evskij's biography in Vladimir Nabokov's The Gift (Dar), identifies one particular feature of Cemy~evskij's life: His biographers mark his thorny path with evangelical signposts (it is well known that the more leftist the Russian commentator the greater is his weakness for expressions like "the Golgotha of the revolution"). Chernyshevski's passions began when he reached Christ's age. Here the role of Judas was filled by Vsevolod Kostomarov; the role of Peter by the famous poet Nekrasov, who declined to visit the gaoled man. Corpulent Herzen, ensconced in London, called Chernyshevski's pillory column "The companion piece of the Cross". And in a famous Nekrasov iambic there was more about the Crucifixion, about the fact that Chernyshevski had been "sent to remind the earthly kings of Christ". Finally, when he was completely dead and they were washing his body, that thinness, that steepness of the ribs, that darkpallor of the skin and those long toes vaguely reminded one of his intimates of "The Removal from the Cross" - by Rembrandt, is it? But even this isn't the end of the theme: there is still the posthumous outrage, without which no holy life is complete. Thus the silver wreath with the inscription on its ribbon TO THE APOSTLE OF TRUTH FROM THE INSTITUTIONSOF HIGHER EDUCATION OF THE CITY OF KHARKOV was stolen five years later from the ironworked chapel; moreover the cheerful sacrilegist

0304-3479/00/$ - see front matter © 2000 Published by Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII: S0304-3479(00)00066-1

334 Jonathan Hill Brown, Stephan K~ipper, Claudia Roth, Cornelia Soldat

broke the dark-red glass and scratched his name and the date on the frame with a splinter of it. (Nabokov 1963: 205-206) Nabokov's fictitious author is, of course, being ironic in interpreting Cerny~evskij's life as the life of a saint. The irony works in two ways. On the one hand, it aims at 12emy~evskij himself, who appears as a saint while having been ideologically at loggerheads with the established Orthodox church all his life. On the other hand, it is directed against his biographers who "mark his thorny path with evangelical signposts", a fact which, too, was completely at odds with their professed atheism. Nabokov, for one, wouldvjum p at this irony for purely ideological reasons. However, the fact that Cerny~evskij was portrayed as a saint by his contemporaries makes for an interesting investigation into the cultural mechanisms involved in this "canonization". Methodologically, we shall use a semiotic approach. In semiotic terms, behaviour can be described as a text, i.e. an ordered sequence of signs. These signs are made up of more or less arbitrarily defined segments of a person's life that are liable to be invested with a particular meaning and then subsumed under a general pattern. Since this semiotization of life can take its origin both from the point of view of the actual person in question and from the point of view of an external observer, it is possible to shape one's life as well as interpret someone else's behaviour according to an existing model (Pjatigorskij, Uspenskij 1967; for concrete analyses see e.g. Lotman 1994). Russian Orthodox hagiography provided one such model that possessed both clearly defined attributes and a high axiological value in society. Moreover, hagiography had an educational function, and Saints' lives were used mainly to set examples to be emulated by the listeners or readers (Jablonskij 1908: 231,233). Consequently, their aim was not to describe the actual facts of a saint's biography, but to reveal the ideal through the example of his or her particular life. This model was codified in a large number of texts. In outlining the model, we shall avoid discussions about genre classifications and define hagiography simply as any text that to some extent describes the life of one or several saints. It is a truth universally acknowledged that hagiographic literature follows a set of quite narrowly defined topical rules. This makes it all the more easy to take it as a model in the semiotic sense of the word. We shall only briefly list the most common topoi connected with the description of saints' lives, restricting ourselves to narrative units and neglecting rhetorical topoi. Our description follows the works of Klju6evskij (1871: 429f., 435), Jablonskij (1908: 235-237) and Ignatiew (1976: 39-41), which are based on the evaluation of numerous ~itija by various hagiographers. Saints are invariably born to God-fearing parents. Their sainthood becomes apparent in childhood, frequently expressed through self-restraint in

Cernygevskij's First Biography

335

food, drink, and games. Parents who chide their children for this are rebuked by them and reminded that the welfare of the soul stands above the welfare of the body. Future saints are good at school: from an early age they study the Scriptures, showing amazing prowess. Sometimes an initially retarded child is miraculously transformed into an exceptional pupil. As youths they embark on their first saintly feats, which may vary to a great degree. After taking holy orders - in which their parents or other persons may try to hinder them they show particular obedience towards the abbot and their fellow brethren and distinguish themselves through ascetic and other feats. Their reputation rises, and they begin to gather a following. This is particularly important as it is the precondition for veneration (Ignatiew 1976: 39). Also, they gradually rise in the ecclesiastic hierarchy. They resist the devil's temptations and overcome evil spirits working against them. As a result, the saints work miracles for the community, heal the sick, raise the dead etc. While being hard on themselves, they show generosity and kindness to those around them. Frequently they also found new monasteries or churches. They often foresee their own death, giving their last instructions to the community. Although saints live to an old age, they die healthy in body and spirit and are deeply mourned. Often their funeral is accompanied by miracles, and invariably they work miracles after death, this being the ultimate proof of their sainthood. It is our firm belief that the label of "saint" for t~ernygevskij is more than a rhetorical commonplace carelessly and self-contradictingly applied by writers of materialist persuasion, as Nabokov's fictitious author implies. At the same time, it is not an ironic derision in the way Godunov-Cherdyntsev uses it. We believe that in mid-19th-century Russia, Cernygevskij played a role similar to medieval saints. While meeting the demands of the day, he followed certain rules of behaviour that were reminiscent of hagiographic literature and which could therefore be easily recognized and evaluated by his contemporaries. Moreover, not only did his writings provide new models of behaviour, but Cernygevskij could himself act as a role model as well as demonstrate through his very life that the new theoretical teachings could actually be put into practice. In this, his person stood for the validity of his teachings. This relates to a central feature of sainthood: the saint is the tangible image of a higher, intangible truth. His very existence as an icon of this truth guarantees its existence. As early as 1864, shortly after (~emygevskij's civil execution and exile to Siberia, there appeared a brief description of his life in the 15 October 1864 issue of Gercen's 6migr6 paper, Kolokol. 2 For a long time this was the only existing biography of CernySevskij and can therefore be supposed to be seminal in shaping public opinion on Cemygevskij's life. This biography has all but been forgotten and, despite its status, has not been included in the two 3 standard Vospominano'a sovremennikov. There is good reason to believe that it is precisely this brief text which is responsible for CernySevskij's "canon-

336 Jonathan Hill Brown, Stephan Kupper, Claudia Roth, Cornelia Soldat

ization" as it possesses all the topoi of a ~itie. It has to be stressed that the main facts of Cerny~evskij's life are rendered correctly, albeit from a specific angle, although we have not been able to verify some anecdotes. In particular, these are the rejection of the gold medal, the details on (~erny~evskij's father and the "conversion" of the Saratov dinovnil6 - all of which add significantly to (~ernygevskij's canonization. Tellingly, the article begins with the words "nes6astnyj mu6enik nelepogo despotizma" (1558). It then goes on to praise Cemy~evskij's father, Gavriil Ivanovi6, who was immensely popular with the poor inhabitants of Saratov for his wisdom, honesty and good deeds. The apostrophe of the saint's parents as pious and God-fearing is a common topos in hagiography. However, it is precisely this fact which presents a problem for a biographer who, to say the least, has a critical attitude towards the Orthodox church. With his resum~ "Eto byl ne pop, ili, po krajnej mere, o~en' malo pop" (1558), the biographer rescues Gavriil Ivanovi6's reputation in a most curious twist: while saints' parents have to be pious and god-fearing, t~erny~evskij's father, who was just that, must be exempted from the usual accusations made against the practice of the Russian clergy in order to qualify as a father worthy of his son. Young Nikolaj is then portrayed as an exceptionally gifted pupil with a particular talent for foreign languages as well as Bible studies. Here the biographer saves himself and his subject by explaining that after finishing school, "Nikolaj Gavrilovi~ po~uv~voval duchotu toj atmosfery, v kotoroj on dvigalsja" (1558), implying that Cerny~evskij already had within him the seeds of future sainthood. Cerny~evskij, with the aid of his father, moved to Petersburg. There he became involved in the study of philosophy and after some months of seclusion emerged as a new man ("novym 6elovekom", 1558, italics original), quickly rising to first place among his fellow students and even outshining his professors. A conversion experience is, though not typical, also a commonplace in saints' lives and harks back to St Paul's conversion in Damascus (Acts 9: 3-19). 4 There follows an anecdote which serves as the equivalent of a miracle: Cerny~evskij had written an article that was to qualify him for a gold medal. Upon hearing that one good and industrious fellow student also aspired to this award, Cerny~evskij withdrew his article and conceded the medal to him in all modesty and secrecy. Having finished his studies and following the wish of his loving and beloved mother, (~erny~evskij returned to his native Saratov and, for the time being, sacrificed his studies and his friends. There he worked as a teacher and for his unconventional manners quickly became as popular with his pupils as he was unpopular with the local high society. The former he taught wisely and without pretensions, even giving money to those who lacked boots; the latter he tried to convert to the path of wisdom through the power of his

Cernygevsko"s First Biography

337

bright nature. Here the biographer waxes almost Gogolian in his style (note the repeated use of"da~e"): ~a~e n3 qric~a 3THX3an~ecHeae~bixrocno~, He ollrtn GTa.iI,6aaroaapa qepHbltUeaCKOMy, qyBCTBOBaTb 3aTXJIOCTb oKpy~motttero Bo3~yxa, nepecTaBa.q 6paTh B3$1TKH, 6panca 3a KnHry, C rpexoM-nonohaM npoqHTblBa.q ee n, HaKoHeI.I, ~ a ~ e BblXO,RHJI B OTCTaBKy, qTO6 3aHIITbC~I qeM-l-lHry~b 6ozee COOTBeTCTByloIIIHM qe.qoBeqecKoMy ~OCTOHHCTBy.

3aczyra a'ra nonaTna B Poccnn, KTO 3HaKOM C qrlUOBnt,lqbrlM 6blTOM XOTbnecKom,KO. (1559) In Saratov, (~erny~evskij fell in love with Ol'ga Sokratovna Vasil'eva and began writing to his friends and teaching at school about the meaning of love and woman. He married and moved with her to Petersburg in 1853, shortly after his mother died. This and the fact that t~erny~evskij did not shed any tears during the funeral were badly received in Saratov society. The biographer hastens to assure his readers that, contrary to popular belief, this was not at all due to a lack of genuine affection for his mother on Cerny~evskij's part, but due to his contempt for false etiquette. Gavriil Ivanovi~ understood his son and remained proud of him all his life, in spite of rumours that t~erny~evskij's a~est shortly before his father's death had "killed him". The description of Cerny~evskij's relation to his parents is reminiscent of the way saints' parents, even if they sometimes resist their children's vocation, realize the merits of the path they have chosen. Now there begins the topical description of the obstacles that saints have to overcome. Back in Petersburg, Cerny~evskij quickly distinguished himself through the erudition which spoke from his first serious publication, a review of a book about Aristotle by the Moscow professor Ordynskij. Although (~erny~evskij wrote his review under pressure, almost without the aid of secondary sources and relying solely on his talent and knowledge, the biographer states that by his review, "on zadel za ~ivoe moskovskogo urenogo" (1559). Living in poor conditions, on the brink of poverty, (~erny~evskij completed his dissertation. Its subsequent defence coincides with another topos of saints' lives, the dispute between the saint and his opponents. Again, the biographer strikes an almost lyrical note: "Na dispute Cerny~evskij svoim tonkim, zvonkim golosom, s legkoj ironireskoj ulybkoj na gubach - 2ivo otra~al napadenija svoich neposil'nych opponentov" (1559). However, his views on art did not at all coincide with those of the minister of education who was present and whom the biographer calls v"ubogij telom i umom, polomnik Avraam Norov" (1559). Consequently, Cemy~evskij was denied his degree. Moreover, he fell out with the liberal inspector of the cadet school he was teaching at and forced to take his leave. All these features - the

338 Jonathan Hill Brown, Stephan Ku'pper, Claudia Roth, Cornelia Soldat wisdom, the struggles against adversaries - are typical for Saints' lives, too. There is even something like a temptation episode: (~emy~evskij was offered the editorship of the Sankt-Peterburgslde vedomosti, declined, then was offered the editorship of Voennyj sbornik. This (~emy~evskij accepted, but soon resigned from his post, since he, as the biographer remarks laconically, "kone~no, byl obmanut" (1560). t~erny~evskij found new employment with the leading liberal paper, Sovremennik, where he was made head of the critical and political department. "Togda to talant t~emy~evskogo javilsja vo vsem svoem bleske; on razom zanjal v literature mesto ostavavgeesja prazdnym so vremeni Belinskogo" (1560). His articles were read by progressive youths all over Russia, his influence was enormous, even on his adversaries. Yet he continued his quiet and withdrawn life, conversing mainly with students and working from morning to night. In short, Cerny~evskij was leading the typical life of a saint: tirelessly working for the community, gathering followers, but continuing his modest life untouched by temptation. With the advent of Alexander II's reign and the comparatively liberal atmosphere of the early sixties (which the biographer hastens to qualify as a mere posturing on the part of the Tsar), Cemy~evskij's popularity rose further, as did the attacks on him. The biographer names several debates in which (.~erny~evskij was involved. The treatment of these conflicts is telling. Not much detail is given. Instead, the biographer simply claims that (~ernygevskij expressed the thoughts and feelings of his entire generation in a clear and understandable way, while his opponents are portrayed as vile and hypocritical slanderers. The biographer closes his account of the struggles Cemy~evskij was involved in: "Ni~to odnako ne sokru~alo bodroj energii Cemy~evskogo, on znal, 6to ego 6itajut i ponimajut mnogie" (1560). Finally, Cemy~evskij's foes resorted to fabricated accusations against him and his circle, resulting in the arrest first of his friends, then of Cerny~evskij himself. Here the biographer strikes a decidedly biblical key: Omt peturlnrlcb BSOmO rt 6ectlepeMOHHO, Ha ocHoBanml nporl3Bona rt .rlIOTOGTHCBOefi, HaCJla31rlTbC~l I4 noTem14TbC~ rlajl CBOefi mepTaOfi [...]. BneqaTaeHHe, nporl3Be~leHHoe npotte~typofi Or~,SBaeHHS KOHqbHpMattmt qepr~bitUeBCKOMy 6blnO norpscammee; yrpo 1 mOH~ (13 HrOHS) XMyprmocl,, XO~OJlUbI~~ O ~ b o6aasa~ corpaBturmcs.(1560)

Who by this description would not be reminded of Christ's passion and crucifixion, particularly after Gercen's own famous description of the pillory column as "tovari~6 kresta" in the same paper, only four months earlier? 5 The biography lacks some topoi connected with a saint's death, such as his deathbed instructions to the community and the posthumous miracles. This is quite natural, since (~erny~evskij was still alive. However, in a differ-

Cernygevskij's First Biography

339

ent article on t~erny~evskij published in the preceding issue of Kolokol (No. 189, 15 September 1864, pp. 1549-1550) and signed with the letter Z, those elements are supplemented, v The article opens and closes with a quotation from Cto delat 7, the novel Cerny~evskij wrote while in prison: Foaopn me BceM: BOXqxo B 6y~lymeM, 6y~tymee caerno n npeKpacHo. f h o 6 u T e ero, cTpeMrlTeCb K HeMy, pa6oTafiTe ~na Hero, npn6Jm~afiTe e r o , HepeHOCHTe H3 Hero B HaCTOalUee, CKOJ'IbKOMOmeTe rlepeHecTH: Ha CTOJIbKO 6y~teT CBeTJIa H JIo6pa, 6oraTa pa31OCTblO H HacJIa)K/IeHHeM Bama mH3Hb, Ha CTOm,KOm,~ yMeeTe nepeHecTH B Hee 6yJlymero. CTpeMHTeCb K HeMy, pa6oTafiTe /Ina Hero, npH6Jmma~Te ero, nepeHOCHTe

Ha Hero B HaCToamee, qTO MOmeTe nepeHecTH. (1549, the quotation is taken from Vera Pavlovna' s fourth dream) The general tone of this article is to present Cerny~evskij as the innocent victim of a brutal regime which had never before acted so harshly against an opponent. Cerny~evskij is called "borec protiv temnogo carstva" (1550) and "lu6~ij u6itel' russkogo j uno~estva" (1550), again invoking hagiographic connotations. Finally, there is the author's commitment to the continuation of Cerny~evskij's work. Mbl rop~u )lopornM npaBOM 3BaTb ce6a eeo yqeHHKaMH, BOCHHTaHHHKaMH ego UlKOJIbl; Mbi rop}lbl 3THM, HOTOMy qTO qyBCTByeM, qTO MOmeM cJ~ymHTb HapoJIy XOTJI COTOIO JloJlelo e r o cJ~ymeHna H Hame cJ~ymeHHe He 6y~IeT 6eCl-fflO,tlHO-- HM pyKOBOJIHTTa HcKpeHHfla .rllO6OBb H TO HCTHHHOe yBa~eHne, KOTOpblM OH yqHJ1 H C KOTOpblM OH OTHOCHJ1Ca K Hapo~y H MOaOJIOMynoKoneHmo, nnaTnBmeMy eMy ropa'~nM BOBBpaTOMTex me '-IyBCTB...(1550) Here it is obvious that t~emy~evskij is treated like a deceased saint, Cto delat'? being his testament. This is no wonder. Cto delat'? is in itself a text charged with religious connotations, 6 of which the description of the "rigorist" Rachmetov (Ch. 3, pt. XXIX) is the most obviously hagiographic (Paperno 1988: 207f., Clark 1985: 49-51, Ziolkowski 1988: 191-195; Gtinther 1984: 103f.). Being an archpriest's son, t~erny~evskij was familiar with hagiographic literature to a degree that allowed him to isolate its specific traits and apply them to people from his native Saratov. He himself retold their histories in a clearly hagiographic mold that closely followed the models he knew from his father's Cet'i minei (Klimenko 1988: 187-190). The way Cerny~evskij treated his characters was such that it allowed them to become role models for Russia's revolutionary youth. 7 This stemmed directly from his own critical tenets. His main concern in his criticism was the social impact of literary works: the degree to which the writer portrayed social reality, the means he used, and the degree to which the work was

340 Jonathan Hill Brown, Stephan Kfipper, Claudia Roth, Cornelia Soldat

capable of forming social consciousness. This was a didactic goal, and the seeds he sowed in his teachings fell on fertile soil (Carli, Lehmann 1989: 3969, Paperno 1988: 16-20, 27-36 and passim). Consequently, Cto delat'? was regarded much like a sacred text. It attracted such descriptions as "a kind of Koran" (no source given, cited after Paperno 1988: 27), a "new gospel (in the words of contemporaries, the 'Scriptures' or a 'catechism' of 'the new faith', a 'socialist gospel')" (Paperno 1988: 195). It is no wonder that the bringer of this gospel was given the position of a "prophet of the young generation" (Paperno 1988:11). According to the plans laid out in Cto delat '?, communes were founded that tried to put Cerny~evskij's teachings into practice - an obvious analogy to gathering followers and founding a monastery. Of the many points that link ~to delat'? with hagiography, we shall only discuss one point that, again, coincides with traditional hagiographic topoi. 8 (~erny~evskij, who led an ascetic private life (see below), allows his "new men" a great deal of luxury in their private lives, which, after all, are meant to be a model for future generations. There is frequent merrymaking, most notably in the epilogue, and the heroine, Vera Pavlovna, is allowed to indulge in all sorts of small luxuries, such as oversleeping, bathing extensively, and drinking tea with more than a little cream in it - always provided that she does not neglect her civic duties. This echoes the "moderate asceticism" that was the rule in many Russian monasteries, starting with the very first monastery of significance on Russian soil, namely the Kievan cave monastery, and its second abbot, Feodosij. 9 In fact, Feodosij himself was an active and energetic organizer of the Kievan cave monastery's economy. Large parts of his ~itie are devoted to his managerial activities, thus extending the boundaries of traditional Byzantine hagiography (Adrianova-Peretc 1964: 48f.). And just as Feodosij's success is attributed to his faith, Cemy~evskij attributes the success of his "new men" to their acting according to scientifically sound principles - the principles of the "new faith" which he himself preached. Both cases are typical instances of virtue rewarded. The image of Cemy~evskij as a saint-like figure became fixed in Russian letters. The number of quotations that call him a prophet, a sufferer etc., or otherwise compare him and his work to hagiographic models is astonishing, although there seems to be no other text that so fully corresponds to the genre of ~itie as the first biography. It is difficult to ascertain whether these labels are influenced by the Kolokol article or part of a general rhetoric convention. In a society based on Christianity, quotations from the Scriptures or from hagiography are ready at hand. On the other hand, the rhetoric may be regarded as indicative of a sort of quasi-religious status granted to the materialist values embraced by the "progressive" part of Russian society. We shall now present further material for the case, arguing that in fact the latter was the case.

Cernygevskij's First Biography

341

As Nabokov's fictitious author as well as the Kolokol articles indicate, the myth of (~erny~evskij as a saint developed around (~erny~evskij's civil execution, which took place in Petersburg on 19 May 1864, following his two-year imprisonment in Petropavlovskaja kre~ost' and preceding his exile to Siberia. l0 This spectacle marked the loss of Cerny~evskij's civil rights and was watched by 2,000 sympathetic spectators. Cerny~evskij was chained to a pillar on a scaffold in the centre of Mytinskaja plo~ad' and a plate bearing the inscription "gosudarstvennyj prestupnik" was hung around his neck. After his sentence had been announced, a sword was broken over his head. (~erny~evskij's civil execution was easily interpretable as a "mock crucifixion" (Paperno 1988: 206). The first to do so in public was Aleksandr Gercen, who in an article written at the occasion and published in Kolokol calls thev pillar to which (~emy~evskij was chained "tovari~ kresta" (see above). Cerny~evskij's civil execution is thought to have inspired N.A. Nekrasov to write his poem 'Prorok', which ends with the lines: ")~l, ITb ./Jfil.q ce6fl BO3MO)KHO TOJIBKO B

Mrxpe,

Ho yMepexbBOaMOmHO~,nS~pyr,x!" TaK MBIC.rlMT OH -- H cMepTB eMy n~ofe3Ha. H e CKa,'KeT OH, tlTO ~)t(M3HBeFO I-ly)KHa, He CKa~KeT OH, qTO FM~eJIB 6 e c n o h e 3 n a :

Ero cy~h6a ~aasuo eMy ~cua... Ero erie HOKaMeCTbHe pacrmn,, Ho qac n p . ~ e r - OH6y~er .a Kpecre; Ero noc~ianBor FHeBa n I-[eqa.rln Pa6aM 3eMYlH HarlOMHHTB O Xpnca'e. Eyewitnesses report (~emy~evskij's extraordinary calmness during the ceremony, ~2 which corresponds to the stoicism of Christian martyrs. Paperno sums up: "For many, the scene became a crucifixion of the 'Russian democratic Christ'" (no source given, cited after Paperno 1988: 206). She then goes on to state that "it is no wonder that when Chernyshevsky died, his son Mikhail was struck with the resemblance of his father's dead body to representations of the deposition of Christ from the cross, and that Chernyshevsky's widow, who was a religious person, reported witnessing miracles after death" (Papemo 1988: 206). After Cemy~evskij's death, wreaths were sent with inscriptions that called Cemy~evskij an "apostle of truth" (Dem6enko, Pokusaev 1982: 455) and a "stradalec", a sufferer, a term with clear hagiographic overtones. Incidentally, these wreaths caused some trouble with the police, who did not approve of this characterization (Dem6enko, Pokusaev 1982: 460).

342 Jonathan Hill Brown, Stephan Kiipper, Claudia Roth, Cornelia Soldat

Apart from his civil execution and exile, it was particularly Cemy~evskij's position as "star critic" (Carli, Lehmann 1989: 39) of the leading liberal journal Sovremennik that prompted young people to describe their idol in hagiographic terms. For instance, the student N.Ja. Nikoladze wrote: "at home I studied old issues of the Contemporary and digested from the first to the last line each new number, whose publication I awaited as manna from heaven" (cited in Paperno 1988: 23, our italics). The young revolutionary Nikolaj I~utin claimed that "history had produced only three great men: Jesus Christ, Saint Paul, and Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky" (cited in Paperno 1988: 205). (~erny~evskij's friend N.I. Kostomarov called Cerny~evskij the "prophet Moses among our socialists". 13 While writing for the Sovremennik, in his readers' consciousness Cernygevskij assumed a position not uncommon for medieval saints: the preacher of truth in the face of the mighty (TschiZewskij 1959: 33f., 96f.). This quality features heavily in Nikoladze's memoirs, in which (~emy~evskij is called "a man who made no ceremonies in dealing with giants" (Dem~enko, Pokusaev t982: 244). However, this was nothing new for Russian writers and poets. Starting at least with Derfmvin, the poet had laid claim to dealing with the powers that be on equal terms. What was new was that the police actually assumed that Cerny~evskij possessed real authority in revolutionary circles, j4 The stereotype of Cerny~evskij as the "prophet of the revolution" is still alive in Russia today. In a review of the Russian edition of Paperno's book, the reviewer starts by listing the most common notions about Cerny~evskij. The notion of prophet is second only to "kumir revoljucionnoj demokratii" (Sklovskij 1996: 232). The combination of personal asceticism and generosity towards others that is characteristic of many saints, and was propagated in Cto delat'?, extended into Cerny~evskij's private life. Nikoladze recalls that Cernygevskij did not visit theatres, concerts, clubs or even friends, did not play cards, smoke, or drink. ~5 Still, he allowed his wife all the freedom she wanted: parties, entertainment, even the possibility of extramarital affairs (Paperno 1988:119-125). This was due to Cerny~evskij's conviction, manifest in Cto delat'?, that "the idea of marriage was combined with dreams of social service and with the whole complex of ideas that associated the liberation of woman with the liberation of humanity" (Pat~erno 1988: 91). In fact, the reverse of the coin is that women's liberation Cerny~evskij-style may put as much strain on a relationship as traditional patriarchy. ~erny~evskij then was all the more willing to sacrifice traditional marriage customs to his political creed. His relationship to his wife is an instance of conscious self-stylization of behaviour. Although, at first glance, it is not connected with traditional hagiography which, after all, deals chiefly with celibate monks, it is a classic example of how the teachings of a new doctrine are put into practice even at the cost of self-denial.

Cernygevskij's First Biography

343

There is evidence that Cemy~evskij, consciously or unconsciously, actually modelled his life on hagiographic patterns. A diary entry from his time as a teacher in Saratov reporting a talk with his bride Ol'ga Sokratovna reads: ~q ~ y Ka,~Hlylo MrlHyTy nO~lB.rleHH~l~aH~lapMOB, KaK 6.rlaFoqeCTHBblfi xpHcTHaHHH Ka~UlylO MHHyTy ~¢dleT Tpy6bl CTpalJJHOFO cy~a. KpoMe TOFO, y Hac CKOpO 6y~eT 6yHT, a eczn OH 6y~eT, a 6y~ty HerlpeMeHHO

y~aCTBOBaTI,B HeM.(Cerny~evskij, PSS 1:418) On 11 August 1858 he wrote to Dobroljubov: Mb! c BaMH, GKO.FibKOTel-lepb 3Haro Bac, JlrO~H, B KOTOpbIx BehHKO~ymHn, Hall 6naropoiIcTBa, HJ]H repoHBMa, HnH qeFO-TO TaKOFO, Fopa3~o

6ozbme, He~KesmTpe6yeT HaTypa. FIoTOMyMbl 6epeM Ha ce6n ponn, KOTOpble BhIme HaTypa~bHOBCnnbl HenoBeKa, CTaHOBHMCZaHrenaMn, xpHCTaMHH T. 2I. (Cerny~evskij, PSS 14: 359) These remarks testify to Cerny~evskij's quasi-religious dedication and his will to become a role model in the hagiographic mould - in the letter to Dobroljubov, (~erny~evskij undoubtedly had in mind the educational function of saints' lives (Ginzburg 1979: 50-53). How far (~erny~evskij succeeded in presenting himself, albeit semiconsciously, as a saintly figure, is demonstrated by the reactions of others toward him and his work. We shall now try to outline the semiotic mechanisms at work in Cerny~evskij's canonization. There is no doubt that Cerny~evskij's life was read according to the hagiographic model, but it still has to be explained why this was the case. After all, the segmentation of a continuous life-text into discrete units is, like the segmentation of any text, a matter of the observer's preference (Pjatigorskij, Uspenskij 1967: 8). So why should Cerny~evskij's contemporaries have chosen to highlight these biographical facts that coincide wih the hagiographic model and interpreted his biography in terms of a saint's life? After all, given the anticlerical stance of the liberal and revolutionary movement, they could have ignored the model or looked for a new one. When Cerny~evskij arrived on the literary scene in the mid-1850s, the Russian orthodox tradition had been reinstated in literature and intellectual life after a century of apparent oblivion. This was in great measure due to a general counterreaction to the 18th-century's enlightenment, which many saw as un-Russian and which they countered with the attempt to restitute the national tradition. Christianity was one part of this tradition, and even those who took a critical stance towards the Orthodox church returned to hagiography as a genuine Russian cultural and literary tradition and a means of achieving narodnost' in literature and of reconnecting with the pre-Petrine,

344 Jonathan Hill Brown, Stephan Kiipper, Claudia Roth, Cornelia Soldat

"genetic Russian" past. This was done largely through incorporating the Russian hagiographic tradition into literary texts. The first to resurrect hagiographic stereotypes were the Decembrists, who mainly dwelt on the figure of the saintly prince. The tide of "gra~danskaja" literature that followed in their wake regarded hagiography as an important link to the people's ("narod") traditions and at the same time as a means to make their writings more accessible to new readers. By making use of those models that were known to a large number of otherwise inexperienced readers, "progressive" ideas could be conveyed in a familiar clothing that also served to reinforce their authority. 16 Moreover, opposing the established church and religion did not mean opposing religion per se. Contrariwise, many intellectuals looked for alternative religious models that were compatible with recent scientific discoveries and yet retained basic teachings of Christianity, or at least its humanist kernel (Lotman 1993: 131f.). Cerny~evskij himself was a follower of the French Christian socialists Saint-Simon and Fourier. Cto delat'? is heavily influenced by Feuerbach's theology. Feuerbach's idea that man could himself become God had, in turn, long been central to Orthodox theology which held that "God was made man that man might be made God" (Paperno 1988: 204). In the mid-19th century in Russia, science was to supplement religion, not to replace it (Lotman 1993: 131f.). Consequently, hagiographic models were not only easily available but enjoyed a certain status even among those members of the intelligentsia that were critical of the Orthodox church and the official doctrine of narodnost', pravoslavie and samoder~avie. It represented a tradition that appeared timehonoured and progressive at the same time. If (~erny~evskij picked up hagiographic models as a pattern for his own life, this can be explained by the fact that in many ways he was a typical raznodinec, a young man of comparatively humble origins, whose education alienated him from his roots, but whose manners did not match the standards of Petersburg high society, which they aspired to be part of. The establishment's contempt bred familiarity among these young men, and they began to form a new community among the intelligentsia, complete with their own rules of behaviour (Paperno 1988: 75-88). What used to be seen as bad manners was cultivated and turned into a sign of belonging to a special group, the standard bearers of the most progressive ideas. We must remember that the 1830s and 1840s saw a renewed interest in religion and a search for a faith that transcended the traditional Orthodox boundaries to combine the deeper religious truth with new scientific truth (Lotman 1993: 132). The fact that Cerny~evskij thought himself to be in possession of "the truth" is testified by the principles of his literary criticism, whose main criteria for judging a literary work was the extent to which it gave a true picture of reality - the ability to assess this means to know the objective truth. From this

Cernygevskij's First Biography

345

point on, for the owners of these new truths it was only a small step to being linked to hagiographic models, all the more so as saints were traditionally portrayed as differing from normal patterns of behaviour - in fact, this guaranteed their authority (Lotman 1992: 365). Surely,. the coincidence of individual biographical traits with the hagiographic model did no harm, either. We must also remember that it was the Decembrists who resurrected hagiographic models in Russian literature, most notably that of the saintly prince. The Decembrists' pattern of behaviour had by the 1840s been widely popularized through literature and exercised an influence on the raznodincy that cannot be underestimated. ~7 It can be argued that the behaviour of the raznodincy was nothing but a reinterpretation, not to say misinterpretation, of the Decembrists' behaviour as conveyed through literary texts. While the Decembfists were aware of the fact that they enacted literary models, the raznodincy, due to the shift in literature from Romanticism to Realism, assumed their role models to be real persons. So it turns out that, objectively, the origins of the Russian revolutionary movement were in no way as diametrically opposed to religion as many would have it. What was taking place was a general substitution of realia, while the underlying values remained the same. The writer assumed the position of a saint, while his writings were ascribed the status of a sacred text. This mechanism is in full accord with the so-called "dualistic model" of Russian cultural history, introduced by Lotman and Uspenskij (1977). Although their description ends with the end of Peter I's reign, the model can accommodate many phenomena of more recent history, too. According to the dualistic model, Russian culture knows no axiologically neutral zones. Every cultural phenomenon, as soon as it makes itself apparent, is assigned a definite positive or negative value and integrated into the axiological structure of the existing culture. "Turning points", i.e. significant structural changes in the history of culture, are largely equivalent to changes in the axiological hierarchy. These, however, do not affect the status of the single elements: what was once good is now bad and vice versa, but its function as well as its position remains the same. The other fundamental mechanism is the "renaming" of existing elements. Thus, after the conversion of Rus' many Christian saints took over the functions of the old pagan gods basically, the pagan gods were simply given new, Christian names. This mechanism also accounts for the structural conservatism of Russian culture. The system of relations did not change. What did change was the names given to the elements of the system and the values attached to them - and these values had to be unequivocally positive or negative. Much in the same way, Cerny~evskij's biography could be made to fill the existing slot in Russian culture that was reserved for Saints' lives, namely, to serve as a role model for others to emulate. Since it fitted the existing pattern to a sufficient degree and consequently fulfilled an existing

346 Jonathan Hill Brown, Stephan Kapper, Claudia Roth, Cornelia Soldat

function, it could replace or simply coexist with the existing Lives, regardless of the opinion held on Cerny~evskij, or, for that matter, religion itself. What mattered was that a phenomenon was subsumed under a familiar cultural pattern, thereby identifying it and assigning it a definite value. Following this model, in socialist times the cult of the saint was replaced by the cult of the poet, most notably Pu~kin (Debreczeny 1991). How well this mechanism worked can be demonstrated by another example. It is reported that the Saratov archimandrite Nikanor, who later came under (~erny~evskij's influence, too, compared (~erny~evskij to a demon appearing in the guise of angels or even Christ himself (Oksman 1958: 158). Nikanor apparently recognized clearly that (~erny~evskij's behaviour fitted the familiar cultural pattern, but assigned him a negative instead of a positive value. So it appears that regardless of the underlying axiology, the deep structure was the same for Orthodox priests, intellectuals seeking a religion that met the demands of the time and, finally, the dyed-in-the-wool atheists whose reactions amused Nabokov's fictitious author so much. Consequently, what appeared like an amusing irony to Nabokov turns out to be a typical phenomenon for Russian culture. Orthodox priests, razno~incy intellectuals, radical atheists - they could not help but read Cerny~evskij's life-text according to the same cultural model: that of Russian hagiography.

NOTES For a closer discussion see Schmidt (1996: 235); see also Lenhoff (1996) for problems of genre. Pp. 1558-1560 in the facsimile edition of 1964. In references to this text, page numbers will be given in brackets. These are: Oksman (ed.) (1958-1959, 2 vols.), Dem~enko, Pokusaev (eds.) (1982). A most striking parallel is the case of Dionysius Areopagita (Acts 17: 34), who assumedly converted to Christianity after hearing St Paul preach in Athens and subsequently was attributed the authorship of the second most influential theological writings after the Bible, namely the Corpus Diony-

siacum. Kolokol 186, 15 June 1864 (p. 1525). Vol. 11 of the PSS. The allusions are discussed by Papemo (1988: 195-218). This is traced in great detail in Papemo (1988). She does not, however, elaborate on the specific hagiographic traditions that (~erny~evskij took up. We closely follow her study both in methodology and material and regard ours as a modest supplement to her findings.

Cernygevskij's First Biography

8 9 lo

1~

12

13 14 15

~6

17

347

For a detailed account see Paperno (1988: 195-218); see also Clark (1985: 4951), Ziolkowski (1988: 191-195). TschiZewskij (1948: 142-157); for Feodosij's Life see Tschi~ewskij (1964: 20-78). "It has to be stressed that [...] the biographical and historical facts of t~erny~evskij's life in Fedor's biography are accurate" (Davydov 1985: 369f.). For accounts of eyewitnesses see Cerny~evskaja (1953: 331f.), Demrenko, Pokusaev (1982: 286-288), Oksman (1959: 19-51). Cited after Nekrasov (1967, 2: 420f.). A version of the last line replaces "rabam" with "carjam". This version, which was first published in 1931, rests on the memory of the narodnik P.V. Grigor'ev, published in Pravda (Geneva) 1883, Nos. 16-17, 20, but is not supported by autographs. The poem, which is dated 1874, may have been written as early as 1862, following Cerny~evskij's arrest, or be directed at an "ideal revolutionary", although tradition links it firmly~to (~erny~evskij. Cf. notes to 'Prorok', Nekrasov (1967, 2: 679-681). See Cemy~evskaja (1953: 331f.), Demrenko, Pokusaev (1982: 286-288), Oksman (1959: 16, 23f.); a fact that Lokys (1961: 594) deems necessary enough to mention in his review. Oksman (1958: 158). Again, Lokys (1961: 590) feels compelled to quote this in his review. See Lokys (1961: 594); Paperno (1988: 21,228). For a detailed account of the "civic" tradition in Russian literature see Freidin (1987). Dem6enko, Pokusaev (1982: 251). Nabokov, on the other hand, dwells on the fact that Cerny~evskij was a heavy smoker. If this is true, Nikoladze's memoirs are all the more telling. It is not our aim to discuss the term "narodnost'" here. We take it in its most global meaning as both "rooted in the native Russian tradition" and "appealing to the broad masses of the Russian people". For an account of the Christian undercurrents during the ostensibly secularized 18th century and the increasing influence of the Russian hagiographic tradition on intellectual life in the early 19th century see Lotman (1993). A description of the influence of hagiography on 19th-century Russian literature is provided by Ziolkowski (1988). On the behavioural patterns of the Decembrists see Lotman (1994, Ch. 'Dekabrist v povsednevnoj ~izni'). The genealogy runs as follows: The Decembrist as a !iterary character (e.g. Cackij), the "li~nij 6elovek", the "nigilist" and finally Cerny~evskij's "novye ljudi".

348 Jonathan Hill Brown, Stephan Kapper, Claudia Roth, Cornelia Soldat

REFERENCES Adrianova-Peretc, Varvara P. 1964 'Zada6i izu6enija "agiografi6eskogo stilja" Drevnej Rusi'. In: Trudy otdela drevnerusskoj literatury, 20, pp. 41-71. Carli, Gabriela, Lehmann, Ulf (Eds.) 1989 'Nikolai Gawrilowitsch Tschemyschewski - Leben und Werk'. In: Nikolai Tschernyschewski, Das Sch6ne ist das Leben. Ausgew~ihlte Schr!ften. Berlin, pp. 7-81. Cerny~evskaja, N.M. 1953 Letopis' 2izni i dejatel'nosti N.G. Cerny~evskogo. Moskva. Clark, Katerina 1985 The Soviet Novel. History as Ritual. Chicago (2nd Ed.). Davydov, Sergei 1985 'The Gift. Nabokov's aesthetic exorcism of Chernyshevskii'. In: Canadian-American Slavic Studies, 19, pp. 357-374. Debreczeny, Paul 1991 '"Zhitie Aleksandra Boldinskogo": Pushkin's Elevation to Sainthood in Soviet Culture'. In: South Atlantic Quarterly, 90, pp. 269292. Dem6enko, A.A., Pokusaev, E.I. (Eds.) 1982 N.G. Cernygevsko" v vospominanijach sovremennikov. Moskva. Freidin, Gregory 1987 'Authorship and citizenship: A problem for modem Russian literature'. In: Stanford Slavic Studies, 1, pp. 361-378. Ginzburg, Lidija 1979 0 literaturnom geroe. Leningrad. Giinther, Hans 1984 Die Verstaatliehung der Literatur. Stuttgart. Ignatiew, Catherine 1976 Zitie Petra des Metropoliten Kiprian. Eine Untersuchung zu Form und Stil russischer Heiligenleben (= Frankfurter Abhandlungen zur Slavistik, 22). Wiesbaden. Jablonskij, V. 1908 Pachomij Serb i ego agiografi~eskie pisanija. Sankt-Peterburg. Klimenko, S.V. 1988 '"(~et'i minei" v detskom 6tenii N.G. (~emy~evskogo'. In: Russkaja literatura, No. 1, pp. 186-191. KOu6evskO, N. 1871 Drevnerusskie ~itija svjatych kak &tori&sko" &todnik. Moskva. Ko~kol Gazeta A.I. Gercena i N.P. Ogareva. Vypusk sed'moj. London. Fak1864 simil'noe izdanie Moskva 1963.

Cernygevskij's First Biography

349

Lan~6ikov, Anatolij 1982 Lenhoff, G~I 1996 Lokys, D. 1961

N. G. ~ernygevsko'. Moskva. 'Medieval Russian Saints' Lives in Socio-Cultural Perspective'. In: Russian Literature, XXXIX, pp. 205-222. Review: 'N.G. (~emy~evskij v vospominanijach sovremennikov v dvuch tomach (ob~aja redakcija Ju.G. Oksmana). Saratov 1958, 1959'. In: Zeitschriftfar Slawistik, V, pp. 587-603.

Lotman, Ju.M. 'Literaturnaja biografija v istoriko-kul'turnom kontekste'. In: Iz1992 brannye stat'i v trech tomach, tom I: Stat 'i po semiotike i tipologii kul'tury. Tallinn, pp. 365-375. 1993 'Russkaja literatura poslepetrovskoj epochi i christianskaja tradicija'. In: Izbrannye star 'i v trech tomach, tom III: Slat 'i po istorii russkoj literatury. Teorija i semiotika drugich iskusstv. Mechanizmy kul 'tury. Melkie Zametki. Tallinn, pp. 127-137. Besedy o russkoj kul'ture. Byt i tradicii russkogo dvorjanstva 1994 (XVIII-na6alo XIX veka). Sankt-Peterburg. Lotman, Ju.M., Uspenskij, B.A. 'Die Rolle dualistischer Modelle in der Dynamik der russischen 1977 Kultur (bis zum Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts)'. In: Poetica, 9, pp. 140. Nabokov, Vladimir 1963 The Gift (Translated from the Russian by Michael Scammell with the collaboration of the author). London. Nekrasov, N.A. 1967 Polnoe sobranie stichotvoreno" v trech tomach. Leningrad. Oksman, Ju.G. (Ed.) 1958 N.G. Cerny#evsk O"v vospominanijach sovremennikov, Vol. 1. Saratov (vol. 2: 1959). Paperno, Irina 1988 Chernyshevsky and the Age of Realism. A Study in the Semiotics of Behavior. Stanford, CA. Pjatigorskij, A.M., Uspenskij, B.A. 1967 'Personologi6eskaja klassifikacija kak semioti6eskaja problema'. In: Trudy po znakovym sistemam, 3, pp. 7-29. Schmidt, Wolf-Heinrich 1996 'Probleme einer Theorie der Hagiographie'. In: Russian Literature, XXXIX, pp. 235-260. Sklovskij, Evgenij 1996 'Paradoks Cemy~evskogo. Recenzija na: Irina Paperno: Semiotika povedenija. Nikolaj Cerny~evskij - 6elovek epochi realizma'. In: Znamja, No. 8, pp. 232-233.

350 Jonathan Hill Brown, Stephan Kf~pper, Claudia Roth, Cornelia Soldat

Tschi2ewskij, Dmitrij 1948 Geschichte der altrussischen Literatur im 11., 12. und 13. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/Main. 1959 Das heilige Ruflland. Russische Geistesgeschichte L 10.-17. Jahrhundert. Hamburg. Tschi£ewskij, Dmitrij (Ed.) 1964 Paterik Kievo-pe~erskogo monastyrja. Miinchen. Ziolkowski, Margaret 1988 Hagiography and Modern Russian Literature. Princeton.