19th Century Russi The Superfluous Man

The ‘superfluous man’ is a literary concept that developed in 19th century Russia, which gained popularity by Ivan Turgenev’s novella The Diary of a Superfluous Man. It is used to describe an individual, who is intelligent, learned, and well informed by idealism and goodwill, but incapable of engaging in effective action for societal welfare. These characters are in constant conflict and disharmony with the world around them. The ‘superfluous man’ paradigm is best depicted in the following three characters: Pechorin (Mikhail Lermontov’s A Hero of Our Time), Bazarov (Ivan Turgenev’s Fathers and Children), and Ivan Ilych (Leo Tolstoy’s The Death of Ivan Ilych). This paper will explore the idea of the superfluous man in the preceding three characters
through a psychological, philosophical, economical and sociological lens; as well as compare and contrast these features amongst them. In Lermontov’s A Hero of Our Time, the protagonist Pechorin embodies a Byronic hero; an alluringly dark and mysterious man filled with contradictions. He is seen as being both cynical as well as sensitive, as depicted by the way he treats women. Pechorin’s philosophy centers on the futility of life and existence, and concentrates on the nihilistic, thereby making him a very detached and alienated person in society. Although he is free from societal and moral constraints, he does not present himself as a romantic figure, but contrarily uses this freedom to crush and destroy not only those around him, but also himself.
His inability to understand the purpose of living produces an unbearable ennui within him, which eventually leads to his downfall. This is seen especially towards the end of “Princess Mary”, where the reader is teased with a moment of hope as Pechorin gallops after Vera. The reader almost accepts that Pechorin can finally experience true emotions, but fate intervenes and Pechorin falls off his horse. He relapses into cynicism, and does not undertake further effort to reach her: “I saw how futile and senseless it was to pursue lost happiness. What more did I want? To see her again? For what? Wasn’t it all over between us” (Lermontov 144). Through Pechorin, Lermontov suggests the impossibility of the existence of a pure romantic being, which can be brought back to what is mentioned in the preface: “The Hero of Our Time is, my good sirs, indeed a portrait, but not of a single person. It is a portrait of the vices of our whole generation in their ultimate development.” (4). Unlike Pechorin who at times does show appreciation for nature and travel, which are typical characteristics of a romanticist, Bazarov strongly rejects the romantic lifestyle.
He bears strong adherence to his nihilistic and materialistic principles, which leads him to a self-destruction. Being an ardent realist, he sees humans as flawed and selfish, and seeks to live above them through science and destruction. He disdains the romanticist acts of various other characters: “A decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet” (Turgenev 21); also he mocks Nikolai Petrovich’s cello playing and Arkady’s devotion to Katya, to whom he advises to “restrain her sentimental tendencies.” (72). It’s this disrespect for people’s basic need for sentimentality that leads him to advocate a nihilistic philosophy, which is a rejection of all religious and moral principles, often in the belief that life is meaningless. Though Bazarov is a realist and a pragmatist, his very individual nature is subject to emotional trappings, which can be seen in his shift in opinion regarding women and love. His strong nihilistic approach causes him to be cynical about love, considering it “rubbish or unforgivable stupidity” (71), and anyone who gets influenced by a woman to be idiotic. But when Anna Odintsova challenges Bazarov’s views, he begins to feel his morals sway in her presence. He lacks the strength to have his way with her, or leave her. He calls his love for Anna as “a feeling that
tormented and enraged him” (71). Thus, a man who previously mocked and ridiculed emotion and love, makes an impassioned declaration of love, and realizes that he cannot return back to his past security within the limits of his nihilistic philosophy. The climax of the novel when Bazarov is dying and declares his love for Anna at his deathbed (as seen on page 157-158) shows the degree to which he has strayed away from his nihilistic beliefs. The reader feels sympathy for Bazarov because he showed such promise for brilliance at the beginning of the novel, but was unable to live up to his own self-image. Unlike Pechorin and Bazarov, Ivan Ilych lacks personal judgement and perception; he lives his life by the dictates of others, rather than relying on his own reason and good sense.
Ivan blindly adopts the beliefs and norms of aristocratic society, and believes that by imitating their lifestyle and conduct, he will be able to improve his own life and find the true meaning of life and existence. Although he is not as cynical about women and love as Pechorin or Bazarov, Ivan considers a wife to be an ‘object’ of wealth and secure means. In his obsession to be recognized by all his middle-class friends, he attempts to have everything in his life be decorous and seemly. Even though his marriage is awful, as long as it appears ‘normal’ enough to society, he is satisfied: “He only required of it those conveniences – dinner at home, housewife, and bed – which it could give him, and above all tat propriety of external forms required by public opinion.” (Tolstoy 27). Ivan tried to be ‘in sync’ with societal norms, but fate intervenes (similar to Pechorin); and one day, whilst he is climbing a ladder to hang some drapes in his house, he makes a false step and slips, and becomes injured. Whilst he rests, Ivan suffers tremendous amounts of pain and dissatisfaction, especially with his life. Like Bazarov’s death, Ivan’s death too is filled with hope, since death allows him to confront his own isolation. This confrontation provokes the use of his reason and gives rise to existential
thoughts: “At that very moment Ivan Ilych fell through and caught sight of the light, and it was revealed to him that though his life had not been what it should have been, this could still be rectified. (…) He was sorry for them, he must act so as not to hurt them: release them And free himself from these sufferings” (62)
Ivan is able to examine his life, and question his existence in compete autonomy. Death, ironically, seems to have a healing influence on him as it reveals to him the true nature of life. He realizes that compassion and love are the true morals of life. Ivan, through his actions, represents a mere ordinary man striving towards respect and aristocracy, without respecting his own reason and volition. Tolstoy best expresses this sentiment: “Ivan Ilych’s life had been most simple and most ordinary and therefore most terrible.” (22). Thus, we see how the above three characters are not only in conflict with their exterior environment, but also with themselves. The climaxes of each novel provide the reader with some hope and comfort, as we see the shifts in character and personalities from who they are at the beginning to what they ultimately become. The above characters, especially Bazarov and Pechorin, share similar philosophies and cynicism (that is a questioning of one’s sincerity and motivations) regarding life and existence (progressive nihilism), as well as intelligence at the start of the respective novels. They share similar emotional detachment from their surroundings, and look upon the pettiness of living. But as strong as their beliefs are, their individual natures are quite sensitive. Bazarov’s sympathy and compassion can be observed from his dealings with Anna Odintsova, who seems to have a significant influence over him, causing him to be more humane and sensitive, thereby shifting him from his set of principles. Pechorin’s compassion can be observed by the way he feels about Vera and Bella, causing him to stagger away from his nihilistic Byronic ideals. Ivan Ilych’s trajectory in the novel starts quite differently from those of Pechorin’s or Bazarov’s, since Ivan lacks his own rationality and propriety as he strives to show himself as an aristocrat in the eyes of his friends. His occupation with petty aristocratic social norms is a way for him to escape the ‘real world’ around him, which includes his wife and her daughter. Like Bazarov and Pechorin, Ivan is in conflict and disharmony with the world around him, and only towards his death is able to understand and appreciate the true meaning of life.