Russian Literature and the Canon

[astrum]

One aspect about the Western canon, which intrigues me, is its ample inclusion of Russian/eastern European (namely Polish) works, and works by writers from those areas. Fyodor Dostoevsky, Joseph Conrad, Ayn Rand, and Leo Tolstoy come to mind, but of course, there are others.

I once read that, during the mid-20th century, high school and college students were encouraged to learn Russian. It seems as if Western society has historically had a tacit fascination with Russia. I wonder why that's so.


I also wonder how such sentiments shaped diplomatic relations before and during the Cold War--and even to this day.

What do you think?

[hannah_arendt]

Are you interested in Russian literature or maybe you would like to know something more about Polish writers? If it comes to the first one, I like Dotoyevski very much.

[stlukesguild]

Why are a good number of Russians included in the Canon? For the same reason as writers from other nations. The work merits attention. The work has had an impact on writers outside of Russia. The work is accessible (the are good translations available in other major Western languages). Then certainly there are political reasons. As a nation becomes increasingly powerful and influential, those abroad will likely take their cultural achievements seriously. As Russia became an increasingly important European power you will find that not only do we find their literature entering into the Canon, but also their music and art. Of course much of this has to do with Russia coming of age... coming out of the constraints of the Middle-Ages that had continued to dominate. I have no doubt that American-Russian relations played a role in promoting Russian literature... just as American relations with Japan and now China are promoting their achievements, and the turmoil in the Middle-East has led to a greater interest in exploring Middle-Eastern culture.

[Darcy88]

Russian literature does seem to get an especially large amount of attention on this site and among the literary people I know in real life, probably more than even Germany and France. Only Britain and America seem more popular. I think much of this can be attributed to Dostoevsky. His novels feature a perfect blend of drama and philosophy. They are highly entertaining and no less profound, satisfying one both emotionally and intellectually. Russia also has a certain mystique that I can't quite explain.

[astrum]

Russia also has a certain mystique that I can't quite explain.

Interesting observation.

[cafolini]

I don't think there is a canon anylonger. I think that's an old-fart fabrication. But Russian literature remains interesting.

[JBI]

Why are a good number of Russians included in the Canon? For the same reason as writers from other nations. The work merits attention. The work has had an impact on writers outside of Russia. The work is accessible (the are good translations available in other major Western languages). Then certainly there are political reasons. As a nation becomes increasingly powerful and influential, those abroad will likely take their cultural achievements seriously. As Russia became an increasingly important European power you will find that not only do we find their literature entering into the Canon, but also their music and art. Of course much of this has to do with Russia coming of age... coming out of the constraints of the Middle-Ages that had continued to dominate. I have no doubt that American-Russian relations played a role in promoting Russian literature... just as American relations with Japan and now China are promoting their achievements, and the turmoil in the Middle-East has led to a greater interest in exploring Middle-Eastern culture.

The American government since the Second World War has put a massive amount of cash into translation and understanding Japanese culture. First as understanding the enemy, then as understanding the occupied territory (As the US to this day is still present in Japan).

Basically this has led to perhaps the best translated, and one of the most accepted "Foreign" cultures in the US. Think food, art, and literature, and Japan as a non-European culture seems central to the American imagination (almost as much as the even more "occupied" Latin American cultures which have also been absorbed through the work of scholars).

Technically, as a Sinologist I am hoping the same thing will happen. Not only will it bring exposure to works I personally deem important and good for world culture, but also it will allow me to more easily get funding in the future, which is always good. Research on China has become more fashionable since the 80s, there is no doubt, and recently it has hit a sort of new high. The downside is the quality of scholarship has in general been slipping to a far too populist position. What used to be an esoteric debate amongst learned academia has now become a sort of farce. I cannot count the number of times I see virtually unknown "China specialists" saying all sorts of semi-educated things in the paper on a daily basis. We would think with this new exposure, we would have better training in understanding.

As for the role war plays - no doubt Russian language learning was encouraged by the fact everyone thought the US was going to war with Russia. IT had nothing to do with literature really, which is, in the case of Realist novels, virtually the same in any language. I cannot see someone wanting to learn Russian to read Dostoevsky, in the sense that they may want to learn Japanese to read poetry. Pushkin maybe, and I still read Eugene Onegin once a year, but it seems the majority of Dostoevsky fans never make it over to verse, as the boards here can attest, this is also the norm amongst the general reading population.

Reading Chinese verse, for instance, has taught me a few things about international culture - there is no such thing when it comes to literature. We are all completely isolated. The few that do go international barely get anywhere - it is merely a few academics who ever make it out the door.

As for Russian literature, maybe 3-4 authors have English language readership appeal, and an extended 10 or so with learned English language readership appeal. The rest are virtually unknown, like the names of the majority of Russian cities, to the Western reader.

[stlukesguild]

Yes. I'm always bemused by those Russian fanboys who place the Russians at the pinnacle of literature after having read all of 5 or 6 authors... and no poets. My own library includes works by perhaps 20 writers... not counting the anthologies of poetry... a pitiful selection in comparison to what I have from the French, Germans, Italians... even the Spanish and the Greeks... to say nothing of the Brits. My musical library, by contrast, not limited by language, is far richer in Russian composers... still they remain somewhat limited even there in comparison to other cultures... as result of only having been a major "player" for a little over a century.

[ennison]

Most of the pre- revolutionary writers we know of do deserve to be read widely by those who like good literature but only a handful of the socialist realists have anything interesting to say to me. Sholokhov is just a hack. There are writers whose work received little acknowledgement who are yet to get much of a Western readership but they will get it - belated recognition is worth something. V Grossman's "Life and Fate" is a brilliant piece of work from almost any angle. I also am a Solzhenitsyn aficionado and an admirer of Makhine. There are several autobiographical works from the Soviet period that are very good and worth reading. I readily admit an almost total ignorance of Chinese writers. Well life is too short to read everything worth reading and I will make no strenuous efforts to do so

[Ecurb]

"manuscripts don't burn" - "(рукописи не горят)”
― Mikhail Bulgakov, The Master and Margarita

[Ecurb]

Yes. I'm always bemused by those Russian fanboys who place the Russians at the pinnacle of literature after having read all of 5 or 6 authors... and no poets. My own library includes works by perhaps 20 writers... not counting the anthologies of poetry... a pitiful selection in comparison to what I have from the French, Germans, Italians... even the Spanish and the Greeks... to say nothing of the Brits. My musical library, by contrast, not limited by language, is far richer in Russian composers... still they remain somewhat limited even there in comparison to other cultures... as result of only having been a major "player" for a little over a century.

My book shelves are heaped with hundreds of Russian novels and poetry anthologies, all written in the original language.

Unfortunately, since I don’t read a word of Russian, or even comprehend the alphabet, I am reduced to reading lurid graphic novels in their stead, although I occasionally peruse Antony Beevor’s history of the Battle of Stalingrad and my translated copy of the Russian folktale, “The Little Man as Big as Your Thumb with the Mustaches Seven Miles Long”.

[Ecurb]

Duplicate

[lichtrausch]

My book shelves are heaped with hundreds of Russian novels and poetry anthologies, all written in the original language.

Unfortunately, since I don’t read a word of Russian, or even comprehend the alphabet, I am reduced to reading lurid graphic novels in their stead, although I occasionally peruse Antony Beevor’s history of the Battle of Stalingrad and my translated copy of the Russian folktale, “The Little Man as Big as Your Thumb with the Mustaches Seven Miles Long”.

How did you end up with so much Russian literature despite not knowing Russian?

[wordeater]

If you compare Dickens to Dostoyevsky the latter comes out as an improvement because he goes deeper into the psychology of his characters. Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy and Chekhov have written some of the best prose ever. Unfortunately Russian literature partly collapses after 1918, with some exceptions. In terms of quantity English literature has produce many more masterpieces, but in terms of quality the Russians of the nineteenth century remain unique.

[astrum]

wordeater,

So in your opinion, Russian authors tend to delve deeper into the psychology of characters?

I think you might be on to something.