A Herzen Reader

23. Political Dinners in Moscow [1859]

VERY DANGEROUS!!! 95 5. Herzen’s remarks are a parody of common phrases from the poetry of Maykov and Fet, and have much in common with Dobrolyubov’s criticism of “pure art” in The Contemporary. 6. “Transport” (“Perevoz”), by Ilya V. Selivanov (1810–1882), appeared in The Contemporary in the third issue published in 1857. The “long odyssey” is Goncharov’s Oblomov, which appeared in the first four issues of Fatherland Notes for 1859. Herzen takes issue with Druzhinin’s praise of the novel in Readers’ Library and Dobrolyubov’s strongly positive essay in The Contemporary, as well as Goncharov’s role as a censor. 7. Panin was minister of justice. Count Peter A. Kleinmikhel (1793–1869) was director of transportation and public buildings from 1842 to 1855. 8. Herzen is challenging the basic argument of an article by Pollunsky in Readers’ Library, 1859:3. 9. Nikolay Gogol was widely criticized for his 1847 book Selected Passages from a Correspondence with Friends (Doc. 6). On Pushkin, see Chapter V of Herzen’s 1850 essay “On the Development of Revolutionary Ideas in Russia” (Doc. 1). 10. St. Thomas Sunday is the first Sunday after Easter, and begins a week (fomina nedelia) devoted to the apostle who only believed the miracle after he had seen the risen Christ. 11. In his 1859 article “Russia and Poland,” Herzen mentioned the “Pecherins, Gagarins , and Golitsyns” who lived as Catholics in emigration, Vladimir Pecherin becoming a monk, and Prince Ivan Gagarin a Jesuit priest. 12. Konarsky and Wollowicz were Polish revolutionaries executed by the tsarist government. 13. Herzen has in mind Lermontov’s poem “Thought” (“Duma”). 14. The three super-censors whom Herzen has previously mentioned.  23  The Bell, No. 49, August 1, 1859. Semi-public banquets, organized by progressive forces (on the model of France in 1848) were organized in Russia only after the death of Nicholas I. For instance, the Moscow intelligentsia gathered in November 1855, not long after Granovsky’s passing, to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Mikhail Shchepkin’s acting debut; anything honoring Shchepkin acquired extra resonance in pre-emancipation Russia because he was born a serf. Organized by Sergey Aksakov and Sergey Solovyov, the 200 guests included professors, literary figures, enlightened merchants, and members of the Moscow administration. Konstantin Aksakov gave a toast to “public opinion” (obshchestvennoe mnenie), which brought a standing ovation, this being the first time that phrase was used in public, and alarmed the Third Department agent deputized to attend (Istoriia Moskvy, 3:769–70; Christoff, Nineteenth-Century Russian Slavophilism, 3:164). Hearing about such events at a distance, Herzen was unable to gauge their effect, and fully aware that any praise of the living could only harm them. Herzen focused below on the hypocrisy of a dinner whose main purpose was to pay homage to those in power.  96 A Herzen Reader Political Dinners in Moscow [1859] I We Russians have always liked to dine and to dine well, but recently we have learned to dine politically, and, while formerly we gathered for fish soup with sturgeon, now we gather for dinner with a speech. Even that consummate Nicholaevan Zakrevsky was given a dinner on April 24, 1859, with a speech by Kornilov; we cannot resist acquainting our readers with it.1 Count Arseny Andreevich, Not long ago we celebrated the tenth anniversary of the governing of Moscow by your highness, and the same feelings of love and devotion to you have brought us together now. However, all that was then joyful in our feelings is now clouded by the genuine sadness of farewell. A severe blow has been sent to you from on high. It is not the first in your arduous, brilliant life; you had already traveled a difficult path. During 11 years of service under your thoughtful leadership, full of good-humored concern, we have grown used to seeing you always firm, always tireless, always indefatigable, strict toward yourself, and indulgent to others. That is how you behaved during the calamitous year when cholera devastated Moscow. Quickly, with sensible measures, having asked God’s help, you brought to an end the calamity and lent a compassionate hand to the orphans and families of the epidemic’s victims. Thus you behaved during the Crimean War, a terrible time for the Fatherland.2 Vigilant under the weight of your responsibilities, you encouraged the inhabitants of Moscow and roused their patriotic feelings. We have seen the same in you during joyous times in our beloved...