View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship Repository BURNING FLAMES AND SEETHING BRAINS: PASSION, IMAGINATION, AND MADNESS IN KARAMZIN, PUSHKIN, AND GOGOL BY MATTHEW DAVID MCWILLIAMS THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Russian, East European, and Eurasian Studies in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2017 Urbana, Illinois Master’s Committee: Professor Lilya Kaganovsky, Adviser Professor David Cooper Professor John Randolph ABSTRACT My thesis begins with an overview of sensibility (chuvstvitel'nost') and passion (strast') in Russian Sentimentalism, with a focus on the prose fiction of Nikolai Karamzin. After describing the correlation between passion and madness (a commonplace of eighteenth- and early-nineteenth-century discourse) and the emergence of a positive Romantic model of madness (featured in the works of E.T.A. Hoffmann and Vladimir Odoevskii, among others), I go on to show that Aleksandr Pushkin and Nikolai Gogol—the most celebrated poet and prose writer of the Romantic era in Russia—both depict madness in a rather un-Romantic light. In the second chapter, I discuss Pushkin’s eclectic treatments of madness, identifying classic tropes of literary madness and several likely sources. I use peripeteia and anagnorisis (concepts from Aristotelian poetics) to address the intersection of madness and plot, and I examine Pushkin’s use of the fantastic in, and the influence of early French psychiatry on, his depictions of madness. The remainder of the text is devoted to three of Gogol’s Petersburg tales, linked by their mad protagonists and the influence of the Künstlerroman: “Nevskii Prospect,” “The Portrait,” and “Diary of a Madman.” I suggest that Piskarev’s story in “Nevskii Prospect” functions as a parody of Karamzin’s fiction, with which it shares a narratorial mode (Dorrit Cohn’s “consonant thought report”). I also maintain that poshlost' plays an important role in the story, and is itself connected to Sentimentalism and ‘sentimentality.’ Next, I outline three types of passion in “The Portrait”—divine, demonic, and petty—and argue that although Chartkov’s downfall has supernatural (satanic) origins, it is also a product of poshlost'. Rather than the either/or of the fantastic, I contend that in “The Portrait,” evil—and, by extension, madness—is both individual and social. Subsequently, I show that in both “Nevskii Prospect” and “The Portrait,” the passions ii are depicted in terms of physiognomy, which relates to Gogol’s (negative) treatment of balls, fashion, and comme il faut in the Petersburg haute monde. I begin my reading of “Diary of a Madman” by discussing the depiction of madness in texts with first-person character narrators (which do not allow for thought report) and the interpretive difficulties posed by Poprishchin’s radical narratorial unreliability. Taking seriously Robert Maguire’s suggestion that “we could very well … read Gogol’s [“Diary of a Madman”] as a case study,” I read “Diary” through a Freudian lens, tracing the progression of Poprishchin’s madness from hallucination and paranoia to schizophrenic megalomania (65). Ultimately, I argue that Gogol’s treatment of madness is a profoundly negative response to Hoffmann and Odoevskii. Unlike the mad artistic geniuses of the positive Romantic model— who experience creative inspiration and metaphysical insight—Gogol’s madmen are misled by the irrational (dreams, imagination, passions), and it is precisely the revelation of truth that drives them mad. I contend that deception is the basic feature of Gogolian poshlost' and Gogolian madness, both of which imply aesthetic, ethical, and spiritual deficiency. iii To My Family, Friends, and Wonderful Wife-to-Be (and Soon-to-Be Stepcats) iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I am eternally grateful to my thesis advisor, Professor Lilya Kaganovsky, for her insight, advice, and saintlike patience. Her pedagogical and scholarly brilliance is an inspiration, and her guidance has been invaluable. I would also like to thank REEEC Associate Director Maureen Marshall for her help with proofreading and planning, Linda McCabe, and all my other colleagues, teachers, and friends at REEEC and the Slavic department at the University of Illinois. I am indebted to Professors Harriet Murav, George Gasyna, and Michael Finke, and special thanks are due to Professors Valeria Sobol and David L. Cooper for their generosity, wisdom, and countless small kindnesses. Thank you for sharing your passion with me. v TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: THE IRRATIONAL IN RUSSIAN SENTIMENTALISM: PASSION AND MADNESS BETWEEN CLASSICISM AND ROMANTICISM....................………………...…1 CHAPTER 2: MADNESS IN PUSHKIN’S “GOD GRANT THAT I NOT LOSE MY MIND,” POLTAVA, THE BRONZE HORSEMAN, AND “QUEEN OF SPADES”………........................10 CHAPTER 3: GOGOLIAN MADNESS: “NEVSKII PROSPECT,” “THE PORTRAIT,” AND “DIARY OF A MADMAN”…………………………………………………………………..…34 REFERENCES.………………………………………………………………………………...116 vi CHAPTER 1: THE IRRATIONAL IN RUSSIAN SENTIMENTALISM: PASSION AND MADNESS BETWEEN CLASSICISM AND ROMANTICISM “The root of the passions is good and is planted by nature itself in our sensuous organism … they arouse a wholesome energy in man, without which he would fall into lazy sleep. A completely passionless man is a fool and a lifeless block, incapable of doing either good or evil … Hence moderation in passion is wise; the safest way is to travel in the middle of the road. Excess in passion is destructive; absence of passion is moral death … if your passions are directed toward a good end by experience, reason, and affection, you may drop the reigns of anxious prudence, and let them soar at will; their goal will always be greatness.” -Krest'tsy nobleman, Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow Closely linked to the reason-emotion binary, the long-lived association between passion and madness probably stems from “the triumph of the Stoic theory of passion as an illness of the soul”: for the Stoics, “all passion comes from an error of judgment” (“Madness”). In the eighteenth-century Russian “Age of Reason,” the reason-emotion binary was bound to favor the ideal of the age. Emotions (chuvstva) were perceived as fundamentally irrational, and the passions (strasti), or particularly powerful emotions, as potentially dangerous, linked to foolishness, immorality, and madness.1 With the rise of Sentimentalism, however, sensibility or sensitivity (chuvstvitel'nost') took on a positive ethical valuation. Predicated on feeling, sensibility describes the subject’s response or responsivity to emotional stimuli—of paramount importance was the ability to be moved by the suffering of others, i.e. sympathy (sostradanie).2 1 In Aleksandr Sumarokov’s 1747 epistle on poetry-writing (Epistle II, Dve epistoly. V pervoi predlagaetsia o russkom iazyke, a vo vtoroi o stikhotvorstve), for example, the purpose of satire is “cleans[ing] … coarse mores” (gruby nravy), “expung[ing] vices” (poroki), “turn[ing] splendid madness [bezumstvo pyshnoe] laughable,” and “playfully scold[ing] passions and foolishness” (strastiam i durostiam) (121-22). According to Sumarokov, the main difference between satires and comedies is ultimately derived from the author’s attitude toward the passions: satires are based on abhorrence at their “darkness” (t'mu strastei), comedies on amusement at their follies (125). 2 Chuvstvitel'nost' was defined in a contemporary dictionary as 1) a “movement of the soul excited or stimulated … through the impression of external objects acting on the sensory instrument [Dvizhenie dushi vozbuzhdennoe ili vozbuzhdaemo … chrez vpechatlenie deistvuiushchikh na chuvstvennyia orudiia vneshnikh predmetov],” and 2) compassion or sympathy (sostradatel'nost') (“Chuvstvitel'nost'”). Functionally, it reflects the parallel scientific theory of sensibility developed by Albrecht von Haller (Febris Erotica 27). 1 Together with the concept of delicacy or tenderness (nezhnost'), which it incorporated, sensibility was perceived as the sign of a good soul.3 According to the first (1789-94) and second (1806-22) editions of the Dictionary of the Russian Academy (Slovar' Akademii Rossiiskoi), the word strast' (passion) denotes suffering (stradanie, muchenie) as well as “a strong feeling of desire or aversion, combined with the extraordinary movement of blood or animal spirits [Sil'noe chuvstvovanie okhoty ili otvrashcheniia, soedinennoe s neobyknovennym dvizheniem krovi i zhiznennykh dukhov].”4 In the latter case, passion is defined as a strong emotion (chuvstvovanie) which is correlated with (if not necessarily attributed to) two physiological processes which were presumed to be coextensive: the circulation of blood and the movement of animal spirits.5 The classification of passion as 3 Among other definitions (“soft,” “gentle,” and “weak”), nezhnyi (adj. form of nezhnost') denoted literal or metaphorical chuvstvitel'nost': sensitive friendship, compassion, or love (e.g. a “tender heart,” nezhnoe serdtse) (Chuvstvitel'nyi k druzhbе, k sostradaniiu, k liubvi) (“Nezhnyi”). 4 My translation of zhiznennykh dukhov as “animal spirits” is based on a contemporary (1783) text in which D.S. Anichkov translates the same phrase as “spiritus animales” (Anichkov). The Latin animalis (“animate” or “living”) comes from anima, meaning “psyche” or “soul.” I use “vital spirits” to designate pneuma zootikon,