RUDIN (1856) by Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev (1818-1883) tells the story of a character typical to Turgenev -- a "superfluous" man, weak of will, brimming with indecisive frustration -- and yet tormented by ideals. Rudin is made impotent by the dissonance of honoring the older generations while at the same time embracing the new bold epoch of pre-revolutionary Russia. The theme of melancholic powerless men coupled with vital idealistic women is prevalent in Turgenev's work, and it would be hard to find a clearer study of the type than RUDIN.
Ivan Sergeyevich Turgenev (Cyrillic: 袠胁邪薪 小械褉谐械械胁懈褔 孝褍褉谐械薪械胁) was a novelist, poet, and dramatist, and now ranks as one of the towering figures of Russian literature. His major works include the short-story collection A Sportsman鈥檚 Sketches (1852) and the novels Rudin (1856), Home of the Gentry (1859), On the Eve (1860), and Fathers and Sons (1862).
These works offer realistic, affectionate portrayals of the Russian peasantry and penetrating studies of the Russian intelligentsia who were attempting to move the country into a new age. His masterpiece, Fathers and Sons, is considered one of the greatest novels of the nineteenth century.
Turgenev was a contemporary with Fyodor Dostoevsky and Leo Tolstoy. While these wrote about church and religion, Turgenev was more concerned with the movement toward social reform in Russia.
A fragrant mist lay like a soft shroud over the garden; a drowsy scent breathed from the trees near. The stars shed a mild radiance. The summer night was soft 鈥� and softened all.
Nabokov, with his usual sharpness, said about Turgenev that his storytelling was lame and that 鈥榯he worst of Turgenev was thoroughly expressed in Gorki鈥檚 works, and Turgenev鈥檚 best (in the way of Russian landscape) was beautifully developed by Chekhov鈥�, mischievously mocking his 鈥榩erfectly modulated, well-oiled prose and perfectly rounded graceful sentences鈥�. I thoroughly enjoyed reading Turgenev鈥檚 debut novel from 1856, mostly because of that silky-smooth, mellifluous prose, his marvellous gift to evoke nature and atmosphere and his mild ironic take on human tribulations at the backdrop of the mightiness of the landscape 鈥� a view that would get much more bitter and barbed in his 1867 novel . .
Poetry is the language of the gods. I love poems myself. But poetry is not only in poems; it is diffused everywhere, it is around us. Look at those trees, that sky on all sides there is the breath of beauty, and of life, and where there is life and beauty, there is poetry also.
Dmitri Nikolaevich Rudin, the eponymous protagonist, is thoroughly imbued with German poetry, German romanticism and philosophy when he returns to Russia after studying in Heidelberg and turns into the focus of attention of a circle of small landowners on the country, where he stays as the house guest of an aging widow.
Talkative and idealistic, he is the philosopher who will not write anything, the painter who will not touch any canvas, undisciplined, not fitting in, gnomic and attractive but shying away from every true engagement, firing and inspiring others by his animated discussion but unable to bring himself to any action. The slightest opposition makes him falter and give up, even makes him flee. Like Goncharov鈥檚 , and Puskin鈥檚 , he isn鈥檛 up to the strength and determination of the young woman who falls in love with him and whom he repudiates as sadly illustrated by a confessional scene in the woods which reminds greatly of the letter scene in . The music of eloquence is beguiling, but falls silent when it comes to take action.
Rudin has been mentioned among those archetypical 鈥榮uperfluous man鈥� of Russian literature like Lermontov鈥檚 Pechorin (from , a misfit, not fitting into the social norms, but the poor chap doesn鈥檛 even seem to fit into the mould of the of that concept! He seems prey to a paralyzing impossibility to act, does not endeavour into any of the typical behaviours (gambling, drinking, duels), nor is he is a cynic 鈥� he is more of a windbag, a sponger, creating an aura of expectations around him he cannot live up to.
And yet, do not judge Rudin to harshly - how right it feels that Turgenev doesn鈥檛 and treats him with kindness. Isn鈥檛 it rather so that some people are more comfortable with the word, while others more tend to act? Isn't a perfectly balanced amalgamation of both qualities quite rare? It would be a blessing if everyone who cannot realise their potential because of inhibitions of character keeping them from being effectual in their particular context would be graced with a mild and generous friend, someone that would be simply there for them, despite all - like Rudin in the end.
What sweet moments Natalya passed when at times in the garden on the seat, in the transparent shade of the aspen tree, Rudin began to read Goethe鈥檚 Faust, Hoffman, or Bettina鈥檚 letters, or Novalis, constantly stopping and explaining what seemed obscure to her.
O bookish people, beware when you consider bestowing books upon a romantic individual 鈥� they might fall in love with you and before you can say forget-me-nots things might get horribly out of hand.
Rudin is the first novel by Ivan Turgenev, a famous Russian writer best known for his short stories and the novel Fathers and Sons.
The main protagonist of the novel. Rudin is a well-educated, intellectual and extremely eloquent nobleman.
His finances are in a poor state and he is dependent on others for his living. His father was a poor member of the gentry and died when Rudin was still very young.
He was brought up by his mother who spent all the money she had on him, and was educated at Moscow University and abroad in Germany, at Heidelberg and Berlin.
Unii critici literari au insinuat c膬 Rudin este 卯nt卯iul 鈥瀘m de prisos鈥� prezentat 卯ntr-o carte. Nu prea cred. E plin膬 literatura de oameni pe c卯t de geniali, tot pe at卯ta de inutili.
Romanul lui Turgheniev devine obositor prin faptul c膬 naratorul 葯tie tot (e omniscient, cum ar veni, ca 葯i naratorul lui Saramago, numai c膬 ultimul e 卯ntotdeauna ironic) 葯i 葲ine mor葲i葯 s膬 ne 葲in膬 la curent cu 葯tiin葲a lui. Se gr膬be葯te s膬 divulge tot ce simt, tot ce g卯ndesc personajele 卯n sinea lor, dac膬 o dam膬 are o m卯nc膬rime 卯n nas 葯i de ce... Nimic nu r膬m卯ne neconsemnat de autor. Cititorul iese strivit.
Dar despre ce este vorba 卯n cartea lui Turgheniev? Foarte pe scurt, cam asta: un individ banal, bun vorb膬re葲, simpatic, mai degrab膬 umil 葯i mai cur卯nd fricos, dezam膬ge葯te o fat膬. Adic膬 refuz膬 s膬 fug膬 卯n lume cu fata (卯nc膬 minor膬) care 卯l iube葯te. 脦n definitiv, Rudin procedeaz膬 ra葲ional. La葯itatea lui o salveaz膬 pe Natalia Alexeevna de la un necaz aproape sigur. Rudin nu e cel mai potrivit b膬rbat pentru ea. Nu 葯tie 葯i nici nu poate s膬 decid膬, e purtat de via葲膬 de colo-colo, nu are nici o ini葲iativ膬, e m卯nat numai 葯i numai de hazard. Moare pe o baricad膬 卯n revolu葲ia de la 1848 din Paris. Ce a c膬utat acolo doar el 葯tie...
N-am uitat, totu葯i, c膬 Rudin s-a tip膬rit 卯n 1856. Asta m-a f膬cut s膬 adaug o stelu葲膬 la estimarea corect膬. Ca portret al parazitului, Rudin e, totu葯i, o reu葯it膬.
O carte tocmai potrivit膬 pentru ni葯te nervi sl膬bi葲i de astenia timpului incert de afar膬, o carte aflat膬 卯ntre 卯nghe葲ul insistent 葯i prov膬cator al iernii 葯i nestatornicia prim膬verii care va s膬 vin膬...Demult nu mai citisem o carte de Turgheniev, ultima tot la 卯nceputul unui feburarie 卯nghe葲at o r膬sfoisem, dar acum contextul e un pic mai diferit, Rudin este prima carte cu care 卯葯i face debutul clasicul rus 葯i probabil cea mai fluent膬, lizibil膬 葯i u葯or de 卯n葲eles; scriitorul nu se prea complic膬 卯n divaga葲ii filosofice sterile ca majoritatea scriitorilor ru葯i c芒nd e vorba de personaje universale, Rudin este un personaj simplu, dar totodat膬 complex, bine educat, manierat, vis膬tor 葯i foarte vorb膬re葲, Rudin nu face dec芒t s膬 stagnze, s膬 pluteasc膬 葯i la sf芒r葯it aproape s膬 se 卯nece 卯n propriile vise m膬re葲e 葯i teorii despre via葲膬 pe care nu le va pune 卯n aplicare niciodat膬, de ce? pentru c膬 eroul nostru este un indecis, analitic 葯i prea tipicar ca s膬 duc膬 la bun sf芒r葯it o fapt膬 m膬rea葲膬, plin de patos 葯i elocin葲膬 葯i totodat膬 pasionat, Rudin le 葲ine isonul eternilor eroi ai literaturii ruse: Oneghin, Peciorin, Arkadi din Adolescentul lui Dostoievsky 卯ntr-o pierde a timpului nesf芒r葯it膬...Romanul lui Turgheniev e ca un samovar care fierbe 卯ncontinuu la foc mic 葯uier芒nd la final zgomotos,dar degeaba pentru c膬 nu-l mai aude nimeni.
In my opinion, it is quite noticeable that this is Turgenev's first novel due to the fact that it mainly feels like reading an unfinished work... Most of the characters fell flat, were kind of uninteresting (or rather I couldn't really connect with any of them) and it's definitely a character-driven novel!! I must add that Turgenev's descriptions were already quite magnificent and picturesque in this novel, so cheers to that!!! STUNNING atmosphere that one could really get immersed in!!!
Additionally, the little plot that there was really confused me. Although I have to be precise here and say that it wasn't the actions that confused me... What caused the confusion were THE MOTIVES for those particular actions. Namely, I failed to observe and find a (rational) explanation for how the storyline unfolded and why things happened the way they did. For example (not mentioning names to avoid spoilers), one of the character admits and voices his feelings of love for another character out of the absolute blue. There was no bigger buildup for it, the character just went from 0% to 100% in (not sure butttt I think it was) 3-4 pages. That's just one example out of a few others.
This next opinion I will state will most likely be really controversial buttt... well... I actually found the epilogue one of the most enjoyable passages of this novel. It managed to portray and shed light onto the "main issue" of the protagonist (and this entire story) in a really poignant manner. I finally started to feel SOMETHING for the characters... And, quite surprinsingly, that feeling was empathy, shocker, honestly. I feel like here we actually kind of started to understand what the "moral of the story" or the message of the book was, so to say, which I, frankly speaking, was quite glad about because I don't really like reading meaningless literature (and it would have been a huge surprise to me, if Russian classical literature suddenly left me without any of that to be honest, since that's precisely why I love it so much XD). Sidenote: I hated the last page of the epilogue though or rather how it was written. The end (in the direct and indirect way cough cough) was destined to happen in that way, however, the way it was worded and the circumstances around it were just "silly" or not thought through well, in my opinion. I won't really say more in order to avoid spoilers!!! You'll probably understand what I mean after reading this short novel.
Overall, I was really intrigued by the topic of the "superfluous man" that is of major importance in Russian classical literature as a whole, and which, admittedly, is one of my favourite themes of all time in novels and literature!! However, that specific story was quite a letdown (I have high standards for Russian classics authors, so it still was WAYYY above average compared to modern literature hahahahah!!!). If you feel like you want to read about the "superfluous man", I suggest you to pick up Pushkin's "Onegin" or Lermontov's "Hero of Our Time" instead!!
P.S. How did the author manage to use the word "胁锌褉芯褔械屑" 42 times in such a short novel?????
[maggio 2018] Sto leggendo le Memorie di un cacciatore, evento letterario russo del 1852, perch茅 un giorno, casualmente, mi ero letto il primo romanzo di Turgenev, questo Rudin, pubblicato quattro anni dopo le Memorie, che mi era piaciuto molto e mi aveva fatto venir voglia di conoscere di pi霉 l'autore.
Rudin, considerato un ritratto della generazione romantica russa, 猫 un romanzo breve, veloce; un romanzo da camera, direi: di incontri, di discorsi, di salotti e conversazioni, di pensieri e di sentimenti, sviluppati, dichiarati, esaminati, discussi e proclamati; di parole pi霉 che di azioni. Nella brevit脿 dell鈥檌nsieme compaiono molti personaggi, tutti presto riconoscibili, tratteggiati felicemente, comprese le figure minori, come il parassita ufficiale (un 鈥渓eccapiatti鈥� come dice a un certo punto espressivamente la traduzione, usando una parola che troviamo ad esempio nei meravigliosi 痴颈肠别谤茅 di De Roberto), che serve anche da contrasto per capire meglio il protagonista; oppure il giovane e appassionato precettore, il misogino dichiarato ed esibito, ecc. Agilmente Turgenev ci fa cos矛 intravedere un piccolo mondo provinciale di proprietari terrieri russi, un mondo che sembra bloccato in una situazione infinitamente ripetibile, sospesa e senza sbocchi. Il movimento centrale del romanzo inizia quando giunge inaspettatamente il protagonista eponimo, Dmitri Nikolaevi膷 Rudin: il piccolo mondo di relazioni 猫 messo in moto.
Il cuore di tutto il romanzo 猫 la tensione 鈥� impossibile da risolvere 鈥� tra l鈥檌ntelligenza e la volont脿, tra le grandi passioni, gli ideali di conoscenza e di vita, e i limiti della personalit脿, tra il voler sentire senza riserve e puramente e la coscienza della complessit脿 del proprio animo, dell鈥檌ncertezza dei propri sentimenti. 鈥淎lla russa鈥�, ossia con grandi proclami, appassionati discorsi, appassionati anche nell鈥檃utodenigrazione. E la caratteristica pi霉 affascinante del libro, alla fine, 猫 forse l鈥檃mbiguit脿: .
A differenza delle Memorie, che sono proprio dei racconti ad alta voce del cacciatore a un uditorio, qui un narratore c'猫 ma 猫 quasi invisibile; qualche volta fa capolino con una frasetta ma non si lascia individuare; agisce soprattutto governando con grande abilit脿 i passaggi della struttura asimmetrica: molte pagine per pochi giorni concentrati e dettagliatamente osservati poi dilatazioni temporali che condensano anni in poche pagine.
I caratteri 鈥� e i giudizi ampiamente formulati sui caratteri dei personaggi 鈥� non emergono dal narratore e dall鈥檌ntrospezione romanzesca, e si possono solo parzialmente ricostruire dalle azioni; sono invece quasi interamente in mano alle parole dei personaggi stessi, che dichiarano e discutono il proprio essere e quello degli altri, creando un meraviglioso senso di ambiguit脿 e di insicurezza. Si affacciano poi le grandi questioni storiche russe a met脿 dell'Ottocento: la servit霉 della gleba; il rapporto complesso tra formazione europea e forte contatto con la 鈥渕adre Russia鈥�; l'immobilismo sociale. Il tutto 猫 brillante: oltre a essere una lettura interessante, Rudin 猫 anche una lettura divertente.
Each book I read offers a new perspective. In this post, I share my thoughts on this book in both Persian and English hope this will be enjoyable for you :)
The novel "Rudin" is one of the masterpieces of classic literature. With Turgenev鈥檚 beautiful and fluent prose, it portrays a complex world of personal and social conflicts. Set in a calm and contemplative atmosphere, it vividly depicts the lives of 19th-century Russian aristocrats and intellectuals, oscillating between traditions and modern ideas. Rudin, the protagonist, symbolizes the dreamers and idealists鈥攊ndividuals who passionately speak about changing the world, yet often face deep contradictions when confronted with the harsh and undeniable realities of life. Turgenev鈥檚 perspective on this character is philosophical and filled with psychological precision, compelling the reader to reflect.
This was my first experience reading Turgenev's works, and it felt like stepping into a world that not only grapples with idealistic challenges but also offers a profound perspective on humanity and society. I must say, his ability to create vivid, relatable, and even tragic characters fully captivated me and strengthened my determination to explore his other works. His writing style not only immerses you in the heart of the story but also invites you to think and question topics like identity, responsibility, and the meaning of life.
Rudin is not merely a story about a character or a specific historical period; it serves as a mirror for people of its own time and ours鈥攖hose caught between ambitious dreams and the harsh limits of reality. For me, this book is a reminder that literature can be both entertaining and thought-provoking. If you鈥檙e someone who enjoys stories that not only captivate but also delve into existential questions, Rudin might just be the perfect choice for you.
Translated by Constance Garnett. To be read before . Available at Librivox:
In this novel Turgenev has a message to convey. Some people talk very, very well, but when it comes to taking an action and actually doing something, they fail. The book looks at how we view such people. They can incite other people to action even if they lack the ability themselves. Eloquence is exhilarating; it moves others. Conversely, not having the courage to act oneself can in some situations be viewed as a failing. There is the gist of the novel.
Who ends up getting married and whom they choose is another theme.
One can read the book for its character studies of the following people: *Dmitrii Nikolaevich Rudin *Natal鈥檡a Alekseevna Lasunskaya (Natasha) *Dar鈥檡a Mikhailovna Lasunskaya *Mihailo Mihailych Lezhnev *Aleksandra Pavlovna Lipina *Sergei Pavlovich Volyntsev *Konstantin Diomidych Pandalevskii *Afrikan Semenych Pigasov *Basistov I typed the names out, so I had them before me as I listened to the story. This is my method of dealing with Russian names! I scribble down what I learn about each as the story progresses.
Did I come to care for the characters? No, actually, I didn鈥檛, and this explains why I do not give the book more stars. I know who they are and I understand why each one acts as they do, but I feel no attachment to them, except maybe for Natal鈥檡a. To her I feel a connection; I know I would do as she does.
I like very much Turgenev鈥檚 description of nature. The translation is easy to follow, and there are lines packed with wisdom concerning how people relate to each other. For example, that mothers and daughters rarely see eye to eye and that young people often want to draw easy, simple, pat conclusions.
The book feels very Russian to me. One recognizes the strong attachment to one鈥檚 country and how friends accept failings in one another.
Lee Smalley narrates the audio version of the story at Librivox. His narration I have given three stars. It took a while for me to get used to his narration. I began to recognize how he pronounced the characters鈥� names. It isn鈥檛 easy to quickly snap up the three to four different names each Russian character has. The speed isn鈥檛 too fast once you recognize who is who. The French spoken is not good, but it is stated in the text that the character did not speak French fluently. The narration is fine, but nothing exceptional. I wouldn鈥檛 object to listening to this narrator again, which is in fact a vote of confidence.
I like this book. It never bored me, but neither do I love it, so I have given it three stars.
I was and remain in love with Turgenev鈥檚 short novels of 鈥� not ideas, exactly; not morality plays, as I used to try to describe them; at any rate, short novels that hinge on a commitment, a choice, and that emplot the questions of Turgenev鈥檚 day, or is it the question? Whether to act. How to act, given that there is wide agreement on the necessity of action and a frustrating lack of scope for it, in intelligentsia circles of Turgenev鈥檚 day. They lived under the tsar but read French utopian socialists. The nobility had an old ethic of service to the state but their once-steep service obligations had been curtailed, and they were left with the ethic 鈥� and no outlet. So the history books tell me. Also in Russia, there were no dedicated philosophers as in Germany or France, but literary circles took up this task 鈥� to respond to philosophy and social questions; so that everybody was a dilettante; so that novelists and literary critics were the ones to conduct the discussions of the day, social-political-philosophical.
You end up with novels like Turgenev鈥檚. Not novels of ideas, but engaged as get-out, about engaged people, about the question of engagement. You have young women like Natalya in this, who are often the hinge of the decision in the plot; whose young urgency and seriousness about life I found a rare focus in classic fiction when I was her age. I recommend Turgenev鈥檚 novels to girls. Let no-one tell me Turgenev鈥檚 novels are 鈥榚ssentially love stories鈥�, as I see around, because they are about a girl鈥檚 puzzle as to where to vest her life and energies. This time, Natalya is wasted, as is Rudin, who was too cowardly (my word, and Natalya鈥檚) to take up her earnest offer and act upon his fine words. Rudin speaks wonderfully on the ideals afloat in the day, and fires other people with enthusiasm 鈥� this is his saving grace, that those enthusiasms are not always or altogether lost; that people can take a fine speech on with them through life, and in their seedy age, perhaps, recognise its potency in them, in what they have managed to do. So argues Rudin鈥檚 most critical friend, to console a seedy run-down Rudin in his age. He also cites the fact that Rudin has never stayed still, which need not be inability to commit but refusal to commit to the compromises most people do. We get several views of Rudin, two different verdicts even from this friend who changes his mind. Turgenev has made his main a coward but is quite kind to him, early and late.
Rudin is a highly educated, well-brought up man in his 30s living in Russia. He embodies the Superfluous Man popular in Russian literature: a man of high intelligence and ideals with no action. He is, essentially, all talk and incapable of following through with his thoughts and desires. He is a moocher, living off of the generosity of others. He is taken in by Darya Lasunsky, mother of 17-year-old beauty, Natalya. Rudin befriends Natalya, an equally intelligent young woman, filled with secrets, most important of which are her feelings for Rudin. As they become more honest and open with one another their secret is discovered and the relationship is vetoed by Natalya's mother. Rudin leaves and spends the rest of his days as a wanderer, consistently misunderstood, even upon his death.
For a short Russian novel Turgenev managed to fit an impressive amount of information. The social opinion of the time following the Crimean War, when Rudin was written, was one of a need for reform. The character of Rudin is the image of many of the day in that he knew what was needed but was incapable of following through in making it happen. He once refers to himself as a mighty oak in talking with Natalya, but by the end of the novel he admits to another that he is just "a rolling stone". He admits to Mikhaylo Lezhnev - the one who never had the wool pulled over his eyes by Rudin's idealism - that Lezhnev was always correct in his opinion of Rudin's worth. Many years have passed since he was 35 and he now acknowledges his ineffectiveness just in time for the French Revolution.
I do love me some Russian lit. This is my first experience with Turgenev and a good starting point as it was also his first novel published in a magazine in 1856. His writing at this point is not quite as rich as Tolstoy's or as expressive as Dostoevsky's.
Turgenev has a way with words so whatever the work may be, it is worth reading. The characters here are beautifully written especially for such a short novel and are truly memorable, specially Rudin but memorable characters are there in his short stories as well. The length of a work doesn't stand in the way of Turgenev in creating his rare, yet very realistic characters.
Turgenev's Rudin is the sort of charismatic man who sets people's hearts on fire but he has a fatal flaw. He is a superfluous man, perhaps like Pushkin's Eugene Onegin. He is all talk and no action. He has high-minded ideals but can not transfer them into deeds. As such he is destined to remain unhappy. However, unlike other characters, he is aware of this and can remain true to himself in contrast to other characters in the novel.
Once you finish this, you'll be left with troubling unanswered questions about your own life because it is a powerful parable to anyone who is seriously examining their motives, especially if you are dissatisfied with your current endings.