Dave Schaafsma's Reviews > Fathers and Sons
Fathers and Sons (Dover Thrift Editions: Classic Novels)
by
by

Dave Schaafsma's review
bookshelves: fiction-19th-century
Aug 28, 2012
bookshelves: fiction-19th-century
Read 2 times. Last read January 1, 2016 to September 7, 2016.
I re-read Fathers and Sons for a couple reasons; 1) I have been on a small Rereading Great Russian Novels kick the last couple years and 2) I was interested in what the book might have to say about the relationships between fathers and sons. As to #1, this novel was the first Great Russian Novel to achieve international fame, paving the way for—in my estimation—greater works from Dostoevsky and Tolstoy, but it’s also pretty legitimately great in its own right. As to #2, I think it’s less actually about father and son relationships than generational cultural, political and philosophical differences in the Russia of the time [though I just read Brian Friel's play adaptation of the novel, and that does a better job--in the shorter space--of focusing on those "generation gaps."]
The book features a youngish nihilist botanist Bazarov who asserts that he basically believes in nothing (which puts him somewhat to the left of anarchism, and well left of pragmatism, two lively nineteenth century sort of anti-philosophical frameworks for living) and who is completely engaging—if not all that likable. This character in particular set off a firestorm of critique from the right (who saw it as an attack on traditional Russian humane values because they thought Turgenev approved of Bazarov) and the left, especially nihilists, (who thought Turgenev denounced/satirized Bazarov).
Turgenev, who was interested in depicting with a kind of social realism the Russia of mid-nineteenth century, was not interested in didacticism or political essays. His goal was to write a novel with complex characters, and in my opinion, pulls it off! He admitted he was fond of Bazarov as one of his characters, but disavowed any association with his cynical ideas. And when we see the chinks in Bazarov’s cynical armor, we get to like him a little. A little. But he’s never a dull character.
Bazarov is kind of (Lee, in a review I recall from weeks ago, calls him) a nineteenth century punk, anti-social, anti-arts, who puts more faith in rationalism and science than metaphysics or grand theories. As he says, “What's important is that twice two is four and all the rest's nonsense.� He prefers to debunk ideas more than anything else. While he says “first let’s destroy everything, raze it to the ground, and we’ll worry about re-building later,� he’s really too lazy to do any of the actual razing. He’s a sort of slacker, a puppy, all bark.
Bazarov accompanies a follower, fellow university student Arkady, to his summer home, when the freeing of the serfs was slowly taking place (about the time slaves were being freed in the US). Arkady mainly just agrees with everything Bazarov says. Has a kind of man-crush on him, but he has no ideas of his own. Arkady’s Dad Nikolai and his uncle Pavel, old school humanists who want to Do Good in the World, are exasperated by these new-fangled ideas.
Though Bazarov is the most memorable central character, my favorite character in the book is Uncle Pavel, for sure (Lee calls him a metro-sexual, which works), who is sophisticated and common-sensical and thinks the young guys are talking like idiots. As he says of them, “The fact is that previously they were simply dunces and now they've suddenly become nihilists.�
So the young pups leave the uni for the country, run into a couple of bright and memorably strong-willed and articulate sisters, Katya and Anna, whom they promptly fall in love with, which takes the edge off their anti-idealism in a kind of comic way. In one memorable line, Bazarov, who is studying botany, remarks to Arkady about Anna: “What a magnificent body, how I should like to see it on the dissecting table.� Ha! There, Bazarov is proven right: biology, love/lust triumphs over philosophy and big fancypants ideas, go figure. Light comedy. But both the older and younger generations are gently lampooned.
When the boys return to Arkady’s place the uncle, Pavel, for some reasons (one involving a woman, the other politics) insists on dueling Bazarov, getting (lightly) wounded in the process, which is also a kind of comic story. Hot-headed men and their talk! Again, the Clash of Big Ideas comes down to two guys fighting (as if) to the death. Biology (testosterone) trumps philosophy. Again, light comedy, and Turgenev basically likes these folks.
The fathers/uncle and their liberal (as opposed to radical) ideas are not prominently featured in this book; they basically shut up and let the young turks blather on, though they also love them a great deal. Parents in this book love their crazy kids and just want them around (and to maybe shut up about all the radical talk already!): Just fall in love, have babies, and grow up! Family, father and son relations matter! So (spoiler alert?) love conquers all, and Arkady stops being all revolutionary and marries and reconnects with Dad, whew, back in the fold. But he was never a real radical, so no big surprise there.
I won’t tell you what happens to Bazarov, in the end, but I was surprised and liked it, too. I will say I liked the book quite a lot. You won’t forget Bazarov and Pavel. A classic that is also entertaining!
The book features a youngish nihilist botanist Bazarov who asserts that he basically believes in nothing (which puts him somewhat to the left of anarchism, and well left of pragmatism, two lively nineteenth century sort of anti-philosophical frameworks for living) and who is completely engaging—if not all that likable. This character in particular set off a firestorm of critique from the right (who saw it as an attack on traditional Russian humane values because they thought Turgenev approved of Bazarov) and the left, especially nihilists, (who thought Turgenev denounced/satirized Bazarov).
Turgenev, who was interested in depicting with a kind of social realism the Russia of mid-nineteenth century, was not interested in didacticism or political essays. His goal was to write a novel with complex characters, and in my opinion, pulls it off! He admitted he was fond of Bazarov as one of his characters, but disavowed any association with his cynical ideas. And when we see the chinks in Bazarov’s cynical armor, we get to like him a little. A little. But he’s never a dull character.
Bazarov is kind of (Lee, in a review I recall from weeks ago, calls him) a nineteenth century punk, anti-social, anti-arts, who puts more faith in rationalism and science than metaphysics or grand theories. As he says, “What's important is that twice two is four and all the rest's nonsense.� He prefers to debunk ideas more than anything else. While he says “first let’s destroy everything, raze it to the ground, and we’ll worry about re-building later,� he’s really too lazy to do any of the actual razing. He’s a sort of slacker, a puppy, all bark.
Bazarov accompanies a follower, fellow university student Arkady, to his summer home, when the freeing of the serfs was slowly taking place (about the time slaves were being freed in the US). Arkady mainly just agrees with everything Bazarov says. Has a kind of man-crush on him, but he has no ideas of his own. Arkady’s Dad Nikolai and his uncle Pavel, old school humanists who want to Do Good in the World, are exasperated by these new-fangled ideas.
Though Bazarov is the most memorable central character, my favorite character in the book is Uncle Pavel, for sure (Lee calls him a metro-sexual, which works), who is sophisticated and common-sensical and thinks the young guys are talking like idiots. As he says of them, “The fact is that previously they were simply dunces and now they've suddenly become nihilists.�
So the young pups leave the uni for the country, run into a couple of bright and memorably strong-willed and articulate sisters, Katya and Anna, whom they promptly fall in love with, which takes the edge off their anti-idealism in a kind of comic way. In one memorable line, Bazarov, who is studying botany, remarks to Arkady about Anna: “What a magnificent body, how I should like to see it on the dissecting table.� Ha! There, Bazarov is proven right: biology, love/lust triumphs over philosophy and big fancypants ideas, go figure. Light comedy. But both the older and younger generations are gently lampooned.
When the boys return to Arkady’s place the uncle, Pavel, for some reasons (one involving a woman, the other politics) insists on dueling Bazarov, getting (lightly) wounded in the process, which is also a kind of comic story. Hot-headed men and their talk! Again, the Clash of Big Ideas comes down to two guys fighting (as if) to the death. Biology (testosterone) trumps philosophy. Again, light comedy, and Turgenev basically likes these folks.
The fathers/uncle and their liberal (as opposed to radical) ideas are not prominently featured in this book; they basically shut up and let the young turks blather on, though they also love them a great deal. Parents in this book love their crazy kids and just want them around (and to maybe shut up about all the radical talk already!): Just fall in love, have babies, and grow up! Family, father and son relations matter! So (spoiler alert?) love conquers all, and Arkady stops being all revolutionary and marries and reconnects with Dad, whew, back in the fold. But he was never a real radical, so no big surprise there.
I won’t tell you what happens to Bazarov, in the end, but I was surprised and liked it, too. I will say I liked the book quite a lot. You won’t forget Bazarov and Pavel. A classic that is also entertaining!
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
Fathers and Sons.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
August 28, 2012
– Shelved
September 30, 2014
– Shelved as:
fiction-19th-century
January 1, 2016
–
Started Reading
August 8, 2016
–
9.52%
"Restarted reading this, on vacation. . .one of the greats of nineteenth century Russian lit. .. revisiting..."
page
16
September 7, 2016
–
Finished Reading
August 9, 2021
–
Started Reading
(Other Paperback Edition)
August 9, 2021
– Shelved
(Other Paperback Edition)
August 9, 2021
– Shelved as:
drama
(Other Paperback Edition)
August 9, 2021
– Shelved as:
father-brother-s...
(Other Paperback Edition)
August 9, 2021
–
Finished Reading
(Other Paperback Edition)
Comments Showing 1-17 of 17 (17 new)
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Dave
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Sep 07, 2016 05:07PM

reply
|
flag


oh forgot Chekhov..I have a collected stories of his

That's what I remember most about this book - and especially Bazarov's poor parents!
Thanks for a very clear analysis, David.

That's what I remember most about this book - and especially Bazarov's poor parents!
Thanks for a very clear analysis, David."
Oh, yes, well I wrote too much already but I did have compassion for his parents, loving their arrogant son. . .. when he left them after not having seen them for two years, and stayed only three days, that was sad. And the end... the parents of both guys come through as sweet, reasonable, likable people.

oh forgot Chekhov..I have a collected stories of his" and the plays, of course. And the main poet I know is Anna Ahkmatova, whose work I love.

oh forgot Chekhov..I have a collected stories of his" and the plays, of course. And the main poet I know ..."
I am not that familiar with Russian poetry..or really much poetry at all (save the classics)...it's not my wheelhouse

oh forgot Chekhov..I have a collected stories of his" and the plays, of course. And the mai..." The narrative of her life is a novel in itself. The poetry just emerges out of her story, drastically impacted by living in WWII Leningrad.

oh forgot Chekhov..I have a collected stories of his" and the plays, of cour..."
I can tell you have an MFA...I'm curious, if you don't mind me asking, what your PhD was in? :) I've always wondered what one would research for an English dissertation


oh forgot Chekhov..I have a collected stories of his" and the ..."
I did not do an English dissertation. I was admitted to a grad English PhD program, and had I accepted that invitation, I probably would have written something about Hemingway. My MA thesis was actually about Jane Austen novels, though, actually. My dissertation is in English and Education, and that title of the dissertation is Eating on the Street: Teaching Literacy in a Multicultural Society, about a community-based oral history summer wiring project for middle school students in Detroit in the late eighties. It became a book that sold pretty well for an educational book.

oh forgot Chekhov..I have a collected stories o..."
That's really cool. So Hemingway and Jane Austen. Interesting :) I am currently working my way slowly through some classics that I had not read in awhile or just have not read-Joyce's Ulysses is a prime example..as well as perhaps re-reading Salinger and Melville soon....did pick up Jack London's White Fang (I've read Call of the Wild) :) Well as I truly do appreciate and love history, so must you English...

oh forgot Chekhov..I have a colle..." I don't get notification of when people reply to me, have to fix that... rude to just trail off in a convo, but it happens to me since I don't hear of responses. What are you reading? Any classics? In history, I only read meta-history or New Historicist stuff as it pertains to narrative/fiction. But I want to read some historical fiction.... that British bestseller. . .
