this exquisite novel, first published in 1859, like so many great works of art, holds depths of meaning which at first sight lie veiled under the simplicity and harmony of the technique. to the english reader on the eve is a charmingly drawn picture of a quiet russian household, with a delicate analysis of a young girl’s soul; but to russians it is also a deep and penetrating diagnosis of the destinies of the russia of the fifties.
elena, the russian girl, is the central figure of the novel. in comparing her with turgenev’s other women, the reader will remark that he is allowed to come into closer spiritual contact with her than even with lisa. the successful portraits of women drawn by men in fiction are generally figures for the imagination to play on; however much that is told to one about them, the secret springs of their character are left a little obscure, but when elena stands before us we know all the innermost secrets of her character. her strength of will, her serious, courageous, proud soul, her capacity for passion, all the play of her delicate idealistic nature troubled by the contradictions, aspirations, and unhappiness that the dawn of love brings to her, all this is conveyed to us by the simplest and the most consummate art. the diary (chapter xvi.) that elena keeps is in itself a masterly revelation of a young girl’s heart; it has never been equalled by any other novelist. how exquisitely turgenev reveals his characters may be seen by an examination of the parts shubin the artist, and bersenyev the student, play towards elena. both young men are in love with her, and the description of their after relations as friends, and the feelings of elena towards them, and her own self-communings are interwoven with unfaltering skill. all the most complex and baffling shades of the mental life, which in the hands of many latter-day novelists build up characters far too thin and too unconvincing, in the hands of turgenev are used with deftness and certainty to bring to light that great kingdom which is always lying hidden beneath the surface, beneath the common-place of daily life. in the difficult art of literary perspective, in the effective grouping of contrasts in character and the criss-cross of the influence of the different individuals, lies the secret of turgenev’s supremacy. as an example the reader may note how he is made to judge elena through six pairs of eyes. her father’s contempt for his daughter, her mother’s affectionate bewilderment, shubin’s petulant criticism, bersenyev’s half hearted enthralment, insarov’s recognition, and zoya’s indifference, being the facets for converging light on elena’s sincerity and depth of soul. again one may note turgenev’s method for rehabilitating shubin in our eyes; shubin is simply made to criticise stahov; the thing is done in a few seemingly careless lines, but these lines lay bare shubin’s strength and weakness, the fluidity of his nature. the reader who does not see the art which underlies almost every line of on the eve is merely paying the highest tribute to that art; as often the clear waters of a pool conceal its surprising depth. taking shubin’s character as an example of creative skill, we cannot call to mind any instance in the range of european fiction where the typical artist mind, on its lighter sides, has been analysed with such delicacy and truth as here by turgenev. hawthorne and others have treated it, but the colour seems to fade from their artist characters when a comparison is made between them and shubin. and yet turgenev’s is but a sketch of an artist, compared with, let us say, the admirable figure of roderick hudson. the irresponsibility, alertness, the whimsicality and mobility of shubin combine to charm and irritate the reader in the exact proportion that such a character affects him in actual life; there is not the least touch of exaggeration, and all the values are kept to a marvel. looking at the minor characters, perhaps one may say that the husband, stahov, will be the most suggestive, and not the least familiar character, to english households. his essentially masculine meanness, his self-complacency, his unconscious indifference to the opinion of others, his absurdity as ‘un pere de famille‘ is balanced by the foolish affection and jealousy which his wife, anna vassilyevna, cannot help feeling towards him. the perfect balance and duality of turgenev’s outlook is here shown by the equal cleverness with which he seizes on and quietly derides the typical masculine and typical feminine attitude in such a married life as the two stahovs’.
turning to the figure of the bulgarian hero, it is interesting to find from the souvenirs sur tourguenev (published in 1887) that turgenev’s only distinct failure of importance in character drawing, insarov, was not taken from life, but was the legacy of a friend karateieff, who implored turgenev to work out an unfinished conception. insarov is a figure of wood. he is so cleverly constructed, and the central idea behind him is so strong, that his wooden joints move naturally, and the spectator has only the instinct, not the certainty, of being cheated. the idea he incarnates, that of a man whose soul is aflame with patriotism, is finely suggested, but an idea, even a great one, does not make an individuality. and in fact insarov is not a man, he is an automaton. to compare shubin’s utterances with his is to perceive that there is no spontaneity, no inevitability in insarov. he is a patriotic clock wound up to go for the occasion, and in truth he is very useful. only on his deathbed, when the unexpected happens, and the machinery runs down, do we feel moved. then, he appears more striking dead than alive — a rather damning testimony to the power turgenev credits him with. this artistic failure of turgenev’s is, as he no doubt recognised, curiously lessened by the fact that young girls of elena’s lofty idealistic type are particularly impressed by certain stiff types of men of action and great will-power, whose capacity for moving straight towards a certain goal by no means implies corresponding brain-power. the insight of a shubin and the moral worth of a bersenyev are not so valuable to the elenas of this world, whose ardent desire to be made good use of, and to seek some great end, is best developed by strength of aim in the men they love.
and now to see what the novel before us means to the russian mind, we must turn to the infinitely suggestive background. turgenev’s genius was of the same force in politics as in art; it was that of seeing aright. he saw his country as it was, with clearer eyes than any man before or since. if tolstoi is a purer native expression of russia’s force, turgenev is the personification of russian aspiration working with the instruments of wide cosmopolitan culture. as a critic of his countrymen nothing escaped turgenev’s eye, as a politician he foretold nearly all that actually came to pass in his life, and as a consummate artist, led first and foremost by his love for his art, his novels are undying historical pictures. it is not that there is anything allegorical in his novels — allegory is at the furthest pole from his method: it is that whenever he created an important figure in fiction, that figure is necessarily a revelation of the secrets of the fatherland, the soil, the race. turgenev, in short, was a psychologist not merely of men, but of nations; and so the chief figure of on the eve, elena, foreshadows and stands for the rise of young russia in the sixties. elena is young russia, and to whom does she turn in her prayer for strength? not to bersenyev, the philosopher, the dreamer; not to shubin, the man carried outside himself by every passing distraction; but to the strong man, insarov. and here the irony of insarov being made a foreigner, a bulgarian, is significant of turgenev’s distrust of his country’s weakness. the hidden meaning of the novel is a cry to the coming men to unite their strength against the foe without and the foe within the gates; it is an appeal to them not only to hasten the death of the old regime of nicolas i, but an appeal to them to conquer their sluggishness, their weakness, and their apathy. it is a cry for men. turgenev sought in vain in life for a type of man to satisfy russia, and ended by taking no living model for his hero, but the hearsay insarov, a foreigner. russia has not yet produced men of this type. but the artist does not despair of the future. here we come upon one of the most striking figures of turgenev — that of uvar ivanovitch. he symbolises the ever-predominant type of russian, the sleepy, slothful slav of to-day, yesterday, and to-morrow. he is the slav whose inherent force europe is as ignorant of as he is himself. though he speaks only twenty sentences in the book he is a creation of tolstoian force. his very words are dark and of practically no significance. there lies the irony of the portrait. the last words of the novel, the most biting surely that turgenev ever wrote, contain the whole essence of on the eve. on the eve of what? one asks. time has given contradictory answers to the men of all parties. the elenas of to-day need not turn their eyes abroad to find their counterpart in spirit; so far at least the pessimists are refuted: but the note of death that turgenev strikes in his marvellous chapter on venice has still for young russia an ominous echo — so many generations have arisen eager, only to be flung aside helpless, that one asks, what of the generation that fronts autocracy to-day?
‘do you remember i asked you, “will there ever be men among us?” and you answered, there will be. o primaeval force! and now from here in “my poetic distance” i will ask you again, “what do you say, uvar ivanovitch, will there be?”
‘uvar ivanovitch flourished his fingers, and fixed his enigmatical stare into the far distance.’
this creation of an universal national type, out of the flesh and blood of a fat taciturn country gentleman, brings us to see that turgenev was not merely an artist, but that he was a poet using fiction as his medium. to this end it is instructive to compare jane austen, perhaps the greatest english exponent of the domestic novel, with the russian master, and to note that, while as a novelist she emerges favourably from the comparison, she is absolutely wanting in his poetic insight. how petty and parochial appears her outlook in emma, compared to the wide and unflinching gaze of turgenev. she painted most admirably the english types she knew, and how well she knew them! but she failed to correlate them with the national life; and yet, while her men and women were acting and thinking, trafalgar and waterloo were being fought and won. but each of turgenev’s novels in some subtle way suggests that the people he introduces are playing their little part in a great national drama everywhere around us, invisible, yet audible through the clamour of voices near us. and so on the eve, the work of a poet, has certain deep notes, which break through the harmonious tenor of the whole, and strangely and swiftly transfigure the quiet story, troubling us with a dawning consciousness of the march of mighty events. suddenly a strange sense steals upon the reader that he is living in a perilous atmosphere, filling his heart with foreboding, and enveloping at length the characters themselves, all unconsciously awaiting disaster in the sunny woods and gardens of kuntsovo. but not till the last chapters are reached does the english reader perceive that in recreating for him the mental atmosphere of a single educated russian household, turgenev has been casting before his eyes the faint shadow of the national drama which was indeed played, though left unfinished, on the balkan battlefields of 1876-7. briefly, turgenev, in sketching the dawn of love in a young girl’s soul, has managed faintly, but unmistakably, to make spring and flourish in our minds the ineradicable, though hidden, idea at the back of slav thought — the unification of the slav races. how doubly welcome that art should be which can lead us, the foreigners, thus straight to the heart of the national secrets of a great people, secrets which our own critics and diplomatists must necessarily misrepresent. each of turgenev’s novels may be said to contain a light-bringing rejoinder to the old-fashioned criticism of the muscovite, current up to the rise of the russian novel, and still, unfortunately, lingering among us; but on the eve, of all the novels, contains perhaps the most instructive political lesson england can learn. europe has always had, and most assuredly england has been over-rich in those alarm-monger critics, watchdogs for ever baying at slav cupidity, treachery, intrigue, and so on and so on. it is useful to have these well-meaning animals on the political premises, giving noisy tongue whenever the slav stretches out his long arm and opens his drowsy eyes, but how rare it is to find a man who can teach us to interpret a nation’s aspirations, to gauge its inner force, its aim, its inevitability. turgenev gives us such clues. in the respectful, if slightly forced, silence that has been imposed by certain recent political events on the tribe of faithful watchdogs, it may be permitted to one to say, that whatever england’s interest may be in relation to russia’s development, it is better for us to understand the force of russian aims, before we measure our strength against it and a novel, such as on the eve, though now nearly forty years old, and to the short-sighted out of date, reveals in a flash the attitude of the slav towards his political destiny. his aspirations may have to slumber through policy or necessity; they may be distorted or misrepresented, or led astray by official action, but we confess that for us, on the eve suggests the existence of a mighty lake, whose waters, dammed back for a while, are rising slowly, but are still some way from the brim. how long will it take to the overflow? nobody knows; but when the long winter of russia’s dark internal policy shall be broken up, will the snows, melting on the mountains, stream south-west, inundating the valley of the danube? or, as the national poet, pushkin, has sung, will there be a pouring of many slavonian rivulets into the russian sea, a powerful attraction of the slav races towards a common centre to create an era of peace and development within, whereby russia may rise free and rejoicing to face her great destinies? hard and bitter is the shaping of nations. uvar ivanovitch still fixes his enigmatical stare into the far distance.
edward garnett
january 1895.
