# Reading > Forum Book Club >  Christmas Reading: "Fathers and Sons" by Turgenev

## Scheherazade

*

We will be reading Fathers and Sons by Ivan S. Turgenev.

Please post your comments and questions here.

Online Text

Synopsis:



Turgenev's masterpiece about the conflict between generations is as fresh, outspoken, and exciting today as it was in when it was first published in 1862. The controversial portrait of Bazarov, the energetic, cynical, and self-assured 'nihilist' who repudiates the romanticism of his elders, shook Russian society. Indeed the image of humanity liberated by science from age-old conformities and prejudices is one that can threaten establishments of any political or religious persuasion, and is especially potent in the modern era. This new translation, specially commissioned for the World's Classics, is the first to draw on Turgenev's working manuscript, which only came to light in 1988.


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Fathers-Sons...7371465&sr=8-1


Book Club Regulations*

----------


## thelastmelon

Very good that it could be read online!  :Thumbs Up:  I was trying to find the book in the Swedish online stores, 
but couldn't find it. So either that or borrow the book from the library. I'll try to get through this one.  :Smile:

----------


## Nightshade

finshed 8 chapters...and Im _really_ enjoying this, great comeback read!  :Nod: 
I need to find out abit of context , so russian history when Ive time.
Lots of it are rather timless observations of the generation gap, though arent they I can see ( actualy I have seen and heard my family having conversations simmilar to the one where Arkady explains to his father and uncle what a Nihlist is,)
also this 



> The servant, in whom everything--the turquoise ring in his ear, the hair plastered down with grease and the polite flexibility of his movements--indicated a man of the new improved generation


Cant you just see a 'punk' , well my copies translation is slightly different it says "dyed pomaded hair"... still fitting though.

 :Biggrin:

----------


## papayahed

> finshed 8 chapters...and Im _really_ enjoying this, great comeback read! 
> I need to find out abit of context , so russian history when Ive time.
> Lots of it are rather timless observations of the generation gap, though arent they I can see ( actualy I have seen and heard my family having conversations simmilar to the one where Arkady explains to his father and uncle what a Nihlist is,)
> also this 
> 
> 
> Cant you just see a 'punk' , well my copies translation is slightly different it says "dyed pomaded hair"... still fitting though.


My copy says "pomaded hair of various shades".

Interesting.

----------


## grace86

I will start reading tonight. One final left yet so then I'll be able to finish it in a hurry.

----------


## Dori

I'll start reading once I finish Tolstoy's "Hadji Murad."

----------


## thelastmelon

I'll start reading when I finish _Emma_. I'll do it as soon as I can.
I got the book from a library nearby.  :Thumbs Up:

----------


## Janine

I have read up to about Chapter 6 and am enjoying it very much. So far, I find some of the passages quite amusing and I like Arkady and his father; I am still not sure what to make of Bazarov; also of the old uncle who seems to be somewhat of a 'dandy'. I feel there will definitely be some real clash between those two somewhere in the novel. I thought it interesting to note that Arkady' father has kept a mistress and is shy or ashamed of the fact with his son. I like the way the author doesn't directly come out with this information but suggests, she is his mistress from time to time. I can see this happening to some degree, even today. The son just found out about the child, and this is especially interesting to see the son's now 'open-minded attitude' towards the whole situation; unlike his father, who is rooted in the traditions and conventions of the past. I hope I did not give away too much of the story, but it as I saidm I am only up to Chapter 6. These short Chapters fly right by quickly, so that part is not too far into the book. I accomplished this last chapter, in the waiting room at my doctor's, today. The reading is easy and enjoyable.

----------


## grace86

Should we be focusing on the family aspect of the book (like Nikolai and his son's relationship) or are we just taking the book as a whole? Very interesing ideas on the generations and the newer ones being nihilists....sorry my brain is everywhere today.

----------


## Dori

> Should we be focusing on the family aspect of the book (like Nikolai and his son's relationship) or are we just taking the book as a whole? Very interesing ideas on the generations and the newer ones being nihilists....sorry my brain is everywhere today.


I think we should discuss the book as a whole. And they were _self-proclaimed_ nihilists, to be precise.  :Smile: 

I read most of the introduction to my version today.

----------


## Scheherazade

Finally picked up the book from the library; will start reading it tomorrow.

----------


## Janine

> Should we be focusing on the family aspect of the book (like Nikolai and his son's relationship) or are we just taking the book as a whole? Very interesing ideas on the generations and the newer ones being nihilists....sorry my brain is everywhere today.


*Grace,* I don't entirely agree with *Dori* (sorry Dori) on this one. I think we should discuss the story both, as we go along, and as a 'whole', after we complete our reading of the book. I also think there are many aspects to consider for discussion; and I feel the father and son relationship would be one of those and the changing attitudes or the generation gap ties in with this. The young men may very well be self-proclaimed nihilists, but I have not ventured that far into the book to determine that precisely. I think it would be advantageous to put some first impressions out there in discussion and then see how these alter or change or develop as the story progresses. 

I think that we all have our own style of discussing and with our experiences with our short story group, we have accomplished more by taking the parts of the story and discussing them firstly, along with any symbolism or themes; and then at the end, seeing a total picture of the entire story and what it set out to convey or accomplish. We can also take into account the ideas the author truly was trying to set forth. If we just discuss the 'overall', what point is there in having a monthly discussion at all? We need to work up to the complete picture and most important or 'main' themes. Discussing the book from beginning, is like an adventure of discoverly to encounter the various elements in the book, which help to develop our impression of the characters and settings or help to advance the plot of the novel. It is good to point out specific passages (in quotes) in which this author reveals certain aspects and elements of the book that are vital, for our discussion in this thread. This way each person discussing can throw in his individual ideas concerning that passage or passages in the story. In this way we can see how the author developed his novel and conveyed his story to us.

*Grace and Dori,* I hope all of this makes sense to you. :Wink: 

*Scher* - you will find the book flows along quite quickly. I hope you do enjoy it. I like your new avatar for Christmas - that snow looks so serene and relaxing....cute...my son always loved Snoopy!

----------


## papayahed

I wish I had read this book when I was younger to compare it with this reading

----------


## Janine

> I wish I had read this book when I was younger to compare it with this reading


Yes, but first time reading, you get the element of surprise in the story!

----------


## papayahed

> Yes, but first time reading, you get the element of surprise in the story!


I'm just wondering if I would have read it when I was in my early twenties/teens would I identify with Bazarov and Arcady moreso then the father/uncle.

----------


## Nightshade

> Yes, but first time reading, you get the element of surprise in the story!


Unless you do a Night and skim the last 10 pages....  :FRlol:

----------


## Janine

> Unless you do a Night and skim the last 10 pages....


 :FRlol:   :FRlol:   :FRlol:  You know I never do that....but apparently you do, *Night!*  :FRlol:  Well, enjoy the middle of the book last! :Wink: 




> I'm just wondering if I would have read it when I was in my early twenties/teens would I identify with Bazarov and Arcady moreso then the father/uncle.


*papayahed,* you know, that is an interesting thought. Perhaps we will all relate differently, to the various characters, depending on our own ages.
Since I am reading the book the second time I may now sympathise (being older) with the older generation....who knows. :Wink:

----------


## Scheherazade

You guys want me to start the book immediately; before I even finish the one I am reading at the moment!

Janine> I love Snoopy and Peanuts. My favorite comics. Still read them daily.

----------


## Dori

> finshed 8 chapters...and Im _really_ enjoying this, great comeback read! 
> I need to find out abit of context , so russian history when Ive time.
> Lots of it are rather timless observations of the generation gap, though arent they I can see ( actualy I have seen and heard my family having conversations simmilar to the one where Arkady explains to his father and uncle what a Nihlist is,)
> also this 
> 
> 
> Cant you just see a 'punk' , well my copies translation is slightly different it says "dyed pomaded hair"... still fitting though.





> My copy says "pomaded hair of various shades".
> 
> Interesting.


My translation, by Constance Garnett, says "...in whom everything -- the turquoise ring in his ear, the streaky hair plastered with grease, and the civility of his movements -- indicated a man of the new, improved generation... Essentially, it's the same, but it is interesting to compare translations.




> I'm just wondering if I would have read it when I was in my early twenties/teens would I identify with Bazarov and Arcady moreso then the father/uncle.


I'm a teen and from my previous reading of this book, I couldn't really identify with Bazarov; I believe that I indentify more with the "old idealists" as Bazarov describes Pavel and Nikolai. Also, I'm not sure I could identify with someone who said "[Nikolai Petrovich] wastes his time reading poetry." I may respect Bazarov, but I certainly cannot identify with him. 




> *papayahed,* you know, that is an interesting thought. Perhaps we will all relate differently, to the various characters, depending on our own ages.
> Since I am reading the book the second time I may now sympathise (being older) with the older generation....who knows.


I'm not sure that it will depend on our age, although it might hold true to some. Like I mentioned above, I think I can identify more with the oldies than Bazarov and Arkady, and I'm a teenager.




> I have read up to about Chapter 6 and am enjoying it very much. So far, I find some of the passages quite amusing and I like Arkady and his father; I am still not sure what to make of Bazarov; also of the old uncle who seems to be somewhat of a 'dandy'. I feel there will definitely be some real clash between those two somewhere in the novel. I thought it interesting to note that Arkady' father has kept a mistress and is shy or ashamed of the fact with his son. I like the way the author doesn't directly come out with this information but suggests, she is his mistress from time to time. I can see this happening to some degree, even today. The son just found out about the child, and this is especially interesting to see the son's now 'open-minded attitude' towards the whole situation; unlike his father, who is rooted in the traditions and conventions of the past. I hope I did not give away too much of the story, but it as I saidm I am only up to Chapter 6. These short Chapters fly right by quickly, so that part is not too far into the book. I accomplished this last chapter, in the waiting room at my doctor's, today. The reading is easy and enjoyable.


Pavel indeed is, as you said, somewhat of a dandy. I liked how his hand was described: Pavel Petrovitch took out of his trouser pocket his exquisite hand with its long tapering pink nails, a hand which seemed still more exquisite from the snowy whiteness of the cuff, buttoned with a single, big opal, and gave it to his nephew." And then Bazarov, as he speaks with Arkady, goes on saying, "You're uncle's a queer fish...Only fancy such style in the country! His nails, his nails -- you ought to send them to an exhibition!"  :Biggrin:  Nevertheless, from my last reading, I sympathized with Pavel throughout the story.

----------


## Janine

> You guys want me to start the book immediately; before I even finish the one I am reading at the moment!
> 
> Janine> I love Snoopy and Peanuts. My favorite comics. Still read them daily.


*
Scheherazade,* what are you reading now? Maybe try doing as I do; read more of that one and then just a chapter or two of the new book, just to get your feet wet, so to speak. 

Yes, they are really cute and my son had a stuffed Snoopy he would sleep with every night...oh what memories. :Smile:  We always watched all the specials, especially this time of year. His friend and he liked Snoopy as 'The Red Baron", best of all; funny, because his friend went on to be a pilot. My mother still keeps a small collection of the miniature plastic Christmas figurines that she puts on a certain windowsill in the kitchen, I think mostly in honor of her only grandchild and our memories of when he was little and still living here. They do look so cute and we have a set of the ceramic ones for a Christmas tree that were also my sons. Perhaps we can pass them onto our newly expected grandchild and great-grandchild come spring or next Christmas.

----------


## Quark

> I'm just wondering if I would have read it when I was in my early twenties/teens would I identify with Bazarov and Arcady moreso then the father/uncle.





> *papayahed,* you know, that is an interesting thought. Perhaps we will all relate differently, to the various characters, depending on our own ages.
> Since I am reading the book the second time I may now sympathise (being older) with the older generation....who knows.


The conflict between the younger characters and their older relatives and friends certainly is a generational one; but, it's also a matter of beliefs. I think I agree with Dori that, even though I'm closer in age to Bazarov, I actually agree more with Pavel. I'm much more of a pretentious romantic than I am a levelheaded scientist. I think my attitudes are probably closer to Bazarov's, though. At the end of chapter six Bazarov shows much of the presumptuous arrogance that characterizes youthful arguments. He says of people like Pavel: 




> Well, should I coddle them, these provincial aristocrats? Why, it's all pride, it's fashionable custom, it's foppishness


I think I've talked about some people like this before. I also think I've been talked to by older people like Pavel who are so close-minded that they can't even accept that others might have ideas outside of their own. 

So, I agree with Pavel, but I think I empathize with Bazarov. Hopefully, that means I have the good sides of each character. Or, maybe it just means I'm really confused. I think we're probably all in the middle somewhere. That's why Ardiskii (however you spell it) is the main character. We all, to some degree, feel stuck in the middle of Pavel and Bazarov going back and forth.

Yet, if Pavel represents the older generations views, Bazarov the new, and Ardaskii (I'm going to change my spelling until I stumble into the correct one) is trapped in the middle, what is the purpose of Nikolai--the father. What purpose does he serve? Or, better put, what do you think of him?





> Janine> I love Snoopy and Peanuts. My favorite comics. Still read them daily.


C'mon, what about Calvin and Hobbes?

----------


## Dori

> ...it's also a matter of beliefs. I think I agree with Dori that, even though I'm closer in age to Bazarov, I actually agree more with Pavel. I'm much more of a pretentious romantic than I am a levelheaded scientist.


I agree completely. 




> So, I agree with Pavel, but I think I empathize with Bazarov. Hopefully, that means I have the good sides of each character. Or, maybe it just means I'm really confused. I think we're probably all in the middle somewhere. That's why Ardiskii (however you spell it) is the main character. We all, to some degree, feel stuck in the middle of Pavel and Bazarov going back and forth.


First of all, my translation says the main character's name is Arkady (and it is spelled this way too). I agree with your final statement. I sympathize with Pavel for what he's gone through, evinced in Chapter VII, and I can relate to him, although I'm not as aristocratic as he is. Bazarov is, among other things, rebellious, nonchalant, and scientific -- three traits I don't share with him, despite my youth.




> Yet, if Pavel represents the older generations views, Bazarov the new, and Ardaskii (I'm going to change my spelling until I stumble into the correct one) is trapped in the middle, what is the purpose of Nikolai--the father. What purpose does he serve? Or, better put, what do you think of him?


I don't think I'll comment on that quite yet; I'll wait until later in the story. Truthfully, even though I've read this story before, I'm not sure what to think of Nikolai (at that point I was far more interested in Pavel and Bazarov). 




> C'mon, what about Calvin and Hobbes?


I prefer Calvin and Hobbes to Snoopy anyday.  :Biggrin:

----------


## Quark

> First of all, my translation says the main character's name is Arkady (and it is spelled this way too).


I looked in my copy. The MLC edition spells his name Arkadii. There are probably endless variants since they're translating it from a language with an entirely different alphabet. They could refer to him as quf&#37;[email protected]#yfhii and it would be just as accurate, I guess. Whenever I read these novels it always takes me thirty or forty pages to remember who is who. If I can't pronounce the names, I often have a hard time distinguishing between Petryvitch and Petrovitch. This problem becomes even worse when they start using their patronymic or nicknames. In a scene where there are only two people having coffee, I think it's a party of twelve. If I start talking about Evgenii and Bazarov like they're two different people, just remind me.




> I agree with your final statement. I sympathize with Pavel for what he's gone through, evinced in Chapter VII, and I can relate to him, although I'm not as aristocratic as he is. Bazarov is, among other things, rebellious, nonchalant, and scientific -- three traits I don't share with him, despite my youth.


I guess the question is: if you're stuck in a carriage ride between St. Petersburg and a remote town in the country, who would you rather talk to?

----------


## Janine

> I looked in my copy. The MLC edition spells his name Arkadii. There are probably endless variants since they're translating it from a language with an entirely different alphabet. They could refer to him as quf%[email protected]#yfhii and it would be just as accurate, I guess. Whenever I read these novels it always takes me thirty or forty pages to remember who is who. If I can't pronounce the names, I often have a hard time distinguishing between Petryvitch and Petrovitch. This problem becomes even worse when they start using their patronymic or nicknames. In a scene where there are only two people having coffee, I think it's a party of twelve. If I start talking about Evgenii and Bazarov like they're two different people, just remind me.


*Hi Quark*, good to see you in the discussion, now the the L short story thread is on hold... :Wink: . I hope in the new year we can start up the Chekhov again. I have those audiobook CD's. 
Anyway, back to F&S, both you and *Dori* are making me laugh. You don't have to identify with anyone yet, really. It is funny to hear you two guys changing your mind every couple of seconds as to who you are more like. I don't know who I am identifying with at this point. I do find Bazarov as was described by* Dori* , "Bazarov is, among other things, rebellious, nonchalant, and scientific -- three traits I don't share with him, despite my youth." I don't boast of youth and I don't identify with his traits either, so far; which to me is strange, because I had the impression, that when I first read the book, I did feel the most empathy for Bazarov....maybe I just have not gotten far enough into the story, to feel as I once did...who knows?

*Quark*, your paragraph above is just how I felt on my first reading. I got so confused, with the mulitple names; you really cracked me up with your saying "They could refer to him as quf%[email protected]#yfhii and it would be just as accurate, I guess." I also think there are 'more people in the room', because of the surnames or whatever one technically calls them, in a Russian novel. It takes me about forty pages also, to figure out just who is who. I think my book has an introduction where it lists them....well, hopefully it does...






> I guess the question is: if you're stuck in a carriage ride between St. Petersburg and a remote town in the country, who would you rather talk to?



 :FRlol:  Yes, that might be the quesion! you could want to talk to quf%[email protected]#fhii or maybe you would rather talk to tdfr*[email protected]#... :Wink:

----------


## papayahed

> The conflict between the younger characters and their older relatives and friends certainly is a generational one; but, it's also a matter of beliefs. I think I agree with Dori that, even though I'm closer in age to Bazarov, I actually agree more with Pavel. I'm much more of a pretentious romantic than I am a levelheaded scientist. I think my attitudes are probably closer to Bazarov's, though.





> First of all, my translation says the main character's name is Arkady (and it is spelled this way too). I agree with your final statement. I sympathize with Pavel for what he's gone through, evinced in Chapter VII, and I can relate to him, although I'm not as aristocratic as he is. Bazarov is, among other things, rebellious, nonchalant, and scientific -- three traits I don't share with him, despite my youth.


I am the levelheaded scientist. It's funny I can clearly remember getting into debates with my uncle, very reminiscent of Bazarov/Paul(Paval). Which kind of makes me laugh because as I'm reading I'm having more sympathy for the older gents.

Side Note:

In my copy it's spelled Arcady, i think I have the Englishized version because the uncle is "Paul".

----------


## Dori

> I looked in my copy. The MLC edition spells his name Arkadii. There are probably endless variants since they're translating it from a language with an entirely different alphabet. They could refer to him as quf%[email protected]#yfhii and it would be just as accurate, I guess. Whenever I read these novels it always takes me thirty or forty pages to remember who is who. If I can't pronounce the names, I often have a hard time distinguishing between Petryvitch and Petrovitch. This problem becomes even worse when they start using their patronymic or nicknames. In a scene where there are only two people having coffee, I think it's a party of twelve. If I start talking about Evgenii and Bazarov like they're two different people, just remind me.


 :FRlol:  You get used to it after a while. I don't usually have a problem with it, but I've been interested in Russian literature for the past two or three months. It becomes second nature after a while.  :Wink:  I can see what you're saying though; for instance, Pavel's full name is Pavel Petrovitch Kirsanov and as a result he can be referred to as Pavel, Pavel Petrovitch, or Kirsanov. 

I've seen translators translate names differently, but most of the time they're similar. For example, you can spell Dostoevsky's name six different ways:

Dostoevsky; Dostoevskii; Dostoievsky; Dostoyevsky; Dostoievskii; Dostoyevskii. 

None of these are necessarily wrong, but the most common are Dostoevsky and Dostoyevsky.




> I guess the question is: if you're stuck in a carriage ride between St. Petersburg and a remote town in the country, who would you rather talk to?


At this point, probably Pavel. I fear a conversation with Bazarov might turn into this:  :Argue:  




> *Hi Quark*, good to see you in the discussion, now the the L short story thread is on hold.... I hope in the new year we can start up the Chekhov again. I have those audiobook CD's. 
> Anyway, back to F&S, both you and *Dori* are making me laugh. You don't have to identify with anyone yet, really. It is funny to hear you two guys changing your mind every couple of seconds as to who you are more like. I don't know who I am identifying with at this point. I do find Bazarov as was described by* Dori* , "Bazarov is, among other things, rebellious, nonchalant, and scientific -- three traits I don't share with him, despite my youth." I don't boast of youth and I don't identify with his traits either, so far; which to me is strange, because I had the impression, that when I first read the book, I did feel the most empathy for Bazarov....maybe I just have not gotten far enough into the story, to feel as I once did...who knows?


 :Biggrin:  I know I don't have to identify with anyone yet, but it would be interesting to see how my opinions of certain characters have changed of the course of my reading. 


As for my progress, I just finished Chapter VIII.

----------


## Dori

> Side Note:
> 
> In my copy it's spelled Arcady, i think I have the Englishized version because the uncle is "Paul".


Really? I've never come across a piece of Russian literature that replaced the Russian name with its English alternative. I for one prefer the Russian names; Paul sounds too boring.  :Tongue:

----------


## thelastmelon

> I've seen translators translate names differently, but most of the time they're similar. For example, you can spell Dostoevsky's name six different ways:
> 
> Dostoevsky; Dostoevskii; Dostoievsky; Dostoyevsky; Dostoievskii; Dostoyevskii. 
> 
> None of these are necessarily wrong, but the most common are Dostoevsky and Dostoyevsky.


Just to add another spelling: Dostojevskij.
That's what it says about him on the Swedish Wikipedia site.

----------


## Janine

translations, translations, translatons....*awwwww, sigh*...are we all reading the same book? I guess we will all get the general idea of the story regardless. As Shakespeare stated "A Rose by any other name.....(you all know the rest)...."

Well, I am progressing well with this book and am hopeful of finishing it by the end of the year....haha - hey that is not far away.

I find the conversations in the book and in the forum somewhat amusing and I, too, can relate to some of these generational aspects of the book. I think the author is wonderfully wry and witty, at times with the body language and the dialogue, even the little details of clothing. The writing moves along so smoothly and so rapidly; as one forum member pointed out, this author does not 'beat around the bush', but directly conveys, what he intends directly to the reader. I liked the small bits of description, such as the one describing the young mistress' dwellings. I found that passage particularly interesting, reflecting so much in the tiny details, like things hanging over pictures, etc and the jars of gooseberry jam on the windowsill, which were Pavel's brother's favorites. I could perfectly imagine that room and Pavel's keen observations. The room had a life of it's own. I love it when, an author can convey so much, in such a small amount of text, and yet catch all the important little details.

----------


## Scheherazade

Janine> I am reading _Behind the Scenes at the Museum_ at the moment. Only 100 pages left so I should be able to stat _Fathers and Sons_ tomorrow.


> C'mon, what about Calvin and Hobbes?





> I prefer Calvin and Hobbes to Snoopy anyday.


Bah, humbug!

Kids today! What do they know? 

 :Wink:

----------


## bazarov

I will wait for everyone to finish it.  :Smile:

----------


## Quark

> *Hi Quark*, good to see you in the discussion, now the the L short story thread is on hold.... I hope in the new year we can start up the Chekhov again. I have those audiobook CD's.


I do want to start the short story threads again. I have a good one for the Chekhov thread already picked out.




> You don't have to identify with anyone yet, really.





> I know I don't have to identify with anyone yet, but it would be interesting to see how my opinions of certain characters have changed of the course of my reading.


Identify is probably too strong of a word. After all, Pavel and Bazarov are really only meant to be caricatures. I don't think I would really want to be either of them. But, it does make me smile when I catch myself acting like them.

----------


## Janine

> Janine> I am reading _Behind the Scenes at the Museum_ at the moment. Only 100 pages left so I should be able to stat _Fathers and Sons_ tomorrow.Bah, humbug!
> 
> Kids today! What do they know?


Yeah, bah humbug - Snoopy rules!.... and so does Woodstock, CB, Lucy, Lional, etc, etc, etc. I sure hope my grandchild (to be) loves Snoopy, too.

Oh, good, *Scheherazade,* 100 pages should go by quickly. I have been listening to another novel on audiobook and just reached the half-way mark, so I may stop here and pick up after F&S since it is a book I already read before. I hope I did not give much away in that paragraph I wrote about the room; that is not far into the book.




> I do want to start the short story threads again. I have a good one for the Chekhov thread already picked out.


*Quark,* great! *sigh* I hope the one you have in-mind is on my audiobook set...






> Identify is probably too strong of a word. After all, Pavel and Bazarov are really only meant to be caricatures. I don't think I would really want to be either of them. But, it does make me smile when I catch myself acting like them.


True; I would agree with this to the greater extent. I also find it amusing sometimes, reading about what they each say to each other, or to the parents, since I can see how I might say the same or similiar thing, without realising it.

----------


## Quark

So, why do you guys think Arkadii likes Bazarov so much in the beginning? He calls him smart, but what else do you suppose makes Bazarov likeable to Arkadii?





> *Quark,* great! *sigh* I hope the one you have in-mind is on my audiobook set...


Well, which ones are in your audiobook? Since it's probably only going to be the two of us talking for a while, I may as well pick a story that you have.

----------


## papayahed

> So, why do you guys think Arkadii likes Bazarov so much in the beginning? He calls him smart, but what else do you suppose makes Bazarov likeable to Arkadii?


Do we know the ages of Arkadii and Bazarov? I get the feeling that Bazarov is slightly older (a year or two), maybe a little more experience.

----------


## Janine

> So, why do you guys think Arkadii likes Bazarov so much in the beginning? He calls him smart, but what else do you suppose makes Bazarov likeable to Arkadii?


*Quark,* I think Arkady looks up to Bazarov, because Bazarov presents himself as being very 'sure of himself' and definite about what he believes in. Even though Arkady seems somewhat different, in temperment and disposition and maybe even deeply rooted beliefs, than Bazarov, I think that Arkady is drawn to B, because he represents something very unlike his past life (with his parents and uncle). Also, Bazarov represents the new form of thinking. This would be a time, in the lives of these two young men, when they feel the need to reject the old ways and rebell against them. Is this not evident, even today? I think Bazarov presents himself as a sort of prophet or leader of the new scientific way of thinking and nilistic views. Others are usually drawn easily to that sort of personality - they appear to attact, even in some mysterious way. If you notice Bazarov is a man of few words as a rule and this only enhances his mystique to Arkady.





> Well, which ones are in your audiobook? Since it's probably only going to be the two of us talking for a while, I may as well pick a story that you have.


Oh thanks, *Quark,* for being so accomodating. 
These 12 ~ In the Ravine, Oh!The Public, The Chorus Girl, The Trousseau, A Shory Without a Title, Chidren, Misery, Fat and Thin, The Beggar, Hush!, The Orator, An Actor's End




> Do we know the ages of Arkadii and Bazarov? I get the feeling that Bazarov is slightly older (a year or two), maybe a little more experience.


*Papayahed,* I get the sense they are the same age, but that Bazarov seems to be older, because he projects a much more self-assured image than Arkady; at least in the beginning half of the book. I can't speak for the rest yet, since I didn't read past about half and I forget (from my earlier reading), just what his attitudes are by the end. I had the impression they were in the same school together and probably meet in the same class or classes. But it could be possible that B is older than Arkady. I don't think the text ever stated their ages at all, did it...does anyone know?

----------


## Quark

> Do we know the ages of Arkadii and Bazarov? I get the feeling that Bazarov is slightly older (a year or two), maybe a little more experience.


I'm not sure whether Bazarov is actually older, or whether it just seems that way to the reader. They both graduate at the same time, so that leads me to believe they must be very close to the same age. I think it might just appear that Bazarov is older because of his confidence and resolve.




> *Quark,* I think Arkady looks up to Bazarov, because Bazarov presents himself as being very 'sure of himself' and definite about what he believes in. Even though Arkady seems somewhat different, in temperment and disposition and maybe even deeply rooted beliefs, than Bazarov, I think that Arkady is drawn to B, because he represents something very unlike his past life (with his parents and uncle). Also, Bazarov represents the new form of thinking. This would be a time. in the lives of these two young men. when they feel the need to reject the old ways and rebell against them. Is this not evident even today? I think Bazarov presents himself as a sort of prophet or leader of the new scientific way of thinking and nilistic views. Others are usually drawn easily to that sort of personality - they appear to attact, even in some mysterious way. If you notice Bazarov is a man of few works usually and this only enhances his mystique to Arkady.


Yeah, I think Arkadii is looking to distance himself from his past life. He certainly realizes that things need to change around his father's land. Bazarov probably does attracts Arkadii because of his contrary opinions. In a few scenes, when Bazarov is challenging the older generation, Arkadii seems all too happy to echo Baz's radical notions. Also, I think you and Papayahed are right about Bazarov's confidence being important. Arkadii appears a little timid whereas Bazarov exudes a steady confidence. Although, I wonder whether this is really genuine confidence. Sometimes, Turgenev makes this self-reliance seem more like callousness than confidence. 

Janine, I hadn't thought about Bazarov's mysterious being a quality that the other characters liked. I had always considered this mysteriousness more of a ploy used by Turgenev to keep the reader guessing what Baz is going to do next or where Bazarov's ideas will lead him. From what I see, Arkadii thinks that he actually does understand Bazarov. Later on, though, he turns out to be sadly mistaken.






> Oh thanks, *Quark,* for being so accomodating. 
> These 12 ~ In the Ravine, Oh!The Public, The Chorus Girl, The Trousseau, A Shory Without a Title, Chidren, Misery, Fat and Thin, The Beggar, Hush!, The Orator, An Actor's End


Of those, "The Ravine", I think, is best. Although, two of them I haven't read. I'll have to think about it over Christmas.

----------


## Janine

> I'm not sure whether Bazarov is actually older, or whether it just seems that way to the reader. They both graduate at the same time, so that leads me to believe they must be very close to the same age. I think it might just appear that Bazarov is older because of his confidence and resolve.


*Quark,* did they actually say they both had just graduated? I thought I read that in the beginning. Since I am really busy decorating the house, etc...maybe you would be so kind to quote that passage for everyone's benefit.






> Yeah, I think Arkadii is looking to distance himself from his past life. He certainly realizes that things need to change around his father's land. Bazarov probably does attracts Arkadii because of his contrary opinions. In a few scenes, when Bazarov is challenging the older generation, Arkadii seems all too happy to echo Baz's radical notions. Also, I think you and Papayahed are right about Bazarov's confidence being important. Arkadii appears a little timid whereas Bazarov exudes a steady confidence. Although, I wonder whether this is really genuine confidence. Sometimes, Turgenev makes this self-reliance seem more like callousness than confidence.


So your book called him Arkadii; to Bazarov 'because of his contrary opinions', right? and the sense of youthful rebellion of sorts. That is a good way of phrasing it, when you said 'Arkadi seems all too happy to echo Baz's radical notions.' - yes, he almost sounds like a parrot sometimes, in mimicing Baz; it becomes humorous to some degree. Arkadii does seem more timid next to Bazarov - they seem to contrast nicely with each other. I feel that Arkadii isn't entirely against the old ways yet; nor is he totally insensitive to his father, as his father now believes. There is a certain natural 'pulling-away', a youth goes through from any parent, so I don't find that is so strange at all and I find it is just as valid today, as ever.
I agree with your last two statements here. I think we will see some change in Bazorov's attitudes, as the second half of the story progresses.





> Janine, I hadn't thought about Bazarov's mysterious being a quality that the other characters liked. I had always considered this mysteriousness more of a ploy used by Turgenev to keep the reader guessing what Baz is going to do next or where Bazarov's ideas will lead him. From what I see, Arkadii thinks that he actually does understand Bazarov. Later on, though, he turns out to be sadly mistaken.


Yes, because I had known someone like that once and he seemed to just have this certain allure of 'mystique' about him, that was a very attractive force for other people; one felt instantly drawn to him and you really could not say why, exactly. He also spoke with assurance and confidence and yet I always felt an underlying questioning in this person and I don't think he was nearly as secure or confident, as he would have make you believe he was. So this further supports your idea that you expressed in your last two sentences, of the first quoted post of yours. 






> Of those, "The Ravine", I think, is best. Although, two of them I haven't read. I'll have to think about it over Christmas.


Well, "The Ravine" is the title story for the audio cd set "The Ravine and other stories by Anton Chekhov", so it must be really good - the best one probably. It is narrated by Kenneth Branagh, so it should be something I would enjoy listening to; I would listen to him narrate the phone directory! He is a fine narrator and his "Richard III" is suberb, but that is with a full cast.  :Thumbs Up:  Of what I heard so far of the audiobooks Chekhov stories, he does the whole cast and it is quite interesting/amusing.

----------


## Dori

I must be terse for now; I have too much homework to write anything more detailed than the following.




> So, why do you guys think Arkadii likes Bazarov so much in the beginning? He calls him smart, but what else do you suppose makes Bazarov likeable to Arkadii?


I believe Bazarov is a very charismatic individual. In chapter V, Bazarov "made friends [with two farm boys] at once, and set off with them to a small swamp about a mile from the house to look for frogs." This perhaps is a mild demonstration of his charisma, but I think it also attests to his good interpersonal skills (which also plays a part in attracting 'pupils') . He was also confident; in chapter II Turgenev writes of Bazarov, "He showed Nikolai Petrovich his whole face...it was lighted up by a tranquil smile, and showed self-confidence and intellegence."

----------


## Janine

> I must be terse for now; I have too much homework to write anything more detailed than the following.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe Bazarov is a very charismatic individual. In chapter V, Bazarov "made friends [with two farm boys] at once, and set off with them to a small swamp about a mile from the house to look for frogs." This perhaps is a mild demonstration of his charisma, but I think it also attests to his good interpersonal skills (which also plays a part in attracting 'pupils') . He was also confident; in chapter II Turgenev writes of Bazarov, "He showed Nikolai Petrovich his whole face...it was lighted up by a tranquil smile, and showed self-confidence and intellegence."


*Dori,* sometimes fewer, more 'select' words are better. You certainly hit upon several very good points here with specific references, to back up your ideas. I would agree entirely and the word 'charismatic' is an excellent one. Citing the example make perfect sense to me. 

Good luck with your homework!  :Wink:

----------


## bazarov

> So, I agree with Pavel, but I think I empathize with Bazarov. Hopefully, that means I have the good sides of each character. Or, maybe it just means I'm really confused. I think we're probably all in the middle somewhere. *That's why* *Ardiskii (however you spell it) is the main character*. We all, to some degree, feel stuck in the middle of Pavel and Bazarov going back and forth.


Definitely not, Evegeniy Vasilyevich Bazarov is the main character, whole plot about traditionalism and nihilism is on his back, that little yo-yo is really useless. 




> Yet, if Pavel represents the older generations views, Bazarov the new, and Ardaskii (I'm going to change my spelling until I stumble into the correct one) is trapped in the middle, what is the purpose of Nikolai--the father. What purpose does he serve? Or, better put, what do you think of him?


In my opinion his only purpose is to reduce Arkady's possibility of free thinking and showing how Arkady cannot be a true nihilist and act in that way. HIs love to his father is too strong and he cannot control it like Bazarov can.





> So, why do you guys think Arkadii likes Bazarov so much in the beginning? He calls him smart, but what else do you suppose makes Bazarov likeable to Arkadii?



He is everything what Arkady wants to be; smart, liberal and open minded. He made Arkady to stop think in old provincial way.




> Do we know the ages of Arkadii and Bazarov? I get the feeling that Bazarov is slightly older (a year or two), maybe a little more experience.


Well, they are probably same age, they are at classes together.

[QUOTE=Janine;497264]
I think Bazarov presents himself as a sort of prophet or leader of the new scientific way of thinking and nilistic views. Others are usually drawn easily to that sort of personality - they appear to attact, even in some mysterious way. If you notice Bazarov is a man of few words as a rule and this only enhances his mystique to Arkady.
[\QUOTE]

Agree.



> Yeah, I think Arkadii is looking to distance himself from his past life. He certainly realizes that things need to change around his father's land. Bazarov probably does attracts Arkadii because of his contrary opinions. In a few scenes, when Bazarov is challenging the older generation, Arkadii seems all too happy to echo Baz's radical notions.


Arkady is also afraid of challenging his father and uncle; his love toward them is stronger then his nihilistic ideas and that's the reason of his rift with Bazarov.

Have you finished the novel?

----------


## Janine

> Definitely not, Evegeniy Vasilyevich Bazarov is the main character, whole plot about traditionalism and nihilism is on his back, that little yo-yo is really useless.






> In my opinion his only purpose is to reduce Arkady's possibility of free thinking and showing how Arkady cannot be a true nihilist and act in that way. HIs love to his father is too strong and he cannot control it like Bazarov can.


This sounds like something 'E V Bazarov' would say!  :FRlol:  






> He is everything what Arkady wants to be; smart, liberal and open minded. He made Arkady to stop think in old provincial way.


Well, phrased!




> Well, they are probably same age, they are at classes together.


Later it does tell their age or Bazarov's, I believe. I think it was late 20's - maybe 28 or 9. I will look it up, but I don't have time presently.




> Agree.


 Oh, good... :Smile:  




> Arkady is also afraid of challenging his father and uncle; his love toward them is stronger then his nihilistic ideas and that's the reason of his rift with Bazarov.


I have not reached that part of the book yet, but feel it is eminent.





> Have you finished the novel?


*Bazarov,* I can only speak for myself - I am now about half way through the book; might be a little slow for me for now, until Christmas is over...I am so busy...therefore, please have patience...or if not, go on without me.

----------


## Dori

> *Dori,* sometimes fewer, more 'select' words are better. You certainly hit upon several very good points here with specific references, to back up your ideas. I would agree entirely and the word 'charismatic' is an excellent one. Citing the example make perfect sense to me. 
> 
> Good luck with your homework!


I try to back up whatever I can, because in my English teacher stresses that we should do so. I'm not very good at being succinct though.  :Tongue:  




> Have you finished the novel?


I read it six months ago, so the story is still somewhat fresh in my mind. I'm reading it again and I only have about 60 or so pages left.

----------


## Janine

> I try to back up whatever I can, because in my English teacher stresses that we should do so. I'm not very good at being succinct though.


*Dori,* Absolutely, it is a good practice. In fact, usually in our Lawrence threads, we do post a lot of the text that applies to the idea(s), that we are trying to get across. You didn't do that here exactly, but I knew the part in the book you spoke of. I think the text is online and we can copy and past certain parts of it. I will check that out now. I know you were strapped for time (very understandable and so are most of us with the holidays approaching). I think you still did a fine job, backing up what you said and stating your ideas directly.





> I read it six months ago, so the story is still somewhat fresh in my mind. I'm reading it again and I only have about 60 or so pages left.


Ahhh haaa, no wonder you are done the book so fast; well, good idea reading it again. I do that usually, if I have read the book before. I have to refresh my memory...it is getting overloaded with so much material! Unfortunately, I read this book about 15-20 yrs ago, so it is a wonder I do recall somethings I know will happen in the book. It must have left an indelible impression on me, don't you agree? I just heard on a interview, show an interviewer stating that he read somewhere 'that if one connect emotionally with something, it stays in their mind forever'. I thought that was interesting and so true. These are the memories we retain.

----------


## bazarov

> I read it six months ago, so the story is still somewhat fresh in my mind. I'm reading it again and I only have about 60 or so pages left.


No problem!  :Biggrin:  




> This sounds like something 'E V Bazarov' would say!


That's a compliment!  :FRlol:  






> Later it does tell their age or Bazarov's, I believe. I think it was late 20's - maybe 28 or 9. I will look it up, but I don't have time presently.


I don't think so. It's said about Odincova's ages, about 28 or 29, and them much younger.





> I have not reached that part of the book yet, but feel it is eminent.
> 
> *Bazarov,* I can only speak for myself - I am now about half way through the book; might be a little slow for me for now, until Christmas is over...I am so busy...therefore, please have patience...or if not, go on without me.


Sorry, sorry! Of course I will wait! I waited for this for years, I can wait for another week.

----------


## Quark

I went away for a few days when there wasn't much activity on the thread; and then, of course, as soon as I leave everyone comes back. Well, it will take me a moment to work through what everyone said, but I am glad that we got some discussion going. 




> *Quark,* did they actually say they both had just graduated? I thought I read that in the beginning. Since I am really busy decorating the house, etc...maybe you would be so kind to quote that passage for everyone's benefit.


I thought they did. Here, hold on, let me find it. Mrmhph... This book is heavy. It's not just _Fathers and Sons_; it's a twelve-hundred page hard cover anthology of Russian Literature. It's got everything from Goncharov to Tolstoy, and there is even some Russian art shoved in the middle. Hey look a glossy picture of a painting by some famous Critical Realist. Wow, my idea of perspective is so being changed. Now, to find Turgenev I need remember when _Fathers and Sons_ was published (everything is ordered chronologically). I'm thinking it has to be after _Dead Souls_, but before _Anna Karenina_. I flip randomly and hope I find it, but, no, I'm still in Tolstoy country. Oh, oh, wait, I have it. Turgenev! Here we go. Scanning... Yes, I'm right. Turgenev writes, "He was waiting for his son, who'd just graduated." In my book, this is page 635, but I think the page numbers are a little skewed by the other twelve hundred pages of Russian Lit crammed around the novel. 





> I agree with your last two statements here. I think we will see some change in Bazorov's attitudes, as the second half of the story progresses.


Do you think Bazarov changes in the novel? I actually found him to be somewhat of a flat character. He grows a little bit in the end, but his character doesn't change that much.





> Well, "The Ravine" is the title story for the audio cd set "The Ravine and other stories by Anton Chekhov", so it must be really good - the best one probably. It is narrated by Kenneth Branagh, so it should be something I would enjoy listening to; I would listen to him narrate the phone directory! He is a fine narrator and his "Richard III" is suberb, but that is with a full cast.  Of what I heard so far of the audiobooks Chekhov stories, he does the whole cast and it is quite interesting/amusing.


I'm thinking about starting the Chekhov thread sometime in early January. I know everyone else is doing their's at the exact same time, but I don't want to wait any longer than I already have. 




> I believe Bazarov is a very charismatic individual. In chapter V, Bazarov "made friends [with two farm boys] at once, and set off with them to a small swamp about a mile from the house to look for frogs." This perhaps is a mild demonstration of his charisma, but I think it also attests to his good interpersonal skills (which also plays a part in attracting 'pupils') . He was also confident; in chapter II Turgenev writes of Bazarov, "He showed Nikolai Petrovich his whole face...it was lighted up by a tranquil smile, and showed self-confidence and intellegence."


So you're drawn to Bazarov, too? I think he is likable, at times. Particularly, when he's refuting the arguments of idiots. But, I don't know if that means he has good interpersonal skills. You're right that Bazarov quickly befriends many of the people around him, but what do you suppose that means? I'm not even convinced that Bazarov is even capable of friendship. He's very cold and detached. Later in the novel you'll see how this part of his personality puts a strain on his relationships. 




> Definitely not, Evegeniy Vasilyevich Bazarov is the main character, whole plot about traditionalism and nihilism is on his back, that little yo-yo is really useless.


Ha, I like Arkadii as a yo-yo. Also, it's impressive that you remember all three of Baz's names. I'm still not convinced Bazarov is the center of the story, though. When you say that Bazarov is the main character, I think you may be confusing conflict with plot. Baz does push the story to crisis. Ultimately, though, the crisis is Arkadii's. He is the one that feels compelled to choose. I know "main character" is not really a literary term, but I think if we had to apply the vague phrase to anyone, it would be him. 





> In my opinion his only purpose is to reduce Arkady's possibility of free thinking and showing how Arkady cannot be a true nihilist and act in that way. HIs love to his father is too strong and he cannot control it like Bazarov can.


I'm starting to agree with you. Originally, I thought Arkadii's decision was between Bazarov and Pavel. Yet, that doesn't really make any sense since Arkadii only pities Pavel. Really, the father is the other option for Arkadii. He has to decide whether to accept the radical doctrines of Bazarov or have compassion for his father. 




> Have you finished the novel?


Yeah, it sounds like many of us are just rereading it.

----------


## Janine

> I went away for a few days when there wasn't much activity on the thread; and then, of course, as soon as I leave everyone comes back. Well, it will take me a moment to work through what everyone said, but I am glad that we got some discussion going.


Yeah, active little thread, isn't it? Glad to see you back again, *Quark.* :Smile:  




> I thought they did. Here, hold on, let me find it. Mrmhph... This book is heavy. It's not just _Fathers and Sons_; it's a twelve-hundred page hard cover anthology of Russian Literature. It's got everything from Goncharov to Tolstoy, and there is even some Russian art shoved in the middle. Hey look a glossy picture of a painting by some famous Critical Realist. Wow, my idea of perspective is so being changed. Now, to find Turgenev I need remember when _Fathers and Sons_ was published (everything is ordered chronologically). I'm thinking it has to be after _Dead Souls_, but before _Anna Karenina_. I flip randomly and hope I find it, but, no, I'm still in Tolstoy country. Oh, oh, wait, I have it. Turgenev! Here we go. Scanning... Yes, I'm right. Turgenev writes, "He was waiting for his son, who'd just graduated." In my book, this is page 635, but I think the page numbers are a little skewed by the other twelve hundred pages of Russian Lit crammed around the novel.


 :FRlol:  I know those anthology books - first off, they are so heavy one would get arthritis in the arms, trying to hold one up to read. I made the mistake of picking up two of those, looked barely used, from my library 'freeby' shelf...no wonder someone got rid of them; who would want to lug these 2000 p. Literature anthologies to class?!  :Frown:  
Thanks for that information, having to wade through all those authors to find it, and I will look up that later passage when the text mentions someone's exact age.





> Do you think Bazarov changes in the novel? I actually found him to be somewhat of a flat character. He grows a little bit in the end, but his character doesn't change that much.


Too soon to say for me, since like I already stated - I read the book about 15-20 yrs ago...considering my feeble aging mind...I can't say exactly yet...I was just vaguely recalling a change in him, so so I thought...maybe not....*you can see I am a little befuddled  :Eek:  on this point*





> I'm thinking about starting the Chekhov thread sometime in early January. I know everyone else is doing their's at the exact same time, but I don't want to wait any longer than I already have.


 :Thumbs Up:  Sounds good to me! I hope one of my stories gets picked. Did you read the two you said you had not yet read (my audiobook set)?





> So you're drawn to Bazarov, too? I think he is likable, at times. Particularly, when he's refuting the arguments of idiots. But, I don't know if that means he has good interpersonal skills. You're right that Bazarov quickly befriends many of the people around him, but what do you suppose that means? I'm not even convinced that Bazarov is even capable of friendship. He's very cold and detached. Later in the novel you'll see how this part of his personality puts a strain on his relationships.


*Quark,* I agree with this. I don't think he has honed his interpersonal skills and I don't think he much cares either. He seems to befriend some but not all, he is completely selective, even to those he will treat curtiously. I thought on his first meetings with the father and uncle he was pretty arrogant and aloff and I can see how the father and uncle would form a curious impression of him from that first meeting (first impression). I don't feel he is capable of true friendship either - he is cold and detached. I think I recall feeling at the end that he was a person who was missing some element of his human feelings or just could not connect to them. Like I said I have a vague rememberance so I should wait and see before commenting, therefore don't quote me on these last sentences.




> Ha, I like Arkadii as a yo-yo. Also, it's impressive that you remember all three of Baz's names. I'm still not convinced Bazarov is the center of the story, though. When you say that Bazarov is the main character, I think you may be confusing conflict with plot. Baz does push the story to crisis. Ultimately, though, the crisis is Arkadii's. He is the one that feels compelled to choose. I know "main character" is not really a literary term, but I think if we had to apply the vague phrase to anyone, it would be him.


I don't know. I am a little kinder and don't like to equate or label people as yo-yo's. I thought Bazarov was referring more to the conversation we all were having about which character we felt we related personally to or identified with. I agree with you in that I am not sure Bazarov is central but I tend to think he is as was Iago in 'Othello'...just using that as an example and might be a ways off. I think all 4 of the main characters here are key characters and I am not sure we can name one the 'main character' of the book - they all are needed to balance out the ideas presented.





> I'm starting to agree with you. Originally, I thought Arkadii's decision was between Bazarov and Pavel. Yet, that doesn't really make any sense since Arkadii only pities Pavel. Really, the father is the other option for Arkadii. He has to decide whether to accept the radical doctrines of Bazarov or have compassion for his father.


I think I agree also, with this idea.




> Yeah, it sounds like many of us are just rereading it.


I am 're-reading', but my poor senile brain needs to be refreshed of the remainder of the plot. Like I already stated, my remembrance of the rest of the story is shadowy, to say the least. I just recall now a couple of key scenes. I will read more tonight and hopefully knock off a few more chapters, if I am not too tired.

----------


## papayahed

> Definitely not, Evegeniy Vasilyevich Bazarov is the main character, whole plot about traditionalism and nihilism is on his back, that little yo-yo is really useless. 
> 
> 
> In my opinion his only purpose is to reduce Arkady's possibility of free thinking and showing how Arkady cannot be a true nihilist and act in that way. HIs love to his father is too strong and he cannot control it like Bazarov can.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He is everything what Arkady wants to be; smart, liberal and open minded. He made Arkady to stop think in old provincial way.


I think somebody's a little biased.  :FRlol:  

I'm having a hard time seeing Arkadii as a yo-yo or not smart, not liberal, and not open minded, and there really isn't any evidence to suggest he is these things. Arkadii, to me seems like a guy trying to find his own way in the world. Who wouldn't be attracted to Bazarov's philosophies at that age, "don't believe in authorities" It's a built in crowd pleaser. I'm only halfway through so that may change.

----------


## Janine

> I think somebody's a little biased.


Could it be his name-sake?  :Wink:   :FRlol:  




> I'm having a hard time seeing Arkadii as a yo-yo or not smart, not liberal, and not open minded, and there really isn't any evidence to suggest he is these things. Arkadii, to me seems like a guy trying to find his own way in the world. Who wouldn't be attracted to Bazarov's philosophies at that age, "don't believe in authorities" It's a built in crowd pleaser. I'm only halfway through so that may change.


Yes, I would have to agree with *Papayahed* here....
and I would like to add, that I don't think any of the characters are clearly good or bad, or right or wrong, nothing is clearly black or white; I just think all are human with human tendencies and weaknesses.

----------


## Dori

I just want to remark on something as it is quite late:




> Also, it's impressive that you remember all three of Baz's names.


Not necessarily. Especially since we encounter Evgeny's dad later in the novel. The patronymic, Vasilyevich (however you want to spell it), is the fathers first name (Vasily) with -evich attached on the end. Therefore, it is quite easy to remember all of these. You just have to keep in mind the payronymics and you'll be set.  :Wink:

----------


## grace86

Hi guys! I am reading the novel but don't have time to reply. I just flew into Texas to be with my family for Christmas. But I should post when I have more time. Really enjoying it...hope to read more of these comments.

----------


## Janine

> Hi guys! I am reading the novel but don't have time to reply. I just flew into Texas to be with my family for Christmas. But I should post when I have more time. Really enjoying it...hope to read more of these comments.


Hi *Grace,* great to see you here! Happy to see you are reading the book and enjoying it so.  :Thumbs Up:  Hope you can find time to post some thoughts on it, too.
Have a great time with you family. Glad you had a safe trip.

----------


## Scheherazade

Started reading (only 5 chapters yet) but finding it hard to like Bazarov (no offence to our resident Bazarov here!  :Tongue: )


> I'm just wondering if I would have read it when I was in my early twenties/teens would I identify with Bazarov and Arcady moreso then the father/uncle.


Wondering the same thing too!

----------


## Janine

> Started reading (only 5 chapters yet) but finding it hard to like Bazarov (no offence to our resident Bazarov here! )Wondering the same thing too!


*Scheherazade,* that is funny, when I started reading the book I read the first 5 chapters, too...they went by pretty quickly. I agree...I could not warm up to Bazarov in the first half of the book...he seemed so disrespectful to me of his elders and I found that a bit irritating. I am not sure now what I think of him; I am about half way done the novel.

----------


## Quark

> I'm not even convinced that Bazarov is even capable of friendship. He's very cold and detached. Later in the novel you'll see how this part of his personality puts a strain on his relationships.





> I agree with you in that I am not sure Bazarov is central but I tend to think he is as was Iago in 'Othello'...just using that as an example and might be a ways off.





> finding it hard to like Bazarov (no offence to our resident Bazarov here!


Hmm, maybe we're being a little hard on Bazarov. Is he really Iago? Ouch. I was just trying to say that Baz, while being very intelligent and confident, is also distant and callous at times. We started out talking about why Bazarov was an attractive character. I just wanted to bring out what is unattractive about Bazarov.

----------


## Alexei

> *Scheherazade,* that is funny, when I started reading the book I read the first 5 chapters, too...they went by pretty quickly. I agree...I could not warm up to Bazarov in the first half of the book...he seemed so disrespectful to me of his elders and I found that a bit irritating. I am not sure now what I think of him; I am about half way done the novel.


Exactly as I do  :FRlol:  I am currently on chapter 18 and I am not sure, but I think my opinion is going to be drastically changed. In fact I've read only the few first chapters before and I started seriously reading today, but I find it hard to leave the book. I was quite surprised when in the beginning I was more willing to identify myself with the older generation, although I am in my teens now, but it seems I am not the only one. Now I have only 100 pages left, so I am going to finish it  :Tongue:

----------


## Janine

> Hmm, maybe we're being a little hard on Bazarov. Is he really Iago? Ouch. I was just trying to say that Baz, while being very intelligent and confident, is also distant and callous at times. We started out talking about why Bazarov was an attractive character. I just wanted to bring out what is unattractive about Bazarov.


*Hi Quark,*no need to say "Ouch" - No, you took me all wrong. I did not mean he was like Iago (Iago is an extreme case). I just meant that, even thought the play is called "Othello", isn't the most interesting character Iago? He is the most complex and hard to figure out. I just mean this as an example of how one character can 'steal the show', so to speak. I think all eyes are turned to Bazarov and therefore, he does feel 'central' to the story and the plot and the ideas behind the story. If there was no Bazarov, there would be no story "Fathers and Sons". Can you see what I mean? There are many things about Bazarov that I find to be very unattractive. I am a 'people person' and I don't see this with Bazarov, sure he made friends with the young boys when he went to gather specimens but is that such an accomplishment; he talked to the peasants and they might have been the friendly ones there, but when it comes to his friend's own family members he has no social graces and seems insolent to me at times...really ignorant of their feelings. I, like several others have expressed, did not like him at all at first. He seemed to think he was 'above it all' and I don't take well to people such as that.

Yes, *Alexei,* isn't it something how one can't put the book down...a little easier for me this time around since I sort of know what is to come but when you don't you want to read on to see where the story will lead us. Turgenev really has a great way of pulling the reader in and keeping his/her attention. He is an easy author to read because he is so direct and does not draw out everything in endless detail. Even descriptive parts of the book are not long, but just right, in my opinion.

----------


## Quark

> Exactly as I do  I am currently on chapter 18 and I am not sure, but I think my opinion is going to be drastically changed. In fact I've read only the few first chapters before and I started seriously reading today, but I find it hard to leave the book. I was quite surprised when in the beginning I was more willing to identify myself with the older generation, although I am in my teens now, but it seems I am not the only one. Now I have only 100 pages left, so I am going to finish it


You may be the farthest into the book of any of us. I didn't know you were in you teens, though. I've seen you on a couple of other threads, and something made me think you were older. So you like the older Kirsanovs? I think I like the Nikolai more than I like Pavel. You feel for Nikolai in this book; Pavel is just too absurd of a character for me to really indentify with.

Oh, and Janine, sorry I misread your post there. I saw Bazarov and Iago in the same sentence, and I thought you were trying to villainize Bazarov--which would be kind of harsh. Now that I actually read what you're saying correctly, I think I agree with you. Bazarov does steal the show, at times. During the arguments with the parents, I'm far more interested in what Baz has to say than any of the other characters.

----------


## papayahed

I'm dying to talk about Bazarov at Madam Odintzov and his statement that all people are the same:




> "People are like trees in a forest; no botanist would dream of studying each birch tree in detail"






> "In a proper functioning society it woldn't matter a jot whether a man were stupid or intellegent, good or bad"


He back up those statements by saying that all men have the same spleen. He never mentions what a "proper functioning society" would be? I'm noticing he criticizes everything but hasn't given answers on how to make things right.

----------


## Quark

> I'm dying to talk about Bazarov at Madam Odintzov and his statement that all people are the same:
> 
> He back up those statements by saying that all men have the same spleen. He never mentions what a "proper functioning society" would be? I'm noticing he criticizes everything but hasn't given answers on how to make things right.


Do you want to talk about Baz's sayings philosophically or do want to consider them as part of Turgenev's characterization of Bazarov?

----------


## Alexei

Well, I finished the book and now I am quite exited about it. I have finally formed my general impression. I think I am slightly disappointed. It's not like I didn't like the book, on the contrary - I like it very much, but I started reading with a very different idea about what I am going to read. I suppose I expected to see something more like Dostoevsky and Tolstoy I am not sure. On the other hand, as I've already said, I liked it very much, especially the second part of the book, but I will talk about it later  :Tongue:  Actually, I have a little complain - I wanted it to be a little longer  :Biggrin:  




> *Hi Quark,*no need to say "Ouch" - No, you took me all wrong. I did not mean he was like Iago (Iago is an extreme case). I just meant that, even thought the play is called "Othello", isn't the most interesting character Iago? He is the most complex and hard to figure out. I just mean this as an example of how one character can 'steal the show', so to speak. I think all eyes are turned to Bazarov and therefore, he does feel 'central' to the story and the plot and the ideas behind the story. If there was no Bazarov, there would be no story "Fathers and Sons". Can you see what I mean? There are many things about Bazarov that I find to be very unattractive. I am a 'people person' and I don't see this with Bazarov, sure he made friends with the young boys when he went to gather specimens but is that such an accomplishment; he talked to the peasants and they might have been the friendly ones there, but when it comes to his friend's own family members he has no social graces and seems insolent to me at times...really ignorant of their feelings. I, like several others have expressed, did not like him at all at first. He seemed to think he was 'above it all' and I don't take well to people such as that.


I can see what are you talking about, Bazarov is domineering the whole novel, I feel it the same way (well, I think this is doubtless, but never mind, I just needed to say it  :FRlol:  ). I find him very special even though I can't start to like him or identify myself with him. I find charming this need to have certain attitude toward him, you can't just ignore him, you have to like him or dislike him. It's all because he is such strong character, but still this fascinates me, may be it's because for a long time I haven't read a book with main character having such overwhelming personality.




> Yes, *Alexei,* isn't it something how one can't put the book down...a little easier for me this time around since I sort of know what is to come but when you don't you want to read on to see where the story will lead us. Turgenev really has a great way of pulling the reader in and keeping his/her attention. He is an easy author to read because he is so direct and does not draw out everything in endless detail. Even descriptive parts of the book are not long, but just right, in my opinion.


I am not really sure whether I like this. I generally prefer more detailed style of writing with more descriptions and sometimes long reflections on the characters' behavior and personality. But still I like the book and keeps me interested. 




> You may be the farthest into the book of any of us. I didn't know you were in you teens, though. I've seen you on a couple of other threads, and something made me think you were older. So you like the older Kirsanovs? I think I like the Nikolai more than I like Pavel. You feel for Nikolai in this book; Pavel is just too absurd of a character for me to really indentify with.


Really? That's very interesting, especially after I just turned 17 a little more than a week ago  :FRlol:  
I am not sure who is the one I prefer. For me there is something interesting and attracting in both of them. Nikolai seems so romantic and gentle and, of course, there is something that win him o his side - his playing the violoncello. I don't know I find something so sad in the way Bazarov decided that this is ridiculous. I am not talking about Bazarov now, just about the estimate of the action. It gives off such sorrow. And then in this sentence:

_"Oh, how Bazarov would have laughed at him, if he had known what was passing within him now! Arkady himself would have condemned him. He, a man forty-four years old, an agriculturist and a farmer, was shedding tears, causeless tears; this was a hundred times worse than the violoncello."_

As for Pavel, I think this sentence depict his character the best:

_"Pavel Petrovich walked on to the end of the garden, also deep in thought, and he, too, raised his eyes to the sky--but his beautiful dark eyes reflected only the light of the stars. He was not born a romantic idealist, and his fastidiously dry though ardent soul, with its tinge of French scepticism, was not addicted to dreaming . . ."_

The English translation is so beautiful. I am reading it on Bulgarian it's so different. I like this one better, it's more poetic. I've checked the Russian text and it's actually closer to mine, there are some slight changes in the English one, still I think I prefer it  :Tongue:  There the statement is more direct here things are hinted, but it doesn't sound so much as "final verdict".

I think there is something captivating in all this. I find a certain beauty in the contradiction of this description and the description of Pavel's love story in chapter 7 (may be it's not a perfect contradiction, but still I find at least a slight one). 




> I'm dying to talk about Bazarov at Madam Odintzov and his statement that all people are the same:
> 
> _"People are like trees in a forest; no botanist would dream of studying each birch tree in detail"_
> 
> _"In a proper functioning society it woldn't matter a jot whether a man were stupid or intellegent, good or bad"_
> 
> He back up those statements by saying that all men have the same spleen. He never mentions what a "proper functioning society" would be? I'm noticing he criticizes everything but hasn't given answers on how to make things right.


I find them interesting it too, although my first reaction is of strong disagreement. I think he is neglecting the fact that the mind isn't something like an organ in the human organism.

----------


## Dori

> Do we know the ages of Arkadii and Bazarov?





> I don't think the text ever stated their ages at all, did it...does anyone know?


In Chapter XXVI, Arkady says, "I am not now the conceited boy I was when I came here...I've not reached *twenty-three* for nothing..." 

And in Chapter XXV, Anna Seergevna says, "...and to see that he is clever...And *[Arkady's] young*...that's the great thing...*not like you and me, Evgeny Vasilich.*" Although this statement doesn't directly refer to the age of Evgeny, I do believe he is older than Arkady. Anna Seergevna "was a little older than Arkady---she was twenty-nine---..." (Chapter XIV)

----------


## Janine

It is like *Quark* said - I go away for a time and come back and wow, so much has happened here - 5 or 6 new posts! I am too tired now to address any, but I did read them all. It has been a hectic day and I am tired out....sorry. I will keep reading.

----------


## hellsapoppin

``why do you guys think Arkadii likes Bazarov so much in the beginning? He calls him smart, but what else do you suppose makes Bazarov likeable to Arkadii?``


Reply: Bazarov represents the new form of thinking. This would be a time, in the lives of these two young men, when they feel the need to reject the old ways and rebell against them.


A good reply.

Both were students at a time when scholars were preaching socialism and a new order in Europe. As they pass by cart through an impoverished village, Arkady reflects in this manner:

``"It's a pity about the forest," said Arkady, and began to look around him.

The country through which they were driving could not possibly be called picturesque. Field after field stretched right up to the horizon, now gently sloping upwards, then slanting down again; in some places woods were visible and winding ravines, planted with low scrubby bushes, vividly reminiscent of the way in which they were represented on the old maps of Catherine's times. They passed by little streams with hollow banks and ponds with narrow dams, small villages with low huts under dark and often crumbling roofs, and crooked barns with walls woven out of dry twigs and with gaping doorways opening on to neglected threshing floors; and churches, some brick-built with the stucco covering peeling off in patches, others built of wood, near crosses fallen crooked in the overgrown graveyards. Gradually Arkady's heart began to sink. As if to complete the picture, the peasants whom they met were all in rags and mounted on the most wretched-looking little horses; the willows, with their broken branches and trunks stripped of bark, stood like tattered beggars along the roadside; lean and shaggy cows, pinched with hunger, were greedily tearing up grass along the ditches. They looked as if they had just been snatched out of the clutches of some terrifying murderous monster; and the pitiful sight of these emaciated animals in the setting of that gorgeous spring day conjured up, like a white ghost, the vision of interminable joyless winter with its storms, frosts and snows . . . "No," thought Arkady, "this country is far from rich, and the people seem neither contented nor industrious; we just can't let things go on like this; *reforms are indispensable . . . but how are we to execute them, how should we begin?"* ``


Arkady is someone with great feeling, great empathy for those who suffer. His father owns serfs and is responsible for some of this imposed pain. But Barzov and his ideals promises reformation and betterment for those victims. Thus, he gives Arkady hope and a newer, better vision for the future.

----------


## hellsapoppin

``Bazarov quickly befriends many of the people around him, but what do you suppose that means? ``


Arkady's father views himself as having an enlightened view of serfdom. If I recall correctly (I read the book about 2 years ago) he abated certain tributes or taxes and has relieved them of certain work obligations. But they are still serfs to him!

By contrast, Bazarov rejects all theories (new or old) about serfdom. As a nihilist, he regards all men as equals and he is fully receptive to all whether rich man, poor man, beggar man, etc. ''A nihilist is a person who does not bow down to any authority, who does not accept any principle on faith, however much that principle may be revered." But he accepts people as they are: ''In a few minutes Bazarov had explored all the little paths in the garden; he went into the cattle yard and the stables, discovered two farm boys *with whom he made friends at once* ... Bazarov, who had a special capacity for winning the confidence of lower-class people''.

To Bazarov the nihilist, principles mean nothing - people are all that matter.

----------


## bazarov

> Do you think Bazarov changes in the novel? I actually found him to be somewhat of a flat character. He grows a little bit in the end, but his character doesn't change that much.


No, not too much, actually; he just shows his ''human'' side.




> You're right that Bazarov quickly befriends many of the people around him, but what do you suppose that means? I'm not even convinced that Bazarov is even capable of friendship. He's very cold and detached. Later in the novel you'll see how this part of his personality puts a strain on his relationships.


He is not cold; there was no one to warm him up before he met Odintzova. He acted in his nihilistic style, carrying for nobody.




> Also, it's impressive that you remember all three of Baz's names. I'm still not convinced Bazarov is the center of the story, though. When you say that Bazarov is the main character, I think you may be confusing conflict with plot. Baz does push the story to crisis. Ultimately, though, the crisis is Arkadii's.





> Not necessarily. Especially since we encounter Evgeny's dad later in the novel. The patronymic, Vasilyevich (however you want to spell it), is the fathers first name (Vasily) with *-evich* attached on the end. Therefore, it is quite easy to remember all of these. You just have to keep in mind the payronymics and you'll be set.


 ...or * -ovich*; so 

Arkady Nikolayevich Kirsanov
Nikolay Petrovich Kirsanov
Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov
Ana Sergeyevna Odintzova 

I will stop here... :Smile:  

Even when he dies, they are still talking about him. He is the representative model of nihilist, because Arkady obviously isn't. 






> I think somebody's a little biased.





> Could it be his name-sake?


No, why... :FRlol:   :FRlol:  





> I'm having a hard time seeing Arkadii as a yo-yo or not smart, not liberal, and not open minded, and there really isn't any evidence to suggest he is these things.


I am just saying he is not a nihilist!





> He back up those statements by saying that all men have the same spleen. He never mentions what a "proper functioning society" would be? I'm noticing he criticizes everything but hasn't given answers on how to make things right.


They are nihilists. Their theory is that everything is wrong but they don't give any solutions for solving it. Check first conversation between youth and elders.

----------


## hellsapoppin

_Their theory is that everything is wrong but they don't give any solutions for solving it._


Precisely. 

In his prolonged and often hostile discussion with Pavel, Bazarov is challenged thusly:

'' 'you became convinced of all this and decided not to undertake anything seriously yourselves'

'We decided not to undertake anything'

... ' And to confine yourselves to criticism?'

'And to confine ourselves to criticism'

'And that's called nihilism?'

''And that's called nihilism'. ''  


All talk, no solutions. No wonder nihilism went kaput.


Part X p 54 [The Modern Library Edition]

----------


## hellsapoppin

But Bazarov was not entirely devoid of some measure of practicality.

In his discussion with Pavel, he expressed admiration for Germanic pragmatism, especially their advancements in science and medicine. ''The Germans are our instructors in this ... The scientists there are sensible people ... A good chemist is twenty times as useful as any poet''. 

Ch VI, pp 26, 27

In that time period, Bazarov would have been called a Westernizer as opposed to slavophiles. The former viewed Russia as too archaic and wished to have it modernized by adopting European standards. The latter argued that social salvation or advancement could have or should have been achieved by affirming traditional Russian values.

----------


## Quark

> He is not cold; there was no one to warm him up before he met Odintzova. He acted in his nihilistic style, carrying for nobody.


Yeah, Mrs. Odintzova awakens something inside of Bazarov that he isn't exactly comfortable with. Does Baz learn anything from this, though? I wonder why he strikes out with both women he approaches? And, why does Turgenev make Baz so successful in certain situations and yet so hopelessly inept in others?

----------


## hellsapoppin

``why does Turgenev make Baz so successful in certain situations and yet so hopelessly inept in others?``

Perhaps it was because this illustrates that Bazarov, like other reformists of his time, was well intentioned, but doomed to failure. In this, Turgenev is accurately predicting doom for those reformists as happened to Decembrists and others from the previous generation.

----------


## Janine

Interesting discussion so far; I have been reading along and will comment this week - too tired out now from holiday preparations.
I just wanted to stop by and wish everyone a happy holiday season....

----------


## bazarov

> Yeah, Mrs. Odintzova awakens something inside of Bazarov that he isn't exactly comfortable with. Does Baz learn anything from this, though? I wonder why he strikes out with both women he approaches? And, why does Turgenev make Baz so successful in certain situations and yet so hopelessly inept in others?


He learns, but it was too late; he died and had no time to use it.
Bazarov said that ''no woman is worth of his internal peace'', it was all some kind of joke. As a scientist, he was successful in things were only brain was needed, and when some normal human feelings were involved, he failed; there are no emotions in nihilism.




> Perhaps it was because this illustrates that Bazarov, like other reformists of his time, was well intentioned, but doomed to failure. In this, Turgenev is accurately predicting doom for those reformists as happened to Decembrists and others from the previous generation.


Agree. Bazarov represents nihilism and Turgenev wanted to show through Bazarov's death how will those reformist movements in Russia end up. That's also a reason why Bazarov had to die, his death was inevitable.


Do you, after all consider Bazarov as a nihilist?

Thanks Janine, enjoy yourself too.  :Smile:

----------


## Dori

> Do you, after all consider Bazarov as a nihilist?


It will help to have a definition of nihilism at hand. My book states that "[...] twentieth century nihilism came to signify deep existential doubt or the belief that life lacks meaning. However, that is not the nihilism of _Fathers and Sons_. In the novel, nihilism in the philosophical sense is a rejection of idealism and a willingness to believe only in what is provable by observation; in a political sense it is anti-absolutist, a rejection of the traditional social order and a reliance instread on scientific principles and practicality."

With regard to the above definition, I believe Evgeny Bazarov is a nihilist. I think Turgenev intended for him to be a nihilist (my book also states that "In a letter to the poet and editor K.K. Slutchevsky, Turgenev advises that when Bazarov calls himself a nihilist, the word should be read as meaning 'revolutionary'"). However, his nihilism is overcome at times by human emotions, namely love.

----------


## hellsapoppin

``Do you, after all consider Bazarov as a nihilist?``

Definitely. Especially since he specifically calls himself one.

But again, for all of his professed idealism, he is not totally without some measure of practicality: when he and Arkady discussed Mrs Odintsov he praised her practicality when she married a wealthy man (she had been let impoverished by her deceased father who was a gambler). ''Marrying a wealthy old man is not a strange thing to do. On the contrary, it makes perfect sense ... I'd like to think that it's justified'' {p 79}.

In his discussion with her, Bazarov discussed medicine and applied sciences while disdaining the arts. Mrs Odintsov readily held her own in that talk which lasted for three hours. Obviously, she was self educated and very enterprising - an attribute that was essential in the emerging and reforming society. 


``Bazarov had to die, his death was inevitable``

Perhaps a *spoiler alert* is warranted. But yes, at bottom he was impractical owing to his standards and actions. By contrast, Mrs O took all that life had given her and accepted it as Fate. ''Order is essential in everything'' she said. ''Having no prejudices of any kind, or even strong convictions ... she'd seen many things clearly ... after all, tranquility is the best thing on earth''.


What could possibly have caused this big contrast in characterization?

Perhaps it is that Bazarov got his education in school, while Mrs O got hers in the school of hard knocks. 

pp 91, 92, 109

----------


## Pensive

Just completed first five chapters (thanks goes to the online lit-net version of this book)  :Smile:  So far, the story has been quite good, especially, things have started being interesting from the fifth chapter. 




> He has no faith in principles but he has faith in frogs.


- Pavel Petrovich about Bazarov

As I have only read a little bit of it, I don't think I shall judge Bazarov's character but till now he has seemed to me very cold, distant and even insolent, and a person that I liked reading about as a character but could not bring myself to like as a person I would have to say, but then my views might change later.  :Tongue: 

I wish I had started the novel a few days earlier, hope I can catch up with you guys.

----------


## Dori

> Just completed first five chapters (thanks goes to the online lit-net version of this book)  So far, the story has been quite good, especially, things have started being interesting from the fifth chapter. 
> 
> [...]
> 
> I wish I had started the novel a few days earlier, hope I can catch up with you guys.


I'm glad you could join us, Pensive.  :Smile:  It seems that you are enjoying it so far.

----------


## Pensive

> I'm glad you could join us, Pensive.  It seems that you are enjoying it so far.


 :Smile: 

Yes, indeed. Dialogues are mostly intelligent and entertaining. At the moment, am on the thirteenth chapter. And yes, still can't bring myself to like Bazarov as a person despite his witty character.

----------


## Pensive

Finally finished it. It has been one of those few books lately that I have completed in one sitting.  :Smile: 




> It will help to have a definition of nihilism at hand. My book states that "[...] twentieth century nihilism came to signify deep existential doubt or the belief that life lacks meaning. However, that is not the nihilism of _Fathers and Sons_. In the novel, nihilism in the philosophical sense is a rejection of idealism and a willingness to believe only in what is provable by observation; in a political sense it is anti-absolutist, a rejection of the traditional social order and a reliance instread on scientific principles and practicality."
> 
> With regard to the above definition, I believe Evgeny Bazarov is a nihilist. I think Turgenev intended for him to be a nihilist (my book also states that "In a letter to the poet and editor K.K. Slutchevsky, Turgenev advises that when Bazarov calls himself a nihilist, the word should be read as meaning 'revolutionary'"). However, his nihilism is overcome at times by human emotions, namely love.


I agree. When I look at the definition of 'nihilism' in my Oxford Dictionary, it says: rejection of all religious and *moral* principles. Now if we consider this definition, Bazarov doesn't seem like a nihilist to me. Having finished the book just a few minutes ago, I clearly remember him mentioning to Pavel after duel when he got wounded something like, "First of all I am a doctor so I would clear up your wounds." (I don't remember the exact wording but whatever it was, it conveyed this exact message) Now according to that, he seems to be following the usual code of morals quite well, the duty of a doctor and all that.  :Tongue:  One can say that it was his inner goodness which made him do so, no doubt that must have that played a part in that too but I feel he believed it to be his duty as a doctor too. I hope I am making sense here. 

But if we actually consider how the book represents nihilism, I like the way how Dori has put it above, then probably he was a nihilist but I wouldn't be too sure about it.

Someone wrote previously in this thread that she/he considers Bazarov to be a nihilist because Bazarov himself admitted that. I don't think that everything we claim to be we actually are. Just a thought.

----------


## hellsapoppin

``... Bazarov to be a nihilist because Bazarov himself admitted that. I don't think that everything we claim to be we actually are. Just a thought.``


A very good and meaningful thought, it might be added. But one thing we must remain mindful of: definitions of terms evolve over the years.

Yesteryear's Republican stood for less government, non intervention overseas, civil rights, and equal opportunity for everyone.

Today (without being unduly political about it) the term means something quite different - in fact, quite the opposite of all that.

Therefore, let us be mindful of 'nihilist' as it was defined back then. I believe that Turgenev succeeds in illustrating the sterility of this ideology via Bazarov's outlook, conduct, character shortcomings, and the inevitable tragedy that befell him.

----------


## Quark

That's a nice tree Janine. Mine is kind of leaning to one side; I couldn't get it in the stand right. I can decorate one side, but the ornaments just slip off the other. At least one side is festive. The other I just turn to the back. 

I hope everyone else is having a good Christmas.

As for Baz's title, I agree that he isn't a nihilist in the usual sense. He certainly has beliefs, and he earnestly believes that he can improve society with his ideas. The better word we might label Bazarov with is "Materialist". Bazarov does believe that better living conditions, health, and prosperity would make life better. He just reject the idea that morals, philosophies, or arts are important in any way. All of that he considers just braindead whimsies dreamed up by a malfunctioning consciousness. These are the views normally associated with Materialism. They may appear as nihilistic to an Idealist like Pavel, but really they're something seperate.

----------


## Janine

> That's a nice tree Janine. Mine is kind of leaning to one side; I couldn't get it in the stand right. I can decorate one side, but the ornaments just slip off the other. At least one side is festive. The other I just turn to the back. 
> 
> I hope everyone else is having a good Christmas.


Thanks *Quark,* Merry Christmas! Actually this tree is artificial in our dining room, and thus does not have the 'leaning' problem you have encountered with yours. A few years back we waited till my son could get us our main big real tree for our living room, and he found one the day before Christmas. What a disaster; it totally leaned to one side as the one you describe, not an inch of the trunk was straight...a wonder it would go into the stand. I cried (literally) and then made the best of it, putting it on top a table and doing my best to make it look presentable and hopefully beautiful.  :FRlol:  How funny - your ornaments actually slip right off one side... :Frown:  Now when I look at photos of ours I just have to laugh and laugh....made for some very good stories, also.

My Christmas was wonderful! My son and his wife invited everyone over to a big dinner; it was so much fun, considering his wife is expecting their first child, my first grandchild. I am very happy this Christmas, indeed!  :Biggrin:  

I hope yours was great, too and everyone else on Lit Net!

----------


## hellsapoppin

Turgenev utilizes great literary technique in F&S and succeeds in presenting what is truly a classical novel through irony, setting, and symbolism.

First, as noted above, one can readily read this 200+ page book in very few sittings. There is great irony throughout the book as it begins with a family gathering (one much where great joy is anticipated) and it ends with a family in sorrow as a son is lost. There is further irony in that a nihilist who asserts that he does not stand for principle, ultimately stands for honor by dueling. He also disdains romance but falls in love despite his professed indifference to romance. 

A great deal of meaning can certainly be ascertained through these characterizations.

But to me, the greatest literary technique used by Turgenev is the atavistic symbology that appears throughout the entire book. Here are a few examples:

''hungry as *wolves*''

''long haired *creature*''

''social *lion*'' {pp 16, 17}

''you and I are the same as *frogs*'' {p 19}

''you have an *eagle eye*'' { p 35}

''Bazarov's sideburns made him look like a *pig in a sty*'' {p 46}

''it's your privilege as an *animal* to ignore the feeling of compassion''

''human beings are such strange solitary *animals*

''*nettle plants* are growing out of me'' {pp 133-135}

''he's like a *falcon* that flies ... you and I are like *mushrooms* in the hollow of a tree'' {p 144}


Thus, Turgenev portrays a society that is retrogressing towards an animal state because it lacks the wisdom to adopt pragmatic principles. Perhaps no other classical Russian novel of that era quite succeeds like this gem.

----------


## bazarov

> ``Do you, after all consider Bazarov as a nihilist?``
> 
> Definitely. Especially since he specifically calls himself one.







> Someone wrote previously in this thread that she/he considers Bazarov to be a nihilist because Bazarov himself admitted that. *I don't think that everything we* *claim to be we actually are.* Just a thought.


We are what people around us see us, not what what we think we are.




> ``Bazarov had to die, his death was inevitable``
> 
> Perhaps a *spoiler alert* is warranted.


Sorry, I forgot that some members are still reading it. :Tongue:  


What would happen if Bazarov and Arkady went to see Bazarov's, and then Kirsanov's?

----------


## hellsapoppin

``We are what people around us see us, not what what we think we are.``


I agree in principle with that statement. But remember that definitions change with the times.

On another forum we had a discussion about 2d Amendment rights and how they should be interpreted. Someone remarked that this provision calls for a ''well regulated militia' and thought that this means a well *controlled* armed force. I replied that in the years 1700-1900 the word ''regulated'' meant well armed, not well controlled.

I have a law degree and know this for a fact. Immediately thereafter, a constitutional lawyer replied that I was correct.

Therefore, let us refrain from using the modern understanding of the term nihilist and let us use, instead, the past definition. On that basis, Bazarov would fit the proper definition --- at least, that has been my past understanding for the 35+ years that I have been reading classical 19th century Russian writings.

References: Tomas Masaryk, Konstantin Mochulskii, and Eugene Rose.

----------


## Janine

Sorry everyone I have not been in here lately. I am still reading the book, unfortunately. The holidays really interrupted my reading schedule; have had more company/entertaining than normal. I am having a friend over tonight. I will try hard to complete the book soon. Just wanted to say this actually - I have been reading the posts everyday and found them all very interesting, so far.

----------


## hellsapoppin

``What would happen if Bazarov and Arkady went to see Bazarov's, and then Kirsanov's?``


A good question - while I've been trying to think it over, I cannot honestly come up with a different outcome.

Both sets of elders are reform minded. They claim to be liberals who liberated their serfs but continue to treat them with condescension. They obviously love their children and hope that their adoption of the new social ideals will be recognized and appreciated by their youths. 

But it did not appear to me that meeting either set of parents impacted upon the two returning nihilists as did their encounter with Madame Odintsov and her sister Katia:

Arkady tells Katia: ''I've definitely changed a great deal ... you're in essence the one to whom I owe this change ... I want to be useful ... My eyes have been opened''. He proceeds to propose marriage and is redeemed by the power of love --- Katia's love.

By contrast, Anna (Odintsov) asks Bazarov to stay at her lodging in the hope of redeeming him as well because ''he did love me once''. But, he says, ''when you say I'm kind ... It's like laying a wreath at the head of a corpse''. 

Bazarov rejects the power of loving redemption and this led to his inevitable doom.

Years ago I read where one of the great Russian classicists said, ''in order to be a true Russian, you must love humanity with all your heart''. It appears Turgenev is suggesting that when Bazarov rejects the redeeming power of love, it bespeaks of an inevitable fate for Russia if it adopts alien ideals such as nihilism and socialism. That instead, it must get back to its roots (that is, one of Orthodoxy, patriotism, love for fellow Russians) or face apocalyptic peril. 

As we all know from reading history, Russia chose a path that diverged from Turgenev's recommended direction. Thereafter, the extent of the horrible consequences became utterly incalculable.

----------


## hellsapoppin

``Turgenev portrays a society that is retrogressing towards an animal state because it lacks the wisdom to adopt pragmatic principles.``


A thought occurred to me that follows up on this point: while some regard is shown in the book for German rationalism, there does not appear to be much regard for Orthodox religion in this troubled society: several characters resort to using mild oaths such as ''for Heaven's sake'', ''for God's sake'', and ''I swear to God'', and repeated cries of ''thank God'' which bespeak of resignation. But nothing in the way of religious comfort is said to be afforded by church or religious doctrine. 

There is one religious cleric named Father Aleksei but his role is minimal at best. While Bazarov affords a peasant great comfort by extracting a painful tooth, Aleksei does nothing and does not have even the slightest clue as to how to give him comfort. {p 198}

There one Orthodox religious practitioner in the story and that is Bazarov's mother Arina (his father Vasalii is also religious but not quite as Orthodox). She is said to be of the old order --- religious while superstitious, prejudiced against Jews and the poor, but charitable. Then Turgenev humors us by writing, ''Such women are not common nowadays - God knows whether we ought to rejoice!'' {p 127}

Near the end of the story Bazarov converses with a peasant on life and metaphysics. The latter addresses him as ''your worship'' and exclaims, ''there's God's will, which is why you're our superiors. The stricter the master is, the better for the peasant.'' {p 196} Obviously, he succumbs to religious resignation but derives no comfort from religion.

In the end, Bazarov dies and his grieving parents are left in a feeble state --- ''their prayers, their tears are fruitless''. {p 215} Thus, even the Orthodox religious practitioners are also left without comfort as religion affords nothing in the way of true solace or fulfillment.

----------


## hellsapoppin

``religion affords nothing in the way of true solace or fulfillment``


Bazarov appears to be a walking superficiality --- yet, he is highly complex. A mass of contradictions - a scientist, a medic, an antihero, a realist who seeks to end all illusions rather than one who wallows in total negation; a polemicist but one who is (despite his denials) principled to an extent: when challenged to a duel, he fought though this is not consistent with nihilism. Yet, he spared the life of his rival which does reflect the nihilist view that such a struggle is utterly useless (sparing his rival's life makes him somewhat heroic). While many abandoned nihilism, he stood with it until his death. Bazarov was a true democrat in that he treated everyone alike.

The music of the previous generation was called the ''Romantic'' school. This idealistic view of life was countered by the realism of the next generation. As a nihilist, the quest to end the delusion of romanticism constituted ''realism'' to nihilists. And while Bazarov denounced art and aesthetic creativity, he was struck by Mdm Odintsov's beauty and resourceful living. Furthermore, he was emotionally wounded when she rejected him. Yet, she welcomed him to a longer stay in her lodging (it appeared) the hope of redeeming him. In the end she requested the assistance of a medical specialist to treat the condition that infected Bazarov but it was to no avail. Anna was a true romanticist --- and she prospered more than anyone else in the story.


One last thought on religion and its notable absence in F+S -- Bazarov asserted that ''I only look to Heaven when I sneeze''. Obviously he had no use for religion as it offered nothing in the way of solace or practicality. He did not take the proper precautionary steps to avoid contagion when he worked on the body of the deceased person. In doing so, he violated a law of nature. Nothing science could do was able to save him. Prayers on his behalf were equally useless. So what could Turgenev have meant by this sad state of circumstances?

It appears that the author was saying that society needed to adopt a viewpoint or a philosophy that was geared towards utilitarian and pragmatic principles. Principles that work were needed in a changing society. Utopian ideals, flawed religion, economic injustices, and old archaic ways were not the way to improve society or to correct its problems. Each character in some way represents some fault or flaw in that society with Bazarov representing society's biggest vulnerabilities. By contrast, resourceful Anna Odintsov ( a romanticist) who was open minded and receptive to new ideals, flourished. Perhaps Turgenev was suggesting that this is the better way for Russia's transformation into a modern society.

----------


## grace86

I finished Fathers and Sons a little late it seems, but I will post my thoughts anyway.

I don't think that just because someone claims himself a nihilist makes him one, someone mentioned this earlier (sorry I am not going back to reread the posts). Bazarov didn't seem really convinced of it himself either...especially when he fell subject to human emotions and ideas that didn't fit his ideals...it made him angry and ultimately unhappy. When he confessed to Odintsova that he loved her and shook so terribly he was torturing himself for ideas it seemed he knew he didn't believe in himself. To me it was like Bazarov thought that so much change could happen by having this nihilistic outlook, when really he kept himself where he was at in life and never advanced because he wouldn't allow himself to express how he felt...maybe in some sense I think he was trying to take everything human out of being human. I felt sorry for him because I'm not sure how well he was succeeding.

How often do we hear a good idea (like Arkady) and try to adhere to it only to find that it never makes us happy? 

It was really interesting for me to read this novel at this point in my life, because as I was reading of Bazarov and Arkady leaving university for the winter to see their families, I too was going home from university to visit my family.

In the novel when Arkady was at the table and there was that narration and Turgenev's thoughts on youth and the wine...it was uncanny how I understood how Arkady felt when addressing his dad as "father" and how to outside society he was recognized as someone different (or an adult) where at home he would always be recognized as a child in some respect (don't we all stay children in our parents' eyes?)

Okay, this might seem a little odd, but how many people (or am I the only one) laughed when they read the part where Bazarov and Pavel are duelling? It seemed comical because both parties claimed to be there because they hated each other - because of the ideas the other party possessed. (Or was it because of Fenechka??  :Wink:  ) It was a nice place for Turgenev to show us the contrast of the different generations though.

Sorry all my thoughts are mashed up, but it is late and I just finished the novel so I thought I would throw my opinion out there. Again, sorry if I am repeating already past conversation.

----------


## Janine

Hi *Grace,* Here I am as promised  :Wink:  . Don't be a bit sorry. I find your post very observant and I like the way your zeroed in on the crux of the story - the 'human' aspects. Afterall, this is a story about human-beings and not puppets. 




> I finished Fathers and Sons a little late it seems, but I will post my thoughts anyway.


I finished up a little before you, and I felt that last page really struck a cord with me, as I closed the book...I kind of sighed.... The last paragraph or so was so poignant, meaningful to me. I will discuss this later on, and we can both post our separate translations, of that section, as we compared them last night directly. *Dori,* I believe, has the same translation as I do, so he might add a comment or two. I will ask him to personally. I know he liked the book exceedingly.

*Grace,* using the words 'a little late' is truly meaningless, I believe. I think that one can never finish up too late on these discussions. All of the threads stay open forever, so you can comment any time. I feel good that the system here alows for that, because sometimes, even months after reading of a particular story or book, a really good thought will come to you that relates back to a certain part of that text. So, I say, why not pop-in, revive the thread and comment? It is surprising how more people might surface to comment on your comment. I often check old threads, and sometimes they do surface again and even revive. I like to think they are like a book one can once again open and read parts from.

How did you like the book, *Grace?* This was my second reading and I enjoyed it very much and I think I understood parts much better this second time around. 





> I don't think that just because someone claims himself a nihilist makes him one, someone mentioned this earlier (sorry I am not going back to reread the posts). Bazarov didn't seem really convinced of it himself either...especially when he fell subject to human emotions and ideas that didn't fit his ideals...it made him angry and ultimately unhappy. When he confessed to Odintsova that he loved her and shook so terribly he was torturing himself for ideas it seemed he knew he didn't believe in himself. To me it was like Bazarov thought that so much change could happen by having this nihilistic outlook, when really he kept himself where he was at in life and never advanced because he wouldn't allow himself to express how he felt...maybe in some sense I think he was trying to take everything human out of being human. I felt sorry for him because I'm not sure how well he was succeeding.


I agree whole-heartedly with your thought here about the political confictions in the book. I don't think that Bazarov was completely convinced, he surely thought he was until real human emotion and love came suddenly into his existence. I think he also showed much wavering in his beliefs as he was dying. He tried hard to stick to his new beliefs but did not family win out in the end? He could not divorce himself entirely from his parent's love. He really did not advance, because as you said ' he wouldn't allow himself to express how he felt and maybe in some sense I think he was trying to take everything human out of being human' - that is an interesting way of putting that. I think he did try too hard to be above human or detached from being merely 'human'. Even though he made friends with the lower classes, peasants easily - was he really in close contact with them? The true intimacies of his life he could not achieve. Even his close, or so-called close friendship with Arkady, he could not maintain, when he, Bazarov, himself, cut him off as a friend. Bazarov was quite forlorn and alone and very sad to me. His isolation was self-imposed and yet when he met his match in emotional matters - Odintsova - he, by contrast in his change of heart, could see himself, as in a mirror, into this woman, I believe. She was the epitomy of the isolated human being, with full control over her emotions, heart....but was she(?)...apparently so by the ending of the novel and her marriage to a rich man. In fact, did she not try to control her sister also and keep her from happiness and true human intimacy? I don't believe that the author intended to have Bazarov succeed because this mirrors what finally did happen in Russia in history. I think the author definitely was imparting a very basic lession here that we, as humans, cannot divorce ourselves from our emotional self.





> How often do we hear a good idea (like Arkady) and try to adhere to it only to find that it never makes us happy?


Exactly. Many young people are attracted by anything that appears to us as new and inovative. We naturally reject what our parents had and how they lived in an old-fashioned backward vane. That is fine, but when we lose site of the whole core of the human race, then we also lose our perspective. I think that Bazarov only knew how to reject the old ways and he had it right in thinking of advances in science and physics, but he lost sight of the simplicity of life and the ties that bind all of us. He thought to reject everything - family, love, etc...but to replace these things he had no solution or suggestion which ultimately would leave nothing but a void. If you read some of the passage - often ending paragraphs or chapter mention a void or a 'precipice'. I found this to be quite interesting and perhaps prophetic of the ending of the story.





> It was really interesting for me to read this novel at this point in my life, because as I was reading of Bazarov and Arkady leaving university for the winter to see their families, I too was going home from university to visit my family.


That is incredible...when one can directly relate a story and how a character feels to ones life. I think this book is a very universal story and I agree with you about the family aspects of the novel, in your follow observations.





> In the novel when Arkady was at the table and there was that narration and Turgenev's thoughts on youth and the wine...it was uncanny how I understood how Arkady felt when addressing his dad as "father" and how to outside society he was recognized as someone different (or an adult) where at home he would always be recognized as a child in some respect (don't we all stay children in our parents' eyes?)


Yes, parents never don't think of the child/adult as the child - the one they knew from a tiny helpless baby. Memory is a very strong thing. Being both a mother, myself, and a daughter, I know just how true this can be and I understand it completely. Here again, in this story, is a very 'universal' idea and though.





> Okay, this might seem a little odd, but how many people (or am I the only one) laughed when they read the part where Bazarov and Pavel are duelling? It seemed comical because both parties claimed to be there because they hated each other - because of the ideas the other party possessed. (Or was it because of Fenechka??  ) It was a nice place for Turgenev to show us the contrast of the different generations though.


First time I read the dual scene I laughed right out loud. I thought it totally amusing. I sometimes think the funniest things in life are things that happen ordinarily and this whole passage was written with such wit and understanding. I like the idea of Baz contemplating his own demise the night before and yet his going along with such a old-fashioned idea such as dueling. I thought he might be killed the first time I read this book and got to this part, so when it did not happen I was quite relieved and laughed out loud. I thought a terrible humorous line was something like 'I am a doctor, not a duelist.' I will try to look up the exact quote. Anyone know what chapter the duel took place? I also liked when Baz said he knew he lived when he heart the bullet wiz by his ear....I found that somehow funny, maybe since I was relieve to know he still lived. It is funny, but this one showdown scene between Bazarov and Pavel seems to bring them together on a different plane. I don't say they become close but it strikes some sort of tolerance between them when they both face ulitmate death and live. It is a highly intreresting scene to me from different aspects.





> Sorry all my thoughts are mashed up, but it is late and I just finished the novel so I thought I would throw my opinion out there. Again, sorry if I am repeating already past conversation.


No, *Grace,* I don't think your thoughts were 'mashed up' at all, and you are quite observant, sensitive to the story and characters and you brought out some very good basic points to the novel. Thanks for posting! :Thumbs Up:  I don't see where you are repeating yourself either. Post some more, if you have time; I would be interested in your further thoughts on the novel. 

I loved the novel! :Thumbs Up:

----------


## hellsapoppin

Not to unnecessarily beat a dead horse, but we seem to be hung up on what constitutes a nihilist. It appears as if it is thought that someone had to affirm a given set of principles in order to be a true nihilist. Indeed, this is how nihilism is defined today. But it was not necessarily viewed that way during Turgenev's time. 

Consider this:

``“Nihilism was not so much a corpus of formal beliefs and programs (like populism, liberalism, Marxism) as it was a cluster of attitudes and social values and a set of behavioral affects—manners, dress, friendship patterns. In short, it was an ethos.” 

"Nihilism" — and also in large part "realism," particularly "critical realism" — meant above all else a fundamental rebellion against accepted values and standards: against abstract thought and family control, against lyric poetry and school discipline, against religion and rhetoric. The earnest young men and women of the 1860's wanted to *cut through every polite veneer, to get rid of all conventional sham,* to get to the bottom of things. What they usually considered real and worthwhile included the natural and physical sciences ...

''“While nihilism emancipated the young Russian radicals from any allegiance to the established order, it was, to repeat a point, individual rather than social by its very nature and lacked a positive program ...


''Since they had no cohesive, constructive social program the nihilists lacked strategic sustainability of their revolutionary movement.


''Such were the true nihilists, *the destroyers,* who did not trouble themselves about what was to be built after them. They did not exactly deny everything, for they believed firmly, fanatically, in science and in the power of the individual mind. But they thought nothing else worth the slightest respect, and they attacked and sneered at family, religion, art, and social institutions, with all the more vehemence the higher they were held in the opinion of their countrymen ... ``



more at: http://www.counterorder.com/history.html


*And this is the key that I have tried to emphasize in my previous posts on this subject: Bazarov fully met the definition of nihilist as the term was understood at that time by Turgenev and other Russians.*

----------


## Virgil

hellsapoppin, may i ask why you choose such a small font? I frankly have a hard time reading that and my eyes just turn off.

----------


## hellsapoppin

Ooops! I'm terribly near-sighted and frequently have to adjust the font size on my screen --- sorry for any inconvenience.

----------


## Janine

> hellsapoppin, may i ask why you choose such a small font? I frankly have a hard time reading that and my eyes just turn off.


Hi *Virgil, 
Grace* and I both posted some comment on the previous page...not sure if you had seen those and hoped you would comment.

----------


## Pensive

> Okay, this might seem a little odd, but how many people (or am I the only one) laughed when they read the part where Bazarov and Pavel are duelling? It seemed comical because both parties claimed to be there because they hated each other - because of the ideas the other party possessed. (Or was it because of Fenechka??  ) It was a nice place for Turgenev to show us the contrast of the different generations though.


Fenechka was the more immediate reason but from the start they held different opinions which pressed this urge to duel inside them even more, especially Pavel.

Well I agree, I had a hard time holding me from laughing during that part, in fact, in every conversation between Pavel and Bazarov (as far as I remember) I found something to laugh upon. Or is it that I have this habit of laughing on things normally people don't laugh at probably?  :Tongue: 




> We are what people around us see us, not what what we think we are.


Everyone (even people we come across) don't have always the ability to see what we actually are.  :Tongue:

----------


## hellsapoppin

``hellsapoppin, may i ask why you choose such a small font? I frankly have a hard time reading that and my eyes just turn off.
__________________
"That day I shall always recollect with grief; with reverence also, for the gods so willed it." - Virgil, The Aeneid (V, 49)

Mad, Bad, & Dangerous to Know ``




Virgil,

As half-blind as I am, I prefer font size that matches your signature. :Wink:

----------


## Quark

Everything with Pavel is a little funny. He's such a ridiculous character that it's hard not to smile.

----------


## Janine

> Everything with Pavel is a little funny. He's such a ridiculous character that it's hard not to smile.


I agree, *Quark,* and then of course, Pavel does have a serious and even sad side. I did find him thoroughly amusing many times though, as a character, and even at times, so ridiculous, one had to laugh out loud. I think the wit in the book was very well placed and timed, don't you? I think life has moments, when one does not know whether to laugh or cry, so I felt this quality of the book added more realism to the story.

----------


## Virgil

> ``hellsapoppin, may i ask why you choose such a small font? I frankly have a hard time reading that and my eyes just turn off.
> __________________
> "That day I shall always recollect with grief; with reverence also, for the gods so willed it." - Virgil, The Aeneid (V, 49)
> 
> Mad, Bad, & Dangerous to Know ``
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 :FRlol:  I am blind.  :Biggrin:

----------


## Janine

> I am blind.


I think *Hellsapoppin's* quote is showing up rather LARGE on my monitor -larger than yours *Virgil*.... :FRlol:  
I am near-sighted also - *Hellsapoppin*, so if you are, as well as I, how do you read that teensy-weensy type of yours?  :Confused:  I can hardly make out a thing.

----------


## hellsapoppin

Ach! I'm goofing around with the font size so that I can read the darn thing and have somehow managed to make my on-screen printing appear small!

I hope the board mods can re-adjust the mess I made. So sorry!!

----------


## bazarov

> ``What would happen if Bazarov and Arkady went to see Bazarov's, and then Kirsanov's?``
> 
> 
> A good question - while I've been trying to think it over, I cannot honestly come up with a different outcome.


You think so? I am not that sure. 
If they came firstly to Bazarov's, can we be sure that Bazarov would act in same way he did to Pavel and Nikolay and Arkady would be kind and leaving his nihilism? Or Bazarov would act like Arkady did to his parents; with love and friendship, and Arkady would act like Bazarov did to Pavel and Nikolay, dueling with Pavel at the end?

I think there would be a huge difference. Arkady had no real emotions to old Bazarov's, why would he be polite and friendly to them? I think his nihilism would there act similar like Bazarov did; full of irony, sarcasm and rationalism. Maybe not that strong simply because Bazarov was much smarter and had stronger personality.




> ``Do you, after all consider Bazarov as a nihilist?``
> 
> Definitely. Especially since he specifically calls himself one.



Sorry Pensive, have to go again; you're true friends see who and what you are, if you disagree with that then you have wrong opinion about yourself.  :Smile: 
That brings me back to Bazarov and hellsapoppin: We are not defined by our words, we are defined by our acts. Therefore, Bazarov maybe strongly believe that he is a nihilist, but he is not. If he was a true nihilist, he would never have feelings for Ana Sergeyevna, he would never had such a sensitive ending with his parents; he would neglect love no matter of circumstances. It was easy for him to neglect God, family, love or art when doesn't care about God( nobody can't change that; it's inner feeling), he had no family close to him, he was too smart or all womens were too stupid for him and he didn't care about art(that's really subjective; I wouldn't change Guernica and Mona Lisa for jumbo pizza :Biggrin:  ). But, when some nihilistic aspects on humanity were questioned, he failed immediately and his futal resistance and unwillingness to accept it made it even worse.

----------


## hellsapoppin

Regardless of what Bazarov may have thought/said, the key is 'what did Turgenev believe?' From all of my years in reading 19th century classical Russian literature, I know of no critic who thought he was not making an accurate portrayal of a nihilist.

----------


## Virgil

> Ach! I'm goofing around with the font size so that I can read the darn thing and have somehow managed to make my on-screen printing appear small!
> 
> I hope the board mods can re-adjust the mess I made. So sorry!!


That's alright Hellsapopin. I'm just interested in what you're saying.  :Smile:

----------


## Etienne

> I think there would be a huge difference. Arkady had no real emotions to old Bazarov's, why would he be polite and friendly to them? I think his nihilism would there act similar like Bazarov did; full of irony, sarcasm and rationalism. Maybe not that strong simply because Bazarov was much smarter and had stronger personality.


Arkady was never really a nihilist and wouldn't have acted like Bazarov. Even though he might have had some nihilist beliefs they were only a surface and wouldn't affect his real character which is calm, polite and gentle. Absolutely not like Bazarov.




> That brings me back to Bazarov and hellsapoppin: We are not defined by our words, we are defined by our acts. Therefore, Bazarov maybe strongly believe that he is a nihilist, but he is not. If he was a true nihilist, he would never have feelings for Ana Sergeyevna, he would never had such a sensitive ending with his parents; he would neglect love no matter of circumstances.


Nihilism is the ideal he tries to live with, and only this makes him a nihilist. There is no perfect nihilist, like there is no perfect Christian, for example. You are not a nihilist only if you are the "perfect" nihilist. But again this is really just semantics and hair-splitting...

----------


## Dori

> But again this is really just semantics and hair-splitting...


Don't be so anti-semantic.  :Tongue:   :FRlol:

----------


## Janine

> Arkady was never really a nihilist and wouldn't have acted like Bazarov. Even though he might have had some nihilist beliefs they were only a surface and wouldn't affect his real character which is calm, polite and gentle. Absolutely not like Bazarov.


*Etienne,* I agree with this and I thik it totally obsurd to reverse their characteristics or personalities; they are who they are. What is the point of 'what ifs'. We should just go ahead and discuss the other aspects of the story.





> Nihilism is the ideal he tries to live with, and only this makes him a nihilist. There is no perfect nihilist, like there is no perfect Christian, for example. You are not a nihilist only if you are the "perfect" nihilist. But again this is really just semantics and hair-splitting...


I agree with this concept and your comments, but most of all - that all this talk, of whether this character or that character is a 'true nihilist' is definitely 'hair-splitting....not to mention downright boring, at this point. What happened to the book discussion?

----------

