In Peter Chaadaev’s Apology of a Madman, he asks the reader, “Where are our sages, where are our thinkers? Which one of us ever thought, which one of us is thinking today?” (Chaadaev 305). From the readings and artwork that I have been exposed to this semester, it seems clear to me that this question is ridiculous; at that point in history, there had been many great “sages” and “thinkers” in Russia. Alexander Pushkin’s “To Chaadaev” is so interesting because he is one of Russia’s most notable luminaries from that time that Chaadaev chooses to dismiss. Unlike Chaadaev, Pushkin does not believe that Russia is without inspired individuals; yet, he chooses not to completely dismiss Chaadaev in his response. Pushkin addresses him, saying, “Believe, my friend: Russia will rise…On tyranny’s stark wreck the nation/Will write for evermore our name!” (Pushkin 36). Even though Chaadaev essentially directly insulted Pushkin, Pushkin wants to cultivate the shared Russian identity and so calls him a “friend”. Pushkin, however, molds Chaadaev’s criticism of Russian thought, or the lack thereof, to fit an argument that he has made in other pieces of his writing we have read; it is not the fault of the individual but of the autocracy if the Russian culture has not made a significant impact world-wide. According to Pushkin, “Russia will rise” once “tyranny” is brought to “stark wreck”; i.e., once authoritarian government is brought down, Russia’s full glory will be realized. Perhaps that is why Chaadaev’s piece is entitled “Apology of a Madman”; he places the blame of Russia’s lack of prominence in the world’s cultural cannon on lack of individual genius instead of on real societal hindrances.