Author Archives: Brennan Clark

Virgin Mary the Ideal Communist

 

“The Motherland of Electricity” wrestles with the consequences of communism on the human psyche and the forced perception of a Baconian environmental relationship (meaning the environment is there to be used for scientific and humanitarian gains). One of the most striking moments of imagery in the story is a page long description of a necklace of the Virgin Mary, one which is depicted without her son and as her being more of a laborer than a saint. In this passage, I believe Platonov is asking the reader to consider the parallels between Mary and the Communist worker.

 

The comparison begins with the doomed fates of both Mary and the Communist worker. If you take the immaculate conception away from its religious valor, Mary herself is a doomed laborer of God. She has no choice in her fate of motherhood, and the production of children in the case of Jesus can be (problematically) consider a commodity. Platonov describes that the Mary in the amulet is without the son in her arms, highlighting her role as mother and taking away her piousness. Additionally, Platonov depicts this Mary as, “simply an unbelieving working woman who lived by her own labors and received no favors from any god” (265). Platonov’s Mary looks at the world “without meaning or faith,” (265) directly subverting the very ways in which Mary is exalted, at its most extremes within the Catholic church, for her unwavering faith.

 

If we consider Jesus as Mary’s production of a commodity, Platonov’s amulet begins to elevate the importance of labor and the production of commodities within Russian society. As Mary’s labors are the salvation from sin, Platonov is implying that the common worker’s labors are the cause of the salvation of the country. Just as Mary unquestionably birthed Jesus and proceeded in her labor with no complaint, so should the Russian worker, such as our electrician

Tolstoy and Chekov and the De-Romanticizing of Peasant Life

Chekhov’s Uncle Vanya attacks the historic idolization of the Russian country peasant life. The character’s realization of their country lives’ lack of opportunity and monotony causes a suicidal catharsis and the detrition of their already frail familial relationships. Chekhov is attempting to destroy the aggrandized peasant life shown in a novel such as Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina where members of the aristocracy vacation into manual labor and instead show the consequences and horrors of peasant country life.

Famously, Levin in Anna K temporarily inhabits peasant labor in the drawn-out mowing scene. Levin seeks out the life of his peasants for, “so he loved the peasantry in contrast to the class of people he did not love, and so he knew the peasantry as something in contrast to people in general. In his methodical mind, certain forms of peasant life acquired clear shape.” Levin exalts and vacations to peasantry for its simplicity in comparison to the highly political life of Moscow and St. Petersburg. In the simple life of labor, Levin can find purpose and clear meaning to his action.

Tolstoy’s Levin is problematic, however, in that it idolizes peasant life but does not show the harsh realities that accompany country life. Levin is able to vacation into manual labor and embedded (to use Giddens terminology) society but does not immigrate. Tolstoy fails to show the harsh realities accompanying the lifestyle Levin visits.

Chekhov does display the harsh consequences of assimilation into country life. Unlike the aggrandized praise for the natural environment presented in Anna K, Chekhov’s characters display the real hardships that accompany an embedded and labor-filled life. Astrov, the country doctor who has experienced modernized society before, remarks, “it’s our life—our provincial, parochial Russian life—I can’t stand. I despise it with my whole heart… I work harder than anyone in the district. You know that. Fate lashes out at me from all sides.” Instead of romanticizing peasant country life, Chekov accurately show is harsh reality and the poor quality of life manual labor begets. More so, Chekhov continually emphasizes the lack of opportunity and mobility in country residences—they have no opportunity like Levin. As Tolstoy’s Levin romanticizes his two days of labor, Chekov notes the consequences of such a life.

The leveling of Nature and Man

In many of the reading so far, we’ve seen nature approached as an omnipotent uncontrollable force. The authors have manipulated an Eden like relationship where nature and wilderness are unobtainable and unconquerable. In “Forest-Lodge,” however, Zabolotsky presents man and nature as equal combatting foes, giving more developmental credit to humanity than the previous authors.

In Forest-Lodge Zabolotsky presents multiple moments of conflict between the natural and the domesticated, each of which shows a stalemate between the two forces. The very title of the poem “Forest-Lodge” is an oxymoron, similar to the famous Green Church in the mid-evil poetic epic Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Forest implies a natural space and wild space, whereas Lodge signifies a manmade artificial dwelling. A “Forest-Lodge” therefore presents a conflict of the two space, man attempting to domesticate a space within the wilderness.

The representation of animals presents further tension. When the man shoots at “a shaggy creature that loomed at the door,” the mysterious animal’s retreat is juxtaposed with descriptions of the man’s cat springing, “from the sill and hid under the stairs” and the man’s dog growling, “despondently.” The domesticated animals who inhabit a developed space react in fear of nature. Much like the space within forest lodge, they too are separated and distant from their natural and wild beginnings.

Development does not just inhabit natural space but also alters it. As the man shoots at the mysterious creature, “a shot rang out,/ shaking the forest to its foundations.” The man’s gunshot is paralleled to the lighting from the storm earlier in the poem, both being destructive forces but one natural and the other manufactured. Just as the lightning could strike the forest lodge and destroy it, so to can the man fire back at nature.

Zabolotsky leveling of natural and development forces is a novel take on the interaction between Russian culture and the environment. As before we had the perspective of humans being belittled by the grand wilderness, Zabolotsky depicts a combative relationship. Zabolotsky’s “Forest-Lodge” forces consideration of the power of nature in developed spaces, and the continual destruction and domestication of natural spaces.

“The Poet”

Pushkin’s two stanza “The Poet” presents descriptions of writers before and after moments of divine inspiration. Pushkin idolizes the poet, describing the average citizen as “this world’s unworthy sons” (7). Pushkin’s poet may exist within the average society, but is occasionally called upon by a divine figure and through this connection is given a unique inspiration in which his verse is produced. The concluding couplet of Pushkin’s “The Poet”, as well as choice descriptive adjectives imply that not only is a pious connection necessary to produce a profound commentary on society, but also a separation of the poet from society and a devolution to the natural.

Pushkin’s second stanza describes the inspirational process of the poet and the metamorphosis that “divine inspiring word” (10) has on the writer. Such inspiration causes the soul of the poet to, “like a mighty eagle wakes” (12). The eagle is a natural symbol of freedom and mobility: the eagle is an apex predator who can navigate natural landscapes with ease. Additionally, the eagle cannot be tamed or domesticated, rather can only thrive and exist away from society in the wilderness. Pushkin’s inspired poet is similar to the eagle in that it no longer can thrive within society, and has to remove itself to thrive. His comparison fortifies the poet’s heightened connection to nature, and inability to work within the confines of developed society. His ending couplet fortifies the necessity of the reclusive poet. To comment on society, the poet must remove himself inhabiting only the “vacant” (14) natural spaces.

Even more so, Pushkin’s adjective choice fortifies the poet’s necessary transmutation to the natural. The inspired poet is a misfit in normal society, is “fierce and savage” (17) and “consumed with madness” (18). Puskin’s adjectives depict the poet similarly to a wild animal who is misplaced outside of the wilderness. The poet’s transformation “unbowed” his “head” (16) and frees his thinking from the pressures and demands of the society’s “blabbling crowd” (14). The poet’s reversion to natural society is required for his insight into society and allows him to think freely.

Pushkin’s naturalistic poet fortifies Pushkin’s commentary on the necessity of the natural environment. Although Pushkin believes that one can exist within society finely, Pushkin also elicits that poetic perspective is only obtainable through reclusiveness and a deep connection to nature.