'No work in modern literature, with the possible exception of Uncle Tom's Cabin, can compete with What Is to Be Done? In its effect on human lives and its power to make history. For Chernyshevsky's novel, far more than Marx's Capital, supplied the emotional dynamic that eventually went to make the Russian Revolution.' —Joseph Frank, The Southern Review Almost from the moment of its publication in 1863, Nikolai Chernyshevsky's novel, What Is to Be Done?, had a profound impact on the course of Russian literature and politics. The idealized image it offered of dedicated and self-sacrificing intellectuals transforming society by means of scientific knowledge served as a model of inspiration for Russia's revolutionary intelligentsia. On the one hand, the novel's condemnation of moderate reform helped to bring about the irrevocable break between radical intellectuals and liberal reformers; on the other, Chernyshevsky's socialist vision polarized conservatives' opposition to institutional reform. Lenin himself called Chernyshevsky 'the greatest and most talented representative of socialism before Marx'; and the controversy surrounding What Is to Be Done?

Nikolai Chernyshevsky's Novel as a Psychological Profile. You can download the paper by clicking the button above. LibriVox recording of A Vital Question, or, What is to be Done? For more free audio books or to become a volunteer reader. Contents Notes on the Text i Preface ii 1 DOGMATISM AND “FREEDOM OF. 'No work in modern literature, with the possible exception of Uncle Tom's Cabin, can compete with What Is to Be Done? In its effect on human lives and its power to make history. For Chernyshevsky's novel, far more than Marx's Capital, supplied the emotional dynamic that eventually went to make the.

Exacerbated the conflicts that eventually led to the Russian Revolution. Katz's readable and compelling translation is now the definitive unabridged English-language version, brilliantly capturing the extraordinary qualities of the original.

Wagner has provided full annotations to Chernyshevsky's allusions and references and to the, sources of his ideas, and has appended a critical bibliography. An introduction by Katz and Wagner places the novel in the context of nineteenth-century Russian social, political, and intellectual history and literature, and explores its importance for several generations of Russian radicals. 'In the Russian revolutionary movement, no literary work can compare in importance with Chernyshevsky's What Is to Be Done?.... Katz and Wagner have provided us with a version that is worthy of the novel's importance. Katz's translation is faithful to the original, yet cast in words that bring Chernyshevsky's meaning alive to modern readers....

Wagner, in turn, provides abundant notes, explaining obscure references, making connections between parts of the novel that could easily be missed on first reading, and alerting the reader to those many passages where Chernyshevksy hinted at what he could not say outright.' — Russian History.

'No work in modern literature, with the possible exception of Uncle Tom's Cabin, can compete with What Is to Be Done? In its effect on human lives and its power to make history. For Chernyshevsky's novel, far more than Marx's Capital, supplied the emotional dynamic that eventually went to make the Russian Revolution.' --Joseph Frank, The Southern Review Almost from the momen 'No work in modern literature, with the possible exception of Uncle Tom's Cabin, can compete with What Is to Be Done? In its effect on human lives and its power to make history. For Chernyshevsky's novel, far more than Marx's Capital, supplied the emotional dynamic that eventually went to make the Russian Revolution.' --Joseph Frank, The Southern Review Almost from the moment of its publication in 1863, Nikolai Chernyshevsky's novel, What Is to Be Done?, had a profound impact on the course of Russian literature and politics.

The idealized image it offered of dedicated and self-sacrificing intellectuals transforming society by means of scientific knowledge served as a model of inspiration for Russia's revolutionary intelligentsia. On the one hand, the novel's condemnation of moderate reform helped to bring about the irrevocable break between radical intellectuals and liberal reformers; on the other, Chernyshevsky's socialist vision polarized conservatives' opposition to institutional reform. Lenin himself called Chernyshevsky 'the greatest and most talented representative of socialism before Marx'; and the controversy surrounding What Is to Be Done? Exacerbated the conflicts that eventually led to the Russian Revolution. Katz's readable and compelling translation is now the definitive unabridged English-language version, brilliantly capturing the extraordinary qualities of the original.

Wagner has provided full annotations to Chernyshevsky's allusions and references and to the, sources of his ideas, and has appended a critical bibliography. An introduction by Katz and Wagner places the novel in the context of nineteenth-century Russian social, political, and intellectual history and literature, and explores its importance for several generations of Russian radicals. (I don't recall at this point which translation I read.) Written in in the few months the author spent in prison on false charges of instigating civil unrest, this political tract in novel form presents Chernyshevsky's views on materialism, communalism, and feminism. Chernyshevsky shows that only the respectful marriage of equal individuals can be successful. Both parties should be free to pursue happiness, even if it involves ending the marriage because they are no longer in love.

Women ought to (I don't recall at this point which translation I read.) Written in in the few months the author spent in prison on false charges of instigating civil unrest, this political tract in novel form presents Chernyshevsky's views on materialism, communalism, and feminism. Chernyshevsky shows that only the respectful marriage of equal individuals can be successful. Both parties should be free to pursue happiness, even if it involves ending the marriage because they are no longer in love. Women ought to be free to work outside the home, and spouses ought support one another's careers as they are able.

In the workplace, employees should share in business decisions and profits. If it isn't clear who is best at which jobs, everyone should try the different tasks and see who is best suited to them. Experts should be brought it to teach new skills or simply provide continuing education for workers.

Workers should live near the place of work, creating a local community and also saving transit time so that they can get more sleep or have more time to spend on other activities. Everyone should, collectively, think of and plan for the future rather than putting individual interests first. Justice begins in material conditions. Dear Reader, the criticism of this novel is that it is poorly written. I can assure you this is not the case. Chernyshevsky - indeed once a dear friend of mine (we spent some time together in the Fortress of Peter and Paul) - with a few initial 'striking scenes' comes right out and admits he's not trying to win you over with plot. Plot is grossly overrated anyhow; most modern 'authors' would be well served to learn that lesson (and why must a plot have this silly, redundant arc to it?

You've see Dear Reader, the criticism of this novel is that it is poorly written. I can assure you this is not the case. Chernyshevsky - indeed once a dear friend of mine (we spent some time together in the Fortress of Peter and Paul) - with a few initial 'striking scenes' comes right out and admits he's not trying to win you over with plot. Plot is grossly overrated anyhow; most modern 'authors' would be well served to learn that lesson (and why must a plot have this silly, redundant arc to it? You've seen it once, you've seen it a million times!

So for the love of God, try another shape!). In any case, he's very funny, and this translation, including carefully researched footnotes, is quite excellent. I might go so far as to describe it as a brilliant work; in it you will be introduced to my world, a world of 'swindlers and fools' - where your choice is to be but one or the other (and one questions whether or not this remains the case today).

Now of course there is a great deal more to say about the impact of this novel on certain figures, characters you might call them, who loomed rather large in Russian politics - indeed who cast their shadow, as it were, on the course of modern history, in particular one who suffered from painful migraines, who adored chess and mushroom hunting, among other things. Oh, but Dear Reader, I am not an historian!

My duty is merely to recommend this work, which, in all candor, is one of my favorites and should be mandatory reading to any poor soul seeking to understand the origins of certain. Ideas, shall we say.

And oh, but ideas are marvelous things, aren't they? Do read this. This is a rather peculiar book, which I enjoyed quite a lot. It was written in 1863, while its author, Nikolai Chernyshevsky, was in prison for opposing serfdom. Chernyshevsky, who spent a number of years in prison and died in forced exile in Siberia, was considered one of the most radical men of his time, one of the 'new men' of the 1860s, who opposed themselves to the 'men of the '40s' such as Dostoevsky and Turgenyev. 'What Is to Be Done?'

Was for a long time considered the exemplary radical This is a rather peculiar book, which I enjoyed quite a lot. It was written in 1863, while its author, Nikolai Chernyshevsky, was in prison for opposing serfdom. Chernyshevsky, who spent a number of years in prison and died in forced exile in Siberia, was considered one of the most radical men of his time, one of the 'new men' of the 1860s, who opposed themselves to the 'men of the '40s' such as Dostoevsky and Turgenyev. 'What Is to Be Done?' Was for a long time considered the exemplary radical Russian novel, depicting women and men whose approach to life is essentially one of rational egoism and utilitarianism (Chernyshevsky was greatly impressed by Mill), and who occasionally say things like, 'chemistry is infinitely more needed by society than is poetry.' The characters engage in intellectual debates; there are stories within stories (reminiscent of Dostoevsky); the heroine, Vera Pavlovna, starts a cooperative employee-owned workshop for seamstresses; and there is a love triangle reminiscent of 'Jules et Jim' (and here the rationalism breaks down strangely and darkly, but I won't say more).

Chernyshevsky was a great admirer of 'Vanity Fair,' and in this, his only novel, he often addresses his characters and his readers in a manner not unlike Thackeray. Indeed, he often wittily mocks his reader: 'How perceptive you are! As soon as you are told something, you note it instantly and glory in your penetration.

Accept my admiration, reader with the penetrating eye!' Dostoevsky, who was enraged by Chernyshevsky's materialism, rationalism, socialism, feminism and optimism, wrote 'Notes from Underground' and a good bit of 'The Demons' as a response (there are also references in 'Brothers Karamazov'). Chernyshevsky's novel also was a favorite of Lenin and his revolutionary comrades, and it has been said that 'What Is to Be Done?'

Was more influential in laying the foundations for the Russian revolution than anything written by Marx. This is the middle book in an important Russian literary and philisophical argument. The first was Turgenev's Fathers and Sons, and the third was Dostoevsky's. All that stuff Dostoevsky is talking about in Notes - advantage motivating action, the crystal palace, etc. - comes from What is to be Done.

Chernyshevsky thought Turgenev treated nihilism unfairly in Fathers and Sons, so he portrayed nihilism in another manner. Dostoevsky then destroyed Chernyshevsky's vision of an This is the middle book in an important Russian literary and philisophical argument. The first was Turgenev's Fathers and Sons, and the third was Dostoevsky's. All that stuff Dostoevsky is talking about in Notes - advantage motivating action, the crystal palace, etc. - comes from What is to be Done. Chernyshevsky thought Turgenev treated nihilism unfairly in Fathers and Sons, so he portrayed nihilism in another manner. Dostoevsky then destroyed Chernyshevsky's vision of an ideal society.

It is an important book that inspired hundreds of thousands of revolutionaries to take action, and it was the favorite book of Lenin. This one's going to be on my mind for awhile!!

It'll take a long time to unpack all of the ideas & topics of discussion. I must re-read an unabridged version! Chernyshevsky is not a fiction writer, this is his only fictional work. And he succeeds unabashadly! His political background seeps into the story whenever necessary and only to enhance the story he's telling.

I went into this novel blindly knowing nothing of the plot or themes. I think blindness makes the ending more powerful. I recomm This one's going to be on my mind for awhile!! It'll take a long time to unpack all of the ideas & topics of discussion. I must re-read an unabridged version! Chernyshevsky is not a fiction writer, this is his only fictional work.

And he succeeds unabashadly! His political background seeps into the story whenever necessary and only to enhance the story he's telling.

I went into this novel blindly knowing nothing of the plot or themes. I think blindness makes the ending more powerful. I recommend it for feminist/equality folks among many others with an interest in social change. Everything else is spoiler free, top secret! I'll review this and post a link later, it needs to cook for a little while. 'What a pity that at the present hour there are still more than ten antediluvians for every new man! It is very natural, however.

An antediluvian world can have only an antediluvian population.' A new society requires a new anthropological type, new personalities with new virtues, thoughts and values: this should be a truism for those seeking social change but in fact it's rarely given any thought.

This love story about the Nihilist counterculture in 1860s Russia attacks the problem, as young wom 'What a pity that at the present hour there are still more than ten antediluvians for every new man! It is very natural, however.

An antediluvian world can have only an antediluvian population.' A new society requires a new anthropological type, new personalities with new virtues, thoughts and values: this should be a truism for those seeking social change but in fact it's rarely given any thought.

This love story about the Nihilist counterculture in 1860s Russia attacks the problem, as young women reject the old ways and seek autonomy, for example by setting up a seamstress' cooperative. Strange that people consciously discarding hierarchies give no thought to employing domestic servants, but the road must be a long one. Per me � un libro speciale. Non per i meriti letterari o per lo stile, ma per la storia di questo rapporto uomo-donna basilare per la societ�, per il modo di vedere l'organizzazione del lavoro, attuali utopie che non vediamo realizzarsi neppure ora. Nessuna indagine psicologica (cos� non si rischiano toppate;-) che toglierebbero freschezza al racconto, apprendiamo i fatti in maniera quasi oggettiva. E lo scrittore ci bacchetta pure nella buffa prefazione ed epilogo.

Vera � una donna moderna. Ci Per me � un libro speciale. Non per i meriti letterari o per lo stile, ma per la storia di questo rapporto uomo-donna basilare per la societ�, per il modo di vedere l'organizzazione del lavoro, attuali utopie che non vediamo realizzarsi neppure ora. Nessuna indagine psicologica (cos� non si rischiano toppate;-) che toglierebbero freschezza al racconto, apprendiamo i fatti in maniera quasi oggettiva. E lo scrittore ci bacchetta pure nella buffa prefazione ed epilogo. Vera � una donna moderna.

Ci si riconosce facilmente, nelle sue teorie sull'amore, sulla donna e sulla vita. I’ve always thought that stories carry much more power in the minds of men than cardboard tomes full of equations.

“What Is To Be Done,” juxtaposed against “The Communist Manifesto”; “Atlas Shrugged” against “Wealth of Nations”. It is said that “What Is To Be Done” is the book that radicalized Vladimir Lenin. Let that sink in for a moment; a simple (if long) novel about a young girl who wants find peace and a measure of prosperity and independence in Tsarist Russia is responsible for the extermi I’ve always thought that stories carry much more power in the minds of men than cardboard tomes full of equations. “What Is To Be Done,” juxtaposed against “The Communist Manifesto”; “Atlas Shrugged” against “Wealth of Nations”. It is said that “What Is To Be Done” is the book that radicalized Vladimir Lenin. Let that sink in for a moment; a simple (if long) novel about a young girl who wants find peace and a measure of prosperity and independence in Tsarist Russia is responsible for the extermination of 100,000,000 souls. And there are people who deride fiction (insert scoffing sound here) Occupied as my mind has been for many years with the struggle between liberty and collectivisim, what struck me was of course the contrast between “What Is To Be Done” by Nikolai Chernyshevsky and “Atlas Shrugged” by Ayn Rand.

Because if Chernyshevsky is the author of the story of modern totalitarianism, Rand is the dramatist of modern Liberalism’s heroic saga. As literature, “What Is To Be Done” is extraordinarily well written. Having struggled for a long time through Solzhenitsyn and Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, I was impressed by how naturally Chernyshevsky’s writing flowed – how easily the plot developed and held together and how he weaved in ideas of revolution and socialism.

I can only imagine how eloquent it must read in its native Russian, especially 150 years ago when a young and impressionable Lenin found it. “Atlas Shrugged” is also extremely well written – Rand’s mastery of emotions and momentum in her epic tale of destruction and rebirth is also brilliant and I cannot help but think that it too, in Russian (Rand, though Russian by birth, actually wrote in English – making her feat that much more impressive) would be electrifying.

Of course Chernyshevsky wrote in 18th century floury Russian prose that was Tsarist Russia’s response to England’s Victorianism, full of sentimentality and the inner lives of the characters; whereas Rand wrote a century later and her work has a binary and perhaps two-dimensional feel to it, perhaps as a response to soviet ‘Socialist Realism’ (something I’m going to explore further, stay tuned). Rand’s belief that “Art is a selective re-creation of reality according to an artist’s metaphysical value-judgments.” Compared to the idea that by depicting “the perfect person” (New Soviet man), art could educate citizens on how to be the perfect Soviets – as Anatoly Lunacharsky, perhaps the father of ‘socialist realism’, believed. Naturally, the difference between the two portrayals of communism’s nightmare could not be more striking. “We entered the workrooms; the girls who were occupied there seemed to be dressed like daughters, sisters, or young wives of these same officials. Some wore dresses made of the plainest silk, others wore barege or muslin. Their faces reflected the gentleness and tenderness that can come only from a life of contentment. You can imagine how all this surprised me.

() I’d been told that I’d see a workshop where seamstresses live and I would be shown their rooms; also that I would meet seamstresses and would share their dinner. Instead I visited apartments of people who were reasonably well off, united in one establishment. () I shared their dinner which, while not lavish, certainly satisfied me. What was all this about? How could it be possible?

() Instead of poverty I saw contentment; instead of filth, not merely cleanliness, but even some luxury in their rooms; instead of crudeness, considerable education.” Nikolai Chernyshevsky, What Is To Be Done. Paired against: “the first house in sight () showed a feeble signal of rising smoke. The door was open. An old woman came shuffling out at the sound of the motor. She was bent and swollen, barefooted, dressed in a garment of flour sacking.

She looked at the car without astonishment, without curiosity; it was the blank stare of a being who had lost the capacity to feel anything but exhaustion. () There was a useless gas stove, its oven stuffed with rags, serving as a chest of drawers. There was a stove built of stones in a corner, with a few logs burning under an old kettle, and long streaks of soot rising up the wall. A white object lay propped against the legs of a table: it was a porcelain washbowl, torn from the wall of some bathroom, filled with wilted cabbages. A tallow candle stood in a bottle on the table.

There was no paint left on the floor; its boards were scrubbed to a soggy gray that looked like the visual expression of the pain in the bones of the person who had bent and scrubbed and lost the battle against the grime now soaked into the grain of the boards. A brood of ragged children had gathered at the door behind the woman, silently, one by one. They stared at the car, not with the bright curiosity of children, but with the tension of savages ready to vanish at the first sign of danger.” Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged Friends with whom I discuss these things (there are not many) often accuse me of being ‘too Austrian’ in my approach to economics and market interference, especially by governments.

I am after all in favor of that elusive 28th Amendment ‘Congress shall make no law respecting the free trade of ideas and goods or regulating the free operation of the market’. They see ‘Austrianism’ as a fantasy, and humanity as fundamentally in need of supervision (of course those who believe such things usually believe that it is they who should do the supervising, but I digress). “Just like communism,” they say, “too much liberalism will make people vulnerable, and they will be taken advantage of (because the North Koreans never do that); and might lead to economic Darwinism (as if that was a bad thing, cue ‘creative destruction’) which will be hard for those who cannot compete (always thinking about the people who sell the inferior product, not those forced to buy it). We just need balance.” ‘Hadn’t we heard it all our lives – from our parents and our schoolteachers and our ministers, and in every newspaper we ever read and every movie and every public speech? Hadn’t we always been told that this was righteous and just?’ as Rand says. My response is to try and point them to the end results of even the most well-intentioned plans.

“But how did that work out?” I ask, a large glossy picture of the Gulag framed on my desk. North Korea’s death camps where people are tortured unto the third generation. Bonfires of human flesh beside a bread line in Venezuela. Cuba’s ‘Special Period’ where starved inhabitants of that imprisoned island contracted rickets and went blind. “The road to hell is paved by good intentions,” ya, I think I heard that somewhere.

And communism is certainly hell. “Now consider Argentina in the 20s,” I say, though most don’t listen, “the United States even today though we are losing our ‘invisible hand’; Friedrich Hayek’s England. The luxury of Adam Smith’s world. The closer you get to socialism, the more miserable; the closer you get to ‘spontaneous order’, the better off.” Or maybe I just shrug and channel Ayn Rand again, “In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit. In that transfusion of blood which drains the good to feed the evil, the compromise is the transmitting rubber tube.” Its an important lesson, which is why I read Chernyshevsky, and Rand – after all someone has to. Humanity appears to need to re-learn our lessons one generation after another in an endless closed loop, which is why books are so important.

Ed Marlo Cardician Pdf Converter. Because unless we keep pointing out that “They work for themselves; they’re the real owners ()” invariably becomes, “What is it that hell is supposed to be? Evil – plain, naked, smirking evil, isn’t it? Well, that’s what we saw and helped to make – and I think we’re damned, every one of us, and maybe we’ll never be forgiven”, it will all happen again, as it has so many times before. I was expecting a lot from What is to be Done? Naturally because of the buzz this book caused around its time. I can put it down finally with only mixed feelings about it. I suppose the book struck a chord loudly with those of its time, and as much as we present day 'readers with penetrating eyes' wish to be struck with the same impact I believe we can only pretend to be so.

If a book is not written for you and only you, there's only so much you can take away from it. I don't resolve to pretend I was expecting a lot from What is to be Done? Naturally because of the buzz this book caused around its time.

I can put it down finally with only mixed feelings about it. I suppose the book struck a chord loudly with those of its time, and as much as we present day 'readers with penetrating eyes' wish to be struck with the same impact I believe we can only pretend to be so. If a book is not written for you and only you, there's only so much you can take away from it.

I don't resolve to pretend to be anything more than an outsider in this case, but there are certain sentiments relevant to any shift in the times found in these words that one can take to heart genuinely. My biggest issue with the book is its flow. This novel has increased in me a consciousness of a 'current' in narratives. One can tell a novelist is skilled if his flow of words carries the reader through. Chernyshevsky is not a novelist in this sense. He is more accurately a philosopher who attempted to make the novel his medium.which is fine because he tread ground on which many giants were lurking (Dostoevsky, Turgenev, Tolstoy).

If anything, it can be called courageous, but the reading is made more laborious because of it. I was swept by Turgenev's narrative. With Chernyshevsky, I felt as though I were dragging myself through. Like other utopian portraits, the picture can become too idealistic to be believable (looking right at you, Edward Bellamy). Chernyshevsky knows this and makes it a point to insist his characters are normal ordinary people (thus intending to spur his people themselves to go forward rather than to wait for others). I would really like to believe in Vera's dressmaking shop but I just can't.

It seems modeled after Tawney's acquisitive society but I gather it's a product of Fourier, especially the commune living element. The incorporation of classical education into work-life?doubtful. Again, I'd like to believe but experience tells me the life of work and that of education are sharply divided.

The same issue with credulity happens with the character of Kirsanoff especially late in the novel. To summarize, this is a good book with a lot of gems to unearth even if one is not the intended recipient of its message.but a choppy narrative and a lot of dialogue which can leave one backtracking often are constant hindrances to the reader's enjoyment of the work. I started reading this novel to figure out why Dostoyevsky distastes it.

(It is said that Dostoyevsky was enraged by Chernyshevsky's 'utilitarianism' and his depiction of his Russian Utopia.) First of all, I had to look up words like 'materialism' and 'utilitarianism' dozens of times to just get the gist of. Big words like these confuse me so much. As assisting as the notes of the annotator were, they were as confusing.

There are so many explanations that - as an un-perspicacious and unlearned r I started reading this novel to figure out why Dostoyevsky distastes it. (It is said that Dostoyevsky was enraged by Chernyshevsky's 'utilitarianism' and his depiction of his Russian Utopia.) First of all, I had to look up words like 'materialism' and 'utilitarianism' dozens of times to just get the gist of. Big words like these confuse me so much. As assisting as the notes of the annotator were, they were as confusing. There are so many explanations that - as an un-perspicacious and unlearned reader - I could have done without.

Furthermore, the names of many authors, philosophers, great thinkers, etcetera in the explanatory notes overwhelmed me. That aside, I have most enjoyed reading this novel. Chernyshevsky is a most agreeable, well-informed, admirable man.

I was immensely interested in reading what he thought about all sorts of subjects. The intertwined tales became a bit baffling towards the end, and quite surprising, too, when it came to Chapter Five; however, all in all, they were incredibly interesting. I enjoyed reading What Is to Be Done? As much as I enjoyed reading Notes from the Underground.

(I still don't get why Dostoyevsky didn't like Chernyshevsky's peculiarity, for Dostoyevsky's own peculiarity is far beyond Chernyshevsky's.) Oh, and I love Chernyshevsky's direct addressing to the reader and the way he started his novel with the fool's story and preface. The flashbacks and flash forwards were also incredibly interesting. My thoughts are unorganised; but I do recommend this novel to anyone who has a taste for Russian literature. I read it without knowing what it was about - ignoring the plot. I read it because other books drew me to it, more recently Crime and Punishment. It seems, fortunately, that the author does not want to pay too much attention to the plot.

As the book (I read) says it, the ‘Aesopian’ style makes the plot just a means to the author’s intentions. On the surface the plot is simple, but when you think about it, it is precisely because of the different hidden messages. Anyway, I read it because I wante I read it without knowing what it was about - ignoring the plot. I read it because other books drew me to it, more recently Crime and Punishment. It seems, fortunately, that the author does not want to pay too much attention to the plot. As the book (I read) says it, the ‘Aesopian’ style makes the plot just a means to the author’s intentions. On the surface the plot is simple, but when you think about it, it is precisely because of the different hidden messages.

Anyway, I read it because I wanted to understand more about the preamble to the Revolutionary movement in Russia; I wanted to understand what moved its leaders to become more and more committed to their cause. Understanding more about their motivations, is key to creating a purer judgement about their undertaking. I would not have understood it and enjoyed it so much if it wasn’t for a little understanding I have on the subject. Frankly, I wouldn’t recommend this book to anyone who is not either very interested in understanding more the prelude to the Revolutionary movements or the socio-economic environment of Russia in this period or anyone who hasn’t read a little bit about this period. Also, Michael Katz’s translation provides invaluable insight with well-documented notes, a ‘must’ for this book.

In fact, if you read a translation of this book without proper notes, I suggest you read it again – with notes. And this is the other thing that strikes me about this book. I understand Chernyshevsky wrote it whilst imprisoned, but the amount of scientific, historical, literary, musical, philosophical, (etc.) remarks or references is beyond my understanding. How can anyone have such an insight into so many topics, without the modern technology, and possibly, without access to a (good) library? For example, he utilises the moral of Aesop’s fable “The Fox and the Grape” to compare tasty-grapes to idyll happiness. Then, he uses all this to hide a political message into a novel that was scrutinised by the Tsarist censors before being published and becoming one of the main cultural drivers to the Revolutionary leaders, hence, a significant encouragement to produce one of the most drastic twists in history. Of course, we cannot forget the numerous psychological and moral debates.

For example, when Kirsanov is weighing how discreet should he be in managing his absence from Pavlovna’s and Lophukov’s life. (p.234) “In one’s own affairs it’s difficult to distinguish how much one’s reason has been seduced by the sophistries of desire, because honesty is saying, “if you go against desire, you’ll have a greater chance of behaving in an honourable way”. What is to be done?

It seems that what is to be done is to take risks, in fact, to take the necessary steps to contribute towards a (Chernyshevsky’s) bigger cause. Chernyshevsky uses the title of the book a few times throughout, for example on p. 158 when Mertsalov’s young wife asks him to take the risk of marrying Lophukov and Pavlovna. It was a criminal offense without parental consent). He does it sporadically but cleverly. I've noticed quite a few positive reviews on What Is to be Done, which might give people who are interested in Russian literature the idea that this could be an interesting book to read.

It is anything but. Now, for a historian this is an important source, because Chernyshevsky's ideas and especially the character of Rakhmetov have influenced Russian ideas on revolution, social change and what we now call Russian Nihilism more than any other piece of writing. However, Chernyshevsky's style is te I've noticed quite a few positive reviews on What Is to be Done, which might give people who are interested in Russian literature the idea that this could be an interesting book to read. It is anything but. Now, for a historian this is an important source, because Chernyshevsky's ideas and especially the character of Rakhmetov have influenced Russian ideas on revolution, social change and what we now call Russian Nihilism more than any other piece of writing. However, Chernyshevsky's style is terrible (which he actually admits in his preface: he states that he is merely trying to spread his ideas and defend his viewpoints), the plot is laughable and the characters are flatter than you'll ever see in any other book.

Never does this feel like a novel, it's a pamphlet. And it's not a very interesting one at that, precisely because it tries to be a novel. There is a reason for this: in nineteenth century Russia, 'dangerous' ideas like Chernyshevsky's proto-communism (with people like Bakunin claiming that 'the urge to destroy is a creative one') obviously weren't allowed in newspapers, so they had to be presented in a hidden form, in the background of a novel. This has spawned many of the great books of nineteenth century Russia, precisely because they deal with important social and philosophical problems. Chernyshevsky tries to do this through allegorical dreams and the character of Rakhmetov (and some other minor plot elements) that are painfully overdone (it's a miracle this got past the censor).

The rest of the book is basically the worst love story ever written, because the characters are constantly talking in a 'rational', materialistic fashion to promote the individualistic and anti-paternalistic ideas of the author. This is all understandable in the context of the time in which the book was written, but today it's just too boring. Recently, some scholars have been pleading for a reevaluation of What is to be Done's literary value because of its supposedly ingenious structure, but this really is waste of time: characters appear out of nowhere, side plots without any relevance come and go for no reason, sometimes everybody bursts into song just to make a point about materialism or the revolution. And the author admits it all throughout the book when he addresses the reader directly (which, admittedly, is funny, but these little asides only stress the mind-numbing boringness of everything that surrounds it). Really the only reason to read this is the historical relevance.

After all, this book, itself a reaction to Turgenev's great Father's and Sons, provoked one of the weirdest and greatest Russian novels of all time, Notes from the Underground, and furthermore inspired many generations of revolutionaries, all the way up to Lenin. But for a casual reader, this is a complete waste of time. Interesting and tedious at the same time! Also, sad and funny. Chernechevsky's self-conscious narrator is enjoyable. He teases the reader by revealing the plot at different points.

His being in conversation as we read is enjoyable. He is a feminist and his ideal relationships between men and women are still something to dream about--mutual respect, mutually important aspirations, a combination of selfishness and selflessness. His cooperative workplace, owned and managed by the workers is somethi Interesting and tedious at the same time! Also, sad and funny.

Chernechevsky's self-conscious narrator is enjoyable. He teases the reader by revealing the plot at different points. His being in conversation as we read is enjoyable. He is a feminist and his ideal relationships between men and women are still something to dream about--mutual respect, mutually important aspirations, a combination of selfishness and selflessness. His cooperative workplace, owned and managed by the workers is something that you see a little of here in Philadelphia among the young entrepreneurs, but will it survive their entering middle age? This idealism that has yet to be realized makes this optimistic book sad.

But, it is still relevant today. I had to push myself past a few tedious parts -- sometimes those ideal characters are a bit of a bore.:). Intended as an answer to Herzen's Who is to Blame?, Chernyshevsky's ponderous novel, What is to Be Done will test the patience of any modern reader. Its historical value is well known. Lenin thought much of it. Beyond this, the modern reader will likely view it as a work that might have been written by Jane Austin if she had read Karl Marx.and were Russian.

Combine the novel of manners with a socialist blueprint and you get a special creation of tedium. As if you couldn't guess that, right? Intended as an answer to Herzen's Who is to Blame?, Chernyshevsky's ponderous novel, What is to Be Done will test the patience of any modern reader. Its historical value is well known. Lenin thought much of it. Beyond this, the modern reader will likely view it as a work that might have been written by Jane Austin if she had read Karl Marx.and were Russian. Combine the novel of manners with a socialist blueprint and you get a special creation of tedium.

As if you couldn't guess that, right? Heroine escapes from a mercenary home life by marrying a 'radical'.

Each sleep in separate bedrooms. Heroine sets up sewing co-operative.

Marriage dissolves(big surprise) and radical removes himself from the scene. Heroine marries a somewhat more extreme radical, but without the separate rooms.

Second marriage sorts out okay(how about that?) with heroine studying medicine(a favorite subject for Russian radicals in the 19th century). Heroine has dreams, the fourth elaborates a fantastic communist utopia in which heroine learns to worship her inner goddess.

Chernyshevsky emphasizes the importance of personal development for both sexes, the need for commoners to contribute to the revolutionary process, and the incremental nature of this process. The sole 'great' revolutionary Chernyshevsky depicts is almost a comic caricature. What is needed is general progress amongst all and sundry, especially the unexceptional. True love as necessary revolutionary tool hammers away at the reader. Chernyshevsky's perpetual sarcasm in addressing his 'O perspicacious reader' earns him no love after a couple of hundred pages. This work completes the list I created last summer composed of books of importance inversely proportionate to their literary merit.

This one's a real stinker, but Dostoyevsky likely found it a useful foil when writing his Demons. The Fountainhead prevented me from getting to this one last summer.

I guess I owe Rand that much. 58 chapter 2 This book is fucking long, I keep staring at it on the floor.I don't know, I might skip it for later.Seems all these graphic novels are getting ordered from the library, which is pretty great. This should be my focus.Not outdated commie literature. These are just quotes from the intro. 'Social, political, and religious institutions likewise tended to preserve distorted images of reality in order to protect the power and privileges of the social groups that benefited f Page. 58 chapter 2 This book is fucking long, I keep staring at it on the floor.I don't know, I might skip it for later.Seems all these graphic novels are getting ordered from the library, which is pretty great. This should be my focus.Not outdated commie literature.

These are just quotes from the intro. 'Social, political, and religious institutions likewise tended to preserve distorted images of reality in order to protect the power and privileges of the social groups that benefited from these institutions.' 'Chernyshevsky idealized manual labor and asserted that it provided the chief source of personal pleasure.' 'Chernyshevsky's utopian vision projected a harmonious community where egalitarian and just social relations remained unaffected by constant technological change.

Indeed, this vision appealed to educated young Russians precisely because it combined familiar Orthodox Christian ideals with new utopian socialist and democratic models and invested the amalgam with scientific certainty, thereby providing youthful intelligenty with firm moral guidelines during a period of social and ideological dislocation.' 'Passed again, the novel was sent to the journal's editor, Nekrasov, who promptly lost it in a cab.

He managed to recover the manuscript only after advertising in the official gazette of the St. Petersburg police. With what is perhaps the greatest irony of Russian letters, the novel that police helped to retrieve turned out to be the most subversive and revolutionary work of nineteenth century Russian literature.'