A beautiful July day

There is July, and then there is Turgenev's July. Here is the wonderful and magical first paragraph of "Bezhin Meadow" (translation by Charles and Natasha Hepburn):

It was a beautiful July day, one of those days which come only after long spells of settled weather. From the earliest morning the sky is clear; the dawn does not blaze and flame, but spreads out in a gentle blush. Instead of the flaming incandescence that goes with sultriness and drought, or the dark crimson that precedes the storm, the sun has a bright and friendly radiance, as it swims peacefully up from behind a long, narrow cloud, shines out briskly, and then veils itself in the lilac-coloured mist. The tenuous upper edge of the spreading cloud sparkles with a serpentine brilliance, like that of beaten silver. But now the dancing beams come shooting out again—and gaily, grandly, as if on wings, the mighty luminary emerges. About midday there usually appears a multitude of high, round clouds, golden-grey, with edges of tender white. Like islands, scattered across a boundless and brimming river, which surrounds them with deep, translucent expanses of an even blueness, they scarcely stir; farther off, towards the horizon, they concentrate, crowd together, there is no more blueness to be seen between them; but the clouds themselves are of the same azure as the heaven, they are penetrated through and through with light and warmth. The colour of the horizon, a pale and floating lilac colour, remains unchanged the whole day, and uniform all around; there is no darkening or deepening to foretell a storm; sometimes, here and there, there are bluish shafts falling down, betokening the passage of a hardly perceptible shower. Toward evening, these clouds vanish; the last of them, blackish and vague as smoke, lie with a pink curling face turned to the setting sun; over the place where it disappears, as quietly as it rose into the heavens, a scarlet radiance stands for a while over the darkening earth, and, trembling gently, like a carefully carried taper, the evening star begins to burn. On such days, all colours are softened; they are clear, but not brilliant; they are tinged with a gentleness that is somehow touching. Such days may be scorching-hot, and the steam may rise from the sloping fields; but the wind disperses and breaks up the accumulated sultriness, and whirlwinds—sure sign of settled weather—march in tall white pillars along the tracks across the plough-land. In the dry, clean air there is a smell of wormwood, of rye-harvest, and of buckwheat; even an hour before nightfall you feel no dampness. This is the weather that the husbandman needs to gather in his crop… .

A Sportsman’s Notebook discussion: one

The Overgrown Pond by Valentin Serov (1888)
Picture source

A brief discussion covering the first seven of the “sketches”: Khor and Kalinich, Ermolai and the Miller’s Wife, Raspberry Water, The Country Doctor, My Neighbor Radilov, Ovsyanikov the Freeholder, Lgov.

The text and other links related to A Sportsman’s Notebook can be found here. All quotes are from the translation by Charles and Natasha Hepburn.

While the underlying assumption of these stories is rather flimsy—the author’s experiences during hunting in the countryside—it is effective in painting rural Russian life and nature. I’ll highlight a few points running through these stories that I found interesting. “Khor and Kalinich” is the strongest story in this group. The story continually shows contrasts and comparisons between many different groups of people as well as individuals. Some of the contrasts are between the provinces of Orel and Kaluga, the peasants within those districts, nature in those districts, the peasants Khor and Kalinich, serf vs. master, men and women, as well as others. Power and control, as well as the question of freedom are addressed many times. Khor, described as a “positive, practical fellow, … a rationalist” has the following conversation with the narrator:

”Tell me, Khor,” I said to him, “why don’t you buy your freedom from the master?”

“And why should I buy it? As things are, I know the master and I know the rent he wants… .He is a good master, too.”

“All the same, you would be better off if you were free,” I remarked.

Khor gave me a sidelong glance. “Certainly,” he said.

“Well, then, why don’t you buy your freedom?”

Khor swiveled his head from side to side. “And what am I to buy it with, sir?” [He is rumored to have money squirreled away]

“Oh, come on, man… .”

“Once Khor gets in among people who are free,” he continued below his breath, as if talking to himself, “any fellow who shaves his beard would be Khor’s master.”

“But you could shave your own beard, too.”

“What’s a beard? A beard is grass; you can always cut it.”

The following quote appears on many sites discussing Turgenev and this work: “He won his first success in 1847 with "Khor and Kalinich," a sympathetic story of peasant life, which was published later, with similar stories, in A Sportsman's Sketches (1852).” (See Yahoo Encyclopedia for one place this appears, although the information comes from The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright © 2007, Columbia University Press). Yet I find the tone of “Khor and Kalinich” not consistently sympathetic, bordering on damning some of the peasants at times. Khor is relatively well off for a serf, yet he prefers the appearance of control instead of actual freedom. Khor points out how the master abuses Kalinich (and seems more upset by Kalinich’s indifference than to the poor treatment), yet Khor is happy to stay in a position of authority relative to other peasants and keep the system unchanged.

The question of freedom is a thorny one, but so far Turgenev seems to show two underlying things needed for liberty: an inner drive or desire for it as well as education. Kalinich is able to read and knows how to accomplish many things, but has absolutely no drive to change his status. While Khor cannot read, he demonstrates “wide knowledge” and is shrewd. Yet he is complicit in maintaining the serf system since he will retain his relatively privileged status. Instead of a simple “peasants good, gentry bad” formula, Turgenev layers his criticism, sparing no class of people. While he clearly targets nobles who wish to keep the serfs in their place (which includes denying them an education), he does not seem to have much sympathy for the serfs that have an opportunity to improve their lot but would rather moan about the cruelty of fate (like Khor and Kalinich). While sympathetic in listening to “the shrewd simple speech of the Russian peasant” from Khor and others, their portrayal stands in marked contrast to peasants like Feodosya Mikhailovna (in “Ovsyanikov the Freeholder”) who worked hard to achieve her freedom, only to be forced to wait for her master to approve her release.

For structure, Turgenev usually begins with a “while I was hunting for x around the region of y” narrative, using this premise to provide lush depictions of the Russian countryside before introducing the peasants and or landowners he wants to portray. I enjoy his descriptions and can easily picture the scene and the people (and even the animals). Several times his structure sets the story up in this manner, flashes back on a character’s life to provide irony or pathos about their current situation, and then quickly ends the story. Rarely do these stories go anywhere or have much action. The passive narrator draws stories out of his characters, providing something more than just a slice of life. This mosaic approach, depicting individual details to provide an overall effect, works well with his depiction of an uncertain and decaying time.

The nostalgia is especially strong in “Raspberry Water”, “My Neighbour Radilov”, and “Ovsyanikov the Freeholder”. The characters discuss the situation of their current time versus that of prior years. Descriptions of places often show run-down or ruined structures while portrayals of peasants highlights their precarious situation, uncertain of where tomorrow’s food will come from. Even the landowners are far from being well off or secure. There is a sense that people, especially nobles, were grander, fairer and wiser in the past. But not everyone agrees. Luka Petrovich, in “Ovsyahikov the Freeholder” describes his mixed feelings: “No, I have no special reason for praising the good old days. Now take yourself, for example. You’re a landowner to-day, as your late grandfather was, but you’ve nothing like the same power, and you’re not the same sort of man, either.” One more example, from “Raspberry Water” where the narrator is chatting with Styopushka (a serf “they hardly bothered to count” when the census was taken) as they fish:

”You had a strict master, I see,” I began, after a few moments of silence.

“That was the fashion then, sir,” rejoined the old man, shaking his head.

“Things are different now,” I observed, looking at him keenly. He gave me a sidelong glance.

“No doubt things are better now,” he muttered, and cast his line far out into the stream.

Somehow I have trouble believing he really means that. With the false (or at least questionable) nostalgia and the poor conditions of the current day, it becomes somewhat understandable why the serfs may not uniformly want to be freed. They may view it as easier to be ill-treated but have excuses for your poor lot than to face uncertainty in troubling times on your own.

For some that are granted their freedom, like Vladimir in “Lgov” who subsists “on manna from on high”, the question arises if they are truly better off. The peasants are often viewed as something less than human by many of the landowners (who are rarely better educated). While there are beneficent landowners portrayed in these stories, they are the exception. More often the owners appear to believe the peasants exist to serve their whims, as well as feelingthe serfs are lucky to have such magnanimous owners.

The Spartacus War revisited and speculative history

During my week off, I finally read The Spartacus War by Barry Strauss that I mentioned a couple of months ago. Several books I've read lately raises the question of what makes a successful history when little trustworthy material is available on the subject. Persistent use of qualifiers like “perhaps”, “he might have seen”, and “possibly” strains the narrative when the reader constantly has to take a leap of faith. When the myth surrounding the historical event or person surpasses the historical record, separating the two becomes harder in the reader’s mind. A few quick impressions on what makes Strauss’ “speculative” history compelling and fun to read, at least to me:

Strauss provides the historical context within which the Spartacus revolt occurred. Finding the right balance of what to include can be difficult, as well as how best to present the information. While Strauss could have taken more space to frame ancient Rome, his approach limits his discussion to only what was relevant. While he could have included additional facts that would have put Spartacus’ life and times into context without making the book feel padded, I think he strikes a good balance on inclusion to give the reader most of what is needed to understand events. At some point you reach diminishing returns when piling fact upon fact (or speculation upon speculation), and fortunately that point is not reached here. In addition, Strauss’ knowledge and descriptions of Italian geography play an important role in understanding how and why the events unfolded as they did.

The references surrounding Spartacus are limited, and it seems most of them are mentioned and often quoted (although I would have loved an appendix with just the ancient source material). What I enjoyed was not just quotes from ancient sources but discussion on the circumstances of their composition and what biases were involved. Cicero’s published speeches on Roman governor Gaius Verres should be taken with a grain of salt (or maybe a truckload). Knowing that bias is an important consideration to understand Spartacus’ attempted crossing to Sicily. I’m sure it is tempting to present information as definitive, just as a reader probably wants to know exactly what happened, but I appreciate knowing the level of uncertainty. Legends arising out of the subject also make it harder to cut through to what really happened. Knowing that Spartacus’ body was never found after his final battle does not ruin the legend/myth/movie, and I think it adds pathos to his outcome.

While looking at near-term influences, I wish Strauss had spent a little more time with Spartacus’ legacy as well as why he resonates two thousand years after his war and death (even when the message/story is co-opted and distorted). Fortunately he provides an extensive section on sources (grouped by general topics), which lists great places to follow up on anything that strikes the reader’s interest.

Update: While I'm wrestling with back pain, enjoy this interview with author Barry Strauss:

You've already noted that Spartacus was no abolitionist, yet in the public imagination he remains a heroic revolutionary. How do you interpret him and his movement?

He did liberate slaves, even though I'm skeptical that was his ultimate goal. And it is hard not to be inspired by that. His name survives in part because the Romans never forgot him. He lived on as a figure of terror in Roman literature for centuries. His revolt occurred in the 1st century BC, but hundreds of years later even Saint Augustine was still talking about Spartacus and what he did. So this was a revolt with a very long afterlife.

But there are two things that are really striking about this story. First, we don't have any testimony from Spartacus or his side. All the evidence we have is left to us by the Romans. Oddly enough, Roman writers praised Spartacus. They had very kind things to say about him. One contemporary source, Varro, notes that Spartacus was forced to be a gladiator even though he was innocent. Sallust tells us that Spartacus was intelligent, noble, prudent, and wise—and that he even attempted to prevent his men from committing an atrocity against civilians. Sallust also tells us that Spartacus was a patriot mindful of the needs of his homeland. It was pretty unusual for the Romans to use such laudatory terms about an enemy, particularly a slave and a barbarian. The same Sallust says that most of the men who followed Spartacus were human scum, barbarians. To what extent this suited Sallust's own ideological purposes, or to what extent this was the real Spartacus, is unclear. Nonetheless, there is a very strong ancient tradition that Spartacus was a hero.

Whatever happened, I apologize

I've been enjoying a week off from work and staying offline as much as possible. Here's wishing everyone a happy Fourth of July.

Someday, kiddies, you will learn about SEX

We're reading less Dr. Seuss and working our way through 'first reader' books with the oldest. But I did like this line from an interview with Dr. Philip Nel, professor of English at Kansas State University and director of the graduate program in children’s literature (who knew there was such a thing? and would Dr. Seuss qualify for the program today?):

Did his publisher reject any characters or storylines because they were controversial?
No, but Seuss was a practical joker who liked to tweak his editors. His editor Michael Frith recalls receiving a draft page for Dr. Seuss’s ABC, in which Seuss drew a large-breasted woman and the following verse: “Big X, little x. X, X, X. / Someday, kiddies, you will learn about SEX.” That does not appear in the book. Seuss was just making sure that Frith was paying attention.

Having read the book MANY times, I would have much preferred the original (well, maybe with some small changes)...I used to wing it anyway instead of reading things exactly as they appeared in print. Now I have to be more careful about it so the oldest isn't confused...

A Sportsman’s Notebook discussion: online resources and versions

A Sportsman's Notebook by Ivan Turgenev
Translated by Charles and Natasha Hepburn
The Cresset Press, London, 1950

I am glad that this book has come out; it seems to me that it will remain my mite cast into the treasure chest of Russian literature, to use the phraseology of the school-book… Much has come out pale and scrappy, much is only just hinted at, some of it's not -- right, oversalted or undercooked -- but there are other notes pitched exactly right and not out of tune, and it is these notes that will save the whole book.

-- Ivan Turgenev, in a letter to his friend Pavel Annenkov in 1852, remarking on A Sportsman's Notebook
Quote source

Because of differences in translations, I thought it might be helpful to list which stories are in my version. I picked up the used copy pictured above (I know, I need to figure out how to use my camera phone better). I can’t really explain why I went with this version other than I liked the look and loved the feel of it over other versions. I know it’s all the wrong reasons, but I have seen only a few translations recommended and this was one. I’m not sure the best way to go about discussing the book, so I’ll probably only highlight certain stories and have a post on general topics.

Also, be sure to keep checking the main Turgenev online resource page. I add interesting articles as I find them.

Online texts

Most online texts seem to only have some of the stories available. Project Gutenberg looks like they have a complete version: Volume One and Volume Two

The work at Turgenev.org.ru is also the Constance Garnett translation, but has "translation corrected and names modernized by James Rusk"

A pdf version is available at Mootnotes

Additional links about A Sportsman’s Notebook

The biggest hurdle to finding online links to this work is the various translations of the title. As I find more links that look like a good resource, I will continue to add them here.

The Wikipedia entry contains an overview of each story.

The quote at the start of this post was taken from this link, what looks to be the introduction to the 1967 Penguin Books edition. It was found on a syllabus page of Kathleen Ahern, Ph.D., at the University of North Carolina, Greensboro.

A review from TIME magazine in 1950 marking the translation I am reading. Quote:
"[Sherwood] Anderson once called A Sportsman's Notebook the sweetest thing in all literature.'"

Although it has nothing to do with Turgenev's story other than having the title of one tale, Sergei Eisenstein's film Bezhin Meadow has an interesting history.


The contents of the Hepburns’ translated version I am reading:

• Khor and Kalinich
• Ermolai and the Miller’s Wife
• Raspberry Water
• The Country Doctor
• My Neighbor Radilov
• Ovsyankkov the Freeholder
• Lgov
• Bezhin Meadow
• Kasyan from Fair Springs
• The Bailiff
• The Estate Office
• The Bear
• Two Landowners
• Lebedyan
• Tatyana Borisovna and Her Nephew
• Death
• The Singers
• Pyotr Petrovich Karataev
• The Rendezvous
• Prince Hamlet of Shchigrovo
• Chertopkhanov and Nedopyuskin
• The End of Chertopkhanov
• The Live Relic
• The Knocking
• Forest and Steppe

First Love discussion

Book Illustration for 'The Day Before' by Ivan Turgenev, 1947
Konstatin Rudakov
Picture source

The text of "First Love" can be found at
Project Gutenberg,
Google Books,
Mootnotes, or
The Literature Network

An audio version can be found at LibriVox

A summary is provided at Wikipedia

A nice summary, excerpts and more is available courtesy of David C. Lahti at the University of Massachusetts

My post on links to Turgenev resources can be found here

---

The library copy of “First Love” I read was translated by David Magarshack—all quotes are from his version. I’m going to post some extensive quotes as well as reveal some of the plot twists, so be forewarned. I still highly recommend reading the work…I was familiar with the plotline and still enjoyed it tremendously. This was (as far as I recall) my first reading of anything by Turgenev and I’m looking forward to reading more. I hope to read at least two more of Turgenev’s works in the next few weeks, so I’ll go into detail on overarching themes over the course of their discussions.

Turgenev claimed several times that this novella was autobiographical (although he was younger than the protagonist when the events occurred). The story follows 16 year old Vladimir Petrovich (looking back on the events when he is 40) as he falls in and out of love with his neighbor Zinaida Alexandrovna, the daughter of Princess Zasyekin. While the story bills itself as a look at Vladimir’s first love, there is decidedly more going on beneath the surface. Turgenev’s prose is deceptively simple, yet forcefully conveys what the characters are feeling. A few topics as I noted them…

Love as ecstatic torment
Love is the central theme, and the torturous effect it has on the characters becomes difficult to watch. Turgenev does a masterful job of conveying the emotions and the feelings while experiencing a first (or second, or third) love. The first real meeting between Vladimir and Zinaida shows the girl winding wool around the boy’s hands, just as she figuratively winds him around her finger. Zinaida accomplishes this with all her suitors as well. While the title refers to Vladimir, the older men courting Zinaida display many of the same silly actions and concentrated feelings of a first love. Several know how juvenile they are behaving but they continue to dote on her all the same. Vladimir is drawn to Zinaida, unable to escape her gravitational pull. He abandons his studies and would do almost anything for her. He realizes his passion and suffering began at the same time, describing the torment he feels from his love.

My passion began from that day. What I felt at that time, I remember, was something similar to what a man must feel on entering government service: I had ceased to be simply a young boy: I was someone in love. I have said that my passion began from that day; I might have added that my suffering began on that day too. Away from Zinaida, I languished: I could not think of anything, I had not the heart to do anything, and for days on end all my thoughts revolved round her. I languished…but in her presence I did not feel any happier. I was jealous; I realized my own insignificance; I sulked stupidly and cringed stupidly; and yet an irresistible force drew me towards her, and every time I stepped over the threshold of her room I was seized by an uncontrollable tremor of happiness. Zinaida guessed at once that I had fallen in love with her, and indeed I never thought of concealing it; she amused herself with my passion; she made a fool of me, petted me, and tormented me. It is sweet to be the only source, the despotic and arbitrary cause, of the greatest joys, the greatest sorrows, in another human being, and I was like soft wax in Zinaida’s hands.

Vladimir feels he will give up his life to spare her any misery, and he superficially proves it by jumping from a high wall at her request. His love is a transformative power, both when he falls in and falls out of love. After performing extraordinary measures for her love, Vladimir struggles to understand why Zinaida could love his father. He has yet to understand the nature of love, which is driven home as he clandestinely witnesses the final encounter between his father and Zinaida:

I began to watch. I did my best to hear what they were saying. My father seemed to be insisting on something. Zinaida would not agree. I can see her face just as if it were all happening now—sad, serious, beautiful, and with an indescribable imprint of devotion, sadness, love, and a kind of despair—I can find no other word for it. She uttered words of one syllable; she did not raise her eyes but just smiled—submissively and obstinately. It was by this smile alone that I recognised my Zinaida as I used to know her. My father shrugged and set his hat straight on his head, which was always a sign of impatience with him. Thin I heard the words: “Vous devez vous separer de cette…” Zinaida drew herself up and stretched out her hand…. Suddenly something quite unbelievable took place before my very eyes: my father all of a sudden raised his riding crop, with which he had been flicking the dust from the skirts of his coat, and I heard the sound of a sharp blow across her arm, which was bared to the elbow. I just managed to restrain myself from crying out, while Zinaida gave a start, looked at my father without uttering a word, and, raising her arm to her lips, kissed the scar that showed crimson on it. My father flung away the crop and, running up the steps rapidly, rushed into the house. Zinaida turned round, tossed back her head, and, with arms outstretched, also moved away from the window.

What she must separer herself from is hinted at later as Vladimir’s father receives a letter that, combined with begging a favor from his wife, upsets him so much he has a fatal stroke. The father had started his own letter to Vladimir on the day of his stroke: “My son,” he wrote, “fear the love of woman, fear that ecstasy, that poison…” The leveling of emotions, one of the (alleged) benefits of maturity, is absent here. The rush of being in love has the power to sweep that aside at any age.

Nature
Turgenev’s descriptions are simple but convey both the picture and the atmosphere wonderfully. A few descriptors or a simile provide a literary watercolor—not everything is in crisp focus, but enough detail is provided to mentally fill in the gaps. Even when he uses techniques that can be trite, such as having nature mimic internal feelings, the passages wonderfully succeed.

Soon I noticed faint glimmers of light continually lighting up my room. I sat up and looked at the window. The window bars showed up against the mysteriously and dimly lit panes. “A thunderstorm,” I thought, and I was right. It was a storm, but it was very far away, so that the thunder could not be heard; only the faint, long, branching-out forks of lightning flashed uninterruptedly across the sky: they did not flash so much as quiver and quiver and twitch, like the wing of a dying bird. I got up, went to the window, and stood there till morning. The lightning did not cease for a moment; it was what is known among the peasants as a “sparrow night,” or a night of uninterrupted storm with thunder and lightning. I looked at the silent stretch of sand and the dark mass of the Neskoochny Park, at the yellowish facades of distant buildings, which also seemed to quiver with each faint flash. I looked and could not tear myself away: this silent lightning, these restrained gleams of light, seemed to respond to the mute and secret fires which kept blazing up in me too.

Family
Vladimir admits his dad had a strange influence on him: “I love him and I admired him” even though it is clear his dad keeps him at a distance. His dad has the power to transform him from a jealous Othello to a cowering schoolboy in an instant. Family life for Vladimir gets worse as the story goes on…tension between his father and mother increases. While his mother could have garnered the reader’s compassion for all she has to put up with from her husband and son, Turgenev paints her unsympathetically.

My father treated me with good-humoured indifference; my mother scarcely paid any attention to me, although she had no other children: other worries occupied her completely. My father, who was still young and very handsome, had married for money; she was ten years older than he. My mother’s life was far from happy: she was in a state of constant irritation and was always jealous and bad-tempered, though never in my father’s presence—she was terrified of him—while his attitude to her was severe, cold, and aloof. I have never seen a man more exquisitely calm, more self-possessed, or more despotic.

Happiness
Vladimir’s father seems to be the only happy person in the story. Is it because he is so detached and aloof from much of what is going on around him? Or is it because he has power to get what he wants? The father gives Vladimir pointers on happiness and freedom:

• “Grab all you can, but never allow yourself to be caught: to belong to yourself alone is the whole trick of living.”
• In describing what gives a man freedom, his father says “His will, his own will: that will give him power, which is better than freedom. Know how to want something, and you will be free and you will be able to command.”

His father’s actions follow his own tenets, or at least up to the point where he must beg from his wife. For the most part, those tenets also describes Zinaida’s outlook, although she is bound by social constraints that were unbreakable at the time. The importance of wealth and class underlies much of the story. She achieves happiness to a point, but her definition of happiness is distinctly different. She looks for a competent and forceful love to balance and complete her. Her comment that “I want someone who will master me” explains perfectly why she falls in love of Vladimir’s father. It also explains some of her infatuation with Vladimir, who physically resembles his father but whose presence is a pale imitation. Zinaida sacrifices for his father just as the suitors sacrifice for her, all to the same unfulfilled effect. The similarities between Zinaida and Vladimir’s father become clearer as their relationship is revealed.

In addition
There are quite a few reference to literary characters and easy comparisons: Cleopatra and Antony (fated to end badly), Polonius from Hamlet (sycophants), Othello (jealousy), Pushkin’s poem “The Gypsies” (Aleko). Not to mention the undercurrents of Oedipus throughout the story. The literary element includes the poet Maydanov, whose heart seems bigger than his talent.


Some Turgenev themes and motifs stretch across many of his works. Some are apparent here, such as the superfluous man and the strong Turgenev heroine. Even though Turgenev claims some of the events occurred early in his life, the obvious question is how much of his unrequited love for Pauline Viadrot present in the story?

Ivan Turgenev online resources

Portrait of Ivan Sergeyevich Turgenev
By Ilya Yefimovich Repin (1879)
Picture source

A few links on Turgenev. I'll link to individual works as I cover them.

BIOGRAPHY
Wikipedia entry

Biography at Pegasos

Good background information on Turgenev and his time is provided by Dr. Bruce T. Holl (Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas)

ONLINE WORKS
Most online works use translations by Constance Garnett
Works at Google Books
Project Gutenberg, or
Mootnotes.

Audio works available at LibriVox

ADDITIONAL
John MacKail's Overview of the Golden and Silver Ages of Russian Culture provides a general overview of the times and where Turgenev fits (found on the site of Nicholas C. J. Pappas, Professor of History at Sam Houston State University)

Music plays an important role in Turgenev’s life and works. This site provides Turgenev’s thoughts on Russian music as well as audio of works he specifically mentions.
An additional site on Turgenev and Russian Music provides pictures of Turgenev and Russian composers of his time.

Kelley Dupuis' essay regarding the influence of Turgenev on Ernest Hemingway

I didn’t know essays were available at Wikipedia, but this one is from Essays on Russian Novelists by William Lyon Phelps

Two essays by Henry James on Turgenev:
1897 entry in Library of the World's Best Literature
1903 essay

A letter by Joseph Conrad on Turgenev and a study to be published by Edward Garnett:

"For only think! Every gift has been heaped on his cradle: absolute sanity and the deepest sensibility, the clearest vision and the quickest responsiveness, penetrating insight and unfailing generosity of judgment, an exquisite perception of the visible world and an unerring instinct for the significant, for the essential in the life of men and women, the clearest mind, the warmest heart, the largest sympathy--and all that in perfect measure. There's enough there to ruin the prospects of any writer."

Turgenev.org.ru, which has photos/paintings along with a biography and his works (in English and Russina)

An essay on Willa Cather, Ivan Turgenev, and the Novel of Character by Richard Harris from the Willa Cather Archive at the University of Nebraska

Courtesy of Richard Peace, Professor Emeritus, University of Bristol comes The Novels of Turgenev: Symbols and Emblems

One of my favorite current writers, the pseudonymous Theodore Dalrymple, has an article titled How—-and How Not—-to Love Mankind, a look at Turgenev and Karl Marx:
"But for all their similarities of education and experience, the quality of each man’s compassion could not have been more different: for while one’s, rooted in the suffering of individuals, was real, the other’s, abstract and general, was not."

Dale Quarrington's look at the relationship between Turgenev and Dostoevsky

Well, that’s strange

No, not the picture of me from August 1982 (which I ran across this morning when looking for other files). Someone placed a hold on The Odyssey: A Modern Sequel at the library and I can’t renew it. Who knew it was in high demand? Unfortunately I had checked it out several weeks before I could begin reading it so I’ll need to return it this weekend. While I found a version of the book online, I am too much of an old “gotta have the book in my hands” fart. So what to do? I had just gotten rolling on the book. But I think I’ll move on to Turgenev and read a few of his shorter works in the next couple of weeks and come back to Kazantzakis when the book is returned. At least that's the plan for now.

Who was that kid 25 years ago?

Totally off-topic to anything and everything, but…

Last night I watched We Jam Econo, the documentary on the Minutemen. It was 25 years ago that I last saw them, and the Minutemen t-shirt I had from that date was one of my prize possessions for quite a while.

The documentary is decent, although I would have loved more band footage and less “Oh, the band was so great” interviews—those watching the movie already agree. The movie was a flashback of playing their records (“Take that Huskers”) as I finished college and explored an emerging Deep Ellum scene. Funny, it’s not a period of life I usually look back on very much, but the movie captured it perfectly.