I am a literary giant in Russia

Chapter 116 A Commentary That No Russian Writer Can Avoid in the Next Decade

The "superfluous man" is a literary figure that has left a significant mark on classic Russian literature. If we analyze it from a relatively singular perspective, the reason why the superfluous man holds an important position in Russian literature is because the problem of aristocratic revolutionaries becoming detached from the people was a major issue in the first stage of the Russian revolutionary movement.

They possessed lofty ideals, yet remained detached from the people. Dissatisfied with reality, they lacked action; they were "giants in thought, dwarfs in action," wasting their talents in cynicism. Unwilling to side with the government and conform to high society, they also failed to stand with the people against autocracy and serfdom. Dissatisfied with the status quo, yet powerless to change it, they became brooding, melancholic superfluous individuals.

In terms of origins, it was actually the Russian nobles of this period who were deeply influenced by English literature, and the most popular English literature at that time was the "Byronic hero" created by Byron, the old London gunslinger.

These types of people are proud and stubborn. They are dissatisfied with reality and demand to rise up in rebellion, possessing a rebellious character. At the same time, they also appear melancholic, lonely, and pessimistic, detached from the masses, and do things their own way, never finding the right way out.

Pushkin was undoubtedly deeply influenced by this type of character. Thus, in his verse novel "Eugene Onegin," he created the first "superfluous man" based on the realities of Russian society. This character would become the most beloved protagonist in Russian literature for some time to come.

The story is roughly about Onegin, a young nobleman who lived a dull life from childhood, lacking nothing in terms of food and clothing. After reading some books, he developed various ideas, became weary of high society, and dissatisfied with reality, but wanted to do nothing and knew how to do nothing. Later, because he was going to inherit an estate, he went to live in the countryside, where he also planned to make some innovations on his farm and realize some of his early ideas.

But he soon discovered that his new ideas were resisted by the environment, and that a young nobleman like him was unlikely to actually engage in revolution. So he began to feel bored again, and out of boredom he started to make friends and fall in love, but this behavior out of boredom prevented him from doing even these things properly.

So, due to a misunderstanding, he dueled with his best friend and killed him. A very nice girl expressed her love for him, but because he was dissatisfied with reality and therefore had no faith in marriage and family, he rejected her. However, years later, when he met the girl again, she was already someone else's wife. Onegin changed his mind and began writing love letters to pursue her. In the end, the girl rejected Onegin.

Due to their social environment and their own class background, they always think more than they act, and everything they do is somewhat out of place, making no contribution to society while living a miserable life. In fact, such people emerge whenever society faces transformation and change.

Decades later, Yu Dafu created the literary figure of "the superfluous man" based on this.

Pushkin is the originator of the "Superfluous Man" series, and Lermontov, as an admirer of Pushkin, not only cosplayed Lao Da in the dueling aspect, but also in the literary aspect. However, he was ultimately a writer with extremely high talent. Based on the "Superfluous Man" mentioned above, Pechorin in Lermontov's "A Hero of Our Time" is a more profound character.

Besides his superfluous nature, he was a more ruthless and selfish egoist than Onegin. He despised the world while doing his best to harm it, committing numerous evil deeds.

To put it simply, this is a literary, complex character suffering from "chuunibyou" (a Japanese term for adolescent delusions of grandeur). So what are the typical manifestations of chuunibyou? It's someone with a strong sense of self, who feels misunderstood and unhappy. Pechorin is roughly like that. However, he really enjoys analyzing his own psychology and behavior, but no matter how much he analyzes, he often arrives at very personal conclusions.

In a sense, Lermontov was writing an autobiography when he wrote "A Hero of Our Time," and a pretentious one at that. Or rather, he was writing about the kind of person he wanted to be, just as most teenagers with adolescent delusions or those going through puberty fantasize about becoming some kind of awesome person—ruthless, decisive, fearless, and never doubting themselves.

Following this pattern, some online novels in later generations followed this path, and some extreme characters were even elevated to god-like status by some readers. But in fact, such characters already existed in literature, and they were presented in a more complex way. Bi Qiaolin is such a character.

If we were to use a somewhat inappropriate and even insulting example of Lermontov, it would be that the Great Love Immortal Venerable is a simplified version of Pechorin in terms of personality.

Of course, "Great Love Immortal Venerable" is also a work that is loved by many people.

However, the "chuunibyou" (middle school syndrome) doesn't only lead to extreme self-centeredness. In the most intense age of youth, some people are captured by extreme self-centeredness, while others are naturally dazzled by some grand ideal, even willing to dedicate their lives to it.

At this point, perhaps we should bring out the book "How the Steel Was Tempered":
"The most precious thing a person has is life. Each person has only one life. A person should live their life in such a way that when they look back on their past, they will not regret wasting their years, nor be ashamed of having accomplished nothing. Then, when they are about to die, they can say: 'I have dedicated my entire life and all my energy to the most magnificent cause—the struggle for the liberation of mankind.'"

Perhaps we could also bring out Old Ma's high school graduation thesis from when he was seventeen:

"If we choose the profession that best serves the welfare of humanity, then no burden can overwhelm us, because it is a dedication to all; then what we feel will not be a pitiful, limited, selfish pleasure, but our happiness will belong to millions, and our cause will continue to exist silently but eternally, and noble people will shed tears in the face of our ashes."

In summary, some people with chuunibyou (middle school syndrome) think, "I'm the coolest! I'm different from everyone else! The problem isn't me, it's the world!" Others are more like, "I'm going to do the coolest thing! I'll defend you all to the death! I'll create a brand new world!"

As for great figures, they are those who, based on the most superficial adolescent fantasies, steadfastly pursue what they believe in, and if they happen to be born in an era that suits them, then history will leave a glorious page for them.

From this perspective, both "A Hero of Our Time" and "How the Steel Was Tempered" have a certain value that transcends their time, because in any era, young people often seem to be going in two completely different directions, only to varying degrees.

So, getting back to the main point, the above roughly outlines part of Mikhail's literary criticism. To be honest, while the "superfluous man" is a literary figure formally proposed by Herzen, and his arguments are certainly excellent, Mikhail had a wealth of material and the experience of his predecessors at his disposal. Even if he may not be on par with the true masters of literary criticism, his prophetic vision—able to discern the past and future in the present era—is more than enough to compensate for many shortcomings.

Therefore, even though Belinsky believed he had high expectations for Mikhail, when he actually read this literary review, which seemed somewhat immature in its writing style, two or three times in its entirety, he was overwhelmed with waves of ecstasy and trembling.

Firstly, on the textual level, Mikhail analyzed the characters of Onegin and Pechorin extremely thoroughly. Since the publication of "Eugene Onegin" and "A Hero of Our Time" and the resulting uproar, there have been countless comments and discussions about them, but Belinsky is certain that very few comments have been able to hit the essence of these two characters as directly as he has.

“Mikhail, if Pushkin and Lermontov could see this commentary, they would surely agree with almost all of your points.”

Belinsky continued in a slightly trembling voice, "Of course, Lermontov might deny it, because like Pechorin in his writing, if someone could truly dissect his mind, he would not only not consider you his confidant, but would be more likely to be enraged by this and challenge you to a duel."

Mikhail: “?”

Lermontov is quite a character.
Beyond the text itself, Belinsky believed that Mikhail's analysis of the "superfluous man"—a class and a type of person—demonstrated his brilliant insight and profound understanding of Russian society.
In this day and age, aristocratic intellectuals are actually the mainstream. In the intellectual world, people from landlord families often make up the majority. Calling such a large group "superfluous people" seems absurd at first glance.

But upon closer examination, can we really expect the nobles to relinquish their positions voluntarily? Even if some nobles betray their class, how far can they go down this path? And how deeply can they go?
There are just too many things holding them back!
Social environment, family, background
Even within Belinsky's literary circle, most people considered serfdom too cruel, but they often tolerated the landlord regime. Humane landlords typically avoided close relationships with their serfs, instead interacting with them through stewards and village chiefs. Within the writers' circle, they were often solely focused on literature and issues concerning all humanity.

Can this method alone really bring about any change?

Of course, the term "superfluous man" here is not an insult, but rather a sincere description of an awkward situation. Such a statement might resonate with progressive aristocratic youths who are going through such a painful period.

Yes, for them, families and society that adhere to old ideas regard them as outsiders, but the education they receive makes it impossible for them to live like their parents. So what should they do?
In his excitement, Belinsky read the relatively short literary review over and over again. Concepts that had previously seemed vague yet subtly perceptible became increasingly clear. At the same time, he couldn't help but look at Mikhail and say:

“Mikhail, I believe that for at least the next ten years, all Russian writers who want to follow the new trends of the times will absolutely have to deal with your literary review! And the social phenomenon you depicted in your literary review will gradually become a common reality in our Russian society!”

To be honest, Belinsky's prediction was quite accurate. The image of the "superfluous man" would remain popular until the late 1950s, when a new social force, namely the common intellectuals, emerged and grew stronger, and the image of the "superfluous man" gradually gave way to new representatives.

After praising Mikhail, Belinsky gradually cooled down and, once calmed down, began to point out the shortcomings in Mikhail's literary criticism:

"However, Mikhail, some of your statements seem a bit disjointed, and some of your terminology and assertions don't quite fit."

As Belinsky pointed out these problems one by one with a somewhat serious expression, Mikhail broke out in a cold sweat and was immediately reminded of the painful days of revising his thesis. However, while pointing out these problems, Belinsky also changed the subject, saying:
"Of course, since you're just starting out writing reviews, these minor mistakes are nothing; they can be easily polished up. What's more concerning is why you were somewhat ambiguous in some parts? I think you might as well make your statements clearer."

Similarly, I feel that the tone of your article is too objective. This may not be a bad thing, but if you could express your own views more clearly and engage in dialogue with the readers yourself, the article would be more impactful and its emotional power would be greatly enhanced.

And then there's…

Mikhail, upon hearing these words, remained silent.

Hey Lao Bie, if we really do it your way, will this article even pass the review?

Or rather, would the examiner dare to let him pass?
I think it's unlikely.
Mikhail naturally absorbed Belinsky's opinions to the best of his ability, and for those that were difficult to accept, he could only resort to his own methods.

In other words, Mikhail actually used a bit of subtlety in his writing. He seemed very objective, but in reality, his words conveyed a certain bias.

To this, Mikhail could only say that this is the wisdom of our ancestors.
After some revisions, the article was naturally placed in the latest issue of "Modern Man." As time goes by, the latest issue of "Modern Man" will soon be released, and Mikhail will soon be able to resume his university life.

(End of this chapter)