"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.
Michael R. Katz's readable and compelling translation is now the definitive unabridged English-language version, brilliantly capturing the extraordinary qualities of the original. William G. 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.
===
445 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1863
Book details & editions
335 people are currently reading
9331 people want to read
About the author
Nikolai Chernyshevsky117 books108 followers
Follow
Nikolaj Gavrilovič Černyševskij (Russian: Николай Гаврилович Чернышевский,
Николай Чернышевский) was a Russian revolutionary democrat, materialist philosopher, lexicographer, journalist and socialist (seen by some as a utopian socialist). He was the leader of the revolutionary democratic movement of the 1860s, and an influence on
Vladimir Lenin,
Emma Goldman, and Serbian political writer and socialist
Svetozar Marković.
The son of a priest, Chernyshevsky was born in Saratov in 1828, and stayed there till 1846. After graduating from Saint Petersburg University in 1850, he taught literature at a gymnasium in Saratov. From 1853 to 1862, he lived in Saint Petersburg, and became the chief editor of Sovremennik ("Contemporary"), in which he published his main literary reviews and his essays on philosophy.
He was the spiritual guidance of the progressive intellectuals. Because of his radical ideas he was arrested in July 1862 in St. Petersburg, he was released after seven years of prison in Siberia and eighteen in exile and confined in the Fortress of St. Peter and Paul, where he wrote his only finished novel Что делать? What Is to Be Done?, written during his imprisonment. The novel was written in a only apparent innocuous style and with a romantic plot in the fashion style of the era foreshadowing its real messages and its deeply critical political and social themes to avoid censorship. The novel was published in the Sovremennik review in 1863 and later, when it was banned, the novel began to circulate in clandestine copies becoming a cult novel for generations of Russian revolutionaries, who sought to emulate the novel's hero, who was wholly dedicated to the revolution, ascetic in his habits and ruthlessly disciplined, to the point of sleeping on a bed of nails and eating only meat in order to build strength for the Revolution. Among those who took inspiration from the character was Lenin, who wrote a work of political theory of the same name, and who was ascetic in his personal life.
In 1862, Chernyshevsky was sentenced to civil execution (mock execution), followed by penal servitude (1864-72), and by exile to Vilyuisk, Siberia (1872-83). He died at the age of 61, only four months after his release and his return to his hometown Saratov.
Show more
Community Reviews
3.56
3,341 ratings278 reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 275 reviews
The Narrator44 reviews39 followers
Follow
July 24, 2008Dear 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.
russian-literature62 likes
3 comments
Like
Comment
Kushagri234 reviews12 followers
Follow
April 4, 20233.5 stars
I have rounded down the rating, since I was debating between 3 and 3.5 stars.
I didn’t dislike the book; on the contrary, I quite liked it. But the points I raise in this review, are exactly what I said they are, a review! But it may seem like a roast at some points. A preemptory apology for that.
I don’t much know how to review this book. So I will not get into the plot but writer’s intentions. There is a continuous switch between narrative and meta narrative. I felt the novel to be like a pamphlet on the author’s world vision. It has to be judged separately as a work of fiction and as a treatise of socio-political importance. It represents his ideal for a socialist utopia. It was at times good to be true and the three main characters were like Ideal people. But in calling these people Ideal, I basically lower my estimation in Chernyshevsky’s eyes because in that case the reader is some underworld character.
The author was quite condescending to the reader. But as a work of literature the flow of ideas seemed preachy and forced. It didn’t seem natural and free flowing.
The characters live their life according to the philosophy of rational egoism. The following lines from the introduction give an idea of this principle.
The resulting theory of rational egoism enabled him to reconcile the individual’s need for personal self-fulfillment with the collective interests of the community. Put simply, Chernyshevsky argued that all human behavior was motivated by the desire to maximize personal pleasure and to avoid pain. Since human motivation thus was both constant and universal, differences in the behavior of people could be explained only by the different ways in which their socioeconomic environment led them to act in pursuit of their self-interest. Crime and courage, avarice and charity, all emanated from the same egoistical impulse.
The central theme is the liberation, development and independence of a woman, Vera Pavlovna. I liked the following quote from the book where Vera answers to her friend Julie about her reasons for denying a socially and monetarily advantageous marriage.
“You call me a dreamer and ask what I want out of life. I prefer neither to dominate nor to submit. I wish neither to deceive nor to dissemble. I don’t want to be concerned about other people’s opinions, or strive for what others advise, when I really have no need for it. I have not become accustomed to wealth, and have no need for it myself. Why should I seek it only because others consider that it’s good to have and therefore that it would be good for me? I’ve not been in society and have never experienced what it means to be dazzling; it still doesn’t attract me. Why should I make sacrifices for a brilliant position only because other people think it’s valuable? I’m unwilling to sacrifice not only myself but even my slightest whim for something I really don’t need. I want to be independent and live in my own way. I am eager to acquire only what I really need; what I don’t need, I don’t want and won’t want. I don’t know yet what I’ll need later. You say that I’m young and inexperienced and that in time I’ll change. So what? When I change, then I will; but for now, I don’t want a thing, nothing that I myself don’t desire. And you ask me what I want now: welt I don’t even know myself. Do I want to love a man? I don’t know. When I awoke yesterday morning, I didn’t even know that I would want to love you; for several hours before I did, I didn’t know that I would, nor did I know how I would feel when I did. So now I don’t know how I would feel if I loved a man; I know only that I don’t want to submit to anyone. I want to be free; I don’t want to be obligated to anyone for anything. I don’t want anyone ever to say, ‘You’re obligated to do this for me!’ I want to do only what I desire and want others to do likewise. I don’t want to demand anything from anyone. I don’t want to impinge on anyone’s freedom and I want to be free myself.”
But the book was ahead of its time … at times too far ahead that it escapes the scope of vision! Many narratives seem superfluous until later we realize their importance to the overall building of characters.
It took almost 40% of the book for me to going from slight perturbation to (“ohh! It makes sense”) satisfaction. It was at times tedious and the novel was treading on a thin line between being a work of fiction and a social reform treatise.
The author’s patriarchy, and feminism were having a tug of war. The novel was their middle ground. Some moment I am reflecting that wow that’s ahead of times feminist thinking, then he goes and utters something misogynistic and offensive (perhaps it meant as a dig at the social scenario, and not his own opinions! But who knows?)
Also it’s unjust to expect that written in prison, while being falsely persecuted, the focus will naturally lie in conveying revolutionary ideas and not enhancing aesthetic beauty of the novel.
I will share some quotes from the introduction of the book to give an idea of how to perceive this work and a glimpse into Chernyshevsky’s beliefs and principles.
Chernyshevsky claimed that body, mind, and spirit represented merely different aspects of a single, unitary human organism that was an integral part of nature. Action, thought, and emotion thus were nothing more than sensual responses to external stimuli and therefore were governed by natural laws. Chernyshevsky argued that these laws could be discovered by rigorous application to human society of the methodology and concepts developed in the natural sciences by such pioneers as the French physiologist Claude Bernard. Human beings would then be able to reshape their social as well as natural environment in accordance with their needs.
His priorities relating to the novel while writing it, were described in the following lines.
For him, art represented a medium for revealing, vicariously experiencing, and thereby better understanding reality. Reality itself could not be transcended, only comprehended. Idealist notions of pure art or beauty therefore were not simply false but dangerous, because they obscured reality and subordinated it to an unrealizable ideal. Chernyshevsky concluded that art should therefore be judged on the basis of its fidelity to reality and its ability to expand human knowledge. Hence his theory of aesthetics essentially endeavored to transform art into an instrument of education. Taking this principle a step further in What Is to Be Done?, Chernyshevsky sought not only to explain reality but also to change it by providing radical youth with guidelines for social behavior and political action.
This book was written as a response to Turgenev’s Fathers and Sons. Some lines from the introduction give an idea of this.
In his own novel he sought to refute Turgenev’s portrayal of the “new men” (and women) and to present a more “accurate” image that would demonstrate the possibility of reconciling “rational egoism” and romantic love in a single ideology that allowed for effective action.
he transformed Bazarov’s negative, ill-conceived, and easily abandoned nihilism into “rational egoism,” Bazarov’s “abyss of romanticism” into mature, “rational” love, and his self-destructive urge into a revolutionary movement. Even Turgenev’s caricature of a “liberated woman” (Kukshina) was replaced by the genuinely emancipated Vera Pavlovna.
Further a response to Chernyshevsky’s book was Notes from the Underground by Dostoevsky.
I would like to thank my friend Cleo for recommending me this book!
30 likes
7 comments
Like
Comment
Mir5,001 reviews5,356 followers
Follow
Read
October 16, 2017(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.
Show more
29 likes
7 comments
Like
Comment
Michael Steger100 reviews10 followers
Follow
July 5, 2010This 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.
25 likes
Like
Comment
Amirsaman536 reviews275 followers
Follow
May 16, 2020کمتر پیش آمده که برای ریت دادن به کتابی، یعنی اصلا مشخص کردن اینکه از کتابی خوشم آمده یا نه اینقدر مردد باشم. چرا؟
کتاب بنا به توضیح مترجم (پرتو آذر) در مقدمهاش، خیلی مهم بوده برای آنان که در قرن نوزدهم میخواستند انقلاب کنند تا که بعد رسید به لنین و آن ماجراها. البته اهمیت اسطورهای دادن به نویسنده و کتاب جای تعجب ندارد، وقتی که میبینیم در همان مقدمه، شوروی سابق مهد آزادی جهان تلقی میشود و استالینْ رفیق. (کتاب چاپ موسسهی انتشاراتی ارانی است.)
خب پس با کتابی سروکار داریم که ادعا میشود راه انقلاب را به جوانانی که میپرسند «چه باید کرد؟» نشان میدهد. اما غالبیت صفحات کتاب به وصال عشاق میپردازد. اتفاقا این اصلا بد نیست و نکتهی قوت کتاب است؛ نگاه نسبتا پیشرویی که به زنان و ازدواج و روابط اجتماعی به طور کلی دارد. ولیکن از نظر مفسران این داستانهای عشقی در اولویت دوم هستند و اصل همان انقلاب وعده داده شده در کتاب است، همان آدمهای نو و دنیای نو، چیزی که بنظر بنده کتاب اصلا از عهدهی توصیفش برنمیآید.
بنظرم از قضا شخصیتهای معروف و اساسی کتاب هیچ خوب پرداخته نشده بودند و سراسر متناقض بودند، دقیقا چون میخواستند حرفهای نویسنده را از دهان خود بزنند. و البته این ضعف اساسی کتاب مربوط است به بخش ادبیاتی آن. برعکس، شخصیتی حاشیهای مثل ماریا آلکسیونا از نظر من بهترین کارکترِ از آب درآمدهی کتاب است، چرا که واقعا کارکرد رمان را به دویست صفحهی ابتدایی کتاب میدهد، با همهی چموخمهایی که نویسنده در او شناسایی میکند.
همچنین دیدگاههای اقتصادی/مدیریتی نویسنده هم با توجه به زمانهاش باید بررسی شود. آن به اصلاح دنیای نویی که ساخته میشود، با معیارهای امروز ما اصلا شبیه آرمانشهر نیست، ولی همینکه نویسنده متوجه شده که ساعت کار باید کم شود و کارگران باید آموزش ببینند و در سود کارخانه شریک باشند، خوب است. اما باز هم پرداخت ادبی درستدرمانی ندارد.
حتا از نظر علم اقتصاد هم پر از باگ است تئوریهای رفیقمان آقای چرنیشفسکی. معلوم نیست چطور ممکن است که تمام سود را تقسیم کنیم بین کارگران یا وام بدهیم به کسی که دارد عروس میشود برای جهیزیهاش، و آنوقت همزمان کارخانه را هم گسترش دهیم. سرمایه باید همواره در جریان باشد!
و از این بحث به نقد اساسیترم به کتاب میرسم. اینکه قهرمانان چرنیشفسکی، یا مثل رحمت اف، خانوادتا بسیار ثروتمند بودند و حالا با تفکر پیشرویشان میآیند ثروتشان را تقسیم میکنند، یا مثل لاپاخوف و همسرش، مخهای اقتصادی هستند که به سبب تجارت و تولید، پولی به هم میزنند و پیشرفت میکنند و چون بااخلاق و باشرفاند دست بقیه را هم میگیرند. یعنی درست مثل حالا که تبلیغ میشود که استیو جابز هم هیچی نداشت و با نبوغ به اینجا (!) رسید و نوش جانش. خب در این دنیای به اصطلاح سوسیالیستیِ چرنیشفسکی هم که همهاش بحث بر سر پول است. بحث اتفاقا این است که نبوغ رفیقمان آقای جابز فقط به این درد خورد که پول روی پول تلنبار کند و استثمار کند.
خب حالا اگر بخواهیم کارخانههای منصفانه بزنیم باید چکار کنیم؟ مسلما پاسخِ این چه باید کرد در رمان آقای چرنیشفسکی نیست؛ چون با تقسیم سود و بستنی خریدن با آن، دیگر نمیتوان ادامه دادن به اشتغالزایی و شعبه زدن. پس آخر ناموسا چه باید کرد؟
23 likes
9 comments
Like
Comment
Vladys Kovsky229 reviews58 followers
Follow
January 12, 2021Almost the only memory I retain of this book is the author's obsession with aluminium.
It was an important book from the historical perspective but amounts to very little these days. The author was an early proponent of gender and social equality. The book has influenced socialist thought in Russia in XIX century probably more than anything else written at the time. Having said that, the literary value of this oeuvre is close to zero.
19 likes
10 comments
Like
Comment
Cleo168 reviews255 followers
Follow
September 24, 2019What do Chernyshevsky, Nietzsche and Star Trek all have in common? They all believe in socialist Utopias, in that if we all just could see the higher purpose of man and allow our characters to be developed beyond the animalistic tendencies of greed and selfishness and jealousy, we would all be able to lead this idealistic life with money, freedom, happiness and, in Nietzsche’s case, right-thinking for all. Everyone would get exactly what they wanted in all things, and gratification and joy would abound everywhere. And this would all come in an erupting revolution that would change the world as we know it. Sounds good, doesn’t it? Except that there’s one catch. In all of history, men have never been able to shed all strife and avarice and enmity towards each other. We have never been able to only do good, love mercy and walk humbly. So how these people can expect this to happen in the rumblings of revolution, yet also in an easily perceived development of social change, is quite beyond me. “Delusional”is the word that springs first to mind.
In Chernyshevsky’s, What Is To Be Done?, Véra Pálovna is a sheltered young woman with a strident, lower class, controlling mother. Her mother tries to manipulate her with her machinations, but Véra, with stern self command unusual for her age and sex, manages to best her mother and ends up marrying a medical student and tutor, Dmítry Sergéich Lopukhóv, to escape her mother’s nagging domination. While married to Lopukhóv, she starts her own sewing business, employing unusual business acumen to make it a success. Likewise, her marriage is run in an unusual business-like way, to the apparent delight of both. Yet when their close friend, another medical student, Alexánder Matvéich Kirsánov, begins to form an attraction to Véra, an impending tragedy culminates, and finalizes in a most unexpected way.
Although What Is To Be Done? is almost unknown in classic fiction, among Russians it was considered one of the most influential books of nineteenth-century Russia for the ramification it had on human thought, and the effect it had on the history of the country.
Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky was a staunch proponent of materialist philosophy, socialist political economy, and women’s liberation. In his novel, he attempted to provide a remedy for all the social ills and the dilemmas that faced Russian society, believing that the controlling patriarchal hierarchy of the family, social inequality, and political and social problems were the main causes of the tyrannical, unbalanced, economic backwardness of the society. He disliked modern reform, advocating more radical steps. Offering a blend of Russian traditional values, and ideas from Western Europe, he called for a social education that would bring sexual freedom, self-awareness, and prosperity. However, his self-righteousness and intolerance of criticism eventually caused him to be barred from academia, and Chernyshevsky was forced to turn to journalism for an outlet. His views eventually occasioned his arrest and he spent eighteen months in prison, which no doubt helped to advance him to the status of a martyr and enhanced the popularity of this book. He became a symbol of the ultimate revolutionary Utopian socialist.
This book served not only as a platform for Chernyshevsky’s ideas, but it was also a response to Ivan Turgenev’s Fathers and Sons. In Turgenev’s novel, Turgenev explores the relationship between reason and emotion, or perhaps how emotion can undermine one’s ideology. In Fathers and Sons, both the nihilist Bazarov’s ideology and his underdeveloped grasp of emotion appear to cancel each other out, leaving him in a morass of ineffectuality in either. In contrast, the nobleman Kirsanov reaches a level of contentment using a combination of idealism and reason, mirrored in his recognition of family values, the importance of nature and the land on which he lives. Chernyshevsky despised the novel and Turgenev’s portrayal of “new men”; with his novel, he strove to counter the portrayal, borrowing character names from Turgenev and metamorphosing Bazarov’s nihilism into rational egoism for what he thought allowed for more efficient action. The ongoing debate continued with Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s response to What is To Be Done?, in his Notes from the Underground.
Perhaps I was suffering with extreme impatience with naive “genius” philosophers and writers, but the impatience only increased with Chernyshevsky. Not only were his ideas born of some unrealistic fantasy, but the structure of his book was tedious. The book wasn’t really a story, it was merely Chernyshevsky’s ideas. Everyone is subordinate to his ideas, from his plot, to his characters, even his reader cannot escape. While I know that authors control their stories, I like to feel their stories control them to some degree; that the story is born inside of them with not only the passionate ideas that they breed, but perhaps with an insight that is not quite explored or realized. Then, voilà! A “conversation” is begun between reader and writer. Yet, with Chernyshevsky, this certainly wasn’t the case. Instead of speaking with you, he speaks at you. In fact, he goes so far as to address his readers with an intentional condescension, not only confessing what he is doing to you with his prose, but leading you down garden paths of supposition, professing your own ideas and putting words in your mouth, then calling you an idiot because you followed what he was offering you. I don’t understand it. Often these people profess to know all the ills of society and all the solutions, but they have absolutely no social skills or even an appearance of love for humanity at all; or at least it doesn’t come out in their work.
As a novel, it's valuable to read because of its place in Russian history but its political ideology is idealistic to say the least.
2015-52-books-in-52-weeks 2015-books-in-translation classics-minor ...more
15 likes
Like
Comment
Sergio1,430 reviews171 followers
Follow
March 16, 2023Lo scrittore russo Nikolaj Gavrilovic Cernysevskij [1828-1889] scrisse il romanzo "Che Fare?" durante la sua detenzione nella fortezza di "Pietro e Paolo" a seguito della sua condanna per attività sovversiva.
"Che fare?" è un romanzo didascalico che vuole raccontare e insegnare come evitare che un matrimonio nel tempo perda freschezza, si infiacchisca e generi monotonia e infine allontanamento tra i coniugi fino a una convivenza di facciata o peggio a un disamore che può portare a "distrazioni" fatali. Protagonisti principali di questo romanzo la giovane Vera Rozalskij, promessa sposa dai genitori, suo malgrado, al Consigliere di Stato Ivan Storeznikov, lo studente medico Dimitrji Lopuchov e il suo grande amico, anch'egli studente medico, Aleksandr Kirsakov.
Il romanzo, dalla trama avvincente, è raccontato benissimo con uno stile sciolto e fluido, dialoghi brillanti, tesi e ipotesi condivisibili e non manca dunque di nessuna qualità che lo renda una lettura piacevolissima oltreché intrigante e lo pone, a mio modesto parere, tra i migliori romanzi russi dell'ottocento.
letteratura-ottocento scrittori-russi15 likes
4 comments
Like
Comment
Μαρία Γεωργιάδου183 reviews61 followers
Follow
August 2, 2014Απόσπασμα από τη σελ. 387:
«Ό,τι σου δείξαμε, δεν θα έχει σύντομα την πλήρη ανάπτυξή που διαπίστωσες τώρα. Θα περάσουν πολλές γενιές μέχρι να πραγματοποιηθεί αυτό απ’ το οποίο τώρα παίρνεις μια πρώτη γεύση. Όχι, το «πολλές γενιές» δεν είναι ακριβές: η δουλειά μου τώρα προχωράει γρήγορα, κάθε χρόνο και γρηγορότερα, μα, παρ’ όλα αυτά, δεν θα εισέλθεις ακόμα σ’ αυτό το βασίλειο της τελειότητας που κυβερνάει η αδερφή μου. Τουλάχιστον το είδες, ξέρεις πώς θα είναι το μέλλον. Φωτεινό, εκπληκτικό. Πες το σε όλους: να τι θα είναι το μέλλον, φωτεινό, εκπληκτικό. Αγαπήστε το, ποθείστε το, δουλέψτε γι’ αυτό, φέρτε το πιο κοντά, δανειστείτε απ’ αυτό όσα μπορείτε να εφαρμόσετε σήμερα: η ζωή σας θα γίνει πιο φωτεινή και όμορφη, γόνιμη σε χαρές και απολαύσεις, αν μπορέσετε να την πλουτίσετε με δάνεια από το μέλλον. Ποθείστε το, δουλέψτε γι’ αυτό, φέρτε το πιο κοντά, δανειστείτε ό,τι απ’ αυτό μπορείτε να βάλετε σήμερα σε πράξη.»
15 likes
Like
Comment
===
What Is to Be Done?
by Nikolai Chernyshevsky (Author), & 2 more Format: Paperback
4.2 4.2 out of 5 stars (124)
See all formats and editions
Or $12.07 /payment at 0% (Pay in 4). View 2 plans
"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. Michael R. Katz's readable and compelling translation is now the definitive unabridged English-language version, brilliantly capturing the extraordinary qualities of the original. William G. 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 radi
===
From Australia
Vasiliki Mazis
5.0 out of 5 stars Insightful
Reviewed in Australia on 14 June 2023
Format: KindleVerified Purchase
This book really put into context the revolutionary tradition of Russia, its rich history, and the influence this book would have had on someone like Lenin. Sometimes, it was a bit difficult to follow, but it was really interesting to read, so radical for the times it was written in, very secular, very contemporary, a must-read!!
Helpful
Report
From other countries
jordialg
5.0 out of 5 stars Very good quality
Reviewed in Spain on 20 February 2021
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
Good translation!
Report
Translated from Spanish by Amazon
See original ·Report translation
Robert Peate
5.0 out of 5 stars Amazing
Reviewed in the United States on 15 July 2015
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
Between the wit of the opening scenes, the most amazing preface ever written, and the depth and beauty of the characters Vera Pavlovna and Julie le Tellier, this is one of the most amazing books I have ever read. I cannot understand the negative reviews at all. I can only assume the reviewers do not understand or have patience for the fact this is a translation. Despite its being a translation, the work's genius shines through. My biggest regret is that when I finish reading it, there will be no more left to read, but I will find and read his 1877 novel *Prologue*.
Report
Gillian Taylor
5.0 out of 5 stars Surprisingly relevant!
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 19 December 2024
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
Apart from being a bit preachy, the themes are quite modern.
Report
Amazon Customer
5.0 out of 5 stars A great book for changing thought.
Reviewed in Canada on 4 December 2017
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
This book is excellent and impacted me a lot.
Report
Marina
5.0 out of 5 stars one of my faves
Reviewed in the United States on 5 January 2023
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
I read it in high school and remember liking it back then...twenty years later I decided to reread it and didn't regret it: engaging, deep and thought provoking. Although not sure about this particular translation, I read it in Russian
Report
Brian hurlow
4.0 out of 5 stars Four Stars
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 9 January 2015
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
Bought as a present.
Report
TG
4.0 out of 5 stars Very interesting!
Reviewed in the United States on 18 July 2019
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
I bought this book to learn the back story to Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground. It was very interesting and valuable in order to help understand this time period in Russia.
Report
Dama2
5.0 out of 5 stars Book
Reviewed in the United States on 21 April 2024
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
Great book
Report
H. Grubb
3.0 out of 5 stars What is to be Done
Reviewed in the United States on 16 August 2011
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
An interesting novel, so it's the author's imagination. The book is claimed to have been quite popular when it became available, a part of which probably was that there wasn't much else available. The author envisioned the ideal communal society through Co-Operative Living, which included sharing in the work of the economic enterprise and the purchasing power of buying in bulk for the Co-op. However, as time has proven, such organizations have not been successful, as Robert Owen and others have demonstrated with failed attempts. Even the people who believe enough in such approaches to join them, seem to be looking for all they can get, while expecting the others to do the work.
Report
marc
4.0 out of 5 stars Early feminist literature makes great reading
Reviewed in the United States on 6 May 2013
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
Chernyshevsky writes in an interesting, readable, style. He develops his characters very well and effectively weaves in the issues of the time it was written. In my opinion he is one of the great classic Russian writers.
Report
Cosmo Crawley
1.0 out of 5 stars Read something else instead
Reviewed in the United States on 30 October 2015
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
Nikolai Chernyshevsky's 1863 novel What is to be Done? was one of the most famous and influential books in nineteenth century Russia. Three of Dostoevsky's masterpieces – Notes from Underground, Crime and Punishment and The Devils – were, in large part, extended responses to Chernyshevsky's ideas. At the other end of the political spectrum Lenin read the book several times and paid homage to it by borrowing its title for one of his own political tracts. So why isn't such an important work in one of the world's great literary cultures better known in the English-speaking world? The simple answer is that What is to be Done? is a very bad novel. The prose style is flat and didactic without any of the literary flourishes which the author believed merely distracted from the main purpose of art: to propagate progressive political, social and moral ideas. The main characters do little else but calmly and politely lecture their inferiors and each other at great length about the way society and private lives ought to be organised. There are exhaustive descriptions of the organisational details of a co-operative dress-making factory, longs discussions of issues such as whether progressive married couples should knock before entering each other's private bedroom and extended dream sequences where the future agrarian utopia is revealed, replete with electric lighting and aluminium furniture and kitchenware. The narrator frequently interrupts the lofty, improving discourses of the leading characters in order to explain things directly to the reader, just in case he has missed the significance of the scenes that have just been presented.
But for all the author's calm rationalism and humanitarian ideals the novel has its sinister side. The characters who represent the enlightened minority spend most of their time trying to improve the "mean, base, pitiful" majority but their attitude towards them is ambiguous at best. As the progressive Lopukhov says to the very unenlightened Marya Aleksevna: "I'd be glad to wipe you off the face of the earth, but I respect you." One can imagine Vladimir Ilyich Lenin nodding his approval as he underlined this passage.
There is a cast of thousands, but the only interesting one is the fanatical Rakhmetov who is so devoted to the cause that he attempts to eliminate every daily activity that will not be useful in furthering the revolution. He engages in gymnastics and strenuous physical labour because he observes that the common people respect a strong physique and even sleeps on a bed of nails in order to teach himself to withstand pain. Unfortunately for the reader, however, he only appears in about thirty of the novel's four hundred pages. That leaves about 370 pages given over to the worthy deeds and improving discourses of the less colourful characters and the preaching of the omniscient narrator. As one of the characters reflects:
"No matter how fixed the ideas of a man in the wrong, if another man, more developed, more knowledgeable, and more understanding constantly works to lead him into the light, his errors can't hold out for long."
Chernyshevsky obviously thought that four hundred pages of leading his less developed readers into the light would just about do. Personally, I was prepared to invoke the mercy rule after about fifty.
The excellent introductory essay by Michael Katz and William Wagner tells you everything you need to know about Chernyshevsky and his novel. I'm sure Rakhmetov would agree that it would be a waste of valuable time to read any further.
Report
defendant k.
1.0 out of 5 stars what is to be done with this horrible novel?
Reviewed in the United States on 26 March 2007
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
the only good thing about this book is that it exposes the crackpot logic of the russian radicals. chernyshevsky is an abysmally bad writer. and even though he admits it in the preface, he still somehow thinks that his sheer intellectual brilliance will redeem him. it doesn't. this book is important only in that it was extraordinarily influential (a source of inspiration for both stalin and lenin - the latter which deemed chernyshevsky his favorite writer, while calling dostoevsky a "superlatively bad" one - ha!).
anyhow, his analysis of cooperative unions is not entirely without merit, nor are his reflections on women's rights. but insisting your best friend take your wife as a lover? rakhmetov as the "extraordinary man," who eats 5 lbs of beef in one sitting and sleeps on a bed of nails? unconvincing and stupid. his narrative technique is so obnoxious (oh, my perspicacious reader!) and he interjects too often to "add" insight to the story that he himself is creating. also, no matter how much of a hard determinist you are, becoming an apologist for "wickedness" by ascribing it to one's environment is simply absurd.
Report
kenneth r johnston
4.0 out of 5 stars very unusual
Reviewed in the United States on 7 October 2018
Format: KindleVerified Purchase
Stay with it. It goes on and on, but many interesting things along the way.
Report
ma
4.0 out of 5 stars A challenge to read.
Reviewed in the United States on 14 December 2014
Verified Purchase
A challenge to read.
Report
To see more, sea
===
