Canadian Slavonic Papers

Tolstoy in Prerevolutionary Russian Criticism by Boris SorokinReview by: Andrew DonskovCanadian Slavonic Papers / Revue Canadienne des Slavistes, Vol. 23, No. 3 (September 1981), p.348Published by: Canadian Association of SlavistsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40867919 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 07:18

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Canadian Association of Slavists and Canadian Slavonic Papers are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to Canadian Slavonic Papers / Revue Canadienne des Slavistes.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.182 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 07:18:40 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

348 I Revue Canadienne des Slavistes Septembre 1981

Boris Sorokin. Tolstoy in Prerevolutionary Russian Criticism. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1979. xi, 328 pp. $25.00

Critical studies of a major writer by his contemporaries are of two-fold importance to the student of literature. On the one hand, we learn of the state of criticism in general and the predominant approach to a particular writer; this leads to a greater understanding of the contemporary social and literary spirit. On the other hand, it is quite possible that a sensitive analysis by a contemporary, however far removed it may be from present methods and interpretations, may point up and lead to some fresh approaches.

Professor Sorokin's book is a much needed contribution to Slavic scholar- ship in English and as such it compares quite favourably with the ever increasing number of scholarly works on Tolstoy in English. In its seven chapters- "Tolstoy and His Critics: The Intellectual Climate," "The Early Radical Critics," "The Slavophile and Organic Critics," "The Aesthetic Critics," "The Narodnik Critics," "The Symbolist Critics," and "The Marxist Critics"- Sorokin argues convincingly that the critics rejected Tolstoy's ideas because they disagreed with his inter- pretation of current events," although the more thoughtful among them com- prehended something of his message. Sorokin further shows that Tolstoy's "in- ward-directed, psychological message" was too new for the critics who "were still immersed in rational man's strictly outward-directed wars with the environment."

In a book of this kind one learns more of the critics' philosophic bent than that of the writer they chose to discuss, but Sorokin rightly claims that "we need to know their [the critics'] norms because they represent a system of coherent values that may enrich our experience of literature and be useful to understanding Tolstoy." In this sense, this work is not radically different from A. V. Knowles's collection of essays, Tolstoy: The Critical Heritage, not mentioned, incidentally, by Sorokin, no doubt as only a year or less separates the publication of the two books.

There is not a great deal to argue with in Sorokin's well-structured and lucidly written book. A couple of issues of priorities could be raised, namely, the dis- proportionate space given to the ideas of Turgenev and Dostoevsky on Tolstoy by comparison with the more substantial and sustained insights of Konstantin Leont'ev's Analysis, Style, and Atmosphere; and D. N. Ovsianiko-Kulikovskii's equally remarkable and numerous works on Tolstoy and his individual works. For some reason F. Ivanova's (Ed.) very useful book L. N. Tolstoi ν russkoi kritike (Moscow, 1952) is omitted from the bibliography.

Sorokin's work is extremely valuable for a student of Russian literature, who must of necessity be interested in the socio-critical and literary atmosphere in which, and against which, one of Russia's greatest writers wrote.

Andrew Donskov, University of Ottawa

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.182 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 07:18:40 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions