Page:The Spirit of Russia by T G Masaryk, volume 2.pdf/86

60 Pisarev and his literary associates (Zaicev, and others) took the field against Antonovič. Whilst in prison in 1864 Pisarev wrote a more detailed essay on Bazarov. This was entitled The Realists, and even its dedication was intended to blunt the weapons of opponents; it was inscribed, "To my best Friend, my Mother."

At the very time when the dispute about Bazarov was flaming high, Černyševskii's novel was published, and the more radical among the realists were not slow to perceive that the characters of What is to be Done represented the true type. Above all, the figure of Rahmetov became the ideal of the nihilists. From Rahmetov, Pisarev, likewise, borrowed a few lineaments, but to him Turgenev's conception was (characteristically enough) more congenial than Černyševskii's, though Pisarev admits that Černyševskii had a profounder insight than Turgenev into Russian life.

Pisarev began his analysis of realism (he did not use the word nihilism) by explaining that it was the first independent manifestation of Russian thought. All previous trends had been foreign mental products which our good forefathers borrowed from abroad, simply because they were then the fashion abroad. Martinism, Byronism, Hegelianism, and all the other "isms" were to relieve the terrible tedium which then prevailed. After the Crimean war, there had been a rapid development of accusatory literature, but it was feeble and inefficacious and had brought about no notable changes; the various panaceas that had been recommended had failed to work a cure.

The Russians were faced by two great facts; they were poor and they were stupid—poor because they were stupid, and stupid because they were poor. This was not to say that the Russian was an idiot, but the strength of his brain was not displayed in the field of action. A way out of this charmed circle must be discovered. First of all it was the duty of the government to enact laws which would put an end to poverty by arranging that the products which now passed from the hands of the producers (the workers) into the hands of non-producers should remain in the hands of the former. A practical influence must also be exercised upon the