Part 4
Walter Pater is being translated, and seems to be appreciated by cultured Russians, though it is a pity that only fragments and not the whole of his masterpiece “Marius the Epicurean” are appearing in the collection of his works. There is certainly a great demand for English books, and our literature remains in vogue. And books about England have been appearing, the latest being Nabokof’s account of his visit with the journalists. It is somewhat inadequate as an account of England, but then it pretends to reflect only the impressions of this officially guided tour. Nabokof seems to have been greatly impressed by Sir Edward Grey as a new type of diplomatist, a man whose strength lies in the fact that he is always a gentleman and tells the simple truth. Chukovsky’s book, “The Silent Ones have Spoken,” on the British Tommy is popular. Incidentally it may be remarked that Chukovsky, who made such an impression in England, is a journalistic critic of a penetrative quality. His “From Chekhof to our Days,” though containing some things impossible to print in English, is yet a very clever book. A new correspondent of some ability is now representing the _Russkoe Slovo_ in England and giving a more representative account of our life than the old school of academic Radicals who usually represent Russian newspapers abroad.
Rozanof’s book on the war, “The War and the Popular Awakening,” has been out of print for some time, and presumably his publisher has no paper. Novikof’s popular novel on the present point of view with regard to the Revolution is also unobtainable. Many good books of previous years have not been reprinted through the dearness or scarcity of paper. On the other hand, certain more obscure publishers who have managed to hoard up paper can carry on their business in full swing. The chief commercial event of the year in the literary world has been the purchase by Seetin of the _Niva_, the extremely popular weekly. As Seetin already owns the _Russkoe Slovo_ and several other papers and literary enterprises, he is becoming somewhat of a literary king, an interesting figure in modern Russia, for he started life as a peasant, became an itinerant hawker of penny books for the people, and is now a man of great power in Russia.
M. Protopopof, now Minister of the Interior, a man of large commercial interests, is now, backed by certain banks (previously of a strong German complexion but now said to be decently metamorphosed), starting a large new Petrograd newspaper (name not yet decided). There were many blunders in the advertisement of this newspaper enterprise. It was stated that Korolinko would be editor and that Léonid Andreef and many other popular writers would contribute. But Korolinko fought shy of it and the other writers one by one disclaimed interest in the publication. Maxim Gorky was asked to edit it but found out apparently that it was not revolutionary in tendency, was capitalist rather than labour, and that the object was international trade prosperity, and he withdrew entirely. Now A. V. Amphiteatrof, the Italian correspondent of the _Russkoe Slovo_ and author of a great number of curiously interesting historical studies, is to be the editor. He is an Italophile and favours much more friendly relationship between Italy and Russia; in politics he may be said to be Radical and has got into trouble with the Government upon occasion. It will be interesting to see whether the enormous capital behind this paper will give it the chance of success that the same amount of capital behind a new paper in England would give. In Russia large capital is considered fair prey by all who can get itching fingers near it.
These notes give an indication of literary currents and tendencies in the autumn of 1916, in the midst of the war. It should be added that, despite the great rise in prices of all things in Russia, the price of books remains almost as cheap as ever. Reading certainly increases, and consequently makes the general cost of publication less. The most characteristic of the new war phenomena of Russia is still the cry “_Gazette, Gazette!_” flung up at the trains from the fields wherever you travel. You are asked to throw your old newspapers out of the train window, that the people in the villages may read them. This cry will hardly die down when the war is over. But will the gazette satisfy? Will not books have to follow, and more substantial, better books, because of what the peasants have learned from reality? Russia is waiting for new national writers.
* * * * *
An interesting phenomenon in the life of contemporary Russia is the position taken up by Maxim Gorky as a challenger of the national and traditional ideas in Russian life and literature. He has become the spokesman of a considerable number of working men and middle-class Russians, but has at the same time brought upon his head the wrath not only of old-fashioned people but of a great number of liberal and progressive thinkers. His campaign began when he returned to Russia at the beginning of 1914 and launched his attack on Dostoevsky. The war seemed to cause a lull in his activities, but last winter he resumed his verbal warfare with more energy than ever. His point of view is, that Dostoevsky is bad for Russia, because his outlook was concentrated on suffering and death. Russia must turn her back resolutely on Dostoevsky and seek life. Russia must cease to be mystical, suffering, melancholy, and must become clear-minded and mistress of her soul. The challenge raised a great clamour. At first not many sided with him; but since the appearance of “Two Souls”[3] and “A Letter to the Reader”[4] in the journal _Lietopis_ it becomes evident that he has some following. He has raised a question, and many Russians are considering it for the first time.
[3] “Two Souls,” by Maxim Gorky. (_Lietopis_, December 1915.)
[4] “A Letter to the Reader,” by Maxim Gorky. (_Lietopis_, March 1916.)
The Russian which Gorky attacks is just that which is spiritually interesting to us in England--the mystical and unpractical Russia. Russia on pilgrimage, artistic Russia; and that which he wants Russia to be is just what would have least spiritual interest for us--Russia optimistic, cocksure, businesslike, well-dressed, smart, and Western. He writes:
“The Russian seeking-after-God comes from an insufficiency of conviction in the force of reason--from the need of a weak man to find some guiding will outside himself.
“The turning to mysticism and romantic fantasies is a turning towards stagnation, and is contrary to the interests of a young democracy, poisoning and enfeebling it, giving it a passive attitude towards reality, and suggesting doubt in the force of reason....
“The mind of the ancient East weighs most heavily and murderously on our Russian life, and has an influence immeasurably deeper on our psychology than on that of Western Europe....
“We Russians have two souls; one, derived from the wandering Mongol, is that of the dreamer, mystic, idler, believer in fate; the other is the soul of the Slav, which could burn up bravely and clearly, but cannot because of the other.”
One may reasonably question the correctness of this differentiation, seeing that when we scratch a Russian we do not find a dreamer. We should be inclined to say exactly the reverse; that the gentle, dreaming, poetic soul was that of the Slav--and that Gorky would find the educated Tartar considerably nearer his ideal than any characteristic Slav.
The article entitled “Two Souls” made a considerable stir, the magazine went quickly out of print, and a great number of criticisms were made in the Press and on the platform. Their general tone was that Gorky was out of his true medium and had better go back to his art. As a result Gorky wrote “A Letter to the Reader” as a sort of collective answer to “the more or less ironical or angry comments of my colleagues of the pen,” and sarcastically quoted Lescov: “On the Russian people it is good to look from afar, especially when he prays and believes”; and he went on to excuse his being “a bad publicist” and to plead that his words should have weight as being those of one who had lived through a great deal and knew Russian life at least as well as any of his opponents.
In this reply he exhibited a rather curious attitude towards Anglo-Russian friendship which it would be well for English people to note--a belief that we seek friendship with Russia merely to exploit her materially and to keep her in a commercial bondage similar to that which she has suffered from the Germans.
“Our Russian philosophers argue in this way (says Gorky). The alliance with England is worthy of the greatness of the Russian people because it will lead to the union of the nations under the standard of the true spiritual culture of the mystical East. There are only two world Powers--Russia and England. And these two States have, as the foundation of their power, the lands and peoples of the religious East, rather than of the materialistic West. To these two is the problem of uniting culturally India, China, Japan. And when this union of the peoples of the mystic East takes place, the earth will be given ultimate liberty in peace. But for that end it is necessary that Russia keep true to her mission and establish her culture upon the mystical revelations leading to peace and love.”
But Gorky bids these philosophers be undeceived. It is no use, he says, their getting rid of German capitalists simply to make way for English ones. That was what English friendship meant. Such a book, for instance, as “The Way of Martha and the Way of Mary” met with so much approval because in picturing us as holy lazy-bones and unpractical persons it allowed the English capitalist to rub his hands with glee, seeing in Russia a future British colony such as Africa or India. Whilst Russia is in her present state, friendship with any European Power must be the friendship of the earthenware pot and the iron kettle. Russia has to fight not for “ultimate liberty,” but for the simplest civil rights as citizens. We must try to give the people education and try to train their will toward life.
No doubt Gorky makes an appeal in these words; and if the average Russian were asked what were the foundations of Anglo-Russian friendship apart from the needs of the war, he would answer, Commercial exploitation. Trade, it is true, is put jealously forward as something to be captured after the war; but it seems a pity that Russians should not realise the depth, the sincerity of our interest in their characteristic religion, literature, and life. Whatever political tendency our interest may help, it is nevertheless true that England obtains from Russia spiritual help; and a great deal of that which Gorky condemns in his own nation is coming to our help to redeem us from commercialism and materialism. It is something of a paradox that the bright spirits of Russia should hate the melancholy vistas of Tambof and Kaluga and that the bright spirits of England should hate the gloom of Newcastle and Leeds, that one should look with love from England to the wandering pilgrims of Tambof and the other should sigh for the clamour of wheels where “man at least is master.” But paradox is tolerable where misunderstanding is not. For paradoxes abound in truth, and truth is made up of such paradoxes.
Later on in his essay Gorky remarks that stormy and revolutionary eras have produced great men, and his first example is Shakespeare, who flourished “in the stormy time of Queen Elizabeth.” But rather, they were “spacious days”; and great men, great thoughts are almost always born in spacious days, halcyon days, when the dove broods on waters. Strength is with calmness, not with noise and quarrellings and revolutions. The critics are probably right when they say, “Return to Art.” Art is creative, whereas argument is generally destructive. And Maxim Gorky evidently wishes to create.
Maxim Gorky may be called the leader of the _porazhentsi_, the people who believe in defeat. He has lately added to “Two Souls” and “A Letter to the Reader”--the “Letters of William Simpleton, a Knowing Stranger.”[5] But it is what we call “half-baked.” Gorky has read an enormous number of books since he tucked his blouse inside and became respectable, but it is difficult to see where he, or the reader, has profited. He does not know where he is.
[5] Published in _Lietopis_ anonymously but generally ascribed to Gorky.
IX
RUSSIA IN 1916
I WAS in Russia at the beginning of the war and during the first months of conflict, and I witnessed the superb enthusiasm with which she rose to fight. Again I was in Russia last year, when, owing to the general shortage of shells west and east, Germany was able to turn her superiority to account by retaking Galicia and ravaging Poland, and I saw the humiliation almost amounting to despair of Russia then. And therefore returning once more to Russia in June, 1916, I could form a fairly just idea of the spirit of Russia to-day.
Last autumn, returning from Russia, I was bound to say I found Russia pessimistic, and though it is really bad form to be pessimistic, personally I certainly felt so myself. But all has gone well in the intervening period, and when I reached Russia this year I found her remarkably cheerful. My impression is that the Russians have settled down to a long war. It may last three or four years more, but they do not intend to worry. After the period of depression they are brightly optimistic again. Perhaps some are too optimistic and rely on mysterious prophecies as to the war finishing by Christmas, or think that the German people will revolt and give us an easy victory against a divided kingdom. One thing may be observed: the great work of French and English on the western front is now fully reported in the Russian Press. There are on an average two or three columns about us in the Russian newspaper. The Havas Agency is quoted, the _Times_, the _Manchester Guardian_, the _Westminster Gazette_, and other papers, very fully. It is possible for an Englishman in Russia to form a fair idea of each day’s news, so the Russian also can grasp it. That is a splendid improvement on last year when we got only those laconic non-committal communiqués which our smart English journalists can cause to blossom with occult significance for our English newspapers, but which in very truth translated into Russian merely gave the impression that we were doing nothing.
Russia feels us closer. The distance across is not so great. Day by day every one feels that we are all working happily together for one end and with one interest.
The visits of the journalists and the parliamentarians to the West have also helped a great deal. The journalists wrote their impressions very fully and expressed themselves with great enthusiasm. Their contributions on the subject lingered on throughout the summer. And now they are collecting their articles and re-issuing them in book form. Nabokof’s “From Militant England” has already had considerable success. Lectures have also been given. The members of the Duma and the Senate came back imbued with our enthusiasm, Radical and Conservative alike, and what they saw of our work was luminous in debate. On the whole the Russians have become much more warm and friendly towards us. They are obtaining a better understanding of our ideals, our character and national determination.
After the defeats of last autumn there sprang up a sort of intellectual sect, the _porazhentsi_, people who believe in defeat. These held that Russia stood to gain more by being beaten than by winning--a conclusion that the Russian soul is more ready to accept than we should be. Brusilof’s victories seem, however, to have dissipated this doctrine for the time being, and the _porazhentsi_ are little heard of this autumn.
Allied to this, however, has been a more important movement in favour of a self-dependent Russia. Why should Russia struggle out of German commercial bondage merely to fall into British hands? Why cannot she manufacture for herself, be enough unto herself in all departments? This sentiment has been very widespread. Russia has obtained the impression that the striving toward Russian friendship going on for many years before the war has been primarily with the idea of capturing Russian trade. Whereas as a matter of fact the impulse for friendship came first of all from literary and artistic England, then from England as a whole, and the business men were the camp-followers.
The question of Russia and trade needs very careful treatment in the Press. The phrase “exploiting Russia after the war” is obnoxious and almost devoid of real meaning. Many small merchants will be led to try and _exploit_ Russia after the war and will simply burn their fingers. All trade with Russia must be carefully arranged on broad principles to benefit both countries equally as before the war. Russia is the great producing country of the world and she needs a world market for her products--that Britain can obtain for her and that will be for the health of Russia and of the world. In return we shall send much to Russia, but not haphazard, and not shoddy dump, I hope.
Russian trade of all kinds is in a bad way just now and it is a trying time for Russian merchants--especially when they read frequently in their newspapers “Britain’s Record Month of Trade,” and the like. I think these joyful telegrams about our trade should be accompanied by an explanatory note to the effect that the greater part of that so-called trade is a matter of war materials and necessities. The figures really represent our tremendous activity in the Allied cause. War is a material waste, and every moment it is prolonged we lose heavily _materially_. And in this material sense we lose more than Russia loses. We have had more to lose. Our trade figures represent the height of our temperature in the war-fever.
Russia is suffering internally through the fact that she has had only two open ports of value--Archangel and Vladivostock--and she cannot import the manufactures she needs. The railways and the ships are needed for the transport of munitions and food for the Army. The Army comes first, the war comes first, and everything else must give way. The people in the background have a real share in the privations of the war. Disorganisation amounts at times to dislocation, owing to war needs. But the Russians bear things cheerily. All manner of new economic phenomena appear, and the Russians try measure after measure to remedy the troubles.
Practically every man of military age throughout the vast empire is either fighting or training. Before the war many had used influence to avoid military service, had obtained medical exemption on the slightest grounds. But there has been a thorough revision, and large numbers have been recovered. You see the new troops marching and drilling on the open places of the large towns, in camps on the steppes, and as the train takes you through the country you see boy-Cossacks prancing about on their ponies and practising with their lances.
Russia is altogether in the war and for the war. She is doing her utmost. And her spirit is good. It is well English people should feel that to-day. And from us should go out to this great people, suffering and struggling as we are, a great fellow-feeling of gratitude and generous affection.
X
RUSSIAN MONEY
BEFORE the war for £10 you received 94 roubles, but now you receive 150. Last year after the great Russian retreat the exchange stood at over 160, but banks refused to give more than a nominal exchange. And in order to stop traffic abroad and foreign speculation in Russian money it was forbidden by law for any one to take more than 500 roubles out of the country. Now, however, the new value of the rouble seems to have been accepted, and banks generally give the due exchange value. Although the rouble has slightly improved it is not anticipated that the paper money will ever regain its guaranteed gold exchange. Each Russian note is in the form of a certificate that the State Bank will pay in exchange for it a certain quantity of gold. That certificate has little value to-day, and it is an open secret that the Government buys gold at a rate which assumes a lower value for the rouble. People who have hoards of gold coinage--and they are many in Russia, for the people are disinclined to use banks--are keeping their gold, and their action is justified by the privileges which are already accorded those who can pay the Government in coin. It is expected by many that at the end of the war the rouble will be assigned a lower gold value.
One obvious effect of the depreciation of the rouble has been that all real estate and material belongings have increased in money value. If you have an estate worth 94,000 roubles before the war, it is now worth 150,000 roubles, and you are lucky if your fortune was in this comparatively more real form, of land. People, on the other hand, who were in debt have found the actual weight of the debt diminishing as money lost value. This has been particularly noticeable in the case of people who have mortgaged property. Suddenly it has been possible to sell the property at a high figure, pay off the debt, and still retain an unexpectedly large margin.
My friends the M.s have long wished to sell their large house in Vladikavkaz, but have held its value at what was in the old days an absurdly high figure. People used to laugh when the price was mentioned. But this year, “as if by miracle,” to use my friends’ phrase, a purchaser turned up, agreed to their price and completed the transaction in six hours. He was pleased and they were pleased. “What sort of a man was he?” I asked. “Oh, a sort of a Tartar,” they replied. He made a long way the better bargain, for he understood to what extent the rouble had lost value. On the other hand my friends paid off a big debt with these depreciated roubles, and there also they gained.
The people who have made money by the war are busy buying land and houses. This is reproachfully called land speculation, but is in reality commonsense action on the part of those who wish to make fast their wealth. When I paid a visit to Kislovodsk in the Caucasus, an extremely popular watering place in the mountains, I found a perfect rage of buying and selling property, brought about by this elementary change in values.
The public are still exhorted to pay for their railway tickets in gold, but are less inclined to do so than ever. There is reason to believe that there are a number of millions of gold coins being hoarded in the country. Friends have shown me their private supplies. When one reads of burglaries, there is often a mention of several hundreds of roubles in gold being stolen.
In the southern districts of the Empire German agents have appeared, offering 15 roubles paper for 10 roubles gold. In this way Germany is said to have collected a considerable amount of Russian gold. The traffic was discovered by the police in Russian Central Asia, where men were found to be carrying this gold into Persia and thence to Turkey and Germany in small hand-bags. Many arrests were made, including that of M. Poteliakhof, a rich Bokhara Jew and dealer in cotton, who was found to be deep in this nefarious trade.