Abstract
Always effective as a vehicle for social criticism, the satiric journey becomes with Radishchev the means for a powerful exposé of the domestic situation. Unlike the Fonvizin trips A Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow is fictitious.1 Both authors, however, set themselves similar objectives: to penetrate beneath conventional views on society. Radishchev finished work on the Journey in 1788, the year after Catherine’s official trip to Southern Russia and the Crimea. His book was very likely timed as a reply to the glowing reports — on the morale and living conditions of the peasantry — inspired by the Empress’ trip.2 (The whole affair had been expertly stage-managed by Potëmkin to impress not only Catherine but also members of the foreign diplomatic corps.)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Nonetheless the narrator’s views and sensibility often correspond to the author’s own, Many of the incidents are doubtless based on Radishchev’s own experiences of Russian life. See G. P. Makogonenko, A. N. Radiščev, (Moscow-Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Prosveščenie. 1965), pp. 69–71. In the section Tver’ a “poet” appears who discourses on poetic theory and quotes large sections from the ode “Freedom.” (The complete work had already been penned by Radishchev the poet before the untertook the Journey.)
D. Blagoi, “Pervyj Russkij Pisatel’-Revoljucioner Aleksandr Radiščev,” A. Radiščev, Izbrannoe (Moscow: Moskovskij rabočij, 1957), p. 275. The official chronicler of Catherine’s trip was her secretary, A. V. Khrapovitsky. His journal of the events appeared regularly in the Petersburg newspapers.
The initials I***T*** probably indicate “Izdadel’ Trutnja’ i.e., Novikov. (“Truten”‘was the satirical journal he edited before Živopisec.) G. Makogonenko argues for Novikov on the basis of similarities between the Otryvok and arguments advanced by the liberal deputies on the peasant question during the Commission (1767–68) for legal reforms. (N. Novikov, i russkoe prosveščenie XVIII veka, pp. 245–249.) Mak. is principally concerned with refuting the arguments (based on striking textual similarities between the Otryvok and the Journey) in favor of Radishchev advanced by V. Semennikov. (K istorii sozdanija Putešestvija iz Peter — burga v Moskvu,” Radiščev, Očerki i issledovanija, (Moscow-Petrograd: 1923, pp. 319–364)
Most recently, D. Babkin guardedly reaffirms the possibility of Radishchev’s authorship — a thesis that was suggested by the author’s son P. A. Radishchev. (D. S. Babkin, A. N. Ra-diščev Literaturno-obščestvennaja dejatel’nost’, Moscow-Leningrad: Izdatel’dtvo “Nauka,” 1966, pp. 158–159.)
Some passages appear to be at least partially inspired by Sterne’s Sentimental Journey: the dialogue with the peasant lass Anyuta in “Edrovo,” the touching encounter with the blind old singer of folk songs in “Klin.” In fact the entire digressive structure of the work reflects Sterne’s influence. In his enlightening discussion of Sterne and Radishchev Semenni-kov sees the latter consciously parodying the former in “Peški” (Radižčev…, pp. 443–446). Indeed the misery of a Russian hut contrasts with the happiness of the prosperous French peasants in “The Supper.” But the humorless Radishchev here as everywhere else concen trates on social issues, in relation to which any parodic intent is definitely secondary. Another informative comparison between Sterne and Radishchev, especially in regard to their ideas on freedom, may be found in D. M. Lang, “Sterne and Radishchev, An Episode in Russian Sentimentalism,” Revue de la Littérature Comparée (1947) pp. 254–260.
Radishchev, in order to lessen the virulent effect of his attack on serfdom, stated at his trial that he wrote the book in imitation of Sterne and Raynal in order to further his insane ambitions. Unfortunately, some critics have taken these desperate statements at face value. Even the usually astute D. S. Mirsky says: “It would seem that he wrote it merely out of literary ambition and that it is no more than a rhetorical exercise on a subject suggested and familiarized by Raynal.” A History of Russian Literature (New York: Alfred A.Knopf, 1949), P-58.
The semi-allegorical figures and objects depicted in this dream were probably inspired by a series of bas-reliefs and medallions (in honor of the Empress) which hung in the Senate Meeting Hall. The flattering descriptions of the ruler owe much to poetic eulogies to Cathe rine by Derzhavin, Petrov, Kheraskov, and others. The ruler’s high-flown decrees are mo delled on Catherine’s own. See L. V. Krestova, “Son v glave ‘Spasskaja Polest’ ‘Putešestvijv iz Peterburga v Moskvu Radiščeva,” Izvestija Akademii Nauk SSSR, Otdelenie literatury i jazyka, t. XVI, vyp. 4, (Moscow, 1957), pp. 352–359.
A. M. McConnell refutes the current Soviet view of Radishchev as an advocate of immediate violent revolution. For a complete bibliography on the controversy concerning R’s ideas on revolution see A. M. McConnell, “Radishchev’s Political Thought,” American Slavic and East European Review, December, 1958, pp. 439–455
For a more recent bibliography of the controversy see J. Karyakin and E. Plimak, “O nekotoryx spornyx prolemax mirovozrenija A. N. Radiščeva,” Istoričeskie Zapiski, No. 66 (1960), 137–205. This long article presents interesting evidence to the effect that “A Project for the Future” contains a double-barreled satire on Catherine’s manifestoes on the one hand, and various “liberal” projects for reform on the other. Were this the case, the views on violent revolution expressed elsewhere in the Journey can be more readily identified as the author’s own. Despite the critics’ eloquence in seeking to reconcile Radishchev’s varying statements on reform and revolution, it is difficult to accept the implication that R. condemns in principle the just as well as the despotic monarch. In fact the passionate tone of “Xotilov” belies the theory that the views here expounded are merely those of a “straw-man” whose program the author has brought forth only to refute in “Vol’nost’.”
“Radischev’s striving to carry over into literature the principles of oral rhetorical speech, its expressive intonational quality and temperament, is particularly noticeable in the pathetic style of the Journey.” A. Svetlov, A. N. Radishchev (Moscow, 1958), p. 134.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1973 Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wilson, R.K. (1973). Radishchev’s Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow. In: The Literary Travelogue. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1997-2_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1997-2_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-247-1558-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-1997-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive