After the
real tough War and Peace years
ago, I have sought opportunity to read (and love) more of Leo Tolstoy’s. However,
I ended despising Resurrection, Tolstoy final work.
The
protagonist is a nobleman, Prince Nekhlyudov. He has wronged a peasant girl,
Maslova (Katushya), and got her pregnant. Ten years later Nekhlyudov is
selected to be a juror in a murder case. To his surprise, the accused is
Maslova, the girl he has wronged long ago. The sweet-innocent girl has fallen
into prostitution; and it’s all because of him. When Maslova is sentenced to
prison in Siberia, Nekhlyudov is determined to redeem his sin by following her,
and even marrying her. In the process, Nekhlyudov becomes familiar with prison
lives, and he witnesses many injustices commit by powerful people whom he
befriended in his life pre-Maslova case. So, the process of helping Maslova
also changes Nekhlyudov’s, mentally and morally.
The main
critic of this book is the injustice and hypocrisy of man-made laws. Many of
the prisoners in the state prison where Nekhlyudov often visits are innocent
and mistreated. The authorized legal persons and the riches do not care about
the prisoners. Nekhlyudov keeps wondering, how those people can be so blind to
not seeing the blunder, and why this injustice keeps happening. And more
importantly, what must be done to stop it.
From the theme
only, this book looked promising to me, as I am always interested in social injustice
topic. However, it seems to me that Tolstoy was drowned too deep into the
topic, and sacrificed the style. I found it cold, boring, and almost like
reading a preacher. Maybe the translation has an effect too—I read an
Indonesian translation—but I also read in Wikipedia that “…Tolstoy was writing in a style that favored meaning over aesthetic
quality.”
The story
itself is hard to believe and artificial. From the beginning of his involvement
with Maslova’s cause, Nekhlyudov has been searching for the bottom of the whole
problem. He understood more than before, but was still puzzled. In the last
chapter, someone has given him a pocket Bible, which he absent-mindedly put
into his pocket. Later when he was in his room, and was racking his brain for THE answer, he accidentally found the
pocket bible in his pocket. Then he remembered of the sayings that the Bible has the answer to every question…
something like that. And so he opened it casually, and just read the chapter
printed there, which was, coincidentally, Matthew 18 (and Tolstoy really put
all the verses into the book.) And after Nekhlyudov read them all…. Bam! His
mind opened, and suddenly he knew all the answers!
So sorry,
comrade! This is just not my cup of tea. 2,5 / 5 is the final verdict. And for
the time being, no more Tolstoy for me, thank you.
I have not read this. The premise does sound very good. I agree that the ending, as you describe it, sounds artificial and forced. On the issue of translation. I think that it is particularly important to pick a good translator for Tolstoy and the other great Russians.
ReplyDeleteI suppose so (about translation). I didn't think it important when I got this copy, and besides, the translator is a respected man in Indonesian literature, so I thought it's going to be OK. But I still believe it's the story itself. It's like Tolstoy didn't think much of the plot, only what he wanted to communicate. If so, such a pity!
Delete