“Yet I was told that it was you who drove her out of this house!”
Lebezyatnikov even became furious.
“That is more gossip!” he shouted. “It was not like that at all, not at all! It really was not like that! That's all Katerina Ivanovna's lies, because she understood nothing! I was not making up to Sofya Semyonovna at all! I was simply developing her, quite disinterestedly, trying to arouse a protest in her...The protest was all I was after, and anyway, Sofya Semyonovna couldn't have gone on staying in the house as she was!”
“Were you inviting her to a commune?”
“You keep laughing, and very inappropriately, if I may say so. You don't understand anything! There are no such roles in a commune. Communes are set up precisely so that there will be no such roles. In a commune, the present essence of this role will be entirely changed, and what is stupid here will become intelligent there, what is unnatural here, under the present circumstances, will there become perfectly natural. Everything depends on what circumstances and what environment man lives in. Environment is everything, and man himself is nothing. And even now I'm on good terms with Sofya Semyonovna, which may serve you as proof that she never regarded me as her enemy and offender. Yes! I'm now enticing her into a commune, only on a totally, totally different basis! What's so funny? We want to set up our own commune, a special one, only on a much broader basis than the previous ones. We've gone further in our convictions. We negate more! If Dobrolyubov rose from the grave, I'd argue with him. As for Belinsky, I'd pack him away![109] And meanwhile I'm continuing to develop Sofya Semyonovna. She has a beautiful, beautiful nature!”
“So you're finding a use for this beautiful nature, eh? Heh, heh!”
“No, no! Oh, no! Quite the contrary!”
“Come now, quite the contrary! Heh, heh, heh! What a phrase!”
“No, believe me! What reasons do I have for concealing it from you, pray tell? On the contrary, I even find it strange myself: with me she's somehow especially, somehow fearfully chaste and modest!”
“And, of course, you're developing her...heh, heh! ... by proving to her that all these modesties are nonsense? . . .”
“Not at all! Not at all! Oh, how crudely, even stupidly—forgive me—you understand the word development! You really understand n-nothing! Oh, God, you're still so...unready! We seek woman's freedom, and you have only one thing on your mind...Setting aside entirely the question of chastity and womanly modesty as in themselves useless and even prejudicial, I fully, fully allow for her chastity with me, because—it's entirely her will, entirely her right. Naturally, if she herself said to me: 'I want to have you,' I would regard myself as highly fortunate, because I like the girl very much; but for now, for now at least, certainly no one has ever treated her more politely and courteously than I, or with more respect for her dignity...I wait and hope—that's all!”
“Well, you'd better give her some present. I bet you haven't thought of that.”
“You understand n-nothing, I tell you! She's in that sort of position, of course, but the question here is different! Quite different! You simply despise her. Seeing a fact which you mistakenly consider worth despising, you deny her any humane regard as a person. You still don't know her nature! Only it's a great pity that lately she has somehow ceased reading altogether and no longer takes any books from me. And she used to. It's a pity, too, that with all her energy and determination to protest—which she has already proved once—she still seems to have too little self-sufficiency, or independence, so to speak, too little negation, to be able to break away completely from certain prejudices and . . . stupidities. In spite of that, she has an excellent understanding of certain questions. She understood splendidly the question of kissing hands, for instance—that is, that a man insults a woman with inequality if he kisses her hand.[110] The question was debated among us, and I immediately told her. She also listened attentively about the workers' associations in France. Now I'm explaining to her the question of freedom of entry into rooms in the future society.”
“What on earth does that mean?”
“The question was being debated recently, whether a member of a commune has the right to enter another member's room, either a man's or a woman's, at any time...well, and it was decided that he does...”
“Well, and what if he or she is occupied at the moment with vital necessities, heh, heh!”
Andrei Semyonovich even became angry.
“And you just keep at it, at these cursed 'necessities'!” he cried out with hatred. “Pah, I'm so angry and annoyed with myself for mentioning these cursed necessities prematurely, when I was explaining the system to you that time! Devil take it! It's a stumbling block for all your kind, and worst of all—they start tossing it around even before they know what it's about! And just as if they were right! Just as if they were proud of something! Pah! I've insisted several times that this whole question cannot be explained to novices except at the very end, once he's already convinced of the system, once the person has already been developed and directed. And what, pray tell, do you find so shameful and contemptible even in cesspits? I, first, I'm ready to clean out any cesspits you like! There isn't even any self-sacrifice in it! It's simply work, a noble activity, useful for society, as worthy as any other, and certainly much higher, for example, than the activity of some Raphael or Pushkin, because it's more useful!”[111]
“And more noble, more noble, heh, heh, heh!”
“What do you mean by 'noble'? I don't understand such expressions as ways of defining human activity. 'More noble,' 'more magnanimous'—it's all nonsense, absurdities, old prejudicial words, which I negate! What is noble is whatever is useful for mankind! I understand only the one word: useful! Snigger all you like, but it's true!”
Pyotr Petrovich was laughing very much. He had already finished counting his money and tucked it away. However, part of it for some reason remained on the table. This “cesspit question,” in spite of all its triviality, had served several times before as a pretext for quarrels and disagreements between Pyotr Petrovich and his young friend. The whole stupidity lay in the fact that Andrei Semyonovich really got angry, while Luzhin was just letting off steam, and at the present moment wanted especially to anger Lebezyatnikov.
“It's because of your failure yesterday that you're so angry and carping,” Lebezyatnikov burst out at last. Generally speaking, in spite of all his “independence” and all his “protests,” he somehow did not dare to oppose Pyotr Petrovich and generally maintained a certain respectfulness towards him, habitual from years past.
“You'd better tell me one thing,” Pyotr Petrovich interrupted haughtily and with vexation. “Can you, sir...or, better, are you really on sufficiently close terms with the aforementioned young lady that you could ask her right now to come here, to this room, for a minute? I think they've all returned from the cemetery by now...I hear people walking around...I would like to see her—this person, I mean, sir.”
“But what for?” Lebezyatnikov asked in surprise.
“I just want to, sir. I'll be moving out of here today or tomorrow, and therefore I wished to tell her...However, please stay here during our talk. That will be even better. Otherwise you might think God knows what.”
“I'd think precisely nothing... I merely asked, and if you have some business, nothing could be easier than to call her away. I'll go now. And rest assured that I shall not interfere with you.”
109
Nikolai A. Dobrolyubov (1836-61) was a radical literary critic and associate of Chernyshevsky. His career was cut short by consumption. Vissarion Belinsky (1811-1848), a liberal critic of the previous and more idealistic generation, achieved great prominence in his time. He was among the earliest to recognize Gogol's genius, and championed Dostoevsky's first novel, Poor Folk (1846).
110
Lebezyatnikov is alluding to Vera Pavlovna's argument in Chernyshevsky's What Is to Be Done? The question of "freedom of entry into rooms" is also discussed in the same novel.
111
An allusion to arguments about art and usefulness propounded by certain radical critics of the day, particularly D. I. Pisarev (1840-68), a great disparager of Pushkin, who is said to have wept when he read C&P, before hastening to write a critical review of the novel.