CC BY
18PHILOSOPHY AND PHILOLOGY
THE DIVERSITY OF VIEWPOINTS IN JAY PARINI'S BIOGRAPHICAL NOVEL THE LAST STA TION
Feruza Melsovna Khajieva
Uzbekistan, Bukhara English Philology Department, Bukhara State University
Abstract. The article investigates the biographical novel Last Station by American writer Jay Parini. It briefly discusses the plot of the work and interprets the diversity of viewpoints in the book. The literary characters' attitude to each other is observed from the point of view of each personage. Also, the main conflict of novel is highlighted. Such personages as Sofya Andreyevna Tolstaya, Aleksandr Bulgakov, Dr. Dushan Makovitskiy, Vladimir Chertkov's voices are analysed and polyphonic attitude to the same motive for conflict is interpreted.
Keywords: biographical novel, narrator, point of view, character, conflict
Jay Parini's novel The Last Station, first published in 1990, is considered to be a biographical novel devoted to the famous Russian writer Leo Tolstoy. The novel tells the story of the last year in the life of Leo Tolstoy, meanwhile the personages in the novel remember the important events from the past connected to the biographee, such as Sophia Tolstaya's recollections about marriage to Leo Tolstoy or the days when 'he was writing War and Peace' and the moments when Tolstoy 'would bring' her 'the pages to recopy'. Alexandra Lvovna Tolstaya recollects about her childhood and her father's role in her life. In the way of retrospection, each episode from past is interconnected to the main thread of events.
Also, the novel describes Leo Tolstoy's endless love to common people of Lesnaya Polyana, a rural place and a county estate of the writer. It tells Tolstoyan ideas about god, faith, justice, love, vegetarianism and writer's modest style of life, 'his attempt to put Rousseau's theories of education into practice', critical views, his literary and everyday activities and many other aspects of his life. The pathos of the novel is the vivid description of the great love of people to Tolstoy, his wife, his children, his friends, his doctor, his followers, common people who in sense contradict each other and belong to 'rival' parts. These characters' genuine love to their patron is highlighted by their dramatic expression of hatred to each other. Each of them respects Tolstoy but shows distrust to his actions, willing to incline the writer to their favor. The eighty-two years old Tolstoy's testament serves as a motive for conflict in the novel.
The novel has an interesting style of narration. The author Jay Parini used multiple narrators to draw a portray of Leo Tolstoy. Multiple narrators or "telling a story from several points of view has obvious possibilities for representing characters in depth, or the ambiguities of life: it can thus add verisimilitude, contribute large-scale ironies, and perhaps give the relief of variety"(p.40). That is why the novel became close to the reader. Michel Lackey mentions about narrative style in his book The American Biographical Novel, asserting that author names his protagonists after the actual historical figures, which rises the value of the novel(p.21).
Thus, all narrators in the book have historical figures, which is a specific feature of the biographical novel. There are seven narrators in the novel who tell the biographical data from their point of view in 42 chapters: Leo Tolstoy - L.T. whose voice can be heard from his letters, diary entries, philosophic moral (9chapters); Tolstoy's wife, Sofya Andreyevna (8 chapters), his daughter Sasha (5 chapters), his young secretary, Valentin Bulgakov (9 chapters), his publisher and friend, Vladimir Chertkov (3 chapters), his doctor, Dushan Makovitsky (4 chapters) and the author Jay Parini - J.P. (3 chapters). One additional epistolary chapter includes Tolstoy family members' correspondence.
In The Last Station, all of the above-mentioned personages love and respect their patron Leo Tolstoy. For them, he is a spiritual leader, genius. He is the axis around which everybody tries to demonstrate his love and affection. Each narrator from his point of view describes an event, thus, various attitudes to the same event or personage appear. These opinions in most cases contradict each other.
As it was mentioned above, the main motive for conflict of the novel is Leo Nikolayevich Tolstoy's testament. In the plot thread of the book, the testament written by Leo Nikolayevich was rewritten. The first one was for the benefit of the family members, and the second for the benefit of humanity. Different viewpoints to this problem can be observed.
Sofya Andreyevna's attitude to Leo Nikolayevich and his last activities related to the will are rigidly conservative. She dismays her husband's intention to leave Russian people the right to his literary works. She blames Vladimir Chertkov who is at the head of other disciples in inciting her 'Lyovochka' against his family.
For Sofya Andreyevna Leo Nikolayevich's disciples, Chertkov and his friends, are 'Furies', poisonous snakes who destroy his life. They 'have succeeded in coming between' family and Leo Tolstoy, in spite of our forty-eight years of marriage. 'They spread rumors' about her 'claiming, 'Countess Tolstoy has become estranged from her husband. They barely talk. They do not share a similar view of politics or religion(7page).' Sofya Andreyevna considers Chertkov and his camp have no right to his works, for her their aim to get the right to republish his works is absurd, the works which were created with her help. Nobody, but she was working beside the writer, 'hunching over his manuscripts with a magnifying glass, trying to make out the infinite corrections, till' her 'head almost burst with pain'. From the feminine point of view, the reader can justify Sofya Andreyevna's thoughts. There is nothing illegal in her demand to the works created by her husband during their lawful matrimony. She thinks about her children, their future. They must have the right to republish the works of their father, grandfather, and nobody else. The reader can feel her wrath and sympathize her.
But there is another viewpoint in the novel, concerning the case of the last testimony. It is Leo Nikolayevich Tolstoy's disciples' attitude. They are Dr.Makovistkiy, Alexandra Tolstaya, Vladimir Chertkov. These personages are against Sofya Andreyevna in her every action, conduct. They contempt her and try to break spouses relationship showing her in worst to their spiritual leader.
Dr. Makoviskiy, an ardent supporter of Tolstoyan health is definitely against Sofya Andreyevna. He compares her to a 'dog, trying to unearth some new bone of discord', which is harmful to the health of Leo Tolstoy, his great patient. He lusts for separating spouses as neurotic actions of Sofya Andreyevna shortens the life of the old genius. From the medical point of view, the reader can sympathize the doctor, because he tries to protect his patient from manipulative, possessive woman who is constantly threatening suicide to appeal husband's attention. Also, Dr. Makovitskiy is one of the Tolstoyans. He respects Leo Nikolayevich's intention to leave his books to humanity. The doctor considers Tolstoy as a great proclaimer of the new ideology. But his wife's 'avarice is as legendary as her inability to understand her husband's principles'. The reader can feel the conflict between Sofya Andreyevna and Dr. Makovitskiy from their point of view and sympathize both of them.
The next major, influential personage in The Last Station is Vladimir Chertkov, a furious opponent of Sofya Andreyevna. Chertkov thinks that 'the Lord has narrowed' his 'enemies to only one person: Sofya Andreyevna. Because she has never understood. She has not even tried to understand' her great husband. For him, Sofya Andreyevna is a scheming, speculative, meddlesome, possessive woman with a miserable mind. Chertkov tries to set Tolstoy against her. He is an ardent acolyte of Leo Tolstoy,and the day he sees him is blessed and 'God had sent this oriole as a harbinger of joy'. But Chertkov is jealous of Tolstoy's luxurious manner of household because he considers his patron's lifestyle is a contradiction of his principles of poverty and renunciation. For him, Tolstoy is a great person with a prodigious number of titanic works. His ideology and principles are of great, prophetic importance. His followers are inspired by him and sincerely believe his words. For Vladimir Chertkov, a person like Tolstoy can't belong to a small group of people like his family. He, as well as his works, belongs to humanity. He considers that people must have 'access to' the works 'they deserve'. From the point of view common people and disciples, the reader can sympathize Chertkov and share his attitude as well as Sofya Andreyevna or Dr. Makovitskiy.
Another personage with a more objective viewpoint is Bulgakov. He is a young inspirer of Tolstoy and his teaching. His attitude to other personages of the novel is neutral. Bulgakov loves Leo Nikolayevich from their first meeting. For him, Leo Nikolayevich is 'the greatest author of the West', modest genius, who simply 'fetches tea' for him, 'his new secretary, nearly sixty years his junior'. Bulgakov's 'first loyalty is to Leo Nikolayevich'. But, Bulgakov 'lives between two worlds': Sofya Andreyevna's and the world of Tolstoyan disciples. Sometimes he finds himself between extremes of one of the sides, either Sofya Andreyevna treats him 'as a traitor' or she calls him 'a godsend' for their family. The Reader can feel Bulgakov's attitude to Chertkov when he describes him as 'is a crude, manipulative ideologue and, worse, a bore'. Thus leaving no space to doubt that Bulgakov is one of the true followers of Tolstoy who belongs neither camp.
42 № 7(11), Vol.3, July 2016
WORLD SCIENCE
Jay Parini , the author of the biographical novel The Last Station could create multiple narrators to convey biography of the great writer Leo Tolstoy from different viewpoints to represent characters in depth, to show their personal attitude and let the readers create the portray of each by themselves, without intrusion of importunate third person. This technique of narration added large-scale of ironic attitudes, letting the reader recreate each personage from their position. The multiple narrators played a great role in creating the Russian style of speech, form of address, character, epoch and the problems of the end of 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, because each personage through his speech could convey spirit of Russian culture.
REFERENCES
1. Parini Jay.(2008) The last Station, Edinburgh, Canongate Books Ltd.p.112
2. Michel Lackey. (2016) The American Biographical Novel, New York, Bloomsbury. p.271
3. Marjorie Boulton. (1975) The anatomy of the novel, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.p.174
СВОБОДА ВОЛИ И ВЫБОРА В НАСЛЕДИИ АВГУСТИНА БЛАЖЕННОГО И ФИЛОСОФИИ АЛЬ-ФАРАБИ
докторант (PhD) Азербаев А. Д.
Евразийский национальный университет им. Л.Н. Гумилева,
Астана, Республика Казахстан,
Abstract. Concept of Free will and choice in philosopher, theologian, Father of the Church St. Augustine's spiritual heritage and Arab-Muslim philosopher, founder of Arabic-speaking peripatetism Abu Nasr al-Farabi's philosophy is compared in this article. Using in the researching historical and philosophical method and comparative studies, philosophers' heritage were considered as a synthesis of various cultural spiritual traditions, the basic similarities and differences in understanding of free will and choice by St. Augustine and al-Farabi were identified.
Key words: Augustine, al-Farabi, free will, freedom of choice, Christianity, Islam.
Введение. Отец церкви и основатель арабоязычного перипатетизма под наиболее верным выбором человека подразумевали выбор праведного пути и достижение цели. У Августина высшей целью верующего христианина было постижение Божьего промысла, правильная жизнь соотносилась с учением Иисуса Христа. «Град Божий» как предел совершенства представляется постижением веры Христа, соблюдением всех треб веры. Как антоним «Земной Град» содержит совокупность человеческих пороков и заблуждений. Добродетель, даруемая Христом, должна быть присуща истинно верующему. Только путь сообразно вере и добродетели способен привести человека к счастью и постижению Града Божьего.
У аль-Фараби заветы пророка Мухаммеда составляли главный императив. Поиск повсюду философом из Отрара знаний, невзирая на территориальные и религиозные преграды, можно отнести к призыву пророка Мухаммеда о том, что за наукой можно отправиться хоть в Китай. Несмотря на то, что долгое время в советском фарабиеведении аль-Фараби пытались отнести исключительно к рационалистам, сегодня без укоризны можно предположить, что Второй Учитель был мусульманским философом и отстаивал идеи истинного ислама. Хотя ислам изначально с момента появления имел, помимо религиозных, и политические цели создания мощного централизованного государства, следует сказать, что эта религия, прежде всего, проповедует гуманизм, справедливость, любовь и поиск истины. В связи с этим, идеальное государство аль-Фараби «Добродетельный город» содержит как политический, так и нравственный контент. Только нравственно-политический путь согласно добродетелям может привести к счастью. Разновидность «невежественных городов» - антипод «добродетельному городу». Каждый «невежественный город» - эта негативный фактор внутри социума, а также один из человеческих пороков.
Оба философа утверждали, что от правильного выбора, основанного на личной свободной воле человека, зависит та или иная сторона жизни. Сделав, правильный выбор,
