I chose to read Oblomov by Ivan Goncharov for the Classic Circuit without having any idea what the book was about. I had some vague recollection that I had read someone’s blog post about it once and it sounded good but beyond that I could not go. I could even get the book for free online and it was just shy of 200 pages. How could I go wrong? Except it turned out the online free version was abridged and when the book arrived from the library it was 445 pages! So much for short. But it turned out that it didn’t matter.
Illya Illyich Oblomov is landed gentry. He owns a large estate — Oblomovka — and three hundred peasants. When the story opens Oblomov is reclining on his divan in his apartment in St. Petersburg. For the next 150 pages or so he remains on his divan, in his dressing gown determined to deal with two problems — he is being forced to move from his apartment so the building can be renovated and he just got a letter from his estate bailiff explaining that things on the estate are rather dire. But Oblomov, so used to not doing and having others do for him, can’t sort either of the problems out. A “friend” who is really a moocher and a thief, arrives and after making sure Oblomov knows what a great imposition it all is, agrees to help Oblomov at least find a new apartment. As for his estate, the brother of his new landlady agrees to “help” him out with that.
Throughout the entire book Oblomov is either laying down or eating huge amounts of food or ineffectually worrying about things and then putting off their resolution until the next day or next week. Only in one section of the book does he ever show any kind of oomph and that is when he falls in love with the young and beautiful Olga. But even Olga can’t make him resist the grasp of oblomovshchina and the two separate. If it weren’t for Oblomov’s devoted and industrious friend, Stoltz, taking his affairs in hand and looking out for him, Oblomov would have ended his days as a beggar on the street.
There are so many different elements at work in this book I don’t know where to start and probably can’t begin to cover them all. First, you need to know this book is funny. It’s not in your face funny, it’s a subtle funny that plays with irony and the alternating affection and disgust that Oblomov inspires in his reader. Oblomov is pathetic but yet does not inspire pity. He is not stupid or lazy or incapable, his friend Stoltz makes sure we know that; the two were at university together and Oblomov studied law, read poetry and philosophy, and was an art and music connoisseur. Nor does Oblomov suffer from depression. He doesn’t suffer from anything.
Oblomov’s deep and all-pervavise inertia, his oblomovshchina, comes to represent a dying way of life. Through a dream Oblomov has early in the book we glimpse what life on the estate in Oblomovka was like and had always been like and what growing up there meant to Oblomov. The life and ways of Oblomovka are contrasted with social changes represented by Stoltz. Stoltz is not landed gentry. His father was German and his mother was Russian and he has made his way in the world through becoming educated and working hard. He is wealthy because he has earned it not because it was given to him.
Throughout the entire book we have a continual rubbing together of these two ways of life represented by Oblomov and Stoltz. Stoltz is always busy, always on the go, traveling throughout Europe for both work and pleasure. He takes pride and joy in his work and the things that he can do because of it. Oblomov reclines on his divan marveling at Stoltz’s busyness and is glad he doesn’t have to do that. He is always voicing aloud how sorry he is for people who have to be busy and work, always running here and there and for what purpose? Is that really life? Stoltz on the other hand wonders how Oblomov can think that just lying down all day is living. There is no doubt by the end of the book which way of life we are supposed to agree is the best.
I used to have a coworker who was from Russia and loved to read and I wish I still had contact with her because I would so love to be able to discuss this book with her. Oblomov is apparently one of those books that has seeped into the culture. Everyone in Russia, even if they have not read the book, knows what oblomovshchina is. It would be really interesting to talk with someone who is Russian about the book’s cultural meaning. Alas, none of my current coworkers are still in touch with our former coworker.
The translation I read was by Stephen Pearl. It is the most recent translation of the book and is well done. The only unfortunate thing about the book is that whoever did the copyediting was asleep on the job. The text is riddled with typos, paragraphing mistakes (several times a new paragraph begins in the middle of a sentence), and punctuation errors. This is not the fault of the translator, it is the fault of the publisher. The book and the translation are well worth your reading time.
Oblomov is part of the Classic Circuit’s Imperial Russia tour. Hop on over to the Classic Circuit website for the rest of the tour dates.
I’d never heard of this book or author–you’ve made me very curious. I wonder what becomes of someone like this? I have days that I feel that inertia–alas I have no divan. Probably a good thing!
Sounds interesting. I love books set in Russia, it’s one of those exotic places with so much history … I’m dying to go! But I usually have to settle for books to take me there.
This sounds like a book I should read. I’m half Oblomov, half Stoltz (gimpy physiology notwithstanding), and my Stoltzshchina (?) can always use a boost.
This is one of my favorite books. If you’re a procrastinator or have Oblomovism tendencies, this book will (hopefully) shake you into reality.
You & Amateur Reader have me very interested in this book! Didn’t realize that it had seeped into the general cultural stew of Russia – that makes me even more eager to pick it up. Interestingly, I just finished a Soviet-era Russian novel (Cancer Ward) that also features a naturalized German-Russian character, which created some interesting tensions with the Russians, Kazakhs, etc. (Of course, this is post-WWII, so there’s another source of conflict involved…)
I’ve never heard of the book or the author, which is not really surprising. I just haven’t read that much Russian Lit. It sounds amusing to some degree and I love that the term “oblomovshchina” has become a part of the culture. It’s a shame there were so many typos in the version you read.
How come I’ve never heard of this. Sounds wonderful. Granted, my knowledge of Russian Lit is minimal at best. Loved reading about this and have to make a note of it!
I’m another who’d never heard of this, but not only does the library here have a copy, but a video as well–in Russian with English subtitles. (Sounds like something I ought to check out sometime when my daughter’s home.)
I have not heard of either this book or the author — I have a feeling that by the end of this classics circuit tour, I’ll have a long list of books to look for. I haven’t read much Russian lit and probably will learn quite a bit about it over the next few weeks.
I actually like books with subtle humor more than the in-your-face types, so this one is going down on the list!
Is Oblomov’s inaction a nostalgic action, then? A protest?
It sounds like Oblomov is closely related to some of its contemporary books which evoked childhood, the young Tolstoy’s Childhood, Boyhood, Youth, and the old Aksakov’s Family Chronicle, which I’m reading now and will write about next week. I had not realized this.
Karamazov is my favorite, of course. Although the people I write about are almost scarily self-disciplined, I think I enjoy the Russian novels in contrast because their highs are so high-volume and their lows are so despairing!
Stefanie:
Perhaps you might enjoy what another librarian said about Oblomov:
http://lettersfromalibrarian.blogspot.com/2010/06/on-industry-and-sloth.html
Richard http://www.marksinthemargin.com
I also read it not only because I heard it was funny, but because I have a problem with procrastination. One of my favorite comments by Oblomov was when he had to move from his apartment and – referring to his possessions – he mused that: ‘when one moves, one sees things that one sees at no other time’. I’m afraid I’ve found that to be true when I’ve moved.
Russian literature always seems so extraordinarily peculiar in its preoccupations, and yet it often carries a strange emotional punch. (I discount Tolstoy, who just went for the punch). I’ve hardly read any of it, that being said, and am sort of poised on the threshold, not sure how or where to begin. Great review, though, Stef.
I love the word “oblomovshchina.” And this does sounds strangely amusing. I saw a book cover for it (a picture of feet in bed) and really wanted to read it for that alone. What a concept!
In my anthology I’m reading for the Circuit, I have the short story about Oblomov that was written before Goncharov developed it into a novel, so I’m really looking forward to it now! Thanks for this, and thanks for joining the Circuit.
Danielle, Well, I could tell you what happens in the book but that woudl ruin it for you. We all have days where we are grabbed by inertia but imagine what it must be like for it to be all the time. Kind of makes me cringe at the thought.
Miss Rosemary, This book is very little action, not much setting and lots and lots of character. If you like that kind of book you will definitely like this one.
Sylvia, somehow I don’t think you are as much Oblomov as you say. I can’t imagine you dreaming your day away and allowing others to take charge of your affairs because it’s too much for you to make a decision. I think you would enjoy the book though if anything it would prove to you how un Oblomov-ish you are!
Minerva, it is a wonderful book and I am so glad I have read it. It is one that will definitely be with me for a long time.
Emily, I am very interested about what you say regarding the German-Russian character in Cancer Ward because there is much animosity against Stoltz in Oblomov at least from the Russian characters who are trying to take Oblomov to the cleaners. They are always making disparaging remarks about “the German.” So it seems like there is long history of German-Russian tension.
Carol, I haven’t read much Russian lit either but I enjoyed this one so much I think I will have to make it a point to read more.
Iliana, it really is an enjoyable book, not in the vein of how I usually think of Russian lit.
SFP, I saw there was a video, I’m not sure if I will try and watch it though. I liked the book so much I think I want to let it sink it a while.
Valerie, I’m hoping that by the end of the tour I will have a nice list of books to investigate too. If you like subtle humor you will definitely like this one.
Amateur Reader, good question. There is no sense of nostalgia or protest behind Oblomov’s inaction. It is more an attitude of life passed on from generation to generation. I get the sense that Oblomov is somewhat representative of the landed gentry in general and a way of life that was losing favor and changing into something else. I have not read either of the books you mention so I am unable to confirm or deny whether they are related.
Shelley, I hope to tackle Karamazov one of these days. I like what you say about the highs and lows, I think that tends to be so true!
Richard, thanks for the link, I will check out that post!
Bonnie, the book does make you less comfortable with procrastinating, doesn’t it? Heh, yes, that was a good line and very true!
Litlove, yes, I don’t think I’ve read another book quite like this one. It is a fascinating character study ripe for psychological analysis. In other words, right up your alley!
Rebecca, it is amusing and frustrating and most interesting is you never once stop liking Oblomov. I had no idea there was a short story about Oblomov! I will have to try and locate a copy.
I think the short story in my anthology is what was developed into the novel; so you’ve probably already read it, as it was incorporated into the entire novel’s plot.
Ah, I won’t hurry our to find it after all then
Sounds great — I love Russian literature and I really don’t read it anymore and I really really should. I love the names so much!
Hi Stefanie,
So happy to have found your blog through the Classics Circuit.
You speak quite eloquently about the phenomenon of the “superfluous man” without specifically discussing the literary/cultural term. Oblomov is generally considered to be an exemplar of the superfluous man in Russian literature, and your discussion of this character really illustrates the qualities of said “superfluous men.” Their indifference and lack of participation in life is generally a combined outcome of their own personalities, and society’s lack of a place for them. They are early renditions of the modern man, who is forever transcendentally homeless, without a role in society, and without meaning in existence.
Thanks for a great review!
Daphne, I think you are the first American I have ever heard say they love the Russian names!
Only Words to Play With, thanks for stopping by! And thank you for the additional insightful information about the book. I don’t know much about Russian history or culture and after this book I might have to make a project to learn a little more so i can have better context when reading books like Oblomov.
This sounds really great, like something I would like. I love the kind of irony and humor you describe, and I would enjoy reading about the problems and pleasures of laziness and inertia, strange as that sounds, maybe
Dorothy, I think you would definitely like this book. It is all about character and I know how you like character-centric novels
Have wanted to read Oblomov for a long time, Stefanie, but I seem to be too busy reading crazy Latin Americans to make any time for those crazy Russians! Loved this post, though–thanks for the, uh, motivation.
Delighted to see responses to this wonderful comic novel.My gateway to this book was an essay by V.S Pritchett and i would strongly recommend this to anyone who has read the novel.I also remember a TV version of Oblomov which was broadcast in the UK about 20 years ago-it did not work;Oblomov came over as simply a lazy drunken slob. As Pritchett noted, Oblomov is “the accuser of success” and like a saint he carries our secret desire for passivity.Pritchett also points out that we miss the neurosis and darker aspects of being Oblomov- he is as “integrated as a blancmange”.
Pingback: 2010 in Review | So Many Books