Incompatible Rationality in Aleksandr Pushkin’s The Queen of Spades In Aleksandr Pushkin’s The Queen of Spades, Pushkin portrays Herman as a rational European devil who is incapable of thriving in Russian culture. When he hears about the three winning cards, he unintentionally forgoes rationality, while still attempting to maintain it. In his obsession, he falls prey to greed and descends into evil. When he loses in his final round, the queen mocks him, just as Russian mysticism mocks western rationality. Pushkin shows European rationality as having no place in Russian culture, and he depicts how it decomposes under the influence of Russian mysticism. Herman’s descent from rationality to obsession depicts the incompatibility of Russian superstition …show more content…
Herman is so determined to find his holy grail of gambling that he does not consider that the Countess may be serious when she swears that the story “was a joke” (Pushkin 80). In Douglas Clayton’s essay, “The Queen of Spades: a seriously intended joke,” Clayton points out that, at the time of her debt, the story “was a joke at her husband’s expense” and a “story told to [her husband] to disguise the truth” of how she actually paid off the debt (Clayton 12). Clayton goes on to suggest that, in order to pay her debt, the Countess may have slept with Saint-Germain in order to repay her funds, discounting any real mysticism in the story. However, Herman is far past his former rationality that he believes she is just withholding the secret from him. There is not other explanation for her silence. He reasons with her, begs her, and eventually threatens her, resulting in her death. Herman’s actions are based off of a rumor he heard when he was drinking with his friends, which he takes at face value. Even when he hears that the story was a joke, he cannot believe it because he has allowed so much irrational change to transform him. If he were to accept that the story was not true, he would have irrationally obsessed over nothing. In order for him to maintain his internal façade of rationality, the only thing he can do is …show more content…
The guilt that he causes Lizaveta “[does] not touch his grim soul” and he “[does] not feel any gnawings of conscience at the thought of the old woman’s death” (Pushkin 91). He has lost any semblance of sympathy because he is so obsessed with the secret. In fact, the only thing that upsets him about that night is “the irretrievable loss of the secret from which he had anticipated enrichment” (Pushkin 91). His greed and selfishness pull him into a lower level of morality. After leaving Lizaveta’s room, Herman “[descends] a dark staircase” which can be seen as his descent into hell (Pushkin 92). He has left all real rationality behind, left all morality behind, and has essentially become the “Mephistopheles” that Tomsky sees before his
Murphy, Edith. "'A Rich Widow, Now to be Tane Up or Laid Downe': Solving the Riddle of
For Ivan Illych, climbing the social ladder of entrenched Russian bourgeois society was the ultimate goal. Particularly, Ivan would use his career in the law to allow him to obtain such heights. This led to Ivan placing his family on the back burner whilst his own career and ambitions would enter the limelight. Once the end is near however, Ivan begins to feel regret take hold of himself. “It occurred to him that what had appeared perfectly impossible before, namely that he has not spent his life as he should have done, might after all be true … his professional duties and the whole arrangement of his life and of his family, and all his social and official interests, might all have been false” (Tolstoy ...
In the novel, later, Mme. de Clèves asks for further explanation for the love between a woman and the king with “several other lovers” (1039). This passion forms the “political and social effects” (1039) that change the norms in the court. The court mixes this false “event into its own structure, so that the implausible now becomes the norm for the entire court” (1039). This incident drives to the extent of passions, “political ambitions and social events”, that utilize M. de Clève’s passion. Hence, the power of Duchesse de Valentinois doubles “the power of the monarch” (1039).
Another of Adler’s theories discusses that there are a several pathological personalities which can be formed, however, Rumple is the dangerous ruling dominant type, which is characterized by an active and aggressive attempt to master their lives and the people in them. Having this type of personality impairs his ability to form as Adler’s, which is known as social interest, the sense of linking to and empathy for other individuals (Bickhard, 1976, pp. 29-30). Rumplestiltskin’s long-lasting anxiety set in when he was left powerlessness, yet, also afraid of being weak again. He would rather lose everything than agree to take anything less than absolute power.
In canto three there are many people with flawed perceptions. At the Hampton Court Palace Belinda sits down with two knights for a game of cards the game of cards is representing a heroic battle. The sylphs Belinda and the baron all have their own set of flaws and some are noticeable and some are hidden for good reason, but the hidden flaws can be seen as harm to goods eye.
One quickly perceives this notion in the very first scene of the opening act. Slender and Evan's assess Anne Page's attributes in terms of what monetary value her dowry will endow upon her fortunate husband; both conclude that, "seven hundred pounds and possibilities is good gifts"(1.1.58-9). This attitude sets the stage, so to speak, and is suggestive of what meaning the women in the play shall have. Although it is the wives who are the manipulators of the ensuing pranks, it seems that the men are actually in control; they extend their alacrity for business and judicial affairs (which is established first in Pistol and Falstaff's dispute with the others and later in Ford's settlement against Falstaff for the twenty pounds and the men's pretentious positions in Anne's affairs) to the personal and connubial affairs of the women. In fact, the details driving the main plot of the play can, in themselves, be interpreted as a business transaction. ...
Vladek’s failure to move forward from his past experiences causes him to suppress his pain. He is unable to express his emotions; as a result, he uses control as a coping mechanism. Vladek’s control is illustrated when he destroys Anja’s memoirs. Vladek explains, “After Anja died, I had to make an order with everything… These papers had too many memories. So I burned them” (1:159). By destroying any evidence that reminds him of Anja, he harms his own emotional stability. Moreover, burning the papers illustrates his attempt to cover up the reality that he cannot always have control over life. Vladek’s suppression leads him to use control in an unhealthy manner.
In Bisclavret, the supernatural lord is, “a good knight, handsome, known to be / all that makes for nobility. / Prized, he was, much, by his liege lord; / and by his neighbors was adored.” (De France 17-20) His virtue is established before his mythical curse is revealed. His wife, “a worthy soul, / most elegant and beautiful” (21-22) is concerned that his is breaking his marriage vows and has taken a mistress. She pleads, “Tell me, dear husband; tell me, pray, / What do you do? Where do you stay? / It seems to me you've found another! / You wrong me, if you have a lover!” (48-52) In order to convince his wife that he is innocent, he tells her of his condition. Upon hearing his confession, “Terror, she felt, at this strange tale. / She thought what means she could avail / herself of how to leave this man. / She could not lie with him again.” (98-102) She is so disgusted by the concept that her loyal husband is not purely human, she agrees to be the lover of a chevalier if he will help her distance herself from the beast she imagines her h...
Hansen, Bruce. “Dostoevsky’s Theodicy.” Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University, 1996. At . accessed 18 November 2001.
Nikolai Gogol has been widely recognized as one of the most inspiring and remarkable authors of the Russian Empire and the one who produced an enormous impact on literary work of countless contemporaries and successors, both in the Tsarist Russia and abroad. Particularly, Gogol’s literary legacy is praised for his exceptional ability to deploy humor as a means of expression and the way to convey the message. In this respect, the short story The Overcoat written during the St. Petersburg period of Gogol’s activity is a very important work which balances between tragic and humorous elements and presents a brilliant specimen of satire. In this work, Gogol builds up the powerful criticism of the contemporary Russian society with its social hierarchy,
This man is the absolute opposite of everything society holds to be acceptable. Here is a man, with intelligent insight, lucid perception, who is self-admitted to being sick, depraved, and hateful. A man who at every turn is determined to thwart every chance fate offers him to be happy and content. A man who actively seeks to punish and humiliate himself. Dostoyevsky is showing the reader that man is not governed by values which society holds to be all important.
The Speaker in ‘My Last Duchess’ is conversing with the servant of a count whose daughter he is proposing to marry. He treats t...
It seemed that Checkov liked the way that change was coming, especially through the character Lopkin, who seemed to have a positive characteristic and the constant flashback of how his father was a peasant and how now he was a rich man. Even though change was coming and it seemed to be great I just wonder and would like to end off to what Anton Checkov would of thought of the future of Russia through the Stalinist era and the time of the 5 year plan.
This paper will address the Mind/Body Dualism by comparing and contrasting Cartesian rationalism and empiricism and the responses to the Mind/Body Problem by comparing contrasting Kantian Idealism and Phenomenology. It will explain how each attempt to respond/resolve the mind/body problem confronted by both empiricists and rationalists and my own philosophical response to this epistemological problem by sharing my own views are similar to the theories.
It is during this conversation with Dorian, that Lady Henry’s character is completely revealed. She admits to Dorian that she “always hear[s] Harry’s views from his friends.” (42) Not only does Lady Henry act as a naive wife, but also a submissive one. She tells Dorian how much she worships pianists, “sometimes two at a time, Harry tells me.” (42) Therefore, the woman has now admitted that she can not think for herself. It does not appear to disturb her, though, that she lacks knowledge of her husband’s views and does not have a mind of her own.