게르쩬과 체르니셰프스끼의 사상적 연속성과 극복 - 『누구의 죄인가』와 『무엇을 할 것인가』를 중심으로
The Ideological Relativity between A. Herzen and N. Chemyshevsky

Cited 0 time in Web of Science Cited 0 time in Scopus
Issue Date
서울대학교 러시아연구소
러시아연구, Vol.12 No.2, pp. 73-102
서구주의자유주의자유농민공동체WesternismUtilitarianismFreedomVillage Commune
Alexander Herzen is one of the representatives of the progressive and radical thought in Russia in the 1840s. He always aspired liberty, equality and social justice. He was the representative of Westemizers. As a westemizer he defended the autonomy of both reason and personality and emphasized the emancipation of the individual. In the 1860s there arose a new generation. These are called intelligentsia. They were influenced by European Nihilism, Materialism and Utilitarianism and they devoted themselves to promoting the common good, the

good of society. As the radical hero of the sixties Chemyshevsky sought the liberation of human beings from individual, social and political shackles.

Both Herzen and Chemyshevsky were leading thinkers that represent the 1840s and 1860s. They deeply impressed by Feuerbach' s philosophy and French socialist theory, especially that of Fourier, and believed in the possibility of Russian Socialism based on the Russian village commune. Basically they are thinkers and philosophers, but they are also famous for their novels, Who Is to Blame? ~ and wWhat Is to Be Done?~. In wWho is to Blame? ~ Herzen deals with the unhappy marriage, the sacredness of the marriage bond. In his novel Herzen emphasized the free will of Lyubonka and criticized the education given Beltov by his mother

and tutor. Beltov's fault stems from his education unsuited to Russian life

and his unfilled political idealism. Both Lyubonka and Beltov are the victims

of their environment.Chernyshevsky also emphasized the individual freedom in WWhat Is to Be Done?~. In the first part of the book, Vera struggles against the constraints of Russian family tyranny. But Chernyshevsky f s most important

thesis is how to increase the number of the good, and how to diminish

the number of the bad. Lopukhov and Kirsanov behaves only on the basis

of the rational and enlightened egoism. Herzen claimed that both egoism and altruism are rooted in human nature, but Chernyshevsky wanted to bring everything under one formula, and utilitarianism enabled him to do so.
Files in This Item:
Appears in Collections:
College of Humanities (인문대학)Institute for Russian, East European & Eurasian Studies (러시아문화권연구소)러시아연구 (Russian Studies)러시아연구 Volume 12 Number 1/2 (2002)
  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.