Russian Thinkers

Like every single book of Berlin's I ever read, starting with The Hedgehog and the Fox: An Essay on Tolstoy's View of History, I enjoyed this one immensely. There is nobody quite like Berlin. yes, his sentences seem never to end, but there is so much insight and quiet passion packed into every one of them that he really makes the reader feel he or she understands how these isolated desperate and frustrated Russians thought and why.

This is a very important book in my opinion, because it analyzes certain utopian ideas that produced chaos during the 20th Century, but remain popular today despite their horrible track record. Basically, this outstanding work of historical scholarship is about a group of Russian intellectuals who believed if they rid Russia of the monarchy, capitalism, and Russian Orthodox Church, life would be wonderful. So the Tsar and his family were killed, capitalism was wiped out, and the Russian Orthodox Church was suppressed. As we all know, paradise didn't ensue. Instead Russia ended up with the Gulag Archipeligo. How could so many brilliant intellectuals be wrong? Well, perhaps brilliant intellectuals aren't as brilliant as they imagine. If you want to understand the modern world, and the pitfalls of seemingly wonderful utopian ideas, this is the book to read. The author is a highly-respected historian, not a journalist slanting the facts in an effort to convince you to vote for his or her favorite candidate.

All essays in this collection are remarkable but 'The Hedgehog and the Fox' is one of those essays that will take you on a trip to the relativity of truth and have you question both the physical and metaphysical through Berlin's eyes. There are many philosophical angles from which one can interpret Berlin's analysis of the Russian intelligentsia, the one that stands out the most is the question that defined nineteenth Russia, as well as Europe:'What is to be done?' There are two strains of thought in the Russian intellectual circles of this time, the Slavophil movement and the Western-oriented intellectuals. Berlin notes that these were not organized political camps engaged in constant debates of any sort (as there was no political movement to speak of at this time in Russia) but rather unsystematic frames of thinking with which Russian intellectuals of the time identified. The advocates of the Slavophil idea maintained that the salvation of Russia was to be found within Russia; that Russian lifestyle, Russian simplicity and modesty was superior to Western complex theories for the advancement of society. Berlin penetrates Tolstoy's consciousness and deciphers the characters and plots of War and Peace for what they represent i.e. the clash between Western scientific thought and the fundamentally Russian way of life. He argues that Tolstoy would have us believe that, in the end, it is the wise Russian General Kutuzov who wins, not because power or strategy had any significant consequence in the battle itself, but because he has not been infiltrated with Western military tactics and in part because he used his, to use Berlin's words "...Russian, untutored instinct..." and it is this Russian untutored instincts that Tolstoy wants to triumph over scientific rationality. Western oriented intellectuals on the other hand, most of whom were in exile throughout Europe at this time, believed that the solution to Russia's problems could only come through the kind of reform being introduced in Western Europe, not necessarily the revolutionary kind, for Chadaaev the most ardent Western oriented mind in Russia at the time was by and far an ardent conservative who believed in aristocratic virtues, but a representational government like that of Britain. Berlin engages Tolstoy in the center of nineteenth century European philosophical discourse on account of his views on simplicity (the hedgehog) and complexity (the fox) of both his work and personality (if we come to understand the simplicity to represent the adeptly Russian and the complexity to represent the ineptly Western European.) Tolstoy had managed or rather convinced himself that scientific theories are all assumptions and that if one is not exposed to these theories he/she has a better chance of knowing the truth, in Berlin's words "He [Tolstoy] believed that only by patient empirical observation could any knowledge be obtained; that this knowledge is always inadequate, that simple people often

This book provides an excellent introduction to the history of Russian thought. I supplemented it with the pertinent chapters of Billington's "The Icon and the Axe" to piece together a general outline of the evolution of Russian political philosophy. Maybe I didn't pay enough attention to Berlin's own philosophizing, but then that wasn't my objective. I found one of his general observations about Russian thought to be particularly useful, i.e. the tendency to follow an idea through to its fullest consequences, no matter how extreme or objectionable. The book nicely sets the stage for how Marxism was able to take hold, showing that it was in some ways an evolutionary, rather than revolutionary, intellectual development. The problem is, now that the book has allowed me to cobble together a general framework of Russian thought, the only possible next step is to start directly reading Hegel and Marx! And who wouldn't try to put off a daunting task like that?

This is one of these intellectual & spiritual odysseys of the mind that, after you've digested them, remain embedded in the protoplasm of your mental being. All the Russian 19th century greats (except Pushkin and Dostoevsky ) are here: Herzen, Belinsky, Tolstoy, Turgenev, Bakunin. In a book so saturated with ideas, it is not easy to make a pick- my favorite ones are: -the hedgehog and the fox metaphor ("The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing"). Human beings are categorized as either "hedgehogs" (whose lives are embodiment of a single, central vision of reality according to which they "feel", breathe, experience and think- "system addicts", in short. Examples include Plato, Dante, Proust and Nietzsche.) or "foxes" ( who live rather centrifugal than centripetal lives, pursue many divergent ends and, generally, possess a sense of reality that prevents them from formulating a definite grand system of "everything"-simply because they "know" that life is too complex to be squeezed into any Procrustean unitary scheme. Montaigne, Balzac, Goethe and Shakespeare are, in various degrees, foxes.) -precarious position of liberalism-something Berlin was well aware of. A "non-belief belief", liberalism certainly doesn't satisfy "deeper" human needs; also, it managed, following its very nature, to stay away from planned genocides & siren songs of totalitarian power. Yet- Berlin has failed (maybe due to the "history of ideas" nature of this compilation of essays) to answer more fundamental questions plaguing liberal mindset: is it fit to grapple with the 20th/21st century burning issues ? Or- has it mutated into a dark parody of itself, making a pact with postmodern imperial power(s) as represented by X-Filesque military & financial "Free World" greedy elites which batten on the unenviable position of the much of the globe (Latin America, Africa, East Europe & the greater part of Asia) ? -on strong side, essays on Herzen (Berlin's hero), Turgenev ("Fathers and Children" controversy) and Bakunin (juxtaposed to Herzen) are fresh, universal & not dated at all. Tolstoy is covered unsurpassably, and I doubt it can be done better. On the other hand, some essays, like those on Russia and 1848 revolutions, German Romanticism and Russian populism, although brilliantly weaven, are, in my opinion, more of historical interest than pertinent to our contemporary metastable anxiety condition. Be as it may: this is an exquisite intellectual tapestry. Buy it.