Читаем The Adolescent полностью

No, it was not the illegitimacy for which they taunted me so much at Touchard’s, not my sad childhood years, not revenge or the right to protest that was the beginning of my “idea”; my character alone is to blame for it all. From the age of twelve, I think, that is, almost from the birth of proper consciousness, I began not to like people. Not so much not to like, but they somehow became oppressive to me. It was sometimes all too sad for me myself, in my pure moments, that I could in no way speak everything out even to those close to me, that is, I could, but I didn’t want to, I restrained myself for some reason; that I was mistrustful, sullen, and unsociable. Then, too, I had long noticed a feature in myself, almost from childhood, that I all too often accuse others, that I’m all too inclined to accuse them; but this inclination was quite often followed immediately by another thought, which was all too oppressive for me: “Is it not I myself who am to blame, instead of them?” And how often I accused myself in vain! To avoid resolving such questions, I naturally sought solitude. Besides, I never found anything in the company of people, however I tried, and I did try; at least all my peers, all my comrades to a man, proved to be inferior to me in thinking; I don’t remember a single exception.

Yes, I’m glum, I’m continually closed. I often want to leave society. I may also do good to people, but often I don’t see the slightest reason for doing good to them. And people are not at all so beautiful that they should be cared for so much. Why don’t they come forward directly and openly, and why is it so necessary that I should go and foist myself on them? That’s what I asked myself. I’m a grateful being, and I’ve already proved it by a hundred follies. I would instantly respond with openness to an open person and begin to love him at once. And so I did; but they all cheated me at once and closed themselves to me in mockery. The most open of them was Lambert, who used to beat me badly in childhood; but he, too, was merely an open scoundrel and robber; and here, too, his openness came merely from stupidity. These were my thoughts when I came to Petersburg.

Having left Dergachev’s then (God knows what pushed me to go there), I approached Vasin and, on a rapturous impulse, praised him to the skies. And what then? That same evening I already felt that I liked him much less. Why? Precisely because, by praising him, I had lowered myself before him. Yet it seems it should have been the opposite: a man so just and magnanimous as to give another his due, even to his own detriment, such a man is almost superior in his personal dignity to everyone else. And what, then—I knew this, and still I liked Vasin less, even much less, I purposely give an example already familiar to the reader. Even Kraft I remembered with a bitter and sour feeling, because he brought me out to the front hall himself, and so it remained right up to another day, when everything about Kraft became perfectly clear and it was impossible to be angry. From the very lowest grade in school, as soon as any of my comrades got ahead of me in studies, or in witty answers, or in physical strength, I at once stopped keeping company with him and speaking to him. Not that I hated him or wished him to fail; I simply turned away, because such was my character.

Yes, I’ve thirsted for power all my life, power and solitude. I dreamed of them even at such an age that decidedly anyone would have laughed in my face if he had made out what I had inside my skull. That is why I came to love secrecy so much. Yes, I dreamed with all my might and to a point where I had no time to talk; this led to the conclusion that I was unsociable, and my absentmindedness led to a still worse conclusion in my regard, but my rosy cheeks proved the contrary.

I was especially happy when, going to bed and covering myself with a blanket, I began, alone now, in the most complete solitude, with no people moving around and not a single sound from them, to re-create life in a different key. The fiercest dreaming was my companion until I discovered the “idea,” when all my dreams went at once from stupid to reasonable, and from a dreamy form of novel passed on to the rationalistic form of reality.

Everything merged into a single goal. However, they weren’t so stupid even before, though there were myriad upon myriad and thousand upon thousand of them. But I had some favorites . . . However, there’s no point bringing them in here.

Power! I’m convinced that a great many people would find it very funny to learn that such “trash” was aiming at power. But I’ll amaze them still more: maybe from my very first dreams, that is, almost from my very childhood, I was unable to imagine myself otherwise than in the first place, always and in all turns of life. I’ll add a strange confession: maybe that goes on even to this day. And I’ll also note that I’m not apologizing.

Перейти на страницу:

Похожие книги

На заработках
На заработках

Лейкин, Николай Александрович — русский писатель и журналист. Родился в купеческой семье. Учился в Петербургском немецком реформатском училище. Печататься начал в 1860 году. Сотрудничал в журналах «Библиотека для чтения», «Современник», «Отечественные записки», «Искра».Большое влияние на творчество Л. оказали братья В.С. и Н.С.Курочкины. С начала 70-х годов Л. - сотрудник «Петербургской газеты». С 1882 по 1905 годы — редактор-издатель юмористического журнала «Осколки», к участию в котором привлек многих бывших сотрудников «Искры» — В.В.Билибина (И.Грек), Л.И.Пальмина, Л.Н.Трефолева и др.Фабульным источником многочисленных произведений Л. - юмористических рассказов («Наши забавники», «Шуты гороховые»), романов («Стукин и Хрустальников», «Сатир и нимфа», «Наши за границей») — являлись нравы купечества Гостиного и Апраксинского дворов 70-80-х годов. Некультурный купеческий быт Л. изображал с точки зрения либерального буржуа, пользуясь неиссякаемым запасом смехотворных положений. Но его количественно богатая продукция поражает однообразием тематики, примитивизмом художественного метода. Купеческий быт Л. изображал, пользуясь приемами внешнего бытописательства, без показа каких-либо сложных общественных или психологических конфликтов. Л. часто прибегал к шаржу, карикатуре, стремился рассмешить читателя даже коверканием его героями иностранных слов. Изображение крестин, свадеб, масляницы, заграничных путешествий его смехотворных героев — вот тот узкий круг, в к-ром вращалось творчество Л. Он удовлетворял спросу на легкое развлекательное чтение, к-рый предъявляла к лит-ре мещанско-обывательская масса читателей политически застойной эпохи 80-х гг. Наряду с ней Л. угождал и вкусам части буржуазной интеллигенции, с удовлетворением читавшей о похождениях купцов с Апраксинского двора, считая, что она уже «культурна» и высоко поднялась над темнотой лейкинских героев.Л. привлек в «Осколки» А.П.Чехова, который под псевдонимом «Антоша Чехонте» в течение 5 лет (1882–1887) опубликовал здесь более двухсот рассказов. «Осколки» были для Чехова, по его выражению, литературной «купелью», а Л. - его «крестным батькой» (см. Письмо Чехова к Л. от 27 декабря 1887 года), по совету которого он начал писать «коротенькие рассказы-сценки».

Николай Александрович Лейкин

Русская классическая проза
Великий раскол
Великий раскол

Звезды горели ярко, и длинный хвост кометы стоял на синеве неба прямо, словно огненная метла, поднятая невидимою рукою. По Москве пошли зловещие слухи. Говорили, что во время собора, в трескучий морозный день, слышен был гром с небеси и земля зашаталась. И оттого стал такой мороз, какого не бывало: с колокольни Ивана Великого метлами сметали замерзших воробьев, голубей и галок; из лесу в Москву забегали волки и забирались в сени, в дома, в церковные сторожки. Все это не к добру, все это за грехи…«Великий раскол» – это роман о трагических событиях XVII столетия. Написанию книги предшествовало кропотливое изучение источников, сопоставление и проверка фактов. Даниил Мордовцев создал яркое полотно, где нет второстепенных героев. Тишайший и благочестивейший царь Алексей Михайлович, народный предводитель Стенька Разин, патриарх Никон, протопоп Аввакум, боярыня Морозова, каждый из них – часть великой русской истории.

Георгий Тихонович Северцев-Полилов , Даниил Лукич Мордовцев , Михаил Авраамович Филиппов

Историческая проза / Русская классическая проза