Getting rid of the past for the sake of progress

Character

The destruction of tradition with the intention of progress is out there in Flannery O’Connor’s “A View of the Woods” and Ivan Turgenev’s Fathers and Sons throughout the main protagonists in every work. Bazarov is the central character of Fathers and Sons: he could be a young nihilist who problems the traditional Russian aristocracy and the older generation of Russians. Mister. Fortune, the protagonist of O’Connor’s “A View from the Woods, ” is exclusively different from the characters of Fathers and Sons in that he is the two a part of the older generation and also makes a are a symbol of progress in the small town. Bazarov and Mr. Lot of money create circumstances for progress by wrecking not only the traditions with their cultures, but also by destroying nature itself. Through this concept of the change and progress, stress are created, the two internal and external. Because this conflict heightens, Bazarov and Mr. Fortune happen to be revealed as iconoclasts within their respective society by virtue of their particular relationships with the settings as well as the thematic ideologies behind all their actions.

Bazarov and Mr. Fortune’s relationships using their settings are important in understanding their particular actions and beliefs, since, for break down to occur, an inherent tension must first can be found in these relationships. In Fathers and Sons, Bazarov is presented as a nihilist: in Arkady’s words, he’s “a guy who does not really bow down before virtually any authority, who not take virtually any principle on faith, whatever reverence that principle can be enshrined in” (17). Nihilism is in immediate conflict with romanticism, an idea that is maintained Pavel Petrovitch, Arkady’s granddad, and also simply by most of the traditional Russian society. Romanticism is definitely expressed in Fathers and Sons through the imagery and figurative dialect used to explain the various configurations, and, most importantly, Nikolai’s estate: “Fields after fields expanded all along to the very horizon, now sloping softly upwards, then simply dropping down again, [] And the piteous state from the weak, starved beasts in the middle of the lovely springtime day, called up, just like a white phantom, the unlimited, comfortless winter months, with its thunder storms, and frosts, and snows” (8-9). Turgenev uses figurative language through this passage to present a traditional perspective of Spain, a view that is quickly damaged by Bazarov when he recognizes Nikolai’s real estate only for the usefulness. Bazarov does not support science in an abstract perception, because he, being a nihilist, simply cannot support such authority, however , he is still able to have romanticism away of Nikolai’s estate by utilizing nature simply for utilitarian reasons: “‘You examine the body structure of the vision, where will the enigmatical look you talk about come in presently there? That’s all romantic, non-sensical aesthetic decay. We had much better go and appearance at the beetle'” (26). The beetle represents, in this case, one of Bazarov having a creature out of your natural universe and practically killing this, in his nihilism, he destroys every previously held intimate view of Russia, possibly destroying existence itself.

In Flannery O’Connor’s “A View of the Woods, inches the tension among tradition and progress also exists between your protagonist, Mr. Fortune, as well as the setting. Although not a nihilist, Mr. Fortune destroys his surroundings, plots in countryside Georgia, with the intention of progress: “He would never have been completely able to sell off off virtually any lots if this had not been for progress, which will had always been his ally” (337). The main conflict of the story arises in Mister. Fortune’s decide to destroy a plot of land that his granddaughter holds dear. Like Bazarov, Mr. Lot of money looks for the pragmatic uses of mother nature, and, in this plot of land, Mr. Fortune envisions a gas station getting built. He can incapable of learning the romantic watch of mother nature held simply by his granddaughter, Mary Fortune, and the timber are, to him, “an uncomfortable mystery that he had not apprehended before” (348). Mr. Lot of money believes that, because characteristics is not useful, it is usually destroyed to create a clearing for progress. Furthermore, Mr. Bundle of money is a useful man in his relationship with his family, he does not “have any use for” his own girl, who endures his property and stands in the way of progress (336). He sees his daughter’s friends and family, the Pittses, as “the kind that could let a cow meadow interfere with the future” (338), and so it is with his own family that the anxiety between custom and progress reappears.

The image of Mr. Fortune’s destruction is the bulldozer that digs clay out of the land. The bulldozer is definitely described when it comes to words regarding illness and monstrosity: “She [Mary Fortune] sat on the hood, seeking down into the red pit, watching the top disembodied gullet gorge itself on the clay, then, with all the sound of a deep suffered nausea and a gradual mechanical revulsion, turn and spit this up” (335). This motif is used by simply O’Connor to provide an not naturally made creature that directly issues with the surrounding, much just like Mr. Lot of money. When Mister. Fortune dies at the end of the story, he could be left only with his application of damage: “He looked around desperately for someone to assist him however the place was deserted except for one enormous yellow creature which seated to the side, as stationary as he was, gorging itself upon clay” (356). This last irony of Mr. Fortune’s death while using bulldozer discloses his alienation by his family, or traditionalists, and questions the cost of destruction with the intention of progress.

Bazarov and Mr. Lot of money clearly vary in their sights of devastation and improvement. For Bazarov, progress is actually another summary ideal for which will he does not have use: “‘Aristocracy, Liberalism, improvement, principles, ‘ Bazarov was saying meanwhile, ‘if you imagine of it, how lot of international and pointless words! ‘” (39). Though Bazarov will not believe in improvement in the summary, inherent in his ideas of nihilism is a type of implicit progress. Bazarov instead chooses to focus even more on the break down than on the progress of his nihilistic views, as pointed out by simply Nikolai Petrovitch: “‘You deny everything, or, speaking even more precisely, you destroy almost everything But 1 must develop too, you know'” (39). Bazarov would not “construct” anything at all, because, to create, it would be necessary for Bazarov to possess a vision for future years, like Arkady has a vision for Nikolai’s estate (9). Bazarov does not have a vision as they does not trust in anything, so, as a nihilist, he can simply destroy and never create.

In immediate contrast to Bazarov’s nihilism, Mr. Fortune focuses on the progress of his activities, and he sees break down simply as a means to an end. Unlike Bazarov, Mr. Good fortune is “a man of advanced vision” who expectations that, in the foreseeable future, the town through which he lives will be has been renowned Fortune, Atlanta (338). This individual believes in improvement as an ideal to which he can dedicate his life, and he is not really “one of these old folks who fight improvement, who target to almost everything new and cringe at every change” (337). All of his actions line-up with his watch of break down as a approach to progress, even his killing of his granddaughter, Jane Fortune, will serve the purpose of showing to her that her romantic views are wrong (355). He is identified to impose progress in the traditional surroundings, no matter the expense.

Both Ivan Turgenev and Flannery O’Connor produce a touch upon the success of all their protagonist’s actions through the final death scene. Fathers and Sons ends at the gravesite of Bazarov, who has passed away after being infected with typhus. Turgenev’s final sentence reveals his view with the main anxiety of the new: “However keen, sinning, and rebellious the heart concealed the tomb, the flowers growing about this peep serenely at us using their innocent eyes, they inform us not of eternal tranquility alone, of this great peace of ‘indifferent’ nature, they tell us, as well, of everlasting reconciliation along with life with no end” (168). In the have difficulty between nihilism and romanticism, the blossoms, representing character, show that romanticism provides finally overcome Bazarov, and this creation and life will always prevail over destruction and death. O’Connor’s final passing describing Mister. Fortune’s death and indifference with the gigantic bulldozer maintain a similar, even though more sobering, message: O’Connor reveals that Mr. Fortune’s ways are not successful, and this destruction with the intention of progress leads to isolation and death. In all of the, both Fathers and Kids and “A View with the Woods” present protagonists who also find themselves directly at chances with tradition. Through all their destruction with the natural world, these heroes ultimately destroy themselves.

Works Reported

O’Connor, Flannery. The Complete Testimonies of Flannery O’Connor. New york city: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 1971.

Turgenev, Ivan. Fathers and Sons. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications, Incorporation., 1998.

Tweet