Death of Ivan Ilyich, The: Week 3 - Ch 7-9

[Silver]

VII. Longing
VIII. The Doctors Visit
XI. A Strange Idea

[Silver]

One thing I want to mention that kind of struck me as interesting as the grouping of the titles

Hatred
Despair
Longing

Which all came one right after the other, as all of these emotions have some relation to each other, also I think it is interesting how they seem to gradually tapir of. Hatred being I think the most strongest, violent emotion, and longing being in my mind less severe than feelings of despair.

It also brought to my mind the 7 stages of grief, as each of these emotions seems to be expressive of some of the different stages of grief.

[Lily]

Silver wrote: "It also brought to my mind the ... stages of grief, as each of these emotions seems to be expressive of some of the different stages of grief...."

Hatred
Despair
Longing

Thanks for catching that. Here are the stages Elisabeth Kübler-Ross articulated in 1969 (others have adapted/modified the list):

Denial
Anger
Bargaining
Depression
Acceptance

"Kübler-Ross originally applied these stages to people suffering from terminal illness, later to any form of catastrophic personal loss (job, income, freedom)....

"Kübler-Ross claimed these steps do not necessarily come in the order noted above, nor are all steps experienced by all patients, though she stated a person will always experience at least two...."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stages_o...

[Silver]

That is interesting that they were originally used for dealing with terminal illness.

[Leonard]

For me, more interesting than his reaction to death is the callousness with which the others treat him. A stark view of humanity. And the story certainly provide insight into the reaction toward death.

[☯Emily]

Ivan certainly showed some of these stages, including hatred, despair, anger and depression. I guess we will have to see if he ever reveals acceptance.

[Lily]

Leonard wrote: "For me, more interesting than his reaction to death is the callousness with which the others treat him. A stark view of humanity. And the story certainly provides insight into the reaction toward de..."

I was going to go back to some of our comments about doctors to link this post, but yours is appropriate, too, Leonard. One of my TBR books that a recent sorting exercise brought to the fore was Final Exam: A Surgeon's Reflections on Mortality I probably bought it on a reduced price table (the tag says $8.29) to share with my daughter-in-law, who is a medical resident, much as was the author, Pauline Chen, at the time she wrote. But it was one I definitely wanted to read first -- Chen is a transplant surgeon (a "brilliant" one, according to the jacket blurb). The bits I have skimmed are an almost heart wrenching account of the effort required to face death squarely alongside one's patients. I think most of us could learn from her accounts -- both personal and from the examples and studies she cites. However, until I read it completely, while I will offer it, I don't know how much I shall encourage her to use her precious time on it. (I was trained in Stephen Ministry by a pastor who tells stories of holding doctor's hands, discreetly behind their backs, while they delivered news she legally could not. Despite my training, having a care receiver who is known to be terminal is one relationship I request not to be asked to undertake.)

I will say that some of what seems callous in reading the story may not have been so much so in real life, such as the family visiting before going to see Sarah Bernhardt. At one level, they were honoring a privilege that Ivan had made possible for them in a way perhaps preferable to not going. Tolstoy may downplay that aspect, but for all his omniscient narrator opinions, Tolstoy sometimes is just descriptive of what does occur and allows the reader to bring his/her judgments to the situations.

[[deleted user]]

Silver wrote: "One thing I want to mention that kind of struck me as interesting as the grouping of the titles

Hatred
Despair
Longing

Which all came one right after the other, as all of these emotions h..."

Interesting to see them grouped, Silver. I don't even remember that my chapters had the headings, and if they did, I guess I ignored them. Oops.

[Kris]

Even though Tolstoy was writing prior to Kubler-Ross' research, in a way it proves the universality of the stages of grief/dying that she put forth in 1969.

It's neat seeing how others caught the same thread I did!

I caught another thread near the end of Chapter 9. The last 2/3 of the chapter is almost an imperfect recreation of the Job saga from the Old Testament. While Job never curses God for the bad things that happen to him, he does ask 'why?'. Ivan does that, too. He's alone in the middle of the night with the earlier dose of opium wearing off and he starts to get contemplative. This could be seen as part of the transition from anger into bargaining in the stages of grief. But, given how much everyone has commented on Tolstoy's religious awakening I think he might have intentionally set up a parallel between the two characters.

Job had the perfect life with wife, children, and property
Ivan had the perfect life with family, career and property

Job lost all and gets afflicted with boils during a bet between God and the Devil
Ivan lost his career, feels isolated from his family and in constant pain because of his mysterious affliction

Job asks why of God and has a conversation with him
Ivan sort of questions God, but does not expect an answer--so when he gets one. . .is it his subconscious reviewing his life up to this point, or is it God showing him that he has lived on the world, not in it and has missed many chances to create a happy life.

Of course, at the end of Job's story he gets everything back two-fold. I'm pretty sure based on the first chapter of the book that Ivan will not be so lucky. :-)

[Lily]

Kris wrote: "Of course, at the end of Job's story he gets everything back two-fold..."

Which is one of the places where comparisons with still more ancient similar stories get interesting.

[Melissa]

What struck me the most about these three chapters is Ivan Ilych's heightened awareness of lying. He is almost obsessed with it. But at the end of chapter 9 he lies to himself,
"And whenever the thought occurred to him, as it often did, that it all resulted from his not having lived as he ought to have done, he at once recalled the correctness of his whole life and dismissed so strange an idea"
I'm not saying his dying is punishment for the life he has led, I'm saying if he had led a different life he might still be dying but not alone and certainly not with all this angst. Ivan Ilych recognizes this himself in other spots, but here he is determined to ignore this "strange" idea.
I'm reading this story as a parable, kind of like Job. Where Tolstoy is showing us how Ivan Ilych has messed up and giving the reader the chance to truly examine his or her own life and adjust accordingly. Because we will all die and we don't want to regret our lives or the people we've surrounded ourselves with. IMHO!

[Kris]

Melissa wrote: "What struck me the most about these three chapters is Ivan Ilych's heightened awareness of lying. He is almost obsessed with it. ..."

I agree. He's also more aware of the game playing that is part of the social niceties observed by others. Like the scene where the family goes to the theater. Ivan said they should go, but of course he was hoping they would volunteer to stay with him. When the family comes in to say good-bye, he becomes overwhelmed by the idea that they were only there to see him because it was the 'proper' thing to do before they go out and enjoy themselves. He sees their polite, superficial discussion about other performances by the actress to be trite--a way to ignore the elephant in the room as it were. Instead of talking about how much Ivan is obviously in pain (at least to himself) they are talking about social trends.

Now, is this a critique about Ivan's self-absorbtion? Or is it a comment about how in society the conversation is expected to stay civilized and not touch on any unpleasant topics?

[[deleted user]]

BunWat wrote: "Kris wrote: "Now, is this a critique about Ivan's self-absorbtion? Or is it a comment about how in society the conversation is expected to stay civilized and not touch on any unpleasant topics? ......"

Yes! I very clearly see this story being a critique of the society AND the man. That idea has been swirling unformed in my mind, but I wasn't able to label it. Another, wow, from me as I put the pieces together. But, my question is: if society is flawed, what can we do? I mean, it is made up of humans, flawed as we are. Being polite I think is better than being rude! If Tolstoy is critcizing that society, is he saying that peasent society is better, more natural?

[Deborah, Moderator]

Christi wrote: "Silver wrote: "One thing I want to mention that kind of struck me as interesting as the grouping of the titles

Hatred
Despair
Longing

Which all came one right after the other, as all of t..."

Maybe not Christi. My chapters have no titles.

[Deborah, Moderator]

I thought about the stages of grief and dying too. It was also interesting to me that the only person of comfort to Ivan is the one servant. I think the comfort comes from two areas: his status of peasant/servant and the fact the he's honest and direct. Ivan finds he can trust him because of this. Also, the servant is the only one who is truly empathetic with what Ivan is experiencing; again leading to a comforting atmosphere.

I agree that it's a critique of the society and the man. As was mentioned above, if that is the way of society what can we do to change it. For me, it means not playing the games. Ivan has been playing the games of his society in order to achieve what society told him was important. He never considers what is truly important or the way he wants to live his life. As BunWat expressed earlier, he sits there "poor pitiful me" without ever having tried to change anything in his world other than to climb the societal ladder.

I think Ivan is a warning to all of us to not get caught up in the everyday crap and focus on what we really want to bring to our world. If just one person started to communicate directly with Ivan (i.e. doc, wife, etc.) then it would give Ivan permission to communicate as well. Openness fosters openness. But for status conscience Ivan, that person has to be considered an equal.

[MadgeUK]

Well said Deborah!

[MadgeUK]

Christi wrote: If Tolstoy is critcizing that society, is he saying that peasent society is better, more natural?

Simpler I think, without the trappings of the aristocracy. And if we think about the extreme wealth and indulgence of the aristocracy, as exemplified by the Tsars, then peasant life does seem preferable from an ethical p.o.v. Tolstoy was an aristocrat and sickened of that life. In his memoirs Gorky wrote that he once went to see Lenin and found him reading War and Peace. Lenin exclaimed: 'What an artist! And you know the amazing thing about Tolstoy is that he is a real moujik, he has a peasant's voice and he thinks like a peasant.' And Turgenev said that Tolstoy was 'as attached to the peasantry as to a woman expecting a child'.

[MadgeUK]

Tolstoy is deliberately repetitive. Repetition is perhaps the most distinctive single feature of his style.

Nabokov saw something typically 'Tolstoyan' in these repetitions:-

'One peculiar feature of Tolstoy’s style is what I shall term the “groping purist.” In describing a meditation, emotion, or tangible object, Tolstoy follows the contours of the thought, the emotion, or the object until he is perfectly satisfied with his re-creation, his rendering. This involves what we might call creative repetitions, a compact series of repetitive statements, coming one immediately after the other, each more expressive, each closer to Tolstoy’s meaning. He gropes, he unwraps the verbal parcel for its inner sense, he peels the apple of the phrase, he tries to say it one way, then a better way, he gropes, he stalls, he toys, he Tolstoys with words.' (My emphasis.)

There is a lot of Tolstoying in Ivan Ilych!

[Lily]

Christi wrote: "...If Tolstoy is criticizing that society, is he saying that peasant society is better, more natural? ..."

Yes, I think he is, and I am not certain that is necessarily true, even though that society certainly has values it too can bring to the table to enhance our mutual humanity -- much as we find as we come into cultures different than our own. Some call out our hypocrisy, yet introduce us to hypocrisy to new levels in their own customs!

[Lynnm]

I thought the last line of Chapter 9 was interesting: "And whenever the thought occurred to him, and it occurred to him often, that all of this was happening because he had lived wrong, he immediately recalled all the correctness of his life and dismissed this strange thought."

In the previous thread, Deborah talked of the shallowness of life, and I think that this reaffirms that idea.

Ivan might not have lived a "wrong" life, but he didn't live a full life either.

If you live a "wrong" life, it's fairly easy to see. But a shallow life is much more difficult to analyze because most people lead a shallow life. Doing what is expected of us by society and family. Looking for success and material gain. Living for what is best for us rather than those around us. Etc.

People who go against society generally are dismissed. It can also be dangerous in certain eras and countries.

And most people never question our societal and cultural beliefs. So yes, it would seem like a "strange thought" to think that we are living "wrong" when we are just following the pack.

[Lily]

BunWat wrote: "If he doesn't like them they are difficult, unpleasant, disagreeable, improper..."

Do we get a good sense of what Ivan considers difficult, unpleasant, disagreeable, improper, beyond perhaps his wife, his doctors, and his immanent death? (We do, I think, get a sense he avoided those feelings and perhaps situations that could have engendered them.)

How would anyone here contrast/compare Ivan with Oblonsky in Anna Karenina? I would see Oblonsky as even more of a social climber in the sense of seeking opportunities to fund his own lifestyle and that of his large family. Ivan seems not to have indulged in as much womanizing after marriage, but somehow Tolstoy has not made Ivan as affable a character?

[MadgeUK]

I see one of the differences between Oblonsky and Ivan as being that of class. Being an aristocrat insulated by wealth can make a person more affable, less worried about status etc. Ivan has to worry about 'keeping up appearances', Oblonsky doesn't. Oblonsky is also happily married to a pleasant wife and Ivan is not.

[Silver]

Lynnm wrote: "I thought the last line of Chapter 9 was interesting: "And whenever the thought occurred to him, and it occurred to him often, that all of this was happening because he had lived wrong, he immedia..."

I think that is very well stated. Ivan cannot comprehend the idea that he could have lived his life "wrongly" becasue in his mind he has done everything of which he told one should do in thier life.

The fact there they may have been something deeper, something more too life beyond that surface of "correctness" that he was missing, is an idea that was never comprehensible him. He did not begin to consider this until the moment that it was too late.

In addition, now that he has come to this inevitable point it would be far too devastating to now begin to see the truth and to admit to himself that has led a shallow life, and that his life could have been better if he had made different choices.

So it has become crucial to him at this point to continue in his state of denial and to convince himself that he truly has lived life as he should and he cannot entertain the possibility of any wrongness in his life.

[[deleted user]]

Is the peasant boy someone hired by Ivan (I think so, but I am not certain)? If so, I would have my doubts as to whether or not he is someone who represents the compassionate, loving society that Ivan's society doesn't represent. I mean, it is his job to be the grunt. Makes me think of nursing homes. These old folks living there because their families can't take care of them, so these under-paid aids are given the tasks of making the old people comfortable. Then later, you hear them cursing the old people for being gross or old or rude. Was the peasant who the narrator shows as being a giving selfless person Really that way?? I am just so full of doubts!

[Kris]

Christi wrote: "my question is: if society is flawed, what can we do? I mean, it is made up of humans, flawed as we are. Being polite I think is better than being rude!..."

It's definitely hard to change society as a whole and not something that can happen 'overnight' as it were. :-)

Christi, you bring up an interesting question--can society be polite without being superficial? Is true feeling like passion (for a cause, career, person) too 'real' for polite society? Do we automatically go from empty politeness like in the story to being mean and rude to each other?

One thing I like about humanity is that we are flawed. Can you imagine how boring life would be if we were all perfect? ( shudder )

I do believe that rudeness and polite but empty societal pratter are at two extremes of the spectrum. I think there is room in between to have meaningful conversations about things people care about without someone in the group being offended or thinking the speaker was rude. This type of conversation does take work, making sure that what you say means something AND is polite, but it can be done.

Unfortunately, I do not think that Ivan would recognize honesty without rudeness. He has lived so long within the confines of the superficial that the only way the substantial would be heard is if someone hit him over the head with it.

[Silver]

Christi wrote: "Is the peasant boy someone hired by Ivan (I think so, but I am not certain)? If so, I would have my doubts as to whether or not he is someone who represents the compassionate, loving society that I..."

Yes, I beleive that Gerasim was hired by Ivan, but while on the one hand it may be true that he is not helping Ivan purely out of compassion or selfless desire on the other hand I to think that Tolstoy means for us to view Gerasim's sympathy for Ivan as being genuine and that he truly does feel sorry for him and he is not simply aiding him becasue he is under the obligation to have to do so. As well he knows perfectly well that Ivan is dying and thus he knows that his service to Ivan will only last for a limited time which may make his having to do it less of a burden on him.

One of the things that struck out at me, and which I could not help but to wonder about, is the question of the rising of Ivan's legs. Ivan claims that in the position of having Gerasim holding up his legs, he no longer feels the pain. But I wondered when I read it, is it truly the physcial position of having his legs lifted that gives Ivan comfort from his pain? Or is it instead the feeling of acutally having some contact with another person and the feeling of which there is one person who truly does have compassion for his situation and takes his needs into consideration, even if he is hired to do so. His own family whom ought to feel obligated to tend to his needs seem to avoid him and seem to preoccupy themselves with their own denials of what is happening they don't take into consideration what Ivan's needs might be.

But Gerasim sees the truth for what it is and does not try and hide from it or deny it and thus becasue of his simple plain honesty he acts accordingly and is able to provide of Ivan what no one else can.

[Lily]

BunWat wrote: "Gerasim is a servant. He is paid to work in Ivan's house. But so are any number of other servants. The story mentions a footman who irritates Ivan, there will be a cook, a maid... The family aren't..."

I like this post. Thanks. (On the other hand, cynical me doesn't totally trust but what Tolstoy is using Gerasim as a bit of a symbol for peasant virtue and as a contrast to Ivan's wife's use of the French "Jean" to address her husband. Still, the whole sequence is a beautiful demonstration of the power of "presence" -- often as important as the much touted listening. )

[MadgeUK]

IMO being polite oils the wheels of society. It is the difference between barbarity and civilisation. As our societies have become less polite, we have become less tolerant and full of 'rages'.

Even if Gerasim is 'just' being polite because he is a servant, he is helping to oil Ivan's wheels and is therefore one less pain to suffer, one less cause for rage.

[[deleted user]]

MadgeUK wrote: "Christi wrote: If Tolstoy is critcizing that society, is he saying that peasent society is better, more natural?

Simpler I think, without the trappings of the aristocracy. And if we think about..."

Yes, that is understandable. At the time, he did not know that the overthrow of the aristocracy and the supposed intended elevation of the peasant class would lead to the horrors of the USSR. I keep looking at everything from our historical advantage, and that is not quite right of me.

[[deleted user]]

Lily wrote: "BunWat wrote: "Gerasim is a servant. He is paid to work in Ivan's house. But so are any number of other servants. The story mentions a footman who irritates Ivan, there will be a cook, a maid... Th..."

I am with you there, Lily! I just read the older post about the names and found that interesting indeed!

[Lily]

I picked up the recording of this novella last night from the library and listened to half of it this morning (it is only two CDs in length, probably 2-3 hours total). Wonderful experience! The swings of experience across Ivan's lifetime, the little insights into both mundane domestic life and arcane bureaucracy, the trajectory of an entire life within such a short span -- I come away with an even deeper respect for the scope of Tolstoy's talent as a writer, even where I am troubled by specifics or by any overarching messages that are easy to interpret in overly simple ways, whether Tolstoy intended his readers to do such or not.

I questioned whether I really wanted to spend more time with this rather morbid writing, but I am finding listening again to what I have just read to be healing in a way I would be at odds to describe more accurately than just that: "healing."

[Lily]

@34MadgeUK wrote: "IMO being polite oils the wheels of society. It is the difference between barbarity and civilisation. As our societies have become less polite, we have become less tolerant and full of 'rages'...."

It's a strange balance, isn't it, Madge? How to be kind, gentle, compassionate -- all the values that under-gird "polite" at its best and turn into oily hypocrisy or the ignoring of ugly prejudices at its worst versus the truth-telling and openness and genuine human communication that can go with frankness and telling-it-like-it-is, but which can also so easily descend into loud voices or obscenity at best and violence at worst.

PS -- See also Kris @msg 30.

[MadgeUK]

At the time, he did not know that the overthrow of the aristocracy and the supposed intended elevation of the peasant class would lead to the horrors of the USSR.

Yes, at the time many of the Russian intelligentsia were toying with the idea of communism/socialism which to them seemed preferable to the heavy hand of the Tsar and the Russian Orthodox church. Dosteovsky was one of the few who warned against it because he had become very religious whilst in prison. Unfortunately they swapped one form of totalitarianism for another:(. You see some of Tolstoy's ideas about communism as applied to the land and sharing with the peasants in the chapters about Konstantin and Nikolai Levin in Anna Karenina, Konstantin being modelled on Tolstoy himself.

[[deleted user]]

I want to say that I have enjoyed this discussion. Everyone put so much thought into their comments and they really got me thinking! And I appreciated all the links and background info too. You all have a very active group, it is wonderful. If anyone wants to pop over to the Discovering Russian Literature group, we could use some stimulation there! Thank you for the great insights into DII :)

[MadgeUK]

That's nice of you Christi - glad you have enjoyed us!

I've already headed over to DRL, as you know:) Have just ordered Dosteovsky's The Devils for the next read.

[[deleted user]]

I have my copy! We could use some thoughts on the Chekhov ss In the Ravine, have you read it? So glad you will be there for Demons, Madge!

[MadgeUK]

Thinking about our callousness towards death:. How much of this is the result of the competitiveness of modern life and the overcrowding of cities and the planet? When rats are put into an overcrowded cage they begin attacking the old and the dying, so maybe being callous is our coping mechanism. As the elderly in the population begin to outnumber the young, as they are in some part of the Western world, we may find that callousness increases, it may even be a survival strategy. Tolstoy is also describing a form of competitiveness. Is the callousness of those around Ivan a survival strategy? Was the callousness of those around Tolstoy at the end of his life a survival strategy - for him or for them?

Just musing!

[[deleted user]]

MadgeUK wrote: "Thinking about our callousness towards death:. How much of this is the result of the competitiveness of modern life and the overcrowding of cities and the planet? When rats are put into an overcr..."

Interesting musings! Yes, I think the seemingly callous behavior of those around Ivan can be seen as survival strategies. The men who are wondering who will get Ivan's job, have valid reasons to wonder. They have families to support, goals to achieve. And, in focusing on that issue, they think about how life goes on, they don't have to dwell on the sadness of death. And likewise, to get on to a game of cards after the funeral, is a way of coping with the sadness. In a way, maybe they avoid the sadness, but they can also be, just taking their mind to other things so they don't malfunction! I don't want to see all these behaviors as necessarily bad, I think they are coping mechanisms and normal life. I wonder if seeing the people as callous is a survival strategy for Tolstoy too, now that you mention it. It gave him the excuse to runaway.

[Lily]

Lily wrote: "I questioned whether I really wanted to spend more time with this rather morbid writing, but I am finding listening again to what I have just read to be healing in a way I would be at odds to describe more accurately than just that: 'healing.' ..."

Well, this morning I questioned again. The second half was much more of downer for me -- more troubling than healing, I'm afraid. Still, certainly no sense that it is a waste of time to spend so much of it with this small story.

A couple of things bothered me -- Ivan's wife could offer to do things for Ivan, but he would brush them away. It seemed like a part of the dependence/independence dance of the two of them -- and not a very healthy one nor one that either was prone, even willing, to transform into something more intimate and mutually supporting. The narrator seemed to place the start of the separation with the wife's pregnancy. That seems a common story. What do healthy families teach to avoid such, other than just that pregnancy is a pretty normal condition for the female of the species, albeit a demanding one. But not one where one renounces all sorts of old loyalties.

A second thing that bothered me: With all of Ivan's musings, no where does the narrator have him compare his experience of death with those of his children who died.

[[deleted user]]

Lily wrote: "Lily wrote: "I questioned whether I really wanted to spend more time with this rather morbid writing, but I am finding listening again to what I have just read to be healing in a way I would be at ..."

I guess in these examples (wife's pregnancy/death of his children), we do see a very selfish Ivan. He doesn't have compassion for others, he can't feel for others, can't empathize. Those really are key examples, Lily. I noticed them while reading, but didn't connect the fact that Ivan was dying like his kids before him. Death really is a personal experience though. I always think of the Heart of Darkness passage "we live as we dream, alone." And we die alone. Even if we have a better support system than Ivan has. I suppose, up until his death, he didn't bother thinking about what others may experience, but as he lay dying, he certainly did think of himself and his experience. And, I think he did at that point decide that, 'Oh my gosh, my son is sad. He is thinking about my experience." And that is sort of when, he made a turn, I believe. When some truth was revealed.

[Lily]

A third observation was how seldom the word "fear" appeared, even though the atmosphere was infused with it. To check if this was valid, I did a search and I got only three matches:

The Death of Ivan Ilych - Chapter IV
celebrity only increased Ivan Ilych's doubts and fears. a friend of a friend of his, a very good d

The Death of Ivan Ilych - Chapter VIII
id question ivan ilych, with eyes glistening with fear and hope, put to him as to whether there was

The Death of Ivan Ilych - Chapter XII
e is it?" he sought his former accustomed fear of death and did not find it. "where is it?

I was reminded of my own family, where fear was sometimes the elephant in the room, but there was sort of mentality to not mention or name fear as existing. You would work the problem and its ramifications, but the feeling itself was to be subsumed or ignored.

[Lily]

Christi wrote: "didn't connect the fact that Ivan was dying like his kids before him...."

A couple of things finally brought that to my attention -- first another goodreads reviewer of several Tolstoy short stories was pointing out Tolstoy's insensitivity to the feminine (or feminist) perspective in many of these stories, although she didn't say as much about DII in others, so I started picking DII for clues. Second, I have had several discussions along the way about young women (and men) today grieving miscarriages, especially if they have been trying invitro, versus miscarriages for those in their late teens/early twenties who expect to conceive easily again. Third, as we have discussed earlier, death was more intrusive on daily lives in the time of DII. When Ivan was one of his pensive moods, Tolstoy could easily have had Ivan bless his own good fortune at living 40 some years when his children had not had even that chance. But Tolstoy totally sidestepped that possible/probable chain of thought and musing relative to his very own children -- almost as if either that belonged to his wife's realm (in which case he might have found some sympathy for her) or it was so expected and normal that it belonged to the world of living, not his current world of dying. (Sorry, I'm afraid this is a rather muddled post, but my mind doesn't want to clarify it right now, so I'm going to have to listen to it and quit trying.)

[[deleted user]]

Lily wrote: "Christi wrote: "didn't connect the fact that Ivan was dying like his kids before him...."

A couple of things finally brought that to my attention -- first another goodreads reviewer of several Tol..."

Can you believe this: I just got notification about this post! 3 days late!


Actually, your post did not seem at all muddled. I agree with your observations too! I had a miscarriage and was devestated. My husband suffered too (although, admittedly, he didn't suffer from the loss in the same, personal way. Ie, his hormones weren't soaring between pregnancy and plummeting to non-pregnancy, he did not feel the responsibilty that I felt for the loss etc.) While, in the time of Tolstoy, people no doubt were somewhat more hardened to death, because antibiotics weren't used yet, and because, well, death occurred more commonly, I do sense that Tolstoy and Ivan were not concerned with the death of others, but more with their own deaths!! But, I am not being fair, as I do not have details of Tolstoy's personal reaction to the deaths of his kids. Mark Twain, who lived in the same time period (although, obviously not in the same country), mourned the loss of his children. I guess I will have to look further into Tolstoy's life. From all that I have read already about him, I get the impression that he was a selfish man who liked to be the center of attention, and who saw women as his possesions...I wonder if that inflamed comment will come back to haunt me?!

[MadgeUK]

I get the impression that he was a selfish man who liked to be the center of attention, and who saw women as his possesions...

Therefore a traditional man of his time?

[[deleted user]]

MadgeUK wrote: "I get the impression that he was a selfish man who liked to be the center of attention, and who saw women as his possesions...

Therefore a traditional man of his time?"

Heehee, in many ways, possibly. But, as I said, Twain was a man of the same time, and his response was perhaps very different. Twain adored his wife. And he did not take her for granted, he valued her intellegence yadda yadda. And he missed his kids terribly when they died. He respected his family.

[MadgeUK]

It might be that Tolstoy was being critical of the Ivan in himself....

[[deleted user]]

Yep, BunWat, and yep, MadgeUK! Very interesting, isn't it? :) The story that keeps on giving...

[Lily]

Two months later, I am appreciating the comments I missed in September. Thanks!

[MadgeUK]

Hello stranger!:)