First of all, in Pierre’s case, his ‘proposal’ (if you can call it that) seems to occur simply because society wills it. He feels mere physical passion for Hélène, and though he knows he does not love her, he courts her (if somewhat absentmindedly), to the point where he feels he must propose. He asks himself: “how did it all happen?...They all expect this so much, they’re so certain it will be, that I simply cannot disappoint them” (War and Peace 211). Pierre’s engagement to Hélene is inevitable because society wills it into being, where in Levin’s case, society works against him. He is rejected by Kitty, who initially seeks a good match in the eyes of society: Vronksy. Though society puts pressure on both Kitty and Levin to each find someone else to marry, they manage to resist, seeming to know that they are destined to be married, and finally manage the engagement on the second time around. This opposition leads me back to my earlier discussion of fate, and Tolstoy’s appreciation for those characters who can tune into God’s greater design for them, rather than that of society.
Not unrelated to society’s role in each engagement is the role of words, which seem to function as false labels for human feelings, and perhaps a way to explain feelings to society. In Pierre’s case, no love, no proposal actually occurs, but Prince Vassily becomes frustrated and says they have just the same, claiming that Pierre and Helene are in love and engaged. Pierre, rather dumbstruck but not willing to object, actually believes Vassily’s words. He then starts to use words in the same false way, thinking,“Something special is said on these occasions” (214) and forces himself to say : “Je vous aime!” (War and Peace 214).
For Kitty and Levin, the engagement is real (it is actually communicated) though achieved with a minimum of words. Levin and Kitty seem afraid of this falseness we saw in Pierre and Vassily’s use of words. They fear that words will get in the way of the feelings they have for each other, as unable to describe what is actually occurring between them. Levin describes a pre-proposal conversation with Kitty as, “laconic and clear, almost wordless, communication of the most complex thoughts” (Anna Karenina 396). They even limit their communication of their most intimate feelings to the first letter of every word, which somehow helps them to better understand each other. Unlike the engagement between Pierre and Hélène, Levin and Kitty have real feelings for each other, but they go unspoken, they are communicated without thoughts.
There is even a moment that is parallel to Prince Vassily’s ‘naming’ of P + H’s engagement, here the moment where Kitty’s mother “put[s] names to things and translate[s] all thoughts and feelings into questions of life. And it seemed equally strange and even painful to [Levin and Kitty] all in the first moment” (405). Levin and Kitty resist this moment of ‘naming’ their engagement for society, when their feelings must have labels for the outside world.
Well, this is somewhat disjointed, but I suppose that is the limitation of words and the beauty of blogs! Stay tuned, more Tolstoy thoughts to follow!
3 comments:
So, though I enjoy the Kitty/Levin proposal scene as a literary artifact, I really resist the "package" we're to take away from it. I'm interested in your thoughts on this! Do check out Tommy's and Kimberly's posts on very similar issues.
I adore the Levin/Kitty engagement, but I definitely can understand why someone might find it unrealistic, even ridiculous. I think the “package” that Tolstoy would like readers to take away from an ideal love like that of Kitty and Levin is that love is a kind of holy, spiritual bond, profaned by things like society balls, sexuality, and in many cases, even language. The two life partners may initially experience a kind of passion for each other, but eventually this feeling changes into a kind of eternal mild contentedness and happiness rather than about passion.
Tommy talks about words in his first post, as a kind of threat to a romantic relationship. As he says, “It seems like anytime anyone says the words "I love you" in any piece of Tolstoy's literature, the relationship takes a turn for the worse.” Tommy shows this to be true in many relationships, in addition to my discussion of Pierre and Helene and Levin and Kitty (Sergey and Masha in Family Happiness, Andrei and Natasha, and I might also add Boris and Natasha as well as Sonya and Nikolai). I agree—I definitely think Tolstoy shows these words to either conceal true emotions that aren’t quite this spiritual love, or bungle true love by summing it up in three words—essentially profaning this purely spiritual love.
But this kind of love also doesn’t really seem healthy or realistic, to me personally. As Kimberly says in her post, Masha (Family Happiness), eventually resigns herself to home life, “content” in a life of sacrifice to her husband and child, a life that is stagnated and cut off from the rest of the world. I think Tolstoy’s problem here is sexuality (and probably women’s sexuality specifically). It seems that he sees sexuality as a threat to the home, that if women were able to hold onto sexuality after marriage (a la Anna Karenina) the home would inevitably be disrupted and the spiritual connection that bonds husband and wife would be severed. My personal problem with Tolstoy here is that I don’t think a woman’s sexuality has to disappear once she’s married—I think if an amputation of sexuality wouldn’t leave much of a woman left! I think it’s absolutely unnecessary too—why should sexuality be a threat to the home? I think in response to me, Tolstoy would hold up Anna Karenina, but for me, her case felt a lot more than just sexual passion—I mean, the light had been extinguished in her eyes! Although, I know Tolstoy would definitely disagree…!
I couldn't agree more! I find Kitty and Levin's engagement extremely tendentious, especially since there wordless declaration love follows right on the heels of a discussion of "The Women's Question" at Oblonsky's dinner. While everyone is in the drawing room discussing whether women have a right to work outside of the home, the Old Prince brings up the man who nursed his baby (!!!) and then we cut to Kitty and Levin doing their chalk thing. It seems that Tolstoy is telling us that a women who does anything ouside of the home is about as natural as a man breast feeding, and that women should all start reading the minds of the men around them to make the world a better place. So, although this proposal scene is arguably touching and artistically effective, I find it morally and socially repugnant!
Post a Comment