Current state of research
2.6 Altruism and the problem of virtue
Ȼɟɡɡɚɳɢɬɧɨ ɫɟɪɞɰɟ ɱɟɥɨɜɟɱɟɫɤɨɟ. Ⱥ ɡɚɳɢɳɟɧɧɨɟ — ɨɧɨ ɥɢɲɟɧɨ ɫɜɟɬɚ, ɢ ɦɚɥɨ ɜ ɧɟɦ ɝɨɪɹɱɢɯ ɭɝɥɟɣ, ɧɟ ɯɜɚɬɢɬ ɞɚɠɟ, ɱɬɨɛɵ ɫɨɝɪɟɬɶ ɪɭɤɢ.
Ⱥleksandr Grin, Doroga nikuda
So far we have examined cases of personal happiness. This section will deal with the question of the pursuit of non-egoistic forms of happiness which, in Grin’s work, are represented by altruism. This element of Grin’s prose constitutes one of the most significant moral problems in his oeuvre and therefore the one that has been most widely examined by critics.71
Grin’s heroes display altruism either by renouncing their own happiness for the sake of other people's happiness, or by self-sacrifice in the name of moral choice.72
It has been already noted by many critics (e.g. Kovskii 1969, Mikhailova 1980 and Ivanitskaia 1993, to name but a few) that Grin’s break with what may be termed his early egoistic worldview took place before the Revolution and was linked to his disillusionment with Nietzsche’s idea of the Superman.73 Never content to rest with easy answers, Grin sought other solutions to the question of the meaning of life. He turned to idealism, and his post- Revolutionary works display gradually more and more altruism and begin to describe protagonists who care more for others and less for themselves, to the point where they realise that, as Holbach expresses it, ‘to be happy [...] is to make others happy’ (Holbach 2004:15).
The problem of bestowing happiness on other people involves the presence of a donor and a receiver. The donor offers things or acts so as to help other people achieve what they desire, with no intention of gaining profit or even words of gratitude from the receivers of their
71 On altruism in Alye parusa and Doroga nikuda, see Luker (1973:79; 114). 72 The second aspect will be examined more closely in the next part of the thesis. 73
There are various forms of egoism to be found in Grin’s work. In Blistaiushchii mir Runa desires fame, wealth and splendour, the protagonist of ‘Brak Avgusta Esborna’ may be diagnosed as an egoist who is too immature to marry. In the death agony of an old man, the actress Elda (‘Elda i Angoteia’) pursues only financial gain instead of displaying real human compassion. Two of the main characters in ‘Gatt, Vitt i Redott’ lose their lives striving for self-contentment, and Tart in ‘Ostrov Reno’ chooses death rather than a return to society (his words ‘Ʉɚɠɞɵɣ ɡɚ
ɫɟɛɹ, ɛɪɚɬɟɰ!’ (1.I:271) are frequently quoted as the most explicit example of Grin’s understanding of Nietzsche's
help.74 One might introduce the idea of the ‘Promethean gift’ to illuminate this aspect of Grin's prose.
The altruistic aim of bringing light into the life of suffering people is the main theme of ‘Proisshestvie v kvartire g-zhi Seriz’, ‘Iva’, ‘Korabli v Lisse’ and many other works. In the first of these, for example, the wonderful magician Cagliostro helps a young woman to overcome anxiety over her husband who is serving at the front and of whom she has heard nothing for many months. His series of skilful illusions brings the woman joy and peace of mind as she realises that her beloved is safe and will surely soon return.
Prometheanism is also to be found at the heart of the poem ‘Li’. The supernatural figure of Li is described by the narrator as quasi-divine, and endowed with magical gifts.75 Li appears several times to the narrator who is also the main character, helping him and, by his own good example, encouraging and teaching him to help people in his turn. The greatest of Grin's visionaries, Drud (‘Blistaiushchii mir’) and the magician in ‘Uchenik charodeia’, are, in turn, preoccupied with the idea of bringing happiness to the whole of humanity. 76 This, once again, brings to mind the mythical figure of Prometheus, an image of great importance to the understanding of Grin’s moral views, as will be outlined in the final part.
t is clear that Grin’s altruistic characters act for the sake of the happiness of others. The question remains as to why in so doing these altruists very often sacrifice their own happiness. To find an answer we must turn once again to the history of philosophical thought and its treatment of the relation between virtue and happiness.
These two concepts have been linked by numerous thinkers as early as pre-Socratic times. Socrates himself was convinced that to be happy is to enjoy life without pricks of conscience. The same idea certainly lay at the basis of Plato's teachings and stoic ethics.77 Seneca, the most renowned of the stoic teachers, in turn, explained that virtue is the only
74 In ‘Vozvrashchenie “Chaiki”’, for example, Cherniak, the brave and Knight-like individual, acts entirely selflessly
in helping to regain someone else’s debt, and at the end he has to escape from the people whom he has so generously helped since he does not want to be thanked and accept gratitude.
75 Li has counterparts in other works in the person of Bam-Gran, the magician who is present in ‘Iva’ and
‘Fandango’.
76 Even if their utopian visions of a humanity saved from suffering are occasionally naïve, the deeds are undoubtedly
poignant rather than unreasonable.
77 For more detailed description of the ancients’ ethics, see Tatarkiewicz (1985:539-44).
unerring source of happiness.78 Therefore, men who pursue happiness should care only for developing this sphere of life and pay little or no attention to anything else.
Tatarkiewicz avers that stoic eudaimonism was built upon this very understanding of the moral life, and juxtaposes it with the entirely different, but equally influential, ideas of Christianity. Christian preachers and philosophers have claimed that in our earthly existence we should not expect happiness, but focus our attention instead on salvation and the afterlife. Consequently, according to Christianity, happiness is hardly achievable and indeed highly uncertain in this life; instead, it should be seen as reward in heaven for living a morally righteous life on earth.79
Spinoza presented another variation of this concept. He claimed in his Ethica that virtue and happiness are entirely equal one to the other.80 Similarly, Rousseau was of the opinion that virtue is the cheapest way of achieving happiness.81 Furthermore, as Tatarkiewicz has pointed out, the most common way of interpreting the notion of happiness in philosophy relies on the idea that our conscience dictates the need to obey moral principles. Thus, people do not generally consider the virtuous life as something which leads to happiness, but rather as being only loosely connected with it. This is certainly also the case in Grin’s Weltanschauung.
For the writer who is a maximalist in terms of moral deontology all utilitarian-orientated calculations of happiness, such as those offered by John Stuart Mill and Bentham,82 should be put aside. Conversely, Grin’s stance seems accord with Kant’s view that, even though virtue is not likely to bring happiness, it is undoubtedly necessary for enjoying life.83
On the other hand, Grin’s understanding of the relation between virtue and happiness resembles La Mettrie’s views presented in Machine Man:
there is so much pleasure in doing good, in recognizing and appreciating what one receives, so much satisfaction in practising virtue, in being gentle, humane, kind, charitable, compassionate and
78
See: Seneca (Letters, XCII, LXXXVII,LXXXV) and Epictetus (Discourses, book 2, chapter 8).
79 Matthew 5:3-12 ‘3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 4 Blessed are they that
mourn: for they shall be comforted. (...) 10 Blessed are they that have been persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.’ See also Tatarkiewicz (1985:545).
80 ‘Beatitudo non est virtutis proemium, sed ipsa virtus’ (E5, proposition 42). 81
Cf. Tatarkiewicz (1985:545) and Dent (1992:240-3).
82 For more discussion on the calculations of happiness in the history of philosophy, see Blackburn (2001:71). 83 Ziniewicz presents Kant's ethics in the following way: ‘According to Kant, the end or purpose of human life is not
happiness which amounts to the fulfilment of our desires and the satisfaction of our inclinations. The end of human life is to develop humanity within oneself, i.e. to develop a good will’ (Zieniewicz, (http://www.fred.net/tzaka/kant2.html). This seems to be in accordance with Grin’s moral views. See also: Stevenson and Haberman (2004:133-4).
generous (for this one word includes all the virtues), that I consider as sufficiently punished any one who is unfortunate enough not to have been born virtuous. (quoted in: Airaksinen 1995:33)
In Grin’s oeuvre, taking a decision that is likely to limit a character's happiness requires some higher imperative than the rule of pursuing happiness, which is said to be so natural to all human beings. To choose virtue instead of happiness may be seen as a self-sacrifice, but it is not necessarily so. For Grinian heroes morality is more valuable than the desire for a happy life and satisfaction.84