The Superfluous Man

When reading various works of Russian Literature from the 19th century, you come across similar story lines about a superfluous man. A story of a narcissistic man who has no care for others and who continues to manipulate woman. You will notice that there are different interpretations of the superfluous man throughout Russian literature. Some represent the superfluous man as a selfish, self-centered man who manipulates and takes advantage of women he gets involved with and others use this character as a form of entertainment. Specifically, many choose to praise the superfluous man through their works instead of addressing the real issue. Although it is never said, the superfluous man is represented as the typical Russian man or even the “perfect” man. It’s all about the “manly” image shown through this character.  To convey the views of the superfluous man, Russian literature authors provide different representations that praise the superfluous man. Superfluous men are known as coming from wealth and are usually educated, in literature these men are praised on their appealing characteristics rather than their monstrous traits.

In Russian literature,  the superfluous man is seen as a representation of the kind of man every other man would want to be like. For example, the average man in Russian literature is represented as a charming wealthy man who is also superfluous, putting these characteristics into one man gives off the impression that this kind of lifestyle is okay and should be respected because of gender roles, the men in this society have all the power and control over the woman and this was normal for them. This character is shown time and time again in literature and other works written about literature. In the article “The Heyday of the ‘superfluous man’ in Russia”, Frank Friedeberg Seeley provides information on why the Superfluous man is such a known character. “The ‘superfluous man’ is one of the more familiar figures in the social and literary history of Russia, in the history of the intelligentsia, among who has played so many parts- from the most conspicuous to the quite obscure.” As told in this article, the superfluous man is known as a “familiar figure”, in other words it’s common for a Russian literature author or artist to somehow represent this character in their work.  Not only are we seeing the superfluous in literature but we are also including them in the “intelligentsia” of Russia, Intelligentsia is a group of intellectuals that have an influence on culture, socially or politically. Superfluous men are known as coming from wealth and are usually educated, in literature these men are praised on their appealing characteristics rather than their monstrous characteristics.

In other Russian literature works, the average ‘superfluous man’ can be represented through a specific character and carried out throughout a story. In the article “What is Oblomovism?”, which tells the famous story of the novel character Oblomov who was written as a superfluous man. By discussing the traits of Oblomov, the author Dobrolyubov shows this character as a common face in history by presenting as a powerful figure. “But in this article Dobrolyubov seizes Oblomovism as the keyword to describe Russian life, or more precisely the life of the landowning which had produced all heros of Russian literature so far.” In this article the superfluous man is known as a “hero” of this time period representing how life should be. The author goes on to mention that this character deserved to have their own novel written about him showing his significance in history. Comparing the average superfluous man of this time as being very similar in characteristics to Oblomov. Dobrolyubov explains that the superfluous man is necessary in mentioning Russian literature and history, praising the superfluous man gives off the impression that this lifestyle is okay for men.

As we come across Russian literature from the 19th century, the superfluous man is represented in common ways, we notice their story involves romanticism and their relationship with women. By comparing two characters from two different works of literature, there’s a similar storyline between both men, they’re superfluous. When writing Russian love novels we notice a common pattern between the male character involved with their beloved, they’re usually superfluous, deceiving men. In an excerpt from the “The Superfluous Rake” by David D. Eidelman we see different forms of this character type. “The superfluous men all subscribe to the fallacy that talent is inborn and effortless, that only the drudges do the work. They lack a practical work ethic, adopting instead the work sentiments espoused by romantic prototypes in literature.” In other words, this article actually represents the superfluous man as something he should be known for instead of praising their flaws.  

Considering what is known about the superfluous man himself, there might be a question between logic and reality vs. myth and the truth. To ask the question of is this apart of a problematic theory or is this just how life is. Social researcher David Apter expressed his thoughts of this theory, “With terror and mortality representing the outer limits of the state, mytho/ logics is the defining order within them. Text is structure, events are narrative. The state provides the dramatic frame.” This article is explaining the difference between what we perceive as something real and something mythical. The superfluous man is in fact a real character but at the same time he is perceived as a fake image of what we thought Russian society was like. The superfluous man is still known as what is seen through literature but clearly there is more to the story that is not full understood.

Not every superfluous man is a narcissist or a complete rake. Superfluous men can at times be hidden underneath what seems like a respectful nobleman or the perfect husband figure. In 19th century Russian society, men are a lot like what is seen today, specifically when they show love for their beloved but end up breaking their heart. Ivan Turgenev expresses this through his superfluous character Sanin. Sanin fell in love with the beautiful Gemma, he showed his love for Gemma on multiple occasions. He defended her honor and dueled a German officer when he disrespected Gemma and Sanin even vowed to sell all of his estates to support Gemma after he proposed to her. Sanin got caught up with another woman, Maria, who seduced Sanin into having an affair with her. Not only did he cheat on the love of his life with another woman, but he ended the engagement through a letter because he couldn’t even face Gemma to tell her the truth about the affair. Although Sanin seemed to love Gemma in the beginning and he still did even though he cheated, he did something unforgivable which to many would make him superfluous. He did indeed act in a superfluous manner, Sanin broke his promise to Gemma and it cost him his wife and his life.

 

                                                     Works Cited

 

Gifford, Henry. “The Road to the Vyborg Side’ and ‘In Search of the New Man,.” Nineteenth-Century Literature Criticism, edited by Laurie Lanzen Harris and Sheila Fitzgerald, vol. 5, Gale, 1984. Literature Resource Center, https://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/H1420025293/LitRC?u=cuny_ccny&sid=LitRC&xid=ad3e78b8. Accessed 12 Nov. 2018. Originally published in The Hero of His Time: A Theme in Russian Literature, by Henry Gifford, Edward Arnold & Co., 1950, pp. 133-153.

 

Seeley, Frank Friedeberg. “The Heyday of the ‘Superfluous Man’ in Russia.” The Slavonic and East European Review, vol. 31, no. 76, 1952, pp. 92–112. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/4204406.

 

Eidelman, Dawn D. “Horace, the Superfluous Rake: Triangulation of Desire.” Nineteenth-Century Literature Criticism, edited by Lawrence J. Trudeau, vol. 328, Gale, 2017. Literature Resource Center, https://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/H1420122074/LitRC?u=cuny_ccny&sid=LitRC&xid=b2d44320. Accessed 12 Nov. 2018. Originally published in George Sand and the Nineteenth-Century Russian Love-Triangle Novels, Bucknell UP, 1994, pp. 93-129.

 

APTER, DAVID E. “The New Mytho/Logics and the Specter of Superfluous Man.” Social Research, vol. 52, no. 2, 1985, pp. 269–307. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/40970371.

 

Mullet, Etienne. “THE SUPERFLUOUS POSTULATE OF HUMAN RATIONALITY.” Rivista Internazionale Di Scienze Sociali, vol. 120, no. 3, 2012, pp. 269–288., www.jstor.org/stable/43830146.

 

Torrents of Spring