The Dominion. MONDAY, NOVEMBEB 21, 1910. TOLSTOY, THE RUSSIAN.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 979, 21 November 1910, Page 4

The Dominion. MONDAY, NOVEMBEB 21, 1910. TOLSTOY, THE RUSSIAN.

In thinking of the great man whose sick bed has been the centre of world-wide interest during tho last few days, and in trying to decide whether he was an intellectual and spiritual giant or just a stupendous freak, many people overlook the fact that he was a Russian. The result of this oversight is that he is not , seen in that real- setting without which it' is impossible to begin to understand him. But, as no figure can be seen without any background, it follows that to the popular mind Tolstoy appears with an environment quite, different from that which actually surrounded him. He is thought of rather as a Briton than a Russian. This is worse than ■ not to understand; it'is to misunderstand. Even if one regards him as a European, the mistake.is not mended. His countrymen are profoundly right when they -speak of "Russia and Europe," instead df "Russia and the rest of Europe." His characteristic art, his extreme doctrines, his strange conduct belong as much to his country as to himself. All this has been clearly shown by Mr. Havelook Ellis in his. book The New Spirit. He points .out. that it was Tourgenee who turned tho Russian novel in the direction of peasant life, and that the study of the peasantry, who are by far the largest element in the population, has occupied all the great Russian novelists. Direct simplicity and minute realism are common to them all. The passion of pity arid the yearning for comradeship are national traits. Communism to the Russian' peasant is not a new gorpcl, but an ancient and living tradition. - The belief' that tha land must be the property of all is not Radicalism in that country, but Conservatism. Indifference to Statemade laws is deeply • rooted in tho general mind. The remarkable sectarian movements are, in one aspect, emphatic assertions of old racial instincts; their first great development came.by way of passive revolt against the Westernising policy of Peter the Great, whom pious and patriotic' Russians regarded as Antichrist. It may almost bo said that tho Doukhobors were Tolstoyans before Tolstoy. His contemporary and friend, the peasant Soutaef, anticipated him in all his mpsfc characteristic, religious, economic, and political doctrines. Mr. Aylmer Maude notes tho influence of the Slavophils on Tolstoy's thought— "they and he alike regard Russia as su.pc.rior to, and more truly Christian than, the rest of the world, and concludo that sho should therefore not follow in the footsteps of Western constitutionalism." It docs not follow for all this that Tolstoy was a plagiarist. He was really one of the most original of men. Ho did his own thinking, and it is not to bo demanded of any man that he should create his own mind. Tolstoy had a Russian mind, and it was bound to arrive at Russian conclusions. His genius for expression has made him the adequate voice of his country's soul. That is his greatness. Somothing of tho wide difference between English and Russian sentiment is expressed in an eloquent and grateful letter written to Tolstoy not long ago'by. Mr. Maude : "You are definitely anti-political," writes tho' great Russian's biographer, "whereas it is bred in my bones to feel that tho work done by I'ym and Hampdon, and Washington and Abraham Lincoln, and in general tho attempt tho Western world has' made ■at Constitutional Government—faulty and imperfect as it is, and slow as has been its progress—was not an ignoble effort, and hns not utterly failed; and that that path may yet lead on to a juster and kindlier society than the world has yet eeen."

The difference between Tolstoy and his>,English-speaking readers is indeed bred in the bono, and yet the clear recognition of that difference does but make.him seem nearer and greater—no longer a prodigy, but ,a representative man. . .