Short Stories by Chekhov
question but only complicated it, but that it was sometimes impossible
to get on without it. In the given case, for instance, one could not, of
course, bring an action against Von Koren. And this duel was so far good
in that it made it impossible for Laevsky to remain in the town
afterwards. He got a little drunk and interested in the game, and felt
at ease.
But when the sun had set and it grew dark, he was possessed by a feeling
of uneasiness. It was not fear at the thought of death, because while he
was dining and playing cards, he had for some reason a confident belief
that the duel would end in nothing; it was dread at the thought of
something unknown which was to happen next morning for the first time in
his life, and dread of the coming night. . . . He knew that the night
would be long and sleepless, and that he would have to think not only of
Von Koren and his hatred, but also of the mountain of lies which he had
to get through, and which he had not strength or ability to dispense
with. It was as though he had been taken suddenly ill; all at once he
lost all interest in the cards and in people, grew restless, and began
asking them to let him go home. He was eager to get into bed, to lie
without moving, and to prepare his thoughts for the night. Sheshkovsky
and the postal superintendent saw him home and went on to Von Koren's to
arrange about the duel.
Near his lodgings Laevsky met Atchmianov. The young man was breathless
and excited.
"I am looking for you, Ivan Andreitch," he said. "I beg you to come
quickly. . . ."
"Where?"
"Some one wants to see you, some one you don't know, about very
important business; he earnestly begs you to come for a minute. He wants
to speak to you of something. . . . For him it's a question of life and
death. . . ." In his excitement Atchmianov spoke in a strong Armenian
accent.
"Who is it?" asked Laevsky.
"He asked me not to tell you his name."
"Tell him I'm busy; to-morrow, if he likes. . . ."
"How can you!" Atchmianov was aghast. "He wants to tell you something
very important for you . . . very important! If you don't come,
something dreadful will happen."
"Strange . . ." muttered Laevsky, unable to understand why Atchmianov
was so excited and what mysteries there could be in this dull, useless
little town.
"Strange," he repeated in hesitation. "Come along, though; I don't
care."
Atchmianov walked rapidly on ahead and Laevsky followed him. They walked
down a street, then turned into an alley.
"What a bore this is!" said Laevsky.
"One minute, one minute . . . it's near."
Near the old rampart they went down a narrow alley between two empty
enclosures, then they came into a sort of large yard and went towards a
small house.
"That's Muridov's, isn't it?" asked Laevsky.
"Yes."
"But why we've come by the back yards I don't understand. We might have
come by the street; it's nearer. . . ."
"Never mind, never mind. . . ."
It struck Laevsky as strange, too, that Atchmianov led him to a back
entrance, and motioned to him as though bidding him go quietly and hold
his tongue.
"This way, this way . . ." said Atchmianov, cautiously opening the door
and going into the passage on tiptoe. "Quietly, quietly, I beg you . . .
they may hear."
He listened, drew a deep breath and said in a whisper:
"Open that door, and go in . . . don't be afraid."
Laevsky, puzzled, opened the door and went into a room with a low
ceiling and curtained windows.
There was a candle on the table.
"What do you want?" asked some one in the next room. "Is it you,
Muridov?"
Laevsky turned into that room and saw Kirilin, and beside him Nadyezhda
Fyodorovna.
He didn't hear what was said to him; he staggered back, and did not know
how he found himself in the street. His hatred for Von Koren and his
uneasiness--all had vanished from his soul. As he went home he waved his
right arm awkwardly and looked carefully at the ground under his feet,
trying to step where it was smooth. At home in his study he walked
backwards and forwards, rubbing his hands, and awkwardly shrugging his
shoulders and neck, as though his jacket and shirt were too tight; then
he lighted a candle and sat down to the table. . . . XVI
"The 'humane studies' of which you speak will only satisfy human thought
when, as they advance, they meet the exact sciences and progress side by
side with them. Whether they will meet under a new microscope, or in the
monologues of a new Hamlet, or in a new religion, I do not know, but I
expect the earth will be covered with a crust of ice before it comes to
pass. Of all humane learning the most durable and living is, of course,
the teaching of Christ; but look how differently even that is
interpreted! Some teach that we must love all our neighbours but make an
exception of soldiers, criminals, and lunatics. They allow the first to
be killed in war, the second to be isolated or executed, and the third
they forbid to marry. Other interpreters teach that we must love all our
neighbours without exception, with no distinction of plus or minus.
According to their teaching, if a consumptive or a murderer or an
epileptic asks your daughter in marriage, you must let him have her. If
cr?ins go to war against the physically and mentally healthy, don't
defend yourselves. This advocacy of love for love's sake, like art for
art's sake, if it could have power, would bring mankind in the long run
to complete extinction, and so would become the vastest crime that has
ever been committed upon earth. There are very many interpretations, and
since there are many of them, serious thought is not satisfied by any
one of them, and hastens to add its own individual interpretation to the
mass. For that reason you should never put a question on a philosophical
or so-called Christian basis; by so doing you only remove the question
further from solution."
The deacon listened to the zoologist attentively, thought a little, and
asked:
"Have the philosophers invented the moral law which is innate in every
man, or did God create it together with the body?"
"I don't know. But that law is so universal among all peoples and all
ages that I fancy we ought to recognise it as organically connected with
man. It is not invented, but exists and will exist. I don't tell you
that one day it will be seen under the microscope, but its organic
connection is shown, indeed, by evidence: serious affections of the
brain and all so-called mental diseases, to the best of my belief, show
themselves first of all in the perversion of the moral law."
"Good. So then, just as our stomach bids us eat, our moral sense bids us
love our neighbours. Is that it? But our natural man through self-love
opposes the voice of conscience and reason, and this gives rise to many
brain-racking questions. To whom ought we to turn for the solution of
those questions if you forbid us to put them on the philosophic basis?"
"Turn to what little exact science we have. Trust to evidence and the
logic of facts. It is true it is but little, but, on the other hand, it
is less fluid and shifting than philosophy. The moral law, let us
suppose, demands that you love your neighbour. Well? Love ought to show
itself in the removal of everything which in one way or another is
injurious to men and threatens them with danger in the present or in the
future. Our knowledge and the evidence tells us that the morally and
physically abnormal are a menace to humanity. If so you must struggle
against the abnormal; if you are not able to raise them to the normal
standard you must have strength and ability to render them harmless--that
is, to destroy them."
"So love consists in the strong overcoming the weak."
"Undoubtedly."
"But you know the strong crucified our Lord Jesus Christ," said the
deacon hotly.
"The fact is that those who crucified Him were not the strong but the
weak. Human culture weakens and strives to nullify the struggle for
existence and natural selection; hence the rapid advancement of the weak
and their predominance over the strong. Imagine that you succeeded in
instilling into bees humanitarian ideas in their crude and elementary
form. What would come of it? The drones who ought to be killed would
remain alive, would devour the honey, would corrupt and stifle the bees,
resulting in the predominance of the weak over the strong and the
degeneration of the latter. The same process is taking place now with
humanity; the weak are oppressing the strong. Among savages untouched by
civilisation the strongest, cleverest, and most moral takes the lead; he
is the chief and the master. But we civilised men have crucified Christ,
and we go on crucifying Him, so there is something lacking in us. . . .
And that something one ought to raise up in ourselves, or there will be
no end to these errors."
"But what criterion have you to distinguish the strong from the weak?"
"Knowledge and evidence. The tuberculous and the scrofulous are
recognised by their diseases, and the insane and the immoral by their
actions."
"But mistakes may be made!"
"Yes, but it's no use to be afraid of getting your feet wet when you are
threatened with the deluge!"
"That's philosophy," laughed the deacon.
"Not a bit of it. You are so corrupted by your seminary philosophy that
you want to see nothing but fog in everything. The abstract studies with
which your youthful head is stuffed are called abstract just because
they abstract your minds from what is obvious. Look the devil straight
in the eye, and if he's the devil, tell him he's the devil, and don't go
calling to Kant or Hegel for explanations."
The zoologist paused and went on:
"Twice two's four, and a stone's a stone. Here to-morrow we have a duel.
You and I will say it's stupid and absurd, that the duel is out of date,
that there is no real difference between the aristocratic duel and the
drunken brawl in the pot-house, and yet we shall not stop, we shall go
there and fight. So there is some force stronger than our reasoning. We
shout that war is plunder, robbery, atrocity, fratricide; we cannot look
upon blood without fainting; but the French or the Germans have only to
insult us for us to feel at once an exaltation of spirit; in the most
genuine way we shout 'Hurrah!' and rush to attack the foe. You will
invoke the blessing of God on our weapons, and our valour will arouse
universal and general enthusiasm. Again it follows that there is a
force, if not higher, at any rate stronger, than us and our philosophy.
We can no more stop it than that cloud which is moving upwards over the
sea. Don't be hypocritical, don't make a long nose at it on the sly; and
don't say, 'Ah, old-fashioned, stupid! Ah, it's inconsistent with
Scripture!' but look it straight in the face, recognise its rational
lawfulness, and when, for instance, it wants to destroy a rotten,
scrofulous, corrupt race, don't hinder it with your pilules and
misunderstood quotations from the Gospel. Leskov has a story of a
conscientious Danila who found a leper outside the town, and fed and
warmed him in the name of love and of Christ. If that Danila had really
loved humanity, he would have dragged the leper as far as possible from
the town, and would have flung him in a pit, and would have gone to save
the healthy. Christ, I hope, taught us a rational, intelligent,
practical love."
"What a fellow you are!" laughed the deacon. "You don't believe in
Christ. Why do you mention His name so often?"
"Yes, I do believe in Him. Only, of course, in my own way, not in yours.
Oh, deacon, deacon!" laughed the zoologist; he put his arm round the
deacon's waist, and said gaily: "Well? Are you coming with us to the
duel to-morrow?"
"My orders don't allow it, or else I should come."
"What do you mean by 'orders'?"