Prince Vladimir Meschersky’s 'Memoirs' – the Poetics, the Portrait of the Russian Elite, the Vision of Polish Culture.

Prince Vladimir Meschersky (1839–1914) is one of the most renowned characters of Russian social life of the second half of the 19th century. He was conservative, a social activist, publisher, publicist, author of numerous literary works. Many negative opinions have survived him, with his reputation being probably a result of his reportedly homosexual orientation. Prince Meschersky has his place in history as a chronicler of his era by the way of his Memoirs, a work this study is devoted to, and a subject of academic research for the first time. Chapter 1 of this study, titled ‘The Poetics’, analyses the text’s structure and its narrative composition, identifying the features specific for the memoir genre. The work’s title already suggests the genre it falls into, namely a collection of memories. Its title and the dedication point to the combination of two perspectives, namely ‘self’ as the other, and ‘self’ and the other, that is a combination of autobiography and historism. The Prince’s memoirs consist of three parts, jointly spanning 45 years of his life. The basic themes of Memoirs stem from historical events and occurrences, as it was Meschersky’s ambition to faithfully render the social sentiments of his times, and voice his opinion on the most heated or strenuous moments of Russian political life. The memoirist frequently refers to himself as an ‘annalist’ (in the vein of traditional Russian annals or chronicles). His memoirs combine documentary material such as autobiographic texts, documents and commentaries, with elements of literary narration, including miniature stories, anecdotes, descriptions of nature, literary depictions or portraits. The temporal organization of Memoirs is not simple, with narration moving along several time planes. The work’s various itineraries and topoi lend it its vast breadth of interest, resulting with its monumental scope. First person narrative dominates throughout, hence the author, the narrator, and the protagonist are inextricably joined. They are various personifications of the biographic author’s ‘self’. The addressee images present in Memoirs vary including specific, abstract, and ‘internal’. The author’s narration is sometimes juxtaposed with ‘the other’s voice’, for instance by excerpts from correspondence and articles by various publicists. The second chapter, titled ‘The Portrait of the Russian Elite’ takes a close look at the memoirist’s figure, studying the way he portrays himself in his work. Initially, the Prince places himself in the family context, introducing himself as Nikolay Karamzin’s grandson, the heir and continuator of his intellectual legacy. Already in the opening pages of his work he depicts his parents, describing them as personalities lacking any flaws. His school time memories are divided into two parts comprising his education in preparatory classes and in the Imperial School of Jurisprudence. Meschersky perceives his initial stage of education as the continuation of family life, whereas the School of Jurisprudence appears a place and time of army like discipline. The protagonist identifies himself with his school friends, and emphasizes that regardless of the poor education level he was granted the opportunity for moral growth while at the school. Upon his graduation, the Prince was hoping for an active future working for the State, yet the official’s work caused him merely disappointment. In Memoirs, the clerical, official setting serves as a background for his own positive self-image. He prides himself most on his closeness and intimacy with the tsar’s court. He endeavours to portray himself as a person invariably welcome in the tsar’s closest circle. Meschersky’s true calling turned out to be his publicist’s work. Through his own magazine, Grazhdanin, the Prince attempted to influence the reality around him, make waves within the Russian society. It was on the pages of this magazine, that he relentlessly and adamantly raged against liberalism, and harshly criticizing eminent officials, thus frequently falling into conflict with censorship. Meschersky’s Grazhdanin was one of the most outspoken conservative institutions of reformed Russia. As the heir to Nikolay Karamzin’s literary tradition, Meschersky already in his early works condemned the dishonesty and corruption of state officials, employing satirical features in his texts. Being a representative of the literary circle, he participated in a publishing project known as Contribution, where he published a satirical story titled ‘Sketches in Pencil. Selected from the Contemporary Etudes “My Friends”. Piotr Afanasyevich Suslikov’ The Prince also held a literary salon which with time evolved into a political circle. He was wholeheartedly dedicated to social and political matters, wishing to be a rock of support for the last two tsars, their confidante. The third part of the memoirs is dominated by his recollections of meetings and conversations with high-ranking officials and ministers. Throughout his Memoirs he examines and analyses the changes taking place in Russia from a conservative’s footing. To him, unlimited autocracy seemed the ultimate form of government, and the nobility its foundation. He spoke out as a dedicated supporter of slow and well thought-out reforms and of the Russian Eastern Orthodox Church’s active role in the education and enlightenment of the common people. His view on women was anti-progressive, as in his opinion the woman’s crucial role, the sole purpose of her life, rested in utter devotion to family life, whereas taken out of its context the woman lost her prime value. A major portion of the memoirs is devoted to analysing the course of Russian foreign affairs at the time. Meschersky describes events related to the Crimean war and the foreign politics of Alexander II in the 1860s and 1870s towards Prussia and the Eastern Question. Vladimir Meschersky is self-critical, displays a sense of selfirony, notices the influence of the environment on the shaping of his personality. A man of his era, he is not given to verbalizing his bodily experiences or longings. Literary portrayals constitute an important structural element of his Memoirs. The entire work holds eight depictions of literary personae of the times, all of them discussed at length in Chapter 2 of this paper. The writers depicted include Aleksey Apukhtin, Michael Katkov, Aleksey Tolstoy, Pyotr Vyazemski, Fyodor Dostoyevski, Ivan Turgenev, and Ivan Aksakov. The writers listed here were mostly people of similar beliefs and sentiments to Meschersky’s, friends of the family’s, or fellowcontributors to Grazhdanin. Due to their mutual friendship, Meschersky’s memoirs largely hold their favourable accounts. The Prince also portrayed many eminent politicians, both his political sympathizers, and adversaries. This study looks closely at three such portrayals, namely of Pyotr Valujev, Mikhail Loris-Melikov, and Dmitry Tolstoy. The literary depictions of politicians are far more varied than those of writers and publicists. One of the main protagonists of Memoirs is Alexander III, shown not only as the perfect tsar whole-heartedly devoted to his beloved Russia and the Russian people, but also a man virtually without flaws, beyond any criticism. Male literary portraits prevail in Memoirs, yet some female ones may also be encountered, even though there are but a few examples of those, primarily belonging to women from aristocratic circles. Chapter 3, ‘The Vision of Polish Culture’, examines closely the Prince’s attitude to Polish mentality, the Polish state, and the western territories of the Russian Empire. Holding Nikolay Karamzin as his ultimate authority in terms of ideology, the author acquired his grandfather’s ultra conservative view on Polish claims for independence, interpreting them as betrayal of ‘Slavonicity’, the Russian tsar, and the Eastern Orthodox religion. In his eyes, the Poles were an arrogant, rebellious people, opposing supreme authority. After Nicholas I’s death, revolutionary circumstances occurred in Russia, facilitating intensification of movements aimed at uniting the Poles, led in Petersburg by Zygmunt Sierakowski. At the time, the Polish quest for independence was supported by the Russian revolutionary centre located in London, at the Free Russian Printing House and at the Kolokol’s (Russian revolutionary gazette brought to life by Alexander Herzen) headquarters. To appease the revolutionary spirits, Alexander II made some concessions towards Poland in the beginning of his reign, harshly criticized by Meschersky. The author explained the context of the Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolayevich’s arrival to Warsaw, and pointed out the mistakes he believed the government and the viceroy made that resulted in the January Uprising. Meschersky opted for strong government, and spoke out as a passionate supporter of Mikhail Muravyov’s policy known as Russification that led to the defeat of the upheaval in the Northwestern Krai. The Prince even paid a visit to the Northwestern Krai to learn about the living conditions of the local people, their problems, and their education, as the latter was effectively used as a means of indoctrination of Polish, Ukrainian, and Belarusian people and fostering Russian culture among them. During his trip he also enjoyed the opportunity of meeting numerous Russian patriots, who, just like him, supported Russification. Memoirs were published during tsar Nicholas II’s reign and were the Prince’s retort to the liberalization of Russia’s political system, an expression of his major concern for its future.Książka dofinansowana ze środków Katedry Badań Filologicznych „Wschód – Zachód” oraz Wydziału Filologicznego Uniwersytetu w BiałymstokuМещерский В.П., 30-летие издания газеты журнала «Гражданин», Санкт-Петербург 1901.Мещерский В.П., В улику времени, wyd. 2, Санкт-Петербург 1880.Мещерский В.П., Великий и священный день, w: В.П. Мещерский, За великую Россию. Против либерализма, zestawienie i komentarze Ю.В. Климаков, red. О.А. Платонов, Москва 2010.Мещерский В.П., Воспоминания о Федоре Михайловиче Достоевском, w: За великую Россию. Против либерализма, zestawienie i komentarze Ю.В. Климаков, red. О.А. Платонов, Москва 2010.Мещерский В.П., Вперед или назад?, «Гражданин», 10.01.1872, nr 2.Мещерский В.П., Голос правды о наших судах, w: За великую Россию. Против либерализма, zestawienie i komentarze Ю.В. Климаков, red. О.А. Платонов, Москва 2010.Мещерский В.П., Граф Алексей Константинович Толстой, w: За великую Россию. Против либерализма, zestawienie i komentarze Ю.В. Климаков, red. О.А. Платонов, Москва 2010.Мещерский В.П., Дневник за 1882 год, Санкт-Петербург 1883.Мещерский В.П., Дневник за 1891 год, Санкт-Петербург 1892.Мещерский В.П., Дневник, «Гражданин», 07.07.1909, nr 49-50.Мещерский В.П., Дневник, «Гражданин», 6.04.1894, nr 95.Obrazy drogi w literaturze i sztuce, red. J. Adamowski, K. Smyk, Lublin 2012.Викторович В.А., К истории одного объявления в «Гражданине» 1873 г., w: Ф. М. Достоевский: Материалы и исследования, t. 7, Ленинград 1987.Фединский Ю.И., Материальные условия издания русской буржуазной газеты, «Вестник Московского университета», seria: «Журналистика», 1980, nr 2.Зайончковский П.А., Российское самодержавие в конце XIX столетия (Политическая реакция 80-х – начала 90-х годов), Москва 1970.Eberhardt P., Polski panslawizm jako idea geopolityczna, „Przegląd Polityczny”, 2014, nr 7.Бахтин М.М., Эстетика словесного творчества, Москва 1986.Викторович В.А., Дополнения к комментарию, w: Ф.М. Достоевский. Материалы и исследования, t. 10, Санкт-Петербург 1992.Heller M., Historia Imperium Rosyjskiego, tłum. E. Melech, T. Kaczmarek, Warszawa 2009.Mickiewicz A., Literatura słowiańska wykładana w Kolegium Francuzkiem, t. 1: Rok pierwszy, 1840–1841, tłum. F. Wrotnowski, Poznań 1865.Mucha B., Rosyjscy słuchacze paryskich prelekcji Adama Mickiewicza o literaturze słowiańskiej, „Pamiętnik Literacki”, 1994, nr 85/3.Mickiewicz A., Literatura słowiańska, kurs drugi, w: Dzieła. Wydanie rocznicowe 1798−1998, t. IX, tłum. L. Płoszewski, oprac. J. Maślanka, Warszawa 1997.Mickiewicz – Turcja – Europa, materiały zebrane po międzynarodowej konferencji naukowej, Stambuł 24-26.11.2008, red. J. Pietrzak-Thébault, Warszawa 2013.Кудряшев В.Н., А.И. Герцен и М.А. Бакунин о «польском вопросе» (40-60-е гг. XIX в.), «Вестник Томского государственного университета», 2009, nr 326.Mosse W.E., Imperial Favourite: V.P. Meshchersky and the „Grazhdanin”, w: The Slavonic and East European Review, 1981, vol. 59, nr 4.Леонов М.М., Mieszczerski Włodzimierz, w: Idee w Rosji. Leksykon rosyjsko-polsko-angielski, red. J. Kurczak, Łódź 2007.Trentowski B.F., Chowanna czyli system pedagogiki narodowe jako umiejętności wychowania, nauki i oświaty, słowem wykształcenia naszej młodzieży, t. 1, Wrocław 1970.Kuziak M., Bizancjum Mickiewicza (na podstawie literatury słowiańskiej), w: Bizancjum, Prawosławie, Romantyzm. Tradycja wschodnia w kulturze XIX wieku, red. J. Ławski, K. Korotkich, Białystok 2004.Воронин А., Записка о владельческих городах и местечках Юго-западного края, Kijów 1869.Grużewski T., Polska i Rosja: wybór pism, zestawienie i wstęp P. Dąbrowski, Kraków 2013.Jaspers K., Sytuacje graniczne, tłum. A. Staniewska, M. Skwieciński, w: R. Rudziński, Jaspers, Warszawa 1978.История русского романа, t. 2, red. Б.П. Городецкий, Н.И. Пруцков, Москва–Ленинград 1964.Grigorova M., Chrzest Bułgarii i Polski między chrześcijańskim Wschodem i Zachodem. Obrazy Rzymu i Konstantynopola, w: Bizancjum. Prawosławie. Romantyzm. Tradycja wschodnia w kulturze XIX wieku, red. J. Ławski, K. Korotkich, Białystok 2004.Лермонтовская энциклопедия, red. В.А. Мануйлов, Москва 1981.Чванов М.А., Русский крест, Москва 2012.Николина Н.А., Поэтика русской автобиографической прозы, Москва 2002.Cat-Mackiewicz S., Dostojewski, Kraków 2013.Гарин И.И., Многоликий Достоевский, Москва 1997.Гитович И., «Найти свою жизнь и ее значение»: мемуары и автобиографическая память (некоторые вопросы к проблеме), w: Studia Rossica XX: Memuarystyka rosyjska i jej konteksty kulturowe, t. 1, red. A. Wołodźko-Butkiewicz, L. Łucewicz, Warszawa 2010.Kopaliński W., Słownik mitów i tradycji kultury, Warszawa 1985.Ключевский В.О., Статьи по русской культуре. Два воспитания, w: tegoż, Сочинения в 9-и тт., t. 9, Москва 1990.Карнаухов Д.В., Исторический миф как фактор стереотипизации взаимного восприятия поляков и русских, w: Полонии в Сибири, России и в мире: проблемы изучения, Иркутск 2006.Мещерский В.П., Нигилизм — порождение либерально-чиновничьего Петербурга, w: В.П. Мещерский, За великую Россию. Против либерализма, zestawienie i komentarze Ю.В. Климаков, red. О.А. Платонов, Москва 2010.Droga w języku i kulturze. Analizy antropologiczne, red. J. Adamowski, K. Smyk, Lublin 2011.Вяземский П.А., Стихотворения, red. В.С. Киселев, wstęp Л.Я. Гинзбург, Ленинград 1986.Исторический словарь, red. А.С. Орлов, Н.Г. Георгиева, В.А. Георгиев, Москва 2012.Джаншиев Г.А., Эпоха великих реформ. Исторические справки. В 2-х тт., t. 1, Москва 2008.Клеман М.К., Летопись жизни и творчества И.С. Тургенева, Москва 1934.Kołodziej B., Emigracja polska po powstaniach w XIX wieku, „Zeszyty Historyczne”, Częstochowa, 2010, z. XI.Федоров Ф., Мемуары как проблема, w: Studia Rossica XX: Memuarystyka rosyjska i jej konteksty kulturowe, t. 1, red. A. Wołodźko-Butkiewicz, L. Łucewicz, Warszawa 2010.Bezwiński A., Rosyjska myśl filozoficzna czasów romantyzmu wobec Bizancjum, w: Bizancjum. Prawosławie. Romantyzm. Tradycja wschodnia w kulturze XIX wieku, red. J. Ławski, K. Korotkich, Białystok 2004.Феоктистов Е.М., Воспоминания: За кулисами политики и литературы. 1848–1896, Ленинград 1929.Кони А.Ф., Воспоминания о писателях, Москва 1989.Dillon V., Car Aleksander III, Londyn 1893.Мещерский В.П., Наброски карандашом. Из современных этюдов «Мои друзья». Петр Афанасьевич Сусликов, «Библиотека Максима Машкова», http://az.lib.ru/m/mesherskij_w_p/text_1874_suslikov_oldorfo.shtml, 1.03.2016.Уртминцева М.Г., Жанр литературного портрета в русской литературе второй половины XIX века: генезис, поэтика, типология. Автореферат диссертации на соискание ученой степени доктора филологических наук, Нижний Новгород 2005.Bieńczyk M., Melancholia: o tych, co nigdy nie odnajdą straty, Warszawa 2012.Orzeszkowa E., Listy zebrane, oprac. E. Jankowski, t. 3, Wrocław 1956.Аксаков И.С., Еще о польских притязаниях на Западно-Русский край, w: И.С. Аксаков, Полное собрание сочинений, t. 3: Польский вопрос и Западно-Русское дело. Еврейский вопрос. 1860–1886, Москва 1886.Далин В.М., Последние Романовы и князь Мещерский, w: Вопросы истории внешней политики СССР и международных отношений. Сборник статей памяти академика Владимира Михайловича Хвостова, Москва 1976.Ławski J., „Odkrywca słowiańskiego kontynentu”. O wykładzie inauguracyjnym Mickiewicza w Collège de France, w: Prelekcje paryskie Adama Mickiewicza wobec tradycji kultury polskiej i europejskiej: próba nowego spojrzenia: praca zbiorowa, red. M. Kalinowska, J. Ławski, M. Bizior-Dombrowska, Warszawa 2011.Thompson E., Trubadurzy imperium. Literatura rosyjska i kolonializm, tłum. A. Sierszulska, Kraków 2015.Szwarc A., Czy Wielopolski miał rację?, „Mówią wieki. Magazyn historyczny”, Warszawa 01.2013, nr 1/13 (636).Pogranicza, Kresy, Wschód a idee Europy, seria II: „Wiktor Choriew”, red. A. Janicka, G. Kowalski, Ł. Zabielski, Białystok 2013.Łysakowski P., Otto von Bicmarck. Życie i polityka zagraniczna „żelaznego kanclerza”, Warszawa 1997.Dobieszewski J., Słowo wstępne, w: Wokół słowianofilstwa, red. J. Dobieszewski, Warszawa 1998.Поляков С.В., Очерк истории Учебного комитета Русской Православной Церкви, «Журнал Московской патриархии», http://www.srcc.msu.ru/bib_roc/jmp/07/03-07/09.htm, 09.03.2014.Шаповалов М., Тютчев и Вяземский, «Москва», 2003, nr 12.Леонов М.М., «Духовные сыновья»: Интимный патронат в салоне В.П. Мещерского, «Известия Самарского научного центра Российской академии наук», t. 12, Самара 2010, nr 2.Kieniewicz S., Powstanie styczniowe, Warszawa 2009.Andrzejewski M., Od Bismarcka do Schrodera. Portrety niemieckich kanclerzy, Gdańsk 2013.Дронов И.Е., «Капитал, еврей, интеллигент» – образ городской цивилизации в ментальности поземельного дворянства конца XIX века (по материалам журнала «Гражданин»), «Новая локальная история», http://www.newlocal-history. com/node/972, 02.07.2016.Сушко А.В., Духовные семинарии в России (до 1917 г.), «Вопросы истории», 1996, nr 11-12.Батюто А.И., Тургенев и некоторые писатели антинигилистического направления, w: Тургенев и его современники, red. М.П. Алексеев, Ленинград 1977.Jerszow W., Osobliwości w wyjaśnianiu antynomicznych problemów Prawobrzeża Ukrainy polskojęzycznej literatury pamiętnikarskiej doby romantyzmu, w: Pogranicza, cezury, zmierzchy Czesława Miłosza, red. A. Janicka, K. Korotkich, J. Ławski, Białystok 2012.Михайловский Н.К., Сочинения, t. 1, Санкт-Петербург 1896.„Górnoślązak”, Katowice 20.02.1908, r. VII, nr 42.Барсуков Н., Жизнь и труды М.П. Погодина, t. 16, Санкт-Петербург 1902.Карамзин М.Н., История государства Российского, t. 1, Москва 1989.Bezwiński A., Iwan Kiriejewski – krytyk i myśliciel: korzenie rosyjskiego nacjonalizmu, Toruń 1993.M. Murawiow (Wieszatiel). Wspomnienia, red. P. Wieczorkiewicz, tłum., oprac., wstęp Z. Podgórzec, Warszawa 1990.Зайончковский П.А., Правительственный аппарат самодержавной России, Москва 1978.Прохоров Г., Документальность и художественность как потенциальные грани мемуарных произведений (А.Т. Болотов – Ф.М. Достоевский – Б. Пильняк), w: Studia Rossica XX: Memuarystyka rosyjska i jej konteksty kulturowe, t. 1, red. A. Wołodźko-Butkiewicz, L. Łucewicz, Warszawa 2010.Смирнов В.Д., Аксаковы. Их жизнь и литературная деятельность. Биографические очерки, Санкт-Петербург 1895.Czermińśka M., Postawa autobiograficzna, w: Studia o narracji, red. J. Błoński, Wrocław 1982.Żukowski W., list do P. Wiaziemskiego, 23.07/5.08.1848, http://gosudarstvo. voskres.ru/zhukovsk.htm, 16.03.2014.Czermińska M., Autobiograficzny trójkąt. Świadectwo, wyznanie, wyzwanie, Kraków 2003.Borkowska G., Rosja Orzeszkowej, w: Obraz Rosji w literaturze polskiej XX wieku, red. A. Jarzyna, Z. Kopeć, Poznań 2014.Baluk W., Koncepcje polityki narodowościowej Ukrainy. Tradycje i nowoczesność, Wrocław 2002.Хорев В.А., Имагология и изучение русско-польских литературных связей, w: Поляки и русские в глазах друг друга, red. И.Е. Адельгейм, Б.В. Носов, В.А. Хорев, Москва 2000.Sturrock J., Nowy wzorzec autobiografii, w: Autobiografia, red. M. Czermińska, Gdańsk 2009.Wiśniewska L., Kobiety w literaturze (i mężczyźni), w: Kobiety w literaturze, red. L. Wiśniewska, Bydgoszcz 1999.Andrusiewicz A., Carowie i cesarze Rosji, Warszawa 2001.Реєнт О.П., Українсько-білоруські взаємини у XIX – на початку XX ст.: перiод становлення, «Український історичний журнал», 2008, nr 1.de Lazari A., Polskie i rosyjskie problemy z rosyjskością, Łódź 2009.Махонина С.Я., Русская легальная журналистика XX в. (1905 – февраля 1917) (опыт системного исследования), w: Из истории русской журналистики начала XX века, Москва 1984.Слонимский Л.З., О великой лжи нашего времени. К.П. Победоносцев и князь В.П. Мещерский, Санкт-Петербург 1908.Русская философия. Словарь, red. М.А. Маслина, Москва 1995.Афанасьев А.К., Присяжные заседатели в России 1866–1885 гг., w: Великие реформы в России 1856–1874, red. Л.Г. Захарова, Б. Эклофа, Дж. Бушнелла, Москва 1992.Галиуллина Д.М., Проблема изучения мемуаров в отечественной исторической мысли, «Ученые записки казанского государственного университета», t. 148, księga 4, Казань 2006.Ковачичова О., Генологические аспекты мемуаров, w: Studia Rossica XX: Memuarystyka rosyjska i jej konteksty kulturowe, t. 2, red. A. Wołodźko-Butkiewicz, L. Łucewicz, Warszawa 2010.Sobieska A., Gamajun z Paryża – prorok rewolucji, czyli Aleksander Błok o Mickiewiczowskic