Status
Available
Call number
Genres
Collection
Publication
Oxford University Press, USA (1986), Paperback, 336 pages
Description
Arina Petrovna rules the Golovlev family with an iron hand. Around her swarm her family; her alcoholic sons, dissipated grandchildren and degenerate husband. But in his darkened study, her son Porfiry schemes for an overthrow of power. In this powerful novel, the great Russian satirist presents a stark portrait of the Russian gentry sapped by generations of idleness and social irrelevance.
User reviews
LibraryThing member shawnd
This truly Russian novel is a bit of a cross between Gabriel Garcia Marquez's One Hundred Years of Solitude and a darker Tolstoy novel. The story covers three generations of the Golovlyov Family. The family started as moderately weathly landowners whose estate was greatly increased by the matriarch
With few historical references, no descriptions of cities like Moscow or Petersburg, and few outside characters of note, this is a closed-off, almost case study of a family plagued by deception, greed, alcoholism, and some good fortune. At times ribald, it's a well-written solid story that should be read by all who love Russian Literature. As far as a political statement, I suspect negative traits of some gentry are portrayed here. However, Shchedrin keeps the dialogue and intrigue so closely knit to the family that it reads and expresses more as the portrait of the wages of a plagued family whose fate is perhaps separate from their times and their surrounds.
Show More
Arina Golovlyova. She is a classic workaholic and spends almost all her time driving hard bargains and leaving childrearing to serfs. The book mainly deals with the coming of age and her handling of her three sons, Stepan (aka Blockhead) and Porphiry (aka Judas) and a lesser discussed Pavel. The writing starts out funny and almost whimsical when focused on the mother but as it traverses toward the ups and downs of the sons, it gets darker and darker. Stepan becomes more and more tortured by alcoholism, and a large part of the book is the evolution of Porphiry and his mother, his house manager/maid, and nieces. With few historical references, no descriptions of cities like Moscow or Petersburg, and few outside characters of note, this is a closed-off, almost case study of a family plagued by deception, greed, alcoholism, and some good fortune. At times ribald, it's a well-written solid story that should be read by all who love Russian Literature. As far as a political statement, I suspect negative traits of some gentry are portrayed here. However, Shchedrin keeps the dialogue and intrigue so closely knit to the family that it reads and expresses more as the portrait of the wages of a plagued family whose fate is perhaps separate from their times and their surrounds.
Show Less
LibraryThing member jasonlf
The most bleak Russian novel I have read by a very long shot. Every character in the book dies, mostly by suicide and alcohol poisoning. In many cases these deaths are abetted or encouraged by the character's mother or father. Most of them come back to the Golovlyov estate to die, but one commits
It is also a very odd "novel." Each of the seven or so chapters features only two or three characters, not counting servants/serfs. At first you think that Anna Petrovna, the matriarch, is the main character. But then she's cheated out of the estate she cheated others out of by her son, Porphyry (also known as little Judas, bloodsucker and candid boy), and goes off to die. Then he becomes the main character for the rest of the book.
Porphyry is a very odd character. At times he seems like a hypocrite in the mold of Tartuffe, but he has none of his humor and he believes his own religious praddle, to the point where he can sincerely berate a servant he impregnated for her sin while forgetting entirely his part in it. (Oh, and if you're wondering, he sends the child off to an anonymous orphanage after he is born.) One of the more interesting discussions in the book is one where Saltykov-Shchedrin explains the differences between Porphyry and a miser/hypocrite in the tradition of Moliere.
I didn't particularly love reading this book. But after finishing it I read James Wood's excellent introduction which made me appreciate it much more -- and at least retrospectively glad I read it.
Show More
suicide by the side of the road while her sister watches and another die on the road to Siberia, where they have been de facto exiled by his father. Oh, and did I mention, all of them dislike each other, cheat each other, and are indifferent to each other's suffering. To say that betrayal runs in the family Golovlyov would be inaccurate -- the predicate of betrayal is trust.It is also a very odd "novel." Each of the seven or so chapters features only two or three characters, not counting servants/serfs. At first you think that Anna Petrovna, the matriarch, is the main character. But then she's cheated out of the estate she cheated others out of by her son, Porphyry (also known as little Judas, bloodsucker and candid boy), and goes off to die. Then he becomes the main character for the rest of the book.
Porphyry is a very odd character. At times he seems like a hypocrite in the mold of Tartuffe, but he has none of his humor and he believes his own religious praddle, to the point where he can sincerely berate a servant he impregnated for her sin while forgetting entirely his part in it. (Oh, and if you're wondering, he sends the child off to an anonymous orphanage after he is born.) One of the more interesting discussions in the book is one where Saltykov-Shchedrin explains the differences between Porphyry and a miser/hypocrite in the tradition of Moliere.
I didn't particularly love reading this book. But after finishing it I read James Wood's excellent introduction which made me appreciate it much more -- and at least retrospectively glad I read it.
Show Less
LibraryThing member nosajeel
The most bleak Russian novel I have read by a very long shot. Every character in the book dies, mostly by suicide and alcohol poisoning. In many cases these deaths are abetted or encouraged by the character's mother or father. Most of them come back to the Golovlyov estate to die, but one commits
It is also a very odd "novel." Each of the seven or so chapters features only two or three characters, not counting servants/serfs. At first you think that Anna Petrovna, the matriarch, is the main character. But then she's cheated out of the estate she cheated others out of by her son, Porphyry (also known as little Judas, bloodsucker and candid boy), and goes off to die. Then he becomes the main character for the rest of the book.
Porphyry is a very odd character. At times he seems like a hypocrite in the mold of Tartuffe, but he has none of his humor and he believes his own religious praddle, to the point where he can sincerely berate a servant he impregnated for her sin while forgetting entirely his part in it. (Oh, and if you're wondering, he sends the child off to an anonymous orphanage after he is born.) One of the more interesting discussions in the book is one where Saltykov-Shchedrin explains the differences between Porphyry and a miser/hypocrite in the tradition of Moliere.
I didn't particularly love reading this book. But after finishing it I read James Wood's excellent introduction which made me appreciate it much more -- and at least retrospectively glad I read it.
Show More
suicide by the side of the road while her sister watches and another die on the road to Siberia, where they have been de facto exiled by his father. Oh, and did I mention, all of them dislike each other, cheat each other, and are indifferent to each other's suffering. To say that betrayal runs in the family Golovlyov would be inaccurate -- the predicate of betrayal is trust.It is also a very odd "novel." Each of the seven or so chapters features only two or three characters, not counting servants/serfs. At first you think that Anna Petrovna, the matriarch, is the main character. But then she's cheated out of the estate she cheated others out of by her son, Porphyry (also known as little Judas, bloodsucker and candid boy), and goes off to die. Then he becomes the main character for the rest of the book.
Porphyry is a very odd character. At times he seems like a hypocrite in the mold of Tartuffe, but he has none of his humor and he believes his own religious praddle, to the point where he can sincerely berate a servant he impregnated for her sin while forgetting entirely his part in it. (Oh, and if you're wondering, he sends the child off to an anonymous orphanage after he is born.) One of the more interesting discussions in the book is one where Saltykov-Shchedrin explains the differences between Porphyry and a miser/hypocrite in the tradition of Moliere.
I didn't particularly love reading this book. But after finishing it I read James Wood's excellent introduction which made me appreciate it much more -- and at least retrospectively glad I read it.
Show Less
LibraryThing member arubabookwoman
This book is described as a family saga set on the ancestral estate of the Golovlyov family about the time the country was in flux as the serfs were being freed.. I expected something Tolstoyan and idyllic. Instead, this is one of the darkest and bleakest of the Russian novels I have read.
As the
Over the years, Prophyry manages to manipulate matters to turn the tables on his mother. He becomes the owner of the estate and of all of Arina's property. He is in a position to deny her needs and wants (as well as those of his own children), and he exercises this power liberally. All the characters in this novel are unlikeable, even evil, but the most hateful is Prophyry. His character is masterfully developed, and the depiction of his pious hypocrisy is stunning. He is able to justify his every despicable deed with a religious motive, event to the extent of his complicity in the death of his son.
Excellent book.
As the
Show More
novel opens, the matriarch, Arina Petrovna, rules the family estate with an iron hand. She is a stingy miser, and holds everyone in contempt, including her husband and children. Into this setting, her son Porphyry returns from the city, penniless after he has lost the property his mother had bestowed upon him to manage. She gives him a room in an outbuilding, and provides him with starvation-level food. He weasels the occasional odd coin from a serf to buy alcohol. Other family members are another son and a daughter, both of whom have married, and initially live similar unhappy lives on other family estates. Arina is also the guardian of two granddaughters.Over the years, Prophyry manages to manipulate matters to turn the tables on his mother. He becomes the owner of the estate and of all of Arina's property. He is in a position to deny her needs and wants (as well as those of his own children), and he exercises this power liberally. All the characters in this novel are unlikeable, even evil, but the most hateful is Prophyry. His character is masterfully developed, and the depiction of his pious hypocrisy is stunning. He is able to justify his every despicable deed with a religious motive, event to the extent of his complicity in the death of his son.
Excellent book.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Steve38
I came across this author and book in a footnote in Svetlana Alexievich's 'Second Hand Time'. Her book is one of almost verbatim records of conversations with Russians from all over the country in the period following the break up of the Soviet Union. She makes almost no commentary herself and so
The footnote explained that Mr Saltykov and 'The Golovlyov Family' is well known in Russia. So well known that the characters are used as representatives of cultural traits. Similar to the way that Dickens characters are used in English to characterise common traits in Britain. The book itself is the generational story of a minor rural aristocratic family in the late imperial times. Mr Saltykov was a well known writer in his day. A contemporary and friend of Turgenev and in fact buried in the plot next to him. The Golovlyov Family is a savage satire of contemporary Russian life. It's characters are exaggerated. They range from alcoholics to extreme penny pinching matriarch's, to hypocritically pious landlords to free spirited but naive young women. Not one of them has a redeeming feature. Everyone comes to a bad end.
Mr Saltykov was a radical writer at a time when the fading imperial system was repressively trying to keep a grip on society. Serfs had been freed but other liberalising influence from Europe were being resisted. Although no a prolific writer of novels he was a frequent contributor and founder of radical magazines and journals. To such an extent that he was eventually forced out of his senior civil service post.
Something that surprised me was that though Mr Saltykov is well known and remains popular in Russia the short footnote in Second Hand Time was the first time I had come across him. In the English speaking world at least he is by no means as well remembered as other contemporary figures of Russian literature. Why would that be so I wonder? The setting and intergenerational device of the book in a minor aristocratic rural situation is familiar enough from other writers. Some of the key characteristics are also familiar. The extreme boredom of rural life. The devotional but confrontational relationship with the church. The dependence on but suspicion of a whole host of servants and labourers. But possibly the satire is aimed mainly at an audience more familiar with Russian culture of the time. The individuals portrayed evoke little or no sympathy. Their doom is largely well deserved. So whereas Dickens often contrived a happy ending Mr Saltykov did the opposite as he condemned the Golovlyov Family to a desperate conclusion.
Show More
inserts footnotes from time to time to explain Russian cultural references for non Russian speakers.The footnote explained that Mr Saltykov and 'The Golovlyov Family' is well known in Russia. So well known that the characters are used as representatives of cultural traits. Similar to the way that Dickens characters are used in English to characterise common traits in Britain. The book itself is the generational story of a minor rural aristocratic family in the late imperial times. Mr Saltykov was a well known writer in his day. A contemporary and friend of Turgenev and in fact buried in the plot next to him. The Golovlyov Family is a savage satire of contemporary Russian life. It's characters are exaggerated. They range from alcoholics to extreme penny pinching matriarch's, to hypocritically pious landlords to free spirited but naive young women. Not one of them has a redeeming feature. Everyone comes to a bad end.
Mr Saltykov was a radical writer at a time when the fading imperial system was repressively trying to keep a grip on society. Serfs had been freed but other liberalising influence from Europe were being resisted. Although no a prolific writer of novels he was a frequent contributor and founder of radical magazines and journals. To such an extent that he was eventually forced out of his senior civil service post.
Something that surprised me was that though Mr Saltykov is well known and remains popular in Russia the short footnote in Second Hand Time was the first time I had come across him. In the English speaking world at least he is by no means as well remembered as other contemporary figures of Russian literature. Why would that be so I wonder? The setting and intergenerational device of the book in a minor aristocratic rural situation is familiar enough from other writers. Some of the key characteristics are also familiar. The extreme boredom of rural life. The devotional but confrontational relationship with the church. The dependence on but suspicion of a whole host of servants and labourers. But possibly the satire is aimed mainly at an audience more familiar with Russian culture of the time. The individuals portrayed evoke little or no sympathy. Their doom is largely well deserved. So whereas Dickens often contrived a happy ending Mr Saltykov did the opposite as he condemned the Golovlyov Family to a desperate conclusion.
Show Less
LibraryThing member janerawoof
One of the grimmest books I've ever read. There is no letup from the unhappy, dispiriting events in the novel, the author's wicked satire on a landed gentry family during pre- and post serfdom years in 19th century Russia and the eventual failures of its members. The matriarch of the family, Arina
Show More
Petrovna, rules with an iron hand, but is finally displaced by her son and heir, Porfyry Vladimiritch, the perfect archetype of a hypocrite, especially religious hypocrisy, that gives him the excuse for his greed, laziness, and cruelty towards all, particularly family members. One by one each dies, most either by suicide or by succumbing to drink, leaving Porfyry alone in his fantasy world, but for a niece. This "bloodsucker" and manipulator gets his comeuppance on Good Friday in the night. Good touch of the author, that. Not an enjoyable book, but one I'm glad to have read. Show Less
LibraryThing member sparemethecensor
The introduction to my edition ascribes this quote to a contemporaneous critic named Dobrolyubov (surely a pseudonym):
Add a drop of venom to Oblomovism, and you get Golovlyovism.
I can't say it better than that. If you know Oblomov then you know the questions of nihilism and idiocy and tragedy in
Many readers will find this to be too much, and perhaps instead turn to Goncharov for commentary or Gogol for satire. While understandable, that choice won't satisfy the literary Russophile. It's a hard read but I'm utterly glad I did it, even if I need some Turgenev as a palate cleanser next. Saltykov and Dostoyevsky considered themselves literary and political enemies, so we should all know Saltykov just for that.
Add a drop of venom to Oblomovism, and you get Golovlyovism.
I can't say it better than that. If you know Oblomov then you know the questions of nihilism and idiocy and tragedy in
Show More
the state of 19th century Russia. The Golovlyov Family, more nihilistic, more tragic, is perhaps one of the gloomiest novels I've read. (Even for Russia.) What is the point of life for the landed gentry? Nothing. The satire here is to give each character an exaggeration of a common Russian trait then twist the knife.Many readers will find this to be too much, and perhaps instead turn to Goncharov for commentary or Gogol for satire. While understandable, that choice won't satisfy the literary Russophile. It's a hard read but I'm utterly glad I did it, even if I need some Turgenev as a palate cleanser next. Saltykov and Dostoyevsky considered themselves literary and political enemies, so we should all know Saltykov just for that.
Show Less
LibraryThing member colligan
This may be a book for you if (lots of "ifs" coming) some conditions are met. They include:
* You are comfortable with the 19th century "classic" writing style.
* You are patient.
* You aren't addicted to "action-packed, page-turning thrillers".
* You have some modicum of interest in Russian
With those caveats in place, I would recommend "The Golovlyov Family". The first sentence of the introduction states that the work "is one of world literature's most depressing books." [Given my reading preferences, that alone was a hook.] The novel is an unrelenting look at an intergenerational family's disintegration. The characters seem at times stereotypical but the frustration and sadness they create is palpable.
The novel gets off to a somewhat slow start as the characters are introduced and the family dynamics are sketched out. But as the novel progresses, the author does include some fascinating descriptions of the characters' slow mental deterioration. In addition, the author's juxtaposition of a hypocritical versus a simply vile person is certainly salient for our times.
Certainly not every reader's cup of tea but a rewarding read for patient readers.
* You are comfortable with the 19th century "classic" writing style.
* You are patient.
* You aren't addicted to "action-packed, page-turning thrillers".
* You have some modicum of interest in Russian
Show More
history / culture.With those caveats in place, I would recommend "The Golovlyov Family". The first sentence of the introduction states that the work "is one of world literature's most depressing books." [Given my reading preferences, that alone was a hook.] The novel is an unrelenting look at an intergenerational family's disintegration. The characters seem at times stereotypical but the frustration and sadness they create is palpable.
The novel gets off to a somewhat slow start as the characters are introduced and the family dynamics are sketched out. But as the novel progresses, the author does include some fascinating descriptions of the characters' slow mental deterioration. In addition, the author's juxtaposition of a hypocritical versus a simply vile person is certainly salient for our times.
Certainly not every reader's cup of tea but a rewarding read for patient readers.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Eavans
One of the best books I’ve ever read. I’m just a bit at a loss for words to be honest. There’s no way I could fully discuss this novel without writing a true essay-length-verging-on-dissertation exploration on this story’s depth and richness, but… I’m gobsmacked at the rawness and
Show More
reality of this novel written in 1870s. Just breathtaking. Show Less
Awards
Language
Original language
Russian
Original publication date
1876
Physical description
336 p.; 7.48 inches
ISBN
0192816160 / 9780192816160