Perhaps you're familiar with the following Margaret Atwood quote: "The Eskimos had fifty-two names for snow because it was important to them; there ought to be as many for love" (Source). It seems that Mikhail Lermontov has nearly as many ways to describe his characters' eyes, as the Eskimos had for snow. In fact, the introduction of nearly every character in Lermontov's A Hero of Our Time features a vivid description of his or her eyes. Take, for instance, his description of Bela's "...black eyes like a mountain goat's that looked right inside you" (Lermontov 13). Others are equally, if not even more, striking. Lermontov describes the mermaid girl's eyes as "bright and penetrating ... appear[ing] to have some magnetic power and seem[ing] always to be expecting some question" (64). In describing Princess Mary's eyes, Lermontov prefers the word "velvet" (75). He feels it "is just the right word", so much so that he suggests "you borrow it when you talk about her eyes" (Lermontov 75). He then continues his description, noting that "the top and bottom lashes are so long that the pupils don't reflect the sunlight" and "they're so soft, they seem to stroke you" (Lermontov 75).
My favorite description of a character's eyes, however, is definitely that of Pechorin's. Lermontov begins his description of Pechorin's eyes simply by noting their brown color. The rest of his description is worth quoting at length: "I must say a little more about his eyes. In the first place, they never laughed when he laughed. Have you ever noticed this peculiarity that some people have? It is either the sign of an evil nature or of a profound and lasting sorrow. His eyes shone beneath his half-lowered lids with a kind of phosphorescent brilliance (if one can put it like that). This brilliance was not the outward sign of an ardent spirit or a lively imagination. It was like the cold dazzling brilliance of smooth steel. When he looked at you, his quick, penetrating, somber glance left you with the unpleasant feeling that you'd been asked an indiscreet question, and it would have seemed insolent had it not been so nonchalantly calm" (Lermontov 48-49).
What I find most fascinating about Lermontov's descriptions of his characters' eyes is that he uses them to paint a picture of so much more than just their eyes. The reader does learn about a character's physical appearance through these descriptions, but he also learns a great deal about that character's nature, personality, and disposition. I suggest you take another glance at the introduction of the characters in A Hero of Our Time, paying particular attention to Lermontov's description of their eyes - you may be really impressed.
I never noticed this before, but now that you've mentioned it, it seems so obvious! I remember the description of Princess Mary's eyes standing out to me. Lermontov remarking that her "pupils don't reflect the sunlight" gave me an almost sinister impression of her character, especially since I associate the female love interest type with doe-like, shining eyes. I guess the fact that the sunlight doesn't reach her eyes because of her super long, womanly eye lashes sort of neutralizes my sinister interpretation though...
ReplyDeleteI also had noticed Lermontov's obsession with eyes. I think that the saying "eyes are the window to the soul" applies to A Hero of Our Time. As with many of the Russian works that I have read, the descriptions of the most minute details tell the most about a character. I like how different his descriptions of eyes are written; the fact that the portrayals aren't cliche makes them stay with you long after you have finished reading the book.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your point that the descriptions of the most minute details often tell the reader most about a character. Making those descriptions interesting seems a tell-tale sign of a talented author!
DeleteIn my reading of A Hero of Our Time I too noticed the descriptions of the eyes Actually in the Murray (1912) translation the word "eye[s]" appears approximately 93 times - a very subtle yet repetitive image. I linked the image of the eye not only to knowledge, you can about another person through their eyes, but also to framing device (this novel is all about framing). To quote myself from my MAP "Eyes are not a tangible frame, but they do frame vision, determining the boundaries of perception." I feel that you can learn a lot about Pechorin himself from his descriptions of his surroundings and other people. He view the events, filters them through his eyes, than describes what seems important to him.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Katy's statement "the eyes are the window to the soul".... I'd suggest that people look at window imagery in this novel. The motif of the frame, with window being a physical frame, is abundant and will giver you another reading of the novel. "I argue that the literary device of the frame not only provides valuable insight on the relationship between the familiar and the exotic but also an understanding of the transfer of cognition." (myself). I could go on about windows forever... so I'll stop.
I think eyes also play into Ltov's style of characterization--he spends a lot of time on visual details and movement, so it makes sense that he would obsess over eyes. Obviously they also figure into perception and whatnot which we see in the novel's form. But are they really a window into the soul? How much, I guess, can visual description really tell us about any character?
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point. I think what makes Lermontov's descriptions so enthralling is the way that they simultaneously describe physical appearance as well as personality or disposition. Reading his characterizations gave me the sense that I knew the character before I really did. Though I suppose that's what good characterizations set out to do!
DeleteInteresting post, Alex, and discussion. I hope you all pay attention to eyes, and window, and mirrors as we read Tolstoy in a few weeks.
ReplyDelete