Bazarov’s Attitude Towards the Aristocracy: Critical Consciousness or Ontological Hatred?
Introduction
The character of Yevgeni Bazarov in Ivan Turgenev’s novel Fathers and Sons is one of the most striking figures of the social and intellectual transformation experienced in 19th century Russia. Bazarov, who defines himself as a nihilist, is not only an individual but also a representative of a political and ideological stance. The apparent distance he feels towards the aristocracy throughout the novel is an important reflection of this stance. However, is this distance limited to political criticism or does it contain a deeper, psychological and ontological hatred? In this essay, the nature of Bazarov’s attitude towards the aristocracy will be analyzed; it will be discussed whether this attitude is a systematic social criticism or an emotional reaction on an individual level.
Development
- Anti-Aristocracy as Political Criticism
Bazarov’s attitude towards the aristocracy bears the traces of a radical social criticism at first glance. In his eyes, aristocracy is the carrier of outdated values, superficial relations and artificial emotions. When evaluated from this perspective, Bazarov’s attitude coincides with a critique of Enlightenment thought based on individualism and rationalism. However, it is observed that this critique is not based on a class basis. Bazarov does not question the aristocracy on the basis of economic relations; he does not make a systematic analysis of their position in production relations. Therefore, this opposition manifests itself in the form of a cultural and ethical rejection rather than a consciousness of class struggle.
This situation shows that Bazarov differs from the socialist or Narodnik movements of the period. He neither develops a program for the liberation of the peasants nor seeks a revolutionary organization. In this context, his opposition to the aristocracy is not a class critique in the Marxist sense, but a personal conflict of values.
- Ontological Alienation and Hatred
Bazarov’s relationship with the aristocracy sometimes goes beyond systemic criticism and turns into an existential alienation and even hatred. This hatred is not only ideological but also psychological in origin. The aristocrats’ pompous speeches, superficial politeness and traditional relationships are coded as fake and artificial in Bazarov’s world. This situation reflects the contradiction experienced by the individual between his search for sincerity and genuineness and the formal roles imposed by society.
Bazarov’s reactionality is, in a way, an expression of ontological loneliness. Because he feels that he belongs neither to the peasants nor to the aristocrats; he is far from establishing a genuine connection with either class. While this feeling of not belonging strengthens his individual desire for freedom, it also deepens his political loneliness. In this context, hatred towards the aristocracy can be read as an angry outburst of an individual who has withdrawn into himself.
- Lack of Political Vision
Criticisms that are not based on a social class or a mass movement are generally condemned to remain at the individual level. When Bazarov’s anti-aristocratic attitude is evaluated in this context, it is seen that he lacks a political vision. He desires to overthrow the existing order, but is silent about what should be put in its place. This situation positions his intellectual stance within a nihilist framework, not a revolutionary one.
Despite this, Bazarov’s reaction to the aristocracy indicates an important rupture in the cultural and political climate of the period. He is the representative of a new type of individual: a figure who has broken with tradition, prioritizes reason, but has no direction within himself. In this respect, Bazarov approaches the aristocracy not only as an external but also as an internal threat. They are not only a class he opposes, but also an “other” into which he risks becoming.
Conclusion
Bazarov’s attitude towards the aristocracy has a multi-layered structure. Although it appears as a social criticism on the surface, as this attitude deepens, it bears the traces of an alienation and anger experienced on an individual level. Bazarov’s rejection of the aristocracy is based on a conflict at an ethical and psychological level rather than a structural and political analysis. Therefore, his attitude should be interpreted as an existential hatred rather than a political criticism. This hatred neither creates a revolution nor offers a vision of the future; it remains only a tragic rebellion of the individual who is closed within himself. In this context, Bazarov is not a thinker with political potential; he is a figure representing the internal contradictions of modern man.
