Shifting Views of Social Life Lead to Social Exclusion - Essay Example

Shifting Views of Social Life Lead to Social Exclusion Given that social inclusion in every society is based on specific values of acceptable behaviour, the shifting views of social life brought about by pressures of industrialization, which has prompted new social and environmental challenges, inevitably result to the exclusion of individuals in society. This paper explores the manner in which the shifting views of social lives have changed across people’s different types of realism by highlight the overlapping themes of alienation and inclusion through a closed reading 2 Articles namely Matryonas House by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Notes From Underground by Fyodor Dostoyevsky. In Solzhenitsyns Matryona’s Home, Matryona is a victim of circumstances in an exploitative and highly inefficient collective farm system since her illness has secluded her from taking part in the farm’s work (Potts); according to the narrative, “she was all alone in the world and when she began to be seriously ill she had been dismissed from the Kolkhoz as well (Solzhentsyn 431).” The rest of the workers on the farm exploit Matryona by sending her on errands and assigning her jobs that further exhaust her little energy; the writer says, “not a garden could be ploughed without Matryona’s help” (Solzhentsyn 436). The writer generally critics the socialists’ communistic way of life that promotes existence of the group while seriously restricting independence of the individual. Ironically, the collective communist way of life eventually excludes the individual as it does to Matryona who is locked out of the social activities such as communal work due to her illness; the rest of the characters are greedy, corrupt and selfish, virtues often associated with a capitalist society. Ideally, the writer strongly opposes the view that in a communist society, an individual acts in the universal interest of the group rather than in the best interest of themselves; for instance, in Solzhenitsyns article, the selfishness and greed of the other characters eventually destroys Matryona, as was the case in the communist era that led to the suffering of many (Aron 67). The other characters demolish Matryona’s outhouse to obtain timber for their own construction since they could not get the needed timber from elsewhere; Faddei, in particular, relishes the thought of pulling down Matryona’s house and carrying it away since it was inherently destined to be his initially, as the eldest son. The story reveals that he (Faddei), “was furiously taking it apart, board by board, to carry it out of somebody’s compound (Solzhentsyn 448),” the writer contrasts the villagers’ greediness and materialism with Matryona’s righteousness since she meekly yields to their demolition of her top room (Kava 23). Matryona’s house was the very essence of her existence since for the nearly forty years that she had inhabited the place, it had become an integral source of her vitality as explained that “…the thought of breaking up the roof she had lived under for forty years was torture to her (Solzhentsyn 448)” since tearing down the house was equivalent to taking away her life. Nonetheless, Matryona stands out as the archetypical ancient Russian model of Christian, anti-materialistic testimony, unlike the villagers whose materialistic nature reflects the shift from the conventional Russian values, which has contributed to Matryona’s exclusion (Saur 118). Moreover, the truck driver that was hired to transport the demolished timber to Cherus where it was to be utilized also demonstrates clearly that greed is indeed a common factor in the communist society, unlike the conventional view of the communistic way of life as full of good intent for the people. The truck driver’s greediness emerges when he insists on being paid the same amount of money whether or not the truck took two trips or just one; furthermore, the fact that the tractor had been sneaked out by the driver for his side job and had to be returned before morning further highlights his corrupt nature. By only thinking of his interest rather than also considering those who were paying him, the truck driver demonstrates the shifting view of social life in the communist society, thereby strongly undermining the perception that individuals work for the common good of others in such a society that is rife with capitalistic mannerisms. In Dostoyevsky’s story of Notes from the underground, the writer tells the story of a bitter, nondescript narrator simply recognized as the underground Man, a retired civil servant (Matlaw 101); generally, the underground man’s criticism of the emerging western philosophy highlights the shifting view social life. The underground man’s masochistic mannerisms that lead to his isolation and exclusion from the rational egoistic and socialist community way of life in his era underscore the complexity of human nature; in that respect, this disapproves the rational egoist and socialist ideas that utopia can be attained through reason. The rational egoists and utopian socialists’ belief that reason alone can make the world a better place does not hold true given that humans always have an inherent desire for free will, which refers to the capacity for individuals to exert their own will, irrespective of whether it contravenes their best interests (Cherkasova 368). The underground man best depicts the complex nature of humans that greatly undermines the use of reason to perfect the world since he endures liver diseases and toothaches rather than seeking the help of doctors and dentists; he says, “…I believe my liver is diseased… I know nothing at all about my disease, and do not know for certain what ails me… (Dostoevsky 3). The writer highlights the shifting view of the socialists’ utopia, given that the codification of human behaviour could eventually lead to total uniformity, which could potentially degenerate to totalitarianism. The writer also scorns the 19th century’s European influences of enlightenment, progressivism, and utopianism on the conventional Russian way of life that emphasized Russian values of family, religion, personal responsibility as well as brotherly love; he says, “…the characteristics of our ‘romantics’ are absolutely and directly opposed to the transcendental European type, and no European standard can be applied to them (Dostoevsky 70)”. The underground man is excluded from society since his failure and the frustration to live by foreign ideals only serves to exclude him from the society, thus, his passionate rejection of humanistic ideals underscores his psychological and ideological maturity (Wyman 120). According to the underground man, the dissolution of the ancient religious and moral imperatives that promoted absolute confidence in decision-making has made it impossible to certainly determine the best course of action among several possibilities in the modern era. The underground man excuses his inability to make decisions by highlighting his heightened awareness of the many possibilities in every situation and their accompanying consequences; he says, “…to be too conscious is an illness—a real thorough-going illness (Dostoevsky 8). Educated men’s misinformed search for laws of science and reason highlights the modern society’s blind adherence to reason; ideally, the underground man’s argument highlights the shifting view of reason as a means of perfecting the world. Ultimately, it is indeed true that the changing views of individuals’ social life, in their different types of realism inevitably lead to the exclusion of people in society as depicted in Solzhenitsyn and Dostoyevsky’s narratives. Solzhenitsyn refutes the idea that an individual acts in the best interest of the group rather than in the best interest of themselves communist society since the selfishness and greed of the other characters eventually destroys Matryona. The underground man’s failure and the frustration to live by foreign ideals further exclude him from the society of his era that prides itself on European sensibilities and reason, as the basis for perfection in the world, at the expense of ancient Russian values. Works Cited Aron, Leon. The cunningly-inventive Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. Commentary, 132, (2011): 67-71. Cherkasova, Evgenia. (2004). Kant on free will and arbitrariness: A view from Dostoevskys underground. Philosophy and Literature, 28(2), 367-378.  Dostoevsky, Fyodor. “Notes from the Underground.” Wm.B. Michigan: Eerdmans Publishing Co. 2009. Kava, Victor. Towards a description of the protagonist in the fiction of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. 1976. Print. Matlaw, Ralph. “Structure and Integration in Notes from the Underground.” PMLA 73.1, (1958): pp. 101-109. Potts, Michael. “On Alexander Solzhenitsyns “Matryona’s Home.” 2012. Web. 4th June, 2014. Saur, Pamela. "Solzhenitsyns Matryonas home." The Explicator 62.2 (2004): 118-21. Solzhentsyn Aleksandr. Matryonas House. 1970. Print. Wyman, Alina. The specter of freedom: Ressentiment and dostoevskijs notes from underground. Studies in East European Thought, 59.1-2 (2007): 119-140. Read More