"No one ever knew how to write a novel better than Turgenev."

"No one ever knew how to write a novel better than Turgenev."
>A novel has to give an illusion of life in the real world. Yet, if it is to be a true work of art, the novelist's picture must have the artistic qualities; it must be single, harmonious, delightful. But, alas, life in the real world is not distinguished by these qualities. How then is the unfortunate novelist to reconcile his obligations? The answer is that most novelists do not. But Turgenev did.
>His stories give an extraordinary illusion of reality: everything happens so naturally and casually that our first impression is that we are just getting a glimpse of an unpredictable succession of actual events.
>With equal success Turgenev contrived to make reality delightful...so that his vigilantly accurate picture of reality is inevitably also a picture of what is beautiful in reality.

Thoughts?
Did anyone know how to write a novel better than Turgenev?

>Single
>Harmonious

Wasn't this Stephen's take in Portrait/Stephen Hero? Is this what that's from?

Just the intro from a random copy of First Love.

yes,me

why's there a negro with a bottle in the background?

at least he wasn't a christian faggot like dostoyevsky

Sometimes I read things and it just feels like intellectual LARPing. Does anyone else feel the same? Especially making a claim like “No one knew how to write a novel like Turgenev,” it feels like such a dilettante type of thing to say, just to provoke a reaction or argument. What even is a novel? Who defines how it is supposed to be written?

>A novel has to give an illusion of life in the real world.
Why?
>Yet, if it is to be a true work of art, the novelist's picture must have the artistic qualities; it must be single, harmonious, delightful.
What does it mean to give the “illusion of life in the real world”?
What is a “true work”?
“What does “single” mean in this context” does he mean singular? Like the novel must be unique? I don’t understand why.
What is “harmonious” in a novel? Like the plot advances in a way that feels logical? Aren’t there novels that take an absurd bend to the choices of their characters, where one thing does not necessarily logically follow the other?
Why must a novel be “delightful”? What does that mean? Can it be not delightful?

It is a lot of claims without any real support.

...

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Turgenev. The drama is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of philosophy most of the story will go over a typical reader’s head. There’s also Turgenev’s nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into his oeuvre - his personal philosophy draws heavily from Narodnaya Volya literature, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these set pieces, to realise that they’re not just funny- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Turgenev truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn’t appreciate, for instance, the impact of Turgenev’s existential quote “Death's an old joke, but each individual encounters it anew,” which itself is a cryptic reference to William Shakespeare's Othello. I’m smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Russia’s genius wit unfolds itself on their eyeballs. What fools.. how I pity them.

And yes, by the way, i DO have a Turgenev tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It’s for the ladies’ eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they’re within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid

Fuck that. Turgenev created one Nihilistic character with the intent to show everyone how romantic would win the day. The way he gets there does seem casually, but the narrative doesn't flow as naturally as say an Alice Munro short story. Her plotting and character depth reaches deeper into reality than Turgenev did even in his own life. But she isn't a novelist, and has lots of boring stories too. So maybe good on him for being so strict in his aesthetic attacks. The China Mieville of realism.