A Study on Images of Russian Peasants and Discourses on Russian Agricultural Development Models in Anna Karenina
Authors:   Asia-Europe Perspective Association, Lee Kyong-Wan 
Published: June 2018

This paper aims at reflecting on Tolstoy's representation of Russian peasants and his search for Russian agricultural development model amid big social and ideological turmoil after the emancipation of the serfs in 1861 through the mediation of his novel, Anna Karenina. The method is the biblical viewpoint, defined as a mythical worldview based on evangelical belief in the Bible, which might shed light on Tolstoy’s complicated subjective religiosity based on the Gospels uniquely and newly in comparison with other viewpoints.
Since the second half of the 18th century, Russian intellectuals have been involved in epochal tasks of identifying the true nature of Russian peasants and the best Russian agricultural model between serfdom and western models, as a part of pivotal project for Russian national identity. In Anna Karenina Leo Tolstoy tried to suppose his own ideas of Russian peasants and agricultura lmodel through his alter ego, Levin.
In the third part of the novel, Levin, engaging in disputes with liberalist landowners and a conservative landowner, perceives merits and faults of their discourses respectively. In relation to liberalists’ discourses, Levin reflects on their tendency of the blind imitation of western ideas, their overt or hidden self-awareness of superiority as enlightened Europeans to Russian peasants, their idea of Russian agricultural development through exact application of western institutions and technology to Russian reality, and their confidence in the necessity to present Enlightenment education and medical service to Russian peasants for their welfare.
On the contrary, in the conservatist landowner’s anti-humanist attitude to Russian peasants and consent to serfdom Levin finds out a deep understanding of Russian rural reality. Tolstoy’s positive position to the conservatist’s viewpoint is backed up by the favorable representation of his appearance. However, Tolstoy criticizes his propensity of generalizing some peasants' specific negative aspects into typical properties of Russian peasantry.
As an alternative to the two dominant oppositional viewpoints in the second half of the 19th century, Levin supposes a more integrated and comprehensive model in the direction to the application of western advanced agricultural knowledge and technology to Russian natural and human environments more flexibly and reasonably. The temporary alternative model he reached through his experience of farming, continuous empirical observation and rational analysis of Russian peasants and agriculture is the equal distribution system of profits between landowner and peasants.
Apparently Tolstoy's agricultural model changes in the direction to more religious and ethical version in the last part of Anna Karenina and in Confession, published 10 years later after Anna Karenina. However, the thought paradigm is almost the same.
From the biblical viewpoint, Tolstoy's position in relation to Russian peasants and agricultural development model is ambivalent, including positive and negative sides simultaneously. First, his inexhaustible devotion to Russian peasants’ welfare and Russian agricultural development is heroic and Christian in a sense. On the other hand, the model is based on his rationalist self-assertiveness of universality and objectivity of his reasoning, which turns out self-contradictory in reality. He overlooks his own narcissistic bias toward idealist viewpoint of nature and his generic dependence on contemporary external conditions. The unrelenting unconscious influence of Rousseauism on Tolstoy’ worldview is revealed in Levin’s oppositional thought between nature and civilization, Russian peasantry and modern intellectuals.