‘It seems to me that the influence always comes from the side of true education,’ Alexei Alexandrovich said, raising his eyebrows slightly.
‘But what should we take as signs of true education?’ Pestsov said.
‘I suppose that these signs are known,’ said Alexei Alexandrovich.
‘Are they fully known?’ Sergei Ivanovich put in with a subtle smile. ‘It is now recognized that a true education can only be a purely classical one; yet we see bitter disputes on one side and the other, and it cannot be denied that the opposing camp has strong arguments in its favour.’9
‘You are a classicist, Sergei Ivanovich. May I pour you some red?’ said Stepan Arkadyich.
‘I am not expressing my opinion about either sort of education,’ Sergei Ivanovich said with a smile of condescension, as if to a child, and held out his glass. ‘I am merely saying that there are strong arguments on both sides,’ he went on, turning to Alexei Alexandrovich. ‘I received a classical education, but personally I can find no place for myself in this dispute. I see no clear arguments for preferring classical studies over the modern.’
‘The natural sciences have as much pedagogical and developmental influence,’ Pestsov picked up. ‘Take astronomy alone, take botany or zoology, with its system of general laws!’
‘I cannot fully agree with that,’ Alexei Alexandrovich replied. ‘It seems to me that one cannot but acknowledge the fact that the very process of studying the forms of languages has a particularly beneficial effect upon spiritual development. Besides, it cannot be denied that the influence of classical writers is moral in the highest degree, whereas the teaching of the natural sciences is unfortunately combined with those harmful and false teachings that constitute the bane of our time.’
Sergei Ivanovich was about to say something, but Pestsov with his dense bass interrupted him. He heatedly began proving the incorrectness of this opinion. Sergei Ivanovich calmly waited his turn, obviously ready with a triumphant retort.
‘Yet,’ said Sergei Ivanovich, turning to Karenin with a subtle smile, ‘one cannot but agree that it is difficult to weigh fully all the advantages and disadvantages of both branches of learning, and the question of preference would not have been resolved so quickly and definitively if there had not been on the side of classical education that advantage you just mentioned: its moral or -
‘Undoubtedly.’
‘If there had not been this advantage of an anti-nihilistic influence on the side of classical learning, we would have thought more, weighed the arguments on both sides,’ Sergei Ivanovich went on with a subtle smile, ‘and left room for the one tendency and the other. But now we know that the pills of classical education contain the healing power of anti-nihilism, and we boldly offer them to our patients ... And what if there is no healing power?’ he concluded, sprinkling his Attic salt.
Everybody laughed at Sergei Ivanovich’s pills, Turovtsyn especially loudly and gaily, having at last been granted that something funny which was all he was waiting for as he listened to the conversation.
Stepan Arkadyich had made no mistake in inviting Pestsov. With Pestsov intelligent conversation could not die down even for a moment. No sooner had Sergei Ivanovich ended the conversation with a joke than Pestsov started up a new one.
‘One cannot even agree,’ he said, ‘that the government has such a goal. The government is obviously guided by general considerations and remains indifferent to the influences its measures may have. For instance, the question of women’s education ought to be regarded as pernicious, yet the government opens courses and universities for women.’
And the conversation at once jumped over to the new subject of women’s education.11
Alexei Alexandrovich expressed the thought that women’s education was usually confused with the question of women’s emancipation and could be considered pernicious only on that account.
‘I would suppose, on the contrary, that these two questions are inseparably connected,’ said Pestsov. ‘It’s a vicious circle. Women are deprived of rights because of their lack of education, and their lack of education comes from having no rights. We mustn’t forget that the subjection of women is so great and so old that we often refuse to comprehend the abyss that separates them from us,’ he said.
‘You said “rights”,’ said Sergei Ivanovich, who had been waiting for Pestsov to stop talking, ‘meaning the rights to take on the jobs of jurors, councillors, the rights of board directors, the rights of civil servants, members of parliament ...’
‘Undoubtedly.’
