In Chaadaev’s persuasive letter The Philosophical Letters Addressed to a Lady Chaadaev raises many questions of serious importance for his contemporary Russian countrymen. He asks them, indirectly, to consider the implications of Russia’s role in the western world, as well as Russia’s role in the eastern world. He even raises questions as to whether Russia belongs in either region. These are things which Chaadaev confronts the reader with directly. However, what is not so apparent, or at least not so direct, is Chaadaev’s attitude towards his audience, or the supposed reader of this letter. Certainly, it is easy to assume that the letters were written for consumption by his peers and fellow intelligentsia, however, this letter’s publication was secondary to its original intended recipient. This recipient was a woman, and one who historically really did exist.

                So what can we glean from his attitude towards his audience? Topically, that is without the context of knowing that this woman actually existed, we might think that this correspondence was exaggerated for the full benefit of a larger audience. This, however, cannot be the case. So with this in mind we must ask ourselves: what we can learn of Chaadaev’s attitude towards women, and is this at all a progressive or atypical ideal?

                In Chaadaev’s signature way, he is still somewhat inscrutable. Right off the bat one could argue for either, in one case because of his condescending attitude and supposition that these serious thoughts would plague a woman to a condition of impaired health. (23) On the other hand, one could argue that Chaadaev considers women on an individual basis, much as he probably considers men on an individual basis to be either foolish or wise. This can be evidenced by Chaadaev stating the following:

“The traits which distinguish you from the crowd must also render you partially susceptible to the bad effects of the air which you breathe. Could the little which I have allowed myself to say to you bring stability to your ideas amid all that surrounds you?” (24)

Whether he means by this that she (the intended reader) is distinguished from a crowd of her fellow women or from the masses of people who do not take time to consider these things is somewhat ambiguous. Within the passage Chaadaev continues to hint towards both conclusions. Perhaps he even intends for both.

                That isn’t to say that he doesn’t delineate a very strong supposition towards the roles of women in society however. It may be a bit more subtle than Dostoyevsky, as he doesn’t suppose that is reader is fainting and in fits of hysterics over the troubling ideas which, according to him, plague her. However, there is still an understanding that thinking on such serious matters, in fact devoting any time to contemplative thought at all, provides a pervading sense of inquietude for the female sex. Indeed, the whole letter possesses a certain air of paternal sympathy. It is almost as if Chaadaev finds his correspondent to be of a childlike and frivolous disposition and takes it upon himself, to his credit of course, to be the one to lovingly explain the sad and unfortunate workings of a world that is not fair and shall never be so. There is almost, at the periphery of my mind, the mental image of a man sat with a child on his lap, a comforting hand resting on the child’s back.

However, Chaadaev seems as though he considers his reader to possess certain intelligence. (Or at least in the beginning stages of intelligence- i.e. those stages in which a person first starts to take notice of such pervading questions about religion and nationality.) Arguably, on the other hand, this is his own doing, as we cannot be certain of the content of his first discussions with this woman and whether or not he truly believes that she conceived of some of these ideas on her own is debatable. (He does, in fact, apologize profusely for awakening her to such ideas; however this may just be another of his arrogant suppositions.)

It is somewhat impossible to know for sure how Chaadaev felt simply from this one letter. We’ve never spoken to the woman in question and we never got to hear their discussions with one another. What can be learned is that Chaadaev was certainly not opposed to the possibility that women had the capacity to think on such things, and that still goes a lot further than most of his contemporaries.

Written in January of 2011

Author: The Contrary Moth