Renaissance to Realism: Human Progress and Perfectibility

The idea of human perfectibility posits that man is capable of progress, and that the possibilities for human betterment--as individuals and as a species--are limitless. This idea has been central to many great works of literature, but the way it is addressed has changed dramatically over time.
A notion of perfectibility that centers on man's relationship with God is illustrated in Milton's retelling of the biblical story of the Fall in his greatest work, Paradise Lost. But later, during the eighteenth-century movement known as the Enlightenment, those who believed in the importance of progress held that the "proper employment of reason will result in the full achievement of human potential." (Kemerling) Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's work, Faust, is an excellent illustration of the Enlightenment dream of human progress, and the play is often credited with opening the doors for German Romanticism, which embraced the idea of perfectibility and the innate goodness of humankind.
In the nineteenth century, however, Realism expressed a new point of view in works like Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground and Turgenev's Fathers and Sons. Although Realism and its near relative, Naturalism, do not expressly contradict the idea of perfectibility, both movements endeavored to describe life without idealization, which includes showing the sordid side of the world. The resulting works appear to contradict the idea that humans are inherently good. And indeed, many writers who subscribe to the school of Realism strongly oppose the concept of perfectibility. For example, Dostoevsky once said, "Moral perfectibility may be a two-edged weapon and it may lead some not to humility and complete self-control but to the most Satanic pride, that is, to bondage and not to freedom." (Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov) Such views stand in sharp contrast to those of writers like Goethe who manifestly believe in human perfectibility.
In Faust, Goethe pits God against Mephistopheles, the Devil, in a struggle to determine the fate of Faust's soul and thereby to settle an argument between God and the Devil about the ability of humans to progress and to resist temptation. Far from believing that humans are innately good, rather, Mephistopheles sneers that man "digs his nose in every sort of trash" (Goethe, 2). Mephistopheles' dim view of humans is very clear. He contends that there is nothing worthwhile about the human species, and that leading them into temptation takes so little effort that it is not even enjoyable.
Mephistopheles clearly does not agree with the view that reason is man's greatest asset and can allow him to attain the full potential that humanity is capable of. Indeed, he believes that possessing reason, far from elevating man, serves only to sink him deeper into turpitude. Mephistopheles illustrates this conviction in his conversation with God when he says,
"I only see how men will plague themselves.
The little earth-god's stamped in the old way
and is as odd as on creation day.
He'd be much better, Lord, if you'd not let
him have the merest glimpse of heavenly light
which he calls reason, using it at best
only to grow more bestial than the beasts" (Goethe, 2).

At the beginning of the play we find Faust, a man who has dedicated his life to learning and reason, lamenting his ardor for education. He seems to be almost in agreement with the Devil's view of man's inability to use reason as a tool for betterment. While sitting at his desk he says to himself,
"Now I have studied philosophy
medicine and the law,
and unfortunately, theology,
wearily sweating, yet I stand now,
poor fool, no wiser than I was before" (Goethe, 7).

God, on the other hand, believes in the perfectibility of the human species. He has such faith in Faust that he is willing to enter into a wager with the Devil over the fate of Faust's soul. He admits that man is not perfect when he says, "Man is doomed to err as long as he is striving," but He expresses ultimate faith in humans, and Faust in particular, when He says, "The gardener knows that when the branches green/ soon fruit and flowers will show what time can do." (Goethe, 3) Here God is the gardener, recognizing that humans are not yet perfect but confident in their potential for growth and spiritual ripening--a view diametrically opposed to that of Mephistopheles. As the play unfolds, it is God's vision that ultimately is validated, first when Margaret's soul is rescued, and then later, in Part 2 of the play, when Faust himself is saved.
In Paradise Lost, Milton also addresses the religious nature of the perfectibility of humans in his tale of Adam and Eve. Unlike later writers, who addressed the issue of human progress in terms of social changes and societal reforms, writers such as Goethe and Milton were more concerned with man's relationship to God and how that relationship nurtured man's spiritual progress. Although original sin--the consequence of Adam and Eve's disobedience--means that the entire human race has fallen from grace, this doctrine is not entirely divergent from the idea that humans are disposed to strive for goodness. Milton's epic tells us that some good can come from sin, and that although humans as a species are not innately good, individuals can save themselves through loyalty and obedience to God. While love of each other cannot save humankind, love of God may. Thus Milton posits that human love is not the final pinnacle for which humans must strive, and that there is a higher love possible with God.

Humankind's eventual salvation is found in Paradise Lost, after many falls, through obedience to God. As Adam and Eve were leaving Paradise, we learn, "Some natural tears they dropped, but wiped them soon/ The world was all before them, where to choose/ Their place of rest, and Providence their guide" (Milton, 2256). In this way, Adam and Eve's fall from grace is also the first step in mankind's progress toward whatever degree of perfection man can hope to aspire to. Although they eventually lose their home in Paradise, the message is that they will ultimately find true paradise in their hearts through love of God.
In Notes From Underground, Dostoevsky positions himself in furious opposition to the traditionally optimistic ideas of the perfectibility of man. The narrator of Notes From Underground, the Underground Man, is both a nihilist and a masochist and clearly does not believe in the idea of innate human goodness. Rather, he believes that humans are ruled by base and senseless passions and that "man is stupid, phenomenally stupid" (Dostoevsky, 18). Yet although the Underground Man seems to disagree entirely with the idea of human perfectibility, it appears that what he really objects to is the idea of human growth through obedience to God in particular, and religion in general. The view that full human potential could instead be attained through apposite employment of reason to achieve social change or even societal upheaval seems to be in harmony with the Underground Man's criticism of St. Petersburg. One wonders if perhaps the Underground Man would have been a better person had he not had the "misfortune" of being from St. Petersburg, "the most abstract and premeditated city in the whole world" (Dostoevsky, 5).
Though the Underground Man constantly contradicts himself, he does make a few points clear. He believes that reason is only a small part of human nature, and therefore not in and of itself the engine of human development. He says,
"Don't you see: reason is a fine thing, gentlemen, there's no doubt about it, but it's only reason, and it satisfies only man's rational faculty, whereas desire is a manifestation of all life, that is, of all human life, which includes both reason, as well as all of life's itches and scratches. And although in this manifestation life often turns out to be fairly worthless, it's life all the same" (Dostoevsky, 20)...
This contradicts the Renaissance belief of human progress through reason, though it doesn't discount reason's impact altogether. Dostoevsky ends the novel with a searing attack on mankind and the pronouncement that all humans have "become estranged from life, we're all cripples" (Dostoevsky, 91).
Another Realist Russian novel that addresses the ideas of progress, nihilism and angry young men is Fathers and Sons by Ivan Turgenev. The book centers on the confrontation between the philosophical beliefs of the old and new generations. Like Dostoevsky, Turgenev has written this work in such a way as to leave his own intentions unclear. In fact, in the years following the publication of Fathers and Sons, liberals and conservatives both shunned and embraced the novel, unsure of which group the author intended to ally with. The viewpoints in the book are often drastically different, as expressed by Bazarov, the nihilist; Arkady, a faithful follower of Bazarov who, however, can't seem to renounce romance, art, and nature; and the ironic narrator. However, many readers can probably most readily relate to Arkady, who is himself trying to weigh the relative attractions of nihilism and romanticism.
Arkady's father and uncle are clearly on the side of romanticism. They believe in art, poetry, music, and Hegel's philosophy of progress. Arkady is torn between the ideals that he was raised with and the views of his friend, Bazarov. Bazarov's belief in nihilism and his rejection of passions of any sort are reflected in his arguments with Arkady's uncle, Pavel. Bazarov says to Pavel, "Aristocratism, liberalism, progress, principles...just think, how many foreign...and useless words! A Russian has no need of them whatsoever." Although Bazarov rejects the ideas of progress outright, it is clear that he falls prey to many of the "words" that he so vigorously disdains. In the course of the book he fights a duel with Pavel-an act he would of course have shunned if he were a true nihilist-and has his passions aroused by Anna Odintsova, whom he claims to be in love with. Arkady's love for Katya, his family, art and nature, eventually leads to a break with Bazarov and the ideas he represents. At the end, Bazarov's death leaves the reader wondering if Turgenev intended it to represent the infeasibility of nihilism and the implausibility of rejecting progress.

So while progress and human perfectibility remain important issues in literature from the Renaissance to the heyday of Realism, these ideas are treated in very different ways. Paradise Lost and Faust endorse the idea of human moral development but locate the impetus for that development in the sphere of obedience to, and belief in, God. Although it may seem that Realist novels like Notes From Underground and Fathers and Sons reject the idea of human progress, perhaps in reality they are only rejecting the old ways of attaining that progress.

Dostoevsky, Fyodor. Notes From Underground. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2001.

Dostoevsky, Fyodor. The Brothers Karamazov. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1999.

Kemerling, Garth. A Dictionary of Philosophical Terms and Names. 2002. < http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/index.htm>

Lawall, Sarah and Maynard Mack, eds. Norton Anthology of World Masterpieces: The Western Tradition: Literature of Western Culture Through the Renaissance. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1999.