Response to Turgenev's "The Execution of Tropmann"

In the introduction to this essay, Phillip Lopate writes, “It is interesting that Dostoevsky, who detested Turgenev, mocked the writer’s ‘squeamishness, about himself, about his own integrity and peace of mind, and that in the sight of a chopped off head!’” (306). I am not familiar with Dostoevsky’s writing, but I would have to agree with Lopate that this statement is a “willful misinterpretation of Turgenev’s scruples as narcissism” (306). While reading this essay, I did not think that Turgenev was being self-obsessed. He instead uses his personal experience of witnessing Tropmann’s execution to ask questions of human nature, such as why are humans drawn to things like public executions and are capital punishments justified.

Reading this essay, I couldn’t help but feel sympathy for Tropmann, a man condemned for brutally murdering a whole family. I was able to sympathize with him because of Turgenev’s point of view. He describes Tropmann as “an overgrown boy” who had “a natural, healthy, slightly rosy complexion” (317). After the execution, Turgenev looks around and sees that “absolutely no one looked like a man who realized that he had been present at the performance of an act of social justice: everyone tried to turn away in spirit and, as if were, shake of the responsibility for this murder” (323). A murder for a murder.

I find myself examining my own views of capital punishment. As a Christian, I am called to love my neighbor as myself. Would I kill myself if I murdered someone? Is the word “love” not even appropriate in this context? What about justice? What about mercy? What about the operation of the state? Should my desire to forgive affect my opinions of policy? Oh, it’s a messy business. My initial reaction is to extend the hand of mercy. I think I might be with Turgenev on this one.