Sviazhsky got the volumes, and sat down in a rocking-chair.
"What is that you are looking at?" he asked of Levin, who was standing by the round table, and turning the leaves of a review.
Levin held up the review.
"Oh, yes! that is a very interesting article indeed. It argues," he continued with gay animation, "that the principal culprit in the partition of Poland was not Frederic after all. It appears .... " and he gave with the clearness characteristic of him a digest of these new and important discoveries. Although Levin was now more interested in the question of farm management than in anything, he asked himself, as he listened to his friend:—
"What is he in reality? and why, why does the partition of Poland interest him?"
When Sviazhsky had finished, Levin could not help saying:—
"Well, and what of it?"
But he had nothing to say. It was interesting simply from the fact that it "argued."
But Sviazhsky did not explain, and did not think it necessary to explain, why it was interesting to him.
"Well, but the irascible old proprietor interested me very much," said Levin, sighing. " He's sensible, and a good deal of what he says is true."
"Ah! don't speak of it! he is a confirmed slaveholder at heart, like the rest of them,"
"With you at their head" ....
"Yes, only I am trying to lead them in the other direction," replied Sviazhsky, laughing.
"His argument struck me very forcibly," said Levin. "He is right when he says that our affairs, that is, the 'rational management,' [1] cannot succeed; that the only kind that can succeed is the money-lending system like that of the other proprietor, or, in other words, the one that is simplest. .... Who is to blame for this?"
"We ourselves, of course. But then it is not true
- ↑ Ratsionalnoe khozyaïstvo.
