Russian poets Alexander Pushkin and Alexander Blok lived and wrote a century apart. Pushkin's fame came at the beginning of the nineteenth century, as Russia moved politically into the modern era and poetically into the Romantic era. Blok's notoriety came at the beginning of the twentieth century, when Russia moved politically into the Soviet era and poetically into the Symbolist era. Yet, these two poets, placed as bookends on either side of the Russian period between 1820-1920, have more in common than the one hundred triumphant and tumultuous years between them might suggest. Both Pushkin and Blok create artistic poetry that reflects the social and political conflicts of their time, yet their works remain intentionally ambiguous with regard to the on-going debates of their respective eras.

During Pushkin's lifetime in the early nineteenth century, Russia's major socio-political debate was between the conservative "Slavophiles" and the liberal "Westernizers." The Slavophiles believed that Russia should develop her own culture, her own institutions, and her own place in the world. They felt that Russia was unique, not part of Europe or even Asia. The Slavophiles held the position that Russia had its own native culture and genius, and therefore, it was wrong to force Russia to follow a European pattern. Westernizers believed that Russia showed signs of failure and backwardness when compared to Western countries, and they aggressively advocated the wholesale adoption of European ideas and values. They felt that the principle task for Russia was to catch up with Europe.

By the beginning of the twentieth century, during Blok's lifetime, the major sociopolitical debate was between the conservative Tsarist regime of Russia and the revolutionary Bolsheviks. The conservatives believed that the Russian identity was found in the old world order of autocratic rule, in the Russian Orthodox Church, and in the traditional values and customs of the Slavic people. Conversely, the Revolutionists were against Tsarist rule, organized religion, and the traditional way of life. They believed Russian needed to be cleansed in order to find her new identity and spirit.

Thus, the beginnings of both the nineteenth and twentieth centuries were periods of radical, historical change in Russia, and, not surprisingly, these changes were reflected in the Russian literature. Many works of Russian literature in the nineteenth and early twentieth century are closely aligned with either Slavophilic or Westernizer or Tsarist or Revolutionist sympathies, but not the poetry of Pushkin or Blok. Although both of these poets produced works that center on the debates of their respective eras, neither shows a strong affiliation to either the conservative or the radical ideology. Instead, both poets wrote poems that are subject to various interpretations. Specifically, Pushkin's poem "The Bronze Horseman" and Blok's poem "The Twelve" have symbols, imagery, and characterization that veil the poets' social and political allegiances.

In "The Bronze Horseman" Alexander Pushkin shows that he is a Russian moderate. His poem contains elements that suggest both Westernizer and Slavophilic sentiments. His Westernizer sympathies are found in the presentation of St. Petersburg itself. Here is a city that is described in splendor and glory--a real tribute to Peter, whose vision came to fruition in St. Petersburg. On the banks of the Neva, Peter builds his "Window to the West" where "flags of foreign nations" will soon come to call (Pushkin 9). This "proud, young city, newly risen" will outshine Moscow in military might and in ornate "palaces and towers" (9). Pushkin admits that

he "love[s] Peter's own creation" and all it represents-the glitter of the streets, the "ballroom's sparkle," the "precision" of the "riflemen troops," and the boom of the cannon that announces a royal birth or "one more Russian victory" (10).

In the Prologue Pushkin uses imagery to describe St. Petersburg as a beautiful woman, majestic and radiant in frosty winters and in graceful palaces. Pushkin writes that Peter's dream city should go undisturbed in an everlasting sleep" (11). Clearly Pushkin feels that St. Petersburg is a wonderful, new, modern city, one that will improve the present image and future fate of the Russian people. Likewise, Pushkin's description of the statue of Peter, the bronze "idol with its arm outflung" (15) is a testament to the Westernizer philosophy since, to Westernizers, Peter is an incomparable hero, an idol to be worshipped.

Conversely, Pushkin also presents characters, imagery, and symbolism that suggest a Slavophilic ideology. In the narrative that begins in Part One, Pushkin introduces Yevgeny, the "hero" of the tale. He is a quiet clerk with a once-prominent family name who soon realizes that this new "world and rumor held no trace of it" (Pushkin 11). Unlike Peter's dream of Westernlike glory, Yevgeny's dreams are of pure Russian continuance. His world is real, humble, and modest, not imaginative like Peter's; his work is dutiful, not demanding and bold; his dream is simple, not grand and complex. He wishes to save his money, marry Parasha, keep her "free from sorrow," "obtain a position," "tend and rear children," and live to have his "grandsons lay [them] both to rest" (12-13). In the conservative traditions of hard work, independence, and honor, Yevgeny is "content to labor hard and long" and to "build a simple nest" (12).

Contrasts that suggest the debate of a Slavophilic Russian identity versus a Westernizer European identity are abundant in this poem. Pushkin presents the two conflicting socio-political positions with equal sympathy. The poem can be seen as a tribute to Peter who dreams of the sparkling city by the sea as a gateway to the West, or alternatively, as a tribute to the humble

people like Yevgeny who want life in Russia to remain the same, who want only to go on without change in a small cottage outside the Imperial city. Peter desires the new artificial, though glorious, Western surroundings; Yevgeny strives for the old, traditional, native pleasures.

The imagery from the Prologue differs from the imagery of the two parts and reflects the change in both mood and message. The beautiful warm summer nights of Peter's city turn into harsh November. The flood engulfs Yevgeny's home, ruins his dreams, and drives him insane. In a fit of anger, Yevgeny shakes his fist at the bronze statue of Peter. Then the horseman comes to life and chases him until Yevgeny promises never to raise his hand to the "idol" again. Through such imagery Yevgeny can be seen as a victim of the Westernization of Russia brought on by Peter the Great. As evidenced by Pushkin's description of the great flood, for all of his Western influences, Peter cannot impose his order on the land or rivers of Russia, and he fails to take care of his own people. In the eyes of the Slavophiles, Peter betrayed his heritage and his country. His cruel repressions of the majority of the Russian people led eventually to the upheavals and revolutions of the early twentieth century. Pushkin intimates that Peter's Western sentiments may have some merit, but at too great a cost to his own citizens. Critics on both sides of the debate can argue that Peter the Great is a revolutionary who brings Russia closer to the rest of the Western world, but at the expense of those, like Yevgeny, who gain nothing in the bargain but grief and suffering. Peter's grand designs for Russia's destiny disregard the happiness of hundreds of lesser men like Yevgeny.

It is not surprising that Alexander Pushkin created poetry with both Slavophilic and Westernizer sentiments. He was influenced by Western literature, but he also wanted Russia to move into her own literary glory. No doubt he felt Russia deserved her own place in the world canon, so he did not want to ignore the Slavic heritage of his native land or sacrifice Russia's past worth and glory for the sake of her future. But surely he realized, too, that a national literature could only be produced in a modernized society, not in a primitive one. Nevertheless, whatever Pushkin's personal socio-political position, his poetry remains intentionally objective by keeping the conflicting Slavophilic and Westernizer positions on a steady scale.

Just as Pushkin created nineteenth-century poetry which shows elements of both Westernizer and Slavophilic philosophies, so too did Alexander Blok create twentieth-century Russian poetry which contains a similar balance of conservative Tsarist and liberal Revolutionist ideologies. Above all, his poem "The Twelve" displays both Revolutionary tendencies and Tsarist sympathies. Like Pushkin's poem, Blok's "The Twelve" is set in St. Petersburg, but the time is just after the October Revolution of 1917.

In Blok's poem, the old, outdated Tsarist world is represented in the opening canto by a collection of Russian citizens: a "weeping woman" who claims that "these Bolsheviks will be the death of us," a "bourgeois," a long-haired intellectual "pen-pusher," a "waddling cleric," a "lady in fur" who slips on ice, a group of prostitutes, and a hungry tramp ( Blok 136-137). The Bolsheviks consider these Russian citizens-middle-class merchants, clergymen, the elderly, wealthy aristocrats, artists, and beggars-to be enemies of the revolution. Blok seems to insinuate that these people are ignorant, foolish, and do not understand what the civil uprising is all about. Through his imagery of tedium and bitterness Blok exhibits his hatred of the old, conservative, Tsarist world.

Blok's Bolshevik revolutionists are represented by the Red Guardsmen. These twelve men march on patrol through the "pure white," snow-covered street, yelling the slogans of the revolution. Ultimately, in Canto VI, one of these guards shoots and kills his former girlfriend and leaves her dead in the snow. Like true revolutionaries, the twelve are not concerned with the past, only with the future. The guards march "forward," keeping a "Revolutionary Step" (140), and finally catch a glimpse of "Jesus Christ" who walks "ahead of them. .. with dainty steps...wearing a wreath of white roses" (145). Christ seems to take over the leadership of the twelve Red Guards as if they are the twelve apostles. With this image, Bolsheviks can argue that Blok recognized that the Revolution was indeed a blessed event.

Yet, by another argument, the Tsarists can easily claim that Blok's Red Guards stand for nothing positive. Rather, they are ignorant Bolshevik apostles whose only faith is in unnecessary violence and blind hatred. The sinister images of the "mischievous," "whipping" wind, the "darkness," the "black sky [that] grows blacker," the "wicked ice," and the blizzard and "frost [which] never lose[s] its grip" (137) also enhance the negativity associated with the corruption of the revolution. Tsarists can argue that Blok's cluster of helpless people on the street corner demonstrates how the revolutionaries have mocked many traditional values like religion, status, and intellect. In fact, nothing that belongs to the old world seems to matter any longer; everything is trampled on or shot at. The senseless killing of the innocent Kate indicates that Blok suggests the new ways of the Bolshevik society are, in fact, much more wicked than the old Russian ways. Tsarists can also argue that Blok is describing Christ, not leading the Red Guard, but rather walking away from them. The mangy dog, following the Red Guard, is in fact keeping company with those he most represents.

Alexander Blok's poetry is certainly ambiguous and difficult to align exactly with either Tsarist or Bolshevik sympathies. "The Twelve" seems to describe Blok's hatred of the old Russia and his vision of a new world rising out of chaos. Or maybe it describes his love of his native Russian country, her people, her vast, wind-swept spaces, and her tragic loss of traditional values as a result of the mad, irrational catastrophe that was the revolution. The duality of the poem remains a puzzle. Perhaps Blok started as a revolutionist, but then eventually found himself in the ranks of the conservative opponents of the Revolution. Yet, regardless of Blok's personal political position, his poem remains purposefully and splendidly ambiguous.

No doubt Pushkin's "The Bronze Horseman" and Blok's "The Twelve" have much in common. Both poems are dramatic narratives of men and women locked in chaos with nature; both poems center around a love story; and both poems focus on the theme of the sacrifice of lesser, more static individuals for the greater good of wiser, more progressive rulers. Also, both poems contain dual sympathies with both sides of socio-political debates. Pushkin and Blok present these dualities for a reason. Certainly they see the positive strengths of both opposing points of view. Moreover, they know that objectivity, a moderate stance, a balance, or a compromise of divisive philosophies is the position that really makes Russia strong and unique. With the merger of the polarizing influences, Pushkin and Blok show that Russia's true mission is to develop a civilization compounded of the best that Slavophiles and Westernizers and conservatives and revolutionists have to offer.