Чёрный монах

Я сходил с ума, у меня была мания величия, но зато я был весел, бодр и даже счастлив, я был интересен и оригинален. Теперь я стал рассудительнее и солиднее, но зато я такой, как все: я — посредственность, мне скучно жить... О, как вы жестоко поступили со мной! Я видел галлюцинации, но кому это мешало? Я спрашиваю: кому это мешало?

I had lost my mind, I had grand delusions, but I was cheerful, confident and even happy, I was interesting and original. Now I have become more sensible and sedate, but I am just like everyone else; I am mediocre, and I am bored of life... Oh, how cruelly you have treated me! I saw hallucinations, but who did this harm? I ask you, who did this harm?

2018 must be the year I fall for Chekhov. I have seen his plays adapted on stage in the past, but for some reason have never sat down and read anything by him until this year.

His themes, perhaps, are fairly similar to other well-known nineteenth century Russian writers, and, like them, his dialogue sometimes verges on the overly melancholic and grandiose, but his prose is different. He has a style that's direct and to-the-point, he writes about characters without judgement, and this I can really appreciate.

‘The Black Monk', like ‘[b:Палата №6|21470404|Палата №6 (Сборник)|Anton Chekhov|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1394985967s/21470404.jpg|2086250]' (‘Ward No.6'), is an exploration of madness and society's perception of it. Kovrin is an academic on the verge of a nervous breakdown due to overwork. Right from the start, Kovrin is perfectly aware that he is unwell, that his delusions and hallucinations, involving the black monk, are completely unreal. However, this fact hardly troubles him at all, indeed he feels “happy”. Only when those around him begin to become aware of his mental state do events take a turn for the worse... Clearly, as in ‘Ward No.6', the message is that society's definition of madness may do more harm than good. Why is Kovrin's state considered “mad” or socially unacceptable, while others' are not? I personally am a little unsure about Chekhov's thoughts on the relationship between madness and “genius”, but I respect him for raising this issue at that time.

Chekhov seems pretty pessimistic about treatment of mental illness at this time. Although, clearly, I imagine he must have seen for himself, as a doctor, how poor care and medical understanding was, I also wonder if it is fair to put blame entirely on society and the medical profession. It's also hard to say which characters were more "at fault" in this story. I do need to think about this further. Like I said, Chekhov strives to write without judgement, but I did feel sorry for Tanya and what she was put through, her marriage falling apart. Kovrin, as he admits himself, was selfish and cruel in his behaviour towards her and her father, after they "treated" him. But then was this really the behaviour of a "sane" man?