We feature each week Nicholas Reid's reviews and comments on new and recent books
To my shame and
humiliation I admit it.
I had to do a little
research (beginning with Wikipedia) to find out who Kostantin Eduardovich
Tsiolkovsky was, and I am now thoroughly annoyed with myself that I did not
already know.
In a nutshell,
Tsiolkovsky (1857-1935) was one of the major pioneers in “astronautics”, the
theory of space travel and rocketry. Working on his own, first in Tsarist
Russia then in Soviet Russia, he was the first to devise some of the chief
principles that made space travel possible. But most of his research was still
unpublished when the German Hermann Oberth and the American Robert Goddard
independently formulated some of the same hypotheses. In the West, Oberth and
Goddard are regarded as the fathers of space travel. But in Russia, Tsiolkovsky
gets the crown. He featured on Soviet-era postage stamps. In 1957, Sputnik was launched to coincide with
the centenary of Tsiolkovsky’s birth. The statues of him that were put up have
outlasted the Soviet Union.
So much for who
Konstantin was in history.
Now let me deal with who
Konstantin is in this brilliant, brief (not quite 200 pages) novel by a young
British author.
Tom Bullough is not
concerned to tell the whole life story of Konstantin Tsiolkovsky. He is
concerned simply to show the formation of an intuitive young scientific mind.
Rounded off with a startling coda, Konstantin
is an impressionistic account of the childhood and young manhood of the
scientist between 1867 (when Tsiolkovsky was ten) and 1881 (when Tsiolkovsky
was 24), before any of his scientific papers were published.
We are getting a
portrait of the young man before his public lift-off.
Young “Kostya” is restlessly
imaginative and inquisitive in his small, provincial town in late Tsarist
Russia. He is adventurous. On the opening pages he faces off against a wolf
when he takes it upon himself to walk through a forest to bring food to his
father who is labouring in a lumber camp. (The image of hungry wolves
re-emerges surpisingly in the novel’s last pages). He climbs to the very top of
the cupola on a high church tower, against the screamed protests of his young
playmates, to see the curvature of the Earth. Speed attracts him. He is keen on
tobogganing over the snow that is generously on offer and he breaks the ice and
plunges into a frozen river even though he never learns to swim properly.
Through the cold of a
Russian winter he also contracts scarlet fever, nearly dies, and almost loses
his hearing, leading to a life-long dependence on ear-trumpets. There is the
subtle suggestion that partial loss of hearing might have heightened his other
senses and made him more cerebrotonic than he would otherwise have been.
Though he is often
absorbed in his thoughts, there is no suggestion that little Kostya is an
isolate. He is endlessly inquisitive, plays with other kids, and frequently
pours out his ideas to his brother Ignat.
We might judge that the
remote provincial town would limit his potential and not provide him with
intellectual stimulation. But Tom Bullough is seeing this from the child’s own
viewpoint. (Wisely, the novel is narrated in the third-person limited voice, so that we see and experience only what
Kostya sees and experiences, but we are not limited to a child’s vocabulary).
Everything is a source of wonder to the kid, from the geometry he observes in
the natural world to the models of fantastic “reaction engines” (i.e. jets) he
begins to devise; from the few scientific textbooks he can access to the Jules
Verne fantasies he gobbles up.
At least one part of Konstantin’s interest is purely
historical. We know that late imperial Russia was technologically far behind
western Europe, and this might tempt us to believe that it was lacking in
speculative thought. Bullough’s novel suggests otherwise. Though Tsiolkovsky
was largely an autodidact (he flunked out in school and didn’t make it to
university), his self-teaching in a library in Moscow suggests a ferment of
ideas. Oddly, the librarian who is sometimes his mentor is a devout Orthodox
Christian, who wants science to advance so that Man will once again live in
harmony with nature, as in the Garden of Eden. There is that odd Russian
combination of pragmatism and mysticism. It is found, too, in Tsiolkovsky’s
parents. His Polish father is a sceptic who prefers not to set foot in
churches. His Russian mother is a devout worshipper who firmly believes that
contact with the holy icon of St. Nikolai will cure her son’s deafness. The
novel sees both parents as equally important influences on the boy.
While the novel is
convincing in the way it takes the temperature of its time and place, it does
not pile on the period detail for its own sake. Bullough is more interested in
the development of a young consciousness.
Early in the novel, we
see a bright but purely childish imagination as Kostya talks to his brother
Ignat. He is still thinking in terms of magical transformations:
“In my world… there wouldn’t be any gravity,
so it would be easy to pick up anything we liked. In my world I would be able
to jump versts through the air. I would be able to jump through the clouds and
right out into the ether. If I wanted to go to Moscow I would just have to run
and jump and I could fly there, easy. The people in the train would see me
zooming past like a cannonball! I would bring back a new dress for Mama, and a
smart fountain pen for Papa, and a whole cow for us all to eat…” (Pgs.9-10)
A little later, the
child’s imagination becomes more genuinely speculative and analytic, as Kostya
observes the universe while on a journey. A childish egocentricity is still
there, but Kostya now begins to break things into atoms, and realizes that
journeys entail some sort of technology, even if he continues to think in terms
of fairy-tale technology:
“Silent, unmoving
above the shivering sledge, the stars hung untroubled by clouds or even the
moisture that flooded the air on those summer night when he might sleep outside
on the grass. Kostya followed the track they lay above their own, conscribed by
the treetops. He imagined that the stars were the atoms of some monumental
being, perhaps of God Himself. He imagined that he was flying through the
ether, pulled not by horses but by a skein of swans, and that soon he would
arrive on other planets circling other stars, where he would be hailed as tsar
by creatures who communicated not, he thought, by sound but by means of
pictures mounted on their chests, which they would use to send messages even
faster than the telegraph.” (Pg.35)
And a little later
still, the fairy-tale technology is giving way to realizable technology, even
if the dreams remain the grandiose dreams of a child:
“As tsar, Kostya
would abolish death and allow no limit either to food or transort. He would
build a railway in a belt around the equator, where a 4-2-4 would travel at a
perpetual 123 versts per hour, its smoke rising in a spiral into space, and as
he ate meat pies on the velvet cushions of his carriage he would lean from his
window to regard the passing stars, to lift his hat to Mercury and Mars.”
(Pg.68)
I believe passages such
as these, and the novel’s whole concept of the developing young mind, declare
the essential theme of Konstantin
:- A lively imagination is needed as
much in science as in the arts. Intuitive leaps are as important for great
science as are observation, hypothesis and experimentation. The fairy-tales and
icons of his mother make Tsiolkovsky a great innovator as much as the rational
measuring and logical thought of his father.
You will note that all
the passages I have quoted here come from the earlier part of the novel, when
Kostya is eleven years old. The young manhood passages (Konstantin married and
beginning a family) are not quite as focused, and Bullough is tempted to
lecture us a little as Konstantin gives a classroom lesson on physics and puts
his infant daughter to sleep with grand speculations on space travel and the
size of the universe.
This has annoyed a
couple of critics.
In her review in the
(English) Observer (which you can
easily retrieve on-line) Ophelia Field generally praises this novel, especially
its opening childhood section, but she complains that it does not have a
well-wrought plot because, she says, Tom Bullough is constrained by the facts
of Tsiolkovsky’s biography.
I disagree.
Even if there is the
whiff of a lecture in one chapter, this is a perfectly-proportioned short
novel, deliberately not venturing beyond the moment of young inspiration and
the genesis of the adult scientist. Its milieu convinced me as authentic and it
has some of the best-crafted prose I have encountered in a novel for some time.
And for its factual information as much as anything else, I found the last
chapter (the novel’s coda, set in the 1960s) a stunner.
Konstantin is a lovely piece of work.
Footnote
– Here’s an odd coincidence. Tsiolkovsky was a great scientist who was
afflicted with deafness after a childhhod mishap. So was Thomas Alva Edison. I
recently read Anthony McCarten’s latest (short) novel Brilliance, which deals with Edison and his corruption by monetary
interests. There must be something in the Zeitgeist that is attracting young
writers to fictionalised tales of pioneer scientists. The deafness of the Russian
and the American might also imply that there is something in the theory that
this condition drove both men to a more intense speculation. Just a thought.