REVIEWS 541 Despite these interests and influences, Gogol' always distinguished himself by his independent thinking, as, for example, in his preference for the modern side of Rome, with its Baroque churches and dilapidatedmediaeval neighbourhoods,an opinion rarelysharedby other foreignvisitorsof the time. Giuliani is the firstto examine in detail Gogol"s relationswith the Nazarene painters, who appear to have much in common with the Russian writer, including religiousfervour,interestin medieval arts and crafts,utopian belief in a biblical-patriarchalsociety, and an ideal of the artist, which resembles closely the one describedby Gogol' in his second version of 7hePortrait. Rita Giuliani demonstrates that Gogol' was not only actively involved in the artisticlife of the Italian capital, but that he was also very productive during his years in Rome, where he claimed that he was inspired to write about Russia much more successfullythan if he had been living there. The importance of this period is testifiedby the title that Gogol' chose to give to his unfinished short story, a privilege that he otherwise only bestowed on St Petersburgand Mirgorod, the two other most significantplaces in his life. Unfortunately, Gogol"s second period in Rome, between his return from Moscow in August I842 and his decision to move to Naples in May I846, was farless happy and creativefor the man and the writeralike. Gogol' is affected by variouspsychologicaldisordersand an urge incessantlyto rewritehis works in search of an ever higher moral purpose, which will eventuallydrivehim to destroy the second part of DeadSoulsin Moscow before his death. Giuliani's book provides a penetrating insight into the cultural history of Rome during the first half of the nineteenth century, depicting a city somewhat on the peripheryof the Europeanmap, but stillplaying a role in the arts as preserver of the values of the classical civilizations and the Renaissance. And, more importantlyfor the study of Russian literature,it sheds new light on Gogol"s biography and succeeds in reassessing the importance of the Roman periods in his life, and the role of the eternal city in his work and philosophical theories, which had previouslybeing underestimatedby critics. Rita Giulianiis additionallythe firstscholarto do justice to the short storyon Rome, which is analysed and given its place among Gogol"s more famous works. Giuliani's writing is simple and accessible, while being very informative and to the point; her book is widely researchedand makes use of previously unpublished archival material; and the appendix contains a comprehensive chronology of Gogol"s yearsin Rome. The only slightimperfectionis the lack of a bibliography at the end, bringing together the numerous references provided throughout the text and notes. 7he London Libray CLAUDIA Ricci Finke, Michael C. Seeing Chekhov: LifeandArt.Cornell UniversityPress,Ithaca, NY and London, 2005. xiii + 237 pp. Illustrations. Notes. Index. $29.95: fi6.50. ANTON CHEKHOV as writer and man has the reputation of being virtually inscrutable.Acquaintancesfrequentlydescribe Chekhov the man as reserved, 542 SEER, 84, 3, JULY 2006 distant, elusive, unknowable. Biographers are perennially puzzled by the enigma of a private, secretive, detached person, whose restraintmay suggest aloofness, indifferenceor coldness of heart. Chekhov the writer,it may seem, strove to preservehis essentialinviolabilityby aspiringto 'objectivity',thereby remaining unreachable, 'outside'his creations. The myth or legend of Chekhov's 'inscrutability'strikesthis reviewer as somewhat surprising.Chekhov was not a recluse, or a hermit, or a chelovek v futliare.He lived much of his life surroundedby family and visitors.The act of writing, however, required a degree of seclusion. Furthermore,as a doctor he was presumably aware (from I884 onwards)that tuberculosisthreatened him with an early death. Accordingly,Chekhov devoted his limited time and energy to family, friends,creativework and charitableenterprise.His reserve was a natural quality, intensified by the application of will-power and selfcontrol . He was a shy and private man, who dislikedpublicity and being the centre of attention. He avoided ostentatiousself-revelationin his personallife, just as he constantlyshunned overt subjectivityand didacticismin his writings. Is this really so very strange? Nevertheless, for those who would strive to explain him away, the 'enigma' of Chekhov persistentlyremains. In his unfailingly interesting, if ultimately not entirely convincing monograph , Seeing Chekhov: LifeandArt,Michael C. Finkeseeksto gain freshinsights into the writer and the man. His 'psychobiographical'(pp. 2, I41...