The study of Turgenev-Fet relationship is fraught with gaps and inaccuracies, due to researchers’ ofen subjective approach, as well as the incompleteness of the relevant corpus of documents. At the same time, there are still enough publicly available sources that can help to correct certain assumptions about the subject. Fet’s exemplary ‘purity’ of his muse and uncompromising aesthetic beliefs combined with his rationalism in quotidian matters are the antithesis of Turgenev’s aesthetic and life choices. This contrast emphasises and confrms the possibility for a happy symbiosis of the lyrical and ideological elements in art. Such harmonious co-existence is depicted by Turgenev in the character of Nikolay Petrovich Kirsanov. The article challenges A. Uspenskaya’s concept, which named Fet as the prototype of the older Kirsanov. From ideological and aesthetic perspectives alike, the character appears to be Fet’s complete opposite, although the poet’s estate, Stepanovka, was a major inspiration for Turgenev’s portrayal of Kirsanov’s ‘farm.’ The author of the article also questions the attempts to use Turgenev’s failure to meet his own ideal of a happy life as a reason for presenting Fet’s life strategy as superior.