To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Dostoevsky.
Journal articles on the topic 'Dostoevsky'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Dostoevsky.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Maltsev, Leonid A. "Czesław Miłosz’s “Theological treatise” in the context of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s religious worldview." Slovo.ru: Baltic accent 12, no. 4 (2021): 107–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.5922/2225-5346-2021-4-6.
Full textAbstract:
The article investigates a religious and philosophical dialogue of Miłosz and Dostoevsky. The antinomic content of Miłosz's poem “Theological Treatise” is analyzed in the context of Dostoevsky's Christocentric worldview, as well as religious and heretical teachings of early Christianity, which aroused Milosz's interest throughout his career. In their works, Dostoevsky and Miłosz explored the theological problem of apoсatastasis and offered their interpretation of it. The paper also examines Miłosz’s contribution as an essayist to the comparative study of Dostoevsky's works (Dostoevsky — Mickiewicz and Dostoevsky — Swedenborg). The ideological basis of “Theological Treatise” is the dialectical relationship between faith and truth, which is associated with Miłosz's appeal to Dostoevsky's ‘creed’ from his famous letter to Fonvisina. Like Dostoevsky, Miłosz criticizes the natural-scientific concept of truth in its depersonalized and, therefore, dehumanized version, which seems to the author of “Theological Treatise” as an instrument of ‘devilish theology’. In a dialogue with the traditions of Russian religious philosophy, and above all with Dostoevsky’s legacy, Miłosz turns to the Apocalypse, in which the most aesthetically significant the idea for him is that of restoring paradisiacal existence. However, unlike Dostoevsky, the concept of life after death in “Theological Treatise” is not free from pessimism and skepticism. Miłosz is inclined towards the ideological paradigm of the West, and the concept of “Theological Treatise” includes the ideas of Dostoevsky's unbelieving heroes.
2
Dostoevsky, Alexey D., and Natalia V. Shwarts. "“My Husband's Lifelong Dream Was for Our Children to Get an Education...”: Gymnasium Students Lyuba and Fedya Dostoevsky." Неизвестный Достоевский 7, no. 2 (June 2020): 196–218. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2020.4701.
Full textAbstract:
Dostoevsky's main concern was to educate his children, Lyuba and Fedya. After the writer's death, this desire was realized by his widow Anna Grigoryevna. Little was known about the education of Dostoevsky’s children, primarily from memoirs (penned by Anna and Lyubov Dostoevsky, Anna Ostroumova). The article presents previously unknown documents from the Central State Historical Archive of Saint Petersburg (name books, personal statements, etc.), containing information about the education of F. M. Dostoevsky's children: Lyuba — at the Foundry Gymnasium, Fedya — at the F. F. Bychkov Gymnasium (purchased by Ya. Gurevich in 1883). Letters related to the education of Dostoevsky's children were introduced into scientific circulation: Lyuba’s and Fedya’s to their mother, teacher V. Ivanova’s to A. G. Dostoevskaya. In the course of commenting on archival documents, the author emphasizes the continuity between home education and the education of the writer and his children, and reveals the role of A. G. Dostoevskaya in fulfilling Fyodor Mikhailovich's dream: to provide them with a quality education. Home education, first and foremost, the established tradition of family reading, which the Dostoevskys always heeded great attention to, allowed Lyuba to enter the gymnasium at the age of thirteen, bypassing two primary classes, and successfully reach the second, pre-graduation, class. Her classmates were A. P. Ostroumova (Lebedeva) and N. Ya. Polonskaya (Yelachich), who later became famous figures in Russian history. The education received at the gymnasium helped the writer's daughter to prove herself in literature during the years in emigration, to become a Russian writer in Italy, to represent the legacy of Dostoevsky in Europe, and to successfully conduct educational and cultural activities in Italy. The writer’s son Fedya, who studied at the St. Petersburg F. F. Bychkov Gymnasium in 1882-1889, entered the law faculty of the St. Petersburg Imperial University in 1890, became interested in horse breeding, and in the latter years of his life paid great attention to the preservation of his father's handwritten heritage. Thus, the children of F. M. Dostoevsky fulfilled his legacy: “Do not forget to study, both of you”.
3
Zavarkina, Marina. "Manufacturers, Printers and Booksellers in the 1872–1918 Records of F. M. and A. G. Dostoevsky." Неизвестный Достоевский 11, no. 1 (March 2024): 154–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2024.7141.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The Dostoevsky couple’s book trade is a separate, vast topic that has recently attracted increasingly greater attention of researchers. Starting in 1872 — the period of preparation of the novel “Demons” (1873) for publication — the Dostoevskys dealt with various publishers, printers, manufacturers and booksellers. The article is based on the 1872–1881 notebooks of F. M. Dostoevsky and the 1876–1918 notebooks of A. G. Dostoevskaya, as well as on scientific literature on publishing and book trade of 19th-century Russia, expanded comments and biographical references to such representatives of the book business as the Vargunin brothers and separately father and son Alexander Ivanovich and Konstantin Alexandrovich Vargunin; the Glazunov brothers and separately Alexander Ilyich and Ivan Ilyich Glazunov. The last representatives of the Glazunov publishing clan, Konstantin Ilyich and Ilya Ivanovich Glazunov, with whom, judging by the notebooks, A. G. Dostoevskaya interacted after the writer’s death, are being discussed for the first time. The article expanded the comment on the surname “Mamontov.” In the research literature on Dostoevsky, the emphasis is placed either exclusively on the writer’s relationship with Nikolai Ivanovich Mamontov, or with Anatoly Ivanovich Mamontov. Based on the notebooks of A. G. Dostoevskaya of 1876–1881, the article demonstrates that the Dostoevskys communicated with both representatives of the Mamontov family at that time. It is also suggested that in the late receipts issued by A. G. Dostoevskaya to a subscriber of the bookstore of a certain N. G. Mamontov, most likely refer to the bookseller N. G. Martynov. A. G. Dostoevskaya’s notebooks of the period after Dostoevsky’s death shows that the widow continued to cooperate with many publishers, booksellers and manufacturers after her husband’s death.
4
Fokin, Pavel. "Forgotten Memoirs About F. M. Dostoevsky in the Collection of A. G. Dostoevskaya." Неизвестный Достоевский 8, no. 3 (September 2021): 136–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2021.5601.
Full textAbstract:
In the 140 years that have passed since the death of F. M. Dostoevsky, almost all of his contemporaries’ memoirs about the writer have been published (in separate books and collections). To date, we can assume that the main corpus of Dostoevsky’s contemporaries’ accounts of him is publicly available. However, this does not mean that it is completely exhausted. A review of newspaper clippings collected by A. G. Dostoevskaya allowed us to identify several notes that were previously unaccounted for and missed by the publishers. For the most part, these are small fragments included by their authors in articles on other topics, nevertheless, they are also of interest to the biographers of F. M. Dostoevsky. The article publishes and comments on the memoirs of A. A. Sokolov, S. Atava, Vogue, V. G. Avseenko, V. F. Putsykovich. They are related to the final years of Dostoevsky's life, capturing distinct features of his everyday behavior, specific phrases and statements. Of interest is the story related by V. G. Avseenko about Dostoevsky's attitude to the political events in Europe, as well as Dostoevsky's commentary on his “The Grand Inquisitor,” was recorded by V. F. Putskovich after a meeting in Berlin in 1879.
5
Dimitrova, N. I. "Types of philosophical reception of Dostoevsky in Bulgaria from the first half of the 20th century." Solov’evskie issledovaniya, no. 1 (2020): 123–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2020.1.123-136.
Full textAbstract:
The article is devoted to the philosophical interpretations of Dostoevsky's work in Bulgaria in the first half of the twentieth century. Dostoevsky's initial presence in Bulgaria was investigated as well the response of the Bulgarian intelligentsia to his ideas compared to those of Tolstoy. The beneficial influence on the image of the writer as a thinker, philosopher, exerted by the Russian emigration in Bulgaria since the beginning of the 1920s is noted. Particular emphasis is placed on the work of Petr Bitsill, one of the best experts in the field of Dostoevsky studies. The types of interpretations of Dostoevsky as a philosopher are distinguished as follows: Dostoevsky as a Nietzschean. Dostoevsky and Nietzsche (opposition and identification) – bearing in mind the strong influence of Nietzsche in Bulgaria since the beginning of the twentieth century; Dostoevsky as one of the founders of Russian religious philosophy – considering the penetration of the Silver Age ideas in Bulgaria; Dostoevsky and psychoanalysis; Dostoevsky as a religious philosopher and innovator. The author concludes that the study of the peculiarities of the reception of Dostoevsky’s work in Bulgarian culture of the first half of the twentieth century reveals not only the variety of world views but also the specifics of the national spiritual tradition.
6
Dementyeva, Tatyana. "Was the Dostoevsky Estate Profitable?" Неизвестный Достоевский 8, no. 1 (March 2021): 77–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2021.5241.
Full textAbstract:
In August 1831, the parents of Fyodor Dostoevsky purchased an estate in the Kashirsky district of the Tula Province, consisting of the hamlet of Darovoe and the village of Darovaya. In February 1833, they bought the neighboring village of Cheremoshnya. The entire property, including the above-named villages and hamlet, also included land plots in the wastelands: Nechaeva, Trypillya, Harina, Shelepova and Chertkova. Having become the owners of 58 peasant souls and more than 500 dessiatines of land, the Dostoevskys were considered average local landowners. However, Darovoe, well-known as the childhood place of the writer Fyodor Dostoevsky, remains poorly studied from an economic point of view. One of the reasons is that today there are very few documents that could reliably indicate the economic condition of the estate for the memorial period. An exception is the monograph of V. S. Nechaeva “In the Dostoevsky family and estate,” published in 1939, where, based on the correspondence of M. F. Dostoevskaya and M. A. Dostoevsky, the author claims that the estate they acquired was not merely unprofitable, but also caused a family tragedy. The opinion of V. S. Nechaeva became fundamental for researchers of the writer's biography. However, this issue can be revised today, which is what the presented work is devoted to. The correspondence of Fyodor Dostoevsky's parents, the letters of his older brother M. M. Dostoevsky, who was the guardian over the estate and the Memoirs of the younger brother of A. M. Dostoevsky in the aggregate allow to take a fresh look at the estate and the income it brought. In the context of this problem, it is of interest to refer to the newly published “Report of the headman of the village of Darovoe Savin Makarov to Mikhail Mikhailovich Dostoevsky” dated October 8, 1850. The document was discovered in the Russian State Archive of Literature and Art and complements the well-known sources on the economic condition of the Dostoevsky estate.
7
Fedorova, Elena. ""My Most Influential and Friendly Teacher": D. V. Averkiev and F. M. Dostoevsky." Неизвестный Достоевский 12, no. 1 (March 2025): 145–78. https://doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2025.7881.
Full textAbstract:
The playwright, publicist and theater critic D. V. Averkiev began his literary career in the journal published by the brothers Mikhail and Fyodor Dostoevsky “Epokha” (1864–1865). The young employee considered F. M. Dostoevsky his principal teacher. On many issues, he shared the beliefs of the editor of the “Epokha,” and Dostoevsky, in turn, gave the publicist the opportunity to express those ideas that he himself did not have the time to embody. The article traces the polemic of Averkiev, which represents the editorial point of view of the “Epokha”, with the opinions of N. M. Kostomarov and D. I. Pisarev on the significance of the Battle of Kulikovo and Prince Dmitry Donskoy in the history of Russia. After the closure of the “Epokha” magazine, the relationship between Averkiev and Dostoevsky persisted. The writer praised Averkiev’s comedy about Frol Skabeev, anticipating its theatrical success. The publicist was a guarantor for the groom at the wedding of Dostoevsky and A. G. Snitkina, a witness to the triumph that followed the writer’s speech at the Pushkin celebrations in Moscow, and an administrator at Dostoevsky's funeral. Averkiev and his wife helped the writer’s widow in the work aimed at preserving his legacy. Averkiev’s artistic work created in the period after Dostoevsky’s death is imbued with a sense of love and deep respect for the memory of the great writer. In 1885–1886 following Dostoevsky, he published a monthly journal, “A Writer’s Diary”, which was doomed to failure and provoked mixed reactions from readers (reviews by S. A. Vengerov, P. M. Tret’yakov, and I. E. Repin are provided). The article analyzes the contents of the correspondence between Averkiev and Dostoevsky in 1877, for the first time Averkiev’s note to Dostoevsky asking for financial assistance dated 1863–1864 was published, and new documents were introduced into scientific circulation. Among them is a draft of a biographical sketch about Dostoevsky written by Averkiev for the second edition of the Complete Works of the writer (1885–1886), and letters from Averkiev to A. G. Dostoevskaya for 1884 and 1891.
8
Proshchenko, Anastasia. "F. M. Dostoevsky in the Biased Opinions of the Feuilletonist and Critic V. P. Burenin." Неизвестный Достоевский 8, no. 3 (September 2021): 107–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2021.5561.
Full textAbstract:
The influence of the critic V. P. Burenin on the public life of the 1860s — 1880s is great: his popularity was comparable to that of V. G. Belinsky in the 1840s. According to B. B. Glinsky, everyone has secretly read Burenin's feuilletons, even those who despised the newspaper Novoe Vremya (New Time) and personally hated its critical columnist for the sharpness and rudeness of his polemical style. The article examines the evolution of the critic's views of F. M. Dostoevsky’s work and his role in Russian journalism and literature. In the initial period of his activity, V. P. Burenin tended to adhere to common moods and assessments, and scolded Dostoevsky. Gradually, he realized the scale of Dostoevsky's writing gift. Already a famous and influential author of the Novoe Vremya (New Time), V. P. Burenin became a great admirer, friend and defender of the writer. He was one of the few critics who appreciated the Writer's Diary. After Dostoevsky's death, Burenin maintained good communication with the writer's widow. Their correspondence makes it clear that A. G. Dostoevskaya considered Burenin her colleague in preserving the legacy of her late husband. The letters contain previously unknown information, namely, that the correspondence of the Novoe Vremya (New Time) about the fire in Staraya Russa were penned by A. G. Dostoevskaya herself, as well as some other information about Dostoevsky and the fate of his legacy.
9
Andrianova, Irina. "Anna Dostoevskaya’s Notebooks: Published and Overlooked." Неизвестный Достоевский 10, no. 1 (March 2023): 188–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2023.6601.
Full textAbstract:
The article presents an overview of a little-researched archival source — the notebooks of Anna Dostoevskaya. About 100 notebooks kept by the writer’s wife have been preserved in Moscow and St. Petersburg archives. They were created between 1875 and 1917, covering the last five years of Dostoevsky’s life and the time after his death. However, they did not arouse much interest among researchers due to the prevalence of economic and business records in them. Selected entries and pages were published by L. P. Grossman, I. L. Volgin, S. V. Belov, T. N. Ornatskaya, A. V. Arkhipova, I. S. Andrianova, T. V. Panyukova. Many records of undoubted historical and literary significance still haven’t been introduced into scientific circulation, among them sketches of excerpts from “A Writer’s Diary” and memories of Dostoevsky; lists of types of his favorite places and paintings, pharmacy prescriptions; pasted or rewritten letters from readers and documents of the Dostoevsky family; records related to the movement of the writer’s manuscripts, books and the belongings after his death, and to his widow’s work to create the first in Russia “Dostoevsky Memorial Museum,” to establish a school named after him in Staraya Russa, and others. The article provides examples of unpublished records that are of value for biographers (the names of Dostoevsky’s servants in 1875–1876, Maria of Baden’s, Princess Maria Maximilianovna of Leuchtenberg, impression of the writer’s work and death, Dostoevsky’s words remembered by his widow, a rough sketch for his memoirs). Based on the study of economic notes by A. G. Dostoevskaya, it is hypothesized that Dostoevsky’s maid Lukerya could have been the prototype of a servant with the same name from the ‘fantastic short story’ “A Gentle Creature” and the novel “The Adolescent.” A letter written by A. G. Dostoevskaya to E. F. Junge whose autograph is lost was discovered in one of the notebooks. A. G. Dostoevskaya’s notebooks are a genuine treasure trove of materials related to Dostoevsky and his era. They required research, systematization, chronological attribution and publication.
10
Zavarkina, Marina. "Publishing and Book Trade of the Dostoevskys." Неизвестный Достоевский, no. 1 (March 2023): 145–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2023.6581.
Full textAbstract:
The article examines the publishing business and book trade of F. M. and A. G. Dostoevsky. Anna Grigoryevna has begun to actively participate in her husband’s creative process as a stenographer and copyist since 1866, and in the publishing business — since 1873. The publishing business of the Dostoevsky family is considered in the article against the background of the publishing process of the 19th century, which consisted of the author’s prepress work on the text together with the editor, publisher, typographer, printing factor, metranpage, proofreader, censor. Anna Grigorievna worked on the proofs along with Dostoevsky. After the publication of the book or a magazine issue, the book trade began, which described in the memoirs of A. G. Dostoevskaya, her letters and notebooks, which contained systematic records related to the distribution of “A Writer’s Diary” and the sale of books. The names of publishers, booksellers and subscribers are regularly mentioned in F. M. Dostoevsky’s notebook of 1875–1876, as well as in A. G. Dostoevskaya’s notebooks of 1875–1884. However, there is no proper commentary in the scientific literature on many names, or, if present, it is not entirely accurate. The author of the article, in particular, found out which of the five Pechatkin brothers is mentioned in the notebooks of F. M. Dostoevsky and his wife, what are the booksellers from Kazan Dubrovina famous for, who distributed “A Writer’s Diary”, who is S. I. Litov and what led to the popularity of his bookstore in Kiev. This material will allow us to better imagine how publishing and book trade developed not only for Dostoevskys in particular, but also in the 19th century as a whole.
11
Fokin, Pavel, and Maria Zusmanovich. "F. M. Dostoevsky: Biography in Photographs." Неизвестный Достоевский 7, no. 3 (September 2020): 114–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2020.4802.
Full textAbstract:
The collection of photographic materials of The Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature, related to the life and work of F. M. Dostoevsky, is the largest such collection and currently includes 2540 items. The collection of photographs is based on the memorial collection of A. G. Dostoevskaya from the Memorial Museum of F. M. Dostoevsky. In the 1930s, it was transferred to the F. M. Dostoevsky Museum, established in Moscow in 1928, and after its merge with the State Literary Museum in 1940 (since 2017 — The Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature), it became a part of its photography collection. The compendium of photographs related to the life and work of Fedor Dostoevsky continued to grow in the following years. The article provides a comprehensive description of the collection of photos based on two main criteria: by the type of material — original photos, reshot photos, duplicate photos; by genre and thematic content of the images — portraits of F. M. Dostoevsky, portraits of relatives, portraits of children of F. M. Dostoevsky, nephews, descendants, portraits of friends, acquaintances, сontemporaries, sights of places related to the biography of F. M. Dostoevsky. The article analyzes the accompanying inscriptions and autographs on the photographs, specifies the dating and location of the images, which allows to make corrections and additions to the Chronicle of the life and work of F. M. Dostoevsky. Based on a comparative analysis of the translator’s gift autograph on his photo, the facts of F. M. Dostoevsky’s biography, and the analysis of F. M. Dostoevsky’s letter to an unidentified person dated December 5, 1863, an assumption is made that the addressee of the letter is W. Wolfzon.
12
Fokin, Pavel, and Maria Zusmanovich. "F. M. Dostoevsky: Biography in Photographs." Неизвестный Достоевский 7, no. 3 (September 2020): 114–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j9.art.2020.4802.
Full textAbstract:
The collection of photographic materials of The Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature, related to the life and work of F. M. Dostoevsky, is the largest such collection and currently includes 2540 items. The collection of photographs is based on the memorial collection of A. G. Dostoevskaya from the Memorial Museum of F. M. Dostoevsky. In the 1930s, it was transferred to the F. M. Dostoevsky Museum, established in Moscow in 1928, and after its merge with the State Literary Museum in 1940 (since 2017 — The Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature), it became a part of its photography collection. The compendium of photographs related to the life and work of Fedor Dostoevsky continued to grow in the following years. The article provides a comprehensive description of the collection of photos based on two main criteria: by the type of material — original photos, reshot photos, duplicate photos; by genre and thematic content of the images — portraits of F. M. Dostoevsky, portraits of relatives, portraits of children of F. M. Dostoevsky, nephews, descendants, portraits of friends, acquaintances, сontemporaries, sights of places related to the biography of F. M. Dostoevsky. The article analyzes the accompanying inscriptions and autographs on the photographs, specifies the dating and location of the images, which allows to make corrections and additions to the Chronicle of the life and work of F. M. Dostoevsky. Based on a comparative analysis of the translator’s gift autograph on his photo, the facts of F. M. Dostoevsky’s biography, and the analysis of F. M. Dostoevsky’s letter to an unidentified person dated December 5, 1863, an assumption is made that the addressee of the letter is W. Wolfzon.
13
LEKEŠ, Patrik. "FOUR SELVES OF F. M. DOSTOEVSKY IN S. FREUD´S RECEPTION." Ezikov Svyat (Orbis Linguarum) 23.1, ezs.swu.v.23.1 (March 6, 2025): 141–49. https://doi.org/10.37708/ezs.swu.bg.v23i1.13.
Full textAbstract:
The contribution examines the interconnections between Sigmund Freud and Fyodor M. Dostoevsky within the context of both authors' biographies. Freud, in his works, referred with Dostoevsky's literary oeuvre and personal life through the lens of psychoanalysis. In Dostoevsky and Parricide Freud presented a psychiatric perspective on Dostoevsky's writings, identifying four distinct aspects of his personality: the creative artist, the neurotic, the moralist, and the sinner. Freud suggested that certain elements of "Dostoevsky the human" are reflected in "Dostoevsky the artist". This study employs historiographical method to elucidate specific facets of Freud's reception of Dostoevsky. It incorporates excerpts from selected works (e. g. Humiliated and Insulted, The Gambler, Crime and Punishment). The relationship between Freud and Dostoevsky, as well as Freud's contributions to scientific research, is also interpreted through secondary sources (P. Říčan, L. Breger, and others). Furthermore, the study analyzes and interprets Freud's perspective on Dostoevsky's personality, comparing Freud's observations with historical and biographical insights from Anna Dostoevsky's memoirs. The primary aim is to chart the biographical parallels between Dostoevsky and Freud, assess Freud's reception of Dostoevsky, and juxtapose Freud's views with Anna Dostoevsky's recollections, ultimately providing a comprehensive portrayal of Dostoevsky both as a person and as an author.
14
Burlakova, I. I. "Dostoevsky’s Italy." Язык и текст 6, no. 2 (2019): 10–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.17759/langt.2019060202.
Full textAbstract:
The theme “Dostoevsky and Italy” is extensive and diverse due to the fact that a number of researchers constantly turn to it, opening new pages in the life of the great writer. It includes the following areas of research: Dostoevsky's journey through Italy, the images of Italy in the pages of Dostoevsky's works, the reception of the writer's creativity in journalism, cinema and art, the problems of translating Dostoevsky's works into Italian. A special appeal to this topic shows that these four areas of research are connected in the works of Dostoevsky with such Italian cities as Rome, Florence and Naples. This determines the problematic of this article. The author assumes that there is a special integrity in all the disparate impressions and plots of Dostoevsky connected with Rome, Naples, and Florence. Dostoevsky's great novels are born in Rome against the backdrop of the great creations of Italian architecture. Naples is a city of dreams, a city where “noise, thunder, life” is intertwined with Dostoevsky’s fatal love, with truly Italian passions that defined the love story of the writer and Apollinaria Suslova. Florence is a city of quiet family happiness and comfort, which the writer needed so much during his creative dawn.
15
Zakharova, Olga. "The 1862 Case of the Writer F. M. Dostoevsky." Неизвестный Достоевский 8, no. 3 (September 2021): 72–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2021.5621.
Full textAbstract:
Dostoevsky's first trip abroad in the summer of 1862 took place in the midst of an aggravated political situation in Russia, facilitated by radical revolutionary unrest in St. Petersburg, Moscow and other cities, fires that followed the proclamations and raised suspicions of arson. To combat radical propaganda, an Investigative Commission for the dissemination of revolutionary appeals was established under the chairmanship of Prince A. F. Golitsyn. F. M. Dostoevsky, who had met with Herzen in London in July 1862, came to its attention. The article examines materials from the investigation file of the III Department “On the writer Fyodor Dostoevsky,” which have not been previously published and which allow to clarify both the facts of the writer’s biography, and the significance of this historical and literary event. The register of books and papers seized from Dostoevsky at the border is of particular interest. An analysis allows to understand what concerned the writer, what he read and deliberated. The first issue of the magazine "Russische Revue", published in May 1862, is of particular importance. Its editor V. Wolfson witnessed Dostoevsky's literary success in 1845. He witnessed Dostoevsky’s triumph at the salon of Prince Odoevsky, and was an admirer and translator of his works. The article establishes new facts of German-Russian literary contacts in 1840-1860 and Dostoevsky’s biography.
16
Stepchenkova, Valentina. "Lessons in Pushkin Studies in the Editorial Practice of A. G. Dostoevskaya." Неизвестный Достоевский 11, no. 3 (October 2024): 176–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2024.7501.
Full textAbstract:
A. S. Pushkin had a great influence on the development of Russian culture in the 19th century, including book publishing. Pushkin’s motifs and images have repeatedly appeared in the works of F. M. Dostoevsky. The last year of the writer’s life was marked by the triumphant “Pushkin’s Speech,” which turned the overall idea of Russian literature upside down. A. G. Dostoevskaya, who began an active bibliographic and publishing life after the death of her husband, followed the tradition of Pushkin’s publications in it. By the time the Complete Works of F. M. Dostoevsky were published, Pushkin studies had already actively solved textual problems, thereby facilitating subsequent researchers and publishers to work on compiling collections of works and bibliographies of writers. Systematizing her husband’s collected materials, A. G. Dostoevskaya focused on the bibliographic index of Pushkin’s works “Puschkiniana,” compiled by V. I. Mezhov. This is evidenced by the notes she made in her notebooks. The main consultant to the writer’s widow, who for several years had been independently preparing the first bibliography of Dostoevsky for publication, was P. A. Efremov, bibliographer, Pushkin scholar and editor of the Complete Works of A. S. Pushkin. In the poet’s anniversary year of 1899, A. G. Dostoevskaya published Dostoevsky’s Pushkin’s Speech in a separate edition, calling it “Pushkin” and thereby contributing to the celebration of the founder of Russian literature. Pushkin’s work played a significant role not only in Dostoevsky’s biography and literary legacy, but also in the bibliographic and traditional activities of the writer’s wife.
17
Yuri V., Pushchaev. "Dostoevsky and Socialism: Ambivalent Relations." Almanac “Essays on Conservatism” 4 (October 30, 2022): 238–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.24030/24092517-2022-0-4-238-258.
Full textAbstract:
The article examines the ambivalent relationship between Dostoevsky and socialism, that is, both with a minus sign and with a plus sign. It is noted that for all Dostoevsky’s resolute rejection of socialism and criticism of it, he was characterized by certain hidden moments in which he assessed socialists and socialism positively. This, in turn, predetermined the fact that Dostoevsky, for all his anti-nihilism, was recognized as a classic in Soviet times and was never a banned author, even under Stalin. The decisive circumstance is that utopian socialist elements were interspersed and incorporated into Dostoevsky's Christian ideal, in the way he understood Christianity and its role in society. It was clearly expressed in the fact, for example, that Dostoevsky was able to understand the Church and Christianity as "our Russian socialism." And it is precisely this incorporation of foreign material into the Christian ideal, it is precisely this understanding of Christianity that K.N. Leontiev subjected in his famous criticism of the so-called pink Christianity in Dostoevsky.
18
Skuridina, Svetlana A. "Doctors-foreigners in the Dostoevsky’s works: onomastic aspect." Neophilology, no. 18 (2019): 150–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.20310/2587-6953-2019-5-18-150-155.
Full textAbstract:
We reveal the specificity of anthroponymicon of doctors-foreigners in the Dostoevsky’s works. The writer’s appeal to the image of a doctor is due to the desire of F.M. Dostoevsky to answer the question whether a person of this profession is only a healer of the body or can act as a healer of the soul and even spirit. Reflections on the purpose of the doctor dictated by the F.M. Dostoevsky biography: in the field of medicine worked not only the writer's father – M.A. Dostoevsky, but also his great-uncle V.M. Kotelnitsky. The purpose of this study is to identify the features of anthroponymic vocabulary used for doctors nominations. Doctors’ list of names in Dostoevsky's literary texts is socially and nationally determined, as well as chronotopical: the abundance of foreign anthroponyms is a vivid characteristic of the era depicted by the writer, when medical practice was conducted by specialists who came from other countries. F.M. Dostoevsky creates anthroponyms according to traditional models typical for a particular language. At the same time, he uses an easily disclosed etymology, in connection with which many foreign surnames can be attributed to “eloquent” and comic, contributing to the creation of an incompetent and strange doctor’s image. Another common technique of onomastic Dostoevsky’s laboratory is the assimilation of foreign name with Russian – with the aim of reducing or disclosure of the doctor’s image.
19
Panyukova, Tatiana V., and Madina Kayumova. "Dostoevsky, the Writer’s Nephew." Неизвестный Достоевский 12, no. 1 (March 2025): 85–111. https://doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2025.7883.
Full textAbstract:
Andrei Andreevich Dostoevsky, the youngest son of A. M. Dostoevsky, along with his father, widow, son and grandson of the writer, became one of the key figures in preserving the memory of F. M. Dostoevsky. He actively helped Anna Grigorievna in her search, genealogical and publishing work: from 1903 to 1908, he turned out to be the secret keeper of the rough proof of the unpublished chapter “At Tikhon’s” from the novel “Demons.” Later, in 1914–1915, after the publication of N. N. Strakhov’s slanderous letter, he took part in collecting signatures in defense of the memory of the deceased under the protest compiled by A. G. Dostoevskaya. In a letter dated 1909, he informed her about the writer’s autographs being sold by the St. Petersburg bookseller F. G. Shilov (his notes to the clicker M. A. Aleksandrov). After the death of the writer’s widow and son, in Soviet times, being the head of the Dostoevsky family, Andrei Andreevich continued the activities of A. G. Dostoevskaya, adequately accepting the mission that fell to his lot: he actively participated in the large-scale jubilee exhibition dedicated to the life and work of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky and timed to his centenary (November 1921), in 1925–1930 he was a curator in the Pushkin House, and became one of the main informants of M. V. Volotskoy, providing rich material on the Dostoevsky family tree, which formed the basis of the book “The Chronicle of the Generations of Dostoevsky” (1933). He published and commented on the memoirs of A. M. Dostoevsky (1930). Having inherited from his father a large family archive, which, in addition to his father's memoirs and diaries, included family correspondence, i.e., letters from the 1830s, Andrei Andreevich preserved it and transferred it to the Pushkin House (Fund 56). The specifics of his long-term work on the preservation of the heritage of F. M. Dostoevsky’s writings are reflected in his family’s correspondence, which is still poorly understood, and the events of his life are often directly related to the fate of the manuscripts he kept. It is important to systematize the archive of A. A. Dostoevsky and study his biography in detail in order to track the fate of the lost autographs of letters.
20
Trukhan, Elena. "In Defense of Alexander Ivanovich Isaev (Using Materials of the State Archive of the Tomsk Region)." Неизвестный Достоевский 8, no. 2 (July 2021): 48–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2021.5341.
Full textAbstract:
The article introduces into scientific circulation official documents dated 1853‒1855, preserved in the State Archive of the Tomsk region and recreating the last months of the life of Alexander Ivanovich Isaev — a friend of F. M. Dostoevsky in Semipalatinsk, the first husband of Maria Dmitrievna Constant (Isaeva, Dostoevskaya). These documents include: A. I. Isaev's certificate of service, issued on September 27, 1853, and 6 reports and 12 official letters dated February‒November 1855. Until recently, the corpus of biographical literature about Dostoevsky offered an image of A. I. Isaev as a bitter drunkard, a weak-willed man who ruined his career and life and left his family in poverty. Materials of the State Archive of the Tomsk region contain positive characteristics of Isaev and confirm his professional achievements and career growth from 1840 to July 28, 1853, the day of his dismissal. These archival materials reveal an important fact — the official reason for his dismissal from service. It was not Isaev's alcoholism, exaggerated in the works of Dostoevsky's biographers, but a deadly disease, namely, consumption (tuberculosis). This fact explains the words of Dostoevsky in a letter to Baron A. E. Wrangel dated August 14, 1855. about Isaev’s “dark fate”, the writer's unwavering respect and goodwill towards him, as well as the desire to raise his son Pavel as if he was Dostoevsky’s own. Archival materials demonstrate that immediately after the Isaev's death on August 4 (16), 1855, many persons applied for his position as a tavern assessor in the Kuznetsk Zemsky court, but relinquished it soon after starting the job.
21
Puschaev, Yuriy V. "Soviet Dostoevsky: Dostoevsky in Soviet culture, ideology, and philosophy." Philosophy Journal 13, no. 4 (2020): 102–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.21146/2072-0726-2020-13-4-102-118.
Full textAbstract:
The article aims to analyze how Dostoevsky’s works were perceived and presented in the Soviet ideology and philosophy. Contrary to some commonly held views, it is shown that despite the restrictions, there was never any talk of a complete ban or non-publication of Dostoevsky’s works in the Soviet times including the Stalinist years. Individual works of Dostoevsky as well as collections of his works were actively published in those years. The author explores the presence of Dostoevsky in the school literature program as well as the perception of Dostoevsky’s legacy by the Soviet leaders – V. Lenin and J. Stalin. It is concluded that the official ideological position in relation to Dostoevsky was never devoid of dynamics even in the Stalinist years. Among the factors that Soviet ideologists noted as positive in Dostoevsky, the author identifies the following three: Dostoevsky’s allegedly revolutionary past, his humanism and fervent sympathy for the humiliated and offended, and his great skill of an artist and expert in the secrets of the human soul. The author also discusses the perception of Dostoevsky’s work by the Soviet philosopher E.V. Ilyenkov. The author sets the task of further research into the perception of Dostoevsky in the legacy of other creative Soviet Marxists and / or publicists of the sixties – G. Lukach, M.A. Lifshits, Yu. F. Karyakin, etc.
22
Cicovacki, Predrag. "On the Central Motivation of Dostoevsky's Novels." Janus Head 10, no. 1 (2007): 277–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/jh200710118.
Full textAbstract:
This essay analyzes Marcel Proust's claim that "Crime and Punishment" could be the title of all of Dostoevskys novels. Although Proust reveals some important points regarding the motivation for Dostoevskys writings, his account is also inadequate in some relevant respects. For example, while Proust calls our attention to what happens to victimizers, he ignores the perspective of victims; thus Ivan Karamazovs challenge remains unaccounted for in Proust's interpretation. More importantly Proust does not account for Dostoevsky's optimism, which, in connection with his realism, is the central aspect of Dostoevsky novelistic and philosophical approach.
23
Siddiqi, Bilal. "Existentialism, Epiphany, and Polyphony in Dostoevsky’s Post-Siberian Novels." Religions 10, no. 1 (January 17, 2019): 59. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rel10010059.
Full textAbstract:
Dostoevsky can be meaningfully read as a defender of Russian Orthodoxy; a psychologist; a polemicizing anti-nihilist ideologue; a Schillerian romantic; a Solovyovian believer in love, goodness, and beauty; a prophet. I approach Dostoevsky through a new lens—Dostoevsky as an existential phenomenologist. Although writers such as Kauffman, Camus, and Shestov have cast Dostoevsky as an existentialist, their readings often focus too heavily on the critique of rationalist thinking in Dostoevsky’s The Underground Man and explore Dostoevsky’s existentialism largely in ethical rather than in existential-ontological terms. My interpretation will instead demonstrate that the primary focus of Dostoevsky’s novels is on immanent existential-ontological truths—human life—rather than on transcendental, ideal truth, although the emphasis on the former does not negate the possible existence of the latter. This interpretation will also provide an original route towards a polyphonic reading of Dostoevsky.
24
Vassena, Rafaella. "Dostoevsky’s Repertoire for Children." Неизвестный Достоевский 8, no. 1 (March 2021): 183–205. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2021.5181.
Full textAbstract:
The article is devoted to two collections of works for children by F. M. Dostoevsky, compiled by his widow Anna Grigorievna: “A selection from the works of F. M. Dostoevsky for secondary school-age children (over 14 years of age),” edited by V. Ya. Stoyunin in 1887, and “Dostoevsky for school-age children,” published in 1897 under A. V. Kruglov’s editorship. Dostoevskaya’s collaboration with two professionals and experts in child psychology, Stoyunin and Kruglov, allowed her to overcome the failure of the 1883 volume “To Russian children” and consolidate the foundations of Dostoevsky’s “repertoire for children.” The article introduces new archival materials, which allow to reconstruct the history of the publication of these volumes, formulates the tasks Dostoevskaya assigned to them to disseminate her husband’s works, and describes their reception by pedagogical criticism and state institutions responsible for the regulation of children’s reading in Russia in the last two decades of the 19th century.
25
Rachman, Stephen. "Ellison and Dostoevsky: A Critical Reassessment of the Aesthetics and Politics." Literature of the Americas, no. 11 (2021): 34–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.22455/2541-7894-2021-11-34-81.
Full textAbstract:
After an overview of the well-known aspects of Ralph Ellison’s interest in and connections to the works and literary ideas of the Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky, this paper reveals the hitherto unknown depths of Ellison’s research into and usage of the works and aesthetic theories of the Russian writer as he applied them to American and African American literary and social contexts. Making use of archival materials (including Ellison’s correspondence, draft of his unfinished novel Three Days Before the Shooting..., highlighting and marginalia in the books from his personal library, which includes numerous works by and about Dostoevsky), this reassessment addresses the role of the Russian classics, and in particular, of Dostoevsky, in Ellison’s intellectual formation, the role that Dostoevsky played in Ellison’s literary relationship with Richard Wright; the ways that Ellison’s interests in the blues, jazz and other folk and vernacular forms of African American culture were filtered through his analysis of nineteenth-century Russian culture; and the Dostoevskyan origins of a number of fictional scenarios that would find their way into Three Days Before the Shooting... The essay concludes with a discussion of the correspondence between Ellison and Joseph Frank, Dostoevsky’s biographer.
26
Makhlin, V. L. "Dostoevsky in Dostoevsky. M. Bakhtin and the methodological turnaround in the 1910s–1920s." Voprosy literatury, no. 5 (October 11, 2023): 83–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.31425/0042-8795-2023-5-83-104.
Full textAbstract:
The history of Dostoevsky’s reception knows a relatively brief but extremely intense and productive period of ‘paradigm shifting:’ displacing the philosophical journalism of Rozanov, Merezhkovsky, Shestov and others in the 1910s and 1920s was literary criticism proper. The paper is concerned with this methodological turnaround in Dostoevsky studies. Inspired by V. I. Ivanov’s article ‘Dostoevsky and the novel-tragedy’ [‘Dostoevsky i roman-tragediya’] (1911), young scholars of the day (V. Komarovich, L. Grossman, B. Engelgardt, and M. Bakhtin, among others) attempted to comprehend ‘Dostoevsky in Dostoevsky,’ i. e., interpret his novels’ ‘ideology’ in terms of his poetics rather than in abstraction. The author suggests that the main problem in all Dostoevsky-centred polemics since the 1910s–1920s and to this day remains twofold: on the one hand, it is a problem of the writer’s attitude to his characters; on the other, it is a challenge of identifying the genre of Dostoevsky’s novels. Citing Bakhtin’s monograph (1929, 1963), the article sets out to disprove Ivanov’s term of ‘novel-tragedy’ in reference to the nonclassic nature of Dostoevsky’s novels.
27
Andrianova, Irina. "“Don’t Be Abashed Reading This”: Shadow of Barkov in the Texts of Dostoevsky." Неизвестный Достоевский 8, no. 1 (March 2021): 42–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2021.5161.
Full textAbstract:
The subject of research in this article is a partially crossed out portion of a letter from Fyodor Dostoevsky to his brother Mikhail dated September 30, 1844. This letter communicates his decision to leave the military service and devote himself to professional literary work. The entry was first reproduced in the edition of Dostoevsky's correspondence prepared by A. S. Dolinin, and then in the academic Complete Works. However, this was done with distortions and without proper commentary. As a result, the entry was perceived by readers as a rude expletive, which included slang, obscene vocabulary, and insults to the guardian of the Dostoevskys, P. A. Karepin, who opposed the switch of his ward to a literary path and was in no hurry to provide him with financial assistance. Textual analysis of the record about Karepin demonstrated that the strikethrough was made twice — by Dostoevsky himself at the time of writing the letter, and almost 40 years later by his widow, who was preparing the letters for publication. Due to her shyness, A. G. Dostoevskaya could not tolerate obscene words contained in the body of the letter, and she removed them with a thick strikethrough, while encrypting their meaning using shorthand. The restoration of the complete record made it possible to determine the source of the quote, namely, the “indecent” poem “Luka Mudishchev,” written in the post-Pushkin period and attributed to Ivan Barkov, but not written by him. The fact that Dostoevsky knew this poem by 1844 narrows down the range of its dating. In the heat of his “struggle” with Karepin, who criticizes the “abstract laziness and bliss of Shakespeare's dreams,” the novice writer turns the obscene satirical language of Barkoviana against his guardian in a sharp pamphlet style. Continuing his observations on common people's speech in the Siberian Notebook and the Writer’s Diary, Dostoevsky came to a paradoxical conclusion about the combination of profanity and chastity in the Russian people. The writer’s viewpoint on this matter was not clear to his contemporaries and was ridiculed in journalism and caricature.
28
Fokin, Pavel E., and Anna V. Petrova. "Pushkin Speech by Fedor Dostoevsky as an Event (Based on the Materials of the Manuscript Fund of the Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature)." Неизвестный Достоевский 7, no. 2 (June 2020): 162–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2020.4681.
Full textAbstract:
140 years ago, on June 8 (20), 1880, on the occasion of the celebrations associated with the opening of the monument to Alexander Pushkin, F. M. Dostoevsky gave a speech at the second meeting of the Society of Connoisseurs of Russian Literature at the Moscow Noble Assembly hall. It was immediately recognized as a social and cultural event. This episode in Dostoevsky's biography has repeatedly attracted the attention of researchers. The manuscript collection of The V. I. Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature contains a significant set of materials related to Dostoevsky’s participation in the Pushkin Celebration. In the process of collecting materials for the Memorial Museum of F. M. Dostoevsky, A. G. Dostoevskaya, the writer’s widow conducted thorough bibliographic work, tracing almost all available publications in the Russian press devoted to Pushkin speech. She made extensive extracts from newspapers, which allow you to see the event through the eyes of Russian reporters. As the analysis shows, only minor fragments of newspaper reports were of interest to Dostoevsky's biographers. The characteristic of the responses of the Russian press to Pushkin speech as a major public event, presented in this article, allows to expand the context of Dostoevsky's speech and offer a more detailed overview of the audience of Pushkin speech. An observation is made about the similarity of the event associated with Dostoevsky's speech with his optimistic anthropology, formulated in the article Golden age in the pocket (1876, A Writer’s Diary). The presented systematic corpus of publications rooted in the Pushkin speech, allows us to conclude that the speech itself became the most important information event of 1880 as a social and cultural event and literary and journalistic essay. The Appendix to the article contains photos of some materials from the Manuscript Fund of the Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature.
29
Murzina, Svetlana V., and Elena G. Novikova. "The Image of Garibaldi in Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Works." Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, no. 460 (2020): 37–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.17223/15617793/460/4.
Full textAbstract:
The study is the first to collect, describe and analyze the main body of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s comments related to Giuseppe Garibaldi. The image of the Italian political figure is reconstructed in the creative works of the Russian writer. The image is analyzed from historical and political perspectives of the nineteenth-century Russia (1860–1870) and the Italian Risorgimento. The relevance of the study is due to the modern perception of Dostoevsky as an original political thinker and the wide context of Russian-Italian relations. Giuseppe Garibaldi is one of the most distinguished political figures in the European history of the middle of the second half of the 19th century. He is a national hero of Italy, one of the leaders of the Risorgimento whose main political achievement was unification of the country and nation. Dostoevsky repeatedly referred to Garibaldi during two decades, from 1860 to 1876. Dostoevsky’s creative works related to the image of Garibaldi are as follows: Petersburg Dreams in Verse and Prose, Winter Notes on Summer Impressions, The Double, The Adolescent, A Writer’s Diary, as well as his letters of 1867 and 1868. The way Garibaldi’s image is reflected in Dostoevsky’s creative writing is worth noting: Garibaldi is mentioned only in final versions of two works of the beginning of the 1860s, i.e. Petersburg Dreams in Verse and Prose and Winter Notes on Summer Impressions; in the works of the 1860s–1870s (The Double, The Adolescent, A Writer’s Diary), Garibaldi is mentioned only in preliminary drafts, not in the final canonical versions of the works. Garibaldi’s image is of particular importance in Dostoevsky’s creative writing; however, it is often “hidden” being not explicit, but implicit textual evidence. All the mentioned materials show that Dostoevsky was aware of the events and circumstances related to Garibaldi and the Italian Risorgimento as a whole. He received the information from European and Russian newspapers and journals, Garibaldi’s Notes, and, finally, an occasional face-to-face meeting with him in 1867. Garibaldi’s image is created in different ways: Dostoevsky simply mentions his name or creates a vivid artistic image (A.G. Dostoevskaya also contributed to shaping Garibaldi’s image). With all the attention that Dostoevsky paid to Garibaldi’s political activity, the image that he finally created in his works stands out for personal features and traits associated with the unique personality of the “Italian hero”. According to Dostoevsky, “genius” and “open-heartedness” are the essential features of Garibaldi’s personality.
30
WESTERMAN, RICHARD. "FROM MYSHKIN TO MARXISM: THE ROLE OF DOSTOEVSKY RECEPTION IN LUKÁCS'S REVOLUTIONARY ETHICS." Modern Intellectual History 16, no. 3 (September 5, 2017): 927–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1479244317000373.
Full textAbstract:
For European literati of the early twentieth century, Fyodor Dostoevsky represented a mythically Russian spirituality in contrast to a soulless, rationalized West. One such enthusiast was Georg Lukács, who in 1915 began a never-completed book about Dostoevsky's work, a model of spiritual community that could redeem a fallen world. Though framing his analysis in the language and themes of broader Dostoevsky reception, Lukács used this idiom innovatively to go beyond the reactionary implications this model might connote. Highlighting similarities with Max Weber's account of political ethics, I argue that Lukács developed an ethic derived from his reading of Dostoevsky, which focused on the idea of a hero defined by an ability to resolve the specific ethical dilemma of adherence to duty and moral law on the one hand, and, on the other, the need to restore spontaneous human community at a time when the social institutions embodying such laws had fallen into decay. Crucially, he deployed the same framework after his conversion to Marxism to justify revolutionary terror. However different his position from Dostoevsky's, it was through engagement with these novels that Lukács not only clarified his thought but also came to identify Lenin as a Dostoevskyan hero figure.
31
Zakharova, Olga. "Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Pseudonyms. Insertion by F. M. Dostoevsky in the Feuilleton by N. N. Strakhov." Неизвестный Достоевский 8, no. 1 (March 2021): 21–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2021.5221.
Full textAbstract:
Identification of pseudonyms is one of the key tasks of attribution of many articles in the Vremya and Epokha magazines, and the Grazhdanin weekly. I. F. Masanov's article on Dostoevsky in the authoritative Dictionary of Pseudonyms contains errors and repetitions. Fyodor Dostoevsky signed his literary works with his personal name: Fyodor Dostoevsky, F. M. Dostoevsky, or, more often, F. Dostoevsky. On the contrary, the writer preferred to work as a journalist anonymously, more rarely — under pseudonyms. The range of Fyodor Dostoevsky's pseudonyms should be clarified. It is necessary to exclude “N. N.” from the list of pseudonyms, remove repeat “—y, M.” и “M. —y”, leave Dostoevsky's personal pseudonym “Zuboskalov” and add a new pseudonym “Ch. Komitetskiy”. The insert in the “Chronicler's notes” article is not the proper basis to make N. N. Strahov's pseudonym “Letopisets” (Epokha. 1865. № 1) a collective one or assign it to Dostoevsky. Most of Dostoevsky's pseudonyms are of an occasional nature, they are isolated and random. The names and surnames of real persons (M. Dostoevsky, A. Poretsky) in the role of his pseudonyms are accidental. As a result of critical analysis, it was established that in his literary and journalistic activities Dostoevsky used both regular (“F. D.”), (“D.”), (“Ed.”) and isolated pseudonyms “Zuboskal”, “Zuboskalov”, “N. N.”, “M. —y”, “Ch. Komitetskiy”, “Drug Kuzmy Prutkova” (“Friend of Kuzma Prutkov”). At this time, their range can be limited to this list. The appendix to the article contains an insert attributed to Dostoevsky in N. N. Strakhov's feuilleton «Notes of the Chronicler» from the January issue of the «Epoch» for 1865.
32
Akhmetshin, Ruslan. "E. N. Konshina and Her Work on the Publication of Dostoevsky’s Notebooks." Неизвестный Достоевский 9, no. 1 (March 2022): 80–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2022.6001.
Full textAbstract:
One of the most notable literary textual critics of the XX century is Elizaveta Nikolaevna Konshina (1890-1972), who studied and published A. P. Chekhov’s, and subsequently F. M. Dostoevsky’s notebooks and books. "Notebooks of F. M. Dostoevsky" were published in 1935 under her editorship. The article presents the main facts of the professional path of E. N. Konshina, analyzes the part of her considerable archive that is associated with the preparation of Dostoevsky's notebooks for publication, and notes the unique features of the researcher’s textual work. In the 1920s and 30s, E. N. Konshina used her own method of studying autographs in an attempt to understand the workings of the writer's creative thought. Her techniques include reproducing manuscripts and simultaneously reconstructing Dostoevsky’s text editing process. In addition to deep interpretations of the works of Pushkin, Chekhov, Bryusov, and Ibsen, few of which were published in Konshina's articles, her textual experience provides modern researchers with unique opportunities to understand the work of Dostoevsky and Chekhov.
33
Besschetnova, Elena. "The Holy See and Fyodor Dostoevsky: Mutual Attraction and Repulsion." Arts 12, no. 2 (April 7, 2023): 76. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/arts12020076.
Full textAbstract:
The article analyzes the attitude of Fyodor Dostoevsky toward the Roman Catholic Church. The author shows how Dostoevsky comes to the Slavophile idea of unity and the impossibility of salvation outside church communion, while speaking of the Church as an ecclesia, that is, an assembly of believers. At the same time, the reception of Dostoevsky from the side of the Vatican is presented. In the article, special attention is paid to the perception of Dostoevsky’s ideas by Pope Francis. The author notes that the point of attraction and repulsion between Dostoevsky and Catholic culture lies in the plane of his understanding of the concepts of nationality and universality. Dostoevsky’s Russian idea and his view on the essence of Christianity grows from the synthesis of these concepts. The author emphasizes that only in this perspective it is necessary to interpret Dostoevsky’s ideas.
34
Buchneva, Daria. "“He Massacred the Article”: How Dostoevsky Edited an Article About Tyutchev in “Grazhdanin” (“Citizen”)." Неизвестный Достоевский 8, no. 3 (September 2021): 94–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2021.5641.
Full textAbstract:
The problem of attribution of the article “In fresh memory of F. I. Tyutchev” ("Grazhdanin", 1873, No. 31) was posed for the first time by N. F. Belchikov in 1925. N. F. Belchikov referred to F. M. Dostoevsky's letter to A. G. Dostoevskaya dated 29 July 1873, in which the editor of "Grazhdanin" referred to a strong revision of Meshchersky's article. A. V. Arkhipova, citing counterarguments, believed that “In fresh memory of F. I. Tyutchev” cannot be attributed to Dostoevsky, since he limited himself to editorial revision. Taking into account N. F. Belchikov's attribution, the editorial board of the academic "Complete Works of F. M. Dostoevsky" agreed with A. V. Arkhipova’s point of view and did not include the article in the publication. In 2004, V. A. Viktorovich included it in the “Collective” section of the 11th volume of "The Complete Works of F. M. Dostoevsky" in 18 vols. While noting the editorial revision, the researchers did not pay attention to the linguistic features of the text. In this article, the author examines the peculiarities of the style of “In fresh memory of F. I. Tyutchev”, provides the results of examining the article using statistical methods and number of arguments in favor of strong editorial revision done by Dostoevsky, who managed to adapt to the author's style and internalize it. Dostoevsky did not claim authorship. He edited the article, stylistically improved it, but it is an example of editing that does not transform into co-authorship.
35
Panyukova, T. V. "Publishing Activity of F.M. Dostoevsky: Business Books of A.G. Dostoevskaya as a Source." Язык и текст 8, no. 3 (2021): 19–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.17759/langt.2021080303.
Full textAbstract:
The complex of materials related to the publishing activities of F.M. Dostoevsky includes several business notebooks of A.G. Dostoevskaya, preserved in her archive and dedicated to sales accounting, as well as containing records of subscribers' addresses. 7 similar documents were systematized and described, as well as 6 additional sources adjacent to them for the dissemination of "A Writer`s Diary". The work on the preparation for publication of two similar books by subscribers allowed us to identify the possibilities of their use in textual or biographical research: to disclose the names (initials) of the writer's correspondents; clarification (correction) or determination of the dating of the letter; scientific commentary of the epistolary and the compilation of biographical information about correspondents; attribution of anonymous addressees. In general, an appeal to such an optional documentary source as A.G. Dostoevsky's notebooks. Dostoevsky with the lists of subscribers of "A Writer`s Diary" and its use in combination with other materials and sources can be very fruitful and lead to interesting, reliable results in the textual study of the late journalism of F.M. Dostoevsky.
36
Andrianova, Irina, and Daria Buteneva. "“A Word About the Great Artist” by Fyodor Dostoevsky: the Beginning of the Literary Path of Lawyer Anatoly Koni." Неизвестный Достоевский 11, no. 3 (October 2024): 203–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2024.7481.
Full textAbstract:
Anatoly Koni was not only a judicial, state, public and scientific figure, a teacher, but also a writer who left his memoirs of figures of Russian culture and deserved the recognition of his contemporaries. They nominated him for the Nobel Prize in Literature, elected him a member of the jury of the Pushkin Prize in Literature, an honorary academician of the Imperial Academy of Sciences in the category of fine literature, an honorary member of the Pushkin Lyceum Society and a freelance employee of the Pushkin House. The article pays special attention to the beginning of the literary activity of lawyer Anatoly Koni. The reason this talented judicial speaker tried his hand at writing was the sudden death of Fyodor Dostoevsky. These two outstanding contemporaries were linked by a friendship that lasted from 1873 until the writer’s death. They met at court sessions at the trials of Vera Zasulich and Ekaterina Kornilova, made a joint trip to the colony of juvenile lawbreakers, and in the late 1870s lived nearby and had the opportunity to visit each other. The lawyer’s literary career began in 1881, with a speech about Dostoevsky as a criminologist, which later became a repeatedly reprinted essay. The article examines the autograph of the speech, preserved thanks to the writer’s widow Anna Dostoevskaya, and reveals the main features of Kony’s artistic skill, reflected in his subsequent creative works: the influence of his legal profession on literary work, his preference for an impassioned style and didactic pathos, the use of figurative means of expression, and biblical allusions. Koni constantly reworked, supplemented and repeatedly republished his memoirs about Dostoevsky, but they were generally structured into three original essays included in his collected works: “Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky,” “F. M. Dostoevsky,” “More About Dostoevsky.” These texts analyze the work of the author of “Crime and Punishment” from a legal professional’s point of view, and also note the characteristic features of the writer and the person — “a model and a great teacher.” It was in the essay on Dostoevsky that Kony’s talent of an inspired writer was discovered, but Anatoly Fedorovich himself also played an important role in Dostoevsky’s life and work, honestly revealing to the writer the contradictory features of the Russian justice system and being an example of an excellent lawyer. The study uses a wide range of archival and memoir sources: the autograph of the speech of Anatoly Koni about Dostoevsky, his memoirs, the lawyer’s correspondence with members of the Dostoevsky family, notebooks and memoirs of Anna Dostoevskaya.
37
Ulbrecht, Siegfried. "Ernst Jünger and his Reception of Fyodor Dostoevsky." Dostoevsky Journal 22, no. 1 (July 30, 2021): 45–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/23752122-02201007.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This contribution aims to present those aspects of the literary and intellectual legacy of F. M. Dostoevsky (1821–1881) that motivated Ernst Jünger (1895–1998) in formulating his own literary and essayistic work. Dostoevsky’s impact on Jünger has so far been researched only fragmentarily and sporadically. This builds on previous research and complements it with new findings. Ernst Jünger inquired into Dostoevsky’s works throughout his life. He perceived Dostoevsky as a foreteller of crises and disasters. Many of Jünger’s motifs, literary images, characters, and symbols were either influenced by or borrowed from Dostoevsky and developed further. Of great importance to Jünger are such phenomena as power, evil or misery, and pain. Dostoevsky also shaped Jünger’s approach to nihilism.
38
Darensky, V. Yu. "Dostoevsky as an Artist of the Godless World." Orthodoxia, no. 3 (September 18, 2022): 269–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.53822/2712-9276-2021-3-269-290.
Full textAbstract:
Article off ers an unconventional view of Dostoevsky as an artist of the godless world. The author separates Dostoevsky’s Christian worldview from the artistic image of the world he created in his works. In Dostoevsky’s imaginative world, Christianity is only a dream and hope, which is not manifested in real life. While only a few of his characters are focused on it, the absolute majority live their lives as if Christ never existed. The Christian dimension transcends the godless world created by Dostoevsky, only occasionally touching it from the outside as a kind of revelation. The external in this world must be overcome by the internal, which is only possible if one experiences this “external” within themselves, with all its sins and temptations. Dostoevsky’s world is therefore even more godless and frightening than the world in which he had actually lived. Which is also in the nature of things, because the only way to defeat it is by reaching the last satanic depths. Dostoevsky’s texts were originally addressed to secular people, to the religiously ignorant intelligentsia, as opposed to devout Christians. This fact also determines the perception of Dostoevsky’s works by diff erent types of readers. The author proposes a new classifi cation of types Dostoevsky’s readers belong to. The article introduces the concept of a “gnostic myth” about Dostoevsky, the emergence of which is characteristic of modern intellectuals. The historical context of the appearance of the Dostoevsky phenomenon is that Dostoevsky himself was a phenomenon of a traditional person living in conditions of a secular civilization of the modern era. Formed by a millennium of Russian Christian culture, Dostoevsky had been thrown into the godless intellectual world of the 19th century. This godless world, prophetically shown by Dostoevsky, is the world of the 21st century, which he had already envisioned in the 19th century, and this insight into the “new” world ruled by “demons” anticipated the genre of “dystopia” and is in fact his main artistic achievement.
39
Sosnovskaya, Oksana A., and Irina S. Andrianova. "“...After Waiting 23 Years, It Is Unthinkable to Wait Again for 20 Years”: An Unknown Transcript on the Fate of the Dostoevsky Family’s Ryazan Estate." Неизвестный Достоевский 7, no. 1 (March 2020): 168–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2020.4461.
Full textAbstract:
This publication introduces into scientific circulation one of the previously untranscribed shorthand documents of the wife of F. M. Dostoevsky. According to our transcript, the contents of this draft of her letter is related to the inheritance that the writer's family received after the death of a rich Moscow relative, A. F. Kumanina. Dostoevsky did not have the time to use the inherited estate in the village of Spas-Klepiki of the Ryazan province, and the writer’s widow and children became the owners of the Ryazan estate. On these three pages, A. G. Dostoevskaya encrypted a message to an unknown person about the upcoming sale of her family's share of the estate in Spas-Klepiki and a request for advice on drawing up a forestry plan. In addition to the fact that this document is written in shorthand, the work with it was complicated by several circumstances: it was randomly enclosed in a folder with letters from N. A. Disterlo to A. G. Dostoevskaya; there is no evocation of the addressee or date. After studying the letters of F. F. Dostoevsky to his mother, the authors of the article concluded that the draft letter was dated 1895. An attempt is made to attribute it: it is demonstrated that the likely addressee is A. D. Povalishin, the manager of the Ryazan branches of the Noble and Peasant Banks. The transcript helped determine that count A. A. Golenishchev-Kutuzov provided assistance in the sale of the estate. It was established that a certain Monsherov, mentioned in the verbatim draft, is not a joint heir of Dostoevsky, as he is listed in the nominal index of the Complete Academic Works of the writer, but the Ryazan surveyor I. P. Monsherov. The study analyzes unpublished letters from 1896 by this acquaintance of Dostoevsky's widow, as well as epistolary documents from the archive of Andrei and Anna Dostoevsky, which are related to the Ryazan estate. Examination reveals that one parcel of the land inherited by the writer's family was sold, and the first income from the Ryazan estate was received in 1895-1896. The fair copy of the letter written by Dostoevsky's widow has not been recovered; the task of locating it (likely in the Ryazan archives) remains relevant. The transcribed, attributed and dated draft of this letter and the surviving letters of I. P. Monsherov to A. G. Dostoevsky are the documents that establish new facts about the fate of Kumanina’s inheritance after the writer’s death.
40
Zakharov, Vladimir. "“Death Itself May be Overcome…” (Thanatological Plot in “The Brothers Karamazov” by Dostoevsky)." Неизвестный Достоевский 9, no. 4 (December 2022): 30–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2022.6361.
Full textAbstract:
The article reveals how the writer’s personal drama was reflected in his novel “The Brothers Karamazov.” The unexpected death of their three-year-old son on May 16, 1878 was a tragic shock for the Dostoevskys. The causes of his death have not yet been clarified: there is no critical analysis of documentary sources, no diagnosis has been made, the described symptoms (fever, diarrhea, vomiting) may be related to several childhood diseases, family legends about the disease are unreliable. Dostoevsky’s pilgrimage to the Optina Hermitage had a personal reason along with his creative interest in the plot of the new novel. The writer sought to say goodbye to the earthly life of baby Alexey on the fortieth day of his death at Optina, but he was late. During the trip, Dostoevsky had an important conversation with Vladimir Solovyov, in which the writer revealed the idea of his future novel: the Church “as a positive social ideal.” After Dostoevsky’s pilgrimage to the Optina Hermitage, his novel took final shape. The thanatological motifs in the work include scenes in the monastery, Ivan Karamazov’s “collection” of facts, the death of elder Zosima, the illness and death of his brother Markel, Ilyusha Snegirev, and other heroes. These motifs play a key role in forming the poetic idea of the novel. The thanatological theme of the novel has Easter significance. Dostoevsky wrote a novel in which he not merely describe an event, he articulated the meaning of being: in the person of Alexey Fyodorovich Karamazov, he resurrected his son in the name and prototype of the deceased Alexei Fyodorovich Dostoevsky. With every proclamation and glorification of the hero, Dostoevsky proclaimed the immortality of his son.
41
Amusin, M. F. "Is Dostoevsky immortal?" Voprosy literatury, no. 2 (June 17, 2021): 161–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.31425/0042-8795-2021-2-161-193.
Full textAbstract:
The article sets out to trace F. Dostoevsky's presence in Russian literature over a broader period: from the 1960s until the present time. According to Amusin, his article especially focuses on the more empirically evident forms of such presence, namely film adaptations of Dostoevsky's works, critical reviews devoted to the writer, and, lastly, the dialogue between Dostoevsky and Russian writers of the late 20th — early 21st cc. Amusin argues that Dostoevsky's ‘background' influence (mostly of the philosophical or religious variety) was most perceived in the Russian village prose movement, whereas the ‘urban prose' writers, notably A. Bitov, Y. Trifonov, and V. Makanin, moved beyond that ‘background' to interact with Dostoevsky on the level of specific matches and parallels in the text. In the end, the critic finds that Dostoevsky is a constant presence in literature: the idiosyncratic aesthetic ideas and a high degree of spirituality that define his oeuvre give it enough power to penetrate time, stimulate our sensibility and occasionally administer a curative ‘acupuncture' treatment.
42
Zavarkina, Marina. "Litigation Against F. T. Stellovsky in the Correspondence of F. M. Dostoevsky and V. I. Gubin 1871–1874." Неизвестный Достоевский 11, no. 4 (November 2024): 45–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2024.7401.
Full textAbstract:
F. M. Dostoevsky’s epistolary legacy includes more than 2000 letters from the writer and his correspondents. One of Dostoevsky’s correspondents in 1871‒1874 was V. I. Gubin, a lawyer, Dostoevsky’s attorney in the case against the publisher F. T. Stellovsky. He also advised the writer at the initial stage of the Kumanin inheritance case. One letter from Dostoevsky to Gubin and 15 letters from Gubin to Dostoevsky are known. V. I. Gubin’s letters allow us to complete the image of Stellovsky, a notorious speculator in the publishing business and reveal how the writer’s trial against his publisher proceeded. At the end of 1870 Stellovsky released Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment” as the fourth volume of the writer’s Complete Works. For this publication, according to the agreement dated July 1, 1865, Stellovsky was obliged to pay the writer 870 rubles, but he cheated Dostoevsky. Having lost all hope of solving the case peacefully, Dostoevsky launched court proceedings against Stellovsky. First, his stepson P. A. Isaev became the writer’s attorney, and then the role was assumed by Ap. Maikov, who hired lawyer V. I. Gubin at Dostoevsky’s request. The proceedings against Stellovsky, which began in 1871, dragged on for almost 5 years. Judging by Gubin’s letters, who Dostoevsky said “ruined everything,” both the slowness of the bailiffs, to whom the attorney was forced to pay bribes, and the inability to determine the identity of the publisher’s guardians for a long time hindered the process. Gubin also suspected collusion between official authorities and the relatives or guardians of Stellovsky, who since 1872 could no longer take part in the trial himself, as he was being treated in a psychiatric hospital. One of Stellovsky’s guardians, N. M. Sokovnin, settled with Dostoevsky only in 1876. The appendix to the article contains letters from Dostoevsky and Gubin, each letter is accompanied by a textual reference and a commentary.
43
Borisova, Valentina V., and Irina S. Andrianova. "What Is He Like, the “Japanese Dostoevsky”? About the XVIII Symposium of the International Dostoevsky Society." Dostoevsky and World Culture. Philological journal, no. 4 (24) (2023): 284–304. http://dx.doi.org/10.22455/2619-0311-2023-4-284-304.
Full textAbstract:
At the end of August 2023, the XVIII Symposium of the International Dostoevsky Society (IDS), dedicated to the 150th anniversary of the novel Demons, was held at the Nagoya University of Foreign Studies (Japan). The symposium took place in Asia for the first time and found wide resonance in the academic world. Scholars from 17 different countries participated with papers at the forum, showing a variety of approaches to research Dostoevsky’s works and life and raising a wide range of research issues, such as: “Current questions of research in Dostoevsky’s studies,” “Demons in its time and 150 years later,” “Dostoevsky in the Arts (music, cinema, theater, painting)”. The organizers of the Symposium paid special attention to the perception of Dostoevsky in Asia and his influence on Asian culture and literature; a significant event of the Symposium was the round table “Dostoevsky and modern Japanese writers.” The article includes a review of the reports that revealed the image of a “Japanese Dostoevsky”: they were devoted to the analysis of translations of the writer’s works into Japanese, their intermedial transcriptions, new interpretations of Dostoevsky’s works by Japanese scholars representing different generations and academic schools. Attention is paid to the reports of Russian scholars, dedicated to current topics in Dostoevsky’s studies and new research methods to approach the writer’s work.
44
Kapustina, Svetlana. "The Wedding in Simferopol (F. F. Dostoevsky and E. P. Tsugalovskaya)." Неизвестный Достоевский 12, no. 1 (March 2025): 195–209. https://doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2025.7821.
Full textAbstract:
Crimea played an important role in the fates of F. M. Dostoevsky’s closest relatives. For almost two years (July 1858 — May 1860), the writer’s brother Andrei Mikhailovich Dostoevsky was on duty on the peninsula (Simferopol, Feodosia, Yalta, Sevastopol, Balaklava). The novelist’s widow, Anna Grigoryevna Dostoevskaya, who died in 1918 in German-occupied Yalta (Hotel “France”) the owner of the dacha on the South Coast. An important milestone in the life of the son of the classic writer Fyodor Fyodorovich Dostoevsky is connected with Simferopol: not only did he realize his dream of his own stud farm, but also got married for the second time. At the first glance, the “Crimean pages” in the biography of Fyodor Fyodorovich Dostoevsky have been thoroughly studied. However, the “Simferopol chronicle” of his life requires revision and clarification. This article proposes corrections to the date and place of the wedding of F. F. Dostoevsky and E. P. Tsugalovskaya. Irrefutable documentary evidence of this event is provided by the corresponding entry in the register of births, marriages and deaths of the Alexander Nevsky Cathedral in Simferopol, which is currently preserved in the State Archives of the Republic of Crimea. An important verification commentary to this entry was the “Simferopol letters” of F. F. Dostoevsky to his mother. The surviving March and May messages of 1903 not only confirmed the wedding date indicated in the metric (April 27, 1903), but also helped to establish an nontrivial place of the sacrament — the house church in the name of St. Andrew the First-Called at the Orphanage of Andrei Yakovlevich Fabre. The juxtaposition of data from the metric record and direct epistolary evidence of F. F. Dostoevsky also made it possible to determine the members of his immediate circle in Simferopol.
45
Myakinchenko, Mariya A. "Varvara Karepina, née Dostoevskaya – sister and heroine of Fyodor Dostoevsky." Vestnik of Kostroma State University 26, no. 4 (January 28, 2021): 113–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.34216/1998-0817-2020-26-4-113-119.
Full textAbstract:
The article discusses various aspects of the relationship between Fyodor Dostoevsky with his sister Varvara Karepina, née Dostoevskaya, and their reflection in the writer's work. Varvara Karepina served as the prototype for the writer's various characters. The author of the article dwells in detail on the image of Varvara Karepina, collected from her memoirs; the author states that the history of Varvara Karepina’s marriage and the image of her husband were also vividly reflected in the work of Fyodor Dostoevsky. The article provides some valuable comparisons of Varvara Karepina with Varvara Dobroselova and various other female images of Fyodor Dostoevsky's works, the conclusion is drawn that the use of the prototype’s all kinds of personality traits, sometimes opposite ones, when creating images of the heroes of the works, was a feature of the writer's creative method.
46
Zakharov, Vladimir. "The Relevance of Dostoevsky." Неизвестный Достоевский 8, no. 1 (March 2021): 5–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2021.5321.
Full textAbstract:
The year 2021 marks the 200th anniversary of Dostoevsky’s birth and the 140th anniversary of his immortality. Literary anniversaries became a part of the Russian culture relatively recently. The celebration is usually held in memory of those who had already found eternity. The attempt to celebrate the tercentenary of Shakespeare (1864) and the centenary of Pushkin’s birth in 1899 marked the beginning of a new cultural tradition. The dates of literary anniversaries in the 20th century reflect the struggle between these trends: birthdays are gradually replacing memorial days. Anniversaries tend to be an occasion not only for understanding a writer’s significance in the modern world, but also for analyzing the trends and prospects of studying their legacy. The article provides an overview of the past anniversaries of Dostoevsky in Russia and an analysis of several articles from the first issue of The Unknown Dostoevsky journal for 2021. The special feature of Dostoevsky’s bicentennial anniversary is the competition held by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR) “Sources and methods in the study of the legacy of F. M. Dostoevsky in Russian and world culture” (2018–2021), which resulted in the support of 28 projects by leading Russian scientists. They will result in the publication of an unprecedented corpus of studies on Dostoevsky’s biography, philosophy, creativity, textual criticism and poetics. In post-Soviet Russia, the gap between Dostoevsky studies and mass consciousness, science and education is apparent. Moreover, technologies to counteract Dostoevsky’s influence on the modern Russian person are still operating. Reading and studying Dostoevsky remains the privilege of philologists, whose number in Russian universities has been drastically reduced with no prospects of the development of continuous humanitarian education. Nevertheless, despite influential opponents, Dostoevsky represents Russia, the Karamazovs are the most famous Russian surname, and today, just like 150 years ago, the prophet and apostle Dostoevsky conveys the word of truth and veracity to the world.
47
Drobyshevskaya, Inga, and Boris Tikhomirov. "“…She’s a Sweet Sister and a Wonderful Person:” Varvara Mikhailovna Dostoevskaya-Karepina and Her Family (Additions to “The Chronicle of the Generations of Dostoevskys”)." Неизвестный Достоевский 11, no. 2 (July 2024): 74–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2024.7261.
Full textAbstract:
The article introduces the results of archival research devoted to the family of the eldest of F. M. Dostoevsky’s sisters, V. M. Karepina. Vital records (records of birth, wedding, death) of Varvara Mikhailovna herself, her husband Pyotr Andreevich Karepin, their children and grandchildren, discovered by the authors of the article in the funds of the Central State Archive of the City of Moscow (CSA of Moscow), are published. The materials of the archival “Case of the Moscow Noble Deputy Assembly” are introduced into scientific circulation, including documents related to the inclusion in the 3rd part of the Genealogical Book of the Moscow Province of Dostoevsky’s sister’s husband, P. A. Karepin (1838) and the family of their son, the eldest nephew of the writer A. P. Karepin (1911). The documents in this case include the form list of P. A. Karepin, the decree on the resignation of A. P. Karepin, copies of metric documents on the wedding and death of Dostoevsky’s nephew, and the birth of his son, Vladimir Karepin. The published archival materials fill in significant factual gaps in the pedigree of the genealogical branch of Varvara Mikhailovna Dostoevskaya-Karepina, which was published in the fundamental “Chronicle of the Generations of Dostoevskys” (2012), which was a revised and supplemented republication of the classic work of M. V. Volotsky “The Chronicle of the Generations of Dostoevsky” (1933). The Appendix contains two biographical notes: about the daughter of P. A. Karepin from his first marriage, stepdaughter of V. M. Dostoevskaya-Karepina — Yulia Petrovna Pomerantseva and her husband Nikandr Petrovich Pomerantsev.
48
Zakharov, Vladimir. "Dostoevsky’s Great Pentateuch: Concept, Translation, Interpretation." Неизвестный Достоевский 11, no. 2 (July 2024): 5–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2024.7321.
Full textAbstract:
Dostoevsky has been successfully translated into different languages. He remains himself even in unsuccessful translations. Every translation is an interpretation. Interpretations include not only critical publications, but also theatrical productions and screen adaptations. Translations and interpretations expand the corpus of Dostoevsky’s texts. Translation is universal. Dostoevsky is in demand for translations not only into foreign languages, but also from Russian into Russian: manuscript to printed text, printed text to multimedia format. Over the last hundred years, the graphics, orthography and punctuation of the Russian language have changed. Changes in the language distort the meaning of Dostoevsky’s works. Both the shortcomings and the achievements of Soviet and post-Soviet textology are most fully presented in the Complete Works of Dostoevsky. They resulted in the amended texts of the writer, which, in turn, required new translations into foreign languages. The concept of “Dostoevsky’s Pentateuch” is tentative. Had Dostoevsky lived longer, he may have written more great novels: not five, but six or more. And now “Poor People,” “Notes from the Dead House,” “Notes from Underground,” “Diary of a Writer” are added to Dostoevsky’s five great novels . Of the different Pentateuchs, there are two personal ones: one by Moses, the other by Dostoevsky, which was immediately labeled “great.” The concept of the “great Pentateuch” has many authors. It became common place in conference debates as early as the 1970s. At first, it was a rhetorical figure that stated the number of Dostoevsky’s famous novels. At present it is a concept that expresses the ideological content, genre and poetics of the writer’s late novels.
49
Gevorkyan, Tatiana M. "‘I live as long as I work…’." Voprosy literatury, no. 6 (December 20, 2019): 133–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.31425/0042-8795-2019-6-133-150.
Full textAbstract:
The essay is devoted to the memory of the critic, philologist and Dostoevsky scholar Karen Stepanyan. His long-time friend T. Gevorkyan carefully reconstructs their encounters as well as episodes of Stepanyan’s personal and scholarly biography: from their first meeting as first-year philology students of Yerevan university to their city walks in Moscow in the 2000s; from Stepanyan’s early student papers and essays on theatre to his later books – To Realize and to Say: ‘Realism in the Highest Sense’ as Dostoevsky’s Creative Method [ Soznat i skazat: ‘Realizm v vysshem smysle’ kak tvorcheskiy metod F. M. Dostoevskogo ] (2005), The Visitation and Dialogue in Dostoevsky’s Novels [ Yavlenie i dialog v romanakh F. M. Dostoevskogo ] (2010), and Dostoevsky and Cervantes [ Dostoevsky i Servantes ] (2013), and to the publication of the almanac Dostoevsky and World Culture [ Dostoevsky i mirovaya kultura ]. While Gevorkyan devotes plenty of attention to Stepanyan’s scholarly legacy and carefully maps its milestones, her essay primarily serves to portray his persona, that of a close and untimely departed friend.
50
Kolmakova, O. A., and M. N. Zhornikova. "Dostoevsky’s Ethical and Aesthetical Conception and the Problem of Russian National Identity in A. Ponizovsky’s novel <i>Turning into a Listening Ear</i>." Vestnik NSU. Series: History and Philology 23, no. 2 (February 21, 2024): 126–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.25205/1818-7919-2024-23-2-126-137.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose. The aim of the article is to investigate the influence of the F. M. Dostoevsky's creative heritage on the ideological and artistic originality of A. Ponizovsky's novel Turning into a Listening Ear (2013).Results. Ponizovsky's interpretation of Dostoevsky related to the theme of the Russian world and Russian identity. Two plotlines, social (ordinary Russians’ stories) and philosophical (controversy around them), create a conflict field typical for Dostoevsky's works: meaning of life and absurdity of existence, cruelty and compassion, Russian people and Russia. Dostoevsky's intertext is found at all levels of text organization. A deep philosophical understanding of the Russian life’s problems is achieved due to a set of Dostoevsky's intertexts, which have acquired the status of metanarratives in Russian culture (Grushenka's legend about the saving onion, devil's anecdote about a quadrillion kilometers on the way to paradise, Svidrigailov's image of eternity as a bathhouse with spiders). Following Dostoevsky's stylistic strategies includes the usage of a polyphonic novel resources, and reproducing individual techniques of the writer's poetics (anachronism, coexistence of fiction and non-fiction, using of Holy Scripture's text). The very person of Dostoevsky becomes an object of controversy for Ponizovsky. Colliding two concepts of the classic’s image – Freudian and Christian-oriented, the modern author creates a portrait of Dostoevsky’s conflicting personality.Conclusion. The perception of F. M. Dostoevsky's work by A. Ponizovsky is not only reminiscent, but also “genetic” by its nature due to the worldview commonality of these Russian writers.