F. M. Dostoevsky: His Image of Man [Reprint 2016 ed.] 9781512806182

Table of contents :
Preface
Contents
1. Nineteenth-Century Russian Thought
2. Biography of Fyodor M. Dostoevsky
3. Dostoevsky and Contemporary Educational Problems
4. Dostoevsky and Character Education
5. Dostoevsky’s Philosophy and Literary Art
6. The Implications of Dostoevsky's Thought for a Philosophy of Education
Notes
APPENDIX
Selections from Dostoevsky’s Writings A Bibliographical Handbook
Chronological Table of the Works of F. M. Dostoevsky
Acknowledgments
Bibliography
INDEX

Citation preview

F. M. Dostoevsky: His Image of Man

F. M. Dostoevsky: His Image of Man By Miriam T. Sajkovic

Philadelphia

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA PRESS

ig6» by the Trustee» of the University of Pennsylvania

Published in Great Britain, India, and Pakistan by the Oxford University Press London, Bombay, and Karachi Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 63-20690

7368 Printed in the United States of America

To My Mother and Father

Preface THE PRESENT WORK is an initial attempt to introduce American educators to the thought of Fyodor M . Dostoevsky in the field of educational philosophy. T h e views of Dostoevsky on contemporary educational problems of his own time have been historically explored, and the central aspects of his philosophy have been studied in order to see what his contribution might be toward the formulation of a philosophy of education for today. My interest in Dostoevsky originated many years ago when I began graduate study in the field of history and philosophy of education. T h e reading of Dostoevsky's works was a decisive "educational experience" of crucial significance for my own life. T h e questions raised by Dostoevsky provoked and inspired me to explore religion and philosophy; most important of all, Dostoevsky taught me to think. Since then I have kept in mind the possibility of undertaking a study of Dostoevsky for the purpose of introducing him to teachers here in America. I felt that he would have a great deal to contribute toward a new synthesis in educational philosophy. T h e study of Dostoevsky's thought in this respect opens u p for us the serious reconsideration of the areas of religion, metaphysics, and ethics for the education of man. Rather than continued emphasis upon pedagogical methodology in educational philosophy, Dostoevsky provokes the mind to reinstate serious study and reflection upon 7

8

PREFACE

religion, metaphysics, and ethics for the formulation of a philosophy of education. Dostoevsky is unquestionably one of the greatest minds of our contemporary culture and civilization. T h e German philosopher of history Oswald Spengler predicted a future millenium of Dostoevsky's Christianity, and Nicholas Berdyaev, an eminent philosopher of this century, has called Dostoevsky "Russia's greatest metaphysician." T h e Nobel prize winner Albert Camus has written that Dostoevsky has expressed our historical destiny in the most profound way, and that he dominates thought in our literature today. Camus goes so far as to say that our world will perish unless it admits that Dostoevsky is right. Dostoevsky is the unrivaled and perspicacious seer of the human mind and heart; he emerges as a great friend and teacher of humanity. He has clearly read the signs of our times, for he lived through the agonizing doubts and despair of our present spiritual crisis. His sincerity, his spiritual heroism, and his moral courage have never been questioned, although, of course, one need not always agree with his conclusions. Dostoevsky combines a profound analytical mind with artistic genius. He is, as Boris Brasol, the translator of The Diary of a Writer, has written, "a noble and lofty man, a prudent teacher, an inspired prophet whose thought, like mountain peaks, were always pointed toward heaven, and who had measured the depths of man's quivering heart with all its struggles, sins and tempests; its riddles, pains and sorrows; its unseen tears and burning passions. For he did teach men to live and suffer." I am greatly indebted to my teacher, Dr. James Mulhern, Professor of History of Education, T h e University of Pennsylvania, for his encouragement in the completion of this work, for his care in reading the manuscript and

PREFACE

9

for his valuable critical suggestions. I also wish to acknowledge my gratitude to both Dr. T h o m a s Woody and Dr. Roderic D. Matthews of the University of Pennsylvania for their criticisms and suggestions. M y sincere thanks is also due to my colleague and husband, Dr. Vladimir Sajkovid, Chairman of the Russian Department at Mount Holyoke College, for his time in many fruitful discussions on Dostoevsky's creative work and thought. T o Miss Margaret T o n g u e , a young American poet now teaching at Vassar College, I extend my gratitude for her reading of the manuscript and for her valuable remarks.

Contents Preface

7

1 Nineteenth-Century Russian T h o u g h t

15

2 Biography of Fyodor M. Dostoevsky

41

3 Dostoevsky and Contemporary Educational Problems

99

4 Dostoevsky and Character Education

123

5 Dostoevsky's Philosophy and Literary Art

142

6 T h e Implications of Dostoevsky's T h o u g h t for a Philosophy of Education Notes

igi 201

Appendix Selections from Dostoevsky's Writings, A Bibliographical Handbook Chronological T a b l e of the Works of F. M. Dostoevsky

227 253

Acknowledgments

255

Bibliography

259

Index

275

F. M. Dostoevsky: His Image of Man

What a piece of work is a man! How reason! How infinite in faculty! In moving, how express and admirable! how like an angel! In apprehension, a god! T h e beauty of the world! T h e of animals! And yet, to me, what is quintessence of dust?

noble in form and In action how like paragon this

HAMLET A C T II, S C E N E 2 W I L L I A M S H A K E S P E A R E

. . . As I lived through the cruel drama of my epoch I began to love in Dostoevsky one who has lived and expressed most profoundly our historical destiny. For me, Dostoevsky is first of all a writer who, long before Nietzsche, knew how to discern modern nihilism, to define it and predict its monstrous consequences and to try to indicate the road to salvation. . . . T h e man who wrote that "the problems of God and immortality are the same as of socialism but from a different angle" knew that hereafter our civilization will demand salvation for all or for none. . . . Dostoevsky's greatness, however, will not cease growing, because our world will die unless it admits that he is right. " T H E OTHER R U S S I A " ALBERT CAMUS N E W YORK

Herald

Tribune,

DECEMBER 1 9 ,

1957

Chapter One

fr-

Nineteenth-Century Russian Thought B E F O R E UNDERTAKING A STUDY, however brief, of Dostoevsky's philosophy, before discussing his comprehension of or commentaries upon educational problems, some historical background is necessary. T h i s brief review of ideological developments in nineteenth-century Russian thought, and their relation to and implications for educational thought, it is hoped, will lend perspective to understanding the place and significance of Fyodor M. Dostoevsky.

In the study of the different ideological currents of nineteenth-century Russian intellectual history, the various ideologies on the nature and destiny of man lead to fundamental educational implications. Whatever man holds to be an ideal for himself and mankind is promoted in the historic life of a national people, and is implanted in the young, who are expected and encouraged to further the ideal in their way of life. T h e nineteenth century in Russia and in Europe was a period of intellectual ferment. On the whole, it was an optimistic century which believed in the fundamental goodness of man, in man's autonomy through the methodological procedure of science, and in the rational powers of the human mind which would attain all the answers to the human situation. In the Russia of the nineteenth '5

I6

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

century, several significant in the dynamic cultural life to the ideological position tions, practices and results ment. T H E

IMAGE

OF

MAN

currents of thought criss-cross of this people. Let us first turn and the educational implicaof the official Tsarist govern-

OFFICIAL

REGIME

Under the reigns of Alexander I (1801-25), Nicholas I (1825-55), a n d Alexander II (1855-81), the official Tsarist government developed and carried into practice a national ideal of life and education which was in general consistent with its beliefs. 1 Alexander I was a liberal, enlightened person with a politically astute mind. His civic, social, and educational ideas were humanitarian: he wanted the people to participate in affairs of state. He favored the constitutional idea of government, and, with this, the extension of formal education among the people. 2 Alexander's vision was to establish an adequate and a permanent national system of education which would provide for all classes. Therefore, in 1802, he established the Ministry of Public Enlightenment which in effect centralized all educational institutions and cultural institutions, bringing them under state control. 3 Alexander's chief adviser, Mikhail Speransky, saw, however, that in the field of education as well as in the political structure of the state, slow and cautious efforts had to be made. In the absence of a literate populace, how could Russia have a constitution; how could a national spirit be created without freedom of the press or without formal education? T h e political and educational problems clearly focused on the institution of serfdom. T o spread education under the conditions of serfdom would

NINETEENTH-CENTURY

RUSSIAN

THOUGHT

17

be sheer folly, and to abolish serfdom w i t h o u t education was e q u a l l y impossible. T h u s , caution was exercised. First, g r o u n d had to be prepared for the limitation of serfdom. T h i s p r o b l e m became the main bone of contention t h r o u g h o u t the nineteenth century in Russia. F r o m above, however, the Tsars worked steadily toward the limitation and final abolition of serfdom. 4 M a n y practical advances were undertaken and completed d u r i n g Alexander's reign until the disruption of national affairs by the outbreak of the N a p o l e o n i c wars. 5 B u t the postwar period of reaction sought to stem the tide of secular liberal and democratic thought from the West. O n e way of accomplishing this, it was held, was to merge the religious and educational ministries, thus placing religious emphasis at the center of education. In 1817 the Ministry of Education did merge w i t h the Ministry of P u b l i c W o r s h i p , in hopes of b r i n g i n g a b o u t " C h r i s t i a n piety as the permanent basis of true enlightenment. . . ." β T h e a i m was to enable the people to read the B i b l e for themselves, the translation of w h i c h had been made into the Russian language by Bishop Philaret. O p i n i o n s differ sharply as to the " a d v a n c e " of such a merger. O n the whole, the merger seems to have brought little progress. 7 T h i s u n i t i n g of the two ministries did mean, however, that cultural education was replaced by a religious fundamentalism. 8 L e o n t i Magnitsky, a conservative m e m b e r of the official e d u c a t i o n a l council of the Ministry of Education, stated the p r e v a i l i n g attitude which had crystallized as a result of the N a p o l e o n i c wars: T h e whole mischief of Napoleon and his ideas which has been observed in our universities has been caused by the education, the books and the men we have imported from the German universities. There the infection of belief in the revolutionary

I8

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

principles which started in England and gained additional strength in prerevolutionary France has been erected into a . . . system.® A d m i r a l Shishkov, w h o b e c a m e M i n i s t e r of E d u c a t i o n in 1824, s u m m e d u p the official v i e w w h i c h N i c h o l a s I was to inherit: Learning without faith and without morality does not constitute national happiness. Learning is as hurtful in a bad man as it is useful in a good man. . . . T o teach the whole people, or a disproportionate number of them, to read and write would do more harm than good. T o instruct a farmer's son in rhetoric would be to make of him a bad and worthless, if not a positively dangerous citizen. But instruction in the rules of conduct and in Christian virtues and good morals is necessary to everybody. . . . 1 0 U p o n the death of A l e x a n d e r I , in 1 8 2 5 , N i c h o l a s I became T s a r . U n f o r t u n a t e l y f o r h i m a n d f o r his policies, his reign o p e n e d w i t h a political u p r i s i n g , the D e c e m b r i s t r e v o l t . 1 1 N i c h o l a s q u e l l e d the r e b e l l i o n , b e l i e v i n g that he had saved his c o u n t r y f r o m sedition. H e dealt mercilessly with the r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s , e x e c u t i n g or e x i l i n g them. T o Nicholas, this u p r i s i n g r e v e a l e d s u r p r i s i n g d i s o r d e r and abuse w i t h i n the g o v e r n m e n t , a n d he set o u t w i t h intentions of a series of r e f o r m s . I n his c o r o n a t i o n address of J u l y 1 3 , 1826, N i c h o l a s stated: Not by impertinent, destructive dreams, but from above, are gradually perfected the statutes of the land, are corrected the faults, are rectified the abuses. In this order of gradual improvement, every modest desire for the better, every thought for the strengthening of the power of the law, for the spread of true enlightenment and of industry, in teaching us by the legal way, open for all—will always be received by us with grace: for we have not, cannot have any other desire but to see

NINETEENTH-CENTURY

RUSSIAN

THOUGHT

ig

our country on the highest grade of happiness and glory, by Providence predestined. 12 N i c h o l a s first gave foremost a t t e n t i o n to the question of p o p u l a r education. H a v i n g in m i n d the eradication of f u r t h e r " s e d i t i o n , " he was intent u p o n d i r e c t i n g the education of the p e o p l e to f o r m loyal, o b e d i e n t subjects of the state a m o n g all classes. H i s leading p r i n c i p l e was to g i v e to each class its p r o p e r k i n d of e d u c a t i o n so as not to arouse " h o p e s a n d aspirations for rising f r o m one class into a h i g h e r class." 13 T h e official regime's C o m m i t t e e on E d u c a t i o n n o w stated that " . . . a p u b l i c system of education should a i m at securing for the c h i l d r e n of each class such a training as c o u l d fit t h e m to be useful a n d contented in that r a n k of life to w h i c h it had pleased a Most H i g h P r o v i d e n c e to call t h e m at b i r t h . " 14 T h u s , the acceptance of an aristocratic class social o r d e r w i t h an absolute monarchial political structure b e g a n to crystallize. Official ideology was soon g i v e n its theoretical f o r m u lation by C o u n t U v a r o v , w h o b e c a m e M i n i s t e r of Education in 1833 and served until 1849. 15 U v a r o v ' s f o r m u l a was Orthodoxy, Autocracy, a n d Nationality. Returning from an assignment, g i v e n to h i m by the T s a r , to investigate Moscow U n i v e r s i t y a n d o t h e r educational institutions in the provinces, U v a r o v stated: I firmly believe we shall be able to avoid those mistakes, and shall succeed in gradually capturing the minds of the youth and bringing them to that point where there must merge together—a regulated, fundamental education with a deep conviction and warm belief in the true-Russian conservative principles of Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality, which present the last anchor of our salvation and the surest pledge of the strength and majesty of our country. 1 8 In the forties, r e v o l u t i o n a r y events in E u r o p e thoro u g h l y alarmed N i c h o l a s . T h e p r o c l a m a t i o n of a r e p u b l i c

20

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

in France, the Hungarian uprisings which Nicholas helped to quell, his sister's threatened position on the throne of Holland, Germany's attempt at unification—all helped to entrench the forces of conservatism more firmly than ever in Russia. T h e official regime now concentrated all its energies against any liberal activities. It regarded with apprehension the circles of the educated classes, which discussed political, social, educational and literary questions. T h e members of one such literary circle, Petrashevsky's, of which the young Dostoevsky was a participant, were arrested by the authorities. T h e press likewise was curtailed, and a strict censorship prevailed." Even the Minister of Education, conservative C o u n t Uvarov, resigned in 1849 as he could no longer tolerate the extreme restrictions of Nicholas I. In the universities philosophy itself was suspect, and, therefore, abandoned. Suppression and reaction reigned until the death of Nicholas I in 1855. Political and intellectual radicalism had crystallized in the last years of the reign of Nicholas, and with Alexander II, who became T s a r in 1855, this radicalism entered the scene with full clarity and decisiveness. 18 In the forties socialism had already become an ingredient in the thought of the Russian intelligentsia; henceforth, it was to become the "secular equivalent of a religious world view." 19 Other tendencies in thought among the intellectuals were evident. T h e orthodox religious view of life was renewed by a group known as the Slavophiles. By the sixties two towering figures of wide influence emerged: C o u n t L e o Tolstoy and Fyodor Dostoevsky, " w h o aroused all Russian society religiously with their passionate language. . . ." and thought. 20 Both Tolstoy and Dostoevsky took positions as mediators between the socialist group, known as the Westernizers, and the Slavophiles.

NINETEENTH-CENTURY

RUSSIAN

THOUGHT

21

T h e first acts of the new official regime under A l e x a n d e r I I were liberal ones; he abolished university restrictions and again issued passports for Russians to study and to travel abroad. H e lifted the censorship of the press; he began earnest preparations for the abolition of serfdom. 2 1 In the late fifties and early sixties a movement towards liberalism developed which moved in the direction of the establishment of a constitutional monarchy. O n February 19, 1 8 6 1 , after six years of study and debate, the T s a r signed the Act of Emancipation. With the bondage system eliminated, the entire administrative structure based on class principles was changed. N e w judiciary and educational reforms could now become possible. 22 T h e situation prevailing in the early sixties is described by one historian as follows: During the first five years of Alexander's reign the public consciousness made big strides, and had gained initiative and definiteness of purpose. In connection with the peasant reform, there emerged concomitant questions concerning local selfgovernment, judicial reorganization and jury-trials, publicity and freedom of speech, and numerous other questions regarding culture, education, and the satisfaction of the economic and industrial needs of the rejuvenated country. Those questions were formulated in projects of provincial committees, in speeches and addresses of delegates to the provincial assemblies in i860, and were echoed in the press. 23 It soon became evident that reforms were not enough f o r the radical intelligentsia, and the official regime found itself coping with a rising tide of outbursts and demonstrations by the revolutionary groups. 2 4 A strong reaction against further liberalism now set in. Ini 1867, Count D. A . Tolstoy was appointed Minister of Education. Tolstoy was a conservative who opposed any liberal or democratic ideas. H e was a classicist, and above

22

DOSTOEVSKV:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

all promoted the interests of the ruling class to which he belonged. In combatting the "revolutionary nihilism" among the university youth and among the circles of the intelligentsia, Tolstoy, together with the aid of two journalists, M. N . Katkov of the Russian Messenger and P. M. Leontiev of the Moscow News, favored a system of education which would "train young minds exclusively in the acquisition of exact information, and prevent them from excessive reasoning which led to Nihilistic ideas and materialistic teaching. T h e y considered ancient languages, and next—mathematics, as the most important studies in the secondary schools." 26 Acting slowly, persistently, and efficiently, Tolstoy succeeded in having his plan realized to restore classicism to the curriculum, and in 1 8 7 1 his full program went into effect. 2 6 More firmly than ever adhering to the doctrine of Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality, the official regime continually strove to stem the tide of the radical revolutionary thought and action. 2 7 T h o s e who advocated the return to classicism endeavored to keep young minds within bounds and to restore exact reasoning and clear thinking in support of the official national ideology.

THE

WESTERNIZERS

AND

THE

SLAVOPHILES

Alongside the ideology of the official regime, independent currents of thought developed throughout the nineteenth century in Russia. A striving after freedom and social justice permeated intellectual thought. T h e predominant themes in Russian philosophical thought were religious and ethical with social and educational corollaries. 28 W e now turn to a brief study of these currents of thought which, by the forties, had crystallized into two

NINETEENTH-CENTURY

RUSSIAN

THOUGHT

23

m o v e m e n t s w h i c h have c o m e to be designated by the terms Westernizers and Slavophiles. T h e stimulus and i m p e t u s for the a w a k e n i n g of philosophic t h o u g h t a m o n g the y o u n g intellectuals was provided by the a r m y officers' contact w i t h the W e s t in the N a p o l e o n i c wars. T h e D e c e m b r i s t g r o u p represented the F r e n c h influence in the twenties, b u t the f a i l u r e of their c o u p b r o k e their influence. In the thirties, G e r m a n idealism prevailed, as Berdyaev has described: " G e r m a n idealism, K a n t , Fichte, Schelling, H e g e l , had a d e t e r m i n i n g significance for Russian t h o u g h t . R u s s i a n creative t h o u g h t b e g a n to show itself in an atmosphere of G e r m a n idealism and romanticism. . . ." 29 O n e of the o u t s t a n d i n g intellectuals of the p e r i o d has left a description of the times. P r i n c e O d o y e v s k i in his Russian Nights says: My youth was spent in a period when metaphysics was as much in the general atmosphere as the political sciences are now. We believed in the possibility of an absolute theory, by means of which one would be able to order all the phenomena of nature, just as men today believe in the possibility of a social order that will fully satisfy all human needs. . . . However that may be, at that time all of nature, all of human life, seemed very clear to us, and we rather looked down upon the physicists and chemists . . . who rooted about in 'vulgar matter.' 30 In 1836, a y o u n g a r m y officer and aristocrat, P. J. C h a a d a i e v , published his " P h i l o s o p h i c a l L e t t e r " in a w i d e l y read j o u r n a l , Telescope.31 T h i s letter b r o u g h t a b o u t a sharp division of t h o u g h t a m o n g the intellectuals. Chaadaiev's w o r k criticized sharply the official d o c t r i n e of nationality. In contrast to the official r e g i m e ' s praise of Russian reality a n d history, C h a a d a i e v w r o t e : A t the very beginning we had savage barbarism, later rude superstition, then a cruel, humiliating domination of the con-

24

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

querors, a domination the traces of which have not been erased from our mode of living to this day. Such is the sad history of our youth; we have not had that age of boundless activity, of the poetical display of the nation's moral forces. The epoch of our social life, corresponding to that age, was filled with a dark colour—less existence, without power, without energy. We have no charming memories, no strong, instructive examples in popular legends. Cast a glance at all the centuries of our existence, at all the expanse that we are occupying now, and you will not find a single reminiscence which would arrest you, a single monument which would tell you about the past in a strong, vivid, picturesque way. We live in indifference to all, in a narrow horizon, with no past or future. . . . 32 He maintained that something had separated Russia from the universal life of mankind: "Russia must begin all over again the whole education of man. For this purpose we have before us the history of nations and the results of movements of ages. . . . " 3 3 T h e ideal of Chaadaiev was Western Europe. Chaadaiev manifested an awakened and independent mind whether his contemporaries liked it or not. Nicholas I had him placed under house arrest; the "Philosophical Letter" was banned, and the publication of the journal Telescope ceased. Nevertheless, Chaadaiev had posed the fundamental problem for Russia: should she turn to the West, the Russia of Peter the Great, or to the East, Moscovy, in her line of further development and progress? 84 T h e crystallization of these two different "ways of life" came into clear focus with the emergence of the Westernizer and Slavophile movements.

NINETEENTH-CENTURY

RUSSIAN

THOUGHT

25

WESTERNIZERS

T h e Russian intelligentsia which idealized the West formulated their ideological position in the forties. T h i s group officially and articulately opposed the doctrine of the official regime. First, what is meant by the term intelligentsia which is applied to the Westernizers? T h e singular phenomenon of the intelligentsia is not to be identified with those in the West who are known as intellectuals. As a social group intellectuals are people of intellectual work and creativeness, mainly learned people, writers, artists, professors, teachers, and so on. The Russian intelligentsia is an entirely different group; and to it may belong people occupied in no intellectual work, and generally speaking not particularly intellectual. Many Russian scholars and writers certainly could not be reckoned as belonging to the intelligentsia in the strict sense of the word. The intelligentsia reminds one more of a monastic order or sect, with its very intolerant ethics, its own obligatory outlook on life, with its own manners and customs and even its own particular physical appearance, by which it is always possible to recognize a member of the intelligentsia and to distinguish him from other social groups. Our intelligentsia were a group formed out of various social classes and held together by ideas, not by sharing a common profession or economic status. They were derived to begin with mainly from the more cultured section of the nobility, later from the sons of the clergy, small government officials, the lower middle class, and, after the liberation, from the peasants. That then is the intelligentsia; its members were of d'fferent social classes, and held together solely by ideas, and, moreover, by ideas about sociology.35 T h e typical features of the intelligentsia were

26

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

Lack of roots in the soil, a break with all class life and traditions, . . . but even these qualities in them took a characteristically Russian form. T h e intelligentsia was always carried away by some idea or other, for the most part by social ideas, and devoted itself to them supremely. It acquired the power of living by ideas alone. Owing to Russian political conditions, the intelligentsia found itself divorced from practical social work, and that easily led to social day dreaming. In the Russia of autocracy and serfdom, the most radical socialist and anarchist ideas were developed. T h e impossibility of political action led to this, that politics were transferred to thought and literature. It was the literary critics who were the leaders of social and political thought and character. T h e intelligentsia assumed that sectarian character which is so natural to all Russians. It lived in schism from its actual environment, which it considered evil, and within it a fanatical sectarian ethic was elaborated. 86 Possessing a particular faculty for "assimilating Western ideas a n d doctrines and giving t h e m original f o r m , " the Russian intelligentsia e m b r a c e d as dogma that which was in the West a hypothesis, or a relative truth. 3 7 It must be kept in m i n d that both the Westernizers a n d the Slavophiles were dissatisfied with the way of life u n d e r the reigns of Alexander I and Nicholas I; both saw the need for reform a n d r e j u v e n a t i o n of Russia; both advocated freedom of intellectual t h o u g h t and the dignity of man, a n d both strove for social a n d political justice. T h e i r "ways" were difEerent, however. For the Westernizers the f u t u r e of Russia lay on the path taken by the c u l t u r e of W e s t e r n Europe. In their idealization of the West, of course, they overlooked glaring dissonances. T h e extreme g r o u p a m o n g the Westernizers completely repudiated the past cultural tradition of Russia, including the national religion of O r t h o d o x Christianity.

NINETEENTH-CENTURY

RUSSIAN

THOUGHT

27

Ideologically the Westernizers adopted a materialistic philosophy. They were either indifferent to religion or atheistic. In repudiating any religious foundation, the Westernizers assimilated contemporary European philosophies of the nineteenth century; they strove to base their world-view on secular humanism. In associating themselves with Western secular culture, they attempted to link the problems of the West to the paths of Russian thought. They devoted their energies to writing on social and political themes; direct action was the desire and goal of their intellectual effort. 38 T h e Westernizers moved from an idealistic position in Utopian socialism (Fourier and Saint Simon) to materialistic socialism derived from Feuerbach in the sixties and seventies, finally culminating in scientific Marxist socialism. T h e two influential personalities of the early Westernizers in the forties were Alexander Hertzen and Visarrion Belinsky. In periodicals which now began to appear, Annals of the Fatherland and the Contemporary, the Westernizers had means of expressing their point of view. Belinsky above all others was the intellectual leader of the younger generation. 39 Belinsky shifted his philosophical speculations from socialistic utopianism "in the name of the individual's emancipation from the oppression of the contemporary social order" to Enlightenment humanism, derived from Hegel. 40 Later he adopted materialism, became a revolutionary, an atheist, and a socialist. Berdyaev has called Belinsky the "intellectual ancestor of Russian communism." 41 As the first significant representative of the Westernizers, what were Belinsky's ideas concerning education? He wrote no formal treatise on education, but scattered in his works one can find his leading ideas. He championed the idea

28

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

that education should be available for all the people, and that the state should assume responsibility for the education of all its members. As a socialist he was against all class distinctions; he believed that nature is no respecter of classes in her gifts. Education should develop a man's moral powers. In championing individualism, Belinsky wrote: " T h e fate of the subject, the individual, the person, is more important than the fate of the whole world or the well being of the Chinese emperor." 42 Yet, Belinsky moved imperceptibly to a new general and abstract humanity in socialism. He believed in progress. Morality and education could perfect mankind. 4 3 T h e second outstanding representative of the early Westernizers was Alexander Hertzen, who was a skeptic and a humanist. Hertzen was inspired by the French socialistic literature, and admired Western European culture. In 1847 he fled from the Russia of Nicholas I, and became active in London as the publisher of the Polar Star, later renamed The Bell. T h i s periodical, though forbidden, had wide circulation in Russia. For Hertzen the higher value of personality was rooted in what he called socialist individualism. W h a t he meant by this seeming contradiction was that the Russian peasant people held within their life the possibilities of both principles: personality and community which could fuse together without domination of one by the other. 44 T h e implications of Belinsky's philosophical premises for educational philosophy led directly toward the formulation of the materialistic world outlook. Hertzen gave impetus to the populist movement of the sixties and seventies. W i t h these early Westernizers the foundations were laid for a more definite movement which, by the sixties and in the seventies, fully developed into a new "Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationalism" of its own which was in op-

NINETEENTH-CENTURY

RUSSIAN

THOUGHT

29

position to the official regime. It was a new orthodoxy of materialistic socialism (Feuerbach, Marx), an autocracy of the elite intelligentsia radical wing, and a nationalism of a new, future Russia. It took time for the elaboration of a political mission and "the realization that only a tightlyknit 'party' could effectively manage radical, political activity. . . ." 45 However, by the sixties the younger generation had begun to speak, now defending realism. By this they meant a view of life based upon findings in the exact sciences. They felt that art should be utilitarian, and morality was also discussed in terms of British utilitarianism. T h e intellectual leaders of the younger generation now became Nikolai G. Chernyshevsky, Nikolai Dobroliubov, and Dmitri Pisarev. These men devoted all their talents and energies to advocating "the emancipation of the earthly man, the emancipation of laboring people from their excessive suffering, to establishing conditions of happy life arid so on." 48 They "declared war against all historical traditions; they opposed 'reason' the existence of which as materialists they could not recognize, to all the beliefs and prejudices of the past." 47 These Russian materialists, unlike those in the West, were nihilists. T h e nihilist claimed that no objective ground for moral principles existed. Social organization was, in its present historical reality, evil, and the only solution was to destroy. T h e way of revolution thus became the ideal for the nihilists of the late sixties and seventies in Russia. Both Chernyshevsky and Dobroliubov concurred in their educational theories. Education was, of course, to foster the revolutionary spirit. T h e teacher was to be a model for students to emulate. What was the ideal? It was the ideal revolutionary who would be trained to overthrow the regime. Once this revolution was accomplished, they

go

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

all would have a general education. One serious young teacher, Nechaiev, carried the socialist ideal to its logical conclusion; he formulated the revolutionary catechism which will be discussed in detail shortly. 48 In the seventies, the work of Chernyshevsky and Dobroliubov was carried on by two leaders who came forward to clarify the ideological foundation for the young generation. These leaders were Peter Lavrov and Nicholas Mihailovski. Lavrov held that "the development of the individual physically, mentally and morally, the embodiment of truth and justice in social forms, this short formula embraces everything that may be considered progress." 49 Both Lavrov and Mihailovski embraced positivism, a philosophy which includes only natural phenomena or the properties of knowable things in their coexistence and relationships. They defended human personality, but to them "personality still remained the creation of the community, of its social environment, and it is not clear whence it found its power to fight against the community, which wants to turn personality into its own organ and function." 50 T h e ideology of Lavrov and Mihailovski was bound by the interests of the people, but not by their beliefs or opinions. 51 Believing that they held the truth, their method was to go directly to the people. This earned them the title narodnik or the narodnichestvo, which would be near the equivalent of populist in the West. T h e young intelligentsia who followed Lavrov and Mihailovski felt that it was their moral duty to serve the interests of the people, to wish for the peoples' freedom and to work toward this freedom. 52 T h e narodniki, however, were doomed to disappointment. T h e Russian people still believed in the sacrosanct character of the autocracy, and were unmoved by these new "socialistic" views of the young "gentlefolk." By no

NINETEENTH-CENTURY

RUSSIAN

THOUGHT

31

means did the official g o v e r n m e n t m a i n t a i n its position by violence;

its a u t h o r i t y

finally

rested upon the religious

convictions of the people. 5 3 Berdyaev has described

the

situation in the following way: What happened was that the people did not welcome the intelligentsia, and the people themselves surrendered those who came desiring to serve them as unselfishly and disinterestedly into the hands of the authorities. T h e people—that is to say, chiefly the peasantry—found the point of view of the intelligentsia strange. T h e people still remained religious. Orthodox, and the lack of religion in the intelligentsia repelled them. T h e people saw a gentlefolk's pastime in the narodnik "going to the people." 5 4 T h e radical wing of the intelligentsia was led by the anarchist, M i c h a e l B a k u n i n . H e r e c o m m e n d e d going to the people, b u t not for the purpose of i m p a r t i n g knowledge and ideas, or literacy, b u t " i n the direct sense of reb e l l i n g against the e x i s t i n g order of things, since until that order was o v e r t h r o w n a n d a n n i h i l a t e d n o proper social d e v e l o p m e n t was possible." 5 5 T h i s call for terrorism culm i n a t e d in the " N e c h a i e v affair." B a k u n i n set revolt as the first goal of life; m a n becomes m a n by revolt. H e wanted to raise a world-wide revolt in the n a m e of the free m a n . Sergei N e c h a i e v went f u r t h e r than B a k u n i n . H e " p u t into the f o u n d a t i o n of his political system the principle of e x t r e m e jesuitism. I n his o p i n i o n a r e v o l u t i o n i s t was justified in i g n o r i n g all m o r a l principles, in deceiving, killing, and r o b b i n g ; for the sake of holding the organization in a firm grip, N e c h a i e v allowed h i m s e l f to compromise his co-workers, to steal t h e i r letters o r d o c u m e n t s , and to terrorize them in o t h e r ways." 5 6 Nechaiev, the f o u n d e r of the r e v o l u t i o n a r y society, " T h e A x e o r the People's J u s t i c e , " composed the " R e v o l u t i o n a r y

32

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS I M A G E

OF

MAN

57

Catechism." In it he characterized the revolutionary as "the doomed man. He has no personal interests, business, feelings, connections, property, or even name. Everything in him is in the grip of the one exclusive interest, one thought, one passion, revolution." 68 T h e only science the revolutionary knows, according to Nechaiev, is destruction. " T o the revolutionary everything is moral which serves the revolution—words which Lenin repeated later." 59 Even Bakunin disowned Nechaiev after the murder of a student, Ivanov, in 1869, by one of Nechaiev's cell groups. After the publication of Dostoevsky's The Possessed (1871-72), Mihailovski took issue with the author, protesting that Peter Verhovensky in Dostoevsky's work (the Nechaiev type) was not the real characteristic ideal of revolutionary to be emulated and taught to the younger generation. By the end of the seventies, with the failure of the peaceful narodniki who went to the people, all the active revolutionary forces were now concentrated in the terrorist struggle with the official regime. T h e ideal of the populist group was pushed into the background. 60 T h e assassination of Alexander II in March, 1881, "by the decision of the Peoples' Will Party was the end and disruption of the Russian revolutionary movement before the rise of Marxism. It was the tragic climax of the single combat between the Russian authority and the Russian intelligentsia." β1

THE

SLAVOPHILES

T h e Slavophiles were opposed to the Westernizers' ideology. By the forties they, too, had formulated their position. T h e historian, Kornilov, has made an adequate summary:

NINETEENTH-CENTURY

RUSSIAN

THOUGHT

33

They were all pure, noble minds, who had worked out an original, solid, and well-proportioned system, their own historiosophy, which like that of Chaadaiev was based on theological principles, and they had also emphasized the contradictions and contrasts in the development of the two different worlds of contemporary mankind: the Western-Latin-German, and the Eastern-Byzantine-Slav, or Greco-Russian. . . . In their conception the Orthodox faith and the Russian people had preserved the ancient principle of spiritual Christianity in all its purity, while in the West it had been distorted by the casuistry of Catholicism, by the Papal authority, and by the prevalence of material culture over spiritual. T h e consequent development of those circumstances had brought, in their opinion, at first Protestantism, and later the modern Materialism, and the denial of the Revelation and of all the truths of the Christian faith. T h e Slavophils asserted that in Russia the state and society had developed on principles of freedom, on the domination of democratic communal elements, while in the West the state and the society developed on principles of violence, of enslaving one class or nation by other classes or nations, which resulted in the Feudal aristocratic form of personal ownership of land, and the landlessness of the masses.eBerdyaev described the Slavophiles as follows: T h e Slavophils were originally Russian landowners, educated men, humanists, lovers of freedom, but they were deeply rooted in the soil, very closely connected with a particular type of life and suffered from the limitations which that type of life imposed . . . with all their animosity towards the empire they still felt the solid earth under their feet and had no premonitions of the catastrophes which were to come. . . . T h e patriarchal organic theory of society was peculiarly theirs; . . . society ought to be constructed upon the analogy of family relationships. 63

34

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

In opposition to the Westernizers and Chaadaiev, the Slavophiles felt that the Europeanization of Russia by Peter the Great was a betrayal of Russia's destiny. Adopting Hegel's idea of a national people's vocation, the Slavophiles applied this to Russia. T h e y associated Russia's destiny with her own u n i q u e history; they therefore idealized the past out of all proportion. T h e Slavophiles believed in the people's culture, and in its ideology, which was firmly grounded in O r t h o d o x Christianity. In valuing the peasants' communal institutions like the mir, the Slavophiles worked for liberal reforms within the framework of the monarchy, holding that reform should come f r o m the top, that is, f r o m the government rather than by way of revolution. T h e leader and inspirer of the early Slavophiles was Aleksei S. Khomyakov, a poet, dramatist, philosopher, and theologian. H e attempted the construction of a Christian philosophy, that is, an integral world-view based u p o n the religious foundations of Orthodoxy.® 4 Khomyakov rejected an individualism based on rationalism and elaborated an anthropology based on the idea of "organic togetherness" or sobornost. His social ideas also retained this principle. Khomyakov respected the principle of the obshchina or village c o m m u n e a m o n g the people. While he held that sovereign power rests u p o n the acceptance by the people, he was no anarchist in the rejection of the state. T h e people should entrust their power to the Tsar. 8 5 O t h e r leaders among the Slavophiles were I. Kireyevski, Ivan and Constantine Aksakov, and Y. Sumarin. It is difficult to summarize the Slavophile position as a whole, because each thinker elaborated his philosophy uniquely. Nevertheless, the two elements common to all Slavophiles were: first, the striving to find in O r t h o d o x Christianity an adequacy which would "satisfy and sanctify the basic

NINETEENTH-CENTURY

RUSSIAN

THOUGHT

35

and ineradicable searchings of the human spirit," 9 6 and second, while the Slavophiles were related to the genuine patristic tradition, they also "accepted everything of value that had matured in modern science, philosophy, and general culture." 87 T h e y strove not for a synthesis of Western culture and Orthodoxy, but to construct "a new and creative cultural consciousness, growing organically out of the very foundations of the Orthodox ecclesiastical tradition." 6 8 T h e r e were both liberal and conservative Slavophiles. T h e liberal group by no means repudiated the best in Western culture; further, they advocated an Orthodox popular democracy which would include freedom of speech and public opinion; serfdom was to be abolished as well. T h e conservative wing supported the monarchy closely, and later advocated Pan-Slavism, the uniting of all Slavs." One does not find direct theorizing on particular educational problems among the Slavophiles. However, on the basis of their ideological premises, one can see that they stood for the reintegration of a Christian culture, which would carry with it the religious and cultural enlightenment of the people. 70 T h e voices of the leaders among both the Westernizers and the Slavophiles in nineteenth-century Russia did not develop particular philosophies of education as such. Rather they were concerned with the broader basis of philosophical inquiry, and they "almost invariably had something to say about education. And in this interest they had enough precedent to constitute almost a heritage. . . ." 7 1 T h e implications of the Westernizer point of view, as already noted, would lead Russia toward the materialistic, and ultimately, revolutionary, world-view. T h e Slavophiles

36

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

hoped to renew and to implement the Orthodox Christian view of life, rooted in the nation's historic tradition. They would combine Christian idealism with the best from Western culture. T h e concern in this short study has been with ideological premises rather than with pedagogical aspects; philosophical ideas lead toward the forming of the minds of men. Westernizer ideology led to the formulation of the ideal of "the revolutionary fighter for democracy," in the view of the Soviet historian Medynskii. 72 T h e Slavophile ideology reformulated the religious ideal, rooted in the tradition of Russia.

LEADERS

IN

RUSSIAN

WESTERNIZERS

THOUGHT AND

OTHER

THAN

SLAVOPHILES

We turn now to thinkers who stand apart from the movements of the Westernizers and the Slavophiles. Four outstanding personalities emerge: Ν. I. Pirogov ( 1 8 1 0 81), Count Leo Tolstoy (1828-10), K. D. Ushinskii (182470), and Fyodor M. Dostoevsky ( 1 8 2 1 - 8 1 ) . Ν. I. Pirogov was a world-famous surgeon. He and Tolstoy, as young men, were "adherents of a positivistic and naturalistic philosophy; both of them became profoundly disillusioned by it, and turned to a specific kind of religious world-view," Christianity. 73 After his return from the Crimean War in 1856, Pirogov published his articles on educational themes, Problems of Lije. He believed in educating the man rather than training technicians or emphasizing social position. In turning attention towards the whole individual, he has been hailed as a reformer in pedagogy. 74 Pirogov advocated higher and free education for all. In upholding the idea that work should be done for its own sake, Pirogov agreed with Toi-

NINETEENTH-CENTURY

RUSSIAN

THOUGHT

37

stoy. Both were against coercion in learning; they advocated the voluntaristic approach to the student. 75 Count Leo Tolstoy, world-renowned artist and ardent Christian moralist, began an experimental school on his estate, Yasnaya Polyana ( T h e Clear Glade). Tolstoy studied pedagogy considerably, even making an extensive trip to Europe to observe the popular schools there. 79 During this period he confirmed his own pedagogical principles: study cannot be forced; one must enthusiastically kindle a child's longing to know. Tolstoy called this "unconscious education." 77 Tolstoy held that teaching was an art and a talent; no one method sufficed, nor all of them together. H e followed the psychological development of the child in age and ability. L e a r n i n g should be something attractive, Tolstoy maintained, and the teacher had to love both his work and the students. A special pedagogical journal, Yasnaya Polyana, was published by Tolstoy himself during the years of his educational activities, 1859-62. Here are printed his own articles which "later evoked a whole tendency toward 'Tolstoyan pedagogy' in various countries—in Russia last of all." 78 W h i l e Tolstoy's ideas and methods were practiced in a very limited way in Russia, his influence was much more widely felt in Europe. 7 9 Konstantine Ushinskii was a professor of law in the Demidov Lycee during the reign of Nicholas I. His pioneer work in education was undertaken in the early sixties during the reign of Alexander I I . Appointed Inspector of the Smolny Institute for N o b l e Girls in 1859, Ushinskii reorganized the entire curriculum, and greatly raised the standards of scholarship. Ushinskii was closest to the Slavophiles. His philosophy can be called idealistic humanism; he was inspired by

J8

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

Bacon, Locke, Mill, Spencer, Kant, and Descartes. 80 Ushinskii believed in the peaceful transformation and development of better men for a better society through education. He agreed with Pirogov, Tolstoy, and Dostoevsky in seeing the whole people of the nation as the "cornerstone of education." 81 Ushinskii held that pedagogy in the broad sense meant to "know man in all his relationships. Education must illuminate the conscience of man and show him clearly the road to the good." 82 T h e aims of education should be moral, mental, social, and physical, but chiefly moral. Education should devote itself primarily to the formation of character. 83 Ushinskii and Dostoevsky both stressed the importance of the family and its duty in giving the child a strong, sound, moral sensitivity, a love for his country, and a respect for the dignity of work. Ushinskii wrote that work was important in developing character; mental work was no less labor than physical work. In fact, it was the highest form of labor. 84 T h e habit of working was important in itself: "Education must develop in the pupil a habit of work and must make it possible for him to find for himself a life work. T h e school must not only provide intellectual development and a definite fund of knowledge, but must arouse in the youth a thirst for serious work, without which life can be neither worthy nor happy." 85 Ushinskii was in agreement with the Slavophiles and with Dostoevsky in insisting upon love and respect for one's native land: "Love for the fatherland, present in every person, provides a true key to the heart of man, and education must accordingly rest upon nationalism." 8 e Both Ushinskii and Dostoevsky agreed that the native Russian language should be the vehicle of expression in the schools.87

NINETEENTH-CENTURY

RUSSIAN

THOUGHT

39

It is significant that all these thinkers stressed the importance of the teacher. Ushinskii wrote: The teacher feels that he is an active member of a great organism, which struggles against the ignorance and vices of humanity, a mediator between his own generation and everything noble and sublime in the past history of mankind, a keeper of the sacred legacy of the people who have struggled for truth and virtue. He feels that he is a living link between the past and the future . . . and understands that . . . kingdoms rest upon his work and that whole generations live by it.8« Agreeing with Tolstoy, Ushinskii also held that the teacher must learn each pupil's abilities and peculiarities. Teaching is also more of an art than a science. T h e art of teaching does, of course, require knowledge of the basic elements of anthropology, physiology, and psychology; but more than science is needed. Patience, understanding, and love are essential. 89 T h e ethical inspiration of the teacher must have a particular religious basis: " T h e public school teacher should have a devout belief in Christianity and his life should be one of example for others. Only in this way could the teacher have an ethical influence on children and youth and his work be 'truly educative.' " βΛ T h e valuable practical work of Ushinskii lay in his plans for a teacher-training program which included a curriculum and an administrative structure. In the seventies many of his proposals were widely applied. His plan for a Teacher's Seminary was in fact made the basis for the zemstvo schools for teachers. 91 His treatise Man as the Subject of Education became the "standard reference book of teachers and professors of education, and was used as a textbook in teachers' seminaries. A generation of teachers of education was brought up on this book and in the spirit of Ushinskii. They became teachers of teachers who cher-

40

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

ished his instructions and passed them on to their successors." 92 T h e following chapters are now concerned with exploring the views of F. M. Dostoevsky on educational problems. In addition, a study of the main aspects of his philosophy has been undertaken to discern his possible contribution toward the formulation of a philosophy of education for our times.

—ê{ Chapter

Two

Biography of Fyodor M. Dostoevsky THREE

RECOLLECTIONS

DOSTOEVSKY WROTE: " M a n c a n n o t even live without something sacred and precious carried away into life from the memories of childhood. Some people, apparently, do not even think a b o u t this; nevertheless, unconsciously, they do preserve such recollections."

1

T w o such "sacred and p r e c i o u s " events Dostoevsky recorded in his Diary: I was only nine years old, I recall, when once, on the third day of Easter week, after five in the evening, all our family —father and mother, brothers and sisters—were sitting at a round table, at a family tea, and it so happened that the conversation revolved around our estate and how we should go there for the summer. Suddenly the door opened and at the threshold appeared our house-servant, Grigory Vasiliev, who just before had arrived from the estate. In the absence of the masters, he used to be entrusted even with the management of the estate. And now, instead of the "superintendent" who always wore a German suit and displayed a solid appearance, there appeared a man in an old shabby peasant's coat; with bast shoes on his feet. He had come from the estate on foot; he stepped into the room and stood without uttering a word. " W h a t is it?"—ciied father, frightened.—"Look, what is it?" " T h e estate has burned down!"—said Grigory Vasiliev, in a base voice. 4'

42

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

I shall not describe what ensued: father and mother were working, not rich people—and such was their Easter present! It developed that everything had been destroyed by fire— everything: huts, granary, cattle-shed and even spring seeds, some of the cattle, and even our peasant Arkhip was burned to death. Owing to the sudden scare, we thought that it meant utter ruin. W e threw ourselves on our knees and began to pray; mother was crying. Presently our nurse, Aliona Frolovna, went up to her; Aliona was a hired servant, not a serf, and belonged to the Moscow commoners' class. She had nursed and brought up all of us children. She was then about fortyfive years old; she was a woman of serene and cheerful disposition, and she used to tell us such wonderful talesl For a number of years she had refused to draw her salary: " I don't need it." It had accumulated to the amount of some five hundred rubles, which were kept on deposit at a loan office: " I t will come in handy in my old age." Suddenly, she whispered to mother: " I f you should need money, take mine; I have no use for it; I don't need it. . . ." 2 T h e second recollection, " o n e i m p e r c e p t i b l e m o m e n t in my early c h i l d h o o d " was recalled d u r i n g his i m p r i s o n m e n t in S i b e r i a : I will relate . . . just a remote reminiscence . . . when I was only nine years old. . . . I recalled the month of August in our village: a dry and clear day, though somewhat chilly and windy; the summer was coming to an end, and soon I should have to go to Moscow, again to be wearied all winter over French lessons; and I was so sad over the fact that I would have to leave the country I went beyond the barns and, having descended to a ravine, I climbed up to the "Losk"—thus was called a thick shrubbery on yonder side of the ravine, which extended as far as the grove. Presently I plunged deeper into the bushes, and then I heard not far off—some thirty steps away—in a field, a solitary peasant plowing. I knew that he was plowing steeply uphill, that it was difficult for the horse to get along, and, from time to time, I heard the man's

BIOGRAPHY

OF

FVODOR

M.

DOSTOEVSKY

43

halloos: " G i d d a p — g i d d a p l " I knew virtually all of our peasants, but I didn't recognize the one now plowing; but this was of n o concern to me, since I was absorbed in my t a s k — I also was busy: I was trying to break a walnut whip for myself, to hit frogs; walnut whips are so pretty, though not solid — n o comparison with birch onesl I was also interested in insects and beetles; I was collecting t h e m — a m o n g them there are very neat ones. I was also fond of little agile lizards with tiny black dots; but I was afraid of little snakes; these, however, were found far more rarely than lizards. Here there were few m u s h r o o m s — t o find mushrooms one had to go to the birch grove, and I intended to proceed thither. A n d in all my life nothing have I loved as much as the forest, with its mushrooms and wild berries, its insects and birds and little hedgehogs and squirrels; its damp odor of dead leaves, which I so adored. Even now, as I am writing these lines, it seems that I can smell the odor of our country birch grove: these impressions remain intact throughout one's whole life. Suddenly, amidst the profound silence, clearly and distinctly, I heard the cry: " A wolf's r u n n i n g ! " I let out a scream and, beside myself with fright, and vociferating, I ran out into the field, straight up to the plowing peasant. T h i s was o u r peasant Marei. I don't know if there is such a name, but everybody called h i m Marei; he was almost fifty years old, stocky, pretty tall, with much gray hair in his bushy flaxen beard. I knew him, but up to that time I had never had occasion to talk to him. W h e n he heard my cries, he stopped his little filly, and when I, in the heat of running, seized the plow with one hand, and with the other—his sleeve, he sensed my dread. " A wolf's r u n n i n g ! " — I shouted, quite out of breath. H e raised his head and impulsively looked around, f o r an instant almost believing my words. " W h e r e ' s the wolf?" " S h o u t e d . . . someone had just shouted: 'a wolf's runn i n g ! ' " — I lisped. " W h a t ' s the matter with y o u ? — W h a t w o l f ? — T h i s appeared

44

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

to you in a dreaml L o o k ! H o w can a wolf be h e r e ! " — h e muttered, trying to enhearten me. But my whole body was trembling and I was c l i n g i n g ever so fast to his coat. I must have looked very pale. H e looked at me w i t h an uneasy smile, apparently alarmed o n my account. "See, h o w thou are frightened! O h , o h ! " — h e said, shaking his head. " N e v e r mind, dear. See, little kid! O h ! " H e e x t e n d e d his h a n d and stroked me on my cheek. " D o stop fearing! Christ be w i t h thee. Cross thyself." B u t I did not cross myself; the corners of my lips quivered and, I believe, this was w h a t impressed him most. Slowly he stretched out his thick finger, w i t h the black nail soiled w i t h earth, and gently touched my trembling lips. " S e e ! O h ! " — A n d h e l o o k e d at m e w i t h a l o n g m o t h e r l y s m i l e . — " G o o d L o r d ! W h a t ' s this? O h , o h ! " Finally, I grasped the fact that there was no wolf, and that the cry " a wolf's r u n n i n g " must have been falsely heard by me. Still, there was a clear a n d distinct cry, but pseudo cries of this k i n d had been heard by me two or three times before, and I was aware of this. (Later, with childhood, these hallucinations disappeared.) " W h y , I'll g o ! " — I said, questioningly and timidly looking at the peasant. " A l l right, go! A n d I shall be keeping thee in sight! Be sure, I shall not surrender thee to the w o l f ! " — h e added with the same motherly s m i l e . — " W e l l , Christ be with thee. N o w , g o ! " — A n d he crossed me w i t h his hand and then crossed himself. I started, but every ten steps I kept looking back. T o be frank, I was a little ashamed that I got so frightened in his presence. Yet, on my way I was still q u i t e afraid of the wolf till I had reached the slope of the ravine, and then the first barn. T h e r e , fright left me altogether. Presently, as if from nowhere, o u r house d o g V o l c h o k rushed to me. W e l l , of course, w i t h Volchok I felt q u i t e safe, and so, for the last time, I turned back toward Marei. N o longer was I able to discern him distinctly, but I felt that he still k e p t tenderly smiling at me and nodding. I w a v e d my h a n d to h i m ; he waved his hand, too, a n d

BIOGRAPHY

OF

FYODOR

M.

DOSTOEVSKY

45

stirred his filly. . . . And now suddenly—twenty years later, in Siberia—I was recalling that meeting . . . it had hidden in my soul imperceptibly, of its own accord, without any effort of my will, and then it came to my mind at the needed time: . . . No doubt, anyone would have cheered up a child —but here, at this solitary meeting, something, as it were, altogether different had happened; and if I had been his own son, he coukl not have bestowed upon me a glance gleaming with more serene love. And yet, who had prompted him? . . . 3 T o the child of nine, two people radiated active love, and at a time when Dostoevsky was s u r r o u n d e d by desperate m e n in the Siberian prison, the memory of Marei restored the spirit of the young man. A child, a youth experiences sufferings, too. T h e third reminiscence is a painful one. However, Dostoevsky says: They may even be painful and bitter; however, even suffering endured in one's life may subsequently transform itself into a sanctuary of the soul. Generally speaking, man has been so created that he loves his past suffering. Besides, man, of necessity, is inclined to mark points, as it were, in his past in order to be subsequently guided by them and to deduce from them something whole—as a matter of routine and for his own edification. 4 T h e third begins: . . . enroute from Moscow to Petersburg. My elder brother and I were going with our late father to Petersburg for matriculation in the Chief Engineering School. It was in May and it was hot. We drove with hired horses almost at a footpace, halting at stations for as long as two or three hours. I remember how, at length, we had grown weary of this journey which had lasted almost a whole week. My brother and I were then longing for a new life; we were meditating intensely about something, about everything "beautiful and lofty'": in those days these were still novel words and they used to be uttered without irony. And, at the time, how many beautiful little

46

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

words were in usel W e passionately believed in something, and although we knew very well everything that was required for the e x a m i n a t i o n in mathematics, we dreamed only about poetry and poets. My brother wrote verses, three poems every day, even d u r i n g our journey, while I kept busy p l a n n i n g in my m i n d a novel dealing with Venetian life. O n l y two months before, Pushkin had died, and en route brother and I agreed to visit without delay the place of the duel and to try to m a k e our way into the former apartment of Pushkin, in order to behold the room in which he had passed away. O n e evening we were stopping at a station, an inn, in some v i l l a g e — t h e n a m e of w h i c h I have f o r g o t t e n — i n the province of T v e r , if I correctly recall. It was a large and well-to-do village. In half an hour we were to resume our journey and, m e a n w h i l e , I was looking through the window, and I saw the f o l l o w i n g : Across the street, directly opposite the inn, was the station building. Suddenly a courier's troika speedily drove u p to the station's platform; a courier j u m p e d o u t of the carriage; he was in full uniform, w i t h narrow little flaps on the back, as was the fashion in those days, and he wore a large threecornered hat with white, yellow and, I think, green plumes. (I have forgotten this detail, w h i c h I could check; but I seem to recall the glimpse of green plumes, too.) T h e courier was a tall, very stout and strong chap, w i t h a livid face. H e ran into the station house and there, surely, must have "swall o w e d " a glass of vodka. I recall that o u r coachman then told me that such couriers always drink a glass of vodka at every station, for without it they w o u l d be unable to endure " s u c h a torment." M e a n w h i l e , a fresh, spirited, substitute troika drove u p to the postal station, and the yamschik, a y o u n g lad of a b o u t twenty, in a red shirt and h o l d i n g an overcoat in his hands, j u m p e d into the coachman's seat. Forthwith, the courier came r u n n i n g down the staircase and seated himself in the carriage. T h e yamschik stirred on, but hardly had he started to m o v e than the courier rose u p and silently raised his hardy right fist and, from above, p a i n f u l l y b r o u g h t it d o w n o n the back of

BIOGRAPHY

OF

FYODOR

M.

DOSTOEVSKY

47

the yamschik's head. H e jolted forward, lifted his w h i p and, w i t h all his strength, lashed the wheel horse. T h e horses dashed forward but this in no way appeased the courier. Here there was method and not mere irritation—something preconceived and tested by long years of e x p e r i e n c e — a n d the dreadf u l fist soared again and again and struck blows on the back of the head. A n d then, again and again, and thus it continued until the troika disappeared out of sight. Of course, the yamschik, w h o could hardly keep his balance, incessantly, every second, like a madman, lashed the horses and, finally, he had w h i p p e d them u p to the point where they started dashing at top speed, as if possessed. O u r coachman explained to me that virtually all couriers are riding in approximately the same manner, but that this one is particularly notorious and everybody knows him; . . . T h i s disgusting scene has remained in my memory all my life. N e v e r was I able to forget it, or that courier, . . , 5 E x p e r i e n c i n g the c r u e l t y of m a n w h i c h l a c e r a t e d his s o u l , and

the i l l u m i n a t i n g g o o d w h i c h g a v e h i m s u p p o r t

in

t i m e s of crisis, D o s t o e v s k y ' s p r i n c i p l e that the " s t r o n g e s t a n d most i n f l u e n t i a l r e c o l l e c t i o n s are those p r o d u c e d childhood"

6

in

was v e r i f i e d in his o w n l i f e .

FAMILY,

CHILDHOOD,

AND

YOUTH

In the parish of St. Peter and Paul at Moscow was born on October 30 of the year 1821, in the dwelling-house of the W o r k m a n ' s Hospital, to Staff-Physician Michail Andreyevitch Dostoevsky, a male child, w h o was named Fyodor. Baptised o n N o v e m b e r 4.7 D o s t o e v s k y ' s f a t h e r , M i c h a i l A n d r e y e v i t c h , c a m e to Mosc o w in the e a r l y years of the n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y to s t u d y m e d i c i n e at the U n i v e r s i t y . D u r i n g the 1812 c a m p a i g n he w a s a m i l i t a r y p h y s i c i a n . I n 1 8 1 9 he m a r r i e d , a n d s o o n obt a i n e d the a p p o i n t m e n t as a staff p h y s i c i a n in the M a r i n -

48

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

sky Hospital in Moscow. Fyodor's father and his mother, the q u i e t and pious, kind Maria T i m o f e e v n a Nechaeva, belonged to the intelligentsia and to the nobility. T h e boy was the second son in a family of seven brothers a n d sisters: Varvara, A n d r e i , Vera, Nicholas, M i h a i l , and A l e x a n d r a . T h e Dostoevskys lived in a small apartment attached to the hospital. In the evenings the family met together, and, as was a favorite pastime of Russian families of that time, Pushkin, Karamzin's History, and the B i b l e were read aloud. T h e children's nurse A l i o n a told them tales and legends of the Russian people. Dostoevsky wrote a b o u t these early years in his Diary of a Writer: I descended from a pious Russian family. As far as I can remember myself, I recall my parents' affection for me. We, in our family, have known the Gospel almost ever since our earliest childhood. I was only ten when I already knew virtually all the principal episodes in Russian history—from Karamzin whom, in the evenings, father used to read aloud to us. Every visit to the Kremlin and the Moscow cathedrals was, to me, something solemn. 8 T h e intimate family life d u r i n g the early years is reflected in Dostoevsky's fiction. " H u m a n intercourse was always conceived by Dostoevsky in later life in terms of the intense, intimate relations of the family hearth." 8 Zenta M a u r i n a discerns correctly Dostoevsky's nature: Dostoievsky was of the kind who never forgot. Light-hearted, transparent natures can behold or experience gloom, pass on and forget. If we pass lightly by, if we forget easily, then the sunlight easily irradiates us again. Dostoievsky could not pass on; he absorbed everything, and when his soul was loaded to the full its fruit fell of itself. This wretched hospital was his first childhood impression. T h e second was when he was eight years old. He had gone with his mother to the cathedral in Holy Week and heard in

BIOGRAPHY

OF

FYODOR

M.

DOSTOEVSKY

49

the heavy atmosphere of the dim, incense-perfumed building, a young priest reading the Book of Job. As he listened tears stole down his thin, sallow cheeks. Deep into his memory sank Job's cry of despair: "Wherefore is light given to him that is in misery, and life unto the bitter in soul? . . . I was not in safety, neither had I rest, neither was I quiet: yet trouble came. . . . For the arrows of the Almighty are within me, the poison whereof drinketh up my spirit: the terrors of God do not set themselves in array against me. . . ." 1 0 When he was over fifty years of age, Dostoevsky wrote to his wife from abroad: " I am reading again the book of J o b , and it stirs up in me such an ecstasy of anguish, such a turmoil of emotion that for long hours I pace my room, well-nigh groaning aloud." 1 1 In 1831 when Dostoevsky was ten years old, the family purchased the summer estate of Daravoe in the province of T u l a . 1 2 T h e family spent their summers there, away from the heat of the city. T h e children lived close to nature and came to know some peasants. " T o the children it meant deliverance from the confinement of Moscow and, perhaps also, from their father's stern control." 1 3 In the clear, fresh air these children hunted mushrooms and played games inspired by Robinson Crusoe and The Last of the Mohicans. T h e y had horses to ride, countryside to explore, peasants to talk with, and time for leisurely reading. Dostoevsky wrote to a friend in later years: " A t twelve, I read right through Walter Scott during the summer holidays; certainly such reading did extraordinarily stimulate my imagination and sensibility, but it led them into good, not evil, paths; I got from it many fine and noble impressions, which gave my soul much power of resistance against others which were seductive, violent, and corrupting." 1 4 Andrei, the youngest brother, has left us an impression about his brother who loved going to T u l a :

50

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

During those journeys my brother T h e d o r would be in a state bordering upon delirium. He would perch himself upon the splash-board of the britchka, and, should the vehicle h a p pen to stop anywhere, even for the briefest of halts, he would leap down and scamper around the vicinity, or else walk, beside the driver while the latter led the horses. . . . At our country house, we were almost constantly in the open air; and, except when at play, we would spend the whole day in watching and superintending the labours of the field. A l l the peasantry liked us, but especially so our brother Thedor, whose lively disposition would lead him to bear a hand in everything—to ask to be allowed to lead the horses when harrowing, and to drive them when ploughing. Also he loved entering into conversation with the peasants, who would speak to him freely whenever he did so. But his greatest delight of all was to be entrusted with some task which enabled him to make himself useful. For instance, one day a peasant woman, when going out to reap with her baby, happened to upset her zhbantchik [wooden can] of water, so that the poor infant would have nothing to drink. U p o n that my brother caught up the zhbantchik, ran to the house, and brought thence a fresh canful of water.1® Dostoevsky wrote the f o l l o w i n g to his friend V l a d i m i r Solovyev: " T h a t little insignificant spot b e q u e a t h e d to m e a strong and a p r o f o u n d impression w h i c h will a b i d e w i t h m e to the e n d of my life. E v e r y t h i n g connected w i t h the place has for m e the dearest of recollections." 1 6 F r o m 1827 o n the children's e d u c a t i o n was b e g u n . T h e y heard the works of the poets D e r z h a v i n and Z h u k o v s k y , as w e l l as P u s h k i n . T h e y k n e w of G o g o l , a n d Dostoevsky dec l a i m e d lines f r o m him. T h e i r father taught the c h i l d r e n L a t i n . In 1831 M i h a i l and F y o d o r attended a small private day school u n d e r the directorship of M o n s i e u r Souchard. In 1834 and for the n e x t three years, the boys attended the private b o a r d i n g school of C h e r m a k . " T h e c u r r i c u l u m

BIOGRAPHY

OF

FYODOR

M.

DOSTOEVSKY

51

was conceived on the generous lines then current—eight hours of school work in the day, not counting preparation; but the school seems to have been a good one in most respects." 17 Early in 1837, the first crisis of Fyodor's life occurred: his mother died. Dostoevsky had always spoken of his mother with affection and love. She left him a little miniature inscribed J'ai le coeur tout plein d'amour; he cherished it all his life. 18 Maria T i m o f e e v n a had been the children's first teacher; she taught them the alphabet, took them to church, and joined with them in their prayers. She watched over their health and their moral welfare. 1 9 Near the time of his mother's death the great poet Pushkin died. Dostoevsky's younger brother, Andrei, wrote: " M y brothers nearly went off their heads. Fyodor in conversations with his elder brother several times said that, if we had not had our family mourning, he would have asked father's permission to wear mourning for Pushkin." 20 In May of the same year, Fyodor, with his brother Mihail, prepared to enter the Military Engineering Academy at St. Petersburg. In September the examinations were passed, and in January of 1838 Fyodor e n t e r e d — b u t alone. Mihail was rejected on account of his health; he later entered the Engineering Academy at Revel. W i t h the separation of the brothers their invaluable correspondence began. Now in the capital city of the empire, this youth was about to begin his studies. W h a t was his mind and soul to find, to endure? T h e letters to Mihail give us an insight into the young Dostoevsky. T h e following excerpts reveal the seriousness and the perspective: I don't know if my gloomy state will ever leave me. And to think that such a state of mind is allotted to man alone—the

52

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

atmosphere of his soul seems c o m p o u n d e d of a m i x t u r e of the heavenly and the earthly. W h a t an u n n a t u r a l product, then, is he, since the law of spiritual nature is in him violated. . . . T h i s earth seems to m e a purgatory for divine spirits w h o have been assailed by sinful thoughts. I feel that o u r world has become one immense N e g a t i v e , and that everyt h i n g noble, b e a u t i f u l , and divine, has turned itself into a satire. 2 1 H e continues: If in this picture there occurs an i n d i v i d u a l w h o neither in idea nor effect harmonizes with the w h o l e — w h o is, in a word, an entirely unrelated figure—what must h a p p e n to the picture? It is destroyed, and can n o longer endure. Yet how terrible it is to perceive only the coarse veil under w h i c h the A l l doth languish! T o know that one single effort of the will w o u l d suffice to demolish that veil and become one w i t h e t e r n i t y — t o know all this, and still live on like the last and least of creatures. . . . H o w terriblel H o w petty is man! H a m l e t ! H a m l e t ! W h e n I think of his m o v i n g wild speech, in w h i c h resounds the groaning of the w h o l e n u m b e d universe, there breaks from my soul not one reproach, not one sigh. . . . T h a t soul is then so utterly oppressed by woe that it fears to grasp the woe entire, lest so it lacerate itself. Pascal once said: H e w h o protests against philosophy is himself a philosopher. A poor sort of system! - 2 I n t h e s a m e l e t t e r w e l e a r n that h e has r e a d t h e w h o l e of H o f f m a n i n R u s s i a n a n d G e r m a n , n e a r l y all of B a l z a c , a n d w o r k s of G o e t h e , V i c t o r H u g o , a n d o t h e r s . H i s l e t t e r o f O c t o b e r 2 1 , 1838, g i v e s us i n s i g h t i n t o his own thinking: M y friend, y o u philosophize like a soul cannot be for ever in a state o p h y is not true and not just. T o less, and vice versa. . . . W h a t d o

poet. A n d just because the of exaltation, your philosknow more, one must feel you m e a n precisely by the

BIOGRAPHY

OF

FYODOR

M.

DOSTOEVSKY

53

word know? Nature, the soul, love, and God, one recognizes through the heart, and not through the reason. Were we spirits, we could dwell in that region of ideas over which our souls hover, seeking the solution. But we are earth-born beings, and can only guess at the Idea—not even grasp it by all sides at once. T h e guide for our intelligence through the temporary illusion into the innermost centre of the soul is called Reason. Now. Reason is a material capacity, while the soul or spirit lives on the thoughts which are whispered by the heart. Thought is born in the soul. Reason is a tool, a machine, which is driven by the spiritual fire. When human reason (which would demand a chapter for itself) penetrates into the domain of knowledge, it works independently of the feeling, and consequently of the heart. But when our aim is the understanding of love or of nature, we march towards the very citadel of the heart. . . . Philosophy cannot be regarded as a mere equation where nature is the unknown quantity! Remark that the poet, in the moment of inspiration, comprehends God, and consequently does the philosopher's work. Consequently poetic inspiration is nothing less than philosophical inspiration. Consequently philosophy is nothing but poetry, a higher degree of poetry! 2 3 I n the same letter Dostoevsky states his view on the contemporary philosophical systems: " I t is odd that you reason quite in the sense of our contemporary philosophy. W h a t a lot of crazy systems have been born of late in the cleverest and most ardent brains! T o get a right result from this motley troop one would have to subject them all to a mathematical formula. A n d yet they are the 'laws' of our contemporary philosophy." 2 4 In conclusion Dostoevsky writes of his father: " I pity our poor fatherl H e has such a remarkable character. W h a t trouble he has had. It is so bitter that I can do n o t h i n g to console him! B u t , do you know, Papa is wholly a stranger in the world. H e has lived in it now for fifty

54

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

years, and yet he has the same opinions of mankind that he had thirty years ago. What sublime innocence! Yet the world has disappointed him, and I believe that that is the destiny of us all." 25 In the summer of 1839, Dostoevsky received the news from Moscow of his father's death. T h e Dostoevsky family maintained silence on the circumstances of their father's death; nowhere in extant correspondence can one find information. However, one surviving letter of Dostoevsky refers to the event. He wrote to Mihail: "Dear brother, I have shed many tears over the death of our father, but now our position is still more appalling! I speak not of myself, but of our family." 26 T h e main problem besetting the family was financial. T h e i r father had only begrudgingly and partially supported the boys in school; now their situation was more distressing. During the next few years, however, Dostoevsky managed to continue and to complete his studies. At school he was diligent and precise in his work. T h e school director's report stated: "What are his gifts? Good." 27 Dostoevsky won and held his classmates' attentions by his inspired lectures or readings of European and Russian classical literature. A close friend and later, a young writer, D. V. Grigorovitch, has written in his Reminiscences: I made friends with Fyodor Dostoevsky the very first day that he entered the College. . . . Despite his reticent nature and general lack of frankness and youthful expansion, he appeared to reciprocate my affection. Dostoevsky always held himself aloof, even then, from others, never took part in his comrades' amusements, and usually sat in a remote corner with a book; his favourite place was a corner in Class-Room IV, by the window. . . . Dostoevsky was much more advanced in all knowledge than I was, and the extent of his reading

BIOGRAPHY

OF

FYODOR

M.

DOSTOEVSKY

55

amazed me. . . . His literary influence was not confined to me alone; . . . a little circle was formed, which gathered round Dostoevsky in every leisure hour. 28

In 1843 Dostoevsky obtained his commission as lieutenant and was appointed to the Engineering Department of the Ministry of War. Literature was for him still the predominant interest. He read and studied thoroughly French literature: the classics and contemporary works, from Lamartine and Victor Hugo to Soulie and Paul de Kock. He knew pages of Gogol by heart, and read Russian literature extensively; he knew his Shakespeare and Dickens, as well as the German classics.29 Soon his brother Mihail graduated from the Academy at Revel and married. Meanwhile Andrei had come to St. Petersburg to prepare for the Academy, and for a while lived with Fyodor. It was one year after his commission that Dostoevsky decided to resign from the Army to devote himself to literature. He wrote to Mihail: Yes, brother, indeed I know that my position is desperate. I want to lay it to you now, just as it is. I am retiring because I ran serve no longer. I.ife delights me not if I am to spend the best part of it in such a senseless manner. Moreover, I never did intend to remain long in the service—why should I waste my best years? But the chief point is that they wanted to send me to the provinces. . . . I am just finishing a novel, about the length of Eugenie Grandet. It is most original. I am now making the fair copy; by the 14th I ought certainly to have an answer from the editor. I want to bring it out in the Otetchestvennia Zapiski [Annals of the Fatherland]. . . . T h a t is the way I wish to make a living. 30

56

DOSTOEVSKY:

DOSTOEVSKY'S

HIS

EARLY

IMAGE

OF

LITERARY

MAN

ACTIVITY

From 1844 to the spring of 1845, Dostoevsky worked on his first novel Poor Folk. He altered it, cut, polished, and reworked it. His letters tell us that financially he was constantly in debt, but still had income from his father's estate. At one point he had hopes of publishing the novel himself. This would have been a hazardous undertaking for a writer of that time. He wrote about Poor Folk: " I am really pleased with my novel. It is a serious and well-constructed work. But it has terrible short-comings, too. . . . These two years of hard study have taken much from me, and brought much to me." 3 1 T w o months later he was still hard at work on the novel. He wrote to Mihail: " M y novel, which I simply can't break loose from, keeps me endlessly at work. . . . I decided to do it all over again, and by God! that has improved it a lot." 32 T h e city of St. Petersburg was the locale of this novel. This "intentional and theoretical" town remained an unreal magical vision that gave him the first "hints of the strange human scene of whose description he was to become a master." 33 Dostoevsky's first work, Poor Folk, and its reception by the literary world, was an event in literary history. " I t is a simple story," he said, "like everyday reality. And the hero is not a great man or a historical figure. . . . He is a humble civil servant, a drudge, even something of a simpleton, with several buttons missing on his uniform!" 34 T h e two main characters who write letters to one another (Dievushkin and Varena) took Russia by storm; their story skyrocketed Dostoevsky to literary fame. In May the manuscript was confided by Dostoevsky to Grigorovich, a literary aspirant like himself whom he had met at

BIOGRAPHY

OF

FYODOR

M.

DOSTOEVSKY

57

the Engineering Academy. Grigorovich took it to his friend Nekrasov, a young writer whose poems had already brought him a certain success and standing in the world of letters. T h e two sat down to read it together, went on reading it through the twilight of the May night, and at four o'clock in the morning came to wake Dostoevsky and congratulate him on having written a masterpiece. T h e manuscript continued its ascent through the literary hierarchy. It was brought by Nekrasov to Belinsky w-ith the tidings that "a new Gogol had appeared", and the famous critic, after a moment of initial scepticism, endorsed the verdict of Nekrasov and Grigorovich. Three days later Dostoevsky was presented to Belinsky. " D o you understand," shouted the latter, impetuously, "what is it that you have written? . . . It is impossible that you at twenty should understand." And he proceeded to explain to the enraptured and open-mouthed author the significance of his work. " A m I really so great?" Dostoevsky began to ask himself. 35 Poor Folk was published the f o l l o w i n g J a n u a r y of 1846 in Nekrasov's Petersburg Almanac. His career as a novelist seemed secure as he was welcomed to the literary circles of the capital. 3 6 W h i l e awaiting the publication of his novel, Dostoevsky spent the s u m m e r with his brother in R e v e l , and upon his return to St. Petersburg began working on a new novel throughout the a u t u m n of 1845. T o M i h a i l he wrote: Jakov Petrovich Goliadkin is a bad hat! He is utterly base, and I positively can't manage him. He won't move a step, for he always maintains that he isn't ready; that he's mere nothingness as yet, but could, if it were necessary, show his true character; then why won't he? After all, he says, he's no worse than the rest. What does he care about my toil? Oh, a terribly base fellow! In no case can he bring his career to a finish before the middle of November. . . , 37 Dostoevsky did finish The Double, which introduced the theme of the split personality into Russian literature.

58

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

T h r o u g h o u t 1845-46 he completed the short stories " N o v e l in N i n e Letters," " M r . P r o k h a r t c h i n , " and " T h e Landlady." D u r i n g this period, however, fame w e n t to the y o u n g author's head. H e himself felt in a w h i r l of events: Well, brother, I believe that my fame is just now in its fullest flower. Everywhere I meet with the most amazing consideration and enormous interest. I have made the acquaintance of a lot of very important people. Prince Odoyevsky begs me for the honor of a visit, and Count Sollogub is tearing his hair in desperation. Panayev told him that a new genius had arisen who would sweep all the rest away. . . . Everybody looks upon me as a wonder of the world. 38 Everyone was splendid, he thought. W i t h the actual publication of Poor Folk, criticism ensued. In F e b r u a r y he wrote to M i h a i l : If you only knew, brother, how bitterly the book has been abused! . . . Even the public is quite furious: three-fourths of my readers abuse, and a quarter (or even less) praise the book beyond measure. It is the subject of endless discussion. T h e y scold, scold, scold, yet they read it. . . . And it was the same with Gogol. They abused, abused, but read him. Now they've made up that quarrel, and praise him. I've thrown a hard bone to the dogs, but let them worry at it—foolst . . . Only think, all our lot, and even Belinsky consider that I have far surpassed Gogol. . . . 38 H e continued: " . . . Every day brings m e so m u c h that is new, so many changes and impressions, agreeable and disagreeable, lucky and unlucky, matters that I have n o time to reflect u p o n them." 40 H e bragged outlandishly, and he himself recognized this: . . . My fame has reached its highest point. In the course of two months I have, by my own reckoning, been mentioned

BIOGRAPHY

OF

FYODOR

M.

DOSTOEVSKY

59

five-and-thirty times in different papers. In certain articles I've been praised beyond measure, in others, again, frightfully abused. What could I ask for more? But it does pain and trouble me that my own friends, Bielinsky and the others, are dissatisfied with my "Goliadkin." T h e first impression was blind enthusiasm, great sensation, and endless argument. T h e second was the really critical one. They are—that is, my friends and the whole public—declare with one voice that my "Goliadkin" is tedious and thin, and so drawn-out as to be almost unreadable. . . . As to myself, I was for sometime utterly discouraged." 41 H e was self-critical: "I have one terrible vice: I am u n · pardonably ambitious and egotistic. T h e thought that I had disappointed all the hopes set on me, and spoilt what might have been a really significant piece of work, depressed me very heavily." 42 A few years prior, Dostoevsky had written to his brother his thoughts on the poet's gift and responsibility: . . . T h e mere thought that through one's inspiration there will one day lift itself from the dust to heaven's heights, some noble, beautiful human soul; the thought that those lines over which one has wept are consecrated as by a heavenly rite through one's inspiration, and that over them the coming generation will weep in echo . . . . That thought, I am convinced, has come to many a poet in the very moment of his highest creative rapture. 43 Knowing that he felt this, one can understand Dostoevsky's conflict within himself. D u r i n g the next two years Dostoevsky continued his literary work. T h i s period was a critical one. H e had to work himself out of the malady of conceit in fame. T o Mihail he wrote: . . . the artist must be independent; and finally, he must consecrate all his toil to the holy spirit of art—such toil is

6O

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMACE

OF

MAN

holy, chaste, and demands single-heartedness; my own heart thrills now as never before with all the new imaginings that come to life in my soul. Brother, I am undergoing not only a moral, but a physical, metamorphosis. Never before was there in me such lucidity, such inward wealth; never before was my nature so tranquil, nor my health so satisfactory, as now. 44 A n d then a reverse: You will scarcely believe it. Here is the third year of my literary activity, and I am as if in a dream. I don't see the life about me at all, I have no time to become conscious of it; no time, either, to learn anything. I want to attain to something steadfast. People have created a dubious fame for me, and I know not how long this hell of poverty and constant hurried work will last. Oh, if I could but once have resti 45 T h e early part of 1849 saw the work Netochka Nezvanoxma, a f u l l length novel, b e g u n . H o w e v e r , in A p r i l , Dostoevsky, a l o n g with other members ( i n c l u d i n g his brother, M i h a i l ) of the literary circle of Petrashevsky, was arrested. T h i s circle met to discuss idealistic and socialistic philosophy; they d r a n k tea, discussed Fourier's theories, read literary works, protested against serfdom, and so on. Dostoevsky's activity in the circle was literary. H e interpreted the criticisms of Belinsky, declaimed P u s h k i n , read his novel u p o n w h i c h he was w o r k i n g , and also read the famous " L e t t e r to G o g o l " of Belinsky (the sole charge b r o u g h t against h i m . ) 4 6 T h e o u t c o m e of the trial sent Dostoevsky at twenty-eight years of age into penal servitude for f o u r years and another five years in Siberian exile. M e a n w h i l e , waiting, he spent eight months in the Fortress of Peter and P a u l . F r o m the Fortress he wrote to his b r o t h e r all d u r i n g the s u m m e r of 1849. H e was joyous that M i h a i l had b e e n released and told a b o u t himself:

BIOGRAPHY

OF

FVODOR

M.

DOSTOEVSKY

6l

At last you are free, and I can vividly imagine how happy you were when you saw your family again. How impatiently they must have awaited you! . . . Have you work, and of what sort? I rejoice that I may answer you, dear brother . . . I rejoice also that you are well, and that the imprisonment had no evil effects upon your constitution. You write, my dear fellow, that I must not lose heart. Indeed, I am not losing heart at all; to be sure, life here is very monotonous and dreary, but what else could it be? And after all, it isn't invariably so tedious. T h e time goes by most irregularly, so to speak—now too quickly, now too slowly. . . . I have occupation, however, I do not let the time go by for naught; I have made out the plots of three tales and two novels; and am writing a novel now, but avoid over-working. . . ,9'9). PP- 5 ° - 5 ! · 4

5 6 7 8 9 0 1

2 3 4 5 6 7

In 1 8 6 1 , the emancipation finally came abolit. M a n y enlightened, thinking men worked to abolish this social institution. However, when it did take place, the radical group of the intelligentsia were no longer satisfied with " r e f o r m s " ; they wanted " r e v o l u t i o n . " Kornilov, op. cit., I, 1 1 1 - 1 1 3 . Ibid., pp. 1 8 7 - 1 8 9 . See also W i l l i a m H . E. J o h n s o n , Russia's Educational Heritage (Pittsburgh, 1950), pp. 78-86. Kornilov, op. cit., p. 189. J o h n s o n , op. cit., pp. 7 9 - 8 1 . T h e catechism and other religious writings were placed foremost in the curriculum of the schools. Leary, op. cit., p. 54. Ibid., p. 56. On December 14, 1825, in St. Petersburg, a radical g r o u p of army officers u n d e r Pestel attempted to set u p a republican f o r m of government with Pestel as leader. See Kornilov, op. cit., pp. 196-208 for details. Kornilov, op. cit., p. 236. Ibid. Leary, op. cit., p. 63. Kornilov, op. cit., pp. 279-280. Ibid., p. 280. Ibid., pp. 2 9 9 - 3 0 1 . 201

DOSTOEVSKY:

202 ι8

HIS

V . V . Z e n k o v s k y , A History

IMAGE

OF

of Russian

MAN

Philosophy

(New York,

"953). I. 320· >9 20

Ibid.,

p. 321.

Ibid.

21

K o r n i l o v , op. cit., II, 6 - 1 0 .

22

Ibid.,

pp. 11-33.

23

Ibid.,

p. 62.

«4

Ibid.,

p p . 80-82. T h e

c u l m i n a t i o n of

the r e v o l u t i o n a r y

out-

bursts e n d e d w i t h the a t t e m p t u p o n the l i f e of the T s a r h i m self, in 1866. Ibid.,

p. 164.

26

Ibid.,

pp. 163-175.

27

Ibid.

28

N i c h o l a s B e r d y a e v , The

29

Ibid.,

30

Z e n k o v s k y , op. cit., p. 133.

25

Russian

Idea

( N e w Y o r k , 1948), p. 33.

p. 32.

3»

K o r n i l o v , op. cit., p p . 284-285.

32

Ibid.,

33

B e r d y a e v , The

p p . 286-287. See also Z e n k o v s k y , op. cit., p p . Origin

of Russian

Communism

148-170.

( L o n d o n , 1948),

p. 26. 34

Ibid.,

35

B e r d y a e v , op.

p p . 2 6 - 2 7 . See also K o r n i l o v , op. cit., p p . 285-287.

article Slavic

cit.,

pp.

"Intelligentsia

19-20. See also H e r b e r t E. in

and East European

36

B e r d y a e v , op. cit., p. 20.

37 38

Ibid.

Nineteenth journal

Century

Bowman's

Russia,"

(Spring, 1957),

The

15:5-21.

Z e n k o v s k y , op. cit., p p . 237-238. B e r d y a e v , op. cit., p. 37.

39 40

Ibid.,

41

Ibid.

42

Ibid.,

43

V . B e l i n s k y , Selected

pp. 41-42. p p . 39-40.

xvii:

"Belinsky

Philosophical

Works

was the i n i t i a t o r of

( M o s c o w , 1948), p.

the r e v o l u t i o n a r y

demo-

cratic m o v e m e n t in R u s s i a . . . the p i o n e e r of Utopian socialism

and

revolutionary

democracy

in

Russia . . . ."

is

the

S o v i e t c o m m e n t . D u r i n g his l i f e t i m e , B e l i n s k y w a s a g r e a t influence Belinsky

o n the y o u n g e r g e n e r a t i o n "their salvation." T h i s

w h o felt that they

was recorded

p h i l e I v a n A k s a k o v . K o r n i l o v , op. cit., p. 303. 44

B e r d y a e v , op. cit., p p . 34-35.

by

the

owed Slavo-

203

NOTES

45 46 47 48

49 50 51 52

Bowman, op. cit., p. 12. Berdyaev, op. cit., pp. 45-46. Ibid., p. 46. Kornilov, op. cit., pp. 2 1 3 - 2 1 4 . Dostoevsky analyzed the "Nechaiev" type in his Possessed. See also Turgenev's Fathers and Sons for the nihilist type in the sixties. Zenkovsky, op. cit., pp. 348-374. Berdyaev, op. cit., p. 70. Ibid. Ibid.

53 54

Ibid., pp. 70-71. Ibid., p. 71. See also Berdyaev's The Russian Idea, pp. 1 0 1 - 1 0 2 , 111 ff. 55 Kornilov, op. cit., p. 213. 56 Ibid. 57 Berdyaev, The Origins of Russian Communism, p. 62. 58 Ibid., p. 63. 59 I b i d > Ρ· 6 460 Kornilov, op. cit., p. 223. 61 Ibid., p. 223-224. 62 Ibid., p. 292. 63 Berdyaev, The Russian Idea, pp. 48-49. 64 Zenkovsky, op. cit., p. 204. 65 Ibid., pp. 203-204. 66 Ibid., p. 236. 67 Ibid., p. 237. 68 Ibid., pp. 237-838. 69 Marc Slonim, The Epic of Russian Literature (New York, 1950), p. 148. 70 Zenkovsky, op. cit., pp. 237-238. 71 Johnson, op. cit., p. 228. 72 Ibid., p. 231. 73 Zenkovsky, op. cit., p. 377. 74 75 76 77 78

A. P. Medvedkov, Kratkii

istoriya russkoi pedagogiki

burg '9'3)· PP· 75"7 6 · I b i d > P· 7 6 · Alexandra Tolstoy, Tolstoy, '953). Chs. 18, 20, 23, 24. Ibid. Ibid., p. 135.

A Life

of My Father

(St. Peters-

(New York,

204 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

OF

MAN

Johnson, op. cit., p. 235. See also Charles-Baudouin, Tolstoi: the Teacher, tr. by Fred Rothwell (London, 1923). Ibid., p. 241. Ibid., p. 240. Ibid. Ibid. Medvedkov, op. cit., p. gi. Ibid., pp. 91-92. See also Johnson, op. cit., p. 242. Johnson, op. cit., p. 241. Medvedkov, op. cit., p. 105. Johnson, op. cit., pp. 242-243. Ibid. Ibid., p. 244. See also Medvedkov, op. cit., p. 107. Johnson, op. cit., pp. 244-248. Ibid., p. 248. T w o important followers of Ushinskii in the field of peoples' education were Staunin and Rachinskii. See Medvedkov, op. cit., pp. 109-158. CHAPTER

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

IMAGE

TWO

Diary of a Writer (New York, 194g), II, 752. Ibid., I, 284-285. Ibid., pp. 207-210. Ibid., II, 752-753. Ibid., I, 184-186. Ibid., II, 753. Ethel Colburn Mayne, Letters of Fyodor Michailovitch Dostoevsky to his Family and Friends, London, 1914, chronological table after V. Tchechichin, p. xi. Diary of a Writer, I, 152. Edward H. Carr, Dostoevsky 1821-1881: A New Biography (London, 1949), p. 14. Zenta Maurina, A Prophet of the Soul: Fyodor Dostoievsky, tr. by C. P. Finlayson from Latvian (London, n. d.), p. 37. Ibid., p. 38. T h e estate was a property 150 versts from Moscow, 1350 acres of land, comprising the villages of Darovoe and Chermashny. Carr, op. cit., p. 15. Mayne, op. cit., p. 254. Eugene Soloviev, Dostoevsky, His Life and Literary Activity, tr. by C. J . Hogarth (London, 1916), pp. 42-43.

NOTES

16

Ibid., p. 43.

17

C a r T , op. cit., p . 1 7 .

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

26 27 28 29 30 31

32 33 34 35 36

37 38 39 40 41

205

Maurina, op. cit., p. 42. Idem. Carr, op. cit., p. 18. Mayne, op. cit., p. 3. Letter of August 9, 1838. Ibid., pp. 3-4. Ibid., pp. 6-9. Idem. Ibid., p. 9. After the death of his wife, Michail Andreyevitch was not to be consoled. He became a cruel master and finally his peasants murdered him. Carr, op. cit., pp. 24-25. Henri Troyat, Firebrand: The Life of Dostoevsky, tr. by Norbett Gutemann from French (New York, 1946), p. 42. Mayne, op. cit., pp. 2 6 1 - 2 6 2 . Carr, op. cit., p. 27. See also Mayne, op. cit., pp. 1 0 - 1 6 . Mayne, op. cit., pp. 1 6 - 1 7 . Letter of September 30, 1844. Ibid., p. 22. Dostoevsky had also translated Balzac's Eugénie Grandet; Mihail worked on Schiller. Most of their dreams for publishing fell through for lack of capital. Ibid., p. 23. William Hubben, Four Prophets of Our Destiny (New York, 1952), p. 46. F. M. Dostoevsky, Insulted and Injured, tr. by Constance Garnett, Macmillan edition, p. 65. Carr, op. cit., pp. 28-29. See also "Reminiscences of Grigorovich" in Mayne. Nicholas Zernov, Three Russian Prophets: Khomiakov, Dostoevsky, Soloviev (London, 1944), p. 84. T h e novel's publication was held up because the censor had to pass it. Mayne, op. cit., pp. 26-27. Ibid., p. 30. Ibid

- > P· 33· Ibid., p. 36. Idem. Belinsky could not go further than an appreciation of Dostoevsky's humanism. T h e poor hearts of the novel Poor Folk he understood, but " G o l i a d k i n " in The Double utterly perplexed him. Dostoevsky's idea of the split personality was beyond Belinsky and most of the others. In 1847, V. Maikov,

DOSTOEVSKY:

2O6

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

the b r o t h e r to D o s t o e v s k y ' s closest f r i e n d , the p o e t Maikov, did recognize

his d i s t i n c t i v e g i f t :

w r i t i n g s stabilize the r e i g n of Gogol introduced

"Mr.

Apollon

Dostoevski's

the aesthetic p r i n c i p l e s

which

in o u r l i t e r a t u r e , d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h a t

even

a very g r e a t t a l e n t c a n n o t take a d i f f e r e n t r o a d w i t h o u t violati n g the laws of art. N e v e r t h e l e s s , the creative m e t h o d of

Mr.

D o s t o e v s k i is o r i g i n a l in the h i g h e s t d e g r e e , a n d h e is the last o n e w h o may be called an i m i t a t o r of G o g o l . If y o u w e r e to a p p l y this term to h i m y o u w o u l d be o b l i g e d to call G o g o l an i m i t a t o r of H o m e r a n d S h a k e s p e a r e . I n this sense a l l true artists i m i t a t e o n e a n o t h e r , because b e a u t y is a l w a y s a n d

every-

w h e r e s u b j e c t to the same laws. . . ." A n d he c o n c l u d e s :

"Both

G o g o l a n d M r . D o s t o e v s k i p o r t r a y a c t u a l society. B u t

Gogol

is p r i m a r i l y a social writer, a n d

Mr. Dostoevski

primarily

p s y c h o l o g i c a l w r i t e r . F o r o n e , the i n d i v i d u a l is s i g n i f i c a n t

a is

r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of a certain society o r a c e r t a i n circle; f o r the o t h e r , society is i n t e r e s t i n g i n s o f a r as it i n f l u e n c e s t h e personality of the i n d i v i d u a l . " M a i k o v praised The

Double,

a n d ad-

vised D o s t o e v s k y n o t to g i v e a t t e n t i o n to t h e critics. See S e d u r o , Dostoevski

in Russian

Literary

Criticism,

V.

1846-1956

( N e w Y o r k , 1957), p p . 1 1 - 1 3 . 42

Ibid.,

43

M a y n e , op. cit.,

p. 37.

44

Ibid.,

pp. 41-42.

45

Ibid.,

pp. 45-46.

46

N i c h o l a s I w a s a l a r m e d at the r e v o l u t i o n a r y s i t u a t i o n i n Eu-

p. 8.

r o p e d u r i n g the late forties. H e took care that a n o t h e r D e c e m brist u p r i s i n g w o u l d be f o r e s t a l l e d . B e l i n s k y w a s to b e arrested also, b u t he was o n his d e a t h b e d . See C h . 4 of C a r r f o r comp l e t e details. 47

M a y n e , op.

cit.,

p p . 46-49. A n d r e i w a s m i s t a k e n

for

Mihail

a n d h e l d t w o w e e k s in prison. M i h a i l w a s h e l d f o r f o u r m o n t h s . Dostoevsky himself

underwent

five

o r six

cross-examinations.

T h e o n l y w o r k he c o m p l e t e d in the Fortress w a s his short story " T h e L i t t l e H e r o " w h i c h was p u b l i s h e d a f t e r his release f r o m prison. 48 49

Ibid.,

p. 49.

Idem.

50

Ibid.,

pp. 51-52.

51

Ibid.,

p. 53.

NOTES

207

52 53

Idem. The Diary of a Writer, I, 9. " H i s comrade in chains on the way to Siberia, a Polish fellow prisoner, Jastrzembski, thus expressed himself about Dostoevsky: 'It was Dostoevsky's friendly and helpful conversations that saved me from despair . . . his sensitiveness, his delicacy of feeling, his playful sallies—all this exercised a calming influence upon me. . . T h e two men parted in tears at T o b o l s k . " Hubben, op. cit., pp. 47-48.

54 55 56

Mayne, op. cit., pp. 55-58. Ibid., pp. 59-67. Ibid., pp. 69-71.

57 58 59

Ibid.., γ. ηi. Ibid., p. 72. Ibid., pp. 289-320. Vrangel had been present as a young student at the ceremony of the execution in the Semyonovsky Square on December 22, 1849. Ibid., p. 308. The House of the Dead was published upon Dostoevsky's return to Petersburg. Ibid., p. 75. Letter of J u n e , 1855. Ibid., p. 8 1 . Letter of October, 1855. Idem. Ibid., p. 82. Carr, op. cit., p. 95. Robert L . Jackson, Dostoevsky's Underground Man in Russian Literature (The Hague, 1958), pp. 23-24. Dostoevsky called the exhibition a kind of biblical picture, and said that much "unremitting spiritual resistance and negation" would be ncccssary to avoid accepting this for one's ideal. See also the Winter Notes.

60 61 62 63 64 65 66

67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75

Mayne, op. cit., pp. 1 0 9 - 1 1 0 . Zernov, op. cit., p. 85. Koteliansky, S. S., tr., Dostoevsky Portrayed by His Wife, The Diary and Reminiscences (London, 1926), pp. 2 0 - 2 1 . Ibid., p. 29. Carr, op. cit., p. 173. Mayne, op. cit., pp. 1 2 9 - 1 3 0 . T h i s letter contains Dostoevsky's views on the congress. Ibid., pp. 1 4 2 - 1 4 3 . Dostoevsky dedicated the work to his niece. Ibid., pp. 1 5 7 - 1 5 8 . Ibid., p. 171.

2o8 76 77 78 79 80 81

82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 g2 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

Ibid., p. 185. Ibid., p. 192. Koteliansky, op. cit., pp. 138-139. S. S. Koteliansky, Dostoevsky: Letters and Reminiscences (New York, 1923), pp. l o o - i o i . Koteliansky, op. cit., p. 103. G. Abraham, Dostoevsky (London, 1936), p. 117. See also Koteliansky, op. cit., pp. 109-144 for details from Madame Dostoevsky's reminiscences. Koteliansky, op. cit., pp. 149-151. The Diary, I, p. 160. E. J. Simmons, Dostoevski, The Making of a Novelist (New York, 1940), p. 319. Ibid., p. 320. Ibid., pp. 319-320. Mayne, op. cit., p. 225. Ibid., p. 226. Idem. Ibid., pp. 233-235. Aimée Dostoevsky, Fyodor Dostoevsky, A Study (London, 1912), pp. 183-185. Ibid., p. 189. Ibid., p. 191. Ibid., p. 195. Ibid., p. 201 Ibid., pp. 205—206. Idem. Maurina, op. cit., pp. 100-101. Simmons, op. cit., p. 343. "Letters: Dostoevsky, New Ones," The Virginia Quarterly (July-October, 1926), pp. 375-384, 546-556. Idem. Idem. Idem. Idem. Mayne, op. cit., pp. 256-257. Simmons, op. cit., p. 385. Koteliansky, op. cit., pp. 158—159. Maurina, op. cit., p. 104. Koteliansky, op. cit., pp. 161-16*.

NOTES

110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117

209

Maurina, op. cit., pp. 105-106. Reminiscences, op. cit., p. 182. Koteliansky, op. cit., p. 187. Ibid., p. 192. Ibid., p. 193. Koteliansky and Murry, op. cit., p. 264. Mayne, op. cit., p. 337. Ibid., p. 334. C H A P T E R

T H R E E

1

Ethel Colburn Mayne, Letters of Fyodor Michailovitch Dostoevsky to His Family and Friends (London, 1914), p. 134.

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ax 22 23 24 25

F. M. Dostoevsky, The Dairy of a Writer, p. 490. Ibid., pp. 480 ft Ibid., p. 49a Ibid. Ibid., pp. 286-293. Ibid., p. 483. Ibid., pp. 604-605. Ibid., p. 624. Ibid., p. 283 Ibid., pp. 286-293. Ibid., p. 573. Ibid., pp. 571, 670; see also Mayne, op. cit., pp. 230-231. The Diary, p. 189. Ibid., p. 724. Ibid., p. 101. Ibid., pp. 101-102. Ibid., p. 103. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid., pp. 106-107. Ibid., p. 750. Mayne, op. cit., pp. 241-243, 286 ff. The Diary, p. 750. Ibid., p. 329. Dostoevsky attended many trials and followed court proceedings during this period. Ibid., p. 13. Ibid., pp. 9-15. Mayne, op. cit., pp. 229-231.

26 27 28

210

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

The Diary, p. 231. Ibid.., p. 401. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid., p. 402. Ibid., p. 40a Ibid., p. 399. Ibid.

37 38 39 40

IbidIbi-i., pp. 399-400. Ibid., p. 400. Ibid., p. 401. Dostoevsky also noted the lack of organized, structuralized forms in the Russian language, but nevertheless, "the spirit of our language is unquestionably multifaceted, wealthy, universal and all-embracing, since even within its organized forms it has proved able to express the gems and treasures of European thought, and we feel these have been expressed correctly and with precision." Ibid., p. 401. Ibid., p. 716. Ibid. Ibid., p. 717. Ibid. Ibid. Mayne, op. cit., pp. 233-235. Ibid. Ibid., pp. 254-255. Ibid. Ibid., p. 255. Ibid. Ibid., p. 236. The Diary, p. 179.

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

Ibid. Ibid., p. 18a See Thomas Woody, History of Women's Education in the United States (New York, 1929). 58 A. Kornilov, Modern Russian History (New York, 1952) II, 170. 59 Ibid., p. 171. 60 Madame Konradi, editor of the progressive journal Nedelia (The Weekly) advocated the opening of the universities to

NOTES

211

women throughout the sixties and in the seventies. See Daniel B. Leary, Education and Autocracy in Russia (Buffalo, 1919), p. 78. 61 The Diary, pp. 340-341. 62 Ibid., p. 341. 63 Ibid., p. 368. 64 Ibid. 65 Ibid., p. 36g. 66 Ibid. 67 Ibid., p. 846. Dostoevsky also advocated the social and political equality for women: " C a n we continue to deny [women] . . . full equality of rights with the male in the fields of education, professions, tenure of office . . . in connection with the regeneration and elevation of our society!" 68 Ibid., pp. 724 ff. See also Ch. I of this work on the Slavophiles. 6g Ibid., p. 703. 70 Ibid., p. 608. 71 Ibid. 72 Ibid., p. 609. 73 Ibid. 74 Ibid. 75 Ibid., p. 843. 76 Ibid., p. 63. 77 Ibid. 78 Ibid. Dostoevsky places the political problem within the context of the religious-ethical viewpoint. For his specific religious convictions, see Mayne, op. cit., pp. 249-250, 233-234, 70-72. Also the teachings of Zossima give a d e a r exposition of Dostoevsky's Christianity. 79 Ibid., p. 1000. 80 Ibid. 81 Ibid., pp. 1000-1001. 82 Ibid., p. 1001. 83 Convinced of this thesis, Dostoevsky looked u p o n the events in Europe of the second half of the nineteenth century with apprehension: ". . . Europe is o n the eve of a general and dreadful collapse. T h e ant-hill which has long been in the process of construction without the Church and Christ . . . with a moral principle shaken loose from its foundation . . . [Europe] is utterly undermined. T h e fourth estate is coming.

DOSTOEVSKY:

212

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

it k n o c k s a t the d o o r , a n d b r e a k s i n t o it, a n d if it is n o t o p e n e d it w i l l b r e a k the d o o r . . . .

I merely foresee that the

balance

h a s b e e n s t r u c k . " T h e a b n o r m a l i t y o f E u r o p e ' s p o l i t i c a l situat i o n " m u s t l e a d to a colossal,

final,

partitioning, political

i n w h i c h e v e r y b o d y w i l l b e i n v o l v e d . . . ." Ibid.,

war

p. 1003. Sig-

n i f i c a n t l y D o s t o e v s k y h e l d t h a t " . . . E n g l a n d a n d the U n i t e d S t a t e s [are] t h e o n l y

t w o r e m a i n i n g states i n w h i c h

political

u n i t y is s o l i d a n d o r i g i n a l , " b u t " t h e m o r a l a n d p o l i t i c a l condition of E u r o p e has b e e n u n d e r m i n e d virtually Ibid., 84

Ibid.,

p. 1001.

85

Ibid.,

p . 1002.

86

Ibid.

C H A P T E R

1

everywhere."

p . 283.

Aimée

Dostoevsky,

Fyodor

Dosloyevsky

1 8 3 - 1 8 5 . S e e also E . M a y n e , vitch

Dostoevsky

to His

F O U R

The

Family

(London,

Letters and

1921),

of Fyodor

Friends

pp.

Michailo-

(London,

1941),

p p . 1 8 3 - 1 8 5 , 225, 238. 2

M a y n e , op. cit., p p . 2 2 9 - 2 3 1 , 2 3 5 - 2 3 9 , 2 3 9 - 2 4 6 , 2 5 3 - 2 5 5 .

3

The

4

Ibid.,

5

Diary

o) a Writer,

Ibid.

6

Ibid.,

p . 149.

7

Ibid.,

p . 150.

Ibid.

Dostoevsky

8

I., 1 4 2 - 1 4 3 .

p . 145.

does not specify w h i c h

M i l l , Strauss, o r D a r w i n a r e m e a n t . 9

Ibid.

10

Ibid.

11

M a y n e , op. cit., p. 241.

12

Ibid.,

13 14 15

p p . 241-242.

Ibid. Ibid.,

p . 246.

Ibid.

16

The

17

Ibid.,

Diary

of a Writer,

p . 175.

18

lb id., p . 176.

19

Ibid.,

p . 181.

20

Ibid.,

p. 201.

p . 166.

particular

w o r k s of

NOTES 21 22 23 24 25

26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

35 36 37 38 39 40

41 42 43 44 45 46 47

213

F o r a s t u d y of Dostoevsky's view o n i m m o r t a l i t y , see p p . 540 ff. in The Diary of a Writer. Ibid.., p. 543. / ¿ i d . , p. 544. Ibid. R e n é F u e l o e p - M i l l e r , Fyodor Dostoevsky: Insight, Faith and Prophecy ( N e w York, 1950), C h . VI. See also c o n c l u s i o n of this chapter. The Diary of a Writer, p p . 544 ff. Ibid., p. 552. Ibid. A r t i c l e e n t i t l e d " C h r i s t m a s T r e e a t t h e Artist's C l u b , " Ibid., p. 162. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid., p. 753* M a y n e , op. cit., p p . 2 5 3 - 2 5 4 . See F r e d e r i c k Eby, The Development of Modern Education ( N e w York, 1952), p p . 6 0 1 - 6 0 2 , f o r t h e history of e d u c a t i o n a l psychological studies. R e n é F u e l o e p - M i l l e r , op. cit., C h . VI. J . M e i e r - G r a e f e , Dostoevsky: The Man and His Work, tr. by H e r b e r t H . M a r k s ( N e w York, 1928), p p . 2 3 6 - 2 3 7 . See t h e f o l l o w i n g section o n " T h e R o l e of t h e F a m i l y i n t h e F o r m a t i o n of C h a r a c t e r . " M e i e r - G r a e f e , op. cit., p . 77. lljki

· F r e u d was b o r n in 1856, a n d was still a s t u d e n t w h e n Dostoevsky's m a j o r novels h a d b e e n w r i t t e n . T h e y e a r Dostoevsky d i e d (1881), F r e u d o b t a i n e d his m e d i c a l d e g r e e . A c t u a l l y t h e science of p s y c h i a t r y was i n t r o d u c e d i n t h e sixties i n P a r i s by C h a r c o t . Freud studied u n d e r him. M a y n e , op. cit., p . 167. See A. G i d e , S. F r e u d , R . F u e l o e p - M i l l e r , R . L a u t h , E . Vivas, N . B e r d y a e v , R . Poggioli in t h e b i b l i o g r a p h y . The Diary of a Writer, p . 759. Ibid., p. 760. I b i d

" P-753· Ibid., p. 761. Ibid., p. 150.

214 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

Ibid., p. 762. Ibid. Ibid., p. 234. Ibid., p. 237. Ibid., pp. 210 fi., 763 δ. Ibid., p. 770 f. Ibid., p. 772. Ibid., p. 775. Ibid., p. 777. Fueloep-Miller, op. cit., p. 83. Ibid. Ibid., p. 84. See also C. M. Woodhouse and S. Freud in the bibliography. Crime and Punishment, Modern Library edition, p. 528. Fueloep-Miller, op. cit., p. 8g. See Dostoevsky's Collected Works, Macmillan edition, 1950. Fueloep-Miller, op. cit., p. 91. See also various articles on specific problems in the field of psychology which Dostoevsky analyzed and anticipated in the bibliography. CHAPTER

FIVE

ι

Vladimir Seduro, Dostoevsky in Russian 1846-1956 (New York, 1957), pp. 28-38.

2

F. W . J. Hemmings, The Russian Novel in France, 1884-IÇI4 (London, 1950), p. 228. Helen Muchnic, Dostoevsky's English Reputation {1884-1936) (Northampton, Mass.), 1939, p. 128. D. H. Lawrence, Selected Literary Criticism, ed. by Anthony Beai (New York, 1956), pp. 229-241. Muchnic, op. cit., pp. 151-152. Ibid. Hemmings, op. cit., p. 235. C. M. Woodhouse, Dostoievsky (London, 1951), p. 107. Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Short Novels of Dostoevsky, Introduction by T h o m a s M a n n (New York, 1951), p. xixSeduro, op. cit., pp. 3—21 Ibid., p. g5· Ibid., pp. 202-232. Ibid., p. 84. Ibid.

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Literary

Criticism

NOTES 15 16 17 j8 19

20

21

22 23

24 25 26 27 28

29 30

215

Ibid., p. 87. Ibid., γ. 281. Ibid., p. 285. Ibid., p. 304. In England, interest in Dostoevsky culminates the interest in Russian culture itself. He was not widely read until 1912, because of the lack of translations. In fact, not until 1921 were all of his artistic works rendered into English by Constance Garnett. In Germany, the translation of Dostoevsky began in 1850 and, in both France and Germany, all his works were fully known by 1890. T h e "ecstatic" tradition of Dostoevsky criticism began in Germany with H. Hesse's essay in 1922 and continued in S. Zweig (1930). René Fueloep-Miller, Fyodor Dostoevsky: Insight, Faith and Prophecy (New York, 1950), Chs. V I and V I I . See also the works of R. Lauth, Z. Maurina, A. Gide, E. Lubac, W. Hubben, and L. A. Zander in the bibliography. L. A. Zander, Dostoevsky, tr. by N. Duddington (London, 1948), p. 15· Ibid. "Geneva ideas" refers to the doctrines of socialism and communism with which Dostoevsky became acquainted at first hand. He attended the conference of the socialists while in Geneva in 1868. Seduro, op. cit., p. 207. Eleseo Vivas, Creation and Discovery (New York, 1955), p. 50. Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Diary of a Writer, tr. by Boris Brasol, (New York, 1950), I, 83. T h e novel The Possessed illustrates this point. Nietzsche declared that Dostoevsky was the one person from whom he had learned anything significant in psychology. He read Crime and Punishment in the sixties, but his own work with the "superman" theory, Thus Spake Zarathustra, was written in 1883. See also H. Lubac, R . Lauth, N. Zemov in the Bibliography. Fyodor Dostoevsky, Crime and Punishment (New York, 1951), pp. 27-36, 42-47. T h e point beyond the logical plane of being in logic itself is considered to be a fallacy; however, from the religious point of view, this "transition to another plane of being" is called mira-

2I6

D O S T O E V S K Y : HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

cle, a n d is a b o v e all, desired. See Z a n d e r , op. cit., p p . 15-30, for the d e s c r i p t i o n a n d analyses of the t w o miracles in sky's novels. Crime

and

Punishment

a n d The

Dostoev-

Brothers

Kara-

mazov. 31

Fyodor

Dostoevsky,

Notes

From

Underground

(New

York,

>95')' PP· 53-543»

R o b e r t L . J a c k s o n , Dostoevskij's sian

Literature

Underground

Man

in

Rus-

( T h e H a g u e , 1958), p p . 27-28. O n M a r c h

26,

1864, D o s t o e v s k y w r o t e to his b r o t h e r M i h a i l : ". . . I t really w o u l d h a v e b e e n better not to h a v e p r i n t e d the

penultimate

c h a p t e r (the m a i n o n e w h e r e the very idea is expressed) [chapter χ in P a r t I] t h a n to have p r i n t e d it as it is, that is, w i t h sentences t h r o w n together, c o n t r a d i c t i n g each other. B u t w h a t is to be d o n e ! T h e swinish censors let pass those places w h e r e I r i d i c u l e d e v e r y t h i n g a n d b l a s p h e m e d for

show,

but

where

I d e d u c e f r o m all this the need f o r f a i t h a n d C h r i s t — t h i s is f o r b i d d e n . Just w h o are these censors, are they in c o n s p i r a c y against the g o v e r n m e n t o r s o m e t h i n g ? " 33

I n his b o o k 1953),

pp.

The 91-92,

Impact

of Science

Bertrand

needs . . . c o m p a s s i o n

on

Russell

a n d a wish

Society

stated:

(New

York,

". . . o u r

that m a n k i n d

should

age be

h a p p y ; . . . T h e r o o t of the m a t t e r is a very s i m p l e a n d oldf a s h i o n e d t h i n g . . . the t h i n g I m e a n — . . .

is love,

Chris-

tian l o v e or c o m p a s s i o n . If y o u feel this, y o u h a v e a m o t i v e f o r existence, a g u i d e in action, a reason for c o u r a g e , an imp e r a t i v e necessity f o r i n t e l l e c t u a l h o n e s t y . " B y permission of S i m o n a n d Schuster, Inc. 34

Vassiii V . Z e n k o v s k y , A History

of Russian

Philosophy,

tr. by

G e o r g e L . K l i n e ( N e w Y o r k , 1953), I, 147. 35

Ibid.

36

Ibid.

37 38

Ibid. Ibid.

See also P a u l R a m s e y , Basic

Christian

Ethics

(New York,

1950), p p . 2 7 6 - 2 7 7 , o n C h r i s t i a n n a t u r a l i s m . 39

Z e n k o v s k y , op. cit., p p . 147-148.

40

Z a n d e r , op. cit., p p . 3 0 - 3 1 . See also f o o t n o t e 30.

41

Ibid.,

4a

George A. Panichas, " T h e

p p . 15-30.

Vladimir's

Seminary

Quarterly

S p i r i t u a l A r t of D o s t o e v s k y , " (Fall, 1958), II, no. 4, p. 27.

St.

NOTES 43 44 45

46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53

54 55 56 57 58 59 60

217

Nicholas Berdyaev, The Spirit of Dostoevsky, tr. by Donald Attwater (New York, 1957), p. 3 1 . Zcnkovsky, op. cit., p. 4 1 5 · See Dostoevsky's statement of faith in Ch. II of this work: " H i s L i f e in Siberian E x i l e . " See also N . Berdyaev, op. cit., pp. 111— 132. Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology (Chicago, 1957), II, 26. Ethel Colburn Mayne, Letters of Fyodor Michailovitch Dostoevsky to His Family and Friends (London, 1914), p. 197. Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov, Modern Library G i a n t edition (New Y o r k , n. d.), p. 335. Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Diary of a Writer, I, 33. Vivas, op. cit., p. 58. The Diary of a Writer, I I , 1003. Ibid. Berdyaev, op. cit., pp. 36—37. Dostoevsky loved E u r o p e very much, and he wrote: " E u r o p e is as precious as Russia; every stone in her is cherished and dear. E u r o p e was as much our fatherland as Russia. Oh, even more so. It is impossible to love Russia more than I do, but I never reproached myself because Venice, R o m e , Paris, the treasures of their arts and sciences, their whole history are dearer to me than Russia. Oh, those old, alien stones, those wonders of God's ancient world, those fragments of holy wonders are dear to the Russian, and are even dearer to us than to the inhabitants of those lands themselves." Winter Notes On Summer Impressions, tr. by Richard L e e Renfield (New York, 1955), p. 29. Dostoevsky also wrote in one of his letters: " T h e beautiful is the ideal; but ideals, with us as in civilized Europe, have long been wavering. T h e r e is in the world only one figure of absolute beauty: Christ." Mayne, op. cit., p. 142. V. Ivanov, Freedom and the Tragic Life, tr. by N. Cameron (London, 1952), p. 1 1 0 . Zenkovsky, op. cit., p. 432. The Brothers Karamazov, p. 111. Mayne, op. cit., pp. 2 3 3 - 2 3 4 . The Diary of a Writer, I, 1 5 0 - 1 5 1 . Zander, op. cit., pp. 1 2 - 1 3 . The Brothers Karamazov, p. 336. F o r a statement parallel to

2i8

61 62 63 64 65 66 67

68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

Dostoevsky's Christological foundation, see Paul Tillich, op. cit., II, 118-137. Janko Lavrin, Dostoevsky (New York, 1947), p. 41. The Brothers Karamazov, p. 239. Ibid., p. 253. Ibid.., p. 254. The Diary of a Writer, I, 9-17. T h i s is the premise in the novel Crime and Punishment. See N. Berdyaev, The Destiny of Man, tr. by N. Duddington (London, 1948), " T h e Problem of Ethical Knowledge," pp. 1 22. Ibid. See also Paul Ramsey, Basic Christian Ethics (New York, 1950), pp. 92-116. T h i s is Raskolnikov's assertion in Crime and Punishment. Zander, op. cit., p. 31. The Brothers Karamazov, pp. 337-338. Panichas, op. cit., p. 25. Ibid

The Brothers Karamazov, pp. 585-591. Ibid., pp. 819-820. Ibid., p. 821. Even the worst reprobate, old Karamazov, was clearly conscious of the fact that Alyosha alone did not condemn him. The Brothers Karamazov, pp. 585-591. Ibid., pp. 821-822. Vladimir Sajkovid, "Notes on Dostoevsky," unpublished materials. Ibid. T h e "loftiest idea of human existence" is the idea of immortality. See The Diary of a Writer, I, 539. Sajkovii, op. cit. The Brothers Karamazov, p. 242. Seduro, op. cit., p. 211. Ibid., p. 214. Ibid. Ibid., p. 219. Ibid. T h e work of Bakhtin is today almost unknown outside Soviet Russia, and in the USSR he is ignored. He was, of course, criticized severely for "ignoring the class character of Dostoevsky's ideology." In fact, Bakhtin absolutely denied the influence of concrete social factors—family or class—on the

NOTES

219

characters; Dostoevsky's characters are dialogues of man with himself, of man with man. Ibid., pp. 227-229, 232. 89 90 91 92 93 94

95 96 97 98 99 j00 101 102 103 j04 105 106 107 108 10g 110 111

lia 113 114 115

Notes From Underground, Macmillan edition, p. 69. Ibid. Ibid., p. 71. T h e dimension of the irrational is metaphysical freedom, the realm of spirit. Notes From Underground, p. 67. H e r m a n Dooyeweerd, In the Twilight of Western Thought, Studies in the Pretended A u t o n o m y of Philosophical T h o u g h t , T h e Presbyterian and R e f o r m e d Publishing C o m p a n y (Philadelphia, i960), p. 186. M a y n e , op. cit., pp. 6 - 7 . Sajkovié, op. cit. Ibid. Zenkovsky, op. cit., p. 419. Berdyaev, op. cit., p. 67. F y o d o r Dostoevsky, The House of the Dead, Macmillan edition (New York, 1950), pp. 275-276. Sajkovic, op. cit. J o h n Dewey, Problems of Men, Philosophical L i b r a r y (New Y o r k , 1946), p. 300. Notes From Underground, p. 68. Ibid., pp. 74-75· Ibid., pp. 68-69. Ibid., p. 62. Ibid., p. 78 St. Augustine taught the existence of two freedoms. See Berdyaev, op. cit., p. 688 ff. Sajkovié, op. cit. Ibid. See The Brothers Karamazov, M o d e r n L i b r a r y G i a n t Edition, pp. 3 8 0 - 3 8 1 , and Crime and Punishment, tr. by D a v i d Magarshack, Penguin Books edition, pp. 5 5 5 - 5 5 9 . Also L . A . Zander, Dostoevsky, tr. by N . D u d d i n g t o n (London, 1948), pp. 1 5 - 3 5 . The Brothers Karamazov, p. 333. Sajkovié, op. cit. Berdyaev, op. cit., p. 89. T h e exact meaning of the Russian is translated: G u i l t and Expiation.

220

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

116 117 118 119

Crime and Punishment, p. 2 3 1 . Ibid. Ibid. Ibid., p. 233. Nietzsche's words echo Raskolnikov: " M a n k i n d is much more of a means than an end . . . mankind is merely the experimental material. . . . T h e object is to attain that enormous energy of greatness which can model the man of the future by means of discipline and also by means of the annihilation of millions of the bungled and botched, and which can yet avoid going to ruin at the sight of the suffering created thereby, the like of which has never been seen before." Bertrand Russell, The Will to Doubt (New Y o r k , 1958), pp. 91—92.

120

Ibid., pp. 3g2, 395. Dostoevsky always drives a concrete fact to its extreme. In this case, the old usuress was bleeding innocent people; her life was "worthless." Further, the deed is complicated by the sister of the old woman who walks in on the scene of the murder; R a s k o l n i k o v is forced to kill her, too. T h e deed itself is the " e x t r e m e " one of taking life. In The Brothers Karamazov, I v a n takes the " e x t r e m e " and unanswerable case of innocent children w h o suffer the sadistic cruelties from adults in presenting the problem of suffering to the moral consciousness. Every account of I v a n is a fact from the newspapers of the time, as Dostoevsky wrote in a letter to his editor. Kirillov in The Possessed also drives home the extreme consequence of the " i l l u s i o n " of G o d ; if God is not, then man is God. T h e final proof required is for man to overcome death. T h i s means someone must take the "first step" and take his own life, in order to show mankind the " T r u t h . " Kirillov acts and commits suicide to awaken mankind to the " T r u t h . "

121

A l l the obvious socio-environmental reasons are present in Raskolnikov's case, but they are not the causes or motivations for the crime. The Diary of a Writer, I, 13. Sec also Mayne, op. cit., pp. 2 1 8 220.

122 123 124

I refer the reader to Chs. I l l and I V of this work. See Boris Pasternak, Dr. Zhivago, tr. by M a x Hayward and M a n y a Harari (New Y o r k , 1958). Pasternak's novel is a monument to the countless people who lived through the horrors and tragedies of the revolution, to the families—the old and

NOTES the

young—whose

lives

were

221

shattered

beyond

repair.

The

e s s e n c e of D o s t o e v s k y ' s c o m p a s s i o n a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g is prese n t in the t e x t u r e of t h e w o r k . P a s t e r n a k is the n e w l i n k

in

the c h a i n of t h e g r e a t R u s s i a n classic t h i n k e r s . 125

The

126

T h e d e s c r i p t i o n of e v i l t o d a y c a n b e s t u d i e d in T . S. E l i o t ' s

Brothers

Wasteland,

Karamazov,

p. 6 7 7 .

in S a r t r e ' s w o r k s , a n d in t h e n o v e l s o f F r a n z K a f k a .

M a n ' s c o n s c i o u s n e s s h a s m o v e d f a r f r o m D a n t e ' s Inferno

and

the P i l g r i m F a t h e r s ' " h e l l - f i r e a n d b r i m s t o n e . " 127

I n a n t i c i p a t i n g the p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t i n o r d e r to p u r g e o n e s e l f from

evil one

should

commit

crime

(which

someone

d e d u c e f r o m Dostoevsky), B e r d v a e v said: " O n l y an

might

immature

o r e n s l a v e d m i n d w o u l d d e d u c e f r o m D o s t o i e v s k y ' s thesis t h a t w e m u s t c h o o s e to f o l l o w t h e p a t h of w i c k e d n e s s in o r d e r enrich our consciousness The

theory

t h a t e v i l is o n l y

good cannot be i m p u t e d . . .

and

profit from a moment

to h i m ;

a

new

in

the e v o l u t i o n

this e v o l u t i o n a r y

is e n t i r e l y o p p o s e d to his spirit. H e w a s n o

e v i l f o r h i m was e v i l , to be b u r n e d

to

experience. of

optimism

evolutionist;

i n t h e fires of h e l l ,

and

t h a t is w h e r e h e cast it. H e t e a c h e s p l a i n l y t h a t it is n o t a t h i n g to b e j u g g l e d w i t h , t h a t it is m a d n e s s to t h i n k that a m a n c a n d e l i b e r a t e l y e n t e r o n a c o u r s e o f w i c k e d n e s s to g e t w h a t h e c a n o u t of it a n d t h e n t h r e w h i m s e l f i n t o t h e a r m s o f t h e g o o d : such an a r g u m e n t c a n n o t be taken seriously a n d indicates

a

w o r t h l e s s state of m i n d . C e r t a i n l y the tragic e x p e r i e n c e of e v i l c a n p r o f i t a m a n a n d s h a r p e n his u n d e r s t a n d i n g , c e r t a i n l y h e cannot thereafter return

to h i s f o r m e r stage o í

development;

b u t w h e n a s i n n i n g m a n b e g i n s to t h i n k t h a t e v i l is e n r i c h i n g h i m , that it is l e a d i n g h i m to the g o o d , t h a t it is o n l y a stage i n his p r o g r e s s , f r o m t h a t m o m e n t h e h a s f a i l e d c o m p l e t e l y :

he

g o e s all to p i e c e s a n d e v e r y d o o r to i m p r o v e m e n t a n d r e g e n e r a t i o n is c l o s e d to h i m . . . . T o c l i m b f r o m e v i l to a h i g h spiritual level one must d e n o u n c e

the evil in oneself

t e r r i b l y , a n d these s u f f e r i n g s D o s t o i e v s k y d e p i c t e d . "

and

suffer

Berdyaev,

op. cit., p p . 9 3 - 9 4 . 128

Ibid.,

p . 93. R a s k o l n i k o v ' s c o n s c i e n c e is a n i l l u s t r a t i o n . Z o s s i m a

has the f o l l o w i n g to say a b o u t " h e l l a n d h e l l hell? I m a i n t a i n

t h a t it is the s u f f e r i n g o f

fire:"

being

"What unable

is to

l o v e . . . . T h e y talk of h e l l fire i n t h e m a t e r i a l sense. I d o n ' t g o i n t o t h a t m y s t e r y a n d I s h u n it. B u t I t h i n k if t h e r e w e r e

222

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

fire in the material sense, they would be glad of it, f o r , I imagine, that in material agony, their still greater spiritual agony would be forgotten f o r a moment. Moreover, that spiritual agony cannot be taken f r o m them, for that suffering is not external but within them. . . . " p. 338. 129 130 131

The Diary of a Writer, I, 1 5 - 1 6 . B e r d y a e v , op. cit., p. 108. Ibid., p. iog.

132 133 134 135 136

Henri T r o y a t , Firebrand: The Life of Dostoevsky, tr. f r o m the French by Norbett G u t e m a n n (New Y o r k , 1946), p. 1 3 5 . Notes From Underground, p. 71. The Brothers Karamazov, p. 239. Ibid. Crime and Punishment, pp. 3 9 2 - 3 9 5 .

137 138 139

The Diary of a Writer, I I , 622. Ibid. The Idiot, tr. by D a v i d Magarshack, Baltimore, 1955, p. 433.

140

Dmitri in The Brothers responsible to all," even in a Siberian prison, he from the bowels of the W h o m is j o y . " p. 720.

141

The Idiot,

142 143 144

The Brothers Karamazov, Panichas, op. cit., p. 20. Ibid., p. 32.

Karamazov exclaims that " w e are all though he would be deep in a m i n e would cry out, and even there "sing earth a glorious hymn to G o d , with

pp. 595-596. p. 382.

CHAPTER

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

F y o d o r M. Dostoevsky, The

SIX

Diary

of a Writer

(New

York,

1949). T I > 572-573· Ibid., I, 490. Ibid., I I , 1001. Ibid., p. 1002. Ibid., I, 1 5 0 - 1 5 4 . George C. Strem, " T h e M o r a l W o r l d of Dostoevsky," The Russian Review, vol. 16, no. 3 (July, 1957), p. 26. J . D o n a l d Butler, " B u i l d i n g a Philosophy of E d u c a t i o n , " Foundations of Education, ed. by Frederick G r u b e r , T h e Martin B r u m b a u g h Lectures, First Series, University of Pennsylvania Press (Philadelphia, 1957)· p. 83.

NOTES 8

Frederick Theory,

Eby,

Development

Organization,

Hall, Inc. 9

The

223

and

of

Practice,

Modern

Education

( E n g l e w o o d C l i f f s , N e w Jersey, 1952), p p . 629-630.

Y e r v a n t H . K r i k o r i a n , ed., Naturalism

and

the Human

C o l u m b i a U n i v e r s i t y Press ( N e w Y o r k , 1949), p p . 10

in

by permission of PrenticeSpirit,

242-243.

Ibid.

11

Ibid.,

pp. 357-358.

12

Paul

R a m s e y , Basic

(New

York,

Christian

Ethics,

1950), p. 269. O n e

Charles Scribner's

branch

of

naturalism

Sons today

g o e s so far as to d e f i n e science as " i n v e n t i o n " r a t h e r t h a n disc o v e r y : " s c i e n c e is a s y m b o l i c system by w h i c h o u r e x p e r i e n c e s c a n b e c o r r e l a t e d in a p r a c t i c a l w a y . . . ." T h e a r g u m e n t e n d s i n a solipsism. See " A Daedalus 13

S t r e m , op. cit., p. 15.

14

Ethel

Colburn

toevsky

C o l l o q u y o n the U n i t y of

(Fall, 1958), 87, n o . 4, p p . M a y n e , Letters

to His Family

and

of

Friends

Learning,"

158-159.

Fyodor

Michailovitch

Dos-

( L o n d o n , 1914), p. 236.

15

B u t l e r , op. cit., p. 92.

16

Ibid.,

17

S e e a r t i c l e of K . C . H i l l , " C r i m e a n d P u n i s h m e n t as P h i l o s o -

p. 93.

p h y , " General 18

Herman

Education

Dooyeweerd,

(1953), 7 : 1 2 2 - 1 3 2 . op.

cit.;

after completing

this

w o r k , the f o u r v o l u m e e d i t i o n o f D o o y e w e e r d ' s A New of Theoretical

Thought,

present Critique

tr. i n t o E n g l i s h by D a v i d H . F r e e m a n

a n d H . D e J o n g s t e , U i t g e v e r i j H . J. P a r i s - A m s t e r d a m a n d T h e Presbyterian phia,

and

Reformed

1953-58), has c o m e

Publishing

Company

i n t o my possession. T h i s

(Philadelscholarly

w o r k is of u t m o s t i m p o r t a n c e f o r m o d e r n p h i l o s o p h y ; it sustains the d i r e c t i o n w h i c h I h a v e t r i e d to p o i n t o u t i n this w o r k on Dostoevsky.

APPENDIX

Selections from Dostoevsky's Writings A Bibliographical

Handbook

T H E TEACHER of English in junior and senior high schools lias a multiple task with students: to help them further the mastery of the fundamental skills of language (grammatical structure and syntax in writing, reading and oral expression); to transmit direct knowledge in both language and literature; to awaken the understanding and appreciation of the richness of one's own language and the literatures of many people as well as one's own. A fourth task is more often a by-product, that is, the ideals, attitudes, and realities of life which personally touch the heart and mind and challenge the student in the reading of literature. Yet it is this fourth factor in teaching which is the most momentous. In the meeting of characters and situations of the novelists and dramatists, from the imaginations of the poets, in the thought of the essayists, students find life values. T h e i r own values and prejudices may be challenged, conscious thought-feeling may be awakened, and strivings for one's life vocation may be evoked.

For the past twelve years, many of the following selections from the writings of F. M. Dostoevsky have been introduced to students from the seventh to the twelfth grades, in public and in private schools, by colleagues and myself. T h e inspiration many students gained from the reading and the discussion of selected works from Dostoevsky is incalculable. Dostoevsky has stirred many students to begin the difficult task of clarifying their thoughts; he has reinforced their idealism, and 227

228

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

has helped them to better face hard realities of life without assuming an attitude of cynicism in our troubled world today. I do not know of a junior or a senior, among the hundreds of students who have passed through my classes, who did not hold Crime and Punishment to be the "greatest" novel of his life. In the teaching of and in understanding of our national ideals and citizenship, universal brotherhood, the problem of freedom, happiness, and so on in our social studies classes, selections from Dostoevsky offer rich and profound challenges. In senior classes, selections from Dostoevsky, together with selections from Plato, J . S. Mill, Milton, E. Burke, T . Jefferson, B. Franklin, et al., have been read, and have opened fruitful comparative discussions on the above-mentioned issues. Students have been greatly inspired, and not in answers so much as in the provoking of their own creative, original thought. T h e following section has been included as an aid to both teachers and students, for the purpose of further introducing special selections from the works of Dostoevsky. It is in the form of a bibliographical handbook; his works are available in current publications. SEVENTH

if

EIGHTH

GRADES

Literature classes: " T h e Heavenly Christmas T r e e " (also called "A Little Boy at Christ's Christmas Tree," a short story, Diary of a Writer, Vol. I, 168-172, 4I/2 pp.). " T h e Peasant Marey," Diary of a Writer, Vol. I, 207-210, 4 pp. " A Meeting With the Schoolboys" (complete scene from the novel The Brothers Karamazov, Modern Library Giant edition, Random House, New York, 182-186, 4 pp.).

SELECTIONS

FROM

D O S T O E V S K Y 'S

EIGHTH

WRITINGS

22g

GRADE

L i t e r a t u r e classes: B o o k X " T h e B o y s " ( f r o m t h e n o v e l The

Brothers

Karama-

zov, 5 4 5 - 5 9 1 , 46 pp.). E p i l o g u e , I I I , " I l u s h a ' s F u n e r a l . T h e S p e e c h at t h e S t o n e " ( f r o m s a m e n o v e l as a b o v e , 8 1 3 - 8 2 2 , g p p . ) .

NINTH i r T E N T H

GRADES

L i t e r a t u r e classes: " T h e H e a v e n l y C h r i s t m a s T r e e " (see a b o v e ) . " W h i t e N i g h t s " (or A S e n t i m e n t a l S t o r y f r o m t h e D i a r y of a D r e a m e r , a s h o r t story, M a c m i l l a n , 1950 e d i t i o n o f

Works,

1 - 5 0 , 50 p p . ) . Selections

from

the Letters

of Dostoevsky

( T h e s e are included

i n this s e c t i o n as they a r e o u t of p r i n t i n E n g l i s h e d i t i o n s . ) Selections

from

the novel

T h e Brothers

Karamazov:

1. T h e p e a s a n t w o m e n , M a d a m e H o l a h o v , L i s e a n d F a t h e r Z o s s i m a (45-58, 13 pp.). 2. " A M e e t i n g w i t h t h e S c h o o l b o y s " ( 1 8 2 - 1 8 6 , 4 p p . ) . 3. B o o k X , " T h e B o y s " ( 5 4 5 - 5 9 1 , 46 p p . ) . 4. E p i l o g u e , I I I , " I l u s h a ' s F u n e r a l . T h e S p e e c h at t h e S t o n e " ( 8 1 3 - 8 2 2 , 9 pp.) H i s t o r y a n d l i t e r a t u r e classes: " T h e L e g e n d of t h e G r a n d I n q u i s i t o r " f r o m t h e n o v e l Brothers

Karamazov

The

( 2 5 5 - 2 7 4 , 19 pp.).

O n freedom, true democracy Selections of a Writer,

f r o m t h e A u g u s t , 1880, P u s h k i n issue of A

Diary

V o l . II.

O n h a p p i n e s s : " B u t w h a t k i n d of h a p p i n e s s w o u l d be

if

it w e r e

based

upon

unhappiness?" (973-974) O n a nation's ideals and on citizenship

it

somebody's

(1000-1002)

230

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

E L E V E N T H if

IMAGE

TWELFTH

OF

MAN

GRADES

L i t e r a t u r e classes: Short Stories (Diary of a Writer

or

M a c m i l l a n 1950 e d i t i o n of c o m p l e t e works.) " T h e Heavenly Christmas T r e e " " T h e Little Hero" " W h i t e N i g h t s " (a romance) " A F a i n t H e a r t " (a y o u n g m a n dies f r o m happiness) " A n U n p l e a s a n t P r e d i c a m e n t " (a y o u n g g e n e r a l pays a visit to the w e d d i n g feast of his s u b o r d i n a t e clerk) " T h e H o n e s t T h i e f " (also r e a d N . G o g o l ' s " T h e C l o a k " for c o m p a r a t i v e study) " T h e D r e a m of a R i d i c u l o u s M a n " (utopia) Selections

from

the Letters

of Dostoevsky

( T h e s e are i n c l u d e d

in this section.) Selections

from

the novel

T h e Brothers K a r a m a z o v :

Same as n i n t h & tenth grades w i t h the f o l l o w i n g a d d i t i o n s : " T h e Brothers M a k e F r i e n d s " (237-255, 18 pp.) F a t h e r Zossima's teachings (327-342, 15 pp.) O n Dreams: "The

Devil.

Ivan's N i g h t m a r e "

(from

the n o v e l

Brothers

The

Karamazov,

673-690, 2i pp.) R a s k o l n i k o v ' s dreams f r o m Crime

ir

Punishment.

Novels Crime

and Punishment

A Raw Youth

(the s u p e r m a n i d e a ) ·

( a u t o b i o g r a p h y of a nineteen-year-old student)

•Seniors who have read Shakespeare's Hamlet could work on papers and discussions on the two heroes Raskolnikov and Hamlet: two "modern" young men.

SELECTIONS

FROM

ELEVENTH if

DOSTOEVSKY'S

WRITINGS

23I

TWELFTH GRADES

History classes: Selections f r o m the August, 1880, P u s h k i n issue of A Diary of a Writer (see ninth & tenth grades). C o m p a r a t i v e study of P a r t I Notes From Underground with the story " T h e D r e a m of a R i d i c u l o u s M a n " (problems of the m e a n i n g of life, freedom, reason, 2 plus 2 equals 4). " T h e L e g e n d of the G r a n d I n q u i s i t o r " (see ninth & tenth grades). F r o m Diary of a Writer: O n juveniles: Vol. I, 1 7 2 - 1 8 2 , 10 pp. Vol. I, 3 3 0 - 3 3 9 , 9 pp.

SELECTIONS F. LETTERS

FROM M.

T O HIS BROTHER

THE

LETTERS

OF

DOSTOEVSKY MICHAEL

Petersburg August 9, 1838 ( T h e letter begins with e x p l a n a t i o n s of why Dostoevsky has not written to his brother f o r so long: he has not h a d a kopek.) It is true that I am idle—-very idle. B u t what will become of me, if everlasting idleness is to be my only attitude towards life? I don't know if my gloomy mood will ever leave me. A n d to think that such a state of m i n d is allotted to m a n alone—• the atmosphere of his soul seems c o m p o u n d e d of a m i x t u r e of the heavenly a n d the earthly. W h a t an u n n a t u r a l product, then, is he, since the law of spiritual nature is in him violated. . . . T h i s earth seems to me a purgatory for divine spirits w h o h a v e been assailed by s i n f u l thoughts. I feel that our w o r l d has become one immense Negative, and that everything noble, b e a u t i f u l , a n d divine, has turned itself into a satire. If in this

AJÍ

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

picture there occurs an individual who neither in idea nor effect harmonizes with the whole—who is, in a word, an entirely unrelated figure—what must happen to the picture? It is destroyed, and can no longer endure. Yet how terrible it is to perceive only the coarse veil under which the All doth languish! T o know that one single effort of the will would suffice to demolish that veil and become one with eternity—to know all this, and still live on like the last and least of creatures. . . . How terriblel How petty is man! Hamlet! Hamlet! When I think of his moving wild speech, in which resounds the groaning of the whole numbed universe, there breaks from my soul not one reproach, not one sigh. . . . T h a t soul is then so utterly oppressed by woe that it fears to grasp the woe entire, lest so it lacerate itself. Pascal once said: H e who protests against philosophy is himself a philosopher. A poor sort of system! [Dostoevsky goes on to enlarge on his brother's and his own financial difficulties.] However, it is time to speak of other things. You plume yourself on the number of books you have read. . . . But don't please imagine that I envy you that. At Peterhoff I read at least as many as you have. T h e whole of Hoffmann in Russian and German (that is, "Kater Murr," which hasn't yet been translated), and nearly all Balzac. (Balzac is great! His characters are the creations of an all-embracing intelligence. Not the spirit of the age, but whole millenniums, with all their strivings, have worked towards such development and liberation in the soul of man.) Besides all these, I read Goethe's ".Faust" and his shorter poems, Polevois' History, "Ugolino" and " U n d i n e " (I'll write at length about "Ugolino" some other time), and, finally, Victor Hugo, except "Cromwell" and " H e r n a n i . " Farewell. Write to me, please, as often as you possibly can, for your letters are a joy and solace. Answer this at once. I shall expect your reply in twelve days at the very latest. Do write, that I may not utterly languish. T h y brother, F. Dostoevsky

SELECTIONS

FROM

DOSTOEVSKY'S

WRITINGS

2J3

Petersburg October 31, 1838 H o w l o n g since I've written to you, dear brother! T h a t hateful e x a m i n a t i o n — i t prevented me from w r i t i n g to y o u and P a p a , and from looking u p I. N . Schidlovsky. A n d w h a t came of it all? I have not yet been promoted. O horrorl to live another whole year in this misery! I should not have been so furious did I not know that I am the victim of the sheerest baseness. T h e failure w o u l d not have worried me so m u c h , if our p o o r father's tears had not b u r n e d into my soul. I had not hitherto k n o w n the sensation of w o u n d e d vanity. If such a f e e l i n g had got hold of me, I might well have blushed for myself. . . . But now you must know that I should like to crush the w h o l e world at one blow. . . . I lost so m u c h time before the examination, and was ill and miserable besides; but underwent it in the fullest and most literal sense of the word, and yet have failed. . . . It is the decree of the Professor of A l g e b r a , to whom, in the course of the year, I had been somewhat cheeky, and w h o was base e n o u g h to remind me of it today, while ostensibly e x p l a i n i n g to me the reason for my failure. O u t of ten f u l l marks I got an average of nine and a half, and yet I'm left. . . . But h a n g it all, if I must suffer, I will. . . . I'll waste no more paper on this topic, for I so seldom have an opportunity to talk with you. M y friend, you philosophize like a poet. A n d just because the soul cannot be for ever in a state of exaltation, your philosophy is n o t true and not just. T o know more, one must feel less, and vice versa. Y o u r j u d g m e n t is feather-headed—it is a delirium of the heart. W h a t do you mean precisely by the word know? Nature, the soul, love, and God, one recognizes through the heart, and not through the reason. W e r e we spirits, we could dwell in that region of ideas over w h i c h our souls hover, seeking the solution. B u t we are earth-born beings, a n d can only guess at the I d e a — n o t grasp it by all sides at once. T h e guide for o u r intelligences through the temporary illusion i n t o the innermost centre of the soul is called Reason. N o w , R e a s o n is a material capacity, while the soul or spirit

234

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

lives on the thoughts which are whispered by the heart. Thought is born in the soul. Reason is a tool, a machine, which is driven by the spiritual fire. When human reason (which would demand a chapter for itself) penetrates into the domain of knowledge, it works independently of the feeling, and consequently of the heart. But when our aim is the understanding of love or of nature, we march towards the very citadel of the heart. I don't want to vex you, but I do want to say that I don't share your views on poetry or philosophy. Philosophy cannot be regarded as a mere equation where nature is the unknown quantity! Remark that the poet, in the moment of inspiration, comprehends God, and consequently does the philosopher's work. Consequently poetic inspiration is nothing less than philosophical inspiration. Consequently philosophy is nothing but poetry, a higher degree of poetry. It is odd that you reason quite in the sense of our contemporary philosophy. What a lot of crazy systems have been born of late in the cleverest and most ardent brains! T o get a right result from this motley troop one would have to subject them all to a mathematical formula. And yet they are the "laws" of our contemporary philosophy! I have jabbered enough. And if I look upon your flabby system as impossible, I think it quite likely that my objections are no less flabby, so I won't bother you with any more of them. Brother, it. is so sad to live without hope! When I look forward I shudder at the future. I move in a cold arctic atmosphere, wherein no sunlight ever pierces. For a long time I have not had a single outbreak of inspiration. . . . Hence I feel as the Prisoner of Chillón felt after his brother's death. T h e Paradise-bird of poetry will never, never visit me again —never again warm my frozen soul. You say that I am reserved; but all my former dreams have long since forsaken me, and from those glorious arabesques that I once could fashion all the gilding has disappeared. T h e thoughts that used to kindle my soul and heart have lost their glow and ardency; or else my heart is numbed, or else. . . . I am afraid to go on

SELECTIONS

FROM

DOSTOEVSKY'S

WRITINGS

2J5

with that sentence. I won't admit that all the past was a dream, a bright golden dream. . . . Now listen. I think that the poet's inspiration is increased by success. Byron was an egoist; his longing for fame was petty. But the mere thought that through one's inspiration there will one day lift itself from the dust to heaven's heights some noble, beautiful human soul; the thought that those lines over which one has wept are consecrated as by a heavenly rite through one's inspiration, and that over them the coming generations will weep in echo . . . that thought, I am convinced, has come to many a poet in the very moment of his highest creative rapture. But the shouting of the mob is empty and vain. T h e r e occur to me those lines of Pushkin where he describes the mob and the poet: So let the foolish crowd, thy work despising, scream, And spit upon the shrine where burns thy fire supreme, Let them in childish arrogance thy tripod set atremble. . . . Wonderful, isn't it? Farewell, Your friend and brother, F. Dostoevsky Postscript: By the way, do tell me what is the leading idea in Chateaubriand's work "Genie du Christianisme." I read lately in Ssyn Otetschestva an attack by the critic Nisard on Victor Hugo. How little the French esteem him! How low does Nisard rate his dramas and romances! They are unfair to him; and Nisard (though he is so intelligent) talks nonsense. T e l l me, too, the leading motive of your drama; I am sure it is fine. I pity our poor father! He has such a remarkable character. What trouble he has had. It is so bitter that I can do nothing to console him! But, do you know. Papa is wholly a stranger in the world. He has lived in it now for fifty years, and yet he has the same opinions of mankind that he had thirty years ago. What sublime innocence! Yet the world has disappointed him, and I believe that that is the destiny of us all. Farewell.

2J6

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMACE

OF

MAN

Petersburg January 1, 1840 I thank you from my heart, good brother, for your dear letter. I am certainly quite a different sort of person f r o m you; you could never imagine how delightfully m y heart thrills when they b r i n g me a letter from you, and I have invented a new sort of enjoyment: I put myself on the rack. I take your letter in my hand, turn it about for some minutes, feel it to see whether it's long, and when I've satiated myself w i t h the sealed enevelope, I put it in my pocket. . . . I believe that in h u m a n life are infinite pain and infinite joy. In the poet's life spring thorns and roses. T h e lyric is like the poet's shadow, always with him, for he is an articulate creature. . . . [Dostoevsky speaks of reading w i t h a friend Homer, Shakespeare, Schiller and Hoffman. Later he writes about Pushkin, Schiller and others:] P u s h k i n and Schiller , . . have no smallest p o i n t of resemblance. N o w between Pushkin and Byron one might speak of a likeness. B u t as to H o m e r and Victor H u g o , I positively believe that you have chosen to misunderstand me! T h i s is w h a t I meant: H o m e r (a legendary figure, w h o was perhaps sent to us by G o d , as Christ was) can only be placed w i t h Christ; by no means with Victor H u g o . D o try, brother, to enter truly into the Iliad; read it attentively (now confess that y o u never have read i t ) . Homer, in the Iliad, gave to the ancient world the same organization in spiritual and earthly matters as the modern world owes to Christ. D o you understand me now? Victor H u g o is a singer, clear as an angel, and his poetry is chaste and Christian through and through; no one like h i m in that respect—neither Schiller (if Schiller is a Christian poet at all), nor the lyric Shakespeare, nor Byron, nor Pushkin. I have read his Sonnets in French. H o m e r alone has the same unshakeable belief in his vocation for poetry a n d in the god of poetry w h o m he serves—in that sole respect his poetry is like Victor Hugo's, but not in the ideas w i t h w h i c h N a t u r e g i f t e d him, and w h i c h he succeeded in ex-

SELECTIONS

FROM

DOSTOEVSKY'S

WRITINGS

237

p r e s s i n g — I never meant the ideas at all, never. I even think that Dershavin stands higher as a lyricist than either of those two. Postscript: I must give you one more scolding. W h e n you talk a b o u t form in poetry, you seem to me quite crazy. I mean it seriously. . . . B u t do tell me how, when you were talking about forms, you could advance the proposition that neither R a c i n e nor Corneille could please us, because their forms were bad? Y o u miserable wretch! A n d then you add with such effrontery: " D o you think, then, that they were both bad poets?" R a c i n e no p o e t — R a c i n e the ardent, the passionate, the idealist Racine, no poeti D o you dare to ask that? Have you read his " A n d r o m a q u e " — e h ? H a v e you read his "Iphigenie"? W i l l y o u by any chance maintain that it is not splendid? A n d isn't R a cine's Achilles of the same race as Homer's? . . . [About Corneille Dostoevsky writes:] . . . w i t h his titanic figures and his romantic spirit, nearly approaches Shakespeare, and w h a t does the romantic stand for, if it doesn't reach its highest development in the " C i d " ? F r o m M a r c h 24, 1845 Letter I read a great deal, and it has a curious effect on me. W h e n I re-read anything that I knew years ago, I feel fresh powers in myself. I can pierce to the heart of the book, grasp it entire, and from it draw new confidence in myself. . . . Brother, in literary matters I am not the same person that I was a couple of years ago. T h e n it was all childishness and folly. T h e s e two years of hard study have taken much f r o m me, and b r o u g h t m u c h to me. Letter of 1847 (excerpt) I must once more beg you to forgive me for not h a v i n g kept my word, and written by the next post. [Dostoevsky is aware and concerned w i t h his brother's health and his burdens:] B u t d o n ' t lose courage, brother. Better days will come. A n d

238

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

know this, the richer we are in mind and spirit, the fairer will our life appear. It is indeed true that the dissonance and lack of equilibrium between ourselves and society is a terrible thing. External and internal things should be in equilibrium. For, lacking external experiences, those of the inward life will gain the upper hand, and that is most dangerous. T h e nerves and the fancy then take up too much room, as it were, in our consciousness. Every external happening seems colossal, and frightens us. We begin to fear life. It is at any rate a blessing that Nature has gifted you with powers of affection and strength of character. . . . [About his own character, Dostoevsky writes in the Postscript:] . . . but even when my heart is warm with love, people often can't get so much as one friendly word out of me. At such times I have lost control of my nerves. I appear ludicrous, repellent, and have to suffer inexpressibly from the misunderstanding of my fellow-creatures. People call me arid and heartless. . . . I can show myself to be a man of feeling and humour only when external circumstances lift me high above the external daily round. When that is not my state, I am always repellent. From the Fortress J u l y 18, 1849 Dear Brother, I was inexpressibly glad of your letter, which I got on July 1 1 . A t last you are free, and I can vividly imagine how happy you were when you saw your family again. How impatiently they must have awaited you! I seem to see that your life is beginning to shape itself differently. With what are you now occupied, and, above all, what are your means of support? Have you work, and of what sort? Summer is indeed a burden in the town. You tell me only that you have taken a new house; and probably it is much smaller. It is a pity you couldn't spend the whole summer in the country. I thank you for the things you sent; they have relieved and diverted me.

SELECTIONS

FROM

DOSTOEVSKY'S

WRITINGS

239

You write, my dear fellow, that I must not lose heart. Indeed, I am not losing heart at all; to be sure, life here is very monotonous and dreary, but what else could it be? And after all it isn't invariably so tedious. T h e time goes by most irregularly, so to speak—now too quickly, now too slowly. Sometimes I have the feeling that I've grown accustomed to this sort of life, and that nothing matters very much. Of course, I try to keep all alluring thoughts out of my head, but can't always succeed; my early days, with their fresh impressions, storm in on my soul, and I live all the past over again. T h a t is in the natural order of things. T h e days are now for the most part bright, and I am somewhat more cheerful. T h e rainy days, though, are unbearable, and on them the casemate looks terribly grim. I have occupation, however, I do not let the time go by for naught; I have made out the plots of three tales and two novels; and am writing a novel now, but avoid over-working. Such labour, when I do it with great enjoyment (I have never worked so much con amore as now), has always agitated me and affected my nerves. While I was working in freedom I was always obliged to diversify my labours with amusements; but here the excitement consequent on the work has to evaporate unaided. My health is good, (on the whole) . . . When our case will be finished I can't say at all, for I have lost all sense of time, and merely use a calendar upon which I stroke out, quite passively, each day as it passes: "That's over!" I haven't read much since I've been here: two descriptions of travel in the Holy Land, and the works of Demetrius von Rostov. T h e latter interested me very much; but that kind of reading is only a d r o p in the ocean; any other sorts of books would, I imagine, quite extraordinarily delight me, and they might be very useful, for thus I could diversify my own thoughts with those of others, or at all events capture a different mood. . . . Don't be too anxious on my account. I have but one wish—to be in good health; the tedium is a passing matter, and cheerfulness depends in the last resort u p o n myself. H u m a n beings have an incredible a m o u n t

240

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

of endurance and will to live; I should never have expected to find so much in myself; now I know it from experience. Farewell I . . . Excerpts f r o m T h e Fortress August 27, 1849 I rejoice that I may answer you, dear brother, and thank you for sending the books. I rejoice also that you are well, and that the imprisonment had no evil effects upon your constitution. . . . I have nothing definite to tell you about myself. As yet I k n o w nothing whatever about our case. My personal life is as monotonous as ever; but they have given me permission to w a l k in the garden, where there are almost seventeen trees! T h i s is a great happiness for me. Moreover, I am given a candle in the evenings—that's my second piece of luck. . . . W i l l you send me some historical works? T h a t w o u l d be splendid. B u t the best of all w o u l d be the Bible (both Testaments). I need one. Should it prove possible send it in a French translation. But if you could add as well a Slav edition, it w o u l d be the height of bliss. Excerpts from last letter T h e Fortress December 22, 1849 Brother, my precious friendl all is settled! I am sentenced to f o u r years' hard labour in the fortress (I believe, of Orenburg) and after that to serve as a private. To-day, the 22nd of December, we were taken to the Semionov Drill Ground. T h e r e the sentence of death was read to all of us, we were told to kiss the Cross, our swords were broken over our heads. . . . T h e n three were tied to the pillar for execution. I was the sixth. T h r e e at a time were called out; consequently, I was in the second batch and no more than a minute was left me to live. I remembered you, brother, and all yours; duri n g the last minute you, you alone, were in my mind. O n l y then I realised h o w I love you, dear brother mine! I also

SELECTIONS

FROM

DOSTOEVSKY'S

WRITINGS

24I

managed to embrace Plescheyev and Durov who stood close to me and to say good-bye to them. Finally the retreat was sounded, and those tied to the pillar were led back, and it was announced to us that His Imperial Majesty granted us our lives. T h e n followed the present sentences. . . . Brother! I have not become downhearted or low-spirited. Life is everywhere life, life in ourselves, not in what is outside us. T h e r e will be people near me, and to be a man among people and remain a m a n for ever, not to be downhearted nor to fall in whatever misfortunes may befall me— this is life; this is the task of life. I have realised this. T h i s idea has entered into my flesh and into my blood. Yes, it's true! T h e head which was creating, living with the highest life of art, which had realised and grown used to the highest needs of the spirit, that head has already been cut off from my shoulders. T h e r e remain the memory and the images created but not yet incarnated by me. T h e y will lacerate me, it is true! But there remains in me my heart and the same flesh and blood which can also love and suffer, and desire, a n d remember, and this, after all, is life. On voit le soleil! Now, good-bye, brother! Don't grieve for me! . . . T h i n k of the f u t u r e of your children. . . . Live positively. T h e r e has never yet been working in me such a healthy abundance of spiritual life as now. . . . Can it be that I shall never take a pen into my hands? I think that after the four years there may be a possibility. I shall send you everything that I may write, if I write anything, my God! How many imaginations, lived through by me, created by me anew, will perish, will be extinguished in my brain or will be spilt as poison in my blood! Yes, if I am not allowed to write, I shall perish. Better fifteen years of prison with a pen in my hands! . . . W h e n I look back at the past and think how much time has been wasted in vain, how much time was lost in delusions, in errors, in idleness, in ignorance of how to live, how I did not value time, how often I sinned against my heart

242

dostoevsky:

his

image

of

man

and spirit,—my heart bleeds. L i f e is a gift, life is happiness, each minute might have been an age of happiness. Si jeunesse savait! N o w , changing my life, I am being reborn into a new form. Brother! I swear to you that I shall not lose hope, and shall preserve my spirit and heart in purity. I shall be reborn to a better thing. T h a t is my whole hope, my whole comfortl . . .

T O P I C EXCERPTS F R O M DOSTOEVSKY'S LETTERS MEN

ARE—MEN

O m s k , February 22, 1854 . . . For that matter, men everywhere are j u s t — m e n . Even a m o n g the robber-murderers in the prison, I came to k n o w some men in those four years. Believe me, there were a m o n g them deep, strong, and beautiful natures, and it often gave me great joy to find gold under a rough exterior. A n d not in a single case, or even two, but in several cases. Some inspired respect; others were downright fine. I taught the Russian language and reading to a young Circassian—he had been transported to Siberia for robbery w i t h murder. H o w grateful he was to mei A n o t h e r convict wept when I said good-bye to him. Certainly I had often given him money, b u t it was so little, and his gratitude so boundless. My character, though, was deteriorating; in my relations w i t h others I was illtempered and impatient. T h e y accounted for it by my mental condition, and bore all without grumbling. Apropos: what a n u m b e r of national types and characters I became familiar w i t h in the prison! I lived into their lives, and so I believe I k n o w them really well. M a n y tramps' and thieves' careers were laid bare to me, and, above all, the whole wretched existence of the common people. Decidedly I have not spent my time there in vain. I have learnt to know the Russian people as only a few k n o w them. I am a little vain of it. I hope that such vanity is pardonable.

SELECTIONS

FROM

DOSTOEVSKY'S

WRITINGS

243

ON HIS F A I T H

Omsk, B e g i n n i n g of March, 1854 . . . I don't k n o w why, but I guess from your letter that you returned home in bad spirits. I understand it; I have sometimes thought that if ever I return home, I shall get more grief than joy from my impressions there. I have not lived your life, and m u c h in it is u n k n o w n to me, and indeed, no one can really k n o w exactly his fellow-mortal's life; still, h u m a n feeling is common to us all, and it seems to me that everyone w h o has been banished must live all his past grief over again in consciousness and memory, on his return home. It is like a balance, by w h i c h one can test the true gravity of w h a t one has endured, gone through, and lost. G o d grant y o u a long life! I have heard from many people that you are very religious. B u t not because you are religious, but because I myself have learned it and gone through it, I want to say to you that in such moments, one does, "like dry grass," thirst after faith, and that one finds it in the end, solely and simply because one sees the truth more clearly when one is u n h a p p y . I want to say to you, a b o u t myself, that I am a child of this age, a child of u n f a i t h and skepticism, and probably (indeed I know it) shall remain so to the end of my life. H o w dreadfully has it tormented me (and torments me even n o w ) — t h i s l o n g i n g for faith, which is all the stronger for the proofs I have against it. A n d yet G o d gives me sometimes moments of perfect peace; in such moments I love and believe that I am loved; in such moments I have formulated my creed, wherein all is clear and holy to me. T h i s creed is extremely simple; here it is: I believe that there is n o t h i n g lovelier, deeper, m o r e sympathetic, more rational, more manly, and more perfect than the Saviour; I say to myself w i t h jealous love that not only is there no one else like H i m , b u t that there could be n o one. I w o u l d even say more: if anyone could prove to m e that Christ is outside the truth, and if the truth really d i d

244

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

exclude Christ, I should prefer to stay with Christ and not with truth. HAPPINESS

October 18, 1855 I believe that happiness lies in a clear conception of life and in goodness of heart, not in external circumstances. Is it not so? One's views alter; one's heart remains the same. WORK.

May 31, 1858 . . . Believe me, in all things labour is necessary—gigantic labour. Believe me that a graceful, fleet poem of Pushkin's consisting of but a few lines, is so graceful and so fleet simply because the poet has worked long at it, and altered much.

AMBITION

May 3, i860 . . . Ambition is a good thing, but I think that one may take it as one's aim only in things which one has set one's-self to achieve, has made the reason for one's existence. In anything else it's nonsense. T h e only essential is to live with ease; and moreover one must sympathize with one's fellow-creatures, and strive to win their sympathy in return. A n d if, indeed, one had no other determined aim, this would by itself more than suffice. MEDIOCRITY

September 29, 1867 Most of all I dread mediocrity: a work should either be very good or very bad, but, for its life, not mediocre. Mediocrity that takes up thirty printed sheets is something quite unpardonable.

SELECTIONS

FROM

ON

DOSTOEVSKY'S

WRITINGS

245

EDUCATION

O c t o b e r 10, 1867 . . . I also think you very intelligent. O n l y one t h i n g is against you: your lack of education. B u t if you really have no desire to l e a m something, at least hear my advice: you must, in any case, be earnest a b o u t your moral development, so far as that is capable of g o i n g w i t h o u t education (but, for education, o n e shall strive u n t o one's life's end).

RESPONSIBILITY

J u n e 11, 1870 . . . the sons of men have not the right to turn away f r o m a n y t h i n g that happens o n the earth and ignore it; no, o n the highest moral grounds they have not.

T H E TRUE

GOOD

M a r c h 27, 1878 Every h u m a n being, w h o can grasp the truth at all, feels in his conscience w h a t is g o o d and w h a t is evil. . . . Believe me: it is u n c o m m o n l y i m p o r t a n t and useful to set a good e x a m p l e even in a narrow sphere of activity, for in that way one influences dozens and h u n d r e d s of people.

APHORISMS

A u g u s t 17, 1870 and D e c e m b e r 19, 1880 W i t h o u t pain, one c o m p r e h e n d s not joy. Ideals are purified by suffering, as gold is by fire. T h e first sign of true f e l l o w s h i p w i t h the people is veneration and love for that w h i c h the great mass of people loves a n d v e n e r a t e s — t h a t is to say, f o r G o d a n d its faith.

246

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

T H E NOBLE M A N

January 1, 1868 . . . Three weeks ago I attacked another novel, and am now working day and night. T h e idea of the book is the old one which I always have so greatly liked; but it is so difficult that hitherto I never have had the courage to carry it out; and if I'm setting to work at it now, it's only because I'm in a desperate plight. T h e basic idea is the representation of a truly perfect and noble man. And this is more difficult than anything else in the world, particularly nowadays. All writers, not ours alone but foreigners also, who have sought to represent Absolute Beauty, were unequal to the task, for it is an infinitely difficult one. The beautiful is the ideal: but ideals with us, as in civilized Europe, have long been wavering. There is in the world only one figure of absolute beauty: Christ. That infinitely lovely figure is, as a matter of course, an infinite marvel (the whole Gospel of St. John is full of this thought: John sees the wonder of the Incarnation, the visible apparition of the Beautiful). I have gone too far in my explanation. I will only say further that of all the noble figures in Christian literature, I reckon Don Quixote as the most perfect. But Don Quixote is noble only by being at the same time comic. And Dickens's Pickwickians (they were certainly much weaker than Don Quixote, but still it's a powerful work) are comic, and this it is which gives them their great value. T h e reader feels sympathy and compassion with the Beautiful, derided and unconscious of its own worth. T h e secret of humour consists precisely in this art of wakening the reader's sympathy.

ToPio

SELECTIONS

FROM

Diary

of a

Writer

M A N AND SOCIETY

The best man is he who has not bowed before material temptation; who is incessantly seeking works for God's cause;

SELECTIONS

FROM

DOSTOEVSKY'S

WRITINGS

247

w h o loves truth and, w h e n e v e r the occasion calls for it, rises to serve it, forsaking his h o m e and his family and sacrificing his life. (Vol. I, p. 490) T h e r e are people w h o c o m m a n d everybody's respect, even the respect of those w h o disagree w i t h their ideas. (Vol. I, p. 272) O n e can very m u c h respect a m a n , even t h o u g h radically disagreeing w i t h his ideas. (Vol. I, p. 29) H e w h o has too m u c h compassion for the offender, probably has n o pity for the offended. (Vol. I, p. 326) It seems to me that, generally speaking, it is as difficult for an advocate to avoid falsehood and to preserve honesty and conscience as for any m a n to attain a paradisiacal state. (Vol. I, p. 214) T o love the universal m a n necessarily means to despise, and, at times, to hate the real m a n standing at y o u r side. (Vol. I, p. 3 3 ) month calls himself a f o o l — i n o u r day this is an unheard-of faculty! Indeed: by l o c k i n g u p the other fellow in a m a d h o u s e one can't prove one's o w n intelligence. ( " B o b o k , " V o l . I, p. 44) He, I take it, is the most intelligent w h o at least o n c e a I think this way: it is possible to rationalize and to perceive a thing correctly and at once, b u t to become a m a n at once is impossible: one has to m o u l d oneself into a m a n . H e r e discipline is required. (Vol. II, p. 604) It is a fact that half of one's affliction vanishes if only someone can be found to share the g u i l t of it, and it is all the m o r e disappointing if absolutely no one can b e f o u n d . (Vol. I, p. 119)

248

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS I M A G E

OF

MAN

T h e ability to b e a citizen is exactly the ability to lift oneself to the level of the c o m m o n o p i n i o n of the country. (Vol. I. p. 11) T h e civic forms of a p e o p l e assume the character in w h i c h their religion is expressed. T h e r e f o r e the civic ideals are always directly a n d organically tied to the moral ideals, a n d — w h a t is most i m p o r t a n t — t h e f o r m e r indisputably are derived o n l y f r o m the latter. C i v i c ideals never a p p e a r of their own accord because w h e n they do appear they have as their o n l y object the c o n s u m m a t i o n of the m o r a l aspirations of the given nationality, in the f o r m and in so far as these moral aspirations have m o u l d e d themselves in that nationality. O n this g r o u n d "self-betterment in a religious sense" in the life of the peoples is the f o u n d a t i o n of everything. (Vol. II, p. 1001) T h e belief that one wishes and can utter the last word to the w o r l d ; that it can be revived t h r o u g h the a b u n d a n c e of one's vital force; faith in the sacredness of one's ideals, in the strength of one's love, of one's thirst for serving m a n k i n d — nay, such a faith is a g u a r a n t y of the loftiest life of the nations, and it is only t h r o u g h this f a i t h that they are in a position to render to h u m a n i t y the f u l l measure of that service which at the time of their inception, they have been destined to render by nature herself, and to b e q u e a t h to f u t u r e m a n k i n d . O n l y a nation fortified w i t h such faith is entitled to sublime life. (Vol. II, p. 577) If society should stop p i t y i n g the weak and persecuted, it w o u l d be p a i n f u l l y afflicted itself; it w o u l d g r o w hard a n d wither; it w o u l d become lewd and sterile. . . . (Vol. I, p. 236)

SELECTIONS

FROM

DOSTOEVSKY'S

WRITINGS

249

SCIENCE

Science is a universal thing: it was invented not by some one people in E u r o p e b u t by all peoples, b e g i n n i n g with the ancient w o r l d ; thus science is a successful proposition. (Vol. I, p. 282) T h e r e is n o such old theme a b o u t w h i c h something new could not be said. (Vol. I, p. 398)

ART

T h e a i m of art is not to portray these or those incidents in the ways of life but their general idea, sharp-sightedly d i v i n e d and correctly removed f r o m the w h o l e multiplicity of analogous living p h e n o m e n a . (Vol. I, p. 90) N o t only to create a n d write artistic works, but also to discern a fact, something of an artist is r e q u i r e d . (Vol. I, p. 469) Poesy is, so to speak, the inner fire of every talent. (Vol. I, p. 216) " R e a l i t y should be represented as it is" they [the artists] say, whereas there is no such reality, never has been because, to man, the substance of things is inaccessible, w h i l e he apperceives n a t u r e as it reflects itself in his idea a f t e r h a v i n g passed through his senses. T h i s is why one should give more leeway to the idea w i t h o u t f e a r i n g the ideal. (Vol. I, p. 83) W h a t is genre, in substance? G e n r e is an art of p o r t r a y i n g c o n t e m p o r a n e o u s , current reality w h i c h the artist has personally felt a n d seen w i t h his o w n eyes, as distinguished, f o r instance, f r o m historical reality w h i c h cannot be b e h e l d with

250

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

one's o w n eyes, and w h i c h is b e i n g portrayed not in a fluent but completed state. (Vol. I, p. 83) Literary talent, for e x a m p l e , is the ability to say or express well that w h i c h a nullity will say and express badly. . . . As far as I am able to observe men of talent, both living and dead, it does seem to me that in the rarest cases only is a m a n capable of mastering his gift; and that, contrarywise, talent almost always enslaves its o w n e r — g r a b b i n g him, so to speak, by his neck . . . carrying h i m far away f r o m the right road. . . . (Vol. I, p. 215)

RELIGION A N D

PHILOSOPHY

T r u t h , even as the sun, cannot be hidden. (Vol. II, p. 608) W i t h o u t ideals, that is, w i t h o u t even vaguely specified longings for the better, n o g o o d reality can ever ensue. (Vol. I, p. 239) Happiness is not in happiness b u t in its pursuit. (Vol. I, p. 193) Faith and mathematical proofs are two incompatible things. (Vol. I, p. 270) Idealists often forget that idealism is in no sense a shameful thing. In both the idealist and the realist, if only they be honest and m a g n a n i m o u s , the substance is i d e n t i c a l — l o v e of m a n k i n d — a n d their object is i d e n t i c a l — m a n ; it is only the forms of the representation of the o b j e c t that are different. (Vol. I, p. 387) W e have totally forgotten the a x i o m that truth is the most poetic thing in the world, especially in its pure state. More than that: it is even m o r e fantastic than the ordinary h u m a n mind is capable of f a b r i c a t i n g and conceiving. (Vol. I, p. 135)

SELECTIONS

FROM

DOSTOEVSK. Y ' S

WRITINGS

25I

M a k i n g m a n responsible, Christianity eo ipso also recognizes his freedom. H o w e v e r , m a k i n g m a n d e p e n d e n t on any error in the social organization, the e n v i r o n m e n t a l doctrine reduces m a n to absolute impersonality, to a total e m a n c i p a t i o n f r o m all personal moral duty, from all independence; reduces h i m to a state of the most miserable slavery that can be conceived. (Vol. I, p. 13) T h e h u m a n m i n d , once h a v i n g rejected Christ, may attain extraordinary results. ( V o l . 1 , p. 151)

ON A C T I V E

LOVE

A s a matter of fact, it is not necessary to conceive the g i v i n g away of property as a binding condition, since in the matter of love constraint resembles a u n i f o r m , fidelity to the letter. T h e conviction that one has complied w i t h the letter leads to haughtiness, formalism, and indolence. O n e has to do only that w h i c h one's heart dictates: if it orders a m a n to give away his f o r t u n e — l e t h i m give it away; if it orders h i m to g o and work for all m e n — l e t h i m go and w o r k . B u t even here, d o n ' t f o l l o w the e x a m p l e of certain dreamers, w h o straightway get hold of a w h e e l b a r r o w and say: " I am not a n o b l e m a n — I want to w o r k as a peasant." T h e w h e e l b a r r o w , too, is a uniform. N e i t h e r the g i v i n g away of property, nor the w e a r i n g of a peasant coat are obligatory: all this is mere letter and formality: only your resolution to do everything for the sake of active love, everything w i t h i n the limits of y o u r possibility. Everyt h i n g w h i c h you sincerely consider possible for y o u r s e l f — i s obligatory a n d important. (Vol. II, p. 622)

252 SOURCE

DOSTOEVSKY: BOOKS

FOR

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

LETTERS:

Mayne, Ethel Colburn, tr., Letters of Fyodor Michailovitch Dostoevsky to his Family and Friends, Chatto & Windus, London, 1914. Koteliansky, S. S., and J . Middleton Murry, trs., Dostoevsky: Letters and Reminiscences, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1923. T h e December 22, 1849 I e t t e r only. Brasol, Boris, tr., The Diary of a Writer, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 1949, 2 vols.

Chronological Table of the Works of F. M. Dostoevsky 1846

1863 1864 1865 1866

Poor Folk The Double " M r . Proharchin" " N o v e l in Nine Letters" " T h e Landlady" " A n o t h e r Man's W i f e " (also called " T h e J e a l o u s Husband") " A Faint H e a r t " " M r . Polzunkov" " O u t of the Service" " T h e Honest T h i e f " " T h e Christmas T r e e and a W e d d i n g " " W h i t e Nights" Nyetochka Νezvanovna (unfinished novel) " T h e Little H e r o " (written in the Fortress; published in 1857) Poem " T h e Uncle's D r e a m " " T h e Village of Stepanchikovo" (or " T h e Friend of the Farriily") Collection of Works, 2 vols., First edition Series of articles on Russian literature (I'remya) The Insulted and Injured House of the Dead " A n Unpleasant P r e d i c a m e n t " (also called " A Silly Anecdote") Winter Notes on Summer Impressions Notes From Underground " T h e Crocodile" Crime and Punishment

1867

The

1847 1848

1849 1855 1859

1860 1861 1862

Gambler *53

254

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

1868 The Idiot 1870 The Eternal Husband 1871-72 The Possessed 1873 The Diary of a Writer (in Grazhdanin) series of articles and "Bobok" "Vlas" 1873—74 Politica] articles in Grazhdanin 1875 The Raw Youth 1876 Diary of a Writer (own publication) " T h e Peasant Marei" " T h e Heavenly Christmas T r e e " " A Gentle Spirit" Other articles 1877 Diary: many articles and " T h e Dream of a Ridiculous M a n " 1879-80 The Brothers Karamazov 1880 Pushkin Address (August issue: Diary) 1881 January issue of Diary

OF

MAN

Acknowledgments T H E A U T H O R wishes to thank the following authors, translators, and publishers for their kind permission to quote from their works listed below, which may not be reproduced in any form without the consent of the copyright owners:

George Allen and U n w i n , Ltd., London, Dostoevsky, Edward Hallett Carr, 1949, 2nd ed. Association Press, New York, The Spirit of Dostoevsky, Nicholas Berdyaev, translated by Donald Attwater, © 1934. Geoffrey Bles, Ltd., London, The Origin of Russian Communism, Nicholas Berydaev, translated by R . M. French, 1948. Carnegie Press, Pittsburgh, Russia's Educational Heritage, William H. E. Johnson, 1950. T h e University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Systematic Theology, Vol. II, Paul T i l l i c h , copyright 1957 by the University of Chicago. Columbia University Press, New York, Λ History of Russian Philosophy, Vassiii V. Zenkovsky, translated by George L . Kline, 2 vols., 1953; Dostoyevski in Russian Literary Criticism, Vladimir Seduro, 1957; Naturalism and the Human Spirit, Yervant H. Krikorian, ed., 1949. Criterion Books, Inc., N e w York, Winter Notes on Summer Impressions, Feodor M. Dostoevsky, translated by R i c h a r d Lee Renfield, foreword by Saul Bellow, © 1955. Dial Press, New York, The Short Novels of Dostoevsky, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Introduction by T h o m a s Mann, 1 9 5 1 . Alfred A . K n o p f , Inc., N e w York, Modern Russian History, Alexander Kornilov, translated by A l e x S. K a u n , 2 vols., © 1 9 1 ? . J 9 2 4 ' 1943. 1952· »55

256

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

T h e Macmillan Company, N e w York, Dostoevsky, Edward Hallett Carr, 1949, 2nd ed.; Dostoevsky, A Study, J a n k o Lavrin, 1947; The Russian Idea, Nicholas Berdyaev, 1948; Four Prophets of Our Destiny, William Hubben, 1952; Notes From Underground, Fyodor M. Dostoevsky, translated by Constance Garnett, 1951 ed. Meridian Books, N e w York, The Spirit of Dostoevsky, Nicholas Berdyaev, translated by Donald Attwater, 1957. University of Michigan Press, A n n Arbor, The Origin of Russian Communism, Nicholas Berdyaev, translated by R . M. French, i960. Modern Library (Random House), New York, The House of the Dead, Crime and Punishment, The Brothers Karamazov, F. M. Dostoevsky. Mouton and Co., Ν. V., T h e Hague, Dostoevskij's Underground Man in Literature, Robert L. Jackson, 1958. T h e Noonday Press, N e w York, Creation and Discovery, Eleseo Vivas, 1955. New York Herald Tribune, " T h e Other Russia," Albert Camus, December 19, 1957. Oxford University Press, Inc., New York, Dostoevski: The Making of a Novelist, Ernest J . Simmons, 1940. Penguin Books, Inc., Baltimore, Md., and Middlesex, England, The Idiot, F. M. Dostoevsky, translated by David Magarshack, 1955. T h e University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, Foundations of Education, Frederick Gruber, ed., First Series, 1957. Philosophical Library, New York, The Will to Doubt, Bertrand Russell, 1958; Problems of Men, J o h n Dewey, 1946. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N. J., The Development of Modern Education in Theory, Organization, and Practice, Frederick Eby, © 1952, 2nd ed. S. C. M. Press, Ltd., London, Dostoevsky, L. A. Zander, translated by Natalie Duddington, 1948. Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, Basic Christian Ethics, Paul Ramsey, 1950; Fyodor Dostoevsky, René Fueloep-Mil-

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

257

1er, 1950; The Diary of a Writer, F. M. Dostoevsky, translated by Boris Brasol, 1949. Simon a n d Schuster, Inc., N e w York, The Impact of Science on Society, B e r t r a n d Russell, (c) 1953. Y. M . C. A. Press, Paris, The Spirit of Dostoevsky, Nicholas Berdyaev, translated by D o n a l d A t t w a t e r , (c) 1934.

Bibliography

PRIMARY

THE

WRITINGS

OF

SOURCES

DOSTOEVSKY

A r b a n , D o m i n i q u e , Correspondence de Dostoïevski, CalmannL e v y , Paris, 1949. Briefe: Fiodor M. Dostojewskij: A l s s o h w a n k e D e r B a d e n U n t e r Mir 1837-1881, W i e s b a d e n , n. d. D o l i n i n , A . S., ed., F. M. Dostoewskii—materialy i issledovanija (articles and researches), Isdatel'stvo A k a d e m i i N a u k SSSR, L e n i n g r a d , 1935. F. M. Dostoewskii—statji i materialy (articles and materials). Isdatel'stvo A k a d e m i i N a u k SSSR, St. Petersburg, 1924-25. Dostoevsky, Fyodor M., The Brothers Karamazov, M o d e r n Library G i a n t Edition, N e w Y o r k , n.d. The Diary of a Writer, 2 vols., tr. by Boris Brasol, Charles Scribner's Sons, N e w York, 1949. The Idiot, tr. by D a v i d Magarshack, Penguin Books, Baltimore, 1955. The Possessed, M o d e r n L i b r a r y edition, N e w Y o r k , 195°·

Winter Notes on Summer Impressions, tr. by R i c h a r d L e e R e n f i e l d , Introd. by Saul Bellow, Criterion Books, Inc., N e w Y o r k , 1955. • —Works, 12 vols., tr. by Constance Garnett, T h e Macmillan C o m p a n y , N e w Y o r k , 1951. • Works, 16 vols., in Russian Y M C A Press, Paris, 1945. H i l l , Elizabeth and D . M u d i e , Letters of Dostoevsky to His 259

26ο

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

Wife, Introd. by D. S. Mirsky, R . R. Smith, Inc., New York, 1930· Koteliansky, S. S., tr. and ed., "New Letters of Dostoevsky," Virginia Quarterly Review, July-October, 1926, 2:275-284; 546-556^ Koteliansky, S. S., and John M. Murry, Dostoevsky: Letters and Reminiscences by His Wife, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1923. Mayne, Ethel Colburne, Letters of Fyodor Michailovitch Dostoevsky to His Family and Friends, Chatto & Windus, London, 1914. SECONDARY

SOURCES

BIOGRAPHIES

Abraham, Gerald, Dostoevsky, Duckworth, London, 1936. Carr, Edward Hallett, Dostoevsky 1821-1881: A New Biography, George Allen and Unwin, Ltd., London, 2nd edition, »949· Dostoevsky, Aimeé, Fyodor Dostoevsky, A Study, W. Heineman, London, 1921. Koteliansky, S. S., tr., Dostoevsky Portrayed by His Wife, George Routledge and Sons, Ltd., London, 1926. Lloyd, J. A. T., A Great Russian Realist: Feodor Dostoievsky, John Lane Company, New York, 1922. Revised edition: Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 1947. Meier-Graefe, Julius, Dostoevsky: The Man and His Work, tr. by Herbert H. Marks, Harcourt-Brace and Company, New York, 1928. Mochulskii, Konstantine, Dostoevsky: Zhizri i tvorchistvo (Life and Work), Y M C A Press, Paris, 1947. Payne, Robert, Dostoevsky: A Human Portrait, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1961. Persky, Serge, La Vie et l'oeuvre de Dostoievsky, Payot, Paris, 1918.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

261

Slonim, Marc, Three Loves of Dostoevsky, Rinehart, New York, 1955. Solovieff, Eugene, Dostoevsky, His Life and Literary Activity, tr. by C. J. Hogarth, George Allen and Unwin, Ltd., London, 1916. Strakhov, N. N., Biografiya, pisma i zametki iz zapisnoi knizhki F. M. Dostoevskogo (Official biography with letters and notes from his notebooks), St. Petersburg, 1883. Troyat, Henri, Firebrand: The Life of Dostoevsky, tr. by Norbett Gutemann, Roy Publishers, New York, 1946. Woodhouse, C. M., Dostoevsky, Arthur Barker, Ltd., London,

»951· CRITICAL

WORKS

Beach, Joseph M., The Twentieth Century Novel, T h e Century Company, New York, 1932. Berdyaev, Nicholas, The Spirit of Dostoevsky, tr. by Donald Attwater, Y M C A Press, Paris, New York, 1934. New edition: Meridian Books, New York, 1957. Brewster, D. and A. Burrell, Dead Reckonings in Fiction, Columbia University Press, New York, 1934. Buber, Martin, Israel and the World, Schockton Books, New York, 1948. Camus, Albert, The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays, tr. by Justin O'Brien, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1955. The Rebel, Foreword by Sir Herbert Read, tr. by Anthony Bower, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1954. Capetanakis, D., Shores of Darkness, Devin-Adair, London, 1949· Clutton-Brock, Α., Essays on Books, E. P. Dutton Company, Inc., New York, 1920. Collins, J., Doctor Looks at Literature, Doran, New York, 1923· Curie, Richard, Characters of Dostoevsky, Wm. Heineman, London,1950. Dempf, Alois, Die Drei Laster, Karl Alber, Munich, 1946.

D o s t o i e v s k y : HIS I M A G E OF

2Ô2

MAN

Eng, J . V a n Der, Dostoevskij romancier, M o u t o n and Company, V G r a v e n h a g e , T h e Hague, 1957. Faure, Elie, Les constructeurs, Pion, Paris, 1950. Fayer, Mischa H., Gide, Freedom and Dostoevsky, L a n e Press, Burlington, Vermont, 1946. Fueloep-Miller, R e n é , Fyodor Dostoevsky: Insight, Faith and Prophecy, tr. by R . and C. Winston, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 1950. Freud, Sigmund, " A Psychoanalytic Study," Stavrogin's Confession, tr. by V. Woolf and S. S. Kotelianskv, N e w Y o r k , 1

947·

Gide, A n d r é , Dostoievsky: ,

Articles

et causeries,

Pion, Paris,

923· G u a r d i n i , R o m a n o , Religiose Gestalten in Dostojewskijs Werk, Hegner-Bucherei, M u n i c h , 1947. Hackett, F., Horizons, Β. W . Huebsch, N e w Y o r k , 1 9 1 8 . Hemmings, F. W . J . , The Russian Novel in France: 1884-1914, O x f o r d University Press, L o n d o n , 1950. Hesse, H e r m a n n , In Sight of Chaos, tr. by Stephen Hudson, Verlag Seldwyla, Zurich, 1923. H o f f m a n , E. J . , Freudianism and the Literary Mind, Louisiana State University Press, Baton R o u g e , Louisiana, 1945. Howe, Irving, Politics and the Novel, Meridian Books, N e w York, 1957. H u b b e n , W i l l i a m , Four Prophets of Our Destiny, Macmillan C o m p a n y , N e w Y o r k , 1952. The Grand Inquisitor on the Nature of Man, L i b e r a l Arts Press, N e w Y o r k , 1948. Huneker, J a m e s G., Ivory, Apes and Peacocks, Charles Scribner's Sons, N e w Y o r k , 1926. Ivanov, Vyacheslav, Freedom and the Tragic Life, tr. by N . Cameron H a r v i l l Press, L o n d o n , 1^52. Jackson, R o b e r t Louis, Dostoevskij's Underground Man in Russian Literature, M o u t o n and C o m p a n y , T h e Hague, 1958· Jarrett-Kerr, M., Studies in Literature and Belief, Harper Brothers, N e w Y o r k , 1955.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

263

Kampman, Theoderich von, Dostojewski in Deutschland, Helios-Verlag, Munster i Westfalen, 1931. Kaus, Otto, Dostoïevski et son destin, tr. by George Cazenave, Rieder, Paris, 1931. Kazin, Alfred, "Introductions" to The Raw Youth, Dial Press, New York, 1947, and to Crime and Punishment, World Publishing Company, New York, 1947. Kohn, Hans, Prophets and Peoples, Macmillan Company, New York, 1947. Lauth, Reinhard, Die Philosophie Dostojewskis, R . Piper and Company, Munich, 1950. Was Vermag Der Mensch?, R . Piper and Company, Munich, 1949. Lavrin, Janko, Dostoevsky, A Study, Macmillan Company, New York, 1947. An Introduction to the Russian Novel, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1947. Lawrence, D. H., Selected Literary Criticism, ed. by Anthony Beai, Viking Press, New York, 1956. Lednicki, W., Russia, Poland and the West, Roy Publishers, New York, 1953. Lossky, N., Dostoevski i evo hristiyanskoe miroponimanie, Chekhov Publishing House, New York, 1953. Lubac, Henri de, S. J., The Drama of Atheist Humanism, tr. by Edith M. Riley, Sheed and Ward, New York, 1950. Maceina, Antanas, Der Grossinquisitor, F. H. Kerle, Heidelberg, 1952. Magarshack, David, "Introductions" to The Devils and Crime and Punishment, Penguin Books, Ltd., London, 1951, 1953. Mann, Thomas, "Introduction" to The Short Novels of Dostoevsky, Dial Press, New York, 1951. Matlaw, Ralph E., The Brothers Karamazov Novelistic Technique, Mouton and Company, 's-Gravenhage, T h e Hague, '957Maugham, S., The Ari of Fiction, Doubleday and Company, Inc., Garden City, New York, 1955. Maurina, Zenta, A Prophet of the Soul: Fyodor Dostoievsky,

264

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

tr. by C. P. Finlayson, James Clarke and Company, Ltd., London, n. d. (ca. 1935). Merejkovsky, D. S., Tolystoy as Man and Artist with an Essay on Dostoevsky, Putnam, New York, 1902. Muchnic, Helen, Dostoevsky's English Reputation (1881-1936), Smith College Studies in Modern Languages, Northampton, Mass., Vol. X X , 1939. Introduction to Russian Literature, Doubleday and Company, Inc., Garden City, New York, 1947. Mueller, G. E., Philosophy of Literature, Philosophical Library, New York, 1948. Murry, J. Middleton, Fyodor Dostoevsky: A Critical Study, Seeker, London, 1916. Passage, Charles E., Dostoevski, The Adapter, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, 1954. Pfleger, Κ., Wrestlers with Christ, Sheed and Ward, New York, 1938· Phillips, E., ed., Art and Psychoanalysis, Criterion Press, New York, 1957. Poggioli, R., The Phoenix and the Spider, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1957. Powys, John C., Dostoievsky, John Lane, London, 1946. Praz, Mario, The Romantic Agony, tr. by Angus Davidson, Meridian Book Company, New York, 1956. Pritchett, V. S., The Living Novel, Reynal Hitchcock, New York, 1947. Rahv, P., Image and Idea, New Directions Press, New York, >949· Roe, Ivan, The Breath of Corruption, Hutchinson and Company, Ltd., London, n. d. Roubeczek, P., Misinterpretation of Man, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 1947. Scott, Nathan Α., Jr., The Tragic Vision and the Christian Faith, Association Press, New York, 1957. Seduro, Vladimir, Dostoevsky in Russian Literary Criticism, 1846-1956, Columbia University Press, New York, 1957. Sewall, Richard B. ( Tragic Themes in Western Literature, ed.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

265

by C. Brooks, Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn., 1955· Shestov, L., In Job's Balances, tr. by C. Coventry and C. A. Macartney, J. M. Dent and Sons, Ltd., London, 1932. Simmons, Ernest J., Dostoevski: The Making of a Novelist, Oxford University Press, New York, 1940. U S S R, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1947· Slonim, Marc, The Epic of Russian Literature, Oxford University Press, New York, 1950. Spector, I., Golden Age of Russian Literature, Caldwell, Ltd., Caldwell, Idaho, 1945. Spengler, O., The Decline of the West, Vol. I, tr. by Charles F. Atkinson, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1944. Stocker, Arnold, Ame russe, Annemasse, Geneve, 1945. Strachey, G. L., Characters and Commentaries, Harcourt, Brace and Company, New York, 1933. Literary Essays, Chatto and Windus, London, 1948. Van Doren, Mark, "Introduction" to The Brothers Karamazov, Literary Guild Edition, New York, 1932. Vatai, Laslo, Man and His Tragic Life, tr. by L. Kecskemethy, Philosophical Library, New York, 1954. Vivas, Eleseo, Creation and Discovery, Noonday Press, New York, 1955. Warner, R., Cult of Power, John Lane, London, 1946. Willcocks, M. P., Between the Old World and the New, Frederick A. Stokes Company, New York, n. d. Wilson, Edmund, The Shores of Light, Farrar, Straus and Young, New York, 1952. Yarmolinsky, Α., Dostoevsky, Columbia University Press, New York, 1921, revised edition, 1957. Zander, L. Α., Dostoevsky, tr. by N. Duddington, S. C. M. Press, Ltd., London, 1948. Zernov, Nicholas, Three Russian Prophets: Khomiakov, Dostoevsky, Soloviev, S. C. M. Press, Ltd., London, 1944. Zweig, Stefan, Three Masters, tr. by Eden and Cedar Paul, Viking Press, New York, 1930.

266 CRITICAL

DOSTOF.VSKY :

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

ARTICLES

Adams, A . E., "Pobedonostsev's Thought Control," Russian Review, Oct., 1952, 1 1 : 2 4 1 - 6 . Alonzo, Pedro-Soler, "Selecciones, con un estudio Dostoevski," Biblioteca enciclopedica popular, Secretaria de Educación Publica, Mexico City, Mexico, 1947, 142 f. Astrov, V., "Dostoevsky or E. A. Poe," American Literature, March, 1942, 14:70-4. " H a w t h o r n e and Dostoevsky as Explorers of H u m a n Conscience," New

England

Quarterly,

J u n e , 1942, 1 5 : 2 9 6 -

3Ϊ9· Bierbaum, O. J . , "Dostoevsky and Nietzsche," Hibbert Journal, J u l y , 1 9 1 1 , 9:823-37. Burchell, S. C., "Dostoieffsky and the Sense of Guilt," Psychoanalytic Review, 1930, 1 7 : 1 9 5 - 2 0 7 . Carr, Ε. H., " T h e Philosophy of Dostoevsky," Spectator, 1934, 153:684. Charques, R . D., "Dostoevsky and the Slavic Idea," Fortnightly, April, 1 9 5 1 , 1 7 5 : 3 7 2 - 3 . Clive, G., "Teleologica! Suspense of the Ethical in Nineteenth Century Literature," Journal of Religion, April, 1954, 34:74-87. Collins, J . , "Tragedist, Prophet and Psychologist," North American, Jan., 1922, 2 1 5 : 6 6 - 8 3 . Dneprov, V., " T h e Esthetics of the Unconscious," The Soviet Review, Dec. 1961, 2, 12, 3-23. Dodd, E. M., "Preaching Values in Dostoevsky's Writings," London Quarterly Review, July, 1944, 169:241-44. Fagin, N. B., "Dostoevsky's Underground Man Takes Over," Antioch Review, March, 1953, 1 3 : 2 3 - 3 2 . Fiske, J . C., "Dostoevsky and Soviet Critics, 1947-48," American Slavic and East European Review, Feb., 1950, 9:42-56. Florovsky, Α., "Dostoevsky and the Slavonic Question," Slavonic Review, Dec., 1930, 9 : 4 1 1 - 2 3 . Fueloep-Miller, René, "Dostoevsky's Literary Reputation," Russian Review, J a n . , 1 9 5 1 , 10:46-54.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

267

" L o s t Dostoevsky Manuscripts," Russian Review, Oct., 1 9 5 1 , 10:268-82. " T h e Posthumous L i f e of Dostoevsky," Russian Review, Oct., 1946, 15:259-65. Gersh, G., "Russian Imperialism: Dostoevsky," Social Education Journal, May, 1956, 2 0 : 2 0 1 - 2 . Gibian, George, "C. G . Carus Psyche and Dostoevsky," American Slavic and East European Review, Oct., 1955, 1 4 : 3 7 1 - 8 2 . "Dostoevski's Use of Russian Folklore," Journal of American Folklore, 1956, 69:239-53. "Traditional Symbolism in Crime and Punishment," PMLA, Dec., 1955, 70:979-96. Gross, J o h n J., "Melville, Dostoevsky and the People," Pacific Spectator, Spring, 1956, 10:160-70. Hacker, Α., "Dostoevsky's Disciples: Man and Sheep in Political T h e o r y , " Journal of Politics, Nov., 1955, 1 7 : 5 9 0 - 6 1 3 . Hesse, H., "Downfall of Europe: T h e Brothers Karamazov," English Review, Aug., 1932, 3 5 : 1 0 8 - 2 0 . Hill, K. C., "Crime and Punishment as Philosophy," General Education, Jan., 1953, 7 : 1 2 2 - 3 2 . Howe, I., "Dostoevsky as a Journalist," American Mercury, Oct., 1949, 69:494-502. Hunt, J o e l , "Balzac and Dostoevskij: Ethics and Eschatology," Slavic and East European Journal, Winter, 1958, 16:307-24. Jarrett, J. L·., "Dostoevsky: Philosopher of Freedom, Love and L i f e , " Review of Religion, Nov., 1956, 2 1 : 1 7 - 3 0 . K a u n , Α., "Dostoevsky's Outlook," American Review, JulyDec., 1924, 2:263-67. Kazin, Α., "Dostoevsky the Columnist," New Yorker, J u n e 25, 1949. 2 5 : 8 1 - 2 . Koenig, A. E., "Dostoevsky's Testament: T h e Diary of a Writer," South Atlantic Quarterly, J a n . , 1954, 5 3 : 1 0 - 2 3 . Kohn, H., "Dostoevsky's Nationalism," Journal of Historic Ideas, Oct., 1945, 6:385-414. Leshinsky, T . , "Dostoevsky: Revolutionary or Reactionary?", American Slavic Review, Dec., 1945, 4:98-106.

S68

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

Lohr, F., "Loneliness and Sanctity," Catholic World, Oct., 1952, 176:32-7. Lvovsky, Z., "Dans le laboratoire de Dostoievsky," Mercure France, April 12, 1932, 235:319-3«. Manning, C. Α., "Dostoevsky and Modern Russian Literature," Sewanee Review, Dec., 1932, 30:286-97. " T h e Double of Dostoevsky," Modern Language Notes, Aug., 1944,59:317-21. " T h e Grand Inquisitor," Anglican Theological Review, 1933, 15:16-26. "Hawthorne and Dostoevsky," Slavonic Review, Jan., 1936, 14:1-8. Matlaw, R. E., "Structure and Integration in Notes From Underground," PMLA, March, 1958, 73:101-09. Maugham, S., " T h e Brothers Karamazov," Atlantic Monthly, March, 1948, 181:89-94. Maximoff, Ν., "Future of Russia: Marx, Tolstoi or Dostoevsky?", Religion in Life, Winter, 1954-55, 24:44-55. Montgomery, R „ "Dr. Adler on Dostoevsky," New Age, 1926, 40:54. "Freud, Adler and Dostoevsky," New Age, 1929, 45:115-16. Mortimer, R., "Dostoevsky and the Dream," Modern Philology, Nov., 1956, 54:106-16. Noyes, R., "Dostoevski," Nation, April 8, 1915, 100:381-83. Panichas, George Α., " T h e Spiritual Art of Dostoevsky," St. Vladimir's Seminary Quarterly, Fall, 1958, 2:20-36. Poggioli, Renato, "Dostoevski and Western Realism," Kenyon Review, 1952, 14=43-59· Portnoff, G. E., "Cervantes and Dostoevsky," Modern Language Forum, May, 1934, 19:80-6. Radar, Μ. M., "Dostoevsky and the Demiurge," Sewanee Review, July, 1931, 39:282-92. Radziwill, C., "Dostoevsky: Writer and Man," Commonweal, Dec. 23, ig3o, 12:322-24. Rahv, P., "Legend of the Grand Inquisitor," Partisan Review, May, 1954, 21:249-71.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

S6g

Ramsey, Paul, "God's Grace and Man's Guilt," Journal of Religion, Jan., 1951, 3 1 : 2 1 - 3 7 . "No Morality without Immortality: Dostoevsky and the Meaning of Atheism," Journal of Religion, April, 1956, g6:go-io8. Rapaport, S., "Dostoevsky," Contemporary, June, 1932, 141:· 765-70. Richards, I. Α., "God of Dostoevsky," Forum, Dec., 1927, 78:-

88-97· Roberts, P., " A Christian Theory of Dramatic Tragedy," Journal of Religion, Jan., 1951, 3 1 : 1 - 2 0 . Scharper, P., "Prophet with Honor," Commonweal, May 4, 1956, 64:125-6. Singer, I., " T h e Aesthetics of 'Art for Art's Sake,' " Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Dec., 1953, 12:343-59. Slonim, Marc, "Dostoevsky Under the Soviets," Russian Review, April, 1951, 1 0 : 1 1 8 - 3 0 . Smith, Samuel, " T h e Abnormal from Within," Psychoanalytic Review, Oct., 1935, 22. Stammler, Η., "Dostoevsky's Aesthetics and Schelling's Philosophy of Art," Comparative Literature, Fall, 1955, 7 : 3 1 3 23· Strakosch, H. E., "Dostoevsky and the Man-god," Dublin Review, 1955, 229:142-53. Strem, G. C., " T h e Moral World of Dostoevsky," Russian Review, July, 1957, 16:15-26. Squires, P. C., "Dostoevsky's Doctrine of Criminal Responsibility,'' Journal of Criminal Law, March, 1937, 27:817-27. "Dostoevsky's Master Study of the Protest," Science Monthly, June, 1937, 44:555"57· "Raskolnikov: Criminalistic Protest," Journal of Criminal Law, Nov., 1937, 28:478-94. Tate, Α., "Dostoevsky's Hovering Fly, A Canarie on the Imagination and the Actual World," Sewanee Review, July, 1943. 5 i : 3 5 3 - 6 9 · Teitelbaum, S. M., "Dostoevsky in France of 1880's," American Slavic Review, Nov., 1946, 5:99-108.

270

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

T h o r n , W . , "Dostoevsky as a Psychologist," London Quarterly Review, A p r i l , 1916, 125:177-88. "Dostoevsky as a Religious T e a c h e r , " Contemporary, A u g . , 1915, 108:220-28. Vakeel, H . J., "Dostoevsky and H u m o r , " Contemporary,

Jan.,

'950, 1 77: 3 6 - 9 · Vivas, E., " T w o Dimensions of Reality in The Brothers Karamazov," Sewanee Review, Jan., 1951, 59:23-49. W e i n r e i c h , M. I., "Ideological Antecedents of T h e Brothers K a r a m a z o v , " Modern Language Notes, June, 1949, 64:4006. W e r n h a m , J. C . S., " G u a r d i n i , Berdyaev and T h e L e g e n d of the G r a n d Inquisitor," Hibbert Journal, Jan., 1955, 5 3 : 1 5 7 64· W i l c o x , Ε. H., "Dostoevsky as Seen by His Daughter," Fortnightly, Feb., 1921, 115:229-39. W i l l i a m s , C., " T h e Ethics of T h r e e Russian Novelists," International Journal of Ethics, 1925, 35:217-37. W i l s o n , E d m u n d , "Meditations on Dostoevsky," New Republic, Oct. 24, 1928, 56:274-76. W o o d h o u s e , C . M., "Dostoevsky as a Prophet," Bibliography of Nineteenth Century, March, 1950, 147:174-83. W r i g h t , R., " D e f i n i n g Dostoevsky," Catholic World, March, 1917, 104:820-25. Yarmolinsky, Α., "Aesthetics of Dostoevsky," New Republic, Sept. 27, 1922, 3 2 : 1 1 5 - 1 1 7 . "Dostoevsky: O n e of Us?", New Republic, Dec. 14, 1942, 107:797-98. "Journalist as Prophet," New Republic, Dec. 4, 1949, 121:15-7. RUSSIAN

CIVILIZATION

AND

CULTURE

Baring, Maurice, Landmarks in Russian Literature, Macmillan C o m p a n y , N e w Y o r k , 1910. The Mainsprings of Russia, T h o m a s Nelson and Sons, L o n d o n , 1914. Beazley, Sir Charles R „ N e v i l l e Forbes, and G . A . Birkett,

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Russia

from

the

Varangians

271

to the Bolsheviks,

Clarendon

Press, O x f o r d , E n g l a n d , 1918. Belinsky, Visarrion, Language

Selected

Philosophical

Works,

P u b l i s h i n g House, M o s c o w ,

B e r d y a e v , N i c h o l a s , The

Origin

Foreign

1948.

of Russian

Communism,

tr.

by R . M . French, G e o f f r e y Bles, L o n d o n , 1948. The

Russian

Idea,

Macmillan Company, New York,

1948. B o w m a n , H e r b e r t E., " I n t e l l i g e n t s i a in N i n e t e e n t h Russia,"

The

Slavic

Visarrion

and

Belinski

East

European

(1811-1848),

Century

Journal,

Harvard

Spring,

University

Press, C a m b r i d g e , Mass., 1954. C h e r n y s h e v s k y , N . G., Selected

Philosophical

Essays,

Foreign

L a n g u a g e P u b l i s h i n g House, M o s c o w , 1953. C r o w s o n , P a u l , A History Green

of the Russian

and Company, New

York,

D a r l i n g t o n , T h o m a s , Education

People,

Longmans,

1948.

in Russia,

W y m a n and Sons,

Ltd., L o n d o n , 190g. Dobroliubov,

Ν . Α., Selected

Philosophical

Essays,

Foreign

L a n g u a g e P u b l i s h i n g H o u s e , M o s c o w , 1948. F e d o t o v , G . P., ed., A Treasury

of Russian

Spirituality,

Sheed

a n d W a r d , N e w Y o r k , 1948. Gross, F e l i x , ed., European

Ideologies,

article by Elias T a r t a k ,

" L i b e r a l T r a d i t i o n in R u s s i a : A . Hert7en and V . Soloveff," P h i l o s o p h i c a l L i b r a r y , N e w Y o r k , 1948. H o w e , S o n i a , A Thousand

Years of Russian

History,

Williams

a n d N o r g a t e , L o n d o n , 1915. J o h n s o n , W i l l i a m Η . E., Russia's

Educational

Heritage,

Car-

negie Press, P i t t s b u r g h , 1950. Kirchner,

W a l t h e r , An

Outline-History

of

Russia,

College

O u t l i n e Series, Barnes a n d N o b l e , N e w Y o r k , 1950. K o h l , J. G . , Russia

and

the Russians

in 1842,

Philadelphia,

1843. K o r n i l o v , A l e x a n d e r , 2 vols., Modern

Russian

History,

A l e x S. K a u n , A l f r e d A , K n o p f , N e w Y o r k , 1952.

tr. b y

*72

DOSTOEVSKY:

HIS

IMAGE

OF

MAN

Lavrin, Janko, Tolstoy, Macmillan Company, New York, 1948. Leary, Daniel B., Education and Autocracy in Russia, University of Buffalo Press, Buffalo, New York, 1919. Lossky, N. O., History of Russian Philosophy, International Universities Press, Inc., New York, 1951. Masaryk, Thomas G., 2 vols., The Spirit of Russia, tr. by Eden and Cedar Paul, Macmillan Company, New York, 1919. New edition, 1950. Mazour, A. G., The First Russian Revolution, 1825. The Decembrist Movement. University of California Press, Berkeley, Calif., 1937. Medvedkov, A. P., Kratki istorija russki pedagogiki, J. Bashmakov, St. Petersburg, 1913. Miliukov, P. N., Outlines of Russian Culture, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, 1942. Pares, Sir Bernard, History of Russia, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1944. Riasonovsky, N. N., "Some Comments on the Role of the Intelligentsia in the Reign of Nicholas I of Russia, 18251855," The Slavic and East European Journal, Fall, 1957, 15:163-76. Schubart, Walter, Russia and Western Man, tr. by Amethe von Zeppelin, Frederick Ungar Publishing Company, New York, 1950. Shore, Michael J., Soviet Education, Philosophical Library, New York, 1947. Solovyev, Vladimir, Lectures on Godmanhood, Introd. and tr. by Peter P. Zouboff, Dennis Dobson, Ltd., London, 1948. Russia and the Universal Church, tr. by Herbert Rees, Geoffrey Bles, London, 1948. A Solovyev Anthology, arr. by S. L. Frank, tr. by N . Duddington, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 1950. Tolstoy, Alexandra, Tolstoy: A Life of My Father, tr. by Elizabeth R. Hapgood, Harper and Brothers, New York, 1953. Vernadsky, George, A History of Russia, Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn., 1944.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

273

Kievan Russia, Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn., 1948. Woody, Thomas, New Minds: New Men?, Macmillan Company, New York, 1932. Zenkovsky, Vassiii V., 2 vols., A History of Russian Philosophy, tr. by George L. Kline, Columbia University Press, New York, 1953.

INDEX

Index A d l e r , A l f r e d , 140 f, 145, 199 agape, 176, 179 agnosticism, 145 Aksakov, Constantine, 34 Aksakov, I v a n , 34, 93 fi, 97 A l e x a n d e r I, 16 f A l e x a n d e r II, 20 f, 32, 37, 7 1 , 103 f A l e x a n d e r III, 97 anarchism, 168 Annals of the Fatherland, 27 anthropocentrism, 156 art, 249 f A u g u s t i n e , 219

Bacon, Francis, 37 Bakhtin, M. M., 144, 149, 169 ff, 218 B a k u n i n , M i k h a i l , 31 f, 126 Balzac, de, Honoré, 52, 205, 232 Belinsky, Visarrion, 27 f, 57 ff, 143, 164, 16g, 202, 205 f Bell, The, 28 Berdyaev, Nicholas, 8, 23, 27, 31. 33, 146, 157 f, 169, 175, 178, 181, 193, 221 Bible, 48, 61, 1 1 1 , 240 Brasol, Boris, 8 Burke, E d m u n d , 228

Butler, J. D o n a l d , 193, 197 Byron, L o r d , 235 f

C a m u s , A l b e r t , 8, 14 Candide, 95 Carr, E d w a r d H., 169 Carus, 69 Cervantes, 78 C h a a d a i e v , Pytor J., 23 f, 33 f C h a r c o t , Jean M a r t i n , 213 C h a t e a u b r i a n d , de, François, 235 Chernyshevsky, N i k o l a i , 29 f, 72, 126, 147 Christ, 68, 78, g i f , 95, 1 1 1 , 117 f, 154 f, 157, 160, 162, 164, 165 f, 170, 178, 180 f, 184, 190, 197, 2 1 1 , 216 f, 236, 243 f, 246, 251 Christianity, 142, 148, 154 f, 158, 181, 211, 251; culture, 35; ethics, 104 f, 162, 199; ideal of, 92, 151, 191; ideal of nation, 117; image of man, 92, 104 f; love, 187 ff; C h r i s t i a n naturalism, 152 f; O r t h o d o x , 33 ff, 118; theodicy, 171; values, 116 ff, 178, 190, 216; world-view, 171

INDEX

Cid, 237 classicism, 22 Comenius, J o h a n n , 124 c o m m u n i s m , 27, 215 Comte, Auguste, 145 consciousness, 168 ff, 196 Contemporary, 27 Corneille, 237 Cowley, Malcolm, 142 crime, 181 ff, 221 C r i m e a n W a r , 71

D a n t e , 158 Darwin, Charles,

126,

145,

159. ' 9 4 ί Decembrist, 18, 23, 63, 67, 70, 201, 206 deism, 154 democracy, 144 Derzhavin, Gavriil, 50, 237 Descartes, René, 37 dialectic, 147 f, 150 ff, 179, 198 Dickens, Charles, 55, 78, 110 f, 173, 246 Dobroliubov, Nikolai, 29 f, 72, 126, 143, 147, 164, 169 Doctor Zhivago, 184, 220 Don Quixote, 78, 1 1 1 , 246 Dooyeweerd, H e r m a n , 173 Dostoevsky, F. M., criticism, 142 fi

Eby, Frederick, 194 education, general, 1 5 - 2 2 ; adolescence, 134 f; aim, 15, 38, 99 f, 167, 191, 227; attitude, 227; character, 123 fi, 136 fi,

192; childhood, 134 f, 137; Christian education, 17 f, 39, 100; Christian image, 197; citizenship, 38, 1 1 6 fi; classical reform, 106; enl i g h t e n m e n t , 100 f; ethical, 39. 1 3 9 f . 192. 1 9 6 ; family, 38, 130, 136 ff; general type, 105 f; faculty of imagination, 132 f; juvenile home, 128 ff; knowledge, 101; language, 38, 106 ff, 210; liberal education, 105 f; memory, 132, 137, 166; methodology, 15, 193; moral, 116 f; n a t i o n a l system (Russia^, 1 6 - 2 2 ; personality, 30, 133; philosophy of, 197 ff; psychology, i 3 o f f ; public, 1 1 6 ; reading, nof; religious, 111 f, 196; science, 115; selfdiscipline, 100 f, 191 f; social ideal of, 118 £; teacher, 39, 102 f; teacher training, 39; universal, 101 f; women's higher education, 1 1 2 ff; work, principle of, 38; youth, 124 ff Eliot, T . S., 221 empiricism, 145 E n g l a n d , 212 environment, doctrine of, 104 f Epoch, 73 essentialism, 155 ethics, 104 t, 139 f; see also Christianity and e d u c a t i o n existentialism, 155 f e x p e r i m e n t a l i s m , 194 evolutionist, 281

INDEX

Faure, Élie, 142 Faust, 232 Feuerbach, L u d w i g Andreas, 27, 29 Fichte, J o h a n n , 23 formalists, 144 Fourier, François Charles Marie, 27, 60 Francis of Assisi, 142 F r a n k l i n , B e n j a m i n , 228 freedom, 174 fr, 197, 231; dialectic of, 17g; metaphysical, 175, 219; political, 175; and suffering, 181 ff; responsibility for, 183 f Freud, S i g m u n d , 140 f, 145, •99- 2!3 Fueloep-Miller, R e n é , 140

G e n e v a ideas, 148, 212 G e r m a n idealism, 23 G i d e , A n d r é , 142 Goethe, J o h a n n W o l f g a n g , 111, 232 Gosse, E d m u n d , 142 G o g o l , N i k o l a i , 50, 55, 58, 111, 164, 206 Gontscharov, Ivan, 111 G o r k i , M a x i m , 144, 164 Gospel, 101, 111, 197 Grazhdanin, 82 Grigoryev, A p o l l o n , 74 G r i g o r o v i t c h , D m i t r i V., 5 6 - 57 Grossman, L e o n i d , 149,

H a l l , G. Stanley, 133 Hamlet, 14, 52, 232

279

H a w t h o r n e , N a t h a n i e l , 173 Hegel, Georg, 23, 27, 34, 67, 69, 150, 178 Hemmings, F. W . J., 146 Hertzen, A l e x a n d e r , 27 f, 73 Hesse, H e r m a n , 215 H o f f m a n , Ε. Τ . Α . , 52, 232, 236 Homer, 206, 236 H u g o , Victor, 52, 55, 232, 235 f humanism, 156, 172, 205

idealism, 145, 250 ideas, 168 ff immortality, 86 f, 159, 168 impressionists, 143 instrumentalism, 194 intelligentsia, 21, 25 t, 29, 32 irrationalism, 172 Ivanov, Vyacheslav, 143, 158, 169

52,

89,

Job, 49 John, Gospel of, 78, 246

Kant, Immanuel, 23, 67, 162,

54, 169

'79 Karamzin, Nikolai, 48, 111 Katkov, Μ. N., 22 Kaus, Otto, 149 Kepler, Johannes, 182 Kireyevskii, Ivan, 34 K h o m y a k o v , A l e x e y , 34 Kock, de, Paul, 55 Komarovich, V . L., 149 Koran, 67

INDEX

Kornilov, Alexander, 32, 112 Kranikhfel'd, Vladimir, 143 Krikorian, Yervant H., 195

Last of the Mohicans, The, 4g Lauth, Reinhard, 146 Lavrin, Janko, 145, 160 f Lavrov, Peter, 30 Lawrence, D. H „ 142, 164 Lenin, Nikolai, 32, 145 Leontiev, Konstantin Ν., 22 Lermontov, Mikhail, 89 logic, 197 f, 215 f Lunacharski, Ana toi, 144 Lycurgus, 182

Magnitsky, Leonti, 17 Mahomet, 182 Maikov, Apollon, 77, 80, 143, 206 Mann, Thomas, 143 Marx, Karl, 29, 150 Marxism, 32 marxists, 143 f, 164, 175 materialism, 27, 29, 33 Medynskii, Yevgeni, 36 Meier-Graefe, Julius, 134, 146 Merezhkovsky, Dmitri, 143, 145, 169 metaphysics, 193t, 196, 199 Mihailovski, Nikolai, 30, 32, 126, 142 f, 163 Mill, John Stuart, 126, 145, 159, 228 Milton, John, 164 mir, 34 Mochulskii, Konstantin, 146 Moscow News, 22

Mohammedans, 119 f Mosaic Law, 119 f Muchnic, Helen, 146 Murry, Middleton, 142, 145, 164 mysticism, 145

Napoleon, 182 Napoleonic wars, 17 f, 23 Narodnik, 30 ff, 127, 143 nation, 117 f naturalism, 145, 156, 1 9 4 ^ 223 Nechaiev, Sergei, 30 ff Nechaiev type, 124 ff, 203 Nekrasov, Nikolai, 57 NEP, 144 New Testament, 63, 96 Newton, Sir Isaac, 182 Nicholas I, 18 ff, 24, 27, 37, 71, 206 Nietzsche, Friederich, 150, 215, 220 nihilism, 22, 29, 1248, 203

obshchina, 34 Odoyevski, Prince, 23 Orthodoxy, Autocracy, tionality, 19, 22, 28

Na-

Panichas, George Α., 164, igo Pan-Slavism, 35 Paradise Lost, 164 Pascal, Blaise, 52, 173 Pasternak, Boris, 184, 220 £ Pereverzev, Valerian, 144 Pestalozzi, Johann, 124

INDEX

Peter the Great, 34 Petrashevsky, Mikhail, 20, 60 Philaret, Bishop, 17 philosophy, 53, 155, 158 Pirogov, N. I., 36 5 Pisarev, Dmitri, 29 Plato, 124, 228 Plekhanov, Georgi, 143 Pobiedonoszev, Konstantin, 97 pochva, 72 polyphonic form, 143, 149 populist, 28, 30, 32; see also narodnik positivism, 30, 36, 126, 145 147, 172, 178 pragmatism, 194 Praz, Mario, 142 Prescott, William Hickling, 111 Protestantism, 33 psychology, 135, 138, 1 4 ö S , 199. 2 1 4 f Pushkin, Alexander, 48, 50, 60, 89 f, 93 ff, i n , 235 f, 244 Racine, 237 Ramsey, Paul, 196 Randall, John H. Jr., 195 Rank, Otto, 141, 199 rationalism, 72, 147, 156, 172, 178 raznochinets, 143 realism, 29, 145 reason, 53, 1 7 1 ff, 198, 233 £ reconstructionism, 194 Robinson Crusoe, 49 Rousseau, J e a n Jacques, 153 Rozanov, Vasiii V., 143, 169 Russell, Bertrand, 216, 220

281

Russian Messenger, 22 Russian Revolution, 184

Sajkovid, Vladimir, 168, 173, 178, 180, 218 f Schelling, Friedrich, 23 Schiller, Ferdinand, 111, 205, 236 science, 86, 155, 198, 223, 249 scientific realism, 145 scientism, 156 Scott, Sir Walter, 49, 89, 110 £ Seduro, Vladimir, 146 serfdom, 17, 21, 35, 60 seventeen trees, 61 Shakespeare, William, 14, 55, 61, 1 1 1 , 206, 236 Shestov, Lev, 143, 145, 169 Shishkov, Admiral, 18 Sistine Madonna, 88 Slavophiles, 20, 22 ff, 26, 32 ff, 37· 93 f. " δ sobornost, 34, 116, 143 socialism, 20, 27, 91, 95, 1 1 2 , 126, 144, 168, 215 Socialist Peace Congress, 77 Socialist realism, 144 solipsism, 147, 166, 223 Solon, 182 Solov'yov, Yevgeni, 143 Solovyev, Sergei, 111 Solovyev, Vladimir, 50, 90 Spencer, Herbert, 37 Spengler, Oswald, 8, 145 Speransky, Mikhail, 16 Steckel, 141, 199 Strakhov, Nikolai, 73, 77, 79, 97 Strauss, David, 126,159

282

INDEX

Strem, George C., 193, 197 Sumarin, Y., 34 superman idea, 150, 163, 215 symbolists, 143

Telescope, 23, 24 Tillich, Paul, 155 Tolstoy, D. Α., 2i f, 106, 112 Tolstoy, Count Leo, 20, 36 f, 38 f, 85, 95, 111, 189 Tolstoyan pedagogy, 37 T o w e r of Babel, 91 Turgenev, Ivan, 94, 111, 203

United States, 212 utilitarianism, 29, 126, 145, 147, 172 Ushinskii, Konstantin D., 36 ff, 39, 112 Uvarov, Count, 19 f

Veresayev, V. V., 143 Vivas, Eleseo, 149, 156, 193

Vogüé, chior, Vrangel, 207 Vremya,

Vise. Eugène Mel142 Baron, 69, 72, 74, 72, 73

Wasteland, The, 221 Westernizers, 20, 22 ff, 35, 72, 93, 126, 147 Woodhouse, C. M., 143 Yanovsky, S. D., 80 Yarmolinsky, Avrahm, 145 Yermilov, V . V., 144, 164 Zander, L. Α., 146 f, 160, 162 f Zaslavski, D. I., 144 Zdhanov, Andrey, 144 zemstvo, 103 Zenkovsky, Vassiii V., 152 f, 168, 175, 193 Zernov, Nicholas, 146, 193 Zhukovsky, Vassili, 50 Zweig, Stefan, 215