Search

By the end of the 19th century, Russian literature had gained world- leading status. This process was connected in particular, with the political realities generated by Russia’s defeat in the Crimean War (1853–1856), the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–1871 (as a result of which the role of the ideal Other in French cultural consciousness was transferred from Germany to Russia) and the birth of L’Entente on the outskirts of the First World War. In this context, the importance of E.-M. de Vogüé’s book “Russian Novel” (1886), which played the role of a cultural accompaniment to the political doctrine of creating the Franco-Russian alliance (1891–1892), should be assessed. The links between politics and literature were often paradoxical. Thus, the Crimean War, accompanied in the West by building an anti-Russian propaganda industry, simultaneously contributed to the rooting of Russophile tendencies in Western European literature. The article pays special attention to modelling the image of the Other on the example of N. M. Karamzin and F. M. Dostoevsky. It is concluded that for the world’s critical reception, Russian classics are often fundamentally “non-classical”: they are a phenomenon of a Modern type associated with the metaphysics of the rational paradigm crisis.

The article is devoted to the issues of F. M. Dostoevsky’s understanding of the role of Ivan the Terrible’s state activity in Russian history and the reflection of the writer’s ideas about the personality of Ivan the Terrible in works of art and literary criticism. The article notes the importance of a detailed study of the references in the writer’s work to the events and figures of the past periods, the attention to which until recently was on the periphery of scientific interests, and if it was covered, then along the way, when considering the historiosophical views of the writer and mainly on the material of journalism. The article points to the writer’s interest in the figure of Ivan the Terrible as a monarch and a person. It emphasizes that the writer’s attitude toward this ruler was influenced by reading The History of the Russian State by N. M. Karamzin. If, in his artistic work, Dostoevsky is attracted primarily by Ivan the Terrible as a split and tragically complex personality, then, in A Writer’s Diary, the talent of a statesman is put in the first place, whose experience can be helpful in solving the Eastern question vital for the era. At the same time, observations are made on Dostoevsky’s understanding of the “historical” truth and the specifics of the writer’s interpretation of historical plots.

The new concept of the history of Russian literature presupposes a hermeneutic reading of the texts of classics, allowing us to understand the hidden meanings embedded in them, reflecting the Christian foundation of Russian culture. The need to look at the work of Russian writers of the 19th century as a reflection of a unique discourse of precedent Christian texts poses the need for teachers and lecturers of literature to master additional educational programs on the “Spiritual and Moral Foundations of Russian Literature.” This article provides an analysis of the images of small and large eschatology in the last novel of the Great Pentateuch by F. M. Dostoevsky, reflecting the axiological views of the writer. The research demonstrates that the content of Dostoevsky’s last novel contains the spiritualizing and enlightening power of Christian life-building for the world.

The article is devoted to the role of history in the life and work of F. M. Dostoevsky. The writer studied world and Russian history throughout his life. The work notes what historical works Dostoevsky read and especially valued, and what books on history were in his home library. The article attempts to determine how Dostoevsky understood history, how he saw the role of the individual in history, and how he expressed it in his works. The writer’s first literary experiences in the early 1840s were already associated with an attempt to write essays on historical topics. And then, he defined many of his works by the genre as “chronicle” or “annals,” which allows them to be formally classified as “historical literature” in a broad sense. In Dostoevsky’s works, the characters not only enthusiastically study and teach history but also actively compose historical works of a scientific and artistic nature. The author of the article substantiates the idea that the writer and his characters’ appeal to history lies at the basis of Dostoevsky’s poetics and often creates a secondary plot in his works, giving the depicted scenes and characters additional historical and cultural volume.

The article provides a historiography of the coverage of the theme of adolescence in the works of L. N. Tolstoy and F. M. Dostoevsky. An axiological approach to the works of both writers by the famous scientist and thinker A. A. Ukhtomsky allows us to explore the spiritual and moral issues of the works. The story “Childhood” and the novel “The Brothers Karamazov” show the types of proud characters — this is Tolstoy’s Nikolenka and Dostoevsky’s Ilyusha Snegirev. Due to their pride and the desire to please others, both characters experience a similar state of “eclipse,” when carnal feelings drown out the “natural” law. Kolya Krasotkin, like Nikolenka, is carried away by rationalism, which leads both characters to a spiritual crisis.

The article reviews the monograph by Kapitalina Antonovna Koksheneva, DSc in Philology, dedicated to the cultural and philosophical aspects of N. N. Strakhov’s legacy. The book under review is an innovative study that links the problems of nihilism and devaluing of the idea of personality, and the crisis of rationality in the European philosophical culture of the last third of the 19th century. The monograph examines the legacy of K. S. Stanislavsky in the context of the theory of “organic art.” The study is characterized by both new approaches and interdisciplinary thoroughness. Based on the concepts of understanding man and the national nature of the soul, created by Russian philosophers of the second half of the 19th century, the author defines the range of national ideals that N. N. Strakhov developed in “The Struggle with the West in Our Literature,” and which is fundamental, eternally relevant for Russian culture. The research of K. A. Koksheneva convincingly proves that only the metaphysical method allows us to understand the cultural studies of N. N. Strakhov and the circle of artists-creators and thinkers-creators close to him.

This review is dedicated to the book by the American researcher, a famous specialist in the field of literary comparative studies, Dale Peterson, “Up from Bondage. The Literatures of Russian and African American ʽSoul’.” D. Peterson’s work represents the first study that draws a parallel between the evolution of Russian and African-American cultural identities in literary works and analyzes the phenomenon of the “folk soul.” The study is distinguished not only by its innovative approach and high scientific significance but also by its careful research of archival materials, manuscripts, and letters from the authors, which creates a solid basis for subsequent theoretical generalizations. Using the concept of the “polyphonic novel” by M. M. Bakhtin and the theory of culturally embedded speech acts he developed, Peterson concludes that the dynamics of development and deep mentality of Russian and African-American literature are similar.

The article is devoted to the analysis of the picturesque plot in F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Demons,” built around the canvas of the Italian master Raphael Santi, “Sistine Madonna,” in its semantic and symbolic dynamics — the inner spiritual relationship with the fate of Stepan Trofimovich Verkhovensky. The image of Raphael’s Madonna is the most significant element of the ethical and aesthetic system of the character’s worldview, defining the way of thinking and behavior of the character. At the same time, in the conceptual space of the novel, the Sistine Madonna acquires the features of a spiritually ambivalent image: inspiring Stepan Trofimovich to a high way of thinking, she, nevertheless, turns out to be powerless to transform his life. The article analyzes the theological content of the canvas in the context of the Russian tradition (Zhukovsky, Karamzin, Dostoevsky, Bulgakov), which makes it possible to decipher the pictorial code in the fate of Verkhovensky’s father. Spiritual healing and the near-death transformation of the hero become possible thanks to two symbolic and semantic transitions carried out by the Verkhovensky’s father in the final part of the novel: from the Western Catholic “Sistine Madonna” to the Russian Mother of God, from the Western way of thinking and life to the Russian “soil” and Orthodox spirituality.

The article presents a review of the monograph by Susan Fusso, an American researcher, and professor of Russian, East European, and Eurasian languages at Wesleyan University, published by Bibliorossika Publishing House and devoted to the role of an authoritative journalist, editor, and publisher of the largest organs of the Russian conservative press M. N. Katkov — in the formation of the concept of the Russian novel of the second half of the 19th century. The author’s attention focuses on Katkov’s relationship with the major Russian writers of the second half of the 19th century, I. S. Turgenev, F. M. Dostoevsky, and L. N. Tolstoy. Based on a broad historical and literary context, a scrupulous analysis of the journalistic speeches of the journalist and the literary texts of Turgenev, Dostoevsky, and Tolstoy, the researcher rethinks the importance of Katkov in the literary process of the 1860s and 1880s. The review describes the structure of the monograph, and the range of issues raised in it, highlights the most successful and original author’s conclusions, and outlines the prospects for further research.

The article proposes a typology of righteous heroes on the material of L. N. Tolstoy’s stories “Father Sergius,” “False Coupon,” “Alyosha the Pot,” and F. M. Dostoevsky’s novels “Teenager,” “The Brothers Karamazov.” The “great sinners” Dostoevsky and Tolstoy have gospel prototypes — the prodigal son and the “prudent thief.” At the same time, both writers have static characters — righteous people carrying Christian ideals. In the later stories of Tolstoy and the novels of Dostoevsky, there is a teleological plot, which includes the plot motifs of the test, the choice of the hero, and his movement toward salvation. Turning to the ethical teaching of A. A. Ukhtomsky, created based on the works of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, allows us to highlight the dominant character of the hero, which involves the rejection of egocentrism and determines his salvation, as well as the hero’s “doubles” and “interlocutors” who are capable of awakening his selfawareness. A comparison of the reading range of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky shows their attention to the works of John Climacus, Isaac the Syrian, and Tikhon of Zadonsk.

Jon Stewart's book Hegel's Century analyzes the reception and modifications of Hegel's notions of recognition and alienation by his German, Russian, and Danish followers. The present text pays attention to the method of Stewart's approach and the chapters devoted to F. M. Dostoevsky, K. Marx, and F. Engels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Based on the ethical teaching of the religious thinker A. A. Ukhtomsky, the article traces and comprehends the development of the type of the Dreamer and Underground Hero in Lermontov and Dostoevsky’s stories and novels. Lermontov creates the image of the artist Lugin as a Dreamer (“Stoss”), and in the character traits of Krasinsky and Pechorin (“Princess Ligovskaya”), the features of the Underground Hero appear. In the work of Dostoevsky, the Dreamer appears not only in the story “White Nights,” but also in the story “Little Hero,” the story “Netochka Nezvanova.” The Underground Hero of Dostoevsky is depicted in the story “Notes from the Underground” and the novel “The Teenager.” The dreamers of both writers are immersed in the world of literature, music, theater, which develops their imagination. However, the characters of Dostoevsky, unlike Lermontov’s one, are able to commit an act and influence reality.

Readers are invited to review a new collective monograph on the phenomenon of the epic novel, published under the scientific editorship of a DSc in Philology V. G. Andreeva (IWL RAS) and which is the result of the work of well-known specialists in Russian classics in Russia. Besides V. G. Andreeva, the authors of the monograph are A. V. Gulin, N. L. Ermolaeva, S. K. Kazakova, Yu. V. Lebedev, V. I. Melnik, N. G. Mikhnovets. The author of the review analyzes the structure of the monograph, emphasizes the breadth of coverage of the material, as well as an attractive for the reader and at the same time promising scientific approach to the issues under study. The monograph examines in detail the most significant novels of Russian literature of the second half of the 19th century. The seemingly heterogeneous literary material is comprehended from a single methodological point of view, and the term “epic novel” is the key theoretical concept for the monograph. The review characterizes the range of problems raised in the monograph, highlights the successful and non-trivial observations of the authors of the new book.

The article examines parallels in plot and images between Ostrovsky’s drama “Without a Dowry” and Dostoevsky’s novel “Demons.” Ostrovsky’s remarks about Dostoevsky in the last years of his life reveal that he distanced himself from the creative principles of the author of “Demons.” However, gestures and remarks of the characters of “Without a Dowry,” such as Paratov, Vozhevatov, Larisa Ogudalova, as well as motifs and collisions connected with them allow us to suggest that while working on the drama, Ostrovsky was influenced by a “literary recall” of Dostoevsky’s novel “Demons” and its characters, namely Stavrogin, Petr Verkhovensky, Liza Tushina. The possible parallels between the characters in “Without a Dowry” and “Demons” are also indicated by their common biblical and literary prototypes: there are allusions to the Serpent-temtper, Hamlet, Prince Harry, Mephistopheles and Faust contained in the stories of Stavrogin and Paratov, allusions to the Serpent and Mephistopheles in the gestures and actions of Petr Verkhovensky and Vozhevatov, while allusions to Ophelia, Gretchen and Poor Liza can be found in the images of Liza Tushina and Larisa Ogudalova. Even despite the differences in the writers’ approaches, there are remarkable plot parallels between the two works, common components in the characters’ images, similar artistic techniques, which, in our opinion, are signs of a literary “dialogue” between the authors of “Demons” and “Without a Dowry.”

This review examines a new in-depth study of the perception by contemporaries, both literary critics and readers, of a complex and multi-colored picture of the existence of the creative heritage of F. M. Dostoevsky. The author of the review notes the source base of the study under consideration, emphasizes the breadth of views of the authors of the book, their constant desire to understand the writer in his main ideas and the smallest observations. The assessment of literary criticism in the new edition becomes the reason and basis for identifying Dostoevsky’s place in public and literary life. Presenting the book, the author of the review describes its main sections, pays special attention to the names of forgotten writers and publicists, the movement and polarization of criticism.

The article analyzes a little-known literary work by D. N. Mamin-Sibiryak – his Christmas fantasy “The Last Lights” (1897). This work is considered in a broad context of the “Christmas” narrative of the writer, covering, in total, about three dozen texts, most of which have characteristic genre nominations: “Christmas story”, “Christmas tale”, “Christmas fantasy”, and “legend”. At the same time, special attention is paid to the context of the author’s collection-cycle “Christmas Stories” (1898) and the text of the Christmas fantasy “Iyi” (1902). It is noted that in connection with the stable genre stereotype, in most of the Christmas stories of Mamin-Sibiryak (“Kum”, “Christmas Eve”, “The Cunning German”, “The Song of Mister Kal”, etc.), it is the utopian mode of the historical future that is emphasized, which implies the triumph of moral and religious values inherent in Christianity. In contrast to the dominant utopian beginning of the Christmas story, the writer in “The Last Lights” creates a kind of “inside-out utopia” (N. K. Mikhailovsky), following a pronounced anti-utopian course. A variant of his Christmas fantasy is regarded as an individual authored experience of artistic futurology, containing a spiritual and religious justification for the reasons of the decline of the European civilization – up to the ideas of national disunity, the destructive power of militarism and panmongolism, as well as the degeneration of the European race, the consequences of birth control and the use of the principles of Eugenics social practice. The genre-compositional form of “The Last Lights” is defined as a philosophical fragment that serves to express clearly stated anti-utopian content. In this regard, the article draws intertextual parallels with the anti-utopias “The Last Suicide” and “Cecilia” by V. F. Odoevsky, “A Brief Tale of the Antichrist” by V. S. Solovyov, as well as pictures of dreams about the “golden age” in the works of F. M. Dostoevsky (“Crime and Punishment”, “Idiot”, “Dream of a Ridiculous Man”). At the end of the article, it is concluded that Mamin-Sibiryak’s “Christmas” narrative actively developed the method of “inspired realism” designated by the writer himself, which involved the use of certain neo-romantic and symbolist tendencies, including a creative focus on the genre of parables, fairy tales and legends.

The review is dedicated to the book by the honorary professor of the University of Nottingham, the famous Russist and dostoevist Malcolm Jones “Dostoevsky and the Dynamics of Religious Experience” (trans. from English by T. Grosheva). The author of the review concentrates on the structure, style and original research methodology consisting in the synthesis of the ideas of M. M. Bakhtin, deconstructivism and “the model of Epstein.” The book by M. Jones offers his own concept of the evolution of Dostoevsky’s and his heroes’ “religious experience,” genetically determined in the tradition of apophatic theology and ascending through doubts and tossing between unconditional faith and nihilistic atheism to a new form of religious consciousness, called “minimal religion” (Epstein’s term). The book under review reveals non-trivial, bold conclusions, sometimes unexpected for Russian literary criticism, about the nature of Dostoevsky’s religious searches, their genesis, evolution and artistic embodiment in later novels.

Социализм – одна из ключевых идей, составляющих общественно-историческое, философское и нравственное мировоззрение Ф. М. Достоевского в 1860–80-е гг. Проблема «Достоевский и социализм» была поставлена исследователями уже в начале XX в., литературоведы и философы отмечали особое отношение мыслителя к этому строю общества. В рамках изучения геополитических представлений Достоевского об Европе в 1860–1881 гг. необходимым и закономерным представляется изучение проблемы социализма в публицистических текстах и письмах мыслителя. Целью статьи является изучение и реконструкция позиции Достоевского по отношению к социализму в 1860–1881 гг. Материалом исследования стали публицистические тексты, заметки, неоконченные статьи, письма Достоевского 1860–1881 гг. Эмпирическая база исследования формировалась с помощью приема сплошной выборки понятия «социализм». В исследовании используются биографический, культурно-исторический, имагологический методы. В рамках исследования были рассмотрены все имеющиеся тексты изучаемого периода, включающие понятия «социализм». В результате выявлено, что в 1860–1881 гг. проблема социализма была весьма актуальна для Достоевского. Мыслитель рассуждает и о европейском, и о русском социализме, но в первую очередь ему важнее понять сущность социализма. Европейский социализм, основанный на законах, требованиях и науке, по мысли Достоевского, ведет к разрушению Запада. Писатель формулирует свое понимание социализма, противопоставляет искусственное построение общества (европейский, или западный, социализм) любви, нравственности, братству (русский социализм). Особенность социалистических идей Достоевского в их отождествлении с равенством и социальной справедливостью под предводительством безграничной искренней веры в учение Христа. С 1860-х гг. Достоевский размышляет о социализме и противопоставляет два определения этого понятия: форма государственного устройства и братское единение, основанное на нравственных чувствах общества. На основании этих определений социализма он противопоставляет европейский (западный) социализм и русский социализм. Писатель был убежден в возможности реализации социалистической теории для создания справедливого общественного устройства, верил, что достичь этого возможно без революций, благодаря внутреннему изменению человека и общества. Хронологическая реконструкция позиции писателя к социализму изучаемого периода помогает выявить динамику изменений взглядов Достоевского в этом отношении. Размышляя о социализме в Европе и России, мыслитель обращается к проблемам науки, образования, молодежи, пишет о деятельности европейских лидеров, развитии европейских государств. Социализм оказывается связующим звеном многих вопросов, волнующих мыслителя.

In the 1840s F. M. Dostoevsky became famous in literary circles thanks to his story Poor Folk, but was widely criticized by the Slavophiles, namely by the Aksakov brothers for his creative approach and political ideology. In the 1860s heated disputes between Vremenya and Den’ confirmed Dostoevsky’s ideological disagreements with the Slavophiles. In the 1880s, as the author of the article shows, begins a convergence of Dostoevsky’s position, his artistic ideas and the views of the Aksakov brothers, which is especially noticeable in Dostoevsky’s speech at the Pushkin holiday. The article comprehends the main ideological differences and points of contact between pochvennichestvo and Slavophilism, traces the difficult relationship between Dostoevsky and the Aksakov brothers, which lasted more than 40 years. Numerous disagreements in the beliefs of these contemporaries concerned the issue of creative style, the purpose of literature and ideological currents. Dostoevsky believed in Slavophile thought, but was more progressive; he developed and deepened the ideals of fundamentalism in the second half of the 19th century.

Discusses the Russian-language edition of Donna Orwin’s book about Turgenev, Dostoevsky, and Tolstoy, which came out this year with Academic Studies Press / Bibliorossika. The reviewer considers this book’s publication in Russian a significant scholarly contribution as well as an important reminder of the cultural entanglements among Russia, Europe, and North America. Orwin’s Consequences of Consciousness provides its readers with a comprehensive account of the cultural and philosophical circumstances that gave rise to Russian psychological realism, and offers innovative readings of key literary texts that demonstrate the dynamic dialogue among the three authors who established the genre.

The review contains a description of the book published in the jubilee series dedicated to the 200th anniversary of the writer, named “Sources and methods in the study of F. M. Dostoevsky’s legacy in Russian and world culture.” The collective monograph “Problems of the textual journalism of Dostoevsky (1873–1881)” edited by T. V. Panyukova presents the results of a study of “A Writer’s Diary” and the materials of the newspaper-magazine “The Citizen.” The research is based on archival work, which determines the nature of the results obtained by the compilers: new archival documents have been introduced into scientific circulation, in some cases the history of already known and published materials, their attribution has been clarified. Additions to the book have independent value. In the first of them, materials from A. G. Dostoevskaya’s business books are published for the first time. In conjunction with other materials, they can be useful for attribution and commenting on sources. The second addition contains a chronological attributed description of the “Citizen” for the period of Dostoevsky’s editorship, prepared on the supplemented material of the “Chronicles of the Life and Work of F. M. Dostoevsky”.

The article is devoted to the peculiarity of artistic expression of the theme of money in “A Writer’s Diary” by F. M. Dostoevsky. The article indicates that Dostoevsky’s journalistic style is characterized by the use of metaphor as an artistic term that can accurately designate the phenomena of current reality and give them a social, cultural or philosophical interpretation. Such metaphorical concepts (“soil,” “earth,” “roots,” “golden age,” “golden bag,” etc.) in the writer’s journalism usually grow out of stable ideologemes, idioms or mythologemes universal for Russian culture, but acquire new meanings. The author of the article determines that the metaphor “golden bag” is used in those essays of “A Writer’s Diary” which discuss the problem of the cult of material goods, which penetrated all strata of Russian society of the 1870s. Dostoevsky, appealing to the well-known idiom “golden bag,” starts from its fixed definition of a “very rich man,” creates a metaphorical image of money, profit and greed, gaining power over modern man, then synonymously brings us closer to the idiom of the “golden calf,” which is not represented in “A Writer’s Diary.”

Введение. Роман Ф. М. Достоевского «Подросток» определяется многими исследователями как роман воспитания. Если взаимоотношения Версилова и Аркадия всесторонне освещены в исследовательской литературе, то другая ипостась родительской любви – материнская – видится недостаточно разработанной. Хотя некоторые ученые (Н. А. Тарасова, Н. А. Кладова, Е. А. Иванова) опосредованно касались этой темы, она еще не становилась предметом самостоятельного изучения. Цель – рассмотрение образов героинь-матерей в романе Ф. М. Достоевского «Подросток»: Софьи Андреевны Долгорукой и Дарьи Онисимовны. Материал и методы. Материалом исследования является роман Ф. М. Достоевского «Подросток». С помощью структурно-семиотического, мотивного и сравнительного методов прослеживается специфика авторского воплощения художественных образов матерей от замысла и черновиков к окончательному тексту, анализируется роль материнских образов Софьи Андреевны Долгорукой и Дарьи Онисимовны (Настасьи Егоровны) в процессе воспитания Аркадия, Лизы и Оли. Результаты и обсуждение. Ключевыми образами, воплощающими образы матерей и детей, являются Софья Андреевна Долгорукая и ее дети, Аркадий и Лиза, также Дарья Онисимовна и ее дочь Оля. В художественной концепции романа материнская любовь представлена как действенный способ преодоления духовной болезни нации, отдельной семьи и каждого ее члена. Жажда значительной жизненной цели, юношеский максимализм, отрицание опыта и ценностей предыдущих поколений, якобы «вина» родителей за недостаточные успехи или личные качества подростка – типично возрастные особенности развития личности. Незрелость неустоявшейся личности подростка можно преодолеть, исцелить именно в семье. Через преодоление эгоизма и тщеславия, осознание себя неотъемлемой частью своей семьи юноша обретает свой путь, свою индивидуальность. Причем ведущая роль в формировании подростка именно материнская. Через понимание и принятие «святой матерью» недостатков и ошибок ребенка любого возраста постепенно открываются источники любви и наследуется модель семейного поведения как сакральная нравственная норма, обеспечивающая стабильность и цельность взрослой личности. Кроме того, в статье раскрывается процесс взаимовлияния в системе отношений «мама – дитя» как внутри семьи, так и в более широком социальном контексте. Писатель акцентирует негативную роль трагических событий в духовной трансформации художественных образов матерей, изображая страдание женщины, лишившейся младенца (Лиза), и горе женщины, пережившей самоубийство дочери (Дарья Онисимовна). Заключение. В романе «Подросток» Достоевский изображает два типа материнской любви. Первый тип любви – милосердной и всепринимающей – воплощает Софья Андреевна. Ее любовь повлияла на образ мыслей Аркадия, трансформировала его душу и открыла перед ним ценность семейных отношений, безусловность родительской любви. Во взаимоотношениях Лизы и матери, как и в случае взаимоотношений Аркадия и Софьи Андреевны, любовь стала спасительной, принесла утешение в горе, помогла пережить страдания и возрасти духовно. Второй, противоположный тип – гипертрофированной любви-страсти к ребенку – реализован в отношениях между Дарьей Онисимовной и Олей. Такая любовь изначально деструктивна, лишена христианской основы, вследствие чего происходит трансформация материнского образа как художественной целостности: место Дарьи Онисимовны замещает тень героини – Настасья Егоровна.

The article is written on the basis of the author’s report at the International Symposium “Visual Theology. Themes and Horizons”, held in Yaroslav-the-Wise Novgorod State University on September 29–30, 2021. The problem of a human visual image is actualized, considering it in aesthetic, sensual-perceived, philosophical and anthropological and religious and anthropological contexts. The author refers to the work of F. M. Dostoevsky, whose memorable dates – 200 years since the birth and 140 years since death – are widely famous events in Russia and all over the world in 2021. The main problem of the article is to disclose and justify the importance of a holistic visual image from the point of view of the Orthodox theological, ascetic and mystical (hesychast) thought of the heroes of the novels “Idiot”, “Demons”, “Teenager” and “Brothers Karamazov”, like Prince Myshkin, Monk Tikhon, Wanderer Makar Ivanovich and Elder Zosima. The article begins with the critical analysis of the position of M. M. Bakhtin, who in his interpretation of Dostoevsky’s heroes absolutized the importance of the dialogue as a form of personal self-consciousness and thereby obviously underestimated the importance of the visual image. The author strives to show that for Dostoevsky, not only in what the main characters say, but also in how they look, in their visual, holistic, aesthetic image, there is a way of manifesting human personality in her phenomenal form. Each character identifies both specific and general features of the visual image, determined by the spirit of the ancient, ascetic Russian Orthodox anthropology. The basis for understanding such image is the aesthetics of the beauty of Russian elders, permeated by honoring the divine beauty and mystery of the world, the expiration of light in their image, the joy of life, prayer, compassion, openness to people and love for them and God. The image of such people is leading to God not only and not only through words, but also by example of personal visual-orthodox communication. The article shows by the example of the heroes of Dostoevsky’s novels the relevance of Orthodox visual anthropology to modern visual personalism and aesthetics of the human image. Статья написана на материале выступления автора на международном симпозиуме «Визуальная теология: темы и горизонты», проходившем в Новгородском государственном университете имени Ярослава Мудрого 29–30 сентября 2021 года. В исследовании актуализируется проблема визуального образа человека в эстетическом, чувственно-воспринимаемом, философско-антропологическом и религиозно-антропологическом контекстах. Автор обращается к творчеству Ф. М. Достоевского, 200 лет со дня рождения и 140 лет со дня смерти которого широко отмечаются в России и во всём мире. Основная задача статьи заключается в раскрытии и обосновании значимости целостного визуального образа таких героев романов «Идиот», «Бесы», «Подросток» и «Братья Карамазовы», как князь Мышкин, монах Тихон, странник Макар Иванович и старец Зосима. Образы этих персонажей имеют большое значение с точки зрения православной богословской, аскетической и мистической (исихастской) мысли. Статья начинается с критического анализа позиции М. М. Бахтина, который в своей интерпретации героев Достоевского абсолютизировал значение их устного диалогического слова как формы личного самосознания и тем самым очевидно недооценил значение визуального образа. Автор стремится показать, что для Достоевского важно не только то, как говорят его главные герои, но и то, как они выглядят, каков их целостный визуальный, эстетический образ, который, по мнению автора статьи, является непроизвольным способом проявления человеческой личности в её феноменальной форме. В дальнейшем автор подробно останавливается на каждом из указанных персонажей, выявляя как специфические черты их визуального образа, так и общие характеристики, которые определяются духом святоотеческой, аскетической и русской православной антропологии. Основой для понимания такого образа в статье выступает эстетика благообразной красоты русских старцев, пронизанной почитанием божественной красоты и тайны мира, истечением света, радостью жизни, молитвой, состраданием, открытостью людям и любовью к ним и к Богу. Образ таких людей приобщает к Богу не только и не столько словами, сколько уже одним своим видом, являя пример личностной визуально-православной коммуникации. Автор статьи предполагает на примере героев романов Достоевского раскрыть актуальность православной визуальной антропологии для современного визуального персонализма и эстетики человеческого образа.

In F. M. Dostoevsky’s works and working notes there are medical terms and expressions written in Latin. The article provides a textual description of these foreign language inserts and analyzes their stylistic and ideologically meaningful functions. The Latin names of diseases used by Dostoevsky denote fever, feverish states and act more as stylistic means. Terminological inserts are also used in relation to the image of a doctorresident from the story “Notes from the House of the Dead”. On one hand, the inserts mark the hero’s professional affiliation, and on the other, they graphically mark the boundaries of the prisoner’s “rest” in the hospital. The use of a Latin aphorism, which goes back to the dictum of Hippocrates, in the novel “The Adolescent” is noteworthy. It is known that Dostoevsky relied on the published protocols of the trial of N. A. Dolgushin’s secret society. One of the protocols contained the saying of Hippocrates written on the wall of Dolgushin’s room, but in Russian translation. In his working notes, Dostoevsky always writes an aphorism in Latin. This gives grounds to assume that through an appeal to the Latin primary source, the writer shows the transformation of humanistic values in modern society at the substantive and stylistic levels.

The article deals with the art reviews of F. M. Dostoevsky. Based on the analysis of the articles “Exhibition at the Academy of Arts for 1860–61” and “About the Exhibition” published in “A Writer’s Diary” for 1873, the aesthetic criteria for Dostoevsky’s assessment of genre, historical, portrait and landscape Russian painting are determined. The author of the article reveals the most important criteria outlined by Dostoevsky: the expression of the author’s ideal that distinguishes a painting from mirror reflection and photography; the artist’s independence from direction, excessive naturalness, theatricality and “excessive showiness”. Particular attention is paid to Dostoevsky’s analysis of paintings by V. N. Jacobi, V. G. Perov, V. E. Makovsky, N. G. Sсhilder, M. P. Klodt, I. E. Repin, A. I. Kuindzhi, N. N. Ge, whose work aroused genuine interest of the writer and prompted reflections on artistic truth in art. The characters of the paintings as presented by Dostoevsky come to life, acquire a “history of feelings”, a psychological appearance and a voice. The work distinguishes between such concepts used by Dostoevsky to analyze contemporary painting for the writer in the light of “realism in the highest sense”, such as “natural truth”, “real truth”, “stage truth”, “artistic truth”, “higher truth”.

The article analyzes the nature of the interaction between first-line literature and fiction in the 1860–1870s as dynamic, versatile and dialogical. It is argued that the historical novel by E. A. Salias “The Pugachevites” (1874), based on the discoveries of the epic novel “War and Peace” by L. N. Tolstoy, testified to the process of strengthening the epic tendency in Russian literature of the 19th century. The novel by E. A. Salias was not exclusively secondary, the portrayal of the “predatory type” hero became innovative, but not deeply understood by the fiction writer. It is noted that further development was undertaken by F. M. Dostoevsky at the first stage of the creation of the novel “The Adolescent”. Its distinctive feature was the consideration of the “predatory type” in the context of the Russian history of spiritual quests of the 17th–19th centuries. The description of the stages of development of the type by F. M. Dostoevsky made it possible to come to the conclusion that the process of cognition of the Russian character, the identification of the laws of the historical development of Russia presupposed a versatile comprehension of the national foundations of life, which predetermined the epic character as the leading feature of the Russian novel of the second half of the 19th century.

The article attempts to identify the key moments of F. Dostoevsky’s presence in the context of the literary and critical declarations of the journal Zavety, primarily, by its co-editors, V. Chernov, and especially by Ivanov-Razumnik. His attitude towards the writer as a “world genius”, “the apogee of ethical individualism”, expressed in a number of articles, should be considered programmatic for this journal. A. Dolinin’s critical reception and reviews in the bibliographic department are in line with this attitude.

We consider in this work linguostatistical methods that were used for attribution (establishing authorship) of publicistic articles of the XIX century. At that time, F. M. Dostoevsky edited and headed three journals: ""Time"", ""Epoch"" and ""Citizen"", where there are about 500 unattributed texts. Samples from texts were compiled, their characteristics were studied, and a comparative analysis of the classification results based on various machine learning methods (decision trees, recurrent networks, parallel recurrent networks, transformer model) was carried out. The input of texts, their processing and the calculation of linguostatistical parameters were carried out using an updated version of the SMALT information system.

One of the urgent issues of modern Russian studies is the study of letters to the power of Russian writers. It is legitimate to single out these addresses in a special genre, which, in contrast to the genre of friendly writing, has practically not been studied. Fedor Dostoevsky wrote letters to Alexander I, V. A. Dolgorukov, A. E. Timashev, A. A. Suvorov, heir to the throne A. A. Romanov, and Grand Duke K. K. Romanov. Of particular note is the voluminous correspondence between Dostoevsky and K.P. Pobedonostsev – correspondence between a writer and an official of such a high rank is very rare (it should be noted that the addresser and the addressee were connected not only by business, but also by personal relations). The subjects of Dostoevsky’s letters to the authorities are very diverse – requests to move to the capital, creativity, literary and social life in Russia and Europe, the publication of “Citizen” and others. On the basis of F.M. Dostoevsky’s letters to the Emperor, the Tsareviches and their confidants of various ranks, one can trace the relationship with the authorities and clarify a number of already obtained facts and assessments. The messages of Russian writers to power are a special kind of epistolary genre that has both aesthetic value and is a historical document – evidence of the relationship between power and literature in our country. Obviously, the authorities were interested in cooperation with writers, and specific rulers showed interest in the work and in the personality of Dostoevsky.

The triad: Orthodoxy, autocracy, people form the basis of the conservative views of F.M.Dostoevsky and A.I. Solzhenitsyn. Based on common worldview constants, thinkers build concepts of a national-conservative persuasion. Their creative heritage is broader than “soil culture”, nevertheless, the ideas of this direction are developing in their journalism. The article presents a comparative analysis of the views of the authors concerning their views on the land, the Russian people and the intelligentsia. An analysis of the texts of Dostoevsky’s “Diary of a Writer”, Solzhenitsyn’s artistic and publicistic miniatures “Krohotki” and his other publicistic works allows us to understand why many of the “soil” issues raised in the 19th century were actualized a century later. The continuity of ideas of authors of different centuries in the context of social and political transformations in society is considered. A significant time period separating Dostoevsky and Solzhenitsyn makes it possible to see not only coincidences and consonances in their work, but also divergences.

The article considers novels The Life and Adventures of Tikhon Trostnikov (1843) by N. A. Nekrasov and Humiliated and Insulted (1861) by F. M. Dostoevsky as experimental works in which the authors sought to combine European and national traditions. The reference to biographical material, the use of the structural method allowed to discover the similarity in genre content of the works and the difference of ideological attitudes of the authors. Both novels were created as autobiographical works, adventurous and satiric, included elements of “natural essay”, but each of the authors sought to use national genre content: Nekrasov's is a folk drama, and Dostoevsky refers to the traditions of Old Russian calendar literature, a literary story that shows the verification of the Holy Scriptures. Nekrasov failed to create a complete work, largely due to the narrative form, in which in some cases the parody begins to appear. But Dostoevsky managed to bring the novel to a new level, especially in his last works The Raw Youth and The Brothers Karamazov. Performing the task of “restoring the lost man”, Dostoevsky turns to the church calendar, Gospel allusions and parable plot.

Crime fiction originated in the mid-nineteenth century, at a time of great positivistic confidence in thepotential of human knowledge. Edgar Allan Poe’s short stories are considered as the beginning of thegenre, and his character Auguste Dupin is the first modern literary detective. F. M. Dostoevsky did notwrite crime novels because the elements of the genre present in his novels participate in the constructionof a different kind. However, this paper will try to look in more details at the key differences betweenDostoevsky and the classical rules of crime fiction, on the example of the novel “Crime and Punishment”.A deeper understanding of these differences reveals the limits of the genre, while in Dostoevsky onecan recognize one of the early critiques of the fundamental principles and world picture that the genrerepresents.

Copyright of Journal of the Faculty of Philosophy in Sarajevo / Radovi Filozofskog Fakulteta u Sarajevu is the property of Faculty of Philosophy in Sarajevo and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Yearbook of the Faculty of Political Sciences / Godisnjak Fakultet Politickih Nauka Beograd is the property of University of Belgrade, Faculty of Political Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Yearbook of the Faculty of Political Sciences / Godisnjak Fakultet Politickih Nauka Beograd is the property of University of Belgrade, Faculty of Political Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Yearbook of the Faculty of Political Sciences / Godisnjak Fakultet Politickih Nauka Beograd is the property of University of Belgrade, Faculty of Political Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Yearbook of the Faculty of Political Sciences / Godisnjak Fakultet Politickih Nauka Beograd is the property of University of Belgrade, Faculty of Political Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Введение. Феноменологический дискурс в литературоведении связан с методологической установкой на восприятие литературного произведения как феномена авторской действительности и события в восприятии читателя. За счет такой диалогической двуориентированности литературный текст перестает осмысляться как замкнутый объект, выходя на уровень экзистенциальной коммуникации автора и читателя с основой на ценностную событийность. Что позволяет говорить о возможности раскрытия воспринимающего сознания через диалогический поиск своего и чужого слова. Материал и методы. В исследовании используются аналитико-описательный, аксиологический методы и феноменологический подход. В качестве материала для исследования выступают глава «Дневника писателя» Ф. М. Достоевского «Одна из современных фальшей» (1873), эго-документы: записные книжки 1863–1864 гг., письма к А. Г. Ковнеру (1877), Н. П. Петерсону (1878) и Е. Ф. Юнге (1880). Результаты и обсуждение. В рамках аксиологического анализа текста в качестве ресурса была выделена категория «позиция автора» как «эстетический коэффициент» вектора ценностной ориентации литературного произведения. «Позиция автора» осмысляется через диалогическое начало, выведенное М. М. Бахтиным как первоопределяющее в полифоническом строе произведений Ф. М. Достоевского. Диалог у писателя понятие всеохватное, не имеющее ни временных, ни пространственных границ. Это нашло непосредственное отражение в идее, жанре и композиции «Дневника писателя». Другодоменантность, основанная на сопряжении сознаний Я и Другого, характеризуется позиционно-ценностной вариативностью. Экзистенциальное сознание писателя проявляется в слове, имеющем диалогическую ориентацию. Диалог является атрибутивной характеристикой экзистенциального сознания. Личностное Я проявляет себя как объект и субъект через ситуацию анализа процесса самопознания. Заключение. Процесс открытия читателем не просто духовно-нравственных основ личности автора, но самой ситуации их формирования является важным в ситуации ценностной ориентации молодого поколения. Через диалог с сознанием воспринимающего субъекта Достоевский открывает для читателя путь к обретению своего Я (как Я-автора, так и Я-читателя).

Copyright of Journal of Language & Literary Studies / Folia Linguistica & Litteraria is the property of Journal of Language & Literary Studies / Folia Linguistica & Litteraria and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Language & Literary Studies / Folia Linguistica & Litteraria is the property of Journal of Language & Literary Studies / Folia Linguistica & Litteraria and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The aim of the paper is to define more closely the model of theological thinking of the current Pope Francis on the example of his interpretation and communication of the religious thought of the Russian novelist F. M. Dostoevsky. In the theological thinking of Pope Francis, this concept has a mediating role between the cultural form of religion and its meaning and role for theology. Next, the study reviews the sources and cultural influences of his approach to theology. Finally, through an analysis of his texts, it presents specific systematic insights into the nature of the interconnectedness of Russian religious thought, including implications for the content and mode of mediating salvation to people today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the dialogue in A. Slapovsky’s works of the late 1990s–2000s with F. Dostoevsky. The article highlights forms and functions of this dialogue: the mention of the writer's name, the reinterpretation of his works perform the function of an ironic, often parodic, reflection on the changed status of the author, the nature of the readership, the perception of literature during a crisis of literary centrism; the value deformations occurring in society are emphasized with the help of a literary prism. “Dostoevsky's context” reflects the writer's reflection on his own work and allows us to judge the direction of Slapovsky's creative evolution.

Введение. Антропология Достоевского является сложной полиаспектной темой, исследование которой возможно с использованием междисциплинарного подхода различных отраслей гуманитарного знания: литературоведения, лингвистики, философии, богословия, психологии, психоанализа, антропологии. Целью настоящей работы является анализ актуальных направлений развития современного достоевсковедения и систематизация международного опыта изучения художественной антропологии Достоевского. Материал и методы. Материал исследования – выступления, тезисы и аннотации докладов участников Международного симпозиума «Антропология Достоевского. Человек как проблема и объект изображения в мире Достоевского». Методы исследования – аналитико-описательный, экспертное оценивание, экспертный анализ. Результаты и обсуждение. Экспертные мнения ученых из 16 стран мира, представивших свои доклады на международном симпозиуме, позволили системно рассмотреть три ведущих проблемно-тематических направления: антропология Достоевского в свете философской антропологии и европейской культуры ХХ в.; антропология Достоевского в перспективе русской религиозно-философской мысли и русской культуры ХХ в.; проблема человека в романе «Идиот». В связи со 150-летним юбилеем романа «Идиот» отдельное внимание было посвящено обсуждению особенностей его экранизации в рамках круглого стола «„Идиот“ Достоевского и „Идиот“ А. Куросавы». Заключение. Ценность представленных в рамках проблемно-тематических направлений симпозиума докладов – в способности исследователей сохранить уникальный дух творчества Достоевского, его глубокое понимание человека, представленное в различных формах художественного письма, философских идеях и подлинно психологических интерпретациях.

Copyright of RumeliDE Journal of Language & Literature Research / RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi is the property of RumeliDE Uluslararasi Hakemli Dil & Edebiyat Arastirmalari Dergisi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Literature / Literatura is the property of Vilnius University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Social Sciences & Humanities Studies / Društvene i Humanističke Studije (DHS) is the property of Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences, University of Tuzla and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

В либретто оперы Д. Д. Шостаковича «Нос» в партии Ивана использованы первые два куплета Смердякова из романа Ф. М. Достоевского «Братья Карамазовы». В статье исследуются истоки образа Ивана в свете семантики и философского образа Смердякова и других персонажей Н. В. Гоголя, как и самого облика Гоголя в восприятии Достоевского. Использование куплетов Смердякова в опере на гоголевскую тему предстает крайне органичным: Гоголь и Достоевский оказываются сближенными в эволюции художественных идей. В романе Достоевского Смердяков излагает свои исторические сентенции, ставшие основными маркерами этого образа. В опере Шостаковича лакей Иван обрисован, как приверженец тех же идей, заостренно выраженных в интонационной сфере брутальности, воплощенной собственно музыкальными средствами. Стилистические истоки куплетов Смердякова находятся в песенных жанрах XVIII- XIX вв., содержащих элементы «романса» Смердякова. Но ни в одном фрагменте они не совпадают с «романсом» текстуально. Комический абсурдизм оперы «Нос» гротескно сгущает фантастический комизм гоголевской повести, выводя наше восприятие на новый уровень оценки ее художественного содержания по сравнению с уровнем фантастического реализма.

Although Poor Folk, the first novel by Fyodor Dostoyevsky, has been thoroughly studied, the correlation between its characters’ epistolary styles is not yet clarified. Varvara Dobroselova’s language usually escapes critical attention, albeit her “verbal” function in the novel might even exceed her “plot” function. Makar Alekseyevich’s style develops itself in the endless dialogue with “pattern” style and can be only understood in comparison. The article focuses on the major differences in the narrative strategies of the characters. It reveals the opposition of Varvara Alekseyevna’s “ready-made” word deeply enrooted in the sentimental tradition and Devushkin’s language which is intensely forming at the moment of writing and shifts constantly from one level of discourse to another. The topics selected by the characters, time orientation of their letters, and their style are closely analyzed in comparative perspective. The analysis reveals an important regularity: the expressiveness in Varvara Alekseyevna’s letters is attained through paralipsis, while Devushkin’s letters are expressive precisely as they speak even the most obscure and painful things. Devushkin’s language, as the article shows, tends to appropriate and combine diverse elements of the style of the other and to explore new thematic and stylistic spheres. As a result, the problems and techniques of the Natural School emerge in his letters. The study of Devushkin’s speech strategy with its effusive and even aggressive nature allows us to conclude that the character not only “unbosoms his feelings,” but also tries to assert himself in the new word, as it were, when arguing with Varvara Alekseyevna (read: old literature).

One of the most important questions of the religious-philosophical anthropological concept of S.L. Franck are questions about the close relationship between man and God, about sin and suffering, and about the definition of the boundaries of his freedom. In the definition of freedom and its main points, it proceeds not only from Western philosophical thought, but also from the anthropological views and ideas of F. M. Dostoevsky. According to Frank, as in Dostoevsky, the disclosure of the fullness of freedom in man is interconnected with the doctrine of human freedom as self-determination in good and in God, accepting sufering as an indispensable component in his salvation. The article is devoted to the comparison of the basic anthropological and personality concepts, as well as the idea of freedom and its characteristics in the works and works of both thinkers, in order to trace the continuity of Dostoevsky’s tradition with Frank in the framework of his anthropology and personalism in order to prove that for him human freedom and self-Man is an absolute value, his anthropology can be viewed in the context of his philosophy of unity and not contradict it.