Dostoyevsky, Fyodor, 1821-1881; Dostoyevsky, Fyodor, 1821-1881 -- Criticism and interpretation
What Dostoevsky says here about dreams we shall apply to his own books,
not for a moment that I would consider assimilating these stories to
the absurdities of certain dreams, because we feel when we leave one of
his books, even should our reason refuse complete agreement with it,
that he has laid his finger on some obscure spot “which is part of our
actual life.” In this, I think, we shall find explained the refusal of
certain minds, in the name of Western-European civilization, to admit
Dostoevsky’s genius, because I readily observe that in all our Western
literature (and I do not limit myself to French alone) the novel, with
but rare exceptions, concerns itself solely with relations between
man and man, passion and intellect, with family, social, and class
relations, but never, practically never with the relations between
the individual and his self or his God, which are to Dostoevsky all
important. I fancy nothing could better illustrate my idea than the
reflection made by a Russian and quoted in Mme. Hoffmann’s biography,
the best by far I know, but which unfortunately has not yet been
translated. His reflection, she holds, will enable us to discern one
of the peculiarities of the Russian soul. Once reproached with his
unpunctuality this Russian gravely retorted: “Yes, life is difficult!
There are moments that must be lived well, and this is more important
than the keeping of any engagement.”[2] The inner life is thus
more highly prized than relations with one’s fellow-man. Here lies
Dostoevsky’s secret, the thing which makes him for some so great, for
many others so insufferable!
Not for a moment do I suggest that in Western Europe, in France, for
example, man is wholly a social being, ever dressed for a part. We
have Pascal’s _Thoughts_ and the _Fleurs du Mal_, strangely solitary
and profound, yet as French as any other works in our literature.
But a certain category of problems, heart-searchings, passions,
and associations seem to be the province of the moralist and the
theologian, and a novelist has no call to burden himself with them.
The miracle Dostoevsky accomplished consists in this: each of his
characters--and he created a world of them--lives by virtue of his
own personality, and these intimately personal beings, each with his
peculiar secret, are introduced to us in all their puzzling complexity.
The wonder of it is that the problems are lived over by each of his
characters, or rather let us say the problems exist at the expense of
his characters: problems which conflict, struggle, and assume human
guise to perish or triumph before our eyes.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account