Russian literature -- 19th century -- History and criticism
“Dostoievsky,” writes Strakov, “loved literature; he took her
as she was, with all her conditions; he never stood apart from
literature, and he never looked down upon her. This absence of
the least hint of literary snobbishness is in him a beautiful and
touching characteristic. Russian literature was the one lodestar of
Dostoievsky’s life, and he cherished for it a passionate love and
devotion. He knew very well that when he entered the lists he would
have to go into the public market-place, and he was never ashamed of
his trade nor of his fellow-workers. On the contrary, he was proud of
his profession, and considered it a great and sacred one.”
He speaks of himself as a literary hack: he writes at so much a line,
three and a half printed pages of a newspaper in two days and two
nights. “Often,” he says, “it happened in my literary career that the
beginning of the chapter of a novel or story was already set up, and
the end was still in my mind and had to be written by the next day.”
Again: “Work from want and for money has crushed and devoured me. Will
my poverty ever cease? Ah, if I had money, then I should be free!”
I have said that one of the main elements of Dostoievsky’s character
was vehement passion. There was more than a vehement element of passion
in Dostoievsky; he was not only passionate in his loves and passionate
in his hates, but his passion was unbridled. In this he resembles
the people of the Renaissance. There were perilous depths in his
personality; black pools of passion; a seething whirlpool that sent
up every now and then great eddies of boiling surge; yet this passion
has nothing about it which is undefinably evil; it never smells of the
pit. The reason of this is that although Dostoievsky’s soul descended
into hell, it was purged by the flames, and no poisonous fumes ever
came from it. There was something of St. Francis in him, and something
of Velasquez. Dostoievsky was a violent hater. I have already told
how he hated Bielinsky, the Socialists and the materialists whom he
attacked all his life, but against Tourgeniev he nourished a blind and
causeless hatred. This manifests itself as soon as he leaves prison, in
the following outburst: “I know very well,” he writes, “that I write
worse than Tourgeniev, but not so very much worse, and after all I hope
one day to write quite as well as he does. Why, with my crying wants,
do I receive only 100 roubles a sheet, and Tourgeniev, who possesses
two thousand serfs, receives 400 roubles? Owing to my poverty I am
_obliged_ to hurry, to write for money, and consequently to spoil my
work.” In a postscript he says that he sends Katkov, the great Moscow
editor, fifteen sheets at 100 roubles a sheet, that is, 1500 roubles
in all. “I have had 500 roubles from him, and besides, when I had sent
three-quarters of the novel, I asked him for 200 to help me along, or
700 altogether. I shall reach Tver without a farthing. But, on the
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account