-
Notes
- University of Wisconsin Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
Notes Introduction 1. For the longest general studies on the relationship of Pushkin and Dostoevsky, see Richard Peace,“Dostoevsky and Pushkin,” Irish Slavonic Studies (): – ; W. J. Leatherbarrow, “Pushkin and the Early Dostoevsky,” Modern Language Review (): –; D.D.Blagoi,“Dostoevskii i Pushkin,”in Dusha v zavetnoi lire: Ocherki zhizni i tvorchestva Pushkina (Moscow: Sovetskii pisatel’, ), – ;Alfred Bem,“Pushkin i Dostoevskii,”in U istokov tvorchestva Dostoevskogo,vol. of O Dostoevskom (Prague: Petropolis,).References to more specific comparisons of works by Pushkin and Dostoevsky will be made in the following chapters. There are a number of studies that bear the names of Dostoevsky and Pushkin in the title but are mostly collections of articles on the two writers with no comparisons . See V. D. Rak, Pushkin, Dostoevskii i drugie: Voprosy tekstologii (St. Petersburg: Akademicheskii proekt, ); G. M. Fridlender, Pushkin, Dostoevskii, “Serebrianyi vek” (St. Petersburg: Nauka, ); V. V. Sapelkin, Pushkin i Dostoevskii (San Paulo: Luch, ). However, the monograph by B. S. Kondrat’ev and N. V. Suzdal’tseva— Pushkin i Dostoevskii: Mif, son, traditsiia (Arzamas: AGPI, )—devotes several chapters to comparative analyses. In addition, a publication of the lectures at an international conference on Dostoevsky and Pushkin contains about sixty short articles , all of a comparative nature. There is a great deal about Dostoevsky’s Pushkin speech, but many other topics are covered as well. See Pushkin i Dostoevskii: Materialy dlia obsuzhdeniia, mezhdunarodnaia nauchnaia konferentsiia, – maia goda (Novgorod Velikii: Novgorodskii gos. universitet, ). 2. Joseph Frank, Dostoevsky: The Seeds of Revolt, – (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, ), –. 3. Frank, Seeds of Revolt, –. 4. Pushkin disagrees. See his remarks on Shakespeare’s mastery of Italian locale in Romeo and Juliet in The Critical Prose of Alexander Pushkin, ed. and trans. Carl R. Proffer (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, ), ; :–. Citations from this translation will be followed by a semicolon, then corresponding volume and page numbers from A. S. Pushkin, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, rd ed., vols. (Moscow: Nauka, –), also indicated by PSS. 5. F. M. Dostoevsky, The Diary of a Writer, trans. Boris Brasol (Santa Barbara, CA: Peregrine Smith,),–.The original Russian is from F.M.Dostoevskii, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, ed. V. G. Bazanov et al., vols. (Leningrad: Nauka, –), :. All Russian quotations from Dostoevsky’s work are from the above edition. The Russian citations will follow the citations for all the English translations. 6. Walter Jackson Bate—The Burden of the Past and the English Poet (Cambridge , MA: Harvard University Press, ), —has written at length of the terrible dilemma of both admiring a writer and being compelled to do something different from him because of the demands of originality. “Similarly, if you are exhorted to be ‘original’ at all costs, how do you take even the first step—especially if what you have been taught most to admire (and what in fact you really do most admire) is best typified by those very predecessors from whom you must now distinguish yourself, and, even worse, if your‘original’ departure from admired modes must spring from an ‘originality’ that is itself ‘sincere.’ . . . How the Oriental artist, during all the centuries that he followed his craft, would have stared—or laughed— if told that those past artists by whom, and through whom, he had been taught should suddenly represent territory that was verboten: that he had studied them only in order to be different!” (, ). Bate concedes that in the nineteenth century it was still possible to be original and creative with the long literary form, but mostly with the novel (). 7. Harold Bloom, The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry (New York: Oxford University Press, ), , , . 8. Leatherbarrow,“Pushkin and the Early Dostoevsky,” –. 9. Blok was referring to Pushkin’s encounter with Peter the Great, and Dostoevsky ’s with Christ, but the same could be said of Dostoevsky’s encounter with Pushkin. A. A. Blok, Zapisnye knizhki, – (Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, ), . See Vladimir Golstein’s use of this reference in his discussion of Pushkin and Shakespeare in his review of Alexander Dolinin’s Pushkin i Angliia: Tsikl statei, in Pushkin Review (): . 10. W. J. Leatherbarrow (“Pushkin and the Early Dostoevsky,” ) also maintains that Dostoevsky does not engage Pushkin in his later fiction as much as in his earlier fiction, and that most of the engagement (distortion) of Pushkin is found in Dostoevsky’s journalism and nonfiction writings. 11. Blagoi (“Dostoevskii i Pushkin,”) writes that his study is devoted to finding Pushkin in Dostoevsky but also Dostoevsky in Pushkin, yet he is not as interested in comparing the...