The Novel in the Age of Disintegration: Dostoevsky and the Problem of Genre in the 1870s

Notes

193 INTRODUCTION 1. F. M. Dostoevskii, “Zapisnaia Tetrad’ (1872–1875),” in Neizdannyi Dostoevskii : Zapisnye knizhki i tetrad 1860–1881 gg, Literaturnoe Nasledstvo 83 (Moscow: Nauka, 1971), 290. The Academy Edition editors include most of this passage (up to “The Citizen must present the picture”) in the preparatory notes for the conclusion of Demons, perhaps because of the mention of Kirillov, but the last two sentences appear in volume 21, alongside the rest of the notes on The Citizen: Dostoevskii, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii v tritsati tomakh (Complete Works, hereafter cited as CW), ed. V. G. Bazanov et al., 30 vols. (Leningrad: Nauka, 1972–90), 11:308, 21:252. The task of deciphering the chronology and ordering of Dostoevsky’s notebooks, especially those from this period, has presented scholars with formidable challenges, as Lidia Rosenblium pointed out in her introduction to the volume of Literaturnoe Nasledstvo which first introduced the notebooks to the reading public. The notes rarely contain dates and deal with a wide variety of topics. See L. M. Rosenblium, “Tvorcheskie dnevniki Dostoevskogo,” Literaturnoe Nasledstvo 83 (Moscow: Nauka, 1971), 9–92, and Tvorcheskie dnevniki Dostoevskogo (Moscow: Nauka, 1981). Here and throughout the rest of the book, unless stated otherwise, translations of passages from Dostoevsky’s notebooks are taken from Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Unpublished Dostoevsky, ed. Carl Proffer, trans. Arline Boyer and Carl Proffer, 3 vols. (Ann Arbor, Mich.: Ardis, 1975). 2. On the reforms of Alexander II, sometimes called the “Great Reforms,” see W. B. Lincoln, The Great Reforms: Autocracy, Bureaucracy and the Politics of Change in Imperial Russia (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1990). For a recent study of the cultural significance of the reforms, see Olga Maiorova, From the Shadow of Empire: Defining the Russian Nation Through Cultural Mythology, 1855–1870 (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2010). 3. “Heteroglossia,” or raznorechie, is of course Mikhail Bakhtin’s term, taken from his “Discourse in the Novel.” The unstable social dynamics of postreform Russia provided the perfect breeding ground for the linguistic stratificaNotes 194 Notes to Pages 6–13 tion which Bakhtin sees as the novel’s primary material: Bakhtin, “Slovo v romane ,” in Voprosy literatury i estetiki (Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1975), 72–88. For discussion of the term “heteroglossia,” see Gary Saul Morson and Caryl Emerson, Mikhail Bakhtin: Creation of a Prosaics (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1990), 139–45. 4. For Bakhtin, monologism is the countervailing force to dialogized heteroglossia . When an author takes on a monologic voice, he often makes use of “authoritative discourse” or “internally persuasive language.” See Bakhtin, “Slovo v romane,” 72–88; Morson and Emerson, Mikhail Bakhtin, 218–23. 5. The reforms of Alexander II are generally seen by historians as beginning with the emancipation of the serfs in 1861 and ending with the Universal Military Service Statute of 1874, which held all Russian men, no matter what their social estate, equally responsible before the law to defend their country, meaning that all men between sixteen and twenty had to register for military service. Before this the nobility had been exempt from military service. 6. J. W. Kipp and W. B. Lincoln, “Autocracy and Reform: Bureaucratic Absolutism and Political Modernization in Nineteenth Century Russia,” in Imperial Russian History II: 1861–1917, vol. 3 of Articles on Russian and Soviet History 1500–1991 (New York: Garland, 1992), 1–21. 7. Lincoln, The Great Reforms, 163–64. 8. See Richard Wortman, The Crisis of Russian Populism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967), 1–34, and Adam B. Ulam, In the Name of the People: Prophets and Conspirators in Pre-Revolutionary Russia (New York: Viking, 1977), 269–96. 9. Richard Wortman, The Development of a Russian Legal Consciousness (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976), 28. 10. W. B. Lincoln, In the Vanguard of Reform: Russia’s Enlightened Bureaucrats , 1825–1861 (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1982). 11. Louise McReynolds, The News Under Russia’s Old Regime: The Development of a Mass Circulation Press (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1991), 11–29. 12. Ibid., 41–43. 13. Harriet Murav, Russia’s Legal Fictions (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1998), 57–59. See the most notable trial commentary in A Writer’s Diary: 21:13–23; 22:50–73; 23:5–20, 136–41; 24:36–43; 25:182–93. 14. See the notes to M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, Sobranie sochinenii, ed. A.S. Bushmin et al., 20 vols. (Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia Literatura, 1970–76), 13:655–56. 15. For a modern take on and a summary of the...