The Unknown Dostoevsky

3-15

Authors: Тихомиров Борис Николаевич

Статья посвящена атрибуции одного наброска из записной тетради Ф. М. Достоевского 1866–1867 гг. (РГАЛИ. Ф. 212.1.5. С. 10). Как в 1-м, так и во 2-м изданиях академического Полного собрания сочинений (ПСС) этот набросок атрибутирован как подготовительные материалы к неосуществленному замыслу начала 1866 года, которому публикаторами присвоено название «Ростовщик». В статье приведены альтернативные наблюдения, дающие основание датировать набросок осенью 1867 года, и высказывается гипотеза о принадлежности записей на этой странице подготовительным материалам ранней редакции романа «Идиот», датируемым осенью 1867 года. Критически оцениваются аргументы публикаторов ПСС. Анализируется положение наброска среди окружающих записей тетради, а также его содержание, позволяющее обнаружить близкие переклички с черновыми материалами «Идиота». Рассматривается проблема прототипов (в аспекте установления сквозных мотивов). Выявляется специфика наброска, затрудняющая его атрибуцию.

31-45

Authors: Тертий Филиппов

В статье публикуются материалы переписки Т. И. Филиппова с историком М. П. Погодиным 1873–1874 гг. Публикация писем сопровождается подробным фактическим комментарием. Эпистолярные материалы освещают различные стороны авторского участия Т. И. Филиппова в еженедельном журнале «Гражданин», дают представление о деловой обстановке в редакции, осложненной наличием у журнала двух «хозяев» — редактора Ф. М. Достоевского и издателя (неофициального соредактора) В. П. Мещерского. Наиболее подробно отражена в письмах работа Т. И. Филиппова над серией статей по проблемам старообрядческого единоверия, написанной для «Гражданина» в 1873–1874 гг. по материалам дискуссий в Петербургском отделе Общества любителей духовного просвещения. Письма Т. И. Филиппова содержат критические отзывы о книге М. П. Погодина «Простая речь о мудреных вещах» (М., 1873), рецензировавшейся в «Гражданине» (1873. № 43).

67-81

Authors: Елена Алексеевна Федорова

Taking an active part in the cultural life of Russia of the late 19th and early 20th centuries E. N. Opochinin was acquainted with lots of his famous contemporaries — Vyazemsky P. P., Maikov A. N., Milyukov A. P., Grigorovich D. V., Krestovsky V. V., Polonsky Ya. P., Turgenev I. S., F. M. Dostoevsky and others — and depicted their portraits in his notes. The article for the first time envisages Opochinin’s diary notes of 1879 1880 about F. M. Dostoevsky, entitled “My conversations with Dostoevsky”, from the viewpoint of the spiritual and moral reference points that defined the worldview of the late Dostoevsky. In his notes Opochinin specified the issues Dostoevsky was occupied with during his work on the novel “The Brothers Karamazov”. In his conversations with the novice man of letters Dostoevsky thought about peculiarities of the infant soul and world, about the construction of a religious family as a way out of the spiritual crisis of the society and the crisis of “gender relations”, about repentance as a way to the restitution of harmony of Man with conscience and with God, about the writer’s attitude to his nation and Motherland, about the veneration of God’s image by Russian people. Dostoevsky’s spiritual and moral ideas turned to be familiar to Opochinin’s ones. Thus, following them allowed the young contemporary of the great writer to take a rightful place in life, journalism and history of Russian literature.

3-22

Authors: Georgiy S. Prokhorov

The primary focus of this article is to cast some light on the procedural aspects which resulted from the investigation into Mikhail Andreevich Dostoevsky's death. In this article we attempt to interpret the material evidence of the face-to-face interrogation of the two key witnesses to the case — Ivan Leibrecht and Vladimir Nechaev. The interpretation of the case is made based on the effective Russian legislation of the 1830s and the existing police investigation papers of the years 1839—1840. Thus, three main semantic lines of police inquiry have been disclosed, i. e. the cause of death, the source of the murder gossips (hearsay witnesses) and the problem of jurisdiction. Alongside this, discrepancies between the two legal bodies involved in the judicial proceeding — The Court of Kashira Uezd and Tula Criminal Chamber — have been brought to light.

59-70

Authors: Александр Отливанчик

В рамках изучения редакционного архива еженедельника «Гражданин» (1872–1879) предпринимается комментированная публикация писем к Ф. М. Достоевскому Н. П. Шаликовой (1815–1878) — писательницы, публициста, непостоянного автора «Гражданина». Исследуется вопрос о датировке письма Н. П. Шаликовой Ф. М. Достоевскому, имеющего авторскую дату «12 апреля 1877». Авторская датировка данного письма дважды оспаривалась: сначала А. Г. Достоевской, отнесшей письмо к 1872 г., затем в архивной справке и справочном издании «Описание рукописей Ф. М. Достоевского» (М., 1957), где письмо датировано 12 апреля 1874 г. Изучение содержания письма Н. П. Шаликовой, его сопоставление с другими архивными материалами показало, что авторская дата «12 апреля 1877» не является ошибочной и не нуждается в исправлении.

96-109

Authors: Юлия Юхнович

Проводя летние сезоны 1872—1880 гг. в Старой Руссе, Ф. М. Достоевский встречался, знакомился и приятельствовал с разными людьми. К старорусскому окружению Достоевского, в первую очередь, нужно отнести священника Иоанна Румянцева; подполковника А. К. Гриббе и его племянницу А. Г. Елисееву; генерала Е. И. Леонтьева; актрису курортного театра А. П. Орлову; мещанку А. И. Меньшову (прототип Грушеньки из романа «Братья Карамазовы»); петербургского журналиста П. А. Гайдебурова; супругов Жаклар. Среди старорусских соседей Ф. М. Достоевского были люди, которые лишь вскользь упоминались в его переписке с женой и те, о которых он мог знать понаслышке. Связи с этими людьми требуют отдельного рассмотрения. Данная статья дает представление о том, насколько разнообразен был круг старорусских знакомых Достоевского. Общение с ними во многом могло повлиять на ход творческого процесса писателя.

3-17

Authors: Vladimir N. Zakharov

Lots of anonymous articles were published in the periodicals edited by Dostoevsky in the 1860s–1870s. Traditional methods of their attribution often turn out to be ineffective. As a rule, discussing this issue researchers try to decide definitely who one or another article belongs to, but they do not take into consideration a specific character and practical aspects of journalistic and editorial work of those times, prerequisites and conditions of publication of articles, their genre singularity. Almost all the anonymous articles in these periodicals were editorial, written by editors or employees and authors under a commission of the editor in chief. Sometimes the editors office bought someone else’s text and revised it. The given articles manifested the journal’s policy, put into force ideas and instructions of the editor in chief. The authorship of the articles did not matter. The author was deprived of his rights for the article, which became the journal’s property. Thus, it is advisable to consider the editorials as a particular genre meant to formulate the journal’s policy, bring its program into effect, and implement the editor’s instructions. Their attribution is possible but not necessary. Among the anonymous articles in the journals "Vremya" and "Epokha" and the weekly "Grazhdanin" the most distinguished are the publications of F. M. Dostoevsky, as well as those prepared in collaboration with the following co-editors — M. M. Dostoevsky ("Vremya", "Epokha") and V. P. Meshchersky ("Grazhdanin"). In the editorial domain, the leading role belonged to F. M. Dostoevsky. As a specific genre, the given articles should be published and included into actual editions on history of Russian literature and journalism.

35-58

Authors: F. M. Dostoevsky, V. P. Meschersky

Correspondence between F. M. Dostoevsky and V. P. Meshchersky covers the period of nine years from 1872 till 1880. Their letters contain valuable biographical and literary information on the history of Russian literature and journalism of the 1870's.

120-142

Authors: Irina S. Andrianova

A dynamic process of professionalization of literary activity in the 19th century involved female writers as well. In contrast to the opinion of many of his fellow reviewers and writers, F.M. Dostoevsky considered female education a way to moral renewal of Mankind and approved of women’s involvement in literary activity. Such a viewpoint of Dostoevsky used to evoke women’s confidence and encourage them to write to him in search of moral support and a trustworthy opinion. The Russian archives keep the letters of more than 20 female writers addressed to Dostoevsky. The authors of two of them remain unidentified up to now. The study of the letter of the third correspondent of Dostoevsky, an emerging author, unknown before, who sent to Dostoevsky the manuscripts of her writings in response to the review, has resulted in the attribution appeared in the given article. Having carried out textual analysis of the autograph, examined documentary, biographic, historic and literary sources, information of genealogy websites, the author has brought to a focuse and adduced arguments in favor of the opinion that the letter to Dostoevsky dated back to March 7th, 1877 and signed with a cryptonym "M.Z." (in the text of the letter referred to as "M.F.Z.") belongs to Maria Florianovna Kharkeevich (whose maiden name was Zavadskaya). She lived in the village Shatalovka of Voronezh province, in the estate of her husband Yakov Alekseevich Kharkeevich. Thus, the extant Kharkeevich mansion in the village Shatalovka as well as being an architectural landmark of the 19th century, takes on a new significance of a site of memory in the Russian rural area where the female author used to write letters to Dostoevsky.

149-159

Authors: Pavel E. Fokin

Maria Fyodorovna Dostoevskaya (nee Nechaeva), mother of the great writer, died on March 11th (February 27th), 1837. She was buried at the first public graveyard in Moscow — Lazarev cemetery, the largest one until 1917. In the 1930s this cemetery was ravaged, and the writer’s mother’s remains were subjected to a barbaric exhumation. The tombstone was kept for a long time in the cellar of the State Literary Museum. The given article covers the history of reconstruction of the tombstone of M. F. Dostoevskaya. This cultural and historical event occurred on March 11th, 2017 in the territory of the former Lazarev cemetery in Moscow, near the Holy Spirit Temple. The reconstruction of M. F. Dostoevskaya’s grave is not only the reconstruction of a place of memory of the Dostoevsky dynasty, but is also evocation of recollections of all the buried in the destroyed Lazarev cemetery.

166-167

Authors: I. Volgin, D. Bak, V. Zakharov

The Annex to the article contains the published speeches of several participants of the consecration of the monument and the memorial service taken place on March 11, 2017 on the occasion of 180th anniversary of the death of Maria Fyodorovna Dostoevskaya. These speeches reveal the historical meaning and importance of the restoration of the monument on the grave of the writer’s mother.

3-22

Authors: Natalja A. Tarasova

The article is devoted to the textual analysis and publication of Dostoyevsky’s draft manuscripts, more specifically sketches in his notebooks and coherent draft texts. The presented results cover the manuscripts created between 1865 and 1879, such as drafts of the novels “Crime and Punishment”, “The Idiot”, “The Adolescent”, and “The Brothers Karamazov”. The Article also considers in detail scientific approaches to the publication of Dostoevsky’s creative heritage evolved in the 1920s–1930s and developed later, into the scientific concept of academic edition of the author’s works. Based on this analysis, the range of issues is determined, important for modern Dostoevsky studies and for new projects related to the publication of Dostoevsky’s texts, both paper and electronic books.

47-60

Authors: Yulia A. Dunaeva

The article indicates to the discrepancy between the most common version of the address of the “Old Pawnbroker’s House” — Griboyedov canal, 104 — and the text of the novel “Crime and Punishment”. Basing on previous researches of other authors and on her own findings the author argues that a possible location of the “Old Pawnbroker’s House” might be somewhere on the right bank of the Griboyedov canal and to the West of Stolyarnyi Alley. The author suggests a new version of the address — Kazanskaya Street, 60 / Fonarny Alley, 18 / Griboyedov Canal Embankment, 83.

79-84

Authors: Alexander V. Otlivanchik

The pen name Евгенiевъ [Evgeniev], appeared at the end of the articles №№ 3, 6 and 11 in the Journal “Grazhdanin” of 1873, is attributed by the author reference to the publication signed with the true surname of a staff writer. The article provides new biographical details about Vasily Yakovlevich Ososov, the owner of the pen name Евгенiевъ [Evgeniev]. Possible reasons for termination his work for “Grazhdanin” in March 1873 are investigated in the article.

108-118

Authors: Valentina S. Zinkova, Anna I. Solopova

There are plenty of research works on personal and business relations between F. M. Dostoevsky and V. F. Putsykovich. The basis for such researches is the variety of letters and documents. Dostoevsky’s letters to Putsykovich were published once and again. However, up to now, some of them, mostly those from Berlin archive, are not studied enough. As for the letters of Putsykovich, they have never been released entirely. The present article makes an attempt to represent for the first time the correspondence of Dostoevsky and Putsykovich in a right chronological order, maintaining peculiarities of spelling and punctuation of the originals and correcting the mistakes of previous publishers.

3-13

Authors: Vladimir N. Zakharov

Among Dostoevsky’s manuscripts, a seemingly insignificant document can be found. It consists of five pages torn out by the writer from his sketchbook — apparently, in August 1864. This document demonstrates how Dostoevsky the editor would work with authors, guide them and shape the policy of his journal. In his notes on classical and real education, Dostoevsky expressed the idea and conception of the article, which he commissioned to be written by A. A. Golovachov, a Moscow litterateur. Despite its brevity, the text reads as a complete statement. In it, Dostoevsky puts forward his vision of the new education in Russia which must overcome the "Roman and Germanic" influence, as well as teach young people how to become Russian "through learning" (if they cannot be Russians a priori), and how to strive for "deeper understanding of Russia" in schools and universities. Later, in his 1880 sketchbook, Dostoevsky took these ideas a step further in an essay titled "To study Russia". Dostoevsky’s pedagogical ideas have not lost their relevance for contemporary Russia: his call for a deeper study and understanding of Russia as the main challenge for national education still remains largely unheeded.

28-69

Authors: Feodor M. Dostoevsky

The fee list №№ 23–39 of the journal “Grazhdanin” of the year 1873 is published with the author’s spelling and punctuation but the drawbacks committed in its’ first publication are corrected here (Literary Heritage. Vol. 83. Moscow: Nauka, 1971. Pp. 305–309). The publication is accompanied with the photos of the original pages of the fee list and comments on all the fee calculations and payments. Based on the analysis of the marks in the fee list, the comparison of the calculated fees with the length of the texts inserted into issues №№ 23–39 of “Grazhdanin”, and the rates of payment per a text line, attribution of anonymous and pseudo-anonymous publications in “Grazhdanin” becomes possible.

92-127

Authors: Boris N. Tikhomirov

The article is dedicated to analysis of repercussions of the book “Heaven and Hell” (1688—1772) by Emmanuel Swedenborg in the creative work of Dostoevsky. The moment of acquaintance of the author with the treatise of the Swedish theosophist is studied. The article summarizes the research results on the theme “Dostoevsky and Swedenborg” in national and international literary studies. The author of the article focuses on the traces of Swedenborg’s book’s impact on genesis of the fantastic story of Dostoevsky “Bobok” (1873), and proves the opinion that the artistic space of this writing is similar to “the world of spirits” of the Swedish mystic, that is seen as a transitional sphere between mortal life of a Man and his eternal being in Hell or in Heavens. At the same time, the differences between an artistic conception of Dostoevsky and the doctrine of Swedenborg are emphasized. The evidence of the author’s awareness of the treatise “Heaven and Hell” is also found in the preliminary materials to the novels “Demons” and “the Brothers Karamazov”.