- Sergey Rosedkin -
		About d about with t about e in with to about m
	Main | News | Cut-away | fotobio | Prose | About Dostoevsky | J. Roberts | Humour | Non-fikshn | Criticism | Young Porn
Neva, 2002, № 12.	«Literary lie», Or Fruits of biassed reading … Amendments to V.Nabokov's lecture "Feodor Dostoevsky" Last years in Russia are widely published and republished among V.V. other products . Nabokov (1899—1977) and its well-known «Lectures on Russian literature» in a translation from English. In due time they have literally opened to the American students, and now here and much of us, the Russian readers, an eye on the nature of genius and riches of style N.  V.Gogol, have helped to understand more full and more adequately  L.N.Tolstoy,  I.S.Turgeneva's creativity    , And.  P.Chekhov and even And.  M.Gorkogo. In a word, these lectures-judgements are rather curious and informative, to publish-republish them, certainly, it is necessary. However, publishers for some reason neglect a duty to comment on obvious actual errors which, certainly, these lectures in any way do not decorate. The large writer who, undoubtedly, was V.Nabokov, has the right to dare to have the judgement about creativity of other known artists of the word, let even not coinciding with the standard and established point of view, it can and be deceived in any details, the moments, figures, the facts concerning the biography and creativity of other writer, but to mislead the reader even to V.Nabokov hardly permissibly. The god with them, with the American students who, maybe, study till now Russian literature on Nabokov's "lectures", but now, possibly, these "lectures" recommend as the grant and to the Russian students, and them to deceive the erroneous data translated from English on domestic classics simply guilty. However, speech at us will go only about not mentioned while lectures "Feodor Dostoevsky" for in it inattentive perusal of texts of Russian classic and superficial studying of its biography was showed by V.Nabokov most brightly in inadmissible quantity of actual errors. With F.  M.Dostoevskim at Nabokov was occurred-has happened any obvious failure, and it is possible to explain it, possibly, only to that if in Gogol our lecturer has been literally enamoured, Tolstoy admired, Chekhov with Turgenevym respected, to Dostoevsky, being expressed by an euphemism, is obvious «breathed roughly». At once we will underline, that purely speculative and too biassed flavouring judgements of the author of lecture into consideration we will not take. That it was clear, about what speech — we will result samples: «I feel some awkwardness, speaking about Dostoevsky. In the lectures I usually look at the literature under a unique corner interesting to me, that is as on the phenomenon of world art and display of personal talent. From this point of view Dostoevsky the writer not great, but mediocre enough, with flashes of unsurpassed humour which, alas, alternate with long heathlands of literary banalities». Or: «In a"Crime and punishment "of Dissenters it is not known why kills the old woman-protsentshchitsu and her sister. <…> why Dissenters kills? The reason extremely zaputanna. <…> Dostoevsky would succeed more likely, having made Raskolnikova strong, counterbalanced, serious the young man, confused too literally understood materialistic ideas». And here still: «Once and for all we will agree, that Dostoevsky — first of all the author of detective novels … <…> But if you have re-read the book (Dostoevsky. — N. N) which already have read once and know all intricate unexpectedness of a plot, you will feel, that do not test former pressure». Judgements these and similar to them with which lecture dazzles, vividly characterise not Dostoevsky, and, first of all, Nabokov. In this plan the reason is especially characteristic what is better to make Raskolnikova «counterbalanced, serious the young man»: it is thought, to show-show a difference of creative temperaments between holodnokrovnym more visually, "head" Nabokov and volcanic, "warm" Dostoevsky it is simply impossible. Well it is fine! As among a stream of similar estimated judgements meet in lecture and such which do honour of an insight and to a critical scent of the author. For example: «… Dostoevsky so the hating West, was most European of Russian writers». Or: «It seemed, the destiny to it has been prepared to become the greatest Russian playwright, but it has not found the way and became the novelist». And here still: «It possessed remarkable feeling ridiculous, more correctly, tragicomic, it it is possible to name exclusively talented humorist, but humour at it all time on the verge of a hysterics, and people will painfully wound each other in a rough exchange of insults». However, in last two cases Nabokov magnificence of first half of phrase absolutely greases and brings almost to nothing notorious and ridiculous "but", having given in to emotional tendentiousness. Let's pass, however, to annoying actual discrepancies which any tendency not to explain, and for convenience we will number them one after another. And, we will use V.Nabokov's reception which hardly further, already in lecture about Chekhov, assorting its story «In a ravine», italics numbers "deceits" of characters. So: The first deceit: «Dostoevsky undoubtedly suffered a neurasthenia and since the childhood has been subject to a mysterious illness — epilepsies». Right after Dostoevsky's death in February numbers «New time» for 1881 have appeared certificates of doctor S.D.Yanovsky that the epilepsy was showed for the first time at Dostoevsky in 1846 (at 25-year-old age), and the publisher of the newspaper of Ampere-second. Suvorina which confirmed as if Dostoevsky was ill paduchej in the childhood, on what it was minded on pages of the same of "New time» by the younger brother of the writer And.  M.Dostoevsky. And it is valid, Dostoevsky in the first ambassador of penal servitude the letter to big brother M.M.Dostoevsky  (on January, 30th - on February, 22nd, 1854 ), describing the ostrozhnye four years, for the first time mentions: «From frustration of nerves at me has happened paduchaja, but, however, happens seldom». In the letter to the same Michael Mihajlovichu in half a year (on July, 30th, 1854 ) adds: « In general penal servitude has much deduced from me and has much imparted to me. I, for example, already wrote to you about my illness. The strange attacks similar on paduchuju and, however, not paduchaja ». And only still almost in three years in the letter to  A.E.Vrangelju (on March, 9th, 1857 ) informs« the definitive diagnosis ":" In Barnaul with me there was an attack <…> the doctor has told to me, that at me the present epilepsy … » Suvorin, composing the obituary, had near at hand Dostoevsky's no letters-certificates, but here to Nabokov instead of blindly trusting Suvorinu, to glance in primary sources stirred nobody — these letters have been published in XIX century The second deceit: «Dostoevsky has given the novel to Nekrasov, and at night in bed could not get off bad presentiments:“ They will laugh at mine «Poor people» ”, — he repeated about itself(himself). But in four o'clock in the morning him have woken Nekrasov and Grigorovich». Here, first, V.Nabokov holds back, Grigorovich but the matter is that Dostoevsky has given the manuscript of the first novel just D whence has suddenly jumped out.  To V.Grigorovich with whom lived during that time on one apartment, and already that has taken down «Poor people»  to N.A.Nekrasov — about it Grigorovich writes to the «Literary memoirs» also, and Dostoevsky has in detail told in January release of "the Diary of the writer» for 1877 Well, and about "have woken" — it is necessary not to know at all Dostoevsky's nature, not to understand it. In the same "DP" the author of "Poor people» recollects: « In the evening of the same day as I have given the manuscript, I have gone somewhere far to one of former companions; we have all night long spoken with it about “Dead souls” and read them, again I do not remember. <…> I Was turned back home already at four o'clock, in white, light as in the afternoon the Petersburg night. There was perfect warm time, and, having entered to itself in apartment, I to sleep have not laid down, have opened a window and villages at a window. Suddenly a call, it is extreme me surprised, and here Grigorovich and Nekrasov rush to embrace me, in perfect delight, and both hardly do not cry. They were overnight turned back early home, took my manuscript and began to read, on test: “From ten pages it will be visible”. But, having read ten pages, have decided to read ten more, and then, not coming off, have stayed already all night long till the morning, reading aloud and alternating when one got tired. <…> when they have terminated (seven quires!) have unanimously decided to go to me immediately: “That such that sleeps, we will wake him, it above a dream!” … »That's it — above: it is possible to think, Dostoevsky with its character and nerves, having given on already known at that time and influential Nekrasov's already known at that time court the first literary child over which year worked days and nights almost and upon which rested all hopes (« Instead of I will attach the novel so, maybe, and to Neva … », — from the letter to brother Michael from May, 4th, 1845 ) was capable to lay down since evening to sleep … The third deceit: «“ Poor people ”have been printed in nekrasovskom“ the Contemporary ”». That in "nekrasovskom" — it is correct, but not "Contemporary", and — «the Petersburg collection» (1846). The fourth deceit: «last years spent in Siberia, he again has taken up the pen and has written“ Village Stepanchikovo ”(1859) and“ Notes from the dead house ”». In Siberia Dostoevsky, except «Village Stepanchikova and its inhabitants», has written just small vaudevillian story «Uncle's dream»; and «Notes from the Dead house» have been written them later, already in Petersburg in 1860-1862  The fifth deceit: «In Germany its passion to gambling — a scourge of a family and an absolute obstacle to though to any prosperity in the house for the first time was showed». Yes, during the first trip abroad (1862 ) at Dostoevsky «it was showed its passion», but not to gambling, and — to a roulette which it then so it is live has represented in "Player" (1865). The author "Ruletenburga" (so this novel first was called) hated maps. To it testifies And.  G.Dostoevskaja: «By the way about maps: in that society (mainly literary) where Feodor Mihajlovich rotated, there was no usage to play cards. For all our 14-year-old joint life the husband of all once played preference at my relatives and in spite of the fact that did not take in hands of maps more than 10 years, played excellently and even has beaten partners on some roubles, than has been very embarrassed». The same doctor S. D.Yanovsky knowing the writer since 1846 has even more categorically expressed it   : «In maps Feodor Mihajlovich not only did not play, but had no concept about one game and hated game». By the way, disgust for maps and passion to a roulette, besides, brightly characterise Dostoevsky's nature: composure, thin calculation, tenacious excellent memory are necessary for a card play and in any measure bent to fraud, shulerstvu (not without reason to Nekrasov's address, made to itself a condition on maps, persistent bad hearings went). For the author of "Player" of such qualities was not available, he perfectly knew about it also the rate has made on ruletochnyj a ball — a symbol of blind Fate, fatality, a lottery. The sixth deceit: «After death of the brother the magazine which it published, was closed. Dostoevsky has gone bankrupt, and on it the burden of cares of a family of the brother — a duty which he has voluntary incurred at once has laid down. To cope with this excessive burden, Dostoevsky zealously was accepted to job. All most known compositions:“ The crime and punishment ”(1866),“ the Player ”(1867),“ the Idiot ”(1868),“ Demons ”(1872),“ Brothers Karamazovy ”(1880), etc. — were created in the conditions of eternal haste: it not always had possibility even to re-read written, is more correct — dictated to stenographers. In the name of one of them he has met, at last, woman very betrayed to him with a fair practical vein, with its help began to keep within terms and has got out of financial crisis. In 1867 he married it. It was happy marriage. Since 1867 on 1871 they have reached relative material welfare and could return to Russia. Since then and to the most death Dostoevsky lived rather easy.“ Demons ”had tremendous success. Soon after their occurrence to it have suggested to be printed in conservative magazine" Citizen "which was published by the prince Meshchersky. Before death it worked over the second volume of the novel“ Brothers Karamazovy ”, become famous most than other novels». This sixth deceit-paragraph in general is unique, for the ten "podobmanov"-discrepancies which not to get confused comprises, it is necessary to number in simply figures. And, besides, too biassed latent statements-hints as if Dostoevsky «zealously has begun» to write the novels only to earn money and to get out of debts, or not less ridiculous, a pier-say, on Anna Grigorevne Snitkinoj, from it «a practical vein», the writer married especially for the same mercantile reasons that «to keep within terms» and «to get out of financial crisis», — also we will leave on conscience of the author of lecture and in this register we will not switch on. Speech, we will repeat, only about actual perederzhkah. 1) Yes, after Michael Mihajlovicha's death the magazine was really closed, but not "Time" (1861—1863) about which before there was a speech at Nabokov and only about him, and the second magazine of brothers of Dostoevskys — "Epoch" (1864—1865). 2) In the beginning of October, 1866 Dostoevsky to have time to write  novel already sold to publisher F.T.Stellovskomu (future "Player"), for the first time in the life has addressed to the help of the stenographer. It had appeared And.  G.Snitkina with which help he also has written-has created the novel for 26 days, and then, in February of next year, and married Anna Grigorevne. These facts are widely known under Dostoevsky's letters, memoirs of the wife, are resulted in all biographies of the author of "Player" so about any "stenographers" in plural and speech cannot be. 3) the Statement (hardly above) as if Dostoevsky «not always had possibility even to re-read written, is more correct — dictated to stenographers», was born, of course, not from the life truth, and from aspiration to confirm for the author of "Idiot" and "Demons" bad glory ostensibly the bad stylist though somehow to support reproaches to it in verbosity, untidiness of language and other similar sins that is considered at literary snobs almost a good form. And meanwhile, was to address to "Memoirs" enough And.  G.Dostoevskoj where process of their teamwork with the husband is described in detail and time and again: the writer did sketches at night, made a draught copy, re-read-corrected dictated by it and deciphered by the wife the day before in the afternoon and dictated a new fragment. And in memoirs of other people close knowing Dostoevsky, about it it is possible to find authentic data. For example, at  N.N.Strahova: « Subsequently Anna Grigorevna constantly continued to help it., when at it draught sketches with every possible amendments, blots, inserts etc. have been prepared ., it dictated to it from these sketches. She wrote down stenograficheski, and then copied the shorthand; the accurate and distinct list turned out. <…> Anna Grigorevna ordinary came to Feodor Mihajlovichu at about noon, and they worked till 2 or 3 hours. At first Feodor Mihajlovich read that has been dictated by it the day before and now has been brought already copied, and then dictated further ». Besides, Dostoevsky practically «always had possibility» to "re-read and correct written also in a proof-reading.« I have to you one pokornejshuju and nastojatelnejshuju the request: when edition begins to send me a proof-reading of the April book “R <usskogo> the bulletin” let will send all this proof-reading in duplicate, that is in 2 prints … »(on April, 9th, 1880 );« Ubeditelnejshe I ask to send in due time proof-reading. I will not detain minutes … »(on August, 10th, 1880 );« I convincingly and especially ask to send me a proof-reading in duplicate (instead of in one). The Second copy to me absolutely here is necessary for forthcoming public readings … »(on November, 8th, 1880 ) Such requests taken from last letters of the writer to the coeditor of magazine« Russian bulletin »(in which Dostoevsky's all novels were published almost)  for N.A.Ljubimovu, — a refrain of its correspondence with edition. 4) the Message, that spouses Dostoevskys «could return to Russia» at few informed reader will call, of course, bewilderment for earlier about their compelled life-byte from April, 1867 till July, 1871 abroad, in Europe, at Nabokov it was not mentioned a half-word. 5) That Dostoevskys, living abroad, «have reached relative material welfare», — lovely imagination of the goodhearted author. Then it is possible to tell — through four with superfluous year they have come back to Russia absolutely "grown rich": one child on the hands, the second is literally on the approach, two suitcases with papers and linen, some roubles cash in a family purse yes 25000 (twenty five thousand!) to a debt. 6) Continuing a theme of "relative material welfare», Nabokov writes: «Since then and to the most death Dostoevsky lived rather easy». Alas, as this statement is nice also, but also it, to put it mildly, mismatches the severe truth of a life. Wearisome payment of many thousands debts (the and the died brother) was stretched almost before the death of the writer. Again we will ask to speak to the main witness — Anna Grigorevne: «Only one year prior to death of the husband we, at last, with them have paid off and could breathe freely, not being afraid, that will torment us reminders, explanations, threats of the inventory and property sale and so forth» Anything to myself — is "rather quiet"! 7) «“ Demons ”had tremendous success», — here it just the truth, but all taki not all and extremely one-sided. And.  G.Dostoevskaja recollects: «It is necessary to tell, that the novel“ Demons ”made the big success among reading public, but at the same time delivered to the husband weight of enemies in a literary world». Under «weight of enemies» ingenuous Anna Grigorevna means numerous critics and reviewers both liberal, and the democratic press, given a hostile reception Dostoevsky's to new novel, estimated it is sharply negative. Dostoevsky was so disturbed-had excited by such negative reaction of criticism, that it was going to even to write article-answer under the name «About the one who is healthy also who the madman. The answer to critics. An epilogue to the novel“ Demons ”», but essential affairs have prevented it to make it. 8) to Dostoevsky it is not simple «have suggested to be printed in conservative magazine" Citizen "» — prince V.P.Meshchersky has suggested the author of "Demons" to become the editor (that, of course, two big differences) the newspaper-magazine (if to be exact) "Citizen", on what the writer has agreed and headed this edition since January 1873го till April, 1874  9) «Before death» Dostoevsky could not work «over the second volume of the novel“ Brothers Karamazovy ”» in any way. Having finished on November, 8th, 1880 (for two and a half a month before death) "Epilogue" to the first volume and having sent it in edition of "Russian bulletin», the writer is literally in some days has begun job over materials to renewed by it to "the Diary of the writer». To "Publish" the Diary of the writer ”, — the wife writes-recollects, — Feodor Mihajlovich assumed within two years, and then dreamt to write the second part“ Brothers Karamazovyh ”…» Literally before death, for a day, on January, 27th, 1881 , the writer already sick, still brings editing in a proof-reading of January number "DP" which will come out in day of funeral of Dostoevsky — on January, 31st. Well, here, have somehow overcome this strange paragraph — we move further. The seventh deceit: «a year later, in 1881 , shortly before Alexander's II death, Dostoevsky has died …» As reference point for this statement Dostoevsky's speech on Pushkin celebrations in Moscow (on June, 8th, 1880 ) serves in lecture » , and the death of the writer has come on January, 28th, 1881 — in 6 months and 20 days, that as it is not difficult to understand, nevertheless is closer to vremennumu to a word-definition"half a year". The eighth deceit: «this Story <…> is written to 1840 » It is told about "Double", but this story is written to 1845 and published in a February issue «Domestic notes» for 1846  The ninth deceit: «In its world there is no weather, therefore as people are dressed, has no special value». And it is absolutely ridiculous! We will open Dostoevsky: «Night was awful, November, — wet, foggy, rainy, snezhlivaja, fraught with gumboils, nasmorkami, fevers, toads, fevers of all possible sorts and grades — in a word, all gifts of the Petersburg November. The wind howled in deserted streets, raising above rings black water of Fontanka and is fervent potrogivaja lean lanterns of quay which in turn echoed its howls by a thin, shrill scratch that made the infinite, squeaky, jingling concert rather familiar to each Petersburg inhabitant. There was a rain and snow at once. Streams of rain water broken through by a wind sprinkled slightly not horizontally as if from a fire pipe, and pricked and sekli the person of unfortunate mister Goljadkina as thousand pins and hairpins …» ("Double"); «In the beginning of July, during extremely hot time, towards evening, one young man left the closet <…> In the street a heat there was terrible, besides a closeness, a crush, everywhere a lime, woods, a brick, a dust and that especial summer stench, so known to each Petersburger who does not have possibilities to employ a summer residence, — all it at once has unpleasantly shaken and without that already upset nerves of the young man …» ("Crime and punishment"); «There was a wonderful night, such night which unless only and can be when we are young, the kind reader. The sky was such star, such light sky, that, having looked at it, it was involuntarily necessary to wonder: really there can live under such sky different angry and whimsical people?.» ("White nights") Etc ., etc ., and so forth Probably — can! And such whimsical, that do not notice the obvious: what enormous semantic role is played by weather in Dostoevsky's texts not only in respect of clothes of people, but also their inwardness. The tenth deceit: «Having described once an exterior of the hero, it in the old manner does not come back any more to its external shape. So the big artist …» does not arrive We take for an example at least a "Crime and punishment". In 3й portrait Svidrigajlova is given a part: «It was the person of years of fifty, to growth above an average, portly, with wide and abrupt shoulders that gave it a little sutulovatyj a kind. There was it shchegolski and is comfortably dressed and looked the portly barin. In its hands there was a beautiful cane, kotoroju it tapped, with each step, on sidewalk, and hands were in fresh gloves. Wide, skulistoe its person was pleasant enough, and the complexion was fresh, not Petersburg. Its hair, very much still dense, were absolutely blond and slightly unless with streaks of grey, and the wide, dense beard, going down a shovel, was even more light head hair. Its eyes were blue and looked coldly-steadfastly and thoughtfully; lips scarlet. In general it was perfectly saved person and seeming much more youngly the years …» It would seem, "exterior" of the hero is described in detail that to it to come back? But here in 6й novel parts, shortly before the death Arcady Ivanovich what for again "poses" Raskolnikovu, and together with it and to the reader: «It was any strange person similar as though on a mask: white, ruddy, with ruddy, scarlet lips, with it is light-belokuroju a beard and with enough still dense blond hair. Eyes were somehow too blue, and their sight is somehow too heavy and motionless. Something was awfully unpleasant in this beautiful and extremely young-looking, judging by letam, the person. Clothes Svidrigajlova were shchegolskaja, summer, easy, it in particular sported linen. Whether on a finger with expensive stone …» it was necessary to explain a huge ring, how in a repeated portrait nature of the given hero-suicide is psychologically specified, concretised? In the same way in the novel with the art purposes defined, probably, portraits of other basic heroes — Rodion Raskolnikova (in 1й twice are given a part — to a crime; in 3й — after) and Sleepyheads Marmeladovoj (in 2й parts — at bed dying Marmeladova in an appearance of the prostitute; in 3й — when she has come to Raskolnikovu to invite him to commemoration, and he even at first has not learnt it) … How it could to be noticed? About this method-reception of double portraiture in Dostoevsky's products even schoolboys in compositions write! The eleventh deceit: «Four obvious cases: prince Myshkin in“ the Idiot ”, Smerdjakov in“ Brothers Karamazovyh ”, Kirillov in“ Demons ”and nelli in“ Humiliated and offended ”». Nabokov lists here Dostoevsky's heroes-epileptics and, naming figure, as though aspires to accuracy. But then where in this list Murin from the story "Mistress"? «Murin laid on a floor; it jarred on in spasms, its person has been deformed tormently, and foam was shown on its bent lips. Ordynov has guessed, that unfortunate there was in the most severe attack of an epilepsy …» a Case that is called, is more obvious than the obvious. The twelfth deceit: «the Person from an underground draws a picture of general abundance in the future, a crystal palace-hostel …» Here all is turned upside down: the Underground person just does not draw «a picture of general abundance» and «a crystal palace-hostel», he, on the contrary, argues-polemizes with those who draws such "pictures" and "palaces", first of all — with N.  G.Chernyshevskim and its novel «What to do?» (Whether to Nabokov, the author of the novel "Gift", it not to know!) and even underlines, what is it not it «abundance pictures» and «crystal palaces»: «Then, are all of you speak, — the new economic relations absolutely ready and too calculated with matematicheskoju by accuracy so every possible questions in a flash will disappear, actually will come because on them every possible answers will turn out. Then the crystal palace will be built. Then... Well, in a word, then bird Kagan …» will arrive The thirteenth deceit: «(It is necessary to tell, that Dostoevsky tested absolutely pathological hatred to Germans, Poles and Jews that is visible from his compositions.)» This deceit presented by Nabokov in brackets, by the way and, as specially, got to our register under "infernalnyj" number — most, maybe, serious and absolutely unsubstantiated. It is possible to guess, that "lecturer" has here in a kind a way of the image of those or other heroes. Yes, there are in Dostoevsky's world rather sharzhirovanye Germans a baron with baroness Vurmergelm in "Player" yes Amalia Ljudvigovna Lippevehzel with Gertrudoj Karlovnoj Resslih in a "Crime and punishment"; images of two Poles Mussjalovicha and Vrublevsky in «Brothers Karamazovyh» are quite not nice also; to recollect Who else is possible and not mentioned by Nabokov "frantsuzikov"-proshchelyg mademoiselle Blansh and De-Grie from "Player" …? It is difficult to remember. Well, and now other number we will build: Bulls and Ratazjaev from «Poor people», madam Bubnova and the prince Valkovsky from «Humiliated and offended», the same Underground person, Alain Ivanovna, Luzhin and Svidrigajlov from a "Crime and punishment", Pyotrusha Verhovensky, Fedka Unbearable, captain Lebjadkin, Stavrogin from "Demons", at last, Feodor Pavlovich Karamazov and Smerdjakov from last novel … It after all all Russian people, more correctly, almost — bad people: just right about «pathological hatred» writer to compatriots conversation to conduct. As to Jews, it in general a question separate. Among heroes of works of art of Dostoevsky as it is strange, almost absolutely there are no Jews. It is recollected unless "is liquid" Ljamshin, small "demon" in "Demons", yes quite real Isaj Fomich Bumshtejn in documentary-memoirs «Notes from the Dead house» — "is liquid", which has reminded Dostoevsky the Gogol is liquid JAnkelja (and, obviously, has reminded also of own dramaturgic plan of a youth) and which the writer could not recollect without good-natured laughter. Still, Isaj Fomich amused all penal servitude by the cunning, impudence, arrogance and simultaneously awful cowardice. Was artful "zhidku" in a jail better many — he "worked" there the jeweller and the usurer. And more in novels and Dostoevsky's stories quite often there is a word "Jew" and derivative of it, that was usual business for Russian literature of XIX century. And here in publicism, and, first of all, «the Diary of the writer», really, Dostoevsky actively discussed actual and during that time notorious «the Jewish question» — at times too emotionally and polemicheski zaostryonno. But in "DP" (1877, March, gl. 2) Feodor Mihajlovich convincingly also has rejected charge which was shown to it by some contemporaries and which was reanimated-had repeated what for already during our times by Nabokov — in ostensibly «dislike for Jews":" In total that is more surprising to me: how it and whence I have got in haters of the Jew as people, how the nations? As the exploiter and for some defects to me to condemn the Jew partly it is permitted by these misters, but — but only in words: in practice it is difficult to find something more irritably and more scrupulously the formed Jew and is more sensitive than it, as Jew. But besides: when and than I have declared hatred to the Jew as to the people? As in heart we wash this hatred was never, and those from Jews who are familiar with me <…>, know it, I <…> from myself remove this charge <…>. Whether not therefore accuse me of "hatred", what I name sometimes the Jew "Jew"? But <…> a word "Jew", how much I remember, I mentioned always for a designation of known idea: “ The Jew, zhidovshchina, zhidovskoe the kingdom ”and so forth Here was designated known concept, a direction, the characteristic of a century. It is possible to argue on this idea, to disagree with it, but not to take offence a word …» And further (and to it the big chapter, all four parts) Dostoevsky in detail, persistently is devoted a question and repeatedly underlines-explains a difference between "Jew" and "Jew". On Dostoevsky, Russian, and the Tatar — everybody can be "Jew" both the Jew, and. Its this belief is evident was showed in lines from last novel, the characterising Feodor Pavlovicha Karamazov in a youth: «he Has met at first, by its own words,“ many Jews, zhidkami, zhidishkami and zhidenjatami ”, and has terminated that in the end at all only at Jews, but“ and at Jews has been accepted ”…» (kn. 1, gl. 4)/was more detailed see: «Dostoevsky's Minus» / The fourteenth deceit: «Representing this or that hero, it is short describes its appearance and then almost never to it comes back. As and in dialogues there are no notes which other authors usually use: instructions on gesture, a sight or other any detail characterising conditions. It is felt, that he does not see the heroes, what is it simply doll, the remarkable, bewitching dolls floundering in a stream of author's ideas.» About that Dostoevsky when it was necessary, willingly used a repeated portrait in the characteristic of the hero — it was already spoken. As to absence of "gestures", "sights" and other "details", «characterising conditions» in scenes-dialogues, this obvious misunderstanding. It is enough to read at least one page from "Demons", about which Nabokov just also has a speech to be convinced of the return (we will dare to make allocation by italics): «— Sergey Vsevolodovich! — all has exclaimed, having straightened and not descending with armchairs, Barbarian Petrovna, stopping its imperative gesture, — stop for one minute! <…> — Sergey Vsevolodovich, — she has repeated, rapping out words a firm voice in which the terrible call has begun to sound, — I ask you, tell now, not descending with this place: whether the truth, that this unfortunate, lame woman, — here it, there, look at it! Whether the truth, that it... Lawful your wife? I too remember this instant; he not smignul even an eye and steadfastly looked at mother; the slightest change in its person has not followed. At last he has slowly smiled any condescending smile and, not having answered words, has silently approached to mummy, took her hand, has respectfully brought to lips and has kissed. And before there was strongly usual, its invincible influence on mother, that she and here has not dared to draw aside hands. She only looked at it, all obratjas in a question, and its all kind said, that one more instant, and it will not take out uncertainty. But he continued to be silent. Having kissed a hand, he has once again taken a view of all room and still has slowly gone directly to Mare Timofeevne. It is very difficult to describe physiognomies of people during some instants. To me, for example, it was remembered, that Marja Timofeevna, all fading with a fright, has risen to it towards and has combined, as though begging it, before itself of a hand; at the same time the delight in its sight, any mad delight which has almost deformed its lines, — delight which difficultly is taken out by people is recollected also. Perhaps there was both that, and another, both a fright, and delight; but I remember, that I quickly to it have drawn near (I stood almost beside), it seemed to me, that she now will faint. — You cannot be here, — has spoken to it Sergey Vsevolodovich a tender, melodic voice, and in the opinion of it unusual tenderness was lighted. It stood before it in the most respectful pose, and in its each movement the respect affected most sincere. The poor thing prompt half-whisper, choking, has uttered indistinctly to it: — And it is possible for me... Now... To become before you on knees? — No, it in any way it is impossible, — he has perfectly well smiled to it so also she suddenly has joyfully grinned. The same melodic voice and gently persuading it precisely child, it with vazhnostiju has added: — Think that you the girl, and I though also the most devoted your friend, but nevertheless to you the extraneous person, not the husband, not the father, not the groom. Give your hand and pojdyomte; I take you to the carriage and if will allow, itself I will bring you to your house. She has listened and as though in meditation has inclined a head. — pojdyomte, — she has told, having sighed and offering it a hand … » The fifteenth deceit: «In general Ivan will involve in the basic intrigue, than third brother Alyosha more strongly. <…> All long, languid history of aged man Zosimy could be excluded without any damage for a plot, it is faster only would give to the integrity and harmony book. And again absolutely it is independent, in a cut with the general plan, history Iljushechki, the in itself remarkable sounds. But also in this perfect history about boy Iljushe, its friend Kohl, dog ZHuchke, silver pushechke, whimsical tricks of the hysterical father — even in this history Alyosha brings an unpleasant unctuous chill». About «Brothers Karamazovyh» it would be difficult to count these judgements vkusovshchinoj and to charge to too biassed perusal even if they would belong to contemporary Dostoevsky. After all in the foreword «From the author» it is declared-is unambiguously explained: « Beginning the biography of my hero, Alexey Fyodorovicha Karamazov, I am in some bewilderment. Namely: though I also name Alexey Fyodorovicha my hero, but however itself I know, that the person it completely not great, and therefore and I expect inevitable questions in a sort of those: than your Alexey Fyodorovich is remarkable, what you have chosen its hero? <…> I however would not be started up in these rather uninteresting and vague explanations and would begin simply-without ceremony without the foreword: it is pleasant, and so will read; but a trouble that the biography at me one, and novels two. The main novel of the second, is an activity of my hero already presently, in our present present situation. The first novel has occurred still thirteen years ago, and there is almost even not a novel, and only one moment from the first youth of my hero. To manage to me without this first novel it is impossible, because much in the second novel would become not clear … » Even, to possibly, most superficial reader it is clear, that «one moment from the first youth» Alyoshi is it poslushnichestvo in a monastery, plug-in product in a genre zhitijnoj to lead, belonging to its feather, under the name «From life in boze passed away ieroshimonaha aged man Zosimy, is made from own words by its Alexey Fyodorovichem Karamazov. Data biographic» which has occupied the whole chapter in the novel. It at all a stenograph of the story of aged man Zosimy, namely the composition, and the storyteller of the novel not without reason underlines, that Alyosha has made these records some time later. Writer Nabokov knew, how brightly characterises the person of the author its creativity! And without the story about the beginning of friendship Alyoshi with "children" at bed dying Iljushi the Snegiryov, without a scene with bronze (but in any way "silver"!) pushechkoj then, in the second novel, indeed, much could seem "not clear". The wife of the writer And.  G.Dostoevskaja as already it was mentioned here, has confirmed in "Memoirs" Feodor Mihajlovicha's intention in two years to return to «to Brothers Karamazov» and to write the second volume where Alyosha Karamazov, and the basic characters, of course, "children" from the first novel should become the protagonist, friends Iljushechki of the Snegiryov — Kohl Krasotkin. Smurov, Kartashov … There is to it an acknowledgement and in published "Diary" of Ampere-second. Suvorina. So, in whole and the general two with superfluous ten big and small discrepancies in one lecture. mnogovato! We will not repeat once again the obvious author about responsibility, and we will better result here as the conclusion rather curious two judgements from V.Nabokov's article «Pushkin, or the Truth and credibility», published in the same collection: 1) «Is useless to repeat, that founders of the libretto, these ominous persons who have entrusted“ Evgenie Onegina "or" the Queen of spades ”Tchaikovsky to mediocre music, with criminal image spoil the Pushkin text: I speak“ criminal ”, because it just that case when the law should interfere; time it forbids the private person to slander on near as it is possible to leave on freedom of the first comer which rushes on creation of the genius that it obokrast and to add the — with such generosity, that becomes difficult to imagine something sillier, than statement“ Evgenie Onegina "or" the Queen of spades ”on a scene». 2) «Pushkin's Life, all its romantic impulses and inspirations prepare as much traps, how much and temptations for authors of fashionable biographies. <…> but besides it exists also good, disinterested work of the several selected minds which, being dug in the past, collecting the smallest details, are not anxious not so by tinsel manufacturing on potrebu vulgar taste. And nevertheless there comes the fatal moment when the most chaste scientist almost involuntarily begins to create the novel, and here the literary lie has already lodged in this product of the diligent erudite as roughly, as in creation of the shameless compiler». As they say, — without comments. «Day of the literature», № 11, 2002; "Neva", № 12, 2002
çç ● èè
© Rosedkin Sergey Nikolaevich, 2001
E-mail: emp-reports@fustercluck.com