The Problem of Meaningful Differentiation of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Rough Sketches for Different Works

Download:

PDF
Author: Natalia A. Tarasova
Information about the author:

DSc in Philology, Leading Researcher, Institute of Russian Literature (Pushkin House) of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Makarova emb. 4, 199034 Saint Petersburg, Russia.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8775-1434

E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Author 2: Tatiana V. Panyukova
Information about the author 2:

Senior Editor, Petrozavodsk State University, Lenin Blvd. 33, 185910 Petrozavodsk, Russia.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4494-4332

E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
For citation:

Tarasova, N.A., and Panyukova, T.V. “The Problem of Meaningful Differentiation of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Rough Sketches for Different Works.” Dostoevsky and World Culture. Philological journal, no. 4 (20), 2022, pp. 163–189. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22455/2619-0311-2022-4-163-189
Received: 20 Aug. 2022
Published: 25 Dec. 2022
Issue: 2022 no. 4 (20)
Department: TEXTUAL CRITICISM
Pages: 163-189
DOI: https://doi.org/10.22455/2619-0311-2022-4-163-189
EDN:

https://elibrary.ru/XMLZRF
UDK: 821.161.1.0+80
BBK: 83.3(2=411.2)
Keywords: Fyodor Dostoevsky, handwritten text, problems of edition, the omission of the text.
Abstract: The paper deals with issues of textual research and publication of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s draft manuscripts. The authors of the article focus on the problem of contextual analysis of handwritten materials and meaningful differentiation of entries related to different creative ideas of the writer, which at the draft stage is often a significant difficulty for researchers. As a result of the critical analysis proposed in the article, inaccuracies of reproduction and omissions in scientific publications of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s drafts were found. The textual and real comments on the studied material were supplemented. The analysis of this problem remains relevant due to the complex composition of the manuscript heritage of Fyodor Dostoevsky. The writer’s workbooks include a considerable number of scattered draft notes, the boundaries of which and the thematic affiliation to a particular idea are not always clear. In addition, scholarly reflection on the content of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s draft notes is particularly relevant in the context of the academic preparation of the complete collections of the writer’s works.

References

1. Viktorovich, V.A. F.M. Dostoevskii — redaktor “Grazhdanina” (1873–1874) [Fyodor Dostoevsky as the Editor of the “Grazhdanin” (1873–1874)]. Petrozavodsk, Petrozavodsk State University Publ., 2019. 426 p. (In Russ.)

2. Viktorovich, V.A. “Glava 4. 1871–1874. V zone turbulentnosti” [“Chapter 4. 1871–1874. In the Zone of Turbolence”]. Viktorovich, V.A., and Zakharova, O.V. F.M. Dostoevskii v russkoi kritike. 1845–1881 [F.M. Dostoevsky in Russian Criticism. 1845–1881]. Kolomna, Liga Publ., 2021, pp. 237–293. (In Russ.)

3. <Dal’, V.I.> Issledovanie o skopcheskoi eresi [Research on Skoptsy’s Heretical Sect]. St. Petersburg, 1844. 238 p. (In Russ.)

4. Dobrotvorskii, I.M. Liudi bozhii. Russkaia sekta tak nazyvaemyh duhovnykh khristian [People of God. The Russian Sect of So-Called Spiritual Christians]. Kazan’, Universitetskaia tipografiia Publ., 1869. 200 p. (In Russ.)

5. Dostoevskii, F.M. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii: v 30 tomakh [Complete Works: in 30 vols]. Leningrad, Nauka Publ., 1972–1990. (In Russ.)

6. Dostoevskii, F.M. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii i pisem: v 35 tomakh [Complete Works and Letters: in 35 vols]. St. Petersburg, Nauka Publ., 2013–(continuing publication). (In Russ.)

7. Konshina, E.N., and Ignatova, N.I., eds. Zapisnye tetradi F.M. Dostoevskogo, publikuemye Tsentral’nym arkhivnym upravleniem SSSR (tetradi №№ 1 i 4) i Publichnoi bibliotekoi SSSR imeni Lenina (tetradi №№2 i 3) [F.M.Dostoevsky’s Notebooks Published by the Central Direction of Archives of the USSR (Notebooks № 1 and № 4) and by the Lenin State Library of the USSR (Notebooks № 2 and № 3)]. Moscow, Leningrad, Academia Publ., 1935. 473 p. (In Russ.)

8. Zakharova, O.V. “Spor s Dostoevskim o ‘Besakh’: problema neponimaniia romana v prizhiznennoi kritike” [“Polemic with Dostoevsky on Demons: The Problem of Misunderstanding of the Novel in the Lifetime Criticism (1871–1873)”]. Problemy istoricheskoi poetiki, vol. 10: Evangel’skii tekst v russkoi literature XVIII–XX vekhov: tsitata, reministsentsiia, motiv, siuzhet, zhanr [Evangelical text in Russian literature of 18th-20th Centuries: quote, reminiscence, motif, plot, genre], no. 7, 2012, pp. 143–162. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15393/j9.art.2012.347

9. Sakulin, P.N., and Bel’chikov, N.F., eds. Iz arkhiva F.M. Dostoevskogo. Idiot. Neizdannye materialy [From the Archive of F.M. Dostoevsky. The Idiot. Unpublished Materials]. Moscow, Leningrad, Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo khudozhestvennoi literatury Publ., 1931. 320 p. (In Russ.)

10. Glivenko, I.I., editor. Iz arkhiva F.M. Dostoevskogo. Prestuplenie і nakazanie. Neizdannye materialy [From the Archive of F.M. Dostoevsky. Crime and Punishment. Unpublished Materials]. Moscow, Leningrad, Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo khudozhestvennoi literatury Publ., 1931. 217 p. (In Russ.)

11. Komarovich, V.L. “Literaturnoe nasledstvo Dostoevskogo za gody revoliutsii. Obzor publikatsii 1917–1933” [“Dostoevsky’s Literary Legacy During the Years of the Revolution. Review of Publications 1917–1933”]. Literaturnoe nasledstvo [Literary Heritage], vol. 15. Moscow, Zhurnal’no-gazetnoe ob’edinenie Publ., 1934, pp. 258–281. (In Russ.)

12. Letopis’ zhizni i tvorchestva F.M. Dostoevskogo: v 3 tomakh [The Chronicle of Dostoevskys Life and Work: in 3 vols]. St. Petersburg, Akademicheskii proekt Publ., 1999. (In Russ.)

13. <Livanov, F.V.> Raskol’niki i ostrozhniki: ocherki i rasskazy [The Raskolniki and the Convicts: Essays and Stories], vol. 3. St. Petersburg, doktor M.Khan Publ., 1868–1875, 1872. 626 p. (In Russ.)

14. Mel’nikov, P. “Belye golubi” [“White Pigeons Sect”]. Russkii vestnik, no. 3, 1869, pp. 311 –416. (In Russ.)

15. Mel’nikov, P. “Vospominaniia o Vladimire Ivanoviche Dale” [“Memories of Vladimir Ivanovich Dal’”]. Russkii vestnik, vol. 104, 1873, pp. 275–340. (In Russ.)

16. <Mikhailovskii, N.K.> “Literaturnye i zhurnal’nye zametki” [“Literary and Journal Notes”]. Otechestvennye zapiski, no. 1, part 2, 1873, pp. 133–161. (In Russ.)

17. <Mikhailovskii, N.K.> “Literaturnye i zhurnal’nye zametki” [“Literary and Journal Notes”]. Otechestvennye zapiski, no. 2, part 2, 1873, pp. 314–343. (In Russ.)

18. <Nadezhdin, N.I.> Issledovanie o skopcheskoi eresi [Research on Skoptsy’s Heretical Sect]. St. Petersburg, 1845. [4], 388, 120 p. (In Russ.)

19. Literaturnoe Nasledstvo [Literary Heritage], vol. 83: Neizdannyi Dostoevskii. Zapisnye knizhki i tetradi 1860–1881 [The Unpublished Dostoevsky. Notebooks and Workbooks of 1860–1881]. Ed. by I.S. Zil’bershtein and L.M. Rozenblium. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1971. 727 p. (In Russ.)

20. <Ornatskaia, T.I.> “Rukoiu Dostoevskogo” [“By Dostoevsky’s Hand”]. Dostoevskii. Materialy i issledovaniia [Dostoevsky. Materials and Research], vol. 6. Leningrad, Nauka Publ., 1985, pp. 3–31. (In Russ.)

21. Otechestvennye zapiski [National Notes]. St. Petersburg, A.A. Kraevsky Publ., 1972. (In Russ.)

22. Otechestvennye zapiski [National Notes]. St. Petersburg, A.A. Kraevsky Publ., 1973. (In Russ.)

23. Panchenko, A.A. Khristovshchina i skopchestvo: Fol’klor i traditsionnaia kul’tura russkikh misticheskikh sekt [Christism and Skoptsy: Folklore and Traditional Culture of Russian Mystical Sects]. Moscow, OGI Publ., 2004. 541 p. (In Russ.)

24. Rozenblium, L.M. Tvorcheskie dnevniki Dostoevskogo [Art Diaries by Fedor Dostoevsky]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1981. 368 p. (In Russ.)

25. Adrianova, I.S., editor. Rukopisnoe nasledie F.M. Dostoevskogo [The Handwritten Legacy of F.M. Dostoevsky]. Editorial board: L.V. Alekseeva, E.N. Vial’, M.V. Zavarkina, T.V. Paniukova, O.A. Sosnovskaia, B.N. Tikhomirov. St. Petersburg, RHGA Publ., 2021. 560 p. (In Russ.)

26. Skopcheskie dukhovnye pesni i nechto iz bogosluzheniia skoptsev v Rossii [Skoptsy’s Spiritual Songs and Something from the Worship of Skoptsy in Russia]. Leipzig, Je.L. Kasprovich Publ., 1879. 145 p. (In Russ.)

27. Tarasova, N.A. “Intertekstual’nye sviazi v rukopisnom tekste Dostoevskogo: postanovka voprosa” [“Intertextual Relations in Dostoevsky’s Handwritten Text: Posing a Question”]. Aloe, Stefano, editor. Dostoevskii: filosofskoe myshlenie, vzgliad pisatelia [Dostoevsky: The Thinking of a Philosopher, the View of a Writer]. St. Petersburg, Dmitrii Bulanin Publ., 2012, pp. 99–129. (In Russ.)

28. Tarasova, N.A. “Problemy publikatsii rukopisnogo teksta Dostoevskogo (na materiale chernovykh rukopisei)” [“The Problems of the Publication of Dostoevsky’s Manuscripts (Based on Draft Manuscripts)”]. Neizvestnyi Dostoevskii, no. 4, 2016, pp. 3–22. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2016.2861

29. Tarasova, N.A., and Paniukova, T.V. “Semantika i ideografiia rukopisnogo teksta Dostoevskogo: ot pocherka k smyslu” [“Semantics and Ideography of Dostoevsky’s Handwritten Text: from Handwriting to Meaning”]. Neizvestnyi Dostoevskii, no. 4, 2020, pp. 222–292. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2020.5081

30. Tikhomirov, B.N. “Drugoi Svidrigailov: neosushchestvlennyi zamysel Dostoevskogo nachala 1867 goda (nabliudeniia igipotezy)” [“Another Svidrigailov: Dostoevsky’s Unfulfilled Plan, 1867 (Observations and Hypotheses)”]. Tri veka russkoi literatury: aktual’nye aspekty izucheniia [Three Centuries of Russian Literature: Actual Aspects of Research], vol. 25: F.M. Dostoevskii: o tvorchestve i sud’be: k 190-letiiu so dnia rozhdeniia [F.M. Dostoevsky: On his Art and Destiny: on the 190th Anniversary of his Birth]. Ed. by B.N. Tikhomirov, Iu.I. Mineralov, O.Iu. Iur’eva. Moscow, Irkutsk, Vostochno-Sibirskaia gosudarstvennaia akademiia obrazovaniia Publ., 2011, pp. 141–152. (In Russ.)

31. Tikhomirov, B.N. “Byl li u Dostoevskogo neosushchestvlennyi zamysel pod nazvaniem ‘Rostovshchik’?” [“Did Dostoevsky Have an Unrealized Intention Known as ‘The Usurer’?”]. Neizvestnyi Dostoevskii, no. 3, 2017, pp. 3–15. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2017.3241

32. Tikhomirov, B.N. “Peterburgskie adresa i adresaty Dostoevskogo: (K probleme kraevedcheskogo kommentirovaniia adresnykh zapisei pisatelia)” [“St. Petersburg Addresses and Dostoevsky’s Addressees (on the Problem of Regional Commentaries on Address Books of the Writer)”]. Neizvestnyi Dostoevskii, no. 4, 2017, pp. 90–140. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2017.3361

33. Tikhomirov, B.N. “Peterburgskie adresa i adresaty Dostoevskogo: (K probleme kraevedcheskogo kommentirovaniia adresnyh zapisei pisatelia). Stat’ia vtoraia” [“Dostoevsky’s Addressees and Addresses in Petersburg (on the Problem of Regional Commentary on Address Books of the Writer). Article Two”]. Neizvestnyi Dostoevskii, no. 3, 2018, pp. 56–105. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2018.3701

34. Literaturnoe Nasledstvo [Literary Heritage]: vol. 77: F.M. Dostoevskii v rabote nad romanom “Podrostok”. Tvorcheskie rukopisi [F.M. Dostoevsky During His Work on the Novel The Adolescent. Creative Manuscripts]. Comp. A.S. Dolinin. Ed. by I.S. Zil’bershtein, L.M. Rozenblium. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1965. 517 p. (In Russ.)

35. Dostoevskii, F.M. Prestuplenie i nakazanie [Crime and Punishment]. Comp. by L.D. Opul’skaia. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1970. 808 p. (In Russ.)