logo eng

 A.M.GORKY INSTITUTE OF WORLD LITERATURE
OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

Povarskaya 25A, bld. 1, 121069 Moscow, Russia
fedor@dostmirkult.ru

ISSN 2619-0311 (Print)
ISSN 2712-8512 (Online)

The Teaching of Literary Theory through the Shock of Not Understanding the Text. Crime and Punishment

JATS XML:

XML
BibTEX:

BIB
Research Information Systems Citation Format:

RIS
  • Download:

    PDF
  • Author: Olga A. Meerson
  • Information about the author:

    PhD in Slavic Studies/ Russian Literature, Columbia University, NYC, Professor, Department of Slavic Languages, Georgetown University, 3700 O St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20057, USA.

    https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1543-5229

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

    Meerson, O.A. “The Teaching of Literary Theory through the Shock of Not Understanding the Text. Crime and Punishment.” Dostoevsky and World
    Culture. Philological journal    , no. 1 (21), 2023, pp. 157–174 (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22455/2619-0311-2023-1-157-174
  • Received: 15 Feb. 2023
  • Approved after reviewing: 20 Feb. 2023
  • Published: 25 March 2023
  • Issue: 2023 no. 1 (21)
  • Department: TEACHING DOSTOEVSKY
  • Pages: 157-174
  • DOI: Visit Website
  • EDN:

    https://elibrary.ru/ZAMYHQ
  • UDK: 821.161.1.0
  • BBK: 83.3(2=411.2)
  • Publication Type: Review
  • Keywords: Dostoevsky, Crime and Punishment, Bakhtin, Bakhtinian Dialogus as another’s, borrowed, or double-voiced word, defamiliarization / ostranenie — both in art and as a teaching method, close readings, Deictics/ Deixis, Formalism as a literary school, eclectic approach to literary theory.
  • Abstract: This article presents an exercise in the close reading of two adjacent small chapters in Crime and Punishment — 3 and 4, in Part One of the Novel — Raskolnikov’s Mother’s letter and her son’s reaction to it, respectively. The exercise consists of two activities — homework preparation and its discussion in the classroom. The homework consists of a series of questions as reading guidelines, training the students to look for evidence in the text. These guidelines aim at alerting the students to the speaker’s and the listener’s respective attitudes to what matters to each about the topic of their conversation or, no less importantly, about what they deliberately omit: 1. the use of pronouns — personal as well as demonstrative and adverbial: Pointing to what matters instead of naming it, pronouns allow for a shift of referents. This, paradoxically, makes them more “loaded,” entailing a “naked,” shockingly direct, demonstration of attitude clashes. This requires a semiotic approach regarding deixis. 2. ostranenie/defamiliarization of these attitudes: the students initially presume that they understand what ails or concerns the characters but then discover how different their actual sore spots are — not merely from those presumed by the reader but from one another. Here, Russian Formalist Theory may come handy. 3. polyphony in Bakhtin’s sense — when the discourse offered by one speaker or character becomes re-accentuated by another, in both the way they listen and register the speech and the way they respond to it. Thus the theoretic approaches the students will use will be deliberately eclectic — whatever fits the purpose for the task at hand. The purpose of this exercise is two-fold. On the one hand, it makes theoretical approach relevant. The students begin to apply Literary Theories as instruments for understanding the text, rather than “worshipping” theory as the goal of their exercise in literary studies. On the other hand, it lets close readings counter any ideological reductionism. As the students develop their own interpretive skills, they also build up resistance to brain-washing or pre-digested interpretations, or to any attempted surrogates for their unmediated encounter with the primary text. The skill the students will thus acquire will be free, independent critical thinking. This, in turn, will re-invigorate their sense of Dostoevsky’s relevance, both ethical and aesthetic.

References

1. Bakhtin, M.M. Sobranie sochinenii: v 7 tomakh [Collected Works: in 7 vols], vol. 6: “Problemy poetiki Dostoevskogo”. Raboty 1960-kh – 1970-kh gg. [“Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics”. Works 1960s–1970s]. Moscow, Russkoe slovo Publ., 2006. 800 p. (In Russ.)

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

3. Iakobson, R. “Poeziia grammatiki i grammatika poezii” [“Poetry of Grammar and Grammar of Poetry”]. Semiotika [Semiotics]. Moscow, Raduga Publ., 1983, pp. 462–482. (In Russ.)

4. Meerson, Olga. Dostoevsky’s Taboos. Dresden; Munich, Dresden University Press, 1998. 232 p. (In English)

5. Riffaterre, Michael. Fictional Truth. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990. 137 р. (In English)

Current issue