What Difference Does the Microanalysis of a Literary Text Reveal in the Attitudes of the Author and the Protagonist Toward Mohammed? (Using the Example of the Novel Crime and Punishment)

Download:

PDF
Author: Valentina V. Borisova
Information about the author:

DSc in Philology, Leading Researcher, “Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Memorial Apartment,” Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature, Trubnikovsky Lane, 17, 121069 Moscow, Russia; professor, Moscow State Linguistic University, Ostozhenka St., 38/1, 119034 Moscow, Russia; Сhief Researcher, M. Akmullah Bashkir State Pedagogical University, Oktiabrskaia revoliutsiia St., 3A, 450008 Ufa, Russia.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9011-0160

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

Borisova, V.V. “What Difference Does the Microanalysis of a Literary Text Reveal in the Attitudes of the Author and the Protagonist Toward Mohammed? (Using the Example of the Novel Crime and Punishment).” Dostoevsky and World Culture. Philological journal, no. 3 (27), 2024, pp. 177–190. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22455/2619-0311-2024-3-177-190 
Received: 14 Apr. 2024
Published: 25 Sept. 2024
Issue: 2024 no. 3 (27)
Department: POETICS. CONTEXT
Pages: 177-190
DOI: https://doi.org/10.22455/2619-0311-2024-3-177-190
EDN:

https://elibrary.ru/MAJAOP
UDK: 821.161.1.0+28
BBK: 83.3(2=411.2)
Keywords: Dostoevsky, Crime and Punishment, microanalysis of a text, Christ and Mohammed, Raskolnikov’s “error.”
Abstract: The article applies the principles of microanalysis to a literary text using Crime and Punishment as an example. Through this lens, Raskolnikov’s “mistake” is revealed, specifically his historical “look back” at the great “founders and legislators of mankind.” Understanding Dostoevsky’s work also requires consideration of the context of Sacred History, which is equally important. The historical and value hierarchies of these contexts are shaped by the differing positions of the author and the protagonist in relation to the figure of Mohammed. Mohammed’s image, which simultaneously enters the perspectives of both the author and the protagonist, takes on different axiological meanings, particularly when compared with Christ: it is elevated in the author’s view and diminished in the protagonist’s. Raskolnikov’s “mistake” is intentionally “corrected” by the author, as evidenced by shifts in the stylistic register, changes in modality, and the distinctive use of quotations, keywords, and details, along with “plot criticism” of the protagonist. A microanalysis (including graphic and punctuation considerations) of the “strange” statement made by a Russian Orthodox student about Allah and his prophet reveals two levels of intertextual citation in the passage, aligning with both the author’s and the protagonist’s perspectives. Within the novel, the series of lawmakers and founders of humanity identified by Raskolnikov (Lycurgus, Solon, Mohammed, Napoleon) is replaced by another sequence (Abraham, Christ, Mohammed). This shift highlights Dostoevsky’s vivid exploration of the genealogical and spiritual connections among the Abrahamic religions and their prophets within the context of Sacred History. Without considering this religious genealogy, an adequate interpretation of Raskolnikov’s final vision of the “bosom of Abraham” is impossible. As he contemplates the “paradise valley,” the novel’s protagonist, like the prudent thief, finds himself alongside the forefather.

References

1. Bakhtin, M.M. Problemy poetiki Dostoevskogo [Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics]. St. Petersburg, Azbuka-Attikus Publ., 2015. 412 p. (In Russ.)

2. Borisova, V.V. “Sintetizm religiozno-mifologicheskogo podteksta v tvorchestve F.M. Dostoevskogo (Bibliia i Koran)” [“Synthesis of Religious and Mythological Subtext in Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Works (The Bible and the Quran)”]. Shchennikov, G.K., and R.G. Nazirov, eds. Tvorchestvo F.M. Dostoevskogo: iskusstvo sinteza [Dostoevsky’s Works: The Art of Synthesis]. Ekaterinburg, Izd-vo Ural. un-ta Publ., 1991, pp. 63–89. (In Russ.)

3. Borisova, V.V. “Magomet” [“Mohammed”]. Shchennikov, G.K., editor. Dostoevsky: Estetika i poetika: Slovar’-spravochnik [Dostoevsky: Aesthetics and Poetics: Handbook Dictionary]. Cheliabinsk, Metall Publ., 1997, p. 96. (In Russ.)

4. Borisova, V.V. “Tvar’ drozhashchaia” [“A Trembling Creature”]. Shchennikov, G.K., editor. Dostoevsky: Estetika i poetika: Slovar’-spravochnik [Dostoevsky: Aesthetics and Poetics: Handbook Dictionary]. Cheliabinsk, Metall Publ., 1997, p. 118. (In Russ.)

5. Borisova, V.V. “Roman F.M. Dostoevskogo ‘Prestuplenie i Nakazanie’ v kontekste Sviashchennoi istorii: Avraam, Khristos, Magomet” [“Dostoevsky’s Novel Crime and Punishment in the Context of Sacred History: Abraham, Christ, Mohammed”]. Neizvestnyi Dostoevskii, vol. 9, no. 4, 2022, pp. 186–198. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15393/j10.art.2022.6481

6. Bocharov, S.G. “‘Ty chelovechestvo prezrel’. Ob odnom siuzhete russkoi literatury: Dostoevskii i Pushkin” [“‘You Have Despised Humanity.’ On a Plot of Russian Literature: Dostoevsky and Pushkin”]. Pro memoria: sbornik materialov Mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii, 28–30 maia 2001 g., Peterburg: pamiati akademika Georgiia Mikhailovicha Fridlendera (1915–1995) [Pro Memoria: Proceedings from the International Conference, May 28–30, 2001, St. Petersburg: in Memory of Academician Georgy M. Fridlender (1915–1995)]. St. Petersburg, Nauka Publ., 2003, pp. 87–105. (In Russ.)

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

8. Dostoevskii, F.M. Polnoe sobranie. Kanonicheskie teksty: v 15 tomakh [Complete Works. Canonical Texts]. Ed. by V.N. Zakharov. Petrozavodsk, Izd-vo PetrGU Publ., 1995–2015. (In Russ.)

9. Zakharov, V.N. “Slovo i kursiv v ‘Prestuplenii i nakazanii’” [“Word and Italics in Crime and Punishment”]. Russkaia rech’, no. 4, 1979, pp. 21–27. (In Russ.)

10. Zakharov, V.N. “‘Pravoslavnoe vozzrenie’: idei i ideal” [“‘Orthodox View’: Ideas and Ideal”]. Dostoevskii, F.M. Polnoe sobranie. Kanonicheskie teksty: v 15 tomakh [Complete Works. Canonical Texts: in 15 vols], vol. 7. Ed. by V.N. Zakharov. Petrozavodsk, Izd-vo PetrGU Publ., 2007, pp. 529–544. (In Russ.)

11. Kasatkina, T.A. “‘Brat’ia Karamazovy’: opyt mikroanaliza teksta. ‘Oshibka geroia’ kak osobyi priem v proizvedeniiakh F.M. Dostoevskogo” [“The Brothers Karamazov: An Experiment of Textual Microanalysis. The ‘Hero’s Error’ as a Peculiar Instrument of Dostoevsky’s Works”]. Kasatkina, T.A. Sviashchennoe v povsednevnom. Dvusostavnyi obraz v proizvedeniiakh F.M. Dostoevskogo [The Sacred in the Ordinary: The Two-Folded Image in Dostoevsky’s Works]. Moscow, IWL RAS Publ., 2015, pp. 304–320. (In Russ.)

12. Kasatkina, T.A. “Punktuatsiia kak khudozhestvennyi priem: ‘tol’ko otkryvaiushchaia kavychka’” [“Punctuation as an Artistic Technique: ‘Only Opening Quotation Marks’”]. Roman F.M. Dostoevskogo “Podrostok”: sovremennoe sostoianie izucheniia [Dostoevsky’s Novel The Adolescent: Current State of Research]. Moscow, IWL RAS Publ., 2022, pp. 77–84. (In Russ.)

13. Kasatkina, T.A. “‘Prestuplenie i nakazanie’: kak sozdaetsia glubokii tekst” [“Crime and Punishment: How to Create a Deep Text”]. Dostoevskii i mirovaia kul’tura. Filologicheskii zhurnal, no. 1 (17), 2022, pp. 52–62. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22455/2619-0311-2022-1-52-62

14. Meerson, O. “Avraam i Isaak — svideteli pokaianiia Raskol’nikova” [“Abraham and Isaac, Witnesses of Raskolnikov’s Repentance”]. Dostoevskii i mirovaia kul’tura. Al’manakh, no. 30, part 2, 2013, pp. 9–26. (In Russ.)

15. Meerson, O. “Bibleiskie interteksty u Dostoevskogo kak arbitry pri tolkovanii spornykh mest” [“Biblical Subtexts as Arbiters for Ambiguous Passages in Dostoevsky’s Works”]. Dostoevskii i mirovaia kul’tura. Filologicheskii zhurnal, no. 3 (7), 2019, pp. 34–51. (In Russ.)

16. Nazirov, R.G. Tvorcheskie printsipy F.M. Dostoevskogo [Dostoevsky’s Creative Principles]. Saratov, Izd-vo Sarat. Un-ta Publ., 1982. 160 p. (In Russ.)

17. Podosokorskii, N.N. “Religioznyi aspekt napoleonovskogo mifa v romane ‘Prestuplenie i nakazanie’: obraz ‘Napoleona-proroka’ i misticheskie sekty russkikh raskol’nikov-pochitatelei Napoleona” [“The Religious Element of the Myth of Napoleon in the Novel Crime and Punishment: The Image of ‘Napoleon-Prophet’ and the Mystic Sects of Russian Schismatics, Worshippers of Napoleon”]. Dostoevskii i mirovaia kul’tura. Filologicheskii zhurnal, no. 2 (18), 2022, pp. 89–143. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22455/2619-0311-2022-2-89-143

18. Pushkin, A.S. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii: v 10 tomakh [Complete Works: in 10 vols], vol. 2. Leningrad, Nauka Publ., 1977. 401 p. (In Russ.)

19. Tikhomirov, B.N. “Lazar’! Griadi von”. Roman F.M. Dostoevskogo “Prestuplenie i nakazanie” v sovremennom prochtenii. Kniga-kommentarii [“Lazarus, Come Out.” A Contemporary Reading of Dostoevsky’s Novel Crime and Punishment. Book-Commentary]. St. Petersburg, Serebrianyi vek Publ., 2005. 472 p. (In Russ.)

20. Florenskii, P.A. Stolp i utverzhdenie istiny. Opyt pravoslavnoi teoditsei v dvenadtsati pis’makh [The Pillar and the Ground of the Truth. An Essay on Orthodox Theodicy in Twelve Letters]. Мoscow, Akademicheskii proekt Publ., 2017. 905 p. (In Russ.)

 

Reference list of video entries

1. Martianova, S.A. “Ikonograficheskii siuzhet ‘Lono Abraamovo’ v finale romana ‘Prestuplenie i nakazanie’” [“The Iconographic Theme ‘The Bosom of Abraham’ in the Epilogue to the Novel Crime and Punishment”]. XLVII International Conference “Dostoevsky and World Culture”. St. Petersburg, Memorial Museum F.M. Dostoevsky, 11 Nov. 2022. Available at: https://vk.com/dostoevskyconference?z=video-76064271_456239031%2F264afe92a456fc8e6d%2Fpl_wall_76064271 (Accessed 06 Apr. 2024) (In Russ.)