Javascript must be enabled to continue!
N. N. Strakhov and Dostoevsky’s “Pushkin Speech”
View through CrossRef
The article considered three versions of N. N. Strakhov’s essay on the Pushkin Celebration of June 6–8, 1880 and Dostoevsky’s Speech delivered there. A comparative analysis of the texts published in 1880, 1883 and 1888 reveals the evolution of their author’s consciousness and fills in the existing gap in the history of his attitude to Dostoevsky, which has led to the infamous letter to Tolstoy dated November 28, 1883. According to Strakhov, the artistic flair manifested in Dostoevsky’s “Pushkin speech”, originates directly in God, whose mouthpiece the artist becomes aside from his own earthly personality, which does not only lack a connection with the meanings being transmitted, but may also directly contradict them. This is the ideological ground (combined with personal antipathy) on which the “aversion” to Dostoevsky ripens. As he revises his essay, Strakhov arrives increasingly closer to explaining the triumph of “Pushkin’s speech” solely as a victory of the “party,” and ultimately explains it by the insignificance of the event itself. The article draws a conclusion on the ambivalent nature of Strakhov’s thinking. One and the same phenomenon — in this case, Dostoevsky’s “conciliatory attitude” — is “exaggerated” by the critic alternately in a positive and in a negative sense. In regard to the significance of “Pushkin’s speech” in the history of Russian culture, Strakhov moves from unconditional approval to destructive doubt (from I. Aksakov to K. Leontiev).
Title: N. N. Strakhov and Dostoevsky’s “Pushkin Speech”
Description:
The article considered three versions of N.
N.
Strakhov’s essay on the Pushkin Celebration of June 6–8, 1880 and Dostoevsky’s Speech delivered there.
A comparative analysis of the texts published in 1880, 1883 and 1888 reveals the evolution of their author’s consciousness and fills in the existing gap in the history of his attitude to Dostoevsky, which has led to the infamous letter to Tolstoy dated November 28, 1883.
According to Strakhov, the artistic flair manifested in Dostoevsky’s “Pushkin speech”, originates directly in God, whose mouthpiece the artist becomes aside from his own earthly personality, which does not only lack a connection with the meanings being transmitted, but may also directly contradict them.
This is the ideological ground (combined with personal antipathy) on which the “aversion” to Dostoevsky ripens.
As he revises his essay, Strakhov arrives increasingly closer to explaining the triumph of “Pushkin’s speech” solely as a victory of the “party,” and ultimately explains it by the insignificance of the event itself.
The article draws a conclusion on the ambivalent nature of Strakhov’s thinking.
One and the same phenomenon — in this case, Dostoevsky’s “conciliatory attitude” — is “exaggerated” by the critic alternately in a positive and in a negative sense.
In regard to the significance of “Pushkin’s speech” in the history of Russian culture, Strakhov moves from unconditional approval to destructive doubt (from I.
Aksakov to K.
Leontiev).
Related Results
“Pushkin é nosso tudo”? A.S. Pushkin como hipertexto nacional
“Pushkin é nosso tudo”? A.S. Pushkin como hipertexto nacional
O artigo trata do problema interdisciplinar da biografia criativa de A.S. Pushkin (vida e textos em sua gênese comum) como um hipertexto nacional russo. O artigo considera a possib...
Dostoevsky’s Pushkin Speech in the Testimonies of Contemporaries
Dostoevsky’s Pushkin Speech in the Testimonies of Contemporaries
The article provides a critical analysis of the sources that report the details of Dostoevsky's Pushkin speech on June 8, 1880. They include letters, diaries and memoirs of listene...
PUSHKIN AND CHINA
PUSHKIN AND CHINA
The literary heritage of Alexander Pushkin is well known to a wide range of readers. A line in a letter to Count A. Benckendorff, written in January 1830 and in which Pushkin asks ...
De Russische inspiratie van Joris Van Severen. Deel 2
De Russische inspiratie van Joris Van Severen. Deel 2
In de oorlogsdagboeken van Joris Van Severen valt zijn belangstelling op voor bepaalde aspecten van de Russische cultuur, die weinig met elkaar gemeen hebben, met name Dostojevski ...
Dostoevsky’s Orthodox Political Philosophy
Dostoevsky’s Orthodox Political Philosophy
The article discusses the main ideas of F. M. Dostoevsky’s political philosophy and their organic connection with the integrity of his Orthodox worldview. It is shown that the Orth...
Dostoevsky and the “Pushkin Question”
Dostoevsky and the “Pushkin Question”
The Pushkin question is one of the key issues in Russian literary criticism. It has to do with the great poet’s importance and position in Russian literature as well as the develop...
The Ethnomental Components of F.M. Dostoevsky’s Works
The Ethnomental Components of F.M. Dostoevsky’s Works
Purpose of the study: The purpose of the study is to identify the originality and ideological functional status of the ethnomental component in the works of F. Dostoevsky. Methods...
Dostoevsky on Guadalupe Street
Dostoevsky on Guadalupe Street
Dostoevsky on Guadalupe Street is a riveting collection of short essays on the impact of world literature—and Fyodor Dostoevsky in particular—on a young Latino growing up in Texas....

