Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 27

first rewind previous Page / 2 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Dostoevsky
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 2 next fast forward last
RU
The entire body of the literary works by Fyodor Dostoevsky has been viewed from the point of view of the ontology of a child. The detailed analysis of this phenomenon gives the possibility to understand its nature, quintessence, specificity of the literary embodiment. It is the question of the actualization of the principles of the research experience. The supposed simplicity of the notion “a child” can be revealed in the ontological issue of “parents and children”, that brings to the symbolic definition of the phenomenon through the Biblical paradigm of the “grain”.
EN
In the present article Vitold Gombrovich’s views represented in The Diary and in the supplement essay Senkevich are considered. The author proves that psychological and cultural Slavonic basis has a special part in the writer’s conscience. The system of the judgments about Fedor Dostoevsky’s works and historical
EN
A personal review of the book version of Ewangelina Skalińska’s doctoral thesis devoted to Norwid and Dostoevsky. It discusses the threefold composition of the dissertation and underlines the dashing comparative analysis of Norwid’s Assunta and Dostoevsky’s A Gentle Creature. The open character of the research project is stressed. The reviewer discusses in detail another parallel, between two London texts: Norwid’s The Larva and Dostoevsky’s Winter Notes on Summer Impressions. In conclusion there is a passage on the inspiring role of Skalińska’s book, which fills an important gap and draws a horizon for the future comparative research.
EN
In the works by John Amos Comenius (1592-1670), light often plays a key role in the interpretation of the text. This is related to the philosophy of the Baroque, according to which a person wanders through the metaphorical labyrinth of life and only later, passing through the darkness, can reach the truth. Light in Comenius' works is particularly important for cognition, to which John Amos Comenius devoted a large part of his work, both artistic and pedagogical. Fyodor Dostoyevsky (1821-1881) in his reflections on the nature of man and God also refers to the biblical interpretation according to which light is closely related to the presence of Christ. Man is faced with a choice between the light and the dark, he is lost in the choice, as if in a baroque world-maze and darkness.
EN
This is the second of a pair of articles addressing the relationship between Dostoevsky’s novella Notes from the Underground and Shakespeare’s Hamlet. The first article considered the similarities between the two texts, using David Magarshack’s 1968 English translation of the Notes, before discussing the wider phenomenon of Hamletism in nineteenth-century Russia. In this article, the author focuses on the problem of translation, identifying a handful of instances in the Magarshack translation that directly ‘insert’ Shakespeare, and Hamlet in particular, into Dostoevsky’s text. It is argued that these allusions or citations overdetermine the English reader’s experience of Shakespeare-and-Dostoevsky, or Shakespeare-in-Dostoevsky. Returning to the question of Shakespeare’s status in Europe in the nineteenth century, the article concludes with a critique of Shakespearean ‘universality’ as it manifests through the nuances of translation.
PL
Kiedy pół wieku temu autor tego artykułu rozpoczynał studia nad twórczością Josepha Conrada, w literaturoznawstwie wciąż dominowały tezy Nowej Krytyki, która twierdziła, że właściwe badanie odnosi się tylko do samego tekstu, pomijając w zasadzie kontekst historyczny, osobę pisarza, a także horyzont oczekiwań czytelników. Autor jednak opowiadał się za mniej „czystym”, a bardziej kontekstualnym podejściem, szczególnie w przypadku pisarzy tak związanych z rzeczywistością historyczną, jak Conrad i – może nawet bardziej – Dostojewski. Znajdując uzasadnienie dla swojego podejścia w „logice pytań i odpowiedzi” angielskiego filozofa R. G. Collingwooda, autor twierdzi, że Zbrodnia i kara Dostojewskiego i Lord Jim Conrada przedstawiają różne odpowiedzi na dziewiętnastowieczny kryzys wartości, szczególnie w sferze etyki. Conradowskie postrzeganie ludzkiej natury jest zasadniczo ironiczne, a jego wizja potrzeb człowieka jest hierarchiczna. Ludzką powinnością moralną i miarą naszego człowieczeństwa jest dyscyplinowanie i sublimacja niższych instynktów i namiętności. Dostojewski natomiast podkreśla niebezpieczeństwa spaczonego racjonalizmu i umiejscawia dobroć w naturze i ludzkim sercu. Jest to jednak wizja paradoksalna, ponieważ znajduje on tam również okrucieństwo, chciwość, egoizm i ślepe namiętności. Człowiek Dostojewskiego jest więc – jak jego świat – rozdarty przez sprzeczności nie do pogodzenia, które mogą być tylko transcendowane.
EN
This is the first of a pair of articles that consider the relationship between Dostoevsky’s novella Notes from the Underground and Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Acknowledging Shakespeare’s well-known influence on Dostoevsky and paying close attention to similarities between the two texts, the author frames the comparison by reflecting on his own initial encounter with Dostoevsky in David Magarshack’s 1968 English translation. A discussion of previous Anglophone scholarly attempts to explore the resonance between the texts leads to a reading of textual echoes (using Magarshack’s translation). The wider phenomenon of Hamletism in the nineteenth century is introduced, complicating Dostoevsky’s national and generational context, and laying the groundwork for the second article-which questions the ‘universalist’ assumptions informing the English translator-reader contract.
EN
The paper attempts to examine Stavrogin’s confession in the context of biblical and literary traditions. Both the structure based on plots and the character of the narrative are a testament to the literary nature of the text. A profound meaning of the religious confession determined not only by repentance, but also by intention is implicit in the text so that homo confitens would “alter his mind”. The analysis shows that, when Stavrogin “crossed the border” of his self‑acceptance saturated with hubris, he was no longer afraid of crime or punishment. Hence, he was incapable of expressing Christian remorse. As a result, the so‑called Stavrogin’s confession was merely a lofty declaration in which he confessed to being involved in the “case of Matriosha”, so, in other words, it was a sort
EN
The article presents a comparative interpretation of translations of one of the most controversial (among Polish readers) fragment taken from Dostoyevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov. The paper presents translators with a particular challenge, ideologically and linguistically. In all for these cases, translators see the target culture and themselves as representatives, as aliens. This review aims to show the way different translators approached the task, with greater or lesser success, in spite of critical attitudes being expressed towards Poland and its people.
PL
W artykule przedstawiono porównawczą interpretację tłumaczeń jednego z najbardziej kontrowersyjnych dla polskich odbiorców fragmentu powieści Dostojewskiego pt. Bracia Karamazow. Rozdział ten stanowi szczególnego rodzaju wyzwanie translatorskie zarówno pod względem ideowym (prześmiewcze przedstawienie Polaków jako jednowymiarowych Schwarzcharakterów powieści), jak i językowym (mieszanina języka rosyjskiego i polskiego, jaką posługują się bohaterowie). Wszystko to wymaga od tłumaczy spojrzenia na kulturę docelową i na siebie samych – jej przedstawicieli – jako na obcych. Celem niniejszego studium jest ukazanie, w jaki sposób autorzy polskich przekładów Braci Karamazow mierzą się z tym wyzwaniem lub uchylają się przed nim, oraz rozważenie czy i jak tłumaczom udaje się „obronić” wielkość Dostojewskiego jako światowej sławy pisarza w kulturze, do której odnosił się krytycznie, a nawet wrogo.
EN
The game of desires. Freud about Dostoevsky The feature S. Freud, the father of psychoanalyses, has in common with Dostoevsky is the fascination with the puzzle of human being they both tried to solve by the means of the reflection over human emotions. Freud carried out the psychological analysis of Dostoevsky’s life and work in his essay Dostoevsky and parricide (1928) where he came up with his hypothesis of Dostoevsky’s impulsive character both as a man and as a writer. The way of thinking of Austrian psychiatrist starts from Dostoevsky’s works in connection to the writer’s biography, and, particularly to numerous “shocking” events in his life (the murder of his father by peasants and in this context the fact that Dostoevsky wished his father dead, the rape of a minor, allegedly commited by Dostoevsky, his passionate relationships with women, his gambling addiction). Finally Freud comes to the diagnosis — Oedipus complex. The impulse of the id, which, in Freud’s opinion, Dostoevsky was never able to tame, is the key to the puzzle of Dostoevsky’s soul. Alternately suppressed and fulfilled, not always successfully, his lust drives the author of The Adolescent towards his neurosis, the symptoms of which were his epilepsy attacks. However, according to Freud, Dostoevsky suffered not as much from epilepsy as from hysteria underlay by defective mechanism of suppression of fear. Fear of death and sexual desire are essential in this process. And the gambling addiction, according to Freud’s hypothesis, is the aftermath of Dostoevsky’s subconscious expectation of the punishment for his sins (real or imaginary).
RU
Игра влечений. Фрейд о Достоевском Отца психоанализа, З. Фрейда, тесно связывает с Ф. Достоевским увлечение загадкой человека, которую оба пытались расшифровать путем раздумий над человеческими эмоциями. Фрейд провел психологический анализ жизни и творчества великого русского писателя в эссе Достоевский и отцеубийство (1928), в котором поставил гипотезу об инстинктивной природе Достоевского как человека и писателя. Ход мысли австрийского психиатра об авторе Бесов идет от творчества и через корреляцию с биографией писателя, особенно с имеющимися в ней «потрясающими» событиями (убийство отца крестьянами и связанное с этим желание Достоевского смерти отцу; изнасилование несовершеннолетней, вменяемое в вину писателю; бурные романы с женщинами; зависимость от азартных игр), приводит к постановке диагнозa, в основе которого лежит эдипов комплекс. Влечение id, обуздать которое Достоевскому никогда не удалось, является ключом к разгадке души писателя. Вожделение, попеременно и не всегда успешно вытесняемое и реализованное автором Подростка, приводит его к неврозу, симптомами которого были приступы эпилепсии. Вместе с тем, как предполагает Фрейд, писатель страдал не столько от эпилепсии, сколько от истерии, вызванной неправильным механизмом избавления от влечений. Боязнь смерти и сексуальное влечение играют в этом процессе ведущую роль. В свою очередь, зависимость от азартных игр является, согласно Фрейду, наследием подсознательного ожидания Достоевским наказания за грехи (совершенные или мнимые).
14
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Rosyjskie idee i wojska

63%
RU
Статья представляет собой модифицированный и расширенный вариант введения к моей книге From Chaadayev to Solovyev. Russian Modern Thinkers between East and West, которая выйдет осенью 2022 года в Издательстве Питера Ланга. В связи с исключительными обстоятельствами, в которых была написана эта статья-введение, – а я имею в виду, конечно, преступную войну против Украины, развязанную Путиным 24 февраля 2022 года, – в вышеприведенном тексте я пытаюсь представить общую историю русской философской мысли 19-го века с точки зрения ее отношения как к общечеловеческой гуманистической традиции Европы, так и к милитаристскому национализму в России, часто с религиозной окраской. Именно с этой точки зрения я последовательно рассматриваю сущность мировоззрения Петра Чаадаева, Александра Герцена, Николая Чернышевского, Николая Данилевского и - наиболее широко - Владимира Соловьева. На фоне этих мыслителей я также отношу к преступному «православному мировоззрению» Путина и рассматриваю сущность философско-политической мысли Александра Солженицына. Важное место в этой статье занимает мое обсуждение, а также полемика, иногда даже принципиальная, с некоторыми взглядами на русскую мысль Анджея Валицкого, умершего в июле 2022 года.
EN
Artykuł stanowi zmodyfikowaną i rozszerzoną wersję wstępu do mojej książki From Chaadayev to Solovyev. Russian Modern Thinkers between East and West, mającą się ukazać jesienią 2022 roku w wydawnictwie Peter Lang. Ze względu na wyjątkowe okoliczności, w których ten wstęp-artykuł powstawał – a mam tu na myśli, oczywiście, zbrodniczą wojnę przeciw Ukrainie, rozpętaną 24 lutego 2022 przez Putina  – staram się w powyższym tekście ukazać ogólnie dzieje rosyjskiej myśli filozoficznej XIX wieku z perspektywy ich stosunku zarówno do uniwersalnej tradycji humanistycznej Europy, jak i do militarystycznego nacjonalizmu w Rosji, jakże często o zabarwieniu religijnym.  Z tego właśnie punktu widzenia rozważam kolejno istotę światopoglądu Piotra Czaadajewa, Aleksandra Hercena, Nikołaja Czernyszewskiego, Fiodora Dostojewskiego oraz – najbardziej obszernie – Władimira Sołowjowa. Na tle tych myślicieli odnoszę się także do zbrodniczego „prawosławnego światopoglądu” Putina oraz rozważam istotę myśli filozoficzno-politycznej Aleksandra Sołżenicyna. Ważne miejsce w tym artykule zajmuje moja dyskusja, ale i polemika – niekiedy nawet fundamentalna – z niektórymi poglądami na myśl rosyjską, autorstwa zmarłego w lipcu 2022 roku Andrzeja Walickiego.
PL
The article is a modified and slightly expanded version of the introduction to my book From Chaadayev to Solovyov. Russian Modern Thinkers between East and West, to be published in autumn 2022 by Peter Lang. Due to the exceptional circumstances in which this introduction article was written – and I mean, of course, the criminal war against Ukraine, unleashed by Putin on February 24, 2022 – in the above text, I try to present the general history of 19th-century Russian philosophical thought from the perspective of their attitude to both the universal humanist tradition of Europe and to militarist nationalism in Russia, often with a religious overtone. It is from this point of view that I consider in turn the essence of the worldview of Peter Chaadayev, Aleksandr Herzen, Nikolai Chernyshevsky, Feodor Dostoyevsky, and – most extensively – Vladimir Solovyov. In the background of all these thinkers, I also refer to Putin’s criminal “Orthodox worldview” and consider the essence of Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s philosophical and political thought in general, especially with regard to Ukraine and the European Enlightenment. An important place in this article is my discussion, but also a polemic – sometimes even fundamental – with some views on Russian thought, history, and politics by Andrzej Walicki, who died in July 2022.
EN
The paper explores the geopolitics of the Caucasus in Fyodor Dostoevsky’s sociopolitical works. The writer clearly sees the Caucasus as being part of the Russian Empire and its most recent acquisition. An important feature of the region is its fundamental “otherness”, however its nature and identity are not explored. The paper focuses in particular on the religious affiliation of the Caucasus, which Dostoevsky sees as homogeneous in its symbolic connection with the Muslim world.
RU
Статья посвящена вопросу о месте Кавказа в системе геополитических воззрений Ф.М. Достоевского. На материале публицистики писателя показано, что Кавказ в его картине мира является территорией, принадлежащей Российской империи и недавно вошедшей в ее состав. Характерной чертой региона оказывается его принципиальная «инаковость», однако вопрос о ее специфике не проблематизируется. Особое место в статье посвящено вопросу о религиозной принадлежности Кавказа, который для Достоевского оказывается гомогенным в своей символической причастности к мусульманскому миру.
EN
The paper studies poetics of gesture in A Gentle Creature by Dostoevsky. Characters’ body and facial expressions are seen as replies in the non-verbal dialogue between protagonists. Dynamics of the key kinetic complexes is described: gestures of looking reveal the desire to understand the other, mocking gestures mark the theme of vanity and movement to/from each other shows the will to establish or avoid the dialogue. It is concluded that the eponymous Gentle Creature expresses her view of the world not through words, but rather through gestures, which are recalled and re-interpreted by the narrator.
RU
Статья посвящена поэтике жеста в повести Достоевского Кроткая. Телесные и мимические движения интерпретируются как реплики в невербальном диалоге между героями. Описана семантика ключевых кинетических комплексов: жесты смотрения связаны с желанием понять другого, жесты насмешки – с темой гордыни, жесты движения то навстречу друг другу, то прочь – с приглашением к диалогу или отказом от него. Сделан вывод о том, что точка зрения на мир Кроткой в повествовании явлена не столько через ее прямое слово, сколько через жесты, которые припоминает и заново интерпретирует рассказчик.
EN
This paper proposes a new interpretation of Niyevsky’s novel The Devils. This reading opposes the very influential line of interpretation employed in wkolai Vsevolodowich Stavrogin – a relentlessly intriguing character in Fyodor Dostoorks of thinkers working within the current of Russian symbolism and “cultural renaissance” from the beginning of the 20th century. The author argues that this “religious” interpretive tradition contributes to one of the greatest misunderstand-ings concerning Dostoyevsky’s work in that it oversimplifies its ambivalence and obscures one of Dostoyevsky’s darkest insights into the human soul, initially revealed in Notes From the Under-ground and from that time on recurring in each of his major novels. In the first part of the article, several classic Russian interpretations of Stavrogin are examined in order to show their common tendency to morally judge Stavrogin from the Orthodox point of view, recognize his greatest sin in the lack of faith in God and for that reason see before him only the perspective of self-disintegration and inevitable death. The author argues that “religious” interpretations do not explain the mystery of Stavrogin. What is more, they homogenize the complexity of his character and offer an all-to-easy solution to the vital philosophical problem which reiterates in Dostoyevsky’s entire mature fiction and which finds its greatest artistic representation in Stavrogin himself.
18
51%
EN
In modern literature appears often motif of „two times two does not make four“ which is based on Dostoyevsky’s Notes from the Underground. Polish decadent writer Stanisław Prybyszewski added to this absurd equation the result: two times two does make four but always more than the original product. This absurd equation in the modern narrative manifests itself as maelstrom of reality, reminiscent of Deleuze’s plane of immanence. Modern narrative creates many planes, which resembles a swarm swarming, when each part refers at the same time to another plane of reality. Through this absurd equation we can understand also Deleuze’s terme becoming. This absurd equation can be perceived as a metaphor of modern reality and contemporary narrative.
PL
Artykuł przedstawia analizę małych form folkloru (przysłowia, powiedzenia) w strukturze refleksji metaretorycznej i metastylistycznej bohaterów i narratorów F. Dostojewskiego. Pokazuje, w jaki sposób pisarz korzysta ze schematów gatunkowych i wyrazów przyjętych w języku pisanym oraz mówionym, transformując przysłowia, nadając im nowy sens w zależności od kontekstu, rozwijając je w ramach fabuły (przysłowie staje się źródłem wydarzenia powieści czy opowiadania). Autorka opisuje mechanizmy reinterpretacji, ostranienija, teatralizacji, ironii, zbudowane na podstawie swoistej dekonstrukcji stałych form stylistycznych, funkcjonujących w języku pisanym i mówionym. Na przykładzie tych „drobnych” procesów transformacji językowej artykuł pozwala śledzić ogólną strategię poetyki pisarza, skierowaną w stronę odnowy języka literackiego m.in. poprzez konfrontację właśnie z językiem potocznym, współczesnym, pozbawionym „martwej” frazeologii literackiej, korzystającym z pokładów twórczej wyobraźni ludowej.
EN
The article presents an analysis of small forms of folklore (proverbs, sayings) in the structure of meta-rhetorical and meta-stylistic reflection of characters and narrators of F. Dostoevsky. It demonstrates the way in which Dostoevsky makesuse of genre schemata, as well as words accepted in written and spoken language, transforming proverbs and giving them a new meaning depending on the context, as well as developing them within the framework of the plot (a proverb becomes the origin of an event in a novel or short story). The author of the article describes the mechanisms or re-interpretation, ostranenie (defamiliarization), theatralisation, and irony, built on the basis of a certain deconstruction of fixed stylistic forms, which operate in written and spoken language. Using these ‘minor’ processes of linguistic transformation as an example, the article allows one to trace the general poetics strategy of the writer. The strategy is directed towards a renewal of literary language through, among other things, a confrontation with language that is colloquial, contemporary, devoid of ‘dead’ literary phraseology, and drawing from the wealth of creative folk imagination.
EN
In my paper I set the existential interpretation of Dostoevsky’s Notes from the Underground proposed by Lev Shestov against the religious and psychological interpretations of this novel in order to excavate a vital problem in Dostoevsky, which is the inversion of hierarchy in pairs of oppositional categories such as normality-pathology, happiness-unhappiness, harmony- dissonance, omnitude-lack, certainty-uncertainty, joy-despair, faith-doubt. Following Shestov I argue that Dostoevsky embraces those categories that are traditionally mistrusted and negatively valorized and by so doing he rehabilitates the “underground”, accursed and unhappy existence at the expense of regular, “normal” life, easily founding spiritual certainty and every day satisfaction. Such an un-problematic life Dostoevsky’s man from the underground regards as a false, smug and eventually – “dead”. In further part of my study I focus on the religious aspect of Shestov’s later philosophy and try to prove that the perspective of faith gradually introduced to his reading of Dostoevsky in no way cancels Shestov’s early philosophy of the underground, despair and tragedy. On the contrary: if faith “obtained” is likely to become yet another mask of “evidence” and “certainty” and in this way might put stop to existential doubts and spiritual dissatisfaction, then neither Dostoevsky, nor Shestov himself, can easily trust it. In this situation despair and tragedy cannot but hold in Dostoevsky’s and Shestov’s thought and the circle of searching and suffering must remain vicious. I demonstrate the consistency in Shestov’s philosophical thought on Dostoevsky and its constant adequacy for understanding one of the crucial existential dilemmas in the works of the Russian writer.
first rewind previous Page / 2 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.