About the works of art in the diary of the writer Dostoevsky. Analysis of the product F
Chapter I From the Written Book to the “Diary of a Writer” ® by F.M. Dostoevsky.21
1.1 Journalism of Dostoevsky’s work.21
1.2 Typology of Dostoevsky’s “Diary of a Writer”.42
Chapter II Genre features of “A Writer’s Diary”
Dostoevsky.71
2.1 Interaction of genres in “A Writer’s Diary.”71
2.2 “A Writer’s Diary” - journalistic review.86
2.3 The nature of the fictionalization of the narrative in the “Diary of a Writer”: features of the author’s statement.98
Chapter III Anthropology of the “Diary of a Writer” by F.M. Dostoevsky: the originality of the expression of the author’s position.108
3.2 “A Writer’s Diary” as a conceptual author’s statement.119
3.3 Anthropology of society in the “Diary of a Writer”.131
Introduction of the dissertation 2005, abstract on philology, Shchurova, Valeria Vyacheslavovna
Diary of a Writer" F.M. Dostoevsky is an exceptional phenomenon in the history of Russian literature.
Many researchers paid attention to the exclusivity of the publication. In particular, it was argued that “A Writer’s Diary” is unique as it has “no analogues in the history of Russian and world journalism”1, and that the author resorted to a form of mono-journal, rare in world practice. But, it should be noted that already in the 18th century, similar publications were published in England (journals of Joseph Addison), in Germany (magazines of Johann Christoph Gottsched), in Russia (magazines of N.I. Novikov and I.A. Krylov) and a number of others.
The uniqueness of the “Diary of a Writer” is different: during the years 1876-1877, a temporary publication was published in Russia, the author of which turned it into a personal platform, into a pulpit, from the height of which he spoke to the audience, drawing their attention primarily to the problems that worried him personally. Dostoevsky transformed the facts that came into his field of vision into the real topic of the day. This was the case with the writer’s speeches on legal issues (the cases of Kroneberg, Kairova, Kornilova), on moral topics (fathers and sons, suicide), on pressing political issues (reforms, relations with the West and others). Updating the facts of everyday life turned the “Diary of a Writer” into a truly unique publication. Moreover, this process was accompanied by active fictionalization of the narrative.
Dostoevsky combined three fundamental components in “The Diary”: documentaryism (reliance on facts), artistic imagery (the desire to capture everyday life in the most generalized emotional form) and the personal nature of the narrative, characteristic of diary entries.
Closely intertwined in the text of the Diary, these components gave the publication syncretism, that undifferentiated integrity that still forces researchers to search for both a genre definition of the Diary and to reflect on the nature of this integrity.
G.M. Friedlender, one of the authors of the “Notes” to the “Diary,” writes: “Approaching the “Diary of a Writer” from the point of view of traditional, school poetics, one can rightfully find in it examples of different, dissimilar literary genres: essay, feuilleton, story, novella, memoirs, journalism and so on. But the real essence of “A Writer’s Diary” is not the mechanical unification of these genres, but the fact that, using them in accordance with the general objectives of the “Diary,” Dostoevsky builds on this basis a special, original genre that forms a unique artistic unity.”2
What is unique about “A Writer’s Diary”3, which has no analogues in the history of Russian journalism? What allows us to talk about the relevance of the research undertaken?
Based on the fact that “A Writer’s Diary”, together with “The Brothers Karamazov,” crowns the creative biography of F.M. Dostoevsky, we can talk about the final feelings of the artist, thinker and publicist. The pages of the “Diary” are a collection of thoughts about the world-historical purpose of the Russian people, about the relationship between church and state, about war and peace, about the eternal confrontation between “fathers and sons”, about the place of “Art in the moral education of society. Political, ideological, ethical , aesthetic problems are intertwined in “A Writer’s Diary” not only at the thematic and content level, but also at the level of form, strengthening the ideological and artistic unity of the publication.
No less relevant is the determination of the place of the “Diary of a Writer” in creative biography F.M. Dostoevsky. Unfortunately, the idea that Dostoevsky the artist and Dostoevsky the publicist are still tenacious are two incompatible aspects of the writer: a subtle psychologist, a deep researcher of human souls and a subjective publicist who judges the modern process superficially. An impartial look at the “Diary of a Writer” allows us to speak about the unconditional significance of both fiction and journalism by F.M. Dostoevsky.
In the extensive literature devoted to the work of F.M. Dostoevsky, “The Diary of a Writer” is given a lot of space. “Diary” is considered as an essential fact of the writer’s literary biography by V.F. Pereverzev, L.P. Grossman, K.V. Mochulsky, B.I. Bursov, Yu.I. Seleznev, Yu.F. Karyakin and others.4
Of no less interest is the journalistic heritage of F.M. Dostoevsky, whose analysis is devoted to detailed works by V.Ya. Kirpotina, I.L. Volgina, B.C. Nechaeva, G.M. Friedlander, L.M. Rosenblum, V.A. Tunimanova, T.V. Zakharova, V.N. Zakharova, G.K. Shchennikova, V.B. Smirnov and other researchers. 5
In recent years, several schools have emerged (Moscow, St. Petersburg, Petrozavodsk) that thoroughly explore various aspects of the writer’s journalistic creativity - the connection between journalism and literary works, with the social processes of that time, with the personality traits of Dostoevsky himself. The authors of the collections “Dostoevsky and World Culture”, “Dostoevsky. Materials and research" and others. We can highlight the works of G. Gachev, P.E. Fokina, V.A. Svitelskogo.6
At the same time, it should be noted that time leaves room for further research on the “Diary”.
Let us pay attention, first of all, to the name of the magazine - “A Writer’s Diary”.
A diary is a text intended for internal consumption, writing for oneself (unless the author imitates its form for certain purposes). These are not just notes for memory, a chronicle of current events is a way of intimate introspection, a kind of apocrypha (a non-canonical autobiography of a person that exists only for internal consumption).
Dostoevsky “explodes” this idea of a diary - the hidden, intimate is offered for public reading. Without canceling the personal tone in the narrative, Dostoevsky gives the reader the opportunity to get acquainted with the point of view on events that he offers, in the terminology of B.O. Corman, "biographical author"7.
An important component of Dostoevsky’s style, which also manifested itself on the pages of the Diary, was the “coexistence of different narrative voices” 8, in which it is difficult to separate the chronicler, the narrator, from the author. Dostoevsky’s “Diary of a Writer,” on the one hand, absorbed the features of the writer’s novelistic thinking, and on the other, became the dominant feature of the literary and journalistic unity of F.M.’s artistic consciousness. Dostoevsky. ". A “diaryless” Dostoevsky was just as historically impossible as a “novelless” one. This is perhaps the most “Dostoevsky” internal dominant of his work.” 9 It should be recalled that the peculiarity of expressing the author’s position in a journalistic text is that we are not dealing here with the image of the author, not with special type narrative, the expression of which is the entire work, and with some really existing subject of the statement. In this regard, it is interesting to trace how the attribution of the “Diary” changed in the initial and final versions of the “Announcement for subscription to the “Diary of a Writer” in 1876.” In the first draft there was: “The Diary of a Writer” (works by F. M. Dostoevsky)”, in the second - “The Diary of a Writer” work by F. M. Dostoevsky" and, finally, "the work of F.M. Dostoevsky's "Diary of a Writer". It seems that there is no fundamental difference in the design of the title - the main thing is that “The Diary of a Writer” is classified as “essays,” i.e. works of art. But it is important for Dostoevsky to emphasize journalistic character“Diary”: “This will be a diary in the literal sense of the word, a report on the impressions actually experienced in each month, a report on what was seen, heard and read. This, of course, can include stories and tales, but mainly about real events.”10
On the one hand, it was apparently very important for Dostoevsky that the reading public consider the “Diary” as another “work” of the writer (hence the hesitation with the design of the subtitle - whether to give it in parentheses or without, in the same size with the title or not), on the other hand - It is important that the audience, considering the “Diary” as an “essay,” sees in it, first of all, “a report on the impressions actually experienced in each month.”
This characteristic of the impressions of the month is significant - “survived”, i.e. lived and felt by the author. “Essays” based on “survived impressions” are what is called journalism. The figurative beginning is combined with the support of a fact realized by the “writer”-creator.
In a letter to Vsevolod Sergeevich Solovyov, a writer who collaborated in the St. Petersburg Gazette and in the Russian World, who asked Dostoevsky to announce his Diary, the writer emphasized: “I am not a chronicler, this, on the contrary, is a perfect diary (emphasized by the author - V.Shch.) in in every sense words, that is, a report on what interested me most personally, is even a whim” (XXIX 2, 73).
Survived impressions”, “a perfect diary”, “a report on what interested you personally”, “even a whim” - all these are synonyms for how Dostoevsky saw his new brainchild - specially selected impressions of reality, which are given a subjective assessment of a specific person who wants to speak out . But at the same time - which is very important - the statement belongs to the writer, i.e. a person who knows how to look beyond the horizon.
It is significant that, responding to the release of the first issue of “A Writer’s Diary,” Sun. S. Solovyov noted in his article “Modern Literature. Diary of F.M. Dostoevsky”, published in the newspaper “Russian World” on February 8, 1876: the content of the issue “is extremely diverse - it is a lively conversation of a person, moving from subject to subject, a unique and fascinating conversation, where sometimes serious thoughts come through under the form of a joke.” eleven
A lively conversation moving from subject to subject” is attributed in journalism as a genre of review or - as its variety - feuilleton - review. “Out of twelve issues,” it was said in the “Announcement” about the subscription to the “Diary of a Writer” in 1876, “a whole (subordinated by me - V.Shch.) will be compiled, a book written with one pen” (XXII, 136).
Consequently, when starting work on the “Diary”, Dostoevsky, through the “magic crystal” of the plan, already quite clearly imagined what kind of work would come from his pen - a book as a kind of fulfilled whole, despite the temporary disconnection, as a kind of cycle unified in thought (subject to . by me - V.Shch.), or more precisely, a system of repeating cycles at the thematic and problematic levels, which allows us to talk about the “Diary” as a kind of artistic and journalistic cycle, the core genre of which is the review.
F.M. turned to this genre. Dostoevsky is a completely natural phenomenon: after the publication of the “Temporary Rules on Censorship and the Press” on April 6, 1865, when the conditions for the existence of newspapers and magazines were noticeably eased, 33 new newspapers and magazines appeared in the capitals, and 31 in the provinces. The press becomes an important factor formation of public opinion, a platform that allows you to actively influence society. At the same time, attention to processes occurring in real life is increasing. Literature and art of the second half of the 19th century developed under the sign of interest in everyday reality: the formation of national identity is impossible without awareness of oneself in the surrounding world. The dynamism of what was happening required an immediate response from the artist. Accumulated in the magazines "Time" and
Epoch", partly in "Citizen", the experience of F. M. Dostoevsky sought to be realized in the issues of "The Diary of a Writer", having developed an original plan for the materialization of his ideas. The writer “built” a platform from which he decided to talk to the audience every month.
In this regard, apparently, it is necessary to correct the fairly widespread opinion that “A Writer’s Diary” was just a link between “Crime and Punishment”, “The Idiot”, “Demons”, “Teenager” - on the one hand, and “The Brothers Karamazov” - with another.
Of course, (and Dostoevsky himself did not hide this) the two years of “respite” became a time for accumulating material for the novel, which turned out to be the last in the writer’s creative biography. But one cannot help but see that “A Writer’s Diary” has independent significance as a “work” that claims to have a separate existence.
I.L. Volgin called the “Diary of a Writer” “the diary of a novelist”12.
This formulation allows us to project the journalistic writing techniques used by Dostoevsky onto his purely artistic experience, which makes it possible to consider the qualitative parameters of the “Diary of a Writer” as a system of artistic and journalistic cycles, as a single book, holistic and universal at the same time.
The integrity of the “Diary of a Writer” is ensured, firstly, by its chronological temporality - events in the retelling and in the author’s assessments unfold as they develop (which does not cancel the author’s debatable returns to the past, to events that have already been assessed once).
Secondly, in the “Diary” the author’s unified view of what is happening is clearly visible. Moreover, as already noted, in each issue we have before us the same subject of the statement - the author, confirming his own reality with references to personally observed facts. Already in the first issue of the Diary for 1876, a small note “One word about my biography” appears, in which Dostoevsky seems to remind who the author of the publication is.
The presence of literary texts in the “Diary of a Writer” does not negate the existence of a biographical author. Both voices - the “living” author and the “non-appearing” narrator (conventional narrator) seem to “interrupt” each other (“The boy at Christ’s Christmas tree”, “Colony of juvenile delinquents. Gloomy individuals of people. Remaking vicious souls into immaculate ones. Means for this , recognized as the best. Small and daring friends of humanity" and so on).
Thirdly, in “A Writer’s Diary” a certain level of relationship with the audience is clearly visible: the author does not consider his point of view to be final, canonical. But he strives to ensure that, if possible, it is accepted by the audience. That is why in the “Diary of a Writer” the prevailing tone is not a preaching tone or even a confessional one, which would seem to be expected from a diary, but the tone of oratorical speech, the tone of thinking out loud, the tone of readiness to listen and take into account other points of view.
Therefore, apparently, it is necessary to correct the point of view of T.V. Zakharova, who believes that “the very publication of “The Diary of a Writer” is Dostoevsky’s fundamental orientation towards being rooted in the current in the search for truth”13.
The truth for Dostoevsky, an Orthodox man, lies in Christ. Therefore, in his journalistic texts he is not looking for the truth, but a path that opens the way to it. And in this search, he readily accepts any other point of view, as I. J1 writes about. Volgin: “In all of Dostoevsky’s work, one principle with irrevocable universality is consistently implemented: knowing oneself is impossible without the Other. Towards to an individual another person may act in this capacity; in relation to all humanity, the function of the Outsider obviously belongs to God.
The path of self-knowledge and self-healing begins in Dostoevsky as an action aimed at the Other”14.
Fourthly, the integrity of the “Diary” is ensured by the polemics that run through all issues. "The pathos of Dostoevsky<.>in the complete absence of “secret” ideas, in an open appeal to the reader with a discussion of the most pressing and complex problems of our time, in boundless trust in free thought.
For the sake of such a broad discussion of all pressing issues, Dostoevsky published his “Diary”15.
The remark of the author of the “Diary” is indicative in connection with the facts of distortion of his biography in the “Russian Encyclopedic Dictionary”. Reminding the compilers of the dictionary of the Turkish proverb: “If you are heading towards a goal and begin to stop along the way to throw stones at every dog barking at you, then you will never reach the goal” (XXII, 38), Dostoevsky adds: “If possible, I will follow in “ “in my diary” with this wise proverb, although, however, I would not want to bind myself with promises in advance” (XXII, 38).
Dostoevsky's polemics in The Diary are primarily associated with a discussion of the most pressing problems of modern life in Russia. But we must admit that Dostoevsky responded to opponents’ attacks against himself personally.
Fifthly, “A Writer’s Diary” is characterized by a consistent unity of conceptual and figurative research methods. The point here is not only that in the issues of the “Diary” artistic texts and journalistic texts coexist - we are talking about their mutual enrichment with techniques inherent in both the aesthetically imaginative modeling of the world and the logical article analysis of reality.
As for the universalism of the “Diary”, it is ensured at the subject level by a wide variety of topics reflecting the realities of the surrounding world (universality of content).
At the level of form, the universalism of the “Diary of a Writer” is associated with the widespread use of artistic and journalistic writing techniques (we are talking not only about the stories included in the “Diary”, but also about the various fictionalization of the narrative: the use of direct speech, expressively colored vocabulary, constructions characteristic of fiction and so on).
The universalism of “A Writer's Diary” is also manifested in the method of research itself - Dostoevsky combines sociological analysis with methods of aesthetically organized analysis of reality through a system of artistic images.
And finally, the universalism of “A Writer’s Diary” is manifested in the fact that T.V. Zakharova called “emancipation of the personal self” 16, that is, the completeness of the behavior of the biographical author, who easily uses various narrative forms - from the author - an active participant in events to a neutral narrator.
1. Determine the place of the “Diary of a Writer” in the creative biography of Dostoevsky.
2. Reveal the originality of the “Writer’s Diary” as a type of publication.
4. Determine the genre of Dostoevsky’s “Diary of a Writer” as a holistic work.
We have the right to talk about the relevance of the undertaken research also because modern journalism, firstly, gravitates towards the obvious personification of statements within the journalistic text. Journalism pays attention not just to the message as such, but to the fact; what is important here is not an impersonal assessment, but the point of view of the subject of the statement, thanks to which the role of this subject as a specific author increases. In modern journalism, it is the point of view of a specific person participating in the formation of civil society that is important.
Secondly, before us is the “diary” of Dostoevsky - a man whose voice is listened to. (By the time of the publication of “The Diary of a Writer,” Dostoevsky was already known as the author of “Crime and Punishment,” “The Idiot,” “Demons” and other works). The writer’s point of view is important for the audience, since his previous publications (and literary texts) aroused the interest of the reading audience and discussions in public circles. We can talk about the effectiveness of Dostoevsky’s journalism, from whose experience we clearly see the relationship at the “author-audience” level.
The Russian writer has always been an iconic figure in journalism; in conditions of limited political freedoms, literature and journalism remained almost the only space for expression.
Among such names as N.I. Novikov, A.N. Radishchev, N.M. Karamzin, A.S. Pushkin, J1.H. Tolstoy, A.P. Chekhov, V.G. Korolenko, without a doubt, is also the name of F.M. Dostoevsky.
Thirdly, speaking about the relevance of the study, it should be noted that the topics raised on the pages of Dostoevsky’s “Diary of a Writer” - be it national or universal problems of relationships between generations, man and his connection with the outside world - have not lost their relevance to this day. It should be emphasized that the artist who offers the audience his point of view on what is happening wants to be heard. A journalistic text (as, indeed, a literary text) is always dialogical - it is constructed based on the response of the audience. A diary as a form of conversation with an audience presupposes not only a word of revelation, but also the emergence of feedback generated by this revelation. The diary form opens the way to essayistic narration, which is noticeably felt in the nature of the relationship between F.M. Dostoevsky with his readers.
The object of the study is the “Diary of a Writer” by F.M. Dostoevsky, published as an independent publication in 1876 -1877, in August 1880 and January 1881. Taken together, these 23 issues of the “Diary of a Writer” make it possible to trace at the content level the development of certain topics that were of fundamental importance for the writer, to obtain confirmation of the put forward position about genre specifics publication, talk about the originality of the expression of the author’s position in the “Diary of a Writer”.
The subject of the research is the study of Dostoevsky’s “Diary of a Writer” as a type of publication that combined documentary and fictional forms of storytelling in their indissoluble unity.
This allows the following provisions to be put forward for defense:
1. “The Diary of a Writer” by Dostoevsky is not just a connecting link between the works of the 60-70s and the novel “The Brothers Karamazov”, but an independent integral work, which is an artistic and journalistic cycle reflecting Dostoevsky’s contemporary reality. The cyclical nature of the “Diary of a Writer” is ensured by the unity of the author’s point of view, time, place, form and the development of ideas that Dostoevsky consistently pursues. The general idea is the tragic incoherence of different social groups Russian society and the lack of core faith.
2. The genre-forming basis of each issue of the Diary is a review of current events and current problems.
3. The originality of the expression of the author’s position in the “Diary of a Writer” is determined by the consistent interchangeability of the biographical author with the narrator: “The Diary” is a text that combines different narrative styles into a single whole, the bond of which is the personification of the narrative.
4. The subject of the statement in the “Diary” is syncretic - it absorbs a real person and a certain image of the narrator, which serves to mutually enrich the multi-genre texts of the publication.
5. The integrity of the “Diary of a Writer” is ensured by the unity of artistic images with the analysis of real facts of reality used in the text of the “Diary”.
Thus, the novelty of the work lies in the fact that “The Diary of a Writer” is for the first time considered as a single artistic and journalistic cycle, the genre-forming basis of which is the review with all its inherent characteristics.
At the same time, the originality of the expression of the author’s position in the “Diary of a Writer” (the biographical author as the subject of the statement) is clarified.
The research methodology is based on methods of systemic and typological analysis, which make it possible to analyze Dostoevsky’s journalistic creativity in connection with his artistic creativity and, at the same time, to carry out a study of the typology of the publication as a monomagazine in its connection with similar publications.
The theoretical significance of the work lies in the genre attribution of the “Diary of a Writer” as a certain type of publication, in strengthening the role played by Dostoevsky, a publicist, in shaping the views of Russian society in the second half of the 19th century, in creating a systematic idea of the place of the writer’s journalism in his work.
Practical significance. In the Internet era, the type of monozine is becoming increasingly popular, since any author can try his hand at this type of publication. In addition, the practical significance of the undertaken research is that the dissertation materials are used in the educational process when teaching the courses “History of Russian Literature” and “History of Russian Journalism” at the Faculty of Journalism of Voronezh State University, in the development of a special course “Monozine as a type of publication” prepared by the author dissertations for student journalists.
The work was tested within the framework of scientific and practical conferences in 2000-2005. in Moscow and Voronezh, where the chapters of the dissertation research were presented in the form of thematic reports; Some parts of the work were published in the form of abstracts in collections of materials from scientific and practical conferences in Moscow, St. Petersburg, Voronezh, and in articles in the almanac “Accents” (Voronezh).
Structure of the dissertation. The work consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion, and a bibliography of critical and scientific literature.
Conclusion of scientific work dissertation on the topic ""The Diary of a Writer" by F. M. Dostoevsky: typology, genre, anthropology"
Conclusion
There is a pattern in the fact that in the last lifetime edition of the “Diary of a Writer”, published in August 1880, there is a speech by F.M. Dostoevsky, dedicated to Pushkin.
This speech became an event in cultural life Russia, and Dostoevsky was clearly aware of the significance of what was said. In the “Explanatory Word on the Speech about Pushkin printed below,” the writer says: “Pushkin found and noted the most important and painful phenomenon of our intelligent society, historically cut off from the soil, rising above the people<.>He was the first to give us artistic types of Russian beauty, which came directly from the Russian spirit, found in folk truth<. .>The third point that I wanted to note about the meaning of Pushkin. - ability to be globally responsive<.>Our people precisely contain in their souls this inclination towards universal responsiveness and universal reconciliation, and have already demonstrated it more than once throughout the two centuries since Peter’s reform” (XXVI, 129-131).
Essentially, Dostoevsky’s speech about Pushkin was not just a manifestation of the writer’s views on the historical significance of the work of a man about whom Apollo Grigoriev said: “Pushkin is our everything!”, but also became a kind of summing up of the work that Dostoevsky carried out when releasing his “Diary” " One can express it more definitely: without the “Diary” it is difficult to imagine Dostoevsky’s speech, delivered on June 8, 1880 at the ceremonial meeting of the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature.
I hope to resume the publication of the “Diary of a Writer” in the future 1881, if health permits” (XXVI, 129), he added in the notes to the August issue of the “Diary”. Health did not allow the promise to be fulfilled: the January issue was published after the death of the writer, who died on January 28, 1881.
For all of reading and thinking Russia, the issues of “The Diary” were not just another work of the writer F.M. Dostoevsky, but also the focus of ideas that helped Russian society form its own views and made it possible to understand and evaluate what was happening in the country and the world. Without claiming to be an all-encompassing reproduction of reality, Dostoevsky nevertheless gave in the Diary a conceptual image of the essential aspects of Russian life, capturing the fates of specific people and the real processes that determine their destinies.
Experience of journalism F.M. Dostoevsky, the experience of his “Diary of a Writer” turned out to be in demand in Russian literature in the 20th century. Since the 60s last century, domestic literary journalism (G. Radov, E. Dorosh, V. Ovechkin, etc.) attracted close public attention. Writers grouped around the “New World” (primarily), “Banner”, “Youth”, actively defended general humanistic ideals (of course, within the limits of breaking through censorship), ultimately preparing the journalism of A.I. Solzhenitsyn (“How can we organize Russia”) and the famous collections - manifestos of the era of perestroika.
The tragedy of Dostoevsky, the publicist, and those who followed decades later was that their voice was not heard. The social catastrophe that happened in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century is proof of this deafness of both the authorities and society as a whole. The conceived but unimplemented reforms at the turn of the 20th - 21st centuries also make us think about a disconsolate repetition of what has been done: the government is not capable of fundamental changes either in the economy or in politics. Interest in the spiritual revival of a free personality is obscured by the undisguised desire to achieve momentary economic gain.
And yet, “A Writer’s Diary” remains a bright page in the history of the formation of Russian social thought.
It is important to emphasize that Dostoevsky’s judgments were not simply the statements of an “empirical man” \ as B. Bursov writes about it, but the reflections of an artist, thinker, shepherd (the writer certainly keenly felt these facets of his creativity), who was responsible for every word spoken and was not afraid controversy in connection with what was said.
A Writer's Diary" is a system of impressions that captures the attitude of F.M. Dostoevsky to the facts, processes and people that the artist and publicist encountered throughout his life. Despite the fact that the space of the “Diary” is limited by a chronological framework, the writer expands the boundaries of his thoughts and impressions, making the subject of research the key moments of Russian reality of the 70s, which contributed to the formation (or destruction) of personality. At its core, “The Diary” turns out to be a diary in its generic concept, since it is the history of the formation of the Russian intellectual - Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky himself acts as the central representative figure in the narrative. In this sense, “A Writer’s Diary” is unique because it combines the investigative objectivity of the publicist with the figurative recreation of the character of the hero - the narrator. Therefore, apparently, it is possible to correct G. Gachev’s thesis about the extroversion of the “Diary” - he is just as extroverted as he is introverted.
An analysis of the moral, ethical and social concepts of the author of “A Writer’s Diary” was not part of the objectives of this work - the policy of Russia and its authorities (both internal and external) was probably not as impeccable as it seemed to Dostoevsky at times, but it is no coincidence that all the years , which have passed since the release of the “Diary”, it is analyzed into quotes - in the works of domestic thinkers N. Berdyaev, V. Rozanov, L. Shestov, D.
Merezhkovsky, S. Bulgakov, N. Lossky. Writers Andrei Bely and Vyach refer to the “Diary”. Ivanov, philologists M. Bakhtin and Y. Lotman.
A Writer's Diary" is a dialogue by F.M. Dostoevsky with Russia, with its people, with himself, with the Russian past and present. And also - with world culture, more broadly - with the West - on all aspects of modernity that worried the artist. It is important to emphasize that this dialogue was constantly fueled by pressing issues of the day.
The fact (the situation of children, increasing suicides, the Eastern Question) is a reason for trying to solve pressing problems. And all this in a live conversation with the audience, an instant response to their objections, bewilderments, and tips.
It is impossible not to pay attention to the writer’s tragic worldview, which intensifies on the pages of the Diary. Dostoevsky's great novels of the second half of the 60s and 70s are permeated with this worldview. They show the movement of heroes from life to death. These are novels - disasters. The feeling of a catastrophe impending on the country is also inherent in “A Writer’s Diary”. That is why the active preaching principle grows in the issues of the Diary: the writer no longer wants to reach the hearts of his contemporaries, but to shout out to them. That is why the leisurely fictionalization of facts almost disappears from the 1877 issues, and the writer’s speeches are increasingly of an obvious sociological nature. The “I” as a narrative mask gives way to the “biographical self.” As the subject of the statement, Dostoevsky abandons the techniques of aesthetic ornamentalization of writing - the author’s point of view becomes more rigid and demonstrative. The didactic principle in dialogue with the audience is strengthened.
The evolution of time-based publishing is a natural phenomenon: in the process of communication between publishers and the audience, the author's hypothesis, turning into a concept, is freed from the accidental, secondary, and optional. The assumption expressed in the letter of Vs. S. Solovyov
Here a report on an event, not so much as news, but on what of it (from the event) will remain more permanent for us” - XXIX2, 73) will turn into a well-structured journalistic cycle with core semantic blocks in each issue. The presence of these thematic blocks ensures the integrity of each issue. And the unity of the author’s position in assessing what is happening allows F.M. Dostoevsky to transform individual issues into a single whole.
When starting to publish the Diary, the writer was afraid that he would not be able to keep the narrative within the intended form. In a letter to Kh.D. Alchevskaya, he wrote: “...did not have time to understand the form of the “Diary”<.>, so the “Diary,” for example, will continue for two years, but everything will be a failure” (XXIX2, 78). The writer’s exactingness towards his journalistic work is understandable (and to some extent, the fear that he may not be able to succumb to this type of creativity), but it is quite obvious that the appearance of the “Diary of a Writer” as an original publication adorned the history of Russian journalism, playing a significant role in the formation of Russian social thought in the last third of the 19th century.
Achievements of F.M. Dostoevsky - a thinker and publicist - are obvious here.
1. “A Writer’s Diary” contributed to the steady formation of an audience that shared the interest of F.M. Dostoevsky to the priority of the spiritual development of the individual over purely material interests.
2. “A Writer’s Diary” became for F.M. Dostoevsky was a unique form of “going to the people”: he expanded the artist’s possibilities for dialogue with the audience on the most pressing problems (from the point of view of the writer himself) of modern life in Russia.
3. “A Writer’s Diary” was a platform through which the public dissemination of ideas of integrity became possible (“I took and expressed the last word of my convictions - my dreams about the role and purpose of Russia among humanity”) (XXIX2, 102). But it should be recognized that, according to its typological characteristics, “Diary” was not a magazine. This is a journalistic cycle that incorporates the most various genres, the main one among which was review.
4. “A Writer’s Diary” invited the reader to independently reflect on the events and facts that Dostoevsky commented on in “The Diary.” The Diary formed a thinking reader.
5. Dostoevsky in his “Diary” remained a free thinker, paying attention to the paradoxical processes taking place in the Fatherland.
6. The thematic and genre diversity of the “Diary of a Writer” does not negate its essential feature: the publication belongs to one subject of the statement (“sole magazine”). This is both a confessional and a preaching text, belonging to a deep analyst of what is happening (“an interrogator” B. Bursov calls him).2
7. Focus on F.M. Dostoevsky in “The Diary of a Writer” turns out to be an everyday person, which determines the specifics of the author’s journalistic anthropology. If in Dostoevsky’s novels the focus is on the life of human passions, then in “The Diary” everyday life, life in the diversity of its manifestations, comes to the fore.
Man, according to the writer, is destined for a high mission, but in order to accomplish it, he is required to have maximum internal tension and - this is the main thing - daily, continuous movement towards comprehending God. For comprehension of the meaning of life, comprehension of truth is in Christ.
A Writer's Diary" is a passionate call for human self-improvement, a call for him to realize his historical role in the creation of a perfect civilization. Dostoevsky, polemicizing with Chernyshevsky, who promises man Crystal Palace serene happiness, calls humanity to tireless work. And above all - to the intense work of the soul. v
The “Diary of a Writer” is dedicated to this - one of the best creations ® of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky.
List of scientific literature Shchurova, Valeria Vyacheslavovna, dissertation on the topic "Journalism"
1. Akelkina E. A. Formation of philosophical prose F.M. Dostoevsky / E.A. Akelkina // Creativity of F.M. Dostoevsky. The art of synthesis. Ekaterinburg, 1991. - 224 - 250 S.
2. Akopov A.I. On the issue of the magazine as a type of periodical publication / A.I. Akopov // Typology of journalism. Questions of methodology and history. -Rostov: Publishing house Rostov, university, 1987. P. 61-77.
3. Akopov A.I. Typological research methodology periodicals(using the example of special magazines) / A.I. Akopov. Irkutsk, Irkutsk University Publishing House, 1985. - 96 p.
4. Allen Louis F.M. Dostoevsky. Poetics. Attitude. God-seeking / Alain Louis. St. Petersburg: Logos, 1996. - 176 p.
5. Ardens N.N. Dostoevsky and Tolstoy / N.N. Ardens. M., 1970. - 373 p.
6. Akhundova I. R. “. .All this, perhaps, was not a dream at all!” “Death” of a funny man) / I.R. Akhundova // Dostoevsky and world culture. M.: Classic Plus, 1997. - No. 9. - P. 186 - 205.
7. Barsht K.A. Drawings in Dostoevsky's manuscripts / K.A. Barsht. St. Petersburg: Formica, 1996.-319 p.
8. Batyuto A.I. Unnoticed responses to “Anna Karenina” in “A Writer’s Diary” / A.I. Batyuto // Dostoevsky F.M. Materials and research. L.: Nauka, 1983. - pp. 132-141.
10. Bakhtin M.M. Problems of Dostoevsky's poetics / M.M. Bakhtin. M.: Khud. lit., 1972.-472 p.
11. Belinsky V.G. Complete collection op. (in 13 volumes) / V.G. Belinsky. M.: USSR Academy of Sciences, 1956.-T. 10. -474s.
12. Belkin A.A. Reading Dostoevsky and Chekhov / A.V. Belkin. M.: Khud. lit., 1973-301 p.
13. Belopolsky V.N. Dostoevsky and the philosophical thought of his era. Concept of man / V.N. Belopolsky. Rostov: Publishing house Rostov, unta, 1987.-206 p.
14. Belchikov N.F. Dostoevsky in the Petrashevsky trial / N.F. Belchikov. M.: Nauka, 1971. - 294 p.
15. Belchikov N.F. Foreign publications A.I. Herzen. Bibliographic description. 1850-1869 / N.F. Belchikov. M.: Nauka, 1973. - 95 p.
16. Berdyaev N.A. Worldview of Dostoevsky / N.A. Berdyaev. M.: Zakharov, 2001.-174 p.
17. Berdyaev N.A. About Russian classics / N.A. Berdyaev. M.: Higher. school, 1993.-368 p.
18. Berezina V.G. The genre of annual literature review in Russian journalism of the first half of the 19th century / V.G. Berezina // Russian journalism of the 18th-19th centuries. L.: Leningrad State University Publishing House, 1969. - P. 42 - 79.
19. Biography, letters and notes from F.M.’s notebook. Dostoevsky. -SPb., 1883.-866 p.
20. Borshchevsky S.S. "Domestic Notes". 1868 1884. Chronological index of anonymous and pseudonymous texts / S.S. Borshchevsky. - M.: Book, 1966. - 96 p.
21. Borshchevsky S. S. Shchedrin and Dostoevsky. The history of their ideological struggle / S.S. Borshchevsky. M.: Goslitzdat, 1956. - 392 p.
22. Bocharov A. G. Basic principles of the typology of modern magazines / A. G. Bocharov // Vestn. Moscow University, Series 10. Journalism. 1973. -No. 3. - P. 25-38.
24. Budanova N.F. Dostoevsky and Turgenev: creative dialogue / N.F. Budanova. L.: Nauka, 1987.- 196 p.
25. Bursov B.I. Personality of Dostoevsky. Novel-research / B.I. Bursov. L.: Council, writer, 1979. - 680 p.
26. Bushmin A.S. Saltykov Shchedrin. The art of satire / A.S. Bushmin. -M.: Sovremennik, 1976. - 253 p.
27. Veresaev V.V. Living life: about Dostoevsky and Leo Tolstoy / V.V. Veresaev. M.: Politizdat, 1991. - 335 p.
28. Viktorovich V.A. Dostoevsky and V.P. Meshchersky: On the question of the writer’s relationship with the security camp / V.A. Viktorovich // Russian literature. 1998. - No. 1. - P. 205 - 216.
29. Vinogradov V.V. On the theory of artistic speech / V.V. Vinogradov. -M.: Higher. school, 1971. 240 p.
30. Vladimirtsev V.P. Poetics of the “Diary of a Writer” by F.M. Dostoevsky: ethnographic impression and author’s thought / V.P. Vladimirtsev. -Irkutsk: Irkutsk Publishing House. Univ., 1998. 84 p.
31. Vladimirtsev V.P. The charisma of a people's man in the works of F.M. Dostoevsky: from “Poor People” to the latest issue of “A Writer’s Diary” / V.P. Vladimirtsev // Litera. Vestn. Faculty of Philology and Journalism of ISU. Issue 1. - Irkutsk, 2004. - P. 55-57.
32. Ruler of thoughts: F.M. Dostoevsky in Russian criticism of the end XIX -beginning XX century. SPb.: Khud. lit., 1997. - 656 p.
33. Bore P. Dostoevsky’s Lucifer (On the story “The Dream of a Funny Man”) / P. Voge // Dostoevsky and world culture. SPb.: silver Age. 1999. - No. 13. - P. 185 - 201.
34. Volgin I.L. “A Writer’s Diary”: text and context / I.L. Volgin // Dostoevsky F.M. Materials and research. L.: Nauka, 1978.1. pp. 151-159.
35. Volgin IL. Dostoevsky journalist: (“A Writer’s Diary” and the Russian Public) / I.L. Volgin - M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1982. - 75 p.
36. Volgin I.L. Dostoevsky and Russian society (“A Writer’s Diary” of 1876-1877 in the assessments of contemporaries) / I.L. Volgin // Russian literature. 1976. - No. 3. - P. 123 - 143.
37. Volgin I.L. Dostoevsky and tsarist censorship. (On the history of the publication of “A Writer’s Diary”) / I.L. Volgin // Russian literature. 1970. -№4.-S. 106-120.
38. Volgin I.L. Hesitating over the abyss: Dostoevsky and the (Russian) imperial house / I.L. Volgin. M.: Center for Humanitarian Education, 1998. - 656 p.
39. Volgin I.L. Nobody's contemporary / I.L. Volgin // October. 2002. - No. 3.- P. 145-149.
40. Volgin I.L. Letters from readers to F.M. Dostoevsky / I.L. Volgin // Questions of literature. 1971. - No. 9. - P. 173 - 196.
41. Volgin I.L. Last year Dostoevsky / I.L. Volgin. M.: Council, writer, 1991.-543 p.
42. Volgin I.L. The Missing Conspiracy: Dostoevsky and the Political Process of 1849 / I.L. Volgin. M.: Liberia, 2000. - 703 p.
43. Volgin I.L. Editorial archive of “A Writer’s Diary” (1876-1877) / I.L. Volgin // Russian literature. 1974. - No. 1. - P. 150 - 161.
44. Volgin I. L. Born in Russia. Dostoevsky and contemporaries: life in documents / I.L. Volgin. M.: Book, 1991. - 605 p.
45. Volgina O.V. The argumentative status of “alien speech” in the journalism of F.M. Dostoevsky: judicial controversy in the “Diary of a Writer” / O.V. Volgina // Vestn. Moscow un-ta. Episode 10. Journalism. 2000. - No. 4. -S. 6-55.
46. Volotskoy M.V. Chronicle of the Dostoevsky family. 1506 1933 / M.V. Volotskaya. -M.: North, 1933. - 443 p.
47. Gasparov M.L. Ovid in exile / M.L. Gasparov // Gasparov M.L. Selected articles. M.: New. lit. review, 1995. - P. 440 - 471.
48. Gachev G. D. Confession, sermon, newspaper and novel (About the genre of F. M. Dostoevsky’s “Diary of a Writer” / G. D. Gachev // Dostoevsky and world culture. - St. Petersburg, 1993. - No. 1, part 1. pp. 7-13.
49. Gin M.M. Dostoevsky and Nekrasov: Two worldviews / M.M. Gin. -Petrozavodsk: Karelia, 1985. 184 p.
51. Gromova N.A. Dostoevsky: Documents, diaries, letters, memoirs, reviews of literary critics and philosophers / N.A. Gromova. M.: Agraf, 2000. - 240 p.
52. Grossman L.P. Life and works of F.M. Dostoevsky: Biography in dates and documents / L.P. Grossman. M - L.: Academia, 1935. - 382 p.
53. Grossman L.P. Confession of a Jew / L.P. Grossman. - M.: Dekont: Podkova; 2000. 189 p.
54. Grossman L.P. Poetics of Dostoevsky / L.P. Grossman. M.: Gosizdat, 1925.-192 p.
55. Grossman JI.P. Ruletenburg: (Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky): novel-biography / L. P. Grossman. M.: Zakharov, 2002. - 286 p.
56. Grossman L.P. F.M. Dostoevsky / L.P. Grossman. M.: Young, Guard, 1965. - 543 p.
57. Guralnik U.A. F.M. Dostoevsky in the literary and aesthetic struggle of the 60s / U.A. Guralnik // Creativity of F.M. Dostoevsky. M.: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1959. -S. 293-329.
58. Gurg M. Transformation of the motives of “The Meek” in F. Mauriac’s story “Therese Desqueru” / M. Gurg // Dostoevsky and world culture. St. Petersburg: Silver Age, 1999. - No. 13. - P. 132 - 138.
59. Desnitsky V.A. Journalism and literature in the “Diary of a Writer” by F.M. Dostoevsky / V.A. Desnitsky // Desnitsky V.A. On literary topics. L. - M., 1933. - P. 320 - 343.
60. Jackson R.L. In misfortune the truth becomes clear: the ending of “The Meek” / R.L. Jackson // Dostoevsky and world culture. M.: Classic Plus, 1997, No. 9.-S. 100-106.
61. Dmitrieva L.S. On the genre originality of Dostoevsky’s “Diary of a Writer” / L.S. Dmitrieva // Bulletin of Moscow State University, Journalism. 1969.- No. 6. P. 23-35.
62. Dolinin A.S. IN creative laboratory Dostoevsky / A.S. Dolinin. -M.: Council, writer, 1947. 174 p.
63. Dolinin A.S. Dostoevsky and others: Articles and studies on Russian classical literature / A.S. Dolinin. L.: Hood. lit., 1989. - 480 p.
64. Dostoevskaya A.G. Memories / A.G. Dostoevskaya. M.: Khud. lit., 1981. -518 p.
65. Dostoevsky A.M. Memories / A.M. Dostoevsky. M.: Agraf, 1999.-432 p.
66. Dostoevsky in the memoirs of his contemporaries: in 2 volumes. M.: Khud. lit., 1990.
67. Dostoevsky in foreign literature. JL: Science, 1978. - 240 p.
68. Dostoevsky at the end of the 20th century: Sat. articles // About Dostoevsky. - M.: Classic Plus, 1996. - 621 p.
69. Dostoevsky in Russian criticism. Sat. articles. M.: Goslitizdat, 1956. -471 p.
70. Dostoevsky F.M. Notebooks. -M.: Vagrius, 2000. 158 p.
71. Dostoevsky F.M. Notebooks F.M. Dostoevsky. M. - JL: Academia, 1935. - 473 p.
72. Dostoevsky and Russian writers. Traditions. Innovation. Mastery.- M.: Council, writer, 1971. 447 p.
73. Dostoevsky F.M. and Orthodoxy M.: Father's House, 1997 - 315 p.
74. Dostoevsky and modernity (Materials of Dostoevsky readings). -(Literary Memorial Museum of F.M. Dostoevsky). -Semipalatinsk, 1992. - Sat. 2. - 80 s.
75. Dostoevsky F.M. and Turgenev I.S. Correspondence. L.: Academia, 1928. -200 p.
76. Dostoevsky F.M. Unpublished Dostoevsky. Notebooks and notebooks 1860-1881 -M.: Nauka, 1971.-727 p.
77. Dostoevsky F.M. Correspondence // F. M. Dostoevsky A. G. Dostoevskaya.- L.: Nauka, 1976.-483 p.
78. Dragunskaya L.S. Marx, Dostoevsky, Freud: three anthropological projects / L.S. Dragunskaya // Man. 2000. - N 2. / (http://courier.com.ru/homo/ho0200drag.htm)
79. Dudkin V.V. Dostoevsky Nietzsche: (The Problem of Man) / V.V. Dudkin. - Petrozavodsk: Publishing house KSPI, 1994 - 151 p.
80. Evdokimova O.V. The problem of authenticity in Russian literature of the last third of the 19th century. and “A Writer’s Diary” by F.M. Dostoevsky / O.V. Evdokimova // Dostoevsky F.M. Materials and research.- L.: Nauka, 1988.-P. 177-192.
81. Emelyanov N.P. At the origins of the genre (“Internal Review” in the Sovremennik magazine) / N.P. Emelyanov // Russian journalism of the 18th-19th centuries. From the history of genres. - L.: Publishing house of Leningrad State University. - P. 79 - 102.
82. Ermakova M.Ya. Traditions of Dostoevsky in Russian prose / M.Ya. Ermakova M.: Education, 1990. - 126 p.
83. Erofeev V.V. Find the person in a person: Dostoevsky and existentialism / V. V. Erofeev. M.: Zebra E: EKSMO, 2003. - 287 p.
84. Zapadov A.V., Sokolova E.V. Type of publication as a scientific problem and practical concept / A.V. Zapadov, E.V. Sokolova // Vestn. Moscow un-ta. Ser 11. Journalism. 1976. No. 2. - P. 49 - 59.
85. Zakharov V.N. Problems of studying Dostoevsky / V.N. Zakharov. -Petrozavodsk: PGU, 1978. 110 p.
86. Zakharov V.N. Dostoevsky's system of genres. Typology and poetics / V.N. Zakharov. L.: Publishing house Leningr. Univ., 1985. - 209 p.
87. Zakharova T.V. “A Writer’s Diary” as an original genre phenomenon and ideological and artistic integrity / T.V. Zakharova // Works of Dostoevsky. The art of synthesis. - Ekaterinburg: Ural Publishing House, University, 1991.-S. 251-284.
88. Zakharova T.V. “The Diary of a Writer” by F.M. Dostoevsky as an artistic and documentary work / T.V. Zakharova // Artistically non-fiction. - Ivanovo, 1972. - P. 89 -110.
89. Zakharova T.V. Aesthetic views of F.M. Dostoevsky and M.E. Saltykova Shchedrina / T.V. Zakharova // Problems of creativity F.M. Dostoevsky. Poetics and traditions. - Tyumen, 1982. - pp. 27-35.
90. Zohrab I.F.M. Dostoevsky and A.N. Ostrovsky (in the light of Dostoevsky’s editorial activities in “Citizen”) / I. Zohrab // Dostoevsky F.M. Materials and research. - L.: Nauka, 1988. P. 107 - 125.
91. Ivanova A.A. Philosophical discoveries of F.M. Dostoevsky / A.A. Ivanova. M.: Knizhn. Chamber, 1995. - 194 p.
92. History of Russian journalism of the 18th and 19th centuries. - St. Petersburg: Publishing house - St. Petersburg State University, 2003.-667 p.
93. Karasev JI.B. Ontological view of Russian literature / JI.B. Karasev. M.: Ross. state univ., 1995. - 102 p.
94. Karyakin Yu.F. Dostoevsky and the eve of the 21st century / Yu.F. Karjakin. M.: Council, writer, 1989. - 656 p.
95. Kashina N.V. Man in the works of Dostoevsky / N.V. Kashina. M.: Khud. lit., 1986.-316 p.
96. Kinoshita T. Irony of fate, or romantic irony? Regarding the tragedy of the hero of the story “The Meek” / T. Kinoshita // Dostoevsky and world culture. -M.: Raritet Classica - plus, 1999. -No. 13. - P. 13-17.
97. Kirpotin V.Ya. Dostoevsky in the sixties / V.Ya. Kirpotin. -M.: Hood. lit., 1966. 560 p.
98. Kirpotin V.Ya. Dostoevsky and Belinsky / V.Ya. Kirpotin. M.: Khud. lit., 1976.-301 p.
99. Kirpotin V.Ya. Dostoevsky artist. Sketches and research / V.Ya. Kirpotin. - M.: Sov. writer, 1972. - 320 p.
100. Klimova S.M. Phenomenology of holiness and passion in Russian philosophy of culture / S.M. Klimova St. Petersburg: Aletheya, 2004. - 329 p.
101. Kozlova N.N. Bulletins of Europe / N.N. Kozlova // From century to century: From the history of Russian journalism 1702 2002. - M., 2002. - P. 36-41.
102. Korman B.O. Studying the text of a work of art / B.O. Corman. M.: Education, 1972. - 110 p.
103. Kornilov E.A. Creativity of a journalist and type of publication. To the formulation of the problem / E.A. Kornilov // Typology of journalism. Questions of methodology and history. Rostov: Publishing house Rostov, univ., 1987.1. pp. 37-49.
104. To the last peak. Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky in the memoirs of a typographic typesetter in 1872-1881. // F.M Dostoevsky in the memoirs of his contemporaries. T.2. - M.: Khud. lit., 1990. -S. 213-233.
106. Kroychik JI.E. Between literatures (diary as a documentary text) / JI.E. Kroychik // Accents. 1996. - No. 2-3. - P. 65-70.
107. Kroychik JI.E. Journalistic text: genre and discourse / JI.E. Kroychik // Accents. 2005. - No. 3-4. - P.11 -15.
108. Kroychik JI.E. System of journalistic genres / JI.E. Kroychik // Fundamentals of creative activity of a journalist. St. Petersburg, 2000. - pp. 125-167.
109. Kudryavtsev Yu. G. Three circles of Dostoevsky (Eventual. Social. Philosophical) / Yu.G. Kudryavtsev. M.: Moscow State University Publishing House, 1979. - 344 p.
110. Kurlyandskaya G.B. J.I.H. Tolstoy and F.M. Dostoevsky: (The problem of the method and worldview of writers) / G.B. Kurlyandskaya. Tula: Priok. book publishing house, 1986.-254 p.
111. Leontiev K. Favorites / K. Leontiev. M.: Rarog. 1993. - 367 p.
112. Literary heritage. M.: Nauka, 1965. - 518 p.
113. Likhachev D.S. About philology / D.S. Likhachev. M.: Higher. school, 1989. -208 p.
114. Lossky N.O. God and world evil / N.O. Lossky. M.: Republic, 1994.-432 p.
115. Lotman Yu.M. Inside thinking worlds: Man text - semiosphere - history / Yu.M. Lotman. - M.: Russian languages, cultures, 1999. -464 p.
116. Lunacharsky A.V. Dostoevsky as a thinker and artist / A.V. Lunacharsky // F.M. Dostoevsky in Russian criticism. M.: Goslitizdat, 1956.-S. 435 -453.
117. Martinsen D.A. Controversy about “simplicity” and “simplification” in the “Diary of a Writer” / D.A. Martinsen // Dostoevsky F.M. Materials and research. L.: Nauka, 1991. pp. 179-183.
118. Meletinsky E.M. Notes on the work of Dostoevsky / E.M. Meletinsky. M.: RSUH, 2001.-190 p.
119. Merezhkovsky D.S. L. Tolstoy and Dostoevsky. Eternal companions / D.S. Merezhkovsky. -M.: Republic, 1995. 621 p.
120. Methodology for typological analysis of periodicals. M., 1993.-238 p.
121. Mikheev M. Notebooks and diaries (30s) (from a course of lectures) / M. Mikheev // (http://uni-persona.srcc.msu.su/miheev/filpri.htm)
122. Mikhnovets N. The mechanism of meaning generation in “The Meek”: On the problem of “Author-Reader” / N. Mikhnovets // Dostoevsky and world culture. -SPb.: Silver Age, 1999. - No. 13. - P. 67 - 78.
123. Mochulsky K.V. Gogol. Soloviev. Dostoevsky / K.V. Mochulsky. M.: Republic, 1995. - 607 p.
124. Mochulsky K.V. Dostoevsky. Life and creativity / K.V. Mochulsky. Paris: Yamca-Press, 1980. - 564 p.
125. Nabokov V.V. Lectures on Russian literature / V.V. Nabokov // Trans. from English M.: Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 1996. - 440 p.
126. On a truly scientific basis (edited by I.L. Volgin) // Questions of literature. 1971. - No. 4. - P. 231 - 232.
127. Nasedkin N.N. Dostoevsky: portrait through the author’s text / N.N. Nasedkin. Tambov: TSU, 2001. - 550 p.
128. Nasedkin N.N. Suicide of Dostoevsky: The theme of suicide in the life and work of the writer / N.N. Nasedkin. M.: Algorithm, 2002. - 448 p.
129. Nechaeva B.S. Magazine M.M. and F.M. Dostoevsky "Time" 1861-1863 / B.C. Nechaeva. M.: Nauka, 1972. - 317 p.
130. Nechaeva B.S. Magazine M.M. And F.M. Dostoevsky "Epoch" 1864-1865 / B.C. Nechaeva.- M.: Nauka, 1975. 303 p.
131. Nechaeva B.S. From the archives of the magazine “Time” / B.C. Nechaeva // Dostoevsky and his time. M.: Nauka, 1971. - P. 283 - 295.
132. Nechaeva B.S. Early Dostoevsky. 1821 1849 / B.C. Nechaeva. - M.: Nauka, 1979.-288 p.
133. Samples of studying the text of a work of art in the works of Soviet literary scholars. Epic work / Compiled by B.O. Corman. Izhevsk, 1974. - Issue. 1. - 128 p.
134. Hovsepyan R.P. Periodical press of Russia. System, typology / R.P. Hovsepyan. M., 1995. - 278 p.
135. About Dostoevsky. Dostoevsky's creativity in Russian thought 1881 -1931. -M.: Book, 1990. 432 p.
136. Description of manuscripts by F.M. Dostoevsky / Ed. B.C. Nechaev. -M.: USSR Academy of Sciences, 1957. -588 p.
137. Papero I. Dostoevsky “The Diary of a Writer” and his readers / I. Papero // Suicide as a cultural institution / Trans. from English author. -M.: New. Literary Review, 1999. pp. 203 - 226.
138. Pereverzev V.F. Gogol. Dostoevsky. Research / V.F. Pereverzev. -M.: Council, writer, 1982. 511 p.
139. Correspondence of I.S. Turgenev in 2 volumes / Comp. and comment. V. Baskakova, T. Golovanova and others. M.: Khud. lit., 1986. - T.2. - 543 p.
140. Pomerantz G. Openness to the abyss: Meetings with Dostoevsky / G. Pomerantz. M.: Sov. writer, 1990. - 384 p.
141. Ponomareva G.B. Dostoevsky: I am dealing with this secret / G.B. Ponomareva. -M.: Akademkniga, 2001. -303 p.
142. Potebnya A.A. Rough notes on the works of L. Tolstoy and F. Dostoevsky // Potebnya A.A. Aesthetics and poetics. M., 1976.561 -591 S.
143. Prishvin M.M. Diaries / M.M. Prishvin. M.: Pravda, 1990. -477 p.
144. Problems of creativity F.M. Dostoevsky: Poetics and traditions. - Tyumen: TSU, 1982. 113 p.
146. Prokhorov E.P. Exploring journalism // E.P. Prokhorov. M.: RIP-Holding, 2005.-202 p.
147. Prokhorov E.P. Journalistic review / E.P. Prokhorov. M.: MSU, 1963.-36 p.
148. Rozanov V.V. The Legend of the Grand Inquisitor F.M. Dostoevsky: Lit. essays: About writing and writers: Collection. works / V.V. Rozanov. M.: Republic, 1996. - 701 p.
149. Rozanov V.V. Incompatible contrasts of life: Literary and aesthetic works of different years / V.V. Rozanov. M.: Art, 1990.604 p.
150. Rosenblum L.M. Creative diaries of Dostoevsky / L.M. Rosenblum. -M.: Nauka, 1981. - 368 p.
151. Rosenblum L.M. F.M. Dostoevsky and the trials of the 1870s /L.M. Rosenblum // Man and the Law. 1971. - No. 11. - P. 97 - 110.
153. Saraskina L. I. Fyodor Dostoevsky. Overcoming demons / L.I. Saraskina. -M.: Consent, 1996. 460 p.
154. Svitelsky V.A. Dostoevsky's attitude and the principles of its implementation in the novels of the writer of the 60-70s. / V.A. Svitelsky // Diss. for the job application uch. step. Ph.D. Philol. Sci. Voronezh, 1971.-411 p.
155. Sdobnov V.V. The problem of the reader in the early works of Dostoevsky / V.V. Sdobnov // Reader in the creative consciousness of Russian writers. Kalinin, 1986. - P. 96 - 102.
156. Seleznev Yu.I. Dostoevsky / Yu.I. Seleznev. 3rd ed. - M.: Mol. Guard, 1990.-541.
157. Sinyakova JI.H. “A Writer’s Diary” by F.M. Dostoevsky for 1876 as ideological and artistic unity / L.N. Sinyakova // Author's abstract. diss. for the job application uch. degree of Candidate of Philology. 1988. -20 p.
158. Slinko A.A. From the history of Russian democratic criticism. Literary and critical heritage of N.K. Mikhailovsky / A.A. Slinko. -Voronezh, VSU Publishing House, 1977. 173 p.
159. Smirnov V.B. Journalism and literature. Methodological and historical-literary problems / V.B. Smirnov. Volgograd, 2005.356 p.
160. Smirnov V.B. From literary criticism of the magazine "Delo". Creativity F.M. Dostoevsky in the interpretation of P.N. Tkacheva / V.B. Smirnov // Problems of typology of Russian literary criticism. Smolensk, 1987. -S. 60-72.
161. Smirnov V.B. “Domestic notes” and Russian literature of the 70-80s of the 19th century / V.B. Smirnov. Perm, 1974. - 211 p.
162. Smirnov V.B. F.M. Dostoevsky and Russian democratic journalism of the 70-80s / V.B. Smirnov. Volgograd, Volgograd University Publishing House, 1996. - 128 p.
163. Sokhryakov Yu.I. Creativity F.M. Dostoevsky and Russian prose of the 20th century (70-80s) / Yu.I. Sokhryakov. M.: IMLI RAS, 2002. - 239 p.
164. Stepanyan K.A. Purification by truth: “Selected passages from correspondence with friends” and “Diary of a writer”: To the 170th anniversary of the birth and 110th anniversary of the death of F.M. Dostoevsky // Man. 1991. - No. 6. - P. 128 -135.
165. Tarasov B.N. “The Law of Self” and “The Law of Love” / B.N. Tarasov. M.: Knowledge, 1991.-62 p.
166. Tarasova N.A. “A Writer’s Diary” by F.M. Dostoevsky 1876: creative evolution and history of the text / N.A. Tarasova // Author's abstract. dis. for the job application uch. step. Ph.D. Philol. Sci. Petrozavodsk, 2001. - 18 p.
167. Tvardovskaya V.A. Dostoevsky in the public life of Russia (1861 -1881) / V.A. Tvardovskaya. M.: Nauka, 1990. - 340 p.
168. Typological development of journalism. Rostov: Publishing house Rostov, university, 1993. - 176 p.
169. Tomashevsky B.V. Theory of literature. Poetics / B.V. Tomashevsky. M.: Aspect Press, 1996. - 333 p.
170. Tunimanov V.A. Dostoevsky and Nekrasov / V.A. Tunimanov // Dostoevsky and his time. JL: Science, 1971. - pp. 33-66.
171. Tunimanov V.A. About the anonymous feuilleton legacy of F.M. Dostoevsky during the years of editing “Citizen” / V.A. Tunimanov // Russian literature. 1981. - No. 2. - P. 169-174.
172. Tunimanov V.A. Announcements from the editors of Vremya / V.A. Tunimanov // Dostoevsky. Materials and research. JL: Science, 1983. - pp. 191 -194.
173. Tunimanov V.A. Journalism of Dostoevsky. “A Writer’s Diary” / V.A. Tunimanov // Dostoevsky artist and thinker. - M.: Khud. lit., 1972. - P.165 -209.
174. Tynyanov Yu.N. Poetics. History of literature. Cinema / Yu.N. Tynyanov. -M.: Nauka, 1977.-576 p.
176. Tyukhova E.V. Dostoevsky and Turgenev: (Typological community and generic originality) / E.V. Tyukhova. Kursk: KPI, 1981.-83 p.
177. Tyapugina N.Yu. Poetics F.M. Dostoevsky: symbolic and mythological aspect / N.Yu. Tyapugina. Saratov: Publishing house Saratov, pedagogical. in-ta. 1996.-99 p.
178. Udodov B.T. Essays on the history of Russian literature of the 1820-1830s. / B.T. Udodov Voronezh, 2004. -379 p.
179. Uchenova V.V. Method and genre: dialectics of interaction (methods of journalistic creativity) / V.V. Uchenova. M., 1984.
180. Fedorenko B.V. On the history of the newspaper “Citizen” / B.V. Fedorenko // Dostoevsky F.M. Materials and research. - St. Petersburg, 1994. - P. 246 - 259.
181. Fokin P.E. Teacher, learn for yourself! (Dostoevsky literary critic. “A Writer’s Diary” 1876 - 1877) / P.E. Fokin // Dostoevsky and world culture. - M.: Classic Plus, 1996. - No. 7. - P. 18-42.
182. Friedlander G.M. Dostoevsky and world literature / G.M. Friedlander. JL: Sov. writer, 1985. - 456 p.
183. Friedlander G.M. Realism of Dostoevsky / G.M. Friedlander. M.-L.: Nauka, 1964.-404 p.
184. Khalizev V.E. Theory of literature / V.E. Khalizev. M.: Higher. school, 2000.-398 p.
185. Chirkov N.M. About Dostoevsky's style. Problems, ideas, images / N.M. Chirkov. -M.: Nauka, 1967. 303 p.
186. Cheshikhin Vetrinsky V.E. F.M. Dostoevsky in the memoirs of his contemporaries and his letters / V.E. Cheshikhin - Vetrinsky. - M.: Publishing house
187. T-va “V.V. Dumov, I've eaten. Salaev", 1923. 159 p.
188. Chulkov G. How Dostoevsky worked / G. Chulkov. M.: Council, writer, 1939.
189. Shklovsky V.B. Pros and cons. Notes about Dostoevsky / V.B. Shklovsky M.: Sov. writer, 1957. - 259 p.
190. Shchelkunova E.S. Journalistic text in the system of mass communication: specificity and functioning / E.S. Shchelkunova // Dis. for the job application uch. step. Ph.D. philologist, science. Voronezh, 2004. - 220 p.
191. Shchennikov G.K. Dostoevsky and Russian realism / G.K. Shchennikov. -Sverdlovsk: Ural Publishing House, University, 1987. 352 p.
192. Shchetinina N.N. “A Writer’s Diary” by F.M. Dostoevsky as a journalistic embodiment of the “Russian idea” / N.N. Shchetinina // Mass media in modern world: abstract scientific-practical conf. St. Petersburg, 2001. - pp. 34 - 35.
193. Eikhenbaum B. About prose / B. Eikhenbaum. JL: Hood. lit., 1969. - 503 p.
194. Etov V.I. Dostoevsky. Essay on creativity / V.I. Etov. M.: Education, 1968. - 384 p.
195. XXI century through the eyes of Dostoevsky: prospects for humanity / Mat. Intl. conf. M.: Grail, 2002 - 560 p.
Methodological problems of analysis of “A Writer’s Diary”
The need for a conceptual analysis of “A Writer’s Diary” as a single, independent work encounters a number of problems, primarily methodological. In the scientific tradition "Diary" for a long time was considered as a text secondary to Dostoevsky’s artistic creativity. In addition, during the Soviet period, its ideological orientation was also condemned, as a modern researcher writes: “As is known, for quite a long time the work was approached as a marginal, “unsuccessful” text demonstrating unproductive “backward” ideological sentiments, and thus it , in fact, somehow “fell out” of the research field of serious, thorough study.” dostoevsky diary writer fiction
However, an attempt to overcome the prejudiced attitude towards the Diary as a reactionary, pro-monarchist organ often leads researchers to the opposite extreme. This case is characterized by a frank adoption of the language and rhetoric of Dostoevsky himself or his later followers. The absence of a critical approach and trust in the “voice of the author” is in some cases directly declared as a methodological principle.
The problem of the lack of a strict methodology that would exclude the question of a biased attitude towards Dostoevsky’s personality is complicated by the genre heterogeneity of the text of the “Diary”. One of its characteristic features, according to researchers, is the synthetic mixture of various literary forms, such as a personal diary, memoirs, fiction, feuilleton, journalistic article. This is how, for example, V. K. Kantor describes the genre of the “Diary” in the book “Judging God’s Creature.” The prophetic pathos of Dostoevsky: “...this is not direct journalism, like Voltaire or Tolstoy, these are not literary critical articles of “real criticism,” these are not political articles, these are not memoirs. But “A Writer’s Diary” amazingly combined all these different possibilities.”
S. S. Shaulov in the article “The structure and functions of the “journalistic narrative” in Dostoevsky” writes about the clash in the “Diary” not of genres, but of different narrative positions: the journalist, the novelist and the “author-demiurge” playing with them: “In our opinion, we can talk about a complex clash of different narrative positions in “A Writer’s Diary”. Firstly, this is actually a “journalist”. It is he, irritated by the incident with the boy, who says at the end of the story: “... that’s why I’m a novelist” (the journalist “allowed” himself to be a novelist). Secondly, this is a “novelist” who, from within the narrative, appears in the assumed temporary role of a “journalist”: he “imagines”, “seems and imagines” (this is the moment of transition of narrative strategies: at the beginning of the story it is smooth, at the end pointedly, painfully sharp for the reader).
But there is another level of authorial control of the text: the one who in the “Diary of a Writer” builds and arranges the parts - essays, stories and sketches - among themselves, the one who makes the entire text holistic and endows it with a single and clear author’s ideology. At this level, the subject of the narrator is in many ways identical to the author-demiurge; in novels, it is the subject of speech at this level who plays the positions of “journalist” and “novelist.”
At the same time, analyzing the stylistic and genre features of the “Diary”, researchers note that Dostoevsky’s main task was to create a high-quality new journalistic genre in which the personality of the author would play a central role. It was she who had to ensure the integrity and internal coherence of a text that was heterogeneous in its genre nature. Thus, I. L. Volgin in the monograph “Dostoevsky the Journalist. “A Writer’s Diary” and the Russian Public” writes: “The task was to create a new genre. Journalism had to be animated. “The “thought expressed” had to be connected with the personality of the one who expressed it.”
"A Writer's Diary" is personal from beginning to end. This point acquires fundamental importance in this case. The point is not only that the sole author of the Diary was the focus of the entire publishing process, but that the entire multiplicity of journal functions was personified in him. Unlike any of the periodicals, the Diary also had its own hero. “After all, he himself,” wrote Vs. Solovyov about the author of the “Diary”, is the most interesting person among the most interesting persons of his best novels, - and, of course, he will be all, entirely in this “Diary of a Writer”. (Historical Bulletin, 1881. No. 4, p. 843.) ".
Documentary sources also indicate this. For example, already the first definition of “Diary” in a subscription advertisement in 1876 - “a book written with one pen” - emphasized the importance of the personal element in the text.
However, despite the key role of the narrator, not many studies have been devoted to a comprehensive analysis of the features of the author’s speech in the “Diary of a Writer”. As O.V. Korotkova writes: “The tradition of studying the “Diary of a Writer” in the domestic historical and philological tradition is associated mainly with elucidating the journal and publishing history of the “Diary”, the typology of Dostoevsky’s monojournal and its place in the history of Russian journalism of the 19th century; various aspects of the political and ideological polemics of the author of the “Diary” with the conservative and liberal press; a significant amount of research is devoted to the consideration of purely artistic works included in the “Diary of a Writer” - the so-called. "small prose".
To a much lesser extent, the “poetics” of the “Writer’s Diary” has been subjected to a holistic scientific consideration - there are still practically no studies where the “Writer’s Diary” would be considered not only as the sum of the author’s ideological statements interspersed with literary prose, essays, memoirs, criminal chronicles, etc., etc., but as an ethical and aesthetic whole, the unity and uniqueness of which is created primarily by the personality of the author.”
One of the approaches to holistic analysis“linguistic personality” of the author of “The Diary of a Writer”, which we offer in our work, is an analysis of Dostoevsky’s rhetorical strategy in connection with the problems of “The Diary of a Writer”. The main method of research was the identification of key concepts that are significant both for the formal structure of speech and for the formal structure of the narrator’s thoughts. Such a role in the text of the “Diary” is played, for example, by the idea of “paradoxicality”, which acts, on the one hand, as a stylistic marker of the technique of self-discrediting, and on the other, as a unique principle of working with semantic oppositions.
Among the studies directly related to the problem of the rhetorical strategy of the author of “The Diary of a Writer,” one can note the article by V. V. Vinogradov “The problem of rhetorical forms in “The Diary of a Writer” by F. M. Dostoevsky,” dedicated to the analysis of the speech of lawyer Spasovich in “The Diary of a Writer.”
Also - the dissertation of O. V. Korotkova “Strategies of speech behavior in the “Diary of a Writer” by F. M. Dostoevsky”, dedicated on the one hand to the figures of Dostoevsky’s rhetorical doubles, such as “One Person”, Paradoxalist, and “Funny Man” and the analysis of direct Dostoevsky's polemics with real opponents: Leskov, lawyer Utin, and Tolstoy.
In addition, one of the studies that we focused on in our work was the analysis of M.M. Bakhtin of the rhetorical strategies of Dostoevsky's characters, especially the main character of Notes from Underground.
The center of our work will be the first chapter of the June issue of the Diary for 1876, the chapters: “My Paradox”, “Conclusion from the Paradox”, “The Eastern Question”, “Utopian Understanding of History”.
The first chapter of the work is devoted to the analysis of documentary sources related to the June issue. The main question is in what terms Dostoevsky himself conceptualized his communicative task and how he assessed the success of its solution.
The second chapter analyzes the features of Dostoevsky’s rhetorical strategy, the role of the figure of an imaginary opponent and the specifics of introducing someone else’s word into one’s own text.
The third chapter is devoted to the connection of the rhetorical level with the ideological issues of the selected chapters and the “Diary of a Writer” as a whole. The focus of the study is the problem of the relationship between Russia and Europe through the prism of the concepts of “civilization” and “barbarism”.
Introduction
Conclusion
Introduction
Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky is one of the most significant Russian writers and thinkers.
Dostoevsky is the most prominent representative of “ontological”, “reflective” poetics, which, unlike traditional, descriptive poetics, leaves the character in a sense free in his relationship with the text that describes him (that is, for him the world), which is manifested in the fact that that he is aware of his relationship with him and acts based on it. Hence all the paradoxicality, inconsistency and inconsistency of Dostoevsky’s characters.
Dostoevsky's work is dedicated to understanding the depth of the human spirit. The writer analyzes the most hidden labyrinths of consciousness, consistently pursuing three key ideas in almost each of his works: the idea of personality as a self-sufficient value, inspired by the Spirit of God; the idea of suffering as the real basis of our existence; the idea of God as the highest ethical criterion and the mystical essence of universal existence.
In his works, Dostoevsky showed that morality, built on the shaky foundations of personal arbitrariness, inevitably leads to the principle: “everything is permitted,” that is, to the direct denial of all morality, and therefore to the self-destruction of the individual.
A diary is a text intended for internal consumption, writing for oneself. These are not just notes for memory, a chronicle of current events is a way of intimate introspection, a kind of apocrypha (a non-canonical autobiography of a person that exists only for internal consumption). Dostoevsky “explodes” this idea of a diary - the hidden, intimate is offered for public reading. Without canceling the personal tone in the narrative, Dostoevsky gives the reader the opportunity to get acquainted with the point of view on events that he offers. Fyodor Mikhailovich combined three fundamental components in “The Diary”: documentaryism (reliance on facts), artistic imagery (the desire to capture everyday life in the most generalizing emotional form) and the personal nature of the narrative, characteristic of diary entries.
On the pages of the “Diary” the author reflects on the world-historical purpose of the Russian people, on the relationship between church and state, on war and peace, on the eternal confrontation between “fathers and sons”, on the place of art in the moral education of society. Political, ideological, ethical, aesthetic problems are intertwined in the “Diary of a Writer” not only at the thematic and content level, but also at the level of form, the ideological and artistic unity of the publication is strengthened. Dostoevsky is concerned about the state of modern society and the Russian family. “The modern Russian family is becoming more and more a “random family.” It is a random family that is the definition of a modern Russian family. She somehow suddenly lost her old appearance, somehow even suddenly, but the new one... will she be able to create for herself a new one, desirable and satisfying? Russian heart appearance? Some even so serious people say directly that the Russian family now “does not exist at all.” Of course, all this is said only about the Russian intelligent family, that is, the upper classes, not the people. But, however, the national family - isn’t it now also a question?” he writes on the pages of his “Diary” and tries to answer the question himself.
This work is dedicated to Dostoevsky’s “Diary of a Writer”.
The relevance of this work is predetermined by the constant interest in the work of one of greatest writers Russia and the world - Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky. Dostoevsky's "Diary of a Writer" has not been sufficiently analyzed in modern literature, which determines the relevance of our chosen research topic. It should be noted that a special value in the writer’s work should be considered his deep truthfulness in depicting the environment, persons, the depth of the characters’ experiences and the variety of life and philosophical situations.
The purpose of our research is to form a holistic stylistic picture of the work “The Diary of a Writer” by Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky
The theoretical significance of studying “The Diary of a Writer” lies in the results of a detailed study of the relevance, themes and issues of this work to form an idea of the work of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky.
The object of this study is Dostoevsky’s work “The Diary of a Writer”.
The subject of the study is a detailed stylistic analysis of Dostoevsky’s work, “The Diary of a Writer,” chosen as the object of study.
1. Carefully read “The Diary of a Writer” by Fyodor Dostoevsky.
2. Conduct a lexical analysis of Dostoevsky’s “Diary of a Writer.”
3. Conduct a morphological analysis of Dostoevsky’s “Diary of a Writer”.
4. Conduct a syntactic analysis of Dostoevsky’s “Diary of a Writer”.
5. Draw conclusions based on the results of the analysis carried out during the work.
The sources of information for writing the work were the works of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky, in particular, his work “The Diary of a Writer”, the works of other famous writers and publicists about Dostoevsky and his work, as well as periodic and scientific publications on the issues of stylistic analysis of works, which is described in the section of the used literature.
Chapter 1. Lexical analysis of Dostoevsky’s work “The Diary of a Writer”
Let's consider the features of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky's vocabulary, which he uses in his work “The Diary of a Writer.”
In “A Writer’s Diary” a certain level of relationship with the audience is clearly visible: the author does not consider his point of view to be final, canonical. But he strives to ensure that, if possible, it is accepted by the audience. That is why in the “Diary of a Writer” the prevailing tone is not a preaching tone or even a confessional one, which would seem to be expected from a diary, but the tone of oratorical speech, the tone of thinking out loud, the tone of readiness to listen and take into account other points of view.
One of the chapters of the “Diary” begins with Fyodor Mikhailovich expressing a desire to visit the place of his childhood and adolescence - a small village in which he lived with his parents and about which he keeps warm memories. And then the author poses a problematic question, which attracts the reader’s attention: “You have such memories and such places, and we all had them. It’s curious: what will today’s youth, today’s children and teenagers have precious in their memories, and will they? The main thing is what exactly? What kind of?"
But in order to depict the problems of the last century in a modern light, the author needed to resort to the entire wealth of Russian vocabulary, therefore, “The Diary of a Writer” by Fyodor Dostoevsky is replete with various tropes: epithets, metaphors, hyperboles, lexical repetitions, tautologies, comparisons, which, although for different purposes, but in general they help the reader understand the main idea, the idea that the author wanted to convey to him.
Epithets that enhance the meaning of nouns and create expression help to add imagery to the narrative. Selected for a specific setting in the work, they help to better imagine what is happening. I will give examples: an old Moscow acquaintance, whom I rarely see, but whose opinion I deeply value; small and unremarkable place; (expresses warmth towards a person, place), with dear memories; sacred memories (a person treasures memories), dear stock; a curious and serious question (the author's interest); modern disturbing doubts; harmonious and clear presentation; beautiful paintings; modern Russian family; for a short time; Mighty Rus' (the author's admiration); the most innocent thing; malicious types; stupid rumors (disdain); a perfect gentleman; weak, tender, not at all formed breast of such a small child(a pity); amazing fathers; very unpleasant considerations; These attempts sometimes even have a wonderful beginning, but are unsustained, unfinished, and sometimes completely ugly; cynical, embittered laziness; transitional and decaying state of society; vile intrigues and vile servility; thirsty for the souls of their wretched children; a selfish woman (aversion to images, disdain); children's “fantasy”; depraved heart; small case; cold, selected, offended look (compassion); good intentions; heartless parents, haters of your children; deep, genuine grief; humiliating and shameful position; love for one's native nest; oppressive work; the child is cunning, secretive; a kind, simple-minded child; bitter, difficult impressions of their children's hearts; a good-natured smile; the author's favorite hero; enormous talent, significant intelligence and a person highly respected by intelligent Russia; bitter bewilderment; these words are old, this faith is long-standing; great civilization; the future is great; crazy dream; a terrible and holy thing; land of holy wonders; future peaceful victory; our favorite writers; my dear and beloved novelist; undeniable and deepest kinship; Russian genius; a real conscious turn; the most vivid, solid and indisputable evidence; the greatest global, universal and unifying significance; small word; eternal questions; questionable mental path; Moscow barich; scientific book; housed children; Russian affair; old prince; the case is clear, the accusation is absurd; Slavic lands, Slavic sovereign princes; unheard of oppression, atrocities, robberies; last year's movement; chattering people; Slavic lands; short comic conversation; personal opinions; the opinion is ridiculous; reckless people; dark and completely uneducated Russian people; simple village men; holy places and all the Eastern Christians there; wicked Hagarites; Russian people; thin, trashy people; great artist; ancient historical feature; merciful heart; countless stories of countless torments; countless stories of countless torments; an honest and undeniably decent person; direct feeling; a lied and subdued nation (conveys the mood and attitude of the author towards what is being described).
A significant role in “A Writer’s Diary” is played by metaphors that help to fully reveal the essence of what is happening and the characters’ characters: “it left me with the deepest and strongest impression for the rest of my life and where everything is full of the most precious memories for me” (conveys the author’s unforgettable feelings); “A person cannot live without something sacred and precious, carried into life from the memories of childhood,” “These memories may even be difficult and bitter, but the suffering experienced can later turn into a shrine for the soul” (conveys the significance of childhood in everyone’s life person); “But the trouble is that there has never been an era in our Russian life that would provide so much less data for premonition and foreknowledge of our always mysterious future as the present era”; “Then, you instill a little trust in him with your answer and readiness to answer him, he immediately, but again with caution, changes his curious look to a mysterious one, approaches you and asks, already lowering his voice: “Isn’t it, they say?” , what’s special?”; “The weak, tender, completely unformed breast of such a small child is already accustomed to such horror”; “There are some amazing fathers these days!” (conveys the author’s surprise and indignation); “These attempts sometimes even have a wonderful beginning, but are unsustained, unfinished, and sometimes completely ugly”; “cynical, embittered laziness”; “The majority gets confused, loses the thread and finally gives up” (conveys the hopeless situation of society); “Without the rudiments of the positive and beautiful, a person cannot emerge from childhood into life; without the rudiments of the positive and beautiful, a generation cannot be set on its journey”; “In a word, I want to say that it was impossible to drag this Dzhunkovsky case to a criminal court”; "Children's hearts are soft"; “but hiring a teacher to teach science to children does not mean, of course, handing over the children to him, so to speak, off his shoulders, in order to get rid of them and so that they no longer bother you”; “Your heartfelt care for them, always visible to them, your love for them would warm everything sown in their souls like a warm ray, and the fruit would come out, of course, abundant and kind”; “Finally, a kind, simple-minded child with a direct and open heart - you will first torment him, and then harden him and lose his heart”; “The great eastern eagle soared above the world, sparkling with two wings on the heights of Christianity”; “This time, however, he struck me with the firmness and ardent persistence of his opinion about Anna Karenina; “Caught in a cycle of lies, people commit crimes and die irresistibly: apparently, a thought on the most beloved and oldest of European topics” (conveys the immorality of society); “Since society is structured abnormally, it is impossible to ask human units to answer for the consequences”; “Now that I have expressed my feelings, perhaps they will understand how the apostasy of such an author, his separation from the Russian universal and great cause, and the paradoxical untruth he raised against the people in his unfortunate eighth part, which he published separately, affected me. He simply robs the people of everything that is most precious, deprives them of the main meaning of their life. It would be incomparably more pleasant for him if our people did not rise up everywhere in their hearts for their brothers who suffer for the faith; “News of these horrors penetrated to us in Russia, to the intelligent public and, finally, to the people”; “in my heart I was at one with my king”; “This opinion is absurd, going directly against the fact, and in the mouth of the prince it is easily explained: it comes from one of the former guardians of the people”; “The smart Levin could have understood much more than him, but he was confused by the consideration that the people do not know history and geography.”
To give expression, the author repeatedly turns to lexical repetitions and tautologies: “What has this new corporation, which is just beginning, but so important in the future, presented so far, and what is it able to respond to? It’s better not to answer this”; “Oh, of course, there will be many answers, perhaps even more than questions - answers good and evil, stupid and wise, but their main character, it seems, will be that each answer will give rise to three more new questions, and will go it's all crescendo. The result is chaos, but chaos would be a good thing: hasty solutions to problems are worse than chaos”; “May this perfection be accomplished and may the suffering and bewilderment of our civilization finally end!”; "living life"; “is becoming more and more a random family. It is a random family that is the definition of a modern Russian family”; “all this, undoubtedly, will give birth and has already given birth to questions”; “And most importantly, there is nothing to say about it. They will take it out. Of course, they will carry it out, and they will carry it out without us, both without defendants and in front of defendants.”
The author did not stop at using metaphors. The work contains hyperboles as a type of metaphor. They give the content even more expressiveness and significance. I will give examples: “the transitional and decaying state of society gives rise to laziness and apathy”; “such a sharp turning point in life”; “...still burning with the fire of jealousy”; “Mighty Rus' has endured much worse. Yes, and this is not its purpose and purpose, so that it should in vain turn away from its age-old path, and its dimensions are not the same”; “and so I again plunged into very unpleasant considerations”; “a young man enters life alone, like a finger, he did not live with his heart, his heart is in no way connected with his past, with his family, with his childhood”; “But these are even the best of children, and yet most of them carry with them into life not only the dirt of memories, but the dirt itself, they will stock up on it even on purpose, they will fill their pockets full of this dirt on the road, so that they can use it later in business.” and no longer with a grinding sound of suffering, like his parents, but with a light heart”; “Remember, too, that only for children and their golden heads...”; " pure in heart Levin"; “It’s true, this is a hot man”; “Here, again, there is nothing to mock and laugh at: these words are old, this faith is long-standing, and one thing is that this faith does not die and these words do not fall silent, but, on the contrary, they become stronger and stronger, expand their circle and acquire for themselves new adherents, new convinced figures”; “although Europe is still far from understanding him and will not believe him for a long time”; “Russia draws its sword against the Turks, but who knows, maybe it will clash with Europe - isn’t it too early?”; “Is it the innateness and naturalness of our brotherhood, which is coming out more and more clearly in our time from under everything that has crushed it for centuries, and despite the rubbish and dirt that now meets it, dirty and distorts its features beyond recognition?”; “From a short conversation with him, I always take away some subtle and far-sighted word of his”; “Evil and good are defined, weighed, the dimensions and degrees were determined historically by the sages of mankind, by tireless work on the human soul and the highest scientific development on the degree of the unifying power of humanity in society”; “Have I reached the point with my mind that I must love my neighbor and not strangle him?”; “Sergei Ivanovich has just thrown himself, completely and passionately, into Slavic activities, and the committee has placed a lot on him.”
Next, we should turn to comparisons, an important part of the narrative, since they create great imagery. To confirm this point of view, I would like to illustrate some of them: “This thought was expressed by Pushkin not as just an indication, teaching or theory, not as a dream or prophecy, but was fulfilled by him in practice, contained forever in his brilliant creations and proven by them.” ; “He told and declared to all these peoples that the Russian genius knows them, understood them, touched them like a native”; “Instead, we, of course, could point Europe directly to the source, that is, to Pushkin himself, as the most vivid, solid and indisputable proof of the independence of the Russian genius and his right to the greatest world, universal and unifying significance in the future”; “Not only that: it is unlikely that people like Levin can have final faith”; “I just want to say that these, like Levin, no matter how long they live with the people or near the people, will not fully become the people.”
Dostoevsky uses a rather vivid series of verbs in his work. This gives the description mobility and expression. I will give a number of verbs that convey the above speech: with whom I rarely see, but whose opinion I deeply value (indicates the author’s respect for his friend); I learned something very interesting (indicates the source of information); I haven’t been there for forty years and wanted to go there so many times (conveys regret); I do not at all wish for their repetition; my interlocutor (source of information) told me; in the carriages I noticed (indicates the author’s observation skills); the common people listened and asked questions (source of information).
Now I would like to turn to the manner of narration. It is conducted from the first person, a person who keeps his personal diary, recording in it all his impressions of various events in society. In the text, the author very often addresses the reader, Russian writers, the Russian people, we see his reflections on various topics. This gives rise to a conversational element in the narrative. The topic is so pressing for Fyodor Mikhailovich that sometimes he resorts to criticism.
Thus, we can draw the following conclusion: the lexical warehouse of the work is very diverse. The author uses simple words, characteristic of the era that he describes, which gives the diary of past years. Various paths do not make the meaning of the work unclear, but, on the contrary, enhance its flavor.
We cannot say that the work was written only in a journalistic style, since the author shares his thoughts or feelings with others, exchanges information on everyday issues in an informal setting, which indicates the use of elements of a conversational style. Fyodor Mikhailovich influences the imagination and feelings of the reader, conveys his thoughts and feelings, uses all the wealth of vocabulary, the possibilities of different styles, is characterized by imagery, emotionality, concreteness of speech, which is characteristic of an artistic style.
Thus, “The Diary of a Writer” by Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky is a work of journalistic style with elements of artistic and colloquial. Thanks to the rich vocabulary and ironic remarks used by the author, the work becomes easy to understand for any reader.
Dostoevsky uses epithets, hyperboles, metaphors, comparisons in order to more expressively and clearly describe the image that should be paid attention to, which makes the work bright, expressive, and interesting.
Chapter 2. Morphological analysis of Dostoevsky’s work “The Diary of a Writer”
After the lexical analysis of the work we have chosen as the object, we turn to the elements of morphological analysis.
Morphology in a broad sense is the science of forms and structure. IN in the narrow sense, applicable to literary works - the structure, structure of the form of a sentence (words, phrases), organized in accordance with its function, material and method of formation.
Morphological analysis in linguistics - determination of the morphological characteristics of a word, phrase, sentence. Let's look at this definition in more detail.
So, words and morphemes belong to signs; they have their own signifieds and signifiers correlated with each other. Because of this significant difference, morphological analysis, which deals with morphemes and words as two-way units, is more complex than phonological or lexical analysis. It involves addressing a number of additional criteria.
The analytical approach to language (the path from linguistic means to their functions and meanings) largely involves the use of the same research procedures in relation to units of the phonological, morphological and syntactic structural levels. But there are also serious differences due to the unequal nature of units at different levels.
Thus, the units of the phonological and morphological levels are the same in the sense that they form sets of fundamentally countable quantities.
Since Dostoevsky’s speech in his work “A Writer’s Diary” is rich in complex morphological structures, it makes sense to conduct a morphological analysis of this work in order to clarify and classify certain characteristic features of morphology.
Let's start with the fact that the word and morpheme are the basic units (upper and lower) of the morphological level of the linguistic structure. Their description is dealt with by morphology as one of the sections of grammar.
In order to more clearly carry out a morphological analysis of the selected work, we will select the most striking passages and characterize them with certain morphological categories.
It is now clear to everyone that with the resolution of the Eastern Question, a new element, a new element will move into humanity, which until now has lain passively and inertly and which, in any case and to say the least, cannot but influence the destinies of the world extremely strongly and decisively. (this technique is often used in polemics and discussions, when a statement in the context of a sentence with the introductory words “everyone is clear” makes a kind of psychological connection to the words of the speaker); this construction of the utterance determines the nature of the oppositions between words (and, accordingly, between morphemes) that underlie the systemic organization of the lexicon and morphemicon.
The story is eternal, old, old, which began much earlier than Martyn Ivanovich Luther, but according to the unchanged historical laws, almost exactly the same story in our shtunda: it is known that they are already falling apart, arguing about letters, interpreting the Gospel at their own peril and to your own conscience, and, most importantly, from the very beginning - poor, unfortunate, dark people!; (changing the word forms of adjectives and verbs (old-old, arguing-interpreting, poor-unhappy) leads to an expansion of the semantic load of the sentence). In this way, the nature of the variation of words and morphemes in speech and the relationship between variants of one word and, accordingly, between variants of one morpheme are determined.
This shtunda has no future, will not expand widely, will soon stop and will probably merge with one of the dark sects of the Russian people, with some Khlystovism - this oldest sect of the whole world, it seems, which undoubtedly has its own meaning and preserves it in two the most ancient attributes: spinning and prophecy (the author uses a peculiar transfer of significance and meaning to decorate and enrich speech); in this case, differential features appear that determine the place of words and morphemes in the corresponding systems and ensure their differentiation and identification.
Despite these reasonable and intelligent voices, it still seems to me permissible and quite excusable to say something special about Danilov; Moreover, I even think that our intelligentsia itself would not have humiliated itself so much if it had paid more attention to this fact; a certain impact on the functions of words in speech, the relationships between words in a sentence or phrase - syntagmatic, or relational, meaning.
Listen, after all, you are not these cynics, you are just people who are intelligent and European, that is, in essence, very kind: you don’t deny that in the summer our people showed in some places extraordinary strength of spirit: people left their homes and children and went to die for the faith, for the oppressed, God knows where and God knows with what means, just like the first crusaders nine centuries ago in Europe (it should be noted that this method of formatting speech with repetition serves to enhance the euphony of the sentence). This is how the phonemic and prosodic structure of the exponents of both words and morphemes is expressed.
I affirm that this was the case with all the great nations of the world, the most ancient and the newest, that it was only this faith that elevated them to the possibility, each, of having, in its own time, a huge global influence on the fate of mankind: this, undoubtedly, was the case with ancient Rome, and so it was later with Rome during the Catholic period of its existence, because when France inherited its Catholic idea, the same thing happened to France, and, for almost two centuries, France , right up to the most recent pogrom and her despondency, all the time and indisputably considered herself at the head of the world, at least morally, and at times politically, the leader of its course and the indicator of its future; (this method of indicating the actor or speaker allows you to highlight the direction of the statement and the speaker’s intonation). This example shows the use of attributing word forms to some extra-linguistic moment. So, for example, the meaning of the singular number of a noun is in principle based on the idea of the singularity of the given subject of the statement (France).
It is the same among nations: let there be prudent, honest and moderate peoples, calm, without any impulses, traders and shipbuilders, living richly and with extreme neatness; Well, God bless them, they still won’t go far; this will certainly emerge as a middle ground that will serve humanity in no way: this energy is not in them, this great conceit is not in them, these three moving whales under them are not there, on which all great nations stand; An indication of the nature of the structural-syntactic relationships between words within complex sentence. This is, in this case, the meaning accusative case noun.
You believe (and I am with you) in universal humanity, that is, in the fact that someday, before the light of reason and consciousness, the natural barriers and prejudices that still separate the free communication of nations by the egoism of national demands will fall, and that then only the peoples they will live in one spirit and harmony, like brothers, intelligently and lovingly striving for common harmony. This example uses grammatical form violation. This is done in order to enhance the tragedy of the statement.
We greeted the advent of Rousseau and Voltaire with delight; the traveling Karamzin and I were touchingly rejoicing at the convening of the “National States” in 1989, and even if we later fell into despair, at the end of the first quarter of this century, together with advanced Europeans over their lost dreams and broken ideals, we still did not lose our faith and even consoled the Europeans themselves (in this example, the difference in gender of nouns is used to create the effect of opposition). Using the classification of words within one part of speech.
And indeed: the stronger and more independent we developed in our national spirit, the stronger and closer we would respond to the European soul and, having become related to it, we would immediately become more understandable to it, then they would not arrogantly turn away from us, but would listen to us; (the use of introductory word forms allows you to change intonation within one sentence). These are properties of morphological levels that allow segmentation of speech into words and morphemes and inventory of these units in the lexicon and morphemicon.
Among the Decembrists, perhaps, there were indeed more people in contact with the highest and richest society; but there were incomparably more Decembrists than Petrashevites, among whom there were also many people with connections and kinship with the best society, and at the same time the richest; Both of them undoubtedly belonged to the same lordly, “lordly”, so to speak, society, and in this characteristic feature of the then type of political criminals, that is, the Decembrists and Petrashevites, there was absolutely no difference. Deliberately changing the form of a word to give greater expression to a story.
I remember that at first glance I was very struck by his appearance, his nose, his forehead; For some reason I imagined him completely different - “this terrible, this terrible critic”; By the way, I asked myself several times: what did these several hundred thousand mouths of Bulgarians, Bosniaks, Herzegovinians and others who fled from their tormentors, after beating and ruin, feed on to Serbia, Montenegro, Austria and wherever (in this case the connection between “speech” and the speaker about it as an object makes the speaker an active participant in the communicative act). In this case, we see the use of a specific communicative-situational correlation. Thus, the meaning of the first person implies an indication of the speaker as an active participant in this communicative act.
Thus, it should be concluded that in his work “The Diary of a Writer,” Dostoevsky uses various morphological features when constructing sentences. Note that a change in the morphemic structure of the speech unit under consideration in this case affects various aspects of the speaker’s utterances. Here it is worth noting the movement of thought, the intensification of tragedy or another effect, and the change in word forms to emphasize the importance of the statement.
We also note that the author quite often changes the structure of the sentence, brings to the “foreground” introductory words, exclamations, and also uses modified word forms, which characterizes the richness of the author’s speech and the wide possibilities of operating morphemes in the context of one sentence or statement.
In total, the work contains about 35% nouns, 30% verbs and verbal forms, 20% adjectives and 15% other significant parts. Consequently, the text has a mixed character: nominal and verbal.
Chapter 3. Syntactic analysis of Dostoevsky’s work “A Writer’s Diary”
Syntax is a branch of linguistics that studies the structure of coherent speech and includes two main parts: the study of phrases and the study of sentences.
The syntax addresses the following main issues:
* connecting words into phrases and sentences;
* consideration of types of syntactic connections;
* identification of types of phrases and sentences;
* determining the meaning of phrases and sentences;
* combining simple sentences into complex ones.
It is these basic questions that will be fundamental in our syntactic analysis. We will consider the most striking sentences and phrases of the analyzed work and reveal the essence of their formation and relationships.
In phrases, sentences and texts, words (more precisely, word forms) with their inherent signifiers and signifiers are used as building material.
Performing tasks such as connecting words in speech, formatting sentences and texts (expanded statements) as integral entities, dividing the text into sentences, and sentences into their components, distinguishing sentences of different communicative types, expressing the syntactic functions of the components highlighted in the sentence and their syntactically dominant or subordinate status, falls on the share of formal syntactic means.
Since Dostoevsky’s narrative style, as a great writer, is rich in an abundance of word forms and a variety of syntactic structures, it makes sense to conduct a syntactic analysis of his work “A Writer’s Diary” with examples that most clearly express the essence of syntactic categories.
The Serbian Assembly, which met last month in Belgrade for one moment (for an hour and a half, as they wrote in the newspapers) just to decide: “Should we conclude peace or not?” - this Assembly, as we hear, showed not at all such a hasty peace-loving attitude the mood that was expected of her, taking into account the circumstances; (connecting phrases with both adjectives and conjunctions) In this case, we see the use of various ways to connect elementary phrases into more complex ones.
With such a suffering boy, in the first days of my school, I, back in the summer, reading about them, involuntarily compared the Serbian recruit-mutilator - otherwise, with the same feeling, I could not explain his unfortunate, unreasoning, almost animal desire to throw down the gun and run quickly home, the only difference is that with this desire, incredible, phenomenal, as it were, stupidity was announced (an obvious change in the order of words in order to enhance the impression). We are faced with the use of another universal syntactic means - changing the order of words (their arrangement), and in more complex constructions, the order of sentences. The order of words in sentences is characterized by a tendency towards direct juxtaposition of components connected with each other, that is, their positional proximity, adjacency to each other.
If you limit the right of the Turks to tear the skin off the backs of the people, then you need to start a war, and if you start a war, Russia will now step forward, which means that such a complication of the war may occur in which the war will embrace the whole world; then goodbye to production, and the proletarian will go out into the streets, and the proletarian is dangerous on the street, because in speeches to the chambers it is already mentioned directly and openly, out loud to the whole world, that the proletarian is dangerous, that the proletarian is uneasy, that the proletarian is listening to socialism. (it should be noted that this method is significantly more effective than using a distant location, since the sentence is filled with emotion due to figures of speech).
In principle, the arrangement of words should correspond to the movement of thought. In this case, they talk about the objective order of words, which performs a kind of iconic function (first, what is called is what is initial in the description of a given state of affairs).
Here is Europe's opinion (a solution, perhaps); here are the interests of civilization, and - may they be damned again! movement of thought); and in an interrogative sentence ( general question) the verbal predicate precedes the subject: No, seriously: what is in that well-being that is achieved at the cost of untruth and skinning? What is true for a person as an individual, then let him remain true for the whole nation; This word order determines the presence of inversion, due to the need to distinguish between communicative types of sentences. In this declarative sentence, direct word order is common, with the subject in initial position.
How could they allow this coarse black mass, recently still a serf, but now drunk on vodka, to know and be sure that its purpose is to serve Christ, and its king’s purpose is to preserve Christ’s faith and liberate Orthodoxy (in this example, the word “ “How” acts as a connector, and determines intonation, expresses the author’s surprise); In this case, the use of advancement in the initial position of the word, which serves to connect the sentence with the pretext, is manifested.
Do you think - a German pastor who worked a stunda for us, or a visiting European, a correspondent for a political newspaper, or some educated, high-ranking Jew from those who do not believe in God and of whom there are suddenly so many of us now, or, finally, someone... Are any of those Russians who have settled abroad imagining Russia and its people only in the image of a drunken woman, with a damask in her hands? (in this example we see an indication of the object of action and the subject); in this sentence we see the use of placing in the initial position the component of the statement used as the topic (so, the topic of the statement in this case is an indication of the figure).
If you start writing the history of this worldwide tribe, you can immediately find a hundred thousand of the same and more biggest facts, so one or two extra facts will not add anything special, but what is curious about this: the curious thing is that as soon as you - whether in an argument or just in a moment of your own thought - as soon as you need information about a Jew and his affairs - then don’t go to libraries to read, don’t rummage through old books or your own old notes, don’t work, don’t search, don’t strain, and without leaving your place, without even getting up from your chair, just extend your hand to whichever one you want, the first one lying next to you newspaper and look on the second or third page: you will certainly find something about the Jews, and what interests you will certainly be the most characteristic and certainly the same thing - that is, all the same exploits! (use of adjectives to enhance intonation) Use of structural schemes for constructing elementary phrases.
Don’t the old, undesirable restrictions on the complete freedom of choice of residence for the Russian commoner, which the government has long been paying attention to, continue to this day? (an obvious emotional statement of regret). The presence of an expression by the speaker of his emotions (in this case, the unusual arrangement of words is reinforced by emphatic stress.
Therefore, it is not for nothing that Jews reign everywhere on the stock exchanges, it is not for nothing that they move capital, it is not for nothing that they are the rulers of credit and not for nothing, I repeat this, they are the rulers of all international politics, and what will happen next is, of course, known to the Jews themselves : their kingdom is approaching, their kingdom is complete! (an attempt to convey to the reader the hidden motivation of the hero). The need to express additional meaning is evident.
On the contrary, materialism sets in, a blind, carnivorous thirst for personal material security, a thirst for personal accumulation of money by all means - this is all that is recognized as a higher goal, as reasonable, for freedom, instead of the Christian idea of salvation only through the closest moral and fraternal unity of people. (change of intonation in the context of one sentence). In this case, we observe the most universal syntactic means - intonation. In formal terms, it is the presence of intonation that distinguishes a sentence and text as communicative units from a phrase. With all its components (and above all the melodic and dynamic components) it ensures the unity of communicative formations.
Then I would like, but a little more, to write about some of the letters I received during the entire publication of the Diary, and especially anonymous ones; With a subtle feeling and intelligence, an artist can take a lot from just shuffling the roles of all these poor objects and household utensils in a poor house, and with this funny shuffling he will immediately scratch your heart; Expression of attributive connections. In a given sentence, if there are several complements, the one that is more closely related in meaning to the verb (usually the addressee's complement) can be separated from it by other complements.
There is an instinctive presentiment, but the disbelief continues: “Russia! But how can she, how dare she? Is she ready? Are you ready internally, morally, not only financially? It's Europe, it's easy to say Europe! And Russia, what is Russia? And such a step?”; (relationships between objects and subjects in interrogative and affirmative form); An expression of the relationship between an action and its object or circumstance.
But we must be prepared for anything, and so what: if we assume even the worst, even the most impossibly worst outcome for the war that has now begun, then even though we will endure a lot of nasty, old grief that is already boring to death, the colossus will still not be shaken and early Whether it’s too late, he’ll take everything that’s his; (applies to complex sentences of the work). Using syntactic addition to construct a sentence as a whole.
But our sages also grasped the other side of the matter: they preach about philanthropy, about humanity, they mourn over the shed blood, about the fact that we will become even more brutal and desecrated in war and will further move away from internal success, from the right path, from science (filling a sentence in this way contributes to strong coherence and, in fact, the impossibility of removing parts from the context). In this case, function words (conjunctions and allied words, particles, prepositions and postpositions, connectives) are used as a formal way of expressing syntactic connections and functions. In these examples, close to positional adjacency is syntactic addition, used to create subordinate constructions in which roots (or stems) are freely connected.
And since the plan of “Pan-Slavism” with its enormity can, without a doubt, frighten Europe, then, by the law of self-preservation alone, Europe undoubtedly has the right to stop us, just as, however, we have the right to move forward, not stopping at all in the face of its fear and guided , in our movement, only by political forethought and prudence; (this method of writing a proposal allows you to clearly identify the main components). In this case, the subordinate word is located before the dominant one, which determines the use of preposition.
And where did their entire civilization go then: the most learned and enlightened of all nations rushed to another, equally learned and enlightened, and, taking advantage of the opportunity, tore it to pieces like a wild animal, drank its blood, squeezed out its juices in the form of billions of tribute and chopped off it has a whole side in the form of two of the best provinces; (as we see, postposition is used both to enhance the effect and to state facts). Here the author uses postposition - the subordinate word follows the dominant one.
Only art maintains a higher life in society and awakens souls that fall asleep during periods of long peace; Such a war strengthens every soul with the consciousness of self-sacrifice, and the spirit of the entire nation with the consciousness of mutual solidarity and unity of all members composing the nation; Application of elementary propositional schemes for constructing sentences.
And in general we can say that if a society is unhealthy and infected, then even such a good thing as a long peace, instead of benefiting society, turns to its detriment - this can generally be applied even to the whole of Europe (this example characterizes the principle of propositional binding through use of prepositions). Using methods of linking elementary propositions into complex, complex propositional structures.
The different nature of emotions expressed by linguistic means determines the presence of different types of acts and, accordingly, different pragmatic types of sentences that provide certain social needs of communicators.
Unlike phonology, morphology and lexicology, syntax deals not with reproducible linguistic units, but with constructive units that are built anew each time, in each individual speech act.
Binding to the communicative-pragmatic context is most inherent in the text as a complete sign with relative communicative completeness. The pragmatic properties of the text make it possible to qualify it not just as a closed sequence of sentences, but as a closed sequence of speech acts.
A characteristic feature of Dostoevsky’s “Diary of a Writer” is the author’s use of one-part sentences. In this way, the author tries to express his opinions at a special, unobtrusive pace in order to bring clarity and transparency to the text: Thought and efficient work in this sense are a big hindrance; I'm a funny person; It was the darkest, darkest evening possible; Went up to my fifth floor; Nearby, in another room, behind the partition, there is real soda; And so they bury me in the ground.
Thus, having analyzed the most significant sections of the work “A Writer’s Diary” from the point of view of syntax, one should conclude that the author uses various syntactic means very widely and variedly. To combine both simple sentences into complex ones and to connect phrases, the author uses prepositions, conjunctions, adjectives, as well as intonation of the statement.
The work is filled with complex sentences, but along with this fact we also encounter many single-component sentences. In general, the work “A Writer’s Diary” from the point of view of syntax is constructed competently and is quite diverse and multifaceted, which indicates a high level of professionalism of the author.
Conclusion
In this work, the work of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky “The Diary of a Writer” was characterized and a stylistic analysis was carried out, including lexical, morphological and syntactic analysis of this work.
In the vocabulary, the tropes characteristic of the work were highlighted, and examples from the text were given.
The morphology section describes the morphemes of the work and characteristic aspects of morphological analysis.
The syntactic analysis section provides the most common syntactic structures of speech and their use in the work with examples.
“The Diary of a Writer” by Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky is a work written in a journalistic style with elements of colloquial and artistic. Characterized by logic, emotionality, evaluativeness, and appeal. The information that the writer offers is not intended for a narrow circle of specialist critics, but for broad layers of society, and the impact is directed not only on the reader’s mind, but also on the feelings.
Elements of conversational and artistic styles serve for direct communication, when the author shares his thoughts or feelings with others, uses all the wealth of vocabulary, which gives the “Diary” imagery, emotionality, and the author’s speech - concreteness.
In conclusion, it should be said that the work we are analyzing is complete stylistic features, which are disclosed by us as a result of the analysis; “A Writer’s Diary” is a deep and at the same time understandable work for the reader, which takes us into the world of the writer, makes us experience everything that happens in his life, allows us to comprehend and analyze a whole segment of the life of our country at that time as a whole, and the attitude of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky to these events in particular.
On the pages of the “Diary” the author reflects on the world-historical purpose of the Russian people, on the relationship between church and state, on war and peace, on the eternal confrontation between “fathers and sons”, on the place of art in the moral education of society. Political, ideological, ethical, aesthetic problems are intertwined in the “Diary of a Writer” not only at the thematic and content level, but also at the level of form, the ideological and artistic unity of the publication is strengthened.
Fyodor Mikhailovich combined three fundamental components in “The Diary”: documentaryism (reliance on facts), artistic imagery (the desire to capture everyday life in the most generalizing emotional form) and the personal nature of the narrative, characteristic of diary entries.
Thus, it should be concluded that all the tasks posed in the introduction were solved in full.
List of used literature
1. Kovalenko V.A. General morphology: introduction to the problem. – M., 2002 – 376 p.
2. Nikitskaya A.M. Syntax. Linguistic encyclopedic Dictionary, – M., 1999 – 311 p.
3. Kostruba B.N. Vocabulary and lexical categories. – M., 2001 – 297 p.
4. Danilyuk V.A. Morphological Dictionary of the Russian Language - M., 2001 - 572 p.
5. Rosenthal D.E. Dictionary of linguistic terms. – St. Petersburg, 2001 – 469 p.
6. Vinogradov V.A., Vasilyeva N.V., Shakhnarovich A.M. A brief dictionary of linguistic terms. M., Russian language, 1995. – 175 p.
7. Rosenthal D.E., Telenkova M.A. Dictionary-reference book of linguistic terms. Ed. 2nd. M.: Education, 2006. – 543 p.
8. Dostoevsky F.M. "A Writer's Diary"
Although the author of the "Diary" occasionally published short stories in it ("The Boy at Christ's Christmas Tree", "Marey's Man", "Centenary", "The Dream of a Funny Man", "Meek"), its main content consisted of journalistic articles, as well as essays , feuilletons, memoirs appropriate to the moment. Dostoevsky’s literary activity was associated with a “longing for the current,” in other words, with a deep interest in contemporary events, characteristic phenomena, expressive details of the reality around him. Observing all the shades of the development of “living life,” he followed with unflagging attention the reflection of its manifestations in Russian and foreign periodicals. According to eyewitnesses, the writer looked through newspapers and magazines every day “to the last letter”, trying to grasp in the rich variety of significant and small facts their internal unity, socio-psychological foundations, spiritual and moral essence, philosophical and historical meaning.
This need was dictated not only by the originality of Dostoevsky’s novels, in which eternal themes and topical problems, world issues and recognizable details of everyday life, high artistry and sharp journalisticism were organically fused. The writer always felt a passionate desire to speak directly with the reader, to directly influence the course of social development, make an immediate contribution to improving relations between people. Even in the magazines “Time” and “Epoch”, published by him and his brother in the 1860s, his individual artistic and journalistic essays and feuilletons were published.
However, Dostoevsky intended to publish first a one-man journal, Notebook, and then “something like a newspaper.” These plans were partially realized in 1873. when in the journal of Prince V.P., edited by him at that time. Meshchersky's "Citizen", the first chapters of the "Diary of a Writer" began to be published. But the given framework of the weekly and dependence on the publisher to some extent limited both the thematic focus of Dostoevsky’s articles and their ideological content. And it is quite natural that he strived for greater freedom in covering the “abyss of topics” that worried him, for an uninhibited conversation with readers directly on his own behalf, without resorting to the services of editorial and publishing intermediaries.
From 1876 to 1881 (from two-year break, busy working on “The Brothers Karamazov”) Dostoevsky published “The Diary of a Writer” as an independent publication, published, as a rule, once a month in separate issues, ranging from one and a half to two sheets (sixteen pages per sheet) each. In a pre-notification announcement that appeared in St. Petersburg newspapers, he explained: “This will be a diary in the literal sense of the word, a report on the impressions actually experienced in each month, a report on what was seen, heard and read.”
And in fact, on its pages the author starts a biased conversation, interspersed with personal memories, about various things and outwardly seemingly completely unrelated spheres - about the external and domestic policy, agricultural relations and land ownership, the development of industry and trade, scientific discoveries and military operations. The writer's attention is drawn to train accidents, trials, the intelligentsia's passion for spiritualism, and the spread of suicide among young people. He is worried about the breakdown of family ties, the gap between different classes, the triumph of the “golden bag,” and the epidemic of drunkenness. distortion of the Russian language and many other sore points. The reader is presented with the broadest historical panorama of post-reform Russia: eminent dignitaries and unrooted philistines, bankrupt landowners and successful lawyers, conservatives and liberals, former Petrashevites and born anarchists, humble peasants and self-satisfied bourgeois. The reader also becomes acquainted with the author’s unusual judgments about the personality and work of Pushkin, Nekrasov, Tolstoy...
However, "A Writer's Diary" is not a multicolor photograph or a kaleidoscope of constantly changing colorful facts and non-overlapping themes. It has its own patterns that are of paramount importance. And whatever the author of the “Diary” is talking about - be it an animal protection society or literary types, a tortured soldier or a kind nanny, the puppet behavior of diplomats or the playful manners of lawyers, the bloody reality of terrorist actions or utopian dreams of a “golden age” - his thought always enriches current facts with deep associations and analogies, includes them in the main directions of the development of culture and civilization, history and ideology, social contradictions and ideological disagreements. Moreover, when covering such diverse topics on an extremely specific and at the same time universal level, Dostoevsky organically combined various styles and genres, strict logic and artistic images, “the naive nakedness of a different thought” and specific dialogic constructions, which made it possible to convey all the complexity and multi-dimensionality of the issues under consideration. In this very issue, he sought to determine its ethical essence, as well as “to find and indicate, if possible, our national and popular point of view.” According to Dostoevsky, every phenomenon of modern reality should be viewed through the prism of the experience of the past, which never ceases to influence the present through certain traditions. And the more significant the national, historical and universal understanding of pressing current problems, the more convincing their current solution.
Such work, which seems beyond the strength of our time and the entire editorial staff, completely captivated Dostoevsky and required an enormous amount of physical and spiritual strength from him. After all, he alone had to collect the material, carefully prepare it, compile it, clarify it, and manage to publish it on time, within the specified volume. Extreme conscientiousness forced Dostoevsky to rewrite drafts several times and to calculate the number of printed lines and pages himself. Fearing for the fate of the manuscripts, he handed them over to the printing house personally or passed them on through his wife, an irreplaceable assistant who actively participated in the preparation of the “Writer’s Diary” and in its distribution. After each release, Dostoevsky, according to an eyewitness, “rested in body and soul for several days... enjoying the success...”.
Reading the “Diary of a Writer” today, you never cease to be amazed, perhaps at the most important thing in it, that even after a hundred years many of the author’s conclusions are not only burningly relevant, but also vitally necessary for a conscientious, deep and truly realistic verification of the moral content of those or other tasks and the compliance of the means chosen for their implementation. And there is little doubt that they will remain relevant for a long time, although reality is changing greatly and will change unrecognizably in the future.
It seems that the secret of the undying significance of unusual and unusual journalism for us lies not so much in its accuracy and sharpness, but in its wise penetration into the very core of the problems under consideration, as well as in the unity that is revealed in the extremely diverse content. Therefore, outlining the thematic circle of Dostoevsky’s journalism with its pain and anxiety, it is extremely important to highlight in it the guiding ideas that reveal the internal logic of the sometimes invisible connection of dissimilar facts, events, phenomena, revealing the common roots of certain “sore” issues of life and suggesting ways to solve them .
Dostoevsky's journalism gives a rare and expressive, but, unfortunately. an insufficiently learned lesson of a multifaceted and predictive understanding of contemporary reality. Perhaps, more than any other Russian writer, he peered closely into this reality, when in post-reform Russia “decaying life” and “life forming again” were combined, when “everything was upside down for a thousand years.”
The writer was extremely puzzled that in the era of “carelessness” and “great isolation”, “a bunch of questions arise, a terrible mass of new ones, never seen before, hitherto unheard of among the people.” However, the complexity of the “present moment” was aggravated in his view by the fact that “each answer will give rise to three more new questions, and it will all go crescendo. The result will be chaos, but chaos would be good: hasty solutions to problems are worse than chaos” (I, 25, 174). It’s worse because they don’t cure social illnesses, but only drive them deeper. Straightforward decisions, suffering from militant one-sidedness, are no better. Both among the “old people” and conservatives, so among the “young” and liberals, the writer notes, “gloomy dullards have arisen, their foreheads are frowned and sharpened, and their weight is straight and straight, everything is in a straight line and at one point.”
Being a principled opponent of hasty and straightforward decisions, Dostoevsky carefully studied current phenomena in this “most troubled, most inconvenient, most transitional and most fatal moment, perhaps, in the entire history of the Russian people” in the light of great ideas, world issues, all historical experience, capturing the basic properties human nature. Characterizing his own journalistic methodology, he spoke of the need to give “a report on an event not so much as news, but on what of it (the event) will remain for us more permanent, more connected with a general, integral idea.” In his opinion, one cannot “isolate a case” and deprive it of “the right to be considered in connection with the general whole.”
In Dostoevsky’s view, the ideals of the emerging consumer civilization are far from harmless for the moral state of the individual and the direction of historical development, since they strengthen “obese egoism” in a person, make him incapable of sacrificial love, and condone the formation of a hedonistic understanding of life that separates people. And then “the feeling of grace turns into a thirst for capricious excesses and abnormalities. Voluptuousness develops terribly. Voluptuousness will give birth to cruelty and cowardice... Cruelty will give birth to an intensified, too cowardly concern for self-sufficiency. This cowardly concern for self-sufficiency always, in the end, turns into a long peace into some kind of panic fear for oneself, is communicated to all layers of society, giving rise to a terrible thirst for accumulation and acquisition of money. Faith in the solidarity of people, in their brotherhood, in the help of society is lost, the thesis is loudly proclaimed: “Everyone for himself and for himself.”. ... everyone retires and isolates themselves. Selfishness kills generosity" (I, 25, 101).
Deep understanding of such non-trivial cause-and-effect relationships and non-linear patterns social development allowed Dostoevsky, even in the bud, to reveal the moral half-heartedness of various newly minted ideals, or rather idols, which do not eradicate, but only differently direct and thereby complicate the eternal vices of people adapting to them. Such idols or “unexplained ideals” in the system of his thoughts can also be called “unholy shrines.” He wrote that he could not live without shrines, but still would like to see shrines at least a little more sacred, otherwise are they worth worshiping?" Dostoevsky found around him plenty of unholy shrines, which turn into thoughtless fetishization into "uniform" ideas - for example, fake slogans of freedom, equality and brotherhood, which in fact lead to the triumph of mediocrity and the money bag. A sense of such inversions, when speeches about truth hide lies, behind claims to truth and common sense - fraud, behind the desire for heroism - villainy, etc. ., he had something extraordinary. And he constantly removed the gilding from apparently noble formulations, revealing in them not always realized deep motives that were not within the field of view of the “sages of cast-iron ideas” and “frenzied straightforwardness.”
Therefore, of great importance in Dostoevsky’s journalism is a critical examination of the reputations of various kinds of figures introduced into social consciousness, the originality of which lies not in the high spiritual and moral state of their soul, but in the privileged social status, in the achievements of intelligence and talent. The conventional best people, as he called them, are worshiped as 6s under duress, due to their social-caste authority, which changes its forms when specific historical circumstances are restructured. The writer observed just one of these changes, when the previous conventional people “seemed to be removed from the patronage of authority, as if their officialdom was destroyed” (princely, boyar, noble) and their place was taken by professional politicians, scientists, moneymen... He noted with concern that Russia had never considered the new convention - the “golden bag” - to be the highest thing on earth, that “it had never risen to such a place and with such significance as in our last time,” when the worship of money and Acquisitiveness takes over all spheres of life and when, under the auspices of this new convention, industrialists and merchants acquire the greatest authority. lawyers, etc. are “the best people.” Dostoevsky believed that nothing could be more depraved than such worship, and with fear he discovered its corrupting influence everywhere: “Recently, it has begun to become scary for the people: who do they consider to be their best people... Lawyer, banker, intelligentsia.” (Unpublished Dostoevsky. Notebooks and notebooks 1860 - 1881, p. 587).
According to his observation, the “best people” increasingly began to include figures of science, art and education: “They finally decided that this new and “better” man is simply an enlightened man, a “man” of science and without the old prejudices” (I. 23.156). But this opinion is difficult to accept for a very simple reason: “an educated person is not always an honest person,” and “science does not yet guarantee valor in a person.”
Dostoevsky considered the contradiction between education and morality to be one of the most important in modern times and constantly noted it. “Or do you think,” he addressed those who saw increased education as a panacea for all ills, “that knowledge, “science”, school information (at least university) so completely shape the soul of a young man that upon receiving a diploma he will immediately acquires an unshakable talisman to learn the truth once and for all and avoid temptations, passions and vices? In his opinion, the originality of scientific activity, which seemingly requires self-sacrifice and generosity, nevertheless reveals “the baseness of moral inquiry, moral feeling,” which does not contribute to the spiritual enlightenment and mental health of a person. Hence the natural emergence of highly educated and cunning monsters with a complex thirst for intrigue and power, as well as such questions, for example: “But how many of the scientists will resist the ulcer of the world? False honor, pride, voluptuousness will seize them too. Cope, for example, with this passion, like envy: it is coarse and vulgar, but it will penetrate even the noblest soul of a scientist. He, too, will want to participate in the general pomp and brilliance... On the contrary, he will want fame, and so charlatanism will appear in science, the pursuit of effect, and Most of all, utilitarianism, because you want wealth. In art it’s the same: the same pursuit of effect, of some kind of sophistication. Simple, clear, generous and healthy ideas will no longer be in fashion: something much quicker will be needed: you will need artificiality of passions" (I, 22, 124).
In an era of all kinds of mixtures and complex combinations, insidious idols and dual behavior, Dostoevsky attached special importance to spiritual sobriety, the difficult ability to separate the wheat from the chaff, the ability to recognize even at the origins the vicious movements of “nature”, often deeply hidden under the cover of the most decent forms of unconscious egoistic hypocrisy, prestigious activities or even humane ideas.
According to Dostoevsky’s observation, times have come when the problems of honest untruth or sincere lies arise with all acuteness and seriousness, that is, the unconscious substitution of real values with imaginary ones, an unaccountably shortened, ill-thought-out attitude to various issues of life. As a result, people lose the ability to notice that the ideal of the beautiful and sublime has become obscured, that the concept of good and evil is being distorted and distorted, that normality is constantly being replaced by convention, that simplicity and naturalness are perishing, suppressed by the continuously accumulating lies. Thus, the naive acceptance by the conventional best people of their conditionality as something unconditional, self-identification with the role they play in society, gives their behavior an involuntary shade of deceiving acting. A kind of “internal theater” is created in their souls, maintaining the naturalness of the external picture of the role being played and masking vices, which significantly increases the mutual misunderstanding of representatives of different classes and groups of society. The negative meaning of the game of nobility, when the brilliant appearance of the behavior of secular people, government officials, writers, artists is combined with the “unfinished state” of their soul, and a “steel lock of good taste” hangs over the heart and mind, the writer saw in the fact that it is instead of a real “ beauty of people" creates a false "beauty of rules", which not only masks vices, but also imperceptibly darkens the simplicity of the soul and "eats" its true virtues. After all, according to some special law, “the letter and form of the rules” imperceptibly conceal the “sincerity of the content,” which hinders a person’s self-improvement and strengthens his “incompleteness.”
Even in talent, the writer often found the inevitable possibility of excessive “responsiveness” and “playfulness,” which again involuntarily lulls the conscience, deviates from the truth, and removes humanity. For example, a passion for a catchy word or a high syllable gradually shallows the mind and coarsens the soul of another generous writer or lawyer. Instead of a heart, such a figure begins to beat “a piece of something official, and now he, once and for all, rents, for all future emergencies, a store of conventional phrases, words, sentiments, thoughts, gestures and views, all, of course, according to the latest liberal fashion, and then for a long time, for the rest of his life, immerses himself in peace and bliss" (I, 23, 12).
Dostoevsky also discovered the indiscernibility of truth, based on sincere lies, in the unbridled optimism of modern progressives, who pinned their hopes on the success of culture and civilization in moving towards universal brotherhood. However, with an unbiased look, it turns out that as a result of civilization, people acquired “short ideas and hairdressing development... cynicism of thought due to their shortness, insignificant, petty forms”, they became cultured only in new prejudices, new habits and new clothes.
In addition, the bourgeois civilization that gained strength gave rise to processes that did not encourage deep spiritual culture, which would transform the entire structure of man’s mental world and the selfish incentives of his behavior and would stop periodic wars.
On the contrary, according to implicit laws, progress and “humanity,” which do not have a sufficient spiritual basis and clear moral content, threaten and do turn into regression and barbarism. For example, externally achieving the noble goal of equality of people does not ennoble them internally. After all, “what is equality in the current educated world? Jealous observation of each other, arrogance and envy...” And no treaties are able to prevent wars if such a state of human souls persists, the visible or invisible rivalry of which gives rise to ever new material interests and, accordingly, requires an increase in the variety of various grips. As a result, peacetime industrial and other bloodless revolutions, if it does not contribute to the transformation of egocentric principles human activity, but, on the contrary, creates a breeding ground for them, itself causes the need for war, “brings it out of oneself as a pitiful consequence.” Therefore, Dostoevsky believed, it is necessary to soberly and, so to speak, evaluate in advance certain prospects for the “progress of things”, constantly asking oneself: “What is good and what is best... In our time, the questions are: is good good?” Reflecting on these questions, he noted in the “Diary of a Writer”: “It is clear and understandable to the point of obviousness that evil lurks in humanity deeper than socialist doctors assume, that in no social structure you can avoid evil, that the human soul will remain the same as abnormality and sin come from itself and that, finally, the laws of the human spirit are still so unknown, so unknown to science, so uncertain and so mysterious that there are and cannot yet be any doctors or even final judges..." (I, 25, 201).
Revealing the complex spiritual world man, the many different movements of his free will, Dostoevsky discovered that all of them, despite their different content and different spheres of action, are usually directed towards self-preservation, domination and pleasure. And in everyday, work, love relationships between people, and in all-encompassing principles and ideas, the natural proud-egoistic and aggressive-hedonistic properties of human nature, if their “naturalness” is not suppressed and is not subordinated to the highest ideal truly rooted in being, lead potentially and actually to self-exaltation of heterogeneous personalities, to their disunity and enmity. And not by education, not by external culture and secular polish, not by scientific and technical achievements, but only by “exciting higher interests” directed towards eternal ideas, to absolute joy, one can rebuild the deep structure of egoistic thinking.
Without a “great moral thought”, i.e. Without Christian faith, Dostoevsky believed, normal development, a harmonious mind and the vitality of the individual, the state, and all humanity are impossible, since only in it does a person comprehend “his entire rational goal on earth” and realize in himself “the human face.” Without acquiring semantic fullness and height, human existence turns out to be unnatural and absurd, its connections with various manifestations of life become thinner, and life itself results in distortions and catastrophes. That is why the writer was so worried about the time when, with progressive speed, an indifferent and even nihilistic attitude towards the highest ideas of human existence as “nonsense” and “rhymes” began to spread everywhere.
But it was precisely in the loss of eternal ideals, the highest meaning, the highest purpose of life, in the disappearance of the “highest types” around, that Dostoevsky found the root cause of the underlying spreading of the nihilistic atmosphere, when “something is floating in the air full of materialism and skepticism; the adoration of free gain, pleasure without labor has begun "; every deception, every crime is committed in cold blood; they kill in order to take even a ruble out of their pocket. I know that there were a lot of bad things before, but now they have undoubtedly increased tenfold. The main thing is that such a thought is floating around, such as a doctrine or belief" (I, 22, 31).
"Why are we rubbish?" - Dostoevsky asked, delving into these unconscious teachings and unconscious beliefs, and answered: “There is nothing great.” In the absence of ideas about greatness and non-randomness human life on earth he discovered the roots of the interdependent spiritual diseases of his age.
In popular belief eternal light Dostoevsky found the basis for real enlightenment, without which the “great work of love” would not be possible. The meaning of true enlightenment is expressed, in his opinion, at the very root of this concept, it is “spiritual light, illuminating the soul, enlightening the heart, guiding the mind, telling it the path of life.” Such enlightenment, in his opinion, distinguishes the conditional best people from the unconditional ones, who are recognized not by social caste, intelligence, education, wealth, etc., but by the presence of spiritual light in their soul, well-being of the heart, higher moral development and influence. From time immemorial, he considered such people to be the righteous people widespread in Rus', in whom “the need to be, first of all, fair and to seek only the truth” is clearly expressed. People's shrines. and not science and privilege, the writer noted, indicate the best people. “The best person, according to the popular imagination, is the one who does not bow to material temptation... loves the truth and, when necessary, stands up to serve it, leaving home and family and sacrificing his life” (I, 23, 161).
Taking a general look at the writer’s journalism, one can trace the interconnection of those properties that constitute “noble material” and are included in the “aesthetics of the soul” of the undisputed best people who have received true enlightenment and are capable of becoming brothers to others. Righteousness, love of truth, deep intelligence. sublimity, nobility, justice, honesty, true self-worth, selflessness, a sense of duty and responsibility, gullibility, openness, sincerity, simplicity, modesty. the ability to forgive, the organic and integrity of the worldview, internal goodness and chastity - these spiritual and emotional traits, testifying to the internal victory over the egocentric principles of the unrighteous system of life, determine the individuals before whom they “voluntarily and freely bow themselves down, honoring their true valor,” before whom bow "heartily and undoubtedly."
Dostoevsky believed that not only “the beginning of everything” is personal self-improvement, but also the continuation of everything and the outcome. It embraces, builds and preserves the organism of nationality, and it is the only one, since the ideal of civil structure, developing historically, is exclusively the result of “the moral self-improvement of individuals, and it begins with it... it has been so since time immemorial and will remain forever and ever” (I, 26, 165).
Thus, the true prosperity of society in the most different areas is inextricably linked with the internal moral well-being of its citizens. Speaking, for example, about the possible change and improvement of bureaucratic activity, Dostoevsky emphasizes that the opposition to the bureaucracy misses the mark: “They don’t see the main step... The essence is in the education of a moral sense.” Without taking into account this essence, the constant reduction of staff leads nevertheless to the fact that the staff paradoxically seems to increase. Officials, while simulating an indefinable moral activity, are trying to limit themselves to cosmetic changes. without essentially changing anything and reasoning to ourselves: “...we’d better somehow correct ourselves there, clean ourselves up, well, introduce something new, more, so to speak, progressive, corresponding to the spirit of the century, well, we’ll become like- something more virtuous or something..." As a result, the people liberated from serfdom do not have independence and spiritual support, since in the zemstvo, community, jury and other democratic forms of society they "are drawn to something similar to the authorities." Audits are appointed, commissions are set up, which create subcommittees. Meticulous observers, the writer notes, have calculated that “the people now, at this moment, have almost two dozen commanding ranks, specially assigned to them, standing over them, protecting and caring for them. For an already poor man, everyone and every boss , and here are twenty more special pieces! The freedom of movement is exactly like that of a fly caught in a plate of molasses. But this is not only from a moral, but also from a financial point vision is harmful, that is, such freedom of movement" (I, 27, 17).
The absence of the “main step” weakens, according to Dostoevsky, the various economic reforms that are being carried out right now, “suddenly and even somehow suddenly, sometimes even by a completely unexpected order from the authorities,” to improve the current reality, increase the state budget, pay off debts, overcome deficits. However, with such haste, they achieve only a “temporary, material surface”; they reproduce only what exists in a slightly updated form. These “mechanical-calming consolations” do not lead to a “truly civil, moral-civil” order and preserve the general atmosphere for those who sharpen their teeth on the treasury and the public domain, who turn “into pocket industrialists, some into permitted ones, and others to cover up they will not legally become themselves." Moral and civil disorder with palliative economic prosperity corrupts the consciousness of those observing it and strengthens social disorder. “Some simpleton will look around him and suddenly conclude that it’s only a kulak and a world-eater who can live, that as if everything is being done for them, so I’ll become a kulk, and so it will be. Another, more humble one, will simply get drunk, not because that poverty has overcome, but because the lack of rights is sickening. What can we do here? This is fate" (I, 27, 17).
To overcome this fate, it is necessary, Dostoevsky argued, to direct attention “to some depth, into which, in truth, we have never looked before, because we were looking for the depth on the surface.” What is needed is “a turn of our heads and views in a completely different direction than hitherto... Some of our principles should be completely changed, the flies should be pulled out of the molasses and freed.” It is necessary, he believed, to forget, at least to a small extent, about immediate needs, no matter how urgent they may seem, and focus on “healing the roots,” in other words, on creating conditions for the preservation of folk traditions and ideals, for the development of genuine enlightenment, for the formation of unconditional the best people. Then there will be hope for a conciliar resolution of disagreements among various layers of society, “a general democratic mood and universal consent of all Russian people, starting from the very top.” Then the current reality with its urgent tasks, financial and economic problems can change not only cosmetically, but radically, since it itself will submit to the new principle and “enter its meaning and spirit, and will certainly be transformed for the better.” Then morality will come out of the destructive control of the economy, which (and with it science, crafts, technology) under its influence will become more reasonable and humane, since people’s needs will also become reasonable and humane.
According to Dostoevsky, among the new principles one should firmly understand that it is impossible to artificially push history and make a vaudeville out of it (sometimes cruel and tragic), that all sorts of innovations, even healthy ones, are not implemented in an instant, and their success is determined by “preliminary culture.” , enriched with the results of the spiritual work of many previous generations.
We must remember and not forget, Dostoevsky emphasized, that the true fruitful result of any business depends not on correct monetary calculations and not on the activities of the mythical “new man”, whom no one has seen anywhere and whose “new morality” cannot be rationally understood, but on a golden reserve of noble human material, constantly created by growing from ancient roots and uninterrupted spiritual traditions. “With money, for example, you will set up schools, but now you will not create teachers. A teacher is a delicate thing; a people’s, national teacher is developed over centuries, supported by legends, countless experiences. But let’s say you will provide money not only to teachers, but even, finally, scientists; so what? - after all, you can’t make people. What’s the point of being a scientist if he doesn’t understand the matter? For example, he will learn pedagogy and will teach pedagogy very well from the department, but still he will not become a teacher. People, people are the most important thing. People are more valuable than even money. You can’t buy people on any market, even with any money, because they can’t be bought or sold, but again they only take centuries to make; well, centuries take time, years like twenty-five or thirty, even here, where centuries have long been worth nothing. A man of ideas and independent science, a man of independent business is formed only by the long independent life of the nation, by its centuries-long suffering labor - in a word, he is formed by the whole historical life countries" (Dostoevsky F.M. Diary of a Writer. M., 1989, p. 30).
Dostoevsky had no doubt that moral principles are the basis for everything, including the well-being of the state, although at first glance it seems dependent on won battles or cunning policies.
For a dignified and long-lasting life for peoples and states, the writer believed, it is necessary to sacredly preserve high ideals, for “as soon as after times and centuries (because this also has its own law, unknown to us) its spiritual ideal began to shake and weaken in a given nationality, then immediately nationality began to fall, and at the same time the entire civil charter fell, and all those civil ideals that had managed to take shape in it faded... Therefore, civil ideals are always directly and organically connected with moral ideals, and the main thing is that there is no doubt they are the only ones who come out of them! They never appear on their own, for when they appear, they have only the goal of satisfying the moral aspiration of a given nationality, as and insofar as this moral aspiration has developed in it" (I, 26, 166).
Consequently, the policy of honor and generosity, which is subject to “moral aspiration” and which should not be exchanged for hasty profits, is “not only the highest, but perhaps the most profitable policy for a great nation, precisely because it is great. The current policy practicality and constantly throwing oneself where it is more profitable, where it is more urgent, exposes trifles, the internal powerlessness of the state, the bitter situation... The diplomatic mind, the mind of practical and vital gain has always turned out to be lower than truth and honor, and truth and honor always end up triumphing. And if they didn’t end up that way, they will end up that way, because that’s what people wanted and want, invariably and eternally” (I, 23, 66).
According to Dostoevsky’s logic, the principles of “the sanctity of current gain” and “spitting on honor and conscience, just to rip off a tuft of wool” can temporarily produce certain material results. But they also give rise to wars of conquest, spiritually corrupt nations and ultimately destroy them. And vice versa. Belief in eternal (and not conditionally beneficial) ideals gives spiritual meaning to politics and supports the moral health and greatness of the nation. In this case, wars, if forced, are exclusively liberating in nature and pursue only “a great and just goal worthy of a great nation.”
It was in the context of a morally sound policy that Dostoevsky in his “Diary” considered Russia’s selfless assistance to the struggle of the Balkan Slavs against the Turkish yoke. According to the writer, the true benefit of the Russian state lies in always acting honestly, even making mathematically obvious disadvantages and sacrifices, so as not to violate justice.
History showed Dostoevsky that Russia is strong “by the idea bequeathed to it by a number of centuries”, by the “wholeness and spiritual indivisibility” of the people, capable of demonstrating the greatest will in times of severe trials for the sake of the feat of generosity. Having reached “the last line, that is, when there is nowhere to go,” the Russian people overcame fatal strife and severe suffering thanks to the “unity of our national spirit,” without which politics, science, technology, and weapons would have been helpless. The writer called for maintaining this unity in every possible way not only in crisis moments of history, but also in everyday life and not exchanging “great thoughts” for third-rate considerations. After all, only then is faith in the high destiny of Russia awakened and maintained in the hearts of people, “faith in the holiness of one’s ideals, faith in the power of one’s love and a thirst for serving humanity - no. such faith is the guarantee of the highest life of nations...” (I, 25, 19).
Dostoevsky also found the guarantees of such a life in the peak achievements of Russian literature, which “in its best representatives, and above all our intelligentsia, note this, bowed before the people’s truth, recognized the people’s ideals as truly beautiful,” which determined its historical significance. This significance was manifested primarily, in his opinion, in the work of Pushkin, which, along with artistic perfection, was distinguished by “worldwide responsiveness,” genuine national originality and philosophical and psychological depth. He evaluates in the same way. for example, Leo Tolstoy’s novel “Anna Karenina”: “If we have literary works of such power of thought and execution, then why can’t we subsequently have our own science, and our own economic and social solutions, why does Europe deny us independence, in our own words - this is a question that arises by itself. One cannot assume the ridiculous idea that nature has endowed us with only literary abilities. Everything else is a question of history, circumstances, conditions of the time" (I, 25, 202).
In general, it should be emphasized that in his journalistic articles the writer considers literary issues, like all others, in a moral dominant, unbreakable connection with social and pressing problems of life. Art represents for him a kind of clot of human activity, not only concentratedly reflecting typical processes in society, but also illuminating them with a high spiritual light. “Art, that is, true art, develops precisely during a long peace because it runs counter to the heavy and vicious lull of souls, and, on the contrary, its creations, always during these periods, appeal to the ideal, give rise to protest and indignation, and excite society and often makes people suffer who are eager to wake up and get out of the fetid pit" (I, 25, 102).
It would seem that with such a formulation of the question, literature “with a direction” should come to the fore, exposing vices and indicating ways to correct them. However, according to Dostoevsky, the artist should not “pull out of himself with painful convulsions a theme that satisfies the general, uniform, liberal and social opinion,” but must be given the opportunity to pour out and develop the images that naturally ask from the soul. After all, “any work of art without a preconceived direction, performed solely out of artistic need, and even with an extraneous plot, not at all hinting at anything “directive” ... will turn out to be much more useful for its own purposes ... in a truly artistic work, even if it talks about other worlds, there cannot but be a true direction and correct thought.” Such works, distinguished by natural truthfulness and equally unconstrained morality, in which the writer gives freedom to his feelings and “his idea (ideal)” and thereby enhances the fullness of aesthetic reality, Dostoevsky called the literature of beauty and contrasted it with the literature of deeds and the literature of complete negation, constrained by their predetermination and bias and not having a “positive ideal in the lining.” The literature of the matter is full of unclear and confused searches, since “the matter has not yet been clarified, just a dream.” As for purely accusatory literature, it is completely devoid of any creative principle, capable of inciting hatred and revenge, “needed by those who do not know what to hold on to, what to do and who to believe... Positive ideal prevents them (the authors of nihilistic works - B.T.) from vice, and the negative does not oblige them to anything."
While not “directly” and “directly” reflecting current events and facts of reality, the literature of beauty nevertheless creates images that absorb the most essential features of current life. Tatyana Larina and Evgeny Onegin of Pushkin, Pirogov and Khlestakov of Gogol, Potugin of Turgenev, Vlas Nekrasova, Levin of Tolstoy become unique symbols in Dostoevsky’s articles, helping him to more insightfully analyze the spiritual state of society and the trends of the historical process. He deeply appreciated such expressive types and regretted that shallow literature was losing the ability to create them. "There are many things that our fiction from the modern and current, I completely overlooked a lot and fell terribly behind... Even in the historical novel, maybe because I lost the meaning of the current." Dostoevsky believed that a talent equal to at least Gogol's was needed to reveal and generalize, for example, the type of anonymous scolder with his exorbitant conceit with hidden self-disrespect, or the type of a mediocre and vain ignorant who imagines himself a great figure and an unsurpassed genius. “Another advanced and instructive gentleman will sit down in front of you and begin to say: no endings, no beginnings, everything knocked down and rolled into a ball. He talks for an hour and a half and, most importantly, he speaks so sweetly and smoothly, as if a bird were singing. You ask yourself whether he is smart or something else? - and you can’t decide. Every word, it would seem, is understandable and clear, but in general you can’t make out anything. Will the hen continue to be taught by eggs, or will the hen continue to sit on eggs? You can’t figure out any of this, you only see that the eloquent hen lays game instead of eggs. Your eyes will bulge at the end, your head will be in a daze. This is a new type, recently emerging; fiction has not yet touched upon it..."
An artistic generalization of the socio-psychological reasons for the appearance of such talkers, which fool the consciousness of large masses of people and cloud the course of life, is all the more important because it simultaneously turns out to be one of the ways to overcome their influence and understand true values. In literature, as in any other activity, Dostoevsky sought to highlight the main and significant things for understanding the nature of man and the history he creates. Only convexly denoting the sprouts of evil in the core inner world, a person can direct his attention and strength to their eradication, prevent their organic growth and spread, find and destroy bridges between the egoistic properties of “nature” and false ideas, prevent the devaluation of such lofty concepts as ideal, freedom, brotherhood.
In Dostoevsky's view, the choice of the path of all humanity is inseparable from the self-determination of an individual. After all, the line dividing good and evil passes “not overseas somewhere,” “not in things,” “not outside of you,” but through all human hearts, through every heart. And the journalism of the great Russian writer invites the reader to look deeper into our soul and look at our deeds with an open mind in order to determine where the forces we are wasting are directed - whether they go towards “self-shortening”, turning a person into a “bestial image of a slave” or towards “self-lengthening”, restoring the “human image” in a person.
By weeding out the weeds from one’s own soul, discovering the “deeply hidden” power of love, which “is in each of us,” any person thereby contributes to the victory over the “former animal” and the cultivation of “truly new people,” displaces cosmic evil from the universe, and participates in resolving the future destinies of humanity. And Dostoevsky did not see anything fantastic in this. We just need to remember well, he emphasized, that “one person can be strong,” that in his thoughts and actions there are “countless ramifications hidden from us,” and that “everything is like an ocean, everything flows and touches, in one place you touch, in another the end of the world is given."
Bibliography
diary writer humanity journalistic
1. To prepare this work, materials from the site http://www.portal-slovo.ru/ were used
- 286.00 KbThe subscription period for 1865 was approaching, and the publication of the magazine for 1864 was lagging behind by almost three months, which could not but affect the attitude of subscribers towards it.
In its content, the nature of the polemics, and the breadth of coverage of topics, “Epoch” was largely inferior to “Time.” The change in the political atmosphere in Russian society, and a general decline in reader interest in magazines in 1864-1865. The life of the “Epoch” took place in different, incomparably more difficult conditions. The shadow of Vremya, closed for its “anti-patriotic” article and general direction, lay over the new magazine, which affected the attitude of the censorship authorities towards it and forced auto-censorship.
The existence of "Epoch" ended with an announcement published in newspapers and in the magazine "Library for Reading" in mid-June 1865 under the heading "From the publishers of the magazine "Epoch"": "Many unfavorable circumstances, mostly beyond the control of the current editors, have befallen our publication since last year, they are forcing us to currently stop publishing the magazine, and at the same time the ongoing subscription to it.” 15 The publication of The Epoch enriched Dostoevsky with editorial and publishing experience, but it burdened him with heavy financial obligations for a long time. He owed creditors about fifteen thousand rubles, which he was able to pay off only towards the end of his life. But this did not break Dostoevsky as a publicist, who obviously could not imagine himself without the opportunity to speak out on exciting issues in the life of dynamically developing Russia.
Chapter 3. “A Writer’s Diary” - a unique journalistic work
3.1. “A Writer’s Diary” by F.M. Dostoevsky is an exceptional phenomenon in the history of Russian literature.
Many researchers paid attention to the exclusivity of the publication. In particular, it was argued that “A Writer’s Diary” is unique as it has “no analogues in the history of Russian and world journalism”, and that the author resorted to a form of mono-journal, rare in world practice.
The uniqueness of the “Diary of a Writer” is different: during 1876-1877, a temporary publication was published in Russia, the author-creator of which turned it into a personal platform, attracting the attention of the audience primarily to the problems that worried him personally. Dostoevsky transformed the facts that came into his field of vision into the real topic of the day. This was the case with the writer’s speeches on legal issues (the cases of Kroneberg, Kairova, Kornilova), on moral topics (fathers and sons, suicide), on pressing political issues (reforms, relations with the West and others). Updating the facts of everyday life turned the “Diary of a Writer” into a truly unique publication.
Dostoevsky combined three fundamental components in “The Diary”: reliance on facts, the desire to capture everyday life in the most generalized emotional form, and the personal nature of the narrative, characteristic of diary entries.
Closely intertwined in the text of the Diary, these components gave an undifferentiated integrity, which still forces researchers to look for both a genre definition of the Diary and to reflect on the nature of this integrity.
In the “Diary of a Writer” we can find examples of different literary genres: essay, feuilleton, short story, novella, memoirs, journalism, and so on. But the real essence of “A Writer’s Diary” is not the mechanical unification of these genres, but the fact that, using them in accordance with the general objectives of the “Diary,” Dostoevsky builds on this basis a special, original genre that forms a unique artistic unity.
“The Diary of a Writer”, together with “The Brothers Karamazov”, crowns the creative biography of F.M. Dostoevsky, we can talk about the final feelings of the artist, thinker and publicist. The pages of the “Diary” are a collection of thoughts about the world-historical purpose of the Russian people, about the relationship between church and state, about war and peace, about the eternal confrontation between “fathers and sons,” about the place of art in the moral education of society.
There is an idea that Dostoevsky the artist and Dostoevsky the publicist are two incompatible aspects of the writer: a subtle psychologist, a deep researcher of human souls and a subjective publicist who judges the modern process superficially.
Dostoevsky himself emphasizes the journalistic nature of the Diary: “This will be a diary in the literal sense of the word, a report on the impressions actually experienced in each month, a report on what was seen, heard and read. This, of course, can include stories and tales, but mainly about real events.” It is very important for Dostoevsky that the reading public view the “Diary” as just another “work” of the writer.
This characteristic of the impressions of the month is significant - “survived”, i.e. lived and felt by the author. “Essays” based on “survived impressions” are what is called journalism. The figurative beginning is combined with the support of a fact realized by the “writer”-creator.
“Survived impressions”, “a report on what was of personal interest” - all these are synonyms for how Dostoevsky saw his new work - specially selected impressions of reality, which are given a subjective assessment by a specific person who wants to speak out.
F.M. turned to this genre. Dostoevsky is a completely natural phenomenon: after the publication of the “Temporary Rules on Censorship and the Press” on April 6, 1865, when the conditions for the existence of newspapers and magazines were noticeably eased, 33 new newspapers and magazines appeared in the capitals, and 31 in the provinces. The press becomes an important factor formation of public opinion, a platform that allows you to actively influence society. At the same time, attention to processes occurring in real life is increasing. Literature and art of the second half of the 19th century developed under the sign of interest in everyday reality: the formation of national identity is impossible without awareness of oneself in the surrounding world. The dynamism of what was happening required an immediate response from the artist. F. M. Dostoevsky sought to implement the experience accumulated in the magazines “Time” and “Epoch”, partly in “Citizen”, in the issues of “A Writer’s Diary”, developing an original plan for the materialization of his ideas. The writer “built” a platform from which he decided to talk to the audience every month.
In this regard, apparently, it is necessary to correct the fairly widespread opinion that “A Writer’s Diary” was just a link between “Crime and Punishment”, “The Idiot”, “Demons”, “Teenager” - on the one hand, and “The Brothers Karamazov” - with another.
Igor Leonidovich Volgin, the main modern “Dostoevist,” called “The Diary of a Writer” “The Diary of a Novelist.” This formulation allows us to project the journalistic writing techniques used by Dostoevsky onto his purely artistic experience, which makes it possible to consider the qualitative parameters of the “Diary of a Writer” as a system of artistic and journalistic cycles, as a single book, holistic and universal at the same time.
The integrity of the “Diary of a Writer” is ensured, firstly, by its chronological temporality - events in the retelling and in the author’s assessments unfold as they develop.
Secondly, the “Diary” shows the author’s unified view of what is happening. Moreover, as already noted, in each issue we have before us the same subject of the statement - the author, confirming his own reality with references to personally observed facts.
Thirdly, in “A Writer’s Diary” a certain level of relationship with the audience is clearly visible: the author does not consider his point of view final, non-criminal. But he strives to ensure that, if possible, it is accepted by the audience. That is why in the “Diary of a Writer” the prevailing tone is not a preaching tone or even a confessional one, which would seem to be expected from a diary, but the tone of oratorical speech, the tone of thinking out loud, the tone of readiness to listen and take into account other points of view. The truth for Dostoevsky, an Orthodox man, lies in Christ. Therefore, in his journalistic texts he is not looking for the truth, but a path that opens the way to it.
Fourthly, the integrity of the “Diary” is ensured by the polemics that run through all issues. The essence of publications is the complete absence of “secret” ideas, an open appeal to the reader with a discussion of the most pressing and complex problems of our time, and boundless trust in free thought.
For the sake of such a broad discussion of all pressing issues, Dostoevsky published his “Diary”. Dostoevsky's polemics in The Diary are primarily associated with a discussion of the most pressing problems of modern life in Russia. But we must admit that Dostoevsky responded to opponents’ attacks against himself personally.
As for the universalism of the Diary, it is ensured at the subject level by a wide variety of topics reflecting the realities of the surrounding world. "A Writer's Diary" is associated with the widespread use of artistic and journalistic writing style techniques.
A separate “Diary of a Writer” Dostoevsky - a man whose voice is listened to, by the time the “Diary of a Writer” is published, is already known as the author of “Crime and Punishment”, “The Idiot”, “Demons” and other works. The writer’s point of view is important for the audience, since his previous publications aroused the interest of the reading audience and discussions in public circles.
For a detailed study of the content of the “Diary of a Writer”, it is necessary to highlight three main periods of publication of this journalistic work. The first period was the publication of the Diary in the newspaper-magazine “Citizen” in 1873. The second is the author’s monthly publication of the Diary in 1876-1877. And the third final period, which includes the only issue in 1880 dedicated to “Pushkin’s speech”, and the last issue of the Diary for January 1881, published posthumously.
3.2. “A Writer’s Diary” by F.M. Dostoevsky. Topics and problems.
3.2.1. “A Writer’s Diary”, as a column in the magazine-newspaper “Citizen” for 1873.
In December 1872, Dostoevsky accepted the offer of the publisher of the newspaper-magazine “Citizen”, Prince V.P. Meshchersky, to edit the publication. The writer finally gets the opportunity to, to some extent, realize his long-standing plan, but only in a truncated, incomplete form. However, it was on the pages of this foreign publication that the form of the personal “Writer’s Diary” was finally determined: topical essays of a political, literary, memoir nature, united by the idea of direct communication with the reader. Essentially, a direct dialogue between the novelist and his readers began. Some of the topics raised in the first issues of the Writer’s Diary were already stated in the just completed novel “Demons”; some of the topics were suggested by materials published in the “Citizen” itself and in other periodicals. In total, 15 (without the “Introduction”) issues of “A Writer’s Diary” were published on the pages of “Citizen” in 1873.
The first appearance of the section “A Writer’s Diary” (“Citizen” 1873, January No. 1) consisted of an “Introduction” and a chapter “Old People”. In the “Introduction,” Dostoevsky, addressing the readers of “The Citizen,” spoke about his tasks as the new editor of the newspaper-magazine and described the new unusual form of the “Diary of a Writer.” The half-joking feuilleton introduction is followed by the author’s reflections on the most prominent representatives of the generation of the 1840s - A.I. Herzen and V. G. Belinsky “Old People”.
In the next issue of The Citizen, Dostoevsky devotes his diary to judicial reform. Dostoevsky considers the “mania of justification” in jury trials, new to Russia, as evidence that the concept of moral responsibility is eroding in the public consciousness: “Who is to blame? Wednesday is to blame. So, there is only a vile structure of the environment, and there are no crimes at all” 16. In contrast to this phenomenon, Dostoevsky formulates the Christian idea of personal and universal responsibility, the beginnings of which he finds in calling criminals “unfortunate.” The question of “environment” turned out to be truly key for Russian society, a sign of its historical choice. Dostoevsky contrasted the destruction of society with spiritual order: “... having become the best ourselves, we will correct the environment and make it better. After all, this is the only way to correct it” 17. It is not surprising that, by going “against the grain,” Dostoevsky drew fire from both the liberal and democratic camps. He was accused of unfounded criticism of the courts, of betraying the ideals expressed in Notes from the House of the Dead. A number of prominent press figures defend the principle of social determinism from Dostoevsky, among them: N.V. Shelgunov, V.P. Burenin, A.S. Suvorin. 18
Undoubtedly, anticipating and somewhat ahead of this wave, Dostoevsky devotes the next chapter, “Something Personal,” to refuting the slander against him that he described N.G. Chernyshevsky in his satirical story “Crocodile”. Dostoevsky also took advantage of this opportunity to paint a portrait of another “ruler of thoughts” after Belinsky and Herzen, in a calm, peacemaking tone, emphasizing that his fundamental disagreement with the author of the novel “What is to be done?” does not mean personal hatred. “You can respect a person very much while radically disagreeing with him in opinions” - this judgment was in sharp contradiction with the mores of the modern press. 19
Next chapter "Vlas". An essay devoted to the analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the poem of the same name by N.A. Nekrasova. In this article, Dostoevsky began to comprehend the contradictory appearance of “our true poet.”
2.1. Life path F.M. Dostoevsky……………….…………………...….12
2.2. Magazines of the Dostoevsky brothers “Time” and “Epoch”………………………16
Chapter 3. “A Writer’s Diary” - a unique journalistic work…………………………………………………………………………………………...27
3.1. “A Writer’s Diary” is an exceptional work of Russian literature…………………....……………………………………………………..27
3.2. Topics and problems of the “Writer’s Diary”………………………………………………………………………………….…………..31
3.2.1. “A Writer’s Diary” - a column in the newspaper-magazine “Citizen” (1873)…..31
3.2.2. “A Writer’s Diary” - independent publication (1876-1877)……………….36
3.2.3. “A Writer’s Diary” - self-published (1880-1881)……………….57
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………..59
References………………………………………………………………………………… 60
