Talk:Fyodor Dostoevsky

Origins of Material

I've just noticed that there is a substantial, verbatim overlap between much of this article and the introduction to Crime & Punishment at EBook Eden: Crime & Punishment. Is this copyvio, or them ripping from WP?

--The Rhymesmith (talk) 14:24, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Nietzsche Quote Citations

The two Nietzsche quotes are unsourced, and are copied all over the internet directly from here. Are they supposed to also be from the Mihajlo Mihajlov book cited in the next sentence? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.24.175 (talk) 20:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

There are many references on Google Books. Apparently, Nietzsche said that in Twilight of the Idols after having read Crime and Punishment (see [1]). Laurent (talk) 13:19, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't have time to find the scene at the moment, but I recall reading a passage in "Confessions of an Opium Eater" that Dostoevsky put almost word for word into "Crime and Punishment." When I find it, I'll post it here. Dick Scalper (talk) 12:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Dostoevsky may have used De Quincey's essay as a guidebook for his central character in Crime and Punishment:

ON THE KNOCKING AT THE GATE IN MACBETH. MISCELLANEOUS ESSAYS BY THOMAS DE QUINCEY. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/10708/10708-8.txt "Now it will be remembered that in the first of these murders, (that of the Marrs,) the same incident (of a knocking at the door soon after the work of extermination was complete) did actually occur, which the genius of Shakespeare has invented . . . Murder in ordinary cases, where the sympathy is wholly directed to the case of the murdered person, is an incident of coarse and vulgar horror; and for this reason, that it flings the interest exclusively upon the natural but ignoble instinct by which we cleave to life; an instinct, which, as being indispensable to the primal law of self-preservation, is the same in kind, (though different in degree,) amongst all living creatures; this instinct therefore, because it annihilates all distinctions, and degrades the greatest of men to the level of "the poor beetle that we tread on," exhibits human nature in its most abject and humiliating attitude. Such an attitude would little suit the purposes of the poet. What then must he do? He must throw the interest on the murderer. Our sympathy must be with _him_; (of course I mean a sympathy of comprehension, a sympathy by which we enter into his feelings, and are made to understand them,--not a sympathy[1] of pity or approbation.) In the murdered person all strife of thought, all flux and reflux of passion and of purpose, are crushed by one overwhelming panic; the fear of instant death smites him "with its petrific mace." But in the murderer, such a murderer as a poet will condescend to, there must be raging some great storm of passion,--jealousy, ambition, vengeance, hatred,--which will create a hell within him; and into this hell we are to look . . . The murderers, and the murder, must be insulated--cut off by an immeasurable gulf from the ordinary tide and succession of human affairs--locked up and sequestered in some deep recess; we must be made sensible that the world of ordinary life is suddenly arrested--laid asleep--tranced--racked into a dread armistice: time must be annihilated; relation to things without abolished; and all must pass self-withdrawn into a deep syncope and suspension of earthly passion. Hence it is, that when the deed is done, when the work of darkness is perfect, then the world of darkness passes away like a pageantry in the clouds: the knocking at the gate is heard; and it makes known audibly that the reaction has commenced: the human has made its reflux upon the fiendish; the pulses of life are beginning to beat again; and the re-establishment of the goings-on of the world in which we live, first makes us profoundly sensible of the awful parenthesis that had suspended them."

Compare to this scene: "Raskolnikov stood keeping tight hold of the axe. He was in a sort of delirium. He was even making ready to fight when they should come in. While they were knocking and talking together, the idea several times occurred to him to end it all at once and shout to them through the door. Now and then he was tempted to swear at them, to jeer at them, while they could not open the door! "Only make haste!" was the thought that flashed through his mind." http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2554/2554-h/2554-h.htm (post by Richard Scalper) Dick Scalper (talk) 15:49, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Moscow Subway Station named for Dostoyevsky

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/dostoevsky-images-on-metro-lsquocould-cause-suicidesrsquo-1973964.html

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128954859

I'm not much of an author, but someone who is might want to work this into the article. Of course the suicide angle of the articles on this isn't worth the main article, but the fact that he's been memorialized with a subway station could be worked into the main article pretty nicely.

Gary Allen Vollink 167.206.189.6 (talk) 15:25, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Radwan Coat of Arms -- Dostoyevsky

One ThePiedCow took it upon themselves to remove the reference to the fact Dostoyevsky bore the Radwan Coat of Arms. One can read it on Google books:

http://books.google.com/books?id=n7fb7eH6nRUC&pg=PA6#v=onepage&q&f=false

This ThePiedCow boldly presumes the reference is "unscientific," deems it "guessing," and presumes to have sufficient acumen and personal knowledge to come to such a conclusion, and act upon it.

I'll stick to the published source, thank you very much.

Produce a published source unequivocally stating the opposite, and then this editorial move of ThePiedCow might assume validity, although I doubt it.

Have the courtesy and respect for the public to allow them to read the reference, instead of leaving them completely in the dark in regards to this matter.

ThePiedCow obviously does not understand that, unlike Western European heraldic practice, ENTIRE NOBLE FAMILIES IN EASTERN EUROPE BEAR THE COAT OF ARMS, which means ALL DESCENDANTS are entitled to bear the coat of arms. Do not confuse Eastern European heraldic practice with Western European heraldic practice.

Dostojewski (Polish spelling) a.k.a. Dostoyevsky is listed in armorials as belonging to the Radwan knights clan, with the right to bear the Radwan Coat of Arms, meaning there are other published sources independently confirming Aimée Dostoyevsky's assertion.

Aimée Dostoyevsky states in her book the Radwan armorial bearings were drawn for the Dostoyevsky Museum in Moscow, and she has personal knowledge of seeing them. Before one ThePiedCow implies Aimée Dostoyevsky is a fool and perhaps a liar spinning old wives' tales, this ThePiedCow should personally visit Moscow and file a report. I think it safe to say Aimée Dostoyevsky is closer to the topic and source regarding Dostoyevsky, then non-entities like ThePiedCow, more of a nuisance than a help.

This editorial move of ThePiedCow displays a wanton ignorance and disregard of the complexity of Polish and Russian history, which also includes Lithuanian history, particularly as one moves further back in time.

On a personal note, I'm tired of these knee-jerk editorial moves by the uninformed and arrogant who've not put in the time to do their homework, so all the world becomes subject to their ignorant opinions. Although I strongly doubt it, even if Aimée Dostoyevsky is incorrect in her assertion, her assertion sheds more light on Dostoyevsky's origins than this editorial blunder, which is a result of ThePiedCow completely confusing Eastern European heraldic practice with Western European heraldic practice. -- Exxess (talk) 01:17, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Death?

There is nothing in the article about his death/ 109.255.121.55 (talk) 04:44, 22 August 2010 (UTC)