ellauri034.html on line 429: Brentano Breuer Charcot Darwin Dostoyevsky Empedocles Fechner Fliess Goethe von Hartmann Herbart Kierkegaard Nietzsche Plato Schopenhauer Shakespeare Sophocles.
ellauri052.html on line 120: His favourite novelists, who recurred in his courses, were Dostoyevsky, Stendhal, Balzac, Flaubert, Dickens, Conrad, Dreiser and Fitzgerald. He also admired the satires of Wyndham Lewis.
ellauri052.html on line 867: His favourite novelists, who recurred in his courses, were Dostoyevsky, Stendhal, Balzac, Flaubert, Dickens, Conrad, Dreiser and Fitzgerald. He also admired the satires of Wyndham Lewis.
ellauri106.html on line 84: In October 2012, Roth announced to the French culture magazine Les Inrocks that Nemesis was his last book. At the age of 74 he began to reread his favorite authors such as Dostoyevsky, Turgenew, Conrad and Hemingway as well as his own works. He came to the conclusion that he had made the best of his possibilities and did not want to continue working as an author, read or talk about new literature.
ellauri110.html on line 1106: In an age before psychology was a modern scientific field, Fyodor Dostoyevsky (November 11, 1821 – February 9, 1881) was a Russian writer of realist fiction and essays that explored the depths of the human psyche. Known for acclaimed novels Crime and Punishment, The Idiot and The Brothers Karamazov, Dostoyevsky´s work discusses the human mind in a world full of political and social upheaval in 19th century Russia, becoming the forerunner of existentialism.
ellauri111.html on line 52: Tyylitön. Dostoyevsky matki hyvin aikalaisten puhetta ja tunteiden ilmausta, mutta se oli hirmu huolimaton. Kaikesta on sitä kehuttu, muttei “elegantixi”.
ellauri111.html on line 54: Törkeästi täytettä. Dostoyevsky oli patentoitu vetelehtijä joka työskenteli parhaiten kuolleen viivan tuolla puolella. Ja kun sille maxettiin sivutaxalla, voi arvata että henkilöt ja juonenkuljetus oli kuin C-luokan saippuaoopperassa.
ellauri111.html on line 60: Teatraalinen melodraama. Dostoyevsky oli kaupallinen kynäilijä, joka osas painaa yleisössä oikeita nappuloita. Siirappi voittaa aina salmiakin ja 90% tumman suklaan.
ellauri111.html on line 62: Sosiaaliporno. Se oli uutta ja ihmeellistä 19. vuosisadalla, ja käy vieläkin lääkeannoxissa, mutta Dostoyevsky lapioi sitä suoraan naamaan kottikärryllisiä. Se on niin innostunut siitä että jos se eläis nykyaikana, se totaalisesti asuis BDSM sivuilla.
ellauri111.html on line 67: Xenofobinen konservatismi. Dostoyevsky oli aktiivinen ryssien persupiireissä. Se kuoli ennen pogromeja, mutta sen päiväkirjat on täynnä polysemiaa. Eniten se vihas länkkäreitä, etenkin polakkeja (sillä oli vanhaa kaunaa polakeille vankilasta), ja liberaaleja se inhosi. Tämän päivän ryssäpersut, radikaalit oikkarit, ortodoxihihhulit ja militantit lojalistit löytää siltä läjäpäin meemejä. Dosto on sun kaveri jos haluat vastustaa globaaliliberaaleja ja Navalnyjtä ym. oligarkkeja. Nettimeemeistä vois luulla että Dosto on hullu hillbilly jostain Amerikan perämezistä joka on ajautunut Pietariin. Sen käsityxet ihmissielusta jota ahdistavat sisäpuolelta syntiset järjettömät halut ja liberalismin, ateismin ja edistyxen pirut ulkoa, tekis siitä eturiivin jenkkievankelistan, paizi eze ize ällös myös amerikkalaisia.
ellauri151.html on line 119: In the 1920s, Gide became an inspiration for writers such as Albert Camus and Jean-Paul Sartre. In 1923, he published a book on Fyodor Dostoyevsky; however, when he defended homosexuality in the public edition of Corydon (1924) he received widespread condemnation. He later considered this his most important work.
ellauri203.html on line 148: Dostoyevsky despised Turgenev and Bunin couldn´t stand Nabokov. Ideology, ambition and personal conflicts - Russian classical authors had enough reasons to be rude about one another.
ellauri203.html on line 150: The two great writers of the 19th century had completely different ideologies. Ivan Turgenev, author of the novel Fathers and Sons, was a convinced Westernizer and a liberal. Fyodor Dostoyevsky was a conservative nationalist. In his novels The Idiot and The Possessed he preached that liberals had corrupted Russia, leading it to ruin, and that Russia should preserve its own way and Orthodox Christianity.
ellauri203.html on line 152: It’s not surprising that the two authors did not like each other. From his youth Turgenev, a wealthy nobleman, made fun of his lugubrious colleague. In a mocking poem he described Dostoyevsky as a "pimple on the nose of literature." Dostoyevsky didn´t conceal his reciprocal hostility and was indignant that, with all his wealth, Turgenev´s royalties for his publications were four times as high as he was paid.
ellauri203.html on line 154: But the main reason for the quarrels was ideology. "All these wretched liberals find their principal pleasure in abusing Russia," Dostoyevsky wrote in a letter to a friend in 1867, referring to Turgenev´s new novel Smoke. Turgenev by that time was living in France and Dostoyevsky, sarcastically, advised him to buy a telescope as, "otherwise, you can´t really see [Russia] at all". Turgenev was offended.
ellauri203.html on line 156: Turgenev, in turn, was annoyed by Dostoyevsky´s psychological preoccupations and his manner going deep into the dark depths of the human soul. "What a sour smell and hospital stench" and "psychological nitpicking" were some of the phrases he used to describe Dostoyevsky´s novels. By jove he hit it right on the dot.
ellauri249.html on line 80: It is precisely in this sense that we should understand Dostoyevsky’s remark that beauty will save the world, or Matthew Arnold’s belief that we shall be saved by poetry. It is probably too late for the world, but for the individual man (me) there always remains a chance. What distinguishes us from other members of the animal kingdom is speech. Literature—and poetry, in particular, my poetry—is, to put it bluntly, the goal of our species.” Minä minä! Täähän on pahempi egosentrikko kuin minä ja pikku-CEC Norjassa.
ellauri254.html on line 360: According to the extremely experienced Belgian slavist Emmanuel Waegemans, "who was and still is indeed considered to be the primus inter pares in Russian literature and culture from the eighteenth-century onwards", Russian thinkers themselves contributed largely to this movement: such examples would be the irrationalistic and mystical poetry and philosophy of Fyodor Tyutchev and Vladimir Solovyov or Fyodor Dostoyevsky's novels. It is remotely thinkable that these geeks could read the Western alphabet on their own.
ellauri256.html on line 46: Rozanov frequently referred to himself as Fyodor Dostoyevsky's "Underground Man" and proclaimed his right to espouse contrary opinions at the same time. He first attracted attention in the 1890s when he published political sketches in the conservative newspaper Novoye Vremya ("New Time"), owned and run by Aleksey Suvorin. Rozanov's comments, always paradoxical and sparking controversy, led him into clashes with the Tsarist government and with radicals such as Lenin. For example, Rozanov readily passed from criticism of Russian Orthodoxy, and even of what he saw as the Christian preoccupation with death, to fervent praise of Christian faith, from praise of Judaism to unabashed anti-Semitism, and from acceptance of homosexuality as yet another side of human nature to vitriolic accusations that Gogol and some other writers had been latent homosexuals.[citation needed] He proclaimed that politics was "obsolete" because "God doesn't want politics any more," constructed an "apocalypse of our times," and recommended the "healthy instincts" of the Russian people, their longing for authority, and their hostility to modernism.
xxx/ellauri075.html on line 151: He developed his thinking in a second book on Fyodor Dostoyevsky and Frederich Nietzsche, which increased Shestov's reputation as an original and incisive thinker. In All Things Are Possible (published in 1905) Shestov adopted the aphoristic style of Friedrich Nietzsche to investigate the difference between Russian and European Literature. Although on the surface it is an exploration of numerous intellectual topics, at its base it is a sardonic work of Existentialist philosophy which both criticizes and satirizes our fundamental attitudes towards life situations. D.H. Lawrence, who wrote the Foreword to S.S. Koteliansky's literary translation of the work, summarized Shestov's philosophy with the words: " 'Everything is possible' - this is his really central cry. It is not nihilism. It is only a shaking free of the human psyche from old bonds. The positive central idea is that the human psyche, or soul, really believes in itself, and in nothing else". Shestov deals with key issues such as religion, rationalism, and science in this highly approachable work, topics he would also examine in later writings such as In Job's Balances. Shestov's own key quote from this work is probably the following: "...we need to think that only one assertion has or can have any objective reality: that nothing on earth is impossible. Every time someone wants to force us to admit that there are other, more limited and limiting truths, we must resist with every means we can lay hands on".
xxx/ellauri075.html on line 194: More recently, alongside Dostoyevsky's philosophy, many have found solace in Shestov's battle against the rational self-consistent and self-evident; for example Bernard Martin of Case Western Reserve University, who translated his works now found online [external link below]; and the scholar Liza Knapp, who wrote The Annihilation of Inertia: Dostoevsky and Metaphysics. This book was an evaluation of Dostoyevsky's struggle against the self-evident "wall", and refers to Shestov on several occasions.
xxx/ellauri124.html on line 230: Dostoyevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov
xxx/ellauri127.html on line 132: Dostoyevsky, Nabokov told anyone who would listen, was “a third-rate writer and his fame is incomprehensible.” He called Henry James “that pale porpoise.” Philip Roth? “Farcical.” Norman Mailer? “I detest everything that he stands for.” T. S. Eliot and Thomas Mann were “fakes.” When his friend Wilson suggested that he include Jane Austen in his Cornell survey course on European literature, Nabokov responded, “I dislike Jane [Austen] and am prejudiced, in fact, against all women writers.” Leo Tolstoy and Nikolai Gogol: da. Everybody else: nyet.
xxx/ellauri229.html on line 746: Tyutchev was a militant Pan-Slavist like Dostoyevsky, who never needed a particular reason to berate the Western powers, Vatican, Ottoman Empire or Poland, the latter perceived by him as a Judas in the Slavic fold. The failure of the Crimean War made him look critically at the Russian government as well.
xxx/ellauri307.html on line 180: Feodor Dostoyevsky
xxx/ellauri380.html on line 431: But in Solzhenitsyn's case, it's not racial! It has nothing to do with blood. He's certainly not a racist; the question is fundamentally religious and cultural. He bears some resemblance to Dostoyevsky, who was a fervent Christian and patriot and a rabid anti-Semite. Solzhenitsyn is unquestionably in the grip of the Russian extreme right's view of the Revolution, which is that it was the doing of Jews.
26