web site hit counter A Writer's Diary - Ebooks PDF Online
Hot Best Seller

A Writer's Diary

Availability: Ready to download

The essential entries from Dostoevsky's complete Diary, called his boldest experiment in literary form, are now available in this abridged edition; it is a uniquely encyclopedic forum of fictional and nonfictional genres. A Writer's Diary began as a column in a literary journal, but by 1876 Dostoevsky was able to bring it out as a complete monthly publication with himself The essential entries from Dostoevsky's complete Diary, called his boldest experiment in literary form, are now available in this abridged edition; it is a uniquely encyclopedic forum of fictional and nonfictional genres. A Writer's Diary began as a column in a literary journal, but by 1876 Dostoevsky was able to bring it out as a complete monthly publication with himself as an editor, publisher, and sole contributor, suspending work on The Brothers Karamazov to do so.   The Diary's radical format was matched by the extreme range of its contents. In a single frame it incorporated an astonishing variety of material: short stories; humorous sketches; reports on sensational crimes; historical predictions; portraits of famous people; autobiographical pieces; and plans for stories, some of which were never written while others appeared later in the Diary itself. A range of authorial and narrative voices and stances and an elaborate scheme of allusions and cross-references preserve and present Dostoevsky's conception of his work as a literary whole.   Selected from the two-volume set, this abridged edition of A Writer's Diary appears in a single paperback volume, along with a new condensed introduction by editor Gary Saul Morson.


Compare

The essential entries from Dostoevsky's complete Diary, called his boldest experiment in literary form, are now available in this abridged edition; it is a uniquely encyclopedic forum of fictional and nonfictional genres. A Writer's Diary began as a column in a literary journal, but by 1876 Dostoevsky was able to bring it out as a complete monthly publication with himself The essential entries from Dostoevsky's complete Diary, called his boldest experiment in literary form, are now available in this abridged edition; it is a uniquely encyclopedic forum of fictional and nonfictional genres. A Writer's Diary began as a column in a literary journal, but by 1876 Dostoevsky was able to bring it out as a complete monthly publication with himself as an editor, publisher, and sole contributor, suspending work on The Brothers Karamazov to do so.   The Diary's radical format was matched by the extreme range of its contents. In a single frame it incorporated an astonishing variety of material: short stories; humorous sketches; reports on sensational crimes; historical predictions; portraits of famous people; autobiographical pieces; and plans for stories, some of which were never written while others appeared later in the Diary itself. A range of authorial and narrative voices and stances and an elaborate scheme of allusions and cross-references preserve and present Dostoevsky's conception of his work as a literary whole.   Selected from the two-volume set, this abridged edition of A Writer's Diary appears in a single paperback volume, along with a new condensed introduction by editor Gary Saul Morson.

30 review for A Writer's Diary

  1. 5 out of 5

    Taghreed Jamal el deen

    ليست يوميات بالمعنى الشخصي؛ بل مقالات متواترة استمر دوستويفسكي بنشرها تحت عنوان " يوميات كاتب " في إحدى الصحف على مدى خمسة أعوام .. بعض المواضيع المختارة تتعلق مباشرة بالشعب الروسي وسيجد القارئ صعوبة في الإحاطة بها، وبعضها الآخر متنوع وممتع وعبقري ككل ما كتبه هذا الإنسان. ليست يوميات بالمعنى الشخصي؛ بل مقالات متواترة استمر دوستويفسكي بنشرها تحت عنوان " يوميات كاتب " في إحدى الصحف على مدى خمسة أعوام .. بعض المواضيع المختارة تتعلق مباشرة بالشعب الروسي وسيجد القارئ صعوبة في الإحاطة بها، وبعضها الآخر متنوع وممتع وعبقري ككل ما كتبه هذا الإنسان.

  2. 5 out of 5

    Robert

    Review: A Writer’s Diary by Fyodor Dostoevsky, Volume 1 (1873-1876) I’m almost tempted to say that Dostoevsky became the first blogger when he decided to publish a monthly diary, paid for by subscriptions, in 1873. This literary experiment includes everything from letters, literary battles, and short stories to fragments of poems, recollections and long polemics focused on Russia’s system of justice (which had undergone a substantial reform in the previous decade.) It’s a whopper of a book, over 7 Review: A Writer’s Diary by Fyodor Dostoevsky, Volume 1 (1873-1876) I’m almost tempted to say that Dostoevsky became the first blogger when he decided to publish a monthly diary, paid for by subscriptions, in 1873. This literary experiment includes everything from letters, literary battles, and short stories to fragments of poems, recollections and long polemics focused on Russia’s system of justice (which had undergone a substantial reform in the previous decade.) It’s a whopper of a book, over 700 pages. Do you have to be a Dostoevsky fanatic to want to read it? Probably. But it’s also true that anything Dostoevsky wrote had (and still has) a relentless force and crackling energy worth exploring. In a very long introductory study, Gary Saul Morson of Northwestern University makes a valiant attempt to suggest that many of Dostoevsky’s failings and surprising shifts of genre and subject in his Writer’s Diary amount to a new kind of literature. I didn’t find myself persuaded this was the case, although it is oddly Russian for a writer to push words in any direction he wishes (Solzhenitsyn ended up working in a kind of fictional/historical pastiche format and didn’t like the term novel applied to what he was doing). I won’t go through this book item by item, but I did find a few things worth remarking. Dostoevsky’s faith in the Russian People and the Russian Orthodox Church was boundless. Dostoevsky was deeply preoccupied with the so-called “Eastern Question” which actually refers to Europe’s eastern border on Russia and not to Russia’s eastern border with the Orient. He was a man of strange compassion, always ready to take up the pen to assault injustices perpetrated by Russia’s new courts. He liked to think of Russia as a kind of new country, still fresh and waking up to its mission on earth. He rejected the notion that pan-Slavism was a key to understanding Russia’s quarrel with Europe; he liked to place more emphasis on a spiritual fraternity that united people under the auspices of the Russian Orthodox Church, or Eastern Orthodox Church, as the case may be (though not the Greek Orthodox Church). The line of descent he liked to trace in religious affairs went from Byzantium into what would become Russia, which inherited Orthodoxy in its proper form and had, in some vague way, a claim on Istanbul, or Constantinople. He was an unthinking, reflexive anti-Semite of the worst kind. He adored children. His capacity to write great courtroom scenes in his novels is mirrored in his Writer’s Diary. His oratorical power was silent, spoken in ink, but thunders when you read it. He could be whimsical, self-deprecating, witty, casual and many other endearing things one wouldn’t think of in association with the author of Crime and Punishment. Somehow (presumably through intensive reading of newspapers and direct correspondence) he was able to keep up with the events of the day, including wars hundreds of miles away from where he wrote, in great detail. One wouldn’t think one could do that without the benefit of today’s instantaneous forms of communications, but I can’t see any difference between what he knew about public affairs and what our current pundits know...or don’t know. H.e was on top of things There is a second volume to The Writer’s Diary that covers the years 1877-1881. I’ll probably read it because I am, in fact, a Dostoevsky fanatic and generally fascinated by Russian writers and Russia as a country. The critically important lesson one learns in the first volume of The Writer’s Diary is how alienated, confused, attracted and repelled Dostoevsky was with regard to Europe, not to mention America. We follow Putin’s Russia...or Yeltsin’s Russia...or Gorbachev’s Russia and shake our heads. That’s probably because we don’t fathom Russia’s sense of difference, vulnerability, and mission vis-a-vis the West. Dostoevsky knew all about it, and it shows up on every page of this large strange book.

  3. 4 out of 5

    Steve Evans

    This is a specialist book, or at least for those who are pretty keen on the author. For them, it is a treasure trove of the good and bad aspects of one of the greatest of all writers. The English translation contains about half the text of what was a periodical put out in the years follwing the publication of The Adolescent and before Dostoevsky began serious work on The Brothers Karamazov. It contains some wonderful stories, some interesting analyses of current affairs and accounts of intervent This is a specialist book, or at least for those who are pretty keen on the author. For them, it is a treasure trove of the good and bad aspects of one of the greatest of all writers. The English translation contains about half the text of what was a periodical put out in the years follwing the publication of The Adolescent and before Dostoevsky began serious work on The Brothers Karamazov. It contains some wonderful stories, some interesting analyses of current affairs and accounts of interventions in public affairs - including Dostoevsky's involvement in a court case of a woman who threw her stepdaughter out a window (she lived), who was released. There is also full measure of Dostoevsky's anti-Semitism that is displayed only fitfully in his works of fiction, and of his pretty nutty beliefs about current affairs. I read this book for his belief in "The Russian Idea" that his native country had a mission to fulfill for the planet; he is on this subject eloquent and in his characteristically eccentric fashion, strangely convincing.

  4. 4 out of 5

    Fernando

    La edición completa del Diario de un Escritor tiene 1600 páginas. Está, sólo 300. Además de Escritor, Dostoievski era periodista y podía hacer ensayos realmente extensos a partir de pequeñas notas que leía en los periódicos. Siempre me pregunto cómo hacía para escribir tanto! Realmente admirable...

  5. 4 out of 5

    Irina Constantin

    Profetic, maiestos, titanic, Jurnal de Scriitor nu se termină niciodată pentru că orice idee sau teoremă a lui Dostoievsky formulată în Jurnal are continuitatea veșnică, e prolifică, naște mereu la nesfârșit alte și alte concepții, se repetă, se trăiește de toate generațiile, e seculară, chiar dacă l-am început acum 5 ani Jurnal de scriitor încă nu l-am terminat pentru că aceasta e Biblia mea universală mereu deschisă, mereu cu cotorul la vedere, răsfoită de mii de ori, subliniată, deși e extrem Profetic, maiestos, titanic, Jurnal de Scriitor nu se termină niciodată pentru că orice idee sau teoremă a lui Dostoievsky formulată în Jurnal are continuitatea veșnică, e prolifică, naște mereu la nesfârșit alte și alte concepții, se repetă, se trăiește de toate generațiile, e seculară, chiar dacă l-am început acum 5 ani Jurnal de scriitor încă nu l-am terminat pentru că aceasta e Biblia mea universală mereu deschisă, mereu cu cotorul la vedere, răsfoită de mii de ori, subliniată, deși e extrem de greu să-i parcurgi fiecare pagină la rând, cititul pe sărite e soluția potrivită,cititul fragmentar pentru o delectare lecturală boemă de prim rang, doar aici e vorba despre F.M.Dostoievsky, ce să mai, îl voi citi toată viață, nu poți să minți vreodată pe cineva că l-ai citit pe de-a întregul, ar fi perfid și straniu...

  6. 4 out of 5

    Marius

    Nietzsche a spus despre Dostoievski că este singurul psiholog de la care mai poate învăţa ceva. A spus psiholog şi nu a spus politician sau economist sau filosof. Amintind acest lucru trebuie să spun că la politică Dostoievski e varză. Şi nu doar că bate câmpii dar o face cu fanatism şi înflăcărare. Îţi vine chiar să-i spui: dacă tăceai, filosof rămâneai. Cam o treime de carte, Dostoievski te sâcâie cu „problema Orientului” şi cu panslavismul. De exemplu, spre sfârşit, calul lui de bătaie devine L Nietzsche a spus despre Dostoievski că este singurul psiholog de la care mai poate învăţa ceva. A spus psiholog şi nu a spus politician sau economist sau filosof. Amintind acest lucru trebuie să spun că la politică Dostoievski e varză. Şi nu doar că bate câmpii dar o face cu fanatism şi înflăcărare. Îţi vine chiar să-i spui: dacă tăceai, filosof rămâneai. Cam o treime de carte, Dostoievski te sâcâie cu „problema Orientului” şi cu panslavismul. De exemplu, spre sfârşit, calul lui de bătaie devine Levin, din Anna Karenina. Bineînţeles, atacându-l pe Levin îl înţeapă pe Tolstoi: adică de ce Levin (Tolstoi) nu-şi rupe cămaşa de pe el şi nu-şi smulge părul din cap de grija altor popoare slave asuprite de turci. Sincer, când am citit Anna Karenina, Levin mi s-a părut foarte echilibrat şi de bun simţ. Nu a pus botul la propagandă, aşa cum a făcut Dostoievski [este vorba de acel gen de propagandă clasică din toate războaiele, conform căreia duşmanul aruncă copiii în suliţă, siluieşte femeile în timp ce le înjunghie cu pumnalul, şi jupuieşte bărbaţii de vii.] Şi când este naţionalismul mai oribil? Când e impregnat de misticism. După revoluţia din '89 şi la noi au apărut opinii copilăreşti conform cărora Bucureştiul va fi noul Ierusalim şi poporul român e cel ales etc. etc. Asemenea gogomănii le-a spus şi Dostoievski în Jurnal, doar că poporul ales este cel rus. Poporul rus va izbăvi lumea de ateism şi socialism. Cine cunoaşte istoria poate înţelege ironia ruşinoasă, cu tot bolşevismul şi materialismul care au urmat - cu care am fost „blagosloviţi” şi noi de altfel. Apoi, nu ştiu cum un om extraordinar de inteligent ca Dostoievski a putut scrie despre „problema jidovească”? E drept, atunci când un intelectual „ovreu” îl dojeneşte într-o scrisoare că pentru 10% dintre jidanii care-s rapace şi nesimţiţi îi atacă şi pe restul de 90% dintre evreii ce trăiesc la limita sărăciei, Dostoievski o cam dă în bâlbâială. Aş vrea să-i găsesc o scuză lui Dostoievski, deoarece e scriitorul meu preferat. Pot spune doar că politica ziarului în care şi-a publicat Jurnalul era de orientare conservatoare, aşa că şi el s-a conformat. Sper să mă împac cu gândul acesta. Am scăpat de chestiile negative din acest Jurnal. Acum să vorbesc şi despre caracteristicile pozitive, care-s infinit mai multe şi mi-l dezvăluie pe Dostoievski aşa cum îl ştiu şi-l iubesc. În primul rând în Jurnal sunt incluse două nestemate, Sfioasa şi Visul unui om ridicol. Aceste două povestiri sunt extraordinare. Sunt atât de profunde încât a trebuit să trag un scaun şi să stau vreo jumate de oră să mă dezmeticesc. Ăsta-i Dostoievski pe care-l cunosc, nu naţionalistul ridicol. Apoi, Dostoievski apără şi susţine dreptul femeilor de a avea educaţie universitară. Este nemaipomenit şi de bun-simţ. O idee foarte progresistă pentru vremea aceea, cu mult înaintea mişcărilor feministe din ţările anglo-saxone. În sfârşit, la un moment dat, în capitolul „Un discurs fantastic al preşedintelui completului de judecată” am avut norocul să asist la o lecţie rară de pedagogie şi psihologie infantilă. Lecţia are ca punct de plecare cazul familiei Djunkovski, în care părinţii şi-au supus copii la chinuri groaznice şi la tratamente inumane [existau „ştirile de la ora 5” şi pe vremea aia :)]. Asemenea discurs este înaintea timpului său. Dostoievski a spus: „dacă ar fi să aleg între adevăr şi Hristos aş alege Hristosul”. În Jurnal explică şi dezvoltă această afirmaţie. Fără credinţa în nemurirea sufletului viaţa devine absurdă şi singura soluţie rămâne sinuciderea. [Mi-am amintit că tocmai despre absurd şi sinucidere a vorbit şi Camus în Mitul lui Sisif, ba chiar cu citate din Demonii.] Îmi place foarte mult că în Jurnal se explică cele mai importante idei din romanele sale. Am înţeles mai bine unele lucruri şi toată gândirea din spatele lor. Cred că acesta a fost şi motivul principal pentru care m-am apucat să citesc cu poftă cartea asta uriaşă. Şi ceva amuzant. Am aflat că existau troli şi pe atunci. Capitolul Despre scrisorile anonime injurioase tratează cu amuzament şi înţelegere această chestie.

  7. 5 out of 5

    رضوى أحمد عيد

    كتاب مليء بالأحداث السياسية التي لا تهم سوى الشعب الروسي على الأرجح ولذلك لم أستطع تكملته 😅 المقدمة أكثر إفادة من باقي الكتاب لما بها من معلومات عن أعمال دوستويفسكي .وسنوات نشرها..فيما عدا ذلك يصعب قراءته لعدم إلمامنا بتاريخ روسيا

  8. 5 out of 5

    ميّ H-E

    هذا الكتاب هو مجموعة من المقالات الصحفية التي نشرها دوستويفسكي تحت عنوان "يوميات كاتب" في جريدة "المواطن" أولاً، ثم في جريدته الخاصة التي حملت نفس الاسم لاحقاً. يخطئ من يظن أن الكتاب ممل. إنه على العكس تماماً، جرعة متعة يومية داومتُ عليها طوال الأسابيع الفائتة. هناك بعض المقالات المغرقة في الشأن الروسي (وبخاصة من الناحية السياسية) وهي تهم القارئ الروسي ولكن القارئ العربي لن يستمتع بها ما لم يكن مطلعاً على تاريخ روسيا قليلاً، ومقالات أخرى عرض فيها دوستويفسكي آراءه في بعض القضايا الاجتماعية وبضع جر هذا الكتاب هو مجموعة من المقالات الصحفية التي نشرها دوستويفسكي تحت عنوان "يوميات كاتب" في جريدة "المواطن" أولاً، ثم في جريدته الخاصة التي حملت نفس الاسم لاحقاً. يخطئ من يظن أن الكتاب ممل. إنه على العكس تماماً، جرعة متعة يومية داومتُ عليها طوال الأسابيع الفائتة. هناك بعض المقالات المغرقة في الشأن الروسي (وبخاصة من الناحية السياسية) وهي تهم القارئ الروسي ولكن القارئ العربي لن يستمتع بها ما لم يكن مطلعاً على تاريخ روسيا قليلاً، ومقالات أخرى عرض فيها دوستويفسكي آراءه في بعض القضايا الاجتماعية وبضع جرائم جنائية، وكانت بمجملها رائعة من حيث تحليلها وتحليل نفسية جميع الأطراف المعنيين بها وأيضاً تناول دوستويفسكي مواضيع لم نعد نسمع بها البتة (كجلسات استحضار الأرواح) ونقديات أدبية (كمقالاته حول رواية آنا كارنينا وأدب نكراسوف وبوشكين) إضافة إلى الكثير من المواضيع المتنوعة الشائقة. صدق المترجم عندما نقل عن أديب روسي معاصر تساؤله المفحم "وهل هناك من هو أكثر معاصرة لنا من دوستويفسكي؟" فالكتاب بمجمله يرسم صورة الكثير من تفاصيل عصرنا، وكأن الزمن أدار عجلته دورة مئوية كاملة إلا أن الإنسانية لا تزال واقفة على عتبات أواخر القرن التاسع عشر. وإذا كنا نتعرف على دوستويفسكي الأديب الإنساني العبقري والطبيب النفساني البارع في أعماله الروائية، فإننا في مقالاته الصحفية سنكتشف فيه المواطن الروسي الغيور على شعبه ووطنه، والناقد الساخر، والمحلل السياسي والمصلح الاجتماعي، والصحفي النزيه الذي نقل هموم وقضايا عصره بصدق وشفافية، والمكافح الذي لم يتنازل عن الحفاظ على جودة أعماله رغم انقطاع شريانه وملازمته الفراش في أيامه الأخيرة. لن أكف عن الانبهار بعظمة هذا الروسي في كل ما أقرأ من أعماله.

  9. 4 out of 5

    Bettie

    From Brain Pickings: "One November night in the 1870s, legendary Russian writer Fyodor Dostoyevsky (November 11, 1821–February 9, 1881) discovered the meaning of life in a dream — or, at least, the protagonist in his final short story did. The piece, which first appeared in the altogether revelatory A Writer’s Diary (public library) under the title “The Dream of a Queer Fellow” and was later published separately as The Dream of a Ridiculous Man, explores themes similar to those in Dostoyevsky’ From Brain Pickings: "One November night in the 1870s, legendary Russian writer Fyodor Dostoyevsky (November 11, 1821–February 9, 1881) discovered the meaning of life in a dream — or, at least, the protagonist in his final short story did. The piece, which first appeared in the altogether revelatory A Writer’s Diary (public library) under the title “The Dream of a Queer Fellow” and was later published separately as The Dream of a Ridiculous Man, explores themes similar to those in Dostoyevsky’s 1864 novel Notes from the Underground, considered the first true existential novel. True to Stephen King’s assertion that “good fiction is the truth inside the lie,” the story sheds light on Dostoyevsky’s personal spiritual and philosophical bents with extraordinary clarity — perhaps more so than any of his other published works. The contemplation at its heart falls somewhere between Tolstoy’s tussle with the meaning of life and Philip K. Dick’s hallucinatory exegesis." Read more here.

  10. 4 out of 5

    Majed almajed

    استمر دوستويفسكي من عام ١٨٧٦ حتى عام ١٨٨١ ( مع انقطاع دام عامين ) بإصدار يوميات كاتب في مطبوعة مستقلة، تصدر مرة في الشهر ، وبين الكاتب بأن المطبوعة أو اليوميات ستكون يوميات بالمعنى الحرفي للكلمة، ستكون تقريرًا عن الانطباعات التي تكونت لديّ فعلاً في كل شهر ، تقريرًا عما شاهدته وسمعته وقرأته . . يقول دوستويفسكي عن كتابة اليوميات : أكتب اليوميات لنفسي، وقد استولت هذه الأفكار على ذهني وترسخت فيه . وعلى كل فأنا أعترف بأن هذه ليست أفكارًا بل مجرد أحاسيس وهواجس تراودني . . . وبعد عام من اصدار اليوميات أخذت استمر دوستويفسكي من عام ١٨٧٦ حتى عام ١٨٨١ ( مع انقطاع دام عامين ) بإصدار يوميات كاتب في مطبوعة مستقلة، تصدر مرة في الشهر ، وبين الكاتب بأن المطبوعة أو اليوميات ستكون يوميات بالمعنى الحرفي للكلمة، ستكون تقريرًا عن الانطباعات التي تكونت لديّ فعلاً في كل شهر ، تقريرًا عما شاهدته وسمعته وقرأته . . يقول دوستويفسكي عن كتابة اليوميات : أكتب اليوميات لنفسي، وقد استولت هذه الأفكار على ذهني وترسخت فيه . وعلى كل فأنا أعترف بأن هذه ليست أفكارًا بل مجرد أحاسيس وهواجس تراودني . . . وبعد عام من اصدار اليوميات أخذت رسائل القراء تتوارد على دوستويفسكي ونشأت بينه وبين قراءه صلة لا مثيل لها في روسيا ،فقد كان القراء يمطرونه برسائلهم وزياراتهم ليعبروا عن شكرهم على ما يقدمه لهم من غذاء أخلاقي رائع في يومياته. وكان بعضهم يقول إنه يقرأ اليوميات بإجلال كما يقرأ الكتاب المقدس . . . الكتاب عبارة عن مقالات يعبر فيها دوستويفسكي عن أفكاره وآراءه ووجهة نظره وانطباعاته للعديد من القضايا والأفكار والمسائل في زمنه . تكلم عن روسيا والاصلاحات والصراع الفكري بين الغربوية والسلافوية ورؤية كل فريق لطريقة الاصلاح والتنوير والنهوض بروسيا . وأيضًا تكلم وعبر عن وجهة نظره في النظام القضائي بعد الاصلاح ، وعن الأدب والأدباء ، مسائل الأخلاق والإيمان والخير والتعليم والأسرة والطفل ، وموقفه من موجة الإلحاد وغيرها . ونلاحظ حبه للأطفال ومناصرته للمرأة وكرهه لليهود وأفكارهم ، واعتزازه بالشعب الروسي وإيمانه العميق بالمسيحية والقومية وجذوره التاريخية . . ولقد كان دوستويفسكي يرى أن إيمان الشعب بالنور الأبدي هو بالذات الأساس الذي يجب أن يقوم عليه التنوير الحقيقي الذي يستحيل من غيره تحقيق القضية العظمى ( المحبة ) ومغزى التنوير الحقيقي مُتضمن حسب رأيه في جذور هذا المفهوم بالذات، وهو النور الروحي الذي يضيء النفس وينير القلب ويوجه العقل ويدله على درب الحياة . . . كتاب يحتوي على مقالات وأفكار تستحق القراءة وبعضها كان ممل صراحة وما اعجبتني ، هالكتاب انصحك فيه إذا كنت محب لدوستويفسكي وترغب في التعرف عليه وعلى أفكاره وآراءه بشكل أعمق .. .

  11. 5 out of 5

    Andreea

    Well...let me think. It is Dostoievski, but somehow different, as expected, probably. I was kind of surprised, as I was assuming he will talk more about his literary work, how did he come to write certain novels. Of course, you may guess some of his drivers, but the focus is not on him, but on Russian people. I have been impressed all the time I was reading it (three volumes of about 400 pages) about his great love, respect and hopes he had for the people. So, actually it is about putting face t Well...let me think. It is Dostoievski, but somehow different, as expected, probably. I was kind of surprised, as I was assuming he will talk more about his literary work, how did he come to write certain novels. Of course, you may guess some of his drivers, but the focus is not on him, but on Russian people. I have been impressed all the time I was reading it (three volumes of about 400 pages) about his great love, respect and hopes he had for the people. So, actually it is about putting face to face principles that do not seem to go together (and he is trying to explain why and how things came to this): Russian people vs. Russian "elite", Slavic vs. non-Slavic, Russia vs. Europe, war vs. peace, Orthodox vs Catholic (!), mother language vs. learned language, justice vs. injustice, equity vs, inequity. I have to say that as naive he may seem sometimes, his analysis are quite profound and still surprising (mind you it was written around 1875) although science, history evolved since then. And sometimes you just may find yourself in those times. There are also few pages about Puskin, Tolstoi, about his work. He tells stories (fictional and non-fictional) as good as ever, talking about law suits when he is trying to shed some light on the characters and their motivations, and from my point of view these are the best parts and after reading you can say: yeah, this is Dostoievski. Being Romanian, I was interested to find out how did he see us (part of the journal is written in 1877 when we had our Independence war), but alas only few words. :(

  12. 4 out of 5

    Junta

    All of Dostoyevsky's heroes question themselves as to the meaning of life. In this they are modern: they do not fear ridicule. What distinguishes modern sensibility from classical sensibility is that the latter thrives on moral problems and the former on metaphysical problems. In Dostoyevsky's novels the question is propounded with such intensity that it can only invite extreme solutions. Existence is illusory or it is eternal. If Dostoyevsky were satisfied with this inquiry, he would be a philo All of Dostoyevsky's heroes question themselves as to the meaning of life. In this they are modern: they do not fear ridicule. What distinguishes modern sensibility from classical sensibility is that the latter thrives on moral problems and the former on metaphysical problems. In Dostoyevsky's novels the question is propounded with such intensity that it can only invite extreme solutions. Existence is illusory or it is eternal. If Dostoyevsky were satisfied with this inquiry, he would be a philosopher. But he illustrates the consequences that such intellectual pastimes may have in a man's life and in this regard he is an artist. Among those consequences, his attention is arrested particularly by the last one, which he himself calls logical suicide in his Diary of a Writer. In the installments for December 1876, indeed, he imagines the reasoning of 'logical suicide'. ... - The Myth of Sisyphus, Albert Camus (p. 101 of 134)March 18, 2016

  13. 4 out of 5

    Alec Fletcher

    Dostoevsky is the first writer of literature that I fell in love with. Of nineteenth-century authors, none had a better eye for the psychology of the downtrodden, the frustrated, the half-mad. Perhaps this is because he himself was all of these things, at least at certain points in his life. He spent four years in a Siberian prison, suffered from a gambling addiction, battled epilepsy and struggled with constant debts. Perhaps it takes an erratic soul to accurately depict erratic souls. D. publi Dostoevsky is the first writer of literature that I fell in love with. Of nineteenth-century authors, none had a better eye for the psychology of the downtrodden, the frustrated, the half-mad. Perhaps this is because he himself was all of these things, at least at certain points in his life. He spent four years in a Siberian prison, suffered from a gambling addiction, battled epilepsy and struggled with constant debts. Perhaps it takes an erratic soul to accurately depict erratic souls. D. published the "Writer's Diary" mostly in 1876-1877. Half-journalism, half-literary experiment, he meant it to be a vessel for his continually evolving views on current events which, by their nature, are currently evolving. Gary Saul Morson's foreword labels this a "processual" approach--D. did not know how the Diary would evolve because he could neither predict future events nor his contemporary responses (he also selected the articles and stories that would show up in this abridgment. As far as I can tell, he did a good job; everything that is included seemed relevant to my interests in D.). This means that we get the real Dostoevsky, writing to his readers as if they were close friends, and it's often phenomenal. He writes passionately about poor children, about criminals who maybe are not as guilty as it would seem, about the suicide epidemic that seemed to be spreading. The small observations and literary detours are the best parts of the "Diary", as one can sense the conception of an idea earlier in the work before enjoying its realization later. The more political articles are interesting as well, though it's good to know a bit about the complicated politics of Russia in the second half of the nineteenth century. D. often positions himself in a unique position in the framework of contemporary society--he's neither a liberal Westernizer, those who want Russia to emulate European ideals and mores, nor a hard-line conservative. His most constant belief is in the power of the Russian peasant class, whom he calls the People, as he believes that they perfectly embody a Russian national spirit that is inextricably linked with humble, "genuine" Christianity. I read Frank Turner's Dostoevsky biography a few years ago, and, while it covered the "Diary", I think I could have benefited from having read it beforehand, as the "Diary" truly illuminates D.'s frame of mind. But his mind has many ugly features, and these show through. As 1877 rolls around, and with it the increasing likelihood of war with Turkey, D. betrays himself as a fervent ethno-nationalist who wants to lilberate Russia's Slavic brethren in the Balkans from the cruel and malicious Turks. While I don't doubt that the Slavs were oppressed by the Turks, D.'s narrow view about the potentials of this war contrast heavily with the empathy he generally portrays, both in his fiction and in other articles. Many get caught up in the patriotism and zeal of war, but D. took it a step further. Convinced that he understood the way that European history would play out, he writes several times about an impending clash between French socialists allied with papists and German Protestants. He predicts that a war will break out, and that Russia, by liberating the Slavs in the East, will be able to spread its strong national idea throughout the Continent, taking the first step in a chain of events that will eventually lead to a universal Christian brotherhood across the globe. The spirit of the "People" would be accepted by all, and love for one's neighbors would be the way of the world. Which all sounds nice and one can forgive a man for dreaming, but when such a dream takes hold, a person can excuse many means in order to obtain their preferred end. I can't help but see hints of the single-mindedness that would lead Europe to destroy itself several decades after D. was buried. It's interesting to read his predictions now, because, in a way, Russia did spread itself throughout the world, and, in a way, France and Germany did have a climactic clash, but none of it happened for the reasons that D. thought it would, and universal Christian brotherhood seems to have been entirely left out. And then there's the article semi-ironically titled "The Jewish Question", in which D. defends himself against a host of readers who accused him of anti-semitism, but mostly just proves himself as an anti-semite in the process. D. gets so much about empathy and love correct, and it's more than disheartening to see this side of him. Yet, for all the flaws, he's a great writer. Tolstoy may have been more modern in his historical-philosophical views and in the quality of his sentences, but something about Dostoevsky seems to transcend the normal literary criticisms one might level at him. I'm reminded of a story in Hemingway's "A Moveable Feast" in which Hemingway asks a friend how it's possible that D. can be so moving when he's such a terrible writer. I'm also reminded of an essay by David Foster Wallace in which he reviews Frank Turner's Dostoevsky biography and discusses how D., unlike modern or postmodern authors, was truly trying to change the way the world in non-artistic ways. He thought he had a God-given mission to save Russia and direct it toward the future triumph of it and the Christian idea that it embodied, and he took this mission very seriously. Strong convictions don't always make great people, but they can make great writers. "A Writer's Diary" shows the convictions and the writing side by side, and thus is remarkable.

  14. 4 out of 5

    Dumitru Adrian

    Dacă vreți, adaptat la zilele noastre, sunt postările de pe blogul lui Dostoievski, sau poate peretele lui de Facebook, publicate timp de câțiva și adunate într-o carte. Eu le-am citit de 3 ori.

  15. 4 out of 5

    Oguz Eren

    Dostoyevski'nin başta bir dergide yazdığı köşe, sonra da bizzat kendi çıkardığı derginin adı, "Bir Yazarın Günlüğü". Kendisi dergi olarak yaklaşık iki sene boyunca düzenli olarak çıkarmış; 1876-1877 yıllarında. Ardından sağlık sorunları dolayısıyla 3 sene kadar ara veriyor; 1880'de çıkardığı tek sayı dışında. 1881'de tekrar düzenli yayına heves etse de bir sayıdan fazlasına ömrü vefa etmiyor. Dolayısıyla 1200 sayfalık bir külliyat kalmış, bu makalelerden. Bu 1200 sayfa bilmediğimiz Dostoyevski'yi Dostoyevski'nin başta bir dergide yazdığı köşe, sonra da bizzat kendi çıkardığı derginin adı, "Bir Yazarın Günlüğü". Kendisi dergi olarak yaklaşık iki sene boyunca düzenli olarak çıkarmış; 1876-1877 yıllarında. Ardından sağlık sorunları dolayısıyla 3 sene kadar ara veriyor; 1880'de çıkardığı tek sayı dışında. 1881'de tekrar düzenli yayına heves etse de bir sayıdan fazlasına ömrü vefa etmiyor. Dolayısıyla 1200 sayfalık bir külliyat kalmış, bu makalelerden. Bu 1200 sayfa bilmediğimiz Dostoyevski'yi göstermesi açısından ilginç. İki üç öyküye de yer verilen külliyat, çoğunlukla güncel siyasi / toplumsal meseleler üzerine yazılardan oluşmuş : - Tipik üçüncü sayfa haberleri, önemli bir yüzdeyi oluşturuyor. Çocuğu pencereden atan üvey annenin bu işi hamileliği dolayısıyla yaptığından, çocuklarını dövüyor diye mahkemeye verilen anne babalara, intihar eden gençlere kadar mahkemeye aksetmiş bir çok konu ile ilgili uzun uzun yazılar var. - Batıcılık / Slavçı milliyetçilik ekseninde bir çok yazı var. Dostoyevski batıcıların karşısında, Slav davasını savunanların tarafında yer alıyor. Slav davası, bizim Türki cumhuriyetler üzerinden kurulan turancılık ideolojisi gibi, Rusların Ortodoksluk paydasında buluştuğu Slav halkları üzerinden inşa edilen siyaset. Bu minvalde Tolstoy'un Anna Karenina'sındaki Levin karakteriyle uzun uzun cebelleşiyor Dostoyevski Aslında derdi Tolstoy'la tabii. - Türklerle, Türklerin Slav halkları üzerinde uyguladığı vahşetle ilgili bir çok bölüm var. Doğu Sorunu'nu sadece Rusya'nın çözebileceği, "Çargrad" diye andığı İstanbul'un "Hasta Adam"'ın çöküşünden sonra sadece Rusların olması gerektiğine dair uzun uzun yazılar var. - Rus edebiyatı üzerine çok az şey var. Ölümünün ardından Nekrasov'la ilgili bir yazı, yukarıda bahsettiğim Tolstoy'un Anna Karenina'sı üzerine bölümler var. Her ikisine de Dostoyevski övgüler düzmüş. Dostoyevski'nin üç öyküsü de var : "Bobok", "Gülünç adamın düşü", ve "İsa'nın Noel Ağacındaki Çocuk". İlk ikisi İletişim'in bastığı "Öyküler" kitabında da varlar. Sonuncusu ise yok; çok kısa bir Noel öyküsü. Dostoyevski'yi bugün yaşasa sevmeyeceğimizi kanıtlayan bu 1200 sayfalık yazıalrı, ancak benim gibi külliyatı tamamlamadan edemeyen completist'lere öneriyorum. Yoksa bunun yanında Pessoa'nın "Huzursuzluğun Kitabı" bile aksiyon öyküsü gibi kalıyor.

  16. 4 out of 5

    Славея

    Достоевски, пророк на революцията и човек надникнал в 21 век.. "Според моето най - дълбоко и пълно вътрешно убеждение Русия няма да има и никога не е имала такива ненавистници, завистници, клеветници и дори явни врагове, каквито ще бъдат всички тия славянски племена веднага щом Русия ги освободи, а Европа се съгласи да ги признае за освободени!.. .. ще изтъкнат като политическа, а по-късно и като научна истина, че ако през тия сто години не би я имало Русия, те отдавна биха се освободили от турц Достоевски, пророк на революцията и човек надникнал в 21 век.. "Според моето най - дълбоко и пълно вътрешно убеждение Русия няма да има и никога не е имала такива ненавистници, завистници, клеветници и дори явни врагове, каквито ще бъдат всички тия славянски племена веднага щом Русия ги освободи, а Европа се съгласи да ги признае за освободени!.. .. ще изтъкнат като политическа, а по-късно и като научна истина, че ако през тия сто години не би я имало Русия, те отдавна биха се освободили от турците било благодарение на собствената си доблест, било с помощта на Европа, която - стига да нямаше Русия - не само не би имала нищо против тяхното освобождение, но и лично би ги освободила. Това хитро учение несъмнено ще прерасне в научна и политическа аксиома. Може би още цяло столетие, ако не и повече, те непрестанно е треперят за своята свобода и ще се страхуват от властолюбието на Русия; ще се умилкват на европейските държави, ще клеветят Русия, ще бълват хули против нея."

  17. 4 out of 5

    Alex

    Ma asteptam sa fie un pic mai personala. Treateaza prea mult cauza Rusiei si a ortodoxismului. N-are nimic in comun cu celelalte opere ale sale, si nici nu mi-am dat seama cum a putut acest om sa scrie niste opere extraordinare, iar in jurnalul sau sa fie interesat de cu totul alte probleme. Totusi, e un capitol interesant (daca mi-l mai amintesc bine), cand pleaca la bai in Germania si este pur si simplu uimit de diferenta dintre functionarul public rus si cel neamt. Cel neamt il trata cu respec Ma asteptam sa fie un pic mai personala. Treateaza prea mult cauza Rusiei si a ortodoxismului. N-are nimic in comun cu celelalte opere ale sale, si nici nu mi-am dat seama cum a putut acest om sa scrie niste opere extraordinare, iar in jurnalul sau sa fie interesat de cu totul alte probleme. Totusi, e un capitol interesant (daca mi-l mai amintesc bine), cand pleaca la bai in Germania si este pur si simplu uimit de diferenta dintre functionarul public rus si cel neamt. Cel neamt il trata cu respect, rabdare, cel rus se ascundea dupa un gemulet mic, ignora faptul ca oamenii stateau la coada. Cu cat te facea pe tine, cel care stateai la coada sa te simti mai mic, el devenea mai important. Interesant e sa compari lucrurile cu Romania, si lucrurile par a nu se fi schimbat de atatea sute de ani. Si pare a fi o problema de cultura. Cu toate acestea, la 13 ani distanta, pot spune ca functionarul public roman s-a schimbat mult. Au mai ramas rusi, dar nu mai sunt atat de multi :).

  18. 5 out of 5

    Abrir un Libro

    Si hay algo que sorprende de este compendio de relatos, artículos, análisis y reflexiones varias que es el Diario de un escritor de Dostoievski, es la capacidad del autor para extraer de cualquier asunto —a priori nimio—, toda una retahíla de observaciones, cavilaciones, especulaciones y desarrollo de tesis diversas que harán las delicias de aquellos lectores que deseen conocer de manera quizás algo más personal a un autor que en su época ya recibió un gran reconocimiento por sus obras. Gran adm Si hay algo que sorprende de este compendio de relatos, artículos, análisis y reflexiones varias que es el Diario de un escritor de Dostoievski, es la capacidad del autor para extraer de cualquier asunto —a priori nimio—, toda una retahíla de observaciones, cavilaciones, especulaciones y desarrollo de tesis diversas que harán las delicias de aquellos lectores que deseen conocer de manera quizás algo más personal a un autor que en su época ya recibió un gran reconocimiento por sus obras. Gran admirador de Nikolái Gogol o de Ivan Turguénev, en esta nueva reedición de Diario de un escritor de Fiódor Dostoievski con Alba Editorial y traducción de Víctor Gallego... http://www.abrirunlibro.com/2016/06/d...

  19. 4 out of 5

    Anton Shanaurin

    Читал эту книгу около полугода, связано это с тем, что язык достаточно труднопроходим и требует определённой концентрации и вдумчивости. Также встречаются очерки, злободневные на момент написания, но малоинтересные мне сейчас, через которые приходилось продираться далеко не с первого подхода. Между тем, встречаются мысли, которые были бы любопытны "широкому кругу читателей" и сейчас. Очень небезынтересная для меня, хоть и нелёгкая книга. В частности, речь о Пушкине, произнесённая в 1880 году и з Читал эту книгу около полугода, связано это с тем, что язык достаточно труднопроходим и требует определённой концентрации и вдумчивости. Также встречаются очерки, злободневные на момент написания, но малоинтересные мне сейчас, через которые приходилось продираться далеко не с первого подхода. Между тем, встречаются мысли, которые были бы любопытны "широкому кругу читателей" и сейчас. Очень небезынтересная для меня, хоть и нелёгкая книга. В частности, речь о Пушкине, произнесённая в 1880 году и заметки на смерть Некрасова. Но не рекомендую, если вы не любитель этого временного периода в целом и Фёдора Михайловича в частности.

  20. 4 out of 5

    Jane Griffiths

    the perfectly respectable academic introduction to this edition, from the 1990s, goes on an on about form. But really, who cares, he was writing a blog, and a splendid one too. Waspish and loving by turns, as old Fyodor was. All my years of Russian literature and I had never read this. Shame on me.

  21. 5 out of 5

    Eva

    Noch vor dem Internet: Dostojewski war der erste Blogger Manch einer mag sich wundern, wie ich bei einem Autor, der von 1821 bis 1881 gelebt hat, zu der scheinbar wahnwitzigen Aussage komme, er sei der erste Blogger gewesen. Doch tatsächlich lässt sich das Unterfangen, was Fjodor Michailowitsch Dostojewski mit „Дневник писателя“, zu deutsch „Tagebuch eines Schriftstellers“ oder auf englisch „A writer’s diary„, unternommen hat, so am besten beschreiben, wie ich finde. Im Folgenden möchte ich erklä Noch vor dem Internet: Dostojewski war der erste Blogger Manch einer mag sich wundern, wie ich bei einem Autor, der von 1821 bis 1881 gelebt hat, zu der scheinbar wahnwitzigen Aussage komme, er sei der erste Blogger gewesen. Doch tatsächlich lässt sich das Unterfangen, was Fjodor Michailowitsch Dostojewski mit „Дневник писателя“, zu deutsch „Tagebuch eines Schriftstellers“ oder auf englisch „A writer’s diary„, unternommen hat, so am besten beschreiben, wie ich finde. Im Folgenden möchte ich erklären, warum und Dir gleichzeitig ein Buch vorstellen, das mich seit Februar in seinen Bann zieht und nun wohl zweifelsohne zu meinen Lieblingsbücher gehört. Kommentar, Chronik, Tagebuch, Kritik, Entwurf – ein Blog? Obwohl ich Russisch in der Schule hatte (sogar bis zum Abitur), stand für mich schon vor dem Buchkauf fest: „Дневник писателя“ werde ich in der Übersetzung lesen. Nur welche Fassung, die deutsche oder die englische? Nach ein wenig Recherche, entschied ich mich für die englische Übersetzung von Kenneth Lantz. Der Grund? Der Herr ist Professor für Russische Literatur an der Universität für Toronto und die zweite Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts ist sein Steckenpferd. Anders als so mancher Verlagsübersetzer, der vieles einfach mal so in seine Muttersprache überträgt, haben wir es hier mit einem tatsächlichen Slawisten zu tun, das war mir wichtig. Obwohl mein Russisch bis heute locker dazu reicht, einen Tee zu bestellen, über das Wetter zu plaudern und sonst wie Smalltalk zu betreiben, traue ich mich an große Werke der Literatur in russischer Originalsprache dann doch nicht heran. Der Wetterbericht und Goethe sind ja auch zwei paar Schuhe, nicht wahr? Eben. Ein anderer Grund: Die Übersetzung von Kenneth Lantz, obwohl sie eine gekürzte Fassung ist, ist mit zahlreichen Anmerkungen und einem gut recherchierten Vorwort versehen. Bei diesem wohl brisantesten Buch von Dostojewski kommt man nicht umher, dem Leser im Vorhinein ein paar Hinweise und Denkanstöße mit auf den Weg zu geben. Da geht es um historische Kontexte und natürlich um die bekannte, leidige Kontroverse: War Dostojewski Antisemit? Tatsächlich werden im Buch zahlreiche Themen behandelt. Zeitgeschehen, von Kriminalfällen, die den Autor beschäftigt haben über kriegerische Auseinandersetzungen bis hin zu pamphletartigen Politbekenntnissen und nachdenklichen, theoretischen Überlegungen, wird fein säuberlich seziert. Ähnlich wenig zimperlich verfährt Dostojewski mit Schriftstellerkollegen und bespricht zum Beispiel „Anna Karenina“ von Leo Tolstoi. Dabei erstreckt sich das Buch über einen zeitlichen Rahmen von 1873 bis 1881 und befindet sich damit am Ende von Dostojewskis Schaffen. Es endet auch irgendwie abrupt und lässt die Frage offen, ob es, wäre Dostojewski nicht am 9. Februar 1881 gestorben, fortgesetzt worden wäre. Womöglich. Daneben finden wir im Buch zahlreiche Geschichtenskizzen und Figurüberlegungen, die wohl Einfluss auf sein späteres Werk „Die Brüder Karamasow“ gehabt haben dürften. Interessant ist außerdem, dass Dostojewski sich hin und wieder die Zeit nimmt, auf Leserbriefe und Zeitungskritiken zu antworten. Auch das finden wir in „A writer’s diary“, das weit mehr als nur ein Tagebuch ist, wie man bereits erahnen kann. Das Werk wurde monatsweise in mehr oder minder regelmäßigen Abständen (mit Unterbrechungen) in Zeitschriftenform veröffentlicht. Denn WordPress, Blogger & Co gab es damals ja noch nicht. Ansonsten wären diese Formate ideal für das chronologisch fortlaufende Werk gewesen, wie ich meine. Man muss sich jedoch einmal vor Augen führen, wie ausgefallen dieses literarische Konzept zur damaligen Zeit gewesen sein muss, so ganz ohne roten Faden, außer dass eben der Autor derselbe bleibt! Zu dem zunächst seltsam anmutenden Blog-Vergleich bin ich gekommen, als ich überlegte, wo eigentlich dieser Blog hier einzuordnen ist. Anders als mein Projekt Histamin-Pir.at gibt es auch hier, wie bei Dostojewskis Tagebuchprojekt, keinen offensichtlichen Zusammenhang zwischen den einzelnen Artikeln, oder doch? Eine Texter-Kollegin, die ich sehr schätze – Lilli Koisser – erklärt auf ihrem Blog für Texter sehr anschaulich und mit aller Deutlichkeit, was einen Texter-Blog ausmachen sollte. Er muss vor allem eins haben: Eine Nische. Und obwohl ich diese Seite hier auch zur Kunden-Akquise nutze bzw. um mich als Texter im Netz zu präsentieren, befolge ich diesen Rat ganz und gar nicht 🙂 Hier auf dem Blog geht’s tatsächlich um mich als Schreiberling (schweres Don’t!). Was beschäftigt mich? Was hilft mir im Berufsalltag? Was lese ich gerade? Irgendwie geht’s um Gott und die Welt. Schreiben als Tätigkeit und die Gedanken, die dem vorausgehen, spinnen den roten Faden der Website. Denn so sieht mein Berufsalltag aus: Er ist sehr vielseitig. Ich schreibe für Agenturen, für andere Blogs, für Ratgeberseiten und beginne dann auch noch eigene Projekte, nur für mich. Der lose Zusammenhang zeigt sich als Buchstabensalat. Und, war Dostojewski da so anders (nicht, dass ich behaupte, mit dem gleichen Talent gesegnet zu sein!)? Hat der sich seinen Kopf darüber zerbrochen, wie er sich marketingtechnisch, SEO-optimiert positionieren würde oder hat er einfach nur die ursprünglichste Form eines Blogs in der Auseinandersetzung mit seinem Umfeld geführt? Ging es ihm nicht einfach auch um Austausch? Schließlich war auch er nicht nur Autor, sondern auch Journalist. Allzu viele Blogs haben heute mit dem, wie Bloggen einst begonnen hat, nichts mehr zu tun. Sie schreiben den Leser nicht mehr an, sondern schreiben ihm etwas vor oder halten ihm Produkte unter die Nase, mit dem unmissverständlichen Tenor: Du brauchst das! Kauf es! Und ich nutze sie auch – Affiliate-Links. Aber was immer da verlinkt ist, brauchst Du nicht. Das rede ich Dir auch nicht ein. Du wirst ohne nicht umkommen und mit nicht zum perfekten Menschen. Aber es gefällt mir und vielleicht auch Dir, so wie zum Beispiel das angesprochene Buch von Dostojewski. Es hat mir etwas gegeben und vielleicht auch Dir. Lass es mich wissen! Darum geht’s. Und es sind diese zwei Motive: Selbstreflexion und der Austausch mit der Leserschaft, die einen Blog und auch „A writer’s diary“, meiner Meinung nach, ausmachen. Also schauen wir mal rein. Food for thought: Zitate aus „A writer’s diary“ Während ich das letzte halbe Jahr in „A writer’s diary“ bis Seite 533 gelesen habe, hat mich mein eigenes Notiz- und irgendwie auch Tagebuch stets begleitet. Einige Passagen habe ich mir direkt rausgeschrieben, andere lediglich mit bunten Klebezettelchen im Buch selbst markiert. Die Passagen, die mich besonders bewegt haben, gibt es im Folgenden als kleine Zitatesammlung: "We all know that entire trains of thought can sometimes pass through our heads in an instant, like sensations of some sort, without being translated into human language, never mind literary language." Das obige Zitat fand ich besonders interessant (der erste Eintrag in meinem Notizbuch). Das aus dem Munde des Mannes, der Meister des Kettensatzes ist, der manchmal keinen Punkt zu kennen scheint und überhaupt als Genie des Bewusstseinsstroms gilt! Da wird einem vieles klar oder nicht? "Reality is transfigured passing through art." Die Umgestaltung der Wirklichkeit durch Kunst ist die Aufgabe eines jeden Kreativen. Den Satz mal sacken lassen oder auf einem Streifen ins Federmäppchen legen! Vergiss es nie. An anderer Stelle plädiert Dostojewski dafür, aus dem gleichen Material mehr als nur ein Werk zu machen. Ich habe es bereits hier erwähnt: Es gibt Themen, die sich durch unser Schaffen ziehen und meist schöpfen wir immer wieder aus der gleichen Quelle für immer neue Ergebnisse. Ist so. Bei mir ist das u. a. Sterben, bei Dostojewski ist das u. a. Suizid, aber sicherlich aus völlig unterschiedlichen Gründen. Während Dostojewski durch das Studium der menschlichen Seele und von Zeitungsartikeln als schwer religiöser Mensch zu ergründen versucht, warum jemand den Wunsch verspüren könnte, sich umzubringen, geht es bei mir oft um das Prozessuale des Sterbens, um das Vergängliche im Leben – um die Frage, was bleibt und wo gehen wir hin? So ist Dostojewski beispielsweise der Meinung, der Teufel sei ein Agnostiker. Und scheint auf „mein Thema“ so zu antworten: "I am a happy man who isn’t satisfied with everything." Seine Charakterstudie eines Selbstmörders hält fest, dass diese Menschen meist von ungeduldiger Erschöpfung (impatient fatigue) geplagt werden und sich durch ein furchtbares, quälendes Ausmaß von angeekeltem und zynischem Unglauben (terrible, agonizing amount of disgusted and cynical unbelief) (in andere Menschen) auszeichnen. Somit haben sie offensichtlich jedes Vertrauen in Wahrheit und allen Glauben an Pflicht verloren und der Überdruss von Leben ermüdet sie. Das scheint vor allem auf wohlwollende, freundliche und ehrliche Menschen zuzutreffen. Doch Selbstmordgedanken machen noch keinen Suizid. So schreibt Dostojewski: "I think that many suicides and murders have been committed simply because the person had already taken the pistol into his hand." Wie sonst können die gleichen Umstände und Voraussetzungen zu unterschiedlichen Ergebnissen führen? Das wird zum Beispiel in „Crime and Punishment“ oder „Verbrechen und Strafe“ deutlich, als Raskolnikow nicht nur eine geizige Pfandleiherin umbringt, um der Frage nach einem „gerechtfertigten/erlaubten Verbrechen“ nachzugehen, sondern auch ihre zufällig erscheinende Halbschwester tötet, was weder geplant noch gewollt war, aber er hatte die Axt nun mal schon in der Hand und er hatte bereits getötet. Außerdem: Sie wäre eine Zeugin gewesen. Um den Roman „Verbrechen und Strafe“ zu verstehen, muss man übrigens unbedingt (!!!) den Epilog lesen. Sonst wird die Intention des Autors nicht klar. Noch eins zum Thema Selbstmord und dann werden wir politisch. "Only with faith in the immortality of the soul you can understand the sense of earthly being. Without that suicide becomes a necessity for any intellectual being." Einer der wichtigsten Sätze – insbesondere vor dem Hintergrund aktueller Geschehnisse in der Welt – ist der folgende, der offenbar auf das Phänomen „Ah, das ist weit weg …“ anspielt: "At what distance does love for humanity end?" Das Wort Kasino-Kapitalismus finden wir unweigerlich beim Autor von „Der Spieler“ in leichter Abwandlung wieder – „stock-exchange gambling“ – im 19. Jahrhundert. Ich werde nicht müde, darauf hinzuweisen, dass Dostojewski diesen Roman nicht (nur) aufgrund von etwaiger Spielsucht, sondern tatsächlich als Kritik am Finanzsystem geschrieben hat. Oh, und er hatte eine ausgesprochene Abneigung gegen Finanzen! Er war übrigens auch nur so hochverschuldet bzw. willig am Roulettetisch sein Glück zu versuchen, weil er einen riesigen Schuldenberg von seinem älteren Bruder vererbt bekommen hatte, der nun abbezahlt werden musste, ein Fakt, der nur allzu gern unterschlagen wird. Eine wunderbare Definition von „Kultur“ (lat. colere = pflegen, bebauen, cultura = Ackerbau, Pflege) liefert Dostojewski im Folgenden, auch wenn es nicht als Begrifferklärung hierfür explizit gemacht wird: "When a nation loses the urge for general individual self-betterment in that spirit in which it originated, then all „social institutions“ begin to die out, for there is nothing more to preserve." Generell haben viele Passagen an Aktualität nicht verloren, sondern nur gewonnen. Manche Textstellen lesen sich erstaunlicherweise so als wären sie gestern geschrieben worden. Diese hier in ihrer Vollständigkeit wiederzugeben, würde jedoch den Rahmen sprengen. Wer diesen überraschenden und schockierenden Aha-Effekt erleben möchte (Was, das hat der Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts schon gesagt?!), liest am besten selbst mal rein. Bevor ich diesen Beitrag beende, gibt es jedoch noch eine Frage zu beantworten, die ich eingangs aufgeworfen habe. Was ist dran: Dostojewski und der Judenhass? Denn das ist ja, was heute gemeinhin mit Antisemitismus gemeint wird. Dostojewski und Antisemitismus Bereits in der Einleitung nimmt sich Kenneth Lantz dem Thema selbst an und weist auf ein paar, zugegebenermaßen sehr harsch formulierte Passagen im Buch hin. So würden die Juden, würden sie je über Russland herrschen, die Russen versklaven, massakrieren und komplett ausrotten, „as they did more than once with alien peoples in times of old in their ancient history“. Juden, Jiddisch, Israeliten – all diese Terme werden synonym durcheinandergeworfen und teils mit drastischen Zuschreibungen versehen. Dabei ist die Rede von einem abstrakten „Yiddism“, von einem gewissen Geist – selten von konkreten Menschen. Die auch heute noch allzu häufige Verknüpfung von Finanzwesen, Kapitalismus, Ausbeutung und Internationalisten mit Juden findet sich ebenso bereits bei Dostojewski. So streitbar das klingen mag, wäre es dennoch falsch, den Autor als Judenhasser per se abzustempeln. Warum? Wie bereits Lantz in der Einleitung anmerkt, ist Folgendes im Falle von Dostojewski hervorzuheben: "Dostoevsky does not draw the conclusion that those whom the Jews would enslave or exterminate would be justified in expelling or exterminating the Jews first." Er ruft also zu keinem Zeitpunkt zu Beschimpfungen, Gewalttaten oder sonstigem gegen Juden auf. Ein Kapitel im Speziellen beweist sogar so ziemlich das Gegenteil. Ich meine das Kapitel „The Funeral of ‚The Universal Man'“. Hier wird die Beerdigung eines deutschen Arztes beschrieben, der in M. praktizierte und Protestant war. Nun, warum erzähle ich das und was hat das mit der aufgeworfenen Frage zu tun? Dostojewski selbst erzählt von dieser Beerdigung auch nur, weil er einen Leserbrief erhalten hat, in welchem selbige beschrieben wird und zwar von einer Jüdin. Daran ist ja immer noch nichts Besonderes. Und doch soll diese Episode nicht unerwähnt bleiben. Denn was Dostojewski an diesem sehr gutherzigen Arzt so herausragend fand, war der Respekt, der ihm auf seinem letzten Weg entgegengebracht wurde. Die Leserin schreibt in ihrem Brief: "A pastor and a Jewish rabbi spoke at his [the doctor’s] graveside, and both wept; but he just lay there in his old, worn uniform coat with an old handkerchief tied around his head – that dear head; and it seemed that he was sleeping, so fresh was the color of his face …" Dostojewski selbst eilt Kritikern voraus und stellt selbst fest, es handle sich um einen „isolated case“. Am Ende nimmt er denselben isolierten Fall jedoch als Musterbeispiel dafür, wie unterschiedliche Religionsgruppen und Ethnien friedlich und glücklich miteinander leben könnten und schreibt: "All this is very simple; only one thing seems complicated: just to become convinced that without these same isolated instances you will never arrive at a total; everything may be about to fall apart, but it is these people who can bring it together. They are the ones who inspire ideas; they are the ones who give us faith; they provide a living example, and so a proof as well. And there’s certainly no need to wait until everyone, or at least very many people, are as good as they are: we need very few such people in order to save the world, so powerful are they. And if such is the case, then how can we not hope?" Jemand, der sich derart über das Zusammentreffen von Pfarrer, Rabbi und allen anderen Bewohnern eines ganzen Ortes bei der Beerdigung eines wohltätigen Menschen freut, der diese Verständigung als beispielhaft für Nächstenliebe, und mehr noch, als zukunftsweisend, beschreibt, der wirkt auf mich nicht wie ein Antisemit. Trotzdem sind auch die anderen angesprochenen Textstellen im Buch vorhanden.

  22. 4 out of 5

    Sinan Öner

    Rus Yazar Dostoyevsky'nin "Bir Yazarın Günlüğü" kitabı çok değerli bir yayın! Yapı Kredi Yayınları, Değerli Çevirmen Kayhan Yükseler'in çevirisi ile yayınlıyor Dostoyevsky'nin "Bir Yazarın Günlüğü" kitabını ki, bin sayfayı aşan bir kaynak yapıt, 19. Yüzyıl dünyasını, 19. Yüzyıl yazınını anlamak isteyen okurlar için vazgeçilmez bir kitap "Bir Yazarın Günlüğü". Dostoyevsky, Türkçe'de Cumhuriyet kurulduktan kısa bir süre sonra kitapları çevrilen bir yazar, daha sonra da kitaplarının çoğu Rusça'dan Rus Yazar Dostoyevsky'nin "Bir Yazarın Günlüğü" kitabı çok değerli bir yayın! Yapı Kredi Yayınları, Değerli Çevirmen Kayhan Yükseler'in çevirisi ile yayınlıyor Dostoyevsky'nin "Bir Yazarın Günlüğü" kitabını ki, bin sayfayı aşan bir kaynak yapıt, 19. Yüzyıl dünyasını, 19. Yüzyıl yazınını anlamak isteyen okurlar için vazgeçilmez bir kitap "Bir Yazarın Günlüğü". Dostoyevsky, Türkçe'de Cumhuriyet kurulduktan kısa bir süre sonra kitapları çevrilen bir yazar, daha sonra da kitaplarının çoğu Rusça'dan çevrildi, farklı yayınevleri tarafından farklı yıllarda yayınlandı. Türkçe'de, "Karamazof Kardeşler", "Suç ve Ceza", "Budala", "Beyaz Geceler", "Delikanlı" gibi romanları ile sayısız okurlar kazanan Dostoyevsky'nin öykü kitapları, deneme kitapları, konuşmaları da yayınlandı. Dostoyevsky, Rus felsefesinin gelişmesinde liderlik yapmış bir yazardır, Nekrasov, Çernişevsky, Tolstoy, Gorki, Şolohov gibi Rus yazarları etkileyen Dostoyevsky, daha sonra da tüm dünyada okunan bir yazar oldu, dünya yazınını 20. Yüzyıl süresince etkiledi, esinledi, Dostoyevsky ile ilgili bir çok biyografiler yayınlandı farklı ülkelerde, yazın eğitimi açısından da Dostoyevsky başlıca modern kaynaklardan biridir.

  23. 4 out of 5

    Sinan Öner

    Russian Novelist Fyodor Dostoyevsky's "A Writer's Diary" is the one of best sources for understanding Russian literature in the 19. Century. Dostoyevsky writes his observations, impressions, opinions, thoughts and methodological approachs for literature, for his life, for Russian life! Dostoyevsky's novel writing brought a lot of different subjects for modern writing, in Dostoyevsky's "A Writer's Diary" we see Dostoyevsky's notes for his novel writing. Dostoyevsky discusses his "novel characters Russian Novelist Fyodor Dostoyevsky's "A Writer's Diary" is the one of best sources for understanding Russian literature in the 19. Century. Dostoyevsky writes his observations, impressions, opinions, thoughts and methodological approachs for literature, for his life, for Russian life! Dostoyevsky's novel writing brought a lot of different subjects for modern writing, in Dostoyevsky's "A Writer's Diary" we see Dostoyevsky's notes for his novel writing. Dostoyevsky discusses his "novel characters" to describe their formation in his creative work during his writing. "A Writer's Diary" is very useful book for understanding the novel writing of one of the Great Novelists of Russia in 19. Century.

  24. 4 out of 5

    Hisham Ahmed

    قريت ١١٠ صفحه فقط

  25. 5 out of 5

    Derek Shouba

    Lots of great stuff in these diaries but we all may be better off NOT knowing about his right wing and often anti Semitic politics.

  26. 4 out of 5

    Diana

    (...) La muerte de Nekrásov es otro tema que el autor trató en su diario, pues sentía una gran admiración por ese poeta ruso. Fue él quién leyó su primer relato,  Pobre gente  —uno de mis relatos favoritos—, y lo envió a una editorial. Nekrásov tuvo la firme idea de que había encontrado al siguiente Gógol. Esas páginas fueron de las pocas que hicieron hablar a Dostoyevski sobre lo que sentía sobre una de sus obras. Y, sin duda, se trató de la parte que más amé ya que descubrí los senti (...) La muerte de Nekrásov es otro tema que el autor trató en su diario, pues sentía una gran admiración por ese poeta ruso. Fue él quién leyó su primer relato,  Pobre gente  —uno de mis relatos favoritos—, y lo envió a una editorial. Nekrásov tuvo la firme idea de que había encontrado al siguiente Gógol. Esas páginas fueron de las pocas que hicieron hablar a Dostoyevski sobre lo que sentía sobre una de sus obras. Y, sin duda, se trató de la parte que más amé ya que descubrí los sentimientos del escritor y recordé los míos propios, aquello que sentí mientras leí Pobre gente. Rememorando, me encontraba en una cafetería que hasta entonces no había visto y permanecí dentro hasta que acabé ese relato. Sólo había una persona en una de las esquinas y no me sentía muy avergonzada, así que me dejé llevar y devoré las últimas páginas con lágrimas que se me hundían en la piel (no se deslizaban, ¡me atravesaban!). Cabe decir que la música que se escuchaba dentro de esa cafetería no ayudaba ya que era una melodía muy triste, sumamente triste. Ese fue nuestro primer encuentro, ahí conocí a Dostoyevski y ahí le hice las primeras preguntas. Quién diría que después de unos años, volvería a recordarlo con tanto amor... No imaginaba que ese momento iba a apoderarse de mi corazón e iba a hacerme tan feliz.  Reseña completa: https://todo-mi-ser.blogspot.com.es/2...

  27. 4 out of 5

    Ilya Ivanov

    Про Достоевского обычно пишут в контексте порока, страдания, и глубокой психологии порока и страдания. А тут он с очень человечной стороны открылся, особенно меня тронули два момента: когда Достоевский пошёл в библиотеку подсмотреть что-то у Теккерея, а библиотекарша его осадила в духе "и не стыдно вам ерунду такую читать, когда у нас тут рационализм уже между прочим" и про крах чахлого революционного кружка. Про кружок в газете кто-то не Достоевский написал, что мельчают все эти революционеры, Про Достоевского обычно пишут в контексте порока, страдания, и глубокой психологии порока и страдания. А тут он с очень человечной стороны открылся, особенно меня тронули два момента: когда Достоевский пошёл в библиотеку подсмотреть что-то у Теккерея, а библиотекарша его осадила в духе "и не стыдно вам ерунду такую читать, когда у нас тут рационализм уже между прочим" и про крах чахлого революционного кружка. Про кружок в газете кто-то не Достоевский написал, что мельчают все эти революционеры, от декабристов к петрашевцам явный спад, и дальше там ещё несколько звеньев всё хуже и хуже, вплоть до того кружка о котором речь. И Достоевский как монархист в принципе с посылом согласен, но прибавляет что ПО ПОВОДУ ПЕТРАШЕВЦЕВ КОЕ-КОМУ НЕ МЕШАЛО БЫ И ВАРЕЖКУ-ТО ПОДПРИВАЛИТЬ и дальше подробно объясняет, почему декабристам они вовсе не уступали. Про сербско-турецкую войну, правда, аж до некомфортности актуально у него, когда он радуется толпам добровольцев, и как вся страна в едином порыве собирается защищать братушек-славянушек. Особенно, когда он заочно полемизирует с Толстым и конкретно с "Анной Карениной", где "насколько я его понял ... во-1-х, все это так называемое национальное движение нашим народом отнюдь не разделяется, и народ вовсе даже не понимает его, во-2-х, что все это нарочно подделано, сперва известными лицами, а потом поддержано журналистами из выгод, чтоб заставить более читать их издания, в-3-х, что все добровольцы были или потерянные и пьяные люди или просто глупцы, в-4-х, что весь этот так называемый подъем русского национального духа за славян был не только подделан известными лицами и поддержан продажными журналистами, но и подделан вопреки, так сказать, самых основ… И наконец, в-5-х, что все варварства и неслыханные истязания, совершенные над славянами, не могут возбуждать в нас, русских, непосредственного чувства жалости и что «такого непосредственного чувства к угнетению славян нет и не может быть»."

  28. 5 out of 5

    John

    En samling med noveller och artiklar som Dostojevskij skrev åren innan Bröderna Karamazov publicerades. Om man känner till Dostojevskij är det ingen överraskning att de politiska åsikterna är ganska vrickade. Ett egensinnigt hopkok av rysk nationalism, kristendom och vissa progressiva idéer. Han argumenterar bl a passionerat för att Ryssland ska erövra Istanbul och återinföra det Bysantiska riket. Det har talats en del om hans antisemitism. Det man kan läsa här är väl inte så mycket värre än vad En samling med noveller och artiklar som Dostojevskij skrev åren innan Bröderna Karamazov publicerades. Om man känner till Dostojevskij är det ingen överraskning att de politiska åsikterna är ganska vrickade. Ett egensinnigt hopkok av rysk nationalism, kristendom och vissa progressiva idéer. Han argumenterar bl a passionerat för att Ryssland ska erövra Istanbul och återinföra det Bysantiska riket. Det har talats en del om hans antisemitism. Det man kan läsa här är väl inte så mycket värre än vad som trycktes i dagstidningarna på den här tiden, men ändå en tråkig fläck på hans karaktär. Novellerna är bra som vanligt, men på det hela taget är boken mest intressant som en blick in i författarens märkliga världsbild.

  29. 5 out of 5

    Autumn

    there's some russian political stuff in here that i wasn't really up on, so those parts were a bit dry for me, and then the anti-semitic rants were not great. but overall it's another perspective into d.'s writing, his (conservative) political and religious leanings that inform his fiction, and there are some little mini-stories sprinkled in as well. i'd describe it as an abridged, grumpy russian mcsweeney's written by one brilliant but probably difficult person. there's some russian political stuff in here that i wasn't really up on, so those parts were a bit dry for me, and then the anti-semitic rants were not great. but overall it's another perspective into d.'s writing, his (conservative) political and religious leanings that inform his fiction, and there are some little mini-stories sprinkled in as well. i'd describe it as an abridged, grumpy russian mcsweeney's written by one brilliant but probably difficult person.

  30. 5 out of 5

    Kathy

    Not really a diary, per se, but a collection of published articles written in the 1870s by Dostoevsky expressing his opinion on various topics. I thought it was invaluable in understanding such terms as Pan-Slavism, Slavophiles and Westerners, Moscow the third Rome and the divine mission of Russia as viewed by the intelligentsia of the day. Very long.

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.