Two fictional journeys in the life of Dostoevsky: Typskin’s Summer in Baden–Baden and Coetzee’s The Master of Petersburg

Antonio Martínez Illán

doi:10.1080/23753234.2017.1388146

Abstract

This article explores two literary works based on the life of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky between the years 1867 and 1869: Лето в Бадене (Summer in Baden-Baden, 1982) by Leonid Tsypkin and The Master of Petersburg (1994) by J. M. Coetzee. Both novels endeavor to understand Dostoevsky. Their approaches are characteristic of late twentieth-century writing: the novelized life and travelogue, in which reality and fiction are interwoven. Both books recreate the life of Dostoevsky and the process by which he wrote The Gambler, The Possessed and The Idiot, based on Dostoevsky’s works and biographical sources. Each novel is framed by a question: Where does Dostoevsky’s writing come from? (Coetzee) and, What can account for this fascination with Dostoevsky? (Tsypkin). The comparative analysis offered here addresses the ways in which such fascination with the life and literary work of Dostoevsky is shaped, and examines the issue of Dostoevsky’s influence on these writers in line with Harold Bloom’s theory in The Anxiety of Influence.

Highlights

This article explores two literary works based on the life of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky between the years 1867 and 1869: Лeто в Бaдeнe (Summer in Baden-Baden, 1982) by Leonid Tsypkin and The Master of Petersburg (1994) by J
This article explores two works of fiction based on the life of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky between 1867 and 1869: Leonid Tsypkin’s Лeто в Бaдeнe (Summer in Baden–Baden, 1982) and J
Bloom draws a distinction between writers who invent their precursors, such as Borges with Kafka and Browning, and those he refers to as positive apophrades, where influences goes beyond imitation; it is so strong that the dead return and speak through the living: ‘the mighty dead return, but they return in our colors, and speaking our voices, at least in part, at least in moments, moments that testify to our persistence, and not to their own’ (1997, 14)

Summary

Introduction

The purpose of Frank and other biographers is to paint a clearer picture of Dostoevsky by returning to the sources, to offer an exhaustive account of who he was by reading his letters, etc.; and the fictions of Tsypkin and Coetzee share a similar aim: to give readers an insight into the enigmas encompassed by Dostoevsky’s work. Tsypkin’s book presents images of Dostoevsky as he foreshadows some of the characters and scenes that were to feature in his novels; but such links are very difficult to trace, and Tsypkin uses crystallization, a form of literary transfiguration, to represent this purpose. The Master of Petersburg presents the man as a writer, the character does not write anything until the last chapter of the novel, ‘Stavrogin’, which contains a section that Dostoevsky later had to omit from The Possessed: It takes him no more than ten minutes to write the scene, with not a world blotted.

Conclusion

Notes on contributor