Study Of Dostoevsky Research Articles

«Об одном символе»: истоки и параллели. Статья вторая: Достоевский как символист

The article is devoted to the literary and philosophical origins of Sergei Durylin’s report “On a Symbol in Dostoevsky” (the report was read in 1926 at a meeting of the Commission for the Study of Dostoevsky at the Literary Section of GAKhN). The history of the report in the context of the Literary Section is considered. Аbstracts and debates on the report are published for the first time. The relationship of Durylin’s ideas with the complex of Dostoevsky’s interpretations, developed by both the Symbolists (G.I. Chulkov) and Russian religious philosophers (P.A. Florensky, A.F. Losev) is shown. Both the report “On a Symbol in Dostoevsky’s” and the subsequent report “Landscape in Dostoevsky’s” are devoted to an anthropological and Christological story, connected with the symbolism of the setting sun, the symbolism of “oblique rays”, and its embodiment in Dostoevsky’s novels. Both texts are a continuation and a development of the same theme. A landscape is an artist’s mapping of nature, the created world; interiors are the artist’s image of the anthropomorphic world, the human space. The ontological symbol receives its sociocultural projection: a landscape or an interior. The problem of the relationship between the mapping/image and the object of the image, the problem of the ontological status of reality and its embodiment in the artistic/mythopoetic language, reflected in the report, corresponded to the focus of GAKhN on the development of a new “language of things” and a new concept of the humanitarian knowledge. The article is timed to coincide with the 200th anniversary of F.M. Dostoevsky, the 135th anniversary of S.N. Durylin, and the 100th anniversary of GAKhN.

ПОЛИЛИНГВИЗМ ХУДОЖЕСТВЕННОГО МИРА Ф.М. ДОСТОЕВСКОГО

The article attempts to lay a foundation for highlighting the problem of artistically determined functioning of foreignlanguage elements in the narrative-text space of Dostoevsky's works as a special aspect of studying the writer's literary system. The processes of integration and interaction of languages and literary-artistic discourses are highly conditioned by the spatial-cultural interplay of countries and the dominant vector of their development, so the presence of a significant amount of material borrowed from French and German languages in the texts of Dostoevsky is quite expected to correlate with the idea of national-ideological and cultural priorities of Russian society of that time. The intensity of the creative reception of the material of other languages as one of the moments determining the individual originality of the artistic-speech semiosis, is also explained by the autobiographical factor – long stay of the writer in a foreignspeaking cultural environment and saturation of emotional-intellectual experience in the process of intercultural communication. On the basis of the study of Dostoevsky's creative heritage from this angle, it is possible to draw a conclusion about the diverse range of his use of foreign-language elements in his texts to solve artistic and narrative problems. The article analyzes the most relevant aspects of the writer's artistic and linguistic element in the application of foreign-language inserts in interaction with the material and the traditional system of expressive means of native language: the role in the construction of narrative discourse, intertextuality, reverse interference, occasional word formation, font transposition iconism. In view of the scientific and empirical significance of the problem, it seems necessary to continue its research on a broader theoretical and methodological basis, in particular – through interdisciplinary integration of the potential of linguistics and poetics.

«Об одном символе»: истоки и параллели. Статья вторая: Достоевский как символист

The article is devoted to the literary and philosophical origins of Sergei Durylin’s report “On a Symbol in Dostoevsky” (the report was read in 1926 at a meeting of the Commission for the Study of Dostoevsky at the Literary Section of GAKhN). The history of the report in the context of the Literary Section is considered. Аbstracts and debates on the report are published for the first time. The relationship of Durylin’s ideas with the complex of Dostoevsky’s interpretations, developed by both the Symbolists (G.I. Chulkov) and Russian religious philosophers (P.A. Florensky, A.F. Losev) is shown. Both the report “On a Symbol in Dostoevsky’s” and the subsequent report “Landscape in Dostoevsky’s” are devoted to an anthropological and Christological story, connected with the symbolism of the setting sun, the symbolism of “oblique rays”, and its embodiment in Dostoevsky’s novels. Both texts are a continuation and a development of the same theme. A landscape is an artist’s mapping of nature, the created world; interiors are the artist’s image of the anthropomorphic world, the human space. The ontological symbol receives its sociocultural projection: a landscape or an interior. The problem of the relationship between the mapping/image and the object of the image, the problem of the ontological status of reality and its embodiment in the artistic/mythopoetic language, reflected in the report, corresponded to the focus of GAKhN on the development of a new “language of things” and a new concept of the humanitarian knowledge. The article is timed to coincide with the 200th anniversary of F.M. Dostoevsky, the 135th anniversary of S.N. Durylin, and the 100th anniversary of GAKhN.

ПОЛИТИЧЕСКАЯ ПРОБЛЕМАТИКА НАСЛЕДИЯ Ф.М. ДОСТОЕВСКОГО: АМЕРИКАНСКАЯ РЕЦЕПЦИЯ

The article explores the American reception of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s political ideology. The relevance of the study is due to the interdisciplinary character of modern literary criticism and perception of Dostoevsky not only as a talented writer, but also as an original philosopher and political thinker. It is for the first time when the reception of Dostoevsky’s political ideology is revealed on the basis of works by American philologists and political analysts; namely, the study unveils the image of Dostoevsky as a political thinker formed within American scientific discourse. In addition, the analysis of the reception of Dostoevsky’s writings in a foreign scientific culture contributes to a deeper understanding of the mechanisms of cultural interaction. The analysis of literary works on the basis of comparative-historical and comparative-cultural approaches, as well as modern semiotic concepts, reveals the basic periods and trends in the reception of Dostoevsky’s writings on political issues in the USA in the 20th and the 21st centuries. The evolution of scholars’ views on the writer’s political ideology is disclosed. In the 1950s–1960s, Dostoevsky’s political philosophy is primarily analyzed in terms of its fictional representation. In the context of cultural interaction, this period can be termed as a preliminary one followed by the period of active transmission of the texts that explore the essence of Dostoevsky’s political ideology. Indeed, an intensive study of political views of the writer started in the 1970s–1980s. At this time, scholars addressed Dostoevsky’s opinion journalism, incorporating the writer’s political ideology into his social and religious views. A new period started in the 2000s. It is characterized by the synthesis of the most characteristic features of Dostoevsky’s artistic method, his philosophical and political ideas. Thus, the image of Dostoevsky as a political thinker in American literary studies is characterized by analyzing the writer’s political philosophy within his religious and social thoughts and considering Russian literature closely connected with the state policy. The most negative evaluation of Dostoevsky’s political ideology, accusatory statements on writer’s nationalism, imperialism, and chauvinism are found in the works whose authors investigate Dostoevsky’s political ideology beyond his religious views. The interest of American scholars in Dostoevsky’s political ideology is registered at all stages of Dostoevsky studies development. The changes in diplomatic relations between Russia and the Western world stimulate American scholars to address political issues in Dostoevsky’s writings. However, besides pure political circumstances, the alteration of periods in addressing political issues in Dostoevsky’s writings is due to the mechanisms of cultural interaction when the period of passive saturation with new semiotic material is followed by the period of active transmission of new texts.

Бэнэдэк М. Двойник господина Голядкина

It is here presented the Russian translation of the introduction Dostoevsky’s short story The Double, firstly published in the fourth volume of the Hungarian translation of Dostoevsky’s Collected Works (1922) that was part of a large educational project by the publishing house Révai. The author of this short article about The Double, Marcell Benedek (1885–1969), writer, translator, and literary scholar, was an eminent representative of the Hungarian culture of the early and mid-20th Century. His works and media appearances were intended to familiarize readers with the works of Hungarian and European literature, to teach them to understand the language of fiction and the mechanisms of the aesthetic interpretation of reality. Benedek wrote one of the first articles about Dostoevsky’s early work in the European history of Dostoevsky studies and is at the origins of a tradition of deep reflection on the nature of the writer’s aesthetic principles.

Dostoevsky at the Turn of the 21st Century: Antinomies of Interpretation

The aim of the proposed article is to identify the key trends and contradictions in the study and interpretation of Dostoevsky’s work at the turn of the 21st century. Dostoevsky studies are one of the most advanced and active branches of Russian literary studies, which is confirmed by a large number of regular scientific conferences, as well as by a significant number of fundamental monographs. The search for a new interpretive basis in the Christian tradition, which has revealed a number of axiological and methodological contradictions, including the inevitable choice between literary and philosophical/theological discourses, is seen as the main methodological breakthrough in contemporary Russian literary studies (and simultaneously a challenge). Three aspects of the question of the Christian basis of Dostoevsky’s work are examined: along with “dogmatic ranting” (as defined by I. A. Esaulov), reading the writer’s works in the context of the legacy of religious philosophy of the Silver Age remains relevant. We recognize the analysis and interpretation of Dostoevsky’s texts in the spirit of historical poetics as the most productive, provided that the postulate about the Christian nature of the Russian classical tradition is accepted. The methodological search of Dostoevsky’s researchers, typical for the turn of the 21st century, has found its expression in a multitude of “research subjects”: this polemic centers on the definitions of “realism in the highest sense”/“Christian realism” and a dispute around The Idiot and the image of Prince Myshkin, caused by the receptive conflict of interpreters. In addition, the article underscores the problem of the use of Bakhtin’s legacy in Dostoevsky studies: in our opinion, the key notions of his concept in literary studies “function” either in an adjusted form, or as scientific metaphors, or as an “appeal to authority”. Therefore, it seems more productive to include Bakhtin’s heritage in Dostoevsky studies as an essential fact in the history of perception of his work, rather than as a methodological basis for studying the text. It is in this aspect that the success of Russian literature in recent years is most obvious, however, the gap between scientific excellence and mass perception of Dostoevsky is also apparent. The final conclusion states that the contradictions of interpretations generated by transcending the “spectrum of adequacy” when reading a classical text have not been overcome. Dostoevsky’s work still causes controversy and methodological arguments. This means that the history of his perception remains an ongoing, living narrative. Dostoevsky still remains a subject of contemporary culture, rather than its object.

Обращение русской эмиграции в Чехии к творчеству Ф. М. Достоевского: А. Л. Бем и психоаналитический метод интерпретации художественного произведения

The article is devoted to the conversion around works of F. M. Dostoevsky which took place among Czech intellectuals, among whom there were a lot of immigrants from Russia. In this context, the example of Alfred Ludwigovich Bem is indicative. The article reveals main reasons for the interest in Dostoevsky in Czechoslovakia. An important role in the study of Dostoevsky was played by the so-called ‘Russian action of aid’ and ‘Russian trace’ left by the exiles in Prague. In this regard, A. L. Bem is interesting not only as a researcher who devoted many works to Dostoevsky’s work but also as one of the founders of Dostoevsky’s first international society. Bem was also one of the first researchers who applied psychoanalysis to the interpretation of Dostoevsky’s literary works. He was also one of those who also analyzed the specifics of using psychoanalytic methods in literary criticism. The article reveals the methodological basis of Bem’s interpretation: attention is drawn not only to the connection between the theme “Dostoevsky and his Reader” and psychoanalysis (Bem’s ‘method of small observations’), but also to the origins of Bem’s interpretation of psychoanalysis associated with the formal school in literary criticism; the disadvantages of psychoanalysis as a way of interpreting a work of art are emphasized.

Евангельский текст в творчестве Ф. М. Достоевского: проблемы и перспективы изучения

The article reflects on the results and prospects of studying the gospel text in the works of F. M. Dostoevsky at the present stage, identifies the main directions and methodological problems of their analysis and interpretation in the framework of ethnopoetics as a new scientific direction in literary studies of the late 20th — early 21th century. Its principles are rooted in historical poetics, which aimed to define the role and boundaries of the Christian tradition in Russian literature. As a result, the scientific discourse included new poetical categories of conciliarity (“sobornost”) and paschality, and the understanding of Christian realism as an artistic method was established. Its aesthetic principles were mastered by Russian literature in the 19th century. Revealed in the gospel, Christian realism appeared in Dostoevsky’s work as “realism in the highest sense.” The main result of studying Russian literature from the point of view of ethnopoetics is to identify the gospel text itself. It has not yet been singled out in the early 1990s, but today its key outlines are already well-described, above all — in the works of Dostoevsky. The regularities of the development of modern Russian studies of Dostoevsky in this regard can be traced using the example of the terminological thesaurus formed in the process of studying the gospel text in the works of the author of the Great Five Novels. There is a fundamentally significant combination of literary, philosophical, and theological categories. Nevertheless, the problem of distinguishing philological and religious-philosophical discourses in modern literary studies in general and in studies of Dostoevsky in particular remains relevant: on the one hand, a number of works remain inclined towards pure theology; on the other hand, scientists are paying increasingly greater attention to the analysis of the functions and ways of creative transformation of Christian tradition in Russian literature.

Peculiarities of Adaptation of the Novel by F.M. Dostoyevsky “The Idiot” in the Opera by M. Weinberg of the Same Name

The article is devoted to the issues of correlation between the literary source and the musical drama. The opera “The Idiot”, finished by the Russian composer Mieczysław Weinberg in 1986 and performed on the leading Russian stages in the creative season of 2016-2017, has become the object of scientific interest. The libretto written by A.V. Medvedev is based on the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky of the same name. Musical studies of Dostoevsky’s works started emerging during the life of the writer. It was expressed in the use of musical terminology in the criticism and scientific studies concerning literary works by F.M. Dostoevsky. In 1916, S.S. Prokofiev created the opera “The Gambler”, which became the first opera adaptation of the writer’s prose, congenial with the literary source. Since then, the creative heritage of the author of “Demons” has repeatedly attracted composers’ attention. Musical adaptations of Dostoevsky’s literary works today comprise more than seventy compositions in various genres. Operas are of particular interest, since dramatic and musical texts are equally important in conveying the implications of the writer’s novels. The specific features of the interaction of prose and musical drama in this article are revealed using the intertextual analysis methods, which highlight the relevance of the topic addressed. The libretto is studied as an important component of the opera in the light of the trends of the modern science of music. The techniques of the dramatist’s work with the literary source are considered. The libretto texts that are not introduced in the novel and their sources are revealed; the logics of the reference of the “The Idiot” opera creators to Dostoevsky’s meta-text and the legacy of other authors in the context of artistic conception are explained. The article determines the functions of the characters of the first and second action plan, gives their brief description and indicates their role in the dramaturgy of the opera

Альбом из Аргентины: Достоевский в коллекции А. И. Калугина

The reserves of the Alexander Solzhenitsyn House of Russian Abroad in Moscow holds 84 large-format albums with clippings from emigrant newspapers from the 1940s and 1950s, selected according to various subjects (Necropolis, Icons, Church, Our achievements, etc.). These materials are a valuable source for researchers, since the collections of emigrant periodicals in Russian and foreign libraries are fragmented. All albums are predictably associated with the activities of the Russian emigrants. In 1996, A. I. and N. D. Solzhenitsyns transferred them to the collection of the House. The materials were initially received from the collector himself — Alexey Ivanovich Kalugin (1883-1982), a Russian emigrant who lived in Lithuania, Germany, Italy and Argentina. The article clarifies a number of biographical facts about Kalugin, presents a letter to him from A. I. Solzhenitsyn dated September 21, 1980, analyzes the content of the album "Dostoevsky" from the Russian Writers series. In it Kalugin included excerpts from <i>Golos naroda</i>, <i>Novoe russkoe slovo</i>, <i>Russkaya mysl</i>, <i>Narodnaya pravda</i>, <i>Za pravdu</i>, <i>Nasha strana</i>, <i>Seyatel</i>, and other newspapers that reported on new editions of the writer's books, performances, literary debates and lectures devoted to his work (professor V. N. Ilyin, writer Osip Dymov, etc.). They also contained information on the activities of the “Circle for the study of Dostoevsky” in Paris under the leadership of G. A. Meyer, and presented the commemoration program for the 70th anniversary of Dostoevsky's death in France. The album includes reviews of published books about the writer's work, articles about his life and work written by critics and emigrant researchers, the first publications of essays by I. S. Shmelev, B. K. Zaitsev and A. M. Remizov about Dostoevsky in Russian, etc. Among the little-known materials previously unpublished in Russia, the Kalugin album contains an article by Ekaterina Dostoevskaya about Fedyusha – the writer's grandson, a publication of the boy's poems, Professor V. N. Speransky's memoirs about Anna Dostoevskaya and an interview with her. These materials are published in the Appendix to the article.

The Main Trends in the Contemporary F. M. Dostoevsky Studies

This survey article is devoted to Russian and foreign individual and collective monographs about Dostoevsky published over the recent three years (2017–2019). It contains a rather detailed bibliography of such publications; some of them are analyzed in detail. A number of new biographical materials are presented, which have been recently published recently and have significantly enriched our understanding of the writer’s life. Particular attention is paid to works of hermeneutic and psychoanalytical nature, in which new approaches to Dostoevsky are outlined. Many of them, according to the author, can serve as an excellent illustration of how the tools, borrowed from the famous works of Mikhail Bakhtin, increasingly find themselves unsuited to Dostoevsky’s artistic thought. In the work, some methodological principles for conducting comparative studies dealing with source criticism are also formulated and demonstrated through examples. According to the article, a breakthrough in the Dostoevsky studies might occur only on the basis of a downright dismissal of all the prisms alien to the writer’s thought, through which it became customary to investigate him, including not only the Marxist and structuralist perspectives, but also the Orthodox Christian and Bakhtinian ones.

Types of philosophical reception of Dostoevsky in Bulgaria from the first half of the 20th century

The article is devoted to the philosophical interpretations of Dostoevsky's work in Bulgaria in the first half of the twentieth century. Dostoevsky's initial presence in Bulgaria was investigated as well the response of the Bulgarian intelligentsia to his ideas compared to those of Tolstoy. The beneficial influence on the image of the writer as a thinker, philosopher, exerted by the Russian emigration in Bulgaria since the beginning of the 1920s is noted. Particular emphasis is placed on the work of Petr Bitsill, one of the best experts in the field of Dostoevsky studies. The types of interpretations of Dostoevsky as a philosopher are distinguished as follows: Dostoevsky as a Nietzschean. Dostoevsky and Nietzsche (opposition and identification) – bearing in mind the strong influence of Nietzsche in Bulgaria since the beginning of the twentieth century; Dostoevsky as one of the founders of Russian religious philosophy – considering the penetration of the Silver Age ideas in Bulgaria; Dostoevsky and psychoanalysis; Dostoevsky as a religious philosopher and innovator. The author concludes that the study of the peculiarities of the reception of Dostoevsky’s work in Bulgarian culture of the first half of the twentieth century reveals not only the variety of world views but also the specifics of the national spiritual tradition.

В.В. Розанов в итальянском достоевсковедении

The article attempts to retrace the history of perception of Rozanovian personal­ity and creativity, presented in the light of the experience of Dostoevsky’s inter­pretation in Italy. By this work, the author introduces the texts, previously un­known to the Russian specialists on Rozanov, published in Italy over the past 50 years. The elaborations of the Russian Rozanovian Studies serve as the me­thodological and axiological guidelines, that, however, are not cited in connec­tion with the format of the article, but with which the author relates in her own conclusions. The great sensitivity of Italian critics to Dostoevsky could not be re­flected on the approach to his younger contemporary. The article raises the ques­tions about the degree of influence and borrowing, congeniality and the presence of the polemic component. It carries out its analysis with the help of the proven critical tools: using the main lines of research and consideration of possible ap­proaches to the thinkers’ common axial themes. The author distinguishes main research lines in the mainstream of which it is possible to trace the stages of de­velopment and the exit of Italian Rozanovian Studies from under the shadow of Dostoevsky Studies. The “popular” and literary-biographical lines of research are summarized, and the religious-philosophical line is more detailed, with the inclusion of a political element. The last line analyzes in fuller manner the Com­ments on “Legend of the Grand Inquisitor”. Rozanov’s entire future creative process, according to Italian critics, has already been declared by this book, right up to the final “Apocalypse of our time”. Passing thinkers through the phases of rapprochement and repulsion, admitting Dostoevsky’s finish speaking in Rozanov, Italian researchers consider Russian thinkers as inhabitants of different meta­physical worlds, generating in their touch the invariants of Russian culture.

Chulkov G. The life of Dostoevsky

A review of the biography The Life of Dostoevsky [ Zhizn’ Dostoesvkogo ], penned by the renowned Russian and Soviet writer Georgy Chulkov (1879—1939) and prepared for publication by the Dostoevsky scholar Olga Bogdanova. Opening IMLI RAN’s very promising series Study of Literary Sources in the 20th Century [ Istochnikovedenie literatury XX veka ], the book sets a very high standard for any subsequent issues. The book is published eighty years after its completion, and although it hardly contributes to modern Dostoevsky studies, the publication pays tribute to Chulkov and offers insights into the history of the topic, as well as the state of pre-war Soviet literary theory. Appended to the book are reviews of Chulkov’s typed-up manuscript by B. Tomashevsky, B. Drugov, V. Kirpotin, and V. Lyubimova (Dorovatovskaya), which adds bibliographical value to this edition.

ТРАДИЦИЯ ДОСТОЕВСКОГО В РОМАНЕ С. МОЭМА «РОЖДЕСТВЕНСКИЕ КАНИКУЛЫ»

The article is devoted to the study of Dostoevsky’s tradition reception in the novel “Christmas holiday” (1939) by William Somerset Maugham (1874-1965). For Maugham Dostoevsky was a literary guideline throughout his creative career. The English writer left numerous essays on Dostoevsky. As a result of the analysis of the novel “Christmas holiday”, the author of the article concludes that W. Somerset Maugham borrows the elements of Dostoevsky’s poetics: the motive of duality, the motive of the innocent’s suffering for the guilty’s sins, the motive of the Russian world sophistication, the images of the humiliated and offended, the image of the underground man, the image of the righteous man, the image of the criminal philosopher, the tragic vision of the world and the man. The paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the text of W. Somerset Maugham’s novel “Christmas holiday” in this aspect.

«Единый текст»: к истории термина и о роли термина в изучении творчества Ф.М. Достоевского

«Единый текст»: к истории термина и о роли термина в изучении творчества Ф.М. Достоевского

ОСОБЕННОСТИ ВОСПРИЯТИЯ ИДЕЙ Ф.М. ДОСТОЕВСКОГО В КИТАЕ

History of study of Dostoevsky in the twentieth century in China is characterized by insta-bility and difficulty. This article examines four historical stages of perception of the views and ideas of F.M. Dostoevsky (1821-1881) in China: acquaintance with the works of Dostoevsky; the promotion of the ideas of Dostoevsky; a decline in the popularity of studies on Dostoevsky; a new perspective on the study of his works and ideas.

Romantic realism: A comparative study of Dostoevsky and JM Coetzee

Romantic realism: A comparative study of Dostoevsky and JM Coetzee

Treasures in Earthen Vessels in Dostoevsky's The Idiot

This article examines Dostoevsky's perplexing novel The Idiot through the lens of its biblical subtext of treasures contained in earthen vessels (from Paul's Second Letter to the Corinthians). Images of fragile earthen vessels–porcelain teacups, clay pots, and especially the Chinese vase Myshkin breaks–occur throughout the novel, always linked to the fragility of human life. C. G. C. Turner first identified these images as references to 2 Corinthians 4:7 (Dostoevsky Studies [1985]), but assumed these references were either unconscious or did not refer to the the larger context of the Corinthian letters; since then, scholarship on The Idiot has ignored both the image of earthen vessels in the novel and its biblical origin. This article returns to the biblical subtext, examining Dostoevsky's image of fragile earthen vessels in the context of Paul's larger theological argument about the mystery of redemptive suffering that unfolds on an invisible, eternal plane rather than a visible, temporal one. Identifying several additional references to Paul's Corinthian letters in The Idiot, this article argues that Dostoevsky purposefully embedded Paul's argument about redemptive suffering in the novel as a subtle counter to the explicit and pervasive tragedy in the novel. Contrasting eternal and temporal viewpoints, Dostoevsky rests his novel on the hinge of faith, forcing his readers to interpret the novel and its theology rather than offering a comparatively simplistic resolution, as found in the end of Crime and Punishment. The Idiot thus marks a major artistic and theological step in Dostoevsky's development as a writer.

Epilepsy in the process of artistic creation of Dostoevsky

IntroductionFyodor M. Dostoevsky (Moscow, 1821-Saint Petersburg, 1881) suffered epilepsy throughout his full literary career. The aim here is to understand his condition in light of his novels, correspondence and his contemporaries’ accounts as well as by later generations of neurologists. DevelopmentFrom Murin and Ordynov (The landlady, 1847) to Smerdyakov (The brothers Karamazov, 1879-1880), Dostoevsky portrayed up to six characters with epilepsy in his literature. Apart from making an intelligent use of the disease by incorporating it into his novels, his seminal idea –that a moment of happiness is worth a lifetime– was probably inspired by his epileptic aura. Through epilepsy, Dostoevsky also found a way to freedom from perpetual military servitude. The first symptoms of the epilepsy presented in early adulthood (late 1830s to early 1840s), but he was only diagnosed a decade later. In 1863 he went abroad seeking expert advice from Romberg and Trousseau. In the first retrospective study of Dostoevsky's literary epilepsy, Stephenson and Isotoff noticed the influence of Carus’ Psyche (1848) in the preparation of his characters, whilst his epilepsy has inspired later generations of epileptologists. ConclusionsDostoevsky offers an insight into the natural history of an epilepsy, which in contemporary scientific terms would be classified as cryptogenic localisation-related epilepsy of probable temporal lobe origin. Above all, Dostoevsky's case illustrates the good use of a common neurological disorder by a remarkable writer who transformed suffering into art and a disadvantage into an advantage.