888 Reviews the discussion revolves is arguably a similar weakness. Nevertheless, the revelation of how, in the run-up to the 1905 revolution, psychiatrists reclassified as sane certain progressive writers who had previously been diagnosed as mad (Maksim Gorky pri? mary among them) provides a fascinating insight into the science's role in organizing society. Overall, although Diagnosing Literary Genius makes only a modest contribution to our understanding of the reception of major writers such as Gogol and Dostoevsky, its primary aim of broadening our understanding of the role of psychiatry in literary history is clearly achieved. The writing of pathographies provided a stage for physi? cians who wanted to express a world-view and supplement their professional claims with moral authority. This integration of their special scientific interests within a wider culture is what makes the study of Russian psychiatry such a rich subject. University of St Andrews Claire Whitehead Dostoevsky and theIdea ofRussianness: A New Perspective on Unity and Brotherhood. By Sarah Hudspith. (BASEES/RoutledgeCurzon Series on Russian and East European Studies) London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon. 2004. x + 228 pp. ?60. ISBN 0-415-30489-x. With the completion of Joseph Frank's monumental five-volume study of Dosto? evsky's life and work, not to mention a hundred years of Dostoevsky criticism sym? pathetic to, or focused on, his Christian and Slavophile thinking, the most difficult of tasks is finding 'a new perspective'. Sarah Hudspith, it becomes clear from the very beginning, is not just a sympathizer or a focused critic: she is a believer. This in itself does not make for an entirely new perspective, but it certainly creates a more impassioned and consistent defence. What she achieves in this clearly written, beautifully presented, impeccably referenced, and grossly overpriced book is a parallel study. The evolution of Dostoevsky's thought on the Russian people, on Orthodoxy, and on Western Europe occupies the foreground, and a discussion of Slavophile thought, from Khomiakov to Aksakov, runs simultaneously in the background. This makes sense, in that Dostoevsky's career as a writer chronographically matches the Slavophile parabola, as it emerges from Romantic utopianism, revitalizes Orthodoxy, and then hardens into a sclerotic anti-Muslim and anti-European jingoism. The difficultythat this reviewer has is that Dostoevsky, like Tolstoy, is not nearly as wise or persuasive a thinker as the fictional characters he invents. Even the magnificent rhetoric of Dostoevsky's Pushkin speech, however sacrosanct a moment it may be in Russia's self-image, disintegrates on closer examination into a series ofnon sequiturs, begged questions, and megalomaniac nationalism. Hudspith is controlled, well-read, and perspicacious enough to see the absurdities, inconsistencies, and inadequacies of Dostoevsky's statements on Europe. In the firsthalf of her study, which is devoted to Dostoevsky's journalism and to the semi-fictional Notes from the House of the Dead, she traces the development of his thinking from his first contacts with Nekrasov, Belinsky, and Speshnev and lays emphasis on the cathartic role ofthe Siberian prison and his firstprolonged encounter with the narod. When she comes to Winter Notes on Summer Impressions she fails, however, to concede the lapse from the genuine recollection of experience in Siberia to the preposterous distortion of ill-understood encounters in London, where the fogof Hay market and total ignorance ofthe language and culture make Dostoevsky a bad, unreliable observer. When Konstantin Leontiev berates the average Western bourgeois as 'The Ideal and Instrument of Universal Destruction', his wit and passion give his lunatic constructs at least a poetic validity. Dostoevsky denouncing the West, on the other hand, has only the intolerance and the banality of an Osama bin Laden. MLRy 100.3, 2005 889 Hudspith does admit Dostoevsky's xenophobia, but there are aspects of Dosto? evsky's ideal of brotherhood which she leaves unmentioned, and which are now being explored by other critics, notably his anti-Semitism and his refusal, even in private correspondence not destined for publication, to accept fair-minded remonstrance. If Dostoevsky is to convince, let alone convert, it can only be through his fictional characters. The second half of this study is far more successful. It deals with the major novels, and very properly includes...
Read full abstract