UDC

821.161.1

Authors

Yaroslavna N. Degteva
Voronezh State University; pl. Lenina 10, Voronezh, 394018, Russian Federation;
e-mail: Dyogteva@phil.vsu.ru

Abstract

In the system of methods and means of creating an artistic image, an important role is played by the poetics of the visual. The visual in literature has been studied from many sides, but some of its aspects remain unexplored, in Fyodor Dostoevsky’s works in particular. One such important issue is alien look, to study which the article turns to Dostoevsky’s novel The Double (1846). Alien look is defined as a subject’s gaze directed at some object, other than oneself, with alienation (as if with someone else’s eyes). In line with its purpose, the research applied a cultural-historical approach to the analysis of literary phenomena. The works of Russian and foreign scholars – M.M. Bakhtin, M. Jones, R. Lachmann, A.B. Krinitsyn and others – were used as a methodological basis. The phenomenon of alien look in Fyodor Dostoevsky’s works is studied here for the first time. Hence the theoretical significance of this paper, contributing to the existing fundamental concepts and demonstrating their heuristic value in the legacy of a certain writer. In terms of practice, the results of the analysis of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s prose can be used in teaching relevant disciplines to university students as well as in psychological counselling, bibliotherapy in particular. Alien look in The Double belongs to the tradition of the Petersburg text of Russian literature and to the scopic regime of the 19th century. The phenomenon under study is significant not only as an element of poetics, but also as a means of developing literary anthropology and characterology. Research into alien look allows us to expand the interpretation and analysis of Dostoevsky’s The Double.

Keywords

Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Double, the visual, alien look, Petersburg text of Russian literature, scopic regime

References

1. Degteva Ya.N. Chuzhoy vzglyad: utochnenie definitsii v kontekste tvorchestva F.M. Dostoevskogo [The Other’s View: Clarification of the Definition in the Context of Dostoevsky’s Works]. Izvestiya VGPU. Ser.: Filolologicheskie nauki, 2016, vol. 272, no. 3, pp. 162–165.
2. Bakhtin M.M. Problemy tvorchestva Dostoevskogo. Problemy poetiki Dostoevskogo [Problems of Dostoevsky’s Oeuvre. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics]. Kiev, 1994. 509 p.
3. Bakhtin M.M. Sobranie sochineniy [Collected Works]. Moscow, 2003. Vol. 1. 960 p.
4. Bakhtin M.M. Plan dorabotki knigi “Problemy poetiki Dostoevskogo” [Finalization Plan for the Book Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics]. Moscow, 1977, p. 300.
5. Jones M.V. Dostoyevsky After Bakhtin: Readings in Dostoyevsky’s Fantastic Realism. New York, 1990. 221 p.
6. Lachmann R. Memory and Literature: Intertextuality in Russian Modernism. Minneapolis, 1997. 436 p.
7. Krinitsyn A.B. Ispoved’ podpol’nogo cheloveka. K antropologii F.M. Dostoevskogo [Confession of the Underground Man. On the Anthropology of F.M. Dostoevsky]. Moscow, 2001. 370 p.
8. Kasatkina T.A. Svyashchennoe v povsednevnom: Dvusostavnyy obraz v proizvedeniyakh F.M. Dostoevskogo [The Sacred in the Everyday: A Two-Part Image in the Works by F.M. Dostoevsky]. Moscow, 2015. 528 p.
9. Kovalev O.A. Formuly vseznaniya, chtenie mysley i otvetnyy vzglyad u Dostoevskogo [Formulas of Omniscience, Mind-Reading and the Return Glance in Dostoevsky’s Works]. Filologiya i chelovek, 2007, no. 3, pp. 55–70.
10. Lavlinskiy S.P. O dvukh strategiyakh khudozhestvennoy reprezentatsii zrimosti [On Two Strategies of Artistic Representation of Visibility]. Kul’tura i tekst, 2014, pt. 3, pp. 48–55.
11. Wachtel A. Dostoevsky’s The Idiot: The Novel as Photograph. History of Photography, 2002, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 205–215.
12. Podoroga V.A. Mimesis. Materialy po analiticheskoy antropologii literatury. T. 1. N. Gogol’, F. Dostoevskiy [Mimesis. Materials on the Analytical Anthropology of Literature. Vol 1. N. Gogol, F. Dostoevsky]. Moscow, 2006. 685 p.
13. Toporov V.N. Peterburgskiy tekst russkoy literatury [Petersburg Text of Russian Literature]. St. Petersburg, 2003. 612 p.
14. Antropologiya literatury: metodologicheskie aspekty problemy [Literary Anthropology: Methodological Aspects]. Grodno, 2013. Pt. 1. 321 p.
15. Fokin A.A. Ot funktsional’nogo izucheniya literatury k antropologicheskoy poetike [From the Functional Study of Literature to Anthropological Poetics]. Russkaya literatura XX–XXI vekov: problemy teorii i metodologii izucheniya [Russian Literature of the 20th – 21st Centuries: Problems of the Theory and Methodology of Studying]. Moscow, 2004, pp. 451–455.
16. Kreydlin G.E. Neverbal’naya semiotika: yazyk tela i estestvennyy yazyk [Nonverbal Semiotics: Body Language and Natural Language]. Moscow, 2002. 592 p.
17. Tynyanov Yu.N. Poetika. Istoriya literatury. Kino [Poetics. History of Literature. Cinematography]. Moscow, 1977. 574 p.
18. Savinkov S.V., Faustov A.A. Aspekty russkoy literaturnoy kharakterologii [Aspects of Russian Literary Characterology]. Moscow, 2010. 331 p.
19. Faustov A.A., Savinkov S.V. Igry voobrazheniya. Istoricheskaya semantika kharaktera v russkoy literature [Imagination Games. Historical Semantics of Character in Russian Literature]. Voronezh, 2013. 335 p.
20. Young S., Milne L. (eds.). Dostoevsky on the Threshold of Other Worlds: Essays in Honour of Malcolm V. Jones. Ilkeston, 2006. 276 p.