u/PK_Ultra932

I came across this letter (March 1869) and it made me chuckle:

"You write about Turgenev and about the Germans. Turgenev has run out of steam abroad and has lost all his talent, which even the newspaper “Golos” remarked upon. I am not afraid of becoming Germanized, because I hate all Germans, but I need Russia; without Russia I will lose the last little bit of strength and little talent I have. I feel this, I feel it in my very flesh."

https://preview.redd.it/yptemu0ggaph1.png?width=477&format=png&auto=webp&s=2855fb041f5e8c62c0a9d87fe353548812e79a75

“Now, if your nerves are strong, go through the door on the left: in that room dressings and operations are performed. There you will see doctors with arms bloody to the elbows and pale, gloomy faces, occupied around a cot on which, with open eyes and speaking, as though in delirium, meaningless, sometimes simple and touching words, lies a wounded man, under the influence of chloroform. The doctors are occupied with the repulsive, but beneficent work of amputations. You will see how a sharp curved knife enters white healthy flesh; you will see how, with a terrible, heartrending cry and curses, the wounded man suddenly regains consciousness; you will see how the medical orderly throws a severed arm into the corner; you will see how, on a stretcher in the same room, another wounded man lies and, watching his comrade’s operation, writhes and moans not so much from physical pain as from the mental anguish of anticipation, — you will see terrible, soul-shaking sights; you will see war not in orderly, beautiful, and brilliant formation, with music and drumbeats, with waving banners and prancing generals, but you will see war in its true expression — in blood, in suffering, in death...

On leaving this house of suffering, you will certainly experience a comforting feeling, breathe the fresh air more deeply, feel pleasure in the awareness of your health, but, at the same time, from contemplating these sufferings you will draw an awareness of your own insignificance and calmly, without hesitation, go to the bastions...”

https://preview.redd.it/4gmslj70o8dh1.png?width=487&format=png&auto=webp&s=91c13ecf0572cac46677c42ac38ebd749d944af4

It's often overlooked, and can be awkward at times, but you can definitely see glimpses of C & P, The Idiot, and even TBK. Sure, it doesn't hold a candle to his later works, but I think it's definitely worth a read for any Dostoevsky fan

In moments when his mind was not clear, the thought flashed upon him that he was condemned to live in a long, unending dream, full of strange, fruitless agitations, struggles and sufferings. In terror he tried to resist the disastrous fatalism that weighed upon him, and at a moment of tense and desperate conflict some unknown force struck him again and he felt clearly that he was once more losing memory, that an impassable, bottomless abyss was opening before him and he was flinging himself into it with a wail of anguish and despair.

I came across a letter Turgenev wrote to Dostoevsky thanking him for his praise of Fathers & Children, and specifically the character of Bazarov. Unfortunately, Dostoevsky's original letter to Turgenev has not survived, but below is a translation of Turgenev's response. It's really interesting considering the complex relationship between the two.

To F.M. Dostoevsky 18(30) March 1862. Paris

My dearest Fyodor Mikhailovich, I have no need to tell you to what degree your response to “Fathers and Children” delighted me. Here the matter is not in the satisfaction of vanity, but in the assurance that one, therefore, was not mistaken and did not miss the mark completely — and that the labor was not wasted.— This was all the more important for me, since people in whom I have great faith (I am not speaking of Kolbasin), seriously advised me to throw my work into the fire — and only the other day Pisemsky (but this is between us) wrote to me that the figure of Bazarov had entirely failed. How, then, do you order one not to begin doubting and not to lose one’s bearings? It is hard for an author to feel at once to what extent his thought has been embodied — and whether it is true — and whether he has mastered it — and so on. He is, as if in a forest, in his own work.

You have surely experienced this yourself more than once. And therefore once again thank you. You grasped so fully and so subtly what I wanted to express through Bazarov that I only spread my hands in amazement — and pleasure. As though you had entered my soul and felt even what I did not think it necessary to utter. God grant that this showed not only the sensitive penetration of a master, but also the simple understanding of a reader— that is, God grant that everyone should see at least part of what you saw! Now I am at peace regarding the fate of my tale: it has done its work — and I have nothing to repent of.

Here is another proof for you of how much you have made yourself at home with this type: in Arkady’s meeting with Bazarov, in the place where, according to your words, something is lacking, Bazarov, telling about the duel, made fun of knights and Arkady listened to him with secret horror and so on.— I threw this out — and now regret it: in general I crossed out and rewrote a great deal under the influence of unfavorable responses — and from this, perhaps, arose the sootiness which you noticed.

I received a sweet letter from Maikov — and will answer him. They will abuse me severely — but this must be waited out, like a little summer rain.

I would be very sorry if I did not find you in Petersburg.— I leave here at the end of the local April, i. e. in a month. Now I can tell You for certain that I shall bring you my work finished — it has not only advanced greatly, it is approaching its end. In it there will be about 3 printed sheets. A strange thing is coming out. It is precisely those “Phantoms”, because of which several years ago a dispute arose between us and Katkov — I do not know whether you remember this. I had begun another thing — and suddenly seized upon this one and worked for several days with enthusiasm. Now only a few pages remain to be written.

I rejoice at the success of “Time”. It is annoying that you cannot arrange the regular sending of the journal. I say this not so much out of personal interest,— after all, I shall soon return myself — but for your own benefit. “The Russian Herald” is sent here regularly.— (However, I have not yet received the February issue).

Once more I press Your hand firmly, firmly and say thank you to You. Convey my earnest bow to Your wife and be well.

Devoted to You
Iv. Turgenev.

I'm an avid runner and will be in Yerevan for two weeks in August (my first time). I'll be staying near Diana Abgar Park.

Anyone have any suggestions for places to run?

I typically run about 15 km per day.

Any tips would be welcome.

"We have two tsars: Nicholas II and Leo Tolstoy. Which of them is stronger? Nicholas II can do nothing with Tolstoy, cannot shake his throne, whereas Tolstoy undoubtedly shakes the throne of Nicholas and his dynasty. They curse him; the Synod has its own determination against him. Tolstoy answers; the answer circulates in manuscripts and in foreign newspapers. Let someone try to touch Tolstoy. The whole world will cry out, and our administration will tuck in its tail. Sipyagin has nothing left except consolation in the phrase he said to the sovereign: “If Tolstoy’s answer to the Synod is printed, the people will tear him apart.” Console yourselves, friends, console yourselves, feeble-minded rulers. Herzen thundered from London. Tolstoy thunders in London from Yasnaya Polyana and Moscow; he thunders in Russia by means of lithographs, which are sold for 20 kopecks. A new time is coming, and it will show itself. It is already showing itself by the fact that the government is completely tangled up and does not know what to begin. “Whether to lie down to sleep or to get up.” But how long will this disorder last? At least one may die with this conviction: that arbitrary rule has been undermined, and that no storm at all is needed for it to fall. An ordinary wind will knock it down."

I just finished reading The Double (in Russian!) and some of what Dostoevsky later wrote about his second book. In Diary of Writer, 30 years later, he admitted it was a failure (it was widely torn apart in the press), but he always thought its central premise, the idea of the human soul and psyche divided against itself, was one of his greatest contributions to literature.

Of course, The Double was written before his arrest and ideological split, so the divided self under social and psychological pressure was portrayed as a social issue brought on by an oppressive government. But you can definitely see the divided self in some of his great characters in his later novels (Raskolnikov, Stavrogin, Ivan Karamazov). These “doubles” were more subtle though, found in hallucinations or in the introduction of separate characters, and they were a byproduct of what Dostoevsky regarded as the radical Western ideologies.

The most obvious example that I can think of is Ivan Karamazov’s devil

“In reviling you, I revile myself!... You are me—my very self—only with a different face. You say precisely what I am already thinking... and you are powerless to tell me anything new!... You are me, you are I and nothing more! You are trash, you are my fantasy!”