Download Dostoevsky and English Modernism 1900-1930 by Peter Kaye PDF
By Peter Kaye
Whilst Constance Garnett's translations (1910–1920) made Dostoevsky's novels obtainable in England for the 1st time they brought a disruptive and releasing literary strength, and English novelists needed to confront a brand new version and rival. The writers who're the point of interest of this research - Lawrence, Woolf, Bennett, Conrad, Forster, Galsworthy and James - both fashionable or feared Dostoevsky as a monster who may well dissolve all literary and cultural differences. notwithstanding their responses differed vastly, those writers have been unanimous of their lack of ability to acknowledge Dostoevsky as a literary artist. They seen him as an alternative as a psychologist, a mystic, a prophet and, within the circumstances of Lawrence and Conrad, a hated rival who forced inventive reaction. This research constructs a map of English modernist novelists' misreadings of Dostoevsky, and in so doing it illuminates their aesthetic and cultural values and the character of the fashionable English novel.
"Clearly written and ampli documented, the booklet is suitable for upper-division undergraduates via faculty." selection
Read or Download Dostoevsky and English Modernism 1900-1930 PDF
Similar literary theory books
This new number of not easy literary experiences performs with a foundational definition of Western tradition: the be aware turn into flesh. however the be aware develop into flesh isn't really, or now not, a theological already-given. it's a millennial target or telos towards which each and every textual content strives. either witty and immensely erudite, Jacques Rancière leads the serious reader via a maze of arrivals towards the instant, might be continually suspended, whilst the notice unearths its flesh.
Ranging from a accomplished exam of present post-structuralist and socio-semiotic theories of narrative, this publication formulates an interactive version of literary interpretation and pedagogy emphasizing strategy, serious self-awareness and methods of re-reading/re-writing. A literary pedagogy premised at the idea of "rewriting", the writer argues, will permit readers to event the method of narrative and significant building creatively.
Whilst a poet addresses a dwelling person--whether good friend or enemy, lover or sister--we realize the expression of intimacy. yet what impels poets to jump throughout time and area to talk to invisible listeners, looking an incredible intimacy--George Herbert with God, Walt Whitman with a reader sooner or later, John Ashbery with the Renaissance painter Francesco Parmigianino?
- The Range of Interpretation
- Said Dictionary, A
- Repetition and Identity (The Literary Agenda)
- Poetic Justice and Legal Fictions
Extra info for Dostoevsky and English Modernism 1900-1930
Bunin, Andreyev, Gogol, V. V. ¹⁴ Koteliansky also translated a selection of Dostoevsky’s letters, excerpts from his Diary of a Writer, and Stavrogin’s Confession and the Plan of the Life of a Great Sinner (previously unpublished material from The Possessed and Dostoevsky’s notebooks). In he translated The Grand Inquisitor as an independent work and enlisted Lawrence to write the preface. ¹⁵ Kot sought Lawrence’s collaborative help in his translating activities. Though the emigrant’s knowledge of Russian language and literature was great, he never became completely fluent in English, so he used collaborators, including Lawrence, the Woolfs, Katherine Mansfield, and Middleton Murry, to help smooth the rough edges.
Prophetic rage and rivalry: D. H. Lawrence A letter to S. S. Koteliansky, dated December , reinforces Lawrence’s sense of the complete identification between Murry and Dostoevsky. After reading Murry’s introduction to Koteliansky’s translation of excerpts from Dostoevsky’s Diary of a Writer, Lawrence bitterly complained: Both [Dostoevsky and Murry] stink in my nostrils. Dostoevsky is big and putrid, here. Murry is a smaller stinker, emitting the same kind of stink. How is it that these foul-smelling people ooze with such loving words.
All the Dostoevsky characters stand on the same jerrybuilt stage as heroes without meaningful distinction. One might as well put together Pickwick, Uriah Heep, Little Nell, and Fagin and declare their sameness. ⁴³ What might otherwise seem to be unsolicited anger can be understood more readily when placed within the context of Murry’s devotional excess. Lawrence’s railing against Dostoevsky’s destructive mental consciousness and self-absorption is elucidated by Murry’s penchant for hyperconscious characters who define the world in egoistic terms.