In one of our conversations, I and a friend culminating in the theme "Dostoevsky." He did not even read a book dost, but saw the film adaptation of The Demons directed by a filmmaker whose name and nationality not recorded (but flashes of memory I do believe that this is a director of Eastern Europe, which is plausible, given the geographical and cultural proximity between such regiãoea Russia), and one of their conclusions is that the character Shatov story's hero, is about the writer's literary alter ego, religious, reactionary, Slavophil ocidentalofóbico and just like Dostoevsky. He spoke with such arrogance, with that look of "I killed the riddle," that means dismissing or condemning the writer because of his conservative ideological position and related features, which only left me blame him. It is not the first time he shows his implies or rancid with Dostoevsky - even in one of his tales is my favorite writer satirized indirectly - due to the ideological prejudices of fools.
First, to criticize anything with the property before it is necessary to identify it with reasonable depth (no wonder therefore that his criticism flawed argumentative relatively superficial), second, execrate a writer for discrepancies philosophical, moral, ideological, finally, by having a world view different from ours, the behavior does not seem wise and worthy of an intellectual (in the sense here of that word), who would not fit reject great literature, especially when it comes to an author of the caliber of Dostoevsky, "ideologically reactionary and regressive ¹ philosophically," according to critic and journalist Manuel Pinto da Costa (and, despite these issues, possessing an accurate view, dialectical world, capable of dealing fully with the other currents of thought in vogue in the nineteenth century and even rebuild them in their literary discourse in a sublime way), but aesthetically revolutionary and pioneer in refining psychological magician he devoted to his characters. And such was his keenness of mind, intuiçãoe intelligence, in his speech that even anti-leftists find criticism highly valuable to the present day, including the prophetic "predict" the totalitarian communist regimes that is established in the XXI century (I was catatonic when I read such descriptions of totalitarianism in Demons , at a time when organizations and preludes to revolution s communists were still in their infancy, sensitivity amazing how an artist can catapult themselves beyond their time)
One of the flaws I see in the analogy drawn between the personality of Dostoevsky and his literary creation, Shatov, is the determination of Slavophilism. Dost was never a Slavophil itself, and in works such as his record of travel to Europe Winter Notes on Summer Impressions , certain conceptions Slavophil both the Russian people as West's misguided in his view are refuted, but it is undeniable nationalistic confess your profile (like other Russian writers, only major brand) and excessive: revered traditional Russia, the Russian people and many of its customs and practices (in contrast, was a humanist and pacifist to classic patterns, which rejected the enslavement of serfs, existing in the country until [], and violence against women), defended the czarist and segregated by a messianic vision about Russia, seeing it as the ultimate safeguard of the universal Christian religion in its essence. Shatov is also an unstable, hysterical type that does not fit well with the personality of Dostoevsky, a neurotic in their own way which platonic passion for a lady matron, disillusionment with socialism (here a resemblance to his creator) and a certain naivety and lack of experience (including sexual, as deduce the lines), regardless of age, explain much of its unique psychological profile, and therefore contradictory attitudes that takes over the narrative. It is more like anti-hero hero. And this is not such a director plunged deep into the psychology of its transposition into Shatov the language of film - or "revolt" with my friend's character was so great that it blinded him as to its other features - I have only to regret that the work comes from Dost into the hands of the filmmakers so awkward.
Yes, one of the greatest writers of world literature was an artist whose commitment to human and psychological clearing their guts was higher than their religious views, philosophical and ideological, indeed less solid and more changeable than the ordinary literary sense designs, because of their anxieties, inner conflicts and doubts - even about the existence of God - which tracks and records found scattered in his journalistic, literary and memoirs; understand more and judge less is a slogan of Dostoevsky's prose, in spite of moralism (doubtful) of the author. It is also noticeable in his work a pessimistic conception of the world socially and spiritually optimistic poles (or projections of the behavior) but capable of opposing human reconciliaçãoe where they intersect the intellect and morality of the individual in constant conflict with himself, the environment and with God, even when the void in his life, as well as all values (nihilism), or when you submit them to a pure rationalization (and here comes the Dost antipositivist) or ideological - attempts to deny or escape the spiritual transcendence (?), for Dostoevsky, is not God who is dead: many of us that suicide is the sublime aspect of existence.
¹ Affirmation moot, anyway Dost is considered the forerunner of existentialism, I would say that the "regressive" applies when more philosophical interpretation and ontological ; Logic tends to approach the metaphysical and divine plan exactly, or the problems relate primarily to the headquarters of the company or lack of spirituality, less straining his vision human and social contradictions themselves in a seemingly contradictory trend in the face of their religion: God does not directly influence an individual's life, released here on Earth and sentenced to the free- agency.
0 comments:
Post a Comment