Dostoevsky and the "Jewish question". Part 2

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

The second chapter of the March 1877 issue of A Writer's Diary, "the Bible of Russian anti-Semitism," as many call it, was born of Dostoevsky's correspondence with the Jew Abraham-Uriya Kovner.

Soviet literary critic Leonid Grossman (!) Wrote a whole monograph ("Confessions of a Jew") dedicated to the life and work of his half-forgotten fellow tribesman, special attention in the book was given to Kovner's correspondence with Dostoevsky. Grossman is pleased that the great Russian writer considered Kovner's letter "wonderful in many ways" - he never ceases to quote this quote from The Diary of a Writer. At the same time, one can clearly trace the attempt of a literary critic to belittle the significance of the March issue of the "Diary". Grossman says that Dostoevsky's arguments are "newspaper, not philosophical," the writer does not rise above the "current arguments of the nationalist press," for him, throughout his journal essay on Jews, he never once tries to look closely at their history, ethical philosophy, or racial psychology."

The author of the preface to the 1999 edition of the monograph, S. Gurevich (!), Echoes him, saying that “Dostoevsky never found a worthy answer to Kovner’s questions and accusations either in a letter to him or in the writer's diary” that all the arguments of the writer are "a well-known and familiar circle of statements on this topic", are of a stereotyped nature. However, further he involuntarily blurts out: “It was Dostoevsky who first brought all possible real reasons and fantastic fabrications that are constantly brought up as an accusation against the Jewish people. " In other words, Gurevich admits that among Dostoevsky's statements there are not only fantastic inventions, but also real arguments. Moreover, the writer managed to systematize them (the systematization of information is one of the scientific methods, so we can say that the writer is making an attempt to research the "Jewish question").

In addition, Gurevich is trying to discredit the writer's essay about Jews, recalling that during the war the Nazis scattered leaflets with quotes from Dostoevsky near the trenches of Soviet fighters, and in fact equates Russian national patriots and soldiers of the Nazi army, saying that they had common goals.

Both Gurevich and Grossman note the duality of Dostoevsky's views set forth in the "Diary of a Writer" (we will return to this later and try to give our explanation). They treat their fellow tribesman-contemporary Dostoevsky Kovner with special reverence, constantly repeat what he was the smartest and most educated man of his time, how Rozanov, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy admired his intellect. Against this background, the attempts of two literary scholars to embellish the shameful fact of the biography of this "smartest and most educated person" - an attempt to commit forgery and fraud, subsequent arrest, trial and imprisonment. Gurevich calls everything that happens "A tragic period in his life"Grossman poeticizes Kovner's failed fraud. Stealing money from a bank is, in his opinion, “an attempt to go against the conventions of the surrounding society and its legal system in order to deepen your mental feat and reveal your vocation to the end ».

Let's summarize. In Grossman's book Confessions of a Jew, with Gurevich's preface to the 1999 edition, the author's intention is very clearly expressed to downplay the March 1877 issue of the Writer's Diary, Dostoevsky's contribution to the study of the Jewish question.

Gurevich's statement that the attitude towards Jews in Russia is a "litmus test" that unmistakably shows "the decline in the moral level of a significant part of Russian society, first of all, its intellectual stratum" does not at all stand up to criticism. Because just after the Russian people began to be persecuted for anti-Semitism (after the Jewish revolution of 1917), when the “chosen by God” came to power in the country, the same “decline in the moral level of a significant part of Russian society” took place.

But let us return directly to the “bible of Russian anti-Semitism” - the second chapter of the March 1877 “Diary of a Writer”. It consists of four parts:

I. "THE JEWISH QUESTION"

II. PRO AND CONTRA

III. STATUS IN STATU. FORTY CENTURIES OF BEING

IV. BUT YES BROTHERHOOD HONOR!

Let's take a look at each of these parts.

In the "Jewish Question" Dostoevsky at the very beginning declares that he never felt hatred for the Jewish people, rejects suspicions that his antipathy for the Jewish people has a religious background, says that he only verbally condemns the Jew. Along the way, the writer notes this peculiarity of Jews, like touchiness

Fedor Mikhailovich distinguishes between the concept of "Jew" and "Jew":

In the second part, "Pro and Contra," Dostoevsky, in response to Kovner's accusations that he does not know the forty-century history of the Jewish people, says that he knows one thing for sure:

The writer admits that he does not believe such complaints, compares the hardships of the Jews with the hardships of the ordinary Russian people:

In one of his letters to Dostoevsky, Kovner speaks of the need to grant all civil rights to Jews, including the free choice of residence. Only after this, Kovner believes, can the Jews be required to "fulfill their obligations to the state and to the indigenous population." Dostoevsky answers him on the pages of his "Diary":

Dostoevsky admits that he is not strong in the knowledge of Jewish life, but is convinced that among the Russian people there is no religious enmity like "Judas, they say, sold Christ." As proof of his innocence, he cites his fifty years of life experience. The Russian people have always shown religious tolerance towards Jews, which cannot be said about Jews

And Russians show tolerance everywhere:. Moreover, the Russian people forgive a Jew for their contemptuous attitude: “

Further, the writer asks himself a question that is stunning in its depth and power:

In the third part "Status in Statu" (state in state), Dostoevsky pays tribute to the strength and vitality of the Jewish people, reflects on what helped Jews to survive as a nation, not to dissolve among other nations for forty centuries. The writer believes that a people like the Jews could not have survived if they did not have one common idea, “

What, according to Dostoevsky, is the idea that unites all Jews, or status in statu? He lists some of the features of this idea: "".

The writer reinforces his words with quotations from the Talmud:

This status in statu, as the writer believes, is not enough to ascribe to persecution and a sense of preservation alone, as some educated Jews do. Self-preservation alone would not have been enough for forty centuries: more powerful civilizations could not live half of this period. So

Dostoevsky, being a deeply religious person, believes. But at the same time, he expresses fears that the "perfect equalization of all kinds of rights" will not end well for a Russian person. And these fears are well founded:

Here Dostoevsky comes to the very essence of the idea of status in statu, which “.

Fyodor Mikhailovich's excellent counterargument to the hackneyed expression that “there are good people among the Jews too”:

In the final part of the chapter, "But Long Live Brotherhood!" Dostoevsky repeats his words about what he is for “- here we see that the writer's religiosity is not at all the reason for his dislike of Jews, as is commonly believed, rather, on the contrary: being a respectable Christian, he advocates a humane attitude towards this people, for equalization of his rights, despite the consequences. Dostoevsky, out of Christian and humane considerations, proclaims the idea of a Russian-Jewish brotherhood (""), says that there are no obstacles to translating this idea into reality on the part of the Russians, but they are full of them on the part of the Jews - we are talking about the disgust and arrogance of the Jewish people according to attitude towards Russians and other nationalities. It is not the Russian who has more prejudices against the Jew, but the latter, the Jew is more incapable of understanding Russian than the Russian is of the Jew.

Proclaiming the idea of the brotherhood of peoples, Dostoevsky emphasizes that. In other words, Russians are not against brotherhood, they are Jews against it.

And the "bible of Russian anti-Semitism" ends with a question: how much even the best of the Jews

Dostoevsky does not give a direct answer to this question, but the very idea of status in statu uniting all Jews, about which he discussed so much above, testifies to the impossibility of this brotherhood. For forty centuries of existence, this nation has not learned to live in peace with other nations. Since the publication of the "Diary of a Writer" about 140 years - almost a century and a half. And nothing has changed: they still demonstrate this inability to unite with other peoples.

So, we see that Dostoevsky, being a talented writer and publicist, gives an incredibly accurate psychological description of the Jewish people. There are no contradictions in his reasoning on the "Jewish question"; on the contrary, he is very logical and consistent in his views.

It is completely wrong to believe that the writer's antipathy towards the Jewish people has a religious background: Dostoevsky has very specific claims against the "Jews", and these claims stem from certain features of the national character, which, in turn, is conditioned by status in statu.

Thus, we can conclude that all the arguments of the Grossmanov and Gurevichs regarding Dostoevsky's views on the "Jewish question" are absolutely untenable.

Marya Dunaeva