- Email: [email protected]
The Development of Dostoevskij's Hero
THE
DEVELOPMENT
OF D O S T O E V S K I J ' S
HERO
JAN M.MEIJER
A n o e u v r e is a c o n t i n u i t y . In s o m e c a s e s , like w i t h P r o u s t , this is clear. In o t h e r c a s e s t h i s is less dir e c t l y e v i d e n t . W i t h m a n y w r i t e r s this c o n t i n u i t y w i l l e x p r e s s i t s e l f m a i n l y s t y l i s t i c a l l y , w h i l e in o t h e r s the t h e m a t i c a l c o n t i n u i t y w i l l be s t r i k i n g . In any case, a w r i t e r w h o d e s e r v e s t h a t name, c r e a t e s t h r o u g h a w o r k that he has w r i t t e n both possibilities and imp o s s i b i l i t i e s for his n e x t w o r k . S t a t e d in m o r e s i m p l e terms: a w r i t e r d e v e l o p s t h r o u g h his o e u v r e . A l l this is c o m m o n p l a c e e n o u g h , b u t it is not so easy to d e m o n s t r a t e s u c h a d e v e l o p m e n t . It is p e r h a p s e a s i e s t for style: it is to s o m e e x t e n t a m e n a b l e to s t a t i s t i c a l m e t h o d s , for e x a m p l e in the m a t t e r of w o r d f r e q u e n c i e s . It is p e r h a p s e v e n p o s s i b l e to s k e t c h the i d e o l o g i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t of D o s t o e v s k i j ; it has at l e a s t b e e n t r i e d r e p e a t e d l y . But it h a s n e v e r b e e n d o n e w i t h out a d d u c i n g m a t e r i a l f r o m o u t s i d e the n o v e l s . In so d o i n g o n e a b s t r a c t s f r o m the l i t e r a r y w o r k , one t e n d s to a d d u c e c e r t a i n e p i s o d e s f r o m the n o v e l s as i l l u s t r a tions of such a d e v e l o p m e n t . T h u s D o s t o e v s k i j is set on a line w i t h his c h a r a c t e r s , t h e y a r e g i v e n the s a m e ideological authority. It is the p o s i t i o n of this p a p e r t h a t one r e l e v a n t w a y in w h i c h the d e v e l o p m e n t in D o s t o e v s k i j ' s oeuvre e x p r e s s e s i t s e l f is t h r o u g h the hero. T h i s a g a i n is n o t new: we o f t e n s p e a k of "the" D o s t o e v s k i j hero, or "the" T u r g e n e v hero. But w h a t we h a v e in m i n d , in t h a t case, is a k i n d of c o m p o s i t e hero, c o m b i n i n g t r a i t s of s e v e ral h e r o e s w i t h o u t r e g a r d to c h r o n o l o g y and w i t h o u t a c l e a r basis; we u s e it to d i s t i n g u i s h h i m f r o m a n o t h e r hero, m a d e up just as i n t u i t i v e l y . Yet we a l s o h a v e a f e e l i n g t h a t t h e r e is d e v e l o p m e n t in the hero, t h a t t h e r e c o u l d be no S t a v r o g i n w i t h o u t R a s k o l ' n i k o v . B u t h o w do w e t r a n s l a t e t h a t f e e l i n g into terms we can w o r k w i t h ? It w i l l not do to say t h a t S t a v r o g i n is s i m p l y R a s k o l ' n i k o v at a l a t e r d a t e (of w r i t i n g ) . W h i l e t h e y h a v e t r a i t s in c o m m o n
258
Jan M.Meirfer
one cannot say that Stavrogin's character is a deveWe have to find another balopment of Raskol'nikov's. sis of comparison. Plot cannot be that for roughly the same reason as character. While there are a considerable number of motifs that recur throughout the oeuvre one cannot construct a continuous series out of them. In making this point we are speaking no longer of plot as such, but we have broken it down into its smallest constituents. If we try a similar operation on character, we come up with the notion of function. A character can be adequately described by the function it fulfills in the work in which it -occurs. A function, in this respect, is the designation of a task or a role that has to be occupied/played in a larger whole. It presupposes this larger whole as a structured entity and can be described in terms independent from the actual occupant of that place. Inasmuch as the larger whole is a structured one, there has to be a hierarchy of functions. It will be clear that in a given literary work there will be quite a number and variety of functions that characters can fulfill. This number will be considerably less than that of motifs, but considerably larger than that of characters. Any given character, therefore, will fulfill more than one function, possibly quite a number of them. Likewise, one function may .be fulfilled by more than one character. The first important thing in finding out the functions of a character is of course to designate them correctly. There is not an a priori method to do this. We will have to go about empirically, by trial and error. But we are not entirely empty-handed. Literary tradition has filtered and selected functions through the ages, in particular in drama. In view of the large number of functions we will have to restrict our inquiry to two or three dominant functions. For practical reasons we will further restrict ourselves to the five large novels. What we will have to show is, first, that the functions to be selected are fulfilled in all these novels; next, that their role is of sufficient similarity through these novels to warrant a comparison; thirdly, that this comparison makes clear that there is a development. We will also mention one or two functions to which the inquiry could direct itself next. In general we hope to indicate that it is both possible and worth while to elaborate this approach to include other f>unctions. Finally, we will have to consider some consequences of our point of view. The first and dominant function in Dostoevskij's
Dostoevskij's
Hero
259
five great novels is filfilled, we think, by conscience. While it is hard in literature to find a hero for whom the matter of conscience is irrelevant we think that with Dostoevskij it plays a preponderant role. Once it will be obvious that it is closethis is accepted, ly connected with that of the hero's words and their and with his deeds and their consequences. consequences, is that these should necesWhat is not clear, perhaps, It is in fact possible that they sarily be the hero's. but then they will have to be are another character's, directly connected with the function o-i the hero's conbe considered science. Character can, for our purposes, as the locus where functions are connected. The three functions selected thus are conscience, It will be found that the connection word and deed. between word and deed often has a strong intellectual component while that between deed and conscience is more socially marked. We will look into these functions in regard to the hero in each of the novels and have to demonstrate that they occupy an equally central place in each of the novels and, after that, that there is a development. We start with-crime and Punishment and with the function of the word. What interests us is not its content, but its function. A function is also a relationship and it is of interest in which direction it is exercised. We find, and not only here, that the word not at a particular person, but at the is directed, world at large, in the form of an article. When we speak of the word, by the way, we have in mind not all the. talking done by or to the hero, but only those statements, mostly set apart in the novel, which are of central importance for the development of the story. The deed in this novel is very clear cut. It issues from the hero and is directed at his first victim and implies a second. It sets the plot moving and is directly connected with conscience. Conscience does not issue from the hero, it comes back at him. We find it back in a secondary, active form, namely in the hero's care, directed first at his own family'and afterwards at the Marmeladovs. The conscience function proper is located in several persons. The first is Porfirij, next comes Svi'drigajlov, and finally Sonja. This function forms a kind of spectrum directed at the hero, with Porfirij at the intellectual end and Sonja at the social end. Razumichin would figure somewhere at the intellectual end. Looked at more closely every function would tend to assume this form in a graphic representation. For the sake of-clarity we draw attention to it only when such a spectrum
260
Jav! N. Mei.jer
is
essential. Graphically the matter could hereunder. It is done strictly independent significance'should
be sketched for illustration be attributed
as is done and no to it.
(word) article Razumichin (conscience)
(conscience) KSvidrigajlov
Porfirij
Alena Ivanovna Lizaveta Ivanovna (deed)
After Raskol'nikov there is no other main hero in whose character the functions of word and deed are so closely connected. If we now turn to The Idiot we find an entirely different picture. Here the central place is occupied by the function of conscience, which is located in the hero. It issues forth from him to all sides and activates the moral life of every character with whom he enters into contact. While activating others, conscience is not an active force itself: it does not profess, it does not act, but it answers for. Word and deed thus do not issue from the hero, they are located outside him and in different persons: the word in Ippolit and the deed in Rogozin. The interconnection of word and deed thereby is much less clear. It would be possible to find a solution in Ippolit's unsuccessful attempt at suicide as the deed "belonging to" the word, and likewise to look for the words "belonging to" Rogoiin's deed in some of his conversations with Mygkin. The answer to this is twofold. In the first place, considered functionally it is by no means necessary that the two functions of word and deed be located in the same person; it is sufficient that the functional relationships be clear and important. And this is the case here. Secondly we present, only the most important functional as has been stated, relationships. There is a tendency observable in all the novels to repeat some functional relationships at a lower level, often in a parodistic vein. In The Idiot this is the case, for example, with "PavligEev's son". The intellectual component between word and deed
Dostoevskij's
261
Hero
will as a rule be observable only to the extent that they are located in the same person. This is the case with Ippolit. The social component between deed and conscience operates here in the zone where conscience tends to become active in the form of care; this is the case in the love relationships with Aglaja and Nastas'ja Filippovna.These are functionally equivalent to Raskol'nikov's relationships with his own family and with the Marmeladovs: these also clarify what conscience is led to do and cannot do. With all the vast differences in plot and characters between the two novels it does seem possible to juxtapose them functionally. The question whether these functions and their relationships are as central to T'he Idiot as they are to Crime and Punishment should, I think, be answered in the affirmative. One further parallel should perhaps be noted: a connection seems to announce itself through these novels between conscience and identity, with the problem of intellect acute at the limit. (word) Ippolit (conscience)
Aglaja
;
J/
Mygkin ZNastasja Fillppovna T Rogozin
(conscience)
(deed) 'We have juxtaposed two novels. If there is a development this should begin to be observable with the third novel. But before going into this let us first look at the three functions of which we have spoken in regard to the hero of The Possessed. In Stavrogin we have a word that is not followed by a deed, or at least his own deed. The word he has spoken to Kirillov and zatov is acted upon by them, but not by himself. He is at the receiving end of another word, Petr Verchovenskij's hierarchy, but he refuses the central place allotted to him in this scheme. While he has an enormous potential to act,his deeds have a random character, without direct connection either to the word or to conscience. The on1 one in regard to whom he is actually Stav-rogin is z atov (and to some extent, Mavrikij), but this is not so much the result of an active pursuit, but rather of the attraction he exercises on others. On the other hand he does not act when action is indicated, when he learns of the scheme
Jan M.Meijer
to kill Chromonoika and her brother. Conscience plays a very important role. All his deeds are put into quesand so are the cases where he does not act. In tion, every one of them he seems to probe conscience, to call it into action if there is one. There are visions of a terra firma and a settledness that elude him. It plays an important role in his relationships with three women: the cripple, Liza and Dar'ja. His deeds remain largely potential and the disconnection between word and deed and conscience poses the problem of identity in prominent fashion. It is played out three times in terms that stem from the Time of Troubles:. Ivan Careviz, Grigka Otrep'ev - anafema, and samozvanec. What we have in Stavrogin is a combination of Raskol'nikov and Mygkin. We do not mean the character, but the way functions are played out. Without the irect connection of word and deed in regard to a crime as it is realised in Crime and Punishment on the one hand; without the passivity of Myskin and his relationships with Aglaja and Nastas'ja Filippovna on the other hand, there would have been no Stavrogin. Of course, on principle this character could have been conceived at any time: Raskol'nikov and Mygkin are no ZogicaZ prerequisites for Stavrogin. But these are not things that are figured out theoretically. The Idiot had shown what possibilities there were in the passivity of the main 'character. These are now further exploited in a highly intelligent hero who does not represent conscience for others, but is looking for it himself. The same functions combine very differently in the main relationships. The main characters, therefore, are very diffe-. rent from one novel to the other. This does not exclude the possibility of similarities between an individual character in one novel and one in another. Thus it has been tried to explore the connections between Svidrigajlov and Stavrogin. They certainly have a number of traits in common. Less prominent is the similarity between Raskol'nikov on the one, and gatov and Kirillov on the other hand in their direct relationships with a family and with small children. Overstating a bit one might say that the new functional relationships effect a redistribution of character traits, together with new ones, over the characters of the novel. It is perhaps more apt to say that through the novels there takes place a combination and differentiation of character traits dependent on the changing functional relationships. That does not exclude, but rather implies the possibility that a given type of character can move from a marginal place in one novel to a (much more) central one in a later
Dostoevskij's
263
Hero
novel. We find that the theme of fathers and sons does not play a central role in this novel. It is tacked on, so to the main functional relationships that are to speak, shaping the world Dostoevskij shows us. As a result of those relationships it is Stavrogin who occupies the center stage, while NeEaev - Verchovenskij is excentric. The novel is not modelled on the Nezaev case, this case has been used. Thus what was essentially a phenomenon of the capitals has been moved to the province to suit the novel. This fact would seem to indicate that themes that enter the field of force of the functional relationships are reshaped, or if one prefers, deformed by it. (word) Kirillov (cohscience)
Liza
-->
~avrog~~chromono~ka Stepan
(conscience) Trof.
(deed)
In A Raw Youth we have the word and the potential of a deed, with conscience playing between these two, as the main functional relationships. The theme of fathers and sons plays a much larger role here than in The Possessed.
The word is the hero's, but it is not, as it is in most other novels, concentrated in an article or confession. It largely coincides with the narrator's word. It is the hero's 'idea' that constitutes the word which The deed remains potential but, is to have consequences. entirely different from The Possessed, the very possibility to act out this deed keeps the hero going. The central function is conscience. The hero has a running the word itself is one of the most fredebate with it; quent in the novel. But this d,ebate assumes a double function. As we know it has taken Dostoevskij many pains before he found the right narrator's perspective for this novel. The solution he arrived at - the story of the narrator as he was and acted not quite a year in a masterpiece of psychology, but it agO - resulted caused a certain disequilibrium in the functional buildof the process of self-discovery UP. The requirements gave added importance to the plot and made the functional texture less clear. On the one hand, all the main functions: the word, the deed-that-could-be, and con-
Jan M.Meijer
science, centre in the hero. On the other hand, all the The word is duplicated in functions are duplicated. Versilov, conscience is duplicated in Versilov and MaThe possible deed is directed at Anna Andreevna kar. The same goes for the family and at Katerina Ivanovna. relationships: we have a sister and a half-sister, a a physical and a spiritual father. mother and an aunt, Part of this is explained by plot and viewpoint: the not-knowing, not-yet-knowing by the hero of circumstances vital for his plans, in combination with the point of view necessitate a constant wavering between alternatives. The interference of the plot build-up and the functional build-up makes this the most difficult of the great novels to follow. A look from the functional point of view may in fact help to clarify the picture. When we distinguish behind the plot the web of functional relationships,the plot, too, is clarified by it. Conscience both activates the hero and makes him waver. The deed which remains in abeyance is a very fruitful source for complications of the plot and at the same time is the constant element in many of these complications. The combination of the word-idea of the hero and t‘he story of the narrator on the one hand, and the reduplication of the functional relationship of word and deed not done between Versilov and the hero on the other hand, now clearly appear in each other's perspective as conditioned by one another. After this it will also become clearer that A Raw Youth constitutes a further development after The Possessed. The connection between conscience and non-action has been explored further. It has been combined with the stimulation by conscience that we found in The Idiot. The active exploration of its limits furnishes a more active picture of the hero's identity. On a different plane from The Possessed we find in Kraft again a figure in which word, deed and conscience are directly connected and lead to suicide. The functional build-up is an unstable one that could indeed be realized only in an unstable youth. Further development could never be linear, even less so than with the other novels, but it still is a stage in one development, not an exception from it. We can observe again, for example, the splitting up of functions that were combined in Stavrogin over the hero and Versilov. Finally, the theme of fathers and sons has moved one step closer to the centre. We observe once more how this theme is affected by the functional relationships, i.e. by the field of force into which it is drawn. In view of the fairly strong ideological strand in Dostoevskij the man, and also in view of his interest in day
Dostoevskij's
265
Hero
to day developments, his toska po tekuEzemu,it is all the more striking that this theme, so rife in ideological opportunities, is exploited from a psychological angle, or rather from the angle of word and deed and conscience. (word) 'idea'
Versilov
(conscience)
Anna
Andreevna
Kat.
Ivanovna
(deed)
In The Brothers Karamazov we have a threefold hero and at the same time a striking economy of means in the realization of the functional relationships. The latter is achieved by the fact that the brothers enter into each other's functional relationships. This already suggests that their position in regard to the three main functions is not a parallel one. One brother's word is directed at the second brother while this second may act as conscience to the third. Yet word and deed and conscience vitally affect every one of them. Looking at the brothers separately we find Alega's word in his taking down Zosima's pronouncements and in his talk near the stone. His deed is going out into the world and his conscience is inseparable from his experience. He cares for Liza Chochlakova and for Grugen'ka. Ivan's word,too, is twofold; it is in the article on church and state and in his telling the story of the Great Inquisitor to Alega. Its direction is different from Alega's: the latter accepts it, and passes it on to young people. Ivan actively formulated it for the world at large and on the other hand made it into a story. Ivan's deed also has a double aspect: on the one hand he does not act out his word,although he is directed by it, and on the other he lets a deed happen that he could have stopped. His conscience comes back at him mainly from Smerdjakov and the devil, and also from Alega. With the first two the matter of conscience is directly connected with the question of identity. In his relationship with Alega this identity question is decided positively.
266
Jan M.Meijer
In Dmitrij, finally, we have the word of Ispoved' . gor;jazeqo oerdca and, more directly, the declaration of his intention to kill his father. The latter,however, is half-way between word and deed: it lacks the organized character of his confession. 'monologous', His deed, too, is not perpetrated, but for reasons quite different from Ivan's. His conscience comes at him from Alega and from the tribunal. As Aleza cares for Liza and Grugen'ka, and Ivan for Liza and Katja, so Dmitrij cares for K&tja and Grugen'ka. (word)
(conscience)
(conscience)
Smerdj Father
world
Father (deed)
We already pointed out the economy of the functional build-up in The Brothers Karamazov. We will now have to make this more explicit by tracing the development that led to The Brothers Karamazov. After that we shall try to extrapolate the relationships of the three functions as they were realized through the five novels. If we take the function of conscience, we have seen that it comes back at Raskol'nikov,in Crime and Punishment, in the first place through two characters, namely Porfirij and Sonja, from the intellectual and the The other characters with social side respectively. whom he comes into contact form a kind of spectrum issuing from these two. The connection is formed through Svidrigajlov. In fact, he is Raskol'nikov's vis-3-vis, going to his death while Raskol'nikov haltingly finds his identity in life. In The Idiot the situation is diametrically opposed: here conscience has the central function,
bringing
other
characters
to
words
and
deeds
In The Possessed we find an that lay enclosed in them. Conscience is not active, nor intermediate position. comes it back at the hero after his word and deed. The hero leaves his word without consequence and his deed undone, also in cases where he should-act. In him conscience remains suspended as it were, he is trying to find.it. From.a functional point of view the discovery in this novel is the fact that they can be represented
Dostoevskij
!s Hero
267
in a negative or dubitative mode. This approach furnishes an enormous plot potential, almost too much of it. The novels with the function of conscience in this mode are not those with the most economical treatment of plot. A Raw Youth is a further instance of this. Here conscience is used for its potential, or rather as a potential for living. Like every other function this one also is duplicated in this novel, by a 'suspended' conscience in the hero's father. The possibilities of a non fully realized or active conscience in their relationships with are here further explored, the other main functions. One can sketch such a development for each of the other functions also. The word is at first central to the hero and directed at the world, in the next case it is activated by a pre-conscience in several characters outside the hero, reaching its purest form in IpIn The Possessed it is held in abeyance by the polit. hero who pronounced it, but acted on by others who confront him with it. In A Raw Youth it is almost fused with the story of the hero's development. The function of the deed, again in the briefest outline, develops as follows: it follows directly from the word in Crime and Punishment, it is activated by conscience in The Idiot, it is done or not done arbitrarily, i.e. without direct connection with the other in The Possessed, two functions, while it is the possible deed activating word and conscience in A Raw Youth.
After these briefest of outlines of the development up to The Brothers Karamazov we turn again to this novel. The excursion has clarified our view both of the econom Y and the fulness of the functional treatment. In Alesa conscience is the primary function. It results in the deed, podvig of leaving the monastery and going out into the world. The word he took down connects the two, which result in his own word near the stone. Dimitrij is the man of the deed. The wish to act -results in the ispoveii' gorjasego serdca. Un.der these stimuli the conscience crystallizes slowly into his final confrontation with outward and inward justice. Ivan finally is the man of the word, in his article on church and state and in the Great Inquisitor. His deed perpetrated by another battles with a conscience sharpened by the word. All aspects of all three functions as they appear in the three brothers occur in the other novels also. Comparison of these separate traits through the novels shows that-their best realization is in The Brothers Ka ramazov. Moreover, in each of the brothers a different
268
Jan M.Meijer
function plays the main role, and each of them is connected with the two others by all three functions in a The Brothers Karamazov congreater or smaller degree. stitutes the end and the crown of a development that can be followed at least through the five great novels, but which probably starts even earlier. If we try to extrapolate the three functions of conscience,of word and of deed, we find that their constellation depends on which function has the 'initiaand on their relative strength in the hero. The tive' initiative function will as a rule be strongest. Thus, if the word has the initiative, and if it is directed its author is pressured into an act, at the world, which in turn will activate his conscience. The word 'monological' interpretation enters into all in a less kinds of debates which concern possible,acts and stake out the field where conscience can be active. If conscience has the initiative,words and deeds will be activated in different persons, different between them and from the hero. If the deed has the initiative, the word that goes with it will be sought and it will be placed before the conscience. In cases where the word the deed and the conscience will has the initiative, be in the same person. It is striking that the first two novels present instances when one function very clearly has the initiative over the other two. In those that follow this is much less so. Acting is as important as the omission of an act. The deed may be inadequate to the word, and the other way round. Such situations do not result in less tension, perhaps because the function of conscience is divided over the hero and other characters. The development through the five novels is one which moves towards a greater equilibrium of these three functions. The result is not a loss of dynamism, but rather a gain, because the functions are divided over more than one character. The entry of the father and son motif into this field of force favoured this division of function. On the other hand, this field of force conditioned the shape in which this theme would appear in the novels. We find similarity of character combined with different functions(for example Svidrigajlov, Stavrogin, Versilov) and likewise we find the same function represented by quite different characters (conscience by Sonja, Mygkin, Alega). What we have tried to do here is to make plausible that from the point of view of development the functional relationships are the fundamental ones, and the constant factor behind the chanforces operate on this field of force, which ges. Other
~/OS toevskij
‘s Hero
269
have their own logic and which try to order the matter of the book in their own fashion. The main forces we have in mind are plot, character and ideology. Likewise each theme that enters this field of force undergoes its influence; we have tried to demonstrate this for the theme of fathers and sons. It is clear that what has been presented here does not amount to proving our position. As has been said, everything depends on an accurate description of the functions. If, for example, one would say that guilt,‘ not conscience is the fundamental function, the picture would become quite different. We will have to proceed empirically, by trial and error. If it appears that the above-mentioned functions are taken correctly, we will have to isolate others and assign them their own place in this field of force. Each new one will constitute a check on those we.isolated earlier. The final result, ideally, would be a mapping of the field of force that was Dostoevskij's writing. If this view is correct, this would have important consequences. It would mean that this field of force was inherent in Dostoevskij, that he could not get outside it, but only realize it more and more: It means that when Dostoevskij started writing a novel this field of force went into operation, largely unconsciously perhaps, and never in a completely conscious fashion. It was not outside him, he could work at it, but he had to start from it in his conception. This affects his attitude towards the times. For all his 'desire for the topical' (toska po teku8Eemu) issues of the time could not be simply taken over into the novels. They, too, were subject to the forming or deforming influence of this field of force when they entered it. The treatment of the NeEaev affair is the most notable demonstration of this. We also observed it in the treatment of the fathers and sons theme. If this can be done for Dostoevskij, there is no a priori reason that it could not be done for other writers also. Each writer has his own field of force. Perhaps only few writers fully realize its potential. But by trying to chart this field of force, we will get a clearer view of a writer's specifics and development. Such a field of force is an open structure, an objective entity that is open to inspection and on which, given sufficient research, agreement can be reached. This will not put an end to the existence of many different views of Dostoevskij, nor should it: these are personal views, and as such valuable for those that hold them, for each of us in our time. But it may enable us to distinguish more clearly than
270
Jan M.Meijer
hitherto the general and the personal or, in somewhat the subjective and the objective elechanged terms, ments in our view of Dostoevskij. A field of force is by nature a dynamic thing. It exercises its push and pull on what enters it. We have spoken of its deforming influence on what comes into It would be wrong, however, to bring to the its orbit. The field of force may also lend fore only this aspect. view and push it further, force to, say, an ideological develop it more fully than a 'simple' ideologue - or the writer in that quality - would have done. This can be observed more than once with Dostoevskij. One other point should be mentioned in this connection. Propp's success in analyzing the fairy tale has led to efforts to do the same for other narrative forms. It is clear from a reading of only a few novels that for this form at least a fixed order of functions is not.part of the structure. One of the reasons of this difference is in the medium: folklore has a much stronger mnemotechnic structure. So a Propp treatment of the novel in this sense is not possible. It might still be argued, however - and we would not fundamentally object against such a view - that the charting of a field of force is not fundamentally different from what Propp has done for the fairy tale. In fact, Propp's scheme of the fairy tale might be said to represent the field of force of that form. We have found the field of force as the recognizable element of constancy behind the changes that developAs this field of force is operative in ment implies. any novel of some scope, the question might be raised whether it would be possible to isolate it in one single novel. We will not go as far as to deny that possibility, probably with the help of non-novelistic material concerning that same writer. This would raise questions of method into which we shall not enter now. It will at any rate be more easy and practical to do it on the basis of more than one novel. What we have tried to do here is not new. It is a banality to state that we all try to realize our potenand to discover what they are in the process. tialities, In this connection we often quote Goethe's "Gezetz nach dem Du angetreten bist". In a form more directly concerning writing and the writer Gide said of Balzac that he had been looking for a system all his life and thank God that he did not find it. Dostoevskij did not find it out either, - in fact this is humanly impossible but he realized it with a fulness that only few writers attain. We are conscious of the metaphysical overtones that
Dostoevskij's
Hero
271
are slipping in. But it is not necessary to accept these in order to accept the possibility of charting If one dislikes the term a writer's field of force. for metaphysical reasons, another can surely be found.
Universiteit
van
Utrecht
DEVELOPMENT
OF D O S T O E V S K I J ' S
HERO
JAN M.MEIJER
A n o e u v r e is a c o n t i n u i t y . In s o m e c a s e s , like w i t h P r o u s t , this is clear. In o t h e r c a s e s t h i s is less dir e c t l y e v i d e n t . W i t h m a n y w r i t e r s this c o n t i n u i t y w i l l e x p r e s s i t s e l f m a i n l y s t y l i s t i c a l l y , w h i l e in o t h e r s the t h e m a t i c a l c o n t i n u i t y w i l l be s t r i k i n g . In any case, a w r i t e r w h o d e s e r v e s t h a t name, c r e a t e s t h r o u g h a w o r k that he has w r i t t e n both possibilities and imp o s s i b i l i t i e s for his n e x t w o r k . S t a t e d in m o r e s i m p l e terms: a w r i t e r d e v e l o p s t h r o u g h his o e u v r e . A l l this is c o m m o n p l a c e e n o u g h , b u t it is not so easy to d e m o n s t r a t e s u c h a d e v e l o p m e n t . It is p e r h a p s e a s i e s t for style: it is to s o m e e x t e n t a m e n a b l e to s t a t i s t i c a l m e t h o d s , for e x a m p l e in the m a t t e r of w o r d f r e q u e n c i e s . It is p e r h a p s e v e n p o s s i b l e to s k e t c h the i d e o l o g i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t of D o s t o e v s k i j ; it has at l e a s t b e e n t r i e d r e p e a t e d l y . But it h a s n e v e r b e e n d o n e w i t h out a d d u c i n g m a t e r i a l f r o m o u t s i d e the n o v e l s . In so d o i n g o n e a b s t r a c t s f r o m the l i t e r a r y w o r k , one t e n d s to a d d u c e c e r t a i n e p i s o d e s f r o m the n o v e l s as i l l u s t r a tions of such a d e v e l o p m e n t . T h u s D o s t o e v s k i j is set on a line w i t h his c h a r a c t e r s , t h e y a r e g i v e n the s a m e ideological authority. It is the p o s i t i o n of this p a p e r t h a t one r e l e v a n t w a y in w h i c h the d e v e l o p m e n t in D o s t o e v s k i j ' s oeuvre e x p r e s s e s i t s e l f is t h r o u g h the hero. T h i s a g a i n is n o t new: we o f t e n s p e a k of "the" D o s t o e v s k i j hero, or "the" T u r g e n e v hero. But w h a t we h a v e in m i n d , in t h a t case, is a k i n d of c o m p o s i t e hero, c o m b i n i n g t r a i t s of s e v e ral h e r o e s w i t h o u t r e g a r d to c h r o n o l o g y and w i t h o u t a c l e a r basis; we u s e it to d i s t i n g u i s h h i m f r o m a n o t h e r hero, m a d e up just as i n t u i t i v e l y . Yet we a l s o h a v e a f e e l i n g t h a t t h e r e is d e v e l o p m e n t in the hero, t h a t t h e r e c o u l d be no S t a v r o g i n w i t h o u t R a s k o l ' n i k o v . B u t h o w do w e t r a n s l a t e t h a t f e e l i n g into terms we can w o r k w i t h ? It w i l l not do to say t h a t S t a v r o g i n is s i m p l y R a s k o l ' n i k o v at a l a t e r d a t e (of w r i t i n g ) . W h i l e t h e y h a v e t r a i t s in c o m m o n
258
Jan M.Meirfer
one cannot say that Stavrogin's character is a deveWe have to find another balopment of Raskol'nikov's. sis of comparison. Plot cannot be that for roughly the same reason as character. While there are a considerable number of motifs that recur throughout the oeuvre one cannot construct a continuous series out of them. In making this point we are speaking no longer of plot as such, but we have broken it down into its smallest constituents. If we try a similar operation on character, we come up with the notion of function. A character can be adequately described by the function it fulfills in the work in which it -occurs. A function, in this respect, is the designation of a task or a role that has to be occupied/played in a larger whole. It presupposes this larger whole as a structured entity and can be described in terms independent from the actual occupant of that place. Inasmuch as the larger whole is a structured one, there has to be a hierarchy of functions. It will be clear that in a given literary work there will be quite a number and variety of functions that characters can fulfill. This number will be considerably less than that of motifs, but considerably larger than that of characters. Any given character, therefore, will fulfill more than one function, possibly quite a number of them. Likewise, one function may .be fulfilled by more than one character. The first important thing in finding out the functions of a character is of course to designate them correctly. There is not an a priori method to do this. We will have to go about empirically, by trial and error. But we are not entirely empty-handed. Literary tradition has filtered and selected functions through the ages, in particular in drama. In view of the large number of functions we will have to restrict our inquiry to two or three dominant functions. For practical reasons we will further restrict ourselves to the five large novels. What we will have to show is, first, that the functions to be selected are fulfilled in all these novels; next, that their role is of sufficient similarity through these novels to warrant a comparison; thirdly, that this comparison makes clear that there is a development. We will also mention one or two functions to which the inquiry could direct itself next. In general we hope to indicate that it is both possible and worth while to elaborate this approach to include other f>unctions. Finally, we will have to consider some consequences of our point of view. The first and dominant function in Dostoevskij's
Dostoevskij's
Hero
259
five great novels is filfilled, we think, by conscience. While it is hard in literature to find a hero for whom the matter of conscience is irrelevant we think that with Dostoevskij it plays a preponderant role. Once it will be obvious that it is closethis is accepted, ly connected with that of the hero's words and their and with his deeds and their consequences. consequences, is that these should necesWhat is not clear, perhaps, It is in fact possible that they sarily be the hero's. but then they will have to be are another character's, directly connected with the function o-i the hero's conbe considered science. Character can, for our purposes, as the locus where functions are connected. The three functions selected thus are conscience, It will be found that the connection word and deed. between word and deed often has a strong intellectual component while that between deed and conscience is more socially marked. We will look into these functions in regard to the hero in each of the novels and have to demonstrate that they occupy an equally central place in each of the novels and, after that, that there is a development. We start with-crime and Punishment and with the function of the word. What interests us is not its content, but its function. A function is also a relationship and it is of interest in which direction it is exercised. We find, and not only here, that the word not at a particular person, but at the is directed, world at large, in the form of an article. When we speak of the word, by the way, we have in mind not all the. talking done by or to the hero, but only those statements, mostly set apart in the novel, which are of central importance for the development of the story. The deed in this novel is very clear cut. It issues from the hero and is directed at his first victim and implies a second. It sets the plot moving and is directly connected with conscience. Conscience does not issue from the hero, it comes back at him. We find it back in a secondary, active form, namely in the hero's care, directed first at his own family'and afterwards at the Marmeladovs. The conscience function proper is located in several persons. The first is Porfirij, next comes Svi'drigajlov, and finally Sonja. This function forms a kind of spectrum directed at the hero, with Porfirij at the intellectual end and Sonja at the social end. Razumichin would figure somewhere at the intellectual end. Looked at more closely every function would tend to assume this form in a graphic representation. For the sake of-clarity we draw attention to it only when such a spectrum
260
Jav! N. Mei.jer
is
essential. Graphically the matter could hereunder. It is done strictly independent significance'should
be sketched for illustration be attributed
as is done and no to it.
(word) article Razumichin (conscience)
(conscience) KSvidrigajlov
Porfirij
Alena Ivanovna Lizaveta Ivanovna (deed)
After Raskol'nikov there is no other main hero in whose character the functions of word and deed are so closely connected. If we now turn to The Idiot we find an entirely different picture. Here the central place is occupied by the function of conscience, which is located in the hero. It issues forth from him to all sides and activates the moral life of every character with whom he enters into contact. While activating others, conscience is not an active force itself: it does not profess, it does not act, but it answers for. Word and deed thus do not issue from the hero, they are located outside him and in different persons: the word in Ippolit and the deed in Rogozin. The interconnection of word and deed thereby is much less clear. It would be possible to find a solution in Ippolit's unsuccessful attempt at suicide as the deed "belonging to" the word, and likewise to look for the words "belonging to" Rogoiin's deed in some of his conversations with Mygkin. The answer to this is twofold. In the first place, considered functionally it is by no means necessary that the two functions of word and deed be located in the same person; it is sufficient that the functional relationships be clear and important. And this is the case here. Secondly we present, only the most important functional as has been stated, relationships. There is a tendency observable in all the novels to repeat some functional relationships at a lower level, often in a parodistic vein. In The Idiot this is the case, for example, with "PavligEev's son". The intellectual component between word and deed
Dostoevskij's
261
Hero
will as a rule be observable only to the extent that they are located in the same person. This is the case with Ippolit. The social component between deed and conscience operates here in the zone where conscience tends to become active in the form of care; this is the case in the love relationships with Aglaja and Nastas'ja Filippovna.These are functionally equivalent to Raskol'nikov's relationships with his own family and with the Marmeladovs: these also clarify what conscience is led to do and cannot do. With all the vast differences in plot and characters between the two novels it does seem possible to juxtapose them functionally. The question whether these functions and their relationships are as central to T'he Idiot as they are to Crime and Punishment should, I think, be answered in the affirmative. One further parallel should perhaps be noted: a connection seems to announce itself through these novels between conscience and identity, with the problem of intellect acute at the limit. (word) Ippolit (conscience)
Aglaja
;
J/
Mygkin ZNastasja Fillppovna T Rogozin
(conscience)
(deed) 'We have juxtaposed two novels. If there is a development this should begin to be observable with the third novel. But before going into this let us first look at the three functions of which we have spoken in regard to the hero of The Possessed. In Stavrogin we have a word that is not followed by a deed, or at least his own deed. The word he has spoken to Kirillov and zatov is acted upon by them, but not by himself. He is at the receiving end of another word, Petr Verchovenskij's hierarchy, but he refuses the central place allotted to him in this scheme. While he has an enormous potential to act,his deeds have a random character, without direct connection either to the word or to conscience. The on1 one in regard to whom he is actually Stav-rogin is z atov (and to some extent, Mavrikij), but this is not so much the result of an active pursuit, but rather of the attraction he exercises on others. On the other hand he does not act when action is indicated, when he learns of the scheme
Jan M.Meijer
to kill Chromonoika and her brother. Conscience plays a very important role. All his deeds are put into quesand so are the cases where he does not act. In tion, every one of them he seems to probe conscience, to call it into action if there is one. There are visions of a terra firma and a settledness that elude him. It plays an important role in his relationships with three women: the cripple, Liza and Dar'ja. His deeds remain largely potential and the disconnection between word and deed and conscience poses the problem of identity in prominent fashion. It is played out three times in terms that stem from the Time of Troubles:. Ivan Careviz, Grigka Otrep'ev - anafema, and samozvanec. What we have in Stavrogin is a combination of Raskol'nikov and Mygkin. We do not mean the character, but the way functions are played out. Without the irect connection of word and deed in regard to a crime as it is realised in Crime and Punishment on the one hand; without the passivity of Myskin and his relationships with Aglaja and Nastas'ja Filippovna on the other hand, there would have been no Stavrogin. Of course, on principle this character could have been conceived at any time: Raskol'nikov and Mygkin are no ZogicaZ prerequisites for Stavrogin. But these are not things that are figured out theoretically. The Idiot had shown what possibilities there were in the passivity of the main 'character. These are now further exploited in a highly intelligent hero who does not represent conscience for others, but is looking for it himself. The same functions combine very differently in the main relationships. The main characters, therefore, are very diffe-. rent from one novel to the other. This does not exclude the possibility of similarities between an individual character in one novel and one in another. Thus it has been tried to explore the connections between Svidrigajlov and Stavrogin. They certainly have a number of traits in common. Less prominent is the similarity between Raskol'nikov on the one, and gatov and Kirillov on the other hand in their direct relationships with a family and with small children. Overstating a bit one might say that the new functional relationships effect a redistribution of character traits, together with new ones, over the characters of the novel. It is perhaps more apt to say that through the novels there takes place a combination and differentiation of character traits dependent on the changing functional relationships. That does not exclude, but rather implies the possibility that a given type of character can move from a marginal place in one novel to a (much more) central one in a later
Dostoevskij's
263
Hero
novel. We find that the theme of fathers and sons does not play a central role in this novel. It is tacked on, so to the main functional relationships that are to speak, shaping the world Dostoevskij shows us. As a result of those relationships it is Stavrogin who occupies the center stage, while NeEaev - Verchovenskij is excentric. The novel is not modelled on the Nezaev case, this case has been used. Thus what was essentially a phenomenon of the capitals has been moved to the province to suit the novel. This fact would seem to indicate that themes that enter the field of force of the functional relationships are reshaped, or if one prefers, deformed by it. (word) Kirillov (cohscience)
Liza
-->
~avrog~~chromono~ka Stepan
(conscience) Trof.
(deed)
In A Raw Youth we have the word and the potential of a deed, with conscience playing between these two, as the main functional relationships. The theme of fathers and sons plays a much larger role here than in The Possessed.
The word is the hero's, but it is not, as it is in most other novels, concentrated in an article or confession. It largely coincides with the narrator's word. It is the hero's 'idea' that constitutes the word which The deed remains potential but, is to have consequences. entirely different from The Possessed, the very possibility to act out this deed keeps the hero going. The central function is conscience. The hero has a running the word itself is one of the most fredebate with it; quent in the novel. But this d,ebate assumes a double function. As we know it has taken Dostoevskij many pains before he found the right narrator's perspective for this novel. The solution he arrived at - the story of the narrator as he was and acted not quite a year in a masterpiece of psychology, but it agO - resulted caused a certain disequilibrium in the functional buildof the process of self-discovery UP. The requirements gave added importance to the plot and made the functional texture less clear. On the one hand, all the main functions: the word, the deed-that-could-be, and con-
Jan M.Meijer
science, centre in the hero. On the other hand, all the The word is duplicated in functions are duplicated. Versilov, conscience is duplicated in Versilov and MaThe possible deed is directed at Anna Andreevna kar. The same goes for the family and at Katerina Ivanovna. relationships: we have a sister and a half-sister, a a physical and a spiritual father. mother and an aunt, Part of this is explained by plot and viewpoint: the not-knowing, not-yet-knowing by the hero of circumstances vital for his plans, in combination with the point of view necessitate a constant wavering between alternatives. The interference of the plot build-up and the functional build-up makes this the most difficult of the great novels to follow. A look from the functional point of view may in fact help to clarify the picture. When we distinguish behind the plot the web of functional relationships,the plot, too, is clarified by it. Conscience both activates the hero and makes him waver. The deed which remains in abeyance is a very fruitful source for complications of the plot and at the same time is the constant element in many of these complications. The combination of the word-idea of the hero and t‘he story of the narrator on the one hand, and the reduplication of the functional relationship of word and deed not done between Versilov and the hero on the other hand, now clearly appear in each other's perspective as conditioned by one another. After this it will also become clearer that A Raw Youth constitutes a further development after The Possessed. The connection between conscience and non-action has been explored further. It has been combined with the stimulation by conscience that we found in The Idiot. The active exploration of its limits furnishes a more active picture of the hero's identity. On a different plane from The Possessed we find in Kraft again a figure in which word, deed and conscience are directly connected and lead to suicide. The functional build-up is an unstable one that could indeed be realized only in an unstable youth. Further development could never be linear, even less so than with the other novels, but it still is a stage in one development, not an exception from it. We can observe again, for example, the splitting up of functions that were combined in Stavrogin over the hero and Versilov. Finally, the theme of fathers and sons has moved one step closer to the centre. We observe once more how this theme is affected by the functional relationships, i.e. by the field of force into which it is drawn. In view of the fairly strong ideological strand in Dostoevskij the man, and also in view of his interest in day
Dostoevskij's
265
Hero
to day developments, his toska po tekuEzemu,it is all the more striking that this theme, so rife in ideological opportunities, is exploited from a psychological angle, or rather from the angle of word and deed and conscience. (word) 'idea'
Versilov
(conscience)
Anna
Andreevna
Kat.
Ivanovna
(deed)
In The Brothers Karamazov we have a threefold hero and at the same time a striking economy of means in the realization of the functional relationships. The latter is achieved by the fact that the brothers enter into each other's functional relationships. This already suggests that their position in regard to the three main functions is not a parallel one. One brother's word is directed at the second brother while this second may act as conscience to the third. Yet word and deed and conscience vitally affect every one of them. Looking at the brothers separately we find Alega's word in his taking down Zosima's pronouncements and in his talk near the stone. His deed is going out into the world and his conscience is inseparable from his experience. He cares for Liza Chochlakova and for Grugen'ka. Ivan's word,too, is twofold; it is in the article on church and state and in his telling the story of the Great Inquisitor to Alega. Its direction is different from Alega's: the latter accepts it, and passes it on to young people. Ivan actively formulated it for the world at large and on the other hand made it into a story. Ivan's deed also has a double aspect: on the one hand he does not act out his word,although he is directed by it, and on the other he lets a deed happen that he could have stopped. His conscience comes back at him mainly from Smerdjakov and the devil, and also from Alega. With the first two the matter of conscience is directly connected with the question of identity. In his relationship with Alega this identity question is decided positively.
266
Jan M.Meijer
In Dmitrij, finally, we have the word of Ispoved' . gor;jazeqo oerdca and, more directly, the declaration of his intention to kill his father. The latter,however, is half-way between word and deed: it lacks the organized character of his confession. 'monologous', His deed, too, is not perpetrated, but for reasons quite different from Ivan's. His conscience comes at him from Alega and from the tribunal. As Aleza cares for Liza and Grugen'ka, and Ivan for Liza and Katja, so Dmitrij cares for K&tja and Grugen'ka. (word)
(conscience)
(conscience)
Smerdj Father
world
Father (deed)
We already pointed out the economy of the functional build-up in The Brothers Karamazov. We will now have to make this more explicit by tracing the development that led to The Brothers Karamazov. After that we shall try to extrapolate the relationships of the three functions as they were realized through the five novels. If we take the function of conscience, we have seen that it comes back at Raskol'nikov,in Crime and Punishment, in the first place through two characters, namely Porfirij and Sonja, from the intellectual and the The other characters with social side respectively. whom he comes into contact form a kind of spectrum issuing from these two. The connection is formed through Svidrigajlov. In fact, he is Raskol'nikov's vis-3-vis, going to his death while Raskol'nikov haltingly finds his identity in life. In The Idiot the situation is diametrically opposed: here conscience has the central function,
bringing
other
characters
to
words
and
deeds
In The Possessed we find an that lay enclosed in them. Conscience is not active, nor intermediate position. comes it back at the hero after his word and deed. The hero leaves his word without consequence and his deed undone, also in cases where he should-act. In him conscience remains suspended as it were, he is trying to find.it. From.a functional point of view the discovery in this novel is the fact that they can be represented
Dostoevskij
!s Hero
267
in a negative or dubitative mode. This approach furnishes an enormous plot potential, almost too much of it. The novels with the function of conscience in this mode are not those with the most economical treatment of plot. A Raw Youth is a further instance of this. Here conscience is used for its potential, or rather as a potential for living. Like every other function this one also is duplicated in this novel, by a 'suspended' conscience in the hero's father. The possibilities of a non fully realized or active conscience in their relationships with are here further explored, the other main functions. One can sketch such a development for each of the other functions also. The word is at first central to the hero and directed at the world, in the next case it is activated by a pre-conscience in several characters outside the hero, reaching its purest form in IpIn The Possessed it is held in abeyance by the polit. hero who pronounced it, but acted on by others who confront him with it. In A Raw Youth it is almost fused with the story of the hero's development. The function of the deed, again in the briefest outline, develops as follows: it follows directly from the word in Crime and Punishment, it is activated by conscience in The Idiot, it is done or not done arbitrarily, i.e. without direct connection with the other in The Possessed, two functions, while it is the possible deed activating word and conscience in A Raw Youth.
After these briefest of outlines of the development up to The Brothers Karamazov we turn again to this novel. The excursion has clarified our view both of the econom Y and the fulness of the functional treatment. In Alesa conscience is the primary function. It results in the deed, podvig of leaving the monastery and going out into the world. The word he took down connects the two, which result in his own word near the stone. Dimitrij is the man of the deed. The wish to act -results in the ispoveii' gorjasego serdca. Un.der these stimuli the conscience crystallizes slowly into his final confrontation with outward and inward justice. Ivan finally is the man of the word, in his article on church and state and in the Great Inquisitor. His deed perpetrated by another battles with a conscience sharpened by the word. All aspects of all three functions as they appear in the three brothers occur in the other novels also. Comparison of these separate traits through the novels shows that-their best realization is in The Brothers Ka ramazov. Moreover, in each of the brothers a different
268
Jan M.Meijer
function plays the main role, and each of them is connected with the two others by all three functions in a The Brothers Karamazov congreater or smaller degree. stitutes the end and the crown of a development that can be followed at least through the five great novels, but which probably starts even earlier. If we try to extrapolate the three functions of conscience,of word and of deed, we find that their constellation depends on which function has the 'initiaand on their relative strength in the hero. The tive' initiative function will as a rule be strongest. Thus, if the word has the initiative, and if it is directed its author is pressured into an act, at the world, which in turn will activate his conscience. The word 'monological' interpretation enters into all in a less kinds of debates which concern possible,acts and stake out the field where conscience can be active. If conscience has the initiative,words and deeds will be activated in different persons, different between them and from the hero. If the deed has the initiative, the word that goes with it will be sought and it will be placed before the conscience. In cases where the word the deed and the conscience will has the initiative, be in the same person. It is striking that the first two novels present instances when one function very clearly has the initiative over the other two. In those that follow this is much less so. Acting is as important as the omission of an act. The deed may be inadequate to the word, and the other way round. Such situations do not result in less tension, perhaps because the function of conscience is divided over the hero and other characters. The development through the five novels is one which moves towards a greater equilibrium of these three functions. The result is not a loss of dynamism, but rather a gain, because the functions are divided over more than one character. The entry of the father and son motif into this field of force favoured this division of function. On the other hand, this field of force conditioned the shape in which this theme would appear in the novels. We find similarity of character combined with different functions(for example Svidrigajlov, Stavrogin, Versilov) and likewise we find the same function represented by quite different characters (conscience by Sonja, Mygkin, Alega). What we have tried to do here is to make plausible that from the point of view of development the functional relationships are the fundamental ones, and the constant factor behind the chanforces operate on this field of force, which ges. Other
~/OS toevskij
‘s Hero
269
have their own logic and which try to order the matter of the book in their own fashion. The main forces we have in mind are plot, character and ideology. Likewise each theme that enters this field of force undergoes its influence; we have tried to demonstrate this for the theme of fathers and sons. It is clear that what has been presented here does not amount to proving our position. As has been said, everything depends on an accurate description of the functions. If, for example, one would say that guilt,‘ not conscience is the fundamental function, the picture would become quite different. We will have to proceed empirically, by trial and error. If it appears that the above-mentioned functions are taken correctly, we will have to isolate others and assign them their own place in this field of force. Each new one will constitute a check on those we.isolated earlier. The final result, ideally, would be a mapping of the field of force that was Dostoevskij's writing. If this view is correct, this would have important consequences. It would mean that this field of force was inherent in Dostoevskij, that he could not get outside it, but only realize it more and more: It means that when Dostoevskij started writing a novel this field of force went into operation, largely unconsciously perhaps, and never in a completely conscious fashion. It was not outside him, he could work at it, but he had to start from it in his conception. This affects his attitude towards the times. For all his 'desire for the topical' (toska po teku8Eemu) issues of the time could not be simply taken over into the novels. They, too, were subject to the forming or deforming influence of this field of force when they entered it. The treatment of the NeEaev affair is the most notable demonstration of this. We also observed it in the treatment of the fathers and sons theme. If this can be done for Dostoevskij, there is no a priori reason that it could not be done for other writers also. Each writer has his own field of force. Perhaps only few writers fully realize its potential. But by trying to chart this field of force, we will get a clearer view of a writer's specifics and development. Such a field of force is an open structure, an objective entity that is open to inspection and on which, given sufficient research, agreement can be reached. This will not put an end to the existence of many different views of Dostoevskij, nor should it: these are personal views, and as such valuable for those that hold them, for each of us in our time. But it may enable us to distinguish more clearly than
270
Jan M.Meijer
hitherto the general and the personal or, in somewhat the subjective and the objective elechanged terms, ments in our view of Dostoevskij. A field of force is by nature a dynamic thing. It exercises its push and pull on what enters it. We have spoken of its deforming influence on what comes into It would be wrong, however, to bring to the its orbit. The field of force may also lend fore only this aspect. view and push it further, force to, say, an ideological develop it more fully than a 'simple' ideologue - or the writer in that quality - would have done. This can be observed more than once with Dostoevskij. One other point should be mentioned in this connection. Propp's success in analyzing the fairy tale has led to efforts to do the same for other narrative forms. It is clear from a reading of only a few novels that for this form at least a fixed order of functions is not.part of the structure. One of the reasons of this difference is in the medium: folklore has a much stronger mnemotechnic structure. So a Propp treatment of the novel in this sense is not possible. It might still be argued, however - and we would not fundamentally object against such a view - that the charting of a field of force is not fundamentally different from what Propp has done for the fairy tale. In fact, Propp's scheme of the fairy tale might be said to represent the field of force of that form. We have found the field of force as the recognizable element of constancy behind the changes that developAs this field of force is operative in ment implies. any novel of some scope, the question might be raised whether it would be possible to isolate it in one single novel. We will not go as far as to deny that possibility, probably with the help of non-novelistic material concerning that same writer. This would raise questions of method into which we shall not enter now. It will at any rate be more easy and practical to do it on the basis of more than one novel. What we have tried to do here is not new. It is a banality to state that we all try to realize our potenand to discover what they are in the process. tialities, In this connection we often quote Goethe's "Gezetz nach dem Du angetreten bist". In a form more directly concerning writing and the writer Gide said of Balzac that he had been looking for a system all his life and thank God that he did not find it. Dostoevskij did not find it out either, - in fact this is humanly impossible but he realized it with a fulness that only few writers attain. We are conscious of the metaphysical overtones that
Dostoevskij's
Hero
271
are slipping in. But it is not necessary to accept these in order to accept the possibility of charting If one dislikes the term a writer's field of force. for metaphysical reasons, another can surely be found.
Universiteit
van
Utrecht