What do you think?
Rate this book
The Dream of a Queer Fellow & the Pushkin Speech
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. To ensure a quality reading experience, this work has been proofread and republished using a format that seamlessly blends the original graphical elements with text in an easy-to-read typeface. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
95 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1960
3 people are currently reading
206 people want to read
About the author
Fyodor Dostoevsky
3,250 books72.3k followers
Фёдор Михайлович Достоевский
(Russian)
Works, such as the novels Crime and Punishment (1866), The Idiot (1869), and The Brothers Karamazov (1880), of Russian writer Feodor Mikhailovich Dostoyevsky or Dostoevski combine religious mysticism with profound psychological insight.
Very influential writings of Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin included Problems of Dostoyevsky's Works (1929),
Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky composed short stories, essays, and journals. His literature explores humans in the troubled political, social, and spiritual atmospheres of 19th-century and engages with a variety of philosophies and themes. People most acclaimed his Demons(1872) .
Many literary critics rate him among the greatest authors of world literature and consider multiple books written by him to be highly influential masterpieces. They consider his Notes from Underground of the first existentialist literature. He is also well regarded as a philosopher and theologian.
(Russian: Фёдор Михайлович Достоевский) (see also Fiodor Dostoïevski)
Works, such as the novels Crime and Punishment (1866), The Idiot (1869), and The Brothers Karamazov (1880), of Russian writer Feodor Mikhailovich Dostoyevsky or Dostoevski combine religious mysticism with profound psychological insight.
Very influential writings of Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin included Problems of Dostoyevsky's Works (1929),
Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky composed short stories, essays, and journals. His literature explores humans in the troubled political, social, and spiritual atmospheres of 19th-century and engages with a variety of philosophies and themes. People most acclaimed his Demons(1872) .
Many literary critics rate him among the greatest authors of world literature and consider multiple books written by him to be highly influential masterpieces. They consider his Notes from Underground of the first existentialist literature. He is also well regarded as a philosopher and theologian.
(Russian: Фёдор Михайлович Достоевский) (see also Fiodor Dostoïevski)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
January 28, 2020
Η ομιλία του Ντοστογιέφσκι για τον Πουσκιν. Εξαιρετικο
February 24, 2022
"Yes, beyond all doubt, the destiny of a Russian is pan-European and universal. To become a true Russian, to become a Russian fully in the end of all, I repeat), means only to become the brother of all men, to become, if you will, a universal man. All our Slavophilism and Westernism is only a great misunderstanding, even though historically necessary. To a true Russian, Europe and the destiny of all the mighty Aryan family is as dear as Russia herself, as the destiny of his own native country, because our destiny is universality, won not by the sword, but by the strength of brotherhood and our fraternal aspiration to reunite mankind."
January 12, 2019
Great little story, a Christian parable of a man who (essentially) finds an earth where original sin never occurred.
This is followed by Dostoevsky's speech made on "Pushkin Day" in 1880 when the Russians were arguing about how their nation was going to go (oy). It was interesting enough to make me want to investigate the situation further. It was also interesting in how similar and relevant aspects of it were. Sort of like that old "Simpsons" gag where the robot DJ's jokes on current events:
Computer: "Looks like those clowns in Washington have done it again! What a bunch of clowns!"
DJ [laughing]: "How does it keep up with the news like that?"
Except here Dostoevsky's complaints are eerily familiar in their specificity: An atheistic establishment class completely out-of-touch with the everyman and despising them and their coarseness while hypocritically praising the foreign culture they want to impose.
Also interesting was the reference to the coming Great War which would ultimately erupt as WWI. But this is the third or fourth time I've seen this prediction from the late 19th century, and they were all off by 10-20 years. (All the predictions seemed to think it would happen ca. 1900.)
Anyway, interesting, and Dostoevsky's always great.
This is followed by Dostoevsky's speech made on "Pushkin Day" in 1880 when the Russians were arguing about how their nation was going to go (oy). It was interesting enough to make me want to investigate the situation further. It was also interesting in how similar and relevant aspects of it were. Sort of like that old "Simpsons" gag where the robot DJ's jokes on current events:
Computer: "Looks like those clowns in Washington have done it again! What a bunch of clowns!"
DJ [laughing]: "How does it keep up with the news like that?"
Except here Dostoevsky's complaints are eerily familiar in their specificity: An atheistic establishment class completely out-of-touch with the everyman and despising them and their coarseness while hypocritically praising the foreign culture they want to impose.
Also interesting was the reference to the coming Great War which would ultimately erupt as WWI. But this is the third or fourth time I've seen this prediction from the late 19th century, and they were all off by 10-20 years. (All the predictions seemed to think it would happen ca. 1900.)
Anyway, interesting, and Dostoevsky's always great.
February 16, 2025
Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s Pushkin Speech (1880) is a profound and rhetorically charged address delivered at the unveiling of the Alexander Pushkin monument in Moscow. As one of the most significant public orations in Russian literary history, the speech not only celebrates Pushkin’s genius but also serves as a platform for Dostoyevsky’s broader philosophical, religious, and nationalist ideas. Delivered near the end of his life, this speech encapsulates many of the themes that defined Dostoyevsky’s literary and intellectual legacy, including his vision of Russian identity, his belief in universal reconciliation, and his interpretation of Pushkin’s role as a prophetic figure in Russian culture.
Dostoyevsky frames Pushkin as a uniquely Russian writer whose works transcend national boundaries, embodying a capacity for deep empathy and synthesis of diverse cultural influences. He emphasizes Pushkin’s ability to absorb and express both Western European and Russian traditions, portraying him as a literary bridge between Russia and the rest of the world. This argument aligns with Dostoyevsky’s broader ideological vision of Russia’s historical mission—not merely as a national power but as a spiritual and moral force destined to unite humanity through a uniquely Russian form of Christian universalism.
One of the speech’s most striking aspects is its passionate and almost prophetic tone. Dostoyevsky presents a vision of Russia’s future, urging his audience to embrace a messianic role for the nation, one that will bring salvation to the West through its spiritual depth and humility. This perspective, deeply rooted in his own religious and philosophical convictions, resonated with many in his audience, particularly those who subscribed to Slavophile ideas of Russia’s distinct cultural destiny. However, his rhetoric also sparked controversy, particularly among Westernizers and more cosmopolitan intellectuals who viewed such a vision as overly mystical and nationalistic.
Critics have noted that the Pushkin Speech is as much a reflection of Dostoyevsky’s personal ideology as it is an analysis of Pushkin’s literary significance. His selective reading of Pushkin’s works, focusing primarily on The Bronze Horseman and Eugene Onegin, serves as a vehicle for advancing his own spiritual and political vision rather than engaging in a purely literary critique. Nevertheless, this interpretative approach adds to the speech’s power, transforming it from a conventional commemorative address into a profound statement on Russian identity and destiny.
The Pushkin Speech is not merely an homage to Russia’s greatest poet but a defining moment in Dostoyevsky’s intellectual and literary career. It offers invaluable insights into his late philosophical thought, making it essential reading for those interested in Russian literature, nationalism, and the intersection of art and ideology. While some may find its messianic nationalism problematic, its emotional intensity and intellectual depth ensure its lasting significance in Russian cultural history.
GPT
Dostoyevsky frames Pushkin as a uniquely Russian writer whose works transcend national boundaries, embodying a capacity for deep empathy and synthesis of diverse cultural influences. He emphasizes Pushkin’s ability to absorb and express both Western European and Russian traditions, portraying him as a literary bridge between Russia and the rest of the world. This argument aligns with Dostoyevsky’s broader ideological vision of Russia’s historical mission—not merely as a national power but as a spiritual and moral force destined to unite humanity through a uniquely Russian form of Christian universalism.
One of the speech’s most striking aspects is its passionate and almost prophetic tone. Dostoyevsky presents a vision of Russia’s future, urging his audience to embrace a messianic role for the nation, one that will bring salvation to the West through its spiritual depth and humility. This perspective, deeply rooted in his own religious and philosophical convictions, resonated with many in his audience, particularly those who subscribed to Slavophile ideas of Russia’s distinct cultural destiny. However, his rhetoric also sparked controversy, particularly among Westernizers and more cosmopolitan intellectuals who viewed such a vision as overly mystical and nationalistic.
Critics have noted that the Pushkin Speech is as much a reflection of Dostoyevsky’s personal ideology as it is an analysis of Pushkin’s literary significance. His selective reading of Pushkin’s works, focusing primarily on The Bronze Horseman and Eugene Onegin, serves as a vehicle for advancing his own spiritual and political vision rather than engaging in a purely literary critique. Nevertheless, this interpretative approach adds to the speech’s power, transforming it from a conventional commemorative address into a profound statement on Russian identity and destiny.
The Pushkin Speech is not merely an homage to Russia’s greatest poet but a defining moment in Dostoyevsky’s intellectual and literary career. It offers invaluable insights into his late philosophical thought, making it essential reading for those interested in Russian literature, nationalism, and the intersection of art and ideology. While some may find its messianic nationalism problematic, its emotional intensity and intellectual depth ensure its lasting significance in Russian cultural history.
GPT
September 14, 2017
where would fyodor position himself had he seen the october revolution? would he be closer to mayakovsky or to sorokin? resembling more liquid than air, peacock than bear?
June 13, 2018
Dostoevsky answers the critics of the only non-fiction piece I could find written by him. Good stuff!
June 9, 2024
"Then I suddenly stopped being angry with people, and began almost not to notice them."
March 16, 2019
“I am a queer fellow. They call me mad now. That would be a promotion, if I were not still the same queer fellow for them as before. But I’m not cross with them any more; now I love them all – even when they laugh at me, somehow I love them more than ever. I would laugh with them myself – not at myself, but for love of them – if it did not make me so sad to look at them; sad, because they do not know the truth, and I do. How hard it is for one man who knows the truth! But they won’t understand this. They won’t understand it.
Before, I used to suffer deeply, because I seemed queer. Not seemed, but was. I always was queer; perhaps I’ve known it from the day of my birth. Perhaps when I was only seven I knew that I was queer. Afterwards I went to school, then to the university, and – well, the more I studied the more I discovered that I was queer. So that finally it seemed to me that all my university knowledge existed only to explain and prove to me, the deeper I plunged into it, that I was queer. Each day increased and strengthened my consciousness that I looked queer in every way. Everybody always laughed at me. But not one of them knew or guessed that if there was a man on earth who really knew how queer I was, that man was myself; their not knowing that was quite the most insulting thing of all, but there I was to blame. I was always so proud that nothing would induce me to confess that to any one. My pride increased with years, and I verily believe that if It had happened that I had allowed myself to confess that I was queer to any living soul, I would have blown out my brains with a revolver on the spot. Oh, how much I suffered as a youth for fear I might not be able to hold out, and might suddenly, somehow, confess to my comrades.” Pg: 11
Before, I used to suffer deeply, because I seemed queer. Not seemed, but was. I always was queer; perhaps I’ve known it from the day of my birth. Perhaps when I was only seven I knew that I was queer. Afterwards I went to school, then to the university, and – well, the more I studied the more I discovered that I was queer. So that finally it seemed to me that all my university knowledge existed only to explain and prove to me, the deeper I plunged into it, that I was queer. Each day increased and strengthened my consciousness that I looked queer in every way. Everybody always laughed at me. But not one of them knew or guessed that if there was a man on earth who really knew how queer I was, that man was myself; their not knowing that was quite the most insulting thing of all, but there I was to blame. I was always so proud that nothing would induce me to confess that to any one. My pride increased with years, and I verily believe that if It had happened that I had allowed myself to confess that I was queer to any living soul, I would have blown out my brains with a revolver on the spot. Oh, how much I suffered as a youth for fear I might not be able to hold out, and might suddenly, somehow, confess to my comrades.” Pg: 11
July 25, 2016
Prilično dugačak (i rastresen) govor (održan 1880. na otkrivanju spomenika Puškinu u Moskvi); malo teško povjerovati iz današnje perspektive da je izrečen uživo u komadu. Autor se u njemu standardno očituje kao nepopravljiv nacionalist-utopist, ali ne nužno u nekakvom lošem smislu, više je nabacivao apstraktnosti- što mu je zamjerao dio kritike. (Npr. sveljudskost- da je „ruskom srcu, možda više od svih naroda, suđeno da ujedini svijet u sveljudskom bratstvu“) Osim toga, uzvisuje Puškina izvan svih okvira (što sam doživio prilično komičnim/luckastim, ali očekivanim) te nabacuje neka svoja razmišljanja, prije svega o Tatjani, Onjeginu pa i ostalim Puškinovim likovima i djelima.
Read
August 9, 2016Deeply, unapologetically philosophical. One of those read-it-and-think-for-a-week types.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews