210. Moskovskie novosti, no. 42, 18 October 1992, p. 23.
211. Tsipko 1991, 7.
212. Golovanov 1992, 13.
213. Zaslavskaya 1984, 106.
214. As quoted by Mikhail Heller 1988, 134 (= Geller 1985, 151). For a documentary study of alcoholism in the Soviet Union, see Boris Segal’s fascinating book The Drunken Society (1990).
215. Belkin 1991a, 4.
216. E.g., Tkachenko and Iakubova 1992.
NOTES TO CHAPTER 3
1. Dal’ 1984 (1862), vol. 2, 191–92.
2. Wierzbicka 1992, 189.
3. Vekhi 1909, 48ff.
4. Berdiaev 1991, 64.
5. Berdiaev 1990, 76. If in some of his writings Berdiaev manifests a positive attitude toward smirenie, as Wierzbicka has shown (1992, 189–90), this means that he is ambivalent about the subject. In any case I cannot agree with Wierzbicka’s idea that smirenie is a consistently positive and exclusively religious notion.
6. Freud 1989 (1928), 41.
7. Khomiakov 1955, 83.
8. Ibid., 397.
9. Ibid., 83.
10. Berdiaev 1968 (1921), 164.
11. As quoted by Wierzbicka 1992, 188.
12. Dal’ 1984 (1862), vol. 2, 194.
13. Custine 1989, 501, italics added.
14. Custine 1843, vol. 4, 103.
15. Fenichel 1945, 364.
16. Sarnoff 1988, 209.
17. Pipes 1974, 161.
18. Kavelin 1882, 151.
19. Wierzbicka 1992, 67.
20. As quoted by Wierzbicka 1992, 72.
21. See Andreev’s motif-index of folktales (1929, 67), which includes about a dozen items on sud’ba and the related “dolia” (roughly, “one’s lot in life”).
22. Example furnished by Yuri Druzhnikov. Recently in the Russian press the word sud’ba has been frequently appearing in the plural form (e.g., “sud’by naroda,” “sud’by otechestva”). Mikhail Epshtein has written about this phenomenon (1989, 312ff.). This is no doubt yet another reflection of the increasing “pluralism” of Russian society.
23. Cherniavsky 1961, 132. I have modified his translation somewhat.
24. Wierzbicka 1992, 70.
25. Mel’chuk and Zholkovskii 1984, 857–66.
26. Dal’ 1955 (1880–82), vol. 4, 356.
27. Wierzbicka 1992, 108; cf. esp. the section on “not being in control,” 413–30.
28. As quoted by Wierzbicka 1992, 113.
29. Hubbs 1990, 59.
30. For examples, see Dal’ 1984 (1862), vol. 1, 39–40. See also Fedotov 1975, 1, 349–50.
31. Cf. Martynova 1978, 182.
32. Martynova 1978, 178.
33. Anikin 1991, 68.
34. See Farnsworth 1992, 149. Eremina (1992) attempts to show that the death-wish lullabies were really an attempt to “deceive death,” to ward off the child’s possible death by concocting an apotropaic “contact with death.”
35. Dal’ 1984, vol. 1, 298.
36. Dunn 1974, 384.
37. Ransel 1988, 266ff.; Ransel 1991. Cf. Semenova-Tian-Shanskaia 1914, 57; Dunn 1974, 388ff.; Hoch 1986, 68–69.
38. Ransel 1991, 120.
39. Baiburin 1993, 52.
40. Dal’ 1984 (1862), vol. 1, 221.
41. Ibid., 45.
42. See, for example, Selivanov 1991, 73.
43. Ibid.
44. Reik 1963, 163.
45. Infanticide did sometimes occur among the peasantry. An illegitimate infant might be drowned, suffocated, or poisoned, for example (e.g., Semenova-Tian-Shanskaia 1914, 57–58).
46. Mel’chuk and Zholkovskii 1984, 860.
47. Gertsen 1954–65, vol. 7, 185.
48. Nekrasov 1967, vol. 2, 274.
49. Durova 1988 (1836), 34.
50. Boiko 1988, 197.
NOTES TO CHAPTER 4
1. Merezhkovskii 1914, vol. 16, 166–67. Compare Maksim Gor’kii’s assertion that Russian writers (including the greats, Dostoevsky and Tolstoy) offer an “apology for passivity” and support violence “by preaching patience, reconciliation, forgiveness, justification” (Gor’kii 1937 [1905], 8, 9).
2. Gorodetzky 1973, 27–74. Cf. Fedotov 1942, which bears some curious resemblances to Gorodetzky, although Fedotov writes more clearly.
3. Ziolkowski 1988.
4. As translated by Gorodetzky 1973, 42. For the Russian original, see Turgenev 1960–68, vol. 10, 175.
5. Translated by Gorodetzky 1973, 39. Cf. Turgenev 1960–68, vol. 4, 358.
6. See Rancour-Laferriere 1993a; 1993d. On Tolstoy’s own masochism, see Blanchard 1984, 31–43.
7. Rosen 1993, 430.
8. Wasiolek 1964, 54.
9. There is an enormous psychoanalytic literature on Dostoevsky which gives due attention to the roles of guilt, abjection, suffering, humiliation, punishment, and related psychological issues in the life and works of this great author. See, for example: Freud 1989 (1928); Rancour-Laferriere 1989b, 6–10; Geha 1970; Bonaparte 1962; Kristeva 1982, 18–20; Paris 1973; Dalton 1979, 68ff.; Breger 1989, 25ff., 102, 196; Rosen 1993. Gorodetzky (1973, 59–69) treats Dostoevsky in terms of the humiliated Christ, and numerous other non-psychoanalytic critics have also paid ample attention to Dostoevsky’s cult of suffering.
10. Dostoyevsky 1980, 415, 433.
11. Ibid., 438.
12. Saltykov-Shchedrin 1980, 36. The Russian original is Saltykov-Shchedrin 1965–77, vol. 8, 292.
13. Saltykov-Shchedrin 1980, 10. The Russian original is Saltykov-Shchedrin 1965–77, vol. 8, 270.
14. Saltykov-Shchedrin 1980, 98, 152; 1965–77, vol. 8, 350, 401.
15. Seifrid 1992.
16. Smirnov 1987; 1990.
17. Clark 1985, 178.
18. Solzhenitsyn 1989, 361–62; 1978-, vol. 11, 426–27.
19. Pipes 1991, 213.
20. Dostoyevsky 1950, 618, italics added; Dostoevskii 1972–88, vol. 14, 458. Cf. Wierzbicka 1992, 71.
21. Dostoyevsky 1950, 615–16; Dostoevskii 1972–88, vol. 14, 456–57.
22. Dostoyevsky 1950, 617, italics added; Dostoevskii 1972–88, vol. 14, 458.
23. Dostoyevsky 1950, 617–18, italics added. I have had to make some corrections in the Garnett translation. Cf. Dostoevskii 1972–88, vol. 14, 458.
24. See Chaitin 1972, 8Off.; Besançon 1968, 348. I agree with Chaitin’s suggestion that Dmitrii’s desire for imprisonment is the result of Oedipal guilt. Having wished to kill his father, and having gained possession of the maternal Grushenka, his father’s mistress, Dmitrii deserves the Oedipal talion punishment.
But this Oedipal reading does not exclude a pre-Oedipal one, for the desire for punishment can be overdetermined (see chap. 5 herein).
25. See Rozanov 1903, vol. 2, 98.
26. Pushkin 1962–66, vol. 5, 70–71.
27. Nabokov 1981, vol. 1, 166.
28. Dostoevskii 1972–1988, vol. 26, 140. Cf. Hubbs 1988, 216.
29. Nabokov 1981, vol. 1, 228.
30. Ibid., 185; Pushkin 1962–66, vol. 5, 86.
31. Cf. Hubbs 1988, 216.
32. Nabokov 1981, vol. 1, 205; Pushkin 1962–66, vol. 5, 100.
33. See Rancour-Laferriere 1989a.
34. See, for example Freud, SE, vol. 9, 220; Fenichel 1945, 214.
35. For a psychoanalytic interpretation of Tat’iana’s dream, see Rancour-Laferriere 1989a.
36. It is in any case normal, cross-culturally, for the object of love in adulthood to be a parental figure from the past. Biologists, anthropologists, and psychologists of various stripes (including of course psychoanalysts) have studied this phenomenon. See Rancour-Laferriere 1985, 108ff., 196ff.
37. Nabokov 1981, vol. I, 161; Pushkin 1962–66, vol. 5, 66.
38. Nabokov 1981, vol. 1, 304–5; Pushkin 1962–66, vol. 5, 187.