巴赫金《陀思妥耶夫斯基的诗学问题》（Bakhtin, Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics, ed. trans. Caryl Emerson. University of Minnesota Press, 1984.）
Ch. 1 “Dostoevsky’s polyphonic novel and its treatment in critical literature”
P. 5 “Any acquaintance with D… leaves the impression that one is not dealing with a single author-artist, but with a number of philosophical statements by several author-thinkers – Raskolnikov [拉斯科尔尼科夫 / 罪与罚], Myskin [白痴], Stavrogin [斯塔夫罗金 / 群魔], Ivan Karamazov [伊万·卡拉马佐夫], the Grand Inquisitor [宗教大法官].”
“For some authors D’s voice merges with the voices of one or another of his characters; for others, it is a peculiar synthesis of all these ideological voices.” [纳博科夫对陀的批评可否被理解为：还不够彻底地复调——作者 / 上帝之声仍在：罗佳与索尼娅共同祈祷时；阿廖沙最后的宣讲……《洛丽塔》能否视为复调的失败 / 讽刺？]
“Characters are polemicized, learned from [阿廖沙，佐西玛长老：成长小说模式]; attempts are made to develop their views into finished systems [if not “totalized / totalitarian” systems: 斯塔夫罗金，伊万]. The character is treated as ideologically authoritative and independent. He [女性角色呢] is perceived as the author of a fully weighted ideological conception of his own [个人是自身的作者：普遍化的现代性 / 原子性 / “存在主义”性], and not as the object of D’s finalizing artistic vision.” [人物不是“辩证法的诸环节”……开放的，非目的论的系统]
P. 6 “A plurality of independent and unmerged voices, a genuine polyphony [复调] of fully valid voices is in fact the chief characteristic of D’s novels.”
“What unfolds in his works is NOT a multitude of characters and fates in a single objective world [福楼拜的模式], illuminated by a single authorial consciousness [矛盾性：“单一的”“客观现实”及“客观的”“单一”意识，本身已是现代性的结果……Benedict Anderson] [陀走在更前，比福楼拜更前：或者说保存了某种para-modern / “非-现代”的世界观念？T. S. Eliot: “He does the police / polis in different voices”……]; rather a plurality of consciousnesses, with equal rights and each with its own world.”
B. 对D. 的理想化之嫌？每个独立意识都有其自洽性，但有些意识比其他意识更无法接受其他意识的独立性。用萨特的观点（他在讨论《群魔》中基里洛夫的自杀 / 成神哲学）：一些意识比其他意识更倾向于成神，而这些意识往往是主人公 / 某种与小说家本身进一步对话的意识。（第二章有更多讨论。）进而破坏“理想的”复调情境。
而陀的小说，与其说单纯是在实现复调性……不如说更是在呈现一个复调性成为问题 / 进入危机的时代？……
P. 8 “[D’s artistic task] is the task of constructing a polyphonic world and destroying the established forms of the fundamentally monologic (or homophonic) European novel.” [哪些小说？在哪里“断代”？……福楼拜：《包法利夫人》仅在时空上是“复多”的。《情感教育》完全是传统小说。“视差”的复多不是“声音”的复调。]
P. 9 再有：两种失败的批评，抹灭复调 / 抹灭每个声音的主体性。[某个声音是另一个声音的附庸，某个是“作者 / 上帝的声音”等等。]
巴赫金的“声音”是什么概念？首先不是形而上的，而是叙述声音。因而“声音”是否是叙事话语本身的元素……或者话语的结果（结构主义的阅读）……哲学史、社会史、精神史的沉积物。
P. 9-10 “The thinking of his characters is indeed sometimes dialectic or antinomic. [辩证思想是存在的，但并不以结构叙事本身的形式存在，不干涉叙事整体。] But all logical links remain within the limits of individual consciousness, and do not govern the event-relations between them.” [事件打破观念、打破声音的连贯独白。]
复调的关键或许并不在于“声音”如何“承认”（recognize）自身或“承认”其他声音……过于黑格尔的解读，“哲学化”的阅读。[See B’s critique of both Vyacheslav Ivanov and Sergei Askoldov: 前者“承认他者”论，后者“承认自身”论。]
关键在于使复调成为可能的小说结构，叙事的（由宏观到微观的）整体机杼。
“人物”“声音”“事件”“观点”“观念”“意识”等一切概念的重估。
因此着眼于陀思妥耶夫斯基的诗学问题 [poetics, poiesis, “制造”之问题]；具体而言，形式的制造问题。
因此B. 同意批评家Leonid Grossman的观点：D. 作为现代主义者，现代形式的创造者。
P. 14-15 [citing Grossman]: “To link together in one artistic creation philosophical confessions and criminal adventures, to incorporate religious drama into the storyline of a boulevard novel, to lead the reader through all the peripeteia of an adventure narrative only to arrive at the revelation of a new mystery… The Book of Job, the Revelation of St. John, the Gospel texts, the discourses of St. Simeon the New Theologian, are combined here in the most original way with the newspaper, the anecdote, the parody, the street scene, [cf. 波德莱尔的Tableaux parisiens或“巴黎街景”] with the grotesque, even with the pamphlet.”
P. 14 “Grossman sees the distinguishing trait in D. [as] his joining together of the most varied and incompatible elements in the unity of novelistic construction, and in his destruction of the integral and unified fabric of narration.” ——作为蒙太奇主义者的陀思妥耶夫斯基？
L. Grossman同时认为D. 的复调形式主要来源于戏剧对话 [dramatic dialogue] 与哲学、神学的论辩性对话（如苏格拉底）。同时，他认为D. 晚年的作品更接近于中世纪宗教神秘剧 [mystery play] 的形式……更为他的“现代主义”增加了论据。
第四位批评家：Otto Kaus，马克思主义的批评。Otto Kaus如何解释D. 的“无风格之风格” [styleless style]？
Kaus认为陀的叙事即是资本主义精神！
P. 19 “Kaus claims that Dostoevsky’s world is the purest and most authentic expression of the spirit [Geist?] of capitalism. At some earlier time those worlds, those planes – social, cultural, and ideological – which collide in D’s work were each self-sufficient [自洽的，潜藏未表述的前资本主义“诸世界”，社会各环节 / 各阶层], organically sealed and stable, each made sense internally as a sealed unit.”[声音的封闭性对应前资本主义社会阶层的封闭性]
“Capitalism destroyed the isolation of these worlds [Marx: Capitalism “smashed all boundaries, spread itself across the entire surface of the Earth. “All that is solid melts into thin air” 一切坚固的都融化了。资本主义的巨大同化性力量，制造事件、制造现实的力量], broke down the seclusion and the inner ideological self-sufficiency of these social spheres.”
P. 19, continued, brilliant passage. “These worlds have not lost their individual profile, worked out over centuries, but they have ceased to be self-sufficient. Their blind co-existence and their peaceful and trusting ideological ignorance of each other came to an end; their mutual connectedness and mutual contradictoriness was revealed with absolute clarity. Every atom of life trembled with this contradictory unity of the capitalist world, permitting nothing to rest easily, but at the same time resolving nothing.”
P. 20 “The most favorable soil for [资本主义的复调性] was precisely Russia where capitalism set in almost catastrophically, and where it came upon an untouched multitude of diverse worlds and social groups.”
第五位批评家：B. 认为对D. 的复调性理解最深的是B. M. Engelhardt, “Dostoevsky’s Ideological Novel”
“Ideological”一词的寓意：陀的小说是关于“观念”idea / 以“观念”为运动单元的小说。因此并非“哲学小说”或以观念为内容的小说。
P. 23 [citing Engelhardt] “What he wrote were not novels with ideas, not philosophical novels in the style of the eighteenth century [伏尔泰，狄德罗], but novels about the idea. He cultivated an utterly special type of novel that, in contrast to the adventure, sentimental, psychological, or historical novel, may be called the ideological novel.” [观念作为自足的表现对象，运动中、行动中的观念，“分层的” [multi-layered] 观念世界，“观念力量” [idea-forces] 对各人物施加的引力和斥力……]
Engelhardt认为的三重“观念之层面”：
1. “环境” [environment]，机械性决定观念的外部条件；
2. “土壤” [soul]，精神性的、观念滋长的抽象物质；
3. “大地” [earth]，p. 24 陀氏“最深刻的”发现，小说所处的层面。
“It is the earth that is not distinguished from children, the earth that Alyosha Karamazov kissed. […] It is everything – all of nature, and man, and beasts, and birds. It is both the highest degree of reality and the world where earthly life of the spirit unfolds.”
从“大地”的广度来看一个观念的诞生：这也是小说家所处的平面。“环境”（机械决定）与“土壤”（俄国的观念史、精神史）均不足以承担小说叙事本身。叙事本身开始于阿廖沙对大地的“吻”，对全体经验、全体现实的隐秘的、开端性的肯定，或“爱” [love]。对于观念本身的动作 / 存在 / 生命……之肯定，成为叙述的岩架。小说本身即是大地，或者，至少是大地的诸元素结合的场所。
不仅要写“他想了什么”而要写：他是在怎样的天空下 / 怎样的房间里 / 怎样的灯光下 / 呼吸着怎样的空气 / 是热是冷 / 是清澈是浑浊 / 在发烧吗 / 双手沾着鲜血吗 / 坐着吗 / 跪着吗 / 头颅低垂着吗 / 高昂着吗 / 笑着吗 / 流着泪吗 / 面对着谁 / 他自己吗 / 上帝吗 / 小说家吗 / 处在大地的哪片角落 / 在哪个被照亮、被小说的言语所照亮的位置 / 感觉着 / 酝酿着 / 抚摩着 / 逃避着 / 肯定着 / 否定着 / 生活着这个观念。以及这种种现实的或可能的条件，因“大地”而成为可能的条件，怎样结合而使这个独一无二的“声音”在此处诞生。
2024. 10. 21 Arria
