• 러시아어문학연구논집
• /
• 제65호
• /
• pp.109-128
• /
• 2019

The purpose of this paper is to compare the empathy of Dostoevsky 's novel 『Idiot』 and Tolstoy' s novel 『Resurrection』. The empathy can be seen not only in the emotional dimension, but also in the cognitive and the will dimension. Myshkin was emotional, lacking reflection and moral standards. He sympathized with almost all characters, but his empathy could not stop heroine's death. On the other hand, the empathy of Nekhliudov and Katiusha is not limited to the relationship of two people and it is gradually expanded by sympathy with others. His empathy develops with compassion and love for others through reflection on oneself. Thus, while the empathy of Myshkin is a passive level of empathy, Nekhliudov's empathy is an active level of empathy

• 러시아어문학연구논집
• /
• 제60호
• /
• pp.135-160
• /
• 2018

This paper is focused on the sympathy in Dostoevsky's and Tolstoy's poetics. For Dostoevsky, sympathy is based on the social dimension, which is connected with his experience. Though the writer may have thought of the many prisoners he met in Siberian as his own and others, he saw in them the 'Marey' that he had met in his childhood, and the spirituality that lies within Marey is no different from his faith. In other words, Dostoevsky discovered that they also have faith in common and that it is the main code of understanding them and a link that can be one with them. It differs from the intellectuals of the time in which the writer lived, in order to approach the people, in the sense of reason, logic, or any justification. For Tolstoy, on the other hand, sympathy can be considered in terms of morality and practice. Tolstoy's sympathy extends from the individual to the social level, whereas Dostoevsky's sympathy moves from the social dimension to the individual dimension. Through his personal experience and enlightenment, he emphasizes sympathy in the process of practicing what he realizes in society. In other words, after sympathy, he tried to practice his sympathy and realization. It was not for the Russian people or the Slavs, but for the whole human race. In this sense, Tolstoy tried to overcome the partiality of empathy and tried to obtain universality of sympathy. In particular, Tolstoy emphasizes that patriotism is an example of bias in empathy and should be guarded.

• 비교문화연구
• /
• 제45권
• /
• pp.167-194
• /
• 2016

사상가이자 작가인 В.В. 로자노프는 러시아 문학에 대한 수많은 글을 쓴 문학 비평가이기도 하다. 로자노프의 가장 유명한 문학 비평은 도스토옙스키에 대한 비평인 "도스토옙스키의 대심문관에 대한 전설"로, 베르쟈예프는 도스토옙스키에 대한 수많은 비평들 중 로자노프의 비평을 최고로 평가하였다. 도스토옙스키가 인간적으로, 그리고 예술적으로 로자노프의 애정과 칭송을 받은 작가라면 고골은 로자노프로부터 가장 많은 비판을 받은 작가들 중 하나였다. 본고는 고골에 대한 로자노프의 문학 비평 분석을 1차 목표로 한다. 이때 우리의 분석에는 시간상 고골의 앞뒤에 있는 두 명의 위대한 작가들 - 푸시킨과 도스토옙스키 - 에 대한 로자노프의 비평 역시 포함되는데, 왜냐하면 로자노프는 이 두 작가들과의 비교를 통해 고골 창작의 특수성을 규명하려 시도하기 때문이다. 분석을 이렇게 확장할 때 본 논문의 2차 목표가 자연스럽게 도출된다. 즉 고골을 중심으로 한 로자노프 비평분석을 토대로 우리는 러시아 문학에 대한 '문학 비평가' 로자노프의 전반적인 견해 및 태도를 추측할 수 있고, 나아가 로자노프의 문학 비평이 후대의 문학 비평에 끼친 영향을 알 수 있을 것이다.