Dostoevsky in Love
> Christofi, also a novelist, describes "Dostoevsky in Love" as less a biography than a “reconstructed memoir”. His method, he explains, has been to “cheerfully commit the academic fallacy” of eliding Dostoevsky’s “autobiographical fiction with his fantastical life.”
Although I have not read Christofi's book, I am willing to admit that this could be a potentially fruitful method of interpreting the writer and his work. But for those interested in authentic history, I would recommend Joseph Frank's magnificent study "Dostoevsky: A Writer in His Time" (2010), a fascinating yet critical biography that examines Dostoevsky's life, letters and philosophy.
Review of the book his second wife Anna wrote about their marriage (spoilers?): https://www.brainpickings.org/2016/02/15/anna-dostoyevsky-re...
This part seems to be a direct contradiction of the Guardian intro:
> [...] It was these mutual attitudes which enabled both of us to live in the fourteen years of our married life in the greatest happiness possible for human beings on earth.
vs the Guardian:
> His marriages were disastrous [...]
Where is Mr. Golyadkin when we need him to defend us from being brutally trolled by the most feared woman on the Internet, Netochka Nezvanova?
https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=mr_golyadkin
https://www.salon.com/2002/03/01/netochka/
Because she's back:
Lol, this article reminds me of the saying, "only suffering forces us deeper into ourselves"
Russian surnames have gender. So a female surname would be Isaeva, but the male Isaev.
English writers that want to avoid what happens to a Russian family name when involving several members (it's complicated) take the smart way out and do it like this: "after the Isaev family relocated" [1] https://theamericanreader.com/4-june-1855-fyodor-dostoevsky-...
But the reviewer at the guardian (or is it the writer of the book?) goes for "When the Isaevas moved" when writing about husband and wife. If you can't get the surnames right, how much trust should a charitable reader extend towards the review?
If you stumbled across "Hemingway she wife" in an essay on Papa's love life biography, instead of "Hemingway's wife" how much trust would that carry?
Source: I first read the D-dude at nine years of age, in the original, and then went back to him on multiple occasions. What a downer. Also, genius. I prefer Pushkin, the only optimist of Russian literature, but you gotta respect Dostoevsky: how much ahead of the time his realism was, and what an influence he left. And then lots of people simply enjoy his work. If you haven't read "Crime and punishment", strongly recommended.
As for his love life, I read many opposing viewpoints, but I prefer to limit my judgement to the work, not the person. Too messy. Unreliable sources.
> The way he proposed to Anna, Christofi writes, “is so quietly bashful that you can’t help wanting to hug him”. He is quite right, but I won’t give away the plot.
Spoiler alert, this is how he proposed, it's quite sweet:
Anna describes how Dostoevsky began his marriage proposal by outlining the plot of an imaginary new novel, as if he needed her advice on female psychology.[5] In the story an old painter makes a proposal to a young girl whose name is Anya. Dostoevsky asked if it was possible for a girl so young and different in personality to fall in love with the painter. Anna answered that it was quite possible. Then he told Anna: "Put yourself in her place for a moment. Imagine I am the painter, I confessed to you and asked you to be my wife. What would you answer?" Anna said: "I would answer that I love you and I will love you forever". [0]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Dostoevskaya