F. M. DOSTOEVSKY AND NIHILISTIC INTERPRETATION OF HOLBEIN'S PAINTING „DEAD CHRIST IN THE TOMB”

IF 0.1 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Dabiel Miščin
{"title":"F. M. DOSTOEVSKY AND NIHILISTIC INTERPRETATION OF HOLBEIN'S PAINTING „DEAD CHRIST IN THE TOMB”","authors":"Dabiel Miščin","doi":"10.31902/fll.38.2021.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ever since Hans Holbein the Younger completed his painting, The Dead Christ in the Tomb, in 1522, a question has been looming over it, namely, what message does this dead body convey? Having seen the painting in 1847, the Russian classic writer Fyodor Dostoevsky was also intrigued by this question. In his novel, The Idiot, Ippolit Terentyev seeks to give a systematic and direct answer. The article presents a hermeneutic analysis of his position, and classifies it as nihilistic. Nihilism affects all three levels of Ippolit's discourse - the ontic, eschatological and ontological. Nevertheless, the question remains: can such nihilism be justified from the perspective of the painting itself? Posing this question in the context of Alois Riegl’s periodization of European culture has proven to be interesting. He is of the opinion that, following the era of Christian monotheism, the third and the last period of the development of European culture is the natural-scientific period. This particular period, Riegl believes, began in 1520. If we choose to accept this periodization model, The Dead Christ may be seen as one of the first paintings of the modern era, keeping in mind that Holbein painted it in 1521 and 1522. As regards the issue of the body of The Dead Christ being immersed in physical suffering to the extent that the possibility of resurrection is excluded - as Ippolit presumes - this article offers certain reasons of an anatomical nature which may be interpreted theologically and which deny the validity of Ippolit’s modern, nihilistic hypothesis in regard to the meaning of Holbein's Dead Christ.","PeriodicalId":40358,"journal":{"name":"Folia Linguistica et Litteraria","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Folia Linguistica et Litteraria","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31902/fll.38.2021.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ever since Hans Holbein the Younger completed his painting, The Dead Christ in the Tomb, in 1522, a question has been looming over it, namely, what message does this dead body convey? Having seen the painting in 1847, the Russian classic writer Fyodor Dostoevsky was also intrigued by this question. In his novel, The Idiot, Ippolit Terentyev seeks to give a systematic and direct answer. The article presents a hermeneutic analysis of his position, and classifies it as nihilistic. Nihilism affects all three levels of Ippolit's discourse - the ontic, eschatological and ontological. Nevertheless, the question remains: can such nihilism be justified from the perspective of the painting itself? Posing this question in the context of Alois Riegl’s periodization of European culture has proven to be interesting. He is of the opinion that, following the era of Christian monotheism, the third and the last period of the development of European culture is the natural-scientific period. This particular period, Riegl believes, began in 1520. If we choose to accept this periodization model, The Dead Christ may be seen as one of the first paintings of the modern era, keeping in mind that Holbein painted it in 1521 and 1522. As regards the issue of the body of The Dead Christ being immersed in physical suffering to the extent that the possibility of resurrection is excluded - as Ippolit presumes - this article offers certain reasons of an anatomical nature which may be interpreted theologically and which deny the validity of Ippolit’s modern, nihilistic hypothesis in regard to the meaning of Holbein's Dead Christ.
陀思妥耶夫斯基与霍尔拜因画作《死在坟墓里的基督》的虚无主义解读
自从小汉斯·霍尔拜因在1522年完成了他的画作《坟墓里的死基督》以来,一个问题就一直笼罩着它,即这个尸体传达了什么信息?俄罗斯古典作家费奥多尔·陀思妥耶夫斯基在1847年看过这幅画后,也对这个问题很感兴趣。伊波利特·特伦特耶夫在他的小说《白痴》中试图给出一个系统而直接的答案。本文对他的立场进行了解释学分析,并将其归为虚无主义。虚无主义影响着伊波利特话语的三个层面——本体论、末世论和本体论。然而,问题仍然存在:从绘画本身的角度来看,这种虚无主义是否合理?在阿洛伊斯·里格尔对欧洲文化分期的背景下提出这个问题被证明是有趣的。他认为,继基督教一神教时代之后,欧洲文化发展的第三个也是最后一个时期是自然科学时期。里格尔认为,这一特殊时期始于1520年。如果我们选择接受这种分期模式,《死基督》可能会被视为现代最早的画作之一,请记住霍尔拜因在1521年和1522年画的。关于《死基督》的身体沉浸在身体痛苦中,以至于复活的可能性被排除在外的问题——正如伊波利特所推测的那样——这篇文章提供了解剖学性质的某些原因,这些原因可以从神学上解释,并否定了伊波利特关于霍尔拜因《死基督的意义》的现代虚无主义假设的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Folia Linguistica et Litteraria
Folia Linguistica et Litteraria HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信