Fyodor Dostoevsky “Mr. D - bov and the Question of Art,” 1861
(Dostoevsky’s polemical response to Nikolai Dobrolyubov’s defense of utilitarian art)
The main point is that art is always true to reality in the highest degree—its deviations are
fleeting and transient; it is not only always true to reality, but it cannot be unfaithful to
contemporary reality. Otherwise it would not be art. It is the measure of true art that it is always
contemporary, urgent and useful. If it concerns itself with anthologies [of ancient poetry] then
this means that ancient poetry is still needed; mistakes and deviations may happen but, we
repeat, they soon pass. Art which is not contemporary, which does not correspond to
contemporary needs, cannot possibly exist. If such a thing does exist, then it is not art: it
becomes petty and degenerates, losing all force and artistic value. In this respect we go even
further than Mr. D—bov in his idea: he still recognizes the existence of useless art, of pure art
which is neither contemporary nor urgent, and he takes up arms against it. But we do not
acknowledge the existence of such art at all, and we remain calm, because there is nothing to
take up arms against. If there are occasional deviations, they are nothing to get upset about: they
will pass away of their own accord, and quite quickly too.
“But excuse me,” we shall be asked, “on what do you base this view, and how do you reach the
conclusion that true art cannot be uncontemporary or unfaithful to modern reality?”
We reply:
First of all, if we take all the historical facts together, from the beginning of the world to the
present day, we shall see that art has never abandoned man, but has always responded to his
requirements and ideals, has always helped him in his quest for these ideals. It was born with
man, it has developed parallel to his historical existence and died along with his historical life.
Second (and most important): creativity, the basis of all art, lives in man as a function of part of
his total being, but it is inseparable from him. Consequently, creativity can have no aspirations
other than those pursued by man’s whole being. If it were to go off in another direction it would
mean that art was at odds with man and had broken with him. This would mean it had betrayed
the laws of nature. But for as long as mankind is in a sound and healthy state it cannot die out or
betray the laws of nature (generally speaking). Consequently there is no need to fear for art; it
too will not betray its purpose. It will always live man’s true life along with him: it can do
nothing else. For this reason it will always remain true to reality.
Of course, during his life man may deviate from normality, from the laws of nature; in this case
art will deviate with him. But this serves to show art’s close and indissoluble link with man, its
constant loyalty to man and his interests.
But all the same, art will only be faithful to man when its freedom of development is not
inhibited.
It is therefore of primary importance not to hinder art with various aims, not to prescribe laws for
it, and not to confuse it, for even without this it is already confronted by many submerged rocks,
many temptations and deviations inseparable from man’s historical existence. The more freely it
develops, the more normal its development will be and the sooner it will find its true and useful
path. And since its aims and interests are identical to those of man, whom it serves and with
whom it is inseparably united, the freer its development, the greater the benefit it will bring
humanity.
Let me be clear: what we want is for art always to correspond to man’s aims, not to be at odds
with his interests; and if we desire the greatest possible freedom for art it is out of the belief that
the freer its development, the more useful it will be to man’s interests. We must not prescribe
aims and sympathies for art. Why should we? Why doubt art when if it is allowed to develop
normally, according to the laws of nature, it cannot possibly go against man’s needs even
without your prescriptions? It will not get lost; it will not lose its way. It has always been true to
reality and has always gone shoulder to shoulder with man’s development and progress. The
ideal of beauty and normality cannot perish in a healthy society. Therefore leave art to pursue its
own path and trust it not to go astray. Even if it does go astray it will immediately retrace its steps in
response to man’s first need. Beauty is normality, health. Beauty is useful because it is beauty
and because man has a constant need for beauty and its highest ideal. If a people preserves an
ideal of beauty and a need for it, it means that the need for health and normality is also there, and
this in itself guarantees the highest development of that people.