Polyphonic Dissonance in the Works of F. M. Dostoevsky: Contrapuntal Motifs and Voices from the Margins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis examines marginal voices as new ways of reading and understanding narrative polyphony in three of Fedor Dostoevsky’s final novels: The Idiot, Demons, and Brothers Karamazov. Narrative development in these works is driven by an open and continuous exchange of ideas, but I argue that not all voices are heard equally. I build on Mikhail Bakhtin’s theory of polyphony as a means of studying the interplay of fully valid voices. I contend that marginal voices are integral to the narrative and contribute to the ideological core of each text. In Chapter 1, on The Idiot, I consider how motifs reveal the protagonists’ individual experience of condemnation amidst the breakdown of communication in high-society St Petersburg. Two women, Marie and Nastasia Filippovna, are at the heart of this investigation, and they establish the theme of marginalised female voices as a key source of narrative dissonance. In Chapter 2, I investigate the ethical problems that frame the unparalleled tragedy of Demons. Maria Lebiadkina is the focus of this study, and although she is disparaged for her physical and mental condition, the echo of her voice throughout the narrative carries the novel’s hope of moral regeneration. In Chapter 3, on Brothers Karamazov, I examine how the dominant voices of the Karamazov men silence those around them. I focus on the motifs of hysteria and motherhood to bring the missing voices of women to the narrative foreground. Through this analysis, I demonstrate how Dostoevsky relies on marginalised voices as a source of ideological dissonance. This dissonance provides new insight into the author’s representation of women, his fascination with the unorthodox faith of marginalised communities, and the power of disruptive speech from the margins. Scholarship has long focused on the title characters of Dostoevsky’s novels, and my thesis complements this work by considering the fuller range of voices in the polyphonic narrative.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".