In everything Dostoyevsky wrote, he was writing about his spiritual research and exploration, and looking for solutions to the issues that worried him, but which would not be solved, as he himself clearly realized. And all of his heroes, including those who differ greatly from him in terms of his moral formation, struggle with the issues that Dostoyevsky himself wrestled with throughout his life. He is the spiritual father of all his main heroes, meaning that he represented a model for them. There is not a single person, among those whom he created and created, who did not copy him from himself, even if in a different way.
The life of a great personality becomes intelligible to us to the extent that we are able to delve into it, with one look, in the full diversity of its characteristics, which are often contradictory, but stemming from a single root. If we are not able to accomplish this, then in one way or another, in one way or another; We will simplify and impoverish this great personality.
If a biography of Dostoevsky's life was written without considering his novels, it would be worth nothing, and it would be impossible to restore the formation of his personality without his works. Dostoyevsky's realistic, experimental biography for understanding his novels is no less important than his novels themselves for understanding his personality. On the pages of Dostoevsky's novels, all of humanity's history, thought, and culture are revived, reflected in individual consciousness.
In order to understand the true importance of Dostoyevsky, which he has acquired in our time, a frank conversation is necessary.
The hero of the novel “The Philosopher’s Dance” is a controversial strategic thinker. He worked and still is an advisor to an Arab leader. He took up his job after leaving Palestine on the run after he was accused of dealing with the enemy during wartime, namely Hezbollah.
This thinker or philosopher practiced political dancing. He theorizes democracy and secularism while working for a non-democratic, non-secular leader who supports extremism. He also believes in Arab nationalism and does not recognize Palestinian nationalism. He engages in a sexual relationship with his Israeli colleague (Tzipora), then continues the matter and justifies his actions. He describes it as resistance. He claims his love for his wife, Layal, and at the same time he lives with a Moroccan woman of Jewish origin during his stay in Britain. This woman plays a major role in the novel as a visual artist and has the ability to listen and remain silent.
The philosopher moves to reside in Britain and discovers an attempt to assassinate him by a Druze soldier who was working in the Israeli army. Here the novel sheds light on the reality of the Druze, accusing them and trying to do justice to them at the same time. The credit for thwarting the assassination goes to a man from southern Lebanon who runs a restaurant in London.
The philosopher receives a letter from a deported Palestinian who took refuge in Lebanon, asking him at the end: How do you feel in your homeland? The message affects him greatly, and he searches for the answer whenever he has the opportunity, and there are many opportunities, but he fails to answer. The question forms a basic pillar of the novel as well.
Although the novel is realistic, it does not follow an ascending ladder of events, and what lies within it is much greater than the events mentioned. The novel, as much as it is a novel of events and actions, is an intellectual novel, and here lies the difficulty of talking about it.
We are the generation of war, and our parents are the generation of defeat, and between them souls grew old, and the concepts of war and love became similar to them.
Things are too big to tell, but I believe that a story alone is capable of creating a small homeland that we carry in our pocket, and that we talk about to our children who were born outside the homeland, and who carried its mark on their faces, tongues, and identities without seeing a stone in it. Only a story is sufficient to create the imaginary homeland in their minds alive. .
This collection deals with stories from the lives of women who lived between two rivers. Between Syria and one of the asylum countries, it is concerned with the small details of these two lives, and the effects that the war had on the lives of these women: disappointment, loss, escape, and love.
It is an attempt to overcome the great scene of war, and the frost of the borders creeping as a river of ice between the shoulders, with small details, in which the voice rises and asks: “Yes, I lived between two rivers, but which of them lived in me?”
