In contrast to formalist understanding that a work of art can be studied regardless of culture, socio-historical background, the content and authorship, in this paper I will try to show that the relation between artwork and artist is very important to read into the text in order to do justice to the artwork and to understand underlying principles on which the artwork is produced. The relation of the artist and artwork is essential to this kind of analysis because artist is the reference point for artwork to be evaluated in its contextuality. In order to do this I will mainly focus on a Panofskian perspective that develops three-part process. The first process focuses on factual meaning which Erwin Panofsky calls pre-iconographical, the second namely iconographical directs focus toward the socio-historical context that the author belongs to in the orient of who, what where questions, and lastly iconological process generates an analysis of the underlying philosophy and how and why this background affects the artwork. Even though Panofsky focuses mostly on visual arts, his methodology provides a system to interpret an artwork justly. Therefore, in order to accomplish this project, Fyodor Dostoevsky's work Notes from Underground will be examined under the light of Panosfkian methodology to affirm the argument that an artwork can only be interpreted in its contextuality with its relations to its author, its historicity and ideological totality, but not in its autonomous existence. To accomplish this I will divide my paper into three sections. The first part will cover Panofsky's methodology; the second will replace the author's importance in this analysis. However, author's importance will not be discussed as if artwork is only centered on the artist and its creative genius as in Romanticist interpretation, but rather author as a construction of self in a society as in sociologist George Herbert Mead's analysis. The third part Dostoevsky's work will be used to exemplify the correctness of this methodology.