The Obscure Reading Group discussion

It’s time to wrap up our discussion of The Brothers Karamazov. Each of us will arrive at this thread at our own pace, but when we do, there are a number of things we might discuss:

Did this tome live up to its reputation for you?

What were the pros and cons of your experience with it?

There is no shortage of possibilities on the subject of the book’s themes.

What about Dostoevsky--any new thoughts about this author after completing the book?

The evil in man is one key theme. This was fleshed out in the perverse evil nature of the likes of Fyodor Pavlovitch Karamazov, Ivan, Dimtri, and Smerdyakov. It was captured powerfully in the Grand Inquisitor poem Ivan wrote. That man has become callous and indifferent to human suffering was reflected in the Prosecutor's speech: ‘We are so accustomed to such crimes! That’s what’s so horrible, that such dark deeds have ceased to horrify us. What ought to horrify us is that we are so accustomed to it, and not this or that isolated crime.’

However, it seems to me that Dostoyevsky believes that man has in him the potential and capacity for good. Good and evil dwell side by side in human nature. We see this in Dmitri who was described as 'a marvelous mingling of good and evil.' He acknowledged guilt for 'killing' Grigory. The Karamazovs were described as 'capable of the greatest height and greatest depth.' The last chapter suggested that the future can be redeemed and that there is hope. Preserving good memories of childhood days was held up as a buffer for challenges in the days ahead. The importance of a child's early environment and upbringing cannot be underestimated. There are, of course, many many more themes.

Your second paragraph, Laysee, makes me wonder if the Karamazovs can serve, to an extent, as metaphors for Russia as a whole. There's quite a variety given father and three sons!

So interesting reading this now with Russia dominating the news. I hope to read more Russian history--I'm sure the metaphors are there as you say, Ken.

The blend of good and evil is fascinating, and I love how you sum this up, Laysee.

This section is going faster for me than the others. I’m in the middle of the Defense’s argument right now, and wanted to mention something about the style. These chapters of lawyer’s speeches are such a refreshing break.

You know how when you have to smile too much your face gets tired? Dostoevsky’s one-passionate-outburst-after-another was doing something similar to me, just wearing me out. So this calm reasoning is a welcome change.

I read The Gambler before this book, and Dostoevsky's frequent use of exclamation points stood out to me. After both books, if I had to describe his style in one word, it might be “exclamatory.” :-)

Like you, Kathleen, I found the lawyers' speeches to be a refreshing break. At long last, some reasonable and rational arguments. I thought that Fetyukovktch, the counsel for Dimtri's trial, made a lot of sense. Recall how he defined being a father, not just a person who begets a child but someone who also does his duty by it. Old Karamazov was not a father to his children. "Filial love for an unworthy father is an absurdity, an impossibility." A fair statement.

Apart from examining with insight the nature of human perversity and evil, I think Dostoyevsky also contemplates the theme of redemption that is possible with mercy and forgiveness.

We observe this in Illusha's story. He felt guilt for thinking he had killed the blind dog with a left torn ear. He was dying and believed this was God's punishment. No character, adult or child in this book, escaped the sense of guilt after wrongdoing. When Krassotkin, the one remaining friend, did not visit Illusha, his absence weighed heavily on the latter. Hence, Alyosha's effort to round up the boys including Krassotkin to visit Illusha became all important. It seems quite clear that in Dostoyevsky's world, men who had done wrong can only find redemption in being forgiven by and reconciled with those they had wronged.

The theme of mercy is summed up in these words by Fetyukovtich, the defense lawyer:

"But do you want to punish him fearfully, terribly with the most awful punishment that could be imagined, and at the same time to save him and regenerate his soul? If so, overwhelm him with your mercy! You will see, you will hear how he will tremble and be horror-struck. ‘How can I endure this mercy? How can I endure so much love?’ Am I worthy of it? That’s what he will exclaim.”

Laysee wrote: "Like you, Kathleen, I found the lawyers' speeches to be a refreshing break. At long last, some reasonable and rational arguments. I thought that Fetyukovktch, the counsel for Dimtri's trial, made a..."

I really loved that part, and agree it's hard to argue with that quote. I also liked this related one, I think from around the same part:

“Love cannot be created from nothing: only God can create something from nothing.”

Laysee wrote: "Apart from examining with insight the nature of human perversity and evil, I think Dostoyevsky also contemplates the theme of redemption that is possible with mercy and forgiveness.

We observe th..."

This is so interesting, Laysee. It makes me think of who Dostoevsky chose to get redemption, and who didn't.

Redemption, or the possibility of it:
Dimitri
Ivan
Illusha
Krassotkin

No Redemption:
Fyodor Pavlovich
Smerdyakov

And the person Zossima sent out into the world to steer them to that redemption:
Alyosha

(I'm not sure what to make of the women. I got the feeling they weren't really full people to Dostoevsky, but that's another topic.)

As I look back over the book, I see Dostoevsky has set up a trail of wrongs that people do, displaying a variety of sins. Doesn't matter age, class, gender, education level, vocation, or creed. Vanity, envy, malice, ignorance, pride.... these vices have a way of making us do terrible things to others and ourselves. Whether the temptations come from an external supernatural entity or one we created from what we embody ourselves hardly matters. Thinking too hard about that can give us brain fever. And yet in the end, it comes down to Alyosha reminding us to be kind to one another.

I am so glad to have revisited this book with the group. The deep exploration of good and evil, humanity's flaws, obsessiveness and silliness, faith and doubt - few books drill into so many important topics in such an engaging way. It holds up to scrutiny on this my second read (30 years between), and I again rate it 5 stars.

Cherisa wrote: "As I look back over the book, I see Dostoevsky has set up a trail of wrongs that people do, displaying a variety of sins. Doesn't matter age, class, gender, education level, vocation, or creed. Van..."

This is a beautiful summation, Cherisa, and I appreciate the insights you've shared throughout the read.

I first read it probably almost as many years ago, but still have a long way to go in understanding. This last section was brilliant and it not only made me increase my rating to 5 stars, but gave me courage to plan for a third reading ... someday.

Kathleen wrote: "It makes me think of who Dostoevsky chose to get redemption, and who didn't.

Redemption, or the possibility of it:
Dimitri
Ivan
Illusha
Krassotkin

No Redemption:
Fyodor Pavlovich
Smerdyakov"

Yes, I agree with how you parted the sheep from the goats, Kathleen. Fyodor Pavlovitch was totally unrepentant. Recall what he told Alyosha:

“For I mean to go on in my sins to the end… For sin is sweet; all abuse it, but all men live in it, only others do it on the sly, and I openly."

I don't know about the women. Perhaps, Grushenka. She set out to ensnare Alyosha but like others, she seemed to be changed by her encounter with him. Dostoevsky's women characters did not seem too well differentiated.. To me, they were all histrionic drama queens. Detestable.

Cherisa wrote: "As I look back over the book, I see Dostoevsky has set up a trail of wrongs that people do, displaying a variety of sins. Doesn't matter age, class, gender, education level, vocation, or creed. Vanity, envy, malice, ignorance, pride.... these vices have a way of making us do terrible things to others and ourselves. Whether the temptations come from an external supernatural entity or one we created from what we embody ourselves hardly matters. Thinking too hard about that can give us brain fever. And yet in the end, it comes down to Alyosha reminding us to be kind to one another."

You're right, Cherisa. In Dostoevsky's world, no man is above evil. The idea is Biblical: "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." Alyosha's kindness saved the day. The last chapter (Ilusha;s funeral) where Alyosha spoke to the young boys of keeping a reserve of good childhood memories perhaps captured Dostoevsky's vision for a better world.

Thank you, Cherisa, for all your insightful comments. Like you, I am thankful to have read this book with the Obscure Group. Otherwise, I might have ended up getting brain fever. :-)

Hey, i finally managed to read one with the group. This is my new favorite novel. The ending left me a little sad that the sequel was never written, but maybe it's for the best.

Glad you made it, Danielle. What a fantastic observation in your review: it has everything but sane women. How true that is!