I downloaded The
Brothers Karamazov onto my Kindle because my sister recommended it since I
had started reading some Russian literature. I didn't quite realise how
renowned it was until I was well into it and various people seemed impressed I
was reading an 'epic' novel. That naturally made me take it a little more
seriously so that I could give a decent opinion on the text, especially since I
know there will be immense works (articles, essays and journals) on it
already.
Dostoyevsky covers so many
important themes in the novel with such tact and eloquence that it is a novel
that genuinely and gently opens one to debate and reflection. If we look first
at the theme of 'religion' in its broadest sense, we'll see how Dostoyevsky
explores the role of the Russian Orthodox Church, the monastery, monks and the
dynamics within the Church of newly introduced innovations. We see a community
that is complex, searching and human, with references to corruption and virtue
alike, rivalry and friendship, selfishness and selflessness. With the
influences of European Enlightenment and theories questioning the existence of
God, the Church is put in opposition to a secular belief system. Father Zossima
is a character who embodies an intermediary between these worlds, since his
being elected an elder is already an innovation from the orthodox Church and he
doesn't quite dwell on the physical nature of Hell, contrary to essential
Christian beliefs. He is also accused of not being wary enough of the devils,
the spiritual demons, perhaps showing a lesser emphasis on the 'scary side' of
spirituality, making him more likeable in the eyes of some, and discrediting
him in the eyes of others. Dostoyevsky presents atheism and secularism to us in
a fashion that doesn't offend, and doesn't attack; it doesn't completely negate
the need or role of religion or spirituality but it attempts to make sense of
the world and the human condition, human inclinations (base and uplifted) and
tries to perceive the world differently. I'd say it was a rather agnostic
novel, an honest criticism of the weaknesses in society, and encourages readers
to take part in the discourse and examine themselves and their own relationship
to the faith or lack of faith they adhere to.
In terms of women,
Dostoyevsky portrays them in a rather peculiar fashion. There is no doubt about
there being an enormous amount to be said and analysed of the women alone in
this novel, since they appear to be so eccentric and in many ways stereotypical
but hardly relatable. The only vaguely 'normal' women in the novel seem to be
Marfa Ignatyevna, who has to submissively obey her husband Grigory despite her
superior intelligence and Ilusha's sister, Varvara, who goes to university and
is mentioned quite in passing. Besides these two peripheral ladies, the
feminine image is one of hysterics, meddling, spite, and anger with some
occasional submission. There is a sense of the women being 'out of control',
even of themselves, as their reactions and motives are constantly fluctuating.
They are the oxymoron of being somewhat calculating and impulsive at once.
Alongside the characterisation, there is a general trend of misogyny from the
beginning, which is not necessarily portrayed in a positive light, but is
rather quite blatant and matter of fact. The beating of women is mentioned as a
cultural norm, though Fyodor Pavolvich also receives some heavy-handed smacks
from his first wife. Dostoyevsky does talk about the emancipation of women a
few times in the novel, which it would be interesting to read more about, as
there is obviously a link between the political powers and rights of women and
the characterisation of the ladies in the novel. Generally, however I feel
these women are not supposed to be trusted.
Social class is another
main component of the novel, where the core protagonists come from a wealthy
(or at least upper class) background. Yet, Dimitri finds himself begging for
money and has a reputation of squandering away his wealth recklessly. There is
consistently a distinction between the poverty of the rich and that of the peasants
for those with status maintain power over those without. Madame Hohlakov and
Katerina Ivanovna financially aid the downtrodden Snegiryov family which allows
them small comforts and eases their difficulties significantly. These gestures
are described both as overtly and detailed to describe the dynamic between the
ease of giving for the rich and the desire to accept yet the sense of dignity
and self-respect of the lower class which creates a hindrance. Another time the
gesture is described as a rather natural act of generosity and care, something
that shows the relationship that ought to exist between those who have means,
and those who have fewer means. Grushenka also regularly donates money to help
those in need, from her cousin to the Poles, despite having been described as
stingy and miserly. Father Zossima notes the piety and faith in the hearts of
the peasants, underlining the importance they play in the future of the nation
and the importance of instilling Christian values in their hearts, for they are
intelligent, though simple and ought to be welcomed into the fold of faith and
given an education concerning essential Christian values, albeit through
stories. Even the young boy Nikolay Krassotkin is aware of intelligent peasants
and tries to identify them and engage with them. The end of serfdom is noted as
a remarkable turning point in Russian history and this transition has various
effects on the social hierarchy, despite it being difficult for some peasants
to abandon their roles, such as Grigory, and of course an inconvenience for the
aristocracy. Dostoyevsky addresses the issues of social prejudice and attempts
to give greater credit to and 'humanise' the peasant experience.
The question of justice and
morality is eventually tied in with the criminal justice system. While the
concept of no God and thus no divine laws or sense of morality makes everything
lawful we see that this leads to rather disastrous consequences, or at least
has the potential to, as 'everything is relative' and so it leads to chaos.
With the absence of absolute truth and absolute laws alongside relative laws,
for life and humans come with many nuances, begins the search for another
balance, another understanding and another way to make sense of the world.
Notions of guilt and innocence and punishment, reformation and salvation are
all put into question, as Dostoyevsky explores the search for a new social
system to liberate people from Christian laws but which nonetheless maintain
order.
The use of psychology in
the court case criticises the developing (pseudo)science in a fashion that
displays its strengths and as well as its weaknesses. Many aspects of
psychology may be considered subjective or lacking enough research behind them
to amount to large generalisations. Ultimately both edges of the
"sword" turn out to be fascinating and revealing. The insight is
convincing though dangerous if used to base the entire case upon.
I found that The
Brothers Karamazov was not as dark and grim as, for example, Crime
and Punishment; there is more of a balance of light and dark, hope and
despair. We are currently living in a period that is experiencing the
consequences of the ideas explored in this novel. In many ways the fact that
many have accepted worldview that everything is lawful, while keeping up
appearances of being law-abiding, we find ourselves living in a time of
constant rebellion and much destruction. Many questions raised in the novel
haven't necessarily been resolved and so we find ourselves identifying with the
issues, which are so gently and delicately explored, as opposed to the
aggressive and somewhat militant approaches of our contemporary age.
