Brothers Karamazov

Our book club explored the classic novel by Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov. This review will chronicle our book club's examination, so will not include plot reveals, only themes we had time to cover. It does help to understand that the book is about three brothers and a father, set in late nineteenth century Russia. The father, Fyodor is a big drinking socializer who somehow has a gift for making money. His eldest son Dmitri (Mitya) is after his inheritance, early, to get on with his life. The middle son, Alexi, is an intellectual, rationalist soon to be successful at whatever he chooses to do. The youngest brother Alyosha has been brought up in a monastery, innocent in worldly affairs, but spiritually mature.

We began our discussion with the role of faith and doubt as reflected in the lives of the three brothers. Initially we simply agreed that the youngest, Alyosha, was driven by faith, and that Dmitri and Ivan driven more by doubt. But upon deeper examination, we discovered measures of degree. Ivan was racked with the greatest doubt, most tragically when his rational, strong, intellectual strengths, easily deployed, could have saved his older brother from injustice at the end of the story. Dimitri carried doubt on less lofty ideals than faith or rationalism, focused on the women in his life, Katya and Grushenka. Alyosha also faced doubt, particularly when his mentor the Elder Zosima died. The chapter, “Odor of Corruption” was a searing commentary on Russian mysticism, distinct from Gospel influenced Christianity, another theme from our topics to cover; but doubt took hold even in Alyosha’s pure mind in this time. A prescient admonition from father Zosima to Alyosha had offered foreshadows: the degree to which you deliver love, through your actions to those around you, becomes the measure of your closeness to God. After Father Zosima’s death, Alyosha‘s doubt subsided, his actions - compassion, patience, and love - kept his actions pure and his heart, close to God. If God appeared in this book, He was manifest powerfully through Alyosha.

On this same topic, Doug pointed out that while Ivan was the great intellect and Mitya the scoundrel, Alyosha was ever the listener; for his brother, his father, the women, and even the rambunctious school boys. All were made comfortable to speak honestly with him.

Rick reminded us that these characters are fictional. And yet their existence, and their relationships to one another, elicited deep philosophical questions. This ability to take many of the idiosyncrasies and eccentricities of the human condition and imbue the brothers with these characteristics is a measure of great writing. The contemporaneous philosopher Friedrich Nietsche wrote of many of the challenges on the human condition with the backdrop of a quickly changing society; but Nietsche was a philosopher. Doestevsky’s characters lived these, making them more approachable, relational. A well written novel allows us to contemplate the large philosophical questions, because we see these questions, and answers, in people we know. And in ourselves.

We spent some time in the chapter on The Grand Inquisitor, Ivan’s skepticism of a benevolent God with Alyosha. He returns Christ to 16th century Seville, Spain. In this exchange, the Grand Inquisitor revisits Jesus’s Three Temptations with the devil. In the Bible, Jesus is alone in the wilderness for 40 days and 40 nights when the devil appears to him and says ‘Jesus, you’re starving, you’re living on locusts. Since you are the son of God, turn these rocks into bread’. To which Jesus replies, ‘Man does not live by bread alone’.

The Grand Inquisitor then argues that this answer represents free will, and in so, God’s rejection of taking care of his flock. Did He learn nothing in the Garden of Eden? For 15 centuries, humankind has suffered from starvation. A benevolent God would have fed the people. Ultimately, this first temptation opens an important concept: man’s free will, and the evil arising from it. Free will is good for those chosen few, strong enough to accept free will, with only those with enough strength to commit to and live moral, ethical and socially responsible lives. Most people will surrender free will for a full belly. Who wants free will when you’re starving? Part of this discussion foreshadows Russia’s role in the death of tens of millions of their own people in the 20th century, a post script to the rationalist argument for free will vs. God’s grace famously developed by Neitsche. By the end of this discussion, which went far deeper than this limited analysis, Alyosha cannot disagree with his brother; the argument is rational. Alyosha kisses his brother. His intent is clear: faith and rationalism do not present a binary choice; the choice is where we land on a spectrum. We can live our lives accepting rational thought, accept new answers to old mysteries, while building a relationship with God through our actions. Alyosha does not engage in the argument; the rationalist argument is beside the point. It is through our actions, how we interact with others, how much we give, how much we love, that defines how closely one can be with God. This reconciliation of rationalism to faith is one of Dostoevsky’s great, and most enduring philosophical achievements.

A sub theme we did not cover but that was evident in the story was the distinction between Alyosha's God of the New Testament and foundations from the Old. Consider these transgressions from Ten Commandments: 2. No false Idols (money); 5. Honor they father and mother (Dmitri most glaringly); You shall not murder ('nuff said); 7. You shall not commit adultery (Fyodor); 8. You shall not steal (the Russian way); and that last command, that sensual temptation across mankind, Coveting.

After all this God talk, Rob pointed out this kernel from today, street level: “The socialist who is a Christian is more worthy of fear than the socialist who is an atheist “. (P 91). Chuck confirmed his midwestern experience that in the deepest folds of the bible belt, anyone outwardly projecting his faith, with bumper stickers and slogans, may be reaching for your wallet. To the novel’s point, true faith is manifest in our actions. Religion is a time-honored cloak for misbehavior and corruption.

We talked about how Dostoyevsky‘s life was reflected in his works, including his own incarceration in a Siberian labor camp mine, his near death experience with a firing squad, his epilepsy, and the death of his 2-year old son. Dostoevsky had remarked in another book, “If you do not suffer, you will never learn.” The man knew suffering.

On the topic of individuals and our place in society, we all agreed that societal mores were far more fixed and unyielding in 19th century Russia than they were in the United States or Europe at the time, and more than any ‘modern’ culture anywhere today. The economic system was far from a free trade society where opportunities for wealth creation were broadly available. For a historical perspective, until 1861, 90% of Russians were serfs: slaves, uneducated, peasant farmers, leasing lands from wealthy landowners. A merchant class had only begun to develop; merchants were denigrated, and labor was wholly separate from ‘society’.

Within this highly structured society, Demetri’s public humiliation of captain Snegiyrov would have had far-reaching consequences, as played out in the book. The 'whiskbroom' humiliation was also a curious introduction to the school boys in the novel, who ultimately played a role in observations on social structures unfettered by traditional customs. The book closes with Alyosha’s gift of love and wisdom to the boys, those mostly responsible for their peer’s - the boy Illyusha’s - death.

The devil is revealed in multiple characters, and in different ways. With Fyodor, the father of the three brothers, his actions - stealing his son’s inheritance, stealing his girl - were devilish self-serving actions. With Smerdyakov, his devious plotting and collusion with Fyodor reveals blind selfishness found in all of us from time to time. The devil’s visit with Ivan toward the book’s denouement is the most haunting, and alluring, seductive, taking Ivan’s own words, thoughts, and guilt down a path to his own destruction. Wrecked by his dreamy conversation with the devil, the once powerful, respected intellect Ivan, was reduced to a blithering idiot, unable to save his own brother. Even Alyosha was visited by the devil during ‘Odor of Corruption’ test. His faith and the Elder Zosima’s guidance helped him reject that devil’s visit.

While the women characters in the novel figured largely in the brothers relationships, they appeared as literary props, rather than fully developed characters. The beautiful and capable Grushenka was reduced to a “hetaera” at the trial, while the pathetic Katia was a drama queen and bit player illustrating the brothers’ ungrounded loyalties, misbehavior and swirling emotions. Madame Khokhlakov is a more formidable character, such as when she proposed that Dimitri work the mines, but her part was still minor, except again as a foil to the brothers.

On the writing, we kicked around the idea of why Dostoyevsky included the indicting letter from Dimitri to Katya, but could not find a literary use except for foreshadowing. Its place simply as the catalyst to the verdict seems well below Dostoevsky’s literary skills.

Also on the writing, Rick brought up his concern that the translation from Russian to English or any other language for that matter, necessarily leaves so much nuance and meaning on the cutting room floor. The verbose prose in our translations may or may not have captured Dostoevsky‘s brilliance. That said, what endured through the translation was still rich and fulfilling. Doug added that this book could never have been written in America. These were Russian themes, about Russia, in a time of great social transition. Even Demetri’s disparagement of America, his only hope, confirmed this.

On the topic of printed page versus Kindle, I found my book had pencil notes and underlines on nearly every page. Most of us preferred printed over digital for this tome. While kindle has research capabilities, the personal epiphanies were richer through the self-discovery and retention assist of note taking.

Naturally we discussed why the book is so relevant to us today; an easy lift. We all know people who have some of the characteristics of Dimitri (sensualist), Fyodor (selfish sensualist), Smerdyakov (selfish, devious), Ivan (confident, rational), and Alyosha (loving, generous, faithful). Unfortunately the themes so elegantly woven through the book are rarely expounded in today’s public discourse. Our book club’s different perspectives, opinions, backgrounds, and world views make for a rich environment to explore these intense measures of life. That said, some of our most fundamental alignments, rationalism versus faith for example, form the basis of political and other social loyalties. It’s just that we talk past each other rather than listen.

While the book consumed more of our personal reading time than we ever expected, we all found the book to be a great book for a book club. We all know we have to return to it. Our singular advice: Go get this book and make your way through it, preferably with someone else. You won't regret it.