The Brothers Karamazov
by Fyodor Dostoevsky
|
List Price: Our Price: $8.29 You Save: $9.71 (54%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $5.95 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of The Brothers Karamazov
Book Review: The not-so-Grand Inquisitor
Summary: 5 Stars
"The Brothers Karamazov" nearly falls victim to its best chapter.
Not that it fails, by any stretch of the imagination; the novel is a true tour de force, 960 pages of literary excellence, a fascinating look at classic themes of anger, jealousy, debauchery, sin and redemption. It weaves together the story of four brothers (Dimitri, Ivan, Alyosha and Smerdyakov), their lovers, their father, and his murder. These characters and events make for a complex and fascinating story with more crime and punishment than "Crime and Punishment."
But "The Brothers Karamazov" isn't famous for its story.
No, it's famous for "The Grand Inquisitor," a 20-page existential exploration of the morality of church and state whose brilliance overpowers the rest of the narrative like a large diamond in the middle of a jewel-encrusted tiara.
This chapter sits outside the narrative and shows Ivan's musings to Alyosha about a fictitious meeting between Jesus and a church official leading the Spanish Inquisition. At first, it reads like a monologue, with Jesus saying nothing while the Inquisitor discourses on the ethics of religion and the church's role as a controller of men's consciences. As such, it's a damning indictment of organized religion in general and the Catholic Church in particular, perhaps the most devastating such critique ever set to paper. But it ends with all of these words and all of their cold, bitter cynicism being overpowered by a single act of love. In true fact, if not in the reader's mind, this gesture is a moment of warmth and beauty more lasting and permanent than the frigid torrent of invective that have preceded it.
Many readers, I feel, overestimate this admittedly excellent chapter and the Inquisitor's monologue; certainly on my first read, it made the greatest impression on my young Catholic mind. But, having read the book again after an eight-year-interlude, I've become fascinated by its role in the rest of the book and its relationship to the characters who created it. Ivan, its author, is Dostoevsky's embodiment of European intellectualism and atheism, and he is speaking to Alyosha, the author's personification of Russian simplicity and Christian faith. And at first glance, the latter character seems hopelessly outgunned by Ivan's intellectual artillery.
But the rest of the novel shows that this is not the case.
Alyosha, the book's hero, speaks through actions rather than words, showing that the true face of Christianity isn't its abstract intellectual constructs or its theoretical principles, but rather its physical actions on behalf of the dispossessed and the ostracized, society's losers, people deemed by man to be less important than everybody else, but chosen by God to be tests of man's goodness and faith. For his actions and his innate goodness, Alyosha earns his spot as the book's hero, the one character who emerges enriched, enlarged, and cleansed by the sordid events. It's an important message--intellect and cleverness aren't the keys to salvation, but kindness and goodness are; heaven is open to all, not just the winners with the high IQs.
As if this isn't enough, Ivan the intellectual ends up confronted (and perhaps maddened) by the consequences of his own beliefs. There's a counterpoint to "The Grand Inquisitor" later in the book, when Ivan encounters the devil in a fevered dream. Unfortulately, "Ivan's Nightmare and the Devil" is a slightly weaker chapter than the aforementioned one; there are some very lighthearted moments (at least, lighthearted by Dostoevsky's standards), and some very bizarre ones, so it doesn't quite leave the same impression on the reader, even though its importance is as great or greater.
At this point, Ivan has already learned from his father's murderer that "you taught me many things at the time...since there is no infinite God, there's no such thing as virtue either and there's no need for it at all." But the devil further demolishes Ivan's sense of self-importance. "My dear fellow, let me tell you--intelligence isn't everything," the devil says, and later goes on to discourse about a world in which "man will be exalted spiritually with a divine, titanic pride." In this world, "man will constantly experience such great joy that it will replace for him his former anticipation of the pleasures that await him in heaven."
On its own, this is compelling stuff; in the context of the book, it's even more fascinating, because Dostoevsky has elsewhere shown the self-destructiveness and nihilism inherent in man's search for "such great joy." Dimitri, the sensualist, pursues that goal and is nearly destroyed by it; rather than finding happiness, he ends up broke, brokenhearted, and on the verge of both murder and suicide. (Other readers have characterized him as being involved in a "love triangle," but the geometries of Dostoevsky's relationships aren't nearly so trite--this is more of a "love quadrilateral," or maybe even a "love pentagon.")
At any rate, the quest for instant gratification isn't the only spiritually destructive force at work in the novel. For Fyodor Karamazov's murderer isn't driven by rashness, but by resentment--his is the slow burn, not the fast flame. And this, not the Grand Inquisitor's musings, is the book's true central thesis. Dostoevsky may draw some complaints for its pacing, or for some of the overelaborate convolutions of plot or language, but all of that is insignificant, because he's exploring the very nature of evil here, and doing so in a truly compelling and original fashion.
And therein lies the irony of "The Brothers Karamazov." Intellectuals leap to praise "The Grand Inquisitor," but the rest of the book leads the reader in a completely different direction, away from intellect and cleverness, towards mysticism and humble Christianity, and finally (if one completes the journey and follows the book's ideas to their logical conclusion) to belief in God and an understanding of God's necessity. For as Dostoevsky makes clear, "when there is no God, all is permitted."
Book Review: Conflict between faith and disbelief
Summary: 5 Stars
Spiritually speaking, Dostoevsky worked on The Brothers Karamazov his entire life. The novel is one artistic embodiment riddled with everything he experienced, thought, and created. The central theme is a familiar motif: the conflict between faith and disbelief. This conflict is most accentuated by the personality duality of Ivan Karamazov and his dreamy encounter with the devil. The novel is a cumulation of Dostoevsky's life that in the topography of which his memories of childhood are united with the impressions of his final years. The three brothers, Dimitri, Ivan, and Alyosha are aspects of Dostoevsky's personality, three stages of his spirituality.
Dostoevsky portrays the brothers as a spiritual unity with some collective personality in its triple structure. The principle of reason is embodied in Ivan, the atheist, logician, and innate skeptic. Dimitri represents the principle of feeling in whom one finds the sensuality of insects. The principle of will, realizing itself in active love as an ideal, is presented Alyosha. However much the novel resembles a psychological treatise and a theological epistle; Dostoevsky merely meant it to be a novel. Religious-philosophical material was introduced into the framework of the novel genre and treated according to its laws. A tense dramatic plot is constructed at the center of which stand an enigmatic crime, a murder mystery, rivalry within family, and an entangled love affair. The religious mystery is thus paradoxically joined with a mystery-crime novel, as the ideological masses are ineluctably drawn into the eddy of the convoluted action, and clashing together, produce effective outbursts. Notwithstanding all its depth in philosophical treatise and the musing of immortality and existence of God, the novel is one of the most captivating and popular works of Russian literature.
Tension instantly builds up as the novel opens. The gathering at the Elder's Zosima's abode is an exposition of the characters and complication of the plot, as well as foreshadowing of the imminent fatality. The main protagonists are all presented together in this dramatic scene. The first clash between old Fyodor Karamazov and Dimitri takes place here. Ivan, whose essay establishes atheism, reason and logic, exposes his idea of the impossibility to loving mankind. The scandal anticipates the novel's tragic denouement. Tension mounts with each scene, and one inevitably becomes convinced of the possibility of the murder both practically and psychologically. The murder is a mystery for it seems only that the false denouement with Dimitri's stormy, unbridled character by contrast prepares the tragic tone of catastrophe. No less skillfully is the false murderer Dimitri places in opposition to the moral murderer Ivan. The frenzy of the former is not so terrible as the latter's cold hatred.
Conflict between faith and disbelief is brought to the full actuality in Ivan's nightmarish encounter with the devil. It is obvious that Ivan's consciousness is torn between faith and disbelief for the idea is not resolved in his heart and fretted him. Ivan longs for a world riddled with rational consciousness as opposed to evil and suffering. In a way, proportionally as the apparent atheist withdrew into the shadows, the wrestler with God steps out into illumination. In other words, Ivan is not an atheist but a struggler in the faith. The keenness of Ivan's reasoning lied in that he renounces God out of love for mankind comes forward against God in the role of the advocate of all suffering creation. He asserts the existence of evil in the world shows that there is no God and denying sin, he absolves man of any responsibility for evil and fixes it upon God. All the force of Christianity is in the personality of Christ, who overcomes sin and death. But if there is no sin, then redemption is not needed.
Ivan Karamazov echoes the Grand Inquisitor whose monologue culminates the work of Dostoevsky's whole life: his struggle for man. In it he discloses the religious foundation of the personality and the inseparability of faith in man from faith in God. To the Anti-Christ freedom is a torment for freedom leads to evil. Under the false compassion for the sufferings of mankind is hidden in a diabolic hatred of human freedom and the image of God in man. This is what stuck Ivan Karamazov. The monologue contains a "proof by the contrary" in which the censure of Christ is turned into his glorification. His negative argumentation suddenly transforms into a positive one. The Inquisitor reproaches Christ for having imposed an intolerable burden of freedom upon mankind, having demanded an impossible perfection from it and, having acted as if He did not love at all. Dostoevsky, through a proof of the contrary, shrewdly makes the greatest spiritual disclosure: the free personality of man is revealed only in Christ. Love is not a divine nature and the lover of mankind is not a man but God, who has given his son for the salvation of the world.
Since Ivan is with the Inquisitor against Christ, he must follow the road of apostasy and struggle with God to the end. The dichotomy of his consciousness between faith and disbelief is shown in his dialogue with the devil, which did everything in his power to compel the atheist to accept his reality. The devil might have been the product of Ivan's disbelief. The question of the devil's enigmatic visit will remain unresolved in Ivan's heart. Reality might have escaped the man who has lost the highest reality - God; fact merges with delirium, nothing exists but everything only seems.
The overall framework of the novel prepares for the pro and contra that enters into Alyosha's very soul, becomes his inner struggle, temptation, and victory over the temptation. While Ivan's revolt ends in his struggle with God and negation of God's world, Alyosha's revolt is completed and pruned by his mystical vision of the resurrection, through a feat of personal love. After all, The Brothers Karamazov, in light of its violent nature, calls for love and the miracle it brings about in life.
Book Review: A Masterpiece of Literature
Summary: 5 Stars
This book, by one of the greatest novelists in history, Dostoevsky, is easily the best book I have ever read in my life (albiet, at just barely 18 this is little time, but this work stands so far above the rest I have perused that it merits stating this). It is colossal, it is magnificent, it is one of the few works that have truly moved me, spoken to me at a deep level. I read this book about a year and a half ago, and it was the catalyst that allowed me to begin to contemplate the deeper things in life; it allowed me to realize the joy I find in thinking about deep questions, about human interaction. The first thing that must be talked about, and indeed what truly drives the novel, is its characters. Doestoevsky has crafted not merely one but THREE powerful, unique, and above all REAL characters that can be seen as representing three different ways of living. When I read this book I was battling with depression, and as such I found myself relating strongly to Dimitri Karamazov. What utter beauty. What utter tragedy. Dimitri himself seems to find beauty in tragedy, as is found in some of those who are depressed. He, even in the baseness of many of his actions, has this noble air about him, and that of high tragedy. His quote, "But I'm sure that life will follow its proper course in the end: the worthy man will occupy his rightful place and the unworthy one will vanish in some dark alley and never be heard of again. And there, in that dark and filthy alley, which is so dear to him, where he feels so much at home, amidst the stench and the dirt, he'll perish happily, because that's what he really wants..."
shows perfectly the beautiful tragedy of this character; that line was burned into my mind the second I read it and it has refused to ever leave. Ivan, the most intellectual of the three, creates what for me at least was the central conflict of the book: not the parricide, but rather the tension and conflict between faith (especially in God) and reason. The conversation between Ivan and his brother Alexei (a devout Christian monk) is perhaps the most compelling scene in the whole novel, with the chapters "Rebellion" and "The Grand Inquistior" being absolutely brilliant. The idea behind Ivan's rebellion, behind his inability to accept God, is very compelling, and part of what makes the book so compelling as a whole. Indeed, what sets it apart from many other novels is that it (for the most part) it doesn't come out and tell you that this way, or this other way is the correct way to live; it simply presents life to you, as whole, through its characters and the interaction between them, and allows you to decide (and it does so beautifully). In my personal opinion, it seemed that the author declared Christianity, faith, to be the winner; Ivan's eventual decline, and (in one of the most powerful images I have ever read in any book ever) Alyosha falling to his knees and kissing the ground after seeing the vision of Zosima in Heaven seem to show that the author favors Christianity over atheism, faith over a need for absolute knowledge and fact. Indeed, I think part of what makes the characters so completely fleshed out and compelling is that the author, as it states in his bio, has moved through all these extremes in his life. He had a tough life, and was an atheist, before becoming a devout Christian, and he is able to write about these confilcting viewpoints with utter sincerity and clarity.
I realize that I am not staying very focused in my discussion, but this is because the book is so imcredibly deep that there feels like there is an almost infinite amount that can be discussed. Ultimately, you need to read this book- it is as simple as that. But I would also add that this book is not for everyone (though honestly, I feel like everyone SHOULD read it at least once). if you do not like to, or are incapable of truly THINKING about what you are reading, then you will get little out of it, and its 900 pages will pass slowly for you. But for any who truly enjoy ideas, and the contemplation of them, you will find utter joy in reading this book. It is a masterpiece, and a true work of art. It is a crowing achievement for any man, and I truly believe that my life has become better and more fulfiling as a result of reading it. I give 5 stars to the rarest of books, only the absolute best, and "5 stars" here seems like the most ridiculously inadequate description. I can think of no higher compliment to give. Very Highly Recommended.
Book Review: Que "masterpiece theatre" music.
Summary: 5 Stars
**THIS SECTION IS A PREFACE**Dostoyevsky's Brothers Karamazov was written in the twilight of his life, when this highly intelligent author had silenced most of his critics with numerous rebuttal essays and published responces to mute those not fond of his theistic approach to philosophy, and his exacting surgical naturalism with psychology and law.
Just as us westerners esteem the inklings very highly (C. Williams, Tolkein, Lewis, occasionally D. Sayer and others), the orthodox and reformed russian alike hold Turgenev, Tolstoy, and Dostoyevsky, (occasionally Pushkin) in the same esteem.
If you are serious about Dostoyevsky I would consider reading Ivan Turgenev's "Fathers and Sons" and Dostoyevsky's "Crime and Punishment," before making the endeavor of Mt. Karamazov. I recommend the two stated because I made the mistake of starting the book (BK) too early in my life, before I had read 'Fathers' and 'C&P'. Reading Turgenev, (who because of his more simplistic nature) I had many things explained to me, through quite enjoyable reading, about the volatile, brewing russian intellectual and political climate. In Fathers and Sons, Bazarov has a striking resemblence to Ivan, the olderst of the three brothers in BK. Ivan is sooooo intricate and complex as a character. This forced me often times to pigeon-hole him conveniently into the modern secular-humanist and popular atheist character. Knowing the agenda and pursuits of Bazarov helped me to understand the bitter agnostic tapestry of Ivan, and the appropriate context of most of the characters. Crime and Punishment helped me on a different level. B.K. provides a formidable paradox in that Dostoyevsky appears to be a brilliant and objective scientist, yet deeply religious and and romantic in his philosophies. Crime and Punishment is a social walk through public and personal morality and the efficacy the soul has on behavior, something that is crucial in understanding in B.K.
I also recommend reading a combined works of Schiller (a german romantic poet just pre-fyodor) whom Dostoyevsky is very fond of and quotes often in B.K.. Reading Alexander Pushkin simotaneously could prove dangerous ;) due to Dostoyevskys jocular and sardonic relationship with the romantic russian. Don't worry about Tolstoy unless you are going on a cruise with the boss for a couple weeks and wish to stay mentally sober.
This translation is by far the best, the foot notes and chapter notes were invaluable. I have read both the Constance Garnett translation and this one, and the difference for me was night and day. It would be true to say that the Garnett translation captures Dostoyevsky's prose better, but a 80 word sentence is a little too long for me, gin and tonic or not. Without further adieu, the actual review:
**ACTUAL REVIEW (thanks for the patience:)
The Brothers Karamazov is an epic that spans the far corners of Philosophy, Orthodox Christianity, Nihilism, Atheism, Heretical Catholocism, Psychology, and Law. It brushes upon Anthropology, Cultural Crisis, small scale sociology and cosmology.
Most importantly it is a powerful, moving novel about the ethos and core of what a family is; love that transforms beliefs, and that same love that inspires murder and a pantheon of crimes. It is written in the classic russina style of presenting both sides of an equation and allowing the reader to discern truth from what they will. Alyosha, the youngest of three sons is the protagonist of the novel, as well as the hero. I am feign to use the word hero, however, because he is not at all like the typical mythological hero either in the east or the west; he is a silent, listening hero, ( a still, small voice) that drives the rest of the characters around him in the most powerful display of genuine altruism I have ever read in a novel.
This book changed my life. It spoke to my mind with its intellectual and cerebral labors, but more importantly pulled at my heart, forcing a 22 year-old male college student to cry. Cana of Galilee, the catalyst chapter in the center of the book spurned an incredible personal experience for me, and has left its continuing mark more than a year later.
This book improved who I am, strenghtened my mental capacities, expanded my vocabulary, helped me be a better man to my woman, and transported me for weeks from my rut of mired western thought. If you are ready, drop everything and read this book.
Book Review: My favorite book -- My favorite translation
Summary: 5 Stars
I just have to begin my review my urging everyone to read the review by "a reader from wichita, kansas." I had always heard that the great plains were marginalized, but I had no idea.....This is a great book. Arthur Miller ("Death of a Salesman," "After the Fall," "The Crucible," etc) was a C student, until he had read The Brothers Karamazov--and he only started reading it because he heard it was a "murder mystery." After reading this book, he decided to become a writer. Elliot Rosewater, in Vonnegut's "Slaughterhouse Five" proclaims "Everything you need to know about life is in Brothers Karamazov--but damn it! It's just not enough!" Laura Bush--spouse of the person who will never be the president of me--said during an interview on National Public Radio that this was her favorite book, with her favorite part being the chapter entitled "Rebellion." I am a former communist revolutiony, current democratic socialist--and this is my favorite book, with my favorite chapter: "Rebellion."
I want to stress two points in this review. First, this is a hefty book. If you watched HBO's "The Sopranos," you'll know that the shrink Carmello met with suggested that Tony Soprano might be saved--but only if Tony was incarcerated for seven years, and read "Crime and Punishment." Karamazov is longer. Dickens was paid by the pound for his books--and he never wrote anything approaching this book.
BUT! For the love of the cowboy buddha, do not let the size of this book scare you away. Really. This is one of those russian novels with a bizillion characters, and a bunch of plots. Still, there are two chapters that really stand out. I can't urge you more strongly to get this book--and just read those two chapters. If you want to go further, and read the whole book--fab-bu. But here's what you should read: "Rebellion" and "The Grand Inquisitor." Both chapters are about thirty pages.
"Rebellion" involves a meeting with two of the three brothers, Alyosha, a monk, and Ivan, an agnostic intellectual. Ivan starts to explain his doubts about an omnipotent, just god to Alyosha, illustrating his points with examples of horrific abuse that some children have suffered. "What is message, the ultimate answer, the goal that requires such suffering?" he asks. Whether the novel provides an answer--that depends on the reader.
"The Grand Inquisitor" is the most famous section of this novel. Later in the same meeting (it was a long meeting), Ivan tells Alyosha about a story Ivan is writing, involving the dark days of the Spanish Inquisition. Jesus returns to Spain, and simply walks the streets, without saying a word. The Grand Inquisitor--famous for burning hundreds (in not thousands) of "heretics" at the stake has Jesus arrested. Later, the Inquisitor confronts Jesus in jail, and attacks Jesus for Jesus's "mistakes," and how the church has had to correct them....
An amazing, powerful story. I try to get all my religious friends to read this--but with limited success.
My last point is I have to take issue with the previous reviewer. I love this translation--I've read both translations, and find the language in this version much better, more beautiful. But who knows.....I can't imagine there is really a popular demand for rating versions of translations of Russian novels....
Just my personal opinion, I don't think "Crime & Punishment" holds up as well as the other books. Pevear & Volokhonsky's translation of "Deamons," though, that is also excellent.
All in all, while you may not yet have heard of Fyodor, you will soon; he is without doubt one of the most articulate young novelists to have come along in the last hundred & fifty years. In his hands, novels of events that took place in 1870s pre-revolutionary Russia read as though Fyodor were there--personally. I look forward to reading his future works, wondering if he could convey the same feeling for contempory events--like the fall of the Berlin Wall.