19 Comments
User's avatar
David van Gend's avatar

Great piece. Will dust down my Dostoevsky again.

One typo: he was not 'a century' before Nietzsche but just a few years. 'The Brothers K' was 1880 and 'Beyond good and Evil' was 1886.

Expand full comment
Classics Read Aloud's avatar

Terrific essay. Thank you.

Expand full comment
Thomas Field's avatar

The Brothers Karamazov had a massive impact on me ages 24 … I had already read Anna Karenin, which is good, but Dostoevsky blows Tolstoy’s bucolic romanticism out of the water. Almost 40 years later I’m still considering following Alyosha’s path.

Expand full comment
Michael Mohr's avatar

Brothers K is INCREDIBLE. Read it a couple times.

Expand full comment
Gayle Frances Larkin's avatar

As a child I went to many different schools. Once there, my first port of call was the library. Then the town or city library. Books were devoured. Dostoyevsky was a favourite, and he's also been revisited along with other classical authors. Many different schools, private and public, may be catastrophic in some ways but the libraries were, and still are, unfailing friends. One is left with the taste for undeniable quality which is lifelong.

Expand full comment
TheEthologist's avatar

The myths of religion should leave everyone thinking twice before adopting such a practice. Too many people have died for these synthesized realities. Personally, I say no thanks.

I would rather look at leaves on trees and think of their biochemistry rather than participate in a practice that has resulted in too many deaths, too many tortured, and too many excluded, none for a legitimate reason

Maybe if Dostoyevsky had encountered cell and molecular biology he might have found something worthy to ponder and hold up in awe. Instead he was a proponent of building one’s life on a pack of lies. How sad.

Expand full comment
Thomas Field's avatar

8. ....... Formerly they had a heaven adorned with a vast

wealth of thoughts and imagery. The meaning of all that is,

hung on the thread of light by which it was linked to that

heaven. Instead of dwelling in this world’s presence, men

looked beyond it, following this thread to an other-worldly

presence, so to speak. The eye of the Spirit had to be

forcibly turned and held fast to the things of this world; and

it has taken a long time before the lucidity which only

heavenly things used to have could penetrate the dullness

and confusion in which the sense of worldly things was

enveloped, and so make attention to the here and now as

such, attention to what has been called ‘experience’, an

interesting and valid enterprise. Now we seem to need just

the opposite: sense is so fast rooted in earthly things that it

requires just as much force to raise it. The Spirit shows

itself as so impoverished that, like a wanderer in the desert

craving for a mere mouthful of water, it seems to crave for

its refreshment only the bare feeling of the divine in

general. By the little which now satisfies Spirit, we can

measure the extent of its loss.

From the Preface to Phenomenology of Spirit by G W F

Hegel, 1807.

(Trans. A V Miller, OUP, Oxford, 1977.)

Expand full comment
environMENTAL's avatar

“That’s the genius of Dostoevsky. He takes everything we hide… everything polite society teaches us to bury… and brings it right to the surface. He exposes the ugly parts of the human soul, not to glorify them, but to show that without grace, without something higher to live for, we collapse into madness.”

Well said. And one of my personal favorite authors for that reason. The great Russian writers really had a way with that. Same with Solzhenitsyn and Rand.

Expand full comment
JB Self's avatar

Excellent synopsis!

Expand full comment
Dan Colbert's avatar

Very good article, but TBK did not come a century before Nietzsche and Freud.

Expand full comment
Star Mapper's avatar

Excellent illustrations, as well.

Expand full comment
nikos tsiopelas's avatar

Excellent. The introduction of the essay can be used in so many circumstances having to do with the contemporary way of thinking, acting and reacting

Expand full comment
Rita McConnell's avatar

Bravo!

A few years ago, I started genuinely reading Russian authors - primarily Dostoyevsky. At first, I really wasn’t sure what I was reading - but somehow I knew it was profound and I was discovering…something. I wasn’t sure what I was getting from it, but I indulged. It DOES make you uncomfortable. I was at an uncomfortable place in my life - Dostoyevsky showed me this phase if you will was universal. It just seems different to us because the circumstances (age, place, players, reaction) under which we experience it differ. Some of us use it for the better, others hide in societal wisdom.

I never knew how reading these stories impacted my mind until push came to shove in determining the value of my own life, and separating what was truly important from what I was supposed to want. I’m now truly grateful for much of the suffering I had to endure to get here. I think Dostoyevsky might have been prodding me from the corners of my own mind.

Expand full comment
Josh's avatar

Great 👍🏻

Expand full comment
The Brush Up's avatar

What does it take to awaken those around you to the need of an inner life?

Expand full comment
Michael Mohr's avatar

"Most people today can’t read Dostoevsky, not because they’re stupid, but because they’ve forgotten how to sit with discomfort."

Very true. LOVE Dostoevsky: https://michaelmohr.substack.com/p/dostoevsky-russian-wizard

Dost wrote from The Universal. This is sorely missing in our contemporary, myopic, navel-gazing online writing culture today. Every writer needs to read Dostoevsky. He already did everything you think needs to still be done now. It's all there.

Expand full comment
Lisw's avatar

Bravo!

Expand full comment