Poor Folk, A Russian Novella By Fyodor Dostoevksy

Both of these classics revolve around the idea of people suffering in order to keep the world around them happy, or satisfied. This suffering is what creates morality into the reader’s thinking, and suddenly a conscious begins to develop throughout the story. In a way, the theme of suffering and morality, or simplified as “good vs. evil”, can also be seen in the real life problem known as underground human trafficking. These stories display the questionable realism involving the world’s inability to settle the dispute between good and evil, as well as the capabilities it takes to go against order, even when people are suffering and morality is at question.

Viktor E. Frankl, an Austrian neurologist and psychiatrist who also had survived the Holocaust, writes “When we are no longer able to change a situation – we are challenged to change ourselves” (BrainyQuote). Frankl survived genocide against his own people and still chose to have a positive outlook on it because he understands that if he did not, he would continually live an unhappy, upset life. Like Frankl, Ivan Denisovich Shukhov, the main character in One Day In The Life of Ivan Denisovich by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, contains a similar outlook to that of Frankl. The novel takes place during Soviet Russia in a gulag in Siberia, or otherwise known as a labor work camp. The whole book is about only one day that Shukhov lives; from 5 in the morning to 10 at night and all that happens in between. In this labor camp, not only are the weather conditions very cold, making it difficult to work in such circumstances, but also the workers are punished and harshly treated if they do not obey the guards. When placed in this environment, it is easy to be discouraged and miserable, but instead of facing the negatives of his situation, Shukhov remains affirmative in his thoughts – which are most important in order to survive not only physically, but also mentally. This stoicism portrayed in the narrative can also be found in Epictetus’s work, The Handbook. In this text, Epictetus discusses how he believes people can live a happy life, despite the hard conditions they are put through

A story, of any type, is greatly affected by the characters’ outlook on life. A bright, hopeful main character will give the narrative a more lighthearted feel, and cause the reader to feel encouraged and satisfied. If the character has a negative perspective, however, it can elicit sadness, pity, or even irritation from the reader. In Voltaire’s Candide and Tolstoy’s Death of Ivan Ilyich, two characters with very different worldviews are displayed. The lighthearted Candide maintained an attitude of cheerfulness and perseverance even through the hardships of his life, which stems from his deep love and care for others, while the coldhearted despair of Ivan Ilyich is only intensified into anger by the feigned optimism of those around him.

The Readers teach the young minds they are molding the concepts of kindness and charity. In the lesson “The New Year” (83), Edward gives money to a poor family, in “Emulation” (98), a young boy sacrifices his own prominence to help his fellow classmate. The many stories revolving around family and virtues such as, kindness show how looking out for your fellow man was taught through this text. This will be an important idea in the discussion of societal relationships throughout industrialization and it is this value that seems to be the most challenged and evolved within the period of

Damon Knight’s “The Country of the Kind” follows a narrator who the audience at first knows little about, who lives in a society that is different from the norm, but is also initially left ambiguous. This sense of the unknown exists up until the narrator stumbles upon a pamphlet which opens up new viewpoints to the reader. The pamphlet serves to create three new perspectives in particular, all of which significantly shift the reader’s understanding of the story. First, it gives the reader a chance to understand the narrator and sympathize with him. Second, it offers a new perspective on society and their overall conception of what defines a utopia. The third and final perspective is that of the people who live within this society, and their interactions with the main characters. These three new perspectives prove to be formative in understanding the main character, his interactions with other characters in the story, and the role of society.

In One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn shows how Soviet prisoners, known as Zeks, are treated while being in the gulag for one day through the eyes of the protagonist and omniscient narrator named Ivan Denisovich Shukhov. Despite being in an environment such as the Soviet Union, where there is harsh tundra and not much food to eat, Shukhov tries to make good use of what he has received while trying to keep himself alive. The purpose of Solzhenitsyn’s portrayal of food is to show its overall significance and that it is used as a means of trade and survival. Over time, the power of food reveals its significance to the Zeks and especially to Shukhov and food allows both groups understanding towards the necessity of food for their vitality and well-being additionally.

In “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas” by Ursula Le Guin, the informally-speaking narrator depicts a cookie-cutter utopia with perpetually happy citizens that sing and dance in the music-filled streets during the Festival of Summer. However, under one of the beautiful public buildings lays a child, no older than ten years-old, who lays in its own excrement. Although the citizens know the emancipated child is there, they refuse to act upon the child’s suffering, for their happiness depends entirely on the child’s abominable misery. Through ethos, the narrator illustrates this utopian society with a casual tone and frequently asks the audience for their input. Le Guin’s fairy-tale introduction of the story establishes her credibility through her extensive knowledge and understanding of the people of Omelas. Le Guin utilizes logos through the narrator’s second person point of view which incites the audience to draw their own conclusions about the city of Omelas and question their own justifications of the child’s existence. The concept of the happiness of many relying on the necessary suffering of one forces the reader to question their own morals and their justifications for the child’s physical and mental condition. Through ethos, logos, and pathos, Le Guin presents the contrast and divide between the citizens of Omelas and the child in the cellar in order to challenge the reader’s capacity for moral self-conception.

When reflecting on one’s childhood, one either views it as a blissful time in their life, or a hellish society in which they suffered greatly. While both scenarios are very different from one another, it is arguable that both parties experienced a loss of innocence in this time frame.The loss of innocence is something which happens to everybody, sooner or later. Growing up in society, children are exposed to many different concepts. While these concepts play an important role in everyday life, some of them may end up destroying a child’s innocence. Dealing with other people and communicating properly play an essential role in everyday life, but people with malice on their agenda may end up destroying the innocence of others. Even something as simple as learning the countermeasures to deal with the malevolence of others causes a person to lose their innocence. In order to be successful in everyday life, it is necessary for one to confront the harsh reality of our world, which would destroy their innocence.

Ursula K. Le Guin is an award winning author who has made great contributions to the science fiction genera. Le Guin’s stories often evoke readers to view society through a different lens. In the short story The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas Le Guin challenges societies conventions of imagination and believability within a narrative. I will argue, that the story The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas by Ursula K. Le Guin, intertwines two contradictory story worlds in an attempt to critique the limitations we impose on our imagination due to the understanding that we have never experienced a society that does not poses evil. I intend to analyze the rules of the two following story worlds that Le Guin presents; the first story world where happiness is the only thing that the inhabitants experience and the second story world where happiness is experienced when evil presents itself in the society. The two story worlds come together to push the readers to accept a world that simply functions on its own without evil.

In Gardner’s writing, On Moral Fiction, he speaks of society’s view of morals and how they could be skewed from a reader’s interpretation of an author’s writing. In relation, Ethan Frome and The Awakening deal with different views of the characters passions versus what is morally right in society. These novels represent the ongoing internal confusion within all people of what we believe is morally right or if we should simply follow our passions.

When faced with the decision of accepting or rejecting this pernicious philosophy, one is shocked to find oneself in the role of Vonnegut’s protagonist Billy. Stumbling along a life in which he takes no active part, Billy conceives what he believes to be the truth of war, and life in general: “Everything was beautiful, and nothing hurt”(Vonnegut 156). Of course, this kernel of wisdom is shared not in words, but in a child’s drawing, furthermore drawing attention to the willfully childish ignorance that Billy and Vonnegut have chosen for the world. By superimposing the image of an ideal of harmful naivete on his readers, Vonnegut tactfully stirs the morals of his readers in a way that no coolly composed and calculating rhetoric could ever aspire to.

The dark side of human nature has been present throughout the course of life as illustrated in The Cask of Amontillado, Good Country People, and The Lottery. The darkness is a predominant theme as expressed by a few character traits throughout the short stories. Humans have been responsible for acts of care and compassion, yet the dark side of human nature overcomes them through the themes of pride, self preservation, and deception which throughout the short stories gives evidence of the dark side of human nature.

In this paper, I plan to explain Dostoevsky’s criticism of Western Individualism. Dostoevsky’s first criticism resides in the idea to “love life more than the meaning of it, “which is presented by the character Alyosha (Dostoevsky 3). Allowing this character to discuss this topic, along with the commentary of Ivan, demonstrates their mindset to solely focus on their own lives, opposed to caring for others. This leads to them living for the now, and not focusing on how their decisions will affect their future or others. Dostoevsky disapproves of this notion because living by this mentality encourages the guidance of logic, which is dangerous because it could tell you to kill yourself. From Dostoevsky’s Eastern Orthodox background, he believes that the only way from living from this situation is to deny it. By denying this way of living, the focus toward life will not be directed toward yourself, but toward the way you can impact the environment around you. Ivan clearly does not believe in these values, due to his intentions to commit suicide at the age of thirty. As said before, living by the idea to “love life more than the meaning of it” leads to death, and Ivan indulges in this to the fullest (Dostoevsky 3).

“Nothing has ever been more insupportable for a man and a human society than freedom.” –The Grand Inquisitor” “Above all, don't lie to yourself. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others. And having no respect he ceases to love.” - Father Zosima. These two quotes voice the polarized philosophies that impregnate the book, The Brothers Karamazov. Ivan, the second of the three sons, and Zosima, the old monk, are huge commentators on the question, “Is the burden of free will to much for a human to bear?”

Leo Tolstoy’s The Death of Ivan Ilyich tells the story of a modern lawman whose sudden mortality forces him to evaluate the worth of his life and the life choices he has. Throughout the novella, Tolstoy reveals social norms and practices blindly followed by those in the upper-middle class. These norms bring to light modernity’s core values, which Tolstoy critiques through the actions Ivan Ilyich takes before his death, Ivan Ilyich’s revelation as he lies on his death bed, and the way Ivan Ilyich’s family, friends, and colleagues react to his illness and eventual death. In fact, The Death of Ivan Ilyich provides a critique on modernity as a whole; Tolstoy condemns the shallow, superficial lives the higher-ups in society lead, spurred on by the idea of modernity.