The Brothers Karamazov By Fyodor Dostoevsky

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.

Often times in literature, we are presented with quintessential characters that are all placed into the conventional categories of either good or bad. In these pieces, we are usually able to differentiate the characters and discover their true intentions from reading only a few chapters. However, in some remarkable pieces of work, authors create characters that are so realistic and so complex that we are unable to distinguish them as purely good or evil. In the novel Crime and Punishment, Fyodor Dostoevsky develops the morally ambiguous characters of Raskolnikov and Svidrigailov to provide us with an interesting read and to give us a chance to evaluate each character.

Ivan IV was a complicated man, with a complicated past, in a complicated country, in a complicated time; his story is not an easy one. Ivan the terrible, the man, could never be completely understood in a few words, nor in a few pages, and only perhaps in a few volumes. A man of incredible range his dreadfulness could only be matched by his magnificence, his love by his hatred.

In many books, like Crime and Punishment by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky the main character usually faces both good and bad influences from supporting characters. In this book, mainly Svidrigailov and Sonia influenced Raskolnikov who presumed to be the main character. The influences from Sonia and Svidrigailov both shape and change Raskolnikov and develop the plot of the book. Since Raskolnikov was a character being mixed of good and bad traits, it allowed him to easily be influenced in which are expressed as the book progresses.

But whose responsibility is it that he became like that? Whose fault is it that this man...was brought up in such a preposterous way? Did anyone ever teach him to behave sensibly?” (Dostoevsky, 1981). The man continues to argue that because of Dmitry’s childhood, it was no wonder that he grew up to become a man who was a drunk and possibly had the ability to commit murder against his father who raised him.

Would you want to be thrown out of a window? In the novel, Notes from Underground, Fyodor Dostoevsky talks about a scene where the underground man wanted to be thrown out of a tavern window after seeing another man get tossed out of it. The social control theory does a good job at explaining the underground man’s need to fit in with society. Do you want to be constantly in debt that you never have money and are a burden to your friends? The strain theory explains really well the scene in the book where the underground man does not get invited to the going away party and does not have the money to pay for it. Both of the theories had interesting histories and more than one theorist has had some input on both.

Fyodor Dostoyevsky paints Underground man as someone who is tortured in his novel Notes From Underground. Despite everything that Underground man says he is lost and has no sense of his identity. When the character of Liza is introduced the reader gains some hope that the Underground man can find love. Although Underground man ultimately pushes Liza away, he really loved her through his own idea of love. Underground man shows this love for her through his first conversation with Liza, his trying to save Liza, and, ironically, through his cruelty towards Liza.

“Master and Man” by Leo Tolstoy is a story that explores the dynamics between a peasant, Nakita and his master,Vasillii Andriech. Andriech foolishly risks both of their lives, when they venture to another town in inclement weather to secure a business deal. Unfortunately, Andreich's impatience and greed ultimately leads to his demise. At the end of the story Nikita dies and is denied the same bliss that Vasillii Andreich experiences in death; in order to solidify the dichotomy between these two men, demonstrate how Andriech cheated Nakita, and he uses Nakita's lackluster death to amplify Andriech's extraordinary passing.

Imperial Russian society during the time of serfdom was characterized by constantly changing social order. The society experienced a complex social change at the threshold to emancipation. It was undergoing many changes with increasing westernization and serfdom culture that gave rise to formation of new classes (raznochintsy) during the nineteenth century. Many authors have reflected and emphasized this component of change in the structure of pre-emancipation Russian society. This paper will examine how two writers: Nikolai Gogol and Ivan Turgenev, in their novels, Dead Souls and Fathers and Sons depict the society’s constantly changing nature through the relationships between their characters and the development in their beliefs and ideas. Although both the novels explore societal change during the pre-emancipation of serfs, the emphasis of change is different in both the novels. In Fathers and Sons, Turgenev oversees shifting values prevalent in the society. He explores the shift in generational values by depicting the difference in beliefs of characters like Bazarov and Nikolai. On the other hand, in Dead Souls Gogol focuses on issues of morality in society. He depicts a struggle for morality and portrays a corrupt society through the landowners and the protagonist, Chichikov, in his book.

The “superfluous men” is a concept in Russian literature meaning characters’ behavior or philosophy of values in the society that go against existing social norms. They alienated from the surrounding environment, struggle to hold their own beliefs, and duel with conflicts of society or within the self. The intent of this paper, therefore, is to analyze three characters who are described in the three stories, which can be termed as “superfluous men,” regarding both psychological and physical dueling.

Good vs Evil: Karamazov Style The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky establishes the duality of man in the character of Dmitri Karamazov, and further illustrates the two sides with the lives of his brothers Alexei and Ivan. Alexei illustrates the saintly life, and Ivan represents the rejection of God and morality. Each character is firmly established as such by Dostoevsky in order to show the reader where each lifestyle leads, to manifest in an exterior manner the interior conflict of Dmitri, and ultimately to decide the victor of the classic contest between good and evil.

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).

The spiritual life of each person in the world is as individual as a fingerprint. Thousands of different religions create a myriad of outlines for worship, but every personal belief system is unique. “The Three Hermits” by Leo Tolstoy tells of three holy men living a silent life of prayer on an island by themselves. When an Archbishop catches word of them, he insists on diverting his own travel route so that he may visit the hermits. With diligence, he teaches the men the Our Father and departs to return to his ship. Later, the three hermits chase after the ship as if they were running on ground, for they forgot the Our Father and wished to be retaught by the Bishop. Crossing himself, the Bishop assures the hermits that their prayers will be heard by God and asks that they pray for him and other sinners.

“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?”