/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15289992]

>tfw you want to be Alyosha but realize you're more of a Smerdyakov

[Anonymous No.15290129]

>>15289992

At least you're not a fucking Ivan

[Anonymous No.15290144]

>>15289992
>tfw you're Alyosha and not a Smerdyakov

[Anonymous No.15290152]

>>15290144
>tfw you were more Alyosha but now you're more of an Ivan

[Anonymous No.15290227]

>tfw you really want a Gruschenka but you'd settle for a Katerina or even a Lise

[Anonymous No.15290575]

>>15289992
this thread is so sad. It proves that all of you despite reading this masterpiece are still only capable of making stupid washed out meme jokes. There is truly no hope for this world.

[Anonymous No.15290600]

>>15290575

[Anonymous No.15290608]

tfw i'm a dimitri to the marrow of my bones

[Anonymous No.15290746]

>>15290575

This thread is so sad. It proves that all of you, despite watching Mike Tyson fight, still can't throw a punch.

You see how retarded that logic is?

[Anonymous No.15290808]

>>15290746
that's not really a good analogy. at all

[Anonymous No.15291128]

>>15289992
Used to be ivan, but now I'm more smerdyakov. Wish I could be alyosha

[Anonymous No.15291154]

>>15290129
>>15290152
idk senpai I found a lot of things deeply moving about Ivan's character. In his discussion with father Zosima there is a great deal of genuine pain coming from Ivan, and this is really the pain that a post-religious humanity is subject to. He just wants to believe, but he can't intellectually bring himself to do it :(

[Anonymous No.15291237]

>>15291154
>tfw no 40 year old khokhlakov widow gf

Also, are Ivan and kolya supposed to be the same character?

[Anonymous No.15291293]

>>15289992
>Not wanting to be the chad schizophrenic /lit/posting ivan

[Anonymous No.15291308]

>>15291237
interesting question, because the two characters certainly share that "intellectual" archetype...

Idk though, Kolya is intentionally written as much more cringey than Ivan. I think Kolya is intended to be a young "pure" kid persuaded by fashionable nihilistic beliefs to stray from his true nature. Kolya is also less intelligent than Ivan, and doesn't really seem to grasp the intellectual matters he tries to discuss. Ivan, however, is genuinely smart and can't seem to rationally justify a belief in God/Christian morality, though he desperately wants to be an altruistic person.

I think Kolya is unltimately an edgy 14 year old atheist and Ivan is more of a Stoner or Steppenwolf. Kolya is just making himself sad with things he doesn't believe in...Ivan is a different story.

What do you think?

[Anonymous No.15291321]

>>15290575
correct, now hang yourself

[Anonymous No.15291328]

>>15290746
I mean in all honesty, watching someone else do stuff is pretty stupid. More so if you've no personal experience in the activity.

[Anonymous No.15291381]

>>15291308
Crazy how all these archetypes have existed for hundreds of years, I guess that's one reason why Tbk is great. Nothing really changes, spooky stuff.

[Anonymous No.15291480]

>>15291381
This
So many social dynamics, archetypes, etc.. are more or less the same across history only articulated with different terms and phrases
In 300 years people will read stuff and be like “wow they had *insert youthful neologism here* too and they called them ‘coomers’”

[Anonymous No.15291880]

>>15291128
>Used to be ivan, but now I'm more smerdyakov
they're two sides of the same coin so it's not surprising really

[Anonymous No.15291917]

>>15291308
what struck me is that the brothers (save smerdyakov) all have a special affection for children: Alyosha enjoys and seeks out their company, Dmitry has the dream about the "wee one" and Ivan collects stories about child abuse and rejects God's salvation if it is based on children suffering

[Anonymous No.15292370]

>>15290129
>tfw I’m literally Ivan

[Anonymous No.15292815]

>>15291237
No, Kolya is Raskolnikov

[Anonymous No.15292883]

>>15291308
Kolya had some of the funniest parts.
Nothing is cringey about him. He's a kid, ultimately so how can you cringe at him? He's basically a kid with some preconceived notions of what it means to be grown up, ordering the others around by them even though they aren't exactly true. I didn't connect them to Ivan at all.

[Anonymous No.15292895]

>>15290152
This is me. The Ivan in me killed the Alyosha in me

[Anonymous No.15293071]

I've just read this book and I absolutely loved it.
I was deeply moved by the speech by Alyosha about the importance of childhood memories at the end of the book. I'm happy I was able to enjoy it even not being a very intellectual person.
I've read The Crime and Punishment back in highschool and I'm hyped to read Demons in near future.

[Anonymous No.15293086]

>>15292815
Raskolnikov is Ivan/Smerdyakov, though

[Anonymous No.15293093]

>>15292883
Kolya's visit to Ilyushechka's sick bed was kino

[Anonymous No.15293108]

why is he so compelling?

[Anonymous No.15293172]

>>15293093
Agreed. Pretty much everything with Kolya was kino. Great character, a lot of bravado and heart.
>>15293108
Because he is willing to surrender to God and is described as being universally liked because of it.

[Anonymous No.15293195]

>>15293172
>Because he is willing to surrender to God and is described as being universally liked because of it.
but so did Myshkin and he was ridiculed and belittled all the time

[Anonymous No.15293196]

>>15293086
Absolutely not, Ivan and Smerdyakov don't really have an equivalent like other characters.

[Anonymous No.15293261]

>>15293196
What? Ivan and Raskolnikov have the same idea that great men of history don't have to abide by morality (without God everything is permitted) in order to go and perform great deeds. Smerdyak, putting Ivan's ideas into practice by killing Fyodor (an unscrupulous man in every regard, universally hated) is exactly the same as Raskolnikov killing the unprincipled pawnbroker who is likewise hated by all (remember the conversation between the soldier and student discussing how killing the pawnbroker would be doing humanity a favor) etc. etc.

[Anonymous No.15293276]

>>15293195
Yeah, I haven't read that book yet.
A trite answer is that Dosto just wanted people to like him. People in the book seem to respond well to him because doesn't have an ulterior motive, is non-threatening, and difficult to manipulate/steadfast. Maybe some sense of characters perceiving him to be non-judgmental, or even the opposite of some characters wanting to be judged by him (but denied most of the time). If Dosto wanted he could have made all of these qualities hated but that's not the life he wanted to examine in Alyosha's case.

[Anonymous No.15293283]

>>15290575
based

[Anonymous No.15293293]

>>15293276
>Maybe some sense of characters perceiving him to be non-judgmental, or even the opposite of some characters wanting to be judged by him (but denied most of the time).
Not sure what sentence I was trying to write here but I think you get the general idea about some characters appreciating the fact that Alyosha doesn't seem to judge them despite having the moral high ground and others wishing he would.

[Anonymous No.15293296]

>>15290575
Exactly. For people like this, BK is just the office but it's harder to get through. A soap opera and a whodunnit, this is my favorite character and i would marry her, I was like what's going to happen now?

[Anonymous No.15293335]

>>15293296
correct, now hang yourself

[Anonymous No.15293355]

>>15293335
why?

[Anonymous No.15293356]

>>15292370
>tfw I've always been Ivan, never anything else.

I even authored edgy essays for my college's literary magazine

[Anonymous No.15293363]

>>15293355
this ugly world doesn't deserve you

[Anonymous No.15293371]

>>15293363
for what

[Anonymous No.15293420]

>>15293371
for wheat

[Anonymous No.15293443]

>>15293261
Their characters are nothing alike, if there is a comparison it would be Ivan and Stavrogin as he similarly influences Shatov and Kirillov and they have the same demeanour. But Stavrogin also has many similarities to Raskolnikov in that they are both very attractive and have a magnetic personally with incredible potential which for different reasons they don't live up to. It's the same with Kolya as someone pointed out above, that he is gifted and way above the others, but misguided or being led astray by cancerous ideas just like Raskolnikov.

[Anonymous No.15293483]

How hard did Dmitri bang Grushenka the veritable findom whore after the end of the book bros and definitely over his father’s grave

[Anonymous No.15293536]

>>15293420
?
what you're posting is literally untrue

[Anonymous No.15293540]

>>15293536
ryefaggot

[Anonymous No.15294616]

[Anonymous No.15295028]

>>15291917
Dmitri's dream was such a good "wait, he's not just a dumb Chad after all" reveal
Him getting a taste of what Zosima was explaining with the ocean metaphor and naturally resonating with it, yet immediately going back to alcohol and drama anyway, hit me hard.

[Anonymous No.15295108]

Who the fuck is Kolya that you people talk about? For the life of me I can't remember anyone called Kolya in it.

[Anonymous No.15295117]

>>15295108
Absolute brainlet

[Anonymous No.15295135]

>>15295117
There is no brother with the name Kolya in the book. What the fuck. Was it one of the kids or something?

[Anonymous No.15295142]

>>15295135
Nigga try google lmao

[Anonymous No.15295164]

>>15295142
Nigga I can't even read, the fuck you want from me. Be glad i shined your bitch ass with my presence

[Anonymous No.15295880]

>>15295028
what makes you think dmitri is a chad?

[Anonymous No.15295954]

tfw wanna be alyosha but have sensualist tendencies

[Anonymous No.15296346]

>>15295954
The word you're looking for is simp. And it's beneath any of the Karamazov brothers.

[Anonymous No.15296783]

Tfw no Lise gf...

[Anonymous No.15296805]

>>15296346
get the fuck out with your reduction of language

[Anonymous No.15297396]

>>15289992

[Anonymous No.15297466]

>>15297396
>not making Dee Smerdyak

[Anonymous No.15297861]

>>15289992
Read this maybe 3 years ago. Only now realising that i have finally come to be Alyosha from previously being Ivan.

[Anonymous No.15297873]

>>15291328
I should probably stop watching porn then

[Anonymous No.15298646]

>>15290746
mike tyson is a can

[Anonymous No.15298707]

I've always been a Fyodor Pavlovich. I'm not ashamed to say it because he is objectively the best character of the novel
>inb4 seething Dmitris

[Anonymous No.15298899]

>>15296783
Lise is every girl ever, borderline and possibly bipolar

[Anonymous No.15299611]

WHo the fuck ever thought Grusheka would be a nice name to give a girl?

[Anonymous No.15299668]

>>15292370
You wish. Everyone who thinks he's Ivan is Smerdyakov.

[Anonymous No.15299717]

Bros, is there any other book that can compare to TBK

> edgy enough to be interesting, but not over the top degeneracy
> long enough for you to actually get a good depiction of the characters
> characterization of religion that feels true to life
> actually finish the book with some sense of tragic beauty and meaning

I'll certainly admit that I didn't like the court trial at the end very much, but the book as a whole was really wholesome. I know people hate to use that word with how much it has been played out, but it is really nice to finish reading something that actually affects how you view the world, religion, and social relations without turning you into some pessimistic freak.

[Anonymous No.15300647]

>>15290129
>tfw you wanted to be Ivan while reading BK for the first time at age 15
>tfw you realise you are Ivan while rereading at age 26 but now you understand you don't want it

[Anonymous No.15300681]

>>15299611
it's a nickname, her real name is Agrafyena. If you don't understand how Slavic languages work don't write such comments
>>15299717
The Magic Mountain, altho it doesn't really have a plot (besides a very weak romantic plot)

[Anonymous No.15300824]

>>15295954
>have sensualist tendencies
As Zosima had in his youth.

[Anonymous No.15301426]

>>15296346
Definitely not true. Dmitri is a simp through and through. Man is literally ready to kill himself if his oneitis doesn't take him back.

[Anonymous No.15301465]

>>15301426
you can't be a simp for someone you know personally

[Anonymous No.15301481]

>>15301465
This is absolutely not true

[Anonymous No.15301517]

>>15301481
simping for e-girls is entirely different than any kind of relationship with a woman you have shared intimacy with. youre fuckin wrong

[Anonymous No.15301527]

>>15300681
>(besides a very weak romantic plot)
What? Thematically that is one of the most important plot threads in the book. It's the way it is by design. It's not supposed to be a "romantic plot".

[Anonymous No.15301550]

>>15301527
I meant weak in the sense that not much happens. It's important and beautifully written of course. Sorry English isn't my first language

[Anonymous No.15301571]

>>15301517
"Simping" does not necessarily involve e-girls whatsoever. Here's the top definition on Urban Dictionary (since we're using an informal slang term):

"•A man that puts himself in a subservient/submissive position under women in hopes of winning them over, without the female bringing anything to the table.

•A man that puts too much value on a female for no reason .

•A man that prides himself with "Chivalry" in hopes of getting sexual gratification form women"

Additionally, memes about simps and being a simp often incorporate relationships between men and women who actually know each other, with the notable quality being that the man values the woman to a far greater degree than she values him.

Dmitri's relationship with Grushenka in the book (up until the moment she takes him back) is absolutely simp behavior. Also, if your idea of a "simp" requires the presence of e-girls, how could we know that it would be above the Karamazov brothers? There were no e-girls in Russia in the 1800s.

Maybe have some idea of the terms you're using next time, kiddo.

[Anonymous No.15301687]

>>15301571
That person you're replying to isn't me. I didn't say simps were above the Karamazov brothers, I said the Karamazovs were above simping. My God you are dumb. Had Grushenka merely used him and it ended for them there then yes, he would be a simp. But that didn't happen. Read the rest of the book and then talk me to.

[Anonymous No.15301691]

>>15301571
i'm not the guy saying karamovs could not be simps. im saying i disagree that dmitri is simping because i dont believe the term simping can be properly applied to 1880s russia

[Anonymous No.15301714]

>>15301687
Mistyped that bit, I meant "how could we know that the Karamazov brothers would be above simping."

So you're saying that whether he's a simp or not is dependent on the outcome? So if she had told him to fuck off and he killed himself he would be a simp, but since she did not and he did not he isn't? I disagree with that. I think the level of obsession and the debasing behavior he displayed is enough to be a simp in and of itself.

[Anonymous No.15301893]

>>15301714
There is something called true love. At least, in the world of Dostoyevsky it exists. Had Dmitri become her servant and she used this against him all his life for her own gain then he would have been a simp but that isn't what happened. A simp is used by a woman. If she actually respects him and loves him then he isn't used and he isn't a simp.

[Anonymous No.15301942]

>>15298707
>tfw i'm von sohn
what do?

[Anonymous No.15301989]

>>15301893
I agree that Dostoyevsky writes about true love with sincere belief, but I don't know if he necessarily meant Dmitri and Grushenka's relationship to be interpreted that way. I feel like Dmitri is framed as a slave to his passions more than a man driven by genuine true love, and I think her acceptance of him after his stunt is more of a minor miracle than any sign of love. After all, their reunion gets nipped in the bud pretty quickly and we never really get to know what would have happened afterward. It's entirely possible that if Dmitri hadn't been detained by the cops right away that he may very well have become her servant the next morning. For a person like Grushenka, it's much easier to stay with a man when he's the center of a murder trial because of the drama and excitement it brings to her life.

[Anonymous No.15302058]

>>15301989
By the end of the novel they are one another's servants. If you do not want to call that true love then that is fine but if Dmitri was merely a slave to his passions then his experiences in jail, his dream, and every change that occurred in him would have dispelled his passions for her. We can't speak in 'ifs'. What happened, happened. You seem to want to detach the outcome from its causes. If Dmitri was a simp none of this could have happened to him. Simps don't have happy endings with their oneitis. As for the excitement of the trial. I distinctly remember Dostoyevsky explaining how muted she had become in comparison to the seductress she was earlier in the novel.

[Anonymous No.15302174]

>>15302058
You make good points, but I don't think we can rightfully call the ending of the novel a happy one as far as Dmitri and Grushenka are concerned. We never find out, for example, if Ivan does successfully help Dmitri escape, which would obviously open an opportunity for Dmitri and Grushenka to be truly happy together. All we know for sure is that Grushenka shows genuine affection for Dmitri at around the time the novel ends. It's entirely possible for a oneitis to show affection for their simp, and for everything to fall apart very quickly.

I do want to detach the outcome because I think the outcome is irrelevant. If you (possibly) murder your father to get the money to put on a stunt for a girl's affection, and are prepared to kill yourself if she rejects you, you are a simp in my book. He puts so much value on her that he is willing to literally destroy himself. It doesn't matter if it works with flying colors or not. Not saying Dmitri isn't an excellent character because he is, but he's also a textbook simp.

[Anonymous No.15302274]

>>15302174
I get what you're saying and our disagreement boil down to whether everyone who "destroys himself" for a woman is a simp. Is destroying oneself for love different than destroying oneself for a woman? I would say that "genuine affection" is downplaying what happened between him and her. You can display affection without it being a sacrifice. In Grushenka's case she is sacrificing for him (and sacrificing more than she can get out of him at that point). It's at that moment we understand that he is not being used and in my opinion if you are not being used then you are not a simp. I think our disgust towards simps is that they destroy themselves without being willing to admit that they are being used (destroying themselves for a woman as opposed to destroying themselves for love).

[Anonymous No.15302348]

>>15302274
Good points. All I have to add is that I don't think that "being used" is a contributing factor to being a simp. There's definitely a strong correlation between guys that are being used by women and guys that are simps, but I don't think there's anything causal there. Many girls are barely even aware of their simps, but the simps persist nonetheless.

[Anonymous No.15302368]

>>15302058
what is the meaning of mitya's dream?

[Anonymous No.15302503]

>>15302348
Yes I thought about that after I posted. How far the word “used” can be stretched. I suppose even a page view is “using” and many girls, let’s say e-girls as the clearest example, curate their content with the intention to get as much as they can from their audience which often gets nothing but it’s own destruction in return. But maybe it is possible to be a simp without being used. I mean, if you print out a picture of a girl, detach it from all reality so that she doesn’t benefit in any way, and then proceed to worship at the altar of it are you a simp? You’re something sick but then we get into the territory of being a simp for fictional constructs and other things.
>>15302368
He experiences through the dream the same issue Ivan struggles with (suffering of people, exemplified through a child specifically) but instead of blaming God he blames himself.

[Anonymous No.15303387]

To diverge a little bit on this whole "simp" thing, I have a question.
Did Dostoevsky see good vs. evil as the faithful vs unfaithful? I would have said yes since Smerdyakov and Ivan are both hardcore atheists, but then Father Ferapont (the batshit crazy monk who sees demons everywhere) is obviously Christian. So what is good according to Dostoevsky?

[Anonymous No.15303550]

>>15303387
you are totally wrong, you've missed the whole point of the book and it's fucking sad that you've read 800 pages and you're still so shallow.

[Anonymous No.15303572]

>>15289992
>>Actually reading Dostoevsky
kys.

[Anonymous No.15303868]

>>15303572
>>Actually not reading Dostoevsky
kys.

[Anonymous No.15303905]

>>15303387
No, I don't think he did. It could definitely be argued that Smerdyakov is evil, but I don't think Ivan fits that bill whatsoever. And as you pointed out, Father Ferapont is also something of an antagonistic force in the story despite being a man of faith. I think that Dostoyevsky sees the good in all people, but believes that religion can facilitate a "good" life to a greater extent than secular living can. As for what he would define as good, I think that's a much more complicated question.

[Anonymous No.15303993]

tfw no ivan bf

[Anonymous No.15304491]

>>15303905
Smeryakov is merely the radicalized counterpart of Ivan who translated the latter's ideas into deeds, whereas Ivan is still unsure and finds himself at a crossroads at the end of the book. In addition, I don't think Smeryakov was truly evil.I think his suicid can be interpreted as an act of redemption in that the good in him couldn't live with what he had done. If he was actually evil he could've easily used the money and start a new life in France and kept on living conscience because 'without God everything permitted' etc etc.

[Anonymous No.15304503]

>>15303905
In my view Smeryakov is merely the radicalized counterpart of Ivan who translated the latter's ideas into deeds whereas Ivan is still unsure and finds himself at a crossroads at the end of the book. In addition, I don't think Smeryakov was truly evil.I think his suicid can be interpreted as an act of redemption in that the good in him couldn't live with what he had done. If he was actually evil he could've easily used the money and started a new life in France and kept on living with a clear conscience because 'without God everything permitted' etc etc.

[Anonymous No.15304593]

I think I understand the simp issue now. Yes, one can still be a simp if he is not being used by a woman! But! One cannot be a simp if she is sacrificing as much for him!

[Anonymous No.15304614]

>>15304503
Well yes, Smeryakov actually believed Ivan's words and lived the way Ivan claimed man should live. And this frightened Ivan who wasn't truly committed to what he was saying and was simply saying it out of disgust with God or something like that.

[Anonymous No.15304619]

>>15304614

[Anonymous No.15304624]

>>15289992
i will never read this book

[Anonymous No.15304677]

>>15304619
Though the anon's act of redemption thoughts do not make much sense. Smerdyakov was a vindictive and weak man who at once very nearly wished to be Ivan (or at least to have what he had) and at the same time hated him (and perhaps tried to share the blame with Ivan in order to destroy him).

[Anonymous No.15304699]

>>15304677
my interpretation was closer to what you said but i enjoyed anons take.

[Anonymous No.15305209]

>>15304677
But the point that Dostoevsky is hammering home is that Ivan DOES bear responsibilty for his father's death and coincidentally for all that is wicked in the world. After all, his main argument that everyone is "responsible to all men for all men and for everything". Ivan looks at the suffering of children and indicts God whereas Dmitri, as another anon explained, blames himself after having the dream of the 'wee one' which reveal the beginnings of his redemption.
>There is only one way to salvation, and that is to make yourself responsible for all men's sins

[Anonymous No.15305266]

>>15305209
Yes, I understand mostly because I was the anon who mentioned that about Dmitri’s dream. But nothing you said contradicts my point about Smerdyakov who has not come to the same conclusions as Dostoyevsky. Smerdyakov’s motivations.

[Anonymous No.15305372]

I'd like to think that each brother's convictions are present within me. Storms of naive hope, cynicism, hedonistic passion, violence, and yearning for the transcendent etc etc. It's a complete human picture. It's why it's such a good book

[Anonymous No.15305388]

>>15305372
didnt you hear? anon said dosto is a hack

[Anonymous No.15305431]

>>15305266
My point is that you shouldn't write off Smeryakov as evil just because he didn't come to the same realization as Dostoyesvky. When Zosima discusses hell he says a prayer for those who died by suicide even though this goes against the church's doctrine according to which self-murderers can no longer repent and are thus excluded from salvation and doomed for all eternity, meaning that he believes there might still be hope for them and that they may not yet be utterly lost.

[Anonymous No.15305438]

>>15304503
>t. Smeryakov

[Anonymous No.15305475]

>>15305431
Not sure what you mean by evil. All I said was that he did not redeem himself via suicide. I did say he was weak and vindictive whether that makes him downright evil, I guess you don’t think so.

[Anonymous No.15305522]

>>15305438

[Anonymous No.15305608]

>>15305522
isn't it particularly specified that Smerdyakov has curly, unkempt hair?

[Anonymous No.15305663]

>>15305608
i dont remember. i picture a dirty, smelly, scowling Lurch

[Anonymous No.15307515]

Bumping the thread to save it.
I thinik it's foolish to view anything in the book as evil. The biggest moral asset that it brings is to say that we are all human, and are all sinners. But that there is God and and everyone can be saved.
I find it odd that so few people quote the story about the old lady going to hell that Grushenka narrates, for me it's even better and more relevant than the Grand Inquisitor one.
We are all human, we are all damned and we can all be saved.

[Anonymous No.15308714]

>>15307515
>we can all be saved
Imagine being such a beta that you need saving

[Anonymous No.15308728]

>>15290746
If you regularly watch boxing but can't throw a punch you should be ashamed of yourself desu

[Anonymous No.15308764]

>>15308714
hang yourself irrelevant stemcell

[Anonymous No.15308880]

>>15307515
>>15308764
good posts

[Anonymous No.15309062]

What's the point of the arc with ilyushenka, kolya, and the boys?

[Anonymous No.15309090]

>>15309062
to give alyosha time to shine

[Anonymous No.15309173]

>>15309090
basically this, but what was the point of dragging the trail part? It's basically retreading the same ground for the third time with very little insight.

[Anonymous No.15309211]

Why didn't Smerdyakov get his own book like the 3 brothers K? He is also technically a brother.

[Anonymous No.15309320]

>>15293108

Why does he literally look like a girl here?

[Anonymous No.15309327]

>>15301942
jej

[Anonymous No.15309469]

>>15309173
i dont know but i skim these threads often and have seen anon claim it would have had more meaning to a russian audience at the time due to current events.

[Anonymous No.15309794]

tfw you were alyosha at 16 but now at 25 you're more of a zhuchka

[Anonymous No.15309811]

>tfw want to be a ferapont but too much of a zosima

[Anonymous No.15310311]

>>15309320
>tfw no cutie alyosha bf

[Anonymous No.15310356]

>>15309211
>He is also technically a brother.
In what way?

[Anonymous No.15310455]

>>15310356
illegitimate son of fyodor

[Anonymous No.15310480]

>>15290575
really maekes u think

[Anonymous No.15310514]

>>15309173
>The question of whether Dmitri is guilty symbolically represents the greater question of whether human nature is fundamentally good or sinful, so the legal proceedings against Dmitri represent the trial of the human spirit. Just as Book V, especially in the Grand Inquisitor chapter, presents the novel’s indictment of God, Book IX begins its indictment of humanity. This book recounts Dmitri’s past in detail, and the stories of his innumerable sins are retold, as though to summarize the moral failings that lie at the heart of the case. Dmitri has lied to everyone, stolen from and cheated Katerina, turned to violence against Grigory, and been unable to control his passions for Grushenka. In short, he has committed the most common and universal sins of mankind.

[Anonymous No.15310524]

>>15309211
Because he's already included as one of the Brothers Karamazov? The book isn't called the "Three Brothers Karamazov"...

[Anonymous No.15310546]

>>15290129
Ivan was written like an absolute retard. Literally written as if you can't act out values without believing in The Russian Orthodox God. Embarrassing strawman

[Anonymous No.15310593]

>>15310455
Says who?

[Anonymous No.15310598]

>>15310514
>but nah it's fine cause he kept a bit of cash in a pouch
truly the pinnacle of literary prowess

[Anonymous No.15310796]

>>15310593
It's heavily implied. Are you trolling?

[Anonymous No.15310814]

>>15310546
What's the problem with that? We all know people like that IRL, no? In contrast, Smerdyakov can act out values without believing in God.

[Anonymous No.15311161]

>>15310796
No I'm not trolling and I don’t think it's heavily implied either

[Anonymous No.15311384]

>>15310514
>Book IX begins its indictment of humanity.
I don't buy this. Dimitri doesn't represent the whole of humanity(although at one point the lawyer says that Mitri represents the Russian man), I would not see any of the major charters as some stepchildren for a given social archetype. The main reason why the book is great is precisely because these characters are genius written individuals that, as every human, represent only themselves in the end. The brainlet "Oh I'm literally Ivan" reactions are just that, thoughts of shallow idiots.

[Anonymous No.15312127]

>>15310814
The real source of values is our evolutionary predispositions. We have an in-built sense of solidarity with others that exists irrespective of that of any "god". The whole theme of the novel falls flat and comes across as a sad man trying to convince people (and probably himself) of the values specific to the Russian Orthodox Church and ultimately pushing a rather trite religious agenda

[Anonymous No.15312132]

>>15312127
>evolutionary
stopped reading there

[Anonymous No.15312142]

>>15312127
>The real source of values is our evolutionary predispositions.
It's so fucking obvious and it pisses people off so much lmao

[Anonymous No.15312479]

>>15312132
>Denying the most obvious of truths
Self deception is a terrible thing

[Anonymous No.15312614]

>>15312479
t. anglo juden