Jesse Easter SLAV 334 Research Paper

This essay will be an exploration of Dostoevsky. Specifically, it will be an exploration of the differences between Dostoevsky as an author and Dostoevsky as a man. Different opinions, values, arguments, and attitudes expressed in his literature, compared with opinions, arguments, values, and attitudes expressed by Dostoevsky personally give us an insight into the tension between Dostoevsky and his literature. A question comes to mind: how did a man so conflicted, flawed, and ravaged by a tumultuous life create literary work which gives such pure, direct, and beautifully simple insights into our conception of love, morality, God, free will, and beauty?
In order to properly explore and then answer this question, we need to look at samples of Dostoevsky’s writing, and then see what we can glean from these samples about Dostoevsky the author. Next we need to look at direct quotes from Dostoevsky outside of his writing, and accounts of him written by people who knew him, and analyze what these sources tell us about Dostoevsky the man. This information will support a thesis that Dostoevsky's novels were among the first and the best to explore philosophical debate through narrative fiction. In failing in his attempt to write a novel which only advocated a conservative, Christian lifestyle, Dostoevsky actually wrote novels which give us an amazing understanding of all aspects of philosophy, rather than the one side Dostoevsky tried to advocate.
So, lets first take a look at some samples of Dostoevsky’s writing. From Notes From the Underground:
“Every man has some reminiscences which he would not tell to everyone, but only to his friends. He has others which he would not reveal even to his friends, but only to himself, and that in secret. But finally there are still others which a man is even afraid to tell himself, and every decent man has a considerable number of such things stored away. That is, one can even say that the more decent he is, the greater the number of such things in his mind.”
That this sample was taken from Notes from the Underground shows us that Dostoevsky is concerned with psychology. This sample shows us that Dostoevsky believes that a portion of our mind is hidden from most people, our friends, and even ourselves. He also claims that the more outwardly decent a person is, the more our thoughts and feelings lay hidden. Whether or not this is true, it shows us that Dostoevsky explores psychology through his novels, and that the claims he makes within those novels are thought-provoking.
Next, we have three short samples from The Possessed:
"If there is no God, then I am God."

“Life is pain, life is fear, and man is unhappy. Now all is pain and fear. Now man loves life because he loves pain and fear. That's how they've made it. Life now is given in exchange for pain and fear, and that is the whole deceit. Man now is not yet the right man. There will be a new man, happy and proud. He for whom it will make no difference whether he lives or does not live, he will be the new man. He who overcomes pain and fear will himself be God. And this [current] God will not be.”

“But do you understand, I cry to him, do you understand that along with happiness, in the exact same way and in perfectly equal proportion, man also needs unhappiness!"

These quotes show Dostoevsky’s exploration of the question of God and morality through his literature. The question of where morality comes from, the existence of God, and how God is related to morality form the core of Dostoevsky’s work, especially in later novels. The first quote essentially deconstructs the idea of God into its purest form; that is, the concept of the sacred. Therefore the quote argues that our conception of God, if not external, exists within us as the manifestation of our search for the sacred. The second quote explores this further, articulating how exactly a person can move from a philosophy of worship to a philosophy of self-mastery. Fear and pain, the character argues, are the core of mankind’s existence, and if those two things are overcome, man becomes God. The last quote is a rebuttal to the first one, claiming that man needs an equal proportion of happiness and unhappiness, and to simply remove fear and pain is absurd.
The previous sample (particularly the last quote) shows us that Dostoevsky can and does articulate both sides of the philosophical debates he explores. It is key to notice that Dostoevsky’s writing does not simplify the arguments of either side; he gives us as complete as possible a picture of both sides. This act separates Dostoevsky from other religious writers because Dostoevsky’s rigor in depicting both sides does not, at least on a topical reading, aid in the goal of converting readers to faith in God.
The final sample is a culmination of Dostoevsky’s journey into existentialism. From The Brothers Kamarazov:
"I believe that you are sincere and good at heart. If you do not attain happiness, always remember that you are on the right road, and try not to leave it. Above all, avoid falsehood, every kind of falsehood, especially falseness to yourself. Watch over your own deceitfulness and look into it every hour, every minute. Avoid being scornful, both to others and yourself. What seems to you bad within you will grown purer from the very fact that of your observing it in yourself. Avoid fear, too, though fear is only the result of falsehood. Never be frightened at your own faint-heartedness in attaining love. Don't be too frightened even at your evil actions. I am sorry I can say nothing more consoling to you, for love in action is a harsh and dreadful thing compared to love in dreams. Love in dreams is greedy for immediate action, rapidly performed and in the sight of all. Men will even give their lives if only the ordeal does not last long but is soon over, with all looking on and applauding as though on a stage. But active love is labour and fortitude, and for some people too, perhaps, a complete science."
This final sample gives us Doestoevsky’s philosophy at its most optimistic. The first section gives an exploration of “falsehood”, or lying. The key to this section is that, according Father Zossima, being conscious of your flaws and falsehoods is the key to overcoming them. Insight, not passion or deeds, becomes the key to morality in this case. The next section splits love into two categories: love in dreams and active love. Essentially, love in dreams is the ideal of love, or love as an ideal. This is the kind of love that arises from emotional passion and drives people to do impulsive, dramatic and otherwise grandiose acts in the name of the ideal of love, as long as the passion remains. This kind of love is a cause to be championed. It should also be noted that the sample depicts this kind of love as impermanent and fleeting. The other kind of love mentioned, active love, functions in an opposite matter. Referred to as “labour and fortitude”, active love requires patience and diligence.
An example of love in dreams could be any number of romantic comedies available at your local theatre. In romantic comedies, people who barely know each other become infatuated and do dramatic and outrageous things to profess their love for each other, and after a misunderstanding is overcome, are usually seen at the end of the movie happy and together. An example of active love would be what happens to the characters afterwards. Active love would be waking up beside your partner day after day for years, and being loyal, honest, kind, and respectful to your partner on an ongoing basis. The sample makes it seem as though active love is much harder to cultivate than love in dreams. If rising divorce rates are any indicator, this may be a relevant point.
Now that we have a general sense of the philosophy expressed through his literature, how does Dostoevsky the man compare to the ideas found in his work? Depending on your frame of reference, Dostoevsky’s life either mirrored his work, or occurred in spite of it. Dostoevsky was never rich, suffered from compulsive gambling, and spent four years working in a labour camp in Omsk, Siberia. Dostoevsky’s personal beliefs were more philosophical than political, evidenced by the fact that he had at various times denounced western-style capitalism and soviet socialism. His faith, however, was at once absolute and inquisitive. This was a man who doubted his own faith while keeping it. In his own words:
“I will tell you that at such moments one thirsts for faith as `the parched
grass, ' and one finds it at last because truth becomes evident in unhappiness. I
will tell you that I am a child of my century, a child of disbelief and doubt, I am
that today and (I know it) will remain so until the grave. How much terrible
torture this thirst for faith has cost me and costs me even now, which is all the
stronger in my soul the more arguments I can find against it. And yet, God
sends me sometimes instants when I am completely calm; at those instants I
love and I feel loved by others, and it is at these instants that I have shaped for
myself a Credo where everything is clear and sacred for me. This Credo is very
simple, here it is: to believe that nothing is more beautiful, profound, sympath-
etic, reasonable, manly, and more perfect than Christ; and I tell myself with a
jealous love that not only that there is nothing but that there cannot be
anything. Even more, if someone proved to me that Christ is outside the truth,
and that in reality the truth were outside of Christ, then I should remain with
Christ rather than with the truth (Pisma, edited and annotated by A.S. Dolinin,
4 vols. Moscow, 1928-1959, I:142, cited in Joseph Frank, Dostoevsky: The Years
of Ordeal, 1849-1859, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1983, p. 160).”
This quote shows the difference between struggling with faith and struggling against it. Dostoevsky’s literature was the physical embodiment of his struggle with his faith, clashing atheistic and theistic principles together to find the shared morality within. Dostoevsky’s personal beliefs, however, were clearly theist and Christian, saying that if Christ were untrue, he would side with Christ rather than truth. His books, however, prove in their adept exploration of existentialism that Dostoevsky’s self-described “torture” of doubt is a blessing for anyone who reads his books; not in order to be convinced for or against faith, but simply to understand faith as a concept more clearly. Whether or not Dostoevsky envisioned his work to be loved by minds as diverse as Nietzsche and Einstein, obviously there is much to be learned from his work about man’s struggle with God, morality, love, and other existentialist issues.