lhanicova 's review for:

Notes from Underground and the Double by Fyodor Dostoevsky

4.25

dark reflective tense medium-paced

Plot or Character Driven: Character

Strong character development: Complicated

Loveable characters: Complicated

Flaws of characters a main focus: Yes

---

 

 

Notes from Underground – Fyodor Dostoevsky 

In this book, Dostoyevsky describes the inner worlds of a man who was not able to find his place in society. The novel consists of two parts. 

The first, titled simply ”Underground”, is told from a perspective of an unknown narrator called the Underground Man. In this part we acquire an introduction into the mind of the narrator. Basically, we get a look at a mind of a complete nihilist and misanthrope who has been living ”underground” for many years. What this so called ”underground” actually represents though is his own reflective hyperconsciousness. 

”I am a sick man ... I am a spiteful man. I am an unattractive man. […] However, I know nothing at all about my disease, and do not know for certain what ails me. I don’t consult a doctor for it, and never have, though I have a respect for medicine and doctors […] No, I refuse to consult a doctor from spite. That you probably will not understand. Well, I understand it, though. Of course, I can’t explain who it is precisely that I am mortifying in this case by my spite […] I know better than anyone that by all this I am only injuring myself and no one else.” 

What this introduction tells as is that the Underground Man has a truly unusual mind and also that he is a typical Dostoevsky character, which basically means he feels lonely because of his intellectual superiority and feels envious of the ”man of action” which he defines as someone who possesses little intellectual capacity and therefore is free of doubts  and questions. He is aware of the absurdity of reality and this alienates him even further from society. The tension between his intellectual superiority and self-loathing is a recurrent theme throughout the novel. 

”Man is sometimes extraordinarily, passionately in love with suffering: that is a fact.” 

I think he made some brilliant philosophical points and even though I consider them disturbing and depressing, part of me relates. I totally understand the desire to just isolate yourself from everything because nothing and no one really makes sense and people aren’t worth all the trouble. I relate to his confusion, to his disillusionment with the world. Society can truly be disappointing, because it does not ensure you stability – it is ever-changing; and you may always feel like an outsider, no matter the acceptance it gives you. On the other hand though, society can be utterly beautiful. The human connections you make are something indescribable, something absolutely sublime.  In conclusion, the Underground Man is an awfully unlikable character, yet I wouldn’t believe you if you said you couldn’t see some of him in yourself – and that’s what was so good about the book. 

The ”Underground Man” then proceeds to tell us that human civilization has made men more cruel, referring to the recent military conflicts. People think that as humanity advances people will live more and more rationally, and society will approach perfection, which he thinks utopian because according to him, people prefer to live by their “own stupid will” rather than reason, hence the love for suffering - “people desire something opposed to one’s own advantage,”. His reason for saying this is that he thinks they do it simply in order to exercise their free will. 

”I say let the world go to hell, but I should always have my tea.” 

This part ends with him noticing it is snowing outside, which reminds him of a story, and so we move to part two titled ”Apropos of the Wet Snow”. 

The second part describes certain events that took place in the life of the Underground Man as a 24-year-old and we acquire a pretty good understanding of his character. He thinks people hate him because he’s so much smarter and better than them even while he knows how pitiful and pretentious he actually is. He has grandiose fantasies, yet can’t summon the confidence to even look people in the eye. He goes on insane rants to random girls just to have someone listen, then wishes he never opened his mouth. In moments when he realizes how miserable he’s made himself, he romanticizes his own suffering just to have some poetic excuse for his sad life. 

In my opinion, Dostoevsky perfected the portrayal of a total misanthrope. He made such an unlikeable, even despicable, character which was challenging to read for me because of how masterfully he depicted the scary profile of a lost person, overlooked and ridiculed for his deficiencies – a total misfit. His description is an absolutely accurate portrait of the insecure, self-conscious egomaniac – pitiful and dangerous; on a destructive mission against himself, society and the laws of nature he despises but cannot change. Unpleasant and hard to read, disturbing and unsettling, and really brilliant. 

 

The Double – Fyodor Dostoevsky 

This book tells the story of Yakov Petrovich Golyadkin, a low-level bureaucrat living in St.Petersburg, who behaves rather ”outcastly”, nevertheless tries to fit in so hard, mainly by pretending he is of higher society than he actually is. Deep down, though, he is a sensitive and pretentious person. 

The story begins as the protagonist awakens in his room. He has been feeling his mental health decreasing, therefore decides to visit his doctor, who encourages him to keep taking his medication and engage in society. Despite his social awkwardness, he acts on his doctor’s advice and sneaks to a ball organized for Clara, his love interest. Unhinged by the social pressure of his work and by his unrequited love, he loses it, which ends in him being forcibly removed from the party. On the way home, in the blistering cold, he encounters eerily familiar figure walking along the dark St. Petersburg streets: himself. 

”Mr Golyadkin had fully recognized his nocturnal friend: his nocturnal friend was none other than himself, Mr Golyadkin in person – another Mr Golyadkin, but identical to him in every way – in brief, in all respects what is called his double…” 

Despite his initial shock, the protagonist adapts remarkably well, resolving to avoid his other self. Still, his avoidance fails when the double approaches him. The two figures referred to by Dostoyevsky as Golyadin Sr, the original and Golyadkin Jr, the double, form a close friendship, but when his double begins to attempt to steal his life, their relationship becomes increasingly bitter and puts a harsh strain on the sanity of the protagonist. This being, who is sometimes clearly his own reflection, sometimes the embodiment of his aggressive fantasies and sometimes, in some supernatural way, himself. 

“Numb and chill with horror, our hero woke up, and numb and chill with horror felt that his waking state was hardly more cheerful...It was oppressive and harrowing...He was overcome by such anguish that it seemed as though someone were gnawing at his heart.” 

”The Double” is a vivid depiction of one man’s downward spiral into the indecision and confusion of severe mental illness. Golyadkin’s agonizing descent, fueled by alienation, paranoia and self-loathing, is incredibly gripping. Dostoevsky portrays the complexities of a mind that’s consuming itself in front of the readers’ eyes so perfectly, that, though horrifying, it’s nearly impossible to put down. Deftly plotted and heartbreaking, this supposedly “minor work” of Doestoevsky’s is anything but.