Chapter 7 second lecture

I think it is crucial to have some insight into the psychological and ethical aspects of Dostoyevsky's work available to us, and I am anxious to say so.However, his insights are too bold and fresh. If I cut straight to the point, you may think it is a paradox.So, I have to be very careful. I talked about Dostoevsky in the last lecture, and today I think it is the right time to highlight the characteristics of this character, and then examine him in his environment. I have a few close friends in Russia who have never been to Russia; without the help of these people, it would be too difficult for me to speak here.First of all I will state some observations on the Russian people which I have found in a book on Dostoevsky, the masterpiece of the eminent biographer Mrs. Hoffmann.She started out with a strong emphasis on solidarity and fraternity throughout all stages of Russian society, for all and for everyone.Solidarity and fraternity eliminate social barriers and naturally facilitate human relations, as we often see in Dostoevsky's novels; the sudden sympathy after mutual introduction, as one of Dostoyev's heroes so eloquently called "Coincidental Family".Private houses became camps, with strangers on night duty; people received friends of friends, and all were instantly intimate.

Another opinion Mrs. Hoffmann has about the Russian people is that the Russians are not strict, and are often not punctual; it seems that the Russians do not suffer much from chaos, and do not make much effort to get rid of chaos.If I want to find an excuse for the disorder of our series of lectures, I can excuse that Dostoyevsky's thoughts are complex and intertwined, and that it is particularly difficult to satisfy our Western logic. Let's find out what to do.Mrs. Hoffmann attributed the Russians' indecision and indecision to partly a poor sense of time, from which the long nights of winter and the long days of summer allowed them to escape the rhythm of time.In one of my brief talks at the Old Dovecot Theatre, I quoted an anecdote recounted by Frau Hofmann: A Russian reproached for not being punctual retorts: "Yes, life is a difficult art, and there are moments It is worth living well, which is much more important than being on time for an appointment." But we find Russians' special feelings for private life from this enlightening discourse.For the Russians, private life is more important than all social intercourse.

We might as well follow Mrs. Hoffman's statement and mention the tendency of the Russians to be patient and sympathetic. Leiden and Mitleiden, the Russians even sympathize with criminals.Wretch and sinner are just one word in Russian, felony and misdemeanor are just one word.Combined with an almost religious sense of confession, it is not difficult to see that Russians have a deep-rooted distrust in their dealings with others, especially foreigners; , from a consistent sense of self-inadequacy and vulnerability, and far from a feeling of worthlessness in others, in general from mistrust born of humility.

Prince Myshkin, the protagonist of "The Idiot," narrates four encounters that best demonstrate the very special religious feeling of the Russians, which persists even after all faith has been wiped out.Let me read this narrative to you: "About faith," Myshkin began with a smile, "I met them four times in two days last week. One morning when I was traveling by train, I happened to meet S in the same seat and talked with him for four hours. . . . I have long been familiar with his affairs, especially that he is an atheist. He is a very well-bred man, and I am glad to talk to a real scholar. Besides, he is very refined and polite, and regards me as intellectual and learned. He doesn't believe in God. But I'm amazed that everything he says seems to have nothing to do with it. Every time I've talked to, or read, people who doubt God's existence before, I've found similar opinions: what they say All the arguments, even the most plausible ones, I always feel untenable. I don’t shy away from telling S, but maybe I didn’t make it clear and he didn’t understand...I stopped in a county town at night, and stayed in the hotel Everyone was talking about a murder that had happened on the spot the night before. Two peasants of the same age, who were friends, had gone to bed after drinking tea that night (they had taken a double room). One of them Two days ago, I found that my companion was carrying a silver watch with a glass bead chain. I didn’t know it before. This man is not a thief. He is honest. As a farmer, his situation is not bad. But he likes this watch so much that he insists When he got it, he was so crazy that he couldn't help himself. So he picked up a knife, and when his friend turned around, he crept closer, aimed at the direction, raised his eyes to the sky, made a sign of the cross, and prayed devoutly: "God!" Forgive me, for Christ's sake!' And he slashed down, slaughtered his friend like a sheep, and snatched the silver watch."

Rogogina laughed out loud. The man had been depressed all the time, but suddenly he was elated, which was a bit strange.He gasped and said aloud staccatoly: "Brilliant, nothing could be better! One doesn't believe in God at all, and the other says prayers to the point of murder! Is there such a thing? You can't even fake it, duke! Ha! Ha! Ha! It's wonderful, there's nothing better than this..." "I went for a walk in the city the next morning, and I met a drunken soldier, lying crookedly on the boardwalk. He stopped me, accosted me, and said, 'My lord, buy this silver cross, and I'll give you twenty kopecks, The crucifix is ​​silver!' He handed me a crucifix, probably just taken from the neck, for it was tied with a blue cord. But it was immediately recognizable that the crucifix was made of tin, with eight prongs, faithfully imitating the Byzantine figure. I took a twenty-kopeck piece out of my pocket and gave it to the soldier, and put his cross around my neck. He was beaming with joy at defrauding a fellow fool. I took it to the hotel and spent it. At that time, my friend, I was very strongly impressed by what I saw in my hometown; I have been here for five years, so the memory left by my hometown is almost blind. I walked forward slowly, thinking: "Don't rush to condemn this Judas, wait and see, who can tell what is hidden in the fragile heart of drunks. What.' An hour later, when I was returning to the hotel, I met a peasant woman with a nursing baby in her arms. The woman was young, and the baby was about six weeks old. He smiled at the mother, as he had been since birth. Suddenly I saw the peasant woman Make the cross, draw it very piously, very piously, very piously! 'Excuse me, why did you draw the cross?' I asked, and I could ask questions at that time. She replied: 'Hey, when the mother sees the baby smiling for the first time, the more she feels. Happy, God is happier when he sees the sinners in the world praying fervently in heaven.' These are the exact words, and the person who said these words to me was a commoner woman, but the thought she expressed was so profound and sharp , truly believe in religion, which contains all the essence of Christianity, that is, to regard God as our biological father, and to think that God is happy to see people, just like a father is happy to see a son. This is the most important thought of Christ! An ordinary peasant woman She was a mother, to tell you the truth... Who knows? Maybe it was the soldier's wife. Listen to me, Parfena, and now to answer your question: Religious sentiment is indestructible by its very nature Yes, no reasoning, no fault, no crime, no atheism can shake, there is something free from all externals that exists and is everlasting, something that the arguments of the atheists can never knock down. The gist of it is that only in Russia There is such a religious feeling in the human heart that cannot be found anywhere else. This is my conclusion! This is my first impression of Russia. Still need to work hard, Pafena! There are many things to do in this world. Why, take my word for it."

The narrative ends with another character trait revealed: the belief that the Russian people have a special mission. This belief, common to many Russian writers, became an active and painful one in Dostoevsky.His dissatisfaction with Turgenev was that he could not find such national sentiment in Tushi, and that Turgenev was too European. When discussing Pushkin, Dostoevsky claimed that Pushkin realized "a new and sincere sentiment" when he was still imitating Byron and Chenier, which Dostoevsky called Russian sentiment. "What kind of faith can there be in the Russian people and their values?" Pushkin, answering this so-called "damn question," exclaimed: "Tuck your tail, arrogant man! First of all you must overcome your arrogance, get rid of your arrogance, and get rid of your arrogance. In front of everyone, bow your knees and bend your waist until your head touches your homeland."

Perhaps no racial difference stands out more sharply than in the way in which honor is apprehended.The secret vigor of the civilized man seems to me to be not precisely what La Rochefoucauld calls self-esteem, but what we call "honor-related" emotion, the sense of honor, this nerve-wracking spot, the French and the English It is not quite the same for the Italians and the Spaniards . . . but the sense of honor of all Western nations seems to be more or less the same as that of the Russians.When we learn about the honor of Russia, we must be enlightened, and we must find that the honor of the West is often contrary to the exhortations of the Gospel.It is precisely to the exclusion of the Western honor that the Russians bring their own honor closer to the Gospel; in other words, Russian Christianity goes beyond, often beyond, the sense of honor that we in the West understand.

Either take revenge, or admit mistakes and apologize. When making such choices, Westerners often think that the latter is undignified and cowardly.Westerners tend to view unforgiveness, forgetfulness, and unforgiveness as having character.It is true that Westerners try their best to never make mistakes, but once they do, it seems that admitting mistakes is the most humiliating thing.The Russians, on the contrary, admit mistakes at any time, even to the enemy, humble themselves at any time, and apologize at any time. It is probably related to the fact that Greek Orthodoxy encouraged natural inclinations, tolerated and even praised public confession.The idea of ​​confessing not alone in the ear of the priest, but in the presence of everyone, haunts Dostoevsky's novels.In the novel, when Raskolnikov confessed his crimes to Sonia, Sonia immediately persuaded him to kneel in the square and shouted in public: "I killed someone", thinking that this was the only way to lighten the burden on the soul. Method.Most of Dostoevsky's characters at certain moments, often suddenly and inappropriately, yearn to confess, to beg someone to forgive, sometimes to the bewilderment of others;

You must remember this wonderful scene from "The Idiot": at the party at Nastasia Filipovna's house, as a pastime, like a crossword puzzle or handing out strips, everyone present is advised to confess their lives most shameless act.The wonderful thing is that this proposal passed smoothly.One by one began to confess, with varying degrees of sincerity, but hardly anyone was ashamed. Even stranger, I say, is the anecdote about Dostoevsky himself, which I got from a Russian close to Dostoevsky.I accidentally told it to several people, and it turned out to be used by others; judging from the situation of being relayed, it has been misrepresented and completely out of shape.So, I stick with the restatement here:

There are some extremely ambiguous events in Dostoevsky’s life. One of them has been alluded to in the book, and it seems that he has written the subject of a certain chapter, but it was not included in the book when it was completed, and it has not been published, even the Russian version has not been published. .So far only published in Germany, but not for sale.A translation of this chapter appeared later in the June and July 1922 issues of the New France Review.Pron Press published the booklet title: "Stavrogin's Confessions".It was about raping a little girl.The raped girl hanged herself in one room, and the criminal Stavrogin was next door, knowing that she had hanged herself, but sat by and watched her end her life.How much truth is there in this eerie story?It's not important to me to find out.Dostoevsky, however, felt very much the need for conscience-stricken after similar accidents.For some time he had been tormented by pangs of guilt, and probably what Sonia said to Raskolnikov was his remorse.He longed to confess, but not only to the priest.The object of his confession should embarrass him most, and that object was undoubtedly Turgenev.Dostoevsky hadn't seen Tu Shi for a long time, and his relationship with him had always been very bad.Mr. Turgenev is a well-behaved man, well-off, well-known and well-known all over the world.Dostoevsky was desperate, daring, perhaps impulsive, and came to Turgenev's house by accident.Let's imagine: Turgenev is writing at his desk in a comfortable study.Someone rings the bell.The servant announces the visit of Fyodor Dostoevsky. "What is he doing here?" After letting him into the room, he immediately talked about his own story.Turgenev listened with inexplicable astonishment.What exactly do you want to talk about?Sure, he's crazy.After Dostoevsky finished speaking, the room fell silent.He waited for Turgenev to say something... Probably he thought that, as depicted in his novel, Turgenev would open his arms to him, hug him and weep bitterly, and make up with him... But Not at all.

"Mr. Turgenev, I must confess to you: 'I despise myself very much...'" He stopped talking and waited again.But the silence remained.Then Dostoevsky, unable to hold back any longer, added in a rage: "But I despise you even more. This is what I want to tell you..." With that, he slammed the door and left.Turgenev is indeed too European to understand him. Here we see humility suddenly turned to the opposite emotion.Humility makes obedience, bullying makes rebellion; humility opens the gates of heaven, bullying opens the gates of hell.Humility involves a certain voluntary obedience, accepted freely and unhindered, which confirms the truth of the Gospel commandment: "He who humbles shall ascend to heaven." Bullying, on the contrary, degrades the soul, twists it, deforms it, Chills the soul, frets the soul, blights the soul, causes a kind of trauma that is very, very hard to heal. I think that many of Dostoyevsky's characters seem worrisome and eccentric, and their twisted and surly personalities all have something to do with some kind of bullying in the first place. "The Bullied and Insulted" was one of the titles of his early work, and throughout his writings he remains haunted by the notion that bullying suffers, but humility sanctifies.The dream that Alyosha Karamazov described to us is a world without bullying and insult. The most grotesque and disturbing character in Doshi's novels is Stavrogin, the demon lord in the novel. We can find explanations and questions for this demonic figure in the book, despite how different his character looks at first glance.Another character in the book narrates: "Nikolai Vsevolodovich Stavrogin is leading a 'cynical life' in Petersburg at this time, because there are no other words to describe him. In short, he is doing nothing, Don't care about anything." (vol. 1, p. 197) Stavrogin's mother heard this and exclaimed: "Hey, that's what it's like to be different, dare I say it, holy shit. My son was born high and proud, but his self-esteem was damaged prematurely, so he lives like this. You call it cynicism, right? exactly." In what follows, Barbara Petrovna goes on, somewhat exaggeratedly: "If Nikolai, listen to me, if Nikolai had around him a gentle hero, Stepan Trofimovich, to use your beautiful phrase, a great humble man, perhaps he would have Just get rid of the notoriety of the demon king of the world, so that his life will not be ruined by playing the world." (Ibid., p. 201) Sometimes some of Dostoevsky's characters are deeply degraded by bullying, and they find some kind of pleasure and some satisfaction in the depravity caused by bullying, however odious. The protagonist of "The Boy" says when his self-esteem is brutally insulted: "Do I feel a very real resentment from my misfortunes? I can't say. Anyway, since childhood, whenever people bully me in the face, an irrepressible desire arises, and I immediately become arrogant. Indulging in self-deprecation and pandering to the desire of the bully: 'Hey! Are you bullying me? Well! I'm even more self-deprecating, look, look!'" ("Youth" p. 371) If humility is the removal of arrogance, bullying is the opposite, strengthening arrogance. Let’s listen to the narration of the down-and-out protagonist in "Underground Talent" (a translation of "Notes from Underground") (see pages 71-73 of "Underground Talent"): "One night, I passed by a small inn, and saw some billiard players fighting with billiard sticks from the window, and threw one of them out of the window. In normal times, this scene would have disgusted me. But my state of mind that day But I was envious of the guy who was thrown out of the window. I couldn't help but walked into the inn and into the billiard room, thinking, maybe someone would throw me out of the window. "I'm not drunk, what can I do, boredom makes you lose your mind! But it's useless to be crazy. In fact, I can't even jump out of a window, so I came out without being beaten. "I had barely taken a few steps into the house when an officer forced me to stand aside. I was already at the table, and involuntarily stood in the officer's way. He grabbed my shoulders and moved me, without explanation, as if at all. Not seriously. I can forgive him for hitting me, but I can't forgive him for forcing me to change places and not pay attention to me. "Damn it, how I'd love to have a quarrel at any cost, a reasonable quarrel, a respectable quarrel, a literary quarrel, something like that! He treats me like a fly. The officer is huge , and I am short and thin. Besides, I am the perpetrator, as long as I make a noise, I will definitely be thrown out of the window. But after thinking about it, I would rather sneak away." However, as we read further, we quickly discover that the depth of hate turns out to be the depth of love: "...Afterwards, I often met that officer on the street, and I recognized him perfectly, whether he recognized me or not. There were many indications that he did not recognize me, I thought so. But I, I, were hostile to him. Been glaring at him for years. My annoyance got bigger and bigger every year. At first I asked quietly about the officer. It was difficult because I didn't know anyone. But one day I followed from afar, as if He seemed to be leading me along, when suddenly someone called his name, and I knew his name. Another time, I followed him all the way to his house, gave the porter ten kopeks, and found out which floor he lived, alone. Or live with someone else, etc. In short, got everything you can get from the concierge. One morning, although I have never created it, on a whim, I wanted to put the characteristics of the officer in the form of a novella, in the form of a caricature I had a lot of fun writing this novella. I criticized, even slandered. I changed his name so that it would be impossible to guess for a while, and after some careful consideration, I sent the narrative to "Motherland" after some revisions. "Yearbook". But my novella was neither criticized nor published. I was furious, sometimes burning with rage. Finally I made up my mind to challenge my opponent and wrote him a letter in the style of Amiable and charming, begged him to apologize to me, and if he refused to apologize, I made it quite clear that I would fight him. My word is true, if the officer knew a little about beauty and kindness, he would come to my house warmly Hug me and give me your friendship. It would be great if we could do that! We can live in harmony and love each other!" ("Underground Talents", pages 74-75) Thus often in the works of Dostoevsky one emotion suddenly turns into an opposite emotion.We could cite many examples of this, such as the unfortunate boy in "The Brothers Karamazov", who viciously bit Alyosha's finger when Alyosha held out his hand to him, and just at the At that time the child began to fall in love with Alyosha without knowing it.Where does this deviation of love come from in children?It turned out that he had seen Alyosha's brother, Dmitry Karamazov, coming out drunk from the tavern, beating his father and pulling his father's beard brutally.Afterwards the child yells, "Daddy, dear Daddy, he bullied you so hard!" So, with humility, self-esteem is on the same plane, but at the other extreme, and bullying is, with all due respect, compared to humility. Self-esteem is inflated, inflamed, and distorted, sometimes inhumanely. Undoubtedly, psychological reality is always, for Dostoevsky, actually particular reality.As a novelist (Doshield is not a theoretician, but a seeker), he avoids induction and knows that it is imprudent, at least for him, to try to establish general laws.In the February 1922 issue of the "New France Review", Mr. de Schleizer said: "The Russian genius is always based on concrete facts, based on living reality. This is the most important feature. Even the reckless genius; he may then throw himself into the most abstract and daring speculations, but in order to return at last to the original facts and realities, which are therefore both the beginning and the end, after having acquired a richness of thought." And the universal law requires It is up to the restless among us to try to extract it, and to generalize Nato's works like pruning the undergrowth on the road.For example, this law, people who are bullied must bully others, just like Lebedev in "The Idiot", please refer to the wonderful chapter in Appendix II of this book, which talks about Lebedev's torture of General Igorkin Have fun. Dostoevsky's characters, despite the enormous variety of human comedy they perform, are always clustered and layered on one single plane, that of humility and self-respect, which disorients us even It confuses us in the first place, simply because we don't usually dissect and rank human beings in this way.Let me explain again, for example, when I read Dickens's wonderful novels, I sometimes feel almost uncomfortable because he divides the hierarchy, and here we might as well borrow Nietzsche's words: the hierarchy of value appears as a conventional, almost simple and clear thing.And when reading Tuoshi’s works, I seem to feel that there is a certain "Last Judgment" by Angelico in front of me: God's chosen people have it, and those who go to hell have it; The object of the devil's contention.All of them were weighed, as in an Egyptian bas-relief, according to whether they did more or less good.Good people go to heaven, bad people go to hell.Dickens followed his people and the public opinion of that era, and it is bound to happen that bad people will prosper and good people will suffer: this is a disgrace to the world and a disgrace to society.All of Dickens's novels show us that all of them make us feel that the value of the heart exceeds the value of wisdom.I have chosen Dickens as an example because, I think, of all the great novelists we know, he classifies people into classes in the simplest way.I'll add: that's why he's so popular. Recently, however, I have re-read almost all of Dostoyevsky's works at a stretch, and it seems to me that he also divides people into classes in a similar way, perhaps less obviously, but almost as plainly.It is not based on the quality of a person's heart that he can classify his characters according to the value of his heart (please forgive this hateful word), but according to the level of self-esteem of the characters. Dostoevsky, on the one hand, describes to us the humble, some of whom push humility down to baseness, and even take pleasure in it; to crime.The latter are usually the most intellectual.We can see that they are tortured by the demon of self-esteem, and they are blindly competitive.The heinous Pierre Stepanovich said to Stavrogin: "I bet you spent all night talking and talking, and the competition wasted precious time." (Vol. II, p. 227) A few more paragraphs elsewhere: "Even though Versilov frightened her, Katerina Nikolaevna had always admired his high morals and excellent intellect. . . . In his letter he promised her a gentleman's words, and she had nothing to fear .The emotions she expressed herself are not lacking in noble demeanor! They can compete with each other for salutes." ("Youth" page 557) "Nothing can offend your pride," Elisabeth Nikolaevna said to Stavrogin. "I came home the day before yesterday, and after I insulted you in public, you did With such a chivalrous answer, I realized at once that you shunned me because you had a wife, not because you despised me: that is what I am most afraid of as a girl of good society." She concluded, "At least the self-esteem is not damaged". (Volume 3, page 218) Dostoevsky's female characters become firm and mature by having more self-esteem than male characters, such as Raskolnikov's sisters (Dunia in), Nasta in "The Idiot" Katerina Ivanovna in Thea Filipovna and Aglaai Yepanchina. However, viewed in reverse, pardon me for calling it the reverse of evangelism, the lowest is closer to the Kingdom of God than the highest.Dostoevsky's writings are too much influenced by profound evangelical truths: "What is denied to the strong will be given to the weak"; "I have come to save the hopeless", etc. On the one hand, we see self-defeating, on the other hand, in Dolce's novels, the affirmation of personality, the "will to power" (Nietzsche's term) always leads to catastrophe. Mr. Soudy accused me not long ago of sacrificing Balzac for Dostoevsky, and even "slaughtering Balzac as a sacrifice", I think he said so.Is it necessary to refute?True, I have great admiration for Dostoevsky, but I don't think I should worship him blindly.I am ready to admit that Balzac's characters are more varied than the Russian writer's, and his "Human Comedy" is more colorful.But Dostoevsky touches on some areas more deeply, on far more important points than any other writer.We can say, however, that all his characters are made from the same mold.Pride and humility are always the secret motives of the characters' actions, though their responses are colorful according to varied doses. In Balzac's book, as in the Western society in general and in French society in particular, which his novels represent to us, two factors play a role, but in Dostoevsky's novels hardly at all, the first One is intellect and the other is will. I'm not saying that in Balzac's books, the will always leads people to be good, and I'm not saying that the aspirants in his works are just some virtuous people, but at least we see that his heroes achieve good results by will, by perseverance and by intelligence. Do something honorable with determination.Think of Balzac's David Secha, Pianchon, Joseph Bridau, Danielle de Arteze... I could name twenty others. In the oeuvre of Dostoevsky we cannot find a single great character.But you will point to the great Zosima the Elder in "The Brothers Karamazov"... Yes, he is undoubtedly the most sublime figure that the Russian novelist has ever portrayed.Zosima reigns over the whole tragedy.When we read the full translation of "The Brothers Karamazov" (predicted), we will know more about the importance of Zosima.But we will also understand better what is true greatness in Dostoevsky's eyes.Old Zosima was not a great man in the eyes of the world.He is a saint, not a hero.He has reached the holy world precisely because he has abandoned the will, the intellect. In Dostoevsky, as in the Gospels, the kingdom of heaven belongs to the weak and weak.For him, the opposite of love is neither hate nor nerve-wracking. In contrast to Balzac, I studied the decisive characters depicted by Dostoevsky, and suddenly found that they were all bad characters.Look at Raskolnikov at the top of the list, an ambitious weak scholar who starts out as Napoleon and ends up killing a usurer and an innocent girl.And such as Stavrogin, Pierre Stepanovich, Ivan Karamazov, and the protagonist of "The Boy" (this male is the only one of Doshi's characters who has been able to live at least from the beginning of his life). Fixed idea: want to be a Rothschild. It's ridiculous that in all Doshi's books, he can't find a more cowardly and deceitful guy).The wills of Dolce's characters, all the intellect and will that exist in them, seem to work to drive them to hell.Whenever I look for the role of intellect in Dostoevsky's novels, I find it always the role of demon possession. Dostoevsky's most dangerous characters are also his most intelligent. Not only do I want to point out that the will and intellect of Dolce's characters are only for evil, but that even when the will and intellect are directed towards good, their good is an act of pride and doomed to failure.Dolce's characters go to heaven only when they get rid of their intellect, get rid of their personal will and get rid of themselves. Indeed, we can say that, to some extent, Balzac is also a Christian writer.But when we compare the ethics of the Russian writers with that of the French writers, we see how far the Catholic doctrine of the latter differs from the pure evangelical doctrine of the former, and how far the Catholic spirit can differ from the pure evangelical doctrine. Christian spirit.In order not to offend anyone, let us say that Balzac's "Human Comedy" was born of the contact of the Gospel with the Latin spirit, while Dostoevsky's Russian comedy was born of the contact of the Gospel with Buddhism and the Asiatic spirit. touch. The above discussion is just a prologue, which can lead us to further understand the inner world of Dostoevsky's strange characters, which is exactly what I am going to do in the next lecture.