Dostoevsky- The Brother's Karamazov

JT wrote:

 >Holy Mother of God that was long.
 >
 >Funny thing is...it seems to seep into you after you are done reading it.
 >Like being steeped slowly in hot water, the color becomes pronounced and, in
 >this case, profound.
 >
 >I was preoccupied with the murder while I was reading it and it wasn't until
 >later that I started seeing all the symbolism. I view the three brothers
 >as, almost, Freud's ego, superego and ID. All parts of one complete
 >consciousness in conflict with itself Greater thinkers than I have waxed
 >critically and philosophically on this book so I will save my long-winded
 >analysis. I'll just say, that I'm booking a trip to St. Petersburg to see
 >where FD lived and worked. After "Crime and Punishment" and now "Karamazov"
 >this man is beginning to fascinate me.
 >
 >I'm sure I'll never fully "get" this book from one reading but...man...sure
 >beats John Grisham huh?
 >
 >
 >-JT
 >
 >Est'd 1969
 >
 >www.jamestipper.com
 >* may contain peanuts
 >
 >
 >
 >
Forty years later, what has smost stayed with me are the two stories
within the novel told at the middle of the novel, one about Jesus
reappearing during the inquisition, and the other about the man who died
and found himself on the road to heaven. It always struck me as
interesting that Dostoevsky put the stories one after the other in the
center of the book.


Francis A. Miniter<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Dostoevsky- The Brother's Karamazov 

"Francis A. Miniter" <miniter.TakeThisOut@attglobalZZ.net> wrote in message
news:4238a123_3@news3.prserv.net...
 > JT wrote:
 >
  > >Holy Mother of God that was long.
  > >
  > >Funny thing is...it seems to seep into you after you are done reading it.
  > >Like being steeped slowly in hot water, the color becomes pronounced and,
in
  > >this case, profound.
  > >
  > >I was preoccupied with the murder while I was reading it and it wasn't
until
  > >later that I started seeing all the symbolism. I view the three brothers
  > >as, almost, Freud's ego, superego and ID. All parts of one complete
  > >consciousness in conflict with itself Greater thinkers than I have waxed
  > >critically and philosophically on this book so I will save my long-winded
  > >analysis. I'll just say, that I'm booking a trip to St. Petersburg to see
  > >where FD lived and worked. After "Crime and Punishment" and now
"Karamazov"
  > >this man is beginning to fascinate me.
  > >
  > >I'm sure I'll never fully "get" this book from one reading
but...man...sure
  > >beats John Grisham huh?
  > >
  > >
  > >-JT
  > >
  > >Est'd 1969
  > >
  > >www.jamestipper.com
  > >* may contain peanuts
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > >
 > Forty years later, what has smost stayed with me are the two stories
 > within the novel told at the middle of the novel, one about Jesus
 > reappearing during the inquisition, and the other about the man who died
 > and found himself on the road to heaven. It always struck me as
 > interesting that Dostoevsky put the stories one after the other in the
 > center of the book.
 >
 >
 > Francis A. Miniter
 >
 >
 >Those stories must have made 19th century Russians come unglued. I take for
granted the blasphemy I'm guilty of and that our culture indulges in, but at
the time it must have been markedly more poignant.
I can see this book sticking with me for 40 years as well. I could also
imagine a semesters worth of course work being culled from this book alone.

-JT

Est'd 1969

<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.jamestipper.com" target="_blank">www.jamestipper.com</a>
* may contain peanuts<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Dostoevsky- The Brother's Karamazov 

JT wrote:
 > Holy Mother of God that was long.
 >
 > Funny thing is...it seems to seep into you after you are done reading
it.

I felt the opposite true, from the first page I seeped into the book
I've can't remember a more effortless and stimulating read since my
childhood days when I could read several books a day. It seemed to be
structured to be published in short installments in some periodical
but I don't suppose it ever was.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Dostoevsky- The Brother's Karamazov 

"unglued" <dragonseed.RemoveThis@spray.se> wrote in message
news:1111091904.918668.35470@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
 >
 > JT wrote:
  > > Holy Mother of God that was long.
  > >
  > > Funny thing is...it seems to seep into you after you are done reading
 > it.
 >
 > I felt the opposite true, from the first page I seeped into the book
 > I've can't remember a more effortless and stimulating read since my
 > childhood days when I could read several books a day. It seemed to be
 > structured to be published in short installments in some periodical
 > but I don't suppose it ever was.
 >
 >
 >
 >
You may be right. Dickens and his contemporaries in England did so (close to
the same time) in order to make the novel accessible and affordable to the
public. Whether the Russians did the same is a good question.


- JT

99% sig. free
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.jamestipper.com" target="_blank">www.jamestipper.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Dostoevsky- The Brother's Karamazov 

JT wrote in a message to Francis A. Miniter:

J> From: "JT" <contactme.TakeThisOut@mysiteplease.net>

 >Those stories must have made 19th century Russians come unglued. I take for
J> granted the blasphemy I'm guilty of and that our culture indulges
J> in, but at the time it must have been markedly more poignant. I can
J> see this book sticking with me for 40 years as well. I could also
J> imagine a semesters worth of course work being culled from this book
J> alone.

Why would they have made them come unglued?

What is your culture, and how does it differ from that of 19th century
Russians?

Steve Hayes
WWW: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm</a>
E-mail: hayesmstw.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com - If it doesn't work, see webpage.

--- WtrGate v0.93.p9 Unreg
* Origin: Khanya BBS, Tshwane, South Africa [012] 333-0004 (8:7903/10)<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Dostoevsky- The Brother's Karamazov 

<Stephen.Hayes RemoveThis @family-news.org> wrote in message
news:66325f.752c04@fmlynet.org...
 > JT wrote in a message to Francis A. Miniter:
 >
 > J> From: "JT" <contactme RemoveThis @mysiteplease.net>
 >
  > >Those stories must have made 19th century Russians come unglued. I take
for
 > J> granted the blasphemy I'm guilty of and that our culture indulges
 > J> in, but at the time it must have been markedly more poignant. I can
 > J> see this book sticking with me for 40 years as well. I could also
 > J> imagine a semesters worth of course work being culled from this book
 > J> alone.
 >
 > Why would they have made them come unglued?
 >
 > What is your culture, and how does it differ from that of 19th century
 > Russians?
 >
 >
 >
Just to give you an example: when the Frankenstein movie appeared in
theaters in the 30's, people passed out, screamed and ran from the theater.
Today it's boring as hell. Extrapolate.

- James

Est'd 1969

<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.jamestipper.com" target="_blank">www.jamestipper.com</a>
* may contain peanuts<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Dostoevsky- The Brother's Karamazov 

Stephen.Hayes DeleteThis @family-news.org wrote:
 > JT wrote in a message to Francis A. Miniter:
 >
 > J> From: "JT" <contactme DeleteThis @mysiteplease.net>
 >
  >>Those stories must have made 19th century Russians come unglued. I take for
 >
 > J> granted the blasphemy I'm guilty of and that our culture indulges
 > J> in, but at the time it must have been markedly more poignant. I can
 > J> see this book sticking with me for 40 years as well. I could also
 > J> imagine a semesters worth of course work being culled from this book
 > J> alone.
 >
 > Why would they have made them come unglued?
 >
 ><snip>
 >
 > Steve Hayes
 >

The story of Jesus appearing in the midst of the Spanish Inquisition would have
been upsetting to Russian religious traditionalists, of whom there were many at
the time. The Grand Inquisitor engages in a long discourse to Jesus, explaining
why Jesus should not have come and that things were going along very well
without him. The Church was managing just fine, thank you. As Jesus maintains
his silence, the Grand Inquisitor comes inevitably to the conclusion that there
is only one thing to do. Crucify him.

The challenge that presented to the then very powerful Russian Church was
enormous. It was nothing less than a declaration that institutionalized
religion was a con, a structure to forward the interests of the chosen few who
could man its ranks at the expense of the poor who contribute their tithe to
augment its wealth.

The second story, told by the very elderly and saintly Father Zosima shortly
before his death - and it should be noted that the saintly priest's corpse stank
within 24 hours after death, a very unsaintly thing for it to have done - tells
of a man who dies and finds himself on a road. A voice tells him that he is on
the road to heaven. He asks how far, and is told some very great distance, that
he would have to walk to get there. He refuses to budge. He sits there for a
thousand years, then gets up and starts walking with the comment, "Maybe, it is
not so far after all."

Again a challenge, and this time from a character in the story who on the
surface appears to manifest all the good things about the church as institution.
But he is saying in the story that there is no assistance from outside. No
one, not even the church, can help a person achieve a goal. That comes from
within and takes very hard work. The implied message is "So what good does the
Church serve?" The story displaces the Church from its self-proclaimed role as
intercessor with God and God's saints.

Is that strong enough for a conservative 19th century audience?


Francis A. Miniter<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Dostoevsky- The Brother's Karamazov 

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 21:13:18 -0500, "Francis A. Miniter"
<miniter.RemoveThis@attglobalZZ.net> wrote:

 >Stephen.Hayes@family-news.org wrote:
  >> JT wrote in a message to Francis A. Miniter:
  >>
  >> J> From: "JT" <contactme.RemoveThis@mysiteplease.net>
  >>
   >>>Those stories must have made 19th century Russians come unglued. I take for
  >>
  >> J> granted the blasphemy I'm guilty of and that our culture indulges
  >> J> in, but at the time it must have been markedly more poignant. I can
  >> J> see this book sticking with me for 40 years as well. I could also
  >> J> imagine a semesters worth of course work being culled from this book
  >> J> alone.
  >>
  >> Why would they have made them come unglued?
  >>
  >><snip>
  >>
  >> Steve Hayes
  >>
 >
 >The story of Jesus appearing in the midst of the Spanish Inquisition would have
 >been upsetting to Russian religious traditionalists, of whom there were many at
 >the time. The Grand Inquisitor engages in a long discourse to Jesus, explaining
 >why Jesus should not have come and that things were going along very well
 >without him. The Church was managing just fine, thank you. As Jesus maintains
 >his silence, the Grand Inquisitor comes inevitably to the conclusion that there
 >is only one thing to do. Crucify him.
 >
 >The challenge that presented to the then very powerful Russian Church was
 >enormous. It was nothing less than a declaration that institutionalized
 >religion was a con, a structure to forward the interests of the chosen few who
 >could man its ranks at the expense of the poor who contribute their tithe to
 >augment its wealth.

I would have thought it would be more likely to reinforce Russian Orthodox
prejudices against Roman Catholics. If it were as you say, then it would have
been easy to put the story into an Orthodox setting.

In the 19th century the Roman Catholic Church was enormously powerful, much
more so than today. The Russian Orthodox Church was virutally powerless, and
was well under the thumb of the State. It was controlled almost at the whim of
a state official, the Procurator of the Holy Synod. The ROC had a brief whiff
of freedom between the February and October revolutions of 1917, before the
stagte clamped down tighter than ever before.

There are echoes of the Grand Inquisitor, of course, in the exchange between
the Savage and Mustapha Mond in Huxley's "Brave new world"

 >The second story, told by the very elderly and saintly Father Zosima shortly
 >before his death - and it should be noted that the saintly priest's corpse stank
 >within 24 hours after death, a very unsaintly thing for it to have done - tells
 >of a man who dies and finds himself on a road. A voice tells him that he is on
 >the road to heaven. He asks how far, and is told some very great distance, that
 >he would have to walk to get there. He refuses to budge. He sits there for a
 >thousand years, then gets up and starts walking with the comment, "Maybe, it is
 >not so far after all."
 >
 >Again a challenge, and this time from a character in the story who on the
 >surface appears to manifest all the good things about the church as institution.
 > But he is saying in the story that there is no assistance from outside. No
 >one, not even the church, can help a person achieve a goal. That comes from
 >within and takes very hard work. The implied message is "So what good does the
 >Church serve?" The story displaces the Church from its self-proclaimed role as
 >intercessor with God and God's saints.

Again, I don't think the Russian Orthodox Church has ever proclaimed such a
role for itself. The story is typical of those told by and of monks.

For example the story of the old monk who, because of his age and infirmity,
could not keep the Lenten fast in all its strictness, but because of his
obedience always asked the abbott, or failing him, one of his fellow monks for
permission to eat before the ninth hour. One day, however, everyone was away,
and there was no one to ask. The only person around was a little boy. But the
monk asked him, as a fellow Christian, for his blessing to eat. He asked three
times, and the boy said, "What kind of a monk are you? All you ever talk about
is food."

 >Is that strong enough for a conservative 19th century audience?

Is there any record of responses from 19th century Russian readers?

Most Orthodox Russians I've spoken to seem to admire "The brothers Karamazov".
They said that it was things like that that kept the Orthodox Church going
through the Bolshevik years. The Bolsheviks did not ban it, and so it
continued to subvert the minds of Russians with the vision of "Holy Russia"
with its "Russian Orthodox culture". The Grand Inquisitor is deliberately not
Orthodox, and bears a more than passing resemblance to a Bolshevik commissar.


--
Steve Hayes
Web: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.geocities.com/hayesstw/stevesig.htm" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/hayesstw/stevesig.htm</a>
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius" target="_blank">http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Dostoevsky- The Brother's Karamazov 

"Steve Hayes" <hayesmstw.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:rh9041hj44hp70p14r79l129qa1d6q447v@4ax.com...
 > On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 21:13:18 -0500, "Francis A. Miniter"
 > <miniter.TakeThisOut@attglobalZZ.net> wrote:
 >
  > >Stephen.Hayes@family-news.org wrote:
   > >> JT wrote in a message to Francis A. Miniter:
   > >>
   > >> J> From: "JT" <contactme.TakeThisOut@mysiteplease.net>
   > >>
   > >>>Those stories must have made 19th century Russians come unglued. I take
for
   > >>
   > >> J> granted the blasphemy I'm guilty of and that our culture indulges
   > >> J> in, but at the time it must have been markedly more poignant. I can
   > >> J> see this book sticking with me for 40 years as well. I could also
   > >> J> imagine a semesters worth of course work being culled from this
book
   > >> J> alone.
   > >>
   > >> Why would they have made them come unglued?
   > >>
   > >><snip>
   > >>
   > >> Steve Hayes
   > >>
  > >
  > >The story of Jesus appearing in the midst of the Spanish Inquisition
would have
  > >been upsetting to Russian religious traditionalists, of whom there were
many at
  > >the time. The Grand Inquisitor engages in a long discourse to Jesus,
explaining
  > >why Jesus should not have come and that things were going along very well
  > >without him. The Church was managing just fine, thank you. As Jesus
maintains
  > >his silence, the Grand Inquisitor comes inevitably to the conclusion that
there
  > >is only one thing to do. Crucify him.
  > >
  > >The challenge that presented to the then very powerful Russian Church was
  > >enormous. It was nothing less than a declaration that institutionalized
  > >religion was a con, a structure to forward the interests of the chosen
few who
  > >could man its ranks at the expense of the poor who contribute their tithe
to
  > >augment its wealth.
 >
 > I would have thought it would be more likely to reinforce Russian Orthodox
 > prejudices against Roman Catholics. If it were as you say, then it would
have
 > been easy to put the story into an Orthodox setting.
 >
 > In the 19th century the Roman Catholic Church was enormously powerful,
much
 > more so than today. The Russian Orthodox Church was virutally powerless,
and
 > was well under the thumb of the State. It was controlled almost at the
whim of
 > a state official, the Procurator of the Holy Synod. The ROC had a brief
whiff
 > of freedom between the February and October revolutions of 1917, before
the
 > stagte clamped down tighter than ever before.
 >
 > There are echoes of the Grand Inquisitor, of course, in the exchange
between
 > the Savage and Mustapha Mond in Huxley's "Brave new world"
 >
  > >The second story, told by the very elderly and saintly Father Zosima
shortly
  > >before his death - and it should be noted that the saintly priest's
corpse stank
  > >within 24 hours after death, a very unsaintly thing for it to have done -
tells
  > >of a man who dies and finds himself on a road. A voice tells him that he
is on
  > >the road to heaven. He asks how far, and is told some very great
distance, that
  > >he would have to walk to get there. He refuses to budge. He sits there
for a
  > >thousand years, then gets up and starts walking with the comment, "Maybe,
it is
  > >not so far after all."
  > >
  > >Again a challenge, and this time from a character in the story who on the
  > >surface appears to manifest all the good things about the church as
institution.
  > > But he is saying in the story that there is no assistance from
outside. No
  > >one, not even the church, can help a person achieve a goal. That comes
from
  > >within and takes very hard work. The implied message is "So what good
does the
  > >Church serve?" The story displaces the Church from its self-proclaimed
role as
  > >intercessor with God and God's saints.
 >
 > Again, I don't think the Russian Orthodox Church has ever proclaimed such
a
 > role for itself. The story is typical of those told by and of monks.
 >
 > For example the story of the old monk who, because of his age and
infirmity,
 > could not keep the Lenten fast in all its strictness, but because of his
 > obedience always asked the abbott, or failing him, one of his fellow monks
for
 > permission to eat before the ninth hour. One day, however, everyone was
away,
 > and there was no one to ask. The only person around was a little boy. But
the
 > monk asked him, as a fellow Christian, for his blessing to eat. He asked
three
 > times, and the boy said, "What kind of a monk are you? All you ever talk
about
 > is food."
 >
  > >Is that strong enough for a conservative 19th century audience?
 >
 > Is there any record of responses from 19th century Russian readers?
 >
 > Most Orthodox Russians I've spoken to seem to admire "The brothers
Karamazov".
 > They said that it was things like that that kept the Orthodox Church going
 > through the Bolshevik years. The Bolsheviks did not ban it, and so it
 > continued to subvert the minds of Russians with the vision of "Holy
Russia"
 > with its "Russian Orthodox culture". The Grand Inquisitor is deliberately
not
 > Orthodox, and bears a more than passing resemblance to a Bolshevik
commissar.
 >
 >
 > --
 > Steve Hayes
  > >
 >
 >
You asked why would they come unglued? The Frankenstein analogy was a bit
dismissive but relevant. We are desensitized by the trials of history. 100
years can make a big difference when freedom of thought and speech has a
wide and accessible forum. It's simply the growing pains that a culture
experiences when their construct of their world is challenged. Usually in
history this comes with a death toll. Not saying that BK was equivalent to
the writings of Luther BUT, to the average reader, enough to make them gasp
and clutch their babushkas.The only evidence I've seen of this is the
occasional reference to the book being "controversial in it's time". I'd
almost be willing to say that most great books are. That might be why they
are great.

- James

Est'd 1969

<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.jamestipper.com" target="_blank">www.jamestipper.com</a>
* may contain peanuts<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Dostoevsky- The Brother's Karamazov 

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:07:36 -0800, "JT" <contactme.DeleteThis@mysiteplease.net> wrote:

 >You asked why would they come unglued? The Frankenstein analogy was a bit
 >dismissive but relevant. We are desensitized by the trials of history. 100
 >years can make a big difference when freedom of thought and speech has a
 >wide and accessible forum. It's simply the growing pains that a culture
 >experiences when their construct of their world is challenged. Usually in
 >history this comes with a death toll. Not saying that BK was equivalent to
 >the writings of Luther BUT, to the average reader, enough to make them gasp
 >and clutch their babushkas.The only evidence I've seen of this is the
 >occasional reference to the book being "controversial in it's time". I'd
 >almost be willing to say that most great books are. That might be why they
 >are great.

Perhaps I should rephrase my question: what in the stories would make people
come "unglued"?

Francis Miniter has suggested that the stories told in the middle of the
bookmight have done so, but I'm not convinced. I don't see anything that would
give 19th century Russians sleepless nights (as Shelley's "Frankenstein" may
have done for 19th century English readers, and as you say the movie did for
early 20th century audiences.

Bu "unglued" I take it you mean that it shattered their prconceptions and
disintegrated their world view. And, as I said, most of the book would have
reinforced the values of most of the readers, in my view. The book asserts
"traditional values".

--
Steve Hayes
Web: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.geocities.com/hayesstw/stevesig.htm" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/hayesstw/stevesig.htm</a>
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius" target="_blank">http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Dostoevsky- The Brother's Karamazov 

"Steve Hayes" <hayesmstw RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ngj44110blo056hb19lvpu1c3ujk3vb1rr@4ax.com...
 > On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:07:36 -0800, "JT" <contactme RemoveThis @mysiteplease.net>
wrote:
 >
  > >You asked why would they come unglued? The Frankenstein analogy was a bit
  > >dismissive but relevant. We are desensitized by the trials of history.
100
  > >years can make a big difference when freedom of thought and speech has a
  > >wide and accessible forum. It's simply the growing pains that a culture
  > >experiences when their construct of their world is challenged. Usually in
  > >history this comes with a death toll. Not saying that BK was equivalent
to
  > >the writings of Luther BUT, to the average reader, enough to make them
gasp
  > >and clutch their babushkas.The only evidence I've seen of this is the
  > >occasional reference to the book being "controversial in it's time". I'd
  > >almost be willing to say that most great books are. That might be why
they
  > >are great.
 >
 > Perhaps I should rephrase my question: what in the stories would make
people
 > come "unglued"?
 >
 > Francis Miniter has suggested that the stories told in the middle of the
 > bookmight have done so, but I'm not convinced. I don't see anything that
would
 > give 19th century Russians sleepless nights (as Shelley's "Frankenstein"
may
 > have done for 19th century English readers, and as you say the movie did
for
 > early 20th century audiences.
 >
 > Bu "unglued" I take it you mean that it shattered their prconceptions and
 > disintegrated their world view. And, as I said, most of the book would
have
 > reinforced the values of most of the readers, in my view. The book asserts
 > "traditional values".
 >
  > >
 >
Forgive my California slang. Unglued was dramatic but not accurate.
Dismayed, I suppose. The stories Francis expounded on are the moments in
question. As you say, they asserted traditional values. Were those the
values that such revolutionary minds wanted to hear? I'm no scholar on 19th
century Russians but I know that the repressive class system was
recently...shall we say...reorganized and the church, as always, was an
impediment to cultural growth. For some.

- James

Est'd 1969

<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.jamestipper.com" target="_blank">www.jamestipper.com</a>
* may contain peanuts<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Dostoevsky- The Brother's Karamazov 

JT wrote in a message to Steve Hayes:

J> From: "JT" <contactme DeleteThis @mysiteplease.net>

J> "Steve Hayes" <hayesmstw DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message

 > Bu "unglued" I take it you mean that it shattered their prconceptions and
 > disintegrated their world view. And, as I said, most of the book would
J> have
 > reinforced the values of most of the readers, in my view. The book asserts
 > "traditional values".
 >
J> Forgive my California slang. Unglued was dramatic but not accurate.
J> Dismayed, I suppose. The stories Francis expounded on are the
J> moments in question. As you say, they asserted traditional values.
J> Were those the values that such revolutionary minds wanted to hear?
J> I'm no scholar on 19th century Russians but I know that the
J> repressive class system was recently...shall we say...reorganized
J> and the church, as always, was an impediment to cultural growth. For
J> some.

OK, so I take it "unglued" was hyperbole.

Let's say the book was controversial, and perhaps not accepted by some sectors
of society.

Fundis in 19th-century Russian history and culture please correct me, but my
(probably over-simplified) understanding of it is as follows:

Peter the Great tried to modernise Russia, which then, as now, meant
Westernising it, as modernity came from the west. Among other things this meant
destroying the independence of the church and making it subservient to the
state, on the German model. This was done by abolishing the Patriarchate, and
replacing it with a Holy Synod whose most powerful member was the State
watchdog, the Procurator. Many monasteries were closed (shades of Henry VIII in
England), and the upper classes spoke French rather than Russian. Where the
Orthodox Church survived, as resisted modernity, was among the peasants. When
the upper classes became interested in spiritual things, they turned to things
like Freemasonry, not to the Orthodox Church (see the other great 19th century
Russian novelist, Tolstoy, for examples).

In the 19th century those who rebelled against the autocratic political system
of the Tsars were also motivated by modernity. Only they looked to the French
Revolution, rather than the French nobility, for inspiration. Dostoevsky had
initially been among them, but became estanged from their thinking, and
returned to his roots, the traditional values of the Orthodox Church, which had
been retained by the peasants, but, being repressed by the social system,
needed to be awakened as well. The brothers, in some sense, represent many
Russians, faced with these conflicting value systems. None of them is "typical"
of any one of the systems -- they are not caricatures in that sense, but they
represent people who are attracted and influenced by one or other of them.
Alyosha, the youngest, is influenced by the peasant/Orthodox strand, and
attracted to it, but by upbringing he is also estranged from it, and so is on a
voyage of discovery. And Dostoevsky, like many Russians, felt the conflicting
calls of all three within himself.

Sala kahle

Steve Hayes
WWW: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm</a>
E-mail: hayesmstw DeleteThis @hotmail.com - If it doesn't work, see webpage.

--- WtrGate v0.93.p9 Unreg
* Origin: Khanya BBS, Tshwane, South Africa [012] 333-0004 (8:7903/10)<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Dostoevsky- The Brother's Karamazov 

<Stephen.Hayes.DeleteThis@fmlynet.org> wrote in message
news:064050.7935f3@fmlynet.org...
 > JT wrote in a message to Steve Hayes:
 >
 > J> From: "JT" <contactme.DeleteThis@mysiteplease.net>
 >
 > J> "Steve Hayes" <hayesmstw.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
 >
  > > Bu "unglued" I take it you mean that it shattered their prconceptions
and
  > > disintegrated their world view. And, as I said, most of the book would
 > J> have
  > > reinforced the values of most of the readers, in my view. The book
asserts
  > > "traditional values".
  > >
 > J> Forgive my California slang. Unglued was dramatic but not accurate.
 > J> Dismayed, I suppose. The stories Francis expounded on are the
 > J> moments in question. As you say, they asserted traditional values.
 > J> Were those the values that such revolutionary minds wanted to hear?
 > J> I'm no scholar on 19th century Russians but I know that the
 > J> repressive class system was recently...shall we say...reorganized
 > J> and the church, as always, was an impediment to cultural growth. For
 > J> some.
 >
 > OK, so I take it "unglued" was hyperbole.
 >
 > Let's say the book was controversial, and perhaps not accepted by some
sectors
 > of society.
 >
 > Fundis in 19th-century Russian history and culture please correct me, but
my
 > (probably over-simplified) understanding of it is as follows:
 >
 > Peter the Great tried to modernise Russia, which then, as now, meant
 > Westernising it, as modernity came from the west. Among other things this
meant
 > destroying the independence of the church and making it subservient to the
 > state, on the German model. This was done by abolishing the Patriarchate,
and
 > replacing it with a Holy Synod whose most powerful member was the State
 > watchdog, the Procurator. Many monasteries were closed (shades of Henry
VIII in
 > England), and the upper classes spoke French rather than Russian. Where
the
 > Orthodox Church survived, as resisted modernity, was among the peasants.
When
 > the upper classes became interested in spiritual things, they turned to
things
 > like Freemasonry, not to the Orthodox Church (see the other great 19th
century
 > Russian novelist, Tolstoy, for examples).
 >
 > In the 19th century those who rebelled against the autocratic political
system
 > of the Tsars were also motivated by modernity. Only they looked to the
French
 > Revolution, rather than the French nobility, for inspiration. Dostoevsky
had
 > initially been among them, but became estanged from their thinking, and
 > returned to his roots, the traditional values of the Orthodox Church,
which had
 > been retained by the peasants, but, being repressed by the social system,
 > needed to be awakened as well. The brothers, in some sense, represent many
 > Russians, faced with these conflicting value systems. None of them is
"typical"
 > of any one of the systems -- they are not caricatures in that sense, but
they
 > represent people who are attracted and influenced by one or other of them.
 > Alyosha, the youngest, is influenced by the peasant/Orthodox strand, and
 > attracted to it, but by upbringing he is also estranged from it, and so is
on a
 > voyage of discovery. And Dostoevsky, like many Russians, felt the
conflicting
 > calls of all three within himself.
 >
 > Sala kahle
 >
 > Steve Hayes
  > >
 >
 >
That's what I got out of it too Steve. In my OP I mentioned the three
brothers being respective parts of the complete Russian psyche at the time.
I think the controversy comes from the simple public discourse that the
novel provides. The novel, being a relatively new medium at the time,
disseminated these ideas in such an efficient way that it created quite a
stir.

Literacy was becoming prevalent in the lower classes and, as often the case
in history, exposing hitherto ignorant factions of society new ways of
looking at mother Russia, Always dangerous to the entrenched authority.

You mentioned FD swinging essentially from the "left" to the "right". This
part of him fascinates me. I'd like to know about his transition in prison
in detail. Wonder if there's a good bio out there.


- James

Est'd 1969

<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.jamestipper.com" target="_blank">www.jamestipper.com</a>
* may contain peanuts<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Dostoevsky- The Brother's Karamazov