Welcome to Week 7! From a sort of outrageous 70 or 80 marchers, we’re now down closer to a still impressive as hell ~30. Another fun and thoughtful batch of comments this past week. I was particularly gratefully to Cookie for catching this (as So-Called-Bill pointed out) impossibly timely line:
“We are assured that the world is becoming more and more united, is being formed into brotherly communion, by the shortening of distances, by the transmitting of thoughts through the air. Alas, do not believe in such a union of people.”
I’m not sure how I missed that one, though I have this theory that whenever there’s duels and murders and stinking corpses, I’m fully engaged, and then when things switch to religious philosophy and/or 20-page prose interpretations of poems about religious philosophy, I black out.
Fortunately, we’ve been ending of late on these lovely pivot points in the action that leave me looking forward to the trail just ahead. Here’s hoping that string continues!
Next Wednesday: Let’s zip on by the midpoint and catch up with Mitya at at the end of Part III, Book Eight, Chapter 4, where he appears to be running “like a madman.”
(which is to say: please use this Week 4 thread for comments on pages 0-395; aim to finish reading that section and shout out here by end o’ day Tuesday)
"…something like the supervisor of an entire team of political agents…"
Hello to all
I’ve been reading this just as I find your website. I found the website because Twitter sent me an email that you were a follower of mine and I returned the favor. I’ll need to do some serious reading from page 202 to where you are but I’m invigorated now. I’m also reading the 5 volume Joseph Frank biography of Fyodor Dostoevsky. I have a lot of spare time these days.
Gary
Zip, indeed. It’s Thursday and I’m already done with this week’s reading. I think the lack of philosophy and pace of the action has kept me engrossed. Of course, this whole section had me wondering who the narrator could have possibly been, since he has far too much knowledge of the events. Third person perspective, though not really omniscient.
A note on footnotes (p. 788):
Lousy:
9. great and beautiful: see note 2 to page 71 in section 1.2.6.
Lovely:
10. Much on earth…: Victor Terras rightly considers the passage from here to the end of the sub-chapter to be “probably the master key to the philosophic interpretation, as well as to the structure,” of B.K.
omg! from way behind, i’m now way ahead and i don’t want to stop. i’m not missing the philosophy and i’m not missing the catechism, either. now i want to know what happens next!
We finally get a more complete picture of Grushenka. Up until now I thought she was more or less a prostitute, providing sexual favors for money. Turns out she was getting money from multiple sources, but not putting out for anyone except (maybe) “the old man” Samsonov.
But she certainly has the power to make a lot of men nutty, and knows it and enjoys it: “Will you let me sit on your lap, Alyosha–like this!” And there’s Ratikin “watching carnivorously,” wishing she was on his lap. And by the way, does this “eat you up” business mean what I think it means?
I think I have a better understanding of why there are lines like: “Many started calling her a real Jew.” This was a society where a Christian who lent money at interest was committing a sin. So only non-Christians could be openly in the business of making money with money. I like that she was “buying up promissory notes for next to nothing, ten kopecks to the rouble.” Today Mr. Geithner would be calling on her to take a position in some “toxic assets!”
Obviously the title “the old man” got my attention. But then it got a little confusing. At first it refers to Samsonov, then later to Fyodor, and finally to Grigory. In fact I had to re-read the crucial action in the garden (p. 394) to get that “the old man” in this scene was Grigory and not Fyodor. As if all the multiple names for characters weren’t confusing enough already.
This week was an easy read and ‘pulled me along’ with the action. But never has a character appeared more insane than Dimitri does here…actually, all of the characters seemed to be insane. Vodka seems to be the “water” of choice. Maybe the Russians’ reputation for drinking came from this writer. But did Dimitri kill Fyodoro, too? ‘Til next week…..
Oh, questions, questions everywhere and never an answer to be had.
1. Is Doestoevsky REALLY trying for some sort of Greek drama unity in a 700+ page book by making this the longest day in the world? But without any attempt at the Greek ideal of moderation, of course.
2. Is it possible that we have wished unwisely for action instead of endless philosophizing? Everyone runs around like they have vermin in their undies. On second thought, times being what they were, maybe they do.
3. Is everyone in the book nuts? (Once again I find Lynn saying what I was going to say). Do they HAVE to be so overwrought?
Oh, thank goodness for the comic relief of Madame Hohlakov in the “Gold Mine” chapter!
Favorite description so far: Rakitin, who was “very sensitive about everything the concerned himself” but “obtuse as regards the feelings and sensations of others.” Doesn’t everyone know someone (or more than one someone) just like that?
very exciting this week, the characters wound even more tightly than usual. particularly fine scene with pyotr ilyich–oh, crap, that falls after this week’s gatepost, so i won’t give details…but it’s good!
and well within the assigned march, there’s the scene in which samsonov messes with mitya or the one with madame khokhlakov–gold mines both. i’m enjoying this.
I am so very happy because I am caught up! I knew it would happen! And so, since I’ve been personally exposed to the whole vodka thing (my son lives in Ukraine), I thought I’d share these tidbits about vodka taken from the Russia Info Centre (link below) as well as my personal experiences.
1. On Gulping Vodka: “Though in Russia it is a custom to drink vodka at a gulp, trying not to taste it while drinking, there are alternative recommendations as well, such us, for example, the following citation: As any noble drink, vodka should be drunk little by little, by sips, so that it could wash all the mouth cavity. It is bad taste to gulp vodka. Whatever the “proper” way of drinking might be, it is surely a must to take some snacks right after it.”
Speaking from personal experience, I have never seen a Russian or Ukrainian person not “gulp” vodka. It’s always gulped. (Even I have gulped it with the best of them.) Several times before dinner, during dinner, and after dinner. Food is almost always involved. The challenge is thinking up enough creative toasts to go with the gulps. Unlike we Americans, Russians don’t do shots unless they are also eating. A Lot. Of Food. For a very long time. In this, they are very European and laid back with their dinners.
2. On the History of Vodka: “Speaking about the history of vodka and Russian vodka in particular, some sources state that the first drink of the kind was made by the Arabian doctor Pares in 860 for medical purposes. Others claim that for the first time spirit was extracted by Italian alchemists, who in the 11-12th cc. were looking for the elixir-stone and distilled wine’s essence, what they thought to be its soul, or spirit (SPIRITUS in Latin). Hence is the name of spirit. Vodka first came to Russia in 1386, when the ambassadors of Genoa brought grape alcohol, called aqua vitae, to Moscow and introduced it to the Grand Prince, boyars and foreign pharmacists. However, the drink did not take roots in Russia that time and was claimed unhealthy.”
Very few Russians think vodka is unhealthy, to wit, they have one of the highest rates of alcoholism in the world. So, it appears that it’s the fault of the Italians that vodka became so popular in Russia. Dostoevsky is really demonstrating the true flavor of Russian drinking that had long been established as a cultural tradition by his time.
http://www.russia-ic.com/culture_art/traditions/613/
P.S. I’m loving the speed-up of the action in the novel!
400 pages in and I’m finally starting to get it—Dostoevsky’s a giant tease! Alyosha doesn’t drink vodka; Rakitin doesn’t get the satisfaction of Alyosha’s humiliation; Grushenka doesn’t turn up at Fyodor Pavlovich’s; Samsonov doesn’t help Dmitri get his 3,000 roubles; Madame Khokhlakov doesn’t cut the check. Even Zosima doesn’t deliver the miracle of not stinking. O, and the onion snaps, too.
As a reader, I often feel like Dmitri does after rushing at breakneck speed to Lyagavy’s, only to find the guy dead drunk. Or like Alyosha, disappointed that Zosima’s starting to reek. This sense of disappointment—of rushing around to no end—is so insistent that I suspect it’s on purpose. I just can’t figure out what the purpose is.
Part of the problem is that I don’t find any of the characters as interesting or exciting as D. seems to. There are little gems of psychological insight—like the pithy account of Grushenka’s past, and her fear that she’ll come running at her former lover’s whistle; or Alyosha’s wandering thoughts while praying in the “Cana of Galilee” chapter; or the strange calmness of Dmitri, noticing the redness of the berries as he goes to kill his father. But on the whole, these characters aren’t much more than speeches to me, endlessly narrating what they think and feel about their lives instead of letting us in to judge for ourselves.
I can’t shake the feeling this is all part of D.’s grand design, and the narrative toads are meant to turn into princes. Or maybe these surprising, occasional flashes of insight that the characters enjoy are the princes, and D. feels he can only get us to share them through this high-pitched opera of hysterics and reversals. Some heavy foreshadowing going on in this section, so maybe all comes clear at the end. Or maybe I’m missing the tiny green shoots for the speedily passing trees.
I think I missed last week – blame it on the sick child – and now I am way behind though believe that I may be able to catch up… was slowed by the talks and homilies – thoughtful, interesting, loooong and much more enjoyable if I were still in college 🙁
I’m very happy to find out from my fellow marchers’ comments that there is less philosophy and more action this week (I’ll take characters’ with vermin in their undies over mad Russians philosophizing about vermin any day of the week). Unfortunately, I was unable to enjoy said action packed reading as family (of Eastern European origin incidentally) in town this week has prevented me from reading this week’s installment. There’s only so much Eastern European insanity one can take. Computilo has inspired me to press on and catch up soon.
I have found keeping up with this week’s reading a bit of a struggle, but I am marching on nonetheless.
Come on everyone, Zosima’s only human. What’s a bit of decomposition between (religious) friends? Like others I’m glad that the relentless philosophising has come to an end, at least for a while (?).
I enjoyed this part, where Dmitri describes some of what he wants and expects from Grushenka: (p.368)
“I can only note that Mitya thought of Grushenka’s past as definitively passed. He looked upon that past with infinite compassion and decided with all the fire of his passion that once Grushenka told him she loved him and would marry him a completely new Grushenka would begin at once, together with a new Dimitri Fyodorovich, with no vices now, but with virtues only”…
I think a lot of people embark on relationships like that. I think Dostoyevsky fascinatingly offsets the desire for sin to be wiped off the blackboard with a sense of inevitable failure, like the Mysterious Visitor’s story in last week’s reading.
a smelly elder. a becoming fichu. my young moon. you’re a mushroom, but he’s a prince. one doesn’t bump into champagne too often. he was going to gobble sausage. a silly slip of a girl. a dream sequence. ecstasy. ecstatic. ecstasy. a missive from siberia. the vile bog. sullen mirrors. his lower lip, which had always been thick, now looked like a kind of drooping pancake. a vast brain. because fate is a grisly thing. i hasten,i fly! i’ve abused your health. full of morbid antipathies. i’ll come again. even many times. have you decided? answer mathematically. all this will be perfectly well explained to the reader later on. aiee!
who will grushenka eat?
Did they make a movie of this? It scares me how H-wood would have handled the scene with Grushenka sitting on Alyosha’s lap. Strangely it seems to have started Alyosha down the path of not being so shy with women.
Madame Khokhlakov’s gold mine scene was a stitch- Dosty should have given it up and wrote comedy – he could have make a pile of money.
The row of dots after Dmitry picks up the pestle is ominous. Is there something our narrator does not know?
Thoughts inspired by actual fellow deathmarchers:
An earlier comment from Jeff made me realize, I like the philosophical sections, like the Grand Inquisitor, which take a critical look at things, even if in exaggerated fashion. The more straight up religious stuff is harder for me to get thru.
Like the Old Man in KS, I had to re read the last scene to figure out which old man was bleeding. Maybe that is what D intended.
I think the thing I like best about the book is what Rodney K called “the gems of psychological insight,” that resonate. (Ex. Dmitri utters in complete despair, “What terrible tragedies realism inflicts on people.”) Right now, those, and the interventions by the narrator are enough to make me enjoy the book.
I think the most interesting character so far in the Deathmarch is So Called Bill. Very complex. Seems affable one moment, and the next, hes threatening a thrashing. Cant wait to see what he is going to do next.
Thanks to Old Man for putting into perspective the references to Jews. But there were 3 references in this section alone. Would it kill D to lay off a little bit?
And finally, “should we leave everything to the Jews? Yes.
Grushenka comes across as more human and more likeable. “In my whole life I’ve given just one little onion, that’s how much good I’ve done. And don’t praise me for that, Alyosha, don’t think I’m good.” Well, she may not think she is good, but the point of that fable seems to be that one little onion may be enough when deeds are judged. And her indecision about whether to get back with guy who left her made her sympathetic too.
I’ve fallen almost a week behind.
I enjoyed the part about the “corrupted” corpse, fragrances after death, etc.
Yay for action! Actually, serious props for the pacing and setup of the whole “murder mystery” part of this novel. Mr. D is doing a great job of teasing and foreshadowing and even fast-forwarding to *not quite tell us* what’s going to happen, to who, and by whom. Any talk about this book being “formless” is not taking into consideration the care in which he’s at least assembling this particular puzzle.
That said, my favorite section, as others have also said, was the comic exchange with poor desperate Mitya and Mrs K over the gold mines. I had a genuine LOL moment when the moment of truth finally happens, as we knew it would, and it turns out she hasn’t really heard him at all. I keep picturing the actress who played Groucho Marx’s foil in the old Marx Bros movies (too lazy to look up her name) in these scenes. Definitely a case to be made that this entire novel could be staged as a comedy.
I am going to see how many times I can answer people today with this line:
“I believed, I believe, and I want to believe, and I will believe, and what more do you want?”
Also, who can not love Grushenka? She’s given an onion.
I just reread the scene with Dmitri and Madame Khokhlakov over lunch. It really is a comic gem–two people technically talking to each other, but really having two completely different conversations. Madame K. giddy with self-congratulation over her great plan, Dmitri doing a slow burn as she prattles on, then losing it when he finally realizes he’s not going to get the money. Lucky for her she doesn’t get brained with a candlestick.
Confidential to Mr. M: Sorry for sending mixed signals. Let me be clear: I intend to hurt you. And I intend to go on hurting you.
heya jeff: great mystery the things that stay with a person, but here you go–margaret dumont. and yeah, she’d would be perfect.
Still hanging on. Altho it gives away how far behind I am, here’s my favorite line right now: “…all the fatal things take place on the stairs.”
As Cecil, points out, duels and murders are one of the big attractions in the Brothers K. So, how surprised was I, an Indianapolis area resident, to discover this disturbing news story, which has gone national: April 9, 2009 Indianapolis Woman Dies Trying to Stop Sword Fight By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 10:04 a.m. ET
INDIANAPOLIS (AP) — Police have charged an Indianapolis man in the death of his 77-year-old grandmother, who died after trying to break up a sword fight between him and her 69-year-old brother-in-law. Police say 39-year-old Chris Rondeau faces a preliminary murder charge in the death of Franziska Stegbauer. Officers found Rondeau, his grandmother and her brother-in-law, Adolf Stegbauer, with stab wounds when they arrived at the northwest Indianapolis home shortly after 1 a.m. Thursday. Rondeau was hospitalized in stable condition, while Adolf Stegbauer was in surgery with serious injuries. Sgt. Matthew Mount says an autopsy will determine whether Stegbauer died from her stab wounds or a heart attack.
What! A Sword Fight? In Indianapolis? Is truth really stranger than fiction?