Introduction
"The tradition of the West is
embodied in the Great Conversation that began in the dawn of history and
continues to the present day."[1]
This tradition incorporates poetry and philosophy from people such as Socrates,
Nietzsche, Sophocles, Augustine, Aquinas, and many others. The great Russian
writer Dostoevsky is also a part of that great tradition, in fact, his novel The
Brothers Karamazov embodies many of the voices and ideas from the Great
Conversation, for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear. Below, each of the main characters, the
members of the Karamazov family, will be discussed in light of this Great
Conversation.
Fyodor The father
Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov, the
patriarch of the Karamazov family, is an egocentric man driven by his insatiable
desires and passions, especially those of the table and the bed.[2] He is an Epithymotic[3] soul
extremely appetitive and described as "an ill-natured buffoon"[4],
"always of a voluptuous temper, and ready to run after any petticoat on
the slightest encouragement."[5],
and a "wicked and sentimental" man.[6]
His days are filled with drunken debauchery and selfish scheming. The
characters in Machiavelli's "The Mandrake Root" are similar in
quality. The overall theme of that work is if you can get away with it and it
makes you feel good, do it. Machiavelli is mocking the classical and Christian
tradition.[7] We see in Fyodor images of Dionysius, from Euripides' play "The Bacchae", who was the god of bread and wine and was himself an example of the appetitive soul.[8] If the virtuous man is, as Aristotle described, one who walks the middle line between excess and deficiency,[9] then in Aristotelian language, it is safe to declare that Fyodor is the opposite of a virtuous man and no stretch of the imagination could conclude that he is in fact virtuous. Only by seeing Fyodor in the light of Machiavelli's "The Prince" might we say he is virtuous, but that would be an exercise in re-founding the concept of virtue.[10] Aristotle describes such a person and says "the man who indulges in every pleasure and abstains from none becomes self-indulgent"[11]
Fyodor would likely find himself the companion of those poor and wretched souls in circle two and three[12] of Dante's Inferno. In circle two we find those who, in their earthly lives were controlled by their passions and now, in hell, are driven by a great wind storm that gives them no rest. Dante gives us a vivid picture of those like Fyodor, saying "So bears the tyrannous gust those evil souls. On this side and on that, above, below, It drives them: hope of rest to solace them Is none, nor e’en of milder pang. As cranes, Chanting their dolorous notes, traverse the sky, Stretch’d out in long array; so I beheld Spirits, who came loud wailing, hurried on By their dire doom."[13] The second circle of hell seems a fitting place for the man who was so obsessed with himself that he not only abandoned his children but also completely forgot them[14] and indulged every pleasure of his heart without restrain or care.
Fyodor also in many ways anticipates Nietzsche, who hated Christianity and mocked it.[15] At one point Fyodor speaks about being dragged to hell by the hooks the demons, are imagined to use, but the way he speaks of it seems to me to be a complete mockery.[16] His son Alyosha sees this characteristic in his father and shutters when, speaking to Father Zossima, Fyodor calls him "sacred elder".[17]
If we consider this man in light of Aristotelian categories of poetry we could conclude that he is both a comedic character and a tragic[18] one at the same time. He is comedic because he knows and understands, as do those around him, that he is a "buffoon" and he enjoys playing that role. We read "Many even added that he was glad of a new comic part in which to play the buffoon, and that it was simply to make it funnier that he pretended to be unaware of his ludicrous position."[19] But he is also a tragic character and his life is on a tragic trajectory seen in his eventual death by, his illegitimate son, Smerdyakov.[20]
The Brothers
Turning now to the three legitimate
sons of Fyodor we find that each son reminds us in different ways of many of
the voices from the great conversation, just as their father did.
Each
brother in a general way represents one aspect of the tripartite Platonic soul:
Noetic, Thymotic, and Epithymotic. We also find echoes of Aristotle with his
discussion and description of virtue and
vice and his work on poetics and the four genres of poetry as well as politics
with its discussion of the different political regimes. Sophocles’ "Oedipus
the King"; Euripides’ "The Bacchae"; Aristophanes’ "Birds";
Luther's "On Christian Liberty" and Machiavelli's "The Mandrake
Root", and many more, all give us light as we explore the different
attitudes and dispositions of the three brothers.
Dmitri the Oldest Son
Like his father, Dmitri Karamazov is a man driven by his desires
which means that he is appetitive, giving in to every apatite, from lust to
gluttony. One scene which describes much of Dmitri's life is found in book
eight, chapter eight titled "Delirium" where we read these words,
"What followed was almost an orgy, a feast to which all were welcome...
Mitya himself was almost delirious... An absurd chaotic confusion followed, but
Mitya was in his natural element, and the more foolish it became, the more his
spirits rose."[21]
Dmitri is described by his brother Alyosha in the same way as his father, they
share many of the same characteristics. Alyosha says "And what of Dmitri? He too will be harder than
yesterday, he too must be spiteful and angry, and he too, no doubt, has made
some plan."[22]Dmitri also calls to mind Dionysus because of his appetites, but we also see in him images from Sophocles' Oedipus the King[23] because Dmitri's desire was, at times, to kill his father. [24] The differences between Oedipus and Dmitri are important, Dmitri wanted to kill his father, but in the end he didn't while Oedipus had no desire to murder his father and in fact tried to prevent this from happening but unknowingly did in fact murder his father. Oedipus was in fact and indeed the murderer while Dmitri murdered his father in his heart.
In terms of political regimes, Dmitri's character would represent the Democratic. The demos are ruled by their desires and on a whim can change their minds.[25] Democracies tend to be liberal in their orientation and as a result, they tend to become more and more immoral. There also tends to be an instability that is built into this regime because when the demos rule they do so through their passions. We observe this in Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War, where he records how the people of Athens in one moment love and adore Pericles and in the next they turn on him.[26]
Ivan the Middle Child
Moving on to consider Ivan, it is clear that he represents
the Noetic part of the Platonic soul which is the logical aspect, the more
reasoned and philosophic.[27]
Because of this he finds himself in a strange situation, he is a
reluctant atheist. In one of his encounters with Alyosha he says, "in the final result I don’t accept this world
of God’s, and, although I know it exists, I don’t accept it at all. It’s not
that I don’t accept God, you must understand, it’s the world created by Him I
don’t and cannot accept."[28]He doesn't believe in God in one moment, then at another time he says he does believe in God, but not the world he created. It's clear that he is wrestling with the idea that a good and loving can God exist when there is so much suffering in the world, especially the suffering of children. Ivan says, "Imagine a trembling mother with her baby in her arms, a circle of invading Turks around her. They’ve planned a diversion: they pet the baby, laugh to make it laugh. They succeed, the baby laughs. At that moment a Turk points a pistol four inches from the baby’s face. The baby laughs with glee, holds out its little hands to the pistol, and he pulls the trigger in the baby’s face and blows out its brains. Artistic, wasn’t it? By the way, Turks are particularly fond of sweet things, they say.”[29]
His soul is, in a real sense, ripped in two, he shows signs of longing for that heavenly city, but feels the burden and weight of all the suffering that goes on in this world. He is having a tough time reconciling these apparent contradictions. His logical side cannot find a harmony between a loving God and a sin sick world.[30] The image that he calls to mind is that of Pisthetaerus and Euelpides who are unsatisfied with the state of things and long for a new city, one where there are wedding feasts to be enjoyed and the common practice is to greet people in the streets as friends.[31] He also reminds us of Augustine with his discussion of the two cities (The city of God and the city of man).
Much of Ivan's philosophical ideas are in line with Hobbes and Machiavelli. His theo-political poem about the Grand Inquisitor displays this in vivid poetic brilliance.[32] Ivan recognizes that if there is nothing above Plato's divided line, if there is no God and immortality, then all is permissible and lawful. If that's true, then what people should seek is comfort and that is exactly what Hobbs tells us life is all about.[33]
In terms of political regime, Ivan might represent the tyrant. The tyrant thinks he knows what's best and, in his mind, might believe that he is the only one who knows the truth. The problem with the tyrant is that he has a philosophic mind but a bad education.[34] One example of the tyrant might be Julius Caesar[35] who took control of the Roman Empire by unlawful means, but another who might, to some, be considered a tyrant is Abraham Lincoln, who was considered a tyrant by the Southern states and someone they needed to fight against.[36]
Alyosha the Youngest Son
The youngest of the three brothers is Alyosha. He is
characterized by a spirited soul or what Plato might call, Thymotic, which
corresponds to the heart.[37]
There's a boldness and courage in him as we see him confront people with the
truth and try and intervene at times, as well as a spiritual side.[38]
In terms of poetic genre, he is comedic owing to the fact that he is a
Christian. In the end the life of a Christian is comedic because no matter what
happens there is always the hope of the resurrection. We see this hope
explicitly expressed in the closing chapter of "The Brothers
Karamazov" where we read, "'can it be true what’s taught us in religion, that we shall
all rise again from the dead and shall live and see each other again, all,
Ilusha too?' 'Certainly we shall all rise again, certainly we shall see each
other and shall tell each other with joy and gladness all that has happened!'
Alyosha answered, half laughing, half enthusiastic.'"[39]
We encounter Alyosha in different situations and places such as speaking privately with his father or being in the room of father Zossima with other guests and even visiting certain women. In most instances he is the one who shows kindness and compassion, but Alyosha is also a brave adventurer.[40] He might be compared with Odysseus and his many adventures. Alyosha doesn't visit an island with a Cyclops, but he does interact with various characters who are all, in their own ways, adventures. For example, at one point Alyosha finds himself in the home of the whore Grushenka. Alyosha is at a very low point due to the fact that his mentor has just died. In the end he overcomes these temptations and is found to be victorious.[41]
We also might think of Alyosha as the philosopher who reenters the cave[42] in order to teach and educate the populace, especially the children.[43] He receives a commission from Father Zossima to basically do just that. We read, "'When it is God’s will to call me, leave the monastery. Go away for good... I bless you for great service in the world... I send you forth.'"[44] The world in this case would represent the cave. From all of this it's not hard to see why he is called the "hero" of the novel.[45]
The political regime that Alyosha might represent would be either the Aristocracy which is the rule of the few and the wise[46] or he might represent the noble and loving king, something akin to Plato's philosopher king.[47] The one who rules on behalf of the people and out of selfless motives. In this case he would be a picture of the Christ, who is the priest king, the one who rules out of love and by self sacrifice.
Considering the three brothers in light of the human family, it is imperative to recognize that it takes the combined force of both the Noetic and the Thymotic to rule and control the Epithymotic.[48] Understanding and acting upon this truth will have an impact in our personal lives as well as the way we interact with the political regime we find ourselves in because, the city is simply the soul at large.[49]
Smerdyakov the illegitimate son
Let me next briefly discuss Smerdyakov.
He is the twisted and corrupt counterpart to Ivan. For Ivan many of his
theories and philosophies are simply exercises in logic or in thought
experiments. They don't impact the world he lives in, at least not in a
substantial way. He is free to think and to theorize about anything and
everything but for Smerdyakov, the ideas that Ivan expounds do in fact touch
the real world, the day to day life. He takes those theories and applies them
to life. If there is no God, then anything and everything is legal, even
murder.[50]
It is Smerdyakov who takes Ivan's ideas and lives out the true
Machiavellian-Hobbsian vision and who anticipates Nietzsche. He is the
realization of all that Ivan has taught and when Ivan realizes it, he is
crushed and accepts at least in some part that he too is a murderer like
Oedipus.[51]
What we need to understand, is that ideas have consequences, and it may not be the person who first comes up with the idea or theory who takes it to its logical conclusion, but there is still a share in the guilt.
Conclusion
Dostoyevsky is one voice in many,
one in a long conversation that has spanned over 2,500 years. In some ways the Brothers Karamazov can be
seen as a summary of that Great Conversation. The various themes and ideas,
both good and bad, are found in the pages of this novel. He is certainly not
the end of this conversation, but he is an important voice to listen to. 
You and I are invited to not only
listen in to that conversation, but to take part in it, to join our voices to
those of the greats who came before us. We are invited to become active
participants in the quarrel between poetry and philosophy, and as Christians to
show how many of these ideas and concepts point us to the one true and glorious
king - the great philosopher king who rules with love, honesty, justice, and
power.
[1]
Mortimer J. Adler. The Great Conversation, The Great Books vol. 1 Encyclopedia
Britannica, Inc. 1952, page 1
[2]
Féodor Dostoievsky, The Brothers
Karamazov, trans. Constance Garnett, World’s Literary Masterpieces (New
York: The Lowell Press Publishers, n.d.), 1.
[3] Gage,
Warren. CC502 Plato and Augustine, Lesson 7.
[4]
Féodor Dostoievsky, The Brothers
Karamazov, trans. Constance Garnett, World’s Literary Masterpieces (New
York: The Lowell Press Publishers, n.d.), 2.
[5] Ibid
[6] Ibid,
21.
[7]
Warren, Gage. Aquinas and Machiavelli, Lesson 18.
[8] Ibid.
CC504 Aeschylus and Aristotle, Lesson 18.
[9] Ibid.
CC504 Aeschylus and Aristotle, Lesson 1.
[10] In
the Prince, Machiavelli is re-founding the concepts of good and evil. The
Prince teaches us how not to be good. See Gage, Warren. CC602 Aquinas and
Machiavelli, Lesson 22.
[11]
Aristotle, “ETHICA NICOMACHEA,” in The
Works of Aristotle, ed. W. D. Ross, trans. W. D. ROSS, vol. 9 (Oxford: The
Clarendon Press, 1925).
[12]
Dante Alighieri, The Harvard Classics 20:
The Divine Comedy by Dante, ed. Charles W. Eliot (New York: P. F. Collier
& Son, 1909), 25–26.
[13] Ibid,
22.
[14]
Féodor Dostoievsky, The Brothers
Karamazov, trans. Constance Garnett, World’s Literary Masterpieces (New
York: The Lowell Press Publishers, n.d.), 4.
[15] Gage,
Warren. CC704 Nietzsche and Dostoevsky, Lesson 5.
[16]
Féodor Dostoievsky, The Brothers
Karamazov, trans. Constance Garnett, World’s Literary Masterpieces (New
York: The Lowell Press Publishers, n.d.), 20–21.
[17] Ibid,
37–38.
[18]
Aristotle, Aristotle in 23 Volumes,
Translated by W.H. Fyfe., vol. 23 (Medford, MA: Cambridge, MA, Harvard
University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1932).
[19]
Féodor Dostoievsky, The Brothers
Karamazov, trans. Constance Garnett, World’s Literary Masterpieces (New
York: The Lowell Press Publishers, n.d.), 3.
[20] Ibid,
704.
[21] Ibid,
485–486.
[22] Ibid,
191.
[23]
Sophocles, The Oedipus Tyrannus of
Sophocles. Edited with Introduction and Notes by Sir Richard Jebb., ed.
Richard C. Jebb (Medford, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1887).
[24]
Féodor Dostoievsky, The Brothers
Karamazov, trans. Constance Garnett, World’s Literary Masterpieces (New
York: The Lowell Press Publishers, n.d.), 150.
[25]
Gage, Warren. CC702 Thucydides and Tocqueville, Lesson 22.
[26]
Thucydides, The Peloponnesian War
(Medford, MA: London, J. M. Dent; New York, E. P. Dutton, 1910) 1.139.4; 2.21.3.
[27]
Gage, Warren. CC502 Plato and Augustine, Lesson 7.
[28]
Féodor Dostoievsky, The Brothers
Karamazov, trans. Constance Garnett, World’s Literary Masterpieces (New
York: The Lowell Press Publishers, n.d.), 258.
[29] Ibid,
261.
[30] Ibid,
258
[31]
Aristophanes (2012-05-11). The Birds (Kindle Locations 120-125). Kindle
Edition.
[32]
Féodor Dostoievsky, The Brothers
Karamazov, trans. Constance Garnett, World’s Literary Masterpieces (New
York: The Lowell Press Publishers, n.d.), 270.
[33]
Gage, Warren. CC602 Aquinas and Machiavelli, Lesson 25; Lesson 26.
[34] Ibid.
CC502 Plato and Augustine, Lesson 39.
[35] C.
Suetonius Tranquillus, Suetonius: The
Lives of the Twelve Caesars; An English Translation, Augmented with the
Biographies of Contemporary Statesmen, Orators, Poets, and Other Associates,
ed. Alexander Thomson (Medford, MA: Gebbie & Co., 1889), Julius 80.
[36] Gage,
Warren. CC502 Plato and Augustine, Lesson 24.
[37] Ibid.
Lesson 7
[38] Ibid.
[39]
Féodor Dostoievsky, The Brothers
Karamazov, trans. Constance Garnett, World’s Literary Masterpieces (New
York: The Lowell Press Publishers, n.d.), 877.
[40] Ibid,
232, 362–405.
[41] Ibid,
381–400.
[42]
Plato, Plato in Twelve Volumes & 6
Translated by Paul Shorey, vol. 5 (Medford, MA: Cambridge, MA, Harvard
University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd., 1969).
[43]
Féodor Dostoievsky, The Brothers
Karamazov, trans. Constance Garnett, World’s Literary Masterpieces (New
York: The Lowell Press Publishers, n.d.), 868–877.
[44]
Féodor Dostoievsky, The Brothers Karamazov,
trans. Constance Garnett, World’s Literary Masterpieces (New York: The Lowell
Press Publishers, n.d.), 79.
[45] Ibid,
13.
[46]
Gage, Warren. CC502 Plato and Augustine, Lesson 7.
[47] Ibid,
Lesson 36.
[48] Ibid,
Lesson 19.
[49]
Allan Bloom, Plato, The Republic of Plato:
Second Edition (location 8971). Perseus
Book Group-A. Kindle Edition.
Gage, Warren. CC502 Plato and Augustine,
Lesson 49
[50]
Féodor Dostoievsky, The Brothers
Karamazov, trans. Constance Garnett, World’s Literary Masterpieces (New
York: The Lowell Press Publishers, n.d.), 85.
[51] Ibid,
717–736.
