Brothers Karamazov: What Lies Underneath
Sorry for the somewhat general review, as so often in life, I intended to dig deeper but life got in the way and now the details are shaky. I found myself most interested by 1) the works ability to allow us to question, 2) the focus of modern academics on Ivan, 3) The deceptive pattern of the inquisitor and the prosecution and 4) The hope that perseveres
Written by Rev. Philip
It is the very greatest works of art that allow for any sentiment, any fleet of fancy, or any personal desire and yet at the same time challenge you throughout to personal revision. Dostoevski’s Brother’s Karamazov is a work of many voices, but primarily four that attempt to sum up the whole experience. The primary and most obvious three are the brothers themselves: Demitri with his endless pursuit of life, Ivan with his endless questioning, and Alyosha with his endless hope. Yet, there is a fourth pivotal character, which is not the father, it is the narrator; as the narrator is never named, but is a member of the crowd, he takes on the role of humanity - presented with the facts of humanity (including himself) and left to question what is left. We have been invited to explore life and humanity through these four perspectives.
As I read through reviews and debates, it is no wonder that academics would more often side with and talk about the conversations of Ivan. They are like much academics in their pursuit of questioning and yet in their very musing they lean on his delusions, his pride, his loss, which he at moments condemns his very search as folly. He is like someone who can practice every word of intellect and yet at the same moment in the face of someone more knowledgeable than himself, knows that he knows nothing. As intelligent as he truly is, it becomes a pride that becomes a crack, whereby untruth continually comes in. His own intelligence becomes less for lack of truth.
There are numerous sides to Ivan as it is, but none more prevalent than the Grand Inquisitor that appears in his sickness. There will always be that Mr. Hyde in all of us, that Grand Inquisitor, that seeks to outwit the truth and so Jesus Christ. That seeks, like the prosecution, to overwhelm us with what seems to be true, but ignores what lies always at hand, always underneath, if we only look beyond the surface. Dostoevsky, with finesse, presents to us every argument and yet underlies every story with deeper questions about honesty, faith, passion, patience as our hero comes face-to-face with the realities of life, of a broken and misguided world. Then as an answer, in conclusion, he seems to say, “where there is love it will win out - even death and guilt can not overcome love”. Love will overcome all deception.
There is always hope and redemption and this book closes with the reminder that no pain or death need be in vain - Demetre’s life is in question and the brothers come together with hope for the future. Remind us that God has used our own corrupting choices to be a source of new life and even a source of redeeming our future. What did Dimitri’s condemnation actually mean in the end? What did Ilyusha’s death mean in the end? There will always be grief, anger, and pain, but in the end, is that really the worst result, is there rather a more glorious and possible redemption that has been laid out to us in this book. It is a redemption that is not always realized, but it is always possible, especially when you have a hero such as Alyosha that happily walks a fine line of godly justice and mercy all in the name of undying hope. Alyosha continually reminds us that life, hope, and joy are always there if we will only look and believe.
