Forums > Off Topic > Dostoevsky's "The Possessed" (or Demons)
Freeman (65099) on 5/14/2007 5:00 AM · Permalink · Report
I've just finished reading this and was curious if anyone else had read it. The ending, in particular, had me thinking and I wanted to get some other thoughts on it.
Spoilers ahead
First off, here's the relevant part of Nikolay's final letter to Darya,
"I know I ought to kill myself, to brush myself off the the earth like a nasty insect; but I am afraid of suicide, for I am afraid of showing greatness of soul. I know that it will be another sham again - the last deception in an endless series of deceptions. What good is there in deceiving oneself? Simply to play at greatness of soul? Indignation and shame I can never feel, therefore not despair."
Despite his letter to Darya though, Nikolay Stavrogin ends up hanging himself in the end, very shortly after this letter is written. Now, what's his object in doing this? Is it, much like Kirillov, the enactment of a final great idea; a supreme triumph of his self-will? Or something else completely? Nikolay was certainly an interesting character and I look forward to anyone else's insight into this.
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 5/14/2007 5:26 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
Awesome thread. Just for a Dostoyevsky fan like myself :)
My opinion: Stavrogin's suicide is yet another act of indifference. Basically, Stavrogin's tragedy is that he couldn't care. Remember his last words: "Couldn't hate anything". Stavrogin is a prince of indifference, he is "beyond good and evil"; he commits heinous crimes (raping a child, among others...) just because he doesn't care. He is of the same type as Raskolnikov (Crime & Punishment) and Ivan (Brothers Karamazov), only more so, because he has no limits at all.
At the same time, Stavrogin has no illusions. He knows that what he does is horrible. He doesn't fool himself, or anyone else. In fact, he even gets angry when people think he is good, and hurries to correct this impression. His suicide means that he got bored. He knew that there was no sense in his behavior. He knew that sooner or later, it will have to stop. Like Ivan Karamazov, who said: "Till the age of 30, my love to life will overcome everything; after 30, I'll throw the cup on the earth" (sorry for the bad translation). He obviously means killing himself. That's just what Stavrogin does. He sees everything clearly, he has no illusions, and he simply ends the game when it's not fun anymore.
That's the way I see it. Kirillov's case is totally different, because his suicide was like an advertisement for his idea. Stavrogin, on the other hand, has no ideology. He doesn't believe in anything at all, that's also his tragedy. He is intelligent and deep enough to come up with two exciting ideologies and to seduce two people with them (Kirillov with the "Man is God" idea, Shatov with the "Russian nation bears the God" one... a crappy idea, but still ;)). But he himself remains indifferent...
What an awesome character, he is demonically evil and yet it is impossible not to feel pity for him... and what a book! We can discuss it for ages :))
Freeman (65099) on 5/16/2007 4:28 AM · Permalink · Report
I'm not sure it's as simple as mere indifference. The scene with Liza, I think, was a genuine one for him. The language Dostoevsky employed, and the way he reacted to everything Liza said doesn't leave me with the impression that he had completely detached himself from the world,
“You won't leave me,” he went on, almost with despair; “we will go away together, to-day, won't we? Won't we?”
Also when Liza says, “Do you remember I told you I was a dead woman when I came in yesterday? That you thought fit to forget. To forget or not to notice.”
Stavrogin replies: “I don't remember, Liza. Why dead? You must live.”
This seems to be genuinely troubling him. Liza notices too which is why she says ironically “And this is Stavrogin, 'the vampire Stavrogin,'.
So, was Liza's death responsible for Stavrogin's last act? Perhaps, instead of indifference, Stavrogin realized that he didn't have that one great idea in him, and decided on suicide because, as he says,
"I desire evil and feel pleasure from that too. But both feelings are always too petty, and are never very strong. My desires are too weak; they are not enough to guide me."
Anyways, like you said, a fascinating character. About the title; "The Possessed" is Constance Garnett's title, who was the first English translator of Dostoevsky. Later English translators used "Demons" or "Devils".
One side note, I don't remember the scene when Stavrogin rapes a child. Could you refresh my memory?
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 5/16/2007 5:36 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Freeman wrote--]One side note, I don't remember the scene when Stavrogin rapes a child. Could you refresh my memory?[/Q --end Freeman wrote--] Oh, I guess the non-Russian versions don't have the chapter "By Tikhon". Dostoevsky wasn't allowed to include this chapter when the book was published, because of its controversial content. Later, however, there appeared some editions of "Demons" that included this chapter as bonus content in the end of the book. The chapter was originally intended to be the final chapter of Part 1.
Here's what happens there:
spoilers
Stavrogin visits the monk Tikhon and tells him the story of his life. The things he did in St. Petersburg, and so on. He tells him about most of his crimes, including the seduction of a 14-year-old girl. In fact, he has written a document that tells the story of his life, and intends to publish it, to punish himself. Then a conversation begins, during which both Tikhon and Stavrogin go all the way into analyzing Stavrogin's soul. In the end Stavorgin suddenly gets angry and walks away. His document is never published.
I think this chapter is in a certain way the heart of the book, it is absolutely amazing and is vital to understanding the book's content.
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 5/14/2007 5:31 AM · Permalink · Report
BTW, I don't understand why everyone keep translating the title as "Possessed"; the original Russian title is "Demons" ("Бесы"), pure and simple. Of course, the meaning of the book is that every character is like possessed by some demon, but still... no need to mis-translate :)
Игги Друге (46653) on 5/14/2007 6:42 PM · Permalink · Report
Die Übersetzung Die Besessenen ist somit ähnlich ungenau wie Die Dämonen, da Dämonen in der westeuropäischen Tradition eine andere Bedeutung haben als die bösen Geister der russischen Sagen.
Chinese: 群魔 Japanese: 悪霊 German: Die Dämonen Italian: I Demoni Swedish: Onda andar
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 5/15/2007 1:28 AM · Permalink · Report
What does "onda andar" mean?
Anyway... yes, there are some slight differences between the Russian word "бес" and the international word "demon", but I think "Possessed" sounds awfully boring :)
Slug Camargo (583) on 5/15/2007 1:15 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Unicorn B. Lynx wrote--]BTW, I don't understand why everyone keep translating the title as "Possessed"; the original Russian title is "Demons" ("Бесы"), pure and simple. Of course, the meaning of the book is that every character is like possessed by some demon, but still... no need to mis-translate :) [/Q --end Unicorn B. Lynx wrote--] My copy is a spanish edition from 1924 and it's called "Los Endemoniados", which is... actually sort of halfway between "Demons" and "Possessed". It would be something like "Possessed by Demons".
In any case, the mistranslation seems to go way back and span several different languages.
Unicorn Lynx (181775) on 5/15/2007 1:29 AM · Permalink · Report
"Endemoniados" is cool, sounds like the most exact possible translation! But is there such a word in English? "Demonized" means something else... "Bedemoned"? "Demonified"?... LOL :)
General Error (4329) on 5/15/2007 10:52 AM · Permalink · Report
Seems that Portuguese hasn't only all imaginable sounds that the human tongue, throat and other body parts are able to articulate, but also all imaginable words. (I once tried to learn some Portuguese for my holidays, but all those sounds quickly made me give up :-)
chirinea (47495) on 5/16/2007 6:36 PM · Permalink · Report
Hah, it is interesting that you think that way, General. I mean, I used to think that a native Portuguese speaker has lots of advantages over, let's say, a native English speaker, when it comes to learn new languages. It really seems that we have to deal with different kinds of sounds in our everyday life that would allow us to learn better how to speak some other somewhat difficult languages. But I know it doesn't work for every language. German, for instance, seems to be a bit hard for some people, French also. I have this friend who speaks Croatian, and that's a language that seems a lot hard for us to speak.
General Error (4329) on 5/18/2007 11:55 AM · Permalink · Report
Of course! I didn't mean you'll be able to learn every language easily. It's just that Portuguese people will know and use most of the sounds of most other European languages, so it will be a little less difficult... Then again, grammatics are an entirely different thing...
And then, there's this general character of languages: This building-block-like, rectangular, sobre character of German isn't easy for this easy-going, hearty southern mentality. And the baroque and esoteric character of French isn't easy for anyone :-)