Customer Reviews

The Possessed (Barnes & Noble Classics)

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Fyodor Dostoyevesky, perhaps the greatest novelist of all-time, has a canon of mostly very long books delving deeply into dark psychological corners. He shed long-dormant light on such subjects as the conscience, madness, the existence of God, family and criminal psychology, etc. Similarly, The Possessed explores the tendency of people, particularly young ones, toward nihilism. Dostoyevsky shows nihilism's inherent hollowness, that it always leads to the same place in the end. As Don Henley once sang, "It's another hollow rebellion/As rebellions often are/Just another raging tempest/In a jar." Many have observed how Dostoyevsky foresaw the philosophy of Nietzsche, yet for all their darkness and social criticism, many overlook the fact that both, in essence, affirm life. For proof, one need only to look at the fate of characters who deny life. To both Dostoyevsky and Nietzsche, it is not only wrong to live merely for a higher power or hope of eternal reward but also to live for an "ism": atheism, idealism, anarchism, nihilism, etc. This is Dostoyevsky's attempt to strike out at the materialism infesting Russia and to break out of negative modes of thinking. To paraphrase his famous letter, modern nihilists do not deny the existence of God; that is done. They deny with all their might God's creation.

Pity the poor revolutionary who tries to incite a rebellion while denying the very means he must use to do so. Neil Peart once wrote, "Changes aren't permanent/But change is." Anything that does not change becomes stagnant, but we must remember to affirm life. Thankfully we have Dostoyevsky to remind us.

This brilliant novel also explores other subjects: the responsibility of one generation for the next, the responsibility of teachers for students, and above all, the responsibility of philosophers for their ideas. It is a must for any reader of classics or Russian literature.

I'm a big fan of Dostoevsky so I looked forward to reading "Demons." Although you'll recognize it as one of his works, it's quite different than Dostoevsky's other novels. In "Demons," Dostoevsky uses the storyline and characters as a means to describe and critique the pre-revolutionary ideas taking hold of Russia in the 1870s. The book shows both amazing insight into the ideas as well as the individuals making up the movement. While some of the storyline is dense and hard to get through, the genius of the book's main thesis and accomplishment deserve 5 stars (I read the Constance Garnett translation which was fine). Although this book is not for everyone, it will be especially of interest to those with a political and philosophical bent. Decades before the Communist Revolution in Russia, Dostoevsky expertly described the movement that planted the seeds of the Communist Revolution. The movement was one of immense pride, arrogance, selfishness, and hate. Their hate was for God and for men. As others have said, they loved "Mankind" but hate people. All left-wing revolutions have had similar ideas at their root.

The title "Demons" was taken from the passage of the New Testament where Jesus casts the demons out of a man. The demons then ask Jesus to be driven into a nearby herd of pigs which then run off a cliff into the sea. Dostoevsky considered Russia to be like a man possessed by the demons of the revolutionary movement. His hope was that the demons would be driven out of Russia and into the pigs and the sea. His foreshadowing of Russian history decades into the future was chilling.

Here were a few poignant quotes from the book:

"He suggests a system of spying. Every member of the society spies on the others, and its his duty to inform against them. Every one belongs to all and all to every one. All are slaves and equal in their slavery."

"He suggests as a final solution of the question the division of mankind into two unequal parts. One-tenth enjoys absolute liberty and unbounded power over the other nine-tenths. The others have to give up all individuality and become, so to speak, a herd..."

"If there is no God, then I am God...If God exists, all is His will and from His will I cannot escape. If not, its all my will..."

This novel is unfortunately as relatable today as it was in 1870s Russia--an important work of history and literature.

The content of this book is very satisfying, profound in its acute study of the violent contagion of pride, vivid fascinating characters, and a compelling narrative.

Unfortunately, the transfer of this book to electronic format is simply the worst I have read, suffering from electronic character recognitiom errirs that result in irritatingly meaningless words or gibberish interspersed every 150 to 200 words through the script. Somebody just put the book on line without ever proofreading it. Very shabby and unprofessional. Read this book by all means but buy another electronic version. I doubt I will trust a Mobile version again.

The Possessed or The Devils by Fyodor Dostoevsky

This novel is one greatest works of literature. Dostoyevsky is the kind of writer who deeply explores the human psyche.

Dostoevsky was a central figure in the great Russian literary revival of the 19th century, spurred on by the clearly foreseen, and necessary coming revolution that was on every radical intellectuals mind. The Russian novel, in a sense, reflected, in one way or another, the propaganda written for that event. This novel, moreover, forms the intellectual backdrop for a review that I have recently done on Jean Luc-Godard's "La Chinoise" from 1967. That film used the story line of the novel as the script for a modern day version of the struggle of a group of young middle class intellectuals driven to despair by the political/cultural/social and existential circumstances of their lives, yet were unable to fight effectively for their vision of the future, mainly due to their devotion to the "circle" spirit and distance from the class struggles of their times.

Thus from different centuries and responding to different sets of circumstances the film and novel come to the same basic conclusion about the futility of struggle against authority, or the fear that the "new order" will be just a rehash of the old led to both director and author to some very unrevolutionary conclusions. Nevertheless, I always liked this novel, despite, or maybe, because of Dostoevsky's past and its service as a cautionary tale of the futility, at best, of fighting against authority. Of course, Dostoevsky came within a ready hangman's noose for his own radical activity so that might color his approach, at least a little. Right? But Godard, who knows.