Memoirs from the House of the Dead (Oxford World's Classics) Paperback – August 1, 2008

This is a magnificent book, describing Dostoevsky's time in prison after he was convicted of being part of a subversive group.. He richly describes his experiences and the characters around him. This view of criminal theory in 1800s Christian Russia is refreshing in that, although there was cruelty in the form of corporal punishment, the criminal justice and prison system seemed actually to believe in the possiblity of redemption. Even the communities surrounding the prisons showed kindness to the convicts.

As with other Dostoevsky novels, there were points in this novel that caught me entirely by surprise, leading me to weep. Only Dostoevsky has ever done that to me.

I have not read a translation by Mr. Coulson before. This was a fine translation, a very good read. But, I was disappointed by the lack of depth of the footnotes. For instance, none of the french phrases are translated. And, many Russian terms were not explained.

It was only today that I saw that my favorite translators of Dostoevsky, Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky, recenty published their translation of this novel under the title "Notes from a Dead House." They have always written beautifully, and they give lavish footnotes, so I will certainly read their translation also. In fact, although this is a fine translation, I recommend that you go directly to the translation by Pevear and Volokhonsky and get theirs instead of this one, based only on my experience with their other translations.

Distinguishing works of fiction from works of non-fiction often is not a simple and straightforward exercise. Case in point: Dostoevsky's MEMOIRS FROM THE HOUSE OF THE DEAD. Dostoevsky, of course, is known as one of the world's foremost novelists, and HOUSE OF THE DEAD is commonly shelved with his great novels in "Fiction" sections. But it is much more fact than fiction, much more memoir than novel. At bottom, it is Dostoevsky's very lightly fictionalized account of his own four years as a prisoner in Omsk, Siberia. Indeed, I suspect that some of today's "memoirs" published and sold as "non-fiction" are far more fanciful than HOUSE OF THE DEAD.

Dostoevsky was sentenced to prison for doing nothing more incendiary than belonging to a liberal intellectual group that discussed Western philosophy and literature. In the wake of the European Revolutions of 1848, Tsar Nicholas I unleashed a repressive and reactionary program that swept up the rather innocuous Petrashevsky Circle, including Dostoevsky. After being given a phony death sentence and lined up to be shot for the psychological shock effect, Dostoevsky was sent to Siberia, where he then spent four years in prison and five more years in the Siberian Regiment of the Russian Army. Not surprisingly, that experience proved to be critical in his life and in his development as a writer. And, no doubt, it was during that period that Dostoevsky gained much of his understanding of the extremes of human thought and behavior and of the sorts of social misfits and outcasts found in his later novels.

HOUSE OF THE DEAD was published in serial form in 1861 and 1862. It is presented as a manuscript that was found in the papers of one Alexander Petrovich Goryanchikov, who had spent ten years in the prison in Omsk. But scholars have determined that many of the people and events described in the work were actual people and events from Dostoevsky's own four-year imprisonment. Hence, HOUSE OF THE DEAD can be thought of as a work of journalism, providing the Russian people with a grim and realistic picture of a Siberian prison. Its publication was permitted only because the Russian government had decided to loosen censorship in connection with a general policy of Westernization.

It includes vivid descriptions of the prisoners' work routines; their generally filthy conditions, ameliorated slightly by periodic trips to the crowded town's bath; the ten-pound fetters they wore at all times, from prison in-take to release; punishment by being forced to run the gauntlet or being flogged with as many as 2,000 slashes from a birch whip; in-house theatrical presentations; incidents of "changing places", in which, as a result of bartering, a richer prisoner would exchange identities (and sentences) with a much poorer one; the in-prison trade in vodka and occasional benders; and the hospital facilities where Dostoevsky sometimes went just to get away from the regular prison barracks. Interspersed throughout are the sorts of philosophizing and psychologizing that became trademarks of Dostoevsky's fiction. An example:

"Some who came to the prison had burst all bounds, broken through every restraint, when they were free, so that in the end their very crimes were committed, as it were, not of their own volition but as though they did not know why they acted so, as though they were delirious or possessed; the cause was often vanity, raised to the highest pitch."

The book tends to be wordy and slightly repetitive (it could easily have been condensed by at least a fourth without much loss), but there are many passages of powerful, mesmerizing writing. On occasion I was reminded of the writing of Nikolai Gogol - which, in turn, brings to mind Dostoevsky's comment that "we all [i.e., all Russian writers] came from Gogol's overcoat."

Two points of trivia: (1) More than 60 years after Dostoevsky's time there, Paul Wittgenstein (brother of Ludwig Wittgenstein) was imprisoned in Omsk as a POW of World War I, after having been shot, captured, and his right arm amputated; it was in Omsk that he began to train the muscles of his left arm and hand to do the sorts of things that enabled him, once he eventually was freed in a prisoner exchange, to resume a career as a concert pianist, albeit a one-armed one. (2) The last opera of Leos Jánacek was "From the House of the Dead", based on Jánacek's own adaptation of Dostoevsky's book.

Readers looking for thrills and entertainment probably won't enjoy this "novel" by Dostoevsky. I use "novel" because it's much more a biography. The main character is obviously Dostoevsky not his invented character, and this invented character is not plausible or consistent. But all that is minor. Dostoevsky's experience in Siberia is told here in excellent detail, fascinating detail. What's particularly interesting is the way the prisoners live together instead of isolated in cells, which was a later 19th century development. They live communally, sleeping head to head on planks, and this communality has its problems and its good side. Additionally, while the prison has plenty of the worst elements of humanity some of these same types paradoxically show potential to be strong and decent. Prison activities are also very interesting, including what the men do for work and how they interact with the local town, including presenting "theatricals" or special performances on holidays. Any reader seriously interested in Dostoevsky and writing really needs to read House of the Dead. It includes long stretches in which Dostoevsky creates long, amazing dialogue and exchanges amongst prisoners. Dostoevsky himself, as narrator, is subdued and objective, more the observer, so that to his credit his sufferings (including being isolated and scorned) are not emphasized. Very strong, brilliant writing.

This book in NOTHING like any of Dostoyevsky's other works. No rambling mind rants or outside society "heroes". Here he writes as if he had gone on vacation. He is informative about the subject, but I must admit he comes across a s quite arrogant,- labeling himself an aristocrat of sorts. You read this and his other works take on a new light. If you like what most would associate Dostoyevsky BEWARE!

Best of the best. Giving to friends.

I liked this book to a point, the overall story was interesting, a man thrown into jail for something he didn't do and his time in prison. Great concept. The thing that put me off a little was the authors immense detail for every little thing, sure it helped to envision the story but certain things already had enough detail, no more was necessary. Overall though I would recommend this book to other people.

My personal favorite