《卡拉马佐夫兄弟们》之光
The Light of “The Brothers Karamazov”

原始链接: https://www.newyorker.com/books/second-read/the-light-of-the-brothers-karamazov

陀思妥耶夫斯基的《卡拉马佐夫兄弟》并非以单一主角为中心,而是以**多元的声音合唱**为特色——每个角色都以独特的方式表达自己,同时呼应更广泛的社会和哲学思想。这部“声音小说”探讨了人类的相互联系以及普遍责任的可能性,体现了“我们都为一切负责”的信念。 小说探讨了人类*为何*无法实现通过认识这种共同的罪恶感和联系而唾手可得的乐园。陀思妥耶夫斯基将抽象概念置于人类情感、欲望和不完美交织的现实之中。 故事聚焦于动荡的卡拉马佐夫家族:令人厌恶的父亲费奥多尔,以及他的三个儿子——热情奔放的德米特里、理智深邃的伊万和富有同情心的阿廖沙——以及神秘莫测的仆人斯麦尔佳科夫。这些角色被禁锢在一个充满仇恨的家庭中,代表了社会的不同方面,并探讨了信仰、理性和道德的复杂性。最终,这部小说是对人类之谜和努力*成为*真正人类的深刻探索。

## 卡拉马佐夫兄弟们:黑客新闻讨论摘要 一篇最近的《纽约客》关于陀思妥耶夫斯基《卡拉马佐夫兄弟们》的文章,在黑客新闻上引发了热烈的讨论。许多评论者表达了对这部小说的喜爱,但也承认中间部分颇具挑战性。一个主要的争论点围绕着陀思妥耶夫斯基似乎相信宗教是道德的必要条件。一些人不同意,认为社会结构和个人原则就足够了,尤其是在一个比沙皇俄国不那么残酷的世界里。另一些人则反驳说,对基础信仰体系的需求是恒定的,呼应了陀思妥耶夫斯基的“如果上帝不存在,一切皆被允许”。 讨论还涉及小说的写作风格——一些人认为它过于冗长和重复——以及人物的复杂性。一个反复出现的问题是小说中频繁使用精神错乱作为情节装置。几位用户建议在挑战《卡拉马佐夫兄弟们》之前,先从陀思妥耶夫斯基的短篇作品开始。最后,关于昵称“格鲁申卡”的问题,引发了对过时的俄罗斯命名习惯的讨论。总而言之,该帖子突出了这部小说持久的力量,即使在出版几个世纪后,它仍然能够引发思考和争论。
相关文章

原文

What is the light in “The Brothers Karamazov”?

It is the voices. “The Brothers Karamazov” is a novel of voices. Men, women, young, old, rich, poor, foolish, wise: all are allowed to make themselves heard in their own right—all speak with their own voice. And in each individual voice there are echoes of other voices, contemporary or past, written or oral, political or philosophical, from the Bible or from newspaper articles, rumors about town, memories of someone long dead. Everyone in the novel speaks from their own self, their specific and unique place, some of them utterly unforgettable in their magnificent individuality, but they do so using the same language. And, if some of the characters in “The Brothers Karamazov” rank all the way up there with Shakespeare’s creations, still this is not a work dominated by a single protagonist, the way “Hamlet” is Hamlet’s play, or “Othello” is Othello’s. It is the opposite: “The Brothers Karamazov” is a collective novel—it is about the profusion of voices, how they are intertwined and, though they themselves are unable to see it, how they form one whole, one connection, one chorus.

This overarching stylistic feature finds an explicit echo in two of the voices, those of the elder Zosima and of Alyosha, whose shared belief that we are all responsible for all, and that we are all guilty before all, runs as a mantra throughout the novel. That is the hope of the novel, the utopia of the novel—but not its reality. “Mama, do not weep,” says Zosima’s young brother as he lays dying, “life is paradise, and we are all in paradise, but we do not want to know it, and if we did want to know it, tomorrow there would be paradise the world over.” In another passage, a murderer tells Zosima, “And as for each man being guilty before all and for all, besides his own sins, your reasoning about that is quite correct, and it is surprising that you could suddenly embrace this thought so fully. And indeed it is true that when people understand this thought, the Kingdom of Heaven will come to them, no longer in a dream but in reality.”

In other words, the Kingdom of Heaven is nothing other than an unrealized possibility: we are merely a realization away from Paradise.

So why don’t we take that step? What is it that hinders us?

This is what “The Brothers Karamazov” is about. The novel plucks all its ideas down from the heaven of abstractions and forces them into the human realm, based on the insight that they exist only there, in human beings made of flesh and blood. As Dostoyevsky once wrote, “Man is a mystery . . .If you spend your entire life trying to puzzle it out, then do not say that you have wasted your time. I occupy myself with this mystery, because I want to be a man.” In his novelistic universe, human beings are governed by emotions, driven by desire, unpredictable, imperfect, fallible—but also possessed of enormous power. In “The Brothers Karamazov,” he has brought together four very different young men, with very different qualities, in one house. It is a house filled with hatred. The father, Fyodor Karamazov, is a grasping, lecherous, deceitful, and shameless widower. He has always neglected his sons; he has never cared about them, except when there was something to be gained by it. He is the father from hell. Each son is affiliated with a social institution—in the case of the eldest, Dmitri, immensely proud and of a violent temper, it is the military; for the middle one, Ivan, who is rational, cold, and analytical, it is the university; while for the youngest, Alyosha, who is warm, considerate, always accepting, it is the church. In addition, there is the servant Smerdyakov, presumed to be the illegitimate child of Fyodor and the intellectually disabled Lizaveta, nicknamed Stinking Lizaveta.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com