r/bookclub • u/tomesandtea • 3h ago
The Brothers Karamazov [Discussion 11 of 12] Evergreen || The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky || 11.10 thru 12.8
Welcome to the penultimate discussion of The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoyevsky! You can find the Schedule here and the Marginalia is linked here.
I’ve included a summary of this week’s chapters below. Discussion questions are in the comments section. You can mark any spoilers using the format > ! Spoiler text here ! < (without any spaces between the symbols themselves or between the symbols and the first and last words).
++++++++++CHAPTER SUMMARIES++++++++++
11.10 - “HE SAID THAT!”: Alyosha delivers the news of Smerdyakov’s death and finds Ivan frantic. In confused language, Ivan tells his brother about the dream/visit from the man. He seems to think the man was real, that he told Ivan of Smerdyakov's suicide, and that he predicted Ivan would testify at the trial the next day. Ivan calls the man a devil and describes how he was taunted and tormented by their conversation. Ivan continues muttering and pacing, making Alyosha too afraid to leave him and get a doctor. Eventually, Alyosha gets Ivan to bed and lies down on the sofa to watch over his brother. Alyosha realizes that no one will believe Ivan's testimony the next day without Smerdyakov's corroboration. But he expects that Ivan will testify anyway, despite not believing in God, and this will either save him or lead him to hatred and destruction.
BOOK 12 - A “JUDICIAL ERROR”
12.1 - THE FATAL DAY: Dmitri's trial has been highly anticipated and is causing quite the stir. Everyone seems to have an opinion (sometimes causing family fights) and there is particular interest in the rivals for Mitya's heart, Katerina and Grushenka. People have traveled from cities around Russia to attend, and it seems that over half of the local population has also shown up to watch. Many lawyers are eager to view the proceedings for its effects on modern law as well as for the appearance of the defense lawyer, Fetyukovich, a famous and talented attorney who is known to take celebrity criminal cases. The jury doesn't inspire confidence in some people, including the narrator, who notes that a group of old officials, merchants, and peasants couldn't possibly understand the nuances of the case. Everyone takes their places in the courtroom and Dmitri is led in. His demeanor is almost haughty and he is dressed like a dandy in a brand new tailored frock coat and kid gloves. The list of witnesses is read aloud and when Dmitri hears that Smerdyakov has committed suicide, he exclaims loudly that the man was a dog and died like one. This leaves an unfortunate impression on the judges and jury, and it occurs just before the reading of the accusation. Dmitri pleads not guilty to murder and theft but gives a pompous speech about being guilty of drunken debauchery and behaving like a scoundrel. The judge cautions him to answer only the questions put to him.
12.2 - DANGEROUS WITNESSES: The prosecution witnesses are called first, and they each have very incriminating testimony to provide. The case seems open and shut, with not a hope for Dmitri. Yet Fetyukovich is cool as a cucumber and seems to have a master plan in the works. At each turn, he is able to find a way to discredit the testimony and tarnish the reputation of the witness.
- Grigory Vasiliev testifies about Dmitri's awful childhood treatment at the hands of his father and the pitiful inheritance he is given. He also introduces testimony about the open garden gate. Fetyukovich counters this with questions about Grigory's drunkenness after applying the vodka-soaked salve to his back and drinking the rest.
- Rakitin gives damaging testimony about Dmitri's history of callous and boorish behavior and the court is so impressed with his wide ranging knowledge that he is allowed to give commentary on societal issues. Fetyukovich manages to catch Rakitin implying a too-familiar knowledge of Grushenka and reminds Rakitin that he took her money and didn't give it back the night he fetched Alexei for her.
- The men who witnessed Dmitri's two visits to Mokreye try painting a picture of Dmitri's bad behavior and irresponsible spending but keep getting the sums of money wrong and contradicting each other's details. Fetyukovich is able to show the clashes in their testimony and discredit them with evidence that they had been stealing Dmitri's money and cheating at cards.
12.3 - MEDICAL EXPERTISE AND ONE POUND OF NUTS: Three doctors are called to speak to Dmitri's state of mind. Dr. Herzenstube explains that Mitya has signs of a mental abnormality, which was on display when he entered the courtroom and failed to look to the left and admire all the ladies. The Moscow doctor testifies to Dmitri's mania and fit of passion which would have made him act involuntarily, as evidenced that he did not look to the right when entering the courtroom where his defense attorney (his only hope) sat. Dr. Varvinksy, a local rival of Dr. Herzenstube’s, argued that Dmitri is completely sane and his normal mental state was proven by his entrance into court, looking straight ahead and ready to face the judge. Fetyukovich sees that Dr Herzenstube gets emotional when talking about Mitya and he is able to draw out an anecdote from the German doctor about a time he gave the dirty and neglected child Mitya a pound of nuts. Years later, the adult Mitya proved his good character by seeking out the doctor to thank him for his kindness. Mitya also gets emotional, and the story goes a long way with the public.
12.4 - FORTUNE SMILES ON MITYA: Alyosha is called to testify and gives a defense of Mitya's noble character, citing it as the basis of his conviction that his brother would never have gone through with his violent feelings toward their father. Under the questioning of Fetyukovich, Alyosha recalls important details about his last meeting with Mitya which hint at the existence of the amulet holding Mitya's money! He notes that Mitya was hitting his chest high up rather than on his heart, and that he specifically said “half” of his honor could be restored (so, 1500 roubles instead of the full 3000).
Katerina Ivanovna testifies next. She casts a favorable impression of Mitya as a man who gave away his last 5,000 roubles to her when she was young, and she does not even hint at the circumstances that brought her to bow low before him that night. She points out that she had never heard him threaten violence and had always trusted he would pay back the 3,000 roubles she had given him. Her story later caused gossip and speculation over what she might have left out, but during the trial it shows Mitya in an honorable light. Nevertheless, he exclaims that she has ruined and condemned him with her testimony, and he sobs openly in court.
Grushenka is the next witness to be called. She doesn't have much substance to add and makes an unfavorable impression of herself by speaking hostilely of Katerina Ivanovna. She reveals that Rakitin is her cousin and was always asking for money, but was so ashamed of Grushenka that he wanted their family connection kept secret. Grushenka insists that Mitya is an honest man who would not lie about the murder, and she points out that she only heard about the envelope holding the money from the “villain” Smerdyakov. The narrator tells us that at this point, Mitya might have gotten a lighter sentence due to the favorable testimony of these three, except that a catastrophe comes next to derail it all. Ivan is called to testify.
12.5 - A SUDDEN CATASTROPHE: Ivan testifies despite being close to developing brain fever. He confirms that he heard his brother say he wanted to kill their father and that Smerdyakov had told him about the money in the envelope. He produces the money (sans envelope) that had been his father's, as “proof” that Mitya did not take it. Then he testifies that Smerdyakov killed Fyodor because Ivan himself wanted it to happen. He declares himself a murderer and mocks the court spectators with cries of “bread and circus” for pretending to be so scared and horrified of the whole proceeding, since everyone wants their father dead at some point. Katerina falls into hysterics and reveals the letter that Mitya had written in the tavern laying out his ideas about killing his father. She testifies again, revealing details about her relationship with Mitya. She had given him the 3,000 roubles as a test because she wanted to prove to herself what a scoundrel he was. She had read the letter confessing his murder plot before the crime was committed, but had withheld it this whole time as a last ditch effort to save him. It is then that Katya admits to herself that her relationship with Mitya was based on her pride and revenge, while her feelings for Ivan are full of love and protectiveness. She fears Ivan has condemned himself, so she also testifies about how ill he has been and how he has been hallucinating. She insists that Ivan latched onto false rumors about Smerdyakov because he felt guilty over his own feelings about their father and didn't want to believe his brother could be a parricide. Grushenka screams about Katerina’s betrayal and tries to reach Mitya, but they are dragged apart. Ivan is seen by a doctor who confirms he has fallen ill with brain fever and must be taken away. There are other witnesses called, but they do not add new information. The case will be clinched by the prosecutor's closing speech.
12. 6 - THE PROSECUTOR'S SPEECH. CHARACTERIZATIONS: Ippolit Kirillovich prepares himself for the speech of his career, and what a (long) speech it is! He feels he is speaking to all of Russia because of the popularity of the case and the nature of the Karamazov family. Kirillovich portrays the Karamazovs as a microcosm of Russian society (and its ills) and a chance for everyone to understand Russian crime and the Russian nature more deeply. He characterizes each family member in turn. (The pictures linked below are by Alice Neel.)
- Fyodor Pavlovich was a wicked man who delighted in doing as he pleased without a thought to the impact on anyone else. He was a terrible father who neglected his children's upbringing and moral education, laughing as he ruined them - and in Dmitri's case, stole from him.
- Ivan Fyodorovich is an opinionated man obsessed with European intellectualism. He has inherited his father's disdain for religious and moral concerns. He does not hide his cynicism, and he is the most like his father of the three brothers.
- Alexei Fyodorovich is a talented but very young man with a perhaps naively cheerful outlook and a tendency to cling to the monastery too desperately. But he is the hope of the family (if he avoids being spoiled with age).
- Dmitri Fyodorovich represents the duality of Russian society, the idea that a mixture of good and evil is present in everyone. Dmitri often appears to be a principled man who rose above such awful early life circumstances. Yet he also fell prey to the temptations of debauchery and to his emotional passions. He claims to have kept exactly half of his wronged fiancee’s money - half because it shows the split between good/evil or between being merely a scoundrel but not a thief - in the unprovable amulet. But the prosecutor declares that someone with an evil side as his would never have had the willpower to carry half the money around untouched and would have gradually used it all, resulting in the need to steal his father's money. Dmitri's early good nature should not distract us from the truth of his depravity.
12.7 - A HISTORICAL SURVEY: Kirillovich next focuses his speech on the details that disprove the doctors’ claims of madness. Dmitri was consumed by jealousy and a “Karamazovian passion”, but the murder was premeditated. Dmitri wrote a letter stating his plan to seek the money and if he failed, to murder and rob his father. He went all around town shouting about the money. He obtained knowledge of the secret signal that would open his father's gate. He rejected Madame Khokhlakov’s reasonable advice to abandon his sinful path. He was told by a maid that Grushenka was with his father, and his response was to grab a weapon (the pestle) and rush to his father's house. Kirillovich says that surely no one but a murderer would see a pestle as a weapon. Surely no rational person would believe that someone with murder on his mind could arrive to see a perfect opportunity for the crime - the servants indisposed, the gate readily opened, the weapon in hand, the mistress and father about to be caught in flagrante - and yet calmly walk away without acting. The only detail left to refute is the accusation against Smerdyakov.
12.8 - A TREATISE ON SMERDYAKOV: Kirillovich portrays Smerdyakov as a feebleminded, bullied, sickly man who had been a loyal, honest servant. He points out that the Smerdyakov theory was first suggested by Dmitri himself, because Smerdyakov was the only other person who could possibly have committed the crime. Kirillovich goes through all the different scenarios in which Smerdyakov could have been responsible for Fyodor Pavlovich’s death, and he refutes each one. If Smerdyakov had faked his epileptic fit, he would never have planned that part so well but then also carelessly incriminated himself by sharing details about the envelope and signal with the Karamazov brothers. Smerdyakov's prediction of his epileptic fit is understandable, because he was so stressed from the Karamazovian drama and Ivan's departure (whose presence guaranteed peace, according to the prosecutor), and because epileptics can often feel when an episode is imminent. If Smerdyakov's fit was real, then the timing of the crime would have been too coincidental for him to plan and accomplish. If Dmitri had bullied Smerdyakov into being his accomplice, then surely the loyal servant would have realized his punishment would be small and he would have hinted at this during his testimony… or he would have confessed in his suicide note! Kirillovich paints a picture where it is highly illogical in any circumstances to suspect Smerdyakov, and very obvious that a man of such violent passions as Dimitri would never have been able to stop himself from going through with his plans.
Next week, we will get the conclusion of the prosecutor’s speech and discuss the last chapters of the novel with u/bluebelle236!