Previous
Flashbacks
Part 1: Book 3, Chapter 8: Over the Cognac
Explanation and Analysis—Ivan and Alexei:
Throughout the novel, Ivan and Alexei serve as foils for each other. Intelligent and highly educated, Ivan expresses an agnostic or atheistic position that stands in marked contrast to the pious Alexei’s unshakeable faith. These contrasts are highlighted in a passage in which Fyodor playfully interrogates his two sons about their beliefs:
“No, there is no God.”
“Alyoshka, is there a God?”
“There is.”
“And is there immortality, Ivan? At least some kind, at least a little, a teeny-tiny one?”
“There is no immortality either.”
“Not of any kind?”
“Not of any kind.”
“Complete zero? Or is there something? Maybe there’s some kind of something? At least not nothing!”
“Complete zero.”
“Alyoshka, is there immortality?”
“There is.”
“Both God and immortality?”
“Both God and immortality. Immortality is in God.”
Here, Fyodor toys with Ivan and Alexei, attempting to drive a wedge between the two brothers by underscoring their very different worldviews. While previously, in the hermitage, Ivan defended Christian ideas as a sort of intellectual game, under questioning by Fyodor he acknowledges his disbelief in God and the immortality of the soul. Conversely, Alexei remains faithful to his own Christian beliefs, politely verifying his faith without arguing with Alexei. Later, without the interfering presence of Fyodor, they discuss their thoughts with each other in greater depth. Through the debate between these two brothers, Dostoevsky explores the relationship between faith and unbelief.
Related Themes:
Part 4: Book 12, Chapter 1: The Fatal Day
Explanation and Analysis—Katerina and Grushenka :
Katerina and Grushenka, the two women involved in the intersecting love triangles central to the plot of the novel, serve as foils for one another. The sharp contrasts in their personalities and backgrounds is emphasized in the narrator’s description of the trial of Dmitri, during which locals gossip excitedly about the “two rivals”:
One of them—that is, Katerina Ivanovna—especially interested everyone; a great many remarkable things were told about her, astonishing tales were told of her passion for Mitya even despite his crime. Special mention was made of her pride (she paid visits to almost no one in our town), her “aristocratic connections.” [...] Awaited with no less excitement was the appearance in court of Grushenka, Katerina Ivanovna’s rival. The meeting before the judges of two rivals—the proud, aristocratic girl, and the “hetaera”—was awaited with painful curiosity. Grushenka, by the way, was better known to our ladies than Katerina Ivanovna.
Raised in wealth and privilege, the aristocratic Katerina is confident and prideful, though she attempts to conceal her pride behind a facade of humility. The locals are curious about her because she has little interest in socializing with anyone who lives in the town. In comparison, Grushenka is merry and pleasure-loving, though her good cheer masks a practical, thrifty, and entrepreneurial spirit. As Grushenka lives in the district, she is well-known to the locals, some of whom regard her as a woman of ill-repute. The profound differences between these two women inflame the public’s curiosity about this notorious trial.
