Notes from Underground

~Dostoyevsky

About the Author:

Fyodor Dostoevsky was a Russian novelist, philosopher, and essayist, considered one
of the greatest writers in world literature. He was born on November 11, 1821, in
Moscow, Russia, and died on February 9, 1881, in St. Petersburg, Russia.

Dostoevsky's works often explore complex psychological themes, existential

dilemmas, and the depths of the human soul. His writing is characterized by intense
psychological insight, philosophical depth, and a keen examination of the human
condition.

"Notes from Underground" (sometimes translated as "Notes from the Underground"

or "Letters from the Underworld") is one of Dostoevsky's most famous novellas,
published in 1864. It is considered one of the earliest existentialist novels and a
seminal work in the development of modern literature.

The novella is narrated by an unnamed, bitter, and alienated protagonist, known as the
Underground Man, who shares his rambling thoughts and reflections on society,
human nature, free will, and the nature of consciousness. The Underground Man is a
deeply conflicted character who rejects conventional social norms and struggles with
his own sense of identity and purpose.

"Notes from Underground" is divided into two parts: the first part is a monologue in
which the Underground Man expresses his nihilistic views and critiques rationalism
and utopianism, while the second part presents a series of events from his life that
illustrate his philosophy in action.

The novella is celebrated for its profound exploration of existential themes such as
alienation, free will, and the search for meaning in a seemingly meaningless world. It
is also praised for its innovative narrative style, characterized by its first-person,
stream-of-consciousness narration and its complex and unreliable narrator.
Dostoevsky's "Notes from Underground" continues to be widely read and studied
today for its enduring relevance and its powerful depiction of the human condition.

1.Life and Background: Dostoevsky was born into a middle-class family in Imperial
Russia. He studied engineering and then literature but was drawn towards
revolutionary circles, which led to his arrest and imprisonment. He was sentenced to
death, which was later commuted to hard labor in Siberia. These experiences
profoundly influenced his worldview and found echoes in his works.

2.Literary Style: Dostoevsky's writing style is characterized by its psychological

depth, moral ambiguity, and philosophical inquiry. He often delves into the darkest
recesses of the human psyche, exploring themes of guilt, redemption, and the nature
of evil. His narratives are complex, featuring multi-dimensional characters and
intricate plots.

3. Major Works: In addition to "Notes from Underground," Dostoevsky is renowned

for his other novels, including "Crime and Punishment" (1866), "The Idiot" (1869),
"Demons" (1872), "The Brothers Karamazov" (1880), and "The Gambler" (1867).
These works are considered masterpieces of world literature and have had a profound
influence on subsequent generations of writers.

4. Philosophical and Religious Themes: Dostoevsky's works grapple with profound

philosophical and religious questions. He was deeply interested in the conflict
between rationalism and faith, the existence of God, and the problem of evil. His
characters often undergo spiritual crises and moral dilemmas, reflecting Dostoevsky's
own spiritual journey.

5. Impact and Legacy: Dostoevsky's writings have had a lasting impact on literature,
philosophy, and psychology. He is often cited as a precursor to existentialism, with
his exploration of individual freedom, responsibility, and the absurdity of existence.
His works have been adapted into numerous films, plays, and other artistic forms, and
continue to be studied and celebrated around the world.
 Overall, Fyodor Dostoevsky remains one of the most influential and celebrated
writers in the history of literature, known for his profound insights into the human
condition and his enduring literary legacy.

Historical Background:
"Notes from Underground" was written by Fyodor Dostoevsky in the mid-19th
century, a time of significant social, political, and intellectual upheaval in Russia and
Europe. Understanding the historical context in which Dostoevsky wrote the novel
helps illuminate its themes and provides insight into the author's motivations.

1. Russian Society and Politics: During the 19th century, Russia was undergoing rapid
social and political transformations. The country was ruled by an autocratic tsarist
regime, characterized by strict censorship, serfdom, and a rigid social hierarchy. The
oppressive conditions of Russian society, coupled with the influence of Western
European ideas, contributed to growing discontent and revolutionary fervor among
certain segments of the population.

2. Intellectual Movements: Dostoevsky wrote "Notes from Underground" during a

period of intense intellectual ferment in Russia. The mid-19th century saw the rise of
various ideological movements, including liberalism, socialism, and nihilism. These
movements challenged traditional Russian values and institutions, advocating for
social reform, political change, and the pursuit of individual freedom.

3. Philosophical Influences: Dostoevsky was influenced by a range of philosophical

ideas circulating in Europe during his time. The novel reflects the influence of
existentialist philosophy, which emerged in the 19th century and explored themes
such as individualism, alienation, and the absurdity of human existence. Dostoevsky's
protagonist, the Underground Man, embodies many existentialist principles, including
a sense of alienation from society and a rejection of conventional morality.

4. Social Conditions: "Notes from Underground" reflects the social conditions of

Dostoevsky's era, particularly the experiences of urban dwellers in rapidly
industrializing cities. The novel portrays the dehumanizing effects of modernity and
the alienation experienced by individuals living in increasingly impersonal and
bureaucratic societies. The Underground Man's sense of disillusionment and despair
can be seen as a response to the alienating forces of modern life.

5. Literary Trends: Dostoevsky wrote "Notes from Underground" at a time when

Russian literature was undergoing a period of innovation and experimentation. The
novel's unconventional narrative style and psychological depth reflect broader trends
in Russian literature, including the rise of realism and the exploration of subjective
consciousness. Dostoevsky's innovative approach to narrative structure and
characterization helped establish him as one of the preeminent literary figures of his
time.

6. Imprisonment and Exile: In 1849, Dostoevsky was arrested for his involvement in a
literary circle critical of the Tsarist regime and was sentenced to death. At the last
moment, his sentence was commuted to hard labor in Siberia, where he spent several
years in a prison camp. This traumatic experience left a lasting mark on Dostoevsky,
shaping his worldview and informing his writing. His time in prison exposed him to
the harsh realities of Russian society, including poverty, suffering, and injustice,
themes that are echoed in "Notes from Underground."

7. Financial Hardships: Throughout his life, Dostoevsky struggled with financial

difficulties. He faced significant debts, struggled to support his family, and often lived
in poverty. These financial pressures added to his personal turmoil and contributed to
his sense of alienation from society. In "Notes from Underground," the protagonist
grapples with similar financial struggles and feelings of social inferiority, reflecting
Dostoevsky's own experiences.

8.Health Issues: Dostoevsky battled various health problems throughout his life,
including epilepsy and other neurological disorders. These health issues caused him
physical and emotional suffering and impacted his ability to work and socialize.
Dostoevsky's struggles with illness are mirrored in the psychological and physical
 ailments experienced by characters in his novels, including the Underground Man in
"Notes from Underground."

9. Personal Relationships: Dostoevsky's personal relationships were often tumultuous

and fraught with conflict. He had a difficult relationship with his father, who was
abusive and authoritarian, and his first marriage ended tragically with the death of his
first wife, Maria. Dostoevsky's complicated personal life, marked by loss, betrayal,
and emotional turmoil, provided him with rich material for his fiction and influenced
his portrayal of relationships in his novels.

10. Existential Angst: Dostoevsky's own existential angst and search for meaning in a
seemingly chaotic and indifferent universe are evident in his writing. His experiences
of suffering, loss, and existential uncertainty fueled his exploration of existential
themes in his novels, including the nature of freedom, the existence of God, and the
quest for moral truth. The Underground Man's existential crisis in "Notes from
Underground" reflects Dostoevsky's own philosophical inquiries and spiritual
struggles.

In summary, Fyodor Dostoevsky's personal life issues, including his imprisonment,

financial hardships, health struggles, and tumultuous relationships, deeply influenced
his writing and informed the themes and characters of his novels, including "Notes
from Underground." His experiences of suffering and existential uncertainty are
palpable in his work, contributing to its psychological depth and emotional resonance.

Summary
A note from the author introduces a fictional character known as the underground man, who
the author says is “representative of the current generation,” and whose rambling notes will
form the novella that is to follow. The underground man begins by telling the reader that he is
a sick, spiteful, unattractive man. He says that he doesn’t know what he is sick with, but he
refuses to be treated by doctors out of spite. He has been living underground for twenty years,
but used to work in the civil service, where he was rude to anyone who came to his desk. He
tells his readers that he is “neither a scoundrel nor an honest man, neither a hero nor an
insect,” and says that no one of intelligence in the 19th century can be a man of action or
character.
The underground man says that he is not to blame for being a bad person, but that his “overly
acute consciousness” prevents him from taking action. He says that “being overly conscious
is a disease.” He tells the reader that there are times when he wishes someone would slap him
in the face, and says that he would neither be able to forgive someone who slapped him nor
take revenge on him. Whereas less intelligent people act impulsively to get revenge, someone
of “overly acute consciousness” has too many doubts and questions to take action. The
underground man compares himself to a mouse that retreats “ignominiously back into its
mousehole.” He says that men of action simply accept the laws of nature, science, and
mathematics, thinking it impossible to protest that “two times two makes four.” By contrast,
the underground man hates such facts.

The underground man argues that there is pleasure even in a toothache, saying that after a
while someone with a toothache finds enjoyment in indulging in loud moans of pain that
annoy others. He says that being “a nasty little man, a rogue” is pleasurable, and then asks the
reader, “Can a man possessing consciousness ever really respect himself?” Moving on, the
underground man says that he is incapable of apologizing. As a child, he would sometimes
cry and repent when he did something wrong, but would then realize that this “was all lies,
lies, revolting, made-up lies.” He says that often gets into trouble because of his boredom,
which is a result of his hyper-consciousness. He says that men of action only take action
because they are stupid. They think that they have found “a primary cause” of something that
gives them a reason for acting. But someone who is actually intelligent questions these causes
and can think of multiple causes. So, he only acts out of spite.

The underground man speaks of people who believe that humans only do bad things because
they don’t know their “true interest” and that if people knew what was in their best interest
they would only act accordingly. The underground man disagrees and says that sometimes
man desires “something harmful to himself.” He digresses slightly to argue that human
civilization has made men more cruel, citing recent military conflicts such as the Napoleonic
Wars and the American Civil War. He says that some people think that as science advances
people will live more and more rationally, and society will approach the perfection of a
crystal palace. He argues that this kind of existence would be boring and that people prefer to
live according to their “own stupid will” rather than logic or reason. He says that sometimes
people “desire something opposed to one’s own advantage,” simply in order to exercise one’s
free will. He claims that without desire and free will, mankind is nothing but “a stop in an
organ pipe,” obeying the laws of nature. He says that human history has been irrational and
that such irrationality is man’s only way of rebelling against the rationality of “two times two
makes four” and proving that “he’s a man and not an organ stop.” He says that “two times
two makes four is no longer life,” and that “two times two makes five” is preferable.

Continuing to argue against the idea that mankind only acts in his best interest, the
underground man says that there can be a peculiar pleasure in suffering and that “man
sometimes loves suffering terribly.” He says that the utopian idea of the crystal palace is a
hoax and that he would reject it because he wouldn’t be able to stick out his tongue rudely
there out of spite. He tells his readers not to believe “one word, not one little word,” of what
he has written and says that he has no plans to print his notes, but merely writes to relive
some of his boredom. He says that it is snowing outside, which reminds him of a story, and
so in part two of the novella he will tell “a tale apropos of wet snow.”

The underground man’s story takes place when he is 24 and living a solitary life, but still
working in the civil service. At times he wishes to make friends with others in his office, but
at other times he hates them and feels alone. He criticizes himself for being overly Romantic,
and then digresses about Romanticism. He says that Romantics in Germany and France or
overly idealistic and foolish, whereas Russian Romantics remain somewhat practical. The
underground man says that he spent much of his time at home reading, but “sank into dark,
subterranean, loathsome depravity,” because of depression and a “craving for contradictions
and contrasts.” He tells his readers that he is not trying to justify his depravity, but then
changes his mind and says he is.

One night, the underground man sees a man get kicked out of a bar for fighting. He goes into
the bar, thinking that he can get into a fight. He purposely gets into an officer’s way, but the
officer moves him aside without saying anything, barely noticing him and treating him like a
fly. He thinks of challenging the officer to a duel but then realizes that everyone would just
laugh at him for speaking in literary Russian about antiquated notions of honor. He goes back
home and soon after sees the officer frequently around St. Petersburg. He writes the officer a
letter, but ultimately doesn’t send it. He often sees the officer on a particular street and
usually gets out of the officer’s way when they are about to walk into each other. He plans to
walk into the officer and not move out of the way out of defiance and spite. He borrows
money from his office chief in order to buy respectable-looking clothes for his encounter with
the officer. He tries to bump into him, but keeps moving out of the way at the last second.
Finally, he carries out his plan and bumps into the officer, but he acts as if he doesn’t notice
the underground man at all. The underground man is convinced that the officer was merely
pretending not to notice him, and he feels “avenged for everything.”

His happiness soon wears off, though, and he seeks escape from his despair in his dreams of
“all that was beautiful and sublime.” He says that he dreams for three months straight,
involving scenarios where he is a hero, like a character from a work by Lord Byron, and
where everyone loves him. After three months of these dreams, though, the underground man
feels a desire “to plunge into society.” He decides to go visit a former schoolmate
named Simonov, whom he hasn’t seen in a year. He enters Simonov’s apartment and finds
that two other former schoolmates are there as well. No one seems to notice the underground
man and he says that they treat him like “

some sort of ordinary house fly.” His former schoolmates are planning a farewell dinner for a
friend named Zverkov who is leaving St. Petersburg. The underground man remembers
Zverkov from school, and hates him for being an arrogant, attractive man. He recognizes
Simonov’s guests, both of whom he despised in school. He invites himself to the party for
Zverkov, and they reluctantly allow him to come.

After leaving Simonov’s apartment, the underground man berates himself for interfering with
the party. He thinks he shouldn’t go, but realizes that he will definitely go, even though he
doesn’t have any money. He recalls his years at school, when he was “a lonely boy,” and
didn’t have many friends. He says he hated his schoolmates and was more intelligent than
them. Occasionally he would try to make a friend, but would only use these potential friends
to try to “exercise unlimited power” over someone else.

The next day, the underground man plans for the party. He is worried that it will be horribly
awkward and he will be under-dressed, but he decides to go to prove that he isn’t intimidated
by Zverkov and his other former classmates. When he arrives at the hotel where the party is
being held, no one else is there, and a waiter informs him that dinner is not set to start for
another hour. The underground man waits around embarrassedly as the waiter sets the table.
Finally, the others arrive and Simonov apologizes for telling the underground man the wrong
time for the party. Zverkov and Ferfichkin laugh at the underground man for having to wait
by himself for so long. After some awkward conversation, the other party guests speak
amongst themselves, ignoring the underground man and leaving him feeling “completely
crushed and humiliated.” He gets progressively drunker and tries to break into the
conversation, but the others notice how drunk he is and look at him like an insect. The
underground man stands up and makes a toast in which he insults Zverkov. Ferfichkin angrily
says that the underground man deserves to be “whacked in the face,” and he challenges
Ferfichkin to a duel, at which everyone simply laughs. The underground man continues to
drink at the party and paces back and forth, stomping his boots. None of the others pay him
any attention. They all leave to go to a brothel, and as they are leaving the underground man
begs Zverkov for his forgiveness. He decides to follow them to the brothel and demands that
Simonov lend him money for a prostitute. He thinks that he will either win his former
schoolmates over as friends or he will slap Zverkov in the face.

While riding a cab to the brothel, the underground man decides he will definitely slap
Zverkov in the face to regain his honor. But when he arrives there, he can’t find Zverkov. He
sleeps with a young prostitute named Liza and then wakes up at two in the morning, feeling
“misery and bile” growing in him and “seeking an outlet.” He tells Liza about a dead
prostitute whose coffin he saw being carried to a cemetery earlier in the day, and speaks at
length of the horrible life of a prostitute. He and Liza speak about families and marriage, and
he encourages her to leave the brothel, describing the “pure bliss” of married life. He tells
Liza that if she continues being a prostitute she will lose everything. . . health, youth, beauty,
and hope,” and will wind up dead with no one to remember her. Liza cries, and the
underground man gives her his address.

The next day, the underground man writes a letter to Simonov, apologizing for his behavior.
He worries that Liza will come and visit his house and see how revolting he really is. Liza
doesn’t come for a few days, to the underground man’s relief. He describes his
servant Apollon, who is arrogant and disobedient. One day, he tries to withhold Apollon’s
wages and force him to beg for his money, but Apollon simply stares at the underground man
until he breaks down and demands that Apollon show him respect before getting paid. As the
two are fighting, Liza arrives. The underground man feels ashamed in front of Liza and bursts
into tears. He tells her that he has no pity for her and wants her to leave him alone. Liza
embraces him, and he cries hysterically. After recovering, the underground man feels
incapable of returning any love or affection to her, and wants her to leave him by himself in
“peace and quiet.” As Liza finally prepares to leave, the underground man slips some money
into her hand “out of spite.” Liza refuses the money and leaves immediately. He starts to run
after her and imagines how he could “fall down before her, sob with remorse, kiss her feet,
and beg her forgiveness,” but then stops and lets her go. He tells his readers that he hasn’t
seen Liza since, and says that he feels ashamed to have written his notes. He angrily says that
all human are “estranged from life,” and “cripples.” He says that he represents the truth about
mankind, claiming, “in my life I’ve only taken to an extreme that which you haven’t even
dared to take halfway.” He says he doesn’t want to write anymore. An author’s note
concludes the novella, telling the reader that the underground man wrote more notes, but that
this seems like a good place to stop.

Themes
Though v/s Action: Most of Notes from Underground is made up of the underground
man’s rambling thoughts. There is little real action in the plot. This is because, quite simply,
there is little action in the underground man’s life. As he himself says, he is a man of “overly
acute consciousness,” and his excessive intelligence basically cripples him. He over-thinks
and questions everything, and cannot settle on a “primary cause” of anything that would then
allow him to decide what action to take. Similarly, he believes that men of action often act
out of a simplistic idea of justice that they think vindicates their actions. The underground
man, by contrast, cannot settle for an overly simplistic understanding of justice. He thinks
things over ceaselessly and sometimes ponders things so much that he changes his mind or
contradicts himself. Thus, he can find no basis for acting in a particular way, since he can
easily argue himself out of doing something.

The underground man often imagines action but never follows through, as when he is on his
way to the brothel in part two and thinks about how he will slap Zverkov in the face. (He
never actually does this, as he arrives too late to find Zverkov.) This lack of actual action
leads to a pervasive sense of boredom and inertia in the novella, which the underground man
describes as key parts of his underground life and which sometimes give rise to his sense of
spite toward others. Crippled by his own intelligence, all he can do is retreat underground,
talk to himself, and write his thoughts down. Through this pathetic character, Dostoevsky is
able to pose a number of troubling (and perhaps ultimately unanswerable) questions: would it
be better for the underground man to be stupid and therefore able to act and live like a normal
person? What is the value of intelligence or thought if one cannot act on it? And is it possible
for a truly intelligent, acutely conscious person to live a functioning life in modern society?

Loneliness, Isolation and Society: The underground man is a lonely, isolated character. He
speaks and writes from a mysterious place underground, separated from society. But even
before retreating underground, he feels isolated even within society, whether at school (where
he had no friends) or at work (where he hates all his coworkers). The underground man lives
a life effectively in isolation from mainstream society, but it is not clear whether he does this
out of choice—does he reject society or does society reject him? Does he crave the
acknowledgment of others or does he not even want it? At times, it seems that he disdains
society and voluntarily withdraws himself into isolation because he feels that he is more
intelligent than everyone else. However, at times it seems that he lives by himself simply
because no one likes him, and because he is rude and cruel to others. In the end, it is probably
a bit of both: having been rejected by many people, the underground man scorns them and
withdraws, but this withdrawal makes others dislike him even more, so that he withdraws still
more. This cyclical pattern results in his near-complete isolation from society.

The underground man has an ambivalent attitude toward society: on the one hand, he
despises it, but on the other hand he envies those who can function in mainstream society and
occasionally wishes that he had friends or companions. This ambivalence can be seen
especially through his struggles with shame and embarrassment. These are social emotions,
as they are only felt in relation to other people: one feels ashamed or embarrassed in front of
other people or because one imagines what others might think. Around others, the
underground man continually feels ashamed and embarrassed, as can be seen in his
interaction with the officer in part one, or at the party in part two. As these feelings hint that
he really does care what others think, the underground man becomes angry at himself for
feeling embarrassed and ends up vacillating between embarrassment and defiantly acting in a
rude, shameful way (as when he paces back and forth during the party for Zverkov).

Because of his problematic relationship to society, the underground man lives a lonely,
boring life. However, his isolation does afford him certain benefits. By being so separated
from mainstream society, he gains a critical distance from which he can observe, critique, and
comment on society. Also, when growing up, his isolation from others gave him time to read,
learn, and become a very intelligent person. Thus, the underground man does not entirely
hate his isolation. He goes back and forth between wanting to be a part of society and
wanting nothing to do with it, between feeling unfairly exiled from others and voluntarily
exiling himself. Perhaps the most pathetic thing about his character is not so much that he is
isolated from others, but that he cannot even make up his mind about what he wants—
friendship or solitude.
Human Nature: Notes from Underground opens with the underground man’s famous
assessment of his own character: “I am a sick man. . . . I am a spiteful man. I am an
unattractive man.” He is pessimistic and sees the worst in himself. Moreover, he often
generalizes from his own nature and his own ideas about people to speak broadly of human
nature. He presents himself not only as one spiteful, sick man, but as an example of how
mankind is truly spiteful and sick. He has a very a low opinion of modern man, claiming that
anyone of intelligence in the 19th century cannot be a man of action or character. He
disagrees with the idea that humans are rational and naturally improve or desire what is good
for them, citing examples from history to prove that human society is cruel and bloody in part
one.

Additionally, he routinely compares humans to animals. He speaks of people as either bulls

or mice in part one, and repeatedly says that people treat him like an insignificant fly. These
recurrent animal similes are the underground man’s way of bringing humans down to the
level of the animal, suggesting that they are simply one kind of animal among many on this
planet, with no special dignity. This tendency to degrade humanity can be related to Darwin’s
theory of evolution, which had recently been translated into Russian when Dostoevsky was
writing Notes from Underground. In part one, the underground man mentions the scientific
discovery that man is descended from apes (an exaggeratedly simplistic version of
Darwinism). This idea is a huge blow to the human ego, suggesting that humans are not
special creatures, but merely one evolved species out of many.

The underground man thinks of humans as foolish, irrational, cruel, and despicable creatures
—including himself. But to what degree does this deluded character speak to a universal
human condition or nature? The underground man himself addresses this very question at the
end of the novella. Addressing his readers, he says, “I’ve only taken to an extreme that which
you haven’t even dared to take halfway.” He claims that his pessimism is simply honesty
about true human nature, and that others have similar thoughts or tendencies as he does but
suppress them or deceive themselves. Regardless of whether one agrees with the underground
man that his pessimistic conception of human nature is the truth, it is hard to disagree that
spite, malice, and irrationality don’t form at least part of human nature. The underground man
may take these aspects of humanity to an extreme, but his example serves as a corrective to
those alluded to in part one, who would naively think that man can be completely good and
completely rational. We may not be mere insects, but we are not always noble heroes, either.
Reason and Rationality: The Russian writer Nikolay Chernyshevsky and his followers
believed that man only desired what was in is best interest, and that mankind could be
improved and taught to listen to reason so that society would progress to a kind of utopian
existence, symbolized by the image of a perfect crystal palace (which the underground
man derogatively refers to). The underground man can be seen as Dostoevsky’s answer to
Chernyshevsky.

In part one, he rambles and rants about numerous topics, but the primary one is a debate over
rationality: to what degree are humans rational? Do they really only ever desire what is good
for them? The underground man defiantly asserts that man is not rational and insists that
human history is irrational. He argues that the perfect existence of the crystal palace, with
everyone behaving reasonably, is impossible—and not even desirable. The underground
man’s major claim is that man will occasionally desire something not in his best interest, if
only to demonstrate his ability and free will to do so. If mankind behaved only according to
reason, logic, and scientific fact, he would become an “organ stop,” as the underground man
puts it. Life would be nothing but obeying the rules of scientific and mathematic fact,
summed up by the simple equation, two times two equals four. If the whole world operates
according to logic, facts, and equations, how can there be free will or human choice? The
ability to choose actions that are not logical, that are not reasonable or “right” decisions is the
very thing that gives humans free will and individuality, argues the underground man. The
only way to stand up for humanity is to oppose the bland rationality of two-times-two-equals-
four and delight in the irrationality of two-times-two-equals-five.

Not only does the underground man argue for the importance of irrational behavior, but he
also provides an example through his own actions. He often contradicts himself and
emphasizes his ability to hold multiple viewpoints at once, to change his mind, and even to be
hypocritical. His self-contradiction and ability to disagree with himself is a way of
championing individuality over reason. Moreover, in part two, we repeatedly see the
underground man act illogically and not in his best interest, as he embarrasses himself and
gets himself into awkward, even painful situations, such as inviting himself
to Zverkov’s party, or going to the brothel, or giving Liza his address. Thus, one can see part
two as the proof to the argument of part one. In part one, the underground man argues for the
irrationality of human behavior, and in part two he shows examples of his own irrational
behavior. Both his arguments and his actions form a powerful counter to the optimism and
utopianism of those who would look forward to the perfect rationality of the crystal palace.
Spite, Pain and Suffering: The underground man is a spiteful man (he himself says so), who
takes pleasure in annoying and harming others. He irritates his former schoolmates, fantasizes
about slapping Zverkov in the face, and drives Liza to tears by describing her horrible
situation as a prostitute. This malice toward others is one way in which the underground man
separates himself from others and shows that he wants no part in mainstream society.

But if the underground man is to some degree a sadist (one derives pleasure from hurting
others), he is also at times a bit of a masochist (one who derives pleasure from experiencing
pain). He acts in ways that set himself up for awkward and painful social situations, as when
he basically crashes Zverkov’s party. And, more literally, he even says that to him the pain of
a toothache can be pleasurable. He describes a strange pleasure to be found in pain and
despair, and perhaps this is what he seeks by spitefully inflicting so much pain on both others
and himself.

Another way of understanding all the pain the underground man revels in is as another form
of rebellion against oppressive rationality. It makes no sense for the underground man to hurt
others for no reason and to hurt himself, but this may be precisely the point. By recklessly
behaving in a way that benefits neither him nor others, the underground man proves his
ability to defy rationality and live in accordance with his own will, rather than logic—even at
the cost of significant suffering.

Literature and Writing: One of the ways in which the underground man differs from others
and isolates himself is through his obsession with literature. As he recalls in part two, he grew
up without many friends and spent much time reading. Similarly, he says that much of his
time underground is spent reading. As a solitary activity, reading isolates the underground
man from others. Moreover, his excessively literary sensibility prevents him from functioning
normally in society. He is obsessed with the idea of duels, for example, a dated practice from
traditional literature. He imagines challenging someone to a duel in a bar, but then thinks
better of it because he realizes everyone will laugh at him for his talking about such literary
things as points of honor. And when he actually does challenge Ferfichkin to a duel,
everyone does laugh at him. Moreover, Liza tells him that he talks like a book, referring to
his highly literary language. The underground man’s preoccupation with literature thus makes
him socially awkward. Even when among others, his habit of reading has an isolating effect
on him.
Literature does, however, offer one possible way for the underground man to overcome his
isolation: through writing. By writing, the underground man can enter into a kind of
conversation with a community of readers. While most of the novella is made of his interior
monologues, he is able to turn his writing into a kind of dialogue by imagining the responses
of his readers and replying to them. The conversational qualities of the underground man’s
writing can be seen as an attempted response to isolation, as his writing becomes a
conversation with himself and with his imagined readers. However, at the end of part two, the
underground man rejects even this community of readers, when he says that he shouldn’t
have even written his notes. Thus, literature, writing, and reading remain ultimately solitary
pursuits for the lonely underground man. Even when not reading or writing by himself, he is
trapped within his fantasy-tinged world influenced by what he has read. But literature is not
wholly detrimental. While his obsession with literature tends to isolate the underground man,
it can also be seen as offering him a kind of personal escape from his bleak life. And,
ironically, it is through the very medium of literature that Dostoevsky is able to communicate
these negative, potentially harmful aspects of excessive reading and writing.

● The Petrashevsky circle was a informal discussion group of intellectuals, writers, civil

servants, teachers and students who met in the apartment of Mikhail Petrashevsky. A
civil servant a translator for the Russian ministry of foreign affairs.

● His personal library contained many prohibited books that were read by members of

the circle.

● This informal group was one of a number of literary and philosophical groups

engaged in studying the writings of the utopian socialist, social thinkers and
reformers.

The Double
A confession
Foregrounding- Suppression
Petersburg chronicles
Natural school Diary of a Writer
Russian enlightenment (1860s)
Peterashesvsky’s influence
Original name of Notes from Underground was A Confession

Entire life of Dostoyevsky and Russia is important to understand Notes from Underground

The double (invents the idea of underground) and A Confession that is the original name of
Notes from Underground

The Double will somewhat tell the story of The Notes from Underground
The idea of Underground-
He was round because no one in literature who talked about existential, and this underground
is nothing but existential that is when you suppress your basic needs to achieve what you
want.

● Underground is the consequence of a radical denial of man’s organic need for self-

expression, of his natural drive to be himself and to occupy his own space and place
in the world. The suppression of the basic rights does not mean death in the physical
sense but the disfiguration of soul.

● Charles Fourier to establish Utopian Socialist that is to try to dismantle the aristocracy

by moral awakening in Petrashesvky Circle.

● In notes from underground the moral and psychological underground serves

Dostoyevsky as a platform both for an attack on the radical theorist of the so-called
Russian enlightenment of the 1860s and as an illustration of rampant individualism.
The underground emerges finally as a consequence of a profound moral and spiritual
crises of Russia’s educated class.
Russian Enlightenment-

● 2 people who are importing the culture of Europe,

● 1860s- Faux Intellectualism- Rational Egoism which talks about if we use all the

rationalities to solve the problem then you can reach the Utopian Society, but
Dostoyevsky was against this idea of rationalism.
 ● Dostoyevsky was against intellectuals; he says human are whimsical that means who

is changing all the time. He led the idea of Anti-Intellectualism.

● People who were scientific he called them “nothing is sacred anymore.”

● Rational Egoism: The first part of the novel is a response to rational egoism the

prevailing social theory in Russia as well as in Europe in 1860s. Rational Egoism is a

belief that humans are innately good and if they always act rationally and in their best
self interest the world would become a utopia or a perfect society of reason and
harmony the foremost spokesman for the benefits of rational egoism was Russian
Philosopher Nikolay Chernyshevsky who popularized his ideas in the 1863 book
“What is to be Done?”

● Feodor Dostoyevsky vehemently opposed this rational utopian vision for him humans

are innately irrational capricious (impulsive) and evil. He insists they are unstable and
destructive acting more from dark impulses then from enlightened rational thought.
His loathing of rational egoism motivated Dostoyevsky to write notes from
underground in which he dissects the absurdity of rational egoism and its holly
unrealistic notion of human nature. For Dostoyevsky the ultimate good in human
nature is Freewill which had to be sacrificed for rational action.

● Russia was influenced by Europe and Dostoyevsky was against that idea of European

Influence.
Dissatisfied Man
Natural School
Petrashevsky Circle
German Idealism
Gogol’s- Predecessor of Dostoyevsky

Structure of the Novel

Part 1

● Written like a diary.

● His entire soul is in the part.

 ● He is known as the underground man because his name is unknown.

● All about ranting and accepting.

● Set in the present time.

● 1860s

● Attack on Rational Egoism

Part 2

● Contains 3 stories in continuation.

● 1st Story- he is obsessed with someone, and he bought expensive things in order to be

seen by that person this is a boy this was in St. Petersberg.

● 2 nd story- Staying alone and in isolation- After 3 months of isolation he realized that

he need to meet his friends the first person he met was Simoleon, then he met
Zerkhone

● He did everything embarrassing like self-inviting etc

● 3rd Story- He takes a camp and ends up with a prostitute named Lisa and then talks

about how someone should not be a prostitute because after some time she will be a
discarded figure.

● Apollon- He is a servant.

● The underground man is in complete denial.

● Come to his home and chases Lisa to not go and gave money but Lisa refuses because

of her dignity.

● Set in 20 years ago.

● Prequel when he was 20 years of age.

 ● Making a comment of Crystal Palace

● Nicolay appreciated this place while Dostoyevsky said this is something which is

completely a European design and very hollow- Sort of against the Rational Egoism

● The palace was burnt in 1936.

● Wisten Churchill said it as end of an age.

Crystal Palace

● It was built in London for the Great Exhibition of 1851 as a showcase for inventions

arising from science and engineering the Crystal Palace exalted the rationality that
underpins the sciences.

● For this reason, Dostoyevsky uses a symbol of the crystal palace in part 1 to represent

the soul crushing rigidity and rationality of rational egotist of his day as well as the
“alien progress” that came with it

● Nicolay calls this place as the miracle of art, beauty, and splendor.

Kind of style-
Strawman Style (comment on something), stream of consciousness, confession, satirical, he
is an Anti-Hero, it is in first person narrative which leads to a unreliable narrator.

Part 2:

● Attack on Romanticism

● Romanticism was mostly written by Pushkin during the fall of bastin, along with

French revolution.

● New romantics: Robert Buns, John Kete’s, PB Sherly

● During this time rationality is something evil.

● During this time Dostoyevsky said he does not like extreme romanticism. He is

something which should be in balance.

 ● Chief underground prototype Golyadkin, Dostoyevsky he expresses his pride in being

first to bring out the real men of the Russian majority and first to expose his
“disfigured and tragic side”.

● Novel talks about being spiritual and how the symbols that are present for death are

not used they are just symbols.

● Once the idea of spirituality is gone the whole humankind will somewhat die and

everything will be negative which is Christian Rationalism

● This Christian Idealism is a tragic one- some kind of demise of faith.

Underground man

● Underground man is a product of collapsing world.

● Symbolic Character Image of 19th century men who is divorced from his national

roots and faith yet seeking in the depths of his confessions for moral and spiritual
foundations for an “ideal”.

● As a literary type he is a syncretic creation which deep roots in Dostoyevsky own

work and characters leading up to notes from underground.

● Lisa (Prostitute) is symbolizing Russia and European are attacking Russia or Lisa and

polluting this is a critique to Russian Enlightenment and Rational Egoism.

● He is facing identity crises because the generation he is in Russia is continuously

changing and have become which is was not earlier due to which he wants to go back
to the actual Russian roots.

● The Underground man is a Superfluous Man which means a little extra or

exaggerated.

● As bought affinities is the so-called superfluous men who inhabits the work of

Alexander Pushkin, Turgenev, Lermontov and Herzen.

 ● A Byronic hero which means this person is talented but passive due to which he

doesn’t do anything. He is a Nihilist.

● In 1840s and 1850s there emerged a Russian Literary concept derived from Byronic

hero.

● Men who are talented and capable but do not fit in the social norms

● Characteristics:

o Disregard for social norms

o Sinicism
o Existential boredom
o Typical behavior includes gambling, drinking, romantic inbreaks (affairs) and
gules.

Pre-arrest Days of Dostoyevsky:

● Part one is in 1860s in which he is against Rationalism,

● The two parts of the novel is representative of two movements often taking

Dostoyevsky’s Life is consideration.

● The Surplus romanticism that dictated the 1840s and over rationality, utopian

pipedreams, utilitarianism, and rational egoism of the 1860s.

● The underground man is a self-proclaimed anti-hero.

● He is a disillusioned idealist of the Hegel dominated romantic philosophical

generation of the 1840s.

● The underground man emerges as a man without faith and foundation who has been

caught up in the treadmill of consciousness.

● The polemics of underground man is attacking the things Russia is going through.

● In part 1 he is attacking rational egoism and attacking Chernishevksy on the idea of

rationalism.
Cerebral Heroes: have to search

● Notes from underground is a direct polemical and satirical assault of Cherneshevsky’s

denial of moral responsibility, freedom of will and his notion of perfectionism of

human nature.
https://www.litcharts.com/lit/notes-from-underground/summary