Week 10: Part III, chapters 5 and 6

[Roger]

Chapter 5, "A Woman Traveler": Out of nowhere, Shatov's estranged wife MARYA shows up on his doorstep, exhausted and broke and in labor. He is delighted; he still seems to love her. Shortly thereafter, young ERKIL shows up to tell him that the next day he is to show the location of the buried printing press, after which he will be released from all obligation to the secret society. Shatov dashes out to get the best midwife around, who happens to be Virginsky's wife. He pounds on their door until she agrees to come attend Marya. Then he visits Lyamshin to sell his revolver to get money to pay the midwife. Lyamshin is flustered because he knows Shatov's murder is planned for the next day, but he takes the revolver. Madame Virginskaya takes charge of Marya with great efficiency, and sends Shatov out to get some supplies. Shatov goes to Kirillov to get them; the latter is a bit distracted because he has just been told by Pyotr Stepanovich that he is to kill himself the next day. He talks about the few seconds when you perceive eternal harmony; Shatov thinks he is coming down with epilepsy. As dawn breaks, a baby boy is born. Shatov is ecstatic and wants to accept him as his own. Marya is won over by motherhood and Shatov's devotion and does not want him to leave her. Madame Virginskaya runs home to tell her husband that Shatov cannot possibly be planning a denunciation in his current state. Shatov sleeps all day, and when he wakes Erkil shows up to take him away.

[Roger]

Chapter 6, "A Night of Many Difficulties": Virginsky goes to find the other conspirators and tell them that Shatov is no danger in his current state, without success. That evening they all meet to carry out the murder: Pyotr Stepanovich, Tolkashenko, Liputin, Lyamshin, Virginsky, and Shigalyov. Virginsky works up the nerve to object that Shatov is harmless, but Pyotr will have none of it; he calls the baby "Stavrogin's child." Shigalyov says that the murder is stupid and inconsistent with with his revolutionary program and walks away. Then Erkil shows up with Shatov, who shows the location of the press. Then the others jump him and Pyotr puts a bullet in his head. Virginsky cries out that it's not right, and Lyamshin starts screaming like a madman until he is gagged. They weight the body with stones and hide it in a nearby pond. Pyotr gives them an inspirational talk, tells them that Kirillov will take the blame in a suicide note, and sends them home. Liputin runs after him and demands to know if theirs is the only group of five; Pyotr does not deny it. Pyotr goes to see Kirillov and dictate his suicide note. Kirillov is outraged that he is supposed to take the blame for the murder. Pyotr gets him talking about his philosophy. After a good deal of monologuing, he takes a revolver and goes into another room. Pyotr waits but hears no shot; he enters the room to shoot Kirillov himself. He finds him hiding in a corner; when he touches him he is attacked and flees. Then he hears a shot and re-enters the room--Kirillov has shot himself. Later, Pyotr waits for the train to Petersburg with Erkil, whom he flatters and grooms to take on more responsibility for the Cause. He promises to return in a few days, but Erkil will never see him again.

[Roger]

Opening question: The pathos of Shatov having a reconciliation with his wife and then being murdered is almost too much to bear. Does it really work dramatically?

[Emil]

Susanna wrote: "Roger wrote: "Opening question: The pathos of Shatov having a reconciliation with his wife and then being murdered is almost too much to bear. Does it really work dramatically?"

It's somewhat comi..."

Shatov just became a father from his point of view. We can say that the baby is not Shatov's, but Shatov is the baby's father - at least from an existentialist perspective.

It's great that we're discussing those chapters together because I think they have a special relationship: chapter 5 representing life and chapter 6 death.

[Roger]

Susanna wrote: "Roger wrote: "Opening question: The pathos of Shatov having a reconciliation with his wife and then being murdered is almost too much to bear. Does it really work dramatically?"

It's somewhat comi..."

At the height of labor, Marya declares that Nikolay Vsevolodovich is a scoundrel. I think she means he's the one who is responsible for her condition.

[Roger]

In the end, why does Kirillov kill himself? Because he's trapped in a corner?

[[deleted user]]

Susanna wrote: ".Obviously the baby is not his..."

Obviously not his. But legally---and this is the least important reason-- legally, were they really married, the child would be his, and take his name. And very probably they were married as she's referred to as 'Mrs. Shotov" and "his wife." I don't think two weeks of "marital relations" four years ago would have given her that status,

But more importantly, there's Shatov to consider. "On the surface, he was a crude man, but inwardly, it seems, a most delicate one" (39).

Moreover, it seems he never stopped loving her. "Something unusual, altogether unexpected, trembled in his soul. Three years of separation, three years of broken marriage, had dislodged nothing from his heart.... the dear being who had once said to him: "I love you" (569).

And love is important. It's not mentioned much in this book. Here. And in Stavrogin's words to Liza---though HIS actions didn't match his words. And the man who lived with Lembke and his wife. Lembke was "the only one who had ever loved him."

Had she loved him? I don't know. But Shatov had willed himself to believe she had... (as he had willed himself to believe in God...or words to that effect...I can't find the scene this morning in this lengthy, complex book.)

[[deleted user]]

Roger wrote: "At the height of labor, Marya declares that Nikolay Vsevolodovich is a scoundrel. I think she means he's the one who is responsible for her condition.."

I think so, too.

She seems to suggest that. And... that "might" explain why Shatov slapped Stavrogin at his mother's home. Shatov may have heard that his wife had had a relationship with Stavrogin.

Also, her wanting to name the baby "Ivan," reminds us of Stavrogin, as there was the chapter "Ivan the Tsarevich"... connected with Stavrogin.

Finally, what is the point of her showing up and having a baby unless it somehow ties in with the plot?

EDIT ADDED. Yes, I think Shatov is aware that at some time his wife had an affair with Stavrogin. I base that on "The Traveler," part I.

Marya: "So you were in America? I heard you wrote" (571).

Shatov: ":Yes, I... wrote to Paris."

Note the hesitation... and how he omits the name of the man to whom he wrote...though we readers know that it was Stavrogin. Shatov is avoiding naming him so as to avoid the awkwardness that would arise between himself and Marya

Marya: "Enough, and please let's talk about something else.

[[deleted user]]

"The catastrophe t with Liza and the death of Marya Timofeena produced an overwhelming impression on Shatov" (564).

webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary...
CATASTROPHY, noun 1. The change or revolution which produces the final event of a dramatic piece; or the unfolding and winding up of the plot, clearing up difficulties, and closing the play.

Catastrophe, in literature, the final action that completes the unraveling of the plot in a play, especially in a tragedy. Catastrophe is a synonym of denouement. The term is sometimes applied to a similar action in a novel or story. Learn More in these related Britannica articles:
Catastrophe | literature | Britannica

I have to assume that this means that Liza's death is more key to the storyline than Marya's death. Probably going back to whatever happened in Switzerland.

ADDITIONAL EDIT ADDED: Shatov's wife had an affair with Stavrogin when Stavrogin was in Paris.

Back in "Night."

Pyotr to Stavrogin: "you know, I pulled out Shatov's wife, I mean rumors about your liaison in Paris, which, of course, explained Sunday's incident..." (219)

That seems so obvious? I didn't pick up on it when I read it weeks ago.

[[deleted user]]

Speaking of Marya...

WHY does Demons have a Marya Timofeena and a Marya Ignatievna Shatov? Although Shatov calls her "Marie."

What's the importance of Madame Virginsky asking, "Did she send for me herself?"

What's up with that?

[[deleted user]]

Roger wrote: "In the end, why does Kirillov kill himself? Because he's trapped in a corner?"

OK, I'll take a swing. He kills himself because, yes, the demons in the corners have convinced him {"still pacing his room corner to corner" (590). "I thought you wouldn't come, he said heavily from the corner of the sofa" (610). Krillov was "in the corner" (623). "in the corner," "at an angle to the corner: in "the corner of the room, lay the corpse of Kirillov" }

And it may be that philosophically, Kirillov has wrestled himself into a corner. "All my life I did not want it to be only words" (615). Remember his round and and that if he could kill himself he would be God. {If I recall that rightly?}

And... Shatov may have been right. Perhaps Kirillov IS showing early signs of "the falling sickness." Kirillov chuckled softly, "It won't have time" (591).

[Roger]

I think Pyotr was running away when Kirillov shot himself.

[Tamara]

Kirillov's justification for wanting to kill himself sounded like a lot of rambling that didn't make sense to me. The only thing I understood from his conversation with Pytor is that he wants to kill himself to assert his free will: "I am killing myself to prove my independence and my new terrible freedom."

Huh?

[Tamara]

I also don't get why Kirillov isn't thoroughly outraged at the murder of Shatov. He was kind to him. He gave him money, food, tea, and told him to take whatever he needs for his wife. So why does he agree to sign a document claiming he killed him? Is it because Kirillov has stopped caring about anyone or anything other than asserting his freedom by killing himself?

I guess I'm just confused about what motivates many of these characters.

[Roger]

I've got a guess: Kirillov's nihilistic philosophy required him to be indifferent to Shatov's fate. But his humanity rebelled against it, and the two struggled within him. What finally tipped him into suicide was the fear of appearing untrue to his own ideas in front of Pyotr Stepanovich.

[Tamara]

Roger wrote: "I've got a guess: Kirillov's nihilistic philosophy required him to be indifferent to Shatov's fate. But his humanity rebelled against it, and the two struggled within him. What finally tipped him i..."

I think that's possible.

But there's also something very weird going on with Kirillov. It's almost as if he is catatonic. Pyotr checks on him and sees this:

On the right side of this cupboard, in the corner formed by the cupboard and the wall, stood Kirillov, and he was standing in a very strange way; motionless, perfectly erect, with his arms held stiffly at his sides, his head raised and pressed tightly back against the wall in the very corner, he seemed to be trying to conceal and efface himself. Everything seemed to show that he was hiding, yet somehow it was not easy to believe it.

A few lines later:

But when he reached Kirillov he stopped short again, still more overcome, horror-stricken. What struck him most was that, in spite of his shout and his furious rush, the figure did not stir, did not move in a single limb—as though it were of stone or of wax. The pallor of the face was unnatural, the black eyes were quite unmoving and were staring away at a point in the distance.

This maybe a stretch but I'm wondering if Kirillov suffers from schizophrenia.

[Gary]

Tamara wrote: "I guess I'm just confused about what motivates many of these characters."

I feel as if I have a handle on a number of characters. Ones that come to mind are Varvara Stavrogina and Yulia von Lembke, Captain Lebyadkin and Fed’ka, and even Pyotr, who though thoroughly despicable is not particularly complicated.

Others leave me bewildered. For all his studies, Stepan Trofimovich lacks moral, principled or even definite character. Lizaveta completely baffles me; she seems to change who she is from chapter to chapter; she repeatedly does things I did not see coming ... at all. Nikolai is a mass of contradictions: did he love Marya or not, did he inspire Pyotr’s villainy or not, was he a revolutionary or not, was he a cold-hearted and amoral sensationalist or not? And I can’t help but think there’s more to Shatov's and Kirillov's character and story than we read … methinks they protest too much. And then there are the Five. Though they are minor characters what actually motivates them and why are they so easily manipulated?

Dostoevsky set out, at least in part, to mock the pseuo revolutonaries and their ideas who wanted to re-make Russia in the mold of western European socialism. Could the confused thinking and fuzziness of some of these characters be Dostoevsky belittling their fierce idealisms, their demons?

[Gary]

Tamara wrote: "This maybe a stretch but I'm wondering if Kirillov suffers from schizophrenia."

The idea passed through my mind more than once that some of these characters are mentally ill, which is not exactly an endorsement of the novel. So I pushed the idea to the side.

[Tamara]

Gary wrote: "I feel as if I have a handle on a number of characters. Ones that come to mind are Varvara Stavrogina and Yulia von Lembke, Captain Lebyadkin and Fed’ka, and even Pyotr, who though thoroughly despicable is not particularly complicated.

Others leave me bewildered...."

I echo your bewilderment. I also find myself wondering if this is the same Dostoevsky who wrote Crime and Punishment.

[Lily]

I'm simplistic about this -- this is D being D, recording man/woman in all the sinful perversity this Slavophile Orthodox Russian so skillfully and painfully observed. But I do feel as I really need to go find Joseph Frank and see if his insights are readily available to go with all the thoughtful ones here. He spent more time on D than I suspect any of us have had a chance to do. Now, do I care enough to do that, or is the listening done quite enough? Haven't decided yet.

[[deleted user]]

Susanna wrote @13 : "I thought Kirillov killed himself because, if he didn't, Pytor would kill him and make it look like a suicide.

Kirillov. What a puzzlement, eh?

I think that on a rational level---if someone who offers to commit suicide on someone else's timetable can be deemed rational--

I think you put forward a good point...and that on a rational level … Kirillov knows that Pyotr has a revolver, too, and WILL shoot him if it serves his purposes...and... in some bizarro way Kirillov only gets "credit" for his death if he kills himself. The window vent was open...it would seem that he had tried to find an escape route. He can't leave that small room because he can't know whether or not Pyotr is still there waiting to shoot him. So Kirillov shoots himself “to prove” self-will.

But I think it’s the demons who have entered him. His mind was weakened. He’s been obsessing about this for 3 or 4 years {“for three years I’ve been searching”}. He’s a nearly destitute man who owns more than one expensive gun. He tries a time or two to hold on to his humanity…”I won’t write that I killed Shatov.” Well, that sounds like “self-will” to me.

I just can’t follow Kirillov’s suicide for self-will…”without any reason.” As Tamara said, it sounds like ramblings. What sense does it make? Like Gary said, it seems like mental illness… brain fevor…like the man whom the demons entered---not in his right mind.

Kirillow here is pacing like an animal. “He was as if delirious.” “shaking as if in as fever” He’s almost “in a rapture.”

Then he starts writing in French, those foreign ideas, and laughing! Cornered in the dark room, he had become as an animal… bellowing… full of “beastly rage”…savagely biting Pyotr as Savrogin had bitten when he had the brain fevor… and Kirillov has been reduced to the point where his intellectual reasonings are shouts of “now, now, now, now…”
.."

[Bigollo]

I think a reader may discern, in the character of Kirillov, D's mockery of the idea that life can be put into some sort of a logical box or scheme. If we have a free will, then, of course, we can choose wanting, say, death or life on equal footing. If that wanting comes to us from outside, then it's not a free will. So Kirillov tries to be honest to the end and prove, at least for himself, that he does have a free will.. Whether worshipping free will is sane in itself is
another question..

Did I say Free Will?.. I may regret it...

[Thomas]

Pyotr says that Kirillov was eaten by an idea, and Kirillov says “that’s good. You have some small intelligence.” I don’t think Kirilov is mad or mentally ill – he’s eaten by the idea that there is no God.

If there is a God, he reasons, then this God is indifferent to man and is responsible for the laws of nature and all of their miseries, even the death of Jesus, “the highest” of all men. Kirillov’s way of overcoming this is to assert his freedom by killing himself, not out of spite but as demonstration of his absolute freedom. As Kirilov explained to Stavrogin before the duel, he loves life. This sounds surprising from a man bent on suicide, but he has already explained that life’s consolations are a “deceit” that only keeps a man in fear. He thinks that as long as his suicide is freely chosen and not the result of despair, he is demonstrating absolute freedom, and in that respect he is God’s equal. He can overcome God in the way of Nietzsche’s “overman.”

On the other hand, if there is no God, then he has a duty to demonstrate this freedom to others, and his suicide will lead others to a “new life, a new man, everything new.” Not killing oneself to enjoy this freedom would be like a poor man being too scared to collect his inheritance.

But ultimately this freedom is indifferent too – it has to be indifferent in order to be free. He shows this indifference when he writes the confession despite his contempt for Pyotr and his affection for Shatov. He wants it to be ridiculous and abusive with a face at the top sticking out its tongue. And in this way he ends up just as indifferent as the God he imagines he is rebelling against. He becomes like Nikolai in this indifference – at the end he bites Pyotr just like Nikolai bit Gaganov, and he cites Nikolai, who he says was also eaten by an idea:

“if Stavrogin believes, he does not believe that he believes. And if he does not believe, he does not believe that he believes.”

This is a reflection of what Nikolai said about Kirillov before the duel: "If you found out that you believe in God, you would believe; but since you don't know yet that you believe in God, you don't believe." Which is another way of saying that Kirillov believes, but he's hiding that from himself. And in the final scene we find Kirillov hiding in the corner: "By all tokens, he was hiding, yet it was somehow not possible to believe it." I think Pyotr is right when he says that Kirillov "believes in God worse than any priest." And the way he dies shows us what Dostoevsky thinks of the "overman."

[[deleted user]]

Thomas wrote: "Pyotr says that Kirillov was eaten by an idea, and Kirillov says “that’s good. You have some small intelligence.” I don’t think Kirilov is mad or mentally ill – he’s eaten by the idea that there is..."

I really enjoyed reading and rereading your post. Will think about it much today.

[Thomas]

I know it's complicated. I think with Kirillov he's expressing something similar to what Ivan says in BK, that without God, everything is permitted. He goes a little further here and has Kirillov hypothesize that he can be God himself, but the results are similarly disastrous.

[[deleted user]]

Yes. The need for God. The inability to believe in a God.

So...you pushed me to think about Kirillov this morning.

No spoiler. But long.

(view spoiler)[I enjoyed reading and rereading, and considering your post, Thomas. Kirillov says that he was eaten by an idea. Probably that’s true---he’s gone ‘round and ‘round on this subject for the Devil knows how long. I would put forward that it was his struggle with that idea that pushed him into mental instability. Were he rational, I would have to think so very poorly of him as a man.

If he’s angry at what he sees as God’s indifference to man, then in Kirillov’s indifference to what happens to Shavov, and the wife, and child, Kirillov indicts himself.

Kirillov says he’s going to kill himself “without any reason”; Pyotr says he killed Shatov “without any malice.” I don’t believe either one. Kirillov certainly is killing himself for reasons. And it seems to me that Kirillov must know that he’s NOT killing himself “for absolutely no reason.” And this eats away at him, too since “All my life I did not want it to be words only.”

To proclaim his self-will, he says. So then his reason is his need for a proof. Yet killing himself proves nothing to anyone except himself…and he won’t be around to appreciate it.

It seems to me that if Kirillov is rebelling against God, that he’s motivated by spite or anger.

There’s the financial aspect. He DID write the party (someone) to ask for money and offered to do this service. That seems a reason.

The health reason. IS he developing the falling disease, as Shatov suggested? He won’t be around to face it.

And just when he becomes “as if delirious” he says excitedly that he’ll sign everything, “his hand trembling with excitement.” To me, when he wants to abuse in the letter, he’s not indifferent, He’s all, Ha ha… I don’t care!!!!! Not, calmly, I don’t care; and when he bites Pyotr… that’s not indifference, that’s striking out.

I think Kirillov sounded like a man full of despair, not self-will and not rational control. But he’s lost. Either the western demons from Luke or the Russian demons from Pushkin (“leading us this way and that”), or maybe both, have unhinged him.

And… I even think that Kirillov is but barely actually taking his own life. Wouldn’t one have to have a life in order to give up one’s life? Kirillov seems to me to have accepted that he’s going to die…and to have stopped living long ago. He’s going through the motions. The new life force in the baby in his rooms (“Night”) may have animated him to engage, but now he lets this Shatov baby to its fate.

Look at him. How long has he lived there? Long enough to have acquired two samovars. Yet he’s still living out of an unpacked suitcase. Pyotr has been there for a much shorter period of time and he unpacked HIS suitcase (609). Kirillov’s black eyes are “lusterless.” He says he loves children, “quite indifferently, however” (236). “very happy”…”as though making the most ordinary reply.” He’s saying the words only.

Freedom, I think, is not indifference—or what is it worth? He says Jesus was the highest of all men… yet Jesus certainly wasn’t indifferent. Jesus sacrificed himself for mankind.

What is Kirillov--a self-professed "scoundrel'"-- sacrificing and how will it benefit mankind?

Kirillov’s a smart guy. He says the acting of killing himself through self-will will free others. But how could it? He’s written the letter dictated by Pyotr. Surely he must know that Pyotr will spin the letter and the suicide to his own ends. I doubt Pyotr will spread the word of Kirillov’s great act.

*Yes, “he thinks God is necessary and therefore must exist.” Kirillov at his core. “But I know that he does not and cannot exist.” What he has learned to be factual from the Western ideas introduced into Russia.

He can’t kill himself while clinging to life. Maybe he tries to cultivate indifference to life. But he played with that baby and ran after that ball. That German ball from Hamburg. There’s no decent Russian ball? Even balls for babies are imported from the West?



*Rebel Without a Cause “You’re tearing me APART!”
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...




The imagery concerning Pyotr was intense. His “mind was terrible” (609). He was “spiteful” and “vile.” He repeated called on the devil: “Devil take you,” “Devil take it,” “Devil take it,” “Devil take…,” “Eh, the devil!” “Eh, the devil,” dead silence, “Pah, devil take it,” “Ah, the devil…” He was “feeling his way in the darkness.” And then the shot.
(hide spoiler)]

[Emil]

Adelle wrote: "Yes. The need for God. The inability to believe in a God.

So...you pushed me to think about Kirillov this morning.

No spoiler. But long.

I enjoyed reading and rereading, and considering your po..."


Outstanding analysis Adelle!

I don't think Kirilov is mentally ill,  he's just possessed by this rotten idea, that suicide is the only way to assert his free will.


Wouldn’t one have to have a life to give up one’s life? Kirillov seems to me to have accepted that he’s going to die…and to have stopped living long ago


So we can say that Kirilov is dead from the moment he decided to kill himself. I will expand his 'stone' analogy: a big stone is hanging very high on a rope and Kirilov is under it. An invisible hand is cutting the rope. Let's suppose the stone needs one year to reach Kirilov and that he cannot move to avoid the impact. Is Kirilov dead or alive while the stone is falling? Reminds me of Schrödinger's cat.

-----------------------

Kirilov while writing the suicide note:
“Stay! I want to put at the top a face with the tongue out.”

Brilliant! Looks like he just invented the emoji...

[[deleted user]]

Thank you, Emil, that was so nice of you to say.

The characters become quite frustratingly compelling after a while. One can wrestle with them and get some indicators of why they might do things... but there are always countering clues that might support a different interpretation.

I keep thinking what a good installment read this must have been. Plenty of time to go back and re-read old issues while waiting for the next section to arrive.

Your analogy of the big stone and the rope being slowly cut made ME think of The Tiger and the Mouse. And the Strawberry.

And I thought... Kirilov DID seem to take daily pleasure in his hot tea. So perhaps he DID find bits of life to enjoy while he waited.

https://medium.com/age-of-awareness/t...


(lol, I had to google Schrodinger's cat. )

[Thomas]

Adelle wrote: "

So...you pushed me to think about Kirillov this morning.

."

I feel like I should apologize...lol. But I do like your analysis as well. Kirillov's logic begins with the premise that God exists. If there is no God, then Kirillov is already free, and there is no God to supplant and there's no reason to prove himself by suicide. The problem is that he denies his own premise. I don't think he's motivated by spite or anger though; I think he refuses to acknowledge God because that means he would have to submit to him. His suicide is Luciferian in that way. As he says before he decides to go ahead with Pyotr's plan and write the letter, "I'll kill myself to show my insubordination and my new fearsome freedom." The "demon" he's obsessed with is freedom from God.

Now I wonder if the notion of freedom from God, and especially Kirillov's strange idea that he can become a "man-god" by killing himself, has a political counterpart in Pyotr's plan to install Nikolai as Ivan the Tsarevich, the imposter Prince.

[[deleted user]]

Thomas, not in the least!! Pushing people to think is an absolute good. I'm aware that sometimes I have an opinion, or a sense that I have an opinion, but without thinking it thru further, I wouldn't be able to articulate "why." lol

[Aiden]

I just reread Chapter 6 and I think I finally understand Kirillov's final actions.

Thomas's thoughts @25 express what I was thinking before skimming what's been posted as far as philosophical allusion. It seems to me, based on his musings to himself, Kirillov has fully bought into the Nietzschean idea that if man has really killed the gods, it is up to man, as new god, to provide his own value system and live up to it.

The philosophical goal Kirillov set for himself three years earlier in Geneva was of killing himself for no other reasons than because it is absurd to live in a godless world and to prove that he is godlike because he truly expresses "Self-Will!"

He states,

"I don't understand how an atheist could reach this point knowing that God does not exist and not kill himself immediately. To realize that God does not exist, and not to realize at the same time that you yourself have become a God is absurd."

The ultimate validation of his philosophy (in his mind, at least) would be his willingness to go to the furthest extreme just to prove he truly believes by following his own "terrible" logic. I didn't understand Kirillov's fighting and hiding from Pyotr until I reread the section with Kirillov's specific goal in mind.

When Kirillov is appalled by Shatov's murder and refuses to write the letter, Pyotr pulls out his revolver, says he knew Kirillov wouldn't go through with it and starts threatening Kirillov to force him. Once this happens, if Kirillov goes through with his suicide plan, it will be philosophically tainted by the fact that he is not exercising rational self-will.

Kirillov hides in the dark room with the door closed so that when Pyotr walks in to check on him, he can attack Pyotr to relieve the threat posed. This is done by biting Pyotr's finger, forcing him to drop the candle and only light source (recall, Kirillov has his own revolver by this point and Pyotr thinks he's desperate).

Finally, [Pyotr] pulled his finger away and rushed headlong out of the house, trying to find his way in the darkness. He was pursued by terrible cries coming from the room:
"Now, now, now, now..."
About ten times. But he kept on running and was already in the entryway when he suddenly heard a loud shot."

When Pyotr flees, Kirillov cries "Now!" ten times, steeling himself for the act. Only when Pyotr is in flight from darkness and no longer poses a threat to him does Kirillov pull the trigger; thus achieving his ultimate expression of self-will.

Quotes are from the Penguin/Maguire translation.

[Bigollo]

I think you are right about Kirillov's final actions.

Indeed, it takes rereading to sort out everything in a very involved text.

Group reading helps too.. :)

[Emil]

Aiden wrote: "I just reread Chapter 6 and I think I finally understand Kirillov's final actions..."

I presumed that Kirilov was just hesitating, clinging to his newly found fragile peace of mind. Your interpretation is far better, it explains the whole scene.

[Aiden]

Bigollo wrote: "Group reading helps too.. :)"

It definitely does and I think this has been a very fruitful discussion. Emil, I thought the same thing about hesitations from Kirillov the first two times I read it, but his actions seemed so strangely specific that I always felt like there was some method to his madness I wasn’t getting.

[Monica]

Aiden wrote: "I just reread Chapter 6 and I think I finally understand Kirillov's final actions..."

Thank you, Aiden! I reread this chapter and I could not make any sense of Kirillov's actions until now! Although it is not an easy one, at least now I can see some logic in his actions (and words).

[Monica]

Bigollo wrote: "I think you are right about Kirillov's final actions.

Indeed, it takes rereading to sort out everything in a very involved text.

Group reading helps too.. :)"

I think now I am ready to start rereading the whole book and try to fill in the gaps that I have sensed along the first reading and try to make sense of everything the best way I can...

[Aiden]

Susanna wrote: "Was thinking about looking up the Frank biography of FD, but five volumes? Yikes."

I'm planning to read the abridged version: Dostoevsky: A Writer in His Time.

[Bigollo]

Insane or not, Kirillov has got qualities to learn from. As for one, getting ready to commit suicide and taking care of his physical conditioning at the same time.. hmm.. Stoics might applaud..

[Lily]

Thanks for this discussion. Somehow I rebel against doing this kind of careful thinking about D's writings -- the rationality seems too irrational. (Now someone explain why Isaiah Berlin calls D a "hedgehog"?) I get caught between whether this is authorial recording of observation or character creation to elucidate ideas.