The Brothers Karamazov 2024 - Week 9

[Gem , Moderator]

The Brothers Karamazov
Week 9 - Part Three, Book IX

1) In this book, Dmitri has been arrested and his pleas of innocence are met with disbelief. Do you think the authorities are giving him a fair shake? The information he is giving them is almost a confession in and of itself. His past lies and braggadocio are catching up with him, he even has a motive. During his interactions with the authorities, he appears (to the reader) to do some soul-searching and begins to show signs of reformation. Do you think this transformation is real and will govern him going forward?

2) Grushenka tries to take the blame — to take Dmitri's sins upon herself — by crying out that she is responsible for the crime. She played with the passions of an old man and his son, and, as a result, murder was committed. What, do you think has caused her to turn the corner? Is this another reformation?

3) Why do you think the author is so concerned with the actions of the authorities? How do you view the men interrogating Dmitri? Are they trying to railroad him? Or are they honest men who have arrived at a reasonable conclusion?

4) What do you think of Dmitri's statement, "I tell you again, with a bleeding heart, I have learnt a great deal this night. I have learnt that it's not only impossible to live a scoundrel, but impossible to die a scoundrel."

5) What does Dmitri's dream reveal?

[Neil]

1. Perhaps Dimitri is covering up for someone. Where were the other two brothers when all this was happening?

2. Grushenka may have had something to do with it. Or did she just steal the money?

3. The interrogators seem to be honest men in stark contrast to our legal system here in the west. The evidence against Dimitri is damming, if he is found guilty, it will be somewhat of an anti-climax.

4. Acting evil and then being remorseful it’s just Dimitri’s nature. I don’t think this means much.

5. The dream upset Dimitri and I suspect he is comparing his extravagant behaviour against people starving in the real world. Or maybe he is intending to become a philanthropist if he is eventually set free.

I have an open mind about how this novel will conclude I’m not dismissing the fact that the murder may not be resolved and will finish up an enigma. Reflecting on Crime and Punishment - you never know with Dostoevsky!

[Tom]

I found this whole section quite bizarre (well, what of Dostoyevsky isn't!), but the real slant towards the investigating authorities certainly feels like a moral debate of some kind.

Some of the officers know Dimitry and this appears to play on their treatment of him. He is treated with reverence in this section, despite all-but admitting his guilt, because of the way he eloquently reasons about his mental state and behaviours.

I wonder if this is setting us up for an ultimate acquittal for Dimitry; are his seemingly enlightened admissions true revelations that will help him avoid prosecution, or is the author playing with our expectations?

[Nancy]

This section left me grateful for the knowledge that if I am ever accused of a crime I should keep my mouth shut except to say, "I want a lawyer." Of course, that is my experience as a middle-class white American female, and I recognize that it is not the experience of other people. I don't think that Dmitry's accusers are fair to him in the modern sense, but for the time and place their behavior may have been quite indulgent. I found myself wanting to tell Dmitry to say shut up, but of course he had to blab away and make a bad situation much worse. He really comes across as manic and not very bright. I don't think he committed the crime; in fact, I re-read the section in which he was at his father's house, outside the old man's window, and there is no hint that he is guilty of that. As for the dream, it was very confusing, and I don't have a clue what it might mean.

[Rafael]

I don't know Russian legal system from that age, but then people had the right to be helped by a lawyer?

[Gem , Moderator]

Rafael wrote: "I don't know Russian legal system from that age, but then people had the right to be helped by an lawyer?"

Yes, Dmitry will have a defense attorney, that what we call them in the US, not sure the terms are elsewhere.

[Rafael]

Gem wrote: "Rafael wrote: "I don't know Russian legal system from that age, but then people had the right to be helped by an lawyer?"

Yes, Dmitry will have a defense attorney, that what we call them in the US..."

Thank you for your response. I was expecting that they have it, but I was not sure.

[Jen]

I picked this up again after the summer and just finished this section. I suppose Dmitri could be innocent, but his unreliable storytelling about where he got the money, how much, and how he spent it, isn't doing him any favours. I have read that if you're in fact innocent, the best way to get the police and prosecutors to believe you is to loudly and constantly tell them so, though there are plenty of people in prison who say they've been trying to do this since they were first picked up. Also we'll apparently believe you more if you never change a single detail of your story (though good luck with that, ask any politician or journalist who's embellished a story even slightly, no matter how innocently).

The police seem competent enough. They're letting Dmitri tell his story, probing it for weakness. They're not torturing him, not plying him with alcohol or keeping him up. Apparently if you just shut up and let people talk they'll say a whole lot.

I went down a brief rabbit hole looking at the history of the Russian judicial system. At the time the book is set, indeed, Russia was trying to modernise its legal system and Dmitri would have had the right to hire an attorney. However, that is not the same as the right to a public defender, he'd most likely have had to hire one. And having a lawyer present in court is not the same as having one present during police investigation. You also have to ask for one. If you agree to talk to the police without a lawyer, they'll let you go as long as they can.

[Gem , Moderator]

Jen wrote: "I went down a brief rabbit hole looking at the history of the Russian judicial system. At the time the book is set, indeed, Russia was trying to modernise its legal system and Dmitri would have had the right to hire an attorney. However, that is not the same as the right to a public defender, he'd most likely have had to hire one. And having a lawyer present in court is not the same as having one present during police investigation. You also have to ask for one. If you agree to talk to the police without a lawyer, they'll let you go as long as they can."

Thank you for this information, I had wondered about this topic but was tend to go "down a rabbit hole" very deeply and I didn't have the spoons to do that this time.