Friday, July 22, 2011

Analysis of The Grand Inquisitor

Analysis of The Grand Inquisitor
by Fydor Dostoevsky
Lorilyn Roberts





  1. Please read the rest of the book.

    Existential writings seem to be a little bit beyond you. The purpose of the chapter is to present the question of the apparent incompatibility of freedom and universal happiness and whether it is desirable to give up that freedom. You'll find many issues and answers resolved in the Zosima's speech.

    The ideas aren't supposed to be easily reconciled by right or wrong answers and you using the supposed shining example of American democracy as counterpoint is a little bit weak. It is necessary for the government to put regulations on certain capitalistic freedoms to insure that inherent avarice doesn't collapse our system. In very subtle ways, many of which you may not take issue with, we are sacrificing our free will for bliss, we turning our stone to bread, etc.

  2. You should also see the viewpoint in which Dostoevsky is viewing that "Great American Experiment." They just recently finished fighting their civil war, a dispute in which the questions in the Grand Inquisitor are asked, is it up to some higher organization to enforce what should be morality?

    I mean owning a slave is morally reprehensible right? But why should a federal government take away a state's freedom to follow that edict.

    If we take away the south's ability to choose right from wrong are we not dooming them to hell?

  3. Thank you for your comments. I actually did read the entire 1000-page book and will be adding a follow-up to this post with my thoughts on it.

    My professor was delighted with my final analysis of the Brothers Karamazov. I hope you will come back and comment on that also.

  4. And lastly, one more comment.

    Alyosha is characterized as weak because he kind of is at the early stages of the novel. He is a childlike monastic mystic following the scriptures because that's what he knows. He can't really give answers to those tough questions because he doesn't have that sagacious wisdom as someone like Father Zosima.

    Over the course of the novel you'll see him mature and you'll see him tested but by the end of the novel you see his love and faith endure stronger than ever because of the conflicts that arise in the novel. By the end he'll have his own answers the the burning questions that the novel raises while Ivan's perceptions are left incredibly shaken.

  5. I agree. I will post my thoughts on the novel later today. Thanks for your insights. It's been difficult to get people to engage me in conversation because it's so deep.I wanted others' thoughts to help me to understand some of the nuances which were unclear to me.

  6. Hi Lorilyn, I believe that the story of the fall (Genesis) teaches that for mankind, the ideal of free will is a limited one. That is why the tree of knowledge was relatively BAD. Me thinks tt the problem was that Adam and Eve (A&E) were too young to digest the full meaning of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and the consequence of their consuming it would be poisoning (death)- but by grace, the almighty God assisted A&E into finding another outcome to the problem that they had begotten themselves into.

    So whilst free will DOES exist in Christianity, it is subservient to faith in that Almighty God. It is sad I feel that both Christians and non-christians do not seem to grasp this teaching which I feel is the message of Genesis; consequently, everyone believes in the story that Fyodor Dostoevsky paints- he simply uses extremes (straw men) and then demolishes them in a hypothetical story about Jesus reappearing which is quite un Christian in the first place I believe (Jesus pre crucification and post might be slightly different manifestations of God I believe).

    That's all for now, n I believe that Jesus is real, BUT no where near the description that Fyodor Dostoevsky (who is mistaken) describes him as.

  7. Dostoyevsky was epileptic. I believe the Grand Inquisitor was the result of a vision he had while having a seizure (or maybe he just had a vision). What he is talking about here in my opinion is that Christianity was taken over by a predatory energetic being (call it Satan or the Adversary) as a way of controlling humanity. The Grand Inq. is a cardinal AND a satanic being -- is burning heretics something Christ would do? The 3 temptations of Christ were the predator's attempt to co-opt Christ. Certainly the crucifixion sends a very mixed message about Christ as does the entire Christian religion which is rife with contradiction.