Demons is such a rich and complex novel, but a timeless one. Even though it reflects on the society Dostoyevsky lived in, some of its motives can still be seen today. A society dissatisfied with the structure of society and its institutions, on the ideas to reform them and ultimately their widely differing realizations. Because no matter how noble an idea is, it can be twisted into something horrible. As was the case with the most prominent idea of the time - socialism (and nihlism), which could be/was twisted into something destructive, in the form of totalitarian socialism that would come later.

More concretely, the book describes a clash between an older, more traditional society relying on established institutions, where Christianity plays a key role, with a newer revolutionary generation, inspired (even consumed) by lofty ideas of an equal utopic society, one that totally rebuilds society, using rationality (and thus rejecting God), inspired largely by socialist thought. But when it actually comes to bringing this society about, and not just theorizing about it, the reality is very different. The revolutionary group, based mainly around Pyotr Stepanovich, who manipulates the group to his goals, that is, to destroy, ridicule, and confuse their immediate surroundings, to destabilize the current order as much as possible, with the ultimate goal of usurping power tyrannically. The group aids him, as it appears to them as if they were helping to bring about a just and equal society in their eyes (in which, of course, not everyone is equally equal). There is a stark contrast between the idea, which consumes them and that this group of revolutionaries follows no matter what, and its bloody uprisal. Dostoyevsky attributes the behavior of this group to madness (of the spirit), stemming from the rejection of God and with it morality, as if possessed by demons (from which comes the name of the book). Whether it is in the case of Kirillov (a theoretical idea is worth more than his own life), Shigalyov (an idea worth a hundred million lives), or Pyotr Stepanovich who ultimately manipulates them.

What in particular is tragic is that many of these themes were clearly seen not only later in the 20th century, but even now. At least in this book, perhaps even in our society, it is the older generation itself and their ideas that sets the seed for the younger generation and inspire it. This is perhaps best seen in the relationship of Stepan Trofimovich and his son Pyotr, in which Pyotr, although despising his father, builds on top of his father’s then liberal ideas.

To counter these demons and the decay of morality, Dostoyevsky turns to Christianity and its family-centered values. A core part of that is optimism, that is believing that life can be good and worth living, which in the book is induced mainly by the creation of life. The birth of the child of Nikolay and Shatov’s wife completely changes the life of Shatov. It transforms one of the most brooding characters into one that lives life fully and joyfully, even though it is through a child not his, and is born into a broken family.

It is a book that I would love to re-read after immediately finishing it, to explore these motives again. I would also like to highlight the immersive depth and realism of its characters. Especially (what I consider) the two main protagonists - Nikolay Vsevolodovich Stavrogin and Stepan Trofimovich Verkhovensky, both to a degree inspired by real-life figures. The entire novel is surprisingly personal, as a lot of the behaviorisms of small town folk or criminals come from Dostyoevsky’s own experience.

Some of its complexity stems from the fact that, although it is a chronicle written by the character of Anton Lavrentyevich, some of the chapters follow different characters and even their points of view, especially in the third part of the book. This fluidly changing narrative is perhaps emphasized by the fact that each chapter was published (more or less) individually in the Russian Herald journal.

On a closing note, there is one particular chapter that I really enjoyed and that has an interesting story behind it. As mentioned, the chapters making up this book were published individually, but the book (in most published versions) is missing a certain chapter - “At Tikhon’s”. A chapter in my eyes crucial for the plot, but too severe for its time, ended up being rejected by the magazine editor and thus scrapped, forcing Dostoyevsky to finish the plot without it. Which is a great shame, since this chapter is considered one of the best ever written by Dostoyevsky and I would recommend it to anyone to read, even by itself (although it is quite drastic). Deciding whether or not to read this chapter during my reading, or after was a dilemma, but I’m glad I decided on the former. In short, he chapter offers a rare insight into the head of Nikolay Vsevolodovich and helps to understand some of his actions later on in the book, while circulating again around the topic of Christianity, forgiveness and other motives.

Some of this text was inspired by the book introduction written by Robert L. Belknap and this video (which I can recommend).

Motivation to pick-up the book

Can’t remember.