MarxBakuninMe (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)

Right, but . . . but the Jesus thing was in Brothers.

Shadynight44 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)

No, it was The Idiot. You should reread it if you don't understand that. Alyosha is still incomplete, as the story was to have three volumes. Even the dust jacket of the Idiot says this.

MarxBakuninMe (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)

That was Brothers, not The Idiot.

gloi2 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)

dostoevsky ROCKSthats all

platonicideal1 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)

Well, I believe the version of The Republic that I read was an abridged version, so I did not remember the specific quote that you are talking about. My impression was that Socrates (or Plato) was mainly against those aspects of poetry that emphasized the unrealistic things. I remember reading somewhere that Socrates would only frequent the plays of Sophocles, which definitely supports the idea that he wasn't against ALL writing and literature. Do you have the exact line in book X? Thanks.

Shadynight44 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)

If you are not so certain that Socrates (or Plato) would have not kicked Dostoevsky out of the Republic, you haven't read book X. In book X, Socrates says that any writing that makes people think outside the laws of the Republic are a detriment to the Republic. Every poet (dramatist, etc) must leave the Republic. There is only HOPE that one day they might be allowed back in.

platonicideal1 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)

I think that Dostoevsky appeals most to those intellectuals who feel that they are hopelessly fallen. Dostoevsky was very compassionate--to the religious and the criminal. And, he recognized this spirit in Jesus. He loved people of all religions, though, and was by no means a person who shoved his religion down anyone's throat. He helps to make Christianity more respectible philosophically, though he does not expound on his theology that much in his books. He emphasizes openess to others.

platonicideal1 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)

I am not so certain that Socrates would have done anything to stop the publication of Dostoevsky's works. I think Socrates was mainly against the false, misleading things in movies and heroic novels that elevate the "romantic" things and make people want to emulate them, even though they are not true to real life. He would in principle been against any movies that elevated the "unrealistic"--things that were impossible in real life. He considered these particularly dangerous and misleading.

johnshipe (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)

I DO admit I know little about Dostoevsky. That's why I ask. Short bios I've read make it sound like he vascillated politically thru his lifetime. The irony I considered has him appear to support a brand of government that had once treated him badly. My comparison to Orwell's Winston was not about Dostoevsky's character, but about the difficulty of maintaining pure idealist philosophies in oppressive political climates. Do I have a sense of it? Regardless, the novels are indeed a wonder.

Shadynight44 (December 31, 1969 at 4:59 pm)

I think you are right, in part. Dostoevsky point out in The Idiot that if Jesus were to come back, we'd just kill him or make him go insane (cast him out). Nietzsche says, God is dead, and you killed him. But N. is also sarcastic about God often, and Dos, while a sarcastic person, is always serious about the power of metaphyical redemption.