In his essay "The Brothers Karamazov: Idea and Technique" Edward Wasiolek examines two aspects of Dostoevsky's work. It begins with exposition of the scene in the elder Zosima's cell and Ivan's internal struggles with religion, and then continues with a detailed look at the relationship between Dmitri and Katerina. Both of these sections have a lot to say about the novel as a whole, especially when viewed together. However, before starting a discussion about their combined meaning, each of these parts of the essay must be understood on its own. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Wasiolek begins his essay by acclaiming Dostoevsky's introduction to The Brothers Karamazov. The preliminary scene in Zosima's cell is essential because it sets the stage for the entire novel and raises questions that will be addressed throughout the story. The conflicts "son versus father; humility versus hatred; monastery versus world; atonement versus threat" are all introduced (Wasiolek, 813). Additionally, the reader is informed about Ivan's questions regarding religion. Wasiolek emphasizes the importance of Ivan's doubts because, in his own words, "The external drama is Ivan's internal drama" (814). Everything that happens in the cell is a representation of Ivan's conflict of ideas about the existence of God and how he treats or mistreats man. This premise is maintained throughout the novel, as the reader is continually forced to judge the characters' actions based on whether or not God exists and whether His existence requires obedience and respect. The second part of Wasiolek's essay examines the relationship between Dmitri and Katerina. The first point he makes is that their relationship is full of irregularities, especially on Katerina's part. His actions towards Dmitri continually contradict each other. “Her erratic character shifts her from love to hate, from generosity to spite, from arrogance to submission” (816). Her actions seem to encourage him to love and hate her. After studying the nature of Katerina's love for Dmitri, Wasiolek attempts to ascertain the reasons behind her actions, turning to the first meeting between Dmitri and Katerina for the explanation. At this meeting, Dmitri gives Katerina money without getting anything in return, after which they exchange deep bows. Wasiolek suggests that these bows completely humiliate Katerina, because she previously considered herself of much higher quality than Dmitri. Now, though, he's done a respectable thing for her, and she needs to do it in return. His pride is severely wounded by his act of sacrifice, and it is this that causes his actions from then on to be what they are. “Is it any wonder, then, that from this moment on she is obsessed with but one idea: to save Dmitri, to sacrifice herself wholly and fully, to repay the burning insult of sacrifice with the burning insult of sacrifice” (818 ) ). To satisfy her need to be noble, Katerina forgives all of Dmitri's wrongs against her. In fact, sometimes she even encourages him to act in ways that demean her so that she can forgive him in the name of love. However, Dmitri despises this love and feels haunted by Katerina's forgiveness, a concept he cannot understand. Wasiolek continues to explain Katerina's love for Dmitri in terms of tearing. He states that what Dostoevsky meant by this term was “intentional and pleasurable self-harm” (820). Katerina uses "love" for Dmitri to achieve her own goals, to increase his pride in her own goodness. Wasiolek's analysis of these two aspects of The Brothers Karamazov is very accurate and complete. My initial reaction after completing the study of his thoughts wasgeneral agreement. However, the more I reflected on his words, the more one aspect of his essay intrigued me. Because this aspect of this article has led me to more reflection than all the other parts combined, it will be the focus of my discussion from this point forward. The troublesome point I am referring to is the question of Wasiolek's motivations in including in his essay an examination of both Ivan's religious views and the relationship between Dmitri and Katerina. In other words, what is the relationship between these two seemingly unrelated aspects of the novel that would lead Wasiolek to criticize them both together? Wasiolek does not answer this question, but lets his readers come to the answer themselves. However, I believe he provides enough clues throughout the text for the reader to deduce an answer. The most unifying concept between the two sections of Wasiolek's essay is the idea of ​​laceration. Wasiolek goes into detail to explain Katerina's laceration for Dmitri, and then briefly mentions in conclusion that Ivan also practices laceration. I think it would have been very interesting for Wasiolek to explore this idea more, because everything else in his essay builds on it. Katerina and Ivan's lacerations are very similar, as both are based on a willingness to accept humiliation and even condemnation for what they perceive as a higher goal. Katerina tears at Dmitri in an attempt to restore his pride and nobility after he bows to her, while Dmitri tears at God because he believes God is unjust. As is made clear in the Grand Inquisitor scene, he would rather suffer condemnation by denying Christ than follow a God who allows great suffering and injustice to occur. Ivan feels that God has made earthly life too difficult for the multitudes to be truly virtuous and happy at the same time. “Feed men and then ask them for virtue” (Dostoevsky, 233). Katerina and Ivan are both proud and angry because an action has been done for them that cannot be justified or logically explained (Dmitri's free lending of money and God's sacrifice for man's sins). For them, acceptance of these things is akin to humiliation and acquiescence in their weakness and dependence. Although the previous paragraph explains why Katerina and Ivan were torn apart, it does not explain why Dostoevsky includes these two examples of torn apart in his novel, nor why Wasiolek includes them in his essay. I think the answer, at least from a Christian perspective, is evident in the difference between Katerina and Ivan. Their difference is this: while Katerina makes a sacrifice for the purpose of laceration, Ivan rejects the sacrifice of another for the purpose of laceration. This difference is fundamental. To explain its meaning it is useful to move the comparison from Katerina and Ivan to Dmitri and Ivan, because they are both those who refuse the sacrifice. First, Ivan rejects Christ's sacrifice because of his pride. As Wasiolek's essay makes clear, Ivan believes that if God exists, he should manifest himself in all areas of society (expressed in the cell of the elderly Zosima) and should be understandable to man. Since these things are not true for Ivan, he rejects the idea of ​​God on principle2And He has been given the freedom by Christ to do this. Dmitri, however, cannot refuse Katerina's sacrifice. He is forced to suffer under his pride. The meaning is that Christ's sacrifice is perfect and can be rejected, while Katerina's sacrifice is selfish and harmful and cannot be rejected. The difference in the actions of Dostoevsky's characters affirms the nature of love. True love is not laceration; rather it is exactly the opposite, because love is neither proud nor selfish and." 813-21.