Summary of Dostoevsky Notes from the Underground in 2 minutes retelling the plot

Summary
Dostoevsky
Notes from the Underground

A complex work in which there are few events, mainly describing the thoughts of the main character. And the reader must understand what the author wanted to convey to the reader.

The main character, a former employee of management structures, is now retired and spends all his free time thinking about his life. And about the whole society as a whole, about what role he plays in this society.

He lives on the outskirts of St. Petersburg in a small apartment, but does not experience financial problems, since he recently received an inheritance. And due to the fact that he found himself without work, and has a lot of free time, he constantly thinks about life and who he is in it.

He began analyzing his life from early childhood, writes memoirs, condemns the entire world around him and himself for not being able to change it. The main character reads a lot and compares the entire world around him with the one he read about in literature.

The second part of the work is full of mental struggle and resentment. An incredible thing happened when he was in a tavern, an officer pushed him, which touched him to the core. The main character could not answer him due to weakness of spirit.

Dostoevsky. All works

Poor people
White Nights
Demons
Brothers Karamazov
Eternal husband
Double
Uncle's dream
Yershalaim chapters in the novel The Master and Margarita
Notes from the House of the Dead
Notes from the Underground
Player
Idiot
Crocodile
Meek
The Legend of the Grand Inquisitor
Boy at Christ's Christmas tree
Boys
Netochka Nezvanova
Teenager
Crime and Punishment
The village of Stepanchikovo and its inhabitants
Bad joke
Raskolnikov's dream about a horse
Funny man's dream
Humiliated and insulted
Mistress
Epilogue of the novel Crime and Punishment

Summary: Notes from the Underground

F. M. Dostoevsky Notes from the Underground
The hero of the “underground”, the author of the notes, is a collegiate assessor who recently retired after receiving a small inheritance. Now he is forty. He lives “in the corner” - a “trashy, nasty” room on the edge of St. Petersburg. He is also in the “underground” psychologically: almost always alone, he indulges in unbridled “dreaming,” the motives and images of which are taken from “books.” In addition, the nameless hero, showing extraordinary intelligence and courage, explores his own consciousness, his own soul. The purpose of his confession is “to test: is it possible to at least be completely frank with yourself and not be afraid of the whole truth?”

He believes that he is a smart person from the 60s. XIX century doomed to be “spineless.” Activity is the lot of stupid, limited people. But the latter is the “norm,” and increased consciousness is “a real, complete illness.” The mind forces one to rebel against the laws of nature discovered by modern science, the “stone wall” of which is “certainty” only for the “stupid” direct person. The hero of the “underground” does not agree to come to terms with the obvious and experiences a “sense of guilt” for the imperfect world order that causes him suffering. Science “lies” that a person can be reduced to reason, an insignificant fraction of the “ability to live,” and “calculated” according to a “tablet.” “Want” is the “manifestation of all life.” Contrary to the “scientific” conclusions of socialism about human nature and human good, he defends his right to “mix positive prudence […] the most vulgar stupidity […] solely in order to confirm to himself […] that people are still people, and not piano players keys on which […] the laws of nature themselves play with their own hands...”

“In our negative age,” the “hero” yearns for an ideal that can satisfy his inner “broadness.” This is not pleasure, not a career, and not even the “crystal palace” of socialists, which robs a person of the most important “benefits” - his own “wants”. The hero protests against the identification of goodness and knowledge, against unconditional faith in the progress of science and civilization. The latter “does not soften anything in us,” but only develops the “versatility of sensations,” so that pleasure is found in humiliation, and in the “poison of unsatisfied desire,” and in the blood of others... After all, in human nature there is not only the need for order, prosperity, and happiness , but also chaos, destruction, suffering. The “Crystal Palace,” in which there is no place for the latter, is untenable as an ideal, because it deprives a person of freedom of choice. And therefore it’s better - a modern “chicken coop”, “conscious inertia”, “underground”.

But longing for “reality” used to drive me out of the “corner.” One of these attempts is described in detail by the author of the notes.

At twenty-four years old, he was still serving in the office and, being “terribly proud, suspicious and touchy,” he hated and despised, “and at the same time [...] was afraid” of his “normal” colleagues. He considered himself a “coward and a slave,” like any “developed and decent person.” He replaced communication with people with intensive reading, and at night he “debauched” in “dark places.”

Once in a tavern, while watching a game of billiards, he accidentally blocked the path of an officer. Tall and strong, he silently moved the “short and emaciated” hero to another place. “Underground” wanted to start a “proper”, “literary” quarrel, but “preferred […] to angrily hide” for fear that he would not be taken seriously. For several years he dreamed of revenge, many times he tried not to be the first to turn away when they met on Nevsky. When, finally, they “tightly bumped shoulder to shoulder,” the officer did not pay attention to it, and the hero “was delighted”: he “maintained his dignity, did not yield a single step and publicly placed himself on an equal social footing with him.” "

The need of the “underground” person to occasionally “rush into society” was satisfied by a few acquaintances: the mayor Setochkin and a former school friend Simonov. During a visit to the latter, the hero learns about a dinner being prepared in honor of one of his fellow students and “shares” with the others. Fear of possible insults and humiliation haunts the “underground” long before dinner: after all, “reality” does not obey the laws of literature, and real people are unlikely to fulfill the roles prescribed for them in the dreamer’s imagination, for example, “loving” him for his mental superiority. At lunch, he tries to offend and offend his comrades. In response, they stop noticing him. “Underground” goes to the other extreme—public self-deprecation. The dinner companions leave for the brothel without inviting him with them. Now, for the sake of “literariness,” he is obliged to take revenge for the shame he suffered. For this purpose, he goes after everyone, but they have already gone to the prostitutes’ rooms. They offer him Lisa.

After “rude and shameless” “debauchery,” the hero starts a conversation with the girl. She is 20 years old, she is a bourgeois from Riga and recently arrived in St. Petersburg. Having guessed her sensitivity, he decides to make up for what he suffered from his comrades: he paints picturesque pictures in front of Lisa of either the terrible future of a prostitute, or the family happiness inaccessible to her, becoming “into pathos to the point that […] he himself was preparing for a throat spasm.” And it achieves the “effect”: disgust for her base life brings the girl to sobs and convulsions. WHEN LEAVING, the “savior” leaves his address to the “lost” woman. However, through the “literariness”, genuine pity for Lisa and shame for his “cunning” break through.

Three days later she comes. The “disgustingly embarrassed” hero cynically reveals to the girl the motives for his behavior, but unexpectedly encounters love and sympathy from her. He is also touched: “They don’t give me... I can’t be... kind!” But soon, ashamed of his “weakness,” he vindictively takes possession of Liza, and for complete “triumph,” he thrusts five rubles into her hand, like a prostitute. When leaving, she quietly leaves money.

“Underground” admits that he wrote his memoirs with shame, and yet he “only brought to the extreme in […] life what others “did not dare to bring to half.” He was able to abandon the vulgar goals of the surrounding society, but also the “underground” - “moral corruption.” Deep relationships with people, “living life,” inspire fear in him.

Philosophy of the main character

The hero believes that in the 60s of the 19th century, an intelligent person is simply doomed to be “spineless.” The lot of limited, stupid people is various activities, which are considered the norm, while increased consciousness is considered as a disease. The mind makes the protagonist rebel against the laws of nature discovered by modern science. Their “stone wall” is a “certainty” only for a “stupid” person. The hero of the underground does not agree to reconcile with the obvious. He feels “guilt” that the world order is imperfect, and this causes him suffering. Science lies that a personality can only be reduced to reason, “calculated according to a tablet.” “The manifestation of all life” is “wanting.” He defends, in spite of all “scientific” conclusions about human good and human nature, the right to mix “the most vulgar stupidity” with “positive prudence” in order to prove to himself that people are not “piano keys” on which the laws of nature play themselves.

The hero, who wrote notes from underground, yearns for an ideal that can satisfy his “broadness.” This is not a career, not pleasure, not even the “crystal palace” that socialists are building, since it takes away the main thing from a person - his own desire. The hero protests against the identification of knowledge and goodness, the unquestionable belief in the progress of civilization and science. Civilization “doesn’t soften anything” in us, but only develops, in his opinion, “versatility of sensations”, therefore pleasure is sought both in humiliation and in other people’s blood... In human nature, according to the main character, there is not only the need for happiness, prosperity, order, but also suffering, destruction, chaos. The “Crystal Palace,” which discards these negative aspects, is untenable as an ideal, since it deprives freedom of choice. It’s better therefore “conscious inertia”, a modern “chicken coop”, underground.

Finale of the work

The hero admits that he wrote his memoirs with shame. However, he only carried to the extreme what the others did not even dare to carry to half. The hero was able to abandon the goals of society, which seemed vulgar to him, however, the underground is also “moral corruption.” “Living life”, deep relationships with other people inspire fear in him. This is how the work “Notes from the Underground” ends, a brief summary of which we have described.

This story today, after reading, will not leave anyone indifferent. However, immediately after the publication of “Notes from the Underground” in 1864, there were very few reviews, although representatives of the revolutionary democratic camp immediately became interested in them. The only direct response to the work was a parody by Shchedrin, who included the pamphlet “Swifts” in his review entitled “Literary Trifles.” In it, ridiculing the participants in the magazine “Epoch” in a satirical form, he portrayed the “dull fiction writer” Dostoevsky under the guise of the fourth swift. The interest of critics in this story was awakened after the novel “Crime and Punishment” was published, that is, two years later. It developed much of what was outlined in the Notes.

Episode in the brothel

Further, Dostoevsky (“Notes from Underground”) describes the following events. After “debauchery,” “rude and shameless,” the hero talks to the girl. She is 20. She is new to St. Petersburg, and she herself is a bourgeois from Riga. He decides, having guessed the sensitivity in the girl, to take it out on her: he draws picturesque pictures of the future of a prostitute, after which - family happiness, inaccessible to her. The effect is achieved: the girl is driven to convulsions and sobs by disgust for her life. The “Savior” leaves her his address when leaving. However, through his “literariness”, shame for his “cunning” and pity for Lisa make their way through him. The main character of the work “Notes from Underground” really likes to analyze his own actions.

“Notes from Underground”: lunch with former classmates

Occasionally, an underground man felt a need in society, which was satisfied only by a few acquaintances: Simonov, a former school friend, and Setochkin, the mayor. During a visit to Simonov, he learns that a dinner is being prepared in honor of a fellow student and “shares” with the others. “Underground” was already haunted long before this dinner by the fear of possible humiliations and insults, since reality does not obey the laws of literature and it is unlikely that real people will fulfill the roles prescribed for them in the imagination of one dreamer: they will be able, for example, to recognize and love the main character for his intelligence superiority. He tries to offend and offend his comrades at dinner. They simply stop noticing him in response. The underground goes to the other extreme - public self-abasement. Then the dinner companions go to the brothel without him. For the sake of “literariness,” he is now obliged to take revenge on these people for the shame he suffered, so he goes after everyone. However, they had already gone to their rooms. The hero is offered Lisa.

The main character of the work

This is a collegiate assessor who recently retired after receiving a small inheritance. The hero of the work “Notes from Underground” is 40 years old. He lives on the edge of St. Petersburg, in a “crappy” room. This hero is also psychologically underground: he is almost always alone, indulges in “dreaming,” the images and motives of which were taken from books. The nameless hero, in addition, explores his own soul and consciousness, while showing courage and an extraordinary mind. The purpose of such a confession is to find out whether it is possible to be completely frank, at least with oneself, without being afraid of the truth.

Notes from the Underground. Dostoevsky F.M. summary.

Science “lies” that a person can be reduced to reason, an insignificant fraction of the “ability to live,” and “calculated” according to a “tablet.” “Want” is the “manifestation of all life.” Contrary to the “scientific” conclusions of socialism about human nature and human good, he defends his right to “mix with positive prudence <...> the most vulgar stupidity <...> solely in order to confirm to himself <...> that people are still people, and not piano keys, on which <...> the laws of nature themselves play with their own hands...".

Notes from the Underground. Dostoevsky F.M. summary.

“In our negative age,” the “hero” yearns for an ideal that can satisfy his inner “broadness.” This is not pleasure, not a career, and not even the “crystal palace” of socialists, which robs a person of the most important “benefits” - his own “wants”. The hero protests against the identification of goodness and knowledge, against unconditional faith in the progress of science and civilization. The latter “does not soften anything in us,” but only develops the “versatility of sensations,” so that pleasure is found in humiliation, and in the “poison of unsatisfied desire,” and in other people’s blood... After all, in human nature there is not only the need for order, prosperity, and happiness , but also chaos, destruction, suffering. The “Crystal Palace,” in which there is no place for the latter, is untenable as an ideal, because it deprives a person of freedom of choice. And therefore it’s better - a modern “chicken coop”, “conscious inertia”, “underground”.

But longing for “reality” used to drive me out of the “corner.” One of these attempts is described in detail by the author of the notes.

At twenty-four years old, he was still serving in the chancellery and, being “terribly proud, suspicious and touchy,” he hated and despised, “and at the same time <...> he was afraid” of his “normal” colleagues. He considered himself a “coward and a slave,” like any “developed and decent person.” He replaced communication with people with intensive reading, and at night he “debauched” in “dark places.”

Once in a tavern, while watching a game of billiards, he accidentally blocked the path of an officer. Tall and strong, he silently moved the “short and emaciated” hero to another place. “Underground” wanted to start a “proper”, “literary” quarrel, but “preferred <...> to angrily hide” for fear that he would not be taken seriously. For several years he dreamed of revenge, many times he tried not to be the first to turn away when they met on Nevsky. When, finally, they “tightly bumped shoulder to shoulder,” the officer did not pay attention to it, and the hero “was delighted”: he “maintained his dignity, did not yield a single step and publicly placed himself on an equal social footing with him.” "

At lunch, he tries to offend and offend his comrades. In response, they stop noticing him. “Underground” goes to the other extreme—public self-deprecation. The dinner companions leave for the brothel without inviting him with them. Now, for the sake of “literariness,” he is obliged to take revenge for the shame he suffered. For this purpose, he goes after everyone, but they have already gone to the prostitutes’ rooms. They offer him Lisa.

After “rude and shameless” “debauchery,” the hero starts a conversation with the girl. She is 20 years old, she is a bourgeois from Riga and recently arrived in St. Petersburg. Having guessed sensitivity in her, he decides to make up for what he suffered from his comrades: he paints in front of Liza picturesque pictures of either the terrible future of a prostitute, or the family happiness inaccessible to her, going “into pathos to the point that <…> himself was preparing for a throat spasm.” And it achieves the “effect”: disgust for her base life brings the girl to sobs and convulsions. When leaving, the “savior” leaves his address to the “lost” woman. However, through the “literariness”, genuine pity for Lisa and shame for his “cunning” break through.

“Underground” admits that he wrote his memoirs with shame, and yet he “only brought to the extreme in <...> life what others “did not dare to bring to half.” He was able to abandon the vulgar goals of the surrounding society, but also the “underground” - “moral corruption.” Deep relationships with people, “living life,” inspire fear in him.