The House of the Dead

“If you only read the books that everyone else is reading, you can only think what everyone
else is thinking.”
― Haruki Murakami, Norwegian Wood

A book that merely lets us take pleasure in it is not an exemplification of a good book at all. An
excellent book keeps us enamored from beginning to end, as well as persists us in contemplating
critically about the author’s point of view, principles, and impressions that lie beneath the multitude
of words the book retains. And one such work that has enthralled many well-known authors and
philosophers is Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s “The House of the Dead,” with its bleak yet morbidly
fascinating descriptive prose.

Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoyevsky was a Russian

novelist, short story writer, essayist, and journalist.
Throughout his life, he authored a great deal of
literature and journalism, but his books' dramatic
structure and psychological nuance have helped him
become most well-known. His debut book, "Poor
Folk," brought him immediate acclaim and allowed
him to join the Saint Petersburg literary community
However, he was imprisoned in 1849 for belonging
to The Petrashevsky Circle, a radical intellectual
discussion club that studied outlawed literature that
was critical of Tsarist Russia. After being
imprisoned for 4 years in a Siberian prison camp,
followed by 6 years of compulsory military service
in exile, he was released and went on to compose
"Notes from the House of the Dead" in sections
between 1860 and 1862.

“The House of the Dead” is mainly Dostoyevsky’s

prison experience in the guise of a convict named
Alexander Petrovich Goryanchikov, imprisoned ten years for murdering his own wife. But the
book is more than just a straightforward semi-autobiography. The book is a peculiar kind of writing
that seamlessly flips between several genres, including factual, philosophical, autobiographical,
documentary, novel, and social tract. The many genres combine to create a striking image of the
"peculiar world" of the prison, as Dostoyevsky refers to it.
There are more hues and facades to life than just black and white, like two sides of a coin. It can
appear pure red, blue, or lavender at different times. And like an octagonal shape, it comprises
multiple planes. And in this book, Dostoyevsky expresses this very notion. Despite the fact that
the prison was populated with individuals who had committed heinous crimes, some goodness
remained in them despite their offense and sentence. Being guilty of a crime and not feeling guilty
regarding it does not render one either good or bad. It all depends on the viewpoint and perspective.
Someone can be harsh or nice at times, impolite or courteous, or even a criminal or saint. Although
the jail is harsh, its inmates are not necessarily vicious. In the midst of death, Goryanchikov found
hope and life in gestures of compassion and love. Convicts extending assistance to one another,
prisoners fostering animals, widows offering charity to the prisoners, doctors providing kindness
to the inmates—these insignificant acts do not mitigate prison’s darkness, but they permit the
human soul to survive with some semblance of hope.
Of course, there are lovely philosophical musings – a signature trait of Dostoyevsky’s works. In
addition to other complex subjects, the narrator muses about the nature of freedom, the significance
of hope, the disparity in penalties for the same offense, the discrepancy between appearance and
reality, and free will. Through Goryanchikov, Dostoyevsky offers an account of prison life that is
profoundly dehumanizing. He believes in humanity, in treating convicts as they are – human
beings. As he said in the book,
“Every man, whoever he may be and however humiliated, still requires, even if instinctively, even
if unconsciously, respect for his human dignity. The prisoner himself knows that he is a prisoner,
an outcast, and he knows his place before his superior; but no brands, no fetters will make him
forget that he is a human being. And since he is in fact a human being, it follows that he must be
treated as a human being.”
The novel makes readers consider Goriyanchikov's query: How are our neighbors' souls being
shaped by prisons? Furthermore, who is making notes? The book portrayed a vivid picture of a
world in which convicts are tormented by boredom, loneliness, insanity, despair, and a lack of
freedom—and all of this while being shackled. Yet, the book is no mere catalogue of prison’s
hardships.

“Here was the house of the living dead, a life like none other upon earth.”
“The House of the Dead” is a powerful novel of redemption, exploring one man’s spiritual and
moral death and the miracle of his gradual reawakening. The book isn’t an easy read; it is slow-
paced and sometimes monotonous. Moreover, it slightly deviated from Dostoyevsky’s famous
format. In comparison to Dostoyevsky’s other books, “The House of the Dead” is simple and
lacks dramatics. But the book lives up to its title. Despite having an ending, the book leaves the
reader ambiguous, thinking about the morbid yet fascinating nature of life—inside prison or
outside prison. Definitely a Dostoyevsky!

Tasfia Tabassum

Department of English

48th batch

BAERF48223028