The underground man is an interesting character, to say the least. He was once a social worker, but he quit that job when he inherited 5,000 rubles from a relative. 5,000 rubles is not that great a sum of money, but it is enough to live relatively comfortably.
He informs the readers, the readers that he doesn’t intend to exist because no one will read this book, that he is attempting to tell the truth because he is writing this for himself. He wishes to tell the truth as best he can. Even though he claims to be trying to tell the truth, he constantly tells us that what he just said was a lie. Not only that, but it constantly appears that he is actively trying to deceive someone. Perhaps he also lied about not lying to us? Nearly everything he gives us is immediately contradicted, because he can’t decide on any one thing. Any course of action he chooses never happens because following through with that choice would mean limiting himself to one course. One path. He hates this idea. The idea that “twice two makes four” is troubling to him, because he does not wish to be examined as a mathematical equation.
The age of enlightenment was in full swing, giving us reasons for everything. Even the way our minds work has been defined. The underground man resents this idea mostly because that would take away our free will. This limits us. He is very much against limits, which is why it is so hard for him to get anything done.
No comments:
Post a Comment