In his essay “The Karamazov Brothers: Idea and Technique”, Edward Wasiolek examines two aspects of Dostoyevsky's work. It begins with an exposition of the scene in the elder Zosima's cell and Ivan's internal struggles with religion, then follows with a detailed look at the relationship between Dmitri and Katerina. These two sections have a lot to say about the novel as a whole, especially when viewed together. However, before a discussion of their combined meaning can begin, each of these parts of the essay must be understood individually. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Wasiolek begins his essay by acclaiming Dostoyevsky's introduction to The Brothers Karamazov. The preliminary scene in Zosimas' cell is essential because it sets the stage for the entire novel and raises questions that will be addressed throughout the novel. Conflicts “child against father; humility versus hatred; monastery against the world; atonement versus threat” (Wasiolek, 813) are all introduced. In addition to this, the reader is made aware of 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 his treatment or mistreatment of man. This premise continues 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, particularly on Katerina's part. His actions towards Dmitri continually contradict each other. “Her capricious character makes her go from love to hatred, from generosity to spite, from arrogance to submission” (816). Her actions seem to encourage him to both love and hate her. After investigating the nature of Katerina's love for Dmitri, Wasiolek attempts to determine the reasons for her actions, turning to the first meeting between Dmitri and Katerina for an explanation. At this meeting, Dmitri gives money to Katerina without getting anything in return, after which they exchange low greetings. Wasiolek suggests that these arcs completely humiliate Katerina, as she previously considered herself to be of much higher quality than Dmitri. But now he has done a respectable thing for her, and she must return it. His pride is severely wounded by his act of sacrifice, and that is what makes his actions from that point on be what they are. “Should we be surprised then that she is now obsessed with a single idea: saving Dmitri, sacrificing herself entirely and fully, returning the burning insult of sacrifice with the burning insult of sacrifice” (818). ). In order to satisfy her need to be noble, Katerina forgives all of Dmitri's wrongs against her. In fact, she sometimes even encourages him to act in ways that will put her down so that she can forgive him in the name of love. However, Dmitri despises this love and feels persecuted by Katerina's forgiveness, a concept she does not understand. Wasiolek continues to explain Katerina's love for Dmitri in terms of laceration. He states that what Dostoyevsky meant by the term was “intentional and pleasurable self-mutilation” (820). Katerina uses “love” for Dmitri to accomplish her own goals, to develop pride in her own goodness. Wasiolek's analysis of these twoaspects of The Brothers Karamazov is very precise and complete. My first reaction upon completing the study of his thoughts was one of general agreement. However, the more I thought about his words, the more one aspect of his essay intrigued me. Because this aspect of this article has led me to deeper reflection than all other parts combined, it will now be the focus of my discussion. The point of trouble I am referring to is the question of Wasiolek's motives in including in his essay the examination of 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 prompt Wasiolek to criticize them both together? Wasiolek does not answer this question, but lets his readers tackle the answer for themselves. I believe, however, that 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 explains Katerina's laceration in detail for Dmitri, then briefly mentions in conclusion that Ivan also practices laceration. I think it would have been very interesting for Wasiolek to explore this idea further, as the entire rest of his essay builds on it. Katerina's and Ivan's lacerations are very similar, as they are both based on a willingness to accept humiliation and even condemnation for what they perceive as a higher goal. Katerina lacerates herself in front of Dmitri in an attempt to restore her pride and nobility after he bows to her, while Dmitri lacerates himself in front of God because he believes God is unjust. As the Grand Inquisitor scene makes clear, he would rather suffer condemnation by denying Christ than follow a God who allows great suffering and injustice to occur. Ivan believes that God has made earthly life too difficult for the multitudes to be truly virtuous and happy at the same time. “Feed men, then ask them for virtue” (Dostoyevsky, 233). Both Katerina and Ivan are proud and angry that an action was done for them that cannot be justified or explained logically (Dmitri's free lending of money and God's sacrifice for man's sins) . To them, accepting these things feels like humiliation and acquiescence to their weakness and dependence. Although the previous paragraph explains why Katerina and Ivan lacerate each other, it does not explain why Dostoyevsky includes these two examples of lacerations 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 essential. To explain its meaning, it is helpful to compare Katerina and Ivan to Dmitri and Ivan, as they are the ones who both reject 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 elder Zosima) and should be understandable to man. Because these things are not true for Ivan, he rejects the idea of ​​God on principle2E. Christ gave him the freedom to do so. Dmitri, on the other hand, cannot reject 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." 813-21.