The Devils (The Possessed)

“I’d prefer you weren’t known as an atheist, I’d prefer it now especially.”

Varvara appreciates Stepan as an intellectual, but her awareness of her social status compels her to curb his intellectual pursuits. She does not care what he actually believes, only the public appearance of his intellectualism. To the characters, atheism is an indicator of radical political beliefs. Varvara does not care whether Stepan actually believes in God, only that the townspeople do not regard one of her close associates as a political radical.

“Mysteries, secrets! Why are there suddenly so many mysteries and secrets?”

Stepan is an intelligent man, but he has spent 20 years indulging his worst habits. He has been separated from reality by living at Varvara’s expense for so long. “Mysteries and secrets” have always been part of society but he has been insulated from their effects by another person’s wealth. As such, he views their sudden appearance in his life as something new and terrifying, rather than as an indicator of how removed he has been from society for so long. His ignorance and apathy speak to the wider apathy of the older generation in the novel.

“Absolute freedom will occur only when it doesn’t matter whether one lives or dies.”

To Kirillov, suicide is not necessarily a personal act. He has devised a means by which his death by suicide will function as a philosophical statement. Kirillov has invented suicide as a ritual of his nihilistic beliefs, a demonstration of his own conviction that will be illustrative to the world. Whereas other characters plan to stage revolutions or write great books, Kirillov aims toward “absolute freedom” (121) by showing the world the meaningless nature of his own existence.

“It always comes out the same: a road, an evil man, someone’s treachery, a death-bed, a letter from somewhere, unexpected news—I think it’s all lies, Shatushka.”

Marya makes the same prophecy every time she deals her cards. The repetition of the prophecy suggests that her predictions have meaning, and the vague nature of the words allow the audience to read depth or meaning in her words. However, Marya herself recognizes the prophecy as “lies” (151), yet she continues to perform the ritual anyway. The ritual is hollow and upsetting, yet she repeats it every night. Marya’s actions are an analogy for society itself, in which people repeat the same cycle of hollow, empty gestures without expecting any different outcome or any change in results. The prophecy may or may not be real, but the repeated nature of the ritual gives a deeper meaning to Marya’s perception of society.

“By now I’ve forgotten the order in which things happened because of all the confusion.”

The narrator confesses that not everything in the story can be trusted. He was present for many scenes but also describes scenes in which he could not possibly have seen or heard what took place. Even the order of events can become confused. The narrator establishes a sense of chaotic disruption that mirrors the emotional tenor of the town itself. In a town wrapped up in gossip and rumor, nothing can be completely trusted. Even the story is a chaotic blend of truth and fiction, in which the audience is encouraged to assemble a meaningful narrative from the chaos, just like Peter wants to make a new world from the chaos he creates.

“Oh, all Russians should be annihilated like dangerous parasites for the good of mankind!”

Stepan exhibits a form of nationalist self-loathing. Though he was once praised as an intellectual, time has passed him by, and he has come to resent his own society. He does not appreciate the feeling that he has been left behind. Though he does not agree with the nihilists and the radicals who desperately seek reform, he espouses criticisms that would not be out of place in their political pamphlets. The only difference between Stepan and the radicals is that he cannot envision a different future for Russia, so would rather the country ceased to be instead.

“He who teaches that everyone is good, will bring about the end of the world.”

Kirillov’s philosophical thoughts need to be understood in the context of his own personal views. When he warns that someone “who teaches that everyone is good” (251) may destroy the world, he is not necessarily framing this as a bad idea. Kirillov will eventually die by suicide as a demonstration of his own personal convictions. For him, the end of the world may be a similar gesture. The person who teaches that everyone is good may perform a ritual destruction of the world with which Kirillov himself can empathize.

“Everyone deserves an umbrella.”

Stavrogin does not often engage in explicit political discussions but his off-hand comments can reveal the breadth of his political views. While he lacks Peter’s radicalism or Shigalyov’s intellectualism, Stavrogin is broadly an egalitarian. An umbrella is a simple item, but it protects a person from the rain. Stavrogin believes that everyone should have access to this simple form of protection, while at the same time acknowledging that this is currently not the case. For all his sins, Stavrogin believes in a more equal society. He just loathes himself so much that he does not believe that he can bring it about.

“Everyone’s involved in a conspiracy.”

For the other characters, Marya is easy to dismiss. She is marginalized because of her deteriorating mental health and her low social status. When she mentions that “everyone’s involved in a conspiracy” (291), her words are not taken seriously but they are oddly prophetic. In addition to the revolutionary conspiracy orchestrated by Peter, every other character is embroiled in their own system of schemes and secrets that is tantamount to a conspiracy. The entire society is built on a bedrock of secret knowledge, to the point where only a marginalized person has the distance enough to recognize the society for what it is: one giant conspiracy.

“Bear your burden. Or else there’s no merit in it.”

An act is only given meaning through suffering. The ability to endure pain is a form of mortal purgatory, in which atonement is achieved through suffering. Therefore, any kind of act is only given meaning when a person marries it to a form of religious sacrifice. Kirillov says this to Stavrogin, who actively searches for new burdens to bear as a form of self-punishment for his various sins. In Kirillov’s view, Stavrogin’s burden is not the suffering itself but the acceptance of his existence as a form of suffering. By quitting the search for new burdens and looking inwards at himself, Stavrogin will find merit in his burdensome existence.

“And try, if you can, to leave out all nonsense: facts, facts, and more facts. The main thing is, keep it brief. Goodbye.”

Peter treats his father with utter contempt. Though Stepan was once a respected intellectual, Peter bursts into the town and immediately focuses on his father’s intellectual pretensions as a point of weakness. All Stepan has left to contribute to society is his performance at the literary event. Peter weaponizes this performance against his father, ridiculing the very idea that he might have something to contribute. Each insulting syllable is carefully crafted to punish his father for his years of absence.

“There’s a rebellion among the workers. You should have them all flogged; that would put an end to it.”

Peter dances around any ideological issues without ever committing to anything. He is a charismatic opportunist who will say anything to improve his immediate situation. When talking to his fellow revolutionaries, he espouses socialist ideas. When talking to Von Lembke, he calls for rebellious workers to be “flogged” (371). His ideological slipperiness makes him dangerous, as he has no real organizing principals.

“He has a system for spying. Every member of the society spies on every other one and is obliged to inform. Everyone belongs to all the others and the others belong to each one.”

Peter praises Shigalyov’s vision of a political future, though Stavrogin is skeptical. In Shigalyov’s vision, equality is not material. Instead, equality comes in the form of paranoia and suspicion. Rather than creating a system in which work and profits are evenly distributed, he has created a system in which everyone spies on each other. In Shigalyov’s future, there is a communal ownership of mistrust more than a communal ownership of the means of production. For a cynical person with paranoia like Peter, this is the perfect society. For a true socialist or egalitarian like Stavrogin, this is a dystopia.

“Is this what’s called remorse or repentance? I don’t know and to this day can’t tell.”

Stavrogin possesses an unrelenting search for a form of atonement that he cannot truly understand. He sins as a way to convince the world of his own awfulness, yet he is always excused by society. As his sins worsen and his actions become increasingly immoral, he lacks new ways in which to ruin himself and those around him. He is so far removed from “remorse or repentance” (472) that the words have lost all meaning to him. With the loss of meaning comes the loss of opportunity for true atonement.

“Every single bone in his body must be aching in ecstasy; never in his wildest dreams did he imagine such a splendid scenario.”

When others frame Stepan as capable of some form of radical political action, Peter immediately insults his father. The insult says more about him than his father, as the insult reveals Peter’s need to distance himself from the man who did not raise him. Peter defines himself as a revolutionary while relegating his father to the position of ineffectual man of the past. To even suggest that Stepan could be capable of the revolutionary activity that so defines Peter is an insult to Peter’s self-image. He lashes out at his father because of his insecurity and his dislike of being compared to Stepan in any way.

“Science itself won’t stand up for one minute without beauty—don’t you know that, you, who laugh at me—it will turn into a vulgar charade.”

Stepan finally defends himself, but only at a point where he is too late to have any effect on events. The literary festival itself is a “vulgar charade” (550) that is designed to distract the town from arson and murder that are happening elsewhere. In this sense, Stepan’s declarations in favor of beauty over science, of the older ways over the newer ways, are ineffectual but not necessarily incorrect. He simply does not know the full extent of the situation.

“The fire is in the minds of men and not on roofs of houses.”

Von Lembke is not an intelligent man, but he succinctly blurs the line between metaphor and reality, right at the moment when he is losing his grip on events. He is right to credit the “minds of men” (583) as being more of a problem than the fire on the houses. The radical ideology that he fears caused the arson attacks and has the potential to do even more damage. To Von Lembke, Peter’s ideology is an arson attack on the small town that is far more dangerous than any actual fire. Only when he is dislocated from events, however, is he finally able to put his fears into words.

“I declared that everything had occurred entirely by accident, through the actions of people who, while they might have been incited, were not really aware of what they were doing. They were drunk and not in control of themselves.”

The narrator exonerates the crowd who murdered Liza. Given that he was a part of that crowd, his exoneration carries less weight. The narrator is exonerating himself by proxy, excusing his failure to save Liza by insisting that they—and he—lacked all the requisite information. The lack of information can be applied to many of the sins committed throughout the novel, however, wherein the characters—like the crowd—are drunk on ideology and charisma. The narrator’s attempts at exoneration are a reminder for the audience that he is a character in the story, not a detached and objective observer.

“You like to think too much. In my opinion, it’s better not to think, just do it.”

Peter unwittingly reveals his entire character with an off-hand comment. He is not an intellectually serious person; his attempts at revolution are conducted with no real forethought. He lives a self-gratifying existence, one which elevates action above all else, regardless of the impact on other people. He is willing to kill people and to bring down an entire society just to roleplay as a revolutionary, all because he is keener to act than to reflect on the consequences of his actions for even a second.

“You know what you deserve for no longer believing, in your depravity, in God Himself, in the true Creator? You’re no better than a heathen.”

Fedka’s criticism of Peter hurts Peter more than anything else. Fedka and Peter are both killers and both criminals, but Peter considers himself to be better than Fedka. The insults serve the purpose of showing Peter that he is not truly better than Fedka, despite his hollow insistence on working for a greater cause. Fedka correctly diagnoses Peter as a non-believer—not necessarily in God, but in anything at all. Peter is stung by Fedka’s criticism because he knows that it is true. This is why he kills Fedka.

“The old delirium, disgrace, and death are over! Let’s work and begin a new life—all three of us.”

Shatov plays the role of a disillusioned revolutionary in the text. He was in the society, but he has lost interest in their cause. When his estranged wife unexpectedly gives birth to a baby, however, Shatov sees the world anew. For him, the baby has the same effect as a revolution: He sees the world in a new way, creating a firm divide between the past and the present.

“But what scum these people are!”

Peter has dedicated his life to bringing about a revolution for the Russian people, even though he regards them all as “scum” (683). Peter has no real interest in the people of Russia, only in himself. Even his revolutionary partners are vile people in his mind, even though they are the people who will fight alongside him to bring about a better world. Meanwhile, Stavrogin is the only man he truly admires, and Stavrogin loathes Peter. The self-serving nature of Peter’s private revolution reveals the way in which he is striving for the attention of Stavrogin and unable to satisfy himself with the adoration of everyone else.

“I deal extremely well with the common people, extremely well, and I’ve always told them that.”

Stepan’s final days reveal that he is just as deluded as his son. Like Peter, he assures himself that he has a great affinity with the common people of Russia, even though he knows nothing about them. His apparent relationship with “the common people” (715) is an absurd inversion of the radical society, who hope to collapse the Russian regime on the behalf of a people they barely understand. Whereas Peter’s so-called affinity with the common people has a destructive quality, Stepan’s similar affinity is presented as pathetic and “delusional.”