Reader discussion: Notes from the Underground

Public reader discussion about Notes from the Underground in the WeRead Catalog by Fyodor Dostoyevsky.

Notes from Underground and Fahrenheit 451 send opposite messages.

By shelfpath9

Hi, I picked up Dostoevsky’s *Notes from Underground* mostly because it kept getting mentioned in the 2018 *Fahrenheit 451* movie. I figured there was some point to it, so I told myself I’d read it and figure out why. Now that I’m done, I honestly have to recommend *Notes from Underground*—it really hits hard, and it was genuinely enjoyable to read. To me, the two books/movies feel like they’re basically telling opposite stories to the reader. In *Notes from Underground*, the “hero” (more like antihero) is stuck in his own head the whole time, overthinking and living in thoughts, and you can tell the author emphasizes how bookish he is a few times too. That led me to see the message as “think less and go live.” But in *Fahrenheit 451* it feels flipped—without books there’s not enough thinking going on, and without them you can’t really live right. What do you think?

Tough time with Notes from the Underground, by Dostoevsky.

By Ink_Tide

Hey everyone — I started reading *Notes from the Underground* a few days ago and I’ve already made it through Part I. I will say, I got pulled in right away, but I’m still not really getting what the “deep” point is. Like, I understood the stuff about the Crystal Palace critique, but there are other parts where I’m just like… what does he mean? Pleasure, pain, revenge — I can’t quite place it. If anyone has any insight on what I’m supposed to take from it, I’d really appreciate it. (And sorry in advance for any grammar mistakes.)

4 masterpieces by F.M.Dostoyevsky

By inkcrescent275

“Brothers Karamazov,” “Crime and Punishment,” “The Idiot,” and “Demons” feel like his four biggest masterpieces to me. Honestly, if you go through them carefully they can be such a mind-blowing read. It’s like Dostoyevsky is talking about basically all the big stuff in life—relationships, morals, religion, and what it all even means. And he doesn’t just say a point and leave it there; he sets up tough counterarguments too, then tries to answer them. A lot of the novels circle around the same kinds of ideas, so you end up understanding the same themes better without it feeling totally repetitive. Also, his “villains” (or whatever you want to call them underneath) are usually pretty similar: nihilistic atheists who see how absurd life is, and they’re often really smart. That’s Raskolnikov, Ivan, and Kirilov. A lot of his characters are basically different ideas and different personalities, and I feel like most people could see themselves in at least one of them. If I were recommending an order, I’d do: 1) Brothers Karamazov 2) Crime and Punishment 3) The Idiot 4) Demons If even one person gets interested because of this, I’d be really happy. Thanks for reading.

How do you read this passage from Notes From the Underground?

By cafe-clear

I’m kind of stuck on the bold part. When he says “possible not to” put out his tongue, does he mean it literally can’t be done, like it’s impossible? Or am I supposed to read it as, “in theory you could avoid doing it with some building”? I keep going back and forth because the wording feels like it could go either way, and it makes the whole point a little hard to pin down.

Dostoiévski

By weatherDelta7

I’m about to start Crime and Punishment and I honestly have no clue what it’s even like. I haven’t read anything by Dostoevsky before. I mostly stick to fiction, horror, romance, and a couple classics (like Madame Bovary and Wuthering Heights). Is there anything I should know going in? Also, does anyone have good context for who Fiodor is and when/where the story is set? I’d rather not just look it up and miss the discussion. Edit: Okay wow, yeah—it ended up becoming my favorite book now.

Why is Dostoevsky so verbose in 'The Brothers Karamazov'?

By azuresparrow2000

He’s definitely one of the best novelists, no question. I just can’t stop wondering why he chose to do it that way—what was the reason behind the genius move? Also, why do his characters talk so much? I feel like all the things they say could’ve been handled in like 500 pages just by directly describing what they’re doing or thinking. Even the psychoanalysis and the history stuff—surely that could’ve been squeezed way more. If the dialogue was closer to Shakespeare’s style, I’m thinking it might’ve been around 400 pages? Not sure, but it feels like it.

Notes from Underground

By draft_arch

Just wrapped up the first chunk and it honestly felt like I was having a conversation with someone completely unhinged. At the same time, it really makes me think Dostoyevsky is a total genius. I keep catching myself wondering if I’m basically the Underground Man… and, yeah, in some ways maybe. I don’t even know how to pin it down, but these thoughts keep coming up as I read. There’s also one line that hit me hard for no clear reason: “Do away with my desires, eradicate my ideals, show me a better way and I will follow you.” So what was your first reaction when you read Notes from Underground?

About "Notes from Underground" by Dostoevsky

By weather_yard

I’ve tried to get through “Notes from Underground” like three times now and I still don’t really get it. I read “The Gambler” before, and I’ve been working on “Crime and Punishment” for a few days, and neither of those felt this way. I could read them pretty normally. But with “Notes from Underground” it’s like my brain just stops working, and I end up feeling really dumb. Is anyone else struggling with this one, or am I the only one?

Notes from the underground, and other books such as Platon - Republic

By BeeCliff1982

Reading is usually an awesome experience for me, but sometimes I hit books that are way harder than they should be—like I can’t really get what’s going on. I’m working on my third Dostoyevsky right now (Notes from the Underground), and I honestly don’t understand what he’s trying to say. I had the same issue with Plato’s Republic too and ended up stopping halfway. So what am I doing wrong? Am I just not smart enough for this kind of stuff? And are these pages just meant to sound deep without really being understood, or is it all supposed to click if you read it right?

Fyodor Dostoevsky's "Notes from Underground" May Have Completely Demolished My Life Philosophy

By coupletAmber

I don’t really comment a lot, so I’m not even sure how people here will take long posts like this (and yeah, part of me thinks, “maybe nobody wants to read all that,” lol). If you do end up reading the whole thing, thanks a lot. Anyway—quick background: I’m 29, and I’m honestly just really interested in how people act when life gets ugly. Like the whole mix of rationality vs emotion, how suffering shapes behavior, how we mess up our relationships, that kind of thing. I bounce between history/philosophy/behavior psych, and just watching what happens in daily interactions. From all that, I’ve basically noticed the same depressing pattern over and over: humans suffer, and we also cause suffering to each other. Misunderstandings, insecurity, irrational choices… it’s always something. So my personal “counter to that” has been trying to be patient and more empathetic, thoughtful, mindful—basically hoping I can be that little spark that makes things a bit better in how people treat each other. I read *Notes from Underground* earlier this year, and this time I picked it up again and went slower, especially through Part I. Part II hit me before, because it feels more human and emotional, but Part I was… dense. Still, taking my time with it and looking up some context, I think I got what it’s getting at: Maybe life feels miserable because humans want to prove we’re free. Like sure, we can choose things that seem “reasonable” or beneficial, but if every choice is just calculated profit, how free are you really? The idea (at least how it landed for me) is that we somehow know it’s this robotic logic and we still go against it anyway, just to prove we can. Like we choose spite or contradiction because it makes us feel like we have real power. That’s what messed with my head, because it makes me doubt how we ever move toward the “good” I want to believe in. I don’t even mean some perfect utopia for real, but even the idea that humans could keep getting better through the “right actions.” Then it gets even more unsettling—what if before we even care about good or bad, we just want to exist as ourselves, not be trapped in some binary choice system? And when you look at history… wars, famine, violence, genocide, nuclear stuff—it doesn’t exactly scream “rational progress.” So yeah, it makes you wonder if we’re mostly just doing the “I can / I will” thing no matter what. So now I’m stuck thinking about my own stance: as someone who’s into philosophy and trying to understand people, do I change my whole outlook to fit this darker foundation? Or do I stay stubborn and keep believing we can improve, even if it starts smaller—like how I treat the person standing in front of me? I’m probably going to sit with this some more, but I wanted to put it out there. Maybe I’m not the only one who got hit by the same mental loop, and maybe it’ll make someone else want to read the book too. Either way, thanks for reading this far.

Finished reading Notes From Underground by Fyodor Dostoevsky and I have no idea what I have just read. I don't get it but at the same time I can't help but recognise the greatness of this book.

By Mirror_Late

Honestly, what even was this book? I’ve never come across something so weird, depressing, and just straight-up disturbing. The worst part is that there were bits I could actually connect to, and that feeling is really uncomfortable. And at the same time, I’m not sure I even got it—I feel like I only scratched the surface of it. Maybe it’s because I’m still young, and I don’t have the smarts or maturity to fully read Dostoevsky yet.

Never before have I felt so understood by a book as I do by Notes From Underground

By Heather_Table81

This whole thing feels pretty grim, like it’s just stuck with one loner all day by himself, reading, and basically measuring himself against everyone else. I also got that outcast vibe hard—the way he’s both looking down on these “normal” guys and kind of admiring them too. Like they can just charge through life, brave or dumb or whatever, and not overthink everything or feel that weird sense of being different. The depression parts hit too: feeling tiny, like you get turned into some little mouse person with no drive to do anything with your life. And there’s this constant “everyone’s mocking me” feeling, but at the same time it kind of feels like it could just be him projecting his own self-hatred onto everyone else. What really stuck with me was that bitter, almost superior feeling—being so tuned into other people’s suffering, but also being jealous of the folks who seem to fit in and don’t care what anyone thinks.

Is there any literature out there that has an alternative way to the traditional 1st or 3rd person POV of telling a story?

By focusDesk

This is probably a weird question, but I’ve been wondering if there are other ways to tell a story besides either the usual “main character/overall narrator” thing or that super immediate “right now, in the moment” style. I haven’t read a ton of books yet—I just started getting into reading again after everything that happened in high school—but it feels like 1st/3rd person narration is basically the only option I ever run into in stories, TV, and movies. Are there authors who try different formats at all? I’ve been reading some Jack Kerouac, and his stream-of-consciousness style is definitely different, but it still feels like it’s operating in the same lane in a way? Like, am I missing something? Honestly not sure if what I’m thinking even works, because the only way stories have really been explained to me is either through the main character or it’s about a group, but still in that same kind of narration. Does this question even make sense? haha

Notes from Underground by Fyodor Dostoevsky

By looks_velvet

This whole thing feels super intense to me, like there’s this strange clarity even when everything’s messy. I also keep thinking about that whole “hyper-awareness” thing—how it can kind of make you feel like you’ve lost your place in the human world, just watching life move instead of actually being part of it. And the part about even liking despair being a temporary trick makes sense to me. Like, you feel involved for a second, but then you realize things like revenge or justice still don’t really make you feel connected to life. I’m not sure how to fully explain it, but it’s like when someone uses pain to power achievements, and meanwhile you’re just watching too much… life turns into inertia. Nothing really starts, and nothing ever fully ends. Then there’s the idea of being painfully self-aware and somehow messing up your own clarity—like contradictions, pretending, and overthinking just to avoid the fact that you can’t really connect with the world. That hit me. Also, the end of PART II totally threw me off. The way he keeps failing to fit in—trying to be a participant, to talk to people, to make friends, to meet someone he loves—was unexpectedly disturbing. It makes you feel how brutal it is when you can’t deny you’re disconnected anymore, because then nothing seems to work. Shame and envy and all those other feelings don’t seem enough to wake something up. I’m really curious what other people think.

[Review] - No longer Human by Osamu Dazai

By curious-epilogue

I kept putting off reading this for like ten years and I honestly have no clue why. Then I somehow tore through it in a week, and now I’m kind of stuck feeling unsure about whether I should go back and reread it, just to catch more of what I probably missed. From what I got, Yozo is basically freaked out by people. Like, he sees humans as having some “hideous” side—rage, and just how they can switch up and be totally different from one moment to the next. He even compares them to monsters a lot, and with how brutal everything feels in the news, it’s hard for me to fully disagree, even if it’s a scary way to look at things. The whole thing is written like Yozo’s notebooks, and later someone publishes them, which I thought was an interesting setup. He also never really gets real love growing up. He feels like he has to be agreeable and just goes along, and he doesn’t really speak his mind. As he gets older, he turns more and more obedient. And the guys around him take advantage of him. The women are often nicer, but he still ends up feeling like he needs to run away from them too. So yeah, maybe his life could’ve been better if the people around him were more straight with him, but then again… he also keeps saying he can’t understand humans or society, so maybe honesty wouldn’t have fixed it. Also, I looked up the author after, and it seriously messed me up—so much of what I read felt like it matched his life.

I read 'Siddhartha' five months ago, and I still think about it almost every day. I felt my whole perspective on life shift after finishing it, and now I can't imagine my life without having read it. Which book has done this for you?

By bison-summer

The part where Siddhartha talks about searching vs actually finding hit me so hard. It’s like, if you’re just locked onto some goal, you stop really seeing what’s right in front of you. But when you’re open and not chasing, that’s when you can notice and let things in. I honestly think this is the most meaningful passage I’ve read in my life. After I finished *Siddhartha*, I ended up looking at the world differently—just more appreciative, like there was more beauty and sense in everything, if you’d slow down and actually let yourself notice it. What’s the one book or quote that really changed you? And is there a passage you still can’t stop thinking about? Edit: wow, this blew up. Thanks to everyone who chimed in with their favorites. I guess I should really read *Steppenwolf* and *Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance* now.

Notes From The Underground

By BowlDeep33

Just finished this and wow, it was brilliant. I honestly can’t stand the Underground Man—he’s confusing and kind of ridiculous—but at the same time I keep feeling like I can relate to parts of him. The last handful of chapters (like the last 6) were a real struggle for me because I was so irritated with what he was doing… and somehow I still kept reading them. It’s the first book I’ve ever actually finished and immediately thought, okay, I have to read it again. The writing is really dense, so it felt way longer than it is. I ended up hating him, but now I’m low-key tempted to go back to it. Anyway, if you’ve read it, what did you think? (Here’s the link if you’re not familiar.)

NOTES FROM THE UNDERGROUND by Fyodor Dostoyevsky - FULL AudioBook

By river_pepper

Notes from Underground — lol, you’re a legend. Thanks for sharing this!

I want to start reading The Brothers Karamazov, but I am terrible with names, and I am afraid that I'll spend a lot of the book confused.

By shelfEnzyme

I just finished Notes From The Underground and it might honestly be my favorite book. I got sucked in pretty fast, which almost never happens for me when I read. I think a lot of it is how introspective it is, and also that there aren’t that many characters or names to keep track of, so I wasn’t really confused about what was happening.

Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground is the best depiction of anxiety I've read

By drifts-teacup2

Started it this morning and I’m only halfway, but I already feel like it’s gonna be one of my favorites, even though it’s one of Dostoevsky’s shorter ones. The whole self-awareness thing is wild—like he’s able to lay out the exact headspace of someone with anxiety. The constant wanting to hold eye contact and then immediately hating yourself when you’re the first one to look away. Thinking everyone can see your flaws the way you can, so you distance yourself so you “don’t inconvenience” them, but then you’re also jealous of how easy it seems for other people to just accept themselves. And somehow you can carry grudges for years over stuff that probably didn’t even register with them. Also the way his mind jumps around from one topic to the next, because your own thoughts feel scrambled all the time. And there’s this whole entitlement layer too. Like if anxiety basically runs your life, then you don’t really have a social life or relationships don’t last, so you just end up reading. Then you start thinking you’re smarter than everyone because you’re so “well read,” and that just makes the anxiety worse—because you can’t picture being social with someone who isn’t as “enlightened.” So you end up trying to keep up a facade because it’s the only kind of positive thinking you have. It’s honestly hitting way too close. I went through something similar in my 20s and even into my 30s. Like… why did people do things to *me* like that? Why would they be disrespectful to *me*? In my head, everything was personal and intentional because I’d assume everything I do is intentional. And then I’d think nobody “gets” me because I’m just too much smarter/more aware than everyone else. Took me forever to realize I’m not nearly that important. Like none of the stuff I was obsessing over really matters. Nobody’s gonna remember the political arguments I fought on Facebook like my opinion was the only correct one. Nobody’s keeping track of the hours I spent writing perfect replies, getting super worked up, and then deleting them because I worried about how I looked. People don’t think about me as much as I think they do. Now I kinda feel like social intelligence is probably one of the biggest kinds of intelligence. If you can actually get along with people and be real and likable, you’ll have a way less stressful life. Otherwise you end up stuck in your own little underground, and it’s on you to climb out.