Dostoevsky's "Notes from Underground"

In "Notes from Underground," Dostoevsky's nameless narrator quotes Heine's position on the impossibilty of true autobiographies. The narrator proceeds to vouch for this truism citing man's vanity as a catalyst for gratuitous and even false willful admissions of guilt. As such, the narrator must defend his stated objective in writing down the "notes," namely, "to test whether it's possible to be entirely frank at least with oneself and dare to face the whole truth." Heine and the narrator's subsequent exposition of his belief, now obstruct the realization of the narrator's aim.

The narrator responds using dichotomic reasoning: while vanity may tempt one to slander oneself, the threat of vanity manifests itself solely in the public realm; one need not be wary of vainglorious behavior in private. Thus, the narrator may commit to writing his oppressing memory, Heine's statement notwithstanding. Deliberate misrepresentation of the particulars of this memory would be a non-issue here.

From this passage we may glean the following: 1) that there exists a compulsion, born out of vanity, to confess one's wrongdoings 2) that this vanity can even compel one to malign and slander oneself with admissions of wrongdoings that never took place. 3) that the threat of vainglorious recital of guilt is only manifest where one does so in public; in private one seldom has to deal with paroxysms of contrition.

This parallels the rabbinic position as presented in the Talmud: “R’ Kahana stated: I deem insolent one who enunciates his iniquities, as it is written: “Praiseworthy is the one who rides above sin, the one who covers up his iniquities.” R’ Shlomo Yitzhaki, the basic medieval commentator on the Talmud, writes elsewhere regarding this: “in public, for it seems that he has no shame.”

The Talmud recognizes this potential ulterior motive associated with the admission of guilt. One who nevertheless pays no heed is excoriated.

Later, Dostoevsky's narrator engages himself in finding justification for the recording of these memories in his "notes." "Why, actually," he asks himself, "do I want to write it all? If not for an audience, then couldn't I simply go over everything just in my mind, without putting it on paper?"

One justification he offers is that, this way, "it will be in better style." Yet another reason given is that it would provide him with an exercise in cathatric relief. This character is persistently haunted by oppressing thoughts as seen throughout the book. "Lastly," he says, " I am bored, and I never do anything. And writing things down actually seems like work. They say work makes man kind and honest. Well, there's a chance at any rate."

This also parallels with the Mishnaic statement in Tractate Avoth: "Shmaya said: love work." Besides the pernicious effects of indolence, one disinclined to exertion will oftentimes help himself to the fruits of others. One develops a taste for thievery and a dependancy on the communal bursary.

NOTE: See Maimonides Hilchot Teshuva 2:5, regarding R' Kahana's statement. He writes that this pertains to wrongdoings between oneself and God; one who wrongs his friend is enjoined to admit his guilt in public. See also Tractate Yoma 86b.