#also dasha and varvara hi

[omerseyfofan]

first demons post how we feeling gang...

[ggebba]

Hi there, just out of curiosity is it true that the top figure skaters in the same age group as Andrei and Pyotr usually exist in the same social circles as them (KHL/NHL russian players)? I noticed that Alina Zagitova and Andrei used to follow each other which makes sense considering her dad was the junior coach for Akbars + she used to date Dima Voronkov. Theres also this standing rumor that Stasya Konstantinova was Pyotr’s on-off ex for a couple of years. I know they were both sighted at zenit games a couple of times in the past & that he was with her during her birthday. But how common is it for skaters and players to share a bunch of mutual friends?

Hi 👋 Hockey and figure skating in Russia are closely related. More often than not, hockey players and figure skaters still came face to face at international competitions. Especially I want to note the Olympic Games. For example, after the 2018 Olympics, there were rumors that Kirill Kaprizov and Alina Zagitova started dating. But Alina, at that time, was underage and this topic was simply tried not to be mentioned.

Btw, now Kirill Kaprizov is in a relationship with the daughter of a famous Russian singer 🤫

There were a lot of rumors about who Alina was allegedly dating. Honestly, I don't know anything and most of them were just ridiculous rumors.

If we're talking about Andrei Svechnikov, he liked the singer Klava Koka better. That's what I saw information about in Russian publicks, that Andrei likes all her posts in social networks. But Klava has a boyfriend, so...

Klava Koka ⬆️

I've also read all sorts of things about Pyotr and Stasya. I only know about one of his ex-girlfriends, Dasha, because they often posted photos together and Pyotr mentioned her in interviews. Rumors, in fact, there were a lot of rumors. I can write about what was confirmed, but many rumors that I read about hockey players and Pyotr in particular are nothing more than fiction and conjecture 🤷‍♀️

But here's how I summarize it. A lot of Russian hockey players date/marry girls from gymnastics or from modeling. Here are a few examples:

Alex Romanov and Sofia (hockey player and gymnast)

Alexander Nikishin and Varvara Subbotina (hockey player and synchronized swimmer)

Artemi Panarin and Alisa Znarok (hockey player and model)

I hope I answered your question ♥️

[hamliet]

Hello. Just finished Demons and it was an emotional rollercoaster for me. Why do you think Stavroghin wrote to Daria if he intended to kill himself? Do you think he changed his mind and couldn’t stand his guilt anymore?

(Also, is it just me or was Peter a tiny bit too infatuarea with Stavroghin?...)

He reminds me a bit of Chrollo from HxH in a way. He feels so empty and incapable of understanding himself and I guess this is exactly what draws others to them.

Ahhh yay! Crazy, right?

First of all, it's not just you re: Pyotr and Stavrogin. Pyotr's words literally mimic love confessions. Whether or not that was intended as romantic or just to show how obsessed Pyotr is can't be said, but intention aside, it's a fair reading of the text.

You're right though in that Stavrogin's central trait is emptiness. He is desperate to feel something, anything at all, and commits the worst atrocities in an attempt to feel. He is so empty people are able to project whatever they want to believe onto him; hence why he makes a perfect figurehead. Supposedly. I'd actually argue Chrollo, at least, genuinely cares for people even if he pretends he does not; I don't know that Stavrogin does. Stavrogin is an antichrist archetype, more akin to Johan Liebert of Monster, imo.

I think Stavrogin wrote to Dasha for a similar reason: Dasha is the only one who seems to know him as he is and still loves him. He even directly states that Dasha is the only one he can be honest with. Varvara projects the image of the perfect son, Liza of a lover, Pyotr of a revolutionary--he is what they want him to be. Dasha seems to have a far better understanding of who Stavrogin actually is. She knows he is married, for example.

Whether or not Dasha and Stavrogin actually had/were having a sexual affair isn't clear (deliberately unclear, most likely). Given Dostoyevsky's tendency to explore the "hooker with a heart of gold" stock character in various ways (played straight but with depth, like Crime and Punishment's Sonia Marmaladova, played as a projection like Liza in Notes from Underground, or deconstructed in a tragic sense like The Idiot's Nastasya or in a redemptive sense like The Brother's Karamazov's Grushenka) it's likely that Dasha is another exploration of that sort of character, just as Stavrogin is an exploration of the same archetype as C&P's Svidrigailov, The Idiot's Totsky, and TBK's Fyodor Karamazov.

Anyways, whether Dasha actually was sleeping with him or not is beside the point; many assume she is. Dasha is pure and kind, compassionate and good, but Stavrogin still cannot reveal his worst sin to her (Matryosha).

“I’ve told you a great deal of my life, but not all. Even to you! Not all.... Better not come to me. My asking you to is a horrible meanness. And why should you bury your life with me? You are dear to me, and when I was miserable it was good to be beside you; only with you I could speak of myself aloud. But that proves nothing. You defined it yourself, ‘a nurse’—it’s your own expression; why sacrifice so much? Grasp this, too, that I have no pity for you since I ask you, and no respect for you since I reckon on you. And yet I ask you and I reckon on you."

His final act of suicide was twofold, paradoxical, just as he expresses in the letter. First, it was to hurt Dasha as much as it was despair over his lack of ability to feel any guilt at all. By trying to hurt Dasha, he was trying to sever that one link he had. At the same time, the fact that he wanted to sever that link shows that he was human even if he did not feel so.

Stavrogin is one of Dos's most complex and still most detestable characters--and most disturbing, honestly, because he is so inhuman, capable of the worst sorts of grotesque evil, and human at the same time.

[incorrectlit]

Stavrogin modern au!

THE FERAL BEAST HIMSELF:

BASICS:

- full name: Nikolai Vsevolodovich Stavrogin

- Gender: male

- Sexuality: aromantic bisexual

- Pronouns: he/him

OTHERS:

- family: Varvara Stavrogina (Mother)

- Birthplace: St. Petersburg

- Job: Instagram model and influencer. He also has a YouTube channel which consists of promotional videos for Verkhovensky’s campaigns and videos of Stavrogin going absolutely ape for no reason

- Phobias: none

- Guilty pleasures: this bastard’s a real sadist, but he’s not exactly guilty about it.

MORALS:

- morality alignment: CHAOTIC EVIL

- Sins: lust/greed/gluttony/sloth/pride/envy/wrath

- Virtues: chastity/charity/diligence/humility/kindness/patience/justice NONE OF THE ABOVE

THIS OR THAT:

- Introvert/extrovert: extrovert

- Organized/disorganized: organized

- Close-minded/open-minded: close-minded. He’s a stubborn sonofabitch

- Calm/anxious: calm. You’ll never catch him breaking a sweat.

- Agreeable/disagreeable: HAHAHAHAHA DISAGREEABLE WHO TF YALL THINK WE’RE TALKING ABOUT HERE

- Cautious/reckless: reckless. Very reckless.

- Patient/impatient: impatient

- Outspoken/reserved: actually, reserved. He’s taciturn when he’s not going batshit

- Leader/follower: leader obviously

- Empathetic/unempathetic: unempathetic. The man doesn’t have a shred of empathy in his body.

- Optimistic/pessimistic: pessimistic

- Traditional/modern: modern

- Hard-working/lazy: lazy

RELATIONSHIPS:

- OTP: Stavrogin x Verkhovensky is my guilty pleasure

- OT3: none

- Brotp: as I’ve said before, I like the idea of him, Verkhovensky, Shatov, and Kirillov all having a really toxic friendship where they all hate each other but can’t seem to leave each other alone. Also, I love the idea of him and Dasha being best friends.

- NoTP: Liza!!!!!! Leave her!!! Alone!!!!!!!!!!

[hamliet]

hi hamliet! i just finished dostoyevsky's demons! i was wondering if you could write a little about kirillov, stepan, and stavrogin: it seems like kirillov's thinking and stepan's final speech are the two messages the novel really wants to impart to the reader, but i felt like they were somewhat at odds with one another? kirillov was all about the will of man, while stepan was about God. which one is "right"? and what's stavrogin's final death and overall arc about? thank you so much!

Hello Anon!! Thank you for the ask about my favorite novel, and such an exciting ask too! *breaks into a happy dance*

So I would caution against the interpretation that Dostoyevsky wanted to endorse Kirillov’s message, because I think the opposite is the case. Dostoyevsky is fundamentally existentialist; however, he despised nihilism (as each of his major works take it apart that is present in each of his major works), and that is thus reflected in the framing of Kirillov’s ideas, which were born out of bitter despair. Kirillov, you see, did not want to die.

He simply wanted to matter. 

However, he was not convinced he did, despite how kind and genuinely good he was. He begs before his death:

“Let it be comfort. God is necessary and so must exist… But I know He doesn’t and can’t… Surely you must understand that a man with two such ideas can’t go on living?”

For Kirillov, God is the Russian Orthodox version, the one Dostoyevsky very much believed in (in his later years anyways, including when he wrote his major works) as well. Thus, what Kirillov is saying here is that he wants to believe in some kind of sense in this world, a divine maker who is watching over them, who cares about them--but when he looks at the world and how terrible it is, when he sees little children being insulted, when he sees people killing innocents like Shatov, he does not have a way of comprising that with the existence of a loving God. It’s a well known conundrum in theology: the problem of evil. 

Demons is entirely about the evil humans beings are capable of when they become possessed by ideologies--yet, Demons also implies that people need to believe in something. Look at Stavrogin and his despair and aimless actions. Look at Pyotr and how his selfishness literally destroys an entire town, including a good man (Shatov) who had forgiven his wife and loved her despite what she had done to him. As Kirillov says:

“Man has done nothing but invent God so as to go on living, and not kill himself; that’s the whole of universal history up till now. I am the first one in the whole history of mankind who would not invent God. Let them know it once for all…

“I am awfully unhappy, for I’m awfully afraid. Terror is the curse of man.… But I will assert my will, I am bound to believe that I don’t believe. I will begin and will make an end of it and open the door, and will save. That’s the only thing that will save mankind and will re-create the next generation physically; for with his present physical nature man can’t get on without his former God, I believe. For three years I’ve been seeking for the attribute of my godhead and I’ve found it; the attribute of my godhead is self-will! That’s all I can do to prove in the highest point my independence and my new terrible freedom. For it is very terrible. I am killing myself to prove my independence and my new terrible freedom.”

Kirillov is terrified to be alone and to be worthless. If there is no God, he believes he is both. However, if he can be brought to utterly control his own life, setting a precedent, that will “save” people by showing them freedom. It’s not a sane theory (Kirillov is decidedly unstable), but it reflects his desperate desire to grasp at meaning in his life, to make himself count. It’s why he even agrees to die and write a note that will help his friends when he does (without knowing Pyotr’s evil schemes). 

But the thing is, Kirillov killing himself is an act of nihilism. He does not want to die, as evidenced by how terrified he is during that scene, how he literally bites down on Pyotr’s finger and nearly severs it, because he is so desperately angry that Pyotr is forcing him to do this. And his death accomplishes nothing. There is no freedom and no salvation that comes from him killing himself; not for Pyotr, not for Liza, not for Nikolai, not for anyone. 

His death was empty. But his life, his very human fears and need to live, to be worth something, his stunning kindness in a novel that is fundamentally cruel--that is what matters to the reader. His death can’t be regarded as anything other than a tragedy, which is why I’d say that Dostoyevesky is showing the faults in his ideas (while exploring them with empathy) rather than endorsing them. 

So, onto Stepan. Remember when I said it was Russian Orthodox Christianity? The faith element is present in all of Dostoyevsky’s works, and is integral to them. I do think Dostoyevsky is endorsing Stepan’s final speech:

“My friends,” he said, “God is necessary to me, if only because He is the only being whom one can love eternally.”...“My immortality is necessary if only because God will not be guilty of injustice and extinguish altogether the flame of love for Him once kindled in my heart. And what is more precious than love? Love is higher than existence, love is the crown of existence; and how is it possible that existence should not be under its dominance? If I have once loved Him and rejoiced in my love, is it possible that He should extinguish me and my joy and bring me to nothingness again? If there is a God, then I am immortal..”

“There is a God, Stepan Trofimovitch, I assure you there is,” Varvara Petrovna implored him. “Give it up, drop all your foolishness for once in your life!” 

...

“Oh, I should dearly like to live again!” he exclaimed with an extraordinary rush of energy. “Every minute, every instant of life ought to be a blessing to man … they ought to be, they certainly ought to be! It’s the duty of man to make it so; that’s the law of his nature, which always exists even if hidden.… Oh, I wish I could see Petrusha … and all of them …"...

“The mere fact of the ever present idea that there exists something infinitely more just and more happy than I am fills me through and through with tender ecstasy—and glorifies me—oh, whoever I may be, whatever I have done! What is far more essential for man than personal happiness is to know and to believe at every instant that there is somewhere a perfect and serene happiness for all men and for everything.… The one essential condition of human existence is that man should always be able to bow down before something infinitely great. If men are deprived of the infinitely great they will not go on living and will die of despair. The Infinite and the Eternal are as essential for man as the little planet on which he dwells. My friends, all, all: hail to the Great Idea! The Eternal, Infinite Idea! It is essential to every man, whoever he may be, to bow down before what is the Great Idea. Even the stupidest man needs something great. Petrusha … oh, how I want to see them all again! They don’t know, they don’t know that that same Eternal, Grand Idea lies in them all!”

Stepan’s ideas are repeated in The Brothers Karamazov and in The Dream of a Ridiculous Man (a fantastic short story!). Dostoyevsky was very much not just an existentialist and a Christian, but a humanist: he believed this life on earth was incomparably valuable, but also the next life was, as well (in contrast to assuming this life is worthless in light of the next, as many theologies in Christianity will proclaim). Stepan is expressing now that the purpose of life is to live and to love--which is meaningful for Stepan’s character and the novel as a whole in two ways: firstly, because Stepan’s denial of his love for Varvara led to a lot of pain and suffering for both of them (as Varvara setting him up with Dasha is what provoked Stepan to beg his son to visit him), and secondly, Stepan’s abandonment of Pyotr as a child is a direct catalyst of the person Pyotr has become. His failure to love his son well is what led to all this tragedy. He now sees it, but it is too late for him to remedy in this life. However, not all is lost: he has a second life he anticipates, and he dies with his love, Varvara, with him, assuring him that there is a hereafter. 

On the subject of failure to parent and messed-up children: Stavrogin. He is one of Dostoyevsky’s most complex and disturbing characters. On the one hand, Stavrogin knows right and wrong better than most in the cast; on the other hand, he acts contrary to it because Stavrogin wants to believe that there is no right and wrong, and hence he does more and more ‘wrong’ things in an almost subconscious way to... well, prove his philosophy, like Kirillov, but also to punish himself because much like Kirillov’s beliefs were founded on a contradiction, so are Stavrogin’s. (Shatov says that Stavrogin lives to morally torment himself, and notably he’s the first character who loses his enamorment with Stavorigin, hence I trust his viewpoint.) Also, Stavrogin tells Tikhon that his philosophy is that there is “neither good nor evil,” yet he proves this by acting on things that torment him. 

The whole reason people project onto Stavrogin and are drawn to his charisma is because he is empty inside, making him ripe for projection. He is capable of much good and has done some good, but he also is capable of evil (as all characters and people are). Keep in mind that most of the evil Stavrogin is responsible for is through passive means (he foils Stepan here): what he doesn’t do is perhaps more devastating than what he does do. He allows evil to reign and to draw to its tragic conclusions. He sleeps with Liza knowing it will destroy her, but Liza pursued him heavily. He allows Matryosha to commit suicide after he assaults her. He allows Shatov’s death, his wife’s murder, Kirillov’s suicide. He could take action and prevent any of these things, could have even taken responsibility for his evil treatment of Matryosha, but he does not. Instead, he allows her to punish herself because it allows him to continue in his complacent, passively nihilistic philosophy--in fact, it reinforces his philosophy. Good and evil are thus pointless and only lead to ruin, right? These ideas about morality lead to tragedy! He can thus do whatever he wants! (For example, he cites Matryosha believing she has sinned against God--when he’s the one who hurt her--as her reason for her suicide; ie it’s her belief that is the culprit more so than he himself.) 

Except, Stavrogin’s moral nihilism fails him. Because in the end, Stavrogin cannot out run his conscience, and commits suicide. Good and evil might just be ideas, or they might not be, but he cannot escape how he feels about them. His feelings are real, and through hurting others he hurts himself, and he cannot live on with such feelings. Society may shape our ideas of what’s right and wrong and it may be twisted and hurt us (for example, Dostoyevsky surely felt society treated women unfairly, especially in matters of sexuality, as we see in how society ruins Liza and Matryosha), but we also cannot heal without each other (for example, Shatov forgiving his wife, and Stepan being able to die with Varvara; in contrast, Stavrogin isolates himself and dies). 

So, yeah. I hope that was helpful and not too rambly. Feel free to ask any more questions on the novel/for clarification!