I had read the novel for a very long time, when I began reading Dostoevsky, and at that time I did not have the literary interest that makes me search about this novel, and I get enough for saying: It is a good novel.

I definitely knew that studying such a novel would require preparation. I did not begin it until I had finished with Henry Trouba’s book “Dostoevsky: His Life - His Works,” which gives a good biography of Dostoyevsky’s life and the politics of the Russian Messenger Journal, which apparently played a major role in his method, Which should have been boring when it was detailed, but it was beautiful, expressive, full of emotion and humanity.

I also benefited greatly from the study of Nicholas Trail, the literary critic, of Raskolnikov’s character from Dostoyevsky’s novel Crime and Punishment as well, Nicholas ’view that Dostoevsky’s character with epilepsy dominated his work, and whoever reads the crime and punishment will not ask me for clarification of Nicholas’ opinion, Raskolnikov is a fickle hero Strange as it sounds, he has seizures in every event, but Dostoevsky does not describe these seizures as epilepsy more than what he describes as fever, fatigue and exhaustion, except that they always come in the form of epileptic freaks.

As for this novel, it also applies to the concept of Nicholas, as the hero not only has seizures (and by the way, this time the protagonist himself has verbally confessed those seizures) but also lives the life of Dostoevsky completely and suffers from the same problems, I must mention here that Dostoevsky began This work (I mean the novel) with the beginning of his serious work after his release from prison, he had written before him the village of Stepanchikovo and its inhabitants, and it was really one of his worst works, and by his own saying, it was a vulgar comic whose only goal is to collect money after his release from prison, as well as return to the world of writing.

Our novel carried a certain seriousness that made Dostoevsky himself a hero in it. The problem of the protagonist is very similar to the problem of Raskolnikov, as well as the problem of “Basement Man”, a poor, proud writer looking for a way out to get rid of his misery and misery, and in fact I see that Dostoevsky in this novel was influenced by the Victorians most influenced Especially the later ones: the coincidences he put in the novel only occur in a Victorian / classic novel, such as Oliver Dickens or Hugo’s Hunchback, and this is what made Russian critics (who were very real at the time) describe the novel as “extremely fictional.”

As I mentioned at the beginning, the policy of Russian magazines, especially the magazine “The Russian Messenger” and “Time” magazine has greatly influenced Dostoevsky’s writings. The novel is long and not in excess. Dostoyevsky takes whole pages in some descriptions that could have been reduced to one or two words, In some absolutely insignificant dialogues he takes an entire chapter, yet (and this is what distinguishes Dostoyevsky from Tolstoy in lengthening) Dostoevsky’s lengthening was a little more than a filler.

Dostoevsky’s epileptic personality is reflected in the main characters: Ilyosha, Ivan, and Helen, and the three are psychologically misfits due to their occasional seizures, and the main character, Ivan, features Dostoyevsky’s defiant character at the time. Vissarion Belinsky, a great Russian critic at the time, after Fedor wrote his first book “The Poor,” which was the most beautiful opening by a writer at the time, his subsequent writing came like a dream of Uncle and others until his imprisonment, and no one expected him to produce something of value, especially Belinsky.