A Lesson in Empathy with Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky
By: Jad Oubala (October 2021)
Empathy & The Human Condition
Empathy has long been considered a foundational aspect of the human psyche and one that is paramount to the act of connecting with others. It is a commonly held belief that one can only come to truly understand another if they are willing to surrender preconceived notions and biases in exchange for a humble willingness to learn and comprehend with sincerity. It is two Russian writers, Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy, both among the greatest contemporary writers of the 19th century, who, through their literature and treatises, were able to eloquently and judiciously espouse these notions and truly highlight their societal value.
Tolstoy’s Vision for a More Ethical Life
Tolstoy viewed empathy, and its ability to bridge understanding between individuals, as fundamental to the cultivation of what he called one’s humanity. Through this belief he is able to express his view that writing and other adjacent forms of art should act as near supplementary to religion in their status as the most powerful medium by which to teach these concepts about psychological development and human connection. One particular exercise that he often included in his writings was the notion that one could truly expand their humanity by overcoming the reprehensions of meeting an initially unappealing person to instead attempt to connect with them in an authentic way. He viewed the overcoming of these adversities of the human condition as among the most rewarding experiences in life. Many of these notions, elaborated more covertly in his fiction, were better expressed in his Essays on Life and Religion:
“Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking…”
Tolstoy regarded prejudice and the unyielding infatuation with certain beliefs to the point of dogmatism as unabashed ignorance. He preferred an approach that rendered the utility of the Socratic “humble inquirer”, in which the goal of dialogue is to seek to understand, undiluted by personal agenda or sentiment. It is by virtue of this belief that Tolstoy’s distaste toward moralism comes to exist; something he thoroughly criticizes in all three of his most popular works: War and Peace, Anna Karenina, and The Death of Ivan Ilych.
Anna Karenina, published in 1877, acts as one of Tolstoy’s pieces that most evidently displays the desirability he attributes to the quality of empathy. In the novel, the jovial and attractive heroine of the tale, Anna Karenina, is wed to a sententious and austere Alexei Karenin, a high ranking government official. He is often described in juxtaposition to her warm and sanguine temperament, consistently incapable of fulfilling his spouse’s emotional yearnings as a symptom of his callous and status-oriented nature. This comes to a head when Anna, dissatisfied by her husband’s neglect, develops an affair with a wealthy cavalry officer with a charming demeanor named Vronsky. The affair soon develops further, and even as Anna’s husband discovers its existence, his attention seems consumed not with her infidelity, but with what effects it may have upon their noble standing and public opinion. Throughout the novel Tolstoy depicts his character as frigid and unemotional, bearing few genuine or profound feelings expressed in regard to his relationship with his wife.
Karenin even expressed his inability to forgive Anna earlier in the novel, but when Anna gives birth to her daughter with Vronsky, Karenin finds himself at her side. She is deeply ill, believed to be on her death bed, and even as she begs for compassion, Anna recognizes that she is undeserving of it. Karenin however, forgives her, displaying a jarring shift in character that unveiled a side of him utterly foreign to the reader. His vulnerability is further emphasized when he lays his head in her arms and weeps for her and the child.
“But I saw her and forgave her. And the happiness of forgiveness has revealed to me my duty. I forgive completely. I would offer the other cheek, I would give my cloak if my coat be taken. I pray to God only not to take from me the bliss of forgiveness!”
What Karenin discovers after he finally finds the willingness to redeem Anna is a state of euphoria described by him as the “bliss of forgiveness.” He regards it as incomparable to any other feeling of satisfaction in life, and one that is deeply liberating and pious. Even despite this willingness to forgive, later in the novel as Anna recovers from her ailment and seeks to run away with Vronsky, Karenin proves adamantly unwilling to accept the divorce she pleads to have with him. And although this leads in part to her meeting her tragic end through suicide, Karenin takes care of the newborn child that she had with Vronsky, endeavoring to raise her himself.
The point that Tolstoy illustrates to the reader in this exploration is a subversion of the notions derived from an external observation of Karenin. He is in no way an exceptional character, but rather a wholly human one, with qualities of both good and bad. It is, at its heart, the desire of Tolstoy to display that even the most initially unsavory individuals may prove to have affection and compassion buried within that can manifest in moments of considerable importance. Through this realization, it becomes clear that the author has taken his audience upon an empathic journey, in which the reader is brought to novel conclusions that illustrate empathy’s strength as a tool of connection.
Dostoyevsky’s Examination of Inner-Compassion
Dostoyevsky’s exploration of empathy is a similar, though intrinsically different one. His own opinions regarding the nature of human connection are related to his espousal of Christian doctrine, which in and of itself expresses empathy as a common theme and motif throughout. Dostoyevsky’s life was one filled with strife, in his youth he witnessed much of what other noble children at his age were often sheltered from. His father passed away when he was young and in schooling, and into his young adulthood Dostoyevsky associated himself with a group of revolutionary writers. It was this association, although loose, that nearly had him executed and sent to a labor camp in Siberia. It is after this period that he begun his wildly influential writings.
In Dostoyevsky’s most acclaimed work, Crime and Punishment, published in 1866, the approach to empathy is taught inversely to the manner in which it was expressed in Tolstoy’s work Anna Karenina. Whereas in the latter, a reader is brought to show compassion to a character initially displayed as unappealing, Crime and Punishment takes the reader on a journey to witness the descent of an appealing individual, and his path toward self-redemption.
The story’s protagonist, Rodion Raskolnikov, is depicted pleasantly by the author. He is sympathetic, a handsome rebel rouser out of law school and plagued by uncertainty for his future. He attributes himself qualities akin to great leaders such as Napoleon. He is described as having a great fascination with notions of power and ruthlessness, and he views great leaders such as the aforementioned Napoleon as being glorified criminals, those that he is in fact inspired by. He views their great feats and accomplishments as the byproduct of their law-breaking actions, endeavoring rather to forge their own laws. He furthermore believed them to be unafraid and uninhibited by the inevitabilities of bloodshed and war.
“He was, by the way, exceptionally handsome, above the average in height, slim, well-built, with beautiful dark eyes and dark brown hair…”
These depictions of Raskolnikov endow the reader with a perception of him as a well-adjusted and virtuous individual, though his actions later in the novel act in juxtaposition to this preconception. An old pawnbroker and moneylending woman, Alyona Ivanovna, is seen by Rodion as a wretched and mean woman who is lacking in virtue and rectitude. He expresses the great injustice he finds in that fact that she, considering her temperament and nature, is of considerable wealth while someone like him, despite his intellect and fortitude, is poor and barely able to afford food. It is this belief that later founds itself in his desire to murder the women, spending little time in search of alternatives that might liberate him of his destitution.
He breaks into the woman’s home and bludgeons her to death, and when he is interrupted in the act by Alyona’s pregnant half-sister, he kills her as well. Escaping the place in which he committed the crime, it becomes apparent that Raskolnikov is not the rational and stoic leader he believed himself to be. His actions drown him in remorse and regret, and the murder torments him throughout the remainder of the story. It is in this environment that Dostoyevsky brings the reader to embark alongside Raskolnikov on his journey of self-discovery. He shines a light on one’s very human tendency to become entangled in an illusion of what one believes themselves to be; often something that they find glamorous and appealing, despite the probability that it bears little to nothing with their true self.
This path toward self-discovery and understanding is directed inward, for Raskolnikov, and outward for the reader. We see an individual who is, in actuality, far kinder and more sympathetic than his actions make him out to be- and our ability to look past those actions found our understanding of Raskolnikov as a character. He is able to do this, however, without reducing the horror of his actions, exemplified in Raskolnikov turning himself in at the end of the novel. He is able to forgive, to recognize his true self, while at the same time taking responsibility for the damages his self-delusion brought him to inflict.
This, in likeness to Tolstoy’s teachings as well, encapsulates the true value of empathy. One can find peace, and even forgiveness of one’s self if they are able to practice earnestly the act of empathy. Even one like Raskolnikov, who committed a terrible act, and might otherwise be seen as unforgivable, can be sympathetically understood. Just as Karenin, although stiff and cold, might be rediscovered for the compassion he hides within. In these characters, paramount to the narratives forged by both writers, do we discover the notion they truly wished to impart upon the reader:
“Compassion is the chief law of human existence.”
― Fyodor Dostoyevsky
