The Theme in the Work
The work's suffering is, above all, a pleasure that declares itself. The underground man begins by refusing to treat his liver, out of rage, and throughout Part One he explains that the pain he cultivates gives him something to feel. The work then has a second form of suffering, that of the one who does not choose: Liza.
In ch. II of Part One the shame of the ugly acts he committed at night turned, on his return to his corner, into a shameful sweetness and finally a serious pleasure, and the pleasure came from having too much consciousness of his own humiliation.
наслаждение было тут именно от слишком яркого сознания своего унижения, the pleasure came precisely from an overly vivid awareness of one's own humiliation.
In ch. IV of Part One the toothache gives the image: the sick man groans without sincerity, out of spite, and the groan is the message that no one in the house will sleep while he suffers.
Дескать, я вас беспокою, сердце вам надрываю, всем в доме спать не даю. Так вот не спите же, чувствуйте же и вы каждую минуту, что у меня зубы болят., As if to say: I disturb you, I tear at your hearts, I do not let anyone in the house sleep. Well then, do not sleep; you feel too, every minute, that my teeth ache.
In ch. V of Part One he admits that he invented adventures and lived on manufactured offenses, and that even so he suffered for real, with jealousy, out of sheer boredom. The point Part One arrives at is in ch. IX of Part One, where suffering is placed in the highest position.
Страдание — да ведь это единственная причина сознания., Suffering, after all, is the only cause of consciousness.
Before that, in the same chapter, he had already said why suffering does not fit in the building the gentlemen promise.
Страдание, например, в водевилях не допускается, я это знаю. В хрустальном дворце оно и немыслимо: страдание есть сомнение, есть отрицание, а что за хрустальный дворец, в котором можно усумниться?, Suffering, for example, is not admitted in vaudevilles, I know. In the crystal palace it is unthinkable: suffering is doubt, it is negation, and what crystal palace is it in which one can doubt?
In Part Two suffering leaves the thesis and takes on a body. That of Liza, in ch. VII of Part Two, is physical and silent: face down, clutching the pillow, she bites her own hand until it bleeds so that no one in the house will know. The narrator's suffering is of another kind: in ch. VIII of Part Two he spends three days waiting for her to come, with an anguish that does not die and that sends him home as if carrying a crime; in ch. IX of Part Two, in hysteria, he weeps for a quarter of an hour face down on the sofa. Between the two sufferings there is a difference the work organizes: hers has no audience, and his needs one.
The close of ch. X of Part Two repeats the thesis of Part One and takes it to the point of the most cynical possibility: already at home, after returning from the corner, the narrator fantasizes that offense is purification and consciousness the most corrosive and painful, and asks himself which is better, cheap happiness or elevated suffering.
Оскорбление, — да ведь это очищение; это самое едкое и больное сознание!, An offense, well, an offense is purification; it is the most caustic and painful consciousness!
The work's suffering, then, is a value the narrator defends without being able to sustain it. He calls it the sole cause of consciousness, and in the Liza scene what happens is that it passes from the narrator to her.
Who Embodies It
The underground man, who cultivates suffering and describes it; and Liza, who receives it, and in whom it appears without comment. Apollon is the comic counterpart: the servant in whom the text records no suffering whatsoever and who makes the master suffer in silence.
Where It Appears
- Part One, ch. II: The underground man says that the shame of his ugly acts turned into a sweetness and finally a serious pleasure, coming from consciousness of his humiliation being too vivid.
- Part One, ch. IV: The underground man explains that the man with the toothache groans because he takes pleasure in the groan, and that the groan warns the house that no one will sleep while he suffers.
- Part One, ch. V: The underground man says he invented offenses and loves just to live, and that he really suffered with jealousy, even knowing that everything came from boredom.
- Part One, ch. IX: The underground man affirms that suffering is the sole cause of consciousness, and that in the crystal palace it would be unthinkable, because suffering is doubt and negation.
- Part Two, ch. VII: Liza cries face down, clutching the pillow, and bites her own hand until it bleeds, so that no one in the house will know of her torment, after hearing the underground man's sermon.
- Part Two, ch. VIII: The underground man spends three days waiting for Liza with an anguish that does not die in the depths of his heart and consciousness, and returns home as if carrying a crime.
- Part Two, ch. IX: The underground man weeps for a quarter of an hour face down on the sofa, in genuine hysteria, after shouting at Liza that he is ashamed and that he will hate her for having heard.
- Part Two, ch. X: The underground man concludes, already at home, after returning from the corner, that offense is purification and consciousness the most corrosive and painful, and that perhaps it would be better for Liza to carry the offense with her forever.
- Part Two, ch. X: The underground man asks, as he writes, which is better, cheap happiness or elevated suffering, after telling that he spent that night almost dead with pain.
Where the Readings Diverge
The work's suffering can be read in two ways. On one reading, it is Dostoevsky's central thesis: consciousness and suffering are born together, whoever refuses one loses the other, and man does not trade consciousness for any satisfaction. On the other, the narrator's suffering is masochism, a pleasure in being humiliated that he cultivates out of vanity. Joseph Frank rejects the second as an exclusive reading and sees the novella as satire.
The text sustains both to the end, and the difference between them is what is done with Liza. Whoever reads suffering as a value must explain why the narrator transfers it to her, and whoever reads it as vanity must explain the real pain of the last pages, which he himself calls corrective punishment. The book ends without resolving: there is no scene, after the banknote on the table, in which suffering serves anyone.