SMERDYAKOV | THEORY: How an antagonist saved lives which lead to his death—interpretative analysis with a theoretical component
DISCLAIMER: This analysis touches on sensitive topics such as suicide and mental health, explored within the context of The Brothers Karamazov. References to these issues reflect literary interpretations and not an oversimplification of real-life struggles. Please read with this understanding in mind.
The Brothers Karamazov revolves around a family cursed by violence, excess, and internal conflict. At the center of this curse is Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov, a man whose corruption seeps into the lives of his three legitimate sons—Dmitri, Ivan, and Alyosha. Yet, one son stands apart: Smerdyakov. Born from Fyodor Pavlovich’s assault on the mute Lizaveta, Smerdyakov is an outcast, denied the Karamazov name and treated as little more than a servant. Unlike his half-brothers, he does not wrestle with morality or internal dilemmas. Instead, he takes action, killing the man who brought destruction upon them all.
If you have read my previous analysis, you may have seen the chart which stated, briefly, of the events (more if you read it). This is a slight explanation to further help with understanding the theory.
This means that Dimitri was arrested the same night in September when Fyodor Pavlovich was murdered:
“But the little lawyer did not allow him to finish. He turned to Mitya, and delivered himself in a loud, firm, dignified voice: "Ex-Lieutenant Karamazov, it is my duty to inform you that you are charged with the murder of your father, Fyodor Pavlovitch Karamazov, perpetrated this night..."”
And then the investigation and all begins.
FROM ONE NIGHT TO ANOTHER
The events surrounding Smerdyakov’s birth and Fyodor Pavlovich’s death create a symbolic symmetry. Years before the novel’s events, in a "clear, warm, moonlight night in September," (3.2) Fyodor Pavlovich assaults Lizaveta, leading to Smerdyakov’s conception. Decades later, in another September night, Fyodor Pavlovich is murdered—likely by the very son born of his crime. This cyclical structure suggests an inescapable fate, one in which Smerdyakov, whether consciously or not, avenges his mother. If the sins of the father are to be paid by the son, then Smerdyakov’s actions fulfill this grim destiny.
Each of Fyodor Pavlovich’s sons grapples with the weight of their inheritance:
Dmitri is passionate and reckless, but his self-destructive tendencies prevent him from taking meaningful action.
Ivan is the intellectual who theorizes about morality but is ultimately paralyzed by doubt.
Alyosha embodies spiritual purity but avoids direct confrontation with evil.
Smerdyakov, however, is different. He does not fall into the same traps as the others; instead, he acts. In killing Fyodor Pavlovich, he may have ended the source of the family's suffering. Ironically, it is the son who was never given the Karamazov name who succeeds where the others fail—perhaps because he wasn’t burdened by the Karamazov name.
The circumstances of Smerdyakov’s birth further shape his character. If Lizaveta conceived him in September and gave birth in May,“It was a rather warm night in May” in 3.2. This suggests that Smerdyakov was born prematurely.
“A growing body of evidence has shown that individuals who are born preterm have an increased risk of epilepsy in early life, but the longer-term risk of epilepsy in these individuals is unclear. One recent study reported an association between preterm birth or intrauterine growth restriction and an increased risk of epilepsy in individuals in Denmark who were followed up to 24 years of age.”
— Gestational age, birth weight, intrauterine growth, and the risk of epilepsy. Am J Epidemiol 2008
Modern medical research links preterm birth to a higher risk of epilepsy, a condition that plagues Smerdyakov throughout his life. His frequent seizures make him appear weak and non-threatening, yet they also serve as a mask, allowing him to manipulate those around him. The research is not directly focused on Russian populations but still relevant for understanding the potential neurological consequences of preterm birth.
Coincidentally, Smerdyakov is 24 and most probably the same age when he committed suicide. It’s also when his health starts to deteriorate:
“They gave him to understand that the attack was an exceptional one, the fits persisting and recurring several times, so that the patient's life was positively in danger, and it was only now, after they had applied remedies, that they could assert with confidence that the patient would survive. "Though it might well be," added Doctor Herzenstube, "that his reason would be impaired for a considerable period, if not permanently."”
Moreover, his deteriorating health at the age of 24 aligns with studies showing that individuals born preterm are at higher risk of neurological decline in early adulthood. If Smerdyakov sensed that his time was limited, his decision to act—whether as revenge or as a final assertion of control—becomes even more significant.
While the men in the novel scorn or underestimate Smerdyakov, women show him kindness and acceptance. Marfa, Grigory’s wife, cares for him; Marya Kondratyevna and her mother treat him with admiration. Marya Kondratyevna, in particular, appears drawn to his intelligence and authenticity, appreciating qualities that others dismiss. In one of the novel’s scenes, Smerdyakov sings to Marya, despite later dismissing poetry as “rubbish” in 5.2. This contradiction suggests that, despite his bitterness, he values being heard—perhaps for the first time in his life. While the legitimate brothers struggle with their relationships, Smerdyakov finds in Marya Kondratyevna a rare moment of human connection.
What I find interesting is how Smerdyakov’s mother, Lizaveta, was a simple, often dismissed figure, but she was beloved by those around her:
“In fact, everyone seemed to like her; even the boys did not tease her, and the boys of our town, especially the schoolboys, are a mischievous set.”
She was not treated with cruelty or mockery, which is rare given her marginalized status.
However, Smerdyakov, unlike his mother, refuses to be passive. Despite the epilepsy that might have made him an easy target for contempt, he carries a quiet resentment toward those who exploit his circumstances. His growing bitterness is compounded by internalized feelings of inferiority—feelings exacerbated by his illegitimacy and constant subjugation by Fyodor Pavlovich.
“Internalizing symptoms encompass a spectrum of mental states relating to disrupted mood and emotions, such as stress, depression, or anxiety (Kovacs & Devlin, 1998). There has been extensive research on different factors that foster internalizing symptoms spanning genetic, psychological, and socio‐environmental factors (Lynch et al., 2021).”
One possibility is that Lizaveta was viewed as innocent—a victim who never posed a threat. But Smerdyakov, with his intelligence, quiet resentment, and growing defiance, does pose a threat. Unlike his mother, he refuses to be passive, and this makes him feared rather than pitied.
This contrast also deepens the irony: Fyodor Pavlovich took advantage of Lizaveta because she was powerless. Yet the child born from that crime ultimately destroys him. It’s almost as if Smerdyakov embodies all the resentment that Lizaveta, in her innocence, never expressed.
WHY DID SMERDYAKOV WAIT UNTIL NOW TO KILL FYODOR PAVLOVICH?
Despite years of resentment, Smerdyakov only acts at this specific moment. Several factors may explain this:
His declining health—Knowing that he may not have much longer to live, he chooses to fulfill one final act of control.
Ivan’s philosophy—Smerdyakov was already deeply nihilistic, shaped by Ivan’s philosophy that “everything is permitted”—Ivan’s ideas about morality and crime provide the intellectual framework that allows Smerdyakov to justify the murder.
The perfect opportunity – Before now, Fyodor Pavlovich was in full control. But suddenly, the conflict over the inheritance created chaos—Dmitri was a violent, obvious suspect, and Ivan was deeply disturbed. Smerdyakov, always calculating, may have realized this was his best (and possibly only) chance to commit the murder without suspicion falling on him.
Unlike the other brothers, who theorize, hesitate, or self-destruct, Smerdyakov follows through on his intent.
Despite committing the one act that could free him from Fyodor Pavlovich’s shadow, Smerdyakov ultimately takes his own life. Like many murderers, he may have found that the reality of the crime did not provide the liberation he expected. If he hoped to erase his suffering by eliminating its source, he instead discovered that he remained trapped within it. In the end, while he proves himself different from the other Karamazovs, he cannot fully escape the existential despair that haunts them all. Suicide, in criminal context, is known as the coward’s way out.
Smerdyakov is often dismissed as a secondary character—a manipulator and a coward. Yet, upon closer examination, he emerges as the novel’s most decisive figure. His actions bring an end to Fyodor Pavlovich’s reign of chaos, possibly breaking the Karamazov curse once and for all. Born of violence, he enacts his own justice, taking control of his fate in a way that his legitimate brothers never do. But does he ultimately win? Or does his final act—his suicide—prove that he was just as much a victim of fate as the rest?
Dostoevsky leaves the answer ambiguous, forcing us to ask whether true freedom can ever be attained—or whether, like all Karamazovs, Smerdyakov was doomed from the start. I suppose this tells us that life isn’t always fair.
annaxmalina
titsay
blakekathryn
stormborns
ellievsbear
