Notes from Underground is one of Fyodor Dostoevsky's most famous works. It's a novella, a little bit more than a hundred pages and frequently recommended as a good introduction to his bibliography as it contains a bit of his philosophy. Personally, I think that the shorter White Nights might be better as an introduction as it's more accessible, although it doesn't really expose you much to Dostoevsky's philosophy. I first tried reading Notes from Underground a couple of years ago but gave up, finding it a bit difficult to understand at the time. Now, I've had a much easier time understanding the book and what it's about.

In Notes from Underground, we follow an unnamed former bureaucrat as he writes about his narrative. The novella is divided into two parts. The first, a series of monologues about his philosophies, and the second about his misadventures in life. The narrator kind of comes across as a deranged madman in parts and I honestly don't know if that was intentional, but his ramblings do make sense and he presents a pretty coherent view of his own philosophy. Although, I do think that Dostoevsky himself does not necessarily subscribe to this philosophy or has reached a different conclusion.

I actually tried reading two translations of this book. The first one is the public domain translation by Constance Garnett and the second is a paperback Alma Classics edition translated by Kyril Zinovieff and Jenny Hughes. I liked the latter translation better as Garnett's sounds too Victorian and if what I've read about Dostoevsky's original prose is true, I was probably better off reading the Alma Classics edition. It's a good translation, readable and comes with explanatory notes for the references.

Notes from Underground is very existentialist. In it, the narrator makes fun of those less conscious of their own existence, those who weren't as aware as he was. He calls them ignorant, lesser somehow than he was. In several occasions, he talks about how he's okay with being ugly, as long as his face could be considered intelligent. His perceived intellectual and moral superiority allows him to feel above his peers despite being of lower rank and status than them. It allows him to look down on others, feel as if somehow he is above them.

Despite this, the narrator is also very self-loathing. He is very much aware of his own faults and hates that he is aware of his own faults. He also revels in his own awareness of his faults. These faults often contribute to his troubles and he is much aware of it and loathes himself for it. While he holds everyone and the world around him in contempt, he is even more contemptuous of himself.

In this way, we could say that Dostoevsky makes fun of both those less conscious and overly conscious of their existence. The less conscious are ignorant, but able to find pleasure in living, they are content with themselves. On the other hand, those who are overly conscious are very self-aware and yet prone to loathing themselves because of it. They acknowledge the absurdity in societal norms, yet they have to abide by it and end up wallowing in resentment. The nihilists like to bask in the sort of self-satisfaction that comes with believing that life is inherently absurd, and yet hate that their own circumstances are often caused by them.

The narrator even causes problems for himself in Part Two. Over and over again, he commits errors which he knows to be errors in order to prove his own freedom. As he said in Part One, the "Crystal Palace" or utopia would never materialize because it is meaningless to experience pleasure without pain or suffering. Man is not as rational as he likes to think he is. Unconscious factors lead to a person doing things which are against his own interests. This the narrator does over and over again throughout Part Two. He does things which are very irrational out of spite, to revel in his own freedom, his own awareness. In that way, he brings much misery to himself.

Through it all, I found the narrator to be a pitiful, if comic character. He is selfish, narcissistic, cowardly, self-loathing, but also quite intelligent. It's a shame he was such a spiteful character, but the novel wouldn't have been the same if he wasn't. He's such an extreme character and yet one could find the modern equivalent on 4Chan or Twitter perhaps. In that sense, he could read as quite modern.

Overall, I really enjoyed Notes from Underground and it made me think a lot about what Dostoevsky was trying to say. For a book I originally dreaded reading because I thought it would be difficult and inaccessible, it was surprisingly fun. Highly recommended.