The title story is a novella. That is the part I read. "The Eternal Husband" is the model for Saul Bellow's novel, THE VICTIM. Having read and liked THE VICTIM, I decided to read Dostoevsky's novella. I read it in the translation by Pevear and Volokhonsky. (That's the Bantam edition with the Magritte-like painting on the cover, with the man's back to us.) Dostoevsky's masterpiece is not only the model for Bellow's book, it is the blueprint. Bellow's genius was to introduce the theme of antisemitism into Dostoevsky's story of a Christian sinner and his Christian nemesis.
Even what I took to be an inserted set-piece in THE VICTIM reflects what amounts to a set-piece in THE ETERNAL HUSBAND. While Dostoevsky's scene advances the plot and the Bellow scene doesn't, both have a discussion of how to be human while producing art -- singing, in Dostoevsky's book and acting in Bellow's -- and both discussions are in scenes in both books showing the protagonist suddenly enjoying himself in lively company. Saul Bellow matched Dostoevsky almost point-for-point in THE VICTIM

"Flowed from the heart and penetrated hearts."

As with all the other works by Dostoevsky, I find it hard to stop reading before I finish the stories, but eventually I have to go to sleep. I'm reluctant to say too much because it would be a spoiler. I'll write more when I finish all the stories.

Overall structure, plot, experience of reading -- not earth-shaking, but there are some great quotes on human nature. I much prefer other works, esp. Crime and Punishment and The Idiot.

“I suddenly felt that it would make no difference to me whether the world existed or there was nothing anywhere. I began to feel and know with my whole being that with me there was nothing.”


My second Dostoyevsky book of short stories and I loved the selection in this one! It’s been a while since my last Dostoy book so this was a nice re-entry back into his work.

‘A Nasty Anecdote’ was the first story in this collection and I’ve read it before. I decided to skip over it since I wasn’t really a big fan of it when it first read it and chose to move on to the other stories.

‘The Eternal Husband’ is story two and I’m honestly 50/50 with it. When I first read the plot, I imagined it playing out much differently. It definitely has its surprises like when Pavel attacks Velchaninov late at night, when Liza dies, and that whole visit to the Zakhlebinin’s. Pavel and Velchaninov have such an interesting and odd relationship lol. But overall I’d give it a 3/5.

Out of the three short stories I haven’t read before in this collection, I really liked ‘Bobok’ the most. I absolutely loved the idea of a living man being able to listen into conversations the dead are having while at a cemetery. I loved the banal, yet realistic discussions the dead had and being able to get a glimpse into “life after death”. Would definitely give this one 4/5.

Story four was ‘The Meek One’. I’ve seen someone compare this short to ‘White Nights’ recently and it made me curious to see why they made that sort of connection. Now after reading, I can say that I see where they’re coming from (however they are also still vastly different). In both short stories, the idea of love is twisted by our narrators which puts a strain on the love interests. Obviously ‘The Meek One’ is a more intense version of it and the narcissism/victim mentality that the pawnbroker has drives his wife to suicide. This was definitely a very tragic story that went into a much different direction compared to ‘White Nights’. However if someone were interested in ‘White Nights’, I would definitely recommend also reading this one (or vice versa). I think this would be a great way to see how Dostoyevsky explores love, obsession, and complicated/complex male characters when they cross paths with these themes. I’d rate this a 3.8/5 (maybe even a 4!).

And finally (a personal favorite of mine) ‘The Dream Of A Ridiculous Man’. This was on my 2025 reread list so I’m glad it was in this collection. The way the narrator describes this world he dreamt of was so moving and beautiful it almost made me cry the first time I read this story. It’s definitely one I think about often and I always see a lot of love for ‘White Nights’, but never much for ‘The Dream’! This is definitely my 5/5 short story.

Dostoevsky’s explorations of the human condition have not dated. Even human relationships have change that much from his novels. One can still read our contemporary feelings and interactions throughout his pages. Calling these short stories is like calling Kafka’s Metamorphosis a story: the length does not define them but their content. Here one can read a precursor of other characters and themes. In particular, Prince Myshkin, the idiot, is utterly present, and loudest the most as the eternal husband. Whereas Dostoevsky’s economy on his narrative is obvious, that build up has a human impact on the reader, who becomes a witness on the psychological profile of a society and constructs the individual, at the same time that shows its disintegration. This happens at every corner, every conversation within thoughts and digressions.

A Nasty Anecdote, also known as An Unpleasant Predicament along with every other possible translation of the words, is not as pristine of plot as D's previous stories. The paralleled figures, Pralinsky and Pseldonymov, seem to be developed fully, but many of the detailed characters like Mlekopitaev remain offstage. The main idea behind the conflict of the story is brilliant, and apropos to the subject matter of the day. Alexander II had just freed Russia from serfdom, and the intelligentsia were discussing how to relate with their new free fellow citizens. In the story, Pralinsky argues for his superficial thoughts of "humaneness," which he acts upon, and by cutting the cords of class distinction too early, gets himself and everyone around him into trouble. His type is a dreaming everyman of extremes, with lofty ideals and (simultaneously) despicable egoism and pretension. Comic quality wins out in the end, though Pralinsky "doesn't hold out."

Note on this Bantam Classic copy of the PV translation: An important line is missing from the top of the final page 66 of A Nasty Anecdote. If I didn't have another translation available I would've been lost.

The Eternal Husband as a novella epitomizes Dostoevsky's versatility. Here, he takes a break from political, moral and societal causes, focusing on marriage and fidelity. A man, Velchaninov, lives in guilt and must come to terms with the consequences of his youth. He eventually comes around to earning the hero position in the work, while balancing his karma through various injustices instigated by the cuckolded husband of his past lover. This husband, Pavel Pavlovich, is a character with no nobility, who appears to learn nothing during the course of the plot. Only Velchaninov sees the horror of their actions on Liza and, to some degree, everyone else in the plot. Ironically, the paralleled characters use guilt on each other, trading it back and forth in every scene. There are very few women in the cast, amplifying the misguided decisions and responsibilities of the two men.

Bobok is a brief tale Dostoevsky published in the first season of his Diary of a Writer while he was editor of The Citizen. As an answer to criticism for his fantastic character types, Dostoevsky creates a gothic circus of absurd characters speaking from the grave. These "undead" happen to be upper class citizens with stereotypically vile and disgusting traits. (Their bodily decay can only be smelled by others, the more evil they are – the more they stink.) Much of the allegory here is obvious. The corpses prize their lascivious lifestyles and are not ashamed, as if the only change for them beyond the grave is the unfettering of social inhibitions. Perhaps Dostoevsky considered the new political movements of his day to be a sort of "death" to the upper class. If so, the voices he heard in the gradually-uncensored journals seemed to be the ugly, remorseless voices of the dead in graves. Further, if this allegory stands, the grave he was lying on (of the indignant yet equally repulsive General) represents The Citizen.

The Meek One (also translated A Gentle Creature) is a morose account of a man's response to his wife's suicide. After a simple author's intro (this story was published in his own journal A Writer's Diary), Dostoevsky uses first person narration to recount the events surrounding the marriage of a lonely pawnbroker and an impoverished orphan. Usually Dostoevsky's narrators look back on events with a calm understanding – as with Arkady in The Adolescent or Anton Lavrentevich in Demons – though their accounts are sometimes tarnished by their connection to other characters. In this story, Dostoevsky's narrator tortures his sweet wife with first a complete lack of emotional contact, then with his raving, desperate worship. By the end, the reader understands but the narrator still does not. This is a true denouement – a character doomed to deceive himself and repeat his blunders.

The Dream of a Ridiculous Man is the most fantastical and yet most plausible of Dostoevsky's stories by virtue of the dream structure. A suicidal existentialist dreams that he dies and is delivered to a perfect world, then unintentionally corrupts it. When he awakes, his faith in life is restored, he preaches the truth of his dream and is ridiculed for it. The genius in Dostoevsky's delivery of the message is his preparation of the perfect narrator – the self-proclaimed "ridiculous man" and his nihilist renunciation of life. His anguish at bringing sin to the dream utopia redeems him, and he even bizarrely offers himself to be crucified by the natives. I feel that this brief parable of Dostoevsky's is his clearest secular argument against utopianism in general – whether Fourierism or Marxism. It's a convincing one, though his narrator remains an "underground" type, regardless of his reversed solution. The implication here is that the much-debated topic cannot stand outside of the Christ idea.

How?

What an unlikeable pair! They are both so odd I wasn't quite sure what to make of them. It was certainly an unpredictable story too.

Far from his best work, but solid nonetheless. Also: never read Richard Pevear's introductions; he almost always spoils the plot.

I thoroughly enjoyed each story, especially the last short, "The Dream of a Ridiculous Man"
The Eternal Husband is unlike any story I've ever read, in the best way.

Well, I have not been jumping up and down clicking my heels if that is what you are asking. Since when does a secret group of people get together and decide that they are going to make an authors book a classic of print? Personally, I have read a number of Russian authors and I do not feel that Fyodor is one of the better writers. Is that going to damn me to hell fire? These stories were difficult, not because of some deep esoteric implication, there were entire page's that just went on and on to the point that I was glad when they were over.
The very last story " The Dream of a Ridiculous Man," started out with a few pages of promise and then suddenly fell into that goop called idealism on any continent. If you were to ask me which book to read, this one, or, " Fathers and Sons," I would tell you the latter.
I just expected a bit more quality and a little less vodka!