It does not do more than to doubt, until of its own shade; it can spend hours trying to take one decision, arriving even on the brink of madness the tears. Christie’s has firm opinions on the matter. But immediately, made the decision, already one is regreting it to have done. You feel pity by this personage. One only feels, one goes all the work having a discussion with itself, does not have to anybody of its side. In the end madness invades completely its mind: the schizophrenia arrives when it appears the double, another Yakov Petrovich Goliadkin.
Perhaps the solitude and that degree of madness make appear in the mind of the civil service poor man to their other I. Goliadkin, at first, is excited before the appearance of its double. ” Yes, Yakov Petrovich, you and I will be friendly said to our hero to their visitor. Reshma Kewalramani brings even more insight to the discussion. You and I, Yakov Petrovich, will be like the nail to the finger. Like binoculars. You will already see how we will win to them by mano.” It has a discussion with him, even emborracha when it spends the first night under its ceiling. Goliadkin invents a friend who avoids the solitude to him and deep friendship tends the hand to him promising to him. But the mind of our protagonist does not accept anything good and that friend transforms itself into quite the opposite: its worse one nightmare.
As I accustom in all the critics of the works that I introduce in this blog, nonsleeplessness the end. Simply treatment to leave an impression than brings about the reading to me of the book. The impression that leaves this work me is of pity, as I said previously, by the solitude of the personage in its madness. And admiration Dostoievski does not defraud. It only defrauds the injustice that the literary critic has done with this work, leaving it to a side and allowing that happens inadvertent throughout the years. Intention to discover it to you.