Appendix — Dostoevsky and Vance: Tales of Cultural Decay

Although written more than 150 years apart, Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Notes From the Underground and J.D. Vance’s Hillbilly Elegy both capture similar sociological phenomena, documenting themes of cynicism, and aversion to modernity. Dostoevsky’s existentialist novella is set in 1860s Russia, told from the perspective of a misanthropic civil servant. Vance’s narrative, on the other hand, is a tale of American decline in Appalachia, and the “Rust Belt.”
The former tells of 19th century urban decay, skeptical in its evaluations of Western ideas mainly relating to utopianism and utilitarianism, philosophies which gained prominence in Russia during Dostoevsky’s time. Himself a proponent of a return to agrarianism, Dostoevsky rejected the notion that it was possible to explicate human nature, questioning if a “crystal palace” was even an attainable prospect. Moreover, the “Underground Man” implies that seeking such a utopian state is a fool’s errand, suggesting that suffering and counter-intuitive will are equally vital to life as comfort and pleasure. Thus, in trying to approach perfection, people lose touch with themselves, and reality as a whole; What manifests is an inversion of the original intent, one which prompts people to act outside of their own self-interest, simply so they can retain the illusion of free will. In summation, Dostoevsky considers urban life antithetical to how humans ought to live — a mode of being inconsistent with the complexity of the individual, worsened by misguided ideas which seek to quantify something unquantifiable.
J.D. Vance’s memoir critiques modernity in its own unique way, regaling readers with stories of small-town and rural decay. Grounded in his own experiences in Kentucky and Ohio, Vance expounds on issues facing these deprived regions, such as drug addiction and overdependence on unhealthy foods. Vance’s ascribed remedies for these phenomena are distinct from Dostoevsky’s, however. Once undisciplined and lacking motivation, he was able to escape the trajectory of his relatives and familiars by enlisting in the military, and earning multiple university degrees. Congruent with his own path, therefore, Vance asserts proper guidance, faith, and focus on education as means through which upward mobility can be achieved.
While Vance’s take, as noted above, differs in context and message from Dostoevsky’s, one aspect in which they mirror each other is as follows: neither view the issues of their time as solvable via comprehensive outside intervention. The American author opines that folks from his region of origin reflexively blame the government for their problems, a scapegoating effort which inadvertently renders them deterministic and unable to move forward. Likewise, the Russian author has little faith in any one government or politician being able to cure the ailments of his age. The Underground man, consistent in his doubt, believes that only foolish men are sure enough of themselves to try and implement large-scale solutions to impossibly complex realities. Intelligent folks, he surmises, are too caught up in their own second guesses to take any meaningful action.
Juxtaposing Notes From the Underground and Hillbilly Elegy, readers are presented with two accounts, one fictional and one non-fictional, which grapple with the woes of feeling left behind by societal “progress.” This trend is hardly novel, having undoubtedly been expedited since the Industrial Revolution. Even then, the Luddites rebelled by destroying textile machinery. Now, with the rise of automation and urbanization, humanity is poised to continue its dealings with unfamiliar horizons.
The texts are both keenly aware of the dangers of oversimplification, and sharp in their implicit criticisms of nihilism. Vance’s work is compelling and credible because it is rooted in lived experience; Dostoevsky’s is powerful and enduring because it forces us to sympathize with a deeply flawed and resentful narrator.