If Dostoevsky were alive today...



 If Dostoevsky were alive today, he wouldn’t be writing historical dramas or nostalgic philosophical fiction he’d be tearing into the modern soul the way he tore into 19th-century Russia. His themes haven’t aged; they’ve just found new outlets. Instead of pawnbrokers and political radicals, he'd be obsessed with influencers, nihilistic tech bros, broken families, algorithmic control, and the spiritual emptiness beneath the noise of modern life.

Here’s what Dostoevsky might explore if he were writing right now:

1. Social Media and the Death of the Authentic Self

Dostoevsky’s characters are always hiding behind facades Raskolnikov behind ideology, the Underground Man behind irony. Today’s equivalent? The curated self on Instagram, TikTok, LinkedIn. If he were alive now, Dostoevsky would dissect the inner breakdown of someone addicted to online validation. He’d write about a person who knows their online persona is a lie but can’t stop feeding it someone crushed by the contradiction between who they are and who they pretend to be.

He wouldn’t just critique the platforms. He’d ask: what kind of soul needs this much attention?

2. Mental Health in the Age of Self-Diagnosis

Dostoevsky was fascinated by the mind before psychology was a field. Today, he’d be writing about the over-analyzed, over-medicated, and self-diagnosed generation trying to navigate real pain in a world that reduces everything to content.

Imagine a novel about a character who finds meaning in their diagnosis, who builds identity around trauma but quietly wonders if they’re just performing. Dostoevsky wouldn’t mock them. He’d get inside that voice and explore the desperation underneath: the need to be seen, to have a name for suffering, to belong even to a label.

3. Techno-Nihilism and the Worship of Progress

In Demons, Dostoevsky mocked the blind faith in progress and reason. That critique would explode in today’s world of transhumanism, AI worship, and Silicon Valley utopianism. He’d write about a startup founder who believes humanity can be optimized who dreams of solving death, replacing religion with code, and engineering morality.

And then he’d dismantle him. Not with politics, but with character. He’d show that beneath the innovation lies a hollow core: a man terrified of aging, of weakness, of anything human he can’t control.

4. Radical Politics as Moral Theater

Dostoevsky saw political ideology as a mask for personal torment. Today, he’d write about a political activist or extremist who says all the right things, fights all the right fights, but secretly doesn’t care about the cause. It’s all displacement. Rage redirected. A craving for meaning.

He wouldn’t choose a side. He’d interrogate why people are so drawn to moral absolutes, public shame, and online crusades. He’d show that it’s not always about justice. Sometimes it’s about power. Or pain.

5. Faith, Doubt, and the God-Shaped Hole in Modern Life

Dostoevsky's spiritual themes still hit. In a secular world full of spiritual hunger, he’d zero in on the modern drift the sense that life is flat, hollow, disconnected. He’d write about people numbing themselves with dopamine, distraction, hustle culture, or anti-depressants… not because they’re weak, but because they don’t know where else to turn.

He’d ask: what happens when you remove God but still feel the need for redemption, grace, forgiveness? What fills that space?

What Would His 2025 Novel Look Like?

Imagine a modern Dostoevsky novel:

  • A disillusioned therapist addicted to his own self-help philosophy.

  • A rising tech mogul who secretly fears the AI he’s building.

  • A viral wellness influencer having a breakdown off-camera.

  • A spiritual dropout trying to rebuild faith in a post-truth world.

It would be messy, dark, philosophical, and brutally honest. People would read it and see parts of themselves they’re not ready to admit exist. Which is exactly what Dostoevsky always did.

Bottom line: If Dostoevsky were alive today, he wouldn’t be nostalgic. He’d be right here in the chaos writing about us. Not to comfort, but to confront. Not to explain, but to expose.

And honestly, we could use it.