Nikolai Gogol. The Brothers Karamazov. Fyodor Dostoevsky. Novels, Tales, Journeys. Alexander Pushkin. The Idiot. Fyodor Dostoyevsky. Selected Stories of Anton Chekhov. Anton Chekhov. The Death of Ivan Ilyich. The Collected Tales of Nikolai Gogol.
The Magic Mountain. Crime and Punishment. The Power and the Glory. Graham Greene. The Trial. Fathers and Sons. Ivan Turgenev. Anna Karenina. Fifty-Two Stories. Notes from Underground. The Annotated Lolita. Vladimir Nabokov. The Portable Faulkner.
William Faulkner. Why might a fallen man, a beggar, still keep a flame of dignity burning in his heart? Why might a harangued father, drive away his heirs from money, while spending his whole life hoarding for them? Why might a pauper, throw away his last penny on trifles, despite carrying a clear picture of his imminent doom in his eyes? Why might a pure heart, deliberately dirty his soul with pungent secrets, knowing there were no ways to erase them?
Because deep down, what bind us, irrespective of our backgrounds, are the same threads: love, jealousy, ambition, hatred, revenge, repentance. In various forms, they dwell in us, and drive us, to give their formless matter, shape in different people, in different ways, at different places and in different times.
I write a few words on the board and pause to ponder. Laugh, yes; ah yes! There is plenty of humor ingrained, albeit surreptitiously, in this dense text and works like a lovely whiff of cardamom wafting over a cup of strong tea.
Ivan Fyodorovich, my most respectful son, allow me to order you to follow me! There, I made a smiley on the board. I dropped the chalk and wondered: what created so much debate and furore perhaps when this book was first published in the 19th century?
Yes, now that image surely needs to be questioned. But do ask these questions. Do take the plunge into this deep sea of psychology and philosophy. Do feel the thuds of paradoxes and dualities on your soul. Do allow the unknown elements of orthodoxy and modernism to pucker your skin. Do allow some blood to trickle. Do allow some scars to heal. Because No, gentlemen of the jury, they have their Hamlets, but so far we have only Karamazovs! View all 60 comments. I have always been aware of the fact that it is one of the greatest novels ever written so I know I have to read it eventually.
The plot revolves around the murder of perhaps one of the most despicable characters ever created, Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov, the father of the Karamazov brothers. This detail about the book only skims the surface because this only serves as the basic architecture for Dostoevsky's philosophy.
This novel isn't so much a story as: a lengthy dissertation on human nature; the issues of Dostoyevsky's day; detailed personality profiles; and digressions on every subject the author wanted to pursue, including free will, the existence of God, moral responsibility, and truth.
The courtroom drama at the end of the novel, would be very hard to match in modern fiction. Petersburg shows that all the supposedly incriminating circumstances of the case can be understood. Each figure in this household? He changes his mind after a severe illness, and his materialistic belief is replaced by intense spiritual curiosity; Alyosha is an idealist, lovable and loving.
The story started out painfully slow. As with the rest of the book, there were many points where Dostoevsky seemed to descend into meaningless details that, to me, did nothing to advance the plot, atmosphere, or characterization. I feel that the author is disconnected from his audience, and he doesn't seem to care. This comes to a point where I think Dostoevsky frequently loses himself in the meshes of his own word spinning.
The book goes off too many tangents and is densely verbose. I found pages of extraordinary depth and poignancy but they are few and far in between. I find it hard to connect with any of the characters since their personalities are diluted by the manic and morbidly intense verbal flow. Half the book was one of the Karamazovs talking on and on, uninterrupted to an audience as silent and passive as the reader.
I frequently spaced out and have to backtrack. I eventually found myself reading this book in a grim desire to finish it and be done, rather than out of a sense of enjoyment.
I admired author's insights into human nature, but all too often, he seemed to make grand proclamations arbitrarily that have little evidence behind them. As if by declaring them with confidence he somehow made them true beyond question. And for whatever unaccountable reason, his preoccupations landed like a relic in my own life. View all 29 comments. It enters deeply into the ethical debates of God, free will and morality.
The plot revolves around the murder of the obnoxious Fyodor Karamazov and the subsequent trial. He had a major dispute with Dmitri about money and a woman they both desired, which makes him the prime suspect.
Meanwhile a suicide occurs, that puts everything at question. It is a theological drama of moral struggles concerning faith, doubt, judgment and guilt. Their psychological effects are exposed in the subsequent trial leading to a devastating verdict. Drawing of the three brothers in contrast to their father Between Faith and Doubt The central philosophical conflict lies between religious faith and doubt.
Alyosha is characterized by his believe in God, leading him to active love of mankind, kindness, forgiveness, and a devotion to goodness. Ivan on the other hand is known for his atheism, logical skepticism and examination of evidence, leading him to the rejection of God and conventional notions of morality. He becomes cold and experiences inner despair.
But the novel also examines doubt with objectivity, as Ivan argues persuasivly against religion, the Church, and God, suggesting that the choice to embrace religious faith can only be made at great philosophical risk, and for reasons that withstand logical explanation.
Crime and Justice The main motive of the novel is crime and justice, both earthly and devine; exploring sin, redemption, and guilt.
Earthly justice is the basic idea of the actual justice system, laws imposed by the government, trials and the subsequent punishment. Dmitri would only be guilty if he killed his father and stole his money. His previous thoughts and desires are not relevant. In contrast divine justice is the moral code, introduced through religion, suggesting punishment through hell, instead of heaven, requiring immortality. Therefore the only punishment during life is the burden of consciousness, which are the ingrained teachings of religion.
Divine justice suggests, that sins of omission are worse than the sins of commission and should be more severely punished. Manipulating someone else into committing a crime is worse than committing the crime yourself, as you are not only guilty of desiring the crime, your are also responsible for someone else committing the crime.
Therefore everyone bears some responsibility for the sins of everyone else and no one can be held singly responsible for a crime or sin. This idea of shared responsibility is outrageous to those in the novel who doubt Christianity, particularly Ivan, who repeatedly insists that he is not responsible for the actions of anyone but himself.
When the killer explains to Ivan how his amoral philosophical beliefs have made it possible for him to commit the crime, Ivan is forced to accept the consequences of his relentless skepticism: his doubt has made the murder possible, which makes him a complicity.
The Burden of Free Will The novel argues that people have free will, whether they want to or not. Every individual is free to choose whether to believe or disbelieve in God, whether to accept or reject morality, and whether to pursue good or evil. Superficially free will may seem to guarantee independence and ensure that no outside force can control ones choices. Voluntarily rejecting the securities, comforts, and protections of the world in favor of the uncertainties and hardships of religious belief is a burden.
Ivan argues, that most people are too weak to make this choice and will have unhappy lives that end in eternal damnation, while free will is a necessary component of the simple and satisfying faith practiced by Alyosha. Fyodor Dostoevsky Author Fyodor Dostoevsky To really understand the motivation and struggle behind this novel, one has to look at Dostoyevsky biography.
He was raised christian but also exposed to misery and murder. His father was a drunk, and later murdered by serfs on account of his inhumane treatment. In he joined the Petrashevsky Circle, a literary group that discussed banned books critical of Tsarist Russia and promoting atheism. He was arrested in for "the circulation of a private letter full of insolent expressions against the Orthodox Church".
They sentenced him and the other members of the circle to death by firing squad, and the prisoners were taken to their execution. He spent four years in a Siberian prison camp, followed by six years of compulsory military service in exile. Dostoevsky had his hands and feet shackled until his release and he was only permitted to read his New Testament Bible. At the Siberian prison camp Dostoyevsky's personal struggle with the question of faith, and his own experience with injustice and murder, are manifested in the characters of "The Brothers Karamazov".
For him the problem of God became not the recognition of the truth, but the elimination of associated doubt. The primary source of doubt was his struggle to reconcile the suffering evident in the world and the notion of a loving God.
But nothing is a greater cause of suffering. View all 36 comments. For most of the last half this novel is like a Richard Price police procedural Clockers, Freedomland, Lush Life and also like a great courtroom drama with verbatim closing speeches. Got to say, this guy Dosto was not a one trick pony, not by a country mile.
This might be connected to the high alcohol consumption or the poor medical facilities It is clear that the concept of interrupting someone had not yet been introduced into Russia at this point. No one will say this. Eventually the speaker collapses to the floor from lack of oxygen and the next character will launch into their ten page rant.
He says he has gone round talking to people to get all this story straight. Stringing him up on the bitter asp would be too good for him. Because you see, totally co-incidentally, the dead father was robbed of this exact sum also. It can get slightly tiresome, I admit that. We never hear the last of it. Alexei a. Not good boyfriend material. Dmitri a. Mitya, Mitka, Mitenka, Mitri This is the roister-doistering swaggering loudmouth uber-romantic aggravating jerk who because of his ability to drink ox-stunning amounts of hard liquor and then do the Argentinian tango or the Viennese waltz at the drop of a samovar is a wow with the ladies but you better be expecting to pay for his exhausting company because he never has a bean.
Except that on the two occasions he does have a bean beans! Definitely not good boyfriend material. Really not good boyfriend material. Ivan a. Also probably not good boyfriend material. View all 18 comments. I have read this book three or four times in both English and French translations. In English, grab the Volonhovsky one. I cannot even begin to describe how awesome this book is.
If for no other reason than Ivan's two chapters and especially for the Grand Inquisitor, this book is clearly in the upper reaches of the greatest literature ever written in any language. The range of personalities, emotions, and reactions of the various characters - all so fully developed and realistic in that specific I have read this book three or four times in both English and French translations. The range of personalities, emotions, and reactions of the various characters - all so fully developed and realistic in that specific Dostoyevsky way - makes the plot move along so very quickly.
There is just so much in this novel to love. This is one of those desert-island books without which the human race would be poorer. Also highly recommended is Joseph Frank's excellent biography of Dostoyevski if you wish to understand why this book was his last and his greatest.
Ivan's chapters about unbaptized children and The Grand Inquisitor are among the greatest chapters I have ever read, absolutely spell-binding and critical for today's world of "alternative facts" and disdain of objectivity.
Just finished this again, but in audio format. Always so exhilarating! View all 7 comments. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others. And having no respect he ceases to love. Shelves: classics , foriegn-lit , translated , favorites , r-r-rs , philosophy , spiritual.
On Romancing The Devil Warning: This review might contain spoilers even outside the hidden 'spoiler alert' regions. The book is not about the murder or about who did it, those things were very apparent before half the book was completed - the narrator taking special pains to spoil all suspense for his readers at the very beginning harkening back to the days of greek drama and Euripides - according to whom, the effect of a story, even a whodunnit, w On Romancing The Devil Warning: This review might contain spoilers even outside the hidden 'spoiler alert' regions.
The book is not about the murder or about who did it, those things were very apparent before half the book was completed - the narrator taking special pains to spoil all suspense for his readers at the very beginning harkening back to the days of greek drama and Euripides - according to whom, the effect of a story, even a whodunnit, was not in epic suspense about what was going to happen next, but in those great scenes of lyrical rhetorics in which the passion and dialectic of the protagonists reached heights of eloquence.
Everything was to portend pathos, not action, which was always there only as a container for the pathos, to give it form. This was probably done so that the typical clue-seeking aspects of a mystery does not detract his reader from addressing the real, the painful questions littered all across his treatise, almost with indecent abandon. And do not forget that Dostoyevsky even gave us the alternate route that Mitya could have taken in the Zosima narrative - the parallels in that story are too numerous to list out here.
The story is about the reaction - it was all about the jury. The job of the country, the society, of the whole human race is to judge, to determine the fate of individuals based on the stories that they construct, literally out of thin air, out of the small pieces of a life that they can only ever observe. But yet we construct stories, to understand, to predict, to know how to behave, we even make up stories about ourselves so that we may have an illusion of control over who we are - so that we do not melt into the amorphous protean mass that is the rest of humanity - my story separates me from all of them.
I construct, therefore I am. That was the grand trial, the inquisition of reason. But how can the defense stand up in favor of reality without explaining to the jury to humanity why they see things not as they are, that they have made up a story that is perfect but is never real as no story can ever be - as no cause can really cause a definite effect when human beings are involved? You have to tell a story to convince the jury.
You have to tell a story to defend the fact that stories do not exist. A story now, about stories. Or multiple stories to show how all stories are false if only one can be allowed to be true. The only other option is that all are true, simultaneously. There is the irresolvable conflict of the trial, of the story, of the novel, of life. You cannot discredit the myth of the story without the help of a story as the jury that judges cannot understand, cannot comprehend any reality outside of a story, human beings cannot think outside their romances.
They will continue to exist as prisoners to their own stories. That is why it is a comedy and not a tragedy, as no one died and no one killed and it remains akin to a sphinx setting us a riddle which he cannot solve himself. But, judgment had to be passed as the story was told.
One story among many. Possibly the real theme, the above only being my own story But in the fable who was it that really forgave the inquisitor or the inquisitee? And in the overall story too, who forgives whom in the end? But oh wait, this is what I talked of in paragraph length already. By the way, when you read this, keep your ears tuned towards the end - for somewhere in the distance you might hear the laugh of the Grand Inquisitor echoing faintly.
View all 31 comments. Sometimes I feel like modern covers have gone too far. View all 35 comments. Sep 04, Samra Yusuf rated it it was amazing Shelves: fav , russian-literature. Russian novels always get better of me, I am left battered both body and mind. Like the traveler who was long gone on a journey and on his return, bathes for a long good hour, taking good care of every little pore of body, soaping himself as he sinks in tub very slowly, and as water pours over him he shuts his eyes and with numbing senses recalls everything in an episodic m Russian novels always get better of me, I am left battered both body and mind.
The hell we create through our thoughts for ourselves, is never been better visited by any other but D. He occasionally invests himself to an extent, but his natural port is human psychology. Does all that exist of itself, or is it only an emanation of myself, a logical development of my ego which alone has existed forever? We have in detail, the characters donned into garbs of confused expressions about other characters and on the brink of self-assessment and self-denial.
And as the novel proceeds, there are peculiar ideas, echoing into the minds of characters, ideas get doubled or split into multiple strings as the tale follows, Dostoyevsky makes his characters suffer by their own doomed states, their own beings are their torture cells, no one escapes this suffering, no one!
Without it, I am told, man could not have existed on earth, for he could not have known good and evil. Why should he know that diabolical good and evil when it costs so much?
View all 50 comments. This book is one of the most challenging ones to review. And if I consider myself capable of such a venture, it will still take pages to write a proper review that would do justice to the book.
So my attempt here is just to pen my thoughts about the book. I have heard that The Karamazov Brothers is the best work of Dostoyevsky. It may be premature for me to comment on such a conclusion, I can well understand why it is thus praised. It is a book complete in every aspect: in writing, in storytelli This book is one of the most challenging ones to review. It is a book complete in every aspect: in writing, in storytelling, in character development, and the plotline.
Being a book with over pages, I was a little apprehensive at the beginning. But his easy writing style put me at ease from the very first chapter. The book is both a crime story and a philosophical debate.
Both parts were brilliantly done and extremely interesting. But what connected me with this extraordinary work is its character development. Almost all the major characters of the book are taken through a rough journey which tests their strengths and weaknesses and helps them to come to understand themselves, their faith and beliefs.
Alyosha is the supposed hero of the story chosen by the author himself. But I did find an equal hero on that of Ivan. I loved both of them; the two contrasting characters - one is a believer and the other is a non-believer atheist. Their contrasting views added colour and intrigue to the story. All the characters had their virtues and faults which made them real and believable. Throughout the read, I felt like a part of their community which was truly amazing. Dostoyevsky's beautiful and heartfelt writing captures the reader so well and keeps them ensnared in his story.
The Karamazov Brothers is the sort of the book that will somehow become part of yourself and which will live and age with you. That is the true quality of a masterpiece. It is a true blessing to come across such beautiful works of literature. I feel so privileged. View all 37 comments. Oct 14, Alan rated it it was amazing Shelves: russian , favorites.
I have always been an optimist! Imagine that. So obviously the first thing I did was run to the store and blow a good chunk of that money on two books: One Hundred Years of Solitude and The Brothers Karamazov. I am now The first 3 times ended up 50 pages in.
I had the I have always been an optimist! I had the same set of excuses that I would throw around, usually having nothing to do with my inherent lack of maturity and having everything to do with Russian names, nicknames, patronymics, etc. Russian books are depressing! Why would I read them? The 4th and final unsuccessful attempt came when I was beginning my graduate studies. I had actually made it pages in. Then life happened, and it happened hard.
Grad school, I guess. What happened, then, to push me to be successful this 5th and by no means final attempt? My dad picked it up, read it, then proceeded to tell me that he had read it constantly, knowing it would motivate me to get there. Fathers and Sons. Thanks dad. Very cool. We all know. The name is in the culture, and we most likely drift through our lives as readers knowing that the book has a certain aura around it. I took the third option. The themes presented were all worth diving into in-depth.
A juicy 3-page passage on philosophy would be followed up by an even juicer page passage on religion. There were reflections on the psychology of daily life. We saw family strife and meaning-making within a harsh and unforgiving environment. Loyalty and love, death, violence. Pride within society, pride within family, pride within the self. Pernicious pride. I am just throwing words at you at this point, but each of these prompts can take books to discuss and such books do exist — Joseph Frank has a great set of lectures on Dostoyevsky.
This is one where you can vividly picture coming back to often, and each time you do, a specific theme will be more salient than the previous read.
There are a lot of strengths to this novel. Since I do not currently have the time or the expertise to discuss the former, I will write a few words about the latter. How easy it is to straw man! Dostoyevsky never once does that. I can conceivably see readers falling along any spectrum with different characters.
And they would all have a point. I will betray some of my thoughts with my choice of adjectives to come. You start with Fyodor Pavlovich, the father. Reprehensible buffoon. Takes everything, gives nothing.
Dimitri Fyodorovich, the eldest son. A former army man, an unfortunate drunk, a hopeless playboy. Talks big, falls at the feet of a woman who winks at him. Ivan Fyodorovich, the next son. Self-appointed smart one. To him, the arcane is anathema. He is, after all, part of the academics and intelligentsia of higher society Russia. Alexei Fyodorovich, the youngest son. Radiates pure energy.
Just a few, but the list can go on. There is also the issue of translation. This is a great article that discusses the different translations of The Brothers Karamazov. However, I have been on this wave with Pevear and Volokhonsky, so I decided So perhaps not a terrible place to start. Many images came to mind as I read the book. I thought of Job, staying true to his faith. I thought of Socrates on his deathbed, surrounded by disciples and handing out a few final pieces of comforting wisdom.
Most of all, one image remained with me, one that Dostoyevsky explicitly referenced - Contemplator , created by Ivan Kramskoi. Everything I have talked about with the hopes, desires, and frustrations of the characters can be seen in those eyes. The frigid atmosphere is striking. Maybe something to explore in the near future. I have a Word document on my desktop with all the quotes that I took down from this book, but I will end with one that was particularly beautiful — until next time: We are of a broad, Karamazovian nature Someone: Helloooo… yoo-hoo….
Fucktard, you there? Ben: Yes, I'm here I finished The Brothers Karamazov the other night and I'm a bit blown away. Emotionally exhausted. Right now, it has me sitting here thinking about it, feeling all kinds of things, thinking complex, important thoughts Someone: The great Fyodor Dostoevsky should do that to you. He's a literary Giant; one of the all time greats. But you see, knowing you , shitfuck, I'm not surprised you gave it five stars.
You give everythi Someone: Helloooo… yoo-hoo…. You give everything five stars, do you not? I mean, God -- and I mean "God" in a purely metaphorical sense, as he is simply an opiate for the weak masses -- you even gave The Wind-up Bird Chronicle five stars, which was more disturbing than Grace Jones chasing me on horseback. You see, most of Murakami's narrators sound as if they just disembarked the short bus. Not lyrical so much as the product of blunt-force trauma to the head, I think.
But sometimes the two are in fact interchangeable. And don't even get me started on your review of The End of the Affair. A bit self serving, wasn't it? I mean, goodreads isn't your goddamn therapy group. Just about every review you've written is a sap-fest. So what kind of personalized, kitschy, life changing moment are you gonna compare this book to? Just face it, fucktard, you're one of those easily excitable star whores.
You aren't going to tell anyone, are you? Ben: heh. Someone: What is that supposed to mean? Ben: Well, I do plan on sharing this conversation with others, although I can edit out the hooker part, if you'd like. I want to share it because I really want people to know how great this book is, and I know you love this book as well. I hope the fact that it has your full seal of approval will encourage them to read it. Someone: Look, fucktard, usually I'd be happy to be the idol in any person's religion, but I've learned that it's just too much pressure.
I reserve my right to be surly and malevolent. And you get my point, right? You're changing over there, and it's obvious. Toughen up cowgirl. Before you know it you'll be a priest or something. Ben: Actually, Someone, I'm quite cautious about the number of stars I award. My average rating is 3. And in regards to giving out 5 stars like one of your Johns, it actually takes quite an experience for me to award five stars.
Although I should add that I did give a good rating to one of your homeboys recently: I gave Nine Stories four stars. I know you like- Someone: That pissed me off fucktard. That's a five star book if there ever was one. Salinger- Ben: I know, I know: you want to have passionate sex with him and all the rest.
You don't need to go into details. Someone: Don't patronize me, Haruki-hag. Stand up, wipe the sand out of your vagina. Who do you think you are, that innocent little Alyosha or something? Ben: I guess that's better than "jewhole". And Alyosha is one of my top 5 literary characters of all time. So intuitive, insightful and empathetic -- yet a great leader who stands up for what he believes in.
Ivan makes my top five as well. He's- Someone: Ivan! He's subject to various interpretations, and at a surface level, some of his thoughts appear contradictory. Then again, I am not a huge fan of systematic philosophies. He and I are kindred spirits of sorts -- without kindred mustaches, however. We both veer toward iconoclasm and endearing? Wait a second Ben: Yes, Nietzsche. But Ivan was absolutely brilliant and interesting, wasn't he? So intellectual, cerebral and logical, yet passionate and moral.
Of course he's not as "perfect" per se, as Alyosha. Really, the personalities of all the characters are extreme -- almost ridiculously so. Yet somehow Dostoevsky gets you absorbed inside their heads and hearts, and makes them so realistic that you feel like you really know them, and God do you care for them. And their thoughts, ideas, and philosophies -- they span everything, and when his characters interact with each other -- in what is nearly perfect dialogue -- you see the thin line between being brilliant and crazy, and how superb it is when they intermingle, as they often do -- and the magic of life itself opens up: you feel the full rush of all the varying natures within; your heart beats HARD, your senses are on high alert -- shit man, you're feelin' the same way those crazy characters are.
Someone: The storyline is brilliant as well, fucktard. Ben: Yes! The unmatched talent and the outpouring of heart that Dostoevsky puts into this can change your life.
Through this novel you can come to your own conclusions about important, existential philosophies: you can even use this book to better yourself in concrete ways by comparing yourself to the different brothers, learning from their mistakes, and taking the good aspects from each.
Someone: There you go with your idealistic, finding yourself, magic bullshit. It's one of the best books of all time, dammit. Someone: Yes, yes, you're right. This novel is-- Ben: YES! The great ranges in our emotions, the soaring capabilities of our passions, the depths of our intellect and souls. This book hits the full spectrum of just about everything.
They perform functions like preventing the same content from reappearing, ensuring ads are displayed and, in some cases, selecting content based on your interests.
Paperback Audio Download Features Find your next read Sign up for our newsletter Events Podcasts Apps. Children's Children's 0 - 18 months 18 months - 3 years 3 - 5 years 5 - 7 years 7 - 9 years 9 - 12 years View all children's. Puffin Ladybird. Authors A-Z. Featured Authors. Gifts for bibliophiles. Book Bundles. Writing Workshops. View all. Curated Bundles. Children's Gifts. Stocking Fillers.
Penguin Tote Bags. Isokon Penguin Donkey. View more editions. Buy from. Share at. More from this Author.
0コメント