/lit/ - Literature

R.L. Stein

>>14015275
i kek'd

If you are not wise I doubt you can determine wiseness, OP.

As far as Christians go, Kirkegaard has to be up there. Writing understanding on the depravity of man is infectious

>>14015264

Tolstoy. Chekhov would agree.

>>14015313
>Tolstoy
All his poor characters are le happy peasant clichés, he never had real empathy or understanding of them
Shakespeare for me

>>14015264
I was going to say the same. I'd put Dostoievsky, Balzac, Tolstoy (though in a coldest way than the first two) and probably also Kierkegaard in the top tier.
Note that some writers are very perceptive psychologist without being particularly tender, see Céline (mostly guided by contempt, disgust and irony), Stendhal (irony, detachement and simple cheerfulness), Nietzsche at his best.

>>14015322
Shakespeare is a fringe case because while he had a great understanding of humans it's hard to know what he thought about them. Tender acceptance doesn't seem to really describe him well imo. I agree that Tolstoy's understanding is a bit too intellectual and motivated by ideas. On second note, I would remove it from the "tender acceptance" tier and put it in the "understanding but not particularly tender or accepting" tier.

>>14015275
fpbp

>>14015313
>>14015264
I am reading a translation of chekhov by Robert Payne and the writing is appearing very average to me. Is it the translation problem?

Hemingway
Roald Dahl

>>14015264
Houellebecq.

>>14015384

Maybe you started with his earlier things, which are not his best.

For me this 2 short stories by him are the best ever written: "In the Ravine" and "Peasents". The first one is a King Lear of the from the lower middle class animalistic stinginess, and the second is one of the truest and most powerful portraits of poverty ever written. "Poverty is the worst form of violence." Gandhi supposedly said, and his epigram is made flesh in this Chekhov tale. The contrast with Tolstoy's romantic view of the peasants is very instructive.

His short story "Misery" has one of the most heartbreaking endings I have ever seen.

There's also "Lady with a Dog". You can see a fine comment on the wisdom contained in this story here:

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/09/the-chekhov-sentence-that-explains-human-relationships/569860/

And many others: "Ward Number 6", "The Murder", "The Duel", "The Darling" (Tolstoy loved this one), "Gooseberries", "Sleepy or Varka" (another portrait of people living in terrible conditions of poverty and abuse), "The Black Monk", etc.

>>14015501
what translation did you read?
also, why is chekov's translation not discussed much? I have been trying to find a discussion of 'best chekov translation' on the internet but couldn't find a single one.

>>14015552
>what translation did you read?

I read them in Portuguese, not English. I don't really know what are the best English translations. To be fair, I guess the translations I read in Portuguese were not that good because the translation that Nabokov did of "In the Ravine" in his russian lectures contains small details that are not on the portuguese volume I read. I remember that I got pretty triggered with that, because there was no justification for the missing details: it's not as if the translator was trying to mantain the metric of some lnes of poetry and needed to cut off some words for space.

There's maybe the possibility that Nabokov himself inserted those small details in his translation of "In the Ravine", but I find that unlikely.

>>14015501
The Lady With The Dog is one of the greatest achievements in all of literature IMO. It's absolute perfection in narrative form. It's one of the only pieces of literature I actually cried at.

>>14015264
Best Tolstoy biography?

for me, its ibsen

>>14015727
Very cliché story, why do you find that story so good? Only the ending is great.

>>14015840

Henry Troyat for more facts:

https://www.amazon.com/Tolstoy-Henri-Troyat/dp/0802137687/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=henry+troyat&qid=1571440445&s=books&sr=1-2

This one to know how Tolstoy really was like:

https://www.amazon.com/Tolstoy-Making-Novelist-Edward-Crankshaw/dp/1448205212/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=tolstoy+the+making+of+a+novelist&qid=1571440475&s=books&sr=1-1

And his diaries:

https://www.amazon.com/Tolstoys-Diaries-R-F-Christian/dp/0006545130/ref=sxbs_sxwds-stvp?keywords=tolstoy+diaries&pd_rd_i=0006545130&pd_rd_r=e673cd63-0758-4858-8fcd-d24fedec0016&pd_rd_w=jyjqY&pd_rd_wg=KrgUp&pf_rd_p=a6d018ad-f20b-46c9-8920-433972c7d9b7&pf_rd_r=TVTRX8KPA1K00R3DNXRK&qid=1571440518&s=books

>>14015905
On top of having extremely good character dynamics, the story also effectively links into themes of emotional repression and the way in which civilisation dehumanises people. To me, the highlight of the story isn't the ending, but the description of of the mountains at Yalta. It gives an impression of a natural world filled with beauty that the two cynical lovers are trying and struggling to reconnect with.

>>14016246
what's the difference between facts and what he was like

>>14015264
I will go with the safe, traditional answers: Homer, Shakespeare, and the author of the Book of Proverbs (supposedly Solomon).

>>14016246
does the second link include the process of how he became the writer that he became?

>>14015264
Shakespeare, though his mind is inscrutable, nevertheless must have at least loved his characters to create them so solidly.

Below him is a huge gap, and then writers like Tolstoy and those that inspired him (Dickens, Hugo). Personally I think Flaubert understood humans best, though he was neither wise nor accepting.

>>14017486
You should read his list of recommended books broken down by age range.

>>14015264
Obviously Homer and Cervantes.

In terms of gentleness, tenderness, acceptance, humanity and love, what about Dickens. Is anyone less cynical or warmer?

>>14017856
Seconding Flaubert, both on the understanding and on the non accepting count. Guy was apparently unfazed by the possibility of a world-scale war in a not-so-distant future.

>>14018556
Lamartine was reportedly so soft-hearted he found La Fontaine too violent. La Fontaine is still taught to children in France as early as primary school if not kindergarten.
In fairness that's a bit fucked up when you look at the content of the Fables. But still, Lamartine is a big softie. Peak early Romantic.

>>14015264
>tender acceptance
Steinbeck for this. Every drunken beggar can be (and is) a knight of the round table.

>>14015264
Jean Vanier

>>14017486

Do the following. Start reading War and Peace.

Take two notebook of notes. In one you write down every scene skeleton, to see how he organize the novel, balance the episodes, weave the plot threads, etc.

The second notebook is the most important. It’s the notebook of details. On it copy down every detail that strikes you as meaningful, perceptive, true, humane, soul-defining, striking, etc.

Copy on this notebook all the phrases of mind perceptions of the characters, of gestures, of sensations that one character has towards other, etc, etc.

This will take quite a lot of time and effort, but by the end of it you will understand far better how Tolstoy does what he does.

One tip: he pays far more attention to mental details and psychological perceptions than to details of scenarios and places and furniture. What he really finds interesting is the effect of one person on other, the effect of one mind on other.

For more deep understanding, reads this book:

https://www.amazon.com/Tolstoys-War-Peace-Reginald-Christian/dp/0571272754/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?keywords=tolstoy+war+and+peace+christian&qid=1571490112&sr=8-1

And also the chapter on Tolstoy and Nabokov on this book:

https://www.amazon.com/Stalking-Nabokov-Brian-Boyd/dp/0231158572/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?keywords=stalking+nabokov&qid=1571490326&sr=8-1

I suggest you do the same thing with both War and Peace and Anna Karenina.

>>14017859
How come anon? Just to see his influences? Is there any reasoning why he constructs the list he does? Why those books are appropriate at certain ages?

>>14018989
this is good advice

>>14015264
Don't forget Woolf.

>>14015264
Shakespeare. There's no debate about this.

Bump

>>14019495

Thank you. It’s a large amount of work, but it’s really a great way of learning how to write realistic characters. To do the same with Chekhov’s short stories is as great a source of learning as the close reading and annotating of Tolstoy.

>>14015322
Are you thick, have you even red war an peace?