/lit/ - Literature

>>22743383
lost in many ways

>>22743407
What sort of high and mighty attitude is this?

>>22743383
What would a combination of Dostoyevsky and Henry James look like? Would it be kino? Would they cancel out each other’s faults? Would their faults combine into something monstrous?

>>22743383
>he's overrated
You need to stop thinking in terms of rating. No one gives a shit about your top 10, and I don't think others care about mine, unless we just happen to like the same things. Rating books is something you do for popcorn-muncher shit

>>22743383
What westoids don't get is that he shouldn't be treated as a philosopher, just an author. Russians don't treat him that way because to be honest it's retarded, he's a very good author but not a philosopher in the slightest kek

>>22743383
You were never a poor jealous edgelord who dreamed of solving your problems with murder? Maybe you dont have a drunk best friend trying his best to cheer you up. That or you are a woman, but that's highly unlikely.

>>22743383
If you are alluding to Dostoevsky’s worst novels, then, indeed, I dislike intensely The Brothers Karamazov and the ghastly Crime and Punishment rigamarole. No, I do not object to soul-searching and self-revelation, but in those books the soul, and the sins, and the sentimentality, and the journalese, hardly warrant the tedious and muddled search. Dostoyevsky’s lack of taste, his monotonous dealings with persons suffering with pre-Freudian complexes, the way he has of wallowing in the tragic misadventures of human dignity – all this is difficult to admire. I do not like this trick his characters have of ”sinning their way to Jesus” or, as a Russian author, Ivan Bunin, put it more bluntly, ”spilling Jesus all over the place." Crime and Punishment’s plot did not seem as incredibly banal in 1866 when the book was written as it does now when noble prostitutes are apt to be received a little cynically by experienced readers. Dostoyevsky never really got over the influence which the European mystery novel and the sentimental novel made upon him. The sentimental influence implied that kind of conflict he liked—placing virtuous people in pathetic situations and then extracting from these situations the last ounce of pathos. Non-Russian readers do not realize two things: that not all Russians love Dostoevsky as much as Americans do, and that most of those Russians who do, venerate him as a mystic and not as an artist. He was a prophet, a claptrap journalist and a slapdash comedian. I admit that some of his scenes, some of his tremendous farcical rows are extraordinarily amusing. But his sensitive murderers and soulful prostitutes are not to be endured for one moment—by this reader anyway. Dostoyevsky seems to have been chosen by the destiny of Russian letters to become Russia’s greatest playwright, but he took the wrong turning and wrote novels.

>>22743903
You're like the Underground Man

>>22744892
Dosto is essentially sadomasochistic, he loves dwelling on characters who revel in how depraved they are, but who also prostrate themselves in the just punishment or humiliation of their depravity. Again, sensitive murderers and soulful prostitutes imply the exact situation he adored, all the violence and sexual intrigue he desired so much, but with the approval of his super ego since they ritualistically degrade themselves in a kind of spiritual fetishistic pleasure in confessing, being punished, and then being "redeemed". It's lurid and partakes of a sick kind of gratification in self flagellation.

>>22743383
>too much time spent developing useless side characters
You would understand if you didnt give up at page 150

>>22743729
I see him treated more like a psychologist. And he's damn good at it.

I absolutely love him but crime and punishment was a let down for me. it had its moments for sure, but it is beyond me why it seems to be *the* definitive dostoyevsky book in popular culture. i enjoyed every single other book by him ive read more and they all had a more lasting impact on me

>>22743383
A claptrap journalist and a slapdash comedian.

>>22743383
A claptrap comedian and a slapdash journalist

Lenin's opinion towards Nechaev was closely intertwined with Lenin's opinion on the "revolting, yet genius" Dostoevsky. Lenin decided not to read "The Demons" [...] Lenin admitted: ["Demons" is] Evidently reactionary filth, like Krestovsky's "Flock of Panurge", I have absolutely no desire to waste time on it. I have no need for such literature; what could it possibly give me? [...] I have no free time for this garbage."

Lenin held the author's other works in no higher regard. On "The Brothers Karamazov" along with "Demons" he expressed himself in this way: "I am familiar with the content of both these pungent works, and that is more than enough for me. I just about began reading the "Brothers Karamazov" and then dropped it: the scenes in the monastery made me sick."

>>22743383
A slapdash claptrap and a comedic journalist

Lenin did, though, read the novel "Crime and Punishment". One of his comrades remarked to him in the heat of an argument:

"One could easily arrive at Raskolnikov's "All is permitted" at this rate."

"What Raskolnikov?"

"Dostoevky's, from "Crime and Punishment".

Lenin followed up with unbridled contempt: "All is permitted"?! So we have come down to the sentiments and petty words of a soppy intellectual wishing to drown revolutionary questions in moralising vomit. Just which Raskolnikov are you talking about? The one who whacked the old money-lending bitch, or the one who clapped his forehead against the ground in penitent hysterics at the market-place later on? Perhaps [...] that sort of thing appeals to you? [...]

>>22743497
Based.

>>22743383
"Too much time developing side characters" nigga you did not even read till the end you didn't actually see these characters developed, as fpbp said you're lost in many ways, shit even I concede crime and punishment is a tad overrated but for different reasons and even then I concede at the same time it's a highly influential peace deserving of its place it's a book (if you'd actually read it) which you'll harken back to in times of epiphany/right brain thinking and it's helped me immensely. As a book though the idiot is superior, I'm gonna read demons next :)

>>22744984
And this is bad because?

>>22745249
Boy this Lenin fella sure sounds demented I wonder what he did with his life

>>22745266
He conducted a chud genocide.

>>22745244
>>22745249
fvcking based, weird to see my opinion mirrored in Lenin of all people

>>22745276
If you're in the "shoot anyone that doesn't agree with me" racket you kinda become the chud yourself, regardless of political leanings.

>>22743383
>man acts neurotic and overemotional, crying and weeping all the time
>it's okay because it's dostoevsky
>woman acts neurotic and overemotional, crying and weeping all the time
>lol women and bpd mirite
??????

>>22743383
The absurd tangents he wanders off into for dozens of pages really deprecate the quality of his work

He’s literally godtier

>>22743383
Youre not meant to like or agree with most of his protagonists, Raskolnikov is shit and dwells too much on his suffering to show he is shit, The Idiot is the only example I can think that sums up Dostoeyvsky's line of thinking about life, and is absolutely great imo

Crime and punishment and notes from the underground are just his examples of shit people and how narcissism, pseudo intellectualism and victimism in the form of self loathing leads to dogshit lifes

>>22745508
I agree, it often makes shit so confusing to navigate and boring to read, but it also adds to the way he writes in kind of a poetic prose and constantly showing feelings, the tangents are a side effect of indilgent emotion filled writing that ends up being a great aspect of his work, just like HP Lovecraft's racist rants being a downside to his style of writing a bunch of emotional metaphores and poetry indulgence

>>22745517
>generic alcoholic slavshit subhuman who was into gambling and femdom
>godtier