/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.10288913]

I am midway through and I'm liking it a lot, but many times the dialogues between characters and their motives seem off, sometimes over the top and very dramatical. I can understand Nastasia being a hysterical cunt for many reasons, but why is everybody else so sensitive and unreasonable.

[Anonymous No.10288917]

>>10288913
>dramatical
hmmmmm?

[Anonymous No.10288924]

shit I meant dramatic

[Anonymous No.10288941]

>>10288913
Is this your first Dostoevsky novel?

[Anonymous No.10288953]

>>10288941
Read C&P five years ago and I also recall the dialogue being a bit off. Maybe it's just his style, but I dont know if it was just my impression or is there something I didnt quite understand about the plot.

[Anonymous No.10288978]

>>10288913
>but many times the dialogues between characters and their motives seem off, sometimes over the top and very dramatical
That's because Dostoyevsky can't write characters like actual human beings, they're just puppets to drive forward an idea for him. Leave Russian Realism to Tolstoy.

[Anonymous No.10289106]

>Main character gets called an idiot by pretty much everyone in the book
>He's actually the nicest fella of them all

Wish I was like Mishkin

[Anonymous No.10289136]

>>10288978
This. I'm pretty sure the novel is a critique of the Atheist Russian Bourgeoisie.

[Anonymous No.10289169]

>>10288978
the idea that the height of literariness is verisimilitude is a degradation of incredible magnitude

[Anonymous No.10290312]

>>10288913
>>10288978
How interesting is everyday life you dunderheads? Dosto conjures up situations that evoke grand emotions you wouldn't normally feel. For that the characters need to be less cynical. It's a worthy tradeoff.

[Hunter x Hunter. No.10291152]

>>10289169
Why?

[Anonymous No.10292405]

>>10288913
Is that Keanu Reeves?