[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 820 KB, 1471x2244, 91OWbWEAH9L.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16491502 No.16491502 [Reply] [Original]

Is it a good starting point for Dostoevski? I've read other Russian authors, but nothing by him so far

>> No.16491516

>>16491502
for dosto i usually start at the beginning of the book fren

>> No.16491547

>>16491502
Nah Crime and Punishment is better.

>> No.16491594

Demons is humorous throughout, but it doesn't get real good until very late into the story. I'd say Crime and Punishment or Notes from the underground are better places to begin.

>> No.16491684

>>16491594
Haven't read Demons but the rest I can confirm. Notes from Underground and C&P are easy to read. I didn't read Karamazov Brothers yet but a Russian friend of mine said it's best to read it after Crime and Punishment.

>> No.16491706

>>16491502
I wouldn't start with Demons, but it is a must read for Dosto. It has one of the most brutal and tragic endings I have ever read although Stepan's death was the most beautiful thing i have ever read

>> No.16491761

>>16491502
This book is amazing because Dostoevsky nailed the psyche of a leftist perfectly back in 1870. He saw through their bullshit before anyone else. Even though the book is a condemnation of the leftist, he doesn't engage in arguing against socialism or the left ideology, but only the people that perpetuate these ideas.

>> No.16491778

Demons is my favorite but I would start with Crime and Punishment like everyone else probably does.

>> No.16491800

>>16491761
I felt this one was incredibly slow. I lost interest after the first 100 or so pages and moved on. Maybe I should give it a go again because the way you've framed it makes it sound interesting. Having read C&P, Notes and Brothers Karamazov and enjoyed them all from the beginning, this one felt a bit disappointing

>> No.16491870

>>16491800
It is slow. Dostoevsky takes his time setting up the characters. Push through the first part and focus on each character's interactions with either Stravogin or Stepan. Once you get to the last book, you'll see that Demons is right up there with BK. The ending is a masterpiece and worth it. Trust me, push the psychological and social set up at the beginning because the way it pieces together is Dostoevsky at his best

>> No.16491877

>>16491800
It is very slow but the second half of the book has sone of the most memorable scenes in literature in my opinion.

>> No.16491889

>>16491870
>>16491877
Thanks, I'll give it another go

>> No.16491969

It was a great book and even though it dragged at some parts imo there are some pretty kino moments

>> No.16491971

Man if your thought Demons was slow don't read the Idiot.

>> No.16492124

>>16491971
I personally didn't think Demons was slow. There were a number of characters and Dosto has provide the reader with a complete psychological profile of each one. To me, even the way he sets up a social setting is interesting while it is a complete slog for most other writers

>> No.16492201

I read Notes first. Read C&P last since it's light and fun and doesn't slog like all his other books. A dessert.
>>16491870
This

>> No.16492208

>>16491502
No read memories from the underground first

>> No.16492228

>>16491502
Notes From Underground. It will cure you of the urge to read Dostoevsky.

>> No.16492470

>>16491502
It's really good. Just keep in mind that the first 100 or 200 pages just set the stage. After that the story properly begins.

>> No.16492491

Should I read brothers k last? I heard its his final and best work and to understand it even more I should read The Idiot and Demons. Is that right?

>> No.16492503

>>16492491
sry i forgot to mention i read notes from underground and c&p already

>> No.16492505

>>16491502

Notes from Underground / C & P
then the Idiot
then Demons
then BK

>> No.16492520

>>16492491
I read TBK first and will reread after I go through The Idiot and C & P. Already read Demons

>> No.16492568

Just read Tolstoy instead, Dostoyevski is a meme

>> No.16492608

>>16492568
This, but Bulgakov instead

>> No.16492628

>>16491502
Read c and p first

>> No.16492663

Reading Notes first is fine, but it's no where near as good as his novels, so don't let yourself get put off by it. I thought Notes was decent, but then I read C&P and was blown away. Don't let the haters fool you either - Dostoevsky isn't kind to certain types of people, so it's no surprise that he has his fair share of haters.

>> No.16493409
File: 96 KB, 738x1024, 1600852471396m.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16493409

>>16491502
>i fucking LOVE dostoyevski bro
Is there a bigger pleb author than him???

>> No.16493425

>>16493409
Pretty much every American author.

>> No.16494169

>>16493409
>buzzwords
>soiface
>no argument
Yes anon, you really destroyed Dostoevsky's legacy with that post

>> No.16494206

>>16491971
The Idiot was my first book from Dosto, it was extremely good, I guess I should read Demons then.

>> No.16494255
File: 45 KB, 674x338, washyodick.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16494255

>>16491761

>> No.16494260

>>16491502
What are the Russian writers you've read before Dosty?

>> No.16494513
File: 111 KB, 501x284, comfy2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16494513

I have like 175 pages left in brothers K lads, im gonna go mad if cant finish it today. guess I should start reading and stop 4chaning

>> No.16494539

fuck these dumbass nerds

read TBK and if you're not filtered just go down

>> No.16494627

>>16494539
But being filtered by the karamazov brothers is good, right? It can't seriously be considered his best work, can it?

>> No.16494638

>>16491502
Yes, it is.
>>16491547
Why start with his most boring book?

>> No.16494763

>>16491502
ive still only read The Idiot, so i would recommend The Idiot.

>> No.16494797

>>16491684
Yes, The Brothers Karamazov is the culmination of Dostoievsky

>> No.16494944

>>16494513
enjoy the hot choccy fren

>> No.16495121

Do people actually hate Dosto? Why? Is it because he is popular here?

>> No.16495128

>>16495121
because he's popular everywhere

>> No.16495132

>>16495121
because of Jordan Peterson. Nobody hated him 4 years ago

>> No.16495169

>>16495121
There's plenty of reasons to hate him. he was pretty backwards even for the standards of the time. he's a rabid bootlicker and anti-socialist, super religious, he always portrays progressive people as fools or "degenerates", basically projecting considering he was the backwards fool and History has left his type in the dust. He's also the perfect example of why literature NEEDS to be De-colonized, he's a hold-over from an older age who was popular for all the wrong reasons with all the wrong people and is only praised today because that's what people are taught to do, kind of like with Beethoven, everyone will nod in agreement and say he is good just because that's what they've learned to do, meanwhile everyone knows deep down that they are fucking BORING not to mention backwards.

>> No.16495183

>>16495169
Boring bait but I won't be surprised if retards fall for it

>> No.16495188

>>16495169
This Dosto guy sounds pretty based

>> No.16495197

>>16495169
He was pretty on point about the socialists in Russia lol that really didn't turn out very well. His politics aren't even relevant to his best works though, and the religious questions he asks can be appreciated by atheists as well.
>kind of like with Beethoven
>boring
nevermind I see you're just baiting

>> No.16495320

>>16491502
No. Start with c&p, the most accessible. Then following the idiot, demons, and brothers karamazov.

>> No.16495337

>>16494169
SEETHING russian subhuman ape

>> No.16495351

Read Demons after you have an understanding of the Russian literary scene at the time

>> No.16495363

>>16495169
Back in my day people actually put effort into bait

>> No.16495367

>>16495351
This is a good idea, but if you're lazy the footnotes will give you an idea of what was going on

>> No.16495385

>>16495169
This but unironically. Had a uni prof ready to drop on his knees and suck Dusty off each time he 420mgtow'd on progressivism.

>> No.16495748

>>16495121
I literally never see anyone hate dosto

>> No.16495873

>>16491502
I started with his novella The Gambler because it was short, and I'd heard good things. I enjoyed it and have moved onto Crime and Punishment, which is what I'm reading right now. I'll probably read Brothers next. I know for some authors the order is more important than others. Personally, if an author has short stories or a noteworthy novella, that's what I'll start with, dipping my toes in the water so to speak. Maybe that's a plebtier approach, I don't know, and you can't do it with just anything/any author. For example with Dosto, you probably wouldn't want to start with Notes from Underground.

>> No.16496142

>>16495351
cringe

>> No.16496403

>>16496142
>>16495873

>> No.16496856

>>16495121
Dosto uses his remarkable understanding of human psychology to create hyper-realistic depictions of characters in his novel. Like real people, these characters are a complex combination of virtue and vice, and Dostoevsky is pretty blunt with how he depicts people's flaws. He does this with all types of people (not just those to the left of the political spectrum), but virtue-lacking progressives and pseudointellectuals seem to take particular offense. Rather than viewing Dostoevsky's frank psychological observations as an opportunity to identify and change flaws in their own character (which, in my opinion, is one of the greatest benefits of reading Dostoevsky), they prefer to dismiss him as a retarded Christian / conservative.
Case in point:
>>16495169
>>16495385

>> No.16496889

Is the Dosty actually controversial? Not sure I've actually heard a bad thing said about him besides my own slander of him being paid the word.

>> No.16496893

>>16495351
How the hell does one understand 19th century Russian literature other than by reading people like Dosto?

>> No.16496896

>>16496889
How can I get paid to talk shit about dostoevsky online

>> No.16496907

>>16496856
I will add that a lot of atheists or progressive types (the more honest and humble types) can still really like Dostoevsky and see past his political / religious views because they are willing to acknowledge the authenticity of his genius. They know that there was something true and good in the way he saw the world, even if they're not willing to admit he was right about everything. IMO anyone that reads Dostoevsky will come away with the impression that he was a remarkably *good* man, but some people find good men detestable.

>> No.16496944

>>16496907
up until like 5 years ago I never heard people associate Dostoevsky with anything reactionary, Demons was kind of just brushed aside. He was noted for his psychological acuity and his relation to Existentialism. Those were the memes you would hear in relation to him from undergrads or whatever.

>> No.16496994

>>16496944
I think Dosto was always reactionary in the sense that he rejected the nihilism which was gaining steam during his lifetime (and hasn't slowed down since).

>> No.16496996

>>16494513
fuck this last section of the trial is a slog, not sure im going to be able to finish it tonight

>> No.16497025

>>16496994
Dostoevsky himself was clearly a reactionary, albeit an atypical one, but that wasn't how people viewed his literature. The Brothers Karamazov and Crime and Punishment were just viewed as literary classics, again mostly related to their dealing with psychology and proto-Existentialism. It's not like it's hard to take an atheist reading out of his stuff, and his intense compassion for all sorts of 'low' people appealed to many Leftists. You can even view Demons as just a product of its time and reflection on political machinations rather than a tirade against Leftism itself.

Dostoevsky is honestly a terrible example of any kind of reactionary or 'trad' propaganda, he's way too universalist about the human condition.

>> No.16497053

>>16497025
This. Basically any "side" can co-opt Dostoevsky because he didn't conform to an easy box. The Grand Inquisitor in BK seems to allude to this nature of his work.

>> No.16497090

>>16497025
So you're surprised that people in 2020 are now taking issue with Dostoevsky's reactionary side, and are unable to see past it? You may be living under a rock. Look at all the statues that have been torn down, the classic films that have been labelled as 'problematic', the increased antagonism towards the 'white male', Christianity, etc.

I don't mean to sound like right-wing radio here, but I think it's pretty clear why people in 2020 are taking issue with Dostoevsky.

>> No.16497557

>>16491547
C&P is absolute trash

>> No.16497782

>>16496996
nevermind

>> No.16497949

>>16491502
reccomended translations:
Notes from the Underground: Kentish or Katz
Devils/Demons: Katz
Karamazov Brothers: Macandrew or Avsey
Crime and Punishment: Oliver Ready