/lit/ - Literature

>empathy exists
whoa dude, neetche btfo!

Marmeladov was so fucking annoying in that little arc where he was sharing his story with raslolovikic drunk at the pub

Like holy fucking, he was talking for 5 pages with FIVE ALL OF TEXTS.

I skipped basically the entirety of it when i saw how crudely it was written in one big blocky format. Too much strain on my eyes

what did i miss?

>"It was my mistake, too, not to have given them money," he thought, as he returned dejectedly to Lebeziatnikov's room, "and why on earth was I such a Jew?"

What the h*ck was Dostoevsky's problem?

>>12688552

if they were really great (((they))) wouldntve been able to silence them (pic related)

>guy drinking to the last cent
>daughter prostituting herself
>protagonist's sister prostituting herself to a much older pervert
>jew exploiting her dumb sister
>horse getting tortured by owner
>man beating the living shit out of a defenseless woman
>old jewish woman getting axed to death
>woman commiting suicide
...

Part 2 is far from over. How the fuck is the world of Crime and Punishment so miserable?

What is he intended to show the reader in the book? It would seem like he is a monolithic "bad guy." He is a pedophile, he attempted to rape Dunya and he drove his servent to suicide. Yes, he did give money to Sonia and the other kids but it seems like it was an attempt to groom them. So what is the reasoning for Dostoevsky to put such a one dimensional character in the book?

I've just finished this bad boy, and the epilogue left me puzzled. Raskolnikov was immoral because he didn't regret the murder, suffered for a while (but not in a good way because he was still not regretful), then got reborn. So if suffering selflessly is the key to salvation, how did Raskolnikov manage to get reborn without suffering selflessly even for a moment? This is obviously something to do with Sonia, but I couldn't put my finger on it.
Was he saved because
-Sonia suffered in his place;
-He felt bad for her and that caused him to selflessly suffer;
-Something else?

>>12454909
>character named raskolnikov
>he's a bit of a rascal desu

After about 50 pages

Did George Orwell borrow inspiration from Dostoevsky? The scene where Porfiry "interrogates" Raskolnikov is almost identical to the interrogation part in 1984 with Winston and O'Brien.

I will start reading this tomorrow, any advice or recommendation?

What do people think of me when I say Crime and Punishment was my favorite book of all time?

>when the epilogue saves the whole book

post em

>>12110553

When does it get good?

What did it all mean? I've just finished reading it and I feel like I didn't get it, at least not 100%. Needless to say, I feel a bit disappointed. Will I enjoy it more when I reread it? I feel like I will.

This would be the third work by Dostoevsky I've read. There's Crime and Punishment, Netochka Nezvanova, and White Nights. The first is probably the most interesting of the three, but it still felt a bit underwhelming.

Have I picked my Dostoevskys wrong? What are his best novels? What did you think of those three books I mentioned?

Just finished this and I am convinced that the only reason people like this book is because there was not much media back then and reading was one of the few enjoyments there was.

Takes forever to pick up both before and after the climax.

Then the after chapters are excruciating. I think JK Rowling's Book 5 of the Harry Potter series was better and I fucking hated that book.

Protag is a complete piece of shit, just when you be a little sympathetic towards him, he does something shitty making you hate him.

I still think it is worth a read for the conclusion because you just want to see where everyone ends up and the initial drama of after the climax was entertaining, but holy fuck was it a struggle. I mean I get it is supposed to be psychological, but it is hard to feel connect and understand someone who feels like he is not feeling any remorse. Literally only reason he does something right is because someone else tells him to go to that right path.

I don't get it

>>11798008
>dude kill and get crazy
Wow, so this is the book that people meme to be good.

>Teenagehood is thinking the crime in pic related is a man killing an old lady.
>Adulthood is realising the real crime is a man lusting after his sister using a prostitute as a proxy

>Tfw you watch The Act of Killing and The Look of Silence and realize that Dostoyevsky was completely wrong

Is this a good place to start with the Dostoevsky?

Books where the protagonist starts off Based but gradually becomes more cucked throughout the book

I'll start

I don't get it. Is Porfiry supposed to be Dosto's self-insert?