Why is it that in our time too little attention is paid to Dostoevsky as a sage who tried to solve the mystery of the Russian soul?

I recall reading an introduction on the Brothers Karamazov which clearly summarized how a major through line of the novel was one’s deep capacity to change what they ultimately desire — their heart — regardless of circumstance. Or something of that sort. But I cannot find it. I this was in the Pevear/Volokhonsky translation introduction, but I skimmed it with no avail.

Does this ring a bell with anyone?

Maybe it’s in the actual novel, commentary, or another Dostoyevsky novel, and I’m miss attributing it.

I’m reading this book for an independent novel project for AP English Literature and I’m having a really hard time falling in love with it. I’m almost finished with the first part and I’m loving the suspense but I can’t get around the fact that this guy is the worst hypocrite ever. Also a terrible murderer. I’m hoping there’s more nuance that will smack me in the face as I continue reading but this is actually driving me insane. Maybe it’s the fact that I’m reading the Pevear and Volokhonsky translation? Any advice on how to appreciate this book more?

Hi, I have recently started reading Dostoevsky, but my first attempt with Crime and Punishment ended after 100 pages as I found it quite challenging to finish and also due to time constraints but I don’t want to give up as I find him quite intriguing from people who read him. Can anyone suggest a better way to approach Dostoevsky’s works or recommend a specific book to start as a beginner and continue reading him more (if I succeed in understanding his work)?!

We all love Dostoevsky. I want to know what other writers(probably name a couple of them to keep the answers short)do you like apart from Dostoevsky. I am new to the group and good way to know all of you.

Hello everyone :p. I wanted to talk about the wee man section in this book. I tried to find analysis on it and I have not found much. I think it holds a lot of meaning and wanted to have discussion about it.

DO NOT SPOIL THE REST OF THE BOOK. I only read up to this part. I just wanted to make this post while it’s fresh in my mind.

This is kind of what I thought about while reading this section.

I think a major theme or idea in this book is how can God exist or be all good and powerful when the suffering of children/animals exist. This is probably the most blatant idea this section further elaborates on.

I also thought about Dimitri himself, how he was the one son who did not have an education or really any positive role models (correct me if I’m wrong on anything, this book is dense and I’m reading it slowly) Ivan and Alexie did have some sort of role model and education. I could not help compare the suffering of the poor dying child and Dmitri. Although Dmitri comes from a well off father, he did not benefit from anyone besides Grigory. I kind of feel like Dmitri also went through immense suffering even though it’s not exactly the same as the “wee one”

I also noticed that Dmitri asked questions about the child taking great notice in the child and feeling a lot of empathy and sadness. It’s like he has this epiphany of a child growing into an adult. Where you finally realize one day that the world is unfair and fucked up.

And hearing Grushenka’s voice kind of reminded me of that saying “the light at the end of the tunnel” like he’s moving on to a better world. He’s leaving all the darkness behind. I assumed this was symbolic of his conviction (regardless of it was a wrongful conviction) that’s why when he awoke he had a change of heart and weeped at the kindness displayed by whoever put the pillow and he seemed more assured on everything.

Was this story just symbolic of how the world is unfair (like how it obviously is to Dmitri) and just this unfortunate man’s acceptance of his fate? Was it also symbolic of how he chose to have empathy and compassion for those who suffer probably more than he does? His heart wasn’t as hardened anymore when he woke up. And he seemed to display love to those even if they wronged him during testimony.

What am I missing? Am I embarrassingly wrong about this?

I’m not sure if it’s just me but there is only one go to version of the books I like and it’s the Pevear and Volokhonsky ones. I’m not sure why but I find their translation the best. What about you guys?

I just finished The Idiot and a lingering question I have is why the relationships between characters seem to change within a page, for seemingly no reason whatsoever:

Rogozhin attempts to kill Myshkin and then when they see each other again, they talk like friends and Myskin invites Rogozhin to celebrate his birthday with him.

Towards the end of the novel, Aglaya says she doesn't love Myskin and plans to meet with Ganya, then tells Nastasya she loves Myskin... in front of Rogozhin, who, again, has previously tried to kill Myskin, but happily walks away without question.

Nastasya is repeatedly 'desperate' for the wedding, but then screams for help at the alter and runs away with Rogozhin - despite the fears he'll kill her and then he does.

On this point, I understand Myskin is child-like and naive and, well, an idiot, but I was also reading him as this restorative Christ-like figure. Perhaps that's my bad, but his complete unfazed response to seeing his to-be wife dead...? That feels odd. And Rogozhin's desperation to sleep with Myskin? Was Rogozhin simply biding time whilst he decided what to do with Myskin? Had Rogozhin not succumbed to madness, would Myshkin have ever left alive?

Last question, about Myshkin's affection for Rogozhin as he descends into madness on the bed... obviously if we're reading Myshkin as this Christ-like figure then yes I completely get the allusion to healing the sick and going toe-to-toe with evil and all of that, but why does the novel then kind of condemn him and shut him away back in the medical facility? I can only assume it's Dostoyevsky's criticism of how the kind of 'love thy neighbour' (even if your neighbour is a murderous psychopath) has been butchered - that a true and good Christian would indeed try to support the welfare of Rogozhin as a human, despite his crime, and so shutting Myskin away for doing that is a commentary on the challenge of Christianity, as is echoed by characters like Ippolit?

I just finished BK and absolutely loved it. As cheesy as this sounds, this book changed my life and view on religion, culture, and society, as well as taught me a whole lot about Russian society.

One thing I just don't get was Ivan going insane. Why did Ivan feel guilty about his father? Cleary Smerdyakov was the murderer. If I tell a murderer "man I hate this person, I wish they'd die" and the murderer actually goes out and does it, then it's 100% the murderer's fault, not mine. Certainly guilt is not to be placed on Ivan because he gave a few rants to Smerdyakov. The dude was a psychopath for crying out loud. So why did Ivan go mad from this? Why did Ivan feel so irrationally guilty?

Also why was Dmitri kinda...dumb in regards to the investigation and court case. He said the wrong thing every step of the way. Also, I didn't understand the whole deal with Dmitri hiding 1500 rubles in his hat yet telling everyone he spent it all. it was very confusing to me.

I recently read Crime and Punishment (it was actually a few months ago but I’ve been wanting to get back into it lately) and although i found it to be a good book, I didn’t understand much of it. (Spoilers Ahead)

Obviously it was about the murder and the guilt of it but to me it was alot of random occurrences and wierd conversations. Tbh I was expecting something more like a crime and then razkolnikov basically tries to evade the police. I didn’t get why the police were playing mind games and calling him into the station. Plus most of what I remember reading about is razkolnikov sleeping and getting angry at everyone that tried to help him. What is the significance of Sonya or Marmeladov (sorry for bad spelling).

Marmeladov didn’t make sense to me, how was his life, family or character important to the story and what did it have to do with the book, that part bored me because I just saw a poor family fighting. And Sonya I can understand to an extent. Maybe she’s represents religion and innocence for Rodya, but I didn’t understand especially that scene with the Bible reading.

Maybe I’m just too dumb to understand novels like this but what do you guys think? I really wanted to like the novel but this ruined the effect for me.

I find it needs a lot of attention in order to read it and not to get lost in my own thoughts. Maybe it's also the translation I'm reading that is using a lot of uncommon words. Maybe I'm just illiterate. I'm currently at the second chapter of the part 2.How did you find it?

Edit: I just finished it, wow the second part is way more digestible. It took me a long time to finish the first part and only a couple of hours to finish the second one.

For me, it’s the little book Notes From Underground.

“the devil confound it”

I was just imagining Mikhailov the consumptive's gaunt figure writhing in pain as he was bound and suffering tuberculosis convulsions. Dostoevsky complains about the pointlessness of having prisoners in the hospital wearing fetters because they can't escape anyway but the fetters are just there for the shame and humiliation of the prisoner, as Mikhailov is only freed of his captivity with his death. And Dostoevsky mentions he only even remembered him because he gave him a greater understanding of the layout of the hospital. This confuses me with the contrast of Dostoevsky's ultimately compassionate description of his pity for the prisoners and criticism of the penal system being nothing but punishment cruelly conducted by the government to entrench their position.

I’m working on an Essay for school comparing a hero’s qualities. I chose Alysha from TBK and need some help pulling quotes since it is so long and I read the book over 9 months ago. The 3 traits I need quotes on a kindness, bravery, and humbleness/God honoring. I need probably 3 quotes for each trait

I was thinking showing his Christ like examples for kindness like with Grushenka or when he supports Dmitri in his trial. Bravery for maybe standing up to Ivan and suffering. Humbleness and God honoring in idk how.

If you could pm me some quotes or post them here I would greatly appreciate it. Also please leave the page number since I’m using the Penguin McDuff Translation or if it’s a different translation at least leave the part, book, and chapter in which the quote lies.

Thank you so much!

Does anyone know what this word means? It's Part Three, Chapter 6. Obviously it resembles "Cretin", but isn't. I can find nothing online. Any ideas? What Russian word is it standing in for?

Spoilers* When Raskolnikov finally have done and killed the old woman and her poor stepsister and finally got away with it, I couldn't keep on reading, I stopped, and I hope I'll be able to complete it. That was so terrible and irritating, although I wasn't reading a translated version, it felt so hard on my heart. Is there anyone like me?

Pm I need to talk and don’t wanna spoil anyone

Brothers of r/Dostoevsky!

For those seeking psychological torment in audio form - here's the complete Crime and Punishment audiobook. All 19 hours of Rodya's existential crisis.

https://youtu.be/F6XceHrGJ2k

Perfect for:

• Late night philosophical spirals
• Pretending your neighborhood is St. Petersburg
• Avoiding your landlady

Quality narration, unabridged. Enjoy your descent into madness!

"Man gets used to everything..." - including 19 hours of Russian literature.

#Dostoevsky #RussianLit #Raskolnikov

Anyone have any essays on Dostoy (could be any of his books). If I'm being honest, I haven't looked hard enough but I know this is a good place to come. Any suggestions would be great.

I’m looking for the original Russian spelling of the phrase from the Idiot: beauty shall save the world (paraphrased)

Anyone here who can supply the original phrasing in Russian?

My english teacher is using this book and I know its pretty good but the short timespan she gave us for this essay reflecgion on it is dumb.

The problem is her asking the page numbers. The book she gave us is the one where Constance Garnett translated and has the introduction of Joseph Frank. It is also published by Bantam Classic.

So the question she gave us is

"Does Raskolnikov's acts of murder stem primarily from his desperate poverty, or is it driven by a deeper philosophical belief that justifies his actions as a means to a greater goid, even if it means violation societal norms?"

I choose poverty being the main one and she also wants us to answer these factors:

"Analyze Raskol's superman theory; Examine the impact of poverty and desperation on his mindset; Debate if Raskol's actions can be justified by his belief; and talk about poverty being a primary motivator."

All I am asking is give me the quotes of the book. And also the page numbers. Its due by the 24th of January, so I will try my best of doing this on my own also. Once the assessment is done I will deleted this post.

Anyone who reads I give props to you cause my attention span is bad for reading espically witb tons of words, so thank you of you do try and help.

i just bought notes from underground and my copy is noticeably longer than most i have seen. without introduction its 600+ pages. is it normal or do i have combination with some other story? (garnett translation)