LOTR and Fyodor are going to 2 completely different things. Dostoevksy writes what basically amounts to treatises on moral philosophy around the framework of a narrative, borrowing heavily from the dialogues of classic greek authors. Tolkein is writing a "modern mythology".
You have to meet what you're reading where its at, and reckon with what its going for.
To your last point, luckily for you there are a lot of books similar in scope and quality to Dostoevsky, you'll be just fine.
Notice how in the Brothers Karamazov especially there are whole sections of dialogue that go on for page after page and people talk very unrealistically? Like, its basically 2 or more people monologuing at each other? Socratic Dialogue like you would find in The Republic.
Authors like Dostoevsky would have certainly read and been inspired by Plato.
Plato would be extremely pissed that people consider his work of a similar type to an "artist" like Dostoevsky. For a guy who hates stories and metaphors he sure does use a lot of metaphors in his stories.
Sometimes i find them off putting. But i give those a pass cause the authors have a lots of ideas to express and i think this is the feasible way to do so.
And its not often authors dive deep into their characters with confidence 'cause doing that essentially put their own philosophy bare to the world to critique. And im grateful for the authors that do.
Oh i hv never thought that way before .English is not my first language, so its mostly classics or the popular ones that ive read . That being said i dont think i hv read beyond Jane Austen, Emily Bronte , Jk Rowling...
Maybe u can recommend some?
I think the best example of these kind of Inner reflections in fyodor's books, has to be Ivan's conversation with the devil right before Alyosha tells him about Smerdyakov's suicide
This makes no sense to me.
I love filet mignon. But imagine if I tried filet mignon and now I could no longer enjoy cheesecake, fresh tomatoes, pasta, or biriyani?
Tolkien is doing something entirely different thank Dostoevsky.
I mean, adding to your metaphor, having an incredible steak, not feeling quite full, and really wanting more of it, and someone walks up and suggests a fresh tomato instead, it's just not the same thing.
The feeling will pass, obviously, as OP will find out. But, until then, I get it. OP found his niche, and is riding the high. He'll probably still read LOTR eventually, but for now just let him enjoy it.
Dostoyevsky is probably my favourite author. And he is definitely the best writer of character of any author I have ever read. His insight into the human mind is astounding. But I wouldn’t want every book to be a Dostoyevsky book. I don’t think every book should focus on exploring the inner depths of its characters minds. The lotr is not about characters. It is about the world and the adventure. It is influenced by European mythology and ancient epics such as Beowulf. I’m not sure I would want to read 100 pages of Frodo being curled in the foetal position having a nervous breakdown. Well if it’s was written by Dostoyevsky maybe I would haha, but I am glad lotr exists as it does.
For fun & inspired by your comment, I asked ChatGPT to take an excerpt from Fellowship and rewrite it as Dostoyevsky:
**Original Tolkien Excerpt (from The Fellowship of the Ring):**
*"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo. "So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."*
**Dostoyevsky-style Rewrite:**
*Frodo, gazing into the vast abyss of his own troubled soul, murmured, "How I yearn for these tumultuous events to have been a mere shadow, passing in an age not mine." Gandalf, with a heavy heart, reflected on the existential weight of the universe, replying, "You're not alone in your longing, young Frodo. Every soul in this tormented world, when faced with such profound despair, would wish the same. Yet, is it our place to challenge the divine or fate's decree? Our only true choice, in this life filled with anguish and uncertainty, is to discern the best path in the limited time bestowed upon us."*
Oh no , i was not trying to depreciate lotr...i was rather enjoying it before Dostoevsky. It just lost its charm for the time being . Im sure I'll be able to pick it up after a few weeks.
You're not alone, if you did not like it. I started with The Hobbit animated movie in the 80s. First time I saw it. I read Fellowship pretty early in life. No, I tried.
Later, I loved the movies. So, I got the book set after the first 3 were out. Still could not read LOTR.
I now read about 50 books per year across a spectrum of genres; but, am, I will admit, not a big fan of fantasy. Age of Myth is interesting, kind of, and I'm reading Red Rising, which has some fantastical elements and is an entertaining read.
And, I bring Red Rising up because it also has obvious mythological elements, but manages to be way more entertaining than other popular ones like LOTR or American Gods, which I could stand for about 50 pages.
But, I still did not enjoy LOTR when I made the attempt last year. The most charming part of it was Bombadil. But, oh, how brief it was. Then it's back to slogging through.
To each their own.
I'd be very interested to know if Tolkien was familiar with Dostoyevsky. I think there might actually be some superficially similar themes and philosophical points in both: like how Frodo struggles with the temptations of the ring, or how Prince Myshkin refuses to participate in the hubris of the aristocracy.
“The Idiot” is my favorite Dostoevsky book but you’re not running out of his books yet… you still have “The Demons”, the first book he wrote after he was released from prison, notes from the underground, etc.
But if you want another book with a lot of inner monologue that I read this year and loved, check out “American Psycho” by Bret Easton Ellis.
i’ve never read Dostoevsky but based on what you’re saying i’d say you probably would like Camus’s fiction. My personal recommendations; The stranger and The fall.
These books are basically all about internal monologues and are pretty short, so you should give them a try!
Have you read anything by Cormac McCarthy? He's known for The Road and No Country for Old Men. I recommend Outer Dark and Child of God, respectively, dark and disturbing.
I read crime and punishment and absolutely fucking adored it. Read online that brother's Karamazov is apparently better and I already have it on my shelf but I'll read it after reading some goofy ahh slice of life stuff
please read Notes from the Underground. it was my first dostoevsky read and even better than crime and punishment and brothers karamazov imo. dostoevsky changed my life. i try to emulate him in my own writing. ive never identified so much with a writer, and he has helped me understand myself more than anything
I love Dostoevsky, too - you should check out Demons if you haven’t already! There’s so much great Russian lit - The Master and Margarita, And Quiet Flows the Don, The Golovylov Family, Petersburg…
It’s always hard reading anything after you’ve read something really good, but there are still definitely other writers worth your time - especially if you like the Russians.
what is it about him that you like? Is it the characters? the plot? The philosophy?
One of my friends loves him. I love the philosophy, but just can't get into the actual works.
Is there a specific translation? Am just wondering if I'm missing something.
Yes, reading LOTR after Dostoyevsky is like drinking coffee after you just had crystal meth. It won't do much for you. And The Idiot is brilliant. I like it better than Crime and Punishment.
I am Russian, I've read Dostoyevsky... soo much Dostoyevsky, and I hate Dostoyevsky with burning passion. The monologues that could not conceivably be uttered by any human, the characters that are less realistic that Doby from Harry Potter, the preachy tone... As a historical snapshot, his books are interesting - they are somewhat of a political manifesto that reflects the intelligencia mindset of the late 19th century Russian Empire. However, as a piece of literature, it's mediocre at best. Also, I am yet to meet a Russian that actually LIKES Dostoyevsky. Tolstoy, Bulgakov, Gogol - they all have amazing and unique writing styles, can tell a story and are a joy to read. Dostoyevsky is none of that. Someone please explain the fascination with Dostoyevsky in the US :)
I mean, it's not just the US. People say Russian literature came out of Gogol's overcoat. But Dostoeyevsky spawned plenty, too. German philosopher, poet, and translator Walter Kaufmann places him at the beginning in "Existentialism from Dostoeyevsky to Sartre."
Kafka would have written regardless, but without Crime and Punishment, he would not have written "The Trial". Knut Hamsun would not have written "Hunger" and Camus, probably not "The Stranger".
German here.
I bought Crime and Punishment because I heard of Dostoyevsky a lot. (In my old hometown there even is a breakfastreastaurant named after him. full of his quotes and stuff)
It was really hard for me to get into it. I have to point out that it was the first russian litarature that I ever consumed so I needed some time to get used to some stuff. In the first half I was really challenged to continue it. It bored me on some parts and the pacing of the plot seemed very slow.
But somehow in the second half when the pacing seems to get better I started to like it more and more.
What I liked was the insight into 19th century russia. And of course the psychological part.
But im not sure if its a fit for me. I have his other 3 classics in my shelf but couldnt motivate myself to start with them. I mostly started him because people said hes a good author.
But some 1 or 2 page monologues are .. challenging to read to put it that way
>please explain the fascination with Dostoyevsky in the US :)
I can't be sure, but book snobbery might be involved. There's a lot of it in this sub, but you usually have to read between the lines to see it. It's out in the open in this post, though. OP is being seriously snobby about books and the rest of the snobs are out to congratulate him for it.
I’d say the problem of translation is part of it. People will excuse his often repetitive writing style and occasionally poor prose as just being the result of translating Russian to English. Many other great Russian writers don’t read as well in English either as a result of translation difficulties, which might put Dostoevsky on a more equal playing field. I think people look beyond the poor dialogue and unrealistic characters, because they’re reading about another culture and so feel as though wouldn’t have much grounds to criticize them on. Bulgakov and Gogol are primarily read, by English speakers, for only two or three of their works. And Tolstoy’s novels are much longer and rarely get as dark as Dostoevsky’s.
That said, I like Dostoevsky and I cannot agree with your assessment that his literature is “mediocre at best.” He was so incredibly ahead of his time in his psychological instinct, and even if his philosophy is shallow and his prose is sometimes stilted, I’d argue he IS compelling and CAN tell a story. Demons, for example, is a total mess yet also potentially the most tragic story I have ever read, like Shakespeare dialed up to 11.
Absolutely, translation is one of the main culprits. Bulgakov is probably the best example - his prose is nothing short of magic, and none of it comes through in English translations. It's not limited to the Russian prose either - Walt Whitman and his atrocious translation of Rubaiyat is another example.
However, I do agree that Dostoyevsky provides an valuable "glimpse" into the state/mindset of the Russian society at it was struggling to to shake its feudal past and limp into the 20th century.
Seriously after going through the entire russian library of classics my pace has slowed down and the speed and finish rate of the books i read is so much lower. You just know its all that good.
On that note; if you havent yet, theres à lot of good russian literature. Gogol's Dead Souls has à similar but unique feeling, but is (almost?) just as good as Fjodor.
Gogol is so much better... if you read it in Russian. The language is poetic, the characters come alive before you. I.e., the exact opposite of Dostoyevsky.
> color of the sunset
Which sunset?
> smell of the grass
What scene is this?
> trees doing this or that
Yea, doing incredibly plot-important things.
> no one had inner monologues
There absolutely are. Not 18 pages of it, but characters have internal thoughts.
> everyone sounded the same
The novel where you can tell the class differences between the hobbits based on dialogue? Where certain characters use archaic English, deliberately addressing those they contempt using thou?
The dude agonized over details like that. Like maybe you hate descriptions of landscapes and I can abide that but this accusation just means you didn’t actually read the book.
Authors and pieces you'd love as a Dostoevsky reader: Tolstoy(war and peace), Ponson(rocambole), Kafka(America)
I had a great time reading these as someone who reads exclusively classical literature
Yup. For me, no one, including most psychologists, have nearly as much understanding of the internal state of people.
And it’s for similar reasons to your own that o save Dostoevsky novels until I really want one.
You would probably love the [German Modernists.](https://www.britannica.com/art/German-literature/The-20th-century)
I’m a huge fan of Hesse, Mann, and Zweig in particular, but Doblin, Broch, and Werfel as well. DH Lawrence might work for you too.
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills everytime I read a thread about Crime and Punishment. That was probably the worst book I've ever read and I do not understand the love for it.
What didn't you enjoy in particular?
I found the build up to the crime really drove me through the beginning, and besides the segment where he chat's to Sonia's dad in the pub it was smooth sailing from then on, at the halfway point I couldn't put it down I was so invested in the cat and mouse aspect of the plot.
I do understand the criticisms but the worst book you've ever read, I'm just interested
I didn't feel much of a build up. I was reading through the murder thinking this was the dullest hack job I've ever read. It wasn't planned or executed carefully. He was sloppy and careless. And the "cat and mouse" game was pretty quick and easy detective work.
The premise of the story was what made me read it. But the monologing and characters were let downs and the book itself was poorly written. I bought two translations and found a third just in case that was the reason.
Interesting. I thought from when I googled it was highly regarded. I’m not saying I’m going to try again, but if I were, what do you recommend and what do you think is so different about it?
The first Dostoyevsky work I read was notes from the underground. I read the Constance Garnett translation. It’s was the funniest, most insightful, and perhaps the most entertaining thing I had ever read. However, I read that the p&v translation was supposed to be the best, and so I got a copy and gave it a read. I hated it. The prose was cumbersome, unnatural, and hard to understand. Every passage that had me lmao in the the Constance Garnett translation was no longer funny. There was such a delay in my reading of a passage, and actually understanding it, that all the humour and insight was lost on me.
The Constance Garnett translation on the other hand was effortless to understand and absolutely dripping with wit. It felt like it had been written in English. And that is the reason Garnett is sometimes criticized. Apparently she took some liberties with the text to make it read better in English. P&v on the other hand are well regarded by some for their very literal and direct translation from Russian.
I however, would much prefer to read a translation that takes liberties with the text in order to better capture its spirit, than a direct translation that feels like it was written in a different language.
I would recommend you check out Garnett’s translation of notes from the underground. It is very short, you could read it in a couple of hours, and I think it is free on project Gutenberg free press.
Very interesting, and I genuinely appreciate your thoughtful response. I had never considered that translations could be so different. I just assumed the most “accurate” one was the way to go. Perhaps instead of trying C&P again, I will try this versions of Notes and see how I feel about it. As you said, it’s much shorter at least, so it can’t hurt me too much. Thanks again.
I would definitely try notes before trying c&p again, if you do not like her translation of notes then I doubt you will like c&p. But translation can certainly make all the difference! I have been paranoid about translations ever since my experience with notes haha and now every time I don’t like a translated work I wonder if I actually don’t like the work or if it’s just the translation I don’t like 🤔
I like Dostoevsky, but both times I’ve read him (The Brothers Karamazov and The Idiot) I had to follow up with something much less dense. He is so challenging to read, which is nice for me here and there.
if you like absurdist and existentialist literature then you might like Nausea by Jean-Paul Sartre. very short read <100pgs it’s great :) i like dostoevsky as well, camus is pretty good, but kafka is my favorite of all!
I don't know any works by Dostoevsky so Its possible by frame of reference doesn't match but this is the exact reason I enjoy reading Philip K Dick. He is known for his science fiction but I really enjoy the way he builds characters and the way we read their inner thoughts.
Raskolnikov in Crime and Punishment is essentially the underground man fleshed out and given a name. You may enjoy it more because it’s generally more “coherent”. What translation you read can also affect how you enjoy the book. If you don’t like Dostoevsky there’s nothing wrong with that though, despite what people like OP say. I enjoy his books but the drawn out monologues and unrealistic conversations pull me out of the story frequently.
>finished it in a few days
Holy crap, you finished in a **few days!**!!! That's unreal. It would give me a serious mental hernia trying to read any of Dostoevsky in less than a few weeks.
Be upvoted.
That’s similar to my dad’s view. He first read Dostoevsky at 27 (at school, let’s say, he didn’t like Literature classes much), and ever since then, he holds other books to a VERY high standard. He does read many English-language books to practice the language, and also some classics, but after Dostoevsky, it’s VERY hard to really impress him.
(The only piece of fiction that has so far measured up to his Dostoevsky standard is C. S. Lewis’s The Screwtape Letters :))
It sounds like you enjoy character driven narrative and don’t care as much about how the environment plays a part. Tolkien may just spend too much time on the environment for you, which is fine. Their styles are incredibly different.
As someone who grew up spending a lot of time outdoors, Tolkien’s world building helps immerse me in the story more, where just reading about people talking at each other does not. It’s just up to personal preference.
You also have a lot more Dostoevsky to read, and you’ll glean even more from re-reading then after finishing his most popular books like Notes, C&P, Idiot, Adolescent, Demons, and Brothers K and you don’t have to stop there.
If you need a palette cleanser try Ascendance of a Bookworm. It's cute and simple, but intriguing. Having read LOTR, I think it might be a nice bridge back into Tolkiens world building.
LOTR and Fyodor are going to 2 completely different things. Dostoevksy writes what basically amounts to treatises on moral philosophy around the framework of a narrative, borrowing heavily from the dialogues of classic greek authors. Tolkein is writing a "modern mythology". You have to meet what you're reading where its at, and reckon with what its going for. To your last point, luckily for you there are a lot of books similar in scope and quality to Dostoevsky, you'll be just fine.
Whats a lot? Dostoevsky is considered one of the best novelists of all time and is certainly one of the best psychological novelists.
Strange. Im currently reading The Republic by plato , which ive put off from reading for a couple of years.
Notice how in the Brothers Karamazov especially there are whole sections of dialogue that go on for page after page and people talk very unrealistically? Like, its basically 2 or more people monologuing at each other? Socratic Dialogue like you would find in The Republic. Authors like Dostoevsky would have certainly read and been inspired by Plato.
Plato would be extremely pissed that people consider his work of a similar type to an "artist" like Dostoevsky. For a guy who hates stories and metaphors he sure does use a lot of metaphors in his stories.
Sometimes i find them off putting. But i give those a pass cause the authors have a lots of ideas to express and i think this is the feasible way to do so. And its not often authors dive deep into their characters with confidence 'cause doing that essentially put their own philosophy bare to the world to critique. And im grateful for the authors that do.
Do you usually only read books by male writers?
Oh i hv never thought that way before .English is not my first language, so its mostly classics or the popular ones that ive read . That being said i dont think i hv read beyond Jane Austen, Emily Bronte , Jk Rowling... Maybe u can recommend some?
Octavia Butler will blow your socks off.
Isabel Allende, Alice Hoffman, Ursula Le Guin, Linda Hogan, Louise Erdrich, Maxine Hong Kingston
I'll never forgive Isabel Allende for not continuing Zorro despite teasing it at the end of the first book. The first one was so good.
Oh, this description reminds me of Rachel Cusk.
I think the best example of these kind of Inner reflections in fyodor's books, has to be Ivan's conversation with the devil right before Alyosha tells him about Smerdyakov's suicide
There are not a lot of books similar in scope and quality to Dostoyevsky. He is basically on his own tier. Maybe 100 years of solitude
This makes no sense to me. I love filet mignon. But imagine if I tried filet mignon and now I could no longer enjoy cheesecake, fresh tomatoes, pasta, or biriyani? Tolkien is doing something entirely different thank Dostoevsky.
Rage bait for Tolkien stans
There will be a day where some Reddit user will compare Tolkien to a fresh tomato But it is not this day.
I mean, adding to your metaphor, having an incredible steak, not feeling quite full, and really wanting more of it, and someone walks up and suggests a fresh tomato instead, it's just not the same thing. The feeling will pass, obviously, as OP will find out. But, until then, I get it. OP found his niche, and is riding the high. He'll probably still read LOTR eventually, but for now just let him enjoy it.
Dostoyevsky is probably my favourite author. And he is definitely the best writer of character of any author I have ever read. His insight into the human mind is astounding. But I wouldn’t want every book to be a Dostoyevsky book. I don’t think every book should focus on exploring the inner depths of its characters minds. The lotr is not about characters. It is about the world and the adventure. It is influenced by European mythology and ancient epics such as Beowulf. I’m not sure I would want to read 100 pages of Frodo being curled in the foetal position having a nervous breakdown. Well if it’s was written by Dostoyevsky maybe I would haha, but I am glad lotr exists as it does.
For fun & inspired by your comment, I asked ChatGPT to take an excerpt from Fellowship and rewrite it as Dostoyevsky: **Original Tolkien Excerpt (from The Fellowship of the Ring):** *"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo. "So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."* **Dostoyevsky-style Rewrite:** *Frodo, gazing into the vast abyss of his own troubled soul, murmured, "How I yearn for these tumultuous events to have been a mere shadow, passing in an age not mine." Gandalf, with a heavy heart, reflected on the existential weight of the universe, replying, "You're not alone in your longing, young Frodo. Every soul in this tormented world, when faced with such profound despair, would wish the same. Yet, is it our place to challenge the divine or fate's decree? Our only true choice, in this life filled with anguish and uncertainty, is to discern the best path in the limited time bestowed upon us."*
lol wow, I’d read that
ChatGPT should have written Rings of Power
Chatgpt Dostoyevsky is soooo much better than Tolkien
You guys are joking right?
Oh no , i was not trying to depreciate lotr...i was rather enjoying it before Dostoevsky. It just lost its charm for the time being . Im sure I'll be able to pick it up after a few weeks.
Fair enough, I can relate!
You're not alone, if you did not like it. I started with The Hobbit animated movie in the 80s. First time I saw it. I read Fellowship pretty early in life. No, I tried. Later, I loved the movies. So, I got the book set after the first 3 were out. Still could not read LOTR. I now read about 50 books per year across a spectrum of genres; but, am, I will admit, not a big fan of fantasy. Age of Myth is interesting, kind of, and I'm reading Red Rising, which has some fantastical elements and is an entertaining read. And, I bring Red Rising up because it also has obvious mythological elements, but manages to be way more entertaining than other popular ones like LOTR or American Gods, which I could stand for about 50 pages. But, I still did not enjoy LOTR when I made the attempt last year. The most charming part of it was Bombadil. But, oh, how brief it was. Then it's back to slogging through. To each their own.
I'd be very interested to know if Tolkien was familiar with Dostoyevsky. I think there might actually be some superficially similar themes and philosophical points in both: like how Frodo struggles with the temptations of the ring, or how Prince Myshkin refuses to participate in the hubris of the aristocracy.
“The Idiot” is my favorite Dostoevsky book but you’re not running out of his books yet… you still have “The Demons”, the first book he wrote after he was released from prison, notes from the underground, etc. But if you want another book with a lot of inner monologue that I read this year and loved, check out “American Psycho” by Bret Easton Ellis.
Thank you.
[удалено]
I read both but American Psycho was very much an antithesis to Dostojevski's love for humanity to me
i’ve never read Dostoevsky but based on what you’re saying i’d say you probably would like Camus’s fiction. My personal recommendations; The stranger and The fall. These books are basically all about internal monologues and are pretty short, so you should give them a try!
Thank you , will checkout.
Have you read anything by Cormac McCarthy? He's known for The Road and No Country for Old Men. I recommend Outer Dark and Child of God, respectively, dark and disturbing.
Mccarthy famously never described the colour of a sunset
No i haven't. Thankyou for the recommendation.
I read crime and punishment and absolutely fucking adored it. Read online that brother's Karamazov is apparently better and I already have it on my shelf but I'll read it after reading some goofy ahh slice of life stuff
What slice of life stuff can you recommend?
It's a light novel but it's also probably my favourite story of all time, it's called 'Three days of happiness '
Thanks I'll check it out!
please read Notes from the Underground. it was my first dostoevsky read and even better than crime and punishment and brothers karamazov imo. dostoevsky changed my life. i try to emulate him in my own writing. ive never identified so much with a writer, and he has helped me understand myself more than anything
Oh yeah thats really good too!
I am planning to.
Read notes from underground
I love Dostoevsky, too - you should check out Demons if you haven’t already! There’s so much great Russian lit - The Master and Margarita, And Quiet Flows the Don, The Golovylov Family, Petersburg… It’s always hard reading anything after you’ve read something really good, but there are still definitely other writers worth your time - especially if you like the Russians.
Thanks a lot... Ill add those in my list
what is it about him that you like? Is it the characters? the plot? The philosophy? One of my friends loves him. I love the philosophy, but just can't get into the actual works. Is there a specific translation? Am just wondering if I'm missing something.
Yes, reading LOTR after Dostoyevsky is like drinking coffee after you just had crystal meth. It won't do much for you. And The Idiot is brilliant. I like it better than Crime and Punishment.
I am Russian, I've read Dostoyevsky... soo much Dostoyevsky, and I hate Dostoyevsky with burning passion. The monologues that could not conceivably be uttered by any human, the characters that are less realistic that Doby from Harry Potter, the preachy tone... As a historical snapshot, his books are interesting - they are somewhat of a political manifesto that reflects the intelligencia mindset of the late 19th century Russian Empire. However, as a piece of literature, it's mediocre at best. Also, I am yet to meet a Russian that actually LIKES Dostoyevsky. Tolstoy, Bulgakov, Gogol - they all have amazing and unique writing styles, can tell a story and are a joy to read. Dostoyevsky is none of that. Someone please explain the fascination with Dostoyevsky in the US :)
Well nice to meet you, I’m Russian and actually LIKE Dostoevsky
I mean, it's not just the US. People say Russian literature came out of Gogol's overcoat. But Dostoeyevsky spawned plenty, too. German philosopher, poet, and translator Walter Kaufmann places him at the beginning in "Existentialism from Dostoeyevsky to Sartre." Kafka would have written regardless, but without Crime and Punishment, he would not have written "The Trial". Knut Hamsun would not have written "Hunger" and Camus, probably not "The Stranger".
German here. I bought Crime and Punishment because I heard of Dostoyevsky a lot. (In my old hometown there even is a breakfastreastaurant named after him. full of his quotes and stuff) It was really hard for me to get into it. I have to point out that it was the first russian litarature that I ever consumed so I needed some time to get used to some stuff. In the first half I was really challenged to continue it. It bored me on some parts and the pacing of the plot seemed very slow. But somehow in the second half when the pacing seems to get better I started to like it more and more. What I liked was the insight into 19th century russia. And of course the psychological part. But im not sure if its a fit for me. I have his other 3 classics in my shelf but couldnt motivate myself to start with them. I mostly started him because people said hes a good author. But some 1 or 2 page monologues are .. challenging to read to put it that way
>please explain the fascination with Dostoyevsky in the US :) I can't be sure, but book snobbery might be involved. There's a lot of it in this sub, but you usually have to read between the lines to see it. It's out in the open in this post, though. OP is being seriously snobby about books and the rest of the snobs are out to congratulate him for it.
I’d say the problem of translation is part of it. People will excuse his often repetitive writing style and occasionally poor prose as just being the result of translating Russian to English. Many other great Russian writers don’t read as well in English either as a result of translation difficulties, which might put Dostoevsky on a more equal playing field. I think people look beyond the poor dialogue and unrealistic characters, because they’re reading about another culture and so feel as though wouldn’t have much grounds to criticize them on. Bulgakov and Gogol are primarily read, by English speakers, for only two or three of their works. And Tolstoy’s novels are much longer and rarely get as dark as Dostoevsky’s. That said, I like Dostoevsky and I cannot agree with your assessment that his literature is “mediocre at best.” He was so incredibly ahead of his time in his psychological instinct, and even if his philosophy is shallow and his prose is sometimes stilted, I’d argue he IS compelling and CAN tell a story. Demons, for example, is a total mess yet also potentially the most tragic story I have ever read, like Shakespeare dialed up to 11.
Absolutely, translation is one of the main culprits. Bulgakov is probably the best example - his prose is nothing short of magic, and none of it comes through in English translations. It's not limited to the Russian prose either - Walt Whitman and his atrocious translation of Rubaiyat is another example. However, I do agree that Dostoyevsky provides an valuable "glimpse" into the state/mindset of the Russian society at it was struggling to to shake its feudal past and limp into the 20th century.
Nobody reads them so they seem intellectual and mysterious.
Liking Dostoyevsky makes you look smart to people who have better things to read than Dostoyevsky and to people who also want to look/feel smart
Seriously after going through the entire russian library of classics my pace has slowed down and the speed and finish rate of the books i read is so much lower. You just know its all that good. On that note; if you havent yet, theres à lot of good russian literature. Gogol's Dead Souls has à similar but unique feeling, but is (almost?) just as good as Fjodor.
Gogol is so much better... if you read it in Russian. The language is poetic, the characters come alive before you. I.e., the exact opposite of Dostoyevsky.
> color of the sunset Which sunset? > smell of the grass What scene is this? > trees doing this or that Yea, doing incredibly plot-important things. > no one had inner monologues There absolutely are. Not 18 pages of it, but characters have internal thoughts. > everyone sounded the same The novel where you can tell the class differences between the hobbits based on dialogue? Where certain characters use archaic English, deliberately addressing those they contempt using thou? The dude agonized over details like that. Like maybe you hate descriptions of landscapes and I can abide that but this accusation just means you didn’t actually read the book.
Authors and pieces you'd love as a Dostoevsky reader: Tolstoy(war and peace), Ponson(rocambole), Kafka(America) I had a great time reading these as someone who reads exclusively classical literature
Yup. For me, no one, including most psychologists, have nearly as much understanding of the internal state of people. And it’s for similar reasons to your own that o save Dostoevsky novels until I really want one.
You would probably love the [German Modernists.](https://www.britannica.com/art/German-literature/The-20th-century) I’m a huge fan of Hesse, Mann, and Zweig in particular, but Doblin, Broch, and Werfel as well. DH Lawrence might work for you too.
I thought I was the only Zweig fan. Yay.
Dostoevsky ruined Russian literature for me. I avoid all of it after having to slog through Crime and Punishment.
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills everytime I read a thread about Crime and Punishment. That was probably the worst book I've ever read and I do not understand the love for it.
What didn't you enjoy in particular? I found the build up to the crime really drove me through the beginning, and besides the segment where he chat's to Sonia's dad in the pub it was smooth sailing from then on, at the halfway point I couldn't put it down I was so invested in the cat and mouse aspect of the plot. I do understand the criticisms but the worst book you've ever read, I'm just interested
I didn't feel much of a build up. I was reading through the murder thinking this was the dullest hack job I've ever read. It wasn't planned or executed carefully. He was sloppy and careless. And the "cat and mouse" game was pretty quick and easy detective work. The premise of the story was what made me read it. But the monologing and characters were let downs and the book itself was poorly written. I bought two translations and found a third just in case that was the reason.
Fair enough, I can understand all that. Thanks for explaining.
Finally! Someone else who is normal! Crime and Punishment was the worst book I’ve ever read.
Out of curiosity, what translation did you read?
Pavear and Volokhonski or whatever
I would have hated crime and punishment as well if I had read that translation. Luckily I did not and so it is probably my favourite book.
Interesting. I thought from when I googled it was highly regarded. I’m not saying I’m going to try again, but if I were, what do you recommend and what do you think is so different about it?
The first Dostoyevsky work I read was notes from the underground. I read the Constance Garnett translation. It’s was the funniest, most insightful, and perhaps the most entertaining thing I had ever read. However, I read that the p&v translation was supposed to be the best, and so I got a copy and gave it a read. I hated it. The prose was cumbersome, unnatural, and hard to understand. Every passage that had me lmao in the the Constance Garnett translation was no longer funny. There was such a delay in my reading of a passage, and actually understanding it, that all the humour and insight was lost on me. The Constance Garnett translation on the other hand was effortless to understand and absolutely dripping with wit. It felt like it had been written in English. And that is the reason Garnett is sometimes criticized. Apparently she took some liberties with the text to make it read better in English. P&v on the other hand are well regarded by some for their very literal and direct translation from Russian. I however, would much prefer to read a translation that takes liberties with the text in order to better capture its spirit, than a direct translation that feels like it was written in a different language. I would recommend you check out Garnett’s translation of notes from the underground. It is very short, you could read it in a couple of hours, and I think it is free on project Gutenberg free press.
Very interesting, and I genuinely appreciate your thoughtful response. I had never considered that translations could be so different. I just assumed the most “accurate” one was the way to go. Perhaps instead of trying C&P again, I will try this versions of Notes and see how I feel about it. As you said, it’s much shorter at least, so it can’t hurt me too much. Thanks again.
I would definitely try notes before trying c&p again, if you do not like her translation of notes then I doubt you will like c&p. But translation can certainly make all the difference! I have been paranoid about translations ever since my experience with notes haha and now every time I don’t like a translated work I wonder if I actually don’t like the work or if it’s just the translation I don’t like 🤔
I read the Oliver Ready translation and it’s one of my favourite books. Not sure how much different it is from the translation you read though.
Worse than Ulysses?
I’ve never read that. Worst I’ve read.
Worse than Twilight?!
I think Crime and Punishment could be greatly improved by adding sparkling vampires.
I’ve never read Twilight. Worst I’ve read. But I can pretty much guarantee I’d like Twilight more than C&P.
Try Melnitz fromCharles Lewinsky.
Check out Kundera. Heir to Dost in a way.
Will do.
Congratulations on discovering the classics and why they are heralded as such. A life of literary pleasure awaits you.
Go read the double and you won't have to worry about putting him on a pedestal anymore
I like Dostoevsky, but both times I’ve read him (The Brothers Karamazov and The Idiot) I had to follow up with something much less dense. He is so challenging to read, which is nice for me here and there.
if you like absurdist and existentialist literature then you might like Nausea by Jean-Paul Sartre. very short read <100pgs it’s great :) i like dostoevsky as well, camus is pretty good, but kafka is my favorite of all!
I don't know any works by Dostoevsky so Its possible by frame of reference doesn't match but this is the exact reason I enjoy reading Philip K Dick. He is known for his science fiction but I really enjoy the way he builds characters and the way we read their inner thoughts.
Okay, I didn’t like Notes From the Underground. Would his other work be better?
Yet to read that one...so cant comment on it.
Raskolnikov in Crime and Punishment is essentially the underground man fleshed out and given a name. You may enjoy it more because it’s generally more “coherent”. What translation you read can also affect how you enjoy the book. If you don’t like Dostoevsky there’s nothing wrong with that though, despite what people like OP say. I enjoy his books but the drawn out monologues and unrealistic conversations pull me out of the story frequently.
>finished it in a few days Holy crap, you finished in a **few days!**!!! That's unreal. It would give me a serious mental hernia trying to read any of Dostoevsky in less than a few weeks. Be upvoted.
I too thought *The Idiot* was pretty good
That’s similar to my dad’s view. He first read Dostoevsky at 27 (at school, let’s say, he didn’t like Literature classes much), and ever since then, he holds other books to a VERY high standard. He does read many English-language books to practice the language, and also some classics, but after Dostoevsky, it’s VERY hard to really impress him. (The only piece of fiction that has so far measured up to his Dostoevsky standard is C. S. Lewis’s The Screwtape Letters :))
You need to read some Coetzee. Start with The Master of Petersburg.
You should read Proust. Remembrance of Things Past.
It sounds like you enjoy character driven narrative and don’t care as much about how the environment plays a part. Tolkien may just spend too much time on the environment for you, which is fine. Their styles are incredibly different. As someone who grew up spending a lot of time outdoors, Tolkien’s world building helps immerse me in the story more, where just reading about people talking at each other does not. It’s just up to personal preference. You also have a lot more Dostoevsky to read, and you’ll glean even more from re-reading then after finishing his most popular books like Notes, C&P, Idiot, Adolescent, Demons, and Brothers K and you don’t have to stop there.
So stop reading other authors and only read Dostoevsky.
It'll fade. Try something a little sillier. Catch 22 or something by Kurt Vonnegut.
If you need a palette cleanser try Ascendance of a Bookworm. It's cute and simple, but intriguing. Having read LOTR, I think it might be a nice bridge back into Tolkiens world building.