People I want to meet when I die
I think that Dostoyevsky is one of the few authors I really, REALLY, hope to meet when I die, never mind the language barrier. I probably wouldn't speak much and will just stand in awe of him. I think he's really a great author. Maybe it's me, but somehow I prefer Russian authors, the stuff they write has more depth and really open up another world you don't see nowadays.
I hate to tell you, lernet, but Fyodor Dostoyevsky died in 1881.
Oct 10, 2007 2:33 am
I believe lernet is saying he wants to meet Dostoyevsky in the afterlife.
Dostoyevsky wrote brilliant stories with realistic characters, but he went into way too much excessive detail. I've tried reading "Crime and Punishment" a few times and never made it halfway through due to the mountain of indecipherable details. It's an amazing book that I really want to make it through, so now I'm listening to an abridged audiobook version.
Dostoyevsky is the polar opposite of a modern minemalist writer like Chuck Palahniuk of "Fight Club" fame.
Nov 24, 2007 2:06 pm
I adore Dostoevsky, and I am so happy to have finally found a handful of other people who have read his books. I've tried every possible strategy to get my friends to read his stuff, even bribery, but none of it has worked so far.
Anyway, regarding his use of "indecipherable details," sometimes I wonder if he is testing his readers to see how dedicated they are. He was obviously a very passionate man who was incredibly dedicated to his philosophies and "original ideas," he even suffered imprisonment and a death sentence for them, so sometimes I think that he is trying to discern a similar dedication in others. Ya know what I mean?
Feb 25, 2008 3:37 pm
Dostoevsky is by far my favorite novelist. His four major novels are works I return to again and again. However, maybe I am in the minority but I think his last novel, the Brothers Karamazov, is the best. Ivan Karamazov is such an incredible characte. Can't praise or recommend Dostoevsky enough, and this from someone who still haven't read everything he's written.
Feb 25, 2008 8:23 pm
I couldn't agree more. The Brothers Karamazov is awesome. Ivan is an excellent character, but I really loved Smerdyakov. I loved how cunning and malicious he was. His character was the vehicle by which the story was able to be propelled into such deep philosophical realms. Since he was the one who was guilty of the murder, we are able to focus our hatred on him and sympathize with Dmitri and Ivan in a deeper way since we know they are innocent (more or less).
Feb 26, 2008 7:59 pm
Was having a bit of debate with a friend a while ago as to which country's authors; The US or Russia, have been more influenced by the natural properties of their country.
Russian litterature in the 1800's is probably more heavily influenced by the social dimension of the national identity, due to the changes that their society was going through but US writers seem to do the opposite and describe their national identity through the country they observed. Any views on the matter? I would argue, and excuse me for generalising, that American 20th Century litterature owe much to its russian counterpart a century earlier in its importance to the development of the national identity, especially for foreign readers.
Feb 27, 2008 9:28 am
In so many ways Dostoevsky is unparalled, and deserves a new reading every decade. I listed to the unabridged Brothers on books on tape not long ago and found it more current than ever. In high school my favorite was the Idiot. American lit of the 19th Century was radical in in its own right and anyone who reads Moby Dick is in for a Treat (- I'll take that -or the Scarlet letter- over War and Peace for questioning the natural law vs organized religion). Too many issues arise in the 20th century to generalize, but for me, Chekhov was the father of the short story and you could draw a direct line from Chekhov to Joyce to Grace Paley and Alice Munro.
Mar 16, 2008 7:44 pm
"...way too much excessive detail..." is almost a definition of the 19th century novel. The narrative moved more slowly, built brick by brick, creating a world that could and would be thoroughly absorbing. It was a quieter world, with fewer diversions, distractions. It was easier to "get lost" in a book, and I'm sure many would have felt cheated in England (and America) if Dickens decided to cut "David Copperfield" by half, eliminating "excessive detail." Same goes for "C and P." Shall we cut the Malmeladov subplot? or have Porfiry Petrovich cut to the chase and arrest Raskolnikov earlier? In some ways, our world is much the poorer for the
"minimalist arts" we profess to prefer. I too have lost some of my ability to focus on a long narrative. However, I
recall, in my youth, reading "The Count of Monte Cristo" unabridged. It was delicious, and I wouldn't have wished it a syllable shorter!
Mar 29, 2008 7:52 pm
Dostoyevsky is definately near or at the top of the list of authors I want to meet when I move to the next plane. But I wonder if such a brilliant mind as his might have already ascended further planes by then.
Apr 12, 2008 10:10 pm
DEAR FRIENDS I WNNA DISCUSS WITH YOU ABOUT DOSTOVHESKY'S NOVEL"CRIME AND PUNISHMENT"I HOPE U MUST HAVE READ IT
Sep 8, 2009 2:43 pm
i must say friends about dostovheskeys novel"crime and punishment" that in this novel he has stressed upon the factor that life is nothing but action
Sep 10, 2009 2:58 pm