And as the novel proceeds, there are peculiar ideas, echoing into the minds of characters, ideas get doubled or split into multiple strings as the tale follows, Dostoyevsky makes his characters suffer by their own doomed states, their own beings are their torture cells, no one escapes this suffering, no one!
Without it, I am told, man could not have existed on earth, for he could not have known good and evil. Why should he know that diabolical good and evil when it costs so much? View all 50 comments. This book is one of the most challenging ones to review. And if I consider myself capable of such a venture, it will still take pages to write a proper review that would do justice to the book. So my attempt here is just to pen my thoughts about the book.
I have heard that The Karamazov Brothers is the best work of Dostoyevsky. It may be premature for me to comment on such a conclusion, I can well understand why it is thus praised. It is a book complete in every aspect: in writing, in storytelli This book is one of the most challenging ones to review.
It is a book complete in every aspect: in writing, in storytelling, in character development, and the plotline. Being a book with over pages, I was a little apprehensive at the beginning. But his easy writing style put me at ease from the very first chapter. The book is both a crime story and a philosophical debate. Both parts were brilliantly done and extremely interesting. But what connected me with this extraordinary work is its character development.
Almost all the major characters of the book are taken through a rough journey which tests their strengths and weaknesses and helps them to come to understand themselves, their faith and beliefs. Alyosha is the supposed hero of the story chosen by the author himself. But I did find an equal hero on that of Ivan. I loved both of them; the two contrasting characters - one is a believer and the other is a non-believer atheist. Their contrasting views added colour and intrigue to the story.
All the characters had their virtues and faults which made them real and believable. Throughout the read, I felt like a part of their community which was truly amazing. Dostoyevsky's beautiful and heartfelt writing captures the reader so well and keeps them ensnared in his story. The Karamazov Brothers is the sort of the book that will somehow become part of yourself and which will live and age with you. That is the true quality of a masterpiece. It is a true blessing to come across such beautiful works of literature.
I feel so privileged. View all 37 comments. Oct 14, Alan rated it it was amazing Shelves: favorites , russian. I have always been an optimist! Imagine that. So obviously the first thing I did was run to the store and blow a good chunk of that money on two books: One Hundred Years of Solitude and The Brothers Karamazov. I am now The first 3 times ended up 50 pages in.
I had the I have always been an optimist! I had the same set of excuses that I would throw around, usually having nothing to do with my inherent lack of maturity and having everything to do with Russian names, nicknames, patronymics, etc. Russian books are depressing!
Why would I read them? The 4th and final unsuccessful attempt came when I was beginning my graduate studies. I had actually made it pages in. Then life happened, and it happened hard. Grad school, I guess. What happened, then, to push me to be successful this 5th and by no means final attempt?
My dad picked it up, read it, then proceeded to tell me that he had read it constantly, knowing it would motivate me to get there. Fathers and Sons. Thanks dad. Very cool. We all know. The name is in the culture, and we most likely drift through our lives as readers knowing that the book has a certain aura around it.
I took the third option. The themes presented were all worth diving into in-depth. A juicy 3-page passage on philosophy would be followed up by an even juicer page passage on religion. There were reflections on the psychology of daily life. We saw family strife and meaning-making within a harsh and unforgiving environment. Loyalty and love, death, violence.
Pride within society, pride within family, pride within the self. Pernicious pride. I am just throwing words at you at this point, but each of these prompts can take books to discuss and such books do exist — Joseph Frank has a great set of lectures on Dostoyevsky. This is one where you can vividly picture coming back to often, and each time you do, a specific theme will be more salient than the previous read.
There are a lot of strengths to this novel. Since I do not currently have the time or the expertise to discuss the former, I will write a few words about the latter.
How easy it is to straw man! Dostoyevsky never once does that. I can conceivably see readers falling along any spectrum with different characters. And they would all have a point. I will betray some of my thoughts with my choice of adjectives to come. You start with Fyodor Pavlovich, the father. Reprehensible buffoon. Takes everything, gives nothing.
Dimitri Fyodorovich, the eldest son. A former army man, an unfortunate drunk, a hopeless playboy. Talks big, falls at the feet of a woman who winks at him. Ivan Fyodorovich, the next son. Self-appointed smart one. To him, the arcane is anathema. He is, after all, part of the academics and intelligentsia of higher society Russia. Alexei Fyodorovich, the youngest son. Radiates pure energy. Just a few, but the list can go on.
There is also the issue of translation. This is a great article that discusses the different translations of The Brothers Karamazov. However, I have been on this wave with Pevear and Volokhonsky, so I decided So perhaps not a terrible place to start.
Many images came to mind as I read the book. I thought of Job, staying true to his faith. I thought of Socrates on his deathbed, surrounded by disciples and handing out a few final pieces of comforting wisdom. Most of all, one image remained with me, one that Dostoyevsky explicitly referenced - Contemplator , created by Ivan Kramskoi. Everything I have talked about with the hopes, desires, and frustrations of the characters can be seen in those eyes. The frigid atmosphere is striking.
Maybe something to explore in the near future. I have a Word document on my desktop with all the quotes that I took down from this book, but I will end with one that was particularly beautiful — until next time: We are of a broad, Karamazovian nature Someone: Helloooo… yoo-hoo…. Fucktard, you there? Ben: Yes, I'm here I finished The Brothers Karamazov the other night and I'm a bit blown away.
Emotionally exhausted. Right now, it has me sitting here thinking about it, feeling all kinds of things, thinking complex, important thoughts Someone: The great Fyodor Dostoevsky should do that to you. He's a literary Giant; one of the all time greats. But you see, knowing you , shitfuck, I'm not surprised you gave it five stars. You give everythi Someone: Helloooo… yoo-hoo…. You give everything five stars, do you not? I mean, God -- and I mean "God" in a purely metaphorical sense, as he is simply an opiate for the weak masses -- you even gave The Wind-up Bird Chronicle five stars, which was more disturbing than Grace Jones chasing me on horseback.
You see, most of Murakami's narrators sound as if they just disembarked the short bus. Not lyrical so much as the product of blunt-force trauma to the head, I think. But sometimes the two are in fact interchangeable. And don't even get me started on your review of The End of the Affair. A bit self serving, wasn't it? I mean, goodreads isn't your goddamn therapy group.
Just about every review you've written is a sap-fest. So what kind of personalized, kitschy, life changing moment are you gonna compare this book to? Just face it, fucktard, you're one of those easily excitable star whores. You aren't going to tell anyone, are you? Ben: heh. Someone: What is that supposed to mean? Ben: Well, I do plan on sharing this conversation with others, although I can edit out the hooker part, if you'd like.
I want to share it because I really want people to know how great this book is, and I know you love this book as well. I hope the fact that it has your full seal of approval will encourage them to read it. Someone: Look, fucktard, usually I'd be happy to be the idol in any person's religion, but I've learned that it's just too much pressure.
I reserve my right to be surly and malevolent. And you get my point, right? You're changing over there, and it's obvious. Toughen up cowgirl. Before you know it you'll be a priest or something. Ben: Actually, Someone, I'm quite cautious about the number of stars I award. My average rating is 3. And in regards to giving out 5 stars like one of your Johns, it actually takes quite an experience for me to award five stars.
Although I should add that I did give a good rating to one of your homeboys recently: I gave Nine Stories four stars. I know you like- Someone: That pissed me off fucktard. That's a five star book if there ever was one. Salinger- Ben: I know, I know: you want to have passionate sex with him and all the rest. You don't need to go into details. Someone: Don't patronize me, Haruki-hag. Stand up, wipe the sand out of your vagina. Who do you think you are, that innocent little Alyosha or something?
Ben: I guess that's better than "jewhole". And Alyosha is one of my top 5 literary characters of all time. So intuitive, insightful and empathetic -- yet a great leader who stands up for what he believes in. Ivan makes my top five as well. He's- Someone: Ivan! He's subject to various interpretations, and at a surface level, some of his thoughts appear contradictory. Then again, I am not a huge fan of systematic philosophies. He and I are kindred spirits of sorts -- without kindred mustaches, however.
We both veer toward iconoclasm and endearing? Wait a second Ben: Yes, Nietzsche. But Ivan was absolutely brilliant and interesting, wasn't he? So intellectual, cerebral and logical, yet passionate and moral. Of course he's not as "perfect" per se, as Alyosha. Really, the personalities of all the characters are extreme -- almost ridiculously so. Yet somehow Dostoevsky gets you absorbed inside their heads and hearts, and makes them so realistic that you feel like you really know them, and God do you care for them.
And their thoughts, ideas, and philosophies -- they span everything, and when his characters interact with each other -- in what is nearly perfect dialogue -- you see the thin line between being brilliant and crazy, and how superb it is when they intermingle, as they often do -- and the magic of life itself opens up: you feel the full rush of all the varying natures within; your heart beats HARD, your senses are on high alert -- shit man, you're feelin' the same way those crazy characters are.
Someone: The storyline is brilliant as well, fucktard. Ben: Yes! The unmatched talent and the outpouring of heart that Dostoevsky puts into this can change your life. Through this novel you can come to your own conclusions about important, existential philosophies: you can even use this book to better yourself in concrete ways by comparing yourself to the different brothers, learning from their mistakes, and taking the good aspects from each. Someone: There you go with your idealistic, finding yourself, magic bullshit.
It's one of the best books of all time, dammit. Someone: Yes, yes, you're right. This novel is-- Ben: YES! The great ranges in our emotions, the soaring capabilities of our passions, the depths of our intellect and souls.
This book hits the full spectrum of just about everything. It's such a full and complete spectrum that reading this book is like devouring life itself. And it does so in real and fascinating ways. It has to be one of the greatest novels of all time.
It has to be. This novel is a literary grand slam. You have to read it to understand. Nobody should live without reading this book. That's all I can say. I'll never be able to do this beautiful, deep, mesmerizing, brilliant, masterpiece of a book the justice it deserves.
All I can really say is-- Someone: Read it. I will generally finish a novel no matter what I have tried twice, so I suppose this is going to be a novel that doesn't ever make it to my "read" list. I was inches away from abandoning it for good and all. The themes Dostoevsky tackles al I will generally finish a novel no matter what The themes Dostoevsky tackles along the way are significant and weighty.
Just when he begins to move the story forward, he always seems to stop and write a few chapters of political or religious philosophy, and the reader is required to stop with him, digest what the arguments mean, and weigh in personally on which side of the debate truth lies. The book inspires soul searching, but requires almost inhuman concentration. The brothers themselves are atypical characters, volatile and impassioned, unpredictable and complicated. Nothing they do seems to be logical. The father is a buffoon, and so crude and cruel that he garners no sympathy from me at all.
Then, things begin to gel, the story begins to move, I find myself caring about what happens to these men, particularly Dmitri Mitya and to the two women with whom he is involved.
I know I will make it through this time. I understand why this is considered an important work and a classic piece of literature. It addresses many important issues that have universal implications. What happens if you remove God from the equation? What purpose does faith serve in life? Does suffering lead to self-awareness and can it change a man for the better? To what extent are we morally responsible for others? If you wish a murder, if you fail to stop one, are you equally guilty with the man who commits the deed?
I suspect I will be pondering The Brothers Karamazov for a long while. I did not enjoy this read, but it will mean something to me. Perhaps, like Mitya, I needed to suffer to attain appreciation. At the very least, I have come away with a sense of accomplishment.
Now for something very, very, very light. View all 6 comments. Once a upon a time there were three brothers view spoiler [actually there aren't, but that's a spoiler hide spoiler ] , Dmitri, Ivan and Alexei, who went forth into the world each bearing a legacy from their parents.
Along their way they each use the gifts they have to deal with the problems that lie in their path. First Dmitri, the eldest brother who is strong and powerful, falls by the wayside and then Ivan, the middle brother who is clever and educated falls by the wayside, but Alexei, littl Once a upon a time there were three brothers view spoiler [actually there aren't, but that's a spoiler hide spoiler ] , Dmitri, Ivan and Alexei, who went forth into the world each bearing a legacy from their parents.
First Dmitri, the eldest brother who is strong and powerful, falls by the wayside and then Ivan, the middle brother who is clever and educated falls by the wayside, but Alexei, little Alyosha, the youngest brother who is humble and faithful, finds a true path to live happily ever after. The Brothers Karamazov was Dostoevesky's last work. Like all his major novels it was written and published in instalments in so-called 'thick' or 'fat' journals.
Dostoevsky was an epileptic, while writing the novel section by section to a monthly deadline, he had severe fits which left him weak and stopped him from writing for months at a time. Shortly after completing the novel he died. Once upon a time there were three brothers. The eldest brother, Dmitri, had been an army officer, his strength and exuberant vitality seem to represent a pagan, pre-Christian world.
The middle brother Ivan, shows the cold, atheistic, rational learning of the Western world. Only the youngest brother, little Alyosha, portrays the simplicity and humility of the best of Russian Orthodox spirituality from Doestoevsky's point of view , and it is this that answers the question posed by Gogol in Dead Souls when he asks where the galloping Troika is heading to. Once upon a time I wrote out long hand in pencil and then typed with four and a half fingers an undergraduate dissertation on The Brothers Karamazov.
My ambition was amusing because this is, well I don't want to frighten anybody away from reading it, but if you want to get under the surface of this book and start there is an awful lot to explore.
At the same time though it is a relatively simple story. It's like a folktale, once upon a time there were three brothers who set out on a quest. The quest turns out to be about the nature and salvation of Russia, but don't let that put you off, social criticism lies at the heart of many a Dickens novel too but you don't have to be learned at law to enjoy Bleak House. Anyway the downside of having studied something like this a little is that you have a vague awareness, like the child who has picked up one pebble off the beach, of just how much you don't know and how much there potentially is to explore.
One place to start is Vladimir Propp's Morphology of the Folktale. There's a type of Russian folktale with three brothers. The eldest is the strongest, the middle brother is the cleverest while the youngest is the most humble, straightforward and helpful. They each set off in turn on a journey. The strength of the eldest gets him into trouble, the middle one is brought down through his own cleverness, and so it's the youngest one who with humility, by being nice and winning friends who not only reaches the destination but saves his brothers.
This is essentially what we get here, but in the 'realist' form of a nineteenth century novel. Some types of stories are so ubiquitous or deep-rooted that it probably isn't possible to escape their influence, but if the folktale structure was a deliberate choice then really that only enhances the ways in which the story is about Russia, what Russia is about and what it's fate should be.
Dostoevsky's story is set in a town modelled on Staraya Lagoda. Staraya Lagoda according to the oldest Russian chronicle was the town taken over by Rurik to be his capital when he and his Viking kin were 'invited in' to bring 'order' to the Russian lands. Rurik was one of three brothers. One of the roots of the Brothers Karamazov then is sunk deep into the origin myth of the country and its own sense of identity.
The question of what Russia is, an eastern or a western country, is of course a deeply stupid and meaningless question. Perhaps it is a tendency of profoundly ridiculous questions to get under the skin and trouble people in a particularly tenacious manner. The issue is a trope in nineteenth century Russian literature. Apart from the Gogol, one can think of Oblomov with his oriental gown contrasted with his old friend the 'German' Stolz ie Pride , Westernisers and Slavophiles in Turgenev or the rejection of 'Western' agriculture in Anna Karenina and the triumphing of the instinctual 'Russianness' of Natasha in War and Peace.
Here in addition to Dostoevsky showing how he dislikes the new western style court system with jury trials pointedly convicting an innocent man he shows the insufficiency of Dmitri and Ivan, model western military man and western intellectual respectively. Instead we see the success of Alexei, who begins the novel in a monastery intending to become an Orthodox monk. If Dostoevsky was just a nationalistic author he wouldn't be so interesting to non-Russian patriots, he is also a writer concerned with everything to do with spiritual life.
Alexei is not just a monk but is devoted to the starets or Elder Father Zosima. This was an informal position in Orthodox monasticism that re-emerged in the nineteenth century. The starets was a charismatic figure, in a monastery, but outside the formal hierarchy, believed to have a special, personal relationship with the divine, possibly having miraculous powers as a result - we see a fair bit of this in the novel.
It was a Starets that Tolstoy went to see when he ran away from home at the age of The practise was a throwback to late medieval Byzantine monasticism.
Another throwback to the Byzantine religious world is the holy fool. The stylistic accuracy and versatility of registers used. Start earning points for buying books! Uplift Native American Stories.
Add to Bookshelf. Read An Excerpt. Apr 01, ISBN Add to Cart. Buy from Other Retailers:. Mar 28, ISBN Oct 19, ISBN Paperback —.
Also by Fyodor Dostoevsky. See all books by Fyodor Dostoevsky. Product Details. Inspired by Your Browsing History. The Trial. Notes from a Dead House. Fyodor Dostoevsky. That night, Alyosha has a dream in which Zosima tells him that he has done a good deed in helping Grushenka. Dmitri has spent two days unsuccessfully trying to raise the money to pay Katerina the 3, rubles he owes her.
No one will lend him the money, and he has nothing to sell. Then he flees. Dmitri now decides that his only course of action is to kill himself. But he decides to see Grushenka one last time before he does so. A few minutes later, Dmitri strides into a shop, with his shirt bloody and a large wad of cash in his hand. He buys food and wine, and travels out to see Grushenka and her lover. When Grushenka sees the two men together, she realizes that she really loves Dmitri. Dmitri locks the other man in a closet, and Dmitri and Grushenka begin to plan their wedding.
But the police suddenly burst in and arrest Dmitri. He is accused of the murder of his father, who has been found dead. Due to the large amount of evidence against Dmitri, including the money suddenly found in his possession, he will be made to stand trial. Dmitri says that the money was what he had left after spending half of the 3, rubles he stole from Katerina, but no one believes him. Dmitri is imprisoned. Meanwhile, Alyosha befriends some of the local schoolboys. Literary Devices Here's where you'll find analysis of the literary devices in The Brothers Karamazov , from the major themes to motifs, symbols, and more.
Themes Motifs Symbols. Quotes Find the quotes you need to support your essay, or refresh your memory of the book by reading these key quotes. Important Quotes Explained.
0コメント