Why is this considered so good?
>>7441641
Because it's entertaining to read while also having incredible depth.
What's the best English translation I can get for this book? I'm thinking of buying it since everyone on /lit/ seems to praise it so much.
>>7441812
just read garnett. shit's fantastic. fuck all the haters, she's the real OG. but yeah, it's good because it deals with many viewpoints, the characters have real emotion, the world seems open ended and you can swear when you finish it that it keeps on going somewhere in your head, if not on the pages themselves when the book is closed.
>>7441816
Sounds good, thanks anon.
What's Garnett's first name? I doubt she's a black basketball player.
>>7441641
It's the type of book that has profound influence on people and sometimes completely changes their views.
>>7441824
sorry, constance garnett. you might read about her, she's quite interesting, pretty much introduced the russians to the english speaking world in terms of literature. bridged a cultural gap, one might say. a grand queen.
Hey guys, so since this is a thread about a Russian novel, I thought I'd ask this here.
I'm thinking of purchasing either War & Peace, or Crime & Punishment. Which one would you guys recommend for someone who just wants to read a good book, and not want to over analyze/think things the themes and such of the book.
Both the books would be the Vintage editions, are they a good translation?
>>7441876
War and Peace any day. C&P is overrated
>>7441879
Thanks anon. Was it an easy read? It's nearly 1300 pages long, did it take you long to read it?
And if I may ask, how come C&P is overrated?
>>7441876
oh god, crime and punishment. i always felt tolstoy was a bit dry for newcomers, but crime and punishment will make you think, and you'll fuckin enjoy it. in fact, you might try some short stories first, dostoevsky's dream of a ridiculous man, gogol's the portrait, pushkin's tales of belkin, all of those will serve you well, they're a little underknown, the portrait and dream of a ridiculous man are, but they're some of the greatest stories i've read. (personally think gogol's portrait blew dead souls out of the water)
>>7441883
Was easy to read, it took me about 3 weeks. Is long but bearable. You wont regret it. Trust me.
And C&P is overrated because most talk about it when Dosto has better novels: Demons, The Idiot, literally anything except C&P
>>7441890
dude, what? the idiot better than crime and punishment? pfah.
>>7441890
The Idiot is his worst by far. I actually hated it.
Also I bet only reason you have Crime and Punishment is because it's popular. Literally grow up.
>>7441887
Thanks anon. Your opinion seems to be the opposite of the other guy's. I'll also have a look at his stories.
Would you know if the Vintage editions are a good translation of the books?
>>7441890
Thanks anon, both you and the other guy make them seem interesting. I guess $12 for each one isn't much for what seems like good books.
Would you know if the Vintage editions are a good translation of the books?
>>7441892
raskolnikov would kick myshkin's epileptic ass any day.
>>7441895
well, personally, i'd make sure they were constance garnett, the vintage i believe are pevear and volokhonsky, who are revered, but i personally feel that the language loses a fluidity,but i think the best thing to do there is to read an excerpt of a few different translations, and ask yourself which one you prefer. it seems like a lot of work, but a few lines and you'll see some subtle differences that will give you an indication of which you'll end up having a better time reading. people get pretty angry about translations, and in the end it's already far enough away from the original that whatever subtleties you're missing (usually) are not so dramatic as to distract you from the heart of the book. but that's my two cents.
>>7441892
I too prefer The Idiot to Crime and Punishment. Fite me.
The structure and plotting is good, but Dostoevsky's prose and neurotic narration creates a terrible dissonance. He destroys all of his foreshadowing and starts polemics with his reader in strange ways (his paragraphs that defend all of Alyosha's actions for instance).
I seriously want a count of his uses of "suddenly" and "instantly" in his prose. It's superfluous and nearly absurd how much he uses it. His characters also speak in rants (a style Ayn Rand takes and goes wild with).
That said, the dynamics of the three brothers, and their movements within the same space are beautifully choreographed. He's also underrated as a humorist.
I tend to agree with Nabokov, that Dostoevsky would have made a better playwright than novelist.
FUCK penguin classics.
>>7441909
in the end, i like them both, but i feel that crime and punishment hit me harder, it felt more concentrated in a way, myshkin was a disappointing idiot but he was supposed to be, i guess i like a main character to be relatable for me, in the idiot you kept rooting for him but he'd dash it all every damn time. i feel that dostoevsky succeeded in making an idiot, and i respect and love the book for that, but crime and punishment just hit me harder, because rasky > myshkin as a relatable character for me.
>>7441876
War and Peace is much, much better (or Anna Karenina, which is even better than W&P).
I warn you: Tolstoy writes extensive essays on historiography and theories of history (as well as battle plans, maps, etc), which may be annoying to you. Thankfully, they can be skipped without losing any of the plot, really.
C&P is a good pulpy read too, but not nearly as sublime as Tolstoy.
>>7441892
Crime and Punishment is his worst by far. I actually hated it.
Also I bet only reason you have Crime and Punishment is because it's popular. Literally grow up.
>>7441911
Dostoevsky is probably the most praised and influential novelist ever. If not the most he is up there.
>>7441918
anna karenina was dimestore romantic tripe, the only good part of that is when levin is fucking cutting grass.
>>7441924
I'd recommend reading Pushkin (Eugene Onegin at least) and Gogol (Dead Souls, Overcoat, Inspector General) before embarking on the later Russian novelists, as they're the foundation.
Gogol > Dostoevsky by a whoooole lot
>>7441926
>VENGEANCE IS MINE
>dimestore romantic tripe
If you aren't interested in Love and human relationships, I could see how AK is not for you, but, I would note, these themes are very central to Life in this world.
>>7441923
No doubt, but for the parts I praised, and not for his prose.
>>7441641
>Why is this considered so good?
Because it's long, and because of that people don't want to finish it and go "Well that sucked." Because of this it's become a vicious circle to where people read it, don't like it, but because no one wants to admit they read a whole doorstop and it was bad they claim it was good, now other people fooled into reading it thinking it's good when it's bad and they finish it and think "Well I don't want seem like a stupid twat" so they claim it good which leads others to read it thinking it's good, and so on and so forth
>>7441930
>tfw he suggests gogol but doesnt suggest the portrait
>tfw he thinks tolstoy's obvious moralizing and poetic justice is indicative of a true romantic relationship
>>7441918
>Thankfully, they can be skipped without losing any of the plot, really.
>>7441943
yes, that's what makes tolstoy superior, how easy it is to skip his writing.
>>7441892
What didn't you like about the Idiot? I finished it recently and thought it overlong myself.
>>7441938
The Portrait is great, but I prefer The Overcoat, Viy, his plays, etc. Also, Tolstoy's relationships are very lifelike IMO. His morals aren't out of whack. His characters are condemned for their inabilities to forgive, for caring about "how they would be seen" etc. Anna's end rings true to my ears.
>>7441943
I didn't suggest skipping them, just noting that they could be. Tolstoy himself released editions of W&P without his essays in them.
You're speaking out of total ignorance.
>>7441949
>Tolstoy's relationships are very lifelike IMO
>Anna's end rings true to my ears.
i weep for your romantic life. the poetic justice rings true for you because your philosophy corresponds with his moralizing. you're mixing up ideals with reality.
>>7441949
>You're speaking out of total ignorance.
>Didn't speak
>>7441977
no, i think it's tolstoy's moralizing. and now it's yours. also, if you think that her suicide was used to punish, you already show that tolstoy used the plot device to be applicable with his personal judgement of Anna as a character.
>>7441980
VENGEANCE IS MINE
It's almost like you're a radical relativist ...
>>7441987
i know that she specifically has the intent that it was a punishment to vronsky, but that's the point, these characters were corresponding with tolstoy's view, not necessarily an accurate depiction of reality. the 8th part tacked on after was more of his moralizing. to say a cheating wife can't be happy, and pretty much shouldnt is moralizing and her suicide was poetic justice.
>>7441987
also, the vengeance is mine is in the word of god, as tolstoy was in that position, and was a display of his vengeance against Anna and her sinful and selfish behaviour.
>>7441992
>>7441996
Romans 12:19
Tolstoy's fiction has "poetic justice," yes. You're saying that he writes a coherent and satisfying arc, based off of his biblical epigraph (Tolstoy the author being God in this case). He believes that God endows the world with poetic justice. How do you think it should have ended? Happily ever after? What would be the point then?
>Fiction
>Having a prerogative of being "an accurate depiction of reality"
>What "Reality"?
>Whose?
The only prerogative Fiction has is being beautiful, that is, to create an aesthetic union of form and content. Tolstoy has accomplished this, beautifully I might add. Who do you recommend as a superior writer?
If you're entering into Dusty vs Tolstoy polemics, I would note that Dusty uses this strategy in the Brothers Karamazov as well, but with John 12:24.
>>7442001
well let's establish something here, all i'm saying is that tolstoy wasnt writing realism in anna karenina by my record, and neither was dostoevsky. it was a depiction of an event spun in their minds, with morals in the core of every act and every line, my opinion of anna karenina's only moment of realism is when levin is mowing, because i can tell it is an account of tolstoy's own life, a memory of his experiences. that was the only part i felt had a real touch to it, and everything else felt forced to fit into a mold of morality. with dostoevsky, it felt quite a lot more fluid, but it's like i said, i somewhat agree with his ideals, so it went down smooth for me. so, it gives the impression that neither is really a depiction of reality, but more a mirror through the eyes of the authors. but in the end, it's whatever, that's just what i think, i'm definitely not a critic, nor have i ever thoroughly studied either author, so you can take my opinions for what they are.
>>7442026
>hot air paragraph
Yeah that's what I thought. Word-wanker.
>>7442033
you can go fuck yourself, i was never arguing that tolstoy was inferior, i was arguing that it wasnt an accurate depiction of reality. ya fuckin prick.
>>7442038
>Accurate depiction of reality
Spookiest spook of all spooks. Hot air. Wanker.
>>7442042
>Tolstoy's relationships are very lifelike IMO
>Anna's end rings true to my ears.
this is what i was arguing against, you douche.
>>7442046
I happen to believe that there is poetic justice in the world, as I have Faith in a God similar to Tolstoy's.
Off with ye, atheist.
>>7441918
>Thankfully, they can be skipped without losing any of the plot, really.
This is it, this is current /lit/.
How should we feel?
>>7442053
Tolstoy took them out in some editions. He was himself unsure of their necessity. But you wouldn't know that, because you write out of ignorance and imagined superiority.
>>7442056
DELETE THIS
>>7441919
epic
well meme'd
>>7441876
Crime and punishment is more the more "thinky" of the two but theyre both worth it.
Because it has a sanctimonious "If you can't prove the objectivity of ethics then becoming a Christian or retard" are you're only options attitude.
Gotta show those le dumb atheists what's what OP.
>>7441949
>i didn't suggest skipping them, just noting that they could be.
>>7442354
>tfw tolstoy himself removed vast parts of his novel to make it more palatable
>>7442361
>tolstoy
>more palatable
What's everyone's onion on Demons?
>>7442367
>tfw you look up from your writing and realize you'd rather be fisting a donkey
>>7441936
This. Same thing with Moby Dick. Ask anyone why it's good and they'll just say "you obviously just didn't get it."
>>7442390
I don't know man, I'm 60 chapters into the book and I'm really liking it so far. Obviously, a few chapters can get boring here and there, but it's overall pretty good.
The prose is excellent, and honestly, it's not what I expected. I definitely didn't expect a homoerotic tale between two men right from the beginning.
>>7441824
Do not fucking read Garnett. Read OP's pic, McDuff. Believe me.
>>7442482
mcduff is a pleb, poor writing skills, no flow, and pretty much just tries to rewrite constance garnett translations with "modern flair" i.e. dumbing that shit down.
>>7442377
demons = good
>>7441876
If you like endless preaching and boring people talking about boring things read Tolstoy.
If you like endless preaching,boring people talking about boring things,madness and murder read Dostoevsky.
>>7441890
What exactly did you like about Demons?
I remember reading it a long time ago and hating it for being too irrational, political, frustrating and full of unsympathetic characters,but recently I'm starting to reconsider my old values especially when it comes to the above-mentioned qualities.
Is it worth a reread?I liked his other stuff.
>>7442659
yes
his best book
>>7442659
Not him, but it was incredibly boring. To the poing of missing everything.
And it was my 8th Dosto novel.
>>7442411
>a homoerotic tale between two men right from the beginning
I think you might be over-interpreting here. Would you care to explain?
>>7442730
Oh sure. In the 21st century any male companionship, friendship or bonding is considered gay. Even father son bonding is starting to be considered gay And pedo.
Why? Because these bonds are the strongest, and are threatening.
>>7442758
Or it just might be flagrantly homoerotic family
