i havent read since high school but felt like doing it
reading notes from underground, i really dont see much connection between part 1 and part 2... is there supposed to be one or am i just dumb and missing it entirely?
>>8197821
In terms of 1:1 things, ie, things he talks about in part 1 come back in part 2, no, there's no connection. however, the stuff he does in part 2 is pretty consistent with the ideas of part 1; he wouldn't have done the things he did in part 2 if he wasn't sick and spiteful
>>8197821
>i havent read since high school but felt like doing it
That's not how it works. You can't just pick a book up and read it.
I'd recommend you find yourself a book on how to read efficiently and practically.
>>8197857
>I'd recommend you find yourself a book on how to read
>>8197821
Part 1 is the explanation to the behavior/mentality of the protagonist in part 2. That way you don't say "why is he doing that? Why would he say that? Why does he act like that?" he already told you why. Last chapter is a good enough resolution to answer lingering questions
>>8197857
why not? i read alot in high school and i have to honor my ruski heritage somehow
can you just actually contribute instead of
>muh favorite books being read by casuals oh no muh image
>>8197862
I got that much but is that really it? i remember hearing how hard this book was i thought i wouldnt be able to get anything
>>8197868
Dostoyevsky is not difficult to read. Tedious, maybe. Dry at times and long-winded, but he doesn't challenge your aptitude as a reader.
He wrote for the people, not the academics
>>8197866
> Huski heritage
What does this have to do with anything?
Anyhow, I wasn't telling you to not start with Dostoevsky (I've never even read anything by him), I was telling you that you can't jus transition from easy readings to scholastics reading.
A good indication is >>8197862 , which shows you that you have poor reading comprehension are are probably rushing throughout the book like it's a race or reading it like a nail and forgetting parts despite reviewing them multiple times.
I'm serious, learn to read beforehand, otherwise you'll miss out.
>>8197857
Please don't listen to this.
just read and enjoy the books. Have patience (at first). Have imagination. Have intelligence. Have some snacks maybe a bev
>>8197868
That's the amazing part about literature. It's actually entertaining, moreso than any pulp fiction you could ever read. Don't believe the memes -- if you have a brain, it will thrill at material of substance.
>>8197889
>Please don't listen to this.
Then enjoy never truly understanding a book. It's like any other skills, you have to train it first beforehand hopping on any train.
It's not that hard to understand. Not even trying to insult anyone, just saying that op as clearly some comprehension issues tha could have been avoided instantly if he knew how to read properly (read: if he managed to forget all he learned about reading in highschool.)
>>8197884
..why are you assuming that im rushing and dont understand anything?
>what does that have to do with anything
nationalism senpai
>>8197857
>You can't just pick a book up and read it.
what the fuck new meme is this
>>8197910
> Nationalism
Still doesn't have any notable impact. Is Dostoevsky from yout country? Is that it? I don't know and wont bother lookig up tbqh, but I'm happy you like him.
My assumptions are the only possibilities. You might be reading to quickly or reading to slowly.
>>8197921
It's not new at all. Most poeple just read thigs thinking they understood it or that they're reading it at the proper speed, but then again A LOT, and I mean A SHIT TON of poeple are still subvocalising.
Yes,very much. The work is a rejoinder to What Is To Be Done? (the novel): "Yes, I will always do what I want. I will never sacrifice anything, not even a whim, for the sake of something I do not desire. What I want, with all my heart, is to make people happy.
In this lies my happiness. Mine! Can you hear that, you, in your underground hole?"
The man in the "underground hole" here says his piece. In the first part, philosophy is engaged, what if a man doesn't "want* to be happy? Will you force him to? Some communists would find such a notion ridiculous, and the second part illustrates how such a man, who does not wish to be happy, might live his life. The narrator's very life is an integral argument against the philosophy of What Is To Be Done? It is an extension of the philosophical part, a portrait created from the description.
>>8197821
1 is theory, 2 is examples/practice
>>8197930
>Is Dostoevsky from yout country?
this is the guy who's claiming the OP reads too quick and doesn't understand things
fucking idiot
>>8198008
That doesn't really explain how it relates to what is to be done
>>8197921
And this, my friends, is what happens when you don't start with the Greeks.
>>8197857
>a book on how to read
Nah, man, how's he gonna read that? Gotta find some youtube tutorial or something.
>>8198803
I don't even read Dostoevsky, so this doesn't apply to me, fucking idiot.
>>8197882
I don't think it's fair to say Dostoevsky doesn't challenge you as a reader. Even though anyone at even a medium level of reading could pick him up and get something out of it, there's definitely a lot there in terms of psychological depth that you can pick through once you've read it, or once you're a better reader. Not to mention that his four major novels have so many little events and interesting side-characters in them, you're bound to forget a large part of it.
