![devils-dostoevsky-f-m-paperback-cover-art[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/KdqadiW.jpg "devils-dostoevsky-f-m-paperback-cover-art[1].jpg")
>tfw you learn your favorite book was just written as filler for the author to cover some gambling debts
>tfw you realize your favorite author wrote insincerely during the entire second half of his life just to keep the government from killing him
>>7529995
Is it still worth reading though? I love Dostoyevsky and I've never read it.
>tfw you learn your favorite book was written just to impress mary karr
>tfw you realize your favorite author wrote insincerely his entire life just to get audience pussy
I read an article somewhere about Constance Garnett and attempts at English translations of the Russians. It said Dostoevsky wrote with a "sloppiness" that is almost impossible to convey in English, and then went on to list a number of rhymes and plays-on-words that had been butchered in attempts to translate them. It just made me depressed.
>>7530050
>"M'gentlesir, I too read P&V, much more accurate for a scientifically minded man like me"
Garnett or Magarshack are literally the only non fedora translators
>>7530063
what aboutP&V
The Gambler was written to cover gambling debts, and was based on Dostoevsky's experiences before going to prison (he was a degenerate before prison). Demons covered Dostoevsky's deceased brother's debts (which fell on him) incidentally, but he had the idea a long time before.
>>7529995
Dostoevsky is trash. Let this be a lesson to you next time your fedora threatens to turn into a cross.
Am I supposed to disagree with Shigalev's ideas?
>>7530097
Hahaha hah ah ah ... Delete This.
i know that feel bro. well, if you replace "gambling debts" with "alimony payments and an amphetamine addiction".
>>7530099
>tfw love Dosto, but identify with the strawman foils he sets up to mock views he disagrees with
The Grand Inquisitor did nothing wrong
H-how do I cure my fedora tipping ways?
>>7530099
Dostoevsky doesn't write strawmen. That seems to be a source of confusion for some.
>>7530187
>Ivan Karamazov
>Smerdyakov
>Kolya and the schoolboys all preaching socialism
>The entirety of the Underground man
>raskolnikov
>the richpedo who molested raskolnikov's sister
>All of Devils
"Look goy, if you don't believe in the holy orthodoxy you will end up like these guys!"
>>7530210
None of those are strawmen. They all represented different widely held ideologies. Raskolnikov's theory of the extraordinary man is identical with Nietzsche's ubermensch.
The rich goy is not only not a strawman, Randroids believe exactly the same thing, in fact if you quoted some of shit out of context, they'd probably say it's spot on.
How the heck is the Underground Man even remotely a strawman for anything? He represents Christians as much as he does atheists, he's challenging the utilitarian freekthinkers in his ponderings.
Smerdyakov is an idiot, he doesn't represent any ideology, he represents being an asshole. He was generated by Ivan's ideology, but that was not Ivan's intent. And I don't see how Ivan is a strawman for atheists, since there are many atheists in Dostoevsky of different outlooks.
The Devils were based on
https://www.marxists.org/subject/anarchism/nechayev/catechism.htm
I'm not going to go into all these characters in depth, but they're all good.
>>7529995
How does Devils compare to Brothers Karamazov
Can someone do an (official) dostoevsky power rankings i have only read C&P and TBK
>>7530239
I'll add that Dostoevsky has negative Christian characters as well. The murdered old crone was leaving all her money to a monastery, yet she was a piece of shit person. And there's the monastic hermit in The Brothers Karamazov who is just a shit stirrer.
