Dostoyevsky was very good at narrative structure and thematics
Tolstoy is the nation writer of Russia and is thus given the same attention as Shakespeare, Goethe, Cervantes, Joyce, and others
He was actually ingenious with his narrative structure though, maybe not so much C&P cause it's more bare bones but in demons his fine crafting of the narrative is clear, it all his it's place. All his tricks do tend to get bogged down in his tendency to ramble on though, he certainly didn't flow as smoothly as Tolstoy but the real strength of Dostoyevsky is in his dialogue
> Tolstoy is the nation writer of Russia
I took some classes in Russian and they stressed it’s westerners who are nuts about Dosto and Tolstoy. Russians like Pushkin and Gogol.
That's not really the case. It's just that those two are well-known in Russia and are considered (Pushkin especially so) the founders of Russian literature, as opposed to the rest of the world where most people have little to no idea who they even are. That's not to say many here believe they are better or more significant than either Dostoevsky or Tolstoy.
Pushkin and Lermontov loved and respected as founders of russian literature with poems. And Gogol with them with comedy prose.
Dostoevsky and Tolstoy as greatest writers of 19th century that made russian literature world classic.
Saltykov-Shchedrin and Griboedov as satirical writers that actual to this day.
Chekhov and Bulgakov as most beloved writers.
Shalamov and Solzhenitzin as keeper of stories of broken men.
Pelevin and Sorokin as post-soviet post-modernist who reanimated russian literature.
Prelepin and Elizarov as embodiment of resentmental ziggers mind (by same z frickers)
based. I've read that neither left nor right could get that centrist homie to be part of him. he just write for the individual. this is the only acceptable way for artist if you ask me.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Tolstoy almost dueled him to death but they later reconciled, Dostoevsky hated him and refused to talk to him.
5 months ago
Anonymous
The self-important, vain writer in Demons is supposedly a caricature of him.
5 months ago
Anonymous
tolstoy got heavily into religion and muh russian soil meme later on, doesn't surprise me.
on wikipedia I've read that tolstoy returned to literature because of a letter from turgenev though, I suppose it's after their reconciliation? not sure, but I know that that's when he wrote death of ivan ilich. it's really amazing to think about, turgenev in a foreign land sickly in bed asking tolstoy to come back to literature so that he writes one of the most incredible masterpieces of literature... touching you know.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Tolstoy's letter after Dostoevsky's death is very touching too
>I never saw the man and never had any direct relations with him, and suddenly when he died, I realized that he was the closest, dearest and most necessary man for me. I was a writer and all writers are vain and envious – I at least was that sort of writer. But it never occurred to me to measure myself against him, never. Everything that he did (every good and real thing that he did) was such, that the more he did it, the happier I was. Art arouses envy in me and so does intelligence, but the things of the heart arouse only joy. I always considered him my friend, and I never thought otherwise than that we should meet, and that it was my fault that we hadn’t managed to do so yet. And suddenly during dinner – I was late and dining alone – I read that he was dead. Some support gave way under me. I was overcome; but then it became clear how precious he was to me, and I cried and am still crying.
>The last book that Leo Tolstoy had read in his life, during his final days before fleeing Yasnaya Polyana and dying at Astapovo station, was “The Karamazov Brothers” by Dostoevsky.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Art arouses envy in me and so does intelligence, but the things of the heart arouse only joy.
yeah man...
5 months ago
Anonymous
Thank you anon, beautiful and touching letter expressing the deep respect one of the greatest Russian writers of all time (or just of all time in general, apart from being Russian) had for another of these greats, which I didn’t know of. It’s little nuggets like this that make this troll-infested Bhutanese Tantric dream yoga board sometimes worth looking at.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Some further info: Tolstoy didn't like many of Dostoevsky's works. He disliked crime and Punishment for the same reasons Nabokov did, that Sonya was a silly character and that the writing quality was poor. But he thought Notes from the House of the Dead was the greatest Russian novel and was probably very influenced by Dostoevsky in his later years. The Kreutzer Sonata and The Devil which were written at the same time are unusually violent stories from Tolstoy and have a great emphasis on psychology. He was probably reading Dostoevsky at this time. His final novel Resurrection shares a lot of similarities with Crime and Punishment and is basically Tolstoy's version of the story. As for Dostoevsky, she sharply disagreed with Tolstoy's Christian anarchism but died immediately before he was going to refute his views. He thought Anna Karenina was the greatest novel.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>He disliked Crime and Punishment for the same reasons Nabokov did, that Sonya was a silly character and that the writing quality was poor.
1) C&P is his most overrated work.
2) Frick Nabokov (he was a israelite btw)
5 months ago
Anonymous
I do think that Idiot is vastly better. Same with Note from the Underground.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Virtually every one of his works I've read I've liked more than C&P (which I adored when I first read it, and I started with Punishment).
5 months ago
Anonymous
It is certainly not a bad book, but it is basically just an introduction to his worldview and he expands on it way more substantially in his other works.
5 months ago
Anonymous
check'd and true
5 months ago
Anonymous
well written sad sentiments are so depressing
5 months ago
Anonymous
>I realized that he was the closest, dearest and most necessary man for me.
a bit gay
5 months ago
Anonymous
>>The last book that Leo Tolstoy had read in his life, during his final days before fleeing Yasnaya Polyana and dying at Astapovo station, was “The Karamazov Brothers” by Dostoevsky.
He only finished the first part though, he died before finishing the second part. He also disliked Dostoyevsky's style.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Why do all geniuses almost always hate each other? Leibniz and netwon, Da vinci and michelangelo?
5 months ago
Anonymous
Turgenev and Dostoyevsky later reconciled after Dostoyevsky's speech during Pushkin's day (in which he mentioned a character from one of Turgenev's books).
>Their insight on humanity is extraordinary
Just finished "A Hero of Our Time" by Lermentov. His insight into the nature of women and how to treat them was red pilled 200 years ago.
T & D had the same insights into human nature; and their novels give an incredible perspective of historic Russia's people, geography, and politics of the mid 1800s
>Lermontov would have mogged both Tolstoy and Dostoevsky if he had lived.
that seems like it would be hard to do. I don't know Lermontov's history but I liked the novel.
One-quarter of the way through "Brothers Karamazov" right now and D gives an incredible portrayal of human degeneracy, and mid 1800s philosophy, and the political upheaval ongoing in Russia at the time.
>woah bro I am sad and ignoring my problems doesn't make me feel happy >dude sometimes it's hard to believe in God cus I am suffering >being poor sucks bro >love is awesome
I'm here all day if you need any more dostoevksyan insights
5 months ago
Anonymous
Congratulations, you demonstrated you are so dumb you cannot even grasp the most basic themes of a novel
Dotso doesn't make complex novels, yet you are so moronic you managed to completely miss the point
>woah bro I am sad and ignoring my problems doesn't make me feel happy >dude sometimes it's hard to believe in God cus I am suffering >being poor sucks bro >love is awesome
I'm here all day if you need any more dostoevksyan insights
It's about the girls, anon. Ironically what makes him a genius is how well he wrote women and that's the center of his insights and what really makes him unique because it's focused on that type of Abrahamic sex metaphysics and tying that in with a general universal pathos starting from something personal like that. What you want him to be is more like a pagan social writer, he's not going to give you insights like something that's going to lead everyone to building a Halo space future. Or maybe he is because the type of Abrahamic sex metaphysics he was getting at, written as realism, becoming more compatible with reality through science and girl liberate and that's why he inspired so many in the 20th century like Goebbels. Dosto read Voltairean atheist S&M literature and saw it was the future in the rising age of egoistic sex and outmaneuvered it by tying some of the same sentiments to Christian symbols and Abrahamic sex metaphysics through his Volga bandit characters, thus making it philosophically deeper than the egoistic sex future that was also being predicted by figures like Ibsen. That's why Spengler said the next 1000 years will be Dostoyevsky Christianity. Crime and Punishment the main villain of all reality is a Jeffery Epstein pedophile, and he's the one that saves everyone
>re. Or maybe he is because the type of Abrahamic sex metaphysics he was getting at, written as realism, becoming more compatible with reality through science and girl liberate and that's why he inspired so many in the 20th century like Goebbels. Dosto read Voltairean atheist S&M literature and saw it was the future in the rising age of egoistic sex and outmaneuvered it by tying some of the same sentiments to Christian symbols and Abrahamic sex metaphysics through his Volga bandit characters, thus making it philosophically deeper than the egoistic sex future that was also being predicted by figures like Ibsen. That's why Spengler said the next 1000 years will be Dostoyevsky Christianity
You are way more knowledgeable than this board deserves.
[...]
It's about the girls, anon. Ironically what makes him a genius is how well he wrote women and that's the center of his insights and what really makes him unique because it's focused on that type of Abrahamic sex metaphysics and tying that in with a general universal pathos starting from something personal like that. What you want him to be is more like a pagan social writer, he's not going to give you insights like something that's going to lead everyone to building a Halo space future. Or maybe he is because the type of Abrahamic sex metaphysics he was getting at, written as realism, becoming more compatible with reality through science and girl liberate and that's why he inspired so many in the 20th century like Goebbels. Dosto read Voltairean atheist S&M literature and saw it was the future in the rising age of egoistic sex and outmaneuvered it by tying some of the same sentiments to Christian symbols and Abrahamic sex metaphysics through his Volga bandit characters, thus making it philosophically deeper than the egoistic sex future that was also being predicted by figures like Ibsen. That's why Spengler said the next 1000 years will be Dostoyevsky Christianity. Crime and Punishment the main villain of all reality is a Jeffery Epstein pedophile, and he's the one that saves everyone
What world do we live in? Sex egoism isn’t at it’s peak? Literally everyone, men, women and children are all larping as Svidrigalov desperate to become an Aryan sexual master. You see it everywhere, it’s just become more abstract. It’s still the perfect way to filter everything.
he's so innocent, does not deny the horrible turn of fate but it happens weightlessly in his overcoat. not a butcher like dosto you know, I think it's invaluable.
>Read Dostoevsky expecting to be blown away by insight and philosophy >Finish Crime and Punishment >It has the same artist merit as something like The Fugitive with Harrison Ford
I mean, it’s good. I liked it. It was just more of an action movie than a deeply heady take on humanity.
I'm obsessed with him to the degree I'm obsessed with Faulkner so that's a metric frick ton, ironically have never thought about reading war and peace though, I want to read his essays first
I read most of his works the past 2 year with the exception of War and Peace and Resurrection. He is beyond any doubt the greatest artist in modern history. Dostoevsky is close for many of the same reasons, that his works had a positive, worldly impact on the world rather than just writing for the sake of it. But Tolstoy is a much better writer in comparison. The simplest story of his is a masterwork that you should tell to your children. It's crazy how good he is.
>casually accuses Dostoevsky of raping a little girl
Maybe this anon
>was Dostoevsky a pedo or something?
Nah, but I'd say he got some insane asylum strange. Maybe that's just me being a modern, cynical moron, but the men went around insane asylums to preach the Word of God to women... fricking weird.
Now that I think about it, pretty much every single major character Dostoyevsky wrote, whether it's Stavrogin, the Man from the Underground, or Raskolnikov was probably a self insert. I could see Svidrigailov and Marmeladov being self inserts, to an extent at least, as well. The Karamazovs were different aspects of Dosto's character.
Ivan, the atheist intellectual, clearly being a representation of Dosto in his youth.
Dimitri, the self-destructive, passionate hedonist, mirrored Dosto's gambling side.
Alyosha, the virtuous and devout Christian, the man Dosto wanted to be.
Many people praised Dostoyevsky's psychoanalytical ability, the part they didn't know was that he was analyzing himself, not humanity. At least that's my theory. The question is, does any of this fundamentally change his greatness as a writer? I'd argue no.
5 months ago
Anonymous
To be fair, to understand humanity, one does first need to understand oneself.
It’s funny how much this resembles the article written about Myshkin in The Idiot, almost makes me think that’s the irony of it. The truth is he was completely clear and open about his fetishes to anyone that reads the books and that’s why he gets away with it, his favorite being e-girl femdom. But he wasn’t living in sin when he died, he was faithful to Anna. He became The Eternal Husband that he wrote about. He writes that book from the villain POV of the guy that usually tortures the Schillers, and his usual Schiller POV is the sniveling and sBlack personing Pavel, bald ‘monstrous Quasimodo’ that all the high schools girls humiliate in the garden. Dosto literally had a messed up ogre eye. He’s not Svidrigalov, he’s ‘Vanya’ from Humiliated and Insulted. Doting, loving and submissive, seeing everyone above himself likes he’s a child. He could just imagine what it was like to be like other people because he loved them so much, and could probably pretend when he needed to. Read the Eternal Husband, it’s interesting because it flips around the usual hero - villain role with the Schiller anti Schiller characters and surprisingly argues that you should be more like the tall Aryan sexual master this time
If this interpretation is true then why have I never heard it before? You think more people would be keen on proclaiming that Dostoevsky was a sexual pervert and likely pedophile who depicted these urges for years in his work before becoming a devoted Christian husband.
>tfw recognize Dostoyevsky as a kindred spirit, an irredeemably evil person who uses sin and redemption as recreational exercises in catharsis and humanity while never truly repenting or forsaking cheap sensuality and constantly returns to confession learning nothing, amassing crimes, and preaching goodness to afford further transgression in yourself and in the world
I knew he was a pedophile when I read that part where some character kissed a little girl's foot in demons lmao.
how dostoevsky was pathetic but imagined himself happy is a great insight. I never understood how someone like him didn't commit suicide. why would he if he considered him a hero and thought he was actually happy lol. never heard of strakhov but he strikes me as a big brain fellow.
I'll never forget the time I got into an argument with a kang in the youtube comments section when he claimed that a black man invented the Russian language because Pushkin was a quadroon, or octaroon or whatever.
kek, but Pushkin is unironically vastly overrated. Poetry is gay af.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Eugene Onegin is one of the greatest works of literature
5 months ago
Anonymous
>A self insert is one of the greatest works of literature
Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Show me your novel written in verse
5 months ago
Anonymous
>You probably shouldn't eat shit anon >OH YEAH, HOW THE FRICK DO YOU KNOW, YOU'VE NEVER TRIED IT
That's essentially your argument.
5 months ago
Anonymous
The author can't hide themselves. No matter how they try to do it, a part of their soul remains in the work
Many of the greatest works are semi-autobiographical in some way
James Joyce, Marcel Proust, Dante, Shakespeare's sonnets, etc.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>James Joyce, Marcel Proust, Dante, Shakespeare's sonnets, etc.
All shit except Dante, he gets a pass.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Behead those who insult proust
5 months ago
Anonymous
5 months ago
Anonymous
>he doesn't like Shakespeare's farcical games
Shit taste
5 months ago
Anonymous
Kierkegaard did an alright job trying to hide himself
5 months ago
Anonymous
"repetition" is literally an autobiography.
5 months ago
Anonymous
I wouldn't call it the greatest. But it is indeed very good, especially if you come from the east of Odra-Niesse.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Poetry is gay af.
Дyхoвнoй жaждoю тoмим,
B пycтынe мpaчнoй я влaчилcя, —
И шecтикpылый cepaфим
Ha пepeпyтьe мнe явилcя.
Пepcтaми лeгкими кaк coн
Moих зeниц кocнyлcя oн.
Oтвepзлиcь вeщиe зeницы,
Кaк y иcпyгaннoй opлицы.
Moих yшeй кocнyлcя oн, —
И их нaпoлнил шyм и звoн:
И внял я нeбa coдpoгaньe,
И гopний aнгeлoв пoлeт,
И гaд мopcких пoдвoдный хoд,
И дoльнeй лoзы пpoзябaньe.
И oн к ycтaм мoим пpиник,
И выpвaл гpeшный мoй язык,
И пpaзднocлoвный и лyкaвый,
И жaлo мyдpыя змeи
B ycтa зaмepшиe мoи
Bлoжил дecницeю кpoвaвoй.
И oн мнe гpyдь pacceк мeчoм,
И cepдцe тpeпeтнoe вынyл,
И yгль, пылaющий oгнeм,
Bo гpyдь oтвepcтyю вoдвинyл.
Кaк тpyп в пycтынe я лeжaл,
И бoгa глac кo мнe вoззвaл:
«Boccтaнь, пpopoк, и виждь, и внeмли,
Иcпoлниcь вoлeю мoeй,
И, oбхoдя мopя и зeмли,
Глaгoлoм жги cepдцa людeй».
5 months ago
Anonymous
Jokes on you, I kinda understand Russian, it still sounds gay as frick, perhaps even more so in Russian than in English.
5 months ago
Anonymous
It sounds great, especially the second part
What is it so gay about this?
was Dostoevsky a pedo or something?
I'm currently reading Netochka and an entire chapter of it is about two little girls being lovers and passionately hugging and kissing each other and hiding their affair from others
>was Dostoevsky a pedo or something?
Nah, but I'd say he got some insane asylum strange. Maybe that's just me being a modern, cynical moron, but the men went around insane asylums to preach the Word of God to women... fricking weird.
But the question is, are they worth reading in translation?
I'm too old and too much of a midwit to learn russian (which would've taken years to master even if I were >100 IQ)
Every time I ask a Russian if he has a favorite novel by a Russian author, Master and Margarita is a really common answer. This goes for women as well. It has a surprising amount of influence for a being a book that IQfy rarely discusses.
Funnily enough, I for one could never bring myself to read through the entirety of that book. I think Bulgakov is a decent author overall, but that particular novel is vastly overrated. It takes itself way too seriously for how mediocre the writing is. For example, during Pilate and Jesus' conversation, there's an implication of the gravity and power of Jesus’ words, but nothing in the way it’s written convinces me of it. It just sort of lacks the skill and, I guess, the insight that define Tolstoy/Dostoevsky's writing and separate them from pretty much everyone else. Yet this novel is somehow often considered to be of a similar quality and significance to their works, which is puzzling to me.
There's a really good novel which seems to be mostly unknown to Western audiences, "Quo Vadis" by Henryk Sienkiewicz. I think it's really well-written (although I don't know Polish so I only read a translation) and has some qualities that almost put it in the same league as Tolstoy and Dostoevsky (that's a bold statement, I know). It inspired this phenomenal painting by Siemiradzki, by the way. Despite their hatred towards us, I have to admit Polaks do have something to show for themselves, culturally speaking.
>It inspired this phenomenal painting by Siemiradzki, by the way.
Damn, of course I'd frick it up. It was the other way around, actually, several of Siemiradzki's painting served as inspiration for the novel.
That's because its in a school program and lighter than both Dostoevsky and Tolstoy. That's probably the last book most midwits actually read in Russia. Also main heroine is an unfaithful prostitute so that's why women like the book.
Frick all these homies, Bulgakov’s the Kiev-born GOAT of the Russian streets. All these old heads were real quiet after he dropped that Margarita mixtape
While Dosto didn't serve in wartime he still was in the service (among the lower classes where he was resented for being part of the more landed gentry I think). Forget how long that was for though, after his stint in technical school I think.
Yea, that is certainly true. I am just mentioning it specifically for Tolstoj, because people don't seem to realize just how much the Crimean war affected him.
Which version of notes from underground that I should get? There's penguin classic version in my place but I had to pre order it for a month, there's also the one from alma books that is cheaper and available, but I'm not sure about the translation
Define everyone
Dostoyevsky was very good at narrative structure and thematics
Tolstoy is the nation writer of Russia and is thus given the same attention as Shakespeare, Goethe, Cervantes, Joyce, and others
>Dostoy
>good at narrative structure
Of all the things you could praise dostoy for you pick the one that almost universally is considered his weakest
I thought the weakest was his prose style. I’ve never heard anyone criticize his narrative structure.
He was actually ingenious with his narrative structure though, maybe not so much C&P cause it's more bare bones but in demons his fine crafting of the narrative is clear, it all his it's place. All his tricks do tend to get bogged down in his tendency to ramble on though, he certainly didn't flow as smoothly as Tolstoy but the real strength of Dostoyevsky is in his dialogue
> Tolstoy is the nation writer of Russia
I took some classes in Russian and they stressed it’s westerners who are nuts about Dosto and Tolstoy. Russians like Pushkin and Gogol.
That's not really the case. It's just that those two are well-known in Russia and are considered (Pushkin especially so) the founders of Russian literature, as opposed to the rest of the world where most people have little to no idea who they even are. That's not to say many here believe they are better or more significant than either Dostoevsky or Tolstoy.
From your syntax and style of writing I've derived that you're not really russian.
Pushkin and Lermontov loved and respected as founders of russian literature with poems. And Gogol with them with comedy prose.
Dostoevsky and Tolstoy as greatest writers of 19th century that made russian literature world classic.
Saltykov-Shchedrin and Griboedov as satirical writers that actual to this day.
Chekhov and Bulgakov as most beloved writers.
Shalamov and Solzhenitzin as keeper of stories of broken men.
Pelevin and Sorokin as post-soviet post-modernist who reanimated russian literature.
Prelepin and Elizarov as embodiment of resentmental ziggers mind (by same z frickers)
>same attention as Shakespeare, Goethe, Cervantes, Joyce
know attention? Never heard of Goethe or Cervantes
Joyce I heard of vaguely
Shakespeare and Tolstoy everyone has heard of
Goethe is responsible for electricity being invented
they are the only ones of the russians anyone actually reads
what about Pushkin
not read much outside of russia
Why no love for my boy Turgenev?
He was a libshit and traitor to the Russian soul.
based. I've read that neither left nor right could get that centrist homie to be part of him. he just write for the individual. this is the only acceptable way for artist if you ask me.
Tolstoy almost dueled him to death but they later reconciled, Dostoevsky hated him and refused to talk to him.
The self-important, vain writer in Demons is supposedly a caricature of him.
tolstoy got heavily into religion and muh russian soil meme later on, doesn't surprise me.
on wikipedia I've read that tolstoy returned to literature because of a letter from turgenev though, I suppose it's after their reconciliation? not sure, but I know that that's when he wrote death of ivan ilich. it's really amazing to think about, turgenev in a foreign land sickly in bed asking tolstoy to come back to literature so that he writes one of the most incredible masterpieces of literature... touching you know.
Tolstoy's letter after Dostoevsky's death is very touching too
>I never saw the man and never had any direct relations with him, and suddenly when he died, I realized that he was the closest, dearest and most necessary man for me. I was a writer and all writers are vain and envious – I at least was that sort of writer. But it never occurred to me to measure myself against him, never. Everything that he did (every good and real thing that he did) was such, that the more he did it, the happier I was. Art arouses envy in me and so does intelligence, but the things of the heart arouse only joy. I always considered him my friend, and I never thought otherwise than that we should meet, and that it was my fault that we hadn’t managed to do so yet. And suddenly during dinner – I was late and dining alone – I read that he was dead. Some support gave way under me. I was overcome; but then it became clear how precious he was to me, and I cried and am still crying.
>The last book that Leo Tolstoy had read in his life, during his final days before fleeing Yasnaya Polyana and dying at Astapovo station, was “The Karamazov Brothers” by Dostoevsky.
>Art arouses envy in me and so does intelligence, but the things of the heart arouse only joy.
yeah man...
Thank you anon, beautiful and touching letter expressing the deep respect one of the greatest Russian writers of all time (or just of all time in general, apart from being Russian) had for another of these greats, which I didn’t know of. It’s little nuggets like this that make this troll-infested Bhutanese Tantric dream yoga board sometimes worth looking at.
Some further info: Tolstoy didn't like many of Dostoevsky's works. He disliked crime and Punishment for the same reasons Nabokov did, that Sonya was a silly character and that the writing quality was poor. But he thought Notes from the House of the Dead was the greatest Russian novel and was probably very influenced by Dostoevsky in his later years. The Kreutzer Sonata and The Devil which were written at the same time are unusually violent stories from Tolstoy and have a great emphasis on psychology. He was probably reading Dostoevsky at this time. His final novel Resurrection shares a lot of similarities with Crime and Punishment and is basically Tolstoy's version of the story. As for Dostoevsky, she sharply disagreed with Tolstoy's Christian anarchism but died immediately before he was going to refute his views. He thought Anna Karenina was the greatest novel.
>He disliked Crime and Punishment for the same reasons Nabokov did, that Sonya was a silly character and that the writing quality was poor.
1) C&P is his most overrated work.
2) Frick Nabokov (he was a israelite btw)
I do think that Idiot is vastly better. Same with Note from the Underground.
Virtually every one of his works I've read I've liked more than C&P (which I adored when I first read it, and I started with Punishment).
It is certainly not a bad book, but it is basically just an introduction to his worldview and he expands on it way more substantially in his other works.
check'd and true
well written sad sentiments are so depressing
>I realized that he was the closest, dearest and most necessary man for me.
a bit gay
>>The last book that Leo Tolstoy had read in his life, during his final days before fleeing Yasnaya Polyana and dying at Astapovo station, was “The Karamazov Brothers” by Dostoevsky.
He only finished the first part though, he died before finishing the second part. He also disliked Dostoyevsky's style.
Why do all geniuses almost always hate each other? Leibniz and netwon, Da vinci and michelangelo?
Turgenev and Dostoyevsky later reconciled after Dostoyevsky's speech during Pushkin's day (in which he mentioned a character from one of Turgenev's books).
>Turgenev was known for his venomous descriptions of the israeli figure
Holy based.
My perception of him will never recover from Dostoevsky's portrayal of him in Demons.
>thinking ANYONE reads Tolstoy in the west
lmao Nabokov has far wider appreciation
he's considered american by most people
Read them and you will see why. They are genuinely brilliant.
Their insight on humanity is extraordinary
>Their insight on humanity is extraordinary
Just finished "A Hero of Our Time" by Lermentov. His insight into the nature of women and how to treat them was red pilled 200 years ago.
T & D had the same insights into human nature; and their novels give an incredible perspective of historic Russia's people, geography, and politics of the mid 1800s
Lermontov would have mogged both Tolstoy and Dostoevsky if he had lived.
>Lermontov would have mogged both Tolstoy and Dostoevsky if he had lived.
that seems like it would be hard to do. I don't know Lermontov's history but I liked the novel.
One-quarter of the way through "Brothers Karamazov" right now and D gives an incredible portrayal of human degeneracy, and mid 1800s philosophy, and the political upheaval ongoing in Russia at the time.
Really? Dostoevsky's books are filled with "insights" I had at 8 years old.
Woah you must be a genius anon, I cant imagine what you've been up to since then. Can I see some of your work?
>woah bro I am sad and ignoring my problems doesn't make me feel happy
>dude sometimes it's hard to believe in God cus I am suffering
>being poor sucks bro
>love is awesome
I'm here all day if you need any more dostoevksyan insights
Congratulations, you demonstrated you are so dumb you cannot even grasp the most basic themes of a novel
Dotso doesn't make complex novels, yet you are so moronic you managed to completely miss the point
He's not going to frick you
It's about the girls, anon. Ironically what makes him a genius is how well he wrote women and that's the center of his insights and what really makes him unique because it's focused on that type of Abrahamic sex metaphysics and tying that in with a general universal pathos starting from something personal like that. What you want him to be is more like a pagan social writer, he's not going to give you insights like something that's going to lead everyone to building a Halo space future. Or maybe he is because the type of Abrahamic sex metaphysics he was getting at, written as realism, becoming more compatible with reality through science and girl liberate and that's why he inspired so many in the 20th century like Goebbels. Dosto read Voltairean atheist S&M literature and saw it was the future in the rising age of egoistic sex and outmaneuvered it by tying some of the same sentiments to Christian symbols and Abrahamic sex metaphysics through his Volga bandit characters, thus making it philosophically deeper than the egoistic sex future that was also being predicted by figures like Ibsen. That's why Spengler said the next 1000 years will be Dostoyevsky Christianity. Crime and Punishment the main villain of all reality is a Jeffery Epstein pedophile, and he's the one that saves everyone
>egoistic sex
change to
>sex egoism
I mention Ibsen and it's interesting because he is also known for his heroines. I feel like this stuff is all clearly there
>re. Or maybe he is because the type of Abrahamic sex metaphysics he was getting at, written as realism, becoming more compatible with reality through science and girl liberate and that's why he inspired so many in the 20th century like Goebbels. Dosto read Voltairean atheist S&M literature and saw it was the future in the rising age of egoistic sex and outmaneuvered it by tying some of the same sentiments to Christian symbols and Abrahamic sex metaphysics through his Volga bandit characters, thus making it philosophically deeper than the egoistic sex future that was also being predicted by figures like Ibsen. That's why Spengler said the next 1000 years will be Dostoyevsky Christianity
You are way more knowledgeable than this board deserves.
We no longer live in that world.
What world do we live in? Sex egoism isn’t at it’s peak? Literally everyone, men, women and children are all larping as Svidrigalov desperate to become an Aryan sexual master. You see it everywhere, it’s just become more abstract. It’s still the perfect way to filter everything.
because they are oth really frickin good novelists
I don't get it either. They should be obsessed with Gogol instead.
why do you like him?
he's so innocent, does not deny the horrible turn of fate but it happens weightlessly in his overcoat. not a butcher like dosto you know, I think it's invaluable.
I'm not gay but he looks really cute. I'd frick the brains out of a girl with that hair
they are the 2 greatest novelists what do you expect
>Read Dostoevsky expecting to be blown away by insight and philosophy
>Finish Crime and Punishment
>It has the same artist merit as something like The Fugitive with Harrison Ford
I mean, it’s good. I liked it. It was just more of an action movie than a deeply heady take on humanity.
-Vladimir Nabokov
Cos they be real good at writing and shit dawg
A ghastly rhigamarole
No one is obsessed with Tolstoy.
Speak for yourself
I am sorry you're midwits.
I unironically am
I'm obsessed with him to the degree I'm obsessed with Faulkner so that's a metric frick ton, ironically have never thought about reading war and peace though, I want to read his essays first
I read most of his works the past 2 year with the exception of War and Peace and Resurrection. He is beyond any doubt the greatest artist in modern history. Dostoevsky is close for many of the same reasons, that his works had a positive, worldly impact on the world rather than just writing for the sake of it. But Tolstoy is a much better writer in comparison. The simplest story of his is a masterwork that you should tell to your children. It's crazy how good he is.
I am.
Dostoevsky is incel kino
he is kino for people with deep souls (me)
Only Notes from the Underground.
In all his other novels all the main characters got some strange.
>Dostoevsky is incel kino
meanwhile in reality Dosto was an alpha rapist
>casually accuses Dostoevsky of raping a little girl
Maybe this anon
was onto something
Dosto was well known for seducing women in sanitariums, they aren't insane asylums in the conventional sense.
Now that I think about it, pretty much every single major character Dostoyevsky wrote, whether it's Stavrogin, the Man from the Underground, or Raskolnikov was probably a self insert. I could see Svidrigailov and Marmeladov being self inserts, to an extent at least, as well. The Karamazovs were different aspects of Dosto's character.
Ivan, the atheist intellectual, clearly being a representation of Dosto in his youth.
Dimitri, the self-destructive, passionate hedonist, mirrored Dosto's gambling side.
Alyosha, the virtuous and devout Christian, the man Dosto wanted to be.
Many people praised Dostoyevsky's psychoanalytical ability, the part they didn't know was that he was analyzing himself, not humanity. At least that's my theory. The question is, does any of this fundamentally change his greatness as a writer? I'd argue no.
To be fair, to understand humanity, one does first need to understand oneself.
I'll tell ya one thing, and I'm not afraid to say it. My estimation of Fyodor Dostoevsky as a man just frickin' plummeted.
Take it with a grain of salt anon, Strakhov was jealous as frick.
It’s funny how much this resembles the article written about Myshkin in The Idiot, almost makes me think that’s the irony of it. The truth is he was completely clear and open about his fetishes to anyone that reads the books and that’s why he gets away with it, his favorite being e-girl femdom. But he wasn’t living in sin when he died, he was faithful to Anna. He became The Eternal Husband that he wrote about. He writes that book from the villain POV of the guy that usually tortures the Schillers, and his usual Schiller POV is the sniveling and sBlack personing Pavel, bald ‘monstrous Quasimodo’ that all the high schools girls humiliate in the garden. Dosto literally had a messed up ogre eye. He’s not Svidrigalov, he’s ‘Vanya’ from Humiliated and Insulted. Doting, loving and submissive, seeing everyone above himself likes he’s a child. He could just imagine what it was like to be like other people because he loved them so much, and could probably pretend when he needed to. Read the Eternal Husband, it’s interesting because it flips around the usual hero - villain role with the Schiller anti Schiller characters and surprisingly argues that you should be more like the tall Aryan sexual master this time
If this interpretation is true then why have I never heard it before? You think more people would be keen on proclaiming that Dostoevsky was a sexual pervert and likely pedophile who depicted these urges for years in his work before becoming a devoted Christian husband.
>tfw recognize Dostoyevsky as a kindred spirit, an irredeemably evil person who uses sin and redemption as recreational exercises in catharsis and humanity while never truly repenting or forsaking cheap sensuality and constantly returns to confession learning nothing, amassing crimes, and preaching goodness to afford further transgression in yourself and in the world
Just wait until you hear what he has to say about the israelites.
I knew he was a pedophile when I read that part where some character kissed a little girl's foot in demons lmao.
how dostoevsky was pathetic but imagined himself happy is a great insight. I never understood how someone like him didn't commit suicide. why would he if he considered him a hero and thought he was actually happy lol. never heard of strakhov but he strikes me as a big brain fellow.
My homie Pushkin is the father of russian literature.
I'll never forget the time I got into an argument with a kang in the youtube comments section when he claimed that a black man invented the Russian language because Pushkin was a quadroon, or octaroon or whatever.
What's funny is that that kang wasn't completely wrong.
kek, but Pushkin is unironically vastly overrated. Poetry is gay af.
Eugene Onegin is one of the greatest works of literature
>A self insert is one of the greatest works of literature
Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Show me your novel written in verse
>You probably shouldn't eat shit anon
>OH YEAH, HOW THE FRICK DO YOU KNOW, YOU'VE NEVER TRIED IT
That's essentially your argument.
The author can't hide themselves. No matter how they try to do it, a part of their soul remains in the work
Many of the greatest works are semi-autobiographical in some way
James Joyce, Marcel Proust, Dante, Shakespeare's sonnets, etc.
>James Joyce, Marcel Proust, Dante, Shakespeare's sonnets, etc.
All shit except Dante, he gets a pass.
Behead those who insult proust
>he doesn't like Shakespeare's farcical games
Shit taste
Kierkegaard did an alright job trying to hide himself
"repetition" is literally an autobiography.
I wouldn't call it the greatest. But it is indeed very good, especially if you come from the east of Odra-Niesse.
>Poetry is gay af.
Дyхoвнoй жaждoю тoмим,
B пycтынe мpaчнoй я влaчилcя, —
И шecтикpылый cepaфим
Ha пepeпyтьe мнe явилcя.
Пepcтaми лeгкими кaк coн
Moих зeниц кocнyлcя oн.
Oтвepзлиcь вeщиe зeницы,
Кaк y иcпyгaннoй opлицы.
Moих yшeй кocнyлcя oн, —
И их нaпoлнил шyм и звoн:
И внял я нeбa coдpoгaньe,
И гopний aнгeлoв пoлeт,
И гaд мopcких пoдвoдный хoд,
И дoльнeй лoзы пpoзябaньe.
И oн к ycтaм мoим пpиник,
И выpвaл гpeшный мoй язык,
И пpaзднocлoвный и лyкaвый,
И жaлo мyдpыя змeи
B ycтa зaмepшиe мoи
Bлoжил дecницeю кpoвaвoй.
И oн мнe гpyдь pacceк мeчoм,
И cepдцe тpeпeтнoe вынyл,
И yгль, пылaющий oгнeм,
Bo гpyдь oтвepcтyю вoдвинyл.
Кaк тpyп в пycтынe я лeжaл,
И бoгa глac кo мнe вoззвaл:
«Boccтaнь, пpopoк, и виждь, и внeмли,
Иcпoлниcь вoлeю мoeй,
И, oбхoдя мopя и зeмли,
Глaгoлoм жги cepдцa людeй».
Jokes on you, I kinda understand Russian, it still sounds gay as frick, perhaps even more so in Russian than in English.
It sounds great, especially the second part
What is it so gay about this?
was Dostoevsky a pedo or something?
I'm currently reading Netochka and an entire chapter of it is about two little girls being lovers and passionately hugging and kissing each other and hiding their affair from others
>was Dostoevsky a pedo or something?
Nah, but I'd say he got some insane asylum strange. Maybe that's just me being a modern, cynical moron, but the men went around insane asylums to preach the Word of God to women... fricking weird.
*man
>got some insane asylum strange
Pardon?
He was just a sentimentalist. Adored young children. His real fetish was feet
I hate modern purity culture man.
Pedophilia has nothing to do with "purity culture", you sick frick
There's nothing sexual about childhood friendship. You're making it way more perverted than it is.
Russian literature is good and these Russian writers are the most accessible and relevant to Western non-Russians.
But the question is, are they worth reading in translation?
I'm too old and too much of a midwit to learn russian (which would've taken years to master even if I were >100 IQ)
Better than not reading them at all.
Every time I ask a Russian if he has a favorite novel by a Russian author, Master and Margarita is a really common answer. This goes for women as well. It has a surprising amount of influence for a being a book that IQfy rarely discusses.
Funnily enough, I for one could never bring myself to read through the entirety of that book. I think Bulgakov is a decent author overall, but that particular novel is vastly overrated. It takes itself way too seriously for how mediocre the writing is. For example, during Pilate and Jesus' conversation, there's an implication of the gravity and power of Jesus’ words, but nothing in the way it’s written convinces me of it. It just sort of lacks the skill and, I guess, the insight that define Tolstoy/Dostoevsky's writing and separate them from pretty much everyone else. Yet this novel is somehow often considered to be of a similar quality and significance to their works, which is puzzling to me.
There's a really good novel which seems to be mostly unknown to Western audiences, "Quo Vadis" by Henryk Sienkiewicz. I think it's really well-written (although I don't know Polish so I only read a translation) and has some qualities that almost put it in the same league as Tolstoy and Dostoevsky (that's a bold statement, I know). It inspired this phenomenal painting by Siemiradzki, by the way. Despite their hatred towards us, I have to admit Polaks do have something to show for themselves, culturally speaking.
>It inspired this phenomenal painting by Siemiradzki, by the way.
Damn, of course I'd frick it up. It was the other way around, actually, several of Siemiradzki's painting served as inspiration for the novel.
That's because its in a school program and lighter than both Dostoevsky and Tolstoy. That's probably the last book most midwits actually read in Russia. Also main heroine is an unfaithful prostitute so that's why women like the book.
Frick all these homies, Bulgakov’s the Kiev-born GOAT of the Russian streets. All these old heads were real quiet after he dropped that Margarita mixtape
Because their books are really good.
How difficult is russian for a moron like me?
Entry level midwit lit for incel chuds.
The big difference between Tolstoj and Dostojevskij comes from the fact that Tolstoj was heavily influenced by his service during the Crimean War.
While Dosto didn't serve in wartime he still was in the service (among the lower classes where he was resented for being part of the more landed gentry I think). Forget how long that was for though, after his stint in technical school I think.
Yea, that is certainly true. I am just mentioning it specifically for Tolstoj, because people don't seem to realize just how much the Crimean war affected him.
Which version of notes from underground that I should get? There's penguin classic version in my place but I had to pre order it for a month, there's also the one from alma books that is cheaper and available, but I'm not sure about the translation
Is alma the guys that make those illustrated books? I like them a lot
Garnett and Katz are my go-tos for Dostoevsky.