/lit/ - Literature

Is it better to keep translations consistent if you're going to read all his major works or Can I just mix and match without worry it'll mess up something. The only ones that seem to be series wide are by P&V and Garnett and I've heard issues about both of them. Also, besides his five majors, what are some other works you'd reccomend. The two most common I hear about are Poor Folk and The Gambler.

>>15063793
Anything by this guy.

I've always wondered what the heck is up with Dostoyevsky's beard. It's like an apparition or something.

literally me

was just reading the scene where burdovsky and his company attempted to get a part of the prince's inheritance. no problems so far but after gavrila told burdovsky he is not pavlishchev's son and ippolit starts his rambling i lose understanding. what was ippolit going on about? why did he insult the prince like that when he left? no problems so far with this book but i didnt get this part. can someone explain?

holy shit...he’s just like me

how can one man write so well? so masterfully and even perfectly. im sitting here laughing my ass off because the scene is so funny and well written. i cant believe how its possible to write so well. its incredible. here the passage, enjoy: https://pastebin.com/CgSKvB6L

>>13075643
Research hierophany and write about the manifestation of the sacred in Dostoevsky's work, i.e. the experience of the numinous in literature.
Tolstoy is the better stylist (though Dostoevsky's roughness is overstated, sometimes he writes very beautifully, it's just that he is uneven). The only way to argue then is to write about the religious/spiritual/sacred set pieces in Dostoevsky's work, which I sincerely believe outdo Tolstoy. Dosto had a special talent present in scenes like the horse murder in C&P and The Grand Inquisitor that I don't think Tolstoy ever topped. Both of those have a very mystical and effecting feeling to them that I never had in Tolstoy, though I was more impressed with him as a technically skilled artist. That should give you plenty of ammunition for 200 words.

>>12694311
*loves Jesus*

>>12674509
Tolstoy is more skillful but Dosto is still better. Everything in Tolstoy's life was artifice, even his turn to faith at the end was probably artifice. He was without a doubt a megalomaniac. He was a genius and very very talented but still a megalomaniac. First he decided he wanted to be a great intellectual and literary celebrity and then when that wasn't enough for him he wanted to become a saint. Read 'What is Art?' and 'My Confession' and you will see his narcissism. I say this as a person who loved and admired Tolstoy above all other writers, that's why I read his entire bibliography almost. I still read him, but I mainly learn from him as a technician. This megalomania is the same reason he attacked Shakespeare so virulently. He wanted to be the greatest literary figure in the history of mankind.

Dostoevsky actually believed in what he wrote. He had complete conviction. The man stood at death's door and emerged completely changed. He probably had some sort of mental disorder, avoidant personality disorder, maybe hyper-sensitivity to emotions, but his life created the perfect storm for him to write with complete conviction and belief in his art. Tolstoy was LARPing to the very end, trying to build himself up.

>Constance Garnett
>David Magarshack
>David McDuff
>Pevear and Volokhonsky
>...

Got same problem with Dante.
Which Divine Comedy translation is best?

>yfw you realize war is capital is god

Today even the real intellectuals are conceited and arrogant.

Am I the only one who doesn't understand Dostoevsky? I've read Crime + Punishment and Notes from Underground. All I got from them is that he hate rationalism/utilitarianism/etc. Are his novels ambiguous as fuck or am I just retarded? I read an analysis of Notes from Underground and it turns out that it's an attack on some obscure Russian novel called "What Is To Be Done". How was I supposed to know that???? I understood that he was warning us against some silly idealistic ideas that were present in Russia at the time, the novel was clear about that.

Anyway how do I properly read this sort of stuff? People can write dozens of paragraphs about these books, but my understanding is so vague that I can barely say anything about them. I'm gonna read "The Idiot" next, I hope I understand that book properly.

How are all of his works so patrician?

Is he our guy, /lit/?

why do ya'll like this guy

/lit/, what is the best Russian novel (written in Russian) to buy for my friend? he is learning Russian, so I want to get him something that he will eventually be able to read.