/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12677942]

Wasn't the ending a little underwhelming? In the end, he was only saved due to Sofya, and it's not clear why he changed his mind, given he was still holding on to his beliefs in prison.

I also would have edited out Svidrigailov entirely. His sections were very good, but they didn't fit in with the rest of the novel.

It's still an amazing work though.

[Anonymous No.12678046]

>Wasn't the ending a little underwhelming?
I've heard the epilogue was tacked on because Dosto had wanted to do an additional section but had been told to cut it down. In my opinion it isn't needed.

>he was only saved due to Sofya, and it's not clear why he changed his mind, given he was still holding on to his beliefs in prison.
The point is that whilst he may have intellectually thought he was above morality, he emotionally wasn't. This was clear from the get go as he regretted killing her before he actually did. The book was him coming to terms with the realisation that we are all bound by an inherent moral code. It doesn't matter what you are trying to achieve (good, bad or neutral) you can't escape it. It is actually irrelevant that he accepted it or found God as the message would still carry.

>I also would have edited out Svidrigailov entirely
Imagine being this much of a brainlet. Svidrigailov was the contrast of Raskolinov in that they both thought they were above morality (seeing them as social conditioning). Whilst Raskolinov thought he could be above them for the greater good, Svidrigaliov thought he could be above them and commit evils, however, as we know he too was tormented and ended up killing himself. Marmeladov also factors in as he is the neutral version of these two.

There are many others such underlying themes.

[Anonymous No.12679407]

This was Dosto's attempt writing a mass appeal book to a primarily American audience in order to get rich, which is why it's so safe, banal, unassuming and bland.

[Anonymous No.12679526]

>>12679407
do you have any sources for that?

[Anonymous No.12679547]

>>12679407
Americans were shoving cheeseburgers down their elephant sized gullets even then. Really makes you think.

[Anonymous No.12679669]

>>12679526
> Heh heh heh, these dumb assholes think C&P (short for child porn) is some kind of transformative masterpiece of literature and psychology when all it is is some banal wishfulfillment of edgy lonely fatalistic teens who fantasize about commiting incredibly dramatic acts, be found intriguing by everyone in their surrounding and ultimately saved by their waifu.

- Letter from Dostoyevsky to Tolstoy in 1872

[Anonymous No.12679702]

>>12679669
seem legit. gees i don't like c&p now

[Anonymous No.12680046]

We never got the second book hinted at in the epilogue

[Anonymous No.12681054]

>>12677942
>I also would have edited out Svidrigailov entirely.

[Anonymous No.12681171]

>>12679407
0/10