Goodreads | The Brothers Karamazov (Vintage Classics)

topics	replies	last activity
Well Done	9	22 days ago, 07:47PM

Conrad rated it:

04/29/08

bookshelves: fiction, masterpieces, russia, to-reread

Contrary to widespread rumor, this is a far from bleak book. While every character has his or her own misery, and it all takes place in a place called something like "cattle-roundup-ville", the moments of religious ecstasy and moral clarity are heartbreaking in their frequency - it's hard not to wish that one had such bizarre events going on around one in order to prompt such lofty oratory.

The story involves Ivan, Dmitri, Alyosha, and Smerdyakov, four brothers with a rich but notor...more Contrary to widespread rumor, this is a far from bleak book. While every character has his or her own misery, and it all takes place in a place called something like "cattle-roundup-ville", the moments of religious ecstasy and moral clarity are heartbreaking in their frequency - it's hard not to wish that one had such bizarre events going on around one in order to prompt such lofty oratory.

The story involves Ivan, Dmitri, Alyosha, and Smerdyakov, four brothers with a rich but notoriously lecherous father, Fyodor. All four brothers were raised by others, Fyodor having essentially ignored them until others removed them from his care. In the beginning of the book, Alyosha is in the monastery, studying under a famous elder name Father Zosima; Dmitri has just left the army and stolen a large sum of money from a government official's daughter, who he has also apparently seduced, all while pursuing a lawsuit against Fyodor for his inheritance and canoodling with his own father's intended, the local seductress Grushenka; Ivan, the intellectual in the family, has just returned from (I think) Petersburg. Dmitri is violent and impulsive, referring to himself as an "insect," and gets into fistfights with Fyodor several times. Smerdyakov works for Fyodor as a lackey, having gone to France to learn to cook at some point in the past. It's unimaginably more complicated and digressive than all this, and just trying to follow this crucial sum of three thousand rubles through the story is almost impossible. But anyway, Fyodor is killed and much of the book hinges on which brother killed him and why.

When I first read this book in high school, my teacher (who was a devout Catholic, a red-faced drunk who wore sunglasses to class, and the most enthusiastic reader of Russian literature imaginable) asked everyone who their favorite brother was. Was it Ivan, the tortured skeptic? Dmitri, the "scoundrel" who tortures himself for every wrong he commits but can't help committing more? Or Alyosha, the saintly one who always knows the right thing to say? (Certainly Smerdyakov is no one's favorite.) At the time I went with Ivan - I was in high school, after all, and his atheism and pessimism were revolutionary to me.

But now Ivan seems rather selfish and callow, and I can't help siding with Dmitri, the one Dostoevsky uses almost as a case history of conscience. Like Shakespeare, Dostoevsky gives his characters all the space to talk like gods, clearing pages upon pages for their reasoning and dialog. Dmitri fumbles with Voltaire and is clearly not overly literate, but in some ways that's apropos, because his main problem is the constant internal conflict between his desires and his ethics which is only partly resolved when he chooses to become responsible for not only what he does, but also what he wants.

The most famous passage in the book, Ivan's tale of the Grand Inquisitor, is, to me, far less interesting than Zosima's meditations on the conflict between justice and the collective good. The elder Zosima is a kind of Christian socialist who grapples with the typical mid-19th century Russian issues of how to build a equitable society without the extremes of coercion that the Tsar used to turn to, while also ensuring public morality and avoiding the kind of massacres that characterized the French Revolution (an event that seems to have been even more traumatizing for Russians than it was to the French due to the enormous cultural influence France had there at the time.) Zosima's answer is unworkable and in some ways naiive, but the discussion is well worth it, moreso than Ivan's somewhat simplistic dualism of Christ vs. the Inquisitor. Dostoevsky was a cultural conservative in the sense that he was constantly renewing his commitment to the obligations imposed on Russians by the Orthodox Church. At the same time, he was committed to the pursuit of joy through kindness and community and a kind of interpersonal fair dealing in a way that transcends his political concerns and is inspiring to see articulated in the lives of people who are as confused as the rest of us.

It's a huge, messy book, but so worth the effort. It took me about three months to read carefully, though my reading has been flagging lately, as well. I read this while listening to Hubert Dreyfus's accompanying lectures at Stanford on existentialism and this book which are available on iTunes U, and even when I felt his readings overreached, it was a good way to reread a tough and subtle work like this. ...less

Like this review? yes (14 people liked it)

9 comments

Rachel rated it:

(review of isbn 0374528373)

11/09/07

bookshelves: fiction

Read in November, 2007

recommends it for: everyone!

This is a review both of the book and the translation. See my review of Crime and Punishment for an explanation of why I don't entirely like this translation -- the authors sacrifice clarity and readability for technical accuracy in a way that tends to obscure the meaning. That said, though, it's a very good one, and I'd give it a four out of five. My pet peeve in most translations is the choice of the word "meek" instead...more This is a review both of the book and the translation. See my review of Crime and Punishment for an explanation of why I don't entirely like this translation -- the authors sacrifice clarity and readability for technical accuracy in a way that tends to obscure the meaning. That said, though, it's a very good one, and I'd give it a four out of five. My pet peeve in most translations is the choice of the word "meek" instead of "gentle". These have utterly different connotations in modern English, and describing a man as having "meek eyes" totally misses the point Dostoevsky was trying to make, which was that the person was serene and handled someone else gently. Argh.

Anyway, this is the best book ever written. Every time I read it, I discover new truths about life, and find myself reading passages out loud to anyone within range. Different plot lines and passages stand out to me every time I read it, in different parts of my life. It has profoundly affected my outlook on the world, and is very nearly the equivalent of a bible. (Think Moby Dick in Heathers. :) )

Nominally, it is the story of three sons of a lecherous, nasty old man. The oldest is Dmitri, a passionate, sensual man who hates his father for cheating him out of his money. The next is Ivan, an intellectual and enlightened man, who hates his father for abandoning him and for just being a reprehensible person. The third brother is Alexei (called Alyosha by most) -- a quiet, gentle (but not meek!!) mostly innocent boy who (when the book opens) is living in a monastery, and doesn't hate anyone. There is also a possible fourth brother, the illegitimate child of the father and a town fool he raped. The first half of the book culminates in the murder of the father, the second half is spent discovering who did it and why.

To be honest, the first few times I read the book I didn't even remember who actually ended up doing it -- so much more is going on in the book that it turns out to be the least important thing. Any of them could have done it, certainly. But in the course of the book, Dostoevsky uses these characters (and a bunch more) to examine the nature of humanity, religion, faith, good and evil, love, hate, and just about everything that matters in life. He's not like modern authors who gloss over everything -- his characters all do terrible things at various times. There are very few purely good or evil people in his books; he is obsessed with examining all aspects of people, and who they are within themselves and through society. There is an interlude, The Grand Inquisitor, which is a story Ivan tells to explain what he hates about organized religion, that is frequently used as a short story in itself by literature and religion classes around the world.

On a deeper level, Dostoevsky uses the book to express the conflicting parts of himself. He names the father Fyodor, his own name, and splits the sons into caricatures of himself; a passionate side, an intellectual side, and a pure side that is striving for goodness (which last, it must be noted, is named for his son Alexei, who died at three years old.) He has the parts argue with each other and themselves, and tries to work out how they complement each other and what it all means, with the help of other characters who bring out those parts of him. The fourth brother represents the nasty parts of himself that he's mostly unwilling to acknowledge (thus the unacknowledged son), but oddly enough, he gives the fourth brother epilepsy, a problem Dostoevsky himself had.

I could go on for pages, but I'll stop now. Read this book! I mean it! But go for the Constance Garnett translation if you can find it. Or check out several translations, and pick the one that appeals to you the most.

...less

Like this review? yes (6 people liked it)

add a comment

Jesse rated it:

(review of isbn 0374528373)

07/25/08

Basically, the Brothers Karamazov is one of my all-time favorite books. Although it has a compelling plot, to me it's ultimately the characters and the philosophy underpinning the story that keeps it near the top of my list. And that's where I'd like to put the focus of this review. Of course, thematic interpretation is a necessarily subjective thing, and I don't claim to know what Dostoevsky was trying to say when he wrote this book. Even so, here's a list of what I believe to be some of th...more Basically, the Brothers Karamazov is one of my all-time favorite books. Although it has a compelling plot, to me it's ultimately the characters and the philosophy underpinning the story that keeps it near the top of my list. And that's where I'd like to put the focus of this review. Of course, thematic interpretation is a necessarily subjective thing, and I don't claim to know what Dostoevsky was trying to say when he wrote this book. Even so, here's a list of what I believe to be some of the major themes running throughout the story:

1. The Contradiction of Human Nature – Human nature is broad, contradictory, and capable of containing opposite desires and ideals. In other words, Dostoevsky seems to believe that one and the same person, at the exact same time, can be equally drawn to the noble and lofty on the one hand, and the sensual or degrading on the other. This means that in every sinner there is a saint and in every saint there is a sinner.

2. Embracing Human Contradiction in the Right Way – Given the above, Dostoevsky seems to argue that we should accept both the lofty and the sensual in our human nature. Instead of trying to purge one side of human nature and exalt the other, we should seek to bring both sides of the contradiction together in the right sort of way: we should seek to sanctify and lift our sensual, passionate nature in a way that will allow us to love and connect with others; and we should seek to soften and humble our lofty, prideful nature in a way that will allow us to find peace and hope. We do this chiefly by building loving connections with others, by sincerely believing the best of ourselves and of others, by sensing our connectedness to everything, by forgiving and asking forgiveness, and by accepting our personal responsibility to make the world a better place.

3. Active Love Leads to Faith – The experience of active love toward our neighbors leads to meaningful faith, driving out doubt and despair. The more we succeed in actively and tirelessly loving others, the more we become convinced of God and the immortality of our souls. Dostoevsky, in my mind, is arguing that this is the best way to arrive at the existence of God.

4. The Reality of Moral Imperatives – Another, different type of argument Dostoevsky seems to make for the existence God, relating particularly to the life of Ivan Fyodorovich, can be summarized as follows: If there is no God, then everything is permitted. But not everything is permitted. Therefore, there is a God. Thus, much like Kant, Dostoevsky seems to believe you can infer the reality of God through the reality of moral imperatives - imperatives such as "Thou Shalt Not Kill."

5. Building a Life Now Worth Living Forever – One of the subtle themes that I believe supports the entire book is the idea that our central task as human beings is to build a life right now that’s worth living forever. That is, the possibility of life after death is made meaningful and desireable only by building loving connections with others during our life on earth.

6. Connection Versus Disconnection – Throughout the book, Dostoevsky seems to link the idea of connection and disconnection in the characters’ lives with existentialized Christian concepts. For example, loving connection could represent heaven; confession brings personal guilt out of the closet and into the public sphere, thereby driving out secret shame and opening the door for reconnection; and characters like Alyosha, who help isolated people connect with others, represent angels. On the other hand, disconnection and an inability to love could represent represent hell; anything that causes people to become disconnected from one another could represent sin; and characters like Rakitin, who tear people apart from each other, could represent the devil.

Okay . . . if you made it to the bottom of this review, thanks for sticking around. I'll end by saying that although the Brothers Karamazov is a long book that can be somewhat difficult at times, I thought it was surprisingly hard to put down: great story with great characters, great writing, and a ton of depth. Highly recommended....less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Henry rated it:

(review of isbn 0451527348)

07/15/08

Read in February, 2007

recommends it for: Everyone

I liked this book a great deal. In fact, I enjoyed it much more than I expected. There isn't a lot of action compared to the amount of descriptive text and dialog but it's fairly compelling. There are some sections, I must admit, that were hard to get through but taken as a whole, it's a very good book.

The characters seem very real and have great depth. There are a few who Dostoevsky has captured very, very well and who stand out to me. There is a a Mrs. Khokhlakov who is quite funny in th...more I liked this book a great deal. In fact, I enjoyed it much more than I expected. There isn't a lot of action compared to the amount of descriptive text and dialog but it's fairly compelling. There are some sections, I must admit, that were hard to get through but taken as a whole, it's a very good book.

The characters seem very real and have great depth. There are a few who Dostoevsky has captured very, very well and who stand out to me. There is a a Mrs. Khokhlakov who is quite funny in the sense of being odd. She talks and talks, hardly listening to what others say, she has difficulty staying on any one topic for more than a few sentences, and she is easily distracted. She isn't a particularly likable person but certainly has been captured perfectly. Her daughter is also a bit odd. The Karamazov brothers exemplify passion (Dmitry, or Mitya), reason (Ivan), and spirituality or mysticism (Alyosha). Again, while you don't (or I didn't, anyway) exactly end up liking them all, they are very real. I find myself recognizing them in people I know. No one I know is quite as extreme as they are, perhaps, or at least not like Mitya. I know some Ivans and some people similar to Alyosha.

On pages 87 and 88 was the following paragraph:

"I ask your permission to drop this subject altogether," Miusov repeated. "I will tell you instead, gentlemen, another interesting and rather characteristic anecdote of Ivan Fyodorovitch himself. Only five days ago, in a gathering here, principally of ladies, he solemnly declared in argument that there was nothing in the whole world to make men love their neighbours. That there was no law of nature that man should love mankind, and that, if there had been any love on earth hitherto, it was not owing to a natural law, but simply because men have believed in immortality. Ivan Fyodorovitch added in parenthesis that the whole natural law lies in that faith, and that if you were to destroy in mankind the belief in immortality, not only love but every living force maintaining the life of the world would at once be dried up. Moreover, nothing then would be immoral, everything would be lawful, even cannibalism. That's not all. He ended by asserting that for every individual, like ourselves, who does not believe in God or immortality, the moral law of nature must immediately be changed into the exact contrary of the former religious law, and that egoism, even to crime, must become not only lawful but even recognised as the inevitable, the most rational, even honourable outcome of his position. From this paradox, gentlemen, you can judge of the rest of our eccentric and paradoxical friend Ivan Fyodorovitch's theories."

That's quite interesting, to me. It's an idea that I have never heard expressed and while it may not be perfect, it is quite insightful, I think. Considering that this was written over 125 years ago, it is very prescient. Perhaps Dostoevsky was simply very observant. Looking around today, the belief of mankind in immortality has been mostly destroyed. The results are much as Dostoevsky's Ivan said they would be. I'm not convinced that Ivan saw this as a good thing. He wasn't saying that this would be a positive development. He personally did not believe in immortality but he saw that as a terribly tragic thing.

And tragic it is.
...less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Vanja rated it:

(review of isbn 0374528373)

12/21/07

Read in June, 1998

recommends it for: patient individuals, looking for a rewarding experience

Dostoevsky’s "Crime and Punishment" and "Notes from Underground" are his most popular and famous works. And deservedly so. Dostoevsky’s "Brothers Karamazov", on the other hand, is his most critically acclaimed work- regarded by many as the best novel ever written. And deservedly so.

While "Crime and Punishment" and "Notes from Underground" are shorter, easier to read, and more entertaining, Brothers Karamazov is Dostoevsky’s longest, bu...more Dostoevsky’s "Crime and Punishment" and "Notes from Underground" are his most popular and famous works. And deservedly so. Dostoevsky’s "Brothers Karamazov", on the other hand, is his most critically acclaimed work- regarded by many as the best novel ever written. And deservedly so.

While "Crime and Punishment" and "Notes from Underground" are shorter, easier to read, and more entertaining, Brothers Karamazov is Dostoevsky’s longest, but also best, most subtle, and complex work. It has a huge list of characters, and encompasses the most interesting and most thorough philosophical discussions, which address some of the most personal and important topics that we can face. Hence, "Brothers Karamazov" is Dostoevsky’s masterpiece.

On the surface, this book's plot is about the murder of a father, and the possible involvement of 3 sons (plus a potential illegitimate fourth son). Like all of Dostoevsky's works, the real issues are much deeper and more philosophical. This book is essentially about faith and doubt, often involving the theme of free will.

As is again usual of Dostoevsky's works, the book's themes are revealed through the use of caricatured characters. Few of these characters (and purposely so) would appear in real life. Rather, they are extremes. For instance, here is a list of the 3 brothers, with a very brief sketch of their character traits:

Alexei (Alyosha) Karamazov- the supposed hero of the novel. He is the religious, morally upright, almost Christ-like figure. This does not mean that he is not susceptible to some doubts.

Dmitri (Mitya) Karamazov- a bit of an egoistic hedonist.

Ivan (Vanya) Karamazov- A rationalist and an atheist.

Of course, some of the best philosophical discussions in the book occur in the long dialogues between Alyosha and Ivan. What I appreciate about these discussions, and about the book in general, is that Dostoevsky offers a nuanced and complicated set of arguments for both sides, and neither side necessarily clearly "wins" the arguments. Instead, Dostoevsky’s own views are presented through more subtle means, which involve less direct preaching. This is perhaps why I am adamantly opposed to Dostoevsky's philosophy, while at the same time I love his books because of their writing style and philosophical content.

To conclude, Dostoevsky is my favorite writer, and "Brothers Karamazov" is his longest and best work. It is not, however, his most entertaining ("Notes from Underground", "Crime and Punishment"), his most readable ("Notes from Underground", "Crime and Punishment", "the Gambler"), most psychologically insightful ("Notes from Underground", "Crime and Punishment"), his most political ("Demons"/"Possessed"), his best title ("Demons"/"Possessed"), nor my personal favorite ("the Idiot").

...less

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

1 comments

Dustin rated it:

(review of isbn 0374528373)

07/12/08

Read in July, 2008

Clearly Dostoevsky is a master and writes with the fluidity, dependability, and accuracy of gravity or some force of nature. By the end of the book, the characters were so well developed, they seemed to behave on their own, apart from the memory of the fact that they are fiction and someone is writing them.
Two quarrels with the book, both personal taste: I never like self-referential narrators (which are a breed near extinct, but popular in D-'s day) and he got a bit carried away with the liv...more Clearly Dostoevsky is a master and writes with the fluidity, dependability, and accuracy of gravity or some force of nature. By the end of the book, the characters were so well developed, they seemed to behave on their own, apart from the memory of the fact that they are fiction and someone is writing them.
Two quarrels with the book, both personal taste: I never like self-referential narrators (which are a breed near extinct, but popular in D-'s day) and he got a bit carried away with the lives of side characters and such in-depth detail and long conversations which do not play into the plot. The reader gets the sense D- is not writing a novel, but a memoir, where the author is inclined to write details that seem relevant to him, but play no part, to say, in the "story." I like this quality to a degree, but this book is almost a thousand pages long for God's sake.
Besides those things, the book is a masterpiece. The religious discussions between the brilliant atheist, Ivan and the tremendously lovable and clear-headed monk, Alyosha are convicting and insightful.
I am still unsure quite what D- is saying, what his "moral" is regarding many events and the flow of the book. The revered elderly monk, loved across Russia, endlessly wise, a true son of God, and teacher of Alyosha, stinks when he dies, contrary to the expectation, developed among Russians at the time, for the body to refuse stench upon death due to the holiness of the man. Yet the little boy Ilusha, whose funeral is the final scene of the book, does not stink. I know D- admired and was fascinated by children.
Also, how Ivan, arguably the brightest and most intelligent character in the book, falls into metaphysical delirium (despite his rigid materialist, nihilistic beliefs) and is supposed to be near death at the close of the book.
Many times D- hints at the logical strength of nihilism, the utter sense of it, and near-necessity to consider before having the world "make sense." Yet he hints that life can only be meaningful, worth living, and virtuous with a God. And even people who don't believe in God live and love like they do and "when they lost their nose, were led by their nose."
D- implies that there is no reason to be scared of ideas and they all must come out in the open, and that people can love each other who have fundamentally different ideas about the universe, as if they do not. Thus implying that perhaps these ultimate questions are in reality of little weight, that there is more than intellect and knowing, deciding, choosing "answers." When life begins to happen, such as the murder story in the book, such questions fade away, or at least are sidelined. Are beliefs as inconsequential and inapplicable to real life? This question haunts me. ...less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

anne rated it:

(review of isbn 0374528373)

03/20/08

Read in March, 2008

"Everything there was to know about life was in The Brothers Karamazov"
~Kurt Vonnegut

Okay, it took me a few days to get into it, but once I did it was a page turner. I love this book, although it's at times a big, beautiful mess. There are so many themes going on, and each character has every quality under the sun, that I don't really feel equal to wirting a little capsule review. Here are some of the basic themes I took from it: everyone is both guilty and innocent; trying to so...more "Everything there was to know about life was in The Brothers Karamazov"
~Kurt Vonnegut

Okay, it took me a few days to get into it, but once I did it was a page turner. I love this book, although it's at times a big, beautiful mess. There are so many themes going on, and each character has every quality under the sun, that I don't really feel equal to wirting a little capsule review. Here are some of the basic themes I took from it: everyone is both guilty and innocent; trying to solve the question of God with logic is futile; the concept of justice is absurd; in the end love is the only real truth. I became even more smitten with the book when I read a little background on it, and found that after the author's own child (Alyosha) died during the writing of the book, Dostoyevsky took solace in the company of a monk whom Zossima is modelled after - knowing this tied some of the seemingly irrelevant chapters together. The ideas behind Brothers Karamozov are deeper than Tolstoy's, and more life-affirming than Dostoyevsky's own Crime and Punishment. I really liked the loose ending, and the closing scene with Alyosha and the little boys.

Here's my favorite passage, spoken by Ivan the cynic to Alyosha the angelic young monk.

"...I have a longing for life, and I go on living in spite of logic. Though I may not believe in the order of the universe, yet I love the sticky little leaves as they open in spring. I love the blue sky, I love some people, whom one loves you know sometimes without knowing why. I love some great deeds done by men, though I've long ceased perhaps to have faith in them, yet from old habit one's heart prizes them...

I want to travel in Europe, Alyosha, I shall set off from here. And yet I know that I am only going to a graveyard, but it's a most precious graveyard, that's what it is! Precious are the dead that lie there, every stone over them speaks of such burning life in the past, of such passionate faith in their work, their truth, their struggle and their science, that I know I shall fall on the ground and kiss those stones and weep over them; though I'm convinced in my heart that it's long been nothing but a graveyard. And I shall not weep from despair, but simply because I shall be happy in my tears, I shall steep my soul in emotion. I love the sticky leaves in spring, the blue sky -- that's all it is. It's not a matter of intellect or logic, it's loving with one's inside, with one's stomach..."...less

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Robin rated it:

04/02/08

Read in March, 2008

I moved this up on my list when I read that Eugene Peterson re-reads it every year. It took me months.

The translation is easy to read. It has lots of cultural context endnotes, that fill in what Dostoevsky's readers would have known, and I really appreciate that. I have no idea what the Russian language is like, but somehow I had the sense of understanding a communication that really was from another culture (unlike science fiction movies where all the purported aliens not only speak English...more I moved this up on my list when I read that Eugene Peterson re-reads it every year. It took me months.

The translation is easy to read. It has lots of cultural context endnotes, that fill in what Dostoevsky's readers would have known, and I really appreciate that. I have no idea what the Russian language is like, but somehow I had the sense of understanding a communication that really was from another culture (unlike science fiction movies where all the purported aliens not only speak English, but do so with the same accent . . .)

It's a romp of a story, but actually more of a journey; there are lots of trails that wander off then connect; some breath-taking vistas; and when we are at the end, it is clear that the characters are really beginning. I don't mean that it has an unfinished feeling. It's as though we have succeeded in getting to base camp.

I had an idea once of writing about brothers who represented the different temperaments; the problem with reading the classics is you find someone has already used all your good ideas. The joy is finding you are not alone.

In high school I was relieved to find Nathaniel Hawthorne, whose work explores what it is like to be of a cool temperament in a world where warmth is what is needed. It was obvious to me that the protagonist of The scarlet letter was Hester Prynne's husband, and that the other main "character" was the Puritan culture that reinforced his traits and in which he worked out his doom. It's interesting that Dostoevsky's work, in which even the coolest character is passionate, brings Hawthorne to mind . . . like bookends.

The Karamazov brothers represent the full range of temperaments, but they work out their lives in the very specific context of mother Russia. Maybe it's true of all things human, that we can only engage the universal in the particular. I almost feel that there would be a chance for peace in the world if people would replace the modern media with these stories of human souls, these classics. ...less

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

Skylar rated it:

(review of isbn 0374528373)

01/05/08

bookshelves: classics

This novel would lead me to believe that all Russian women are virtual psychopaths and all Russian men muddled philosophers. But for all of its curious characterizations, The Brothers Karamazov is a masterfully written epic, and once I had plodded past the first 40 pages or so, I was enthralled. Fascinated by the brothers, anxious to know their destinies, and stimulated by the depth of the novel's religious speculations, I read on. As a story, Brothers Karamazov is good enough, but as a pene...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

Joshua rated it:

(review of isbn 0374528373)

01/28/08

bookshelves: classics, favorites

Read in January, 2000

recommends it for: Anyone looking to expand what they thought they already knew

When I first finished The Brothers Karamazov , I felt a tinge of sadness wash over me since this was Dostoevsky's last novel. Now I'm not an idiot, I can guess that by being born on 1821 that he just might be dead by now. Still, whenever I read an author's last work I feel as if a weight is placed upon my shoulders. Most author's final novels are created after a lifetime of working and refining their technique, growing into the wizened sages that we all hold our favorite authors as being...more

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

2 comments

Pietrus rated it:

(review of isbn 0393092143)

08/29/07

Read in August, 2007

recommends it for: Everyone

"Above all, don't lie to yourself. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others. And having no respect he ceases to love."

"This is my last message to you: in sorrow seek happiness. Work, work unceasingly."

"He has done me no harm. But I played him a dirty trick, and ever since then I have hated him."

"It's ...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

Kim rated it:

(review of isbn 0374528373)

10/11/07

Read in October, 2007

When I first starting reading this book I was awfully confused. The Modern Library version's translation from Russian into English was awkwardly worded, the characters were each known by several different names, and I wasn't aware of the history of Russia during that period in time. There are also several instances of Latin and French phrases that aren't translated. A friend pointed me to a website that gave an outline of each of the main characters and all of the names associated with each. ...more

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

Dominic rated it:

(review of isbn 0374528373)

06/29/08

Read in June, 2008

I picked up this book with little thought as to what I might get out of it....In fact I was not willing to start it, since I thought it would be a boring old book that I might get a hundred pages into, at most.

I just finished the book, and I'm glad to say, It has been one of the most enjoyable books I've read.

Sure, there was some slow parts, as in every book, but the way it was written, distinct in older books, was very intresting and even refreshing. The story was very clever and meani...more

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

Pjb rated it:

(review of isbn 0374528373)

12/05/07

Read in March, 2007

A pretty deep book that can be hard to follow at points, unless of course you have detailed knowledge of the inner workings of Eastern Orthodoxy (including the structure of monasteries and the varying roles of novices, monks, and hieromonks), as well as 19th Century Russian class structure. The first 300 pages or so were a bit of a struggle, but then it really picked up and by the end was a page-turner. After the first 300 pages, which are sort of like reading St. Augustine's "City of God...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

Shawn rated it:

(review of isbn 0374528373)

06/11/07

recommends it for: people with some time to kill

So vast, in terms of the range of humanity and insights, that it's hard to know where to begin. Great manic talk, characters who are surprising and driven, rich depictions of Russian life, occasionally frustrating tangents. It was sometimes tough to make it through, but so what -- so were Ulysses and Gravity's Rainbow.

Like those novels, this one feels like it earns its place in the canon by sheer ambition and balls -- it takes on the biggest human questions, tries to deal with them squarely...more

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

Martin rated it:

(review of isbn 0374528373)

12/31/07

Read in March, 2005

recommends it for: Russians, Anyone not intimidated by lengthy page counts

Dostoevsky is as hard to read as his name is to spell (and in my case pronounce).

There are so many deep thoughts that come along with any Fyodor's books that your mind will boggle, overload and possibly melt out through your ears.

The experience is likened to my first attempts to read and understand (also spell) Shakespeare. The characters are wonderfully named and deeply developed. The settings are meticulously descrbied and all Eastern European in theme. The stories tend to be incr...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

relyt rated it:

(review of isbn 0451527348)

04/23/08

bookshelves: classics

Read in January, 2003

recommends it for: Anybody

The ideas batted about in the narrative, spoken in many voices, and the dialogs themselves, illuminate why I never can't get enough of this book, nor Dostoyevsky. "The Grand Inquisitor" gets most attention but, for me, at least two other chapters are equally powerful pieces of writing: The one on Father Zossima, and the later chapter containing the dialog between Ivan and you-know-who in the parlor. Unsurpassed dialog, all of it.

The finest charaterization for me was that of Fat...more

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

Danielle rated it:

(review of isbn 0374528373)

01/15/08

bookshelves: fiction

Read in August, 2006

Wow. I hated this book so much. In fact, it's been almost 18 months since I read it, and only now has the bitterness at all that wasted time subsided enough for me to write a review.
Depressingly, I started this book twice before I finally finished it. I thought I just wasn't giving good ol' Dostoevsky a fair chance. He totally betrayed my trust.
First of all, if I'm going to invest the requisite time to read an 800+ page novel, I expect to at least get a mildly interesting story along with ...more

The Brothers Karamazov (Vintage Classics)

discuss this book

groups with this book

friend reviews (0)

lists with this book

other reviews (showing 1-20 of 10488)