Poor Folk and Other Stories

by Fyodor Dostoevsky, David McDuff (Translator)

Poor Folk was Dostoyevsky's first great triumph in fiction and the work that looks forward to the double-acts and obsessions of his later genius.

It takes place in a world of office , lodging-house and seamstress's rooms and consists of an impoverished love affair in letters between a copy clerk and a young girl who lives opposite him. Of the other stories in this volume The Landlady portrays a dreamer hero, housed in dreams of art until he is forced to move from his lodgings; and Polzunkov is a sketch of a "voluntary buffoon." For Mr.Prokharchin Dostoyevsky lifted a plot from a stranger-than-fiction newspaper story (about a poor man's hidden hoard's) and transformed it into inspired and desolate comedy.

Genres: Classics, Fiction, Russia, Russian Literature, Short Stories, Literature, Novels

271 pages, Paperback

Published January 1, 1988

About the author

Фёдор Михайлович Достоевский (Russian)

Works, such as the novels Crime and Punishment (1866), The Idiot (1869), and The Brothers Karamazov (1880), of Russian writer Feodor Mikhailovich Dostoyevsky or Dostoevski combine religious mysticism with profound psychological insight.

Very influential writings of Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin included Problems of Dostoyevsky's Works (1929),

Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky composed short stories, essays, and journals. His literature explores humans in the troubled political, social, and spiritual atmospheres of 19th-century and engages with a variety of philosophies and themes. People most acclaimed his Demons(1872) .

Many literary critics rate him among the greatest authors of world literature and consider multiple books written by him to be highly influential masterpieces. They consider his Notes from Underground of the first existentialist literature. He is also well regarded as a philosopher and theologian.

(Russian: Фёдор Михайлович Достоевский) (see also Fiodor Dostoïevski)

Reviews

[Steven R. Kraaijeveld · Rating 3 out of 5]

Aside from Poor Folk, which is very good (“and though I suffer for you, yet it eases my heart to suffer for you” - I’ll never tire of quoting that), the stories were underwhelming. It has to be remembered, though, that they are very early stories, written when Dostoevsky had just turned his mind to writing. He was trying to find his way, and, perhaps inevitably, began by emulating his favourite writers (like E. T. A. Hoffmann, Schiller, and Balzac). The excess of pathos, the intrusion of the eerie/mystical, and the allusions to Russian folktales in these stories feel like an uneven mix. It caused the critic Vissarion Belinsky to exclaim of Mr. Prokharchin, for instance, that it is "affected, maniéré, and incomprehensible”. Now, I’ll defend Dostoevsky to the death, but I have to somewhat agree with Belinsky here. The Landlady in particular felt affected and exceptionally overdramatized (how many times did she turn pale and tremble?! how often did he lose consciousness and faint from emotion?! and how many tears did they shed?!). Having said that, even this youthful and overabundant Dostoevsky is fascinating. There is enough in the stories to keep you interested, and if you are familiar with his great, later works, there are various things that’ll keep you mentally occupied while and after reading them: 1) the recognition of seeds of ideas and characters in his later novels (especially Crime and Punishment), and 2) the realization of how incredibly far Dostoevsky would ultimate come from these stories; how he would develop and perfect the art that is only inchoately present here, and 3) the fact that the criticism of these early works hurt and distressed Dostoevsky, makes you wonder whether this was ultimately necessary for his development as a writer.

[E. G. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Introduction
Note on the Text

--Poor Folk
--The Landlady
--Mr Prokharchin
--Polzunkov

Notes

[Sotiris Karaiskos · Rating 5 out of 5]

A collection of some of the first works - two short novels and two short stories - by the great Russian writer, most of them unfolding in an urban poverty environment and their plot has to do with it.

The first novel is a love story between a mature man and a young woman who both live in small apartments in a state of poverty, which we follow through their correspondence. Through these letters, we see the tenderness of their relationship, the beautiful passion they develop and the great difficulties they face because of poverty and the social environment. The way the author tells this story is truly wonderful as it manages through this passionate correspondence to convey to us the heroes' anxiety, their feelings and hopes, their despair in front of the huge obstacles and the self-sacrifice that distinguishes them. This way, however, may seem excessive and overly emotional but I think the reader can overrule it thinking it is one of the author's first works but most of all he can forgive it because of all that emotional tension.

The second and smaller novel is more mysterious as it about a very strange woman with an even more strange past. Our hero feels a strange attraction for her as she watches her move through the city and display very strange behavior and ask to learn more as they come closer. The narration of her past in the Russian countryside, with superstition, religion and passionate and often irrational attitudes does not clear up so much but intensifies the mystery by creating an almost gothic atmosphere. In the end, the reader comes across a rather expected solution but also the assurance that this mysterious woman will follow him for much longer.

The two short stories complement this collection very well, with the first one being particularly interesting as the author delves deeper into the subject of urban poverty, showing practical difficulties, human relationships, and with a subversive ending shows the strange psychological processes that is causing.

Μία συλλογή με μερικά από τα πρώτα έργα - δύο μικρά μυθιστορήματα και δύο διηγήματα - του μεγάλου Ρώσου συγγραφέα, με τα περισσότερα να εκτυλίσσονται σε ένα περιβάλλον αστικής φτώχειας και η πλοκή τους να έχει να κάνει με αυτή.

Το πρώτο μυθιστόρημα είναι μία ιστορία αγάπης ανάμεσα σε έναν ώριμο άντρα και μία νεαρή γυναίκα που ζούνε και οι δύο σε μικρά διαμερίσματα μέσα σε συνθήκες φτώχειας, την οποία παρακολουθούμε μέσα από την αλληλογραφία τους. Μέσα από αυτά τα γράμματα βλέπουμε την τρυφερότητα της σχέσης τους, το όμορφο πάθος που αναπτύσσεται αλλά και τις μεγάλες δυσκολίες που αντιμετωπίζουν εξαιτίας της φτώχειας και του κοινωνικού περιβάλλοντος. Ο τρόπος που ο συγγραφέας αφηγείται αυτή την ιστορία είναι πραγματικά υπέροχος καθώς καταφέρνει μέσα από αυτή την παθιασμένη αλληλογραφία να μας μεταφέρει την αγωνία των ηρώων, τα συναισθήματα και τις ελπίδες τους, την απελπισία τους μπροστά στα τεράστια εμπόδια και την διάθεση αυτοθυσίας που τους διακρίνει. Αυτός ο τρόπος, βέβαια, μοιάζει ίσως υπερβολικός και υπέρμετρα συναισθηματικός αλλά νομίζω ότι ο αναγνώστης μπορεί να το προσπεράσει σκεπτόμενος ότι πρόκειται για ένα από τα πρώτα έργα του συγγραφέα αλλά πάνω από όλα μπορεί να το συγχωρήσει εξαιτίας όλης αυτής και συναισθηματικής έντασης που μεταφέρει.

Το δεύτερο και μικρότερο μυθιστόρημα είναι περισσότερο μυστηριώδες καθώς αφορά μία πολύ περίεργη γυναίκα με ακόμα πιο περίεργο παρελθόν. Ο ήρωας μας νιώθει μία περίεργη έλξη για αυτήν καθώς τη βλέπει να κινείται μέσα στην πόλη και να επιδεικνύει μία πολύ παράξενη συμπεριφορά και ζήτα να μάθει περισσότερα καθώς έρχονται κοντά. Η αφήγηση αυτού του παρελθόντος της στην ρωσική επαρχία, με τη δεισιδαιμονία, τη θρησκοληψία και τις παθιασμένες και πολλές φορές παράλογες συμπεριφορές, δεν ξεκαθαρίζει τόσα πολλά πράγματα αλλά εντείνει περισσότερο το μυστήριο δημιουργώντας μία σχεδόν γοτθική ατμόσφαιρα. Στο τέλος ο αναγνώστης συναντάει μία μάλλον αναμενόμενη λύση αλλά και τη σιγουριά ότι αυτή η μυστηριώδης γυναίκα θα θελα να ακολουθεί για πολύ περισσότερο.

Τα δύο διηγήματα συμπληρώνουν πολύ καλά αυτή τη συλλογή, με το πρώτο να είναι ιδιαίτερα ενδιαφέρον καθώς ο συγγραφέας μέσα από αυτό εμβαθύνει περισσότερο στο θέμα της αστικής φτώχειας, δείχνοντας τις πρακτικές δυσκολίες, τις σχέσεις των ανθρώπων και με μία ανατροπή στο τέλος τις περίεργες ψυχολογικές διεργασίες που προκαλεί.

[Pyramids Ubiquitous · Rating 3 out of 5]

These early novellas of Dostoevsky's are an interesting counterpoint to his conceptually more broad later works. There is a lot of the autobiographical in these stories as they illustrate the quotidian of Russian life of the time, with some intricacies here and there. The story of Poor Folk is told entirely through the letters of two (surprise) poor folk. It serves as a document of living in that time and place but is not very exciting narratively. The Landlady is much more intricate and takes on some more interesting themes, at times almost feeling like a Thriller story. The story of The Landlady, the observation, fascination and temptation of this intriguing and inverted couple, really could have been expanded into a longer form and is definitely the highlight of this collection. The final two short stories are both interesting character observations, but don't extend beyond being a sketch. Surely one of Dostoevsky's lesser works overall, but worth reading to see his trajectory as a writer.

[Julie Kuvakos · Rating 4 out of 5]

My first question when finishing any book is always what is the authors intention? As you can guess from the title he is telling a story of the lower class. It is told through primarily two main characters writing letters back and forth to each other a form considered an “epistolary” novel. These characters are Major Devushkin (a middle aged lowly titular councillor) and Varvara Dobroselova a young girl just barely out of her teens.

At first I wasn’t sure what to make of these two - their relationship seemed a bit odd to me and it was pretty apparent they were both kind of hiding things going on in their lives from one another. Makara was such an unreliable protagonist that you just couldn’t trust what he was saying and he is just a bundle of contradictions. On one hand he obsesses over privacy so much so that he will not cross his yard in daylight and on the other fantasizes about being a recognized author and does not respect others privacy. He accuses others for doing the same things he does. In a lot of ways his character seemed to be a slight prototype of the underground man which was to be a big hit in a later novel. Dostoevsky portrayal of the human mind is fully put to work here. We can fully see ourselves in some of these actions by Makar - even though that makes us slightly uncomfortable at times.

“To what depths of humility can poverty reduce a man!”

The biggest question of all seems to be that of Gods world again (similar to that of The Brothers Karamazov- do you accept that this world is Gods world?)… Makar is one who sees God as this grand Architect of sorts and sees this design as His will alone.

Varvara was such a tender character that I felt was completely taken advantage of and her lot being one that she had fully accepted despite its deep hardships. She worries about Makar and makes decisions out of complete desperation. I don’t want to spoil anything more for her side of the story as you will need to read for your self.

“What is it that will most surely break me? It is not the want of money, but the little worries of life”

[Kyle · Rating 3 out of 5]

Woe to the book collectors, especially the type that really, really needs to own the complete works of Pushkin. That seems to be the message here from a young Dostoyevsky, known for writing a few of literature's heavier novels, who writes in a few of this volume's shorter stories about how this obsession with reading leads to ruin. Thanks a lot for telling me this now! I might have felt less like the Idiot perhaps if I had read this book instead of the 1869 novel as my first introduction to nineteenth century literature. And yet, despite the crammed bookshelves, numerous cardboard boxes on moving day, and the various basement suites and cramped apartment found more for my collection as opposed to my own comfort, I feel as though I have led a rich life through them, unlike the poor folk I've just read about.

[Brian · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was great to get a sense of early Dostoevsky, to see how his style had developed over time. These short stories reveal a higher level of sentimentality than his later works, but they also are marked by the philosophical/psychological probing for which he would become so famous. There are many interesting conversations in "Poor Folk" (an epistolary short novel), especially on art, its function, interpretation, etc. Altogether, fascinating stuff.

[Lesle · Rating 2 out of 5]

In a way, The Landlady is like a fairy tale of good vs evil with a princess and prince of folklore tales.

An inheritance allows Ordynov to be his own artistic socialism of seclusion from other humans. While walking about and thinking of his loveless life, his childhood and his future, he finds himself in a church with an old man Murin (with a dark past) and his wife Katerina, young and beautiful and obviously under Murin's spell. Ordynov comes up with any reason to come in contact with Katerina. All along his intention is becoming a guest in Murin's home and Katerina becoming the Landlady.

Murin has powers of clairvoyance that have upset his neighbours and the police. Katerina lets it be known that Murin and her mother had an affair. She also thinks she might be Murin's daughter!

Ordynov develops a love for Katerina, which she gives into after nursing him through delirium. Ordynov spies on Murin who has taken to his bed (ill) and is recounting tales to Katerina while under his spell, which she believes she is a sweet captive of his.

Ordynov tries to convince Katerina to detach herself from Murin. Katerina offers wine to Ordynov and Murin as she considers her choice. Murin tells her any choice is futile. Ordynov believes that Murin is a sorcerer and that Katerina is his slave, as she believes as well. He tries to buy Katerina for her freedom and Murin indicates a veiled threat that the price would be bloodshed for Seeing no way out Ordynov decideds to kill Murin, but fails.

The Landlady is very melodramatic yet eerie and may have a different meaning for some than what I see.

[Brother Gregory Rice, SOLT · Rating 4 out of 5]

Poor Folks: Didn't read it this time (I read it a few years ago). My impressions of it are hazy. It is an epistolary novel between a poor man and woman. It was an account of the day-to-day difficulties of their lives and the financial situation that keeps them from being able to have a life together. I remember finding it a little strange because the man is a good bit older than the woman, and it is heavy with profusions of endearment.

The Landlady: Also strange. Dream-like account of a young man who has spent his youth cooped up reading and has an emotionally intense encounter with a couple he meets at Mass. He seeks where they live and asks to take boarding because of his seemingly spiritual feeling of connection with the woman. It turns out that this is reciprocated, the woman exhorts him to a Christian, brotherly/sisterly love, but is taken away from friendship with him by the overbearing and malevolent husband. Interesting, but confusing, read.

Mr. Prokharchin: My favorite of the collection. A hypochondriac, miserly pessimist of a man lives in squalid poverty out of fear of the bad that may happen to him.

Polzunkov: Shortest and lightest of the bunch. Funny little sad story of a genuinely good man continually letting himself be the butt of the joke, playing the fool, until on fool's day, April 1st, it turns on him.

[J.M. Hushour · Rating 3 out of 5]

Now, I love me some Dosty (see my semi-hysterical reviews of his novels elsewhere here), and never having been much of a completist at anything, I'd always weirdly overlooked his short stories. Now, in parallel with reading Frank's multi-volume biography I thought, shit, why not read them all, either again or for the first time!
The deficiencies become clear when you approach Dost as I have, from the great, epic, lengthy works. In a short form, he feels constrained. Sure, these are early, almost juvenilia, and you can sense what was to come (scholars like to harp on this), but they are stuffy. You can feel that he wants to explode outwards, but didn't have the chance (he'd already risen and fallen--thanks, Belinsky, you asshole!--by this point).
"Poor Folk" I reviewed by itself recently. "The Landlady" is passable, if clunky and difficult to follow, again more a reflection of the short medium than Dost. "Mr. Prokharchin" (which could be translated as "Mr. Starvy"?) and "Polzunkov" are shorter, weirder works of debatable quality. The former certainly stands up better as a kind of proto-Kafka (alienated, weird clerk dies), the latter is more forgettable.
Not to worry, it's still fun to explore the early Dost!

[R · Rating 4 out of 5]

Poor folk is great - the other stories in the book are not so much worth the time. The other stories in the book give a glimpse of sub-par writing from a great writer in the period where he was not at his best. If you are one of those readers who want to see the contrast between a great writing and a fairly successful writing, the stories in this book bring that contrast. According to Dostoyevsky's biographers, some of the other stories were not very well received by the critiques and its that writing that almost brought Dostoyevsky's career as a writer to its nadir. The mundane description of characters in stories such as 'The Landlady' is clearly visible. The stories 'The Landlady' and 'Mr Prokharchin' give a glimpse of Dostoyevsky's attempt to produce Gogol style work but the stories fail to capture the reader's imagination unlike Gogol's masterpiece works.
In summary, if you want to read a Dostoyevsky's book, this is probably not the one you should pick. If you want to read a love story, 'Poor Folk' is not the greatest one you will find. The only reason to read this book is either to review Dostoyevsky's work or to understand the evolution of the writer.

[Arjun Thapar · Rating 3 out of 5]

struggled through this. poor folk - pretty decent, probably 4*.

the other stories were fairly tough reads, very melodramatic & hard to follow.

[Shaz · Rating 4 out of 5]

The collection as a whole - 4 stars, the titular story - PAINFUL to read.

There really is so much wisdom and nuance in the ideas that Dostoevsky presents, and his writing, as always, is deeply melancholic and feeling. But the style of this one made me itch under the skin. The letters between this man and woman were so mundane and full of common drudgery that I felt restless the whole time reading. I know part of point of these letters was to showcase the mundanity of their daily struggles but there was definitely an exaggerated tedium to these letters and I wanted to peel my eyes off, desperately hoping that they would just get to the point. At several points, Dostoevsky makes it clear that he's intentionally made these letters insufferable to read. The woman's letters were particularly painful, she writes in every little detail about her day (no one needs to know) and in many instances does not actually respond to what she recieves, she just goes on and on about the little things she has done/has to do/has felt/thought about. It actually made me itch. And another clue to the fact that this was deliberate was that after a particularly painful and insufferable letter, they take turns to tell each other to, in short, snap out of it, stop moaning so much, and have some shame. She actually states several times, I suppose, in a way to justify her self absorbed ramblings, that venting it all to him (her interlocutor) is a way for her to relieve her own mind. He doesn't seem to mind (because he is the same, only slightly less self-indulgent), so I suppose she's not necessarily excessively flouting any maxims, but I, the reader, did mind.

The insights on poverty and pride and dignity and how these interact, at this point, nothing new. I did notice and appreciate how much of himself Dostoevsky clearly put into this book (and particularly the feelings the characters have about their impoverished state). There was an underlying feeling of self-consciousness to so much of this book that I could really feel the author's voice coming through.

The Landlady ☆☆☆☆☆
Mr Pokharchin ☆☆☆
Polzunkov ☆☆☆

[Catherine · Rating 3 out of 5]

my second favorite epistolary novel!!! here are my rankings:
1. beautiful world, where are you? by sally rooney
2. this one
3.that's it ive only read those two

[Dr Nick · Rating 3 out of 5]

Every journey begins with a single step someone once said. This unusual piece of prose was Fyodor D's first "novel" and for the record this is the first one of Dostoyevsky I have read in full. I tried the Brothers Karamazov when I was 17 but I was too too young and couldnt get past the first few chapters.

The form of this (pretty short) work is a set of letters between two people - an older man employed as a copyist a fairly low role within the burgeoning Russian civil service and an impoverished young woman once from a relatively privileged background. What is their relationship - well it is familial at a distance they seem to be second cousins but is it more: lovers, future partners?

This chamber piece has limitations - indeed I think about 120 pages is about as far as you can take the forms of two letters between two narrators, unreliable or otherwise. Other novels which use letters usually break down more into a narration of events as a third party or protagonist - Wuthering Heights from memory does this and much more recently White Tiger.

It doesn't help that both characters are very pathetic, in the literal sense of the word, the male Makar is a balding, occasionally heavy drinking, in debted individual. Varenka is an ailing abandoned soul open to abuse and manipulation from richer people. Both lived in cramped penury in the urban setting of St. Petersburg - opposite each other: this is what leads to their communication. So their missives are not full of laughs!

Varenka, almost inevitably, by the end is married off to a brutal landowner who wants to hide her away in the Russian countryside. This leaves Makar devastated in a final sad letter to her he states: "I write only in order to write, only in order to write as much as possible to you". But even this is unusual. One doesnt get the sense that this is a great romantic tryst broken by the needs of feudal society and property - a common theme in 18th/19th Century literature - Jane Austen, the Brontes et al.
Makar is a pretty sad character who never gives a sense of being a romantic partner of Varenka. He continually calls her little mother, for example. He is self indulgent in a very male way in his tone particularly after drinking escapades or trying to borrow money - FD does this brilliantly - subservient to his masters but torn by his very real poverty: not a great catch for Varenka!

So not a doomed love story, definitely not. What it is though , which surprised me, is very contemporary (for its time). It explores the static nature of Russian feudalism - which in a sense both characters are victims of - where everyone has their station from which there is no escape. Everything that happens is because of God's will - nothing can be challenged. What is innovative is that this is done from two "urban" characters rather from the serf's perspective which FD was very pre-occupied with in the 1840s.

Urban landscapes are also central - the crowded nature: people living on top of each other; sharing (unwillingly) their most intimate moments - love and death. Compared to Austen where her romances take place in vast spaces - country estates and houses. The claustrophobia here is palpable.

But also, and perhaps most importantly for the author the work explores contemporary literature. Apparently it is very influenced by Gogol which I have not read, in particular a story called the overcoat. In one very funny communication Makar takes personal offence when Varenka sends him this work to read as he identifies so closely with it - stating "I am going to register a complaint". Pushkin is also central - in a moving piece Varenka writes how in her past she searches for a complete works of Pushkin to buy for her first love (also doomed) but allows the boy's impoverished father to say he bought them. French and English lit also get mentions in passing.

So you could say that this novel is about novels albeit this is not clearly stated - the quote at the beginning of the work talks of the power of fiction. And I suppose in the 19th Century the novel was finding its form - which FD was going to spend his life working on.

Others saw it in other ways - it was thought of as Utopian Socialist - with its vision of poverty and its implied critique of the ruling elite. FD was going to do 5 years hard labour for such thoughts in a short amount of time. I think that is there but its lasting significance comes from its other elements. He was also only 26 when he wrote this an incredible fact in itself.

So a lot in 120 pages! And a good signpost for a future journey through FD's work.

[Eva D. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Dostoevsky's first major independent publication! It's a gem of a series of stories. Poor Folk is absolutely phenomenal -- it's written in the epistolary form, and shows a correspondence between a creepy older man and his mysterious younger relative. Devushkin is obsessed with style, yet aware that he doesn't have any; the result is a series of plagiarized, Frankenstein-ish letters that cannot but cause the readers much mirth. The other three stores are equally phenomenal; the Land Lady is heavily inspired by Gothic writings, Mr. Prokharchin details the story of an insanely self conscious titular counselor, and Polzunkov concludes the literary debacle on a good note...at least, as good a note as Dostoevsky is capable of penning.

[Xinyu Tan · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have to admit that except for Poor Folk, I did not quite understand the rest of the short stories. On one hand, I think I need to improve my appreciation on short stories, which I always have a hard time to understand; on the other hand, from other people's reviews, it seems to me that these stories are indeed in the development phase of Dostoyevsky's work (so it justifies why I have a hard time to appreciate them?).

Even though, I am amazed by how deep Dostoyevsky understood the life when he was 25 (the time he wrote Poor Folk). Not every love story, even the purest and the most noble one, would have a happy ending. Not all of the dreams would come true. Not all of the effort would lead to harvest. This, to me, is like the life I have understand over my PhD life.

[Joshua · Rating 3 out of 5]

Only read Poor Folk, not the other stories.

Suffers from the overly verbose old-work lingo, as to be expected.

I found it very arduous to read. At times, I felt the characters' actions didn't make all that much sense. Some of Devushkin's actions were understandable, but most just weren't. I would have loved for the characters to be more fleshed out in general. Most of the letters read like stand-alone ones, not part of an on-going conversation.

I expected the lows to be drawn-out longer, as the highs are very quickly scattered to the four winds.
Overall very melancholic, but, that too, was to be expected.

But then again, the book very well might have been just too big-brain for me.

[JUDEX]

holy shit

[Caity · Rating 3 out of 5]

I quite enjoyed Poor Folk but the other stories were a little boring.

[Hannah · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really liked Poor Folk, but after reading other short stories of his I feel that this was a more incomplete collection compared to the rest.

[Emma · Rating 3 out of 5]

I picked up this copy just for Poor Folk, which is what I read. I’ll give it a 3.5– the writing is obviously good, and the back-and-forth of the letters gives you just enough story to keep you informed, but also has the mystery of what’s happening in between. I can’t criticize the writing, because Dostoevsky is the master. I can criticize my enjoyment of the story: I had a slightly hard time following all the characters, and was sometimes impatient for the plot to continue (when our letter-writers were waxing poetic or rambling). But, I was delighted by the overlap with “The Overcoat,” and it was so interesting to see Dostoevsky’s take on St. Petersburg in contrast with Tolstoy’s, whose work I’ve read more of. Same city, different worlds!

[Paula · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was told it’d be best to read Dostoyevsky’s short stories first in preparation for his larger works because they have similar themes. Having read Notes from Underground/the Double first I can see the similarities in that he tends to write a lot about some socially awkward, overthinking, downtrodden clerk. This book featured several of them. I liked “Poor Folk” the most out of all the short stories. Overall, each one had beautiful prose and concepts to consider. Still, I didn’t find it nearly as engaging as Notes from Underground. This being Dostoyevsky’s first book though I wasn’t expecting greatness.

TL;DR: Meh🤷🏾‍♀️

[Abs · Rating 2 out of 5]

Truly like needed to hold myself at gunpoint to finish this but ! Mission successful. After reading The Idiot …idk man humble beginnings fr. Made me reaaaally want to stick to the classics. 0.0

[Jessica · Rating 4 out of 5]

I like Devushkin’s transformation

[John Hostetler · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good little book. Maybe my expectations were higher after Crime and Punishment. It was enjoyable and will likely read again someday

[ViAViA · Rating 4 out of 5]

Avg 3.75/story

[David Taylor · Rating 4 out of 5]

Brilliant selection of short stories by renowned Russian writer Fyodor Dostoevsky. A classic author of his genre.
THE first TWO longer stories in particular are well worth the READ 👍👍

[Mykasreads · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Literature is a picture, or rather in a certain sense both a picture and a mirror; it is an expression of emotion, a subtle form of criticism, a didactic lesson, and a document" ⎯ Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Poor Folk.

Poor Folk 5/5 ★★★★★
Poor Folk is undoubtedly my most beloved piece. Within this tale of two impoverished lovers, readers witness the acute oppression imposed upon benevolent citizens by the callous potencies of poverty. Makar Devushkin, a timid lowly copyist, squanders his destitute finances toward sustaining and illuminating the life of his distant relative and love interest, Varvara Dobroselova. Devushkin secretly augments his impoverished suffering throughout the story to provide for Dobroselova, thus, allowing readers to perceive the persistent sacrifices those inflicted with poverty must commit for those they love. However, despite Devushkins unfailing love and surrender for Dobroselova, his star-crossed lover encounters a very different fate, emphasizing the sacrifices and sorrows one must confront to withstand the horrid clasps of poverty.

The Landlady 4/5 ★★★★
The Landlady is a profoundly unique composition, one, in fact, very out of refrain with Dostoyevsky's familiar pieces. This piece is categorized as a gothic fantasy presenting themes prominently found within Eastern European folk tales. While looking for a new place to lodge, Vasily Mikhailovich Ordynov, an eccentric scholar, finds himself developing a deep, obsessive passion for his landlady, Katerina, whom is the alleged wife of Ordynovs landlord. However, Ordynovs landlord is not the mere sickly man he appears to be, as our narrator comes to believe he is a psychotic mystic holding Katerina captive.

Mr Prokharchin & Polzukov 3.3/5 ★★★
These last two stories failed to captivate me. However, I still relished the irony and wit of Mr. Prokharchin, a story unveiling the tale of a poor man who compels pity from all around him yet, in the end, is found to be undeserving of such emotion. In addition, Polzukov, the last story within this collection, also presented an intriguing character study.

[David Arthur Smithers · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is my review of Poor Folk and Other Stories by Fyodor Dostoyevsky (1821-1881) Penguin Books, translated, introduction and notes by David McDuff, 1988. In addition to the epistolary novella, Poor Folk, there are three short stories: The Landlady (1847); Mr. Prokharchin (1846), and Polzunkoy (1847) They are all deeply psychological character studies, with minimal plot action. McDuff highlights, in his introduction, the influence of the French novelist and playwright, Honore de Balzac, 1799-1850, famous for his Human Comedy of eighty novels, examining post Napoleonic life in France (Pere Goriot; Eugenie Grandet). Within these psychological books there is a realism, in the story line, allowing for deeper character study. In fact, translating, Eugenie Grandet led to Dostoyevsky’s Poor Folk, in 1846. David McDuff, of Scotland and educated at Edinburgh, has a large number of publications of foreign verse and prose.
Poor Folk follows the epistolary exchange between an indebted and needy government clerk boarded in one house and his sweetheart in a nearby house, where I believe she is a servant Both, in St. Petersburg. Here is an end of one letter and a few lines of a reply from pages 7 -9 both from April 8:
“Goodbye, my little angel! I have written you nearly two pages, and I ought to have set off for work long ago. I kiss your fingers, little mother, and remain, Your most humble servant and most faithful friend, Makar Devushkin. P.S. I ask you only one thing: please reply to me as fully as possible, my angel. With this letter I am sending you a pound of sweets; so, eat them to your heart’s content, and for heaven’s sake do not worry about me or bear me any ill-will. Well, so goodbye then, little mother.
Makar Alekseyevich, Sir, Do you know that you have at last forced me into a quarrel with you? Upon my word, good Makar Alekseyevich, I find it hard to accept your present. I know what they cost you, what deprivations and denials to yourself of the very necessities of life they involve… Yours, Vavara Dobroselova.”
The translator’s notes that Devushkin is derived from a Russian word for ‘a girl’ and Dobroselova is a name which means ‘good village.’ Even a poor government clerk needs include a girl, and her existence overwhelms his mounting concerns about the state of his coat and boots, and borrowings from work. Even the emperor at one point gives him some money after he had been reprimanded for a gap in in an important document that he copied, and the emperor had noticed the state of his clothes. The girl, as I remember did come from a better life as a happy young girl of some village.
All what the reader knows is from these exchanges of letters, and they reflect that hopes and dreams are crushed by lack of income or wealth. That is the prevailing psychology of poor people.
On the first page of The Landlady, which seems scarcely about her, but her displaced tenant, page 133:
Ordynov had finally summoned up the strength of will to find a new room. His landlady, the very poor, elderly widow of a government clerk, from whom he rented lodgings, had been compelled by unforeseen circumstances to move out of St Petersburg and go and live with relatives somewhere in the wilds—and this she had done without waiting for the first of the month, when his rent was due. As he spent the remaining days in his accustomed refuge, the young man had surveyed it with regret, feeling a sense of vexation at having to abandon it: he was poor, and rented rooms were expensive. The day after his landlady’s departure, he had taken his cap and sat off wandering through the lanes of St Petersburg, studying all the advertisements that were fixed to the gates of the houses, and selecting the darkest, most crowded and most solidly built tenements where there was the greatest likelihood of finding a corner in the room of some poor lodgers.”
He had been living on some small amount of inherited wealth and he desired another nest for his books and his studies of them. But his future threatened lessons on life and people who were tragic themselves. This too will involve a girl, but one attached to another in a relationship of abuse. The nearly one hundred pages is finding another nest, a word used in the translation, and the life of books is given over to dealing with people, and tragic probably was the wrong word: certainly, this is a form of Russian human comedy to mirror Balzac’s examination of the French.
From the story, Mr. Prokharchin, and the translator notes that the name derives from the Russian word meaning ‘grub’, or ‘vittles’. The hero of the story has a condition, deprived of food, and his fate, of it, is in the story:
“In the darkest and most modest corner of Ustinya Fyodorovna’s apartment dwelling lived a man of advancing years, a decent-thinking teetotaler by the name of Semyon Ivanovich Prokharchin… Mr. Prokharchin became her favorite…It should be observed that Ustinya Fyodorovna, a most estimatable and amply proportioned woman, who had an especial liking for fatty foods and coffee and who held out during the fasts only with difficulty, maintained in her household several lodgers who paid twice the rent she charged Semyon…”
Just as Balzac had Pere Goriot set amidst tenants in a rooming house, here we have Dostoyevsky having his Semyon Prokharchin amidst tenants in his rooming house. What we know is from the human comedy of the interactions and psychology.
In Polzunkov is a short tale of a man who seems to be a buffoon who weaves stories. It is a story told in first person by someone who knows the hero:
I began to study the man carefully. Even in his external appearance there was something so peculiar that, no matter how dispersed one’s thoughts might be, one found oneself compelled to rivet one’s gaze on him and immediately burst into the most unrestrained laughter. That is what happened to me. I should note that the eyes of this little gentleman were so mobile, and he himself so much subject to the magnetism of the eyes of others that he seemed to guess by instinct that he was being observed, turned instantly to the observer and nervously analyzed his gaze…”
I really have a feeling of a connection between The Landlady and Polzunkov stories, as pieces of Dostoyevsky’s mind and writing personality, in development. After being a translator, a man studying his books, in his nest, at The Landlady, he is forced into following the reality of human interaction or human comedy around him. And, like, Polzunkov, is one who returns the gaze of others, but with some analytics going on, and stories developed, from the personalities he encounters. The translator characterizes Dostoyevsky as a modernist, perhaps pointing in the direction of Kafka, an ultimate clash between characters and the world developed around those characters, much out of their conscious control and satisfaction.