Thoughts?

[Keica]

I'm currently reading this for my AP english lit class, and I'm only about half way through. Up until this point, it's been so hard for me to read! I'll read maybe 20 pages but then have to do something else and come back to it later. The plot is good and it's interesting, but there's just something about it that causes me to now enjoy reading it as much. Is anyone else this way? Also, what are your thoughts after finishing the novel?

[Richard]

The first and last chapters were excellent, the rest was cold porridge and I really didn't enjoy it

The Brothers Karamazov, on the other hand, was much much better

[Evgenia]

Dostoevsky is a very deep author, to understand him, and esp. to love him, i think, one should have like the same signal with him..he is my favourite writer and i can spend hours discussing his works, but lots of my friends dont understand him and think that he is too "heavy"..If i could give colors to his books, i would say that "Crime and Punishment" has a color of wet asphalt, dark grey-blue, deep and dark! But it shows us emotions and feelings of man who committed the worst sin - murder, and punished - the most terrible punishment - this is his most profound spiritual experiences, fear, guilt, danger ... the color of wet asphalt ..
Dostoevsky was a believer he deeply believed in God - After reading his books some people want to become closer to God.
But the main conclusion, which I did for myself after reading - the punishment must come, but the punishment by the state - prison - is nothing compared to the punishment which you will feel within yourself, by your thoughts and feelings. when I tried to put myself in Raskolnikov - and feel that the author wrote - I was filled with the color of wet asphalt..

[[deleted user]]

Since Russian is my first language, I was able to read the original version of the novel. It did take me quite a time, but I did start enjoying it towards the end. Dostoevsky obviously challenges nihilist and nietzschean ideologies, and the mainstream opinion is that the author is trying show how strong conscience can be. However, I tend to believe that Dostoevsky is more focused on his individual character rather than emphasizing a criticism of that time period's philosophies.

[Danielle The Book Huntress]

It took me a while. I hated Raskolnikov at first. I wondered what the point was, and I didn't think a person could be lower down than this character. But then....I just fell into this book and I didn't resurface until I had finished it. What a marvelous and spiritual tale of redemption. Definitely one of my favorites.

[Ignotu]

Heavy contents!
This book is very difficult to get into it but once you are on, you can’t get away! You feel the heavy conscience of Raskolnikov burden in your mind, you feel tired, even subdue by it, but the last page is not yet turn and you’ll be missing him already.
Until now, the best of the best of Dostoyevsky!

[Will]

E.N. wrote: "rather than emphasizing a criticism of that time period's philosophies."

Although he does to a bit of that too :)

[Ignotu]

Will wrote: "E.N. wrote: "rather than emphasizing a criticism of that time period's philosophies."

Although he does to a bit of that too :)"

... I think he does it a lot!

[Marcia]

C&P is a challenge to read, but very much worth it. Try reading aloud. It helps keep you focused. Whenever I have to read difficult work, fiction or nonfiction, including legal cases I have to read for my day job, I find that reading them aloud truly helps.

[Al]

Dostoevsky's characters have so much inner conflict, so much heart and humanity. Personalities taken to the extreme, but still terribly genuine.

Don't worry if your attention wavers at times with Dostoevsky. His stories as a whole do not flow very well, which I feel is Dosto's greatest fault.

[[deleted user]]

Will wrote: "E.N. wrote: "rather than emphasizing a criticism of that time period's philosophies."

Although he does to a bit of that too :)"

I think too many people tend to assume that Dostoevsky's view on human conscience is that it is able to smother any personality in the world. But there is not a single line or implied suggestion in the entire novel in order to actually prove something like that, and that would be too ignorant and hyperbolic for such an author.

I didn't have these assumptions while reading the book, then my mind was kind of pressed to start believing in them (senior AP English class), and then it was too late before I realized that I disagreed with all of my essays on the novel.

Raskolnikov commits the crime and then tries to find redemption morally and legally. Raskolnikov is the one who walks on the verge of becoming insane while being paranoid and scrutinizing unnecessary detail. But a professional serial killer might never even ask a little girl to pray for him. He might even kill the girl, if he's asked to. Why generalize everything?

[Olivia]

I read this book last year for school and I loved it. I love all the depth Dostoevsky incorporates into his writing.

[Lysergius]

Ефим wrote: "Since Russian is my first language, I was able to read the original version of the novel. It did take me quite a time, but I did start enjoying it towards the end. Dostoevsky obviously challenges n..."

What "ideologies" do you suppose Dostoevsky was promoting then?

[[deleted user]]

Lysergius wrote: "Ефим wrote: "Since Russian is my first language, I was able to read the original version of the novel. It did take me quite a time, but I did start enjoying it towards the end. Dostoevsky obviously..."

You clearly didn't read what I wrote.

[Lysergius]

Ефим wrote: "Lysergius wrote: "Ефим wrote: "Since Russian is my first language, I was able to read the original version of the novel. It did take me quite a time, but I did start enjoying it towards the end. Do..."

Oh, but I did, you said "Dostoevsky obviously challenges nihilist and nietzschean ideologies..."

So I could argue that you did not read what I wrote, since there are presumably other ideologies... You mentioned "conscience" does that count as an ideology?

[doug]

Everyone made great points, and this profound work has a depth and breadth that make it an essential work. Beyond that, I remember enjoying the interplay between Raskolnikov and Razumikhin; and the verbal jousting with Porfiry Petrovich.

I took a literature class in college: "Dostoyevsky and Kafka" I was incredibly morose for a whole semester.

[Maria]

Keica wrote: "I'm currently reading this for my AP english lit class, and I'm only about half way through. Up until this point, it's been so hard for me to read! I'll read maybe 20 pages but then have to do some..."

Hello Heica, I read this book only in terms of enjoyment (unlike you, studying), I felt the same way. In my opinion it is a ''heavy'' book to read before you go to sleep! I think that the emotions, the thoughts of this desperate guy (Rashkolnikov), but also the environments that the plot takes place are so intense that you really feel you are a spectator. I enjoyed this book all the 3 times I read it.I reckon that the more severe it becomes, the more the reader wants to go on.Dostoevsky, literally, knew how to illustrate real and tough life.Enjoy!

[Ryan]

Dostoevsky's certainly has interesting ideas, but his prose is so colorless in English. Might be better in Russian, but I don't know. Only read Crime and Punishment. Want to read Brothers Karamazov

[Will]

Ryan wrote: "but his prose is so colorless in English."

Perhaps you just have a poor translation...

[Rick]

I found The Brothers Karamazov much more accessible than Crime and Punbishment but I learned more from Crime and Punishment. One of the themes I came away with from Crime and Punishment was that a person can have an abstract idea that seems justified and reasonable to him, (murder the pawn broker because the world would be better off without her) but when you actually combine an idea with humanity the result can be much different than it was in an abstract form.

[Robert]

What is the best translation?

[Marcia]

Rick - I think you are absolutely right. It is carrying out the grisly details of the act that murderers make their mistakes.

[Abhisek]

I think there is a huge similarity in the thought process of Neitzsche and Dostoevsky...And it is amazing, two people in the same era and in different places, starting to emphasize on the "Will to Power". The difference is that while Neitzsche clearly supports it, Dostoevsky delves on how the will to power can take a dark turn and be unbearable for someone who approves of the idea but doesnt have the will to carry it out, or if he does carry it out, how the incident plagues him because the "will" was merely a "whim".
And the portrayal of the inner ordeals make you think in exactly those lines, get transported there, and it is because of the non use of overt dramatization which many novelists very easily venture into, thus belittling the importance of realism in their works.

[Micko]

Found it the easiest FD to read. Maybe because it wasn't one of the first I experienced. I think it takes a while to get used to his style. The thing I struggle with in his stories are who each character is, especially with all the various long names Russians give each other, formally and informally. Definitely one of the most suffocating, anxious books I've read. Saying that though, The Brothers Karamazov gave me a few panic attacks while reading it.

[Rick]

Micko wrote: "Found it the easiest FD to read. Maybe because it wasn't one of the first I experienced. I think it takes a while to get used to his style. The thing I struggle with in his stories are who each cha..."
I agree about the names. I remember Raskolinikov also being called Rodia by his mother and sister and some of the other characters were addressed by multiple names on top of the fact that a lot of them seemed to sound the same to me. I did a little research and found out that "ovich" as in Romanovich means "son of" or "daughter of". That seemed to add to some of the name confusion for me because it was concatenated with so many of the names that it made them appear similar to.

[Jaye]

I would encourage you to persevere in the way you are doing: in small doses! I found this to be a very heavy read with the subject of depression being dealt with the whole way through. Not one for me ;)

[Tammy]

As a long time reader of a wide variety of books, I was taken aback by this book. I have lost myself in characters and stories repeatedly over the years, but not like I did with this one. It is at once the best book I've ever read and the one I was the happiest to put down when it was over. FD really makes you feel like you are in Rodia's head, he excels at it. When it was over, I was relieved I could leave finally. It's the first time I've ever felt that way , truly an amazing experience to me.

[Will]

Agreed, Tammy. This is the book that started me on my journey through all of Dostoevsky's works. My favorite author hands down.

[William]

I took Crime and Punishment to boot camp and it was confiscated. I didn't get to actually read it until four years later. I was older then and probably appreciated it more than when I was eighteen. This was my kick-start for Dostoevsky. Most of the books are dark and disturbing, however.

[Tammy]

Will wrote: "Agreed, Tammy. This is the book that started me on my journey through all of Dostoevsky's works. My favorite author hands down."

I plan to read to read them all as well, I recently acquired 'The Idiot' and 'The Karamazov Brothers', and am looking forward to starting on them :)

[Kiri]

Sandyboy wrote: "The first and last chapters were excellent, the rest was cold porridge and I really didn't enjoy it

The Brothers Karamazov, on the other hand, was much much better"

That's so odd, I found this to statement to be the exact opposite for me. I had to force myself to get as far in the Brothers Karamzov, and I still ended up not finish the book.

Crime and Punishment had me entertained, though the murder was probably the most interesting part of the book.

[Charlie]

I was going to suggest it might be the translation too, I've just dug out my old copy and it was translated by David McDuff. I read this when I was a teenager and loved it, I fell into a complete bubble and I lived the book for that period, and amazing at it was as others have said it was quite a relief to finish.

I tried it again more recently though when I got a kindle and couldn't get into it at all, it didn't seem like the same book, that was translated by Constance Garnett. I'm not saying McDuff's is the best as these are the only two I've tried, but maybe if you try different versions you'll find one that's more comfortable for you to read. Though I suppose if you're studying it you'll have been told which edition to get.

[Will]

Translations can make or break a book. It's a very good idea to research about which translation is generally recommended over others first.

From what I hear, Pevear&Volokhonsky are the best for Dostoevsky and Tolstoy.

[Rebecca]

I read the Pevear and Volokhonsky and I couldn't put it down.

Constance Garnet writes in a slap-job and very matter of fact way, she might have been better suited to newspapers. I've never managed to finish any of her translations. Apparently she just tried to work through them as fast as possible.

[William]

Still, we owe Constance Garnet a debt of gratitude for introducing so many to Russian literature. Just like with Richard Burton's translation of Arabian Nights, this little Victorian lady was constrained by her time period. The world was just beginning to open up.

[Mauricio]

I read this about 10 years ago and I just remember hating the last chapter. It just seemed so implausible that Raskolnikov, a character I had spent so much time with, would end up so weak and dejected. I wanted him to curse with his last breath society and the State apparatus like Camus'Meursault in The Stranger does. Then again I was reading a lot of Nietzsche and Schopenhauer at the time. I would like to re-read this. I would probably feel different about this ending now. Maybe, maybe not. I mean I know I do not look at Nietzsche the same way I did 10 years ago.

[Kiri]

Mauricio wrote: "I read this about 10 years ago and I just remember hating the last chapter. It just seemed so implausible that Raskolnikov, a character I had spent so much time with, would end up so weak and dejec..."

I read the book fairly recently, and I agree with you about the ending. It seems pretty alien to me that it should have ended the way it did.

[withdrawn]

I am generally a big fan of Dostoevsky but was disappointed in Crime and Punishment. Unlike novels such as The Idiot or Brothers Karamazov, Crime and Punishment has a single focus with a simple message. I think what fans of the book must enjoy is Raskolnikov's anguish. I found this tiring. Kill the old woman and move on. He doesn't move on so he gets caught. Moral: Crime doesn't pay.

Dostoevsky's great novels include a great deal of anguish also but it is more in line with existential angst. They are novels of ideas. Religion and philosophy wrestle for people's souls and minds. This is the Dostoevsky that I came to love.

[Edgaras]

First of all - read it in it's original language - russian.
It's the best book for a human to read.

[Laureen]

I read Crime & Punishment when I was about 20 and it my introduction to literature. It was a long time ago but it made a big impression on me; enough to transform me into a reading nut. I don't like difficult authors like James Joyce so I am having trouble understanding why some people find this novel difficult.

I think it may be the subject matter which is a subject that has always fascinated me - what is conscience; what causes criminal behaviour etc. I liked Brothers Karamazov too which I found more laborious unlike most people seem to.

[Mustafa]

Sandyboy wrote: "The first and last chapters were excellent, the rest was cold porridge and I really didn't enjoy it

The Brothers Karamazov, on the other hand, was much much better"

Exactly what I thought.