My Bible
What did you do?
>>23540604This book takes heavily from the bible bro...
haven't seen this cover of Demons before
>>23540604It confuses me that such a simplistic dosto novel is the one that gets jacked off, legit dude tbk is the greatest novel ever written, and notes from the underground, demons and the idiot aren't far behind it either, but crime and punishment is barely a hair above a Nietzsche seethe fest
>>23540636Rashkalnikov is Ivan, dimitri, alyosha and smerdyakov all in one character.
>Raskolnikov should have chosen the tsundere maid Nastasya instead of that syphilis whore Sonya
>>23540636Greetings from Kazakhstan
>>23541463They hated her for she spoke the truth.
>>23541463the last paragraph reveals the core of the spiritual malaise of the femoid. the whole time she was reading all she could think was "but what does this SAY ABOUT ME that i'm bored?" that's the only thing that matters. what does this say about me? nothing else existsincidentally more and more men think like this too and there is no hope for them at all
>>23540604P&V's version of Crime and Punishment sucks. Stick with C. Garnett's original masterpiece, not the inferior derivative.
>>23541707P&V being popular was the worst thing to happen to literature in decades.
>>23541707>>23541730Why is it bad? I prefer the Russianisms retained by them. I am not a fan of CG's Anglicized prose.
>>23541834Russian and English are not really languages that can be translated and keep all meaning. Garnett can actually write literary English as opposed to Pevear who can barely string a paragraph together without throwing in some awkward construction that you'd never say in English. Translation requires interpretation but it still needs to flow in the target language and be a readable book - that's why Garnett is the GOAT because she interpreted her overall brief the best.
>>23540636>barely a hair above a Nietzsche seethe fest
>>23542014It's perfectly readable.
>>23540604If you are alluding to Dostoevsky’s worst novels, then, indeed, I dislike intensely The Brothers Karamazov and the ghastly Crime and Punishment rigamarole. No, I do not object to soul-searching and self-revelation, but in those books the soul, and the sins, and the sentimentality, and the journalese, hardly warrant the tedious and muddled search. Dostoyevsky’s lack of taste, his monotonous dealings with persons suffering with pre-Freudian complexes, the way he has of wallowing in the tragic misadventures of human dignity – all this is difficult to admire. I do not like this trick his characters have of ”sinning their way to Jesus” or, as a Russian author, Ivan Bunin, put it more bluntly, ”spilling Jesus all over the place." Crime and Punishment’s plot did not seem as incredibly banal in 1866 when the book was written as it does now when noble prostitutes are apt to be received a little cynically by experienced readers. Dostoyevsky never really got over the influence which the European mystery novel and the sentimental novel made upon him. The sentimental influence implied that kind of conflict he liked—placing virtuous people in pathetic situations and then extracting from these situations the last ounce of pathos. Non-Russian readers do not realize two things: that not all Russians love Dostoevsky as much as Americans do, and that most of those Russians who do, venerate him as a mystic and not as an artist. He was a prophet, a claptrap journalist and a slapdash comedian. I admit that some of his scenes, some of his tremendous farcical rows are extraordinarily amusing. But his sensitive murderers and soulful prostitutes are not to be endured for one moment—by this reader anyway. Dostoyevsky seems to have been chosen by the destiny of Russian letters to become Russia’s greatest playwright, but he took the wrong turning and wrote novels.
