Some interesting comments. Joyce talking about Dostoevsky.
>>24111961
>>24111962
>>24111965And finished.Interesting that Joyce liked Brothers K a lot.
>>24111961blurry, didn't read
>>24111977Nice, dude.
>>24111961so which translation was joyce reading?
>>24112002Probably one of the 19th Century French translations, right? Those were the most in vogue. Keep in mind this conversation is taking place in Paris in the 1920s.
>>24111966Gogol was mad?
>>24112081he died a religious nut so maybe he didn't start mad but by the end he was
>>24111961Is it so difficult to put the book on the table and capture all the pages? Why do you have to do it with one hand and omit parts of the text?
>>24112181Okay, I tried it again. Let me know if this is any better.
>>24112192
>>24112196
>>24111961>>24111962>>24111965>>24111966thanks for sharing this, anonjoyce was based, as opposed to corncob nigger with shit taste
>>24111962If 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.
>>24113807alright man, I think we've all seen this on literally every thread ever that mentions dostoevsky, you can pack it up
>>24111965>>24112081Hamlet was mad?He was just tortured by the knowledge that his father was murdered, and the murderer took his wife and throne. He knows he can't prove this, so is reduced to throwing out vague innuendos that seem unhinged to the other characters.
>>24113807Do you have this on standby somewhere or do you see dostoevskys name and go "oh boy I gotta go find it real quick!"
>>24114153Hamlet was mad. Just look at his treatment of Ophelia.
>>24113807Is this a sexual thing for you? Do you get an erection every time you post this?
Bump
>>24113807lol
