Brothers Karamazov and Dostoevsky general

im 260 pages in and I feel like the book has been great, all the characters are great
how can you say nothing has happened? you dont consider looking inside the minds of the brothers and the people around them something significant?
are you like those kind of people who complain that "nothing happens" when watching a Tarkovsky movie?
delete yourself my friend

well, by that time he was ridiculed so much that his manifesto lost meaning.

>nothing happens
>muh plot

Go back to the science fiction general.

i've been NEET for just two months, i dont think most NEETs read, they just watch anime and complain on /r9k/ about woman, they are the kind of people who dont read because "lol that doesnt get you any money so is useless, maga"

Try Laurus, then Crime and Punishment, then come back.

did I say that? you're misreading and misinterpreting my comment yet you find it okay to post mocking me.

first helpful post, thank you

>personal
Can't even meme right

You said that you think Dosto is the NEET author after having only read one of his works which is also his shortest. How about you actually read his work and then you can make blanket generalizations about entire groups of people that read him.

It's really not that great. The best thing about it is how memorable and cheekily fleshed the three principal characters are. But honestly it is long and moralizing and grappling with issues of modernity and spiritualism that are dated at best.

I can't speak to the prose itself. I think I probably read the crap translation. My copy was printed in like the 60s and had a golden cover.

None of the NEETs I know read books. A couple of them thinks they do tho, cant fuckin stand them

It doesn't really get momentum until the end of the 2nd act. The whole idea is you're supposed to wonder why the narrator is making such a big deal of every micro-action. The question "why" is the suspense

Of course it's fucking boring. It's just a moralfag moralfagging and lolling around his half assed and trivial piece of unfalsifiable theology / philosophy. People had fuck all to do for entertainment over 100 years ago so they literally thought it was fun. Also most intellectual pursuits were in their infancy so reading it was classed as an intellectual exercise, believe it or not.

Did he realize that you can't actually do any meaningful calculation while playing roulette while writing the gambler? Did i miss one of the points of the story? It seems like he's really writing honestly about roulette strategy. As a compulsive gambler myself the story was good but this part annoyed me

Do you think maybe Dosto's point with the gambler's thinking was connected (if probably unconsciously) to all the different kinds of thinking gamblers engage in so that, for example, they feel more of a sense of agency in a game like roulette that is 99% a game of chance?
While we're at it, how accurate would you say Dosto got the psychology of the gambler? It seemed deeply insightful to me, but maybe you have a closer perspective

Couple of things. First a correction- roulette is a 100% a game of chance, no strategy. It relies upon people thinking that there is a strategy to make money. That being said, i play roulette from time to time just for the thrill and dost absolutely nailed the thrill of the game. Amazing.

Now that I'm thinking about it though, when the main ch wins all the money and closes all the tables he is acting feverishly and eschewing the calculations he had recommended before to the General's aunt. So maybe dost was making fun of roulette players (who are commonly made fun of by poker players with high equity)

Note of interest dost was a roulette addict and lost heaps of money on the game, and the woman he is chasing in the book was based off of one of his flames. Kind of makes the ending seem like wish fullfillment

Brothers Karamazov is the worst Dosto book. It has none of the edge that others had and the bold new points of view he was famous for are not present. It's like a Dosto best hits novel but without the qualities that made his previous works successful.

>Also most intellectual pursuits were in their infancy
This is why Dostoevsky was famous, he wrote about the problems we would face in the world after the death of God. His scenarios are much less profound because we live in the society he could only envision.

Thanks for red pilling me on BK
I was actually enjoying it, shame on me

It's not a bad book and I encourage you to finish it.

Don't listen to that user, you won't get any insight into BK from a small 4can post, let alone from one as shallow as that. It's easy to say "oh it's old and was different for its time" and "oh well he could only imagine the world we actually live in", but the fact is that there are still philosophical ideas and concepts in this 150 year old book that we haven't answered today and that are still applicable and thought provoking in modern times.

If you want to be "red pilled" on BK then I'd suggest reading some actual scholarly articles and essays written by people that have dedicated their lives to studying him as opposed to some Veeky Forums pseud that wants to act like he's above the novel.

Too late already burned my copy
Reading some Jodorowsky poetry as we speak

I agree with what you're saying about chance and roulette. I was holding off from saying 100% chance since I was kind of tongue-in-cheek thinking of 'don't bet on 0/00' as something of a skill, but even that washes out to chance in the long run
The Gambler is one of my favorite works of his, not just because of the subject matter but also the pressures under which it (along with C&P) was written

>Brothers Karamazov is the worst Dosto book
hot take. I see where you're coming from and why, but still

Dont remember exact passage names but,
>Zosima and the stranger
>The Grand Inquisitor
>Odor of Corruption
>Ilyusha
>The Trial
>Mitya in general
>shit talking psychology and medicine
>Ivan and the devil
How do you guys not enjoy any of this? Even if you think his other books or other writers are better, there is plenty to take from BK.

I finished the book recently and regret it. Don't bother, OP.

This is a Hot thread©®

Fucking demap yourself.

What the fuck are these editions anyway? Are they real?

>when zezima dies and stinks the room out
Classic dosto

This.

Also include the chapters leading up to the Grand Inquisitor when Ivan and Alyosha are talking.

Kys OP. Go pleb out and read your John Green books.

That's not the classic part. The classic part is how all of the monks and priests Jew out over it while Alyosha alone finds the truth.

yes

> Tried to impress girl with literature talk a couple weeks ago
> She knows Dostoevsky
> "Hey, me too, he's my favorite!"
> "What's your favorite book"
> "The brothers Kama-...Karazhakov-...Karazam-...Kamazarow"

Fuck me

no

This is me except no one I know has even heard of Dosto.
>Only person I know who reads had never heard of Count of Monte Cristo until I mentioned it

>nothing happened
and I thought criticisms this plebian I'd only find on /tv/

>A couple of them thinks they do tho
What do you mean?

>all these people ITT that feel patrician for reading a bunch of shitty translations

This is pathetic, you should all kill yourselves.

>he feels patrician because he read a book
>unironically

try out hitchhikers guide

You said it based user, just like how this >translations kys b8 pretends to be Beluga caviar from the Caspian Sea when it's just carp eggs from Lake Erie

I kek'd
iktf senpai

should've just said the idiot

/r9k/ was the entire reason Veeky Forums was created you stupid newfag

I don't know, I feel like non-russians/non-slavs don't really appreciate Brothers Karamazov.

Bros Karamazov should be your last Dostoyevsky book, bot your first.
Start from either The Gambler or C&P.

>tfw Russian family and education
>never have problems with long names or cultural terms in Fyodor's books

Im currently reading it and it is my first dosto
Should I call the cops on myself?

idk how far into the book it is, but when the Karamazov family visits father Zosima it was hilarious.

Not that user, but it is kind of nice to read some other of his works before Karamazov since the last work is such a culmination of what came before in his writings. One thing I think would be really interesting would be to read The Double, The Gambler, and The Idiot concurrently with Karamazov to see closely the comparisons with characters similar to brothers Ivan, Dmitri, and Alyosha respectively. That plan probably would be confusing though for someone who hasn't read much of Dostoyevsky before

It's early in the book. It's a remarkable scene, with parallels all the way back to The Double (apropos what I said above) and the point at which I became hooked on the author

karamazov isnt even hard to pronounce
its not like shchebatskaya were you have to know the russian letters to have a clue how to say it

>walking through bookstore with female friend
>see Crime and Punishment
>say "hey I just finished that this week"
>who wrote it?
>one of my favorite authors. Fyodor Dostoyevsky
>she says nothing
>...Dostoyevsky
>she looks at me funny
>Fyodor. Dostoyevsky.
>user why do you keep making that sound at me
>mfw

the whole book was packed with genuinely hilarious scenes.

the gold mines is the funniest chapter of anything i've ever read.

She obviously isn't the one, user.

>girl from my year likes a status on facebook which celebrates Dostoevsky's birthday
>surprised, but happy
>ask her the next day what her favorite book by Dostoevsky is
>"Can you remind me of some stuff he wrote?"
I wish I was making this shit up

>girl from my year
how old are you?

That happened last year, when I was 19.

Hahahahahah

Imagine what it must be like to be friends with this guy.

Don't forget the 'Cana of Galilee' chapter. That chapter is probably one of my favorite chapters in the entire book.

Fuck off. Boards don't stay the same. This isn't an /r9k/ orbit board anymore and no one on /r9k/ reads anymore.