4 ms·

I also coincidentally re-read Crime and Punishment a few months ago and was also struck at how differently I saw it today than as a college student. I would be

I also coincidentally re-read Crime and Punishment a few months ago and was also struck at how differently I saw it today than as a college student. I would be interested to understand how you came to the conclusion that he argued for both sides? I saw a scathing repudiation of the socialist utopians of the era (and 'rational' ideologues of all sorts). He 'argued' their sides too, but with the goal of making them appear ridiculous. By the time Raskolnikov's fictional essay about the "extraordinary" comes up, i think it's pretty clear what Dostoyevsky is trying to say. Though that's just my interpretation.

stochastic_monk 9y ago
The fascinating thing about Dostoevsky is that he seems to argue the points he doesn’t believe in better. I walked away from Demons and Brothers Karamazov thinking that the points for atheism were more firmly established than the religious worldview he himself espoused. Yes, the nihilism points were argued to be a point of comparison against, but his aim was didactic in the political realm. He explores this further and more completely in Demons.
- atomic77 9y ago
  Interesting, so you would tend to agree with the parent comment, especially if you hadn't known anything about the author beforehand? It's a great illustration of the range of interpretations possible of any artistic work. I've also read that Demons expands upon many of the ideas in C&P though I had a bit more trouble getting into it. After hearing about these newer translations though I might have to give one a try.
  - stochastic_monk 9y ago
    I do, although [spoiler alert] Raskolnivok’s ultimate spiritual transformation and acceptance of Christianity as his morality, without a rational argument behind it, gives away the author’s prejudice. I see Dostoevsky’s characters as analogous to set theories without the axiom of choice: self-consistent yet incomplete. I even felt empathy for the characters I didn’t like because they still felt human to me. The most unrealistic thing about his writings is that normal conversations don’t have alternating monologues which each go on for pages. Clearly he’s effectively writing inline dueling essays. Demons is a little more work to get into, as it takes longer to get going than C&P, but the payoff is well worth the setup.
    - pmoriarty 9y ago
      "The most unrealistic thing about his writings is that normal conversations don’t have alternating monologues which each go on for pages." Unfortunately, there are way too many people in real life who do talk in monologues and rarely let others get a word in edgewise -- especially if they're drunk, but sometimes even when they're perfectly sober. At least Dostoyevsky's characters have something interesting to say.

stochastic_monk 9y ago

The fascinating thing about Dostoevsky is that he seems to argue the points he doesn’t believe in better. I walked away from Demons and Brothers Karamazov thinking that the points for atheism were more firmly established than the religious worldview he himself espoused. Yes, the nihilism points were argued to be a point of comparison against, but his aim was didactic in the political realm. He explores this further and more completely in Demons.

atomic77 9y ago
Interesting, so you would tend to agree with the parent comment, especially if you hadn't known anything about the author beforehand? It's a great illustration of the range of interpretations possible of any artistic work. I've also read that Demons expands upon many of the ideas in C&P though I had a bit more trouble getting into it. After hearing about these newer translations though I might have to give one a try.
- stochastic_monk 9y ago
  I do, although [spoiler alert] Raskolnivok’s ultimate spiritual transformation and acceptance of Christianity as his morality, without a rational argument behind it, gives away the author’s prejudice. I see Dostoevsky’s characters as analogous to set theories without the axiom of choice: self-consistent yet incomplete. I even felt empathy for the characters I didn’t like because they still felt human to me. The most unrealistic thing about his writings is that normal conversations don’t have alternating monologues which each go on for pages. Clearly he’s effectively writing inline dueling essays. Demons is a little more work to get into, as it takes longer to get going than C&P, but the payoff is well worth the setup.
  - pmoriarty 9y ago
    "The most unrealistic thing about his writings is that normal conversations don’t have alternating monologues which each go on for pages." Unfortunately, there are way too many people in real life who do talk in monologues and rarely let others get a word in edgewise -- especially if they're drunk, but sometimes even when they're perfectly sober. At least Dostoyevsky's characters have something interesting to say.