5 ms·

I read Crime and Punishment for the first time recently. found it quite boring and with limited meaning. but I am a 40 year old man and understood the concept

I read Crime and Punishment for the first time recently. found it quite boring and with limited meaning. but I am a 40 year old man and understood the concepts the book was introducing a long time ago. I feel like with the advent of the internet, shocking concepts/ideas are hard to come by. I'm sure ideas in the book were provocative "back then," but nowadays, not so much. I even watched some lectures on youtube discussing the book, which brought to light a thing or two, but still nothing of significance for me.

m0zg 7y ago
That's probably because you've read it in English. For the life of me I don't get why non-Russian people read Russian classical literature. Just don't. It is true that there aren't really any Western authors of the same stature as Dostoevsky or Tolstoy, but really, you aren't really reading what they wrote. Their work requires quite a bit of thought, and that thought requires quite a bit built-in stuff that a native wouldn't even notice. 30% of the meaning is not there because you don't have the same cultural background. Another 15-20% is lost in translation. What remains is still formidable, but nowhere near as good as the original work. I happen to also have recently re-read Crime and Punishment, but in my native Russian, after a gap of some 25 years. I've found it very vivid, engaging, and full of nuance I just wasn't even able see when I was a teenager. Likewise I have fairly recently re-read War and Peace, and it is now my favorite book of all time. When I was much younger it seemed "too long" and extremely boring, because it requires quite a bit of lived experience to fully appreciate, and not just any experience, but experience that only someone who has lived in Russia for an extended period of time (not necessarily originally Russian) would have. Really fundamental, basic things, which Americans just can't even begin to understand. I.e. how the government is perceived there (hint: Tsar-like figure is still perceived as a desirable thing), what it means to have a land war on your soil (Russia had many, some extremely devastating), Russian ideas about patriotism, yet at the same not liking how they do things over there, Russian fatalism, how women are perceived by men and the other way around, etc, etc. Having spent 20+ years in the US and having traveled quite a bit, I've recently read The Grapes of Wrath. I liked the book, and the use of language in it (it almost reads like poetry at times), but I very strongly suspect I didn't quite "get" it to the extent that an American would, for the same reasons I alluded to above. And I have vastly more "American" lived experience than most Americans have "Russian".
- p1esk 7y ago
  I disagree. War and Peace was written 150 years ago and depicts events happening over 200 years ago - the difference between that society and the one you grew up in is far greater than the difference between modern Russia and modern US. Just to give one example (ironic in this context): the language usually spoken by most characters is not Russian, it’s French! Something like 5% of the novel is literally in French, and has to be translated for modern Russians (French was the “official” language of Russian nobility 200 years ago).
  - varjag 7y ago
    Exactly. There are more footnotes than in New English Bible.
  - kiriakasis 7y ago
    The surface can be very similar, but they are foundationally different, that will not change soon
    - p1esk 7y ago
      What is "foundationally" different?
- jacquesm 7y ago
  > For the life of me I don't get why non-Russian people read Russian classical literature. > What remains is still formidable I think you answered your own question there. As for the rest of your comment, yes, someone without the cultural background will miss something. But the same goes for those not born in the same age, those of a different gender than the author, those of a different social standing and so on. There is always a mismatch between author and reader, the better the author the better they are able to compensate for that mismatch and the more the reader will get. Reading an ancient and translated text is going to have those problems in spades and it can still be very much worthwhile to read them anyway, as long as you recognize the gap between you and the author. In my own experience reading of books from different cultures and times, even in translation, is one of the most enriching things you can do short of traveling, and what with the physical limitations on time travel in some cases it is the only way in which we can experience the products of other cultures simply because they are no longer there.
p1esk 7y ago
Actually... (sorry, couldn’t resist), I’m not sure why you expected something shocking or even provocative. The book is a deep dive into the mind of someone who decides to commit a murder, does it, and then has to live with it. That someone happens to be a relatively normal guy who you can understand and even relate to. At least that was my impression of the book when I read it 25 years ago (I was 16 at the time).
- Arnt 7y ago
  That was shocking at the time the book was written. The murderer was supposed to be an Other, not someone you can relate to. The book was shocking because it made the reader feel the murderer's dilemmas. See his rationales, such as they were. I have the impression that the book has kept a part of its old reputation, even as the world has changed and it would never get that reputation in today's world.

m0zg 7y ago

That's probably because you've read it in English. For the life of me I don't get why non-Russian people read Russian classical literature. Just don't. It is true that there aren't really any Western authors of the same stature as Dostoevsky or Tolstoy, but really, you aren't really reading what they wrote. Their work requires quite a bit of thought, and that thought requires quite a bit built-in stuff that a native wouldn't even notice. 30% of the meaning is not there because you don't have the same cultural background. Another 15-20% is lost in translation. What remains is still formidable, but nowhere near as good as the original work. I happen to also have recently re-read Crime and Punishment, but in my native Russian, after a gap of some 25 years. I've found it very vivid, engaging, and full of nuance I just wasn't even able see when I was a teenager. Likewise I have fairly recently re-read War and Peace, and it is now my favorite book of all time. When I was much younger it seemed "too long" and extremely boring, because it requires quite a bit of lived experience to fully appreciate, and not just any experience, but experience that only someone who has lived in Russia for an extended period of time (not necessarily originally Russian) would have. Really fundamental, basic things, which Americans just can't even begin to understand. I.e. how the government is perceived there (hint: Tsar-like figure is still perceived as a desirable thing), what it means to have a land war on your soil (Russia had many, some extremely devastating), Russian ideas about patriotism, yet at the same not liking how they do things over there, Russian fatalism, how women are perceived by men and the other way around, etc, etc. Having spent 20+ years in the US and having traveled quite a bit, I've recently read The Grapes of Wrath. I liked the book, and the use of language in it (it almost reads like poetry at times), but I very strongly suspect I didn't quite "get" it to the extent that an American would, for the same reasons I alluded to above. And I have vastly more "American" lived experience than most Americans have "Russian".

p1esk 7y ago
I disagree. War and Peace was written 150 years ago and depicts events happening over 200 years ago - the difference between that society and the one you grew up in is far greater than the difference between modern Russia and modern US. Just to give one example (ironic in this context): the language usually spoken by most characters is not Russian, it’s French! Something like 5% of the novel is literally in French, and has to be translated for modern Russians (French was the “official” language of Russian nobility 200 years ago).
- varjag 7y ago
  Exactly. There are more footnotes than in New English Bible.
- kiriakasis 7y ago
  The surface can be very similar, but they are foundationally different, that will not change soon
  - p1esk 7y ago
    What is "foundationally" different?
jacquesm 7y ago
> For the life of me I don't get why non-Russian people read Russian classical literature. > What remains is still formidable I think you answered your own question there. As for the rest of your comment, yes, someone without the cultural background will miss something. But the same goes for those not born in the same age, those of a different gender than the author, those of a different social standing and so on. There is always a mismatch between author and reader, the better the author the better they are able to compensate for that mismatch and the more the reader will get. Reading an ancient and translated text is going to have those problems in spades and it can still be very much worthwhile to read them anyway, as long as you recognize the gap between you and the author. In my own experience reading of books from different cultures and times, even in translation, is one of the most enriching things you can do short of traveling, and what with the physical limitations on time travel in some cases it is the only way in which we can experience the products of other cultures simply because they are no longer there.

p1esk 7y ago

Actually... (sorry, couldn’t resist), I’m not sure why you expected something shocking or even provocative. The book is a deep dive into the mind of someone who decides to commit a murder, does it, and then has to live with it. That someone happens to be a relatively normal guy who you can understand and even relate to. At least that was my impression of the book when I read it 25 years ago (I was 16 at the time).

Arnt 7y ago
That was shocking at the time the book was written. The murderer was supposed to be an Other, not someone you can relate to. The book was shocking because it made the reader feel the murderer's dilemmas. See his rationales, such as they were. I have the impression that the book has kept a part of its old reputation, even as the world has changed and it would never get that reputation in today's world.