Fyodor Dostoevsky

[Belisarius]

what do you think about this man? on the one hand he was a nationalist, a gambler and a hardcore christian, but on the other hand his novels are masterpieces. his take on e.g. exploitation in "crime and punishment" (Luzhin is a capitalist par exellence), or existential themes (guilt and depression in "crime and punishment", or freedom and suffering in "notes from the underground") are just divine. he is my personal favourite, but what do you think of him?

[Rjevan]

Dostoevsky's christianity, Russian chauvinism and personal and political views are of course most reactionary and a shame but nevertheless his novels are indeed masterpieces! The character's psyche and the characters themselves are drawn perfectly and complex, the dialoges are great, the plots are interesting and well-thought, some philosophical question brought up (especially Raskolnikov's "great men" theory, Ivan Karamazov's atheism and Kirilov's "free will through suicide"-theory in "The Possessed") are most interesting and well-thought. I really have a hard time saying which one of his novels I like best, probably "The Possessed" or "Crime and Punishment", though I haven't read "The Gambler" out of the list of his five greatest masterpieces.

So like you I have to say that I am disgusted by Dostoevsky's policies but absolutely love his novels, definitely one of the greatest authors who ever lived and ranging on one of the top places in my personal favourite author ranking list!

[Soviet]

"A great writer and a great reactionary"(Stalin)

[Belisarius]

Dostoevsky's christianity, Russian chauvinism and personal and political views are of course most reactionary and a shame but nevertheless his novels are indeed masterpieces! The character's psyche and the characters themselves are drawn perfectly and complex, the dialoges are great, the plots are interesting and well-thought, some philosophical question brought up (especially Raskolnikov's "great men" theory, Ivan Karamazov's atheism and Kirilov's "free will through suicide"-theory in "The Possessed") are most interesting and well-thought. I really have a hard time saying which one of his novels I like best, probably "The Possessed" or "Crime and Punishment", though I haven't read "The Gambler" out of the list of his five greatest masterpieces.

So like you I have to say that I am disgusted by Dostoevsky's policies but absolutely love his novels, definitely one of the greatest authors who ever lived and ranging on one of the top places in my personal favourite author ranking list!
i'm reading the gambler right now, but i've only just started. i'll tell you more when i've finished it.

[Belisarius]

i already told that i'm reading "the gambler". i found a very interesting quote. dostoevsky her defines capitalism in a nutshell:

"To the German method of heaping up riches. I have not been here very long, but I can tell you that what I have seen and verified makes my Tartar blood boil. Good Lord! I wish for no virtues of that kind. Yesterday I went for a walk of about ten versts; and, everywhere I found that things were even as we read of them in good German picture-books—that every house has its 'Fater,' who is horribly beneficent and extraordinarily honourable. So honourable is he that it is dreadful to have anything to do with him; and I cannot bear people of that sort. Each such 'Fater' has his family, and in the evenings they read improving books aloud. Over their roof-trees there murmur elms and chestnuts; the sun has sunk to his rest; a stork is roosting on the gable; and all is beautifully poetic and touching. Do not be angry, General. Let me tell you something that is even more touching than that. I can remember how, of an evening, my own father, now dead, used to sit under the lime trees in his little garden, and to read books aloud to myself and my mother. Yes, I know how things ought to be done. Yet every German family is bound to slavery and to submission to its 'Fater.' They work like oxen, and amass wealth like Jews. Suppose the 'Fater' has put by a certain number of gulden which he hands over to his eldest son, in order that the said son may acquire a trade or a small plot of land. Well, one result is to deprive the daughter of a dowry, and so leave her among the unwedded. For the same reason, the parents will have to sell the younger son into bondage or the ranks of the army, in order that he may earn more towards the family capital. Yes, such things ARE done, for I have been making inquiries on the subject. It is all done out of sheer rectitude—out of a rectitude which is magnified to the point of the younger son believing that he has been RIGHTLY sold, and that it is simply idyllic for the victim to rejoice when he is made over into pledge. What more have I to tell? Well, this—that matters bear just as hardly upon the eldest son. Perhaps he has his Gretchen to whom his heart is bound; but he cannot marry her, for the reason that he has not yet amassed sufficient gulden. So, the pair wait on in a mood of sincere and virtuous expectation, and smilingly deposit themselves in pawn the while. Gretchen's cheeks grow sunken, and she begins to wither; until at last, after some twenty years, their substance has multiplied, and sufficient gulden have been honourably and virtuously accumulated. Then the 'Fater' blesses his forty-year-old heir and the thirty-five-year-old Gretchen with the sunken bosom and the scarlet nose; after which he bursts, into tears, reads the pair a lesson on morality, and dies. In turn the eldest son becomes a virtuous 'Fater,' and the old story begins again. In fifty or sixty years' time the grandson of the original 'Fater' will have amassed a considerable sum; and that sum he will hand over to, his son, and the latter to HIS son, and so on for several generations; until at length there will issue a Baron Rothschild, or a 'Hoppe and Company,' or the devil knows what! Is it not a beautiful spectacle—the spectacle of a century or two of inherited labour, patience, intellect, rectitude, character, perseverance, and calculation, with a stork sitting on the roof above it all? What is more; they think there can never be anything better than this; wherefore, from their point of view they begin to judge the rest of the world, and to censure all who are at fault—that is to say, who are not exactly like themselves. Yes, there you have it in a nutshell. For my own part, I would rather grow fat after the Russian manner, or squander my whole substance at roulette. I have no wish to be 'Hoppe and Company' at the end of five generations. I want the money for MYSELF, for in no way do I look upon my personality as necessary to, or meet to be given over to, capital. I may be wrong, but there you have it. Those are MY views."

[btpound]

A lot of great artists and writers have really fucked up politics. Dostoevsky was a nationalist. T. S. Elliot was a monarchist, who was born in America and moved to Britian to support the monarchy. Salvidor Dali was a fascist. I think you can love the creation and not the creator.

[narcomprom]

If we want to pidgeonhole Dostoyevky, we'll have to split him up into three people:
I. the young socialist until he's sent to a punitive colony in the siberian woods
II. to return as an apolitical psychonaut roughly resembling eta hoffmann
III. and finally, after crime and punishment, we have our Christian romancier.

The only thing I like about him are the thoughts and utterings of his heroes. They're convincing. But their deeds seem utterly random and the plot (we're speaking of Dostoyesky III.) is always the same: we have our western style rationalist coming through sin to redeption in insanity or labour camp or suicide while the meek simpleton turns out to be right.

[DecDoom]

Salvidor Dali was a fascist.

Shit, really? He was one of my favorite artists! :(

[Liberateeducate]

I just got crime and punishment and the idiot today both for 50 cents!

[btpound]

Shit, really? He was one of my favorite artists! :(

My city has a Dali Museum. :thumbup1: