Ride the Book Trail

R E A D "more than human" by theodore sturgeon for a discussion beginning 31 march 2010 with guest host kate

"after leaving mr. mackensie" by jean rhys for a discussion beginning 31 may 2010 with guest host deja

"when you reach me" by rebecca stead for a discussion beginning 31 july 2010 with guest host KT

"olive kitteridge: a novel in stories" by elizabeth strout for a discussion beginning 30 sept. 2010 with guest host elise

Categories

Archives

the brothers karamazov

here it is. the end of june. have you finished the brothers karamazov? neither have i. but i’m still there. i’m still reading. and gosh darn it, i’m going to finish if it kills me. (which it just might.) here’s our guest host’s review: don’t worry, no spoilers or loosening of important plot points follows. feel free to read and comment no matter how far you got into the heavy thing.

 

I figured we should start our discussion with the introduction because many people may have read this far before the enormity of the task overcame their best intentions to read the entire book. If that is not the case, at least you know where to look for the introduction in the book.

 

I love the introduction to this book because of the many different roles it plays in the story. On the one hand, it gives us a taste of the voice of the narrator unencumbered by the plot and characters. This is particularly valuable in this novel because Dostoevsky often highlights the narrator’s voice in the foreground of his novel. Is the narrator a participant in the story? How does the narrator’s extreme proximity to the events of the story shape the narrative that s/he relates? Is s/he trustworthy? Is s/he one of the named characters in the story? I don’t have good answers to any of these questions, but they make the novel fun to read and reread.

 

On the other hand, the introduction draws particular attention to Alexey Fyodorovich Karamazov (Alyosha) as the ‘hero’ of the novel. If we take this comment at face value, the novel becomes a standard bildungsroman with Alyosha as the central character who passes through moments of spiritual crisis on his way to greater understanding.

 

What sets Brothers apart in my mind is the masterful way in which Dostoevsky engages the big questions from a variety of viewpoints. Dostoevsky’s writing is often noted for its polyphonic nature (a multiplicity of independent voices within a single work), but many times when you pin somebody down and try to get them to tell you exactly what that means, the waffling begins. As I read Brothers this time, I was struck by the variety of themes and voices in the novel. I really felt the richness of his characters as they struggled with the fundamental issues treated in the book (guilt, responsibility, suffering of innocents, family, loyalty, greed, buffoonery, faith). Dostoevsky allows each of his characters to experience and express these themes and allows each to move from the background to the foreground in the words and actions of each of his characters. The best comparison I hav eheard likens Dostoevsky’s style to a symphony―themes emerge in one voice, and are later picked up and developed by another voice in the orchestra. When we encounter the same theme in a different voices, we take something new away from the experience. So it is with reading Dostoevsky.

 

The themes of suffering and responsibility/guilt stood out to me in my reading this time. (Perhaps this is because of the circumstances in which I read the book.) These themes are inextricably linked by the the contradictory phrases that Dostoevsky associates with them in the book . . . On the one hand, “All are guilty (often translated as responsible) for all and for everything.” (все виновны перед всеми и за все) but at the same time, “All is permissible.” These statements seem to be at opposite ends of the spectrum in the first sections of the book, representing the wide range of philosophies embraced by the members of the Karamazov family. Throughout the course of the novel, these ideologies charge towards each other, finally colliding in the climactic episode of the story (though we do not see them collide until long after the ‘climactic’ event has taken place). Again, Dostoevsky’s narrator leaves it to his ‘hero’ Alyosha to sort things out after the conflict passes.

 

There is so much more to write about this book, but I have a widget installed that uses an algorithm built on the length of a post, the number of multi-syllabic words and the frequency of semi-obscure literary references to warn the would be blogger if readers will make it through a given post. Said widget informs me that my time is up

 

I am curious to hear your responses. I would love to discuss the points that you find interesting. I would love to hear that anybody else read this book.

our guest host, spencer is (almost) ABD for his PhD in arabic language and literature and lives in jordan (the country) where he enjoys the best chocolate milk in the universe.

5 comments to the brothers karamazov

  • justin

    I’m not sure that the narrator really plays an important part in the plot. I feel like Dostoevsky was using him to make the novel seem more personal. As opposed to Tolstoy or other novelists, Dostoevsky’s narrations have an element of human error in them that make his stories more down to earth. The omniscient narrator is never really favored with Dostoevsky.

    I was rereading this time as well and I was also impressed with the dichotomies that Doestoevsky tackles so effortlessly, often pitting two rivals against each other in gripping dialogue. Often he explains rival opinions in amusing ways, like with Kolya. I really admire his ability to see both sides of an issue. He was a devout Christian, I think, but you can see his own journey to find faith in God through Ivan especially. It’s interesting to compare the treatment that he gives to Ivan’s ideas, and then to Kolya’s.

    At the end, Aloysha is obviously made to be a Christ figure. I was thinking maybe Kolya was made to be like Peter, impulsive and impetuous. Were there any more parallels to the primitive church that people noticed?

  • jes

    well. it’s tough to get your foot in this discussion, what with everyone clamoring to share their opinion.

    i just walked over to the bookcase and pulled off my copy. [it would be embarrassing to admit how many times i've renewed this tome from the library.]

    here’s the truth: i read 53 whopping pages of the brothers. [but, if you include the unnumbered introduction, it should shove that number into the 60s.]

    first, i have to say, in response to spencer, that i found the introduction fascinating, but i do wonder about its effect in terms of conditioning us to respond to the novel and its characters in certain ways, i.e. alyosha as the hero, the narrator as unreliable. i wonder how our perception/reception of the novel alters once we have an “expert” telling us how to understand it. has anyone done any research on this? dissertation topic, perhaps?

    and to justin, it’s interesting to me that you find dostoevsky’s use of a narrator to make the novel more “down to earth” than tolstoy’s. if given the choice, i would rather read tolstoy than dostoevsky. maybe it’s a function of reading translations (spencer?) but i feel like i have to pick my way through dostoevsky’s sentences while tolstoy’s novels seem to have more forward momentum. [does that make me sound uneducated? is it pathetic to like tolstoy more?]

    in any case, i have a few ideas for why this book was so difficult for me to approach. [i haven't actually read a novel in a few months--scandalous.] anyone else have any ideas for why they were too intimidated to attack it? is it the length? the russian-ness?

    or [don't admit it] do you just not like me and my book club anymore?

  • Well, I have to admit now (better late than never) that I’ve tried this book in the past and didn’t get through it. You can see my notation here:

    http://www.katejonuska.com/2006/03/15/the-brothers-karamozov-fyodor-dostoevky/

    Frankly, I didn’t have the time or energy to try it again, although it is still on my lifetime to-read list. Sigh.

  • joel

    at my age, i have an advantage. i read the whole book some time ago (at justin’s urging), and it was easy. you just have to ride the bus. now, back to the advantage: i can’t remember any of it, but i had a good time while i was there…

  • karina

    So, I guess since I was supposed to be the guest host this month I should say something about the book.

    I had a really tough time initially. I didn’t like it. I didn’t enjoy the characters. I hated the monastery. I felt like it would never end. Spencer kept encouraging me to keep going. I have to say, once they left the monastery it got better. Then the whole grand inquisitor part got me off track. Then all of a sudden (somewhere around page 275) I was hooked. I liked it. I could read it without long sighs. When I looked around the room for a book to grab on my way out I considered grabbing the Brothers.

    Now I’m on page 545, on track to finish this month, and loving it. Keep going. It’s worth it.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>