Rating: 
Summary: There's no such thing as a great novel
Review: While cultural pundits try to convince you that some literature is better than other literature, the truth is that all art is relative to individial tastes. Thus, it doesn't make any sense to think that a novel like this one is really any better than say, Michael Crichton or Stephen King. Aesthetic standards can't be grounded.Thus, don't listen to anyone who tries to distinguish between "serious" works of literature like this one and allegedly "lesser" novels. The distinction is entirely illusory, because no novels are "better" than any others, and the concept of a "great novel" is an intellectual hoax.
Rating: 
Summary: Who Killed the Father?
Review: You won't know for a long, long time which of his 4 sons comitted the parricide, but everything is revealed and explained in the end. I know people who have begun this book but not been able to finish it because of its turgid, over-long quality. The plot is okay, but way too slow and drawn-out, way too padded out with unnecessary philosophical and theological dialogue that distracts you from the storyline and adds little to it. Read "Crime and Punishment" instead, it's more gripping and much more compactly written, a far more engaging murder novel by the same indisputable master. David Rehak
author of "A Young Girl's Crimes"
Rating: 
Summary: Yes it is good
Review: The philosophy and all that stuff is the best part. The actual plot is kinda slow at first. I must admit the mystery was better than I expected. The Grand Inquisitor is the most thought provoking part, along with the Monk section. Almost as good as War and Peace. Alessandro Manzoni's The Betrothed is a good companion to these two. All these authors are not just good novelists. They make us think and reflect on our own lives and actions.
Rating:
Summary: One thousand pages of raw literary whoopass.
Review: There are some achievements so staggering that it is difficult to believe their conception by an unaltered human brain. In The Brothers Karamazov, Dostoevsky showcases the end result of a life of writing: the outcome is a psychological (although I'm sure the author would despise such a word) portrayal of nearly every citizen of a small town in Russia. Dostoevsky might seem dated to some, but over the course of reading this book it may become evident that many of the characters "are people you know". In my opinion the author's greatest skill was in articulating the irksome tendencies of people of every variety: clearly he didn't much like people as individuals, although he may have liked them as a whole. Certain characters will annoy you by their very existence, and these are the ones that make the book worth reading. You know these characters because they represent parts of who you are or were at one time, and reading this book will make you aware of what you want to be and do with your life (or more likely NOT be) and provide a revealing (and fun!) insight into the people around you. The book is spectacularly beautiful in all of its aspects. This is one I will have to read again, when I'm less of a Kolya Krasotkin...
Rating:
Summary: Dostoevsky digs deep...
Review: The finest fiction ever written? Some would say so. There is a great deal of philosophical argument and psychological investigation in these great, rambling discourses. There is mystery, murder, intrigue, obsession, romantic entanglement, and courtroom drama. But first, of the drudgery...
Ya ne govoryu po russki... Alexei is Alyosha is Lyoshechka. Ivan is Vanechka. Dmitri is Mitya is Mitka is Mitenka. Agrafena Alexandrovna is Grushenka is Grusha. The elder Zosima is rather a saint. Not only because of his patience, humility, gentleness, and refusal to judge others, but because we must know him only by this one name! Perhaps it's not all that bad, by the time you are, say, 400 pages into our story (about half way through), you will have made your peace with such nuances. Some readers will be troubled by the length of sentences and of paragraphs, typically sentences may contain 6 to 12 commas, they're huge. The exclamatory devices in many dialogues seem [to this reader] to be 'over the top', so to speak, as if Dostoevsky, in his mind's eye, was seeing his story played-out on stage. Perhaps this is just my ignorant perspective.
Enough detraction. The Brothers Karamazov is said to be a master's masterpiece. I will not argue, in this regard, with those who know such things far better than I. Dostoevsky digs deep into the psyche of his central characters, and sometimes the peripheral characters as well. Perhaps more so than any other great novelist. Each of these characters becomes startlingly complex (in many cases we might even say schizophrenic). For example, we meet a monk known for his resolute silence, who suddenly just won't shut-up. Of the Karamazov's, Fyodor and Dmitri are pathological slaves to their self-focused passions, although in Dmitri we come to find a surprising glimmer of possibility. (If you are close to someone terribly like Fyodor, you have my sympathy). The restrained and calculating Ivan is hardheaded and hard-hearted, and to his own demise, his calculating is rather blinded by his over confidence and sense of his own intelligence. The spiritual pilgrim, Alexei -- gentle, humble, careful, encouraging, and in a sense fearless -- is the author's hero, is everyone's rock in the storm, seems burdened only by other's burdens.
Apart from the author's ability to plumb the depths of the human soul, this reader was surprised at the sophistication and integrity of the Russian legal and judicial processes in the 1870's. I won't disclose the story any further except to note that Dostoevsky intended to further examine his characters in subsequent volumes, but died somewhat suddenly preparing this work for publication.
In its philosophic and psychological aspects, this book remains insightful and relevant. Dostoevsky modestly considered himself a dabbler in philosophy. But who isn't? Philosophy is, after all, the love of thought, not the perfect mastery of it, and Dostoevsky emerges as a thinker of greater stature than he conceived himself. He is often included in the 'short list' of great moral philosophers (with Plato and Kierkegaard, for example), and of the great existentialists (with Kierkegaard and Nietzsche).
Rating:
Summary: The best book ever written
Review: Although Alyosha is purported to be the hero, the majority of the book is concerned with the wildly passionate eldest son Dmitry. Dmitry Karamazov may be the most brilliantly evinced, striking, and sympathetic character ever created. The elder Zosima is also wonderful, and the chapters which recall his life are some of the most beautiful in the book. Here is a true portrait of a holy man. The 'Heartbreak' chapters are truly heartbreaking, stirring more pity in me than has ever been effected by a fictional unfortunate. Perhaps my only regret is that Alyosha mentions off-hand at one point that he may not really believe in God, and never goes on to explore his disbelief. But, perhaps that's as it should be. I don't know.
Ivan is never so sympathetic as when he is enumerating the horrors of existence, particularly the tossing by soldiers of babies up into the air and caught on bayonets. He goes on to say that no future heaven, no deeper truth, however beautiful, however profound, could ever excuse the sufferings of one little girl beaten and crying, locked in an outhouse. This is the great objection to God and Dostoievsky is at pains to refute it, or forget it altogether.
Suffice it to say that upon reaching the end of this labrynthian juggernaut i was no more enlightened than when i began, but i had never felt so understood in my life. And that itself was the greatest of consolations. A great read.
Also recommended:
Ressurrection by Leo Tolstoy (The Vera Traill translation)
Rating:
Summary: A reminder of the great genius of man.
Review: The Brothers Karamazov is one of the greatest novels ever written. It is a book not simply to be read, but to be studied, discussed, and loved. I am reviewing the hard cover edition and recommend that anyone who buys this book purchase the highest quality edition possible. One reading will not suffice and the second reading will repay the reader who now knows the story and searches for the lessons to be learned from patient study. The brothers could not be more unlike. Dmitry, the hothead who acts first and then learns to repent later for all his misdeeds, is everyman and is the most easy to identify with, at least for me. He is filled with anger and resentment and hurts deeply the people he loves most. He is the prodigal son who repents too late to be forgiven by a father he dispises. Ivan, the intellectual, lives in a world of ideas, but the action which springs from those ideas is repellant to him. He needs most to repent, but his proud spirit prevents him from learning that humility is needed to live a full and rewarding life. He is Lucifer who falls from grace. Like Lucifer, Ivan's hubris prevents him from seeking redemption. Alyosha is the person we would all be if we had the strength to correspond to God's grace, freely given, but dependant on self-denial and a willingness to serve others. Like Prince Myshkin in The Idiot, another great novel by Dostoyevsky, he is an example of a good man, a modern day St. Francis of Assisi, who imitates Christ and appears, for that reason, childlike and unable to confront the evil of this world. He does not love his life in this world and is not afraid of losing it. This brief review does not even scratch the surface. Those readers who want to know more about this great book will find many fine critiques to help deepen their understanding of Dostoyevsky's intent with this novel. Yet it is not necessary to be a scholar to enjoy The Brothers Karamazov. The reader who patiently bides his time as we are introduced to the main themes of the novel -- the duty we have to honor our parents, even when,like Old Karamazov, they are almost impossible to love, the courage to live by faith when faith seems to be an absurdity, the willingness to live according to the truth when the crowd makes such a stand seemingly impossible -- will be rewarded with a story that involves us completely in the lives of a cast of characters which represent all aspects of the human condition. The hardcover edition will take its place proudly beside the best novels in any person's library and will be taken down from time to time from the shelf, if not to be completely reread, at least to be reminded of the great genius of man.
Rating: 
Summary: In His Element
Review: Fyodor Dostoevsky's final novel, "The Brothers Karamazov" is at the surface a story of overwhelming passion and what a poor upbringing can drive a man to. Dostoevsky's universally regarded masterpiece is not a novel that can be taken at the surface. Truly what this novel about is the struggle that exists in all people from a very early age between the various aspects of our human nature. It is not contradictory to say that human nature consists of both sinful acts of depravity and glorious acts of self-sacrifice. Dostoevsky believed that we each hold within ourselves the ability to undertake both acts of justice and injustice, honesty and deceit, and good and evil. Each of the brothers of his novel represents those seemingly mutually exclusive sides of our natures. The main character of the story, or at least of the narrator's attention, is Alyosha. He is the youngest (perhaps) of the Karamazov brothers. Alyosha represents the goodness and spirituality of humanity. Ivan, the middle brother, represents the intellectual sceptic that seeks for reason and lashes out when he finds only illogic. Dmitri, the oldest brother and Alyosha and Ivan's half-brother, represents the animal passion and depravity to which man can succumb to satisfy his desires. Here, in these representative characters, resides "The Brothers Karamazov"'s strongest and weakest points. This novel cannot be read like a typical story. If you do so, you will find yourself not believing that any irrational person would act as these characters do, let alone a rational one. Even the supporting characters go through fits of ecstasy and despair that would be the hallmark of an unbalanced person in real society. Dostoevsky has also included some characters and plot points (e.g. Liza and her betrothal to Alyosha) that really do not add much and have the feeling that he meant to do something with them but they never really amounted to much. Dostoevsky is at his best when he is exploring the inner workings of the mind. The best scene in the book is Ivan's conversation with the Devil. Towards the end Ivan begins to suffer from a case of 'brain fever'. In his delirium he begins to have halucinations of Satan himself and carries on conversations with him when he's alone. This and Ivan's telling of his poema 'The Grand Inquisitor' are the shining gems of "The Brothers Karamazov". This is certainly a tough novel to get through. Not for any particularly dull sections of the story but because you may find far too much of yourself in the characters in the story who are deemed the most depraved. Not only that but Dostoevsky takes a decidedly dim view of the one character I most identified with in the entire story, Ivan. This is perhaps Dostoevsky's religiosity coming through as Ivan is the only one of the main characters in the story who really questions the existence of God. Given Dostoevsky's belief in God and the Orthodox religion, it is rather logical that he would be more inclined to show in a better light the depraved sinner who believes (Dmitri) than the sceptic (Ivan).
Rating:
Summary: Transcendent.
Review: These Russians really know how to tackle the big issues in literature. I started with Solzenitsyn's Day in the Life, then did War and Peace, then Crime and Punishment, and most recently, The Brothers Karamazov, and I have to say that I am much the better for reading these books. Phew, I thought War and Peace was good (and it was), but the Brothers Karamazov locks horns with the problems we face as human beings, wrestles them to the ground, exposes us for the weak, sinful things that we are, then gives us hope. Principally (to me, anyhow), the novel was about the problem of overthrown authority. God and the church were starting to be questioned as the ultimate authority, and the air in Russia at the time was begining to move towards reform, begining to become modern. Its themes are just as relevant today as they were for Dostoyevsky's time, and there are several passages in "The Russian Monk" chapter that were profoundly prophetic of the problems of modern society- if you replace some words with modern equivelents you have a very good picture of the USA today. Isolation of the individual, invented needs, the problem of freedom- these are some of the things Dostoyevsky tries to tackle. Several chapters are masterpieces enclosed within the work itself, 'Pro and Contra,' 'A Little Demon,' 'The Russian Monk' the chapter where Mrs Kholaklova (spelling) professes her lack of faith to the Elder Zosima, the chapter that focuses on the relationship between Snegiyrov and Illyushin, his son, showing how children lose their innocence and become indoctrinated into this harsh adult world- with bad consequences when violence is present. And of course, there is the 'Grand Inquisitor' chapter. Wow. WOW. Had to read that three times before I think I got everything in it, but I think if every human being on Earth read 'The Grand Inquisitor' 'The Russian Monk' and then 'The Speech at the Stone' we would all be very much the better for it. eh, just read the whole thing while you're at it. Dostoyevsky's conclusion seems to be that faith will be the ultimate healing salve for all humanity- once everybody realizes the stupidity of everything other then selfless, active love, we shall all move forward and life shall be paradise. We've had 120 years or so more progress towards it since Dostoyevsky wrote it, but it looks like we're still not doing very well (thank you very much Ms Ayn Rand). Dostoyevsky provides enough sustenence for people with less ardent faith to continue on- one of the characters, Rakitin, says 'Man kind will find the strength to live for virtue wether or not he believes in the immortality of the soul.' The Devil, in the chapter where he has a conversational duel with Ivan, mocks this idea as 'most charming.' Each of the primary characters- Alyosha, Ivan, Dmitry, and Fyodor Pavlovich, is a guide to a certain way of living. Alyosha the christ-man, Ivan the intellectual skeptic (Raskolnikov mk II), Dmitry the noble savage, and Fyodor Pavlovich as the great sinner. Each character has his own climax in the book, and everybody should be able to identify with at least one of the characters, or find that they may be 10% Dmitry, 50% Ivan, and 40% Alyosha. This should be an exceptional book for any young person trying to figure out what the heck life is all about. There's some good stuff between those covers- Dostoyevsky has a very deep understanding of human nature. So in closing, whatever your beliefs are, don't eat the pineapple compote, and don't take the earthly loaves.
Rating:
Summary: The Best I've Ever Read . . .
Review: The Brothers Karamazov is frequently referred to as the greatest novel of all time. It deserves that title. Dostoevsky forces his characters to turn themselves inside out and reveal everything to the reader. There are no cardboard cutouts. Everyone in the book feels real and raw. Within the main plot, which is a patricide, there are many other smaller stories, including the famous segment called "The Grand Inquisitor". Read The Brothers with a pen in hand. There are countless lines and sections you'll want to remember. I have never enjoyed such a rich reading experience.
|
