Rating: 
Summary: Good
Review: This book is truly a brilliant piece of literature. I believe that this books remarkably deals with the notion of Russian culture and its literary society of 1800s. It shows how in 19th century Russian people were concerned about making their image and fame. The book illustrates not only the endeavor of its main character to successful scholarly life but also the traditional Russian culture. This may not be the most famous work of Dostoyevsky, but it is for sure a very powerful fiction.
Rating: 
Summary: More like negative 5 stars
Review: This book is truly horrible. If there is a worse "great" novel, I'd like to read it, just so I can say I read the worst great novel ever. Until that day, I'll have to settle for this.All of Dostoevsky's novels are badly written, racist trash. Of course all of his books are saved by intersting philosophical musings. My personal opinion is that if you excerpted the philosphical dialoges from his books, you might get about 100 or so pages of interesting ideas. Of course, the beauty of his Orthodox Christian philosophy is irrevocably marred by his anti-semitism. It's strange how Nietzsche gets associated with Nazism even though he rejected and spoke out about anti-semitisim, but Dostoevsky gets credited with predicting the horrors of Stalinism, even though he contributed to the racist ideology that sent so many to innocent people to their deaths. All Demons does is ridicule the author's opponents. Do we still care about nihilism vs. Slavophilism? I doubt it. Demons doesn't make us care either because the characters just aren't interesting enough. The tragedy of monstorous behaviour is that it is commited by people just like us, not by "Demonaics," such as Stephan who merely thrive on chaos. The author seemed to sense this point in Crime and Punishment, which, although very bad, is much better than Demons.
Rating:
Summary: The malevolent best
Review: This book was a slow start, but once I figured out the names of the characters and their relationships to one another, the book really became enthralling. The character Stavrogin was someone I could picture as being dark haired and dashing, and sensitive, but psychologically twisted in his regard for other human beings. It's no wonder, considering the kind of mother he had; an absent and social climbing woman, that he grew up as he did. Dostoyevsky creates a world in this novel. It has drama, humor, mysticism, political intrigue and such a myriad of characters, each with human foibles, that one wonders how he orchestrates the narrative so well. Maybe that is why he is considered one of the greatest writers of all time.
Rating:
Summary: Watch what you say - people tend to believe it.
Review: This ia a great book with many plotlines, truly entertaining and intellectually stimulating. Despite a characteristic criminal underpinnings, the novel is dedicated to another question which was very important to Dostoyevsky: Are individuals responsible for the ideas they produce. The main character, Stavrogin, is awash with doctrines he recycled from the old toothless liberal tradition. His personal charisma is so great that people around burn up with his ideas and turn into blind fanatics of a particular intellectual fad. The novel's got them all: religious nationalism, self-deifying egotism, revolutionary nihilism, totalitarian elitism. The advent of all these ill-conceived personal philosophies was ignited by the man who has absolutely no faith. While the self-styled anarchists wreak the havoc on a small provincial town, the protagonist has to decide whether he is responsible for people's serious interpretations of the theories he made up as a means of avoiding intellectual ennui. The novel is centered around the final encounter of the passive, aloof, and faithless "intellectual father" and vigorously fanatic "children". Truly captivating and probably the most easily readable of Dostoyevsky's books.
Rating:
Summary: A great work of art by a great artist
Review: This is a work of art. All the agonoies, uncertainties, and ecstasies of being Russian are dealt with in this book by a true master. Dostoevsky was a relgious conservative, something very taboo in American society today but there can be no doubt to the genius of this books vision. The pitiful and terrifying nature of evil. Stavrogin is one of the most malevolent characters in liturature, a true Anti-Christ. The creation of a universe by a man-god the one God and the pagan gods of carnal nature all clash in this work in a way that is unsurpased.The depth, the passion of this work can drive one to maddness...Dostoyevsky's vision of Russia's Messanic mission all come togeather in the end to create an absolute...beauty.
Rating:
Summary: Quintessential Dostoyevsky
Review: This is an amazing book. Pervaded by Dostoevsky's usual characterization, the author reaches into the souls of his numerous characters as only he and very few others can. This story has Dostoevsky's favorite existential philosophic undercurrents. The story is an account of how the budding socialist revolutionary movement affects one small Russian town. Dostoevsky gives this phenomenon the treatment it deserves - a mocking condescension with an amusing portrayal or people who are drawn to radical movements. The result is a novel filled with humor. The tragedy is is presented as a natural consequence of people who are making mistakes at every step, confusing sensibility for absurdity. That is what their "possession" really is. It is about a whole generation caught up in the materialization and nihilism of the 19th century resulting from the scientific revolution. To me, this book is on par or surpasses The Brothers Karamazov. It may be viewed as either an atheistic challenge taken up in the latter book or as a repudiation of atheism manifested in one level of the latter. Whatever it is, it's more proof that Dostoevsky is the greatest writer who ever lived.
Rating:
Summary: Quintessential Dostoyevsky
Review: This is an amazing book. Pervaded by Dostoevsky's usual characterization, the author reaches into the souls of his numerous characters as only he and very few others can. This story has Dostoevsky's favorite existential philosophic undercurrents. The story is an account of how the budding socialist revolutionary movement affects one small Russian town. Dostoevsky gives this phenomenon the treatment it deserves - a mocking condescension with an amusing portrayal or people who are drawn to radical movements. The result is a novel filled with humor. The tragedy is is presented as a natural consequence of people who are making mistakes at every step, confusing sensibility for absurdity. That is what their "possession" really is. It is about a whole generation caught up in the materialization and nihilism of the 19th century resulting from the scientific revolution. To me, this book is on par or surpasses The Brothers Karamazov. It may be viewed as either an atheistic challenge taken up in the latter book or as a repudiation of atheism manifested in one level of the latter. Whatever it is, it's more proof that Dostoevsky is the greatest writer who ever lived.
Rating: 
Summary: Needed a strict editor
Review: This is an extremely complex book, where Dostoyevsky indulges in frequent philosophical digressions, indulging a few personal vendettas (notably and most amusingly against Turgenev) along the way. These are tedious, in places, and grind the already creakingly slow plot to a painful crawl. The book was originally published in a periodical, and in a hurry, so presumably without the strong editor it desperately needed. However, the aimlessness and intellectual bankruptcy of the atheist nihilists is crystal clear (FD's purpose in writing the book), as is the sense of panic throughout Russian society: the unrest among the serfs and young radicals presented a problem for which the ruling class had no solutions. That in itself did not make the book worth reading or indeed writing.
Rating:
Summary: Needed a Strong Editor
Review: This is an extremely complex book, where FD indulges in frequent philosophical digressions, indulging a few personal vendettas (notably Turgenev) along the way. These are tedious, in places, and grind the already creakingly slow plot to a painful crawl. The book was originally published in a periodical, and in a hurry, so presumably without the strong editor it desperately needed. However, the aimlessness and intellectual bankruptcy of the atheist nihilists is crystal clear (FD's purpose in writing the book), as does the sense of panic throughout Russian society: the unrest among the serfs and young radicals presented a problem for which the ruling class had no solutions.In itself, that was poor reward for wading through nearly 700 pages.
Rating:
Summary: Dostoevsky's greatest work
Review: This is Dosteovsky's greatest work, and is one of the greatest works of world literature.
|
