Scan barcode
mazaleia's review against another edition
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
nights's review against another edition
challenging
dark
hopeful
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
anarib's review against another edition
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
sydtravis's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
inspiring
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
hassanazmi's review against another edition
5.0
The Grand Inquisitor chapter is the best chapter I've ever read. I've never taken any university philosophy or literature courses but I imagine they must study this chapter at that level. Such a unique, interesting take on religion and organized religion I've never heard before. I'm not the most well-read person but it was really profound for me.
And trial is so great. It was 150 DENSE pages and I read it in one sitting.
This is only my second book I've read from Dostoyevsky and they're both my all time favorites.
I think the great thing about his novels is that he talks about ideas which everybody has at least thought about but he goes in so much depth that it feels like he's completing your thoughts for you.
'Einstein once declared: “Dostoevsky gives me more than any scientist, more than Gauss.” Freud too ranked Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov alongside the works of Shakespeare in terms of its literary significance.'
And trial is so great. It was 150 DENSE pages and I read it in one sitting.
This is only my second book I've read from Dostoyevsky and they're both my all time favorites.
I think the great thing about his novels is that he talks about ideas which everybody has at least thought about but he goes in so much depth that it feels like he's completing your thoughts for you.
'Einstein once declared: “Dostoevsky gives me more than any scientist, more than Gauss.” Freud too ranked Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov alongside the works of Shakespeare in terms of its literary significance.'
jnicholson23a's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
nomnombookies's review against another edition
5.0
"And my goal is a noble one: I will cast into you just a tiny seed of belief and it will grow into an oak, and such an oak that, sitting on it, you will long to join "the hermits in the wilderness and the immaculate virgins,' because that is what you are really secretly longing for: to wander in the desert, feed on locusts, and save your soul."
hadeanstars's review against another edition
3.0
In a word, difficult.
Even if a novel doesn't really click for me in the first few pages, I can persevere and know that usually, by the time I am a quarter of the way through, I will be in the groove with it and the rest will be easy. So I assumed with Dostoevsky's great work. I read to the quarter mark and found it a bit of a mystery. It seemed to be a long treatise on 19th Century church doctrine for the most part. But I persevered, thinking that by the time I got half way through it was bound to become easier. It's a massive book too, so half way through was a good novel's worth by any normal standard. It got better. A little. At least the characters became more apparent and the beginnings of a plot emerged. The trouble I was having now was that the central characters, Mitya and Grushenka, were so manic. They seemed as though they had some sort of personality disorder shared between them. I struggled to relate to them in any ordinary way. The pious and rather woolly Alyosha was not much easier to relate to, and the third brother Ivan had not made much of an appearance by this stage.
There were compensations because Karamazov is not entirely a single novel, but in many ways a collection of loosely connected pastiches, describing the lives and misadventures of various characters. Some of these interludes were highly amusing. But on the whole, the logic of the major characters and of the novel itself eluded me.
I am not certain if Dostoevsky writes about madness with a particular fondness, or if instead the Russian character of his time was habitually a little cracked, but where is the difference? I found Raskolnikov's madness in Crime and Punishment much easier to relate to (if considerably less amenable to that of Mitya!)
It took aboput two thirds of the book to find the central plot, which, in fairness to Dostoevsky, had been developing all along, albeit often subtly enough that it was not immediately apparent. The final part was much better in my view and rescued the novel for me. But Brothers Karamazov is for me rather like a film that's an hour or more too long, and getting through the first half almost negates the value of the overall project.
Ultimately I'm glad to have read it, but I'm also delighted that I'll not have to read it again.
Even if a novel doesn't really click for me in the first few pages, I can persevere and know that usually, by the time I am a quarter of the way through, I will be in the groove with it and the rest will be easy. So I assumed with Dostoevsky's great work. I read to the quarter mark and found it a bit of a mystery. It seemed to be a long treatise on 19th Century church doctrine for the most part. But I persevered, thinking that by the time I got half way through it was bound to become easier. It's a massive book too, so half way through was a good novel's worth by any normal standard. It got better. A little. At least the characters became more apparent and the beginnings of a plot emerged. The trouble I was having now was that the central characters, Mitya and Grushenka, were so manic. They seemed as though they had some sort of personality disorder shared between them. I struggled to relate to them in any ordinary way. The pious and rather woolly Alyosha was not much easier to relate to, and the third brother Ivan had not made much of an appearance by this stage.
There were compensations because Karamazov is not entirely a single novel, but in many ways a collection of loosely connected pastiches, describing the lives and misadventures of various characters. Some of these interludes were highly amusing. But on the whole, the logic of the major characters and of the novel itself eluded me.
I am not certain if Dostoevsky writes about madness with a particular fondness, or if instead the Russian character of his time was habitually a little cracked, but where is the difference? I found Raskolnikov's madness in Crime and Punishment much easier to relate to (if considerably less amenable to that of Mitya!)
It took aboput two thirds of the book to find the central plot, which, in fairness to Dostoevsky, had been developing all along, albeit often subtly enough that it was not immediately apparent. The final part was much better in my view and rescued the novel for me. But Brothers Karamazov is for me rather like a film that's an hour or more too long, and getting through the first half almost negates the value of the overall project.
Ultimately I'm glad to have read it, but I'm also delighted that I'll not have to read it again.
jfonseca_uwu's review against another edition
5.0
Odeio livros grandes, chego ao fim e nem me lembro do que aconteceu no início
wjbriz's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
hopeful
reflective
slow-paced
5.0