Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.16 AVERAGE
4.16 AVERAGE
Meu novo hiperfoco.
Minha cabeça não parou por um segundo durante a leitura. Provoco:
É uma fotografia da insanidade, pobreza e doença dos anos 1860, verdade. Mas fiz um paralelo com o novo século e o jargão de direita “bandido bom, é bandido morto” que dizem com convicção. Viajo na provocação?
Raskolnikov: insosso, pedante e … sim, burro. Não intelectualmente, claro, mas burro, desprovido de sagacidade.
Não torci pra ele em nenhum momento.
Vi niilismo, existencialismo muito antes de serem ideias consolidadas.
Pasmem, vi feminismo também. Estou maluca? Lebeziatnikov, o querido que fez uma pra deus ver ao desmentir Lujin e defender Sonia, sabe? Claro, feminista, mas de um jeito que muitas vezes parece cômico ou superficial. Retrato das pessoas que adotavam ideologias progressistas na época sem compreendê-las completamente. Seria o esquerdo-macho do século 19?
Enfim, acho que é a primeira review longa que escrevo - e que decido levar um tiquinho a sério.
Gostei.
Pronta para o próximo Dostoevsky.
Minha cabeça não parou por um segundo durante a leitura. Provoco:
É uma fotografia da insanidade, pobreza e doença dos anos 1860, verdade. Mas fiz um paralelo com o novo século e o jargão de direita “bandido bom, é bandido morto” que dizem com convicção. Viajo na provocação?
Raskolnikov: insosso, pedante e … sim, burro. Não intelectualmente, claro, mas burro, desprovido de sagacidade.
Não torci pra ele em nenhum momento.
Vi niilismo, existencialismo muito antes de serem ideias consolidadas.
Pasmem, vi feminismo também. Estou maluca? Lebeziatnikov, o querido que fez uma pra deus ver ao desmentir Lujin e defender Sonia, sabe? Claro, feminista, mas de um jeito que muitas vezes parece cômico ou superficial. Retrato das pessoas que adotavam ideologias progressistas na época sem compreendê-las completamente. Seria o esquerdo-macho do século 19?
Enfim, acho que é a primeira review longa que escrevo - e que decido levar um tiquinho a sério.
Gostei.
Pronta para o próximo Dostoevsky.
dark
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
5 stars for Raskolnikov’s story. But overall 4 (why are characters in classic russian lit so prone to hysteria???)
Que libro más bueno, demasiado bien ejecutado, Dostoyevsky era una mente maestra. Voy a seguir pensando en este libro por harto tiempo.
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Hi :)
This was a very solid trip. Never in my life did I expect, that I would be reading this book for fun and then having opinions on it, but here I am.
This is, honestly, a pretty great book. Everything, technically, centers on Raskolnikov, who commit a crime and then suffers a punishment (see what I did there?). Throughout his story, we discover many other stories of people surrounding him and how they attempt to live their lives in the rather dramatic climate of Saint Petersburg of 19th century. It's a story of depression, what man does due to it and what the people around him might do to try and help him.
This was great, I will probably be back to reread it on russian (in like 15 years), but yeah, good read, go commit to it and have fun with it, that is what classics are for.
Oh, and yeah, fuck Svidrigailov.
This was a very solid trip. Never in my life did I expect, that I would be reading this book for fun and then having opinions on it, but here I am.
This is, honestly, a pretty great book. Everything, technically, centers on Raskolnikov, who commit a crime and then suffers a punishment (see what I did there?). Throughout his story, we discover many other stories of people surrounding him and how they attempt to live their lives in the rather dramatic climate of Saint Petersburg of 19th century. It's a story of depression, what man does due to it and what the people around him might do to try and help him.
This was great, I will probably be back to reread it on russian (in like 15 years), but yeah, good read, go commit to it and have fun with it, that is what classics are for.
Oh, and yeah, fuck Svidrigailov.
First of all, the book is extraordinary when it comes to get into the thoughts, feelings, mind and psychology of the characters. They are extremely complex and deep, specifically Raskolnikov (the main character), and makes you feel as if you know that person, as if you were there in the conversations and have known them for years. It makes you feel part of the story. This is something difficult to achieve and I praise Dostoevsky's work for that.
Second, the book focus on several topics as what originates crime, what leads someone to commit a crime and what is the meaning of punishment, but it also covers themes as poverty, child marriage, prostitution etc. Nevertheless the main focus, besides obviously crime, is a criticism on nihilism and rationalism, together with existentialism and utilitarianism.
Even though he paints a vivid portrait of existentialism and conveys a strong sense of the absurd, I agree with Camus criticism about the book and I think he fell short on the existentialist paradigm, not being able to properly address it (likely due to Dostoevsky's own faith).
This, together with characters too melodramatic sometimes, make me give this book 4 stars instead of 5.
Nevertheless, it is a great, complex book, covering many interesting topics and ideas.
I believe that this is a book worth reading and re-reading, as with a first read one barely scratches the surface of all the ideas, symbolism and interpretations contained in these 736 pages.
Second, the book focus on several topics as what originates crime, what leads someone to commit a crime and what is the meaning of punishment, but it also covers themes as poverty, child marriage, prostitution etc. Nevertheless the main focus, besides obviously crime, is a criticism on nihilism and rationalism, together with existentialism and utilitarianism.
Even though he paints a vivid portrait of existentialism and conveys a strong sense of the absurd, I agree with Camus criticism about the book and I think he fell short on the existentialist paradigm, not being able to properly address it (likely due to Dostoevsky's own faith).
This, together with characters too melodramatic sometimes, make me give this book 4 stars instead of 5.
Nevertheless, it is a great, complex book, covering many interesting topics and ideas.
I believe that this is a book worth reading and re-reading, as with a first read one barely scratches the surface of all the ideas, symbolism and interpretations contained in these 736 pages.
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
hopeful
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
No don’t fall victim to insanity, you’re so sexy ahaha
dark
reflective
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Crime and Punishment is a book that questions moral norms. He wants to kill the pawnbroker just to see if he can get away with it. We do see that eventually it gets to him mentally, and he becomes delirious. He ends up having to deal with guilt and the want for redemption. Raskolnikov does end up confessing and shows that what we think is logical and rational isn't always.