Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.79 AVERAGE
3.79 AVERAGE
I had only read Gogol's short stories previously and while there were similar moments of sharp satire, the whole didn't quite captivate me as I perhaps hoped. A good audiobook reading though.
This is dark satire on Russian serfdom and the flawed mentality of the 19th century Russian character. It is ridiculous, reading it now, to think that the buying and selling of people even exists but the way that Gogol creates this seedy business is something else. The absurdity of Chichikov is never really understood in the story, not the way that the reader understands him. It's a slow read, but it's a very telling one if you're into Russian literature.
Another translated book that left me wondering just how different another translation would be. I did enjoy it though, and how Gogol consistently and humorously broke the fourth wall. The technique definitely made the book more memorable than it would have otherwise been.
adventurous
funny
mysterious
slow-paced
on gogol's tombstone, it says something like "I SHALL LAUGH MY BITTER LAUGH."
he is my new hero.
he is my new hero.
There is as much of interest in the circumstances surrounding the genesis, production and partial destruction of this novel as in the story itself. The central idea was entrusted by Pushkin himself to Gogol, it was written in alternations of messianic inspiration and self-abnegating despair, and the manuscript of the second part was largely destroyed in a fit of religious repentance, with the third part never begun. Gogol too was consumed in his own flame, in an event intimately connected with part two's combustion. What we are left with is the spangling hilarity and psychological penetration of the polished first part, and snatches of the development of the story in the more sombre second part, the remaining sections of which are obviously an early draft.
Fittingly, I think, the most luminescent section of the novel describes, in fevered detail, the garden of the landowner Plyushkin, surely named in homage to the novel's benefactor. There were so many moments where I laughed, where I read in admiration of a Russian intelligence flashing its special brand of brilliance, and where I acknowledged the author's insight into human behaviour and minds, transcendent of national borders.
A particularly amusing line I noted: "they had quarrelled violently over some young woman, as fresh and firm as a juicy turnip" typifies Gogol's droll humour.
It is a truly great shame that Gogol's vision went unfulfilled, but a comfort that the first part was finished and preserved. Gogol was never really able to articulate the means of salvation with which he hoped to guide the future course to glory for his countrymen, but who has been able to achieve such a goal?
Fittingly, I think, the most luminescent section of the novel describes, in fevered detail, the garden of the landowner Plyushkin, surely named in homage to the novel's benefactor. There were so many moments where I laughed, where I read in admiration of a Russian intelligence flashing its special brand of brilliance, and where I acknowledged the author's insight into human behaviour and minds, transcendent of national borders.
A particularly amusing line I noted: "they had quarrelled violently over some young woman, as fresh and firm as a juicy turnip" typifies Gogol's droll humour.
It is a truly great shame that Gogol's vision went unfulfilled, but a comfort that the first part was finished and preserved. Gogol was never really able to articulate the means of salvation with which he hoped to guide the future course to glory for his countrymen, but who has been able to achieve such a goal?
Got pretty bored in the last half but there’s a lot of great prose in there
medium-paced
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
The first half is 5/5. I wish I could write even 1% as good as Gogol.
The second half is mehhh but it's also unfinished so fair enough.
The second half is mehhh but it's also unfinished so fair enough.
"Собакевич все слушаше както по-преди с наведена глава и нищо, което от малко да прилича на израз, не се показа на лицето му. Сякаш в това тяло съвсем нямаше душа или имаше, но съвсем не там, дето трябва, а както у безсмъртния Кашчей нейде зад гори и планини и е покрита с такава дебела черупка, че каквото и да мърдаше на дъното, не причиняваше никакво раздвижване на повърхността й."
Dead Souls is, undoubtedly, a book of immense literary merit, featured in many a "X number of books you must read in your lifetime” list. It is also, to my great dismay, horrifically tedious to get through. Classics are, more often than not, laborious to read, but this one felt more like a test straight out of the "Saw" franchise than anything. Hence, no star rating.
Maybe just stick to Dostoevski.
Dead Souls is, undoubtedly, a book of immense literary merit, featured in many a "X number of books you must read in your lifetime” list. It is also, to my great dismay, horrifically tedious to get through. Classics are, more often than not, laborious to read, but this one felt more like a test straight out of the "Saw" franchise than anything. Hence, no star rating.
Maybe just stick to Dostoevski.