Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.81 AVERAGE
3.81 AVERAGE
emotional
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
I wasn't fan of the narration nor how many monologues there were, but I suppose I can let those slide considering the period this was written in. All in all, it's an okay book, but nothing more than that.
3.5 stars. This unfinished novel leaves us wondering “what could have been” if Dostoevsky had completed it, but also kind of thankful that he left it behind to create greater works after his imprisonment in Siberia. The first two thirds of the narrative vaguely captured my interest, but seemed to lack the psychological depth that I’ve come to expect from Dostoevsky. Of course, it’s an incomplete early work, so this can be forgiven. Only after Netochka discovers a letter does this begin to feel like a Dostoevsky novel -- the confusion and inward struggle, the private suffering for a noble cause in the face of vice, the almost visionary moment of epiphany, etc. Just as things start rolling, the manuscript comes to an abrupt end, leaving the reader wanting more.
The middle section is noted for its hint of lesbianism, although I rather thought the relationship between Netochka and Katya was more of a symbolic one -- like doppelgängers or alter egos or split selves who are polar opposites being drawn together and repelled like magnets, or maybe heavenly bodies under gravitational forces (which I imagine was how their relationship would have continued to develop had Dostoevsky completed the novel). Perhaps there is even a note of Goethe’s rumination on [b:the theory of elective affinities,|128837|Elective Affinities|Johann Wolfgang von Goethe|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1171977388s/128837.jpg|1426173] although I’m not familiar enough with the biographical details of the young Dostoevsky to know if he had been reading Goethe at that time.
This is not essential Dostoevsky, but it is well worth a read when you have explored most of his later masterpieces and shorter works.
The middle section is noted for its hint of lesbianism, although I rather thought the relationship between Netochka and Katya was more of a symbolic one -- like doppelgängers or alter egos or split selves who are polar opposites being drawn together and repelled like magnets, or maybe heavenly bodies under gravitational forces (which I imagine was how their relationship would have continued to develop had Dostoevsky completed the novel). Perhaps there is even a note of Goethe’s rumination on [b:the theory of elective affinities,|128837|Elective Affinities|Johann Wolfgang von Goethe|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1171977388s/128837.jpg|1426173] although I’m not familiar enough with the biographical details of the young Dostoevsky to know if he had been reading Goethe at that time.
This is not essential Dostoevsky, but it is well worth a read when you have explored most of his later masterpieces and shorter works.
dark
emotional
sad
medium-paced
dark
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
challenging
emotional
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Dostoyevsky's "Netochka Nezvanova" (literally "nameless nobody") is an unfinished novel, comprised of only 7 chapters, which portrays the early formative years of the protagonist Netochka. The story is cut short because of Dostoyevsky's arrest in 1849 and his subsequent exile in a Siberian prison for having been a member of the Petrashevsky Circle in Sankt Petersburg. The novel was never completed after his release, as he started writing on other works.
me while reading: wow this is definitely one of the best books ive read lately, if not ever
last page: unfortunately, dostoevsky never got to finish this novel
me: die .
last page: unfortunately, dostoevsky never got to finish this novel
me: die .
Netochka Nezvanova is Dostoyevsky's first, though unfinished, attempt at writing a novel. He was, sadly, exiled to Siberia while working on the book, thus leaving it incomplete even after his return.
This so called prologue to the actual novel was quite disappointing. It started off strong, Efimov's story and character were intriguing and interesting, whilst the descriptions of Netochka's psychology as a kid, and ultimately as an adolescent, were in accordance with the naturalistic model of the era, realistic, vivid and memorable. I do believe that Netochka had at times an excessive behavior, which resulted in standstill, however the hints of lesbianism were refreshing.
This is definitely not a typical Dostoyevsky novel and not an indicative of his work.
This so called prologue to the actual novel was quite disappointing. It started off strong, Efimov's story and character were intriguing and interesting, whilst the descriptions of Netochka's psychology as a kid, and ultimately as an adolescent, were in accordance with the naturalistic model of the era, realistic, vivid and memorable. I do believe that Netochka had at times an excessive behavior, which resulted in standstill, however the hints of lesbianism were refreshing.
This is definitely not a typical Dostoyevsky novel and not an indicative of his work.
Dostoyevsky is always good. And this early work is impressive even in its unfinished form. But it is this, and some other deficiencies, that make this work somewhat less than his other stories.
At the final page, I wanted to keep reading, to continue the story, because already I could see how good it could be. But he can never finish it now, and that is a huge disappointment.
There are also some other narrative issues including odd starts and stops and sloppy literary transitions. It’s clear this was Dostoyevsky’s early attempt at grand story-telling....
But this is only in contrast to his later work, because even this is better than, what, maybe 95% of fiction?
Even his bad stuff is good! On his worst day he is still superior to most.
Update: Seeing reviewers here cheering Dostoyevsky's inclusion of a quasi-lesbian relationship... I've heard this before, about this book, and it's possible, I guess. But this seems to me to be 21st century readers reading a little too much into a 19th century text. The two characters involved in the relationship, remember, were only about 8 years old. From what I've seen of little kids, they do sometimes exhibit kissing phases. And they can be very affectionate. I'm not sure it's appropriate to foist our 21st century culture onto a 19th century work of Russian literature.
But this isn't to say that the relationship between Netochka and Katya seemed normal for pre-teen girls. Netochka and Katya both seemed a little too old, in terms of their thought processing and feelings (for me at least, but I guess I could be wrong). And it does seem possible that Dostoyevsky was attempting to show the affects of Netochka's familial background on her social interactions (poverty, madness, illness, deprivation, etc.).
But, then again, 8 year old girls often are expressive, and show great amounts of affection, they enjoy being together, even saying, "I love you," to each other. And etc. So I'm definitely not convinced this was Dostoyevsky portraying a lesbian relationship.
Idk, literature becomes weird when we try to put our causes onto an author's work, redefining and reanalyzing, even re-writing what a story is about. I don't think I've ever liked that whenever I've seen it done. Let the story be what it is, don't rewrite it for the author.
But I guess, this too, comes back to the fact that Dostoyevsky never finished the story, this allows readers more room to interpret; whether they're correct is another matter.
At the final page, I wanted to keep reading, to continue the story, because already I could see how good it could be. But he can never finish it now, and that is a huge disappointment.
There are also some other narrative issues including odd starts and stops and sloppy literary transitions. It’s clear this was Dostoyevsky’s early attempt at grand story-telling....
But this is only in contrast to his later work, because even this is better than, what, maybe 95% of fiction?
Even his bad stuff is good! On his worst day he is still superior to most.
Update: Seeing reviewers here cheering Dostoyevsky's inclusion of a quasi-lesbian relationship... I've heard this before, about this book, and it's possible, I guess. But this seems to me to be 21st century readers reading a little too much into a 19th century text. The two characters involved in the relationship, remember, were only about 8 years old. From what I've seen of little kids, they do sometimes exhibit kissing phases. And they can be very affectionate. I'm not sure it's appropriate to foist our 21st century culture onto a 19th century work of Russian literature.
But this isn't to say that the relationship between Netochka and Katya seemed normal for pre-teen girls. Netochka and Katya both seemed a little too old, in terms of their thought processing and feelings (for me at least, but I guess I could be wrong). And it does seem possible that Dostoyevsky was attempting to show the affects of Netochka's familial background on her social interactions (poverty, madness, illness, deprivation, etc.).
But, then again, 8 year old girls often are expressive, and show great amounts of affection, they enjoy being together, even saying, "I love you," to each other. And etc. So I'm definitely not convinced this was Dostoyevsky portraying a lesbian relationship.
Idk, literature becomes weird when we try to put our causes onto an author's work, redefining and reanalyzing, even re-writing what a story is about. I don't think I've ever liked that whenever I've seen it done. Let the story be what it is, don't rewrite it for the author.
But I guess, this too, comes back to the fact that Dostoyevsky never finished the story, this allows readers more room to interpret; whether they're correct is another matter.