Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.99 AVERAGE
3.99 AVERAGE
If you're anything like me, this book will leave you wondering what the heck you've been doing with your life...
Sai, Andréi, nella mia vita nessun fuoco né divoratore né purificatore ha mai divampato. Essa non è stata, come quella degli altri, simile al mattino che a poco a poco si colora e si accende, poi si muta nel giorno che ferve, arde e palpita nel meriggio luminoso e poi, sempre più pallido e quieto, naturalmente e gradatamente, si spegne nella sera. No, la mia vita è cominciata con il tramonto. E' strano, ma è così! Dal primo momento che ho avuto coscienza di me, ho sentito che mi spegnavo.
Sarebbe anche un capolavoro, peccato che sia un po' troppo lungo, con una parte finale un po' tirata per le lunghe. Ma la caratterizzazione dei personaggi e' davvero eccellente.
It was a pretty light read and sometimes very funny and relatable.
emotional
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
une merveille, qu’un personnage aussi tragique m’apparaisse comme mon double littéraire en est frappant, je remercie mon moi de 15 ans d’avoir eu la flemme de le lire, je n’aurais ABSOLUMENT pas su apprécier toute la richesse de l’œuvre à cette époque
Oblomov! i don't think i will ever be able to forget you. i read last 300 pages of the book in two days. even though i felt so tired, it was really pleasant reading. Goncharov gives you everything you can expect from a russian classic: deep characters, long dialogues and explanations of feelings and a remarkable life-long friend.
emotional
funny
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
God. What can I say. I had to read this book for a Russian Lit class and it was fantastic. It's unlike any other Russian novel I've read and I fell in love with Oblomov over the course of the novel. Reminds me of Of Human Bondage. Fantastic.
Oblomovism is defined as indolent apathy or lazy and disinterested in working but that does not quite catch the true meaning of the word. Oblomov is not lazy in contrast he is continually working his mined in fruitless schemes that will never transpire. When he falls in love he WORKS at it. He tries to define his love but, fails. He tries to understand his love but, fails. He works and makes others work extremely hard at being in love and they all ultimately fail. He is taken for a ride but, due to his friends intervention, the plotters fail. In short to truly understand oblomovism one must read the book and see how hard the work is to be this apathethetic.
challenging
emotional
funny
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Goncharov’s novel is equal parts satire, social critique, and psychological character study, using humor and sincere pathos to diagnose a Russian social phenomenon that would come to be known in literature as the superfluous man. The title character even lends his name to this state of social paralysis, which Goncharov coins in the novel: Oblomovitis.
Oblomov is an aristocrat who finds himself unable to function in the larger world. Exhausted by social obligations, spoon-fed from birth, unable to do labor, having no acumen for business, and without the brains to read or study, Oblomov spends his time lounging in bed, commenting on the futility of other people’s lives as a projection of his own paralysis. His one servant, Zakhar, is equally inept at his job and lives only to “serve” his master, which often means acting as his enabler and filching whatever loose change he can while avoiding real work himself. The novel is obviously a comment on the inept and floundering Russian aristocracy, but stands as a symbol of a greater social problem that would become manifest in the 20th century as future generations faced the alienation of modernity. In that sense, Oblomov reminded me quite a bit of the protagonists of Beckett’s work.
While the premise is great and the opening of the novel is very funny, Goncharov’s novel loses steam about halfway through. His straight-forward narrative style, combined with Oblomov’s paralyzed personal nature, creates a static reading experience. For a couple hundred pages we cringe as Oblomov and Olga go through their doomed courtship. By the time events finally unravel, Oblomov’s unchanging nature becomes insufferable. Goncharov tries to generate genuine sympathy for his sad protagonist, and he is partly successful. But the novel drags on so long that the humor just can’t sustain. The same moments that were amusing on page 50 fall flat on page 450. I grew weary of Oblomov’s stunted psychological state long before the end of the novel, so my sympathy was limited, and the humor just couldn’t hold up.
It’s a worthwhile read, but not my favorite work of Russian literature.
Oblomov is an aristocrat who finds himself unable to function in the larger world. Exhausted by social obligations, spoon-fed from birth, unable to do labor, having no acumen for business, and without the brains to read or study, Oblomov spends his time lounging in bed, commenting on the futility of other people’s lives as a projection of his own paralysis. His one servant, Zakhar, is equally inept at his job and lives only to “serve” his master, which often means acting as his enabler and filching whatever loose change he can while avoiding real work himself. The novel is obviously a comment on the inept and floundering Russian aristocracy, but stands as a symbol of a greater social problem that would become manifest in the 20th century as future generations faced the alienation of modernity. In that sense, Oblomov reminded me quite a bit of the protagonists of Beckett’s work.
While the premise is great and the opening of the novel is very funny, Goncharov’s novel loses steam about halfway through. His straight-forward narrative style, combined with Oblomov’s paralyzed personal nature, creates a static reading experience. For a couple hundred pages we cringe as Oblomov and Olga go through their doomed courtship. By the time events finally unravel, Oblomov’s unchanging nature becomes insufferable. Goncharov tries to generate genuine sympathy for his sad protagonist, and he is partly successful. But the novel drags on so long that the humor just can’t sustain. The same moments that were amusing on page 50 fall flat on page 450. I grew weary of Oblomov’s stunted psychological state long before the end of the novel, so my sympathy was limited, and the humor just couldn’t hold up.
It’s a worthwhile read, but not my favorite work of Russian literature.