Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.99 AVERAGE
3.99 AVERAGE
emotional
reflective
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
E' stata dura, ma i nostri eroi sono riusciti a portare in salvo l'antico vaso, senza tralaltro ubriacarsi di Montenegro!
Detto ciò, torniamo a noi :D
Che dire.. Oblomov è l'essenza, o meglio la reincarnazione, dell'accidia e del posticipare ciò che andrebbe fatto. Si presenta come un personaggio estremamente indolente, pigro, che raramente lascia la sua stanza da letto e facile da odiare.. Eppure non so quale magia ha fatto Goncarov, non ho provato nessun sentimento di astio nei suoi confronti, e conoscendomi, mi sembra un piccolo miracolo.. Ciò mi ha dato l'entusiasmo di proseguire senza che scaraventassi via il libro a pagina dieci per mia stessa indolenza.
Mi è piaciuto tantissimo, e credo che anche questo sia un piccolo miracolo perché io la letteratura russa proprio non la digerisco: per carità riconosco ogni merito a Dostoevskij e Bulgakov, ma non riesco innanzitutto a comprenderli e poi a leggerli come 'piacere'.. Nei miei diversi tentativi ho faticato tantissimo!
Bando alle ciance, torniamo a noi!!
Il libro, tranne alcuni pezzi che rappresentano proprio l'essenza della letteratura russa, scorre che è un piacere e spesso è anche molto divertente.. Zachar è un personaggio sorprendente, il suo pensare, agire e i borbottii sono fantastici!
Non conosco bene (ok, praticamente per niente, ammettiamolo) la storia della Russia del XIX secolo, ma mi è sembrato che Goncarov faccia una satira abbastanza lucida della società del tempo.. Decisamente interessante!
Insomma, Goncarov è un grande autore.. Però non è mai citato nella "rosa" degli scrittori russi.. O almeno, io, da brava ignorante quale sono, non lo avevo mai sentito.. Sicuramente vale un po' più di attenzione, altroché!
L'amore fa incredibili progressi, è la cancrena dell'anima.
Detto ciò, torniamo a noi :D
Che dire.. Oblomov è l'essenza, o meglio la reincarnazione, dell'accidia e del posticipare ciò che andrebbe fatto. Si presenta come un personaggio estremamente indolente, pigro, che raramente lascia la sua stanza da letto e facile da odiare.. Eppure non so quale magia ha fatto Goncarov, non ho provato nessun sentimento di astio nei suoi confronti, e conoscendomi, mi sembra un piccolo miracolo.. Ciò mi ha dato l'entusiasmo di proseguire senza che scaraventassi via il libro a pagina dieci per mia stessa indolenza.
Mi è piaciuto tantissimo, e credo che anche questo sia un piccolo miracolo perché io la letteratura russa proprio non la digerisco: per carità riconosco ogni merito a Dostoevskij e Bulgakov, ma non riesco innanzitutto a comprenderli e poi a leggerli come 'piacere'.. Nei miei diversi tentativi ho faticato tantissimo!
Bando alle ciance, torniamo a noi!!
Il libro, tranne alcuni pezzi che rappresentano proprio l'essenza della letteratura russa, scorre che è un piacere e spesso è anche molto divertente.. Zachar è un personaggio sorprendente, il suo pensare, agire e i borbottii sono fantastici!
Non conosco bene (ok, praticamente per niente, ammettiamolo) la storia della Russia del XIX secolo, ma mi è sembrato che Goncarov faccia una satira abbastanza lucida della società del tempo.. Decisamente interessante!
Insomma, Goncarov è un grande autore.. Però non è mai citato nella "rosa" degli scrittori russi.. O almeno, io, da brava ignorante quale sono, non lo avevo mai sentito.. Sicuramente vale un po' più di attenzione, altroché!
L'amore fa incredibili progressi, è la cancrena dell'anima.
challenging
funny
hopeful
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I had abandoned this at one point but was able to come back and finish it. It is somewhat boring and rambling, with a character that is a sad-sack couch potato, and I skimmed parts. He lacks volition to the point that he wastes his life away. It was interesting when he briefly manages to meet a woman, but he cannot get it together enough to marry her. I think it would have been better as a short story.
Trying to read through the Russian classics. This one is a cautionary tale against laziness, indecision, and fear that keeps a man from living into his potential. He is so incapacitated by the thought of exertion that he keeps to his bed instead of venturing out into life.
"Under life's stress he fell, lost his enthusiasm, and ended by going to sleep--a broken, disenchanted man who had lost his power to live, but not his purity and his intrinsic worth."
"Under life's stress he fell, lost his enthusiasm, and ended by going to sleep--a broken, disenchanted man who had lost his power to live, but not his purity and his intrinsic worth."
This is a confusing book to review. The back of my copy has quotes from two Russian giants, Leo Tolstoy and Anton Chekov, claiming Oblomov as a must-read novel. Despite this, my expectations were less then what I ordinarily expect from a Russian novel because…well, it’s a book about a guy who is lazy. What can it really have to offer?
Upon finishing this, my response is the same as the one I had after finishing [b:Don Quixote|3836|Don Quixote|Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1364958765s/3836.jpg|121842]. Well…huh.
Oblomov, and oblomovism, introduces me to something that I haven’t come across fiction yet. I’m considerably young so maybe this is just a lack of experience speaking, but Oblomov’s character and his way of life really threw me into a loop. While there are likely many interpretations of Oblomov and this novel, one that I took from it is: is it wrong to want to look into the past for comfort and not thrive for more? Enjoy the moments that are granted and sleep through the rest? Or is it just so different that it disconcerts us? I can phrase this question I have at least ten different ways.
Another interpretation offered by the synopsis on my edition itself states that Oblomov is a symbol for the Russian aristocracy in the 19th century. This is certainly plausible given the life of the character and his ending; the parallels are easy to establish. The contrast between Stolz and Oblomov also expands this meaning and displays the downfalls of the aristocracy if they aren’t quick enough to adapt to the change coming their way—which as history has proven was accurate. I understood this interpretation best, it’s straight forward and easier to grasp, but have to admit that ‘oblomovism’ still has me more intrigued.
Putting that aside though, there also ran a sense of melancholy throughout the book about the lack of ambition Oblomov has for life. If I know anything about humans then it is that they are curious, that they reach for change despite resenting it. Oblomov defies this basic understanding and in fact throws this idea back in my face. The reactions to change are so incredulous that it is certainly funny, but there remained a tinge of sadness in it’s hilarity. I couldn’t help but feel pity for him.
I don’t think my thoughts are coherent enough to make too much sense right now, so hopefully this review isn’t too muddled. I liked this book in the end. I can see myself coming back to it in the future and reading it more carefully each time.
Upon finishing this, my response is the same as the one I had after finishing [b:Don Quixote|3836|Don Quixote|Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1364958765s/3836.jpg|121842]. Well…huh.
Oblomov, and oblomovism, introduces me to something that I haven’t come across fiction yet. I’m considerably young so maybe this is just a lack of experience speaking, but Oblomov’s character and his way of life really threw me into a loop. While there are likely many interpretations of Oblomov and this novel, one that I took from it is: is it wrong to want to look into the past for comfort and not thrive for more? Enjoy the moments that are granted and sleep through the rest? Or is it just so different that it disconcerts us? I can phrase this question I have at least ten different ways.
Another interpretation offered by the synopsis on my edition itself states that Oblomov is a symbol for the Russian aristocracy in the 19th century. This is certainly plausible given the life of the character and his ending; the parallels are easy to establish. The contrast between Stolz and Oblomov also expands this meaning and displays the downfalls of the aristocracy if they aren’t quick enough to adapt to the change coming their way—which as history has proven was accurate. I understood this interpretation best, it’s straight forward and easier to grasp, but have to admit that ‘oblomovism’ still has me more intrigued.
Putting that aside though, there also ran a sense of melancholy throughout the book about the lack of ambition Oblomov has for life. If I know anything about humans then it is that they are curious, that they reach for change despite resenting it. Oblomov defies this basic understanding and in fact throws this idea back in my face. The reactions to change are so incredulous that it is certainly funny, but there remained a tinge of sadness in it’s hilarity. I couldn’t help but feel pity for him.
I don’t think my thoughts are coherent enough to make too much sense right now, so hopefully this review isn’t too muddled. I liked this book in the end. I can see myself coming back to it in the future and reading it more carefully each time.
challenging
reflective
sad
medium-paced
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I mean, damn. This is hitting close to home, man. I know about the historical/political interpretations of this story, but even if read at surface meaning, it's pretty horrific. As a passive, indecisive person I can say this is like a death sentence. It's painful to read. It seems like I am one of the few people who didn't find this book droning or boring. Death sentences can be pretty long, but you are never bored if you are on the receiving end.
It's kinda depressing really. This author leaves me no hope at all. Yeah, there is the second generation type solution, but that's really no good – I, Oblomov, am in my grave.
I need to come back to this review in a year's time, see if it had had the motivational effect it seems to be giving off right now.
It's kinda depressing really. This author leaves me no hope at all. Yeah, there is the second generation type solution, but that's really no good – I, Oblomov, am in my grave.
I need to come back to this review in a year's time, see if it had had the motivational effect it seems to be giving off right now.