Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.51 AVERAGE
3.51 AVERAGE
I think it's very good and rings true of how a madman confronted with his "double" might feel internally. And the spiral into a full on psychotic break is done with some admirable restraint -- a cheaper writer might have made poor, poor Mr. Golyadkin pop his complete weasel much sooner. But I think Dostoevsky has done me the courtesy of helping me realize that the "madman diary" genre just isn't for me.
An extremely intriguing read that left me contemplating the notion of identity, our different selves and being stuck in one's head. While at times I couldn't actually work out who was the real Golyadkin, I found this an absolutely fascinating read that took me to places of the human search for identity, acceptance and the shadowy side that exists for everyone. It was almost like the nemesis of the hero of the story was in actuality, himself. That concept intrigued me and kept me engaged in this book. I'm a fan of Dostoyevsky and while his books can be tough reading they delve deep into the human experience.
dark
mysterious
reflective
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
funny
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
conflicted on how I feel about this.
did not hate it. enjoyed many parts of it, but I would never pick this book up again. while I get why it was as incoherent as it was, it just… doesn’t make for a fun reading experience. the ranting was okay until it dragged, and dragged, and dragged and—wait, what happened?
the first time i tried reading this book, I stopped around the 40 page mark out of exhaustion. notes from the underground had the same issue for me, but I don’t think this is as bad as that.
definitely has some merit but like… not for me
did not hate it. enjoyed many parts of it, but I would never pick this book up again. while I get why it was as incoherent as it was, it just… doesn’t make for a fun reading experience. the ranting was okay until it dragged, and dragged, and dragged and—wait, what happened?
the first time i tried reading this book, I stopped around the 40 page mark out of exhaustion. notes from the underground had the same issue for me, but I don’t think this is as bad as that.
definitely has some merit but like… not for me
Through the bureaucratic ocean of papers, there lies Josef K., bored with unanswered arguments.
Behind an unapologetic desk, Bartleby sits in silence, preferring nothing.
As a fearful door opens, Bashmachkin leaves the smothering atmosphere of the office, ready to meet with the others. All set to forget the tasteless morning coffee and the men trying to make their way through scheme and flattery, and recover the humanity once lost. The sun is setting. A gentle breeze with a scent of independence caresses their faces.
Golyadkin, our protagonist, is waiting for them.
The world of the oppressed rests in Dostoyevsky's prose. The essential analyst of the human nature.
Briefly, The Double is about Mr. Golyadkin and his doppelgänger, Mr. Golyadkin Jr., someone who has been born under a stressful snowstorm.
This novella has many elements that can be found in Gogol's work. His influence on Dostoyevsky is well-known. However, this writer dealt with those same themes with an innovative style that traces clear boundaries. He even did that with his own work. For me, this was nothing like the novels I have read before. Universal themes like oppression, sorrow, alienation, work and loneliness are always treated from different angles and original ways of execution. Originality perceived by the mind of Sábato: we all are the sum of what we have read. Topics don't change; the way we deal with them might.
When I read [b:The Brothers Karamazov|4934|The Brothers Karamazov|Fyodor Dostoyevsky|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1427728126s/4934.jpg|3393910], my eyes contemplated Dostoyevsky's genius, word by word. My copy is all written. I highlighted hundreds of sentences that tried to enlighten the intricate path toward the mind. A modest attempt at understanding. However, the times I underlined something on The Double was for the main purpose of keeping up with the story. Actions. Names. I din't find many memorable reflections that left me at awe. The ones I found were at the beginning, mostly. So, what then? It was all in the interpretation. The development of facts, the story itself was what left me staring at an invisible point, drawing in the air, pondering about my own existence and the futility of things.
The fragility of one of the most precious things we own. Our mind. A set of cognitive faculties. A place. A process. Sanity.
We cannot own our mind. Under certain circumstances—sad, nerve wracking, shameful circumstances—, it reacts as it pleases. Or the best way it can. It is the main source of who we are and yet, a trivial fact has the power to break it. A single act. An accumulation of traumatic acts. A life of unfortunate events. A pile of obedient frustrations. The meek silence of unwanted, inevitable solitude. The desire of success in a suffocating environment with people that have already been chosen over you. The search of identity in an alienated world. You can't be alone too much.
These are just some of the observations that emerge from The Double, a true work of art that portrays a man's psychological struggle using a brushstroke of unforgiving reality. We are placed inside Golyadkin's head. We are privileged spectators of his mind. We see it work. We see it weep. We see it shocked, unable to move. We shout, because we know what to do (even though we probably would react the same way if we were in his shoes, you never know).
A privilege that thrills and frightens.
There's much emotion in Dostoyevsky's descriptive and cautious writing. So much, it's difficult to bear.
Sep 29, 15
* Note: Months ago, I watched a 2013 film starring Jesse Eisenberg, based on this novella. Artistically exquisite. Keep it in mind!
** Also on my blog.
Behind an unapologetic desk, Bartleby sits in silence, preferring nothing.
As a fearful door opens, Bashmachkin leaves the smothering atmosphere of the office, ready to meet with the others. All set to forget the tasteless morning coffee and the men trying to make their way through scheme and flattery, and recover the humanity once lost. The sun is setting. A gentle breeze with a scent of independence caresses their faces.
Golyadkin, our protagonist, is waiting for them.
The world of the oppressed rests in Dostoyevsky's prose. The essential analyst of the human nature.
Briefly, The Double is about Mr. Golyadkin and his doppelgänger, Mr. Golyadkin Jr., someone who has been born under a stressful snowstorm.
This novella has many elements that can be found in Gogol's work. His influence on Dostoyevsky is well-known. However, this writer dealt with those same themes with an innovative style that traces clear boundaries. He even did that with his own work. For me, this was nothing like the novels I have read before. Universal themes like oppression, sorrow, alienation, work and loneliness are always treated from different angles and original ways of execution. Originality perceived by the mind of Sábato: we all are the sum of what we have read. Topics don't change; the way we deal with them might.
When I read [b:The Brothers Karamazov|4934|The Brothers Karamazov|Fyodor Dostoyevsky|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1427728126s/4934.jpg|3393910], my eyes contemplated Dostoyevsky's genius, word by word. My copy is all written. I highlighted hundreds of sentences that tried to enlighten the intricate path toward the mind. A modest attempt at understanding. However, the times I underlined something on The Double was for the main purpose of keeping up with the story. Actions. Names. I din't find many memorable reflections that left me at awe. The ones I found were at the beginning, mostly. So, what then? It was all in the interpretation. The development of facts, the story itself was what left me staring at an invisible point, drawing in the air, pondering about my own existence and the futility of things.
The fragility of one of the most precious things we own. Our mind. A set of cognitive faculties. A place. A process. Sanity.
His position at that moment was like the position of a man standing over a frightful precipice, when the earth breaks away under him, is rocking, shifting, sways for a last time, and falls, drawing him into the abyss, and meanwhile the unfortunate man has neither the strength nor the firmness of spirit to jump back, to take his eyes from the yawning chasm; the abyss draws him, and he finally leaps into it himself, himself hastening the moment of his own perdition. (39)
We cannot own our mind. Under certain circumstances—sad, nerve wracking, shameful circumstances—, it reacts as it pleases. Or the best way it can. It is the main source of who we are and yet, a trivial fact has the power to break it. A single act. An accumulation of traumatic acts. A life of unfortunate events. A pile of obedient frustrations. The meek silence of unwanted, inevitable solitude. The desire of success in a suffocating environment with people that have already been chosen over you. The search of identity in an alienated world. You can't be alone too much.
These are just some of the observations that emerge from The Double, a true work of art that portrays a man's psychological struggle using a brushstroke of unforgiving reality. We are placed inside Golyadkin's head. We are privileged spectators of his mind. We see it work. We see it weep. We see it shocked, unable to move. We shout, because we know what to do (even though we probably would react the same way if we were in his shoes, you never know).
A privilege that thrills and frightens.
There's much emotion in Dostoyevsky's descriptive and cautious writing. So much, it's difficult to bear.
Sep 29, 15
* Note: Months ago, I watched a 2013 film starring Jesse Eisenberg, based on this novella. Artistically exquisite. Keep it in mind!
** Also on my blog.
challenging
emotional
reflective
slow-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
La ruptura del Yo, una identidad fragmentada en dos personas. Podemos ver la crisis psíquica que sufre el personaje principal y como evoluciona hacia la locura debido a la propia confusión que experimenta, la cual me contagió logrando confundirme tanto como a él cuando le ocurrían cosas que no podía entender. Nos adentra en su mente y nos retrata su experiencia a medida que progresa su condición. El final es liberador para el protagonista
dark
funny
mysterious
tense
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
funny
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Als lezer ben je aan het eind net zo in de war als de hoofdpersoon zelf, wat ik juist wel sterk vind. Ook al kan ik me voorstellen dat je daardoor ook kan afhaken, want soms moet je stukken opnieuw lezen om na te gaan of je het wel goed begrijpt en dan nog weet je eigenlijk niet of je het goed begrijpt. De schrijfstijl en de lange zinnen, de herhalingen en de gedachten die soms alle kanten opgaan reflecteren wel goed de staat van de hoofdpersoon.