"This urgency, this wildness, the seeming unruliness of his style, which is echoed in the many abrupt twists and turns in the action toward the end of the chapters—the reader must be kept in a state of suspense until the next installment—runs against something else, something heavier and slower, a patiently insistent question that is related to everything that is happening: What are we living for?"
Writes the great novelist Karl Ove Knausgaard, in
"The Light of 'The Brothers Karamazov'/Although Fyodor Dostoyevsky wrote with wildness and urgency, he patiently insisted on asking an essential question: What are we living for?" (The New Yorker).
Dostoyevsky was rushing because he was writing installments and needed the money. His wife observed
that he could have written far more beautifully it only he had some leisure to edit and rewrite. But the results are so good, it's hard to believe the rushing wasn't part of what made it good.
I'm giving this post my "time" tag: "As Dostoyevsky once wrote, 'Man is a mystery... If you spend your entire life trying to puzzle it out, then do not say that you have wasted your time. I occupy myself with this mystery, because I want to be a man.'..."
Mga Post
22 komento:
Evolutionary fitness? Perhaps a conservation of momentum.
"This urgency, this wildness, the seeming unruliness of his style, which is echoed in the many abrupt twists and turns in the action...the reader must be kept in a state of suspense until the next installmentIs..."
Is this The New Yorker's attempt at a thinly-veiled snipe at Trump's Truth Social posts?
Ha, I had a similar reaction. I thought the headline and paragraph was just another anti-Trump editorial.
Knausgaard, in my opinion, is more energetic typist than "great novelist." But maybe it's better in Norwegian.
I applied Knausgaard to my Knaus, and -- sure enough -- it did the trick.
I am Laslo.
Knauss is also the First Lady's maiden name.
“The world says: "You have needs -- satisfy them. You have as much right as the rich and the mighty. Don't hesitate to satisfy your needs; indeed, expand your needs and demand more." This is the worldly doctrine of today. And they believe that this is freedom. The result for the rich is isolation and suicide, for the poor, envy and murder.” ~ Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov
Visit his digs in St. Petersburg if you have the chance.
Both Crime and Punishment and The Brother Karamazov have seen huge rises in sales in the last five years -- the latter has more than tripled its annual sales since 2020 -- so I think some people are moving on to the major works.
Dostoyevsky understood men, angst, and alcohol.
I find that Jane Austen had a humorous understanding, mostly of women, with Lady Susan being the most hilarious.
William Golding's Lord of the Flies is by far the most accurate of people in general except perhaps Orwell.
Orwell understood how we all and how easily we lie to ourselves, and others. Not just as individuals, but also as groups.
Conrad is a mixed bag.
He was a great writer in his day, however, I can’t say that I have met many people who are like the characters of his books. He seems to be more about what people are like when they have been alienated or separated from others etc.
Dostoyevsky was thoroughly enjoyable, but his view was limited by his times. It seems like people have to go through a Dostoyevsky phase though in order to properly grow up, so it is very promising that young people are reading Dostoyevsky.
"Dostoyevsky was rushing because he was writing installments and needed the money."
Panic is a powerful motivator.
Dostoyevsky understood that everyone is simultaneously oppressed and an oppressor, and that if you gave a man or woman everything they desired, they would immediately devise new ways to be unhappy. For these reasons a utopia is impossible, and attempts to create one lead to disaster.
Figes's discussion of Dostoyevsky in "Natasha's Dance" gave me a better understanding of his thoughts, but didn't make me want to read Dostoyevsky.
I am averse to spirituality, especially Russian spirituality.
And twice on Sunday.
Knausgaard, in my opinion, is more energetic typist than "great novelist." But maybe it's better in Norwegian.
No it's not.
I can't understand why he's held in such high esteem, even by people that I hold in high esteem.
Nabokov maligned Dostoevsky for not paying enough attention to style. There is a mystery at the heart of the Brothers Karamazov that does make for suspense in novelistic terms. I don't know if that satisfies people who aren't novel readers and are more accustomed to suspense in other media.
TBK does go somewhere -- the hurried suspense mounts to a conclusion. So does Crime and Punishment. The Idiot doesn't seem to get very far. All the hurried installments don't give much of a payoff. It feels the same with some of Dickens's works.
"My personal philosophy is that all writers need to put GET PAID in their mission statement. All that artistic creative stuff is nice too, but make sure GET PAID is in there (in all caps)." -- Larry Correia
Made me think of the Hamilton line: “Why are you writing like you’re running out of time?”
That also describes Trump. You’d have to replace ‘writing’ with ‘building’ or just ‘Trumping,’ though. He probably sees things through the prism of not having much time left, even without mofos tryna killim. CC, JSM
Kaki, thank you for your fine post here.
The Grand Inquisitor and the later Ivan's nightmare when he is visited by Satan are remarkable. The rest of the novel is largely crazy people behaving oddly. The father who was murdered seems like the only sane character.
Dostoevevsky was friends with pobestdenev the very orthodox interior minister and mentor of the last two czars
Pobestdenev was the inspiration for the father of the protagonist in belys petersburg
Althouse writes quickly and prolifically. We know the results.
The three biggest philosophical influencers on Jordan Peterson are Dostoevsky, Nietzsche and Jung
Kak: Whenever someone mentions "Lord of the Flies," I think of this. The synopsis is provided by ChatGPT:
Real-Life Incident: The Tonga Island Survival
The incident you’re referring to involves a group of young boys from the Tonga Island in 1965, often compared to the themes of "Lord of the Flies," but with very different outcomes.
Key Facts
The Incident: In 1965, six boys aged between 13 and 16 years old from a boarding school in Tonga decided to swim to a deserted island called "Ata" for an adventure. Their plan was to spend a few days on the island, but they ended up stranded for 15 months.
The Boys: The group consisted of six boys: Sione, Tua, Kolo, Tevita, Mika, and Latau. They were friends and had a strong bond prior to the incident.
Survival: Contrary to the violent descent into chaos depicted in "Lord of the Flies," the boys created a functioning society on the island. They managed to build shelters, catch fish, and find food, showing cooperation and mutual support. Their sense of community and collaboration helped them endure the harsh conditions.
Rescue: The boys were eventually rescued in 1966 after a passing ship spotted them. Their story gained significant media attention, and they recounted the experience of survival, emphasizing cooperation rather than conflict.
Themes and Lessons
Cooperation vs. Conflict: Unlike the regression into savagery in Golding’s novel, the boys exemplified teamwork and resourcefulness.
Human Nature: Their actions challenge the notion that isolation leads to chaos, instead highlighting compassion and solidarity.
This real-life event serves as a counter-narrative to the themes explored in "Lord of the Flies," showcasing a different aspect of human behavior in extreme circumstances."
I felt Conrad is more of a demonstration of why colonialism fell apart, than of the human condition itself in a general way.
Dostoyevsky is the neuroticism of unhappy families in a highly patriarchal and elitist society.
Jane Austen is the neuroticism of happy families in a somewhat similar society.
It is fun to contrast them, because the differences in the empires and gender radically changed the difference in perspectives. Both will endure because there is a universality to their very different ideas. The hubris of youth, and neuroticism of family still seem pretty universal.
Mag-post ng isang Komento
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.