This was my first Dostoevsky, and also one of the worst books

>>9149570

>Are all his books like this?

No, they really aren't.

>pre-modernist
lel

>>9150052
Its true though

File: shakespeare.jpg (84KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 1280x720px

I love it, more so than his other works.

>>9149570
>also one of the worst books i've ever read.
agreed.

File: Ux0dvc6.png (30KB, 500x461px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 500x461px

>tfw the Underground Man described you perfectly and you loved Dostoyevsky all the more for it and for calling you out on your bullshit from a century and a half ago.

Thank you, Dosty-sensei

>>9149570
>Pre-modernist stream of consciousness garbage
Kek top, m8. You have no idea what you're talking about
>Nabokov thinks he is a sentimental mediocrity
...and you have no idea why he called him that.

>>9149570
I think Notes From Underground probably resonates more with people who are pseudo-NEET misanthrope whinebags because the book tells you that is such an ugly and irrational way to live. It's why the first half of the book is a rambling, stream of consciousness meandering rant where he frequently contradicts himself. He's struggling to rationalise why his awkwardness, failure and misanthropy is worthwhile. It's more often than not worthwhile.

The book really assisted in kicking my backside out of a self-piteous and self-loathing loop.

Completely appreciate and understand why people may not like it, especially if it's your first Dostoevsky (although his other works differ greatly), but I would probably argue that the book holds more importance with the narcissistic depressives who constantly want pity but never want to change themselves.

>>9150435
The burden of proof isn't on me jackass

>>9149570
One of the most honest books of all time and a complete masterpiece

Its just also for some reason the defacto target moronic special snowflakes use for their hipsterish Dostoyevsky-hate

File: 1480293679800.png (208KB, 807x935px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 807x935px

>>9149570
The reach of Peterson is so deep.

File: peterpray.png (374KB, 437x508px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 437x508px

>>9150232
Kind of reminded me of catcher in the rye in that way, really made me want to stop being such a self-excusing responsibility shirking coward

>>9150447
Is 'burden of proof' the new 'pseudo-intellectual' in argumentation toolbox?

>>9150435
Explain it then

File: 1474466594706.jpg (40KB, 535x577px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 535x577px

>>9150232
Every time U-man described the boundless vanity in his actions I died a little inside. How can a St. Petersburg 19th century civil servant-turned-NEET seem so familiar?

>>9149570
You're retarded. What a surprise.

File: 1470876980342.png (806KB, 1001x823px) Image search: [Google]

806KB, 1001x823px

>>9150232
>>9150495
Same, it absolutely killed me when I first read it, but I'm such a better person now for it.

>>9150770
Great argument

>>9150232
>>9150630
>>9152140

People who identify themselves in literature are bad readers.

>>9152417
Care to substantiate that at all?

>>9152445
It is what sentimental readers do, an emotional insecurify.

>>9152503
Not in this case, the people you quoted saw a critique of their own personalities in the underground man, and took that and examined their own faults. That's not at all an insecurity, it's a strength. They're not self-inserting themselves as a hero like you seem to be implying.

>>9152541
He's a complete retard, don't bother.

>>9152445
You're bringing in extratextual elements to something that should exist on it's own.

>>9149570
Yet the Idiot is even worse.

File: Bookbait.jpg (160KB, 600x847px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 600x847px

>>9152417
Terrible post famalam

>>9152569
Like what?

>>9152541
Children identify themselves as the characters

>>9152579
For example, these folks
>>9150495
>>9150630
>>9152140
are saying that the book is good because of themselves, and the emotions that were elicited from the book, as opposed to the text itself being good. The idea being that a book is good insofar as it has a relation to the reader, making the reader more important than the book itself.

>>9152569
>he thinks a text has meaning independent of a reader
>he doesn't recognize the inherent subjectivity of the meaning of language

>>9152594
Hows highschool going?

>>9152614
Yes, I think accepting the idea that pieces of art have objective values is necessary for any sort of literary study that doesn't devolve into narcissism.

>>9152592
They aren't identifying themselves as the characters, they're identifying a critique of themselves that the story presents.

>>9152594
Then I have to ask you what you think makes a 'good' story? How can a story have any importance if no one is reading it? I don't mean any of this facetiously either. The way I see it, stories are for the audience, not the other way around.

>>9152630

He might be an autist. Even muh Greeks tried to assign objective values to literature. These objective values changed with the times and were de-facto destroyed by post-modern literature. The meme that art is entirely subjective exists only since ~1960. Before that,

I bet the retard you responded to also thinks that there are no bad interpretations of literary works or art in general.

"I think the Mona Lisa is about Mussolini's fascist dictatorship as mr. Vinci was Italian and the lady doesn't really smile. His use of colors symbolizes humanity's desire to be free, as opposed to the oppressing black and white movies of 1920-1940 (times of fascism.)

a.k.a "The catcher in the rye is really about a kid who I identify as a psychology textbook. Here are 32 pages on why I think he was ridden with every single mental disorder I personally know."

>>9152630
I can make up a symbol right now and then define it. The change when I define it will not be in the symbol but in our mind. Objective meaning is not a thing because meaning is a relationship between an object and an interpreter, or subject, not something found in the object itself. Since all our minds are different, meaning will vary from person to person. If you don't understand at least that, then you aren't even equipped to interpret literature by your own metrics, since this very subjectivity is influential in the thoughts of many writers.

>>9152644
Beauty, harmony, all the things that make known to us the aesthetic ideals of reality. The key difference being that these ideals, while being interpreted through our mind, refer to real truths about beauty and life.

>>9152697
If the meaning is not found in the object, then it is found in the interpreter, which makes the object a formality at best.

>>9152728
No, it is the relationship. There is a holism between the object and the subject, because while the subject solely experiences the meaning, his mind could not have created it without the object. The object is still integral to the form the meaning takes without itself containing that or any meaning.

>>9152701
I can accept that. So going back to those three posts from earlier, aren't their reactions to the story coming from those ideals of beauty? Dostoevsky shows us truths about ugliness and life, presumably in the hope that we will avoid it at least, and at best move towards ideals of beauty. And it seems like those three got that out of it.

So relating to a character, while being profoundly affected by their story, and being able to recognise and appreciate the author's original intention of their story are mutually exclusive?

Is that what you all are arguing about?

>>9152644
Literature is not about gaining applicable knowledge for life.

>>9152743
I'm not convinced that's the case.
>>9152140
Talks exclusively about himself.(Excusable, reply to the previous two posts)
>>9150232
This one only describes the book in terms of effect on himself.
>>9150495
Ditto
>>9150630
This one talks about the critique, but I'd like to hear more about it.

If you anons got quoted in this post, I would love to hear more about Notes from you. About the critique in particular, but anything else you found transcendent would be lovely.

>>9152739
Doesn't this mean that the original meaning caused by the object is more important that the subjective meaning as an effect of the objective meaning.

>>9149570
>No wonder Nabokov thinks he is a sentimental mediocrity
He wasn't referring to this novel, you fucking retard. Why don't you read more before making such stupid statements?

>>9152417
I disagree with you.

>>9150438
>the book is self-help therapy
No.

>>9154049
Its juvenile

>>9149570
No it is great

>>9152756
>literature's only uses are what I say they are
Dismissed.

>>9150447
The burden is in the faggot making those statements: you.

>>9150447
>anything is true until proven wrong

I'm reading Crime and Punishment atm. It's a very good book but a lot of it feels like filler and can get a bit boring. It's also annoying keeping track of all the different names that fly around. Some of the characters are referred to by multiple names.

>>9152683

>Implying postmodernism hasn't already been refuted.