Why does /lit/ jack off to this hack? He's utter shit.

How will he ever recover?!

File: 1f465e38021202c30e2145df0d69d623.jpg (31KB, 423x750px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 423x750px

>>9395186
If he's shit, what does that make you?

>>9395219
He won't; Op has checkmated

>>9395219
>>9395238

>bourgeois modernists liking this The Machinist tier bullshit

>>9395186
How is he a hack exactly?

>>9395186
being a contrarian is fun isn't it?

>>9395306
>oh just because he calls shit what it is means he is trying to be a contrarian!!!!!

I hate you bourgeois fucks. Read something good for a change. I hate this fucking board.

>>9395332
ok, what should i be reading friend?

>>9395342
>who is Ernst Bloch
>who is Rosa Luxemburg

You uncultured swine

>>9395353
noted

What is there to criticize?

You do know what Marx thought about shitty socialist writers vs bourgeois swine like Balzac, right?

>>9395404
What did he think, Porky?

>13 year old anon just read dostoyevsky's wikipedia article and found out he wrote a book critical of secularism and revolutionary socialism

>>9395404
uh, wasn't Balzac one of Engel's favorite writers? come on, broe

>>9395466
Sadly this

File: 1489704051819.gif (618KB, 313x235px) Image search: [Google]

618KB, 313x235px

>>9395353
>Marxists
>cultured

>>9395186
I think he may seem over sensationalized at times. The Idiot took about 4 months to grow on me, because it is definitely not a typical novel.

I fell in love with Crime and Punishment right from the start, but I'm also one of the weird people who sympathizes with Raskolnikov throughout the book.

My biggest issue with C&P has to be that it contradicts itself. A major theme is Raskolnikov thinking he's equal to Napoleon, but we see that he lacks the drive or the moral strength to go through with his actions. The very Christian themes of the novel should in theory reinforce the idea of human pettiness, but the scene structure does the opposite.

As I mentioned before, Dostoevsky is a very dramatic and sensationalizing writer. Nabokov called him a journalist, and at times it may seem like he really was writing for a heightened sense of storytelling. For example, the usage of suddenly is very overplayed in his stories. That just kind of bothers me a little. Everything in his novels seems to be catered towards his protagonist. The Idiot allows this to work best, what with the messiah symbolism and all, but it does sometimes fall flat on his face, most notably in the role of women in C&P. They are only reactors to all of Raskolnivkov's actions. It seems to me like a missed opportunity to show the fallibility of man, but he is the writer and the genius, so what do I know?

There is a poetry to his writing at times. One of my favourite pages in literature is Myshkin's telling of the man who was to face his hanging, and also of the painting of christ in his tomb. Beautiful, just some of the most well-fitting stuff I've ever read.

Ok, I got carried away. Basically, the issue a lot of people have with his work would probably have to be the transparency in the writing. I think that may sometimes be just an issue with not reading enough, or perhaps in the critic's appreciation of the writing process and the influences of the time.

His work holds a lot of unviersal feelings and cultural oopmh that so little else has. There is nothing like it.

>>9395555
>My biggest issue with C&P has to be that it contradicts itself. A major theme is Raskolnikov thinking he's equal to Napoleon, but we see that he lacks the drive or the moral strength to go through with his actions.

Raskolnikov's self-image conflicting with his actions is not a contradiction, it's a crucial element of the book.

>>9395186
>>9395219
What the fuck I hate dostoevsky now