April 2014: Fyodor Dostoevsky

Fyodor Dostoevsky is up for April! Have you read any of his before? Any titles or translations to recommend?

I've read Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov and thoroughly enjoyed them. Also on my shelves are Demons (aka Devils, formerly known as The Possessed until someone said "hey, that's a bad translation of the title!") and Notes from the Underground and The Gambler (the former being another that's supposed to be a bad title translation, according to Nabokov!).

As for translations, both of what I read were by Constance Garnett, who is supposed to be a somewhat lacking translator. I still found the books really interesting, though. Hers is usually what's found in cheaper editions (or free online, so for instance if you were to get copies on Gutenberg), so she's also the translator of my cheap Wordsworth Editions copy of Devils. After reading comments about her, now I'm not sure whether I should read it or look for a better one! Which makes me rethink my plan of picking that title for this month. Notes... is an Oxford copy, a "new translation by Jane Kentish," so I imagine the quality of that one is good.

In a Club Read thread, StevenTX said "My most enthusiastic recommendation would be the translations of Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky of any Russian authors, of Fyodor Dostoevsky in particular, and especially of Crime and Punishment. Several years ago I read a 19th century translation of C&P by an anonymous translator, and hated it. Later I read the P&V translation and was literally on the edge of my seat and breathless--just as Dostoevsky himself was breathless with passion as he dictated the novel to his secretary.

There are free translations of Dostoevsky's work by Constance Garnett. Her work is serviceable, but she captures nothing of the individual authors' styles--they all sound alike. And supposedly when she came across a Russian word she didn't know, she just left it out."

And sparemethecensor chimed in "Ditto Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky! They really capture the spirit of the works and the different storytelling styles, not just translating the words. I do not care for Constance Garnett whatsoever, and it's nice that Pevear and Volokhonsky have finally appeared to reduce Garnett's ubiquitousness. I also liked Sidney Monas's translation of Crime and Punishment."

I also have Devils on my TBR - got a copy in college a couple years back and never managed to start it. It was billed upon its publication as nonfiction or quasi-nonfiction (one is never sure with Dostoyevsky) so I'm very interested as I've only read his novels thus far.

Oh? I have no idea what it's about (that's how I prefer things, I like books (and movies) to just unfold as they will and surprise me), I didn't realize that, interesting.

I just looked on my kindle and I have The Possessed or The Devils and I think I have a real book at home just not sure the title. I have read Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov and enjoyed both of them very much. So count me in.

Woo! :) Do you know who the translator on your copy is, ALWINN?

On my Kindle it says Constance Garnett.

I'm contemplating buying a copy done by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky, since they're supposed to be the awesome pair...

I thought I'd follow the translations thread recommendation of Pevear and Volokhonsky, and so far the only Dostoevsky of theirs I've found is Notes From Underground in a very nice hardback Everyman edition. It is tempting as it is very very short, but I would like to read the bigger novels. Will have to weigh up time commitments. I'm going to a different bookstore this weekend, so will see what they have. Unfortunately the search has resulted in my staggering home with some Pevear and Volokhonsky translations of Tolstoy, which wasn't supposed to happen! Definitely don't have time to read him just now.

Hahaha, I certainly know how that goes!

>7 .Monkey.:, 8

not sure if it carries over or matters or is relevant, but this pair's translation of war and peace is supposed to be far and away the best and truest. don't know if it holds for other books/authors, but ...

I've had Crime and Punishment sitting on my bookshelf for years, so I'm going to attempt that one. Turns out I have a Constance Garnett translation also.

Honestly, while it may be better in the other translations mentioned, I still thought it was a great book, regardless of her apparently mediocre skills. I guess Dostoevsky is just that good. ;)

Crime And Punishment (this is a duplicate posting to that on the "I'm pickin' up good translations.." thread, but thought it might be useful here for anyone deciding on a translation - although you'll see that I couldn't, and now have three versions to read!.)

David MacDuff 1991 revised 2003 (text used is that contained in vol 6 of F. M. Dostoyevsky, Polnoye sobranie scochineniy v tridtsati tomakh (Leningrad 1973) and use has also been made of the draft material and notes made in Vol 7.) Penguin Classics

At the beginning of July, during a spell of exceptionally hot weather, towards evening, a certain young man came down on to the street from the little room he rented from some tenants in S - Lane and slowly, almost hesitantly, set off towards K - n Bridge.

He had succeeded in avoiding an encounter with his landlady on the stairs. His room was situated right under the roof of a tall, five-storey tenement, and sooner resembled a closet than a place of habitation. His landlady, from whom he rented this room with dinner and a maid, lived on the floor below in a separate apartment, and each time he wanted to go down to the street he had to pass his landlady's kitchen, the door of which was nearly always wide-open on to the stairs. And each time, as he passed it, the young man had a morbid sensation of fear, of which he was ashamed and which caused him to frown. He was heavily in debt to his landlady, and was afraid of running into her.

Not that he was particularly timid or cowed - quite the opposite, indeed: but for some time now he had been in a tense, irritable state of mind that verged upon hypochondria. ... ... As a matter of fact, no landlady on earth had the power to make him afraid, no matter what she might be plotting against him. But to have to stop on the stairs and listen to all the mediocre rubbish that had nothing whatsoever to do with him, all those pestering demands for payment, those threats and complaints, and be compelled in response to shift his ground, make excuses, tell lies - no, it was better to slink down the stairs like a cat and steal away unseen by anyone.

As he emerged on to the street on this occasion, however, his terror of meeting his creditoress shocked even him.

Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky 1992 (translation made from the Russian text of the Soviet Academy of Sciences edition, volumes six and seven (Leningrad 1973) Vintage Classics

At the beginning of July, during an extremely hot spell, towards evening, a young man left the closet he rented from tenants in S -y Lane, walked out to the street, and slowly, as if indecisively, headed for the K - n Bridge.

He had safely avoided meeting his landlady on the stairs. His closet was located just under the roof of a tall, five-storied house, and was more like a cupboard than a room. As for the landlady, from whom he rented this closet with dinner and maid-service included, she lived one flight below, in separate rooms, and every time he went out he could not fail to pass by the landlady's kitchen, the door of which almost always stood wide open to the stairs. And each time he passed by, the young man felt some painful and cowardly sensation, which made him wince with shame. He was over his head in debt to the landlady and was afraid of meeting her.

It was not that he was so cowardly and downtrodden, even quite the contrary; but for some time he had been in an irritable and tense state, resembling hypochondria. ... ... As a matter of fact, he was not afraid of any landlady, whatever she might be plotting against him. But to stop on the stairs, to listen to all sorts of nonsense about this commonplace rubbish, which he could not care less about, all this badgering for payment, these threats and complaints, and to have to dodge all the while, make excuses, lie - oh, no, better to steal catlike down the stairs somehow and slip away unseen by anyone.

This time, however, as he walked out to the street, even he was struck by his fear of meeting his creditor.

Oliver Ready 2014 (also based on Vol 6 Leningrad 1973 as above) Penguin Classics

In early July, in exceptional heat, towards evening, a young man left the garret he was renting in S - y Lane, stepped outside, and slowly, as if in two minds, set off toward K - n Bridge.

He'd successfully avoided meeting his landlady on the stairs. His garret was right beneath the eaves of a tall, five-storey building and resembled a cupboard more than it did a room. His landlady - a tenant herself, who also provided him with dinner and a maid - occupied separate rooms on the floor below, and every time he went down he had no choice but to pass her kitchen, the door of which was nearly always wide open. And every time he passed it, the young man experienced a sickening, craven sensation that made him wince with shame. He owed his landlady a small fortune and he was scared of meeting her.

Not that he was really so very craven or browbeaten - far from it; but for some time now he'd been in an irritable, tense state of mind not unlike hypochondria. .... .... He couldn't really be scared of a mere landlady, whatever she might be plotting. But to stop on the stairs, to listen to her prattle on about everyday trivia that meant nothing to him, and pester him about payments, threaten and whine, while he had to squirm, apologize and lie - no, better to slink past like a cat and slip out unnoticed.

Still, as he stepped out into the street, even he was astonished by the terror that had overcome him just now at the thought of meeting his creditor.

The Pevear and Volokhonsky translation was the winner of the 1991 PEN/Book-of-the-Month Club Prize For Best Translation, and, according to the back cover, was called 'The best translation currently available' by the Washington Post, yet to me of the three versions of the opening few paragraphs of Crime And Punishment theirs seems the most awkward. Given that we are to understand that the young man was renting an extremely small space, which was much like a cupboard, their decision to use the word 'closet' seems curious, particularly when they must then say that the closet was like a cupboard.

Ready says in his translator's note that he finds that earlier translations tend "towards a polish, and therefore tameness, absent in Dostoevsky's text (effects gained in large part by judicious trimming or padding); or else they have clung so closely to the Russian that the spell cast by the original is periodically broken by jarring literalism, and the author's peculiarities of style, smoothed over in other translations, are made odder still." It seems from his note that in order to return to something feeling like the book would have felt at the time of its first publication, and to replicate the variations of different characters' speech patterns and the distinction between the modern and the archaic in the original his version may be a more liberal translation. Indeed, I note that Nastasya says "sick as a parrot, aren't you", whereas in McDuff she says "I think you're quite ill, aren't you".

McDuff seems to read well, but then on the other hand while, Ready and P&L have opted for "wince with shame" in McDuff's version the young man's morbid sensation of fear causes him to frown.

I was unable to decide on which edition to use as my introduction to Dostoyevsky, so have come home with all three. I suspect I will go with the Ready, and cross refer from time to time with the others. Will post in how I get on, but the result may be as much how much I like Ready as how much I like Dostoyevsky. Interesting to note that Penguin have changed their spelling of Dostoyevsky between the two versions. They have also signaled a change in approach by moving away from the usual Penguin Classics cover with a black background for the title below a painting (or in the case of McDuff a black and white photograph) and have used two 1964 pencil drawings by Mihail Chemiakin, one Raskolnikov's Dream and the other Sonechka for an edgier contemporary (even if they are fifty years old!) look. The Penguin Classics branding only appears at the bottom of the back cover.

Hmm, I agree that the P&V one sounds most awkward, I actually like it the least. I first leaned towards McDuff, but then thought in a couple cases it looks like it's trying to be too modern, but then you say Ready is purposely going for that sort of thing, and to me, that is far more jarring than some slightly stilted language that fits in with an older text. Hm. So conflicted!

Well I'm going to pull out mine (Garnett's) and add to the comparisons!

"On an exceptionally hot evening early in July a young man came out of the garret in which he lodged in S. Place and walked slowly, as though in hesitation, towards K. Bridge.

He had successfully avoided meeting his landlady on the staircase. His garret was under the roof of a high, five-storied house, and was more like a cupboard than a room. The landlady, who provided him with garret, dinners, and attendance, lived on the floor below, and every time he went out he was obliged to pass her kitchen, the door of which invariably stood open. And each time he passed, the young man had a sick, frightened feeling, which made him scowl and feel ashamed. He was hopelessly in debt to his landlady, and was afraid of meeting her.

This was not because he was cowardly and abject, quite the contrary; but for some time past, he had been in an over-strained, irritable condition, verging on hypochondria. (apparently we're skipping 3 sentences here?) Nothing any landlady could do had a real terror for him. But to be stopped on the stairs, to be forced to listen to her trivial, irrelevant gossip, to pestering demands for payment, threats and complaints, and to rack his brains for excuses, to prevaricate, to lie—no, rather than that, he would creep down the stairs like a cat and slip out unseen.

This evening, however, on coming out into the street, he became acutely aware of his fears."

It's very similar to Ready, except a few words she seems to have dropped or slightly altered, possibly due to not knowing them (like meeting the creditor/ess), as mentioned by StevenTX.

> 13 Wow, thanks for posting these! It's really interesting to see the various translations side by side. Obviously, at the end of the day, they are all conveying the same substance, but of course the wording is a HUGE deal in literature. I really like how Ready uses "as if in two minds" rather than "indecisively" and "hesitantly" as the other translators do. I have no idea if this is the closest to the original language or not, but it's such a lovely phrase that really stood out to me whereas the other two words did not. I think you're on to something that part of the reading "result may be as much how much I like Ready as how much I like Dostoyevsky." I'm somewhat embarrassed to say that I usually only read American and British literature, so the issue of which translator to use is rarely a problem for me.

Also, for comparison purposes, I'm including the same opening passage as translated by Constance Garrett:

On an exceptionally hot evening early in July a young man came out of the garret in which he lodged in S. Place and walked slowly, as though in hesitation, towards K. Bridge.

He had successfully avoided meeting his landlady on the staircase. His garret was under the roof of a high, five-storied house, and was more like a cupboard than a room. The landlady, who provided him with garret, dinners, and attendance, lived on the floor below, and every time he went out he was obliged to pass her kitchen, the door of which invariably stood open. And each time he passed, the young man had a sick, frightened feeling, which made him scowl and feel ashamed. He was hopelessly in debt to his landlady, and was afraid of meeting her.

This was not because he was cowardly and abject, quite the contrary; but for some time past, he had been in an overstrained, irritable condition, verging on hypochondria. He had become so completely absorbed in himself, and isolated from his fellows that he dreaded meeting, not only his landlady, but any one at all. He was crushed by poverty, but the anxieties of his position had of late ceased to weigh upon him. He had given up attending to matters of practical importance; he had lost all desire to do so. Nothing that any landlady could do had a real terror for him. But to be stopped on the stairs, to be forced to listen to her trivial, irrelevant gossip. to pestering demands for payment, threats and complaints, and to rack his brains for excuses, to prevaricate, to lie - no, rather than that, he would creep down the stairs like a cat and slip out unseen.

This evening, however, on coming out into the street, he became acutely aware of his fears.

> 14 Oops, looks like we posted at exactly the same time! Oh well, twice the Garnett now ...

Also, while checking on who has done what so far as translations, since these new names made me curious about the other titles as well, I came upon this site which seems invaluable! You can check here for Dostoevsky's "Demons" (I think I prefer Maguire) and this page for the various Dostoevsky works they have available for comparison.

>13 Oandthegang:

wow. i'm left with the feeling of: well i guess i'll have to learn russian then! thanks for posting this; it's really interesting...

McDuff makes an interesting comment in his translator's note: "While the translation strives to retain as much of Dostoyevsky's style, syntax and sentence-structure as possible, it also tries to take account of the general literary context in which the author composed the novel. It is important for the reader of English to be aware, for example, that in certain passages and chapters Dostoyevsky wrote under the direct influence of Edgar Allan Poe and Charles Dickens, among other English language authors, and at time the translation attempts to reflect their style too,. It also aims to provide a readable text as possible, in keeping with the novel's background in the popular journalism of its time, and its engagement with topical issues." While Poe and Dickens are not exactly lauded for their punchy brevity, the reference to popular journalism would mean that Ready's case for updating with colloquial
expressions, even if
Ready talks about the difficulty of translating simple expressions and words, as they have greater accretions of meaning. The Russian word 'delo' means ('deed', 'action', 'criminal case', 'matter', 'thing', or 'business'.

I wouldn't want someone rewriting Poe or Dickens to update their expressions and text to modern-day stuff, so why would I want someone to do that for translations? (That is not negatively directed at you, just in case it reads that way! Just stating my own opinion/feeling on the matter :))

I was planning on reading The Brothers Karamazov in June for a Category Challenge group read. I've learned my lesson with Bleak House so I'm starting early. I picked up the Pevear/Volokhonsky translation.

Thanks for supplying these examples side by side! It's interesting because I remember when I re-read Crime and Punishment in the Peaver & Volokhonsky, it seemed so authentically Russian. (My first read was by Sidney Monas, which I still highly recommend, but does have a more Western feel.) Russian as a language is lyrical but not particularly flowery, and as #19 notes, words can have many meanings.

A strength that I do think is clear in the P&V is that Dostoyevsky is a highly allusive writer, particularly with Christian (Orthodox) allusions, and I think their translation captures the spirit of that more strongly than the Monas or certainly the Garnett. Crime and Punishment is a more interesting work when you have that context.

(I should note that after four years of Russian in college, I was able to read novels like A Hero of Our Time and most poetry but struggled with Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, etc., due to the participles. So I am certainly not an expert on this topic...)

#1 Polymathic .. .:) whatever
Question: Were Pear and Volokonsky available at the time that Constance Garnett was translating Russian novels by Dostoevsky, etc., into English to the delight of competitive English language publishers? Not knowing Russian, it may not have made a difference to me, a young neophyte reader then, overwhelmed by Dostoevsky and Tolstoy, on any level. The ease of translating and producing texts wholesale in instant replicates today is so great, it would be ingratitude not to recognize Garnett as among the finest translators of her time (when the Underwood typewriter was Desk Top Chief suplemented by carbon copies so laborious to correct, one at a time). Considering intercontinental distribution of literary works then, by todayʻs standard, the old ways were indeed humble. But it is true that translations DO matter. I owe all I love of Pablo Neruda to Merwinʻs translations in TWENTY LOVE POEMS AND A SONG OF DESPAIR (1969). It would not do for others to not read the best, which is not necessarily competitively decided either.
Some very small publishers do excellent work on excellent writers but have not the engines of industry and commerce for sails.

>23 leialoha:

I have no problem with crediting Garnett as a good translator for her time -- the late 19th century for many of these works! -- but that doesn't mean the modern reader shouldn't pick from the far more impressive array of choices available now.

I also personally think that omitting any words you don't understand is bad practice for translators whether in 1900 or 2000. That's not what translating is about.

I came across a quote attributed to Russian poet Joseph Brodsky regarding Garnett: "The reason English-speaking readers can barely tell the difference between Tolstoy and Dostoevsky is that they aren't reading the prose of either one. They're reading Constance Garnett."

Perhaps Garnett launched Russian literature into English readers' hands, but that doesn't mean she isn't a relic, now.

But as with anything, YMMV. I say, read whatever works best for you.

I also personally think that omitting any words you don't understand is bad practice for translators whether in 1900 or 2000. That's not what translating is about.

Yes, this!! If you can't find the definitions for all the words, what are you even doing?? Yeah, great that she got the ball rolling, but that doesn't mean shoddy translations should be highly regarded just because they were the first.

Despite all the praise heaped on the P&V translation I am finding Crime And Punishment very hard going and from time to time I have to put it down and read the Olivery Ready translation to get me over the hump. Having been moved forward by Ready I then generally go back to the P&V translation to fill out the text.

It may simply be that I find Dostoyevsky's style very very irritating. For example in P&V someone is described as 'somehow' winking at Raskolnikov, and then 'somehow' winking at him again. What is this 'somehow'? People wink! 'Somehow' to me suggests that the person has overcome some major obstacle, like facial paralysis or major surgery, in order to wink, and yet he is being winked at by someone who to the best of the reader's knowledge has no facial impairment to merit this 'somehow'. 'Somehow' makes frequent appearances in other contexts, e.g. Porfiry becomes 'somehow merry', which read to me simply as though the right expression hasn't been found. The text is littered with similar curious constructions which get in my way. I realize of course from their credentials that this must all be terribly proper and true - in spirit, anyway, as it is unlikely to be literally - to the original, which is why I suspect that I just don't like Dostoyevsky. The novel seemed to pick up in the exchange between Raskolinikov and Porfiry towards the end of Part III. I have just started Part IV and I just want the whole thing to be over.

Hm, I don't know, like I mentioned previously, from what I've seen of the P&V translations I don't much like them, they seem very flat and, I don't know, just unpleasant to read, and I just don't think that is properly reflective of the originals. I couldn't say with certainty but, I just have a lot of trouble believing it to be the case. Both of the Garnett translations of his that I've read I thoroughly enjoyed the stories.

Dostoyevsky is my favorite author. I am currently re-reading Brothers Karamazov.

#24
"I came across a quote attributed to Russian poet Joseph Brodsky regarding Garnett: "The reason English-speaking readers can barely tell the difference between Tolstoy and Dostoevsky is that they aren't reading the prose of either one. They're reading Constance Garnett."

First, I was not saying (never would say) that a translator SHOULD, or even MAY, skip words in an original. I am not a translator, although English was not my first language. Translation is an art. I have nothing to say to translators about translating. What I was saying is -- a reader who depends on the translator for "everything" means s/he is at her/his mercy -- and grace. If the translator is being compared to another translator, the reader herself/himself is not on par with a reader who does know the language -- and so is an alternative reader/translator, instead of one at the mercy and grace of the translator at hand. Seldom do I read two translations of the same work; but I look to reviewers to help me select . ..Unless the subject matter or something is of interest to me, THAT is IT! However Criticism does at times send me back to re-reading passages -- except for editions of the Bible (and I have read all those in English and excerpts of the Latin and much of the Hawaiian the latter is neither here nor there, although translated from the original, not the King James, by American missionaries with Teutonic ears). Enuf of this.

Dostoyevsky is the most favorite author. I am currently reading .
Brothers Karamazov

#24 and others.
What interests me very much , in view of your ongoing discussion with others - is your view of the following:
1. Ilya Kaminskyʻs comments on Christian Wimanʻs translation of Mandelstam. I LEARNED A GREAT DEAL FROM KAMINSKY, here, and am very taken by Wimanʻs translation. Some of the translation KAMINSKY says are "not translations." He says it would not be possible . .I take that to mean "in this case, or that case," but possibly only for Wiman and himself? So a reader like me goes by the Whatʻs Available and commend Kaminsky for admitting Some poems are not easy or are impossible to translate.
2. He is not alone in that. Paul Schmidtʻs THE STRAY DOG CABARET. edited by Catherine Ciepiela and with a commentary by Honor Moore add notes to the translations and comments to the poems.
Cipiela speaks of Schmidtʻs "reshaping of the Russian originals." To my English Ears for Sound and Sense -0 Schmidt is SUPERB.

I take it that when translators speak of "accuracy" and complain about lack of the same, or a fault or defect in one thing or anothe (especially meter and rhythm, OMG!), I am at a loss to know why they should expect an EQUATION. I lived with an excellent (Greek scholar friendsʻ judgement) Greek translator who believed that "a translation should not look like the original," and "should not be shunned because it does not Sound like the original." I donʻt know enough to say Nay or Aye. I accept his view of it, BECAUSE HE IS THE ONLY ONE CAPABLE OF RENDERING JUDGEMENT.

Which means a reader like myself HOLDS VIEWS (opinions, judgements) that are BASED ON MY OWN SENSE OF MY OWN COMMAND OF ENGLISH (and in some parts, intuitively my first language). WHICH IS WHY I feel no compunction to PRAISE TRANSLATIONS the languages of which I have mainly no clue whatsoever.

Speaking of which -- this being POETRY MONTH -- there should be a GROUP OR TOPIC or THREAD for -- TRANSLATORS OF POETRY, of whom I have mentioned a few (above).

Thank you for your explanations. The member who set up the example of "somehow" I think shows the dilemma. In the COURSE OF LIFE, which is SHORT, the whole of a work should not have to depend on every difference -- unless it is KEY to the MEANING of the theme, etc. OR we shall all DROWN. and never smell the flowers given us by the wonderful writers (this awes me) -- from the centuries, all over the world, out of such personal depths and social breadths. Gives one pause. And in gratitude, thanks.

The Russian Olympics gave me the urge to read another Dostoevsky. I had read Crime and Punishment in 2008 and I enjoyed it more or less but I couldn't see it as the pivotal work that every other reader seems to have labeled it as. Plus, it was rather straightforward a story, at least to me, while others seem to beam over the "shock factor". But nevertheless, it was time to try another Dostoevsky.

I ended up reading The Idiot and I can say I enjoyed reading it as a whole, but there were some really aggravating parts. All the female characters were aggravating (although they were supposed to be) which made their scenes really pain-inducing to read. There were also some side characters that could have been edited out, or at least, some of their story could have omitted. I did see where some of the characters told a story of society at the time but when there are that many aggravating characters, you start wishing there were less.

I liked the titular character and I enjoyed the concept of the story and so there were some really genius moments. But at the end of the day, I really just wanted to shove Stefan Zweig's Beware of Pity into their hands to tell them to read and learn and to get over it.

Overall, I'm just meh on Dostoevsky.

>31 leialoha: This being "poetry month" is entirely non-applicable to this group. We read a specific author every month and have a thread for that author. You are welcome to join in or start poetry threads in other groups where they belong.

>32 lilisin: Disappointing, but ah well, we can't all love all the same things! :)

>32 lilisin:

Adding Beware of Pity to my list. Sounds very interesting.

I am reading Devils and finding it much more dense than previous Dostoyevsky I've read. Interestingly, there is a character I believe to represent Turgenev that is treated with contempt, making me want to look into whether the two authors conflicted in real life. Additionally, I was initially misinformed about it being nonfiction. While closely based on real events, it is definitively fiction.

I just finished Devils. It was by far the densest Dostoyevsky I've read, and it requires quite a bit of attention to tease apart which characters represent which people and philosophies. That said, I did like it a lot after finishing. There is a lot of content here. I might look for some criticism of this to understand it more fully.

Here is the short review I posted for Devils:

I've loved many Dostoyevsky novels before. I appreciated this novel, especially once I finished it and let it turn over a bit in my mind, but it is definitively more time-consuming and less immediately rewarding than classics like Crime and Punishment. While that book started off with a bang, this one has what I would consider to be an inordinate amount of set-up.

If you get through the set up, you're rewarded. This is a stunning philosophical treatise. The revelations about Stavrogin are especially dark given the period this was written, and the way he ends up raises numerous philosophical questions about the theory he averred and what was actually going on in his mind.

All that said, I wouldn't recommend this to Dostoyevsky newbies or those who don't care for ponderous Russian literature.

Finally, I should note that this novel is much more French-heavy than Dostoyevsky's other works. In college, I frequently said I know just enough French to read classic Russian literature, but this pushed my limits of comprehension a few times.