<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Even Better WIth Background
Review: Dostoevsky's work is always a pleasure on many levels. Crime and Punishment and Brothers Karamazov are perhaps the most accesible works for readers without a background in Russian intellectual and political history. Demons (or Devils, depending on your edition) is a slightly different story. While the other reviewers all point to the strengths of the writing and the engaging character of the plot, they seem to overlook the contemporary relevance this book had when it was written.
Having enjoyed this book before benefiting from a more in-depth look at Russia's political and intellectual experience in the 19th century, I can say that this book is worth reading in any case. A good background on the history of nihilism in Russia, and popular proto-revolutionary groups like 'narodnaya volya' as well as some background on the way that universities were run and the culture of philosophical 'circles' will greatly enhance one's appreciation of the extraordinary personalities in this book.
In a country where philosophy was banned as a discipline in universities for many years in the 19th century and where one could be subjected to constant police surveillance for even the slightest hint of 'thinking outside the box', one can understand how poorly developed and extreme ideas (often imported from abroad), were given currency by the very fact that they had to be discussed in secret. The danger (and almost comical confusion) of this situation is brilliantly painted by Dostoevsky.
Rating:
Summary: The Prophet Armed
Review: Dostoevsky, as the great historian of Russia Richard Pipes notes, hated Socialism and Socialists more than all else under the sun. This is a continuation of his bombardment of collectivists and utopianists that began with "Notes from Underground" and continued with "Crime and Punishment." Dostoevsky, a Christian and a Russian patriot (in the best -- Roger Scrutonian -- sense of the word) -- rejected anything and everything that would make men and women into mere social ciphers, cogs in the machine of history, into "means" rather than "ends" (to use the terminology of Kant). Dostoevsky's primary inspiration for this novel came from an absolutely horrid novel by one Nikolai Cherneshevsky called "Chto Eto", or "What is to be Done?" An early bit of Russian utopianism, it was a precursor of the vicious theories Lenin/Stalin would deploy to "drag" Russia into the 20th century (indeed it was Lenin's favorite novel). The fact that some 66 million would be killed on the grand march to utopia was irrelevant (as the lunatic Shigalyov states in Dostoevsky's novel, "from unlimited freedom, I ended with unlimited despotism. . ." the solution] to the problems of mankind is to grant absolutely freedom to one-tenth and turn the remaining nine-tenths into a herd). This echoes, of course, the magisterial "dialogue" between Christ and the Grand Inquisitor on the nature of human freedom in The Brothers Karamazov. But this novel is relevant for more than its attack on socialism and communism -- both of which, outside of Cuba, China, and a couple of bookstores in New York City and maybe California -- have collapsed precisely because they could do no more than create misery and murder. What makes The Demons -- indeed, the entire Dostoevsky corpus -- particularly relevant in this first decade of the 21st century is his take on the Russian intelligentsia/liberals of the 1840s -- a group characterized by out and out hatred for their country, which created the conditions for the rise of nihilism, terrorism, and bolshevism in the 1860s-1890s. Those 1840s intellectuals, like the "intelligentsia" of today's America, adopted a "blame Russia first" attitude toward all internal and external problems -- glorying in Russia's humiliations, and cursing her victories. It's not a far leap from Dostoevsky's Stepan Verkhovensky to the likes of Lapham, Vidal, and Moore. The real threat to one's community, Dostoevsky argues, is not the farmer or the factory worker who attends church, votes Republican, and drinks his beer in a tavern, whose sons and daughters march to war because they believe it their duty to the country that bore and sustained them, but those who, cloaking themselves in the false-prophet mantle of "dissent," spit and sneer at the foundations of community, or what Russians would call sobernost -- the things that makes Russia Russia, the things that make America America. Dostoevsky's work is both warning and antidote. It's no wonder he was banned by Lenin; one doubts he is discussed around the smart parties of Manhattan today.
Rating:
Summary: A re-affirmation of life
Review: Fyodor Dostoyevesky, perhaps the greatest novelist of all-time, has a canon of mostly very long books that delve deeply into the darker psychological corners of man's mind. He shed long-dormant light on such subjects as the conscience, madness, the existence of God, family and criminal psychology, and a great many other things besides. In Demons, he explored yet another dark corner of the human mind: the tendency of people, particularly young people, towards nihilism. We have seen in our own times -- in the 1960's, certainly, and, perhaps, we are beginning to see it again now -- the tendency of youth to rebel against everything that the previous generation and the current powers that be stood and stand for, to tear everything down, to start anew. And yet, for all the promise of the 60's ideaology, where has it gotten us? How much change has actually taken place? Are we really any better off than before? Why did the movement fizzle out, and so quickly? Nothing is sadder, for the young modern liberal, than the sight of an old hippie, once idealistic and hungry, now shriveled up, in a depressed state, living off of social security. In Demons, Dostoyevsky explains why this happens. In it, he shows the inherent hollowness of the nihilistic viewpoint, that it always leads to the same place in the end. As Don Henley once sang, "It's another hollow rebellion/As rebellions often are/Just another raging tempest/In a jar." For all its idealism and visions of utopia, it always ends up the same way in the end. What is practitioners often don't seem to realize is that it denies life itself. How can any movement, however pious and idealistic, suceed, if it does this? Many people have observed how the ideas embedded in Dostoyevsky's novels foresaw the philosophy of Nietzsche -- and yet, for all of the darkness and social criticism that sprang from the two men, what many people often overlook is the fact that both of them, in essence, AFFIRM LIFE (for proof of this, one need only to look at the fate of the characters in the book who deny life: even those, like Shatov, who do it once and then repent are, in the end, doomed.) To both Dostoyevsky and Nietzsche, it is not only wrong to live one's life merely for the sake of a higher power or for hope of a reward in some afterlife, but it is also wrong to live one's life for an "ism" -- whether it be atheism, idealism, anarchism, nihilism, or whatnot. Granted, both men themselves subscribed to such things; Dostoyevsky, himself a revolutionary who was served 10 years in jail, some at hard labor, and was nearly executed, saw Demons as "novel pamphlet", his own attempt to speak out at the wave of materialism that had, at the time, infested Russia, and to break out of his habit of dealing in negative modes of thinking. To paraphrase Dostoyevsky's famous letter, modern nihilists do not deny the existence of God: that is over and done with: no one cares about it, anymore. What they do, instead, is deny, with all their might, God's creation, God's world, and everything in it. Pity the poor revolutionary who attempts to incite a rebellion while denying, at the same time, the very means he must use to do so. Neil Peart once wrote "Changes aren't permanent/But change is." Indeed, change is a good thing: anything which does not change will, inevitably, become stagnant. However, whatever changes we may hope to bring about, we must always remember to affirm life. Thank God we have the works of Dostoyevsky left to remind us. This brilliant novel explores other subjects as well: the responsiblity of one generation for the next generation, the responsiblity of teachers for their students, and, above all, the responsiblity of philosophers for their ideas. A must-read novel essential for any reader of classics or Russian literature.
Rating:
Summary: The PROPHET who is also the ''GREAT SATAN''
Review: Has the Western Culture any hope to understand Russian soul that mentioned in Dostoyevsky's books?The soul,Russian soul,that means loving humans,loving all creatures or just loving to love.
All the things I mentioned above are ordinary pieces of subject of Dostoyevsky's books.DEMONS,Dostoyevsky's book that has ideas which has incredible deepness about the main problems concerning socialist trends of all-times,is offical enemy of ''nihilism''.Why?Because ''nihilism''is a socialist trend that adopt himself to acts aginst all kind of loves and social tendences ,so to the Russian soul.
How can Dostoyevsky successfuly defend humanity against cruel attack of ''nihilism''.Because he almost internal to ideas,acts,hierarchy of groups of ''nihilists''.Dostoyevsky is the prophet who shows the way to universal worths, but he also introduce his main human character,GREAT SATAN,who reflect the dark face of humanity in his books(especially in DEMONS).
I want to send my regards to Dostoyevsky's geniunity as one do in reviews of Immanuel Kant's book ''critic of pure reason''.
DOSTOYEVSKY IS THE MAN!!!
Rating: 
Summary: Bracing
Review: Having read Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov, I had no idea how impenetrably dark this novel would be: let's just say that every single even mildly sympathetic, likable, or normative character is dead by book's end, while the primary villain, the terrifying Pyotr Stepanovich, gets off scot-free. Ha ha! Fun for the whole family! Dostoyevksy's politics have little in common with my own, his characterizations of his political enemies are frequently outrageously unfair (although, admittedly, sometimes pretty funny--check the 'With Our People' chapter) and he has no sense of dramatic restraint; all of these characteristics are far more present here than they are in his more famous novels, which I would say are better than this one. Also, more than usual, Demons is pretty formless; there's no discernable protagonist, and dramatic progression is plodding at best. All of this notwithstanding, however, the novel does accrue a startling level of power, even as it makes you cringe now and again. There are a number of memorable characters, lead by the endearingly Micawber-esque Stepan Trofimovich and the childlike Kirillov. And then there's the aforementioned Pyotr Stepanovich, who is surely one of world literature's greatest villains. He's utterly cold-blooded, obviously doesn't even believe in the cause which he nominally spearheads, and doesn't operate with more than a schoolyard bully's level of intelligence--and yet, he never comes to any sort of justice. I cannot help but believe that this character portrait is not as unrealistic as one would hope. I find that I have to sort of psyche myself up to read Dostoyevsky novels; it isn't an everyday undertaking for me. But this one was reasonably worth the effort. I recommend it to all conservative Christians seeking validation for their worldview, as well as fans of Russian literature.
Rating:
Summary: Terror in Russia
Review: I couldn't believe there weren't any reviews for this book. I'm not a great reviewer, but I'll try. This book, for me, is as good as Crime and Punishment and Brothers Karamazov. It is about many things, it is a mosaic of political life in an insulated community in Russia--but moreover, it is about terrorism, specifically, a terrorist cell. It is a comedy, but the characters are not caricatures; the so-called terrorists are humanized. Dostoevsky obviously disaproves of the terrorists, but he uses his mighty soul to feel their lives in order to understand their motives. (Actually, being a former dissident, Dostoevsky probably didn't need to use his imagination in order to understand the mind of a terrorist.) Regardless, this endlessly fascinating book has some of the funniest and scariest moments of any Dostoevsky novel. Not to mention an amazing cast of characters. One of the best books I've ever read.
Rating:
Summary: The Novel of Ideas
Review: Nabokov, in his Lectures on Russian Literature, suggested that Dostoevsky be knocked off the canon of Russian writers, especially in favor of Turgenev, whom Dostoevsky hated. The reason was that Nabokov was against the "novel of ideas" because, he would say, it managed to achieve neither. Demons is, of Dostoevsky's novels, the most ideological, yet still it is masterfully pulled off. Let it be known, however, that at times, the plot suffers at the expense of ideology, just as one has to expect, BUT THE IDEAS! This book, although in my opinion it has the nuance of neither, is a perfect bridge between Notes From the Underground and The Brothers Karamazov. The intelligentsia, you suspect, are trying to build the positivistic paradise that the Underground man railed against, but as the novel progresses, you realize that the idealist vision has already been lost by Stepan Trofimovich, that all that remains is his desire to feel alive, even if that means inflicting every sort of pain. This is the same type of monster that Ivan warns against, and identifies himself with--if he were to act--in the Grand Inquisitor. Also, please note, I tried once to read it in an older translation, and gave up somewhere in the 100s. This one I plunged through with little trouble.
Rating:
Summary: The Novel of Ideas
Review: Nabokov, in his Lectures on Russian Literature, suggested that Dostoevsky be knocked off the canon of Russian writers, especially in favor of Turgenev, whom Dostoevsky hated. The reason was that Nabokov was against the "novel of ideas" because, he would say, it managed to achieve neither. Demons is, of Dostoevsky's novels, the most ideological, yet still it is masterfully pulled off. Let it be known, however, that at times, the plot suffers at the expense of ideology, just as one has to expect, BUT THE IDEAS! This book, although in my opinion it has the nuance of neither, is a perfect bridge between Notes From the Underground and The Brothers Karamazov. The intelligentsia, you suspect, are trying to build the positivistic paradise that the Underground man railed against, but as the novel progresses, you realize that the idealist vision has already been lost by Stepan Trofimovich, that all that remains is his desire to feel alive, even if that means inflicting every sort of pain. This is the same type of monster that Ivan warns against, and identifies himself with--if he were to act--in the Grand Inquisitor. Also, please note, I tried once to read it in an older translation, and gave up somewhere in the 100s. This one I plunged through with little trouble.
Rating:
Summary: Helter Skelter
Review: Reviewers usually mention the social & political commentary at the core of this novel, how it anticipated the Russian Revolution & Stalinism and so forth. Actually the book is more expansive than that, in that it's largely a comedy of manners, set out in a breathless narrative style that breaks all the rules of "novel writing" as taught in our schools. DEMONS was initially published as a serial, and it reads that way. Each of its several parts seems designed to be read in one sitting. The multiplicity of characters & intricacies of the plot are less formidable the more rapidly the book is read (provided the reader is always attentive, of course). In DEMONS Dostoevsky pokes fun at the naivete of Russian nobility, "intellectuals" and petty officials who seek "enlightenment" and wind up the pawns & victims of "very trashy people," a.k.a. "scum." There's murder, romance, plotting & intrigue of all kinds, and there are some "big scenes" resembling comic-operatic finales, with characters arriving one after another, each serving to push disorder over the edge, finally, into utter chaos. Dostoevsky is a master of this sort of writing and his storytelling (and plotting) talent is what makes his "novels of ideas" so much fun to read. Dostoevsky's contempt for Jews is unfortunate, and some of his "messages" are less agreeable & consistent than they might seem while you're immersed in his novels. But the man was certainly sincere, and few great writers are so plainly enthusiastic. DEMONS is an excellent specimen of Dostoevsky's art.
Rating:
Summary: Chilling
Review: This novel, "Demons", is one of Dostoevsky's darkest. It is subtle at times, witty at others, and profoundly dark and ominous at most others.
The novel doesn't really follow a MAIN character, but serval main characters. Nikolai Stavrogin, Pyotr Stepanovich, Stepan Trofimovich are all leading characters and help to propel the plot forward.
This novel certainly is not only for "conservative Christians". I'm a Christian, (though not a right-wing one) and I found the novel to be exquisite in all regards.
This book is startlingly prophetic of the Leninist-Stalinst reigns of terror in Russia. It is also a deeply psychological novel, probing how an idea can "eat you, and not you the idea"
If I could give it ten stars, I would.
<< 1 >>
|
