Customer Reviews

The Brothers Karamazov (Signet Classics)

5 star:		(60)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

In his most comprehensive (and not coincidentally, his final) masterpiece, Dostoyevsky addresses and discusses a number of the most fundamental and universal issues which face man. His multiple perspectives are embodied in seperate characters -- taken together, these characters form the whole of the Karamazov family, and these perspectives constitute the whole of Dostoyevsky's view.

Each of the brothers represents a distinct school of thought or values -- the impulsive Dmitri portrays the instinctive and carnal desires of man; the nihilist, Ivan, displays the cold and unforgiving intellectual, governed by the rules of logic alone; the religious Alyosha, student to the Great Elder Zossima, depicts the humble and devout spiritualist. While the murder of their father, Fyodor Karamazov, is the catalyst to the real action of the book, it is certainly not the central focus -- a fact that might be surmised in light of the fact that the murder is not carried out until more than halfway through the text.

Instead, the work is a discussion and analysis of man's values and beliefs, and an affirmation of Dostoyevsky's fundamental conviction: that the presence of the human spirit cannot be denied without disastrous results, and that despite the assertions of the nihilists, God is a necessary element in the world of man.

"I would die happy if I could finish this final novel, for I would have then expressed myself completely."

This statement from Fyodor Dostoyevsky helps elucidate both the theme and purpose of the The Brothers Karamazov, one of the greatest masterpieces of world literature. Superficially, the novel deals with a patricide and how each of the book's characters contributed directly or indirectly to that murder.

Yet, The Brothers Karamazov, at its heart, is so much more. Its underlying theme deals with the drive for self-redemption in the eyes of both God and man and the role suffering plays in facilitating that redemption.

Fyodor Karamazov has fathered four sons, Dmitri, Ivan and Alyosha, by two wives, and one, Smerdyakov, with a peasant woman known as stinking Lizaveta.

Fyodor Karamazov, a vulgar and ill-tempered man represents, for Dostoyevsky, the Russian government of his times. Like the government, Fyodor shuns his children, preferring instead the materialistic, but joyless, life of wealth and possessions. His union with Lizaveta, who comes to represent all the peasants of Dostoyevsky's Russia, produces Smerdyakov, a bastard child who, in his own turn, will be raped and pillaged by the government and will go on to give birth, metaphorically, to bastard children of his own.

Karamazov's eldest son, Dmitri, an impulsive sensualist, finds respect as an overbearing soldier but one whose inability to pay his debts eventually turns him into a poor and irrational man.

Ivan, Fyodor's second son, is a cold intellectual who finds his fulfillment in his literary and creative abilities. He becomes famous through his writings, especially those concerning the Russian Church.

The youngest son, Aloysha, finds temporary fulfillment in the cloistered, monastic life. Outwardly innocent and naive, Aloysha struggles with his desire for spiritual fulfillment in the monastery and the joys and excitement of the secular life.

The character who provides the catalyst for change is that of Father Zosima, a character who seems to embody the strong spiritual sense that was Dostoyevsky, himself.

Father Zosima, who has lived a pure and spiritually-nourishing life, has the gift to sense both a man's motivations and his needs. Zosima tells the brothers Karamazov that a sheltered, monastic life is not a prerequisite to the achievement of spiritual riches, a fact that seems to be proven true when Zosima's corpse rots after his death in direct contradiction to Russian belief at the times regarding spiritual purity.

It is Father Zosima who, throughout the book, expounds Dostoyevsky's theory that it is suffering that will purify and cleanse our soul, thus bringing us peace. Each brother, in his own fashion, undergoes his own trial by fire, and, in the end, is better for it.

One brother, tormented by a guilt he does not deserve, must live his life in unwanted exile, or not at all, though he possesses the heart and soul of a true Russian. Another suffers the torments of a complete nervous breakdown that leaves him grappling on the very edge of sanity. Only a third son seems to find the answer he is seeking and the novel's uplifting final scene epitomizes Dostoyevsky's eternal belief in the importance of Russia's children in her future, as children hold their hands high and shout, "Three cheers for Karamazov," ending this essentially depressing masterpiece on a joyous note.

An extraordinarily complex and rich novel, The Brothers Karamozov also deals with man's response to death. All of the characters, each in his own way, attempts to flee from death and only those who can finally accept the finality of death and the suffering of living find justification and fulfillment in life.

Dostoyevsky uses many stylistic devices to expound upon his theme of redemption through suffering: imagery, irony and dreams are three of the most prominent, however, it is Dostoyevsky's wonderful ability to manipulate the third person subjective that serves to illuminate each character and bring him to life.

The Brothers Karamazov is a book that delves deeply into the heart of man and the soul of Russia. Dostoyevsky, as any true artist, presented facets of himself in all of his characters who each manages to see the world in a different way and finds redemption through his own unique vision.

Ironically, one of the brothers Karamazov is portrayed as a young man who begins to instill the seeds of change in Russia through its children, something Dostoyevsky, himself, thought was needed if Russia was ever to make the transition from a backward country to a global power. That it did, although the children Dostoyevsky envisioned as spiritual visionaries became instead, violent revolutionaries. They sought to free the peasants, not through enlightenment but through the establishment of a totalitarian state Peter the Great would have envied. Today, however, Russia tragically lies amidst the same poverty in which it was dwelling one hundred years earlier.

Clearly, Dostoyevsky's path to enlightenment, illuminated brilliantly in The Brothers Karamazov, has not yet been fully assimilated by either the people of Russia or the people of the world in general.

A sad and ironic twist to the vision of a master writer and a truly prophetic man.

I recently read a book so amazing, so well-written, and so memorable that I simply must tell you about it. It's The Brothers Karamazov, by Fyodor Dostoyevsky. After reading another of Dostoyevsky's novels, Crime and Punishment, a while ago, and thoroughly loving it, I had to get this one, for I had heard it was his best work. And I can't disagree. To sum up the premise quickly, the novel takes place in Russia circa 1890, and tells the story of four brothers who become involved in the murder of their own father. That is the most basic summary of the plot I can give; but it doesn't even begin to give you an idea of the territory covered in this massive, sprawling novel. (Over 700 pages of great literature.) There are other things going on besides this murder, and eventually the novel is about so much more than this.

This novel has possibly some of the best characterization I've ever seen for any book, period. This is not an exaggeration. First, the four brothers are each given their own distinct personality and background (even though they are brothers they come from different pasts) and become some of the most developed, recognizable, and memorable characters I've ever encountered. In addition, the father is one of the most pathetic, funny, and evil characters in literature. But even then, Dostoyevsky does not stop. There are probably ten or fifteen secondary characters that appear a lot, and even more third-tier figures that don't have much time in the book but are still memorable. This is because whenever a new character is introduced, the author devotes at least a couple of full, developed passages telling the reader about the person, and reveals even more through the many conversations and speeches people have. Remarkably, there are never any repetetive characters. Dostoyevsky manages to create a new, unique, living, breathing person out of every character.

This is also one of the most thematically inclusive books I've ever read, one with such depth. Thanks to the incredible characters and well thought-out plot, the novel discusses a whole range of themes. Dostoyevsky must have been a philosopher or psychologist just as much as he was a writer. Through his characters he expounds on the idea that people have the uncanny ability to harbor opposite and contrasting values within themselves at the same time. Good and evil exist side by side in the hearts of men. Dostoyevsky also shows us that some people are never happy because they don't want to be, and that this fact makes them happy. As long as they are unhappy in their own way, they remain happy, even if they know it's not to their advantage.

Dostoyevsky was so ahead of his time with this novel- his deep knowledge of humanity is so evident. Years before Freud, he develops the idea of punishment as a way to alleviate guilt and love as a way to cure shame, or as he puts it, "self-laceration." He was probably one of the very first to fully implement into his characters the concept of the split personality. At one point, one of the characters has a conversation with his alter-ego, fully aware that he doesn't exist. It's so impressive, it really puts some modern stuff into perspective.

Death, love, forgiveness, immortality, religion, God, the Devil, all of these things are more than briefly touched upon in the course of this narrative. At one point, a character remarks, "I don't know whether God created Man or Man created God, but if the Devil exists, he was created in Man's image." In one chapter, Christ comes back to earth and is challenged and shunned by the religious community. The Devil himself even appears as a person to discuss philosophy and religion with one of the characters. When he's asked, "How are you able to take on human form?" the Devil replies, "Nothing human is beyond me." Powerful, chilling moments like these fill the book.

There are so many moments of pure, unfiltered humanity in this novel, it's as if the author's whole life is bleeding through in the pages. When he creates an evil character, we believe in him, and when he creates the opposite- a truly pure figure- we believe in him, as well. In fact, this book has one of the most believably good characters of all stories. Dostoyevsky plunges the depths of man's soul, and what he brings up is sometimes scary, sometimes beautiful. If there are any stories out there that can come close to showing us the meaning of life, The Brothers Karamazov is one of them.

Anyone interested in the central question facing mankind will find `The Brothers Karamazov' an essential guide. That question--on man's capacity for responsibility and the proper role of the state and religion--is posed throughout the story in dialogue and events, and is framed neatly in a 20-page section where Ivan presents a poem titled `The Grand Inquisitor' to his brother Alyosha. The chapter that bears that title (Book V, Chapter V) is a masterpiece in itself and should be studied for its narrative technique alone. But the ideas it presents are so immense, so mind-blowing and inspirational, that literary criticism is not sufficient.

Indeed, `The Brothers Karamazov' should not be classed merely as a novel--it is a book of philosophy, theology, psychology, and sociology as well that ranks with the greatest documents in those disciplines. There is a fictitious plot, of course, and the characters in the story are some of the most unique in all of literature, so it is rightly praised as a novel. But the modern reader looking for a plot of twists and romantic intrigues is bound to disappointment. Dostoevsky does not stir up drama through the placement of unexpected developments or improbable character traits. Instead, he relies on the inherent needs and wants of all men to make vivid his story.

The amount of dialogue may be shocking (tedious) to one accustomed to the modern show-don't-tell policy in storytelling. Today, novelists and screenwriters let a character's actions speak for them--it is quicker and provides a much more convincing impression. It also limits the kind of ideas that are posed in the story to simple, prosaic ones like `she likes him' or `he wants to defeat him.' By contrast, Dostoevsky allows the characters to speak for themselves, which creates a much longer and subtler exposition, but also frees the ideas to be vast and monumental.

What is the fundamental nature of socialism? What are the uses of the church in finding purpose? In finding salvation? Why is there suffering? What is the meaning of death? Read the brothers' dialogues and contemplate.

Dostoevsky's own philosophy is seen in the protagonist, Alyosha. This is so despite the fact that the author ably covers every perspective on every topic presented in the book, and one can hardly find a positive assertion throughout. If there is one, it rests in the overall effect of the words and actions, a concept Dostoevsky articulated in a personal correspondence--it is that "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."

A word about the translations: The title of Book IV has been translated differently in every version I have seen (other chapter titles are also inconsistent, but Book IV is seemingly the most difficult to agree on). The original Russian is `Nadryvy,' which literally translates to `Ruptures,' though no translations I have seen use `Ruptures.' The word is used throughout the book to convey the motif of `pressures' or `strained conditions about to break.' The various options I have seen for this title are `Lacerations' (Garnett), `Strains' (Pevear & Volkhonsky), `Torment' (MacAndrew), `Crises' (Avsey), and `Crack-Ups' (McDuff). Given this is a central theme, the potential reader might look into which translation he prefers before buying. Apropos, the Princess Alexandra Kropotkin print version bears the Garnett translation, as does the Frederick Davidson audio recording.

My three criteria for Great Book candidates are that they must be deep intellectually, stunning in character development, and beautifully written. This book is unequaled in all three ways. It states the argument against the existence of God based on evil, and the appeal of worldliness, as well as I've ever seen, then epitomizes those ideas in characters and plot, and then does pretty well developing counterarguments on all those levels. The Magic Mountain and Dr. Faustus by Thomas Mann, lots of Sartre and Camus, and actually quite a few other novels, personify but don't particularly argue ideas [very well, at least]; Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, on the other hand, is powerful and catchy and does argue, but her favored characters are mostly one-dimensional facets of her philosophy, which is so extreme that her envisioned opponents end up being straw men. The accuracy of her images of opposed views cannot be defended seriously.

Dostoyevsky's characters are archetypes, but with multiple dimensions and realism, who engage in real conversation and resultant temptations to waver [though not as deeply as Bakhtin claims]. Dostoyevsky gives a rounded description before each main character appears, but then the character, in dialogue, bursts into a colorful reality.

The writing is complex and yet gripping--reading it in high school was pretty hard, but then picking it up in college, I could not put it down, except to rest. It sometimes seems to wander but is constantly building, and its digressions turn out to be amazing constructions.

I've come back to my Constance Garnett translation again and again. I've only read pieces of one or two others [and I cannot read Russian], but Garnett seems as skillful and consistent as any in expressing [seemingly] Dostoyevsky's views and vision of the Russian soul. That soul does contain, regrettably, anti-semitism, anti-catholicism, nationalism, and anti-modernism, and Dostoyevsky transmitted them all. But, except for the anti-modernism, which he argues forcefully, these views obnoxiously mar the book but aren't essential to its amazing argument or structure. Compared with the fine books on many 10 or 100 best lists, this one is a sun competing with floodlights.

"Love to throw yourself on the earth and kiss it! Kiss the earth and love it with an unceasing, consuming love. Love all men, love everything! Water the earth with the tears of your joy and love those tears. Don't be ashamed of your ecstasy, prize it."

Thus ended the paragraph that saved my life from Book VI of Constance Garnett's translation of The Brothers Karamazov. Read unintentionally in tandem with the fourth movement of Beethoven's Ninth Symphony it wreaked upon me a transvaluation of all values. This also happened to some of my students at Shimer College where I teach both the Constance Garnett and the Pevear/Volokhonsky translations. I urge my students who love the book to read BOTH translations. Constance Garnett's poetic grasp of Dostoyevsky's language (with occasionally antiquated twists of phrase) assumes the worldview of the nineteenth century, which is the century in which Dostoyevsky wrote. Her first translation appeared in about 1912.

She lovingly captures the cadences of Father Zosima's voice. This wise elder's words are at the heart of this book. I have never understood why his chapter, "The Russian Monk" has not been excerpted and widely read as "The Grand Inquisitor" which precedes it. Poverty, injustice, cruelty, and the suffering of innocents can only be transformed by love--and beauty. This book, a murder mystery interwoven with four love-triangles, exploring dysfunctional families, the nature of God, erotic lacerations, forgiveness, the devil, and the Russian soul can give you the equipment you need to cope with life's agonies, to go through suffering and into joy.

Hurrah for Karamazov!

Mark Twain once said that a classic is a book that no one ever reads. Unfortunately, the Brothers Karamozov may be a classic of those proportions. Many are intimidated by the bulk of an 800-1000 page book when they see the oversized spine on the shelf and neglect to meet some of the most interesting characters to ever be captured on paper. The Brothers Karamozov is possibly one of the most over-analyzed Russian novels (with the possible exception of War and Peace) since it was written in the 19th century, and yet, at its heart it has some of the most interesting plots and characters in any language. Consider for a moment three brothers--one a pious, bright divinity student, one an intellectual, brazen capitalist, and one a dirty illegimate half wit. Now throw in an ogre of a father, and you can imagine what the dinner conversation might be like. Do yourself a favor and forget the symbolism, the types and anti-types, etc. and get to know these people. Also, forget that you were supposed to have read this book in college and just pick it up for yourself. Dostoevsky's mastery of mood and setting make its popularity among scholars understandable. Yet its serialized plot-line and suspense-filled action will more than satisfy any Stephen King reader or soap opera fanatic.

Fyodor Dostoevsky believed that the Russian people were specially marked by God to endure great suffering in order to prepare them to show the truths of Christ's religion to humanity. He did not accept the notions of material progress and scientific rationalism that were coming out of the "Enlightened" West and felt that such ideas would lead only to spiritual bankruptness and immorality. Dostoevsky articulated these viewpoints and sought to project his vision of what the Russian national identity should be in his masterpiece, "The Brothers Karamazov".

As Dostoevsky himself revealed in the story, the three legitimate sons of Fyodor Pavlovich each represented different aspects of the Russian identity:
1. Dmitriy Fyodorovich was the uncontrollable and irrational brother who could commit acts of senseless violence and engage in extreme debauchery, but despite all of that, aspired to goodness and felt remorse at all of the bad things he had done.
2. Ivan Fyodorovich was the educated brother who espoused the rationalism and cynicism of the West and who claimed to have renounced God. Despite that, he still had not lost his "Russian-ness" and he himself did not believe in what he preached and still had troubling doubts about the existence of God.
3. Alexei Fyodorovich (Alyosha) was the devout brother who aspired to live in a monastery under the guidance of his spiritual father figure, Father Zossima. Alyosha represented all that was beautiful and holy about the Russian Orthodox faith.

Each of these three brothers underwent a crisis in faith that was brought about by the death of their father, either directly or indirectly (as in the case of Alyosha). In each situation, each brother finally came to terms with the suffering that had been placed upon them and accepted responsibility for their actions, or indeed, for all men's actions.

I thought Dostoevsky's description of this painful process of spiritual transformation brought on by suffering and anguish was mesmerizing, because I was able to relate to it in some small way. Indeed, considering the responses of many of the other customer reviewers here, I would say that my reaction was not unusual.

I would suggest that reading "The Brothers Karamazov" could actually lead you to reevaluate your life principles and manner of relating to people (at least it did for me). I wil not go so far to say that this book changed my life (as some reviewers here have claimed), but at least it made me think, and for that reason this book is wonderful. It's funny how such a transcendent book as this, which has something to say to everybody, was originally written as propaganda for Russian nationalism.

This is a long and difficult book, but very interesting. It is an excellent book, but still not my favorite of Dostoyevsky's. This reads like a murder mystery, and there are also lots of philosophical and religious undertones. I would say that this is a good translation and the book includes some helpful tips to get through the story. Honestly, one of the harder things for me was figuring out who was being talked about because everyone had about 3 nicknames. Once you get past that, it is a lot easier.

The Brothers Karamazov is said to be the greatest and last novel written by Fyodor Dostoevsky. In reading the novel, one discovers why so. The novel is set in nineteenth century Russia, and deals with the story of three brothers, Dmitri, Ivan and Alyosha, and the events surrounding the murder of their father Fyodor Kamarazov. The father is a drunkard baffoon, who spares no thoughts or money to his sons, and leads a life of sexual exploits, orgies and drunken revelry. Dmitri, born to Fyodor's first wife, returns to his hometown to seek money from his father, but gets enchanted by Grushenka, who his father lusts for and threatens to win over by the poer of his money. The sensual Dmitri, a former captain of the army, was earlier bethrothed to beautiful Katrina, who he wishes to leave in wake of his intense passion for Grushenka. The brother Ivan, an intellectual stars in the three most famous chapters of the book: Rebellion, the Grand Inquisitor and the Devil; where Dostovesky presents arguments against existence of God and discusses the genesis and futility of evil; the three chapters that on their own could have made the name of the Dostovesky as famous as it is. Ivan formulates arguments that both amaze and befuddle the reader and the reader finds himself tormented by the existential, ethical and theological questions that surface everywhere in the novel. Ivan falls for Katrina.

Dostovesky calls Alyosha the hero of the novel. Alyosha is an idealist, a believer, a charming young fellow who would was all set on becoming a monk, till his mentor and guide Father Zossima asked him to return to the worldly life. The landscape is full of a range of other characters: Grigory and his wife Marya, devoted servants of Fyodor, who bring up an illegitimate, epileptic son of Fyodor, called Smerdyakov; the wealthy townswoman Madame Hohlakov, whose near cripple daughter Lise is engaged to Alyosha for some period of time; Rakitin, a character who full of big talk and shallow personality and two kids Koyla and Illusha.

The novel centers around the events leading to and after the murder of Fyodor, whereby Dostovesky creates a highly engaging and yet pretty verbose analysis of the crime, parricide, providing his deep psychological analysis of characters and endless references from Christian texts. The last few chapters where he weaves courtroom drama provides the right climax to this highly challenging piece of work.

The brilliance of Dostovesky is in making his reader undergo the same fever, same fervour that a criminal is faced with. The depth of portrayal is such that one is continuously full of the characters and the questions that surround their existence: for these questions are eternal questions that confound the reader. While the story is a gripping tale of murder and courtroom drama, the meat of the novel in the three chapters mentioned, in the discussions about what is right and wrong, in the presentation of various facades of human nature and human passion, in arguments for and against parricide, in the dealing of Alyosha with Illusha and Koyla. The last chapter, where Illusha loses his life, culminates a series of heartwrenching events, and this particular chapter is perhaps one of the best pieces arousing pathos in literature. The reader is just washed by the torrent of sorrow, and in a certain sense, Dostovesky succeeds in leading the reader through a sort of catharisis, ending in certain tears and an understanding that Christ-like love and purity of soul symbolized by Illusha and Alyosha is bound to prevail, to save our soul and society.

The novel is also an excellent read in terms of insights it offers into the ethical, social and philosophical ideas present in Russia towards the end of nineteenth century. In that respect, it presents a case study of the undercurrents in the Russian society, the seeds and spread of socialism and well as the nature and depth of belief in church, miracles and God. The novel is also a part-time love story, where the flaring passions are so intense as to drive characters to the brink of madness, to the edge of chaos, to extremes of happiness and sorrow.

Reading Dostovesky is like undergoing catharisis, tortuous and painful, and precisely so he is a must read for everyone who ventures into deeper questions surrounding the humanity.