|
Bumping into a gentlemen then going out to buy a new suit just so he could look respectable when he bumped him back. This book is as great as all dostoyevsky books.I was in stitches with the Dostoyevskys perceptions.
A masterpiece no doubt. I very much enjoyed reading Notes From Underground. The un-named narrator etches an image of the "sick" and "wicked man" that he invariably chooses to be.
But (in my mind) part one simply overpowers part two; part one being philosophical and musing well part two is more of a traditional narrative. And, as different as we become, we still harbor memories of our most shameful experiences, these helping to shape who we are today.they can never be completely overcome.
In fact, both parts insist greatly upon the idea of human irrationality.Overall, not a bad little book, and if you can take each part independently, it becomes a great little book. The author has every intention of exposing just how base and emotional humans can be, how irrational and spontaneous, and this idea rises sharply in part two.
Well I enjoyed reading Notes From Underground, by Fyodor Dostoevsky/Dostoyevsky, I found the structure of the book a little inhibiting. The protagonist seems witty, personable, and philosophical in part one, and in part two just loses it - granted in the second half of the book he is describing himself as a much younger and therefore more foolish man - and that seems to go great lengths towards making the book's point - but it is a little disconcerting to see how distanced we become from our youthful selves.although this could be one of the works greatest contributions.
Just be ready to pay close attention to what the author has written in part one, and realize that part two, after reading part one, will feel, at the least, anti-climactic. Part one and part two simply do not belong together; each could stand on its own as very short books - but read together I feel they are too dissimilar.although I understand this is a literary device employed by the author and one that was necessary, because the book as a whole can be interpreted as the rationalizing or rediscovering in part one of what happens in part two.
I found myself laughing out loud at moments in part one and not really caring as much what happens in part two.
Or does she save him. He is indeed sick, as the opening line, one of the most famous in all of literature, suggests. The most (anti) climactic part is at the end, in his conversation with the prostitute Liza. The first part of the book he explains in a few thoughts what is wrong with him and society.
This was a dark comedy exposing the vanity of liberal enlightenment thinking. At any rate, we soon see that it is not the narrator but society that is sick.This is a very important read, but it is not an enjoyable one. Does he save her. The book is often grim, bracing, and anti-climactic.
IN the second part of the book he illustrates that by a dinner party with some worthless people who have happened to have found some money in their position in life. It is the part of Dostoevsky that the more liberal (and I use that in the original sense of the word) elitists do not want to see: this is where Slavophilism enters its more deadly phase. It is the story of some deranged lunatic who boasts of his inability to adapt to society. In many ways this book is a dark parallel to St Augustine's *Confessions.* But unlike Augustine, this is not a book of praise.
He believes himself to be superior to them intellectually but never fails to utterly humiliate himself in front of them. He seems to be incapable of love or compassion.While not a long read, it is hard - especially the first part. There are two parts to these 'Notes'; the first (shorter) part is a philosophical diatribe which most interesting discussions revolve around the Underground man's challange to 'rational egoism' and defense of free will. The story climaxes with the Underground man's meeting with Liza who he at first shows some sort of kindness but then in the future refuses to treat her humanely or build any sort of decent relationship. It is a story that should probably be read more than once to be able to comprehend it. The second part is a biographical account of the Underground man's relations between some old classmates and a prostitute named Liza.Ultimately, the Underground man is a complex, condtradictory, and fragmented character thoroughly alienated from society. His interactions with his classmates illustrates this well: simultananeously, he desires to become best chums with them but just as quickly would challenge one of them to a duel.
|
