روايه الشخصيات المتناقضه
صراعات داخل العيله
الأب هو فيودور كارمازوف والي يعد واحد من أحقر الشخصيات في جميع ما قريت من روايات
الإبن الأكبر ما يختلفش كتير عن أبوه وإبن تاني مثقف وملحد والثالث متدين وإبن رابع ما يظهرش دوره في الروايه إلا في الآخر
علاقات حب متشابكه ومعقده
مقتل شخص داخل العيله ومحاوله الكشف عن القاتل
روايه استثنائيه للعبقري ديستوفيسكي

n  
n  
هذا الجزء و كأنه قصة داخل قصة نتعرف على إليوشا الصغير و أسرته المتواضعة الفقيرة بعد أن كان أبيه ضابطا ذا سطوة و مال فصار موضع احتقار و سخرية. كما يفرد بعض المساحات للتعرف أكثر على ايفان و جروشنكا و سمردياكوف
تجد مراجعتي للأجزاء الأربعة كاملة  هناn

Esta monumental novela ofrece motivos suficientes para posicionarse como una de las novelas cumbre de la literatura rusa y universal. Fiodor Dostoievski con su ultima y más lograda novela, alcanza retratar a la perfección la decadencia del alma humana así como la obsesión por los deseos carnales más bajos del hombre, tal como ya nos había mostrado en sus novelas anteriores. Una magnífica obra que entre sus tramas refleja a la perfección la situación política de la Rusia del siglo XIX, la espiritualidad del ser y la redención. Una novela altamente emocional y visceral, plagada de personajes disfuncionales y excesivos, pero sobre todo creados con una profundidad y complejidad propia de un autor tan conocedor del alma humana como lo era Fiodor Dosteievski.

Cuando el autor cumplía su sentencia en Siberia en 1850 (por fomentar ideología en contra del Zar), conoció a un joven llamado Ilinski que había sido condenado por asesinar a su padre para convertirse en heredero. Luego de 10 años se descubrió que había sido injustamente condenado y más tarde liberado cuando el verdadero asesino confesó el crimen. Esta experiencia conmovió a Dostoievski, transladándola a su más grande novela mostrándonos a la familia Karamasov. En algo más de mil páginas estructuradas en doce libros y con una prosa llena de sabiduría su autor desprende magia y maestría al contarnos una historia monumental sobre un parricidio.

Fiodor Karamasov es padre de tres hijos, un hombre repugnante y egoísta, que disfruta de caer en el ridículo al parecer un completo bufón; así como aprovecharse de los demás. El primer hijo es Dmitri, un hombre violento y lleno de odio hacia su padre al considerar que éste le robó parte de su fortuna. De un segundo matrimonio Ivan y Aliosha son los siguientes hijos, dotado este último de una personalidad conciliadora y entregado a la religión. Gruchenka, una divertida y despreocupada fémina que goza con implantar discordia en la familia Karamasov será pieza clave en la historia junto a Smerdiakov, el sirviente fiel del Padre Karamasov y del que se cree que es su hijo bastardo. Pronto ocurrirá una tragedia que termina con la muerte del padre, culpando a Dmitri el hijo mayor por considerar suficientes motivos el odio y los celos que sentía hacia su padre por culpa de Grushenka, mujer que tenia una relación sentimental con ambos.

Dostoievski siempre afirmó que Los hermanos Karamasov era su obra maestra. Y sin duda podría dársele ese título debido a la maestría con que su autor escribe innumerables historias entrelazándolas en una obra general. La novela es magistral y plasma toda su complejidad narrativa logrando manipular al lector en los dilemas psicológicos de sus personajes así como al mostrarnos un universo filosófico y altamente alegórico. Podríamos decir con todo mérito que Los hermanos Karamasov es la mejor novela jamás escrita, alabada por diversos autores ha servido de referencia y punto de partida para que grandes pensadores y novelistas desarrollen historias grandiosas inspiradas en esta bella novela. Y es que como diría Dostoievski: No hay nada que seduzca más al hombre que el libre albedrío, pero tampoco hay nada que lo haga sufrir más.

Muhteşem bir tuğla bitirdim dostlar... Okurken biraz yorar gibi oldu ama romanın abc si sayılan bir klasiği bitirmek çok zevkliydi. Hayata karşı, dine karşı ve aile bağları üzerine çok başarılı bir eserdi.

“The Brothers Karamazov” has intrigued me for years. I have always been aware of the fact that it is one of the greatest novels ever written so I know I have to read it eventually. Finally, after reading it, I think I get why this is considered great literature-- and though I can't exactly say that I loved it, I admit that I don’t regret reading it.

The plot revolves around the murder of perhaps one of the most despicable characters ever created, Fyodor Pavlovich Karamazov, the father of the Karamazov brothers. This detail about the book only skims the surface because this only serves as the basic architecture for Dostoevsky's philosophy. This novel isn't so much a story as: a lengthy dissertation on human nature; the issues of Dostoyevsky's day; detailed personality profiles; and digressions on every subject the author wanted to pursue, including free will, the existence of God, moral responsibility, and truth.

It's a high-minded novel full of weighty intellectual themes and Dostoevsky’s skill is unquestionable. “The Grand Inquisitor” is a supremely strange chapter , and one of the most unique things I’ve read in literature. The courtroom drama at the end of the novel, would be very hard to match in modern fiction.  In particular, the defense attorney’s closing argument is remarkable for its command of human psychology, as the hired gun from St. Petersburg shows that all the supposedly incriminating circumstances of the case can be understood.  
And of the family—what a family! Each figure in this household (?) embodies conflicting phases of the author’s great ideas: Fyodor Karamazov, the father, is a sensualist of the lowest type imaginable; Dmitri inherits his father’s passions but is tempered by periods of misgiving; Ivan is a materialist and a cynic. He changes his mind after a severe illness, and his materialistic belief is replaced by intense spiritual curiosity; Alyosha is an idealist, lovable and loving. Dostoevsky’s discordant elements are effectively conveyed in his human characterizations.

That said, “The Brothers Karamazov” still didn’t impress me as much as I expected it to. The story started out painfully slow. In my opinion, a great novel shouldn't require readers to force themselves to stay awake for more than 1/4 of the book in order to become acquainted with initially uninteresting characters. As with the rest of the book, there were many points where Dostoevsky seemed to descend into meaningless details that, to me, did nothing to advance the plot, atmosphere, or characterization.
I feel that the author is disconnected from his audience, and he doesn't seem to care. This comes to a point where I think Dostoevsky frequently loses himself in the meshes of his own word spinning. The book goes off too many tangents and is densely verbose.
I found pages of extraordinary depth and poignancy but they are few and far in between. I find it hard to connect with any of the characters since their personalities are diluted by the manic and morbidly intense verbal flow. Half the book was one of the Karamazovs talking on and on, uninterrupted to an audience as silent and passive as the reader. I frequently spaced out and have to backtrack. I eventually found myself reading this book in a grim desire to finish it and be done, rather than out of a sense of enjoyment.
I admired author's insights into human nature, but all too often, he seemed to make grand proclamations arbitrarily that have little evidence behind them. As if by declaring them with confidence he somehow made them true beyond question. And for whatever unaccountable reason, his preoccupations landed like a relic in my own life. My feelings can be aptly described by Rosewater’s words in Kurt Vonnegut’s “Slaughterhouse Five”:

“There is one other book, that can teach you everything you need to know about life... it's The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoyevsky, but that's not enough anymore.”

I still think it’s worth the read, and there is always something to be earned from reading the books of great authors who influenced other great authors. And besides, no matter what my opinion is, Ol’ Dusty is still going strong!

Rating this book is sort of ridiculous. It stands by itself as one of the greatest books of the western canon. Set in a small city somewhere in czarist Russia in the mid-19th century, Dostoevsky uses the Karamazov family to wrestle with the nature of good and evil, passion and love, faith and doubt, religion and atheism, intellect and kindness.

Whether you can get through the 800 pages depends on your appetite for classic Russian sensibility, and I can understand that not everyone will be able to. But in a weird, wonderful, clever, fun, engaging and deeply moving story, no matter if we believe in God, Satan, socialism, humanism or anything else, Fyodor urges us that while we live we should try to be good, love, be kind, reach out to those around us and make connections. Soon enough we’ll be gone.

When trying to evaluate such a significant novel, one looks to its historical literary context and developments in style and language over the last 140 years in an attempt to explain its shortcomings. The truth is that when read with a modern eye The Karamazov Brothersn  ^n is an inconsistent novel, and not strikingly original. Rather, the opposite is apparent, as its devices have since become familiar influences for countless other works. For something that claims to be philosophical novel, so much of its word count is devoted simply to descriptions of characters and events, much of which are mundane and superfluous (so different to the succinct and incisive Notes from Underground!) If we are honest, most of the first 500 pages of the novel falls into this category. With some exceptions, the role of the first half of the novel is little more than to set up the conclusion, and there is just so much extraneous description and seeming lack of focus that reading it cannot be described as enjoyable. It is easy to see why this novel is so often abandoned. However if one can get through the first half of the novel, the remainder, or more specifically the last 300 or so pages rewards the effort. And because the first half of the novel renders the second half possible, and in fact brings it retroactively to life, I am inclined to regard the entire novel highly based on the merits of the later parts.

As to the content of the story itself and its explorations I won’t go into detail (there are plenty of reviews which cover this already), only to say there is a complexity, richness and nuance that exceeded my expectations. The characters (though often excessively flamboyant or dramatic, sometimes comically so) contain genuine human limitations and contradictions, which together encapsulate the broad possibilities of human experience and whose nature and actions are open to endless interpretation. There is a level of philosophising which is overt in the discourses of the novel, and a secondary level which is hidden in the actions of the characters and evident only under examination. There is so much here beneath the surface, I feel that one could never approach the limits of what this novel has to offer.

The Karamazov Brothers is by no means a perfect novel, but it undoubtedly deserves its reputation as one of the greatest.

* * * * *

n  ^n  In case you were wondering, the translator of this edition explains the variation in the title:

“One need go no further than the title, the standard English rendering of which is The Brothers Karamazov. This follows the original word order, the only one possible in Russian in this context. Had past translators been expressing themselves freely in natural English, without being hamstrung by that original Russian word order, they would no more have dreamt of saying The Brothers Karamazov than they would The Brothers Warner or The Brothers Marx.”

This explanation is compelling enough to me, yet the more “correct” title still sounds odd at first, and loses some of the authority of the distinctive traditional title, with its word order which in English seems for some reason exclusively reserved for Karamazovs and Grimms.

n  "My brothers are destroying themselves," he went on, "my father too. And they are destroying others with them. It's 'the primitive force of the Karamazovs,' as Father Païssy said the other day, a crude, unbridled, earthly force. Does the spirit of God move above that force? Even that I don't know. I only know that I, too, am a Karamazov..."n

n  Initial Thoughts n

Reading Dostoevsky is a bit of a landmark in anyone's reading career and when I was given the challenge to read something outside of my comfort zone it looked like the perfect time in my life for some classic Russian literature. But which novel should I choose? The obvious answer would have been his most famous work, Crime and Punishment, but after doing a bit of digging around I discovered many consider his final novel, The Brothers Karamazov, not only his personal best but also the greatest book ever written. On that basis I decided to give this beast of a novel a whirl.

Yes it's worth noting before you start that this book is huge and a big commitment. It's divided into four parts, each of which is broken down into a further four "books" each containing eight to ten chapters. And yes the text is dense. I'm not sure if that's a feature of Dostoevsky work yet, but I'm assuming it is. But as they say if you want to reap the rewards you go to put that effort in. Wish me luck.

n  "In the town I was in, there were no such back-alleys in the literal sense, but morally they were. If you were like me, you'd know what that means."n

n  The Story n

Although the work is complex, the tale itself is a pretty simple one. Parricide is the order of the day as it centres around the murder of one of the most vile and despicable father's in history. An absolute devil who funnily enough goes by the name of Fyodor. Although he is great at making money, he is good for absolutely nothing else and lives a life of debauchery and sin. Something we all aspire to!

He has three sons, who couldn't be more different. There's the emotional and passionate Dmitri, the calm and rational atheist Ivan and the spiritual and kindhearted Alyosha. There also may be the possibility of a fourth, illegitimate son who goes by the name of Smerdyakov. It's the eldest, Dmitri, that Fyodor is in conflict with as they are both infatuated with the same woman. The bewitching but slightly crazy Grushenka. This is despite the son being married to the beautiful Katerina Ivanovna. There's nothing more complicated than family but this is taking it to another level.

The first half of the novel is spent getting acquainted with the characters and the latter turns into a murder mystery of sorts. There's a lot of sub plots on the go, which all interconnect, but if you think I'm going to tell you all about them then you got another thing coming. Dostoyevsky does a far better job of that than I ever will.

n  The Writing n

When someone says a book is dense this is what they're talking about. There is a lot going on and you need to give it your full attention. The story contains a lot of dialogue that gets deeply philosophical. Dostoyevsky's understanding of society and human psychology is at genius level and the way he incorporated it into the narrative is quite breathtaking.

The main plot is definitely an engaging one but this is certainly not a plot-driven narrative. The story itself is a vehicle used to explore a range of ideas through the exploration of characters and this is interspersed with moments of extreme drama that was greatly entertaining. The way it's done is so thought provoking and you really need to pay attention to what you're reading. Almost every passage has meaning, blink and you could miss something life changing.

But there are a couple of unusual aspects that caught me by surprise. For one, the majority of the main characters have two names and this is not made clear at the onset and it took me a little while to catch on. For instance, Grushenka also goes by the name of Agrafena Alexdrovna and Alyosha by Alexei.

Then the dialogue is interspersed with French and Polish (I think) dialogue with no explanation. My advice is just to keep reading and it doesn't really have an impact.

n  "The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to such a pass that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so looses respect for himself and for others. And having no respect he ceases to love, and in order to occupy and distract himself without love he gives way to passions and coarse pleasures, and sinks to bestiality and vices, all from continual lying to other men and to himself."n

n  The Characters n

This is the moment I've been waiting for. If you love character development like I do, the The Brothers Karamazov is the book for you. The author's style is to concentrate on his fantastic array of characters and their response to stressful situations and interactions with one another. And he really is a master of this like no other.

Dostoyevsky goes so deeply into their lives, their sense of motality and the way they think and view the world that they really do become living, breathing entities. Over the course of the novel, which lasted me almost two weeks I really felt like part of their lives.

Perhaps the most scary thing was I began to see myself in some of them despite the majority being pretty awful people. By the second part of the novel I felt that I knew each character so well that I was invested in their circumstances and plight. It's so well done and perhaps the best character development I've come across in my pretty limited reading career.

The focus of the story is of course the three Brothers Karamazov and as I've already said they are drastically different. Each is used to portray a different outlook on life and morality. Alyosha is the deeply religious one who is the most virtuous, whereas as Ivan is the most intellectual and logical but chooses not to believe in God. Then there's Dimitri who is wild, emotional and impulsive. The distinction is deliberate, and it's up to you in the way you interpret it's meaning, but what is truly impressive is that the author argues both sides so convincingly you would never know, which side he falls on. For instance, Ivan's argument that God doesn't exist is far more convincing and this is recognised by Alyosha. But, how far does that being right get Ivan as he is far less happy and is certainly not the better man?

And while we're on the subject of Alyosha, he was probably my favourite character in the story. The only one who could be termed heroic. After finishing I found that Dostoyevsky's own son died while he was writing this novel and he named this character in honour of him. Some of the moments featuring Alyosha and centering around the meaning of being a father are so emotionally charged you can feel the impact that this event had on the author imbued in the words.



n  Final Thoughts n

So I began this review by saying many regard this as the greatest novel ever written. I certainly wouldn't argue with anyone who said this. It's a tremendous literary achievement and I got more out of this that any other novel I've read. But so I should based on the bloody size of it. Almost as big as this review!

I was expecting it to be a really tough read and had a couple of short stories on standby in case I needed a break. But I didn't need them. From the very first page I was hooked till the moment I put it down. A book that's consumed my thoughts almost entirely during my reading and for a long time afterward. An absolute masterpiece!

It's a book that reminds me of how I have changed as a person. In my youth I'd have found this too slow and boring, lacking the patience to persevere. But now I appreciate the depth and beauty in the writing and the ideas within.

So my first book by Fyodor Dostoevsky but certainly not my last. I'm already lining up Crime and Punishment. I'm starting to feel like a whole new world has opened up to me. The power of reading!

Thanks for reading and...Na Zdorovie!


Genius... Fyodor Dostoevsky

‎دوستانِ گرانقدر، این رمان در نوعِ خود بینظیر است و مقایسهٔ این رمان با رمان هایِ دیگر، بنظرم نادرست است.. این کتاب، اثریست ناب و بی نظیر که همه چیز را در خود جای داده است و نمیتوان شبیه به آن را یافت.. نوشتهٔ داستایوفسکی، اثری فلسفی، روانشناسانه، جامعه شناسانه و هنرمندانه میباشد... یاد زنده یاد <داستایوفسکی> گرامی باد
----------------------------------------------
‎عزیزانم، داستان در موردِ زندگی پُر چالش و ماجراجویانهٔ پیرمردی ثروتمند به نامِ <فئودور کارامازوف> میباشد که فرزندانش <آلیوشا>، <ایوان> ، <دیمتری> و <اسمردیاکوف> با رفتار و اخلاقِ پدر مخالف هستند و هریک به شیوه ای با پدر مخالفت میکند... بنظرم، چیزی که این داستان را خواندنی میکند، تفاوت هایِ رفتاری و اعتقادی و اخلاقیِ این برادرها با یکدیگر میباشد... زنده یاد داستایوفسکی به نوعی مهمترین مواردِ اخلاقی در انسانها را بینِ این برادران، تقسیم کرده است.... و امکان دارد هر خواننده ای، اخلاق و روشِ زندگیِ یکی از برادرها را برتر از برادرانِ دیگر بداند و بتواند با آن شخصیتِ موردِ نظر تا پایانِ داستان، ارتباط برقرار کرده و همزاد پنداری کند
‎شخصیتی که بیش از سایرین، به چشم می آید، ایوان کاراموزوف است.. ایوان، انسانی خردگرا و تیزهوش است که به نوعی خویش را پایبندِ ذهنیتِ اقلیدسی میداند و شیفتهٔ اندیشهٔ ابعادِ سه گانهٔ اقلیدس میباشد.. شاید ایوان را در پایانِ داستان، دادگاهی و سرزنش کنیم، ولی از دیدگاهِ من، او هرچه میکند، بخاطرِ عشق به انسانیت است، درکل میتوان گفت که ایوان در اندیشهٔ رستگاریِ انسانهاست.. وقتی میبیند موجودی به نامِ خدا نمیتواند عدالت را بر رویِ زمین برپا کند، خود دست به کار میشود تا عدالت را اجرا کند... ایوان شخصیتِ دوست داشتی و خردمندِ این داستان است.. او خردگرایی را برمیگزیند و ایمان و موهوماتِ اینچنینی را پارادوکسال به شمار می آورد و آن را امیدی بیخردانه و کورکورانه میداند و دلش به حالِ کسانی میسوزد که خودشان را با واژهٔ موهومِ ایمان سرگرم کرده اند و واقعیتها را نمیبینند
‎اسمردیاکوف، پسرِ کاراموزوف است، ولی از مادری که کلفتِ خانه بوده، زاده شده است .. پس او برادرِ ناتنیِ بچه هاست که در خانه همچون نوکر با او برخورد میکنند و مادرش بخاطرِ رفتارِ بدی که کارامازوف با وی داشته، دق کرده و میمیرد.. این موضوع سبب میشود تا از اسمردیاکوف بزرگ، کینهٔ زیادی در دل داشته باشد و نیاز به جرقه ای دارد تا از او انتقام بگیرد
‎در میانِ برادران، الیوشا، در انزوا زندگی میکند و در کلیسا در حال راز و نیاز است، او قصد دارد تا پدر را از مرگ نجات داده و نگذارد تا برادرانش او را به قتل برسانند
‎و اما برادری دیگر، یعنی دیمیتری، جوانی شهوت ران که به عواقبِ رفتارش فکر نمیکند و حاضر است به خاطرِ دختری به نامِ <گروشنا> رقیبِ عشقیِ خویش یعنی پدرش را از سرِ راه بردارد
‎خلاصه آنکه پدر به قتل میرسد و شواهد نشان میدهد که دیمیتری این کار را کرده است و دادگاهی میشود، ولی حقیقت چیزِ دیگری میباشد..... بهتر است خودتان این داستانِ زیبا را بخوانید و از سرانجامِ آن آگاه شوید
************************************
‎ایوان: هر شرارتی که در جهان به پا میخیزد، از بشر سر میزند... مردم گاه از بی رحمیِ حیوانی سخن میگویند که این خود توهین به حیوانات است.. یک حیوان نمیتواند به اندازهٔ انسان بی رحم باشد، یعنی هنرمندانه بی رحم باشد... ببر و پلنگ، فقط شکار میکنند و میدوند. ولی هیچگاه به فکرشان نمیرسد که آدم را توسطِ گوشهایش به میخ بکشند!!.. حتی اگر قادر به این کار بودند
‎این تورکها از شکنجه دادنِ کودکان بسیار لذت میبردند.. گاه جنینِ به دنیا نیامده را از رحمِ مادر بیرون می آوردند و آن را به هوا پرتاب میکردند و دوباره آن را با سرنیزهٔ خود میگرفتند و درست جلویِ چشمانِ مادرانشان این کار را انجام میدادند.. به خصوص جلویِ چشمِ مادران بود که مایهٔ لذت بسیار زیاد برایِ آنها میشد... فکر میکنم، اگر ابلیس وجود نداشت، انسان آن را به وجود می آورد و درست طبقِ تصویرِ خاصی که از خود دارد، ابلیس را میساخت
************************************
‎ایوان: تنها چیزی که میدانم این است که در این جهان، رنج و عذاب بسیار زیاد است و هیچکس هم گناهکار نیست.. این را خوب میدانم و به همین دلیل است که نمیتوانم زندگی کنم. چه فایده ای دارد دانستنِ اینکه کسی گناهکار نیست و معلول از پیِ علت می آید!؟ .. من خواهانِ عدالت هستم، وگرنه خویش را نابود میکنم.. نه آن عدالتِ موهوم در روزِ حساب و قیامت.. نه آن عدالتی که در زمان و مکانی بینهایت دور به وجود بیاید.. عدالت باید در اینجا و رویِ زمین اجرا شود و من بتوانم آن را ببینم
************************************
‎ایوان: کسی که کودکی را شکنجه میکند، باید تاوانِ اشکهایِ او را بدهد.. این رنج و محنتِ معصومانه را باید کسی جبران کند و کفاره اش را بپردازد، ولی این اتفاق نیافتاده است.. پس آن هماهنگیِ جاوید در ادیان یک دروغ است و وجود ندارد.. چگونه میخواهید رنج و ستمی که بر کودکان روا شده جبران کنید!؟؟ با سوختنِ ستمکار در جهنم؟؟؟ سوختنِ آنها چه ربطی به من دارد؟ اصلاً جهنمِ موهوم چه دردی را دوا میکند، وقتی آن کودکانِ معصوم چنین شکنجه هایی را تحمل میکنند؟ دیگر سوختنِ ستمکاران در جهنم چه فایده ای دارد!؟؟ حتی اگر جهنمی هم وجود داشته باشد

‎«« وای بر کسی که به کودکان آسیب میرساند »»
--------------------------------------------
‎امیدوارم این ریویو در جهتِ آشنایی با این کتابِ بینظیر، کافی و مفید بوده باشه
‎<پیروز باشید و ایرانی>

Chronology
Introduction
Further Reading
A Note on the Text

--The Brothers Karamazov

Notes

“You wanted to regenerate another man within yourself by means of suffering; in my opinion, if only you will remember that other man all your life and wherever you may flee to- that will be enough for you.”

Dostoyevsky successfully captivates a narrative of futility and resentment, while exploring the notion with beauty.

To say a book with such gritty topics is bizarrely beautiful feels ironic, but the craft of this novel really generates a sense of emotion that I did not anticipate. From the depiction of religious and societal questioning, to the changeability of romantic and familial relationships- The Brothers Karamazov is a Journey, a long journey, but filled with the type of moral profundity that almost makes you forget that pages are passing by.

Each character serves a purpose, each brother is a personality worth exploring, every chapter presents new questions, new answers. The ending, a minefield of conflicting emotion.

This book is a long read, but entirely worth it.

If there was still any doubt, let me confirm that this actually is the greatest book ever written. But be warned that you need to set aside a solid month to get through it. And it's not light reading--this is a dense work of philosophy disguised as a simple murder mystery. But it's well worth the effort. It tackles the fundamental question of human existence--how best to live one's life--in a truly engaging way. Dostoevsky created 3 brothers (Ivan, Alexei, and Dmitri) with opposite answers to this fundamental question, and set them loose in the world to see what would happen. A testament to Dostoevsky's genius is he didn't know how the book would evolve when he started writing. As a consequence, the book really isn't about the plot at all, but about how these brothers evolve and deal with their struggles based on their differing world views.

Dostoevsky articulates, better than anyone, how human beings really are what I would call "walking contradictions". Perhaps all of our struggles in life boil down to the reality that we desire contradictory things, simultaneously. If you like your novels with good character development, this is the masterwork. Dostoevsky's characters are more real, more human, than any other. At different points along the way, you will identify with them, sympathize with them, curse them, agonize over them, celebrate them. You will be moved.

Reading this book was a deeply personal experience for me, because I saw myself in one of the characters, and I didn't like what I saw. My worldview, in fact my entire direction in life, shifted as a result of this experience. I can't guarantee the same results for you, but you owe it to yourself to set aside the time, someday, for the Brothers Karamazov.

Be sure to read the Pevear Volokhonsky translation.