I loved Dostoevsky’s Brothers Karamazov and was hoping this would be like it, but in fact it was more of the feverish feeling of Crime and Punishment. The Double was one of the strangest and most bizarre things I’ve ever read. The Gambler was a much easier read, but, like Crime and Punishment, dealt with a character with an obsessive nature which grew weightier throughout—a good portrayal of the destructive nature of hope rooted in addiction, but, because of that, a defeating read.

The Double ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ : the original fight club

The Gambler ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️: amazing story

The Double - 4.5 stars
The Gambler - 5 stars

I wish I remembered The Double more freshly, I only recall that the Pevear & Volokhonsky translation jumped off the page for me and made me feel like I had touched a live wire. I also remember feeling that Dostoevsky's personality as a writer came into 3-D and that his humor suddenly became obvious as a huge part of the way he wrote. The story itself was compelling the whole way through, psychological and zany and funny and sad at parts. Definitely felt connected to Gogol's The Nose. It also caused me to reflect a good bit about how we are almost doubled through walking around with images of ourselves, or alternative selves, or ideals, that we use to then beat up on ourselves in reality or, terrifyingly, derail ourselves in reality.

The Gambler I read aloud with the brothers in our small library, me reading the entire time, a few chapters at a time. I thought it was a weaker story than The Double and am tempted to get them to do a read-aloud of that next because reading aloud brings out the humor so much more than reading privately, it seems, with Dostoevsky. The zaniest just pops where you interrupt yourself with chuckles at the ridiculousness as you try to read aloud. The Gambler had a few hilarious moments and a few incredible portrayals of the throes of a dopaminergic binge, the latter being its true claim to glory. These moments are worth the read on the whole, absolutely. It is a stirring portrayal and could be quoted at length. Apparently, though, he wrote the novella in a month under severe duress and it shows elsewhere, with these few moments of genius spasming within the untidy fold.

4.5 stars. Both reaching their climax in the last few pages and ending so abruptly I feel like I'm teetering on a precipice.

The Double

Even though this was a third person narrative, it is basically a first person point of view of our bumbling, nervous and pitiful "hero", Goliadkin. And boy did I feel completely immersed in his mind.

A wild descent into madness. Was the double a real doppelganger or a projection of our ideal self?

The Gambler

Russians gamble. Women toy with the men who love them.

Another masterful spiral into an uncontrolled state of mind. Feverish addiction. Alexei's flaws were not as immediately obvious as Goliadkin's, and the slow reveal made his ending a bit more tragic.

https://youtu.be/tvJp6vO3I1U

si hay algo que caracteriza a mi compa fyodor por encima de cualquier otro autor es su capacidad para generar en mí ansiedad (más de lo normal lol), algo que se replica en "C&P", "Notes" y este libro.

y creo que ya encontré la receta secreta que se repite en estas historias:
los personajes principales que crea son horribles, insufribles y nefastos (como yo) y aunque uno intenta sentir empatía por ellos, siempre acaban arrastrándote hasta el piso con ellos.
yyyyyyy justo por eso el resultado es una bola de ansiedad en la garganta que te hace sentir igual que ellos.

rating: 3.5

These were unique works by Dostoyevsky. He captures the psychological despair of a man, possibly schizophrenic, who imagines himself to have a double- someone who is accepted by all and winsome in a way he feels he could never be. And then, the irony of the gambler. Dostoyevsky gambled away his income necessitating his writing of this book for some cash.

I don’t really know what to say or make of this reading experience. So much felt as much a dream as the events Golyadkin Sr. suffered through.

This was my first Dostoevsky, though I’m hoping to follow it up with the second novella in this book, The Gambler. This is my first exposure to Russian literature, actually. I’m very much looking forward to more.

I wish I had more to say about this book itself. I don’t. It sparked my imagination and has had me thinking for, what, two weeks now (?) about the idea of an American double. That is, I mean to say, that is (get it yet?) what is the American equivalent? If this story presupposes Russian anxiety about the character of the everyday RU citizen, then what can we learn by asking similar questions to our own societies today?

This question, and the answers I come up with, I hope to explore in my own work. Until then...more reading!

The Double is Dostoevsky's most enigmatic work. If you've read Gogol's Petersburg works, it's easy to see the correlation. Unfortunately, D was also heavily influenced by the critical acclaim he received for his first work Poor Folk, when he wrote this – in most opinions his least readable novel.

The "Akaky-type" from Gogol's Overcoat, Goliadkin is an anti-hero that inspires loathing. He makes all the wrong decisions and does so from a desperate and uncommonly low self-esteem. What irks me most is his unfounded paranoia, which the plot seems to confirm. Enter his double – the exact same man but with a napoleonic vitality who supplants the original Goliadkin on every level. I don't want to leave spoilers, so I'll just say it's difficult to figure out just how trustworthy Goldiadkin is in the telling. Is the double real or imagined?

The Gambler seems shallow and melodramatic at first. Familial intrigues and trysts abound, and the main character seems typically full of angst and unrequited love. Halfway through, however, a comedic tone emerges with the entrance of the grandmother. Her interaction with the heretofore boring characters breaths life and wit into the dialogue, and doubles the effect of the desperate main character's role. Suspense is maintained remarkably by keeping Alexei Ivanovich a novice gambler for most of the story, solidifying the title as more a metaphor of risk than a literal reference to roulette.

Dostoevsky wrote this on a painful deadline (he took a gamble himself on the terms), between installments of Crime and Punishment, and it shows mostly in the blurry timeline of the plot (there are numerous recollections of characters seemingly out of place). The epilogue style "winding down" of the last few chapters seems muddled and somewhat disappointing.

These things aside, Alexei Ivanovich is a purely new and exciting type. He is a blind and egoistic coward, a variation on the underground man, but with fresh impulses and surprising nuances, specifically regarding slavery to addiction and the excitement of risk. The roulette scenes and gaming philosophies are honest and journalistic, taken from Dostoevsky's own experience.

Dastayosky wrote The Double to pay his loan back, but this made it his best novel. I'm totally in line with this assertion.

I reviewed the Double on my progress update, so I’ll just talk about the Gambler here.

Good stuff! Certainly not his top tier best, but still enjoyable. Dostoevsky suffered from a gambling addiction himself so could offer some insight into how the protagonist thought through his gambling. The last line of him believing that one more round of roulette would solve all his problems will stick with me.