The Adolescent

این کتاب رو از همه‌ی کتاب‌های داستایوسکی کمتر دوست داشتم، توی محیط شلوغی شروع به خوندنش کردم و اون‌قدرها جذب داستان نشدم، اما نحوه‌ی روایت و پیچش داستان و شخصیت‌ها زیر قلم این مرد رو نمی‌تونم نادیده بگیرم.

what a brat!

ربما دوستويفسكي لا يعطي القارئ المتعة بقدر ما يعطيه تجربة حياة ، فلو أردنا ان نصف دوستويفسكي ، فأفضل وصف انه انسان ، انسان خبير في الانسان ، فعندما يكتب عن مراهق تشعر ان النص انما كتبه مراهق حقا ، ربما كان يكتب عن نفسه في الحقيقة ، ولا اعلم ان كان ذلك الطبع هو طبع كل مراهق ام لا ، الا انني اجد شيئا من نفسي في تلك الرواية ، فسمة المراهق هي الرفض ، فهو رافض ومرفوض يشعر ان العالم يرفضه ويريده ويشعر ايضا انه يستطيع أن يحرق العالم وايضا يستطيع ان يملكه و ان يملؤه اعجابا
-سيدرك يوما اننا كلنا عاديون غارقون في العادية الا في عيون احبائنا - وربما ذلك التناقض هو سر تعقيد شخصية اي مراهق

قرأت جملة لبيوجفتش ووقفت امامها كثيرا والجملة هي
قد يوجد ملحد على خلق ولكن لا يوجد الحاد اخلاقي
فإذ انا افهمها من دوستويفسكي بجملة واحدة بسيطة وسهلة ، فيقول دوستو
ما شاني انا بما سيجري في انسانيتكم هذه بعد الف عام ، اذا كان قانونكم لا يهب لي جزاء ذلك لا حبا ولا حياة اخرى ولا شهادة بفضيلتي ؟
هل يوجد حجة اسهل ؟
قضية الايمان ربما كانت النقطة الجوهرية في اعمال دوستويفسكي الضخمة ، وربما ايضا هي قضية العصر الذي عاش فيه ، وربما صنف البعض دوستويفسكي انه عدمي ، الا انني استبعدت ولازالت استبعد عدمية دوستويفسكي خصوصا عند قراءتي للجريمة والعقاب والاخوة كرامازوف ، صحيح ان شخصية ايفان في الاخوة كرامازوف وشخصية راسكولينكوف في الجريمة والعقاب قد يكونان المثال الاوضح والاعمق للانسان العدمي ، الا انك تجد ان أفكارهم لم تصمد امام انفسهم اولا ، او الاصح ان نقول ان انفسهم لم تصمد امام أفكارهم ، فعندما يكتب دوستويفسكي على لسان ايفان ، ما دام الله غير موجود فكل شيء مباح ، فكإنه يجزم بوجود الله ، الا ان رواية المراهق ربما جعلتني ارى زاوية اخرى في ذلك الانسان ، فاجده مرة مؤمن ومرة شكاك ، اجده يتحدث عن طوباوية أرضية ثم يعود ليؤكد استحالة الطوباوية ، يتحدث عن الحياة بدون اله عذاب ثم يعود يتحدث عن الحلم المستحيل ثم يعود اخيرا فيقول ،حقا ان على هذه الارض قدرا ، فربما كان دوستويفسكي مؤمن شكاك او الافضل ان اقول عليه كما قال هو نفسه على احد ابطال الرواية
ان امثال هؤلاء الرجال ما ينبغي ان يحكم عليهم بالمقاييس التي يحكم بها على غيرهم ، ان لهم شأنا خاصا ،ان حياتهم ستنقضي دائما على هذا النحو ،وليس في ذلك شذوذ ،بالعكس ، فانما الشذوذ أن يجدوا الهدوء ،وان يصبحوا كسائر الناس المتوسطين

اعود مرة اخرى للمراهقة و سمة اخرى هي الجمال والمثل الاعلى والظما اليهما والقدرة على الحب الجامح الذي يبدو في كثير من الاحيان مثالي ، وتلك السمات قد تستمر عمرا فيعيش الرجل عمره مراهق ، وربما كان البطل وابوه في قصتنا مراهقين ، ودوستو تحدث في كذا موضع عن المثل الاعلى ، فيأخذ عطيل كمثال ويفرق بين الانسان الغيور والانسان الوثوق ، فهو يرى ان الغيور لا يقتل اما الرجل الوثوق فهو قد يقتل اذا انهدم مثله الاعلى ، وربما كان ليقتل اركادي او فريسلوف كاترينا ، بما انها كانت تمثل مثلهما الاعلى لو انها
اظهرت في اي ظرف شيء من الحقارة


اقتباسات

كل ما أطلبه هو ان تتيح لي أن أكذب ، وسوف ترى أن ما سأقوله جميل جدا


إن الحقيقة قائمة في مكان بالوسط ، كذلك شأنها دائما


لئن قتل عطيل ديدمونة ، ثم قتل نفسه ، فإنه لم يفعل ذلك عن غيرة ، وانما فعله لانه سلب مثله الأعلى


ليس من حقي أن أحكم على الآخرين ، لأنني لا أجيد الألم


انني اسجل هذه الخطوات الحقيرة لأبين مدى ما كنت عليه في ذلك الاوان من ترجح في فهم الخير والشر ، والعاطفة وحدها هي التي انقذتني


حتى اذا ان الاوان في ذات يوم دمرت كل شيء ، ابدت كل شيء ، أفنيت العالم كله ، المجرمين فيه والابرياء


الملحد الانسان ، ربما كنت أخشاه الى الان ، ولكن هذا الملحد الانسان لم يتفق لي ان لاقيته مرة واحدة في يوم من الايام ، وانما انا لقيت الملحد المشوش


هؤلاء ليس فيهم جمالا ، ولا يريدون الجمال ، هم جميعا أموات ، ولكن كلا منهم يتباهى بموته ، ولا يخطر بباله ان يتجه الى الحقيقة الوحيدة ، أن يعيش المرء بغير إله فذلك عذاب



ان الحزن يمتزج بالفرح كلما مضت السنون ، ثم يستحيل الى زفرة سعيدة ، هكذا تجري الامور في هذا العالم


ان العصر الذهبي هو الحلم المستحيل الذي حلمه كل من وجدوا على هذه الارض

Foi o mais difícil que li de Dostoiévski, até agora. Narrativa fragmentada, personagens amorais sem qualquer característica que nos possa cativar, um constante desnorteio no ritmo da história, avansos e recuos sem nexo num jogo de gato e rato em que o narrador se baralha e nos confunde.
Não sei se foi experimentalismo e falhou, ou se foi propositado e eu é que não lhe apanhei o sentido, o facto é que o livro teve criticas negativas aquando da publicação.
Salvou-se por alguns diálogos onde Dostoiévski recuperou as grandes questões que debateu ao longo de toda a sua obra. Salvou, mas salvou pouco.

ضحية مجتمع أم ساذج مغرق في سذاجته؟ لا يهم .. فهو في عرف المجتمع مراهق عديم الخبرة سريع التأذي .. حساس حساسية زائدة عن الحد. بالرغم من سنوات عمره العشرين إلا أنه سماه مراهق ربما لانغلاقه على نفسه منذ وعى حقيقة وجوده و ازدرائه للجميع منتظرا الفرصة ليأخذ حظه من الحياة و ينفذ فكرته التي سيطرت عليه.

نعم. لقد استولى عليّ حلم القوة و العزلة طوال حياتي. حتى في سن لو أتيح لأحد أثناءها أن يرى ما كان يدور في رأسي من خواطر لضحك ضحكا شديدا. لذلك أحب السر كثيرا. و كنت أسترسل في الأحلام استرسالا لا يبقي لي وقت للحديث مع الناس. و قد استنتج الناس من ذلك أنني متوحش. و كان ذهولي يبعثهم على تأويلات أشد إيغالا في الخطأ أيضا. و لكن خديّ المتوردين كانتا تبرهنان على غير ذلك.

يعتز بنفسه كثيرا رغم ذلك و يؤمن بأن لديه من الفكر و العزيمة ما يمكن أن يصل به على منزلة روتشيلد في الغنى و المكانة يوما ما.

قد يضحك بعض الناس و يدهشون إذا أنا قلت لهم أنني منذ طفولتي – أو نحو ذلك – لم أستطع في يوم من الأيام أن أتخيل نفسي إلا في المنزلة الأولى في كل مكان و في كل ظرف.

لن يعدم دوستويفسكي أن ينكأ جراحا فلسفية مثيرا لقارئه عاصفة من التأملات التي تزحزح ثوابته و تجبره على إعادة تدوير أفكاره القديمة.

إن الحقيقة قائمة في مكان بالوسط. كذلك شأنها دائما. فرب أمر واحد يكون حقيقة مقدسة تارة و يكون كذبا سفيها تارة أخرى.

و لن ينسى أيضا أن تكون السياسة حاضرة بقوة سواء السياسة الروسية أو العالمية و حتى الاقتصاد استطاع أن يتنبأ بما سيحدث فيه لعدة عقود قادمة في فقرة واحدة من الرواية.

ان جميع الدول رغم توازن الميزانيات و عدم وجود عجز ستفيق ذات صباح فإذا هي متورطة تورطا حاسما. و إذا هي جميعا ترفض أن تدفع. و إذا هي في إفلاس شامل. و لكن جميع العناصر المحافظة في العالم بأسره ستناهض هذا. لأن هذه العناصر ستكون هي مالكة الأسهم و ستكون هي الدائنة. و بطبيعة الحال. سيحدث عندئذ نوع من الأكسدة. يزداد عدد اليهود و يقوم حكمهم. و بعد ذلك. فإن جميع الذين لم يملكوا أسهما في يوم من الأيام – أي جميع الشحاذين – سيرفضون المساهمة في الأكسدة طبعا. فتقوم المعركة. و بعد سبعين هزيمة. يبيد الشحاذين مالكي الأسهم. و يأخذون أسهمهم و يحلون محلهم. كمساهمين أيضا بطبيعة الحال. و قد يقولون شيئا جديدا. و قد لا يقولون. و أغلب الظن أنهم سيفلسون هم أيضا.

و لأن نابليون هو المثل الأعلى في الجبروت و هو من استطاع أن يسرق البريق من القيصر منذ محاولة اجتياح روسيا فإنك تجده حاضرا بقوة في الكثير من روايات دوستويفسكي.

اسمح لي. لقد قامت ثورة في فرنسا و أُعدم الناس بالمقصلة. ثم جاء نابليون و أخذ كل شيء. فالثورة هي الأولى و نابليون هو الثاني. و لكن نابليون أصبح هو الأول و أصبحت الثورة هي الثانية.

لفرط سذاجته و اعتداده بنفسه يقع في المشاكل و يتعرض لاحتقار طبقة من الشعب لا يكن لها هو نفسه أي احترام و رغم أنهم سرقوه إلا أنهم اتهموه باللصوصية و طردوه شر طرده.

يستحيل عليّ بعد اليوم أن أبريء نفسي. يستحيل عليّ أن أبدأ حياة جديدة. فيجب إذن أن أخضع. يجب أن أجعل نفسي خادما. يجب أن أكون كلبا. أن أكون ذبابة. أن أكون واشيا. أن أكون الآن واشيا بالفعل. و في أثناء ذلك أستعد بهدوء و رفق. حتى إذا آن الأوان في ذات يوم. دمرت كل شيء. أبدت كل شيء. أفنيت العالم كله. المجرمين فيه و الأبرياء. و سيعلم الناس جميعا حينذاك على حين فجأة أن الذي فعل ذلك إنما هو الرجل الذي اتهموه بأنه لص. و بعدئذ أنتحر.

كثيرون من انتحروا أو لوحوا بالانتحار في هذه الرواية.

الانتحار أكبر خطيئة يرتكبها الإنسان. و لكن الرب هو الحاكم الوحيد. لأنه وحده يعرف كل شيء. مقاييس و حدودا. و واجبنا نحن هو أن ندعو الله لأمثال هؤلاء الخطاة الكبار. فإذا سمعت عن خطيئة كهذه الخطيئة. فادع لمرتكبها دعاء حنونا قبل أن تنام. و تشفع له عند الرب و لو كنت تعرفه. و إذا كنت لا تعرفه تكون شفاعتك أجدى.

كنت أظن أن دوستويفسكي يفهم المرأة أكثر من الآخرين و لكن هيهات

إنني لا أزال حتى هذا اليوم عاجزا عن أن أقطع فيها برأي. إن الله وحده قادر على أن يرى عواطفها. ثم إن الإنسان جهاز يبلغ من التعقيد أن المرء لا يستطيع أن يفهم من أمره شيئا. و لا سيما إن كان هذا الإنسان امرأة.

تبدا الحكاية بالمرأة و تنتهي بالمرأة و يكون محورها و فاكهتها دوما .. المرأة. و إلا ما كانت حكاية.

سأظل أفكر فيك طول حياتي تفكيري في أغلى إنسان و أنبل قلب و أقدس شيء يمكن أن أحبه و أحترمه. آندره بتروفتش .. افهمني. إنني لم أجيء إلى هنا عبثا يا عزيزي. يا من كنت و لا تزال عزيزا على قلبي. لن أنسى أبدا ما أثرته في نف��ي من مشاعر أثناء لقاءاتنا الأولى. فلننفصل صديقين. و لسوف تظل في حياتي أجلّ خواطري شأنا و أحلاها مذاقا.

كانت هذه الرواية الأجدر بأن تسمى الأبله و ليس المراهق. فما كان الأمير مشكين أبلها و لا كان آركادي بتروفتش مراهقا فلم فعلت هذا بنا يا دوستويفسكي؟

Dedicated to every parent in the world.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm so sorry it took me so long to write this review, and it may take me a while to write others. My father needs me, to help him write a book, and to conclude a thesis. So I don't know how long it's going to take to write a new review. You know, as much as I pleased you, first is duty, and then pleasure.
The first thing I must say about"The Teenager" is that since I read his argument in the encyclopedia of Garzanti Literature. It was just a book, that I wanted to own, and read. I must thank the forerunner, who made him stop being afraid of what the protagonist of"The Citadel" https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... Andrew Manson called"Russian bugs". I must confess, they really intimidate by seeing their large number of pages, and the aura that surrounds them. But it was my dear Juan Manuel de Prada https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...
, who brought me closer to Dostoyevsky. I remember, as both he and I was decisively marked by the reading of Crime and Punishment https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7...
and how the power of sin, evil, redemption, and grace were explored, and how they could live together in man. In fact, also of all the books, which I've read to Dostoyevsky is my favorite. The second of my favorites I suppose, it will be"humiliated and offended" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3... that I drank so much from that Charles Dickens book "The Antique Shop" from which I set out to write a review, and in the end I did not :-( https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4... that I didn't find it as cloying, or as cheesy, as was said. Of course Oscar Wilde was not fine, when he commented that "you had to have a heart of stone so as not to die laughing as you read the ending" https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... we can say, that your opinion became more sensible, when you tested the English prison system in your flesh. Then of course, he liked the reform that Dickens's books pushed. In fact in this novel "The Teen" we will see a reference to this novel by Charles Dickens https://www.goodreads.com/author/show.... . However, although it was one of the novels, which I valued worst, perhaps the novel that has marked me the most, perhaps it was "The Idiot" is curious as there are novels, which seem to mark us, if to imitate our life. My father was marked "Madame Bovary", because the same thing happened to Dr. Bovary https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2... the same thing happened to me with "The Idiot" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... I did not understand, as a writer, who lived a century before my birth (even today) I could know so much the human soul. What Liov Nikolayevich Mischkin thought i thought about myself, and I also had a love triangle. I didn't know if I was Mischkin, or Gavrila Ivanovich. All I know is, I fell in love with a woman, and even though I had a boyfriend, I wanted to marry her, and I would have done anything to get it. Yet I never got to know my Parfen Semionovich Rogochin I didn't even get to see him, and I never had an Aglaya. Of course, even though I didn't give him a good note, he left a shock that I never recovered from. So when I read the Garzanti, and I saw the plot, I realized, that I had to get this novel to cost what it cost. It took a long time. Because it was one of Dostoyevsky's few books, which was not redeemed. I only found a copy in the Youth publishing house in the Book House, and once I got it. It took me a year to read it. I used to wait to see what my friend Manuel Alfonseca said https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... (I must admit, it was my guinea pig), and the same thing happened to me with the "Demons" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5.... I recognize that I was fascinated by the plot of a teenager, who admires and hates his father at the same time, and who was supposed to be the cause of his destruction, as he was manipulated by an evil French schoolmate named Lambert. I was fascinated by that villain, because it reminded me of a character, which I had created for a role-playing game. Lambert's shadow always haunted me. Yet we will see that the work or the plot is not entirely accurate. If you agree that it is a novel, it is divided into three parts, and takes place in a few days. It's a family saga, and another of its characteristics. It's probably the least original of Dostoyevsky's novels. He doesn't have anything novel in himself, but borrows things from his other novels, but of course it's this mixture of everything. Which makes the novel great. This is the story of Arcadi Makarovitch Dolgoruki (despite the princely surname) we see that he is the son of a servant. He is actually the illegitimate son of Andrei Petrovitch Versilov, but a very holy servant (who will leave very little, and almost at the end) Makar Ivanovisch Dolgoruki just as Engels decides to recognize Arkady and his sister Lisa, as his children and marry the peasant whom he seduced V ersilov in this case Sofia Andreievna, which is sometimes called Sonia, and this is a sign, when a character is called Sonia. It's just that he's a very positive, religious, and benevolent character. It's no coincidence that Dostoevevsky called his heroine that. Because still, makar Ivanovitch. Sofia is the most benevolent character in history (on the subject of masters who sleep with servants read "Resurrection" of Tolstoy https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4... clear, that for me does Dostoevsky better than Tolstoy) of course, for me does Dostoyevsky better than Tolstoy. The protagonist Arkady will have a purpose during each of the three parts. In the first he hesitates whether to take down his father Versilov, or fall of fennel at his feet. Dostoyevsky's greatest achievement and I fully agree with my friend Alfonseca. He has been the success of Dostoyevsky in building the psychology, and personality of a teenager. It could almost be a millennial. Here is the achilles heel of the character, who is very impetuous, very soon to action, very passionate, but because of his youth is conformist, and is a character manipulated by all at his will, who play with him, as if it were a toy. Except for Natsume Soseki's novel (which I don't like) "I'm a cat." I have not seen a more impotent narrator, and with less force, though everything can change. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6... Thanks to Arkady we get to know each of the characters, it is like a guide, which Dostoevsky offers to the reader. You could say, it's our eyes. We meet Arkady's half-sister Ana Andreievna Versilova, who aspires to marry the older Sokolski, who is Arkady's patron, and friend of Arkady. We will also see that it relates to another Sokolski, who has had a conflict with Versilov. One thing is very well achieved. Arkady may be debated between love and hatred of his father, but what is certain if someone tries to hurt his father will go after that person. However, there is a key character in the Catalina Nikolayevna Ahkmakova plot, who will play with both Arkadi and Versilov. This plot reminded me a lot of a beautiful novel by Francois Mauriac called "Desert of Love" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... , in fact, Akhmakova reminded me of Marie Cross who is reminded of a father and a son, and just as this novel has a similar solution. This novel would say, which is the opposite of "Demons", because if liberalism, socialism, and communism were criticized there, for being anti-Russian and European ideologies. Here what is criticized is the personalism of Ayn Rand https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... mean individualism, and Nietszchenean theories. We see, if Raskolnikov wanted to be Napoleon. At first Arkady wants to be Rotschild. For all, socialism will be both real and utopian will be present in these pages through the conspirators Dergatchev (actually Dolgurine), Vassine (Vanzinne) (this will be an important character that will have a lot of influence with the Dolguriki) and Kraft (Kracht), who remembers the Kirilov of "The Demons" (another character that might have been very important). In this case there are two mcguffins. One is a real mcguffin, and one decisive for the plot. In any case, Arkady's individualism is crushed, because he cannot do evil, and in this he looks a lot like Raskolnikov, in fact, which is a hybrid between Raskolnikov, and Mishkin. In this case, not much injury is opened in the struggle between Catholicism, against orthodoxy. Even if there's some allusion. The wound from the schism of Miguel Cerulario and Humberto de Silvacandida remains open. For Dostoyevsky Catholicism is a kind of atheism, and something that being foreign must be rejected in favor of Russian orthodoxy, and its Slavophilic theses. In fact, and this is to be appreciated his novel has more on slavophilia, and less on the differences between Catholicism and orthodoxy. Anyway, this is very confusing, because on the one hand the characters hate Catholicism, but on the other hand both Pavlichev tutor of Mishkin , as Versilov talks about the possibility that they are Catholic. So Dostoyevsky's message is very ambiguous. Liubba insisted that his novels were philocatholic, Soloviev https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... we do not know, whether he died Catholic, or Orthodox. This will always remain an enigma in the Dostoyevskiana narrative. Yet we see that Arkady's determination to be that superman wells fantasized with, and Shaw, is falling apart, because it falls apart, because he can't stop doing good. We see that Versilov is not the monster, that Arkady tells us, and that Arkady was wrong about him. But, although he is a more beneficial, than evil, careful character that can give us some surprise. In fact, this story of the reunion of a father and a son. Rarely has it been found better, perhaps only Maxence van der Meersch has succeeded with "Bodies and Souls" Maxence van der Meersch with "Bodies and Souls" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... and the drawing film Doraemon and Treasure Island may have done so. More than the story of the prodigal son. It can be best summed up in this Bible verse "God will return the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to their parents." I think this is the key to this whole story. The second part has the greatest influence on the younger relationship of Sokolski with Arkady, and the protagonist's sister is engulfed. The third is more emphasis on Lambert's criminal intrigues, which may not be as fascinating, as I had imagined, although there is the conversation there between the tempter and his victim. Yet it is a character, who is not as well-taken advantage of as it should be. It is much more interesting the character of Makar Ivanovitch taken advantage of it that it should. It is much more interesting the character of Makar Ivanovitch (who proposes a popular Christian mysticism, and errant). The final third is distressing, and I don't know gives any respite to the reader, I can only say, that when I got to the final part I took a very relief. The subject of the double, rather than in a psychiatric way, I want to see it, as the struggle that man has within himself between good, and evil (see "The Double" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2... and "The Scandal" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2... Shusaku Endo. By the way, there's another Shusaku Endo novel heavily influenced by Dostoyevsky. We refer to "Al tonto wonderful" inspired by "The Idiot", hopefully they edit it in Spanish one day https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2... I believe, that much, that what Dostoyevski seeks is achieved by Shusaku Endo in a few fewer pages). There are characters who would have deserved more attention on my part like Daria Onnissimovna, Trichatov, and Tatiana Prutkova (who as she assumed, or was a very bad character, or very good), as soon as Alphosina gave me a lot of regret I would have chosen a different ending for her. I would have turned her into a Nancy, or a Martha who is very Dickensian, in fact, both Balzac and Dickens are dostoyevsky's masters. I also really liked the literary references both Russian and European, that appear in the novel. You could say, the Garzanti was wrong. I think, except for a character (I'm not going to say which one, but his fate saddened me). The author is fair. Of course, it has flaws there are subplots, which remain in nothing, and one has the feeling that this story could have been told in many fewer pages. But in general it is a beautiful story of a father and a son, and as Dostoyevsky's wife says. Just like Balzac. Dostoyevsky is a man pressured, by creditors, who must deliver his masterpieces within a time frame, so unlike others he cannot review them. Dostoyevsky warning of future risk, and encouraging the Russian youth, not to follow the wrong path. The future, already outlined in "The Demons" that was an advance, of what would happen if socialism, communism, and anarchism triumphed. Unfortunately unlike Arkady. People didn't mature. There were three premature deaths, which led to Russia's disaster. One was the death of Tsar Alexander II (who died too soon), another was That of Stolypin, and finally Dostoyevsky's. If he had died in 1910, and Tolstoy in 1880. Russia would have saved himself a lot of ills, but I say this for everyone. It is through suffering that holiness is attained.

4.5/5

"Dostoevsky gives me more than any scientist, more than Gauss." - Albert Einstein

Dostoyevsky knew how to rip open a human soul and leave it bare in front of his readers. What can I say about his understanding of human mind that haven't been said before? So, I will just stick to a brief review on this book and my experience reading it.

Firstly, 'The Adolescent' should not be compared to Dostoyevsky's other major works. This novel does not have the grand setting like 'Brothers Karamazov' nor does it have high philosophical depth like 'The Idiot' or 'Crime and Punishment', but for me it was equally enjoyable.

The novel starts with an adolescent confessing his story and how he changed as a person. Dostoyevsky introduces us to Arkady Dolgoruky's "idea" and how he wants to weave his life around it. But then, like many adolescents these ideas are built on high impulses and whims, and thereby he slowly loses his determination to take it forward. This is followed by a series of very interesting scenes and conversations which I would not reveal as it might spoil the experience of anyone who is willing to read this book in future.

For me Dostoyevsky and his stories are very important; for life and for living. Reading his works always gives me assurance that I am being understood. And I always felt that the need of being understood is more powerful than the need of being loved.

Following are few lines from "The Adolescent":
"Yes, Arkady, my friend, this sort of memory is always painful. It is like certain 'painful' scenes in the works of great writers that throughout our lives hurt us when we think of them-for instance, the final monologue of Shakespeare's Othello, Pushkin's Eugene Onegin at the feet of Tatyana, or the scene is Victor Hugo's Les Miserables where the escaped convict meets the little girl. Once they have clawed at your heart, the scar will always be there..."


I too carry these scars, and for quite a few of them Dostoyevsky is to be blamed.

One line from Dostoevsky’s work has impressed me much during my early youth reading journey through his novels. He says ‘in suffering look for happiness’. Truth to tell, even before reading his works I used to think that nothing of value could be attained without hard work. This remains valid as of today. But, after reading more and more, that is to say, other very famous novelists before or after him time-wise, and drinking different messages of existence, love, life, enjoyment and celebration, I realize that previous idea was quite masochistic.
What to do? Nothing to be done! Fyodor Dostoevsky is a very special case - he managed to write novels which perhaps are the best in the whole literature of the world – he was a genius. His insight into human beings and their problems is greater than some psychoanalysts, and there are moments where he reaches the heights of great mystics. Well, maybe even transcend them. I love Dostoevsky and all his works have been of immense value to me. I feel there is a depth of sadness in him, which he seems to stop as if something of the opposite is missing..
Reading The Adolescent (or A Raw Youth) – first time, but I foresee re-reading in the future – I cannot help thinking if he himself was not a psychological case. He was capable of writing such great insights as if he was possessed, as if he never knew that there is something like laughter, he was sickly serious. He seems a madman, yet he had such clarity about things.
Our hero by his name Dolgoruky Arkady Makarovitch – a youth of 21 years old – takes the time to sit down to write his own autobiography – basically these are the recollections of the last year before these notes were taken – even if he states that “one must be too disgustingly in love with self to be able without shame to write about oneself”. His motivation is other than to win the praise of his readers, but simply from an inward impulse, because he was so impressed by all that has happened. What it results is a masterful memoir of his inmost secrets of his soul, with some artistic description of his feelings, and some making of reflections, of all possible shades, all leading to a composite structure that brings a lot of satisfaction to a reader used to Dostoevsky’s style.
From the first chapter, on the identity of the narrator writer is shed full light. He is in fact an illegitimate son of the former owner of his legal (old) father, formerly a serf in the household of the Versilov’s. As it happened, the master of the household, a widow of 25 years returns for a time to his village and there he fell in love with the mother of our hero (feeling which is obviously mutual, but absolutely infinite from her side), which is as well a serf, still very young and good-looking. He gives a detailed account about who he was, where he had been till then, and what was the state of mind on the day about which he marked the beginning of his recollections of previous year.
Strange relations grew up, somewhat ceremonious and almost solemn between the legitimate father (who eventually becomes a pilgrim), his mother (who follows her lover hopelessly) and the noble man Versilov (who eventually loses all his money and lives mostly on charity). As most of the time it is emphasized the young Dolgoruky is like an outcast, and almost from his birth he had been with strangers. Around 19 years old he gave up the dream to go to the University and decided to leave Moscow and return to Petersburg to be or live for a while with his family…
For the most part of the book – which is rather lengthy in my opinion and it might prove a challenge because some things get also a bit repetitive – I have been completely absorbed in the descriptions of the dreams he had from early childhood, dreams that took a firm grip on his life, gained force and a definite shape that mould his character, but also his mostly coloured musings, in the sense that he decided that he shall never be alone as he has been for so many awful years because he shall have his “idea” ! The stuff about his “idea” is tragic-comic. I couldn’t help feeling so sorry about him. All that writing is like a cloud of words or the ravings of delirium.
Basically, this is just the tip of the iceberg. The book is a grand epopee of some very mixed and queer family relationships, intrigues, lies and farces, connections with princes and high-society people, but also with people of lower rank, even doubtful integrity. There are lots of interesting, profoundly thoughtful dialogues about abstract subjects – for example of God and of his existence, but also about practical ones, such as of women :) I couldn’t help wondering how the clever men, very learned, usually end by questioning if their intellect is quite sound. It is shocking (or not) but most of the characters in the book are in fact mad, or almost mad, otherwise it is hard to understand their ramblings so incoherently.
Before finishing the book, by a curious game of circumstances, I was reminded of the lyrics of Sympathy for the Devil, of the legendary The Rolling Stones. There seems to an amazing clarification that the book is also trying to expose. I listened to it couple of times and I realized it tells quite well why this book is so puzzling, in and by itself...

“Please allow me to introduce myself,
I'm a man of wealth and taste
I've been around for a long, long year
Stole many a man's soul and fate
I was 'round when Jesus Christ
Had his moments of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that Pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
But what's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game
I stuck around St. Petersburg
When I saw it was a time for a change
Killed the Czar and his ministers
Anastasia screamed in vain
I rode a tank
Held a General's rank
When the Blitzkrieg raged
And the bodies stank
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
What's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, oh yeah
I watched the glee
While your kings and queens
Fought for ten decades
For the Gods they made
I shouted out
"Who killed the Kennedys?"
Well after all
It was you and me
Let me please introduce myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
And I laid traps for troubadours
Who get killed before they reached Bombay

Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
But what's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, oh yeah
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
But what's confusing you
Is just the nature of my game, ooh yeah
Just as every cop is a criminal
And all the sinners saints
As heads is tails just call me Lucifer
I'm in need of some restraint
So if you meet me, have some courtesy
Have some sympathy and some taste
Use all your well learned politics
Or I'll lay your soul to waste, mmm yeah
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, mmm yeah
But what's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, get down
Woo hoo, ah yeah, get on down, oh yeah
Tell me, baby, what's my name?
Tell me, honey, baby guess my name
Tell me, baby, what's my name?
I'll ya one time you're to blame
What's my name?
Tell me, baby, what's my name?
Tell me, sweetie, what's my name?...”