Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to Read a Novel

adjacentpossible.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 64 posts

Re: How to Read a Novel

#41

Post by Boogie_Man »

KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #24
kstrauser wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re nuts. I read “Crime and Punishment” a couple years ago, and went in knowing literally nothing about it except that it was famous. It was astonishingly good. It felt fresh, modern, and claustrophobically suspenseful in a way I wouldn’t have believed possible for a book that age. If you don’t like it, fine. Preferences are a thing and we don’t all have to enjoy the same stuff. But to dismiss it as obsolete or ou…

I might've conveyed myself poorly. Never said Dostoevsky wasn't great or not a relevant read! I was just reacting to the OP who seemed to say it's still the best ever. But we've improved everything, art, kites, the wheel. It's the same for literature, but you do have to get pretty deep into lit to see though. The main criticism for I have for Dostoevsky is that he's overdramatic. Yes it's great fun fiction and a vast…

I think what is easy to overlook with Dostoevsky is that although he is arguably the inventor of the psychological novel, the characters in his novels are largely representatives of the impact of ideologies on the lives and psyches of real people or the impact of the psyches (as impacted themselves by their life experiences) on their choice of ideology. The taking of ideologies to their logical conclusion in his character's lives is what results in "hysterical characters".

I think to argue that Dostoevsky is not among the best psychological novelists is to slightly misunderstand what he was trying to achieve.

Re: How to Read a Novel

#42

Post by LeonardoTolstoy »

pickledoyster wrote: post #5

the single takeaway from this book ad of a post: the CEO of Stripe claims to have read 10 novels/yr. Which is either a boast of how much free time he has or how he skimmed through some major novels. Third option: a lie.

The claim is not that far off from someone claiming they watch a movie a week. A book probably doesn't take much more than 10 hours to read on average. 50 movies are about 100 hours. Is one movie a week a mind-boggling amount of free time?

Re: How to Read a Novel

#43

Post by daxfohl »

I went through the same phase a couple decades ago and also came out with Middlemarch on top. Oddly I'd never heard of it prior, and only grabbed it because it was in some classics list at B&N. It didn't seem like anything I expected to like, but I was astounded.

The one book I couldn't understand all the hoopla about was Faust. Even after reading it twice, it just seemed like a banal overplayed moral tale. Maybe it only works in German?

Re: How to Read a Novel

#44

Post by KaoruAoiShiho »

zabzonk wrote: post #38
KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he did it's not shown in his writing, or really any pre-20th century writers really.

have you read any pre-20th C writers? Or any novels or plays at all?

The conflicts in his plays just aren't that profound, you know? Compared to modern "psychological turmoil" it's relatively simplistic, something like Macbeth's "ambition vs morality".

Modern writers pull in more layers of depth, explain the ebbs and flows of motivations and identities through social forces and work more with complex ideas like self-deception and rationalization. Shakespeare's characters are generally reliable narrators in a way that later lit tends not to be.

Re: How to Read a Novel

#45

Post by coliveira »

pickledoyster wrote: post #5

the single takeaway from this book ad of a post: the CEO of Stripe claims to have read 10 novels/yr. Which is either a boast of how much free time he has or how he skimmed through some major novels. Third option: a lie.

I used to read a novel per week, and I had other things to do. I stopped this rhythm mostly because I don't see many new novels worthy the time, but it is a doable thing.

Re: How to Read a Novel

#46

Post by altruios »

zabzonk wrote: post #18
voisin wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP, but breadth and depth of understanding about psychology have improved dramatically and exposure to diverse viewpoints thanks to hyper connectedness likely make it possible to go deeper.

> breadth and depth of understanding about psychology have improved dramatically Provide one tiny bit of evidence for this. Do you seriously think that Shakespeare (for e.g.) did not have a profound understanding of human psychology?

not who you are replying to - but: Shakespeare was limited by the number of interactions he had with humans. He did not have the internet.

We also have neurology as a science now. So that's one bit of evidence for the claim.

Of course Shakespeare had a profound understanding of human nature. And of course he did not have the working vocabulary and knowledge base of modern psychology which has been built up over time by many humans working together. Two things can be true.

Re: How to Read a Novel

#47

Post by crims0n »

Reading literary fiction is such an enriching activity in life, I highly recommend it. If you don't know where to start (and you need to retrain your attention span), pick up an audiobook. I started with Jeremy Iron's reading of Lolita. Nabokov's prose read in Iron's voice will make a believer out of anyone.

Re: How to Read a Novel

#48

Post by KaoruAoiShiho »

Boogie_Man wrote: post #41
KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might've conveyed myself poorly. Never said Dostoevsky wasn't great or not a relevant read! I was just reacting to the OP who seemed to say it's still the best ever. But we've improved everything, art, kites, the wheel. It's the same for literature, but you do have to get pretty deep into lit to see though. The main criticism for I have for Dostoevsky is that he's overdramatic. Yes it's great fun fiction and a vast…

I think what is easy to overlook with Dostoevsky is that although he is arguably the inventor of the psychological novel, the characters in his novels are largely representatives of the impact of ideologies on the lives and psyches of real people or the impact of the psyches (as impacted themselves by their life experiences) on their choice of ideology. The taking of ideologies to their logical conclusion in his char…

You're right. I think it's extremely cultural to Christianity. The notion of suffering for your sins, and when bad things happen you ought to try to feel it as much as possible instead of working on pain mitigation. This is definitely how a lot of people approach life and it makes sense for his characters. But IMO coping and rationalization strategies are built into every human, a lot of angst is performative and communicative rather than "soulful". They do it because they want to be a good religious boy and communicate devoutness. I honestly don't think he gets that. When his characters perform pain he treats it as evidence of the soul’s torment which doesn't resonate with me since I don't believe in the soul.

Re: How to Read a Novel

#49

Post by mock-possum »

nilirl wrote: post #36

The post does not answer 'How to Read a Novel'. Most of the post is devoted to 'Why I think fiction is useful'. The author's answer: vicarious learning. Author answers how to maybe rank and choose a book: Book that provides recognizable experience of human decision making is better than book that does not. Which is fine. But not 'How to Read a Novel'.

How to read a novel, step one: pick up the book. Gaze upon the cover. What is the title? Is there imagery? Does the face include the author’s name, or any other text? Turn it edgewise, take in the spine - and then spare a glance for the back. What might be written on the pages beneath the cover?

Re: How to Read a Novel

#50

Post by mock-possum »

pickledoyster wrote: post #5

the single takeaway from this book ad of a post: the CEO of Stripe claims to have read 10 novels/yr. Which is either a boast of how much free time he has or how he skimmed through some major novels. Third option: a lie.

Ten novels a year seems light if you’re an avid reader - I’ve certainly run circles round that record in the past, though I’ve admittedly fallen out of practice lately.
Post reply on HN