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

Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

autodidacts.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 324 posts

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#261

Post by dghf »

EvanAnderson wrote: post #252
something765478 wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So it's like in an English novel where someone might be referred to as Smith by the narrator but John in dialogue, but with an extra 50%, at least, of confusion. I've been reading Tom Clancy recently, and that's basically the Jack Ryan books. Somehow, "Jack" is actually a nickname for "John".

> Somehow, "Jack" is actually a nickname for "John". That has never made one iota of sense to me. The whole "Dick" / "Richard" thing makes more sense than "Jack" / "John" to me (and it's nonsensical, too).

According to Wikipedia:

- Jehan (Old French form of "John") -> Jan

- Jan -> Jankin (diminutive)

- Jankin -> Jackin

- Jackin -> Jack

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#262

Post by scrame »

throw4847285 wrote: post #232
noja wrote: post #216

Will Poulter (yes, him) has a very good Crime & Punishment audiobook.

Doesn't surprise me at all. He's really a character actor who happens to look like he does. Similar to Dan Stevens, who coincidentally, has some great Agatha Christie audiobooks. He does all the voices.

That's funny, I recognized the name, but had to look him up and went "oh yeah, eyebrows guy!".

The kid who played Joffrey on game of thrones also always came across as a very smart, thoughtful kid, he just played an intensely hateable character. Similar to the actor who played Marlo in The Wire, I saw him host an actors roundtable and had to blink twice "wow, one of the scariest villains in a gritty show is actually this cheerful, charismatic guy.

I don't think all actors are smart, and I certainly think some actors think they are smarter than they are, but I don't think being smart hurts if you're an actor.

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#263

Post by waynecochran »

B1FF_PSUVM wrote: post #202
waynecochran wrote: post #24

I have never read a book I hated more than The Brothers Karamazov. I never read a book that depressed me more than Crime and Punishment. No more Dostoevsky for me.

You're doing it wrong. I bumped into this 'Short Guide to Russian literature': "Russian literature consists of suffering. Either writer suffers, or protagonist, or reader. If all three suffer simultaneously--then it is a masterpiece. In every difficult situation always read Russian classic literature--it is even worse in there."

Maybe I like my characters to be in worse situations but inspire me by overcoming them and giving hope. Dostoyevsky leaves you in a pool of gray melancholy and dispair.

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#264

Post by hk__2 »

notpushkin wrote: post #186
fleebee wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding Brothers, I don't think it's that much more than the average novel of that length. What I think trips foreign readers up the most is the constant use of Russian diminutive names e.g. substituting Alyosha for Alexei or Mitenka for Dmitri.

I wonder if replacing those with more modern/“western” diminutives would help with that and whether it would hurt the writing style too much. It will definitely lack the vibe, but if you can’t read it otherwise, maybe it’s better than nothing? E.g. Dima (widely used in modern Russian, and it’s clear that it’s short for Dmitry ) instead of Mitenka or Alex instead of Alyosha ( Lyosha is commonly used in Russian, but Al…

In the French translation of War and Peace I read, the first use of every diminutive had a footnote explaining who was that person.

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#265

Post by havblue »

As I get older I appreciate more how much nineteenth and twentieth century literature has in common with the modern era. Notes From the Underground was a great example of this where the narrator feels that he's destined for great things but self-sabotages along the way, becoming more and more isolated. He isn't that much different from the many educated, underemployed and frustrated, or even insufferable, people on the Internet. We haven't changed that much at all.

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#266

Post by biggestfan »

Yizahi wrote: post #244
__rito__ wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The most overhyped literature ever Just because you aren't ready for it doesn't mean it's bad literature. That's basic. I really like Dostoevsky. He was really onto something. What he wrote was deep and meaningful and profound. Tolstoy is also great. His short story "The Three Hermits" (1885) profoundly impacted how I look into these things.

They are not bad. But neither they are great, just average. They are also super outdated and missing a lot of context from the time authors lived in. These books just have this fleurs exotique by the virtue of being russian and written in a very hard language for the Roman group speakers. It's a self-perpetuating self-reinforcing cycle of hype. Like a joke a about "no one was fired for ordering IBM" the same goes for…

What's a book you would recommend instead? I quite like what I've read from those authors but I would be interested in something with a different appeal.

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#267

Post by stasomatic »

krzyk wrote: post #227
mathieuh wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first time I worked with Polish people I had this problem a lot until I noticed the pattern. Someone told me to go and talk to "Maciek", it was only on asking Maciej where to find him that I found out they were the same person

Here there is at least same prefix. Only issue I recall might be with female Aleksandra (abbreviated to Ola) and male Aleksander (abbreviated to Olo, or Olek). Others usually (if I remember correctly) have similar prefix.

Are you sure? Olga/Olha and Oleg distinct names on their own.

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#268

Post by EvanAnderson »

dghf wrote: post #261
EvanAnderson wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Somehow, "Jack" is actually a nickname for "John". That has never made one iota of sense to me. The whole "Dick" / "Richard" thing makes more sense than "Jack" / "John" to me (and it's nonsensical, too).

According to Wikipedia: - Jehan (Old French form of "John") -> Jan - Jan -> Jankin (diminutive) - Jankin -> Jackin - Jackin -> Jack

No doubt there are "reasons" for all of them, but it's so far in the past and so far removed from my cultural experience as to be irrelevant and functionally nonsensical.

This does give me a reason to preserve some fact about one of my favorite cats ever in perpetuity (given the similarity of the John / Jack transition to Joe the Cat's life).

A friend's cat (who I knew as Joe the Cat) went from being called "Ivy" to "Joe" over the course of the cat's 15+ year lifetime by way of being called, successively: Ivy --> Jivey --> Jive --> Java --> Joe

Joe was calm and compliant, and arguably "a good kitty" (albeit I only knew him late in his life). My friend once described Joe as being more frantic in his youthful vigor but being "pacified through years of routine and systematic abuse".

No, my friend and his and his family didn't actually abuse Joe the Cat. He was much loved. I get to use the phrase "years of routine and systematic abuse" in my life (as often as possible!) now, though (often referring to my experiences with various pieces of software).

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#269

Post by Rendello »

waltbosz wrote: post #228
j_bum wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried audiobooks?

I found this Librivox audiobook to have a good narrator. https://librivox.org/crime-and-punishment-version-3-by-fyodo...

I listened to the first third of the book while at work (the second Librivox version) [1]. I'm not sure if he pronounced the names right, because I've heard others pronounce them differently, and I'm not sure who's correct. In any case, having listened to the names, I found it quite easy to read the rest of the physical book, having the pronunciation and prosody of many the names already embedded in me. Having multiple names per person was quite confusing, still.

https://librivox.org/crime-and-punishment-version-2-by-fyodo...

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#270

Post by romperstomper »

perfunctory wrote: post #174

I am genuinely curious why Russian literature is so popular in non-Russian speaking world. How do you wake up one day and decide to read Crime and Punishment? How do you find out about Russian literature in the first place? Recommendation from a friend, marketing in your favorite book store, school? Could somebody shed some light

This is just the past and the modern propaganda nothing more.
Post reply on HN