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

191–200 of 324 posts

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#191

Post by mananaysiempre »

jhbadger wrote: post #182
orthoxerox wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The main difficulty is the names. The names make it so hard. What's wrong with the names? I find Chinese novels much harder to read because everyone's named C{V[n[g]]|ei|ao|ou} C{V[n[g]]|ei|ao|ou}C{V[n[g]]|ei|ao|ou}.

The obscure Russian nicknames! How is anybody supposed to know without being told that Sasha and Alexander are the same guy? (I do realize that while some English nicknames like Johnny for John are pretty self-explanatory, other like Jack for John or Dick for Richard are as opaque to foreigners as Alexander/Sasha)

The dialectal form Aleksasha (following the common pattern Mariya > Masha, Pavel > Pasha, etc.) might reduce the confusion somewhat.

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#192

Post by timka »

vkazanov wrote: post #178
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

Well it is kind of an integral part of the classic european literature canon. Certain novel genre's were invented by Russian writers, say, Tolstoy's epic novels. So the question really is how does one find out about classic writing overall? Outside of school?

BTW, calling that an epic novel is a stretch. Actually great Russian writers like Gogol (surprisingly, Dead Souls is a poem, in prose) and Pushkin (Captain's Daughter is neither novella or novel) had difficulties fitting into Western genres of fiction. I'm sure there are more examples.

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#193

Post by personalityson »

jhbadger wrote: post #182
orthoxerox wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The main difficulty is the names. The names make it so hard. What's wrong with the names? I find Chinese novels much harder to read because everyone's named C{V[n[g]]|ei|ao|ou} C{V[n[g]]|ei|ao|ou}C{V[n[g]]|ei|ao|ou}.

The obscure Russian nicknames! How is anybody supposed to know without being told that Sasha and Alexander are the same guy? (I do realize that while some English nicknames like Johnny for John are pretty self-explanatory, other like Jack for John or Dick for Richard are as opaque to foreigners as Alexander/Sasha)

I was in my 20's when I realized Bill and William are the same name

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#194

Post by mathieuh »

jhbadger wrote: post #182
orthoxerox wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The main difficulty is the names. The names make it so hard. What's wrong with the names? I find Chinese novels much harder to read because everyone's named C{V[n[g]]|ei|ao|ou} C{V[n[g]]|ei|ao|ou}C{V[n[g]]|ei|ao|ou}.

The obscure Russian nicknames! How is anybody supposed to know without being told that Sasha and Alexander are the same guy? (I do realize that while some English nicknames like Johnny for John are pretty self-explanatory, other like Jack for John or Dick for Richard are as opaque to foreigners as Alexander/Sasha)

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

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#195

Post by graemep »

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

The same was as literature from anywhere else. Some authors are famous and you grow up knowing about them: I know about great Russian authors the same way I know about great authors from anywhere. They also get referenced and quoted by authors in other languages. Playwrights get translated and performed.

Less famous authors? Everything you say and more - again, just like any other books and author.

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#196

Post by perfunctory »

alexejb wrote: post #184
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

those books are considered as classics because they deal with different aspects of the human condition which haven't changed significantly. they also give a different and valid intepretation / perspective on these "eternal topics", which are unique and discernible enough from their counterparts from other countries and cultures.

> because they deal with different aspects of the human condition which haven't changed significantly. they also give a different and valid intepretation / perspective

so do the other literary traditions I guess. What's so special about Russian. It seems as if the interest in Russian literature comes at the expense of the others.

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#197

Post by OnACoffeeBreak »

jampekka wrote: post #183
bloak wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem with Russian names in particular is that a Russian name has three parts (e.g. Nikolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky) and different parts get used in different contexts, depending on who's speaking, level of familiarity and so on. 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.

There are also the "canonical" nicknames that are not obvious to non-Russian speakers. E.g. Nikolai is Kolja.

And then we add the diminutives like Kolichka. Though, admittedly, there's much more of a pattern there.

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#198

Post by izacus »

kelnos wrote: post #126
victorbjorklund wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t that the purpose of school? To make kids try and expand their thinking to think about things they don’t think about in normal life. A normal average teen does not think about chemistry, math, physics either. Will everything stick? Probably not. But some might stick for some students and that’s better than just giving up and only teaching teens about things average teens are naturally interest in (sex education?…

There's a difference between teaching kids stuff they aren't interested in in order to expose them to it (good!), and teaching kids stuff that require the lived experience of an adult to truly understand and appreciate (of dubious utility!).

Even more so, I feel it's outright counter productive since it's not uncommon for kids to start hating book reading because of the impression these mandatory reads leave.

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#199

Post by izacus »

DiskoHexyl wrote: post #149
ventana wrote: post #81

As a Russian native speaker who graduated from the high school in Russia many years ago, one thing that I don't really understand is why these great works of Russian literature are included in the school must read list. An average teenager, myself included, always has some better things to do than reading a huge novel, barely understanding characters' motivations, because neither of these books were ever intended for…

I would have agreed that making teenagers read way above their (life) experience level may scare some off of returning to the same books after growing up, but am not so sure anymore. Most adults don't read period - if not for the school reading list they wouldn't have even touched the classics anyway. On the other hand, some of the kids actually like the books they are given. I know I did. Not every single book, but…

Most adults don't read because they were forced to read inappropriate, depressing and poorly readable books at the time when they're supposed to be learning to love books.

The classics are the cause of reading hate, not the victim.

Re: Dostoyevsky isn't difficult

#200

Post by ogurechny »

ventana wrote: post #81

As a Russian native speaker who graduated from the high school in Russia many years ago, one thing that I don't really understand is why these great works of Russian literature are included in the school must read list. An average teenager, myself included, always has some better things to do than reading a huge novel, barely understanding characters' motivations, because neither of these books were ever intended for…

Things that need to be taught need to be taught. Reading, writing, and counting can also be kept for later. Misanthropic heralds could even say that many strata of modern society don't really need literacy, and should just be given smartphones with cameras. “Later” easily turns to “never”.

A student should be given the best examples of human art, not some watered down versions, otherwise there is a chance that people will never try to reach that level. A lot of them won't (and reading some books never was a guaranteed path to a good life anyway), but by deciding what is “good enough for the common person” you artificially limit their world on that path (thankfully, there are other paths).

Whether they realise it or not, people are shaped by their environment. A book that you don't like can still point that certain questions and ways of thinking exist. Its place can easily be taken by seemingly “more appropriate” pop cultural or pop psychological works that, unfortunately, don't reach that level in order to be as “accessible” as possible.

The problem here is the existence of “required reading” lists, and mass education in general. That institute is completely flawed, bureaucratised production process of “studying”, and only the heroic actions of individuals who have to fight it from the inside make it less dumb. A good teacher can teach why the good book is good, but where to find so many of them?

See, for example,

https://www.olgasedakova.com/Moralia/280

https://www.olgasedakova.com/ecclesia/2174

(in Russian)

https://www.olgasedakova.com/eng/Moralia/269

https://www.olgasedakova.com/eng/Moralia/264

(in English, excerpt)

Post reply on HN