Biesy

Biesy

  • Downloads:8037
  • Type:Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
  • Create Date:2021-10-16 09:54:15
  • Update Date:2025-09-06
  • Status:finish
  • Author:Fyodor Dostoevsky
  • ISBN:8377793040
  • Environment:PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle

Summary

Wielowątkowa, diaboliczna opowieść o tym jak szlachetne idee indywidualnej wolności w umysłach ludzi na wolność niegotowych, kształtowanych w uściskach carskiego samodzierżawia, przeradzają się w idee nihilizmu, bezwładne rewolucyjne ruchy i terroryzm。
Gęste od mrocznych emocji, mieszaniny obłudy i szlachetności, nienawiści i współczucia, niewinności i amoralnego cynizmu są Biesy krzywym zwierciadłem ówczesnych – jakże czasami aktualnych w opisanych postawach – inteligenckich marzeń o ludzkiej utopii i proroczą zapowiedzią powstania stalinowskiej wersji totalitaryzmu。

Download

Reviews

Greg

The last of Dosotevsky's major novels that I read; it was sad to realize there were no more。 There is little I can add to the man's genius by way of commentary in a review :-), but I include some of my favorite passages, all thought-provoking, and all either telling reflections of his times or ahead of his time。On atheism:“A complete atheist stands on the next-to-last upper step to the most complete faith (he may or may not take that step), while the indifferent one has no faith, apart from a ba The last of Dosotevsky's major novels that I read; it was sad to realize there were no more。 There is little I can add to the man's genius by way of commentary in a review :-), but I include some of my favorite passages, all thought-provoking, and all either telling reflections of his times or ahead of his time。On atheism:“A complete atheist stands on the next-to-last upper step to the most complete faith (he may or may not take that step), while the indifferent one has no faith, apart from a bad fear。”On children:"In Arina Prokhorovna’s hands a small, red, wrinkled being was crying and waving its tiny arms and legs, a terribly helpless being, like a speck of dust at the mercy of the first puff of wind, yet crying and proclaiming itself, as if it, too, somehow had the fullest right to life…。There were two, and suddenly, there’s a third human being, a new spirit, whole, finished, such as doesn’t come from human hands; a new thought and a new love, it’s even frightening…And there’s nothing higher in the world!”On enlightenment:“There are seconds, they come only five or six at a time, and you suddenly feel the presence of eternal harmony, fully achieved。 It is nothing earthly; not that it’s heavenly, but man cannot endure it in his earthly state。 One must change physically or die。 The feeling is clear and indisputable。 As if you suddenly sense the whole of nature and suddenly say: yes, this is true。 God, when he was creating the world, said at the end of each day of creation: ‘Yes, this is true, this is good。’ This…this is not tenderheartedness, but simply joy。 You don’t forgive anything, because there’s no longer anything to forgive。 You don’t really love – oh, what is here is higher than love! What’s most frightening is that it’s so terribly clear, and there’s such joy。 If it were longer than five seconds – the soul couldn’t endure it and would vanish。 In those five seconds I live my life through, and for them I would give my whole life, because it’s worth it…。”On God; I love this passage。 I also think it's a reflection of Dostoevsky's mind; while he believed that man needed God and that God in fact existed, he also wasn't ever fully convinced。“…God is necessary, and therefore must exist。”“Well, that’s wonderful。”“But I know that he does not and cannot exist。”“That’s more like it。”“Don’t you understand that a man with these two thoughts cannot go on living?”On Government:“You see, my dearest Pyotr Stepanovich, you call us officials of the government? Right。 Independent officials? Right。 But, may I ask, how do we act? The responsibility is on us, and as a result we serve the common cause the same as you do。 We merely hold together that which you are shaking apart, and which without us would go sprawling in all directions。 We’re not your enemies, by no means。 We say to you: go forward, progress, even shake – all that’s old, that is, and has to be remade – but when need be, we will keep you within necessary limits, and save you from yourselves, for without us you will only set Russia tottering, depriving her of a decent appearance, while our task consists precisely in maintaining her decent appearance。 Realize that you and we are mutually necessary to each other。 In England, the Whigs and Tories are also mutually necessary to each other。 So, then, we are the Tories and you are the Whigs, that’s precisely how I see it。”On meaninglessness:“This little word ‘why’ has been poured all over the universe since the very first day of creation, madam, and every moment the whole of nature cries out ‘Why?’ to its creator, and for seven thousand years has received no answer。 Is it for Captain Lebyadkin alone to answer, and would that be just, madam?”…“Now then, madam, you ask me, ‘Why?’ The answer is at the bottom of this fable, in flaming letters!”“Recite your fable。”“’Tis of a cockroach I will tellAnd a fine cockroach was heBut then into a glass he fellFull of fly-phagy…”“The cockroach took up so much roomIt made the flies murmur。‘A crowded glass, is this our doom?’They cried to Jupiter。But as the flies did make their moanAlong came Nikifor,A kind, old, no-o-oble man…I haven’t quite finished here, but anyway, in plain words…Nikifor takes the glass, and, in spite of their crying, dumps the whole comedy into the tub, both flies and cockroach, which should have been done long ago。 But notice, madam, notice, the cockroach does not murmur! This is the answer to your question, ‘Why?’ he cried out triumphantly。 “The cock-roach does not mur-mur!’ As for Nikifor, he represents nature,” he added in a quick patter, and began pacing the room self-contentedly。"On Nihilism:"Instead of paradise,” Lyamshin shouted, “I’d take these nine tenths of mankind, since there’s really nothing to do with them, and blow them sky-high, and leave just a bunch of learned people who would then start living happily in an educated way。”…“That’s a lot of nonsense, however!” escaped, as it were, from Verkhovensky…。”I think all these books, these Fouriers, Cabets, all these ‘rights to work’, Shigalyovism – it’s all like novels, of which a hundred thousand can be written。 An aesthetic pastime。 I understand that you’re bored in this wretched little town, so you fall on any paper with writing on it。”…On Religion:“The aim of all movements of nations, of every nation and in every period of its existence, is solely the seeking for God, its own God, entirely its own, and faith in him as the only true one…The stronger the nation, the more particular its God。 There has never yet been a nation without a religion, that is, without an idea of evil and good…Reason has never been able to define evil and good…and science has offered the solution of the fist。 Half-science has been especially distinguished for that – the most terrible scourge of mankind, worse than plague, hunger, or war, unknown till our century。 Half-science is a despot such as has never been seen before。 A despot with its own priests and slaves, a despot before whom everything has bowed down with a love and a superstition unthinkable till now…”On Russia, and the "Demons" that descended upon it in Dostoevsky's eyes: nihilism, socialism, atheism, anarchism, etc;“…These demons who come out of a sick man and enter into swine – it’s all the sores, all the miasmas, all the uncleanness, all the big and little demons accumulated in our great and dear sick man, in our Russia, for centuries, for centuries!…But a great will and a great thought will descend to her from on high, as upon that insane demoniac, and out will come all these demons, all the uncleanness, all the abomination that is festering on the surface…and they will beg of themselves to enter into swine。 And perhaps they already have! It is us, us and them…and I, perhaps, first, at the head, and we will rush, insane and raging, from the cliff down into the sea, and all be drowned, and good riddance to us, because that’s the most we’re fit for。”On Socialism:"…why is it that all these desperate socialists and communists are at the same time such incredible misers, acquirers, property-lovers, so much so that the more socialist a man is, the further he goes, the more he loves property…"On the Superman:“Man is afraid of death because he loves life, that’s how I understand it,” I observed, “and that is what nature tells us。”“That is base, that is the whole deceit!” his eyes began to flash。 “Life is pain, life is fear, and man is unhappy。 Now all is pain and fear。 Now man loves life because he loves pain and fear。 That’s how they’ve made it。 Life is now given in exchange for pain and fear, and that is the whole deceit。 Man now is not yet the right man。 There will be a new man, happy and proud。 He for whom it will make no difference whether he lives or does not live, he will be the new man。 He who overcomes pain and fear will himself be God。 And this God will not be。”…”Then history will be divided into two parts: from the gorilla to the destruction of God, and from the destruction of God to…the physical changing of the earth and man。 Man will be God and will change physically。”Also:“…and I proclaim that Shakespeare and Raphael are higher than the emancipation of the serfs, higher than nationality, higher than socialism, higher than the younger generation, higher than chemistry, higher than almost all mankind, for they are already the fruit, the real fruit of all mankind, and maybe the highest fruit there ever may be! A form of beauty already achieved, without the achievement of which I might not even consent to live…” 。。。more

DS25

Basterebbe solo il dialogo tra Nikolaj Stavrogin e il pope per rendere questo romanzo un capolavoro。 Unito alla maniacale cura dei dialoghi, alla perfetta psicologia dei personaggi e della conoscenza del "popolo russo", non si può che giudicarlo uno dei capolavori della letteratura universale。La vera domanda è questa: meglio "I Demòni" o "I fratelli Karamazov"? Personalmente ho trovato più attraente il secondo romanzo, se non altro per maggiore profondità teologica e anche, forse, per la dimensi Basterebbe solo il dialogo tra Nikolaj Stavrogin e il pope per rendere questo romanzo un capolavoro。 Unito alla maniacale cura dei dialoghi, alla perfetta psicologia dei personaggi e della conoscenza del "popolo russo", non si può che giudicarlo uno dei capolavori della letteratura universale。La vera domanda è questa: meglio "I Demòni" o "I fratelli Karamazov"? Personalmente ho trovato più attraente il secondo romanzo, se non altro per maggiore profondità teologica e anche, forse, per la dimensione più borghese e meno alta dell'ambientazione。 Ma è come chiedere se si preferisce la pizza o il sushi: entrambe vette della letteratura, con temi simili。。。 ma forse nei Karamazov c'è un filo più di speranza。 Un filo。 。。。more

Amirhossein Heydari

فرآیند خواندن این کتاب برام عجیب ترین بود。 چرا که با هر خطش قلبم به تپش می افتاد و مجبور بودم بعد از چند بند کتاب رو بذارم کنار。 کتابی که باید دو سه هفته خونده میشد، شش ماهه خونده شد。 اما خیالی نیست。 ارزششو داشت

Nicky Wellard

A slow start, but as Dostoyevsky slowly unravels the plot he has an inate ability to draw you into the politics of 18th century Russia leaving you wondering what will happen next。 This was my first dive into Dostoyevsky and Russian literature and I must say I was thoroughly impressed。 I will definitely be revisiting this genre in the future。

Maczak2

Nie wiem co powiedzieć chyba najlepsza książka jaką czytałem w życiu

Dilek

Politik fikirlerin olduğu, Dostoyevski'nin belki de en ciddi kitaplarından。 Arkadaşını öldüren kendisi intihar eden, toplumda kendine bir yer bulmaya çalışan genç fikirler。 *"Kendi yüzüyle dolaşmaktan daha büyük kurnazlık olmaz。 Çünkü kimse inanmaz kendi yüzüyle dolaştığına insanın。"*"Zaman bir eşya değil, düşüncedir。"*"Sağlam bir düşüncenin karşısında bile tutunabilmek için, gerçek büyük insan olmak gerekir。"*"Pişman olmuş bir serbest düşünceli。" Politik fikirlerin olduğu, Dostoyevski'nin belki de en ciddi kitaplarından。 Arkadaşını öldüren kendisi intihar eden, toplumda kendine bir yer bulmaya çalışan genç fikirler。 *"Kendi yüzüyle dolaşmaktan daha büyük kurnazlık olmaz。 Çünkü kimse inanmaz kendi yüzüyle dolaştığına insanın。"*"Zaman bir eşya değil, düşüncedir。"*"Sağlam bir düşüncenin karşısında bile tutunabilmek için, gerçek büyük insan olmak gerekir。"*"Pişman olmuş bir serbest düşünceli。" 。。。more

Guillermo Valencia

"𝑳𝒂 𝒗𝒊𝒅𝒂 𝒆𝒔 𝒅𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒓, 𝒍𝒂 𝒗𝒊𝒅𝒂 𝒆𝒔 𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒓𝒐𝒓, 𝒚 𝒆𝒍 𝒉𝒐𝒎𝒃𝒓𝒆 𝒆𝒔 𝒊𝒏𝒇𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒛。 𝑨𝒉𝒐𝒓𝒂 𝒕𝒐𝒅𝒐 𝒆𝒔 𝒅𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒓 𝒚 𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒓𝒐𝒓。 𝑨𝒉𝒐𝒓𝒂 𝒆𝒍 𝒉𝒐𝒎𝒃𝒓𝒆 𝒂𝒎𝒂 𝒍𝒂 𝒗𝒊𝒅𝒂 𝒑𝒐𝒓𝒒𝒖𝒆 𝒂𝒎𝒂 𝒆𝒍 𝒅𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒓 𝒚 𝒆𝒍 𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒓𝒐𝒓。 𝑨𝒔𝒊́ 𝒍𝒐 𝒉𝒂𝒏 𝒉𝒆𝒄𝒉𝒐。 𝑳𝒂 𝒗𝒊𝒅𝒂 𝒔𝒆 𝒅𝒂 𝒂𝒉𝒐𝒓𝒂 𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒂 𝒆𝒍 𝒅𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒓 𝒚 𝒆𝒍 𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒓𝒐𝒓, 𝒚 𝒂𝒉𝒊́ 𝒆𝒔𝒕𝒂́ 𝒆𝒍 𝒆𝒏𝒈𝒂𝒏̃𝒐。 𝑬𝒍 𝒉𝒐𝒎𝒃𝒓𝒆 𝒕𝒐𝒅𝒂𝒗𝒊́𝒂 𝒏𝒐 𝒆𝒔 𝒆𝒍 𝒒𝒖𝒆 𝒔𝒆𝒓𝒂́。 𝑯𝒂𝒃𝒓𝒂́ 𝒖𝒏 𝒉𝒐𝒎𝒃𝒓𝒆 𝒏𝒖𝒆𝒗𝒐, 𝒇𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒛 𝒚 𝒐𝒓𝒈𝒖𝒍𝒍𝒐𝒔𝒐。 𝑨 𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒆𝒏 𝒍𝒆 𝒅𝒆́ 𝒍𝒐 𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒎𝒐 𝒗𝒊𝒗𝒊𝒓 𝒐 𝒏𝒐 𝒗𝒊𝒗𝒊𝒓, 𝒆́𝒔𝒆 𝒔𝒆𝒓𝒂́ 𝒆𝒍 𝒉𝒐𝒎𝒃𝒓𝒆 𝒏𝒖𝒆𝒗𝒐。 𝑬𝒍 𝒒𝒖𝒆 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒆 𝒆𝒍 𝒅𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒓 𝒚 𝒆𝒍 𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒓𝒐𝒓, 𝒆́𝒍 𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒎𝒐 𝒔𝒆𝒓𝒂́ 𝒖𝒏 𝒅𝒊𝒐𝒔。 𝒀 𝒆𝒍 𝒐𝒕𝒓𝒐 𝑫𝒊𝒐𝒔 𝒚𝒂 𝒏𝒐 𝒔𝒆𝒓𝒂́。。。𝑫𝒊𝒐𝒔 𝒆𝒔 𝒆𝒍 "𝑳𝒂 𝒗𝒊𝒅𝒂 𝒆𝒔 𝒅𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒓, 𝒍𝒂 𝒗𝒊𝒅𝒂 𝒆𝒔 𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒓𝒐𝒓, 𝒚 𝒆𝒍 𝒉𝒐𝒎𝒃𝒓𝒆 𝒆𝒔 𝒊𝒏𝒇𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒛。 𝑨𝒉𝒐𝒓𝒂 𝒕𝒐𝒅𝒐 𝒆𝒔 𝒅𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒓 𝒚 𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒓𝒐𝒓。 𝑨𝒉𝒐𝒓𝒂 𝒆𝒍 𝒉𝒐𝒎𝒃𝒓𝒆 𝒂𝒎𝒂 𝒍𝒂 𝒗𝒊𝒅𝒂 𝒑𝒐𝒓𝒒𝒖𝒆 𝒂𝒎𝒂 𝒆𝒍 𝒅𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒓 𝒚 𝒆𝒍 𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒓𝒐𝒓。 𝑨𝒔𝒊́ 𝒍𝒐 𝒉𝒂𝒏 𝒉𝒆𝒄𝒉𝒐。 𝑳𝒂 𝒗𝒊𝒅𝒂 𝒔𝒆 𝒅𝒂 𝒂𝒉𝒐𝒓𝒂 𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒂 𝒆𝒍 𝒅𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒓 𝒚 𝒆𝒍 𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒓𝒐𝒓, 𝒚 𝒂𝒉𝒊́ 𝒆𝒔𝒕𝒂́ 𝒆𝒍 𝒆𝒏𝒈𝒂𝒏̃𝒐。 𝑬𝒍 𝒉𝒐𝒎𝒃𝒓𝒆 𝒕𝒐𝒅𝒂𝒗𝒊́𝒂 𝒏𝒐 𝒆𝒔 𝒆𝒍 𝒒𝒖𝒆 𝒔𝒆𝒓𝒂́。 𝑯𝒂𝒃𝒓𝒂́ 𝒖𝒏 𝒉𝒐𝒎𝒃𝒓𝒆 𝒏𝒖𝒆𝒗𝒐, 𝒇𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒛 𝒚 𝒐𝒓𝒈𝒖𝒍𝒍𝒐𝒔𝒐。 𝑨 𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒆𝒏 𝒍𝒆 𝒅𝒆́ 𝒍𝒐 𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒎𝒐 𝒗𝒊𝒗𝒊𝒓 𝒐 𝒏𝒐 𝒗𝒊𝒗𝒊𝒓, 𝒆́𝒔𝒆 𝒔𝒆𝒓𝒂́ 𝒆𝒍 𝒉𝒐𝒎𝒃𝒓𝒆 𝒏𝒖𝒆𝒗𝒐。 𝑬𝒍 𝒒𝒖𝒆 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒆 𝒆𝒍 𝒅𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒓 𝒚 𝒆𝒍 𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒓𝒐𝒓, 𝒆́𝒍 𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒎𝒐 𝒔𝒆𝒓𝒂́ 𝒖𝒏 𝒅𝒊𝒐𝒔。 𝒀 𝒆𝒍 𝒐𝒕𝒓𝒐 𝑫𝒊𝒐𝒔 𝒚𝒂 𝒏𝒐 𝒔𝒆𝒓𝒂́。。。𝑫𝒊𝒐𝒔 𝒆𝒔 𝒆𝒍 𝒅𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒓 𝒅𝒆𝒍 𝒎𝒊𝒆𝒅𝒐 𝒂 𝒍𝒂 𝒎𝒖𝒆𝒓𝒕𝒆。 𝑬𝒍 𝒒𝒖𝒆 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒆 𝒆𝒍 𝒅𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒓 𝒚 𝒆𝒍 𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒓𝒐𝒓 𝒍𝒍𝒆𝒈𝒂𝒓𝒂́ 𝒂 𝒔𝒆𝒓 𝒅𝒊𝒐𝒔。 𝑬𝒏𝒕𝒐𝒏𝒄𝒆𝒔 𝒉𝒂𝒃𝒓𝒂́ 𝒖𝒏𝒂 𝒗𝒊𝒅𝒂 𝒏𝒖𝒆𝒗𝒂, 𝒖𝒏 𝒉𝒐𝒎𝒃𝒓𝒆 𝒏𝒖𝒆𝒗𝒐, 𝒕𝒐𝒅𝒐 𝒔𝒆𝒓𝒂́ 𝒏𝒖𝒆𝒗𝒐…" 。。。more

Kincaid Robinson

The prototype for The Brothers K。 The book both benefits and suffers from this。

Seamus Fahey

Definitely slower than Crime and Punishment, but also picks up after the first part of the novel。

Bert

Everything you need to know about politics contained within this book and obviously a lot more

Dagnija Kroģere

visi runāja, nodedzināja mājas, visus nošāva。。。par daudz runāja

Makayla

"But wasn't it you who told me that if it were mathematically proven to you that the truth existed apart from Christ, then you would rather remain with Christ than with the truth? Did you say that? Did you?" (276)"On the contrary, complete atheism is more respectable than secular indifference [。。。] The complete atheist stands on the next-to-last highest rung leading to the fullest and most complete faith (he may take that next step, or he may not), but the indifferent man has no faith at all, ex "But wasn't it you who told me that if it were mathematically proven to you that the truth existed apart from Christ, then you would rather remain with Christ than with the truth? Did you say that? Did you?" (276)"On the contrary, complete atheism is more respectable than secular indifference [。。。] The complete atheist stands on the next-to-last highest rung leading to the fullest and most complete faith (he may take that next step, or he may not), but the indifferent man has no faith at all, except an ugly fear。" (759)"'Provided you also forgave me,' Tikhon uttered in a voice full of emotion。 [。。。] 'For my voluntary and involuntary sins。 In sinning, each person has already sinned against all, and each person is in some way guilty for another person's sin。 There is no isolated sin。 I am truly a great sinner, and perhaps greater than you。'" (781)"Even if you don't achieve reconciliation with yourself and forgiveness of yourself, even then he [Christ] will forgive you for your intention and for your great suffering。。。 for there are neither words nor thought in human language to express all the ways and means of the Lamb, 'until his ways are made manifest to us'。 Who can embrace him, the unembraceable, who can understand all of him, the infinite!" (784) 。。。more

Stefania Ultraviolet

Avrei tanto voluto che qualcuno mi avesse raccomandato di leggerlo con l’audiolibro, perché da quando (più o meno a metà) mi sono messa sotto l’audiolibro (mentre con lo sguardo seguivo la pagina) il libro è diventato molto più “fruibile”。 Più godibile, più comprensibile, meno noioso e meno “mattone”。

Soheil Khorsand

شیاطین وجود دارند و در این شکی نیست، اما درک ما از آن‌ها بسیار مختلف است。گفتار اندر نقدِ مترجم و ناشردر حرفه‌ای بودنِ استاد «سروش حبیبی» در امر ترجمه هیچ شکی وجود ندارد و ایشان از مترجم‌های محبوب من هستند اما دلیل نمی‌شود از نوشتن این نقد خودداری کنم。آقای سروش حبیبی، شما برای یک کتاب ۱۰۱۹ صفحه‌ای، زحمت نوشتنِ حتی یک صفحه مقدمه را به خود نداده‌اید و آن‌وقت پس از ۹۱۸صفحه در جایی‌که موخره نامیده می‌شود آمده‌اید و نوشته‌اید این فصل که از صفحه‌ی بعد می‌آید در فلان‌جا باید خواند؟!این‌چه وضعشه؟ داشتیم شیاطین وجود دارند و در این شکی نیست، اما درک ما از آن‌ها بسیار مختلف است。گفتار اندر نقدِ مترجم و ناشردر حرفه‌ای بودنِ استاد «سروش حبیبی» در امر ترجمه هیچ شکی وجود ندارد و ایشان از مترجم‌های محبوب من هستند اما دلیل نمی‌شود از نوشتن این نقد خودداری کنم。آقای سروش حبیبی، شما برای یک کتاب ۱۰۱۹ صفحه‌ای، زحمت نوشتنِ حتی یک صفحه مقدمه را به خود نداده‌اید و آن‌وقت پس از ۹۱۸صفحه در جایی‌که موخره نامیده می‌شود آمده‌اید و نوشته‌اید این فصل که از صفحه‌ی بعد می‌آید در فلان‌جا باید خواند؟!این‌چه وضعشه؟ داشتیم عادت می‌کردیم و مبارزه می‌کردیم با اینکه برخی مترجمین تازه‌کار موخره‌ها را در مقدمه‌ها می‌ریزند تا اینکه به این نمونه برخوردم!!!گیرم مترجم اینکار را انجام داده، کار ناشر در ایران فقط و فقط افزایش قیمت در هر تجدید چاپ به نسبت تورم است؟ مدیران نشر نیلوفر اصلا خودشان کتاب را خوانده‌اند؟!بگذریم، چون هرچه بگویم قطعا همانقدر تاثیرگذار است که چکش روی آهن سرد می‌گذارد!توجه، توجه، توجه! توصیه‌ نامه‌ی مهمفصلی که مترجم در انتهای کتاب از صفحه‌ی ۹۱۹ قرار داده، فصلی‌ست که حذف شده بوده و جای آن در کتاب دوم(قسمت دوم کتاب) پس از فصل هشتم(ایوان تسارویچ) می‌باشد یعنی دقیقا در صفحه ۵۷۵، اما مترجم و ناشر از نوشتن چند خط توضیح در قالب مقدمه در ابتدای کتاب امتنا کرده، پول‌های فروش کتاب که روز به روز به موجب تورم بالا می‌رود را شمرده و به ریش مردم می‌خندند!به همین جهت لازم دانستم از این تریبون به شما دوستان عزیزم هشدار دهم تا این بخش را در زمان درست خود بخوانید نه همانند من، پس از پایان کتاب!نوشتن از شیاطین آسان نیست، همانطور که خواندنش آسان نبود و سفری بود سخت، پیچیده و طولانی به اعماق روح و روان شخصیت‌هایش، اما بدون ورود به محتوای داستانی کتاب، تلاش می‌کنم در چند بند و صدالبته در سطح خودم از آن بنویسم。مقایسه نامهاگر بخواهم آثاری که از داستایفسکی تا به امروز خوانده‌ام را بر طبق سه مولفه‌ی «علاقه، سطح و کشش» رتبه‌بندی کنم، آنگاه نتیجه مطابق است با:۱-برادران کارامازوف ۲-ابله ۳-شیاطین ۴-جنایت و مکافات ۵-همزاد ۶-همیشه شوهر ۷-شب‌های روشن ۸-بیچارگاندعوت‌ نامهپس از مطالعه‌ی کتاب، به جهت مرتب کردن داده‌های مغزم به سراغ خواندن ریویوی دوستانم در گودریدز آمدم و دیدم برخی ریویوها حقیقتا در سطح و کلاس بالایی قرار داشت و شدیدا خواندنی بود، به همین جهت شایسته دیدم بجای کپی برداری از نوشته‌های این دوستان، شما را دعوت به خواندن این ریویوهای ناب نمایم تا اولا حقوق نویسنده محفوظ بماند، دوم شما با دوستان کتاب‌خوان خوبی آشنا شوید و سوما لذت خواندن کامل نوشته‌هایشان از شما گرفته نشود。ریویوی آبتین گلکار:https://www。goodreads。com/review/show。。。ریویوی مهلا:https://www。goodreads。com/review/show。。。ریویوی رویا:https://www。goodreads。com/review/show。。。ریویوی محمدقائم خانی:https://www。goodreads。com/review/show。。。گفتار اندر علاقه‌ی من به آلکسی نیلیچ کریلوفپیش از هر حرفی باید اعتراف کنم که شاید جز معدود خواننده‌هایی باشم که عاشق شخصیتِ «آلکسی نیلیچ کیریلوف» شدم و هر شب پس از بستن کتاب و چشم‌هایم، تلاش می‌کردم تا صورت او را تجسم کنم و پس از خواندن کتاب وقتی نام او را در گوگل سرچ کرم کاملا تصادفی عکس‌هایی زیادی دیدم که هنوز نمی‌دانم مربوط به یک فیلم است، اجرای تئاتر یا یک مینی سریال اما هر چه بود با چیزی که من در ذهنم تجسم می‌کردم بسیار بسیار نزدیک بود。تقابل آلکسی نیلیچ کریلوف با پیوتر استپانویچ ورخاونسکی در واپسین لحظات زندگیش و قیام و بلوای روحیش یکی از بخش‌های شاهکار این کتاب بود:"من وظیفه دارم که بی‌اعتقادی خودم را اعلام کنم。 برای من، هیچ فکر نیست بالاتر از انکار خدا! تمام تاریخ بشریت گواه است گفته‌ی مرا。 «اختراع انسان، است فکر وجود خدا。» انسان پیدا کرده است این راه را، تا مجبور نباشد خود را بکشد。 تاریخ جهان تا امروز چیزی نبوده است جز همین!"سیاهه‌ای در مورد شیاطین از زبان منداستایفسکی بار دیگر با شیاطین ثابت کرد که یک نابغه است، شیاطین را می‌توان کتابی سیاسی، فلسفی و اجتماعی دانست。سیاسی وقتی او درس سیاست می‌داد:"بریدن سر از همه کار آسان‌تر‌ است و پروردن اندیشه در سر از همه کار دشوارتر。""کدام راه را ترجیح می‌دهید؟ لاک‌پشت‌وار جلو برویم و در باتلاق دست و پا بزنیم یا عقاب‌وار از فراز باتلاق بگذریم؟""من خوب می‌فهمم که چرا ثروتمندان مثل سیل به خارج کوچ می‌کنند و این سیل سال به سال شدیدتر می‌شود。 غریزه است دیگر! وقتی کشتی‌ای غرق شدنی باشد، موش‌ها پیش از همه آن‌ را حس می‌کنند و از آن می‌گریزند。" فلسفی وقتی درس فلسفه می‌داد:"حقیقتِ راستین همیشه زنگ نادرستی دارد。 اگر بخواهید این زنگ‌ را از آن بزدایید باید اندکی دروغ به آن بیفزایید。""من به احوال دل آدم‌ها آشنایم。。。 می‌شود اطمینان داشت که او حالا دیگر خبرچینی نخواهد کرد。。。 چون حالا آدم خوشبختی است。。。"اجتماعی وقتی درس زندگی می‌داد:"تنها ماندنِ طولانی دو دوست، گاهی برای دوستیِ راستین سخت زیان‌بخش است。""هیچ‌ چیز غیرقابل تحمل‌تر از این نیست که وقتی بخت از آدم برمی‌گردد دوستان همه جمع شوند و به او بگویند که کارهایش احمقانه بوده。""ما همه مقصریم، همه مقصریم。 ای کاش همه به تقصیر خود معترف بودیم…"اعتراف می‌کنم ۱۰ روزی را که صرف مطالعه‌ی شیاطین نمودم دوست داشتم و از مطالعه‌ی سطر به سطر کتاب لذت بردم و باز هم آرزوی قدیمی خود را تکرار می‌کنم که ای کاش روزی انسان به علم کپی کردن انسان دست پیدا کند و آن‌وقت یک داستایفسکی دیگر منطبق با نمونه‌ی اورجینالش بسازد تا باز هم برای بشریت بنویسد。نکته:این حق را برای خود محفوظ می‌دارم که پس از طبقه‌بندی داده‌های ذهنم، مطالعه‌ی چند مقاله‌ی مرتبط با اثر و صدالبته جستجو و یافتن آن فیلم یا اجرایی که عکس‌هایش را در گوگل رویت کردم، این ریویو را دست‌خوش تغییرات بنیادین نمایم。نقل‌قول نامه"عادت چه کارها که نمی‌کند!""توان تخیل چه کارها می‌کند!""بعضی دوستی‌ها بسیار عجیبند。 طرفین هر دو می‌خواهند خون هم را بریزند و گوشت بدن هم را بجوند。 تمام عمر بدین سان روزگار می‌گذرانند اما جدایی از هم را بر نمی‌تابند。 حتی می‌شود گفت که جدایی‌شان به هیچ‌ روی ممکن نیست。 اگر یکی از سر بهانه‌جویی و لجاج پیوند بگسلد اول خود بیمار می‌شود و شاید حتی بمیرد!""انسان هرقدر نجیب‌تر باشد سر ضمیرش در آینه‌ی چهره‌اش نمایان‌تر می‌شود。""مردم دو دسته‌اند。 یک دسته از شدت غصه خودکشی می‌کنند یا از زیادی خشم یا از جنون و از این‌ جور چیزها。 این‌ها به یک‌ضرب کار را تمام می‌کنند، فکر رنج را نمی‌کنند。 گروه دیگر با فکر و از روی منطق این‌کار را می‌کنند。 اینها یک‌ عمر فکر می‌کنند。""آزادی کامل وقتی است که زنده ماندن یا مردن برای آدم مساوی باشد و این در حقیقت هدف همه است。""انسان هرچه سیاه‌روزتر باشد، یا قومی هرچه پاافتاده‌تر باشد، امید اجر اخروی و رویای بهشت در دلشان ریشه‌دارتر است، خاصه وقتی صدهزار مبلغ مذهبی مدام بر آتش این امید بدمند و منافع خود را در آن بجویند。""عوض کردن خدا، آسان نیست。""کدام راه را ترجیح می‌دهید؟ لاک‌پشت‌وار جلو برویم و در باتلاق دست و پا بزنیم یا عقاب‌وار از فراز باتلاق بگذریم؟""نیمه‌ی دوم زندگی آدمیزاد از عادت‌هایی شکل می‌گیرد که در نیمه‌ی اول روی هم جمع شده‌اند。""هیچ‌ چیز غیرقابل تحمل‌تر از این نیست که وقتی بخت از آدم برمی‌گردد دوستان همه جمع شوند و به او بگویند که کارهایش احمقانه بوده。""ما باید هوشمندان را با خود همراه کنیم و بر گرده‌ی احمقان سوار شویم。 شما نباید از این شرم داشته باشید، نسل حاضر باید از نو تربیت شود تا شایسته‌ی آزادی باشد。""علت خودکشی نکردنم ترس بود。 بعضی از ترس خودکشی می‌کنند و بعضی از ترس زنده می‌مانند。"کارنامهپنج ستاره و دیگر هیچ🤫خواندن شیاطین را اولا به تمام عاشقان و مریدان داستایفسکی پیشنهاد می‌کنم، اما به سایر عزیزانی که دوست دارند خواندن داستایفسکی را آغاز کنند پیشنهاد می‌کنم با کتاب‌های ساده‌تر او، ترجیحا نوول‌هایش کار را آغاز کنند。نهم مهرماه یک‌هزار و چهارصد 。。。more

Mahla

。。داستایفسکی گوشهٔ کتابخانه‌ام جا خوش کرده تا وقت و بی وقت به نامِ لذت بی‌نهایت از ادبیات و فلسفه، چند روزی مهمان قلم شگفت‌انگیز او باشم。بدون لو رفتن نقطهٔ عطفی در داستان، سخت است تا حرفی از کتاب به میان آورم。 پس از پیشگفتارِ داستایفسکی درباره ستپان ترافیموویچ در چاله حوادث و جهان‌بینی ناب نویسنده اسیر می‌شویم。داستایفسکی در هیاهوی نهیلیسمی که محصول خردگرایی مطلق عصر اوست، در همهمه و فریادِ «خدا مرده است»، از بازگشت ارزش‌های متافیزیکی، لزوم ایمانِ معنوی و دست‌آویزی فراانسانی می‌گوید。 او هزار صفحه 。。داستایفسکی گوشهٔ کتابخانه‌ام جا خوش کرده تا وقت و بی وقت به نامِ لذت بی‌نهایت از ادبیات و فلسفه، چند روزی مهمان قلم شگفت‌انگیز او باشم。بدون لو رفتن نقطهٔ عطفی در داستان، سخت است تا حرفی از کتاب به میان آورم。 پس از پیشگفتارِ داستایفسکی درباره ستپان ترافیموویچ در چاله حوادث و جهان‌بینی ناب نویسنده اسیر می‌شویم。داستایفسکی در هیاهوی نهیلیسمی که محصول خردگرایی مطلق عصر اوست، در همهمه و فریادِ «خدا مرده است»، از بازگشت ارزش‌های متافیزیکی، لزوم ایمانِ معنوی و دست‌آویزی فراانسانی می‌گوید。 او هزار صفحه دست و پا می‌زند تا خدای مرده را احیا کند。ستاوروگین پرسش برانگیزترین شخصیت میان مردانِ ساخته و پرداخته اوست。 شخصیتی که در صف مقابلِ ساده‌لوحی و حماقت پرنس میشکین ایستاده است。 او اَبرمرد نیچه یا بهتر بگویم نمودی از «انسان سادی» است؛ انسانی که از منظر مارکی دوساد، خدا را از عرش کبریا به زیر کشید و خود بر مقام او تکیه زده است。 ستاوروگین در جدال خیر و شر، در کمال بی‌تفاوتی در نقطه صفر مرزی ایستاده، قباحت از شر می‌زداید و نجابتِ خیر را لگدمال می‌گند。 او جلوه‌ای از نهایتِ قدرت بشری است؛ کسی که نه خدا، بلکه خودِ شیطان است。 ستاوروگین پرستیده می‌شود، مجذوب می‌کند، ستایش بر می‌انگیزد و قربانی می‌گیرد؛ اما پریشان است و نمی‌داند این قدرت خداگونه را چگونه به‌کار گیرد。او اگرچه افسار روح خود را به شیطان سپرده است، اما هنوز در کالبدی انسانی جای دارد و از عذاب حمله‌های «وجدان» خلاصی ندارد。 سیلیِ شاتوف به ستاوروگین، سیلیِ آب نکشیده‌ای بود که داستایفسکی زیر گوشِ این پوچ‌گرایی محض می‌نوازد و آن را جز سقوط، آشوبی خبیثانه و جذام خطرناکی افتاده به جان انسانیت نمی‌بیند。 او شاهکاری آفرید که امروز نیز پیشگوی زمانه اوست。در زیرساخت‌های سیاسی و اجتماعی رمان، انقلاب سوسیالیستی در جامعهٔ دهقانی روسیه، کمدی نافرجامی معرفی می‌شود که حاصلی جز آشوب ندارد。 او سرانجامِ انقلاب اکتبر و ظهور استالین را در قالب شخصیت شیگالیوف پیش‌بینی می‌کند。 ستپان تیرافیموویچ در نقش روشنفکری که تخم لق الحاد را در دهان نسل بعد از خود، ستاوروگین و پیوتر، کاشته است در نهایت به میل نویسنده لب به اعتراف و توبه می‌گشاید。داستایفسکی شیاطین را در پاسخ به زمزمه‌های نهیلیسمِ جان گرفته در نبض جریان‌های روشنفکری و در پی آن، تحرکات انقلابیون سوسیالیست جامعه خود نوشت。 برای انذار به ظهور سوسیالیسم در جامعه‌ای که منافع کارگر بازیچه دست مردان جاه‌طلبی چون پیوتر تیرافیموویچ شود。 که شد。。。ستپان تیرافیموویچ، کیریلف، شاتوف، لیزا، ماریا تیموفی یونا، لیپوتین، لبیادکین، داریا، فیدکا و واروارا پترونا هرکدام مهره‌های خاکستریِ شطرنج داستایفسکی و در عین حال همگی بخشی از خود او هستند。داستایفسکی دغدغه‌ای جز انسانیت ندارد، و به گمانم کیریلفِ از گور برخاسته، شبیه‌ترین شخصیت به اوست 。در متن تراژدی هولناک شیاطین، او انجیل دیگری می‌آفریند و اثبات فرض وجود یا عدم وجود خدا را به وجدان بشریت واگذار می‌کند。 جامعه‌ بی‌خدا، خوب و بد را به نفسانیت انسان واگذار می‌کند و «وجود را بر عشق برتری می‌دهد»。 انسانی که بعید نیست در پس رخت و صورتکی دلربا، به شیطانی سراسر سیاهی مبدل شود。 。。。more

Chindo89

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it, click here。 The revolutionist is a dedicated man。He has no interest of his own,no affairs,no ties,no possessions,not even a name。Everything in him is swallowed up in a single exclusive interest,a single idea,a single passion-revolution。

Christian Chapman

his best

Alin Cristian

Nici nu știu ce sa mai zic。 Nici nu mai știu a câta carte este pe care o citesc de la el (mint, a opta)。 Stau și mă întreb dacă mai am voie să îmi dau cu părerea despre ceva din tot ceea ce a scris acest om。 De fapt, cred ca nimeni nu ar trebui sa își permită luxul acesta ;))。 Din punctul meu de vedere, Dostoievski îi pune sub masă pe toți scriitorii care au pus ceva pe foaie (nu, nu exagerez。 Dc?)Am fost puțin speriat la început。 De fapt cuvintele altora m-au făcut să îmi fie frică de cartea ac Nici nu știu ce sa mai zic。 Nici nu mai știu a câta carte este pe care o citesc de la el (mint, a opta)。 Stau și mă întreb dacă mai am voie să îmi dau cu părerea despre ceva din tot ceea ce a scris acest om。 De fapt, cred ca nimeni nu ar trebui sa își permită luxul acesta ;))。 Din punctul meu de vedere, Dostoievski îi pune sub masă pe toți scriitorii care au pus ceva pe foaie (nu, nu exagerez。 Dc?)Am fost puțin speriat la început。 De fapt cuvintele altora m-au făcut să îmi fie frică de cartea aceasta。 Mulţi mi-au spus ca este mai mult un roman politic destul de greoi。 Tot ce pot sa spun este ca am fost mințit cu nerușinare。 Este mai mult de atât。 Chiar dacă primele 200 de pagini au curs destul de greu, pot spune doar că la sfârșitul zilei a meritat tot: banii, nervii cheltuiți și nopțile nedormite。"Dacă nu există Dumnezeu, atunci eu sunt Dumnezeu。。。 Dacă Dumnezeu există, atunci totul este în voia lui, și din această voință eu nu pot ieși。 Dacă nu există, înseamnă că totul este în voința mea, și eu sînt dator să-mi afirm voința liberă supremă absolut liberă。"。。。 。。。more

Jim Dowdell

Pure socialism laid bare – the ranting of a madman

Anna Sorokina

In classic Dostoevsky's fashion, this book was a slow meander up until the last 100 pages。 That would be alright if that meander was at least a bit satisfying or entertaining。 Instead, for most of the book, we are met with incredibly vague conversations laced with political sentiments that require an in-depth knowledge of a specific time in Russian history (i。e。 nihilists)。 I laughed at times, but mostly at the overly dramatic dialogue - and fainting, that surely followed。 Overall, a pretty nich In classic Dostoevsky's fashion, this book was a slow meander up until the last 100 pages。 That would be alright if that meander was at least a bit satisfying or entertaining。 Instead, for most of the book, we are met with incredibly vague conversations laced with political sentiments that require an in-depth knowledge of a specific time in Russian history (i。e。 nihilists)。 I laughed at times, but mostly at the overly dramatic dialogue - and fainting, that surely followed。 Overall, a pretty niche work of literature。 。。。more

Ana S

This book is surely a burn-out and enjoyable。 For around the first 200 pages is relatively boring。 I only find some interesting stuff within the 200 pages are only the conversation Shatov or Kirilov have。 I hate Jane Austen's but if you do, you might find the first 200 pages isn't boring at all。 I enjoy crime Punishment so much but I feel like in Devils, Dostoevsky try to make this novel like cliche Telenovela。 There are a lot of exaggerations in characters' conversations。 But I do really apprec This book is surely a burn-out and enjoyable。 For around the first 200 pages is relatively boring。 I only find some interesting stuff within the 200 pages are only the conversation Shatov or Kirilov have。 I hate Jane Austen's but if you do, you might find the first 200 pages isn't boring at all。 I enjoy crime Punishment so much but I feel like in Devils, Dostoevsky try to make this novel like cliche Telenovela。 There are a lot of exaggerations in characters' conversations。 But I do really appreciate the depths of deep philosophical conversations that each character has。 It's just the family drama could have been less。 There's around 50 characters that you have to keep up, I had to write down the names of the characters on the back and front pages of the book。 It does really help。 I recommend you do that if you have Wordsworth edition。 But if you do have Penguin edition, I recommend you write the characters as well since as I know Penguin doesn't really include all of the characters on the list。The main character Nikolay Stavrogin really starts to have crucial moments in the beginning of 200 pages coz through 1 to 200 pages he didn't appear that much。 Up to 250 pages, Dostoevsky doesn't really give his motives (real intentions) or past actions that he had done (only around in page 400 something he revealed what he has done in the past)。 Nikolay is a very complicated man。 He's a man that really trust what he believes or makes himself what he believes。 He's an atheist but he has strong beliefs in his atheism and the future of Rusia。 He's also shown some psychotic behaviors。 He's the kind of guy that you're afraid of。 He has anger issues。 A liar。 A sly man。 An untrusted man。 Man who has resentments that he will do something (such as killing) if someone pisses him off。 I was thinking what makes him like that。 Was it his mother that unconsciously made him that way or his deceased father or his other traumas。 I don't know how long it took me to finish this book because I read two other non-fiction books around the same time。 I think this took me a month to finish this book。 The experience was totally different when I read Notes from Underground and Crime and Punishment, because I had so much joy reading those two books! I genuinely loved those so much! I surely know that my favorite Dostoevsky's works so far are in the first place is Notes from Underground, 2nd place; Crime and Punishment, then Devils comes in the third place (or fourth, after finishing reading the Brother Karamazov)。 I left a lot of notes on the books。 I have Wordsworth edition, I wish they had more blank pages at the end of the book。 This novel is a very deep political novel, and it really have strong and big arguments on God。 It's very very fascinating。 I love everytime the character, especially Kirilov (who's an atheist) and Shatov (who believes in presence of God) pour out their opinions and ideas。 In conclusion, I enjoy this novel。 I don't know what to say on this review coz I left my opinions on the margins on the book。 If you're starting to read Dostoevsk's, I wouldn't recommend this novel as your first read, I would recommend Notes from Underground first because it's only 200 pages and then read Brother Karamazov or Crime and punishment after that, then read Devils (possessed)。 。。。more

Wojtek Konieczny

(Audiobook), 8/10Lektor - 5/6

Nastaran Ayoubi

“Well, you will。 Be careful, Kirillov。 I’ve heard that’s just how fits begin。 An epileptic described exactly that sensation before a fit, word for word as you’ve done。 He mentioned five seconds, too, and said that more could not be endured。 Remember Mahomet’s pitcher from which no drop of water was spilt while he circled Paradise on his horse。 That was a case of five seconds too; that’s too much like your eternal harmony, and Mahomet was an epileptic。 Be careful, Kirillov, it’s。 epilepsy!”

Egilva

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it, click here。 A differenza di molti esaltati estimatori di Dostoevskij, ritengo che le ragioni per cui questo romanzo abbia valore siano piuttosto pratiche。Lo stile comiziale e da comizio (ed eccovi un orrido giochetto di parole) vale poco sul piano letterario, e chiunque legga in russo capirà di cosa sto parlando。Per paradossale che possa essere, Dostoevskij ha avuto meno fortuna in Russia che fuori, e in modo particolare nei paesi di lingue con la grammatica senza declinazioni。 Mi riferisco soprattuttoa Ita A differenza di molti esaltati estimatori di Dostoevskij, ritengo che le ragioni per cui questo romanzo abbia valore siano piuttosto pratiche。Lo stile comiziale e da comizio (ed eccovi un orrido giochetto di parole) vale poco sul piano letterario, e chiunque legga in russo capirà di cosa sto parlando。Per paradossale che possa essere, Dostoevskij ha avuto meno fortuna in Russia che fuori, e in modo particolare nei paesi di lingue con la grammatica senza declinazioni。 Mi riferisco soprattuttoa Italiano e Inglese, non mi inoltro nella questione di lana caprina del minore impatto sulla cultura francese, assai più consapevole di che cosa, e di come, Fedor Mihailovic abbia saccheggiato i loro vari autori, facendo della censura e di una certa ironia isterica i tratti principali del suo tanto famigerato talento。Vengo al punto。 In questo libro è esposta in maniera chiara la tattica adottata dai rivoluzionari o aspiranti tiranni di alto o basso rango per la loro strategia di scalata sociale。1 recarsi in luoghi disinformati。2 far leva sulla paura per instillare informazioni favorevoli alla propria ascesa negli interstizi di avidità (gestione di premi piccoli e promesse grandi e lontane, spesso dilazionate da "casuali" imprevisti e istanza di prepararsi di più e "attendere il momento giusto") , ignoranza, invidia, stupidità o vanità (creazione di titoli fittizi, riti catartici, istituzione pseudo imitativa dei procedimenti ufficiali secondo una specie di dignificazione di un ambiente familiare ma di minore importanza istituzionale (mi riferisco alle riunioni organizzate da Verchovenskij con gente di ogni calibro, prima nelle case di gente del popolo, poi in quello dei governatori: confusione dell'ordine conferito alle pratiche quotidiane dalla differenza di luoghi e architetture) 。3 compromettere le persone con documenti (presso il governo stesso conto cui ci si batterebbe) 4 prendersi la responsabilità di niente per essere il dispensatore di concessioni ad altri (che pagheranno con il prendersi la responsabilità? No, ma con l'agire "per il bene comune, per l'idea" cioè imitando la irresponsabilità del capo in un'apparente comunità di uguali e fratelli dove infine5 il fratello consapevole di tutto ciò ha ben instaurato una precisa gerarchia, essendo il responsabile, udite udite, dell'idea。 Sia chiaro l'idea non "esiste", mentre gli atti compiuti per lei si, e quelli sono perseguibili, a meno che non continui a farli sperando, ormai a fondo perduto, che il nuovo ordinamento te li perdonerà perché li hai fatti per arrivare a lui。 Libro che il compagno amante della libertà è della fratellanza Stalin lesse e rilesse come guida per il suo operato。 Purtroppo dal punto di vista letterario ci sono delle cose assolutamente enigmatiche: 1varie polemichette dal retrogusto autobiografico (si veda Karmazinov, personaggio del tutto inutile), 2trame scandalistiche da giornaletto di provincia (x e y vivevano nella lontana terra di sogno e di mistero dell'Europa, ma tra la Amata Russia e l'Europa, in Svizzera, successe qualcosa di intrigante。。 E che? Due giovani che si piacciono e si scambiano battutine ma che non riescono a fare sesso? Le loro madri che discutono sui loro figli beneamati? Il personaggio centrale che fa sciocchezze violente o trasandato e poi se ne va dal vecchio santone a confessarsi? Ma per favore。。 ) 3 accorgimenti ad hoc da brividi di fretta per aggiustare cose che non stanno in piedi (le tempistiche delle varie relazioni, troppo brevi, non si potevano, è evidente, gestire con scarti cronologici o variazioni di prospettiva, ma no。 Parentele intrecciate, passati nebulosi che si svelano patetiche storielle da curricula emotivi per macchine candidate a test di Turing, tale è la ripetitività palese, a chi sta attento, dei vari "passati" ; satov, che guarda caso, sta dove sta anche kirillov, però si odiano, però stanno insieme forse per l'esperienza dell'America insieme? O per le idee con cui stavrogin li ha influenzati? I sostenitori più ciechi dicono: è un romanzo di idee, con stavrogin al centro poetico。 Io direi: è una raffazzonata accozzaglia di romanzo giallo, diatribe filosofiche mezzo digerire, personaggi ottenuti da tentativi di farne uno, con quelli riusciti peggio tenuti perché "tutto fa" (ma la gente geniale le chiama "sfumature dell'insondabile psiche umana)。 Persino Dostoevskij nei Karamazov in parte dice con onestà cosa pensa di questo suo trucchetto。 Ma ovviamente di quel capitolo nessuno parla。 E qui lo stesso rispetto al meccanismo che Dostoevskij svela nel personaggio di Verchovenskij, vero protagonista。) 4narrazione cronachistica inverosimile。 Dettagli che non si sa da dove sono presi。 Mi si dirà: ingenuo, sono notizie, e il cronachista stesso, come lo scrittore, dove non ha saputo ha inventato, dove ha saputo ha potuto abellire e omettere。 Bene。 Ma allora perché la tanto declamata "polifonia" non si esprime nel difficile piano formale della variazione della prospettiva narrativa? Troppo facile così。 Inoltre, questa presunta polifonia non potrà certo essere credibile ha chi ha letto Fourier e il nuovo testamento。 L'apparenza di "tante idee" è data dal fatto di presentare le stesse in modo parziale, facendo alzare e abbassare la tensione con spostamenti, eventi o commenti su eventi che rientrano il dialogo (per esempio con il radunare personaggi o farli incontrare da soli, potrei essere più preciso a proposito, se qualcuno me lo chiedesse fornirei tecnicismi)。 Termino dicendo che molte delle presunte vicende super appassionanti di Dostoevskij, rinnegato autore di commedie, derivano dal fatto (e vi aspetto semplicioni che penseranno a Freud e alla sua patetica e superficiale interpretazione dei ROMANZI di Dostoevskij) che non c'è un amore descritto in termini fisici。 Si amano tutti, ma di gesti neanche l'ombra。 Eccetto, naturale, violenze, reazioni esagerate, malattie。 Mi direte: metafore per esprimere。。 Ma per esprimere cosa? Uno scrittore non può glissare su un aspetto della vita a meno di confessare la sua incapacità a trattarlo。 Per capire basta avere letto un qualsiasi altro autore che sia in grado di descrivere il sesso e l'eccitazione senza scadere nel ridicolo o nell'isterico (come fa puntualmente Dostoevskij nei vari inginocchiamenti, baci sulle labbra, strette di mano etc)。 D'annunzio, Mishima, o persino Omero (Iliade, sesso tra Zeus e Era, libro Inganno a Zeus)。 Il sesso può essere un problema, ma nasconderlo così nel delitto, nell'oltraggio, nella necessità di affiancargli una tensione speculativa non tanto per farlo ma per evitare di parlarne mi pare un difetto non da poco。 Grazie a chiunque abbia speso il suo tempo per leggere questa recensione。 Mi auguro che a costoro servirà a qualcosa 。。。more

Jacob

Man。 This one struck at my core。 Dickens moves me in a way similar to Dostoevsky。 I'll probably be slammed for the comparison, but Dickens moves me, and so does this guy。 Dostoevsky has a different kind of emotional impact than Dickens, but to me, equally impactful。 This one takes a while to get going but the payoff is huge in my opinion。 Man。 This one struck at my core。 Dickens moves me in a way similar to Dostoevsky。 I'll probably be slammed for the comparison, but Dickens moves me, and so does this guy。 Dostoevsky has a different kind of emotional impact than Dickens, but to me, equally impactful。 This one takes a while to get going but the payoff is huge in my opinion。 。。。more

Tallus

Tracta els temes habituals de les seves novel。les amb forces personatges tortuosos i un retrat de la societat de la Rússia del segle XIX 。Pel que he entès els dimonis als que fa referència el titol poden ser de molts tipus: personals, socials etc en tot cas tots portem un dimoni a dins i del que es tracta és de salvar-nos。 De fet quasi tots els personatges acaben malament inclosos els més nobles com en Shatov。Una bona novel。la però està a anys llum de la immortal Els germans Karamàzov。Tot i que Tracta els temes habituals de les seves novel。les amb forces personatges tortuosos i un retrat de la societat de la Rússia del segle XIX 。Pel que he entès els dimonis als que fa referència el titol poden ser de molts tipus: personals, socials etc en tot cas tots portem un dimoni a dins i del que es tracta és de salvar-nos。 De fet quasi tots els personatges acaben malament inclosos els més nobles com en Shatov。Una bona novel。la però està a anys llum de la immortal Els germans Karamàzov。Tot i que l' edició de l'editorial Alba és força correcta la traducció de Fernando Otero m'ha semblat bastant dolenta。 Intentaré aconseguir una altre traducció。 。。。more

Ashkan Darouni

خسته کننده ترین رمان داستایفسکی از نظر بنده

Ivana Books Are Magic

This is perhaps the most difficult, grim, violent and tragic work by Dostoevsky that I have read so far (and I read an awful lot of Dostoevsky in my life)。 Despite Demons being a harrowing read at times, I was impressed with this novel in a number of ways。 I can sum it up in five points。 Firstly, it is the kind of book that makes you think, abundant in moral arguments, logical paradoxes and verbal fights。 Secondly, the plot is very engaging and runs smoothly。 Thirdly, the psychological study of This is perhaps the most difficult, grim, violent and tragic work by Dostoevsky that I have read so far (and I read an awful lot of Dostoevsky in my life)。 Despite Demons being a harrowing read at times, I was impressed with this novel in a number of ways。 I can sum it up in five points。 Firstly, it is the kind of book that makes you think, abundant in moral arguments, logical paradoxes and verbal fights。 Secondly, the plot is very engaging and runs smoothly。 Thirdly, the psychological study of its characters is extremely well done。 Fourthly, the philosophical aspect of the book is quite engaging。 Finally, the social, ideological and political satire is brilliant。 NOT AN EASY READ- A DISTURBED AND VIOLENT NOVEL THAT WAS BASED ON REAL LIFE EVENTSThat all being said, this was not an easy read。 I needed to do some research and reading to be able to understand many of its political and ideological references。 I'm still not sure I understand them all, but I think I managed to get a good grasp on things。 Not that you need to dive into Russian history of the 19th century to be able to read this book, but it helps if you are familiar with political climate of the time。 Some aspects of this novel cannot be fully understand without knowing at least basic facts about the revolutions and ideologies of the time, such as the arrival of nihilism, atheism and socialism。 When I say that this novel is tragic, I mean it。 This book is filled with violence, abuse, madness and unrest, both physical and verbal。 There are quite graphic descriptions of suicides and murders。 What is more, there is a lot of physical, psychological and verbal abuse and violence。 One chapter (originally censored) focuses on an abuse of a child and it is absolutely sickening to read。 The presence of murders and suicides definitely makes it a dark read。 There's a definite note of tragedy to Demons, at times so pronounced it made me think of Shakespeare's Hamlet。 The blood is dripping from the pages of this novel, but it is never violence for violence's sake。 There's a reason for all of it。 Demons is in some ways an allegory and a warming against a violent revolution。 In his youth, Dostoevsky was a rebel。 In his older and perhaps wiser years, Dostoevsky realized the danger that lies in violent revolutions and ideologies。 Quite possibly, Demons is a book that Dostoevsky wrote to warn of the dangers of violent revolutionary movements and the sociopaths that are drown to the violence and power present in these movements。 The violence in this novel is out there in the open, but it reflects reality。 Indeed, this novel was based on real life events and murders。 Dostoevsky, like much of the Russian public of the time, followed these public trials for political murders。 The writer then went on to write this novel and infused it with his own signature style- a philosophical study of its characters。 That is how this unique novel came to be- a a book that is wonderfully philosophical and satirically political at the same time。 WHY DEMONS IS (FOR ME PERSONALLY ) THE MOST TRAGIC OF ALL DOSTOEVSKY'S NOVELS? If Demons can be compared to a tragedy, it is still very much a novel。 If you can imagine a tragedy taking the form of a philosophical novel set in nineteenth century Russia and written by Dostoevsky, then you can imagine this novel。 Reflecting a turbulent era in European history, Demons is one of the darkest and grimmest novels I have ever read。 Even if there is a bit of humour in it, it mostly takes the form of irony, cynicism and satire。 There are almost no positive personalities in this novel。 Those characters that could be described as positive (or at least well meaning) are often mentally ill or passive and unable to help neither themselves nor others。 Demons is, in this sense, different from other Dostoevsky's novels。 Crime and Punishment has its dark and pessimistic moments and so does the novel Brother Karamazov, but this novel tops them both in terms of tragedy。 The Idiot is quite tragic in many ways and distinctly cruel towards some of its characters but still there is hope in it。 In contrast, Demons shows no mercy to any of its characters。 This novel tops all of Dostoevsky's works with its grimness, pessimism and tragedy。 I think it's no spoiler to say that Dostoevsky's novels don't end up with- they lived happily every after。 You do expect certain pessimism, realism and naturalism from any writer belonging to literary movement known as realism。 Nevertheless, some of Dostoevsky's work are filled with hope and some of his characters find redemption。 Not so much in this one。 Demons is a deeply depressive and tragic work。 For most (if not all characters), there is no redemption and no consolation。 IS DEMONS STILL A RELEVANT BOOK? There are many philosophical passages in this novel and political questions that remain relevant。 Moreover, spirituality is one of central topics in this book。 Dostoevsky admitted of being tormented by the question whether God exists and so are many of his characters。 They often feel conflict between their beliefs and feelings。 I think it is something we can all relate to。 In many ways, Demons remains a relevant work。 This novel is an intelligent and inspired piece of writing that has proved to be uncannily true in this predictions。 You might even go so far as call Demons prophetic。 It certainly predicted the violent revolutions and the rise of socialism in Russia。 Certainly, this is a book that has a lot to offer to its reader。 You can read my full review by following the link bellow:https://modaodaradosti。blogspot。com/2。。。 。。。more

Pat Wilson

Great because like Tolstoy there are such in depth descriptions of late 19th century cultural trends and political philosophy。 The whole book covers a plot to sow division, discontent, and chaos。 This is presented as a socialist strategy to bring about change。 Dostoevsky clearly does not think much of the movement。 For me, not as good as Tolstoy because the character development is superficial comparatively and there are just too many characters to to keep track of。

Ray Baker

A flattening tale that constructs a portrait of mass delirium that is as familiar now as it was in 1871。 Not only does the novel predict the chaos of the Russian Revolution but it goes further by attempting to diagnose it's cause - nihilism。 Dostoevsky pits various forms of nihilism against each other, embodied within different characters。 There are men whose half-hearted, intellectual nihilism dissolves immediately upon the possibility of death and birth, the opportunistic nihilists (perhaps mo A flattening tale that constructs a portrait of mass delirium that is as familiar now as it was in 1871。 Not only does the novel predict the chaos of the Russian Revolution but it goes further by attempting to diagnose it's cause - nihilism。 Dostoevsky pits various forms of nihilism against each other, embodied within different characters。 There are men whose half-hearted, intellectual nihilism dissolves immediately upon the possibility of death and birth, the opportunistic nihilists (perhaps more than anyone else the titular devils of the novel) who use the lack of principles within nihilism to convince weaker men to commit atrocities under the guise of idealogical revolution and finally the true nihilists who end up committing suicide。 The writing is thankfully often funny, the horrible events made bearable by the likeable narrator (possibly inspiring Michael Haneke to attempt a similar device in his film 'the White Ribbon')。The pacing is odd and imperfect, with some major characters showing up almost halfway through and a huge amount of build up - although this has a gruesome large scale pay off so it is justified。 。。。more