Classics

Demons

Demons

  • Downloads：7163
  • Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
  • Create Date：2022-11-05 05:51:40
  • Update Date：2025-09-07
  • Status：finish
  • Author：Fyodor Dostoevsky
  • ISBN：1420956795
  • Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
  • Download

Summary

One of Dostoyevsky’s most famous novels， this 1872 work utilizes five main characters and their philosophical ideas to describe the political chaos of Imperial Russia in the nineteenth century。 Based on an actual event involving the murder of a revolutionary by his comrades， this novel depicts a band of ruthless radicals attempting to incite revolt in their small， rural community。 At the center of “Demons” lies Dostoyevsky’s desire to protest the enthusiasm for revolution he saw all around him， as well as the conservative establishment’s inability to cope with those revolutionary ideas or their consequences。 The author considered utopias unobtainable， and he depicts the radicals and the ideas they represent with a frightening savage intensity， as if they were possessed by demons rather than those unrealistic ideas。 Perhaps the greatest political novel ever written， Dostoyevsky’s “Demons” fully displays his devastating condemnation of human manipulation through brilliant characterization， as well as his keen and seemingly clairvoyant insight into the hearts of men。 This edition is printed on premium acid-free paper and follows the translation of Constance Garnett。
（back cover）

Download

Reviews

Tuankirie ，

روايات دوستويفسكي تحمل الكثير من عناوينها، احببت الرواية جدااحببت نيقولاي المتقلب وكرهت بطرس وتعاطفت مع شاتوف

Kurt ，

Not for the uninitiated。 Of the four Dostoyevsky books I've read so far， this might be the slowest to start - it feels like very little happens for about the first half （about 350 pages， depending on your edition）。 But this slow pace turns out to just be the （slightly excessive， I'll admit） room Dostoyevsky feels the need to give his wide cast of characters in one of his most complex moral dilemmas， and the payoff is pretty great in most cases！ Though it can be a little heavy-handed （the Christ/ Not for the uninitiated。 Of the four Dostoyevsky books I've read so far， this might be the slowest to start - it feels like very little happens for about the first half （about 350 pages， depending on your edition）。 But this slow pace turns out to just be the （slightly excessive， I'll admit） room Dostoyevsky feels the need to give his wide cast of characters in one of his most complex moral dilemmas， and the payoff is pretty great in most cases！ Though it can be a little heavy-handed （the Christ/Antichrist duality between two characters that comes in is。。。fascinating， but yeah）， there's no shortage of stuff to think about here。 The worst part is， of course， the lack of agency for women， but this has been a long-known problem for Dostoyevsky; at least this one's got many more distinct female characters than I could name from any of his other books。 And I was pleasantly surprised to find that the book was less conservative than I expected it to be - Dostoyevsky might sneer at the socialist movement of his time， but he does seem to express genuine concern for it here; he's much more worried about those who would take advantage of the naivety of such a movement， which is a worry I find myself sharing increasingly these days （don't worry， this isn't the beginning of some slow reactionary turn-around in my politics - I attended a union rally just earlier today）。 I should add that it's also much more fun to read this if you're familiar with other Dostoyevsky books， particularly Crime And Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov， since some of the central conflicts here feel like they sit perfectly between those two。 It's a 4。5 if I'm being really honest （something I've been pulling a lot recently， I know）， but I'll round up based on my awe at the ending， which is worth the wait。 。。。more

Paulaaa ，

¡Obra maestra！

Boris Liparteliani ，

Просто шедевр。 И страшно подумать， что предвидел Федор Михайлович и что после этого вскоре началось。。。

Gilbert ，

Boy， does this guy know how to write！ The very strong psychological torment Dostoyevsky puts his creations through is， to me， terrifying。

Basma Omar ，

الشياطين هي ثالث لقاء ليا مع دويستو والحقيقة انها كانت رواية متعددة الزوايا قضايا سياسية واجتماعية وفلسفية ودينية والجانب الاخير كان بارع فيه وابدع 。。 لكن التقييم ٣。٥ لاني حسيت بصعوبة فالقراية والتشتت لكثرة الاسماء وتشابهها جدا بالرغم ان قرات روسي كتير ومتعودة لكن الموضوع هنا يتوه بزيادةاكتر شخصية علقت معايا كيرولوف شكرا لرفقاء القراءة سارة وسارة ومحمد ♥️

Blagovest Asenov ，

His most violent one。 Absolute masterpiece。

Okan Doğu ，

Okuması， bitirmesi çok zordu。 Ama yarısından sonra olaylar arttı ilginçliği arttı。 Sonuç merak uyandırdı。 Yarıdan sonrasını tamamlamak daha kolay oldu。 Bir yerde zamanınıda Rusya'nın bağırsaklarını temizlediği zannedilen girişimler ve sonuçları anlatılıyor。 Herkese tavsiye etmem。 Okuması， bitirmesi çok zordu。 Ama yarısından sonra olaylar arttı ilginçliği arttı。 Sonuç merak uyandırdı。 Yarıdan sonrasını tamamlamak daha kolay oldu。 Bir yerde zamanınıda Rusya'nın bağırsaklarını temizlediği zannedilen girişimler ve sonuçları anlatılıyor。 Herkese tavsiye etmem。 。。。more

ari ，

"Gott ist der Schmerz der Todesfurcht。"- Kiríllow， Alexéj Nílowitsch"Warum erwarten alle von mir etwas， was sie von anderen nicht erwarten？ Warum soll ich ertragen， was niemand erträgt， und freiwillig eine Last auf mich nehmen， die niemand tragen kann？" - Nikolái Wséwolodowitsch"Ich bin ein Clown; aber ich will nicht， dass Sie， die bessere Hälfte meines Ich， ein Clown seien！ Verstehen Sie mich？"- Pjotr Stepánowitsch "Gott ist der Schmerz der Todesfurcht。"- Kiríllow， Alexéj Nílowitsch"Warum erwarten alle von mir etwas， was sie von anderen nicht erwarten？ Warum soll ich ertragen， was niemand erträgt， und freiwillig eine Last auf mich nehmen， die niemand tragen kann？" - Nikolái Wséwolodowitsch"Ich bin ein Clown; aber ich will nicht， dass Sie， die bessere Hälfte meines Ich， ein Clown seien！ Verstehen Sie mich？"- Pjotr Stepánowitsch 。。。more

Randy Rios ，

I was stuck between giving this book a “4” or a “5”。 I have previously read “Crime and Punishment” and The Idiot”。 In my estimation “Demons” is significantly better than “The Idiot” both both stylistically and philosophically， but not quite as good as C&P which is masterful in both regards。 While philosophically I believe Demons is just as insightful and powerful as C&P， stylistically the pace is not as consistent。 The first 200 pages are a slog （though rather important to the novels themes）， bu I was stuck between giving this book a “4” or a “5”。 I have previously read “Crime and Punishment” and The Idiot”。 In my estimation “Demons” is significantly better than “The Idiot” both both stylistically and philosophically， but not quite as good as C&P which is masterful in both regards。 While philosophically I believe Demons is just as insightful and powerful as C&P， stylistically the pace is not as consistent。 The first 200 pages are a slog （though rather important to the novels themes）， but eventually the narrative picks up。 The last 200 pages are so jam packed you won’t want to put it down。If you enjoyed the major themes of C&P， you will no doubt be at home in Demons。 The biggest differences being while C&P focuses on the psychological （personal） ramifications of Nihilism， Demons zooms out to analyze the political ramifications。 The reader watches as Materialism， Rationalism， Socialism， and the like infect a small Russian town and wait anxiously as things go south。While not his most well paced book， I think Demons is severely underrated。 Dostoevsky masterfully paints the causal relationship between the Middle Aged liberal academics of the 1840s who inherited the Western ideas of French Utopianism and socialism and the young radicals of the 1860s who are hell bent on destroying the institutions of Russia by taking these theories to their logical conclusion。 The characters are split between these two groups and the older liberals are shocked as their philosophical （and biological） children put to practice these academic philosophies， often at disastrous costs。 Dostoevsky reminds us， that we shouldn’t be surprised when “academic” ideas are taken to their logical and often violent conclusions。 Both a harrowing prediction of what the Bolsheviks would do to his country 45 years after this book was written， and a timely commentary on our present dialectic in the western countries in the 21st Century。 。。。more

Emma ，

Il est long， mais en vrai il est cool

Adrianna ，

Po wielu przemyśleniach i mniej lub bardziej pobieżnych badaniach oraz doczytywaniu zagubionych w moim wydaniu fragmentów stwierdzam， że to niezwykła książka。 Piękna i straszna， a jednocześnie miejscami po prostu prześmieszna， ku memu przerażeniu。 Oczywiście najbardziej fascynujące są studia charakterów， zwłaszcza Stawrogina， ale i wszystkich innych， o każdym można by wiele napisać。 Równie interesujące były rozważania o socjalizmie， rewolucji i słowianofilach。 Dostojewski napisał to na długo prz Po wielu przemyśleniach i mniej lub bardziej pobieżnych badaniach oraz doczytywaniu zagubionych w moim wydaniu fragmentów stwierdzam， że to niezwykła książka。 Piękna i straszna， a jednocześnie miejscami po prostu prześmieszna， ku memu przerażeniu。 Oczywiście najbardziej fascynujące są studia charakterów， zwłaszcza Stawrogina， ale i wszystkich innych， o każdym można by wiele napisać。 Równie interesujące były rozważania o socjalizmie， rewolucji i słowianofilach。 Dostojewski napisał to na długo przed rewolucją， a można nabrać wrażenia， że wszystkiemu przyglądał się z boku。Do tego nihilizm， boży szaleńcy， paranoja i lęk。 。。。more

Piyangie ，

“Strike me dead， the track has vanished， Well， what now？ We’ve lost the way， Demons have bewitched our horses， Led us in the wilds astray。"A。 Pushkin。This poem by Alexander Pushkin， quoted in the epilogue， provides an excellent preamble to the story。 Devils or also called Demons or Possessed， is Dostoevsky's platform to address political and moral nihilism of his day。 Dostoevsky saw the damage both these concepts were doing to society。 Political nihilism was paving the way to the destruction of “Strike me dead， the track has vanished， Well， what now？ We’ve lost the way， Demons have bewitched our horses， Led us in the wilds astray。"A。 Pushkin。This poem by Alexander Pushkin， quoted in the epilogue， provides an excellent preamble to the story。 Devils or also called Demons or Possessed， is Dostoevsky's platform to address political and moral nihilism of his day。 Dostoevsky saw the damage both these concepts were doing to society。 Political nihilism was paving the way to the destruction of the established structure of governance while moral nihilism was unsettling the established conventional behaviors and beliefs。 Dostoevsky was not a prig， but he was an anti-nihilist。 He saw nihilism as a dangerous concept that will destruct the future of Russia。 Dostoevsky was a believer， but he was liberal minded toward the atheists。 However， he was positively antagonistic towards nihilism as can be observed in the story。 He was cynical towards these moral and political nihilists and saw them as misguided enthusiasts whose idea of reform was the destruction of established political and social institutions along with the accepted social values and principles。 To Dostoevsky， they were the seeds of anarchy。 Dostoevsky employs five main characters to weave his story and establish his point。 We first meet Stepan Trofimovich， a liberal idealist。 He was once a celebrated professor whose liberal ideas have unwittingly contributed to the cultivation of nihilism in his younger audiences。 His liberal ideas take root in both his son， Pyotr， and Nikolai Stavrogin， the son of his benefactress。 Stepan plays a large role in the story， both seen and unseen。 His liberal ideas go through the test of time and Dostoevsky shows that the aged Stepan doesn't share the same views as the young Stepan。 And what is more？ Dostoevsky also shows that while both Stepan’s "students"， Pyotr and Nikolai， embrace nihilistic ideals， their convictions differ from one another。 Nikolai Stavrogin is the chosen hero of the story。 He is an intelligent， handsome， strong， and fearless atheist， who， though outwardly refined， is morally decayed with his nonbelief in good or evil。 Dostoevsky portrays Nikolai with such a psychological intensity exposing the innermost cruelty of a man of intellect。 Both Pyotr Stepanovich and Ivan Shatov， the two conflicting characters， are disillusioned by Nikolai。 Pyotr sees him as the perfect figurehead for a socialist revolutionary movement， and he tries to lure Nikolai to his camp。 Shatov sees him as one who can inspire Russia to a "Christian regeneration"。 Dostoevsky shows that Nikolai is nothing but a hypocrite， who is waving between the two ends， belief and nonbelief， as it suits him。 （The censored chapter "At Tikhon's" which was luckily included in my edition establishes this point well。）Pyotr Stepanovich is the driving force of the story。 The entire action of the story is revolved around him。 He is the antagonist， a shrewd man who is skilled in manipulating and monopolizing others to achieve his idealistic ends。 Pyotr belongs to a secret society that seeks to overthrow the established government and its governance structure。 Their intention is “systematically undermining the foundations， systematically destroying society and all principles; with the idea of nonplussing everyone and making hay of everything， and then， when society was tottering， sick and out of joint， cynical and skeptical though filled with an intense eagerness for self-preservation and for some guiding idea， suddenly to seize it in their hands， raising the standard of revolt and relying on a complete network of quintets， which were actively， meanwhile， gathering recruits and seeking out the weak spots which could be attacked。” In other words， the sole intention of these revolutionists is to create mayhem and do all possible evil to outrage society into a general uprising against the government and its established political and social institutions。 Pyotr claims that his revolutionary movement is guided by communist values， but Dostoevsky shows that he was only a misguided fanatic and that he and his fellow revolutionists have nothing to do with socialism。 Ivan Shatov is the believer。 He is Dostoevsky's voice in the story。 A former nihilist himself， he has turned to become a passionate defender of Russia's "Christian heritage"。 But Shatov painfully realizes that it isn't easy to be of faith and survive in a degenerating society。 Shatov is the opposing force of Nikolai and Pyotr， but he is outmatched by them。 Dostoevsky is addressing many questions throughout the story。 Stepan is representing the 1840s liberal idealists， who were the first to shoot against faith and beliefs。 This baton was next taken by the nihilists， two decades later， in the 1860s。 They were taking further steps toward the degeneration of society。 Pyotr represents the nihilists。 Dostoevsky shows that this isn't socialism， nor is it progress。 It is mere fanaticism and anarchy。 Then Dostoevsky goes to show that even the moral and political nihilists are divided in their convictions， as was shown through Nikolai and Pyotr。 Nikolai's and Pyotr's ideas don't go hand in hand。 Their ambitions differ。 Nikolai has no desire for a change of governance like Pyotr。 The present condition of life is good for Nikolai as a landowner himself and as an influential wealthy mother behind。 And in the middle of all this moral corruption stands those of faith， friendless and vulnerable as Shatov。 Shatov's death is caused by Pyotr's hand。 And what is more？ Even though Pyotr's accomplices get punished， Pyotr doesn't。 What Dostoevsky was driving at with these incidents cannot be fully fathomed。 But I couldn't help wondering whether he was making a gloomy prediction for the future of Russia。 It almost seems that Dostoevsky saw that， in the name of socialism， anarchy， which eventually turns into despotism， establishing itself， suppressing the voice of those with opposing views， and Christian heritage being supplanted by nihilistic idealism。 Devils is， undoubtedly， the most brutally written work by Dostoevsky。 The fiery and intense psychological portrayal of all the characters made the reading quite hard to endure at times。 But what is interesting is that I was both shocked and fascinated at the same time。 Such opposite emotions can be roused only by a masterpiece。 And alongside Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov， Devils is a masterpiece written by an unparalleled genius。More of my reviews can be found at http://piyangiejay。com/ 。。。more

Roberto D。 ，

BOOK REVIEW"The Possessed" or "Demons" or "The Devils" by Fyodor Dostoevsky"The Possessed" （Garnett Translation） or "Demons" （P。 and Volokhonsky） or "The Devils" （Other Translation） is the third major novel by Fyodor Dostoevsky， first serialized via The Russian Messenger from the years 1871 through 1872， and published in its full book form on the same year it finished serialization。 This novel is about the Prisoner Stavrogin and his cahoots with other Revolutionaries Verkhovensky and Kirillov， w BOOK REVIEW"The Possessed" or "Demons" or "The Devils" by Fyodor Dostoevsky"The Possessed" （Garnett Translation） or "Demons" （P。 and Volokhonsky） or "The Devils" （Other Translation） is the third major novel by Fyodor Dostoevsky， first serialized via The Russian Messenger from the years 1871 through 1872， and published in its full book form on the same year it finished serialization。 This novel is about the Prisoner Stavrogin and his cahoots with other Revolutionaries Verkhovensky and Kirillov， who all help spark a revolution in their locale。 This novel is described by American novelist Joyce Carol Oates as Dostoevsky's most confused and violent novel。 As this novel does discuss the philosophy of violence and lawlessness。 This novel also explores the philosophies of nihilism and its descendant-philosophy， Moral Nihilism， on the questions on whether or not to kill for the best of the world is of the essence。MY THOUGHTS:Out of all the Dostoevsky's 4 major works， this was his most confusing as well as his most ambiguously-toned novel。 This is also the novel that I understood the very least given by how sparse the details of this novel really is。Though this novel not only gave me a sense of dread but also did opened my eyes somehow， to the pleas that most of the people suffering on the hands of injustice， and as all of them deal with the apathy of those from above goes to show my dismantling faith for the justice system is， I really feel so overwhelmed by this novel maybe I should've read this novel over the course of a few days than just 3 days because I felt that I could've got out more from this novel。 Still a great Dostoevsky read but I'd recommend "Crime and Punishment" and "The Idiot"， all beginner novels to Dostoevsky first before this novel。 One must have an idea of Nihilism and what suffering is before reading this work， at the very least。 。。。more

Tanmay Jadhav ，

An excellent commentary on nihilism and hedonism after the liberation of surfs in Russia！ Very relevant to the xenophobic subliminal revolution that seems to be happening today and eerily similar to the Lenin revolution that happened 50 years after the release of this book。

Pinky 2。0 ，

Do not read this book unless you are a Dostoevsky completionist。 It's dull， long with the grandiose dialogues being very few even if they may as well be his best。 Do not read this book unless you are a Dostoevsky completionist。 It's dull， long with the grandiose dialogues being very few even if they may as well be his best。 。。。more

Ariel ，

Un libro difícil de leer， denso， pesado， pero， fascinante。 No lean el estudio que abre el libro porque cuenta detalles importantes del mismo y su trama， hasta que hallan terminado de leer la historia。

Muyou Li ，

Intriguing story with explorative philosophical discussions carried out by uncanny characters。

Francisco Reichenberger ，

Espectacular， qué decir。 Terminé de leerlo en。。。 ¿2020？ Reseña pendiente。

HA ，

dnf @ 66%

Fromlake ，

Per me leggere Dostoevskij è sempre una traversata nel deserto。 Impresa affascinante ma complicata， un viaggio di cui non si capisce bene quale sia la meta。 Ma quando arrivi e ti volti indietro， improvvisamente ti sembra di riconoscere il percorso e con esso， forse， anche il senso del viaggio。Come in questo romanzo， sullo sfondo del quale si intrecciano due aspetti: le tematiche filosofiche tipiche di Dostoevskij e le vicende politiche dell’epoca。Proprio quest’ultimo aspetto mi ha un po’ confuso Per me leggere Dostoevskij è sempre una traversata nel deserto。 Impresa affascinante ma complicata， un viaggio di cui non si capisce bene quale sia la meta。 Ma quando arrivi e ti volti indietro， improvvisamente ti sembra di riconoscere il percorso e con esso， forse， anche il senso del viaggio。Come in questo romanzo， sullo sfondo del quale si intrecciano due aspetti: le tematiche filosofiche tipiche di Dostoevskij e le vicende politiche dell’epoca。Proprio quest’ultimo aspetto mi ha un po’ confuso。 Infatti il racconto della cellula rivoluzionaria di stampo nichilista organizzata da Petr Verchovenskij mi sembrava un po’ debole se visto a sé stante。 Ma se lo si legge alla luce delle caratteristiche dei singoli personaggi， tratteggiati con la maestria tipica dell’autore， la trama assume decisamente una diversa rilevanza e si inquadra in quella che è la filosofia di Dostoevskij。Il quale， nel suo percorso di ricerca mistica e filosofica， arriva all’estremo di ipotizzare un uomo che non crede in Dio fino a porsi “al di là del bene e del male”。 Per questo tipo di uomo non esistono azioni buone o cattive， giuste o sbagliate。 Quest’uomo è Stavrogin， amorale ed annoiato dalla vita。 Dotato di fascino e grande affabulatore， incanta tutti quelli che conosce e che finiscono invariabilmente per pendere dalle sue labbra。 Un burattinaio che sta sullo sfondo e gioca con le vite altrui。Come con quella del nichilista Petr， uomo cinico ed insensibile， succube di Stavrogin al punto di non esitare a mettere in pratica le sue idee， con effetti devastanti。O come con le vite di Satov， che cerca con difficoltà di allontanarsi dall’organizzazione nichilista， e di Kirillov， la cui visione negativa della vita lo porterà a conseguenze estreme。In questo romanzo Dostoevskij ci fa scoprire le forze che fremono con impazienza dietro l’apparente staticità della società russa del tempo。 Forze non sempre limpide， spesso contraddittorie e irragionevoli al punto di commettere azioni aberranti。Un romanzo complesso ma a mio avviso molto bello， che partendo da considerazioni di stretta attualità politica finisce per toccare i temi fondamentali della vita così cari a Dostoevskij。 。。。more

Gus_3751 ，

عميقة عميقة عميقة وممتعة جداماهذا الإبداع يا دوستويفسكي لا تزال تبهرنا ب رواياتك العميقة الحقيقية الممثلة لواقعنا

au ，

STOP volume 1 capitolo 3 sezione 3

Mary ，

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it， click here。 A obra é resumida a um excerto do segundo evangelho do S。 Lucas， VIII， 32-37。Vou então colocar a conclusão que cheguei porque ela toda é resumida em poucas linhas da Bíblia。（Leiam o excerto antes de ler o seguinte para compreender na totalidade）O demónio do homem que sai dele é passa para os porcos é a representação de Stepan， e os demónios são as suas ideas revolucionárias que passaram para Nikolai e Piotr。Consequentemente as ideias cresceram dentro deles （por culpa do niilismo e ateísmo）， e es A obra é resumida a um excerto do segundo evangelho do S。 Lucas， VIII， 32-37。Vou então colocar a conclusão que cheguei porque ela toda é resumida em poucas linhas da Bíblia。（Leiam o excerto antes de ler o seguinte para compreender na totalidade）O demónio do homem que sai dele é passa para os porcos é a representação de Stepan， e os demónios são as suas ideas revolucionárias que passaram para Nikolai e Piotr。Consequentemente as ideias cresceram dentro deles （por culpa do niilismo e ateísmo）， e espalharam se para o resto do grupo revolucionário que representam os porcos que acabaram por não ter controlo nas suas ideias e acabaram por se auto-destruir a eles mesmos e à cidade onde viviam， representando a parte em que os porcos se atiram do SEU PRÓPRIO desfiladeiro e se afogam。A conclusão mais concreta que cheguei foi que não é possível mudarmos a sociedade/o que queremos 。 Por culpa dos demónios。 （ideias niilista neste caso mas no fundo abrange ideias extremas ou mesmo até medíocres mas que contém muita intensidade）。 。。。more

Braden ，

This was a long and complicated novel。 At first it was hard to keep track of all the side characters and who is socialist， who is religious， who is mean or nice， and so on。 But in the end it's a really haunting， tragic story that is engrossing。 It also has Dostoevsky's usual humor and introspective prose。 This was a long and complicated novel。 At first it was hard to keep track of all the side characters and who is socialist， who is religious， who is mean or nice， and so on。 But in the end it's a really haunting， tragic story that is engrossing。 It also has Dostoevsky's usual humor and introspective prose。 。。。more

Farah ，

"THERE WILL BE ENTIRE FREEDOM WHEN IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE WHETHER ONE LIVES OR DOES NOT LIVE。”This is the truest thing I’ve ever read。 This to me is the best and most accurate definition of freedom。 The most well articulated one。 What is more powerful than there being no difference whether one lives or does not live？ What is more freeing。 No necessity， no desire， nothing。 Pure indifference。 Truly “that is the goal to everything” Kirillov。 Never have I hated a character as much as I did Pyotr "THERE WILL BE ENTIRE FREEDOM WHEN IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE WHETHER ONE LIVES OR DOES NOT LIVE。”This is the truest thing I’ve ever read。 This to me is the best and most accurate definition of freedom。 The most well articulated one。 What is more powerful than there being no difference whether one lives or does not live？ What is more freeing。 No necessity， no desire， nothing。 Pure indifference。 Truly “that is the goal to everything” Kirillov。 Never have I hated a character as much as I did Pyotr Stepanovich。 The way this man ruins the life of every person he encounters is insane。 His delusional perception of himself and his abilities TO CHANGE AND SAVE RUSSIA AND START THE REVOLUTION is so frustrating and painful to see because it cost the rest of the characters so much。I felt so bad for Shatov。 I desperately wanted him to live， he was finally happy， but nooo Pyotr Verkhovensky has to live up to his reputation and be the most deranged heartless and cruel person ever。 The way he manipulates EVERYONE around him all for the sake of his personal agenda and plan。 I feel serious hatred towards him。 On the other hand I love the narrator so much， Shatov too， Kirillov and even Stepan Trofimovich surprisingly。 I don’t think he is as terrible as people make him out to be， and I wish it didn’t have to end like that for him， I wish him and Varvara Petrovna had a happy ending so that at least one character in this book has one！ It’s so sad。 Even Stravogin dies！ I wasn’t expecting that at all， I didn’t think he could ever kill himself， he loved himself too much。 A lot of people die in the book and all of it can be traced back to Pyotr Stepanovich。 Maybe that’s Stepan Trofimovitch’s worst mistake， creating such a terrorist。 He ruined everyone’s life and caused the death of at least 10 people。 Wait let’s count them:ShatovKirillov in a way FedkaLebyadkinMarya LebyadkinTheir maid tooLizaveta StavroginShatov’s wife Shatov’s illegitimate son so Stravogin’sIdk if I forgot someone but all of these people were directly or indirectly killed by Pyotr。 I hate him so much。Dostoyevsky does an amazing job at showing how insane people can become under the influence of an idea， and how easily manipulated some people are。 It’s crazy to think that all the events that happened in this town were because of Pyotr’s idea of shaking the Russian society and all that。 That’s how dangerous an idea can be in the mind of a heartless， morally corrupted and deranged individual。 Especially one who’s great at manipulation。 All of this， all of those deaths happened because of that one idea。 All of this is accentuated when we realize that this whole story is based on the 1869 murder by of Ivanov （thus Ivan Shatov ig？） by Nechaev， equally as deranged a political fanatic as our Pyotr Stepanovich。 It’s all so fascinating though， how those 5 men were so blinded by that idea， so easily manipulated into committing those atrocities， and it’s even scary because those individuals exist in our societies in large quantities。 How can people be so easily manipulated？？？？ And so blinded， by an idea， to the obvious reality？ It all fascinates me。The book was also funny in many parts， it was overall very enjoyable especially the dialogues with Kirillov。 As always I’m gonna miss the characters after spending an entire month with them every day。 And this also concludes the 4 big Dostoyevsky， I’ve officially read all of them。 I feel sad。 I will never experience one for the first time ever again， that’s it， I depraved myself of that experience by the age of 19。 Could’ve waited a bit longer。 But I know it will be an amazing experience to re-read them， especially crime and punishment and tbk because I read them at a young age。 Well that’s it， a very unstructured review because idc anymore I made my account private so it’s just me here :D 。。。more

Libriletti ，

Voto: 7+Parto dal presupposto che io non sono veramente nessuno per poter giudicare e dare un voto ai libri di Dostoevskij o di altri maestri della letteratura come lui。 Detto ciò， in queste righe esprimo come sempre il mio parere personale， quello che ho provato durante la lettura e quello che ho e non ho apprezzato。Da questo libro mi aspettavo grandi cose， invece purtroppo finora è il libro di Dostoevskij che mi è piaciuto meno。 L'ho trovato molto pesante e spesso non avevo voglia di leggerlo。 Voto: 7+Parto dal presupposto che io non sono veramente nessuno per poter giudicare e dare un voto ai libri di Dostoevskij o di altri maestri della letteratura come lui。 Detto ciò， in queste righe esprimo come sempre il mio parere personale， quello che ho provato durante la lettura e quello che ho e non ho apprezzato。Da questo libro mi aspettavo grandi cose， invece purtroppo finora è il libro di Dostoevskij che mi è piaciuto meno。 L'ho trovato molto pesante e spesso non avevo voglia di leggerlo。 Di Dostoevskij amo sempre le parti più riflessive， in cui esce tutto il genio e l'originale dell'autore， e secondo me in questo testo sono ben poche。 C'è tanta azione， in alcuni punti troppa， in altri poca， ci sono alcune situazioni a cui si dedicano pagine e pagine e poi non vengono più riprese。Insomma， non posso dire che il libro non mi sia piaciuto perché alcuni punti li ho trovati molto interessanti e apprezzabili， però purtroppo non è nemmeno un libro che mi è piaciuto particolarmente。 Mi dispiace。 。。。more

Afsharcj ，

چرت و پرت بوداین چی بود داستا جان

Angela Saba ，

Dopo aver letto “Il Giocatore” ho capito （come altre volte） che Dostoevsky va letto e riletto tutto， così dopo “L’Idiota” mi sono imbarcata nei “Demoni” con un compagno di letture。 I Demoni è uno di quei libri che ti si appiccica addosso， che ti centillini pagina su pagina， che arrivata a pagina 323 riprendi dall’inizio， perché ti rendi conto che ti sei perso delle cose nel fluire delle parole， un libro di cui vorresti essere capace di cogliere tutto， tutto quello per cui Dostoevsky l’ha scritto Dopo aver letto “Il Giocatore” ho capito （come altre volte） che Dostoevsky va letto e riletto tutto， così dopo “L’Idiota” mi sono imbarcata nei “Demoni” con un compagno di letture。 I Demoni è uno di quei libri che ti si appiccica addosso， che ti centillini pagina su pagina， che arrivata a pagina 323 riprendi dall’inizio， perché ti rendi conto che ti sei perso delle cose nel fluire delle parole， un libro di cui vorresti essere capace di cogliere tutto， tutto quello per cui Dostoevsky l’ha scritto。 Non entro nella trama， ma ho amato la scaltra freddezza e lucidità di Nikolaj Stavrogin， la concretezza e il pragmatismo di Varvara Petrovna， la purezza di testa e di cuore di Satov， le fragilità， l’inconcludenza e le vanità di Stepan Trofimovic; ho odiato la cattiveria inutile e perdente di Petr Verchovenskij。Bellissimi certi personaggi minori sullo sfondo ma essenziali come Aleksej Egoric， Mavrikij， Liza， Von Lembke etc。 Affresco di costume， ma non solo: i fermenti che animavano la Russia di quegli anni sono tutti lì espressi in modo romanzato e mirabile。 Adoro poi la generosità con cui Dostoevsky cita e pubblicizza costantemente altri scrittori suscitando nuove curiosità， tipo Herzen （e mi viene in mente un articolo su Herzen di Piperno letto questa estate）。 I motivi ricorrenti come la Madonna Sistina di Dresda， un quadro che poi scopri essere stato amato da Dostoevsky。 Ma soprattutto come conosce bene l’abisso umano Dostoevsky…。。 insommaUn classico imperdibile。Da leggere e rileggere 。。。more

vincent alexis ☆ ，

wow。

Reference

google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Demons

hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=Demons&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft

The British Library https://bll01.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/search?query=any,contains,Demons&tab=LibraryCatalog&search_scope=Not_BL_Suppress&vid=44BL_INST:BLL01&lang=en&offset=0