Books that changed your life

Chief of SIS wrote:

trevanian wrote:

CRIME & PUNISHMENT - first time (maybe only time) I ever enjoyed a book I was forced to read in school. Usually the main character in stuff I write is named Rod or Roderick because of Rodya.

Fantastic read. But I must say that 'Demons' is a stronger Dostoevsky novel in my opinion. The revolutionary themes and the epic climax is pretty good. Pick it up if you get the chance.

I adore Dostoevsky's DEMONS. I'm going to attempt a loose screenplay adaptation of DEMONS after I'm finished with the screenplay I'm working on now.

But the best Dostoevsky novel? THE BROTHERS KARAMAZOV, no question.

I like the movie version, with Shatner. ;)

But generally I can't do Russian novels for some reason. They always tend to be too overwhelmingly depressing for my tastes. What's odd is I quite enjoy both Rand and Asimov, Russian authors who emigrated to the States.

Then again, you can't fault Russian culture for its completely bleak outlook, given that nothing good has ever happened in Russia, ever.

On the Beach, Neville Shute

got me thinking, always a dangerous thing.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

nothing good has ever happened in Russia, ever.

Er, vodka?

There is no reasonable way in which Dostoevsky's outlook on the world can be considered bleak.

Dostoevskii may have been an optimist in some sense, but his presentation was certainly bleak. Nightmarish even.

I believe he was great optometrist.

I can't see that.

Can't say I ever walked away from Dostoyevsky feeling upbeat about the world and my place in it. That's sort've like trying to say you find the works of Kafka reassuring.

If you read to feel good about the world around you I'd recommend Thomas the Tank Engine or lobotomy as more reliable alternatives.

Avarice wrote:

If you read to feel good about the world around you I'd recommend Thomas the Tank Engine or lobotomy as more reliable alternatives.

Ha, no that's not why I read, but I believe I was trying to respond to the idea that Dostoyevsky was an optimist. My original point was that I can't really stand Russian authors because it's sort've ridiculous to spend all that time in novels that long whose final message is so overwhelmingingly depressing. The whole culture is like that. The books have to be about two to four hundred pages too long and the movies about 60 to 100 minutes too long and the final message, the characters joyless, and the overall sense just absolutely crushing. Again, I chalk it up to the fact that Russian history is basically one awful tragedy after another, along with constant oppression.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

Avarice wrote:

If you read to feel good about the world around you I'd recommend Thomas the Tank Engine or lobotomy as more reliable alternatives.

Again, I chalk it up to the fact that Russian history is basically one awful tragedy after another, along with constant oppression.

Good thing Putin's on the job to put all that right.

Harmsway wrote:

Chief of SIS wrote:

trevanian wrote:

CRIME & PUNISHMENT - first time (maybe only time) I ever enjoyed a book I was forced to read in school. Usually the main character in stuff I write is named Rod or Roderick because of Rodya.

Fantastic read. But I must say that 'Demons' is a stronger Dostoevsky novel in my opinion. The revolutionary themes and the epic climax is pretty good. Pick it up if you get the chance.

I adore Dostoevsky's DEMONS. I'm going to attempt a loose screenplay adaptation of DEMONS after I'm finished with the screenplay I'm working on now.

But the best Dostoevsky novel? THE BROTHERS KARAMAZOV, no question.

The Brothers K does deserve a reread. I read 'notes from the undergound', 'crime and punishment,' 'demons,' and 'brothers k' back to back to back to back. As you can imagine I was pretty tired and depressed by the end.

Ed Tom Kowalsky wrote:

Dostoevskii may have been an optimist in some sense, but his presentation was certainly bleak. Nightmarish even.

Dostoevsky's work has nightmarish and harrowing moments (he is unwilling to turn a blind eye to the tragedies of human existence), but for the most part is laced with humor (sometimes even tipping into outright farce) and a great affection for human beings. It usually carries a strong redemptive arc, grounded in a broader sense of redemptive history.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

That's sort've like trying to say you find the works of Kafka reassuring.

Kafka was terrified of the world. Dostoevsky loved the world. Big difference.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

My original point was that I can't really stand Russian authors because it's sort've ridiculous to spend all that time in novels that long whose final message is so overwhelmingingly depressing.

This painting of Russian authors with such a broad stroke is really quite silly, as if there isn't any difference between Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Chekhov, and Tolstoy. It's like claiming that Tarantino, Kubrick, and Spielberg should all be lumped in together just because they're American.

And the idea that Russian literature and art is uniformly severe and depressing is also very misleading. The Russians are first-rate humorists.

And yet Tarkovsky seemed to think a lot of any individual's art came out of his culture and his experience with that culture, which would make the Russian Aspect something you can't extricate from the artist, at least some of the time.

I'll try to find the quote this weekend, it was in an interview in that Danny Peary book on SF films that OMNI put out in the 80s.

Books that have changed my life?

Well firstly there is the Adventures of Paddington - when I was younger I took a very long time to learn how to read, which was related to the fact I had an astigmatism. I couldn't see, and thus couldn't learn to read or write the basics ... but we found that out just before I went to school. Not that it helped a lot because I was in struggle town for a fair bit.

However my dad, my dear old dad, decided I was going to read. He stopped reading to me and made me read to him. The Adventures of Paddington was basically the first 'big' book I read by myself. I struggled through it and through that I learnt to love reading.

Now I'm a fairly good reader (I like to think), and I am taking two seperate English courses at school (and yet I can't spell ... bahaha) and in general find books highly enjoyable.

So I like to think that book changed my life and helped made me into the kid I am today.

Naturally there have been other significant books but this is the one I hold closest to my heart.

... I'll grab my coat :)

trevanian wrote:

And yet Tarkovsky seemed to think a lot of any individual's art came out of his culture and his experience with that culture, which would make the Russian Aspect something you can't extricate from the artist, at least some of the time.

What the "Russian Aspect" looks like for each Russian artist is different, just as you wouldn't say Spielberg and Tarantino are processing American culture in the same ways. You can't interact with Tarkovsky the same way you would with Nabokov. The way FS has been painting the Russian-ness of Russian authors is that they are uniformly severe and bleak, which ignores the comedy and warmth one finds in much Russian storytelling.

Harmsway wrote:

Ed Tom Kowalsky wrote:

Dostoevskii may have been an optimist in some sense, but his presentation was certainly bleak. Nightmarish even.

Dostoevsky's work has nightmarish and harrowing moments (he is unwilling to turn a blind eye to the tragedies of human existence), but for the most part is laced with humor (sometimes even tipping into outright farce) and a great affection for human beings. It usually carries a strong redemptive arc, grounded in a broader sense of redemptive history.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

That's sort've like trying to say you find the works of Kafka reassuring.

Kafka was terrified of the world. Dostoevsky loved the world. Big difference.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

My original point was that I can't really stand Russian authors because it's sort've ridiculous to spend all that time in novels that long whose final message is so overwhelmingingly depressing.

This painting of Russian authors with such a broad stroke is really quite silly, as if there isn't any difference between Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Chekhov, and Tolstoy. It's like claiming that Tarantino, Kubrick, and Spielberg should all be lumped in together just because they're American.

And the idea that Russian literature and art is uniformly severe and depressing is also very misleading. The Russians are first-rate humorists.

True. My own favorites are Gogol (just about anything by him) and Pushkin's Eugene Onegin (make sure to get a good translation--the best is by James Fagle or Fagles).

Well, it comes down to the fact that I've never enjoyed a Russian film or book, and the reason why in each case was the bleakness. So, yes, Tarkovsky isn't Tolstoy, but the reason I enjoy neither is that they both go on too long and its all so depressing.

Chief of SIS wrote:

I read 'notes from the undergound', 'crime and punishment,' 'demons,' and 'brothers k' back to back to back to back. As you can imagine I was pretty tired and depressed by the end.

I admire your stamina. I recommend reading Dostoevsky's shorter fiction, ala THE DOUBLE and THE ETERNAL HUSBAND, as well as some of his short stories ("The Dream of a Ridiculous Man" is a splendid entry point into discussing Dostoevsky's vision of the world). They're not so heavy. I have nothing but praise for THE BROTHERS KARAMAZOV and DEMONS, but they're dense and long.

Walker Percy--who I name-dropped earlier in this thread in reference to his book of essays, THE MESSAGE IN THE BOTTLE--is strongly influenced by Dostoevsky, but writes from an American point of view. Of his novels, I love THE SECOND COMING and LANCELOT, especially, though conventional wisdom holds that THE MOVIEGOER is the best. He's devilishly funny.

Gogol and Dostoevskii are certainly different writers, but they cannot escape their Russianness any more than Spielberg and Kubrick can escape their Americanness. There is a distinct Russian literature, and given Russia's past--and arguably its present--that literature tends to the grim and morbid side, even when laced with humor and empathy.

Sure. But that humour and humanity tends to offset the grimness of much Russian literature. If it weren't there, I could understand Sykes's objections.

Sharky wrote:

Sure. But that humour and humanity tends to offset the grimness of much Russian literature. If it weren't there, I could understand Sykes's objections.

Humour's one of those incredibly subjective things, so I guess I just wasn't seeing what was there. I don't deny there is humanity there, but it's a kind of generalized collective sense of humanity, no strong central focus. I'm not saying Russian literature is BAD, no way, it's certainly well written by any standard, I'm just saying that if I have a choice between a Russian novel or, say, an Anlgo-originated novel, I wouldn't be choosing Russian, for the reasons outlined above.

The Wind In The Willows by Kenneth Graham