The Brothers Karamazov

This is one of the few books of Dostojevski that still are readable. And what a feast! This book is as "grand" as much of the other great work of D. but, at least here you can find a story that you can follow till the end. And what a beautifull story, thrilling till the end, and touching the very escence of being human.Is eigenlijk een van de weinige boeken van Dostojevski die nog echt overeind blijft, maar dan wel ineens een topper (en een klepper). Het is even breedvoerig (zoniet nog meer) dan de anderen, maar er steekt een verhaallijn in die tot op het eind wordt gevolgd. Stilistisch bovendien prachtig breeduit vertellend. De figuren worden bijna allemaal goed uitgewerkt. Aljosja is duidelijk de hoofdfiguur. En natuurlijk is het verhaal van de Groot-Inquisiteur een klassieker, zij het dat de slavofiele inslag ons westerlingen erg bevreemd.Eerste keer gelezen toen ik 17 jaar was; ik was onmiddellijk gegrepen.

Plot: The main plot is a simple crime tale. The side plots are what makes this book great - every character seems to have his or her own story told, and they all add up to a fascinating study of humanity and society. At times the story takes off for a hundred pages to tell a back story or follow a minor character, which makes it hard to read. Characters: A huge cast, and everybody gets enough attention to be interesting and layered. It is hard to dislike anyone, but equally difficult to truly like someone either. The female characters are stereotyped and grating, however. Style: Very hard to read. This book sprawls and meanders, and it is exhausting. Dostojewsi was paid by the word, and it shows. Plus: Stunning character studies. Minus: Too many words at times. Summary: One of the greatest epics in literary history, but not for a beginner to Russian literature. Or for someone with no stamina.

Welcome to crazy town.

Let me explain the lesson I learned with this book. Do not even think about approaching Dostoyevsky with the idea that you can skim through, have a quick read, knock it off in an afternoon, get the point without too much work. In other words, devote the time and energy to reading Dostoyevsky that he put into the writing.I say this because, contrary to the way I approached The Idiot (and who does that make idiot?), I approached this book with the idea that I would take some time with it. I made sure I knew the characters. I made sure I knew the locations. I made sure I knew the circumstances. And, because of that, I had one of the best reading experiences I have ever, well...experienced.You can read synopses anywhere. I will simply say that this is story of four brothers and their father – the way they interact, the way their lives move forward. There are people you will like, there are people you will dislike, and there are people you will change your mind about whether you like or dislike. In other words, lives that match the way people really are.It seems ludicrous, a recommendation from someone like me for you to read a classic. But there are a lot of "bad" classics out there, and we should all be steered away from them.Do not steer away from this one. Set aside the time; set aside the brainpower. And delve into a fascinating world. (And now, maybe, I better go back and take another look at that book of Dostoyevsky's I gave short shrift.)

I found this to be a bit long and ponderous. Characters were well developed and the main theme of filial interaction after the death of the father of the three brothers was handled well.

Please forgive me a few minutes of gloating over my success at having finished this book. It's been like a millstone around my neck for years now, as I've picked up and put down this book three times now before I finally made it through to the end of the book. It was the only book I have ever put down unfinished because I found it too difficult to continue. So, I type this feeling very proud that I finally, finally finished the book.I must say that this book is nothing like I initially thought it was based on the first 300 pages (my stopping point). What first appears as a religious tome in which the characters intone religious doctrine after doctrine, it turns into quite the murder mystery. Rather than theological in nature, the book fosters a debate on the idea of nature versus nurture in forming personalities. Like Crime and Punishment (one of my favorite books), he also explores the idea of sacrifice.To be sure, one of the most difficult issues to overcome as a reader is the incessant dramatics and theatrics each character uses. The dialogue is unrealistic, as are some of the characters. Several of my fellow book club members felt that each character represented a caricature rather than actual humans because "no one they know would ever talk this way". I personally think this is characteristic of Russian literature in general, so it's not as off-putting as it may be for others. Once I got past the philosophical diatribe, I really enjoyed this book. It was slow reading but worth every page. After each chapter, I was left with more food for thought, so much so that I could not put away the book after I put it down. Even as I write this, more questions come to mind about the fate of the characters. This book has been touted as Dostoyevsky's crowning achievement. While I didn't enjoy it as much as Crime and Punishment, Dostoyevsky gives his audience much to think about. In fact, I suspect that someone, if it hasn't already been done, could write a dissertation on the psychology of this book. While someone in present-day U.S. might not be able to relate to the Russian peasant, at the heart of the book is human interactions, greed, love, and family relationships. These are themes which never grow old and are key to the longevity of the book. Like a good relationship, this book is challenging but worth the struggle in the end. I would recommend this book to anyone who likes Russian literature or enjoys stories that discuss the psychology of relationships.

It gets you caught up in it at certain times. Very emotional, though somewhat hard to get into. I loved how it got into Mr. Karamazov's perspective at the beginning. The whole chapters involving the elder are wonderful, in my opinion the best part of the book!

Story of faith and doubt. It also is a story of Russia and the Russian peasant. There is a lot of contrasts in the book. Ivan and Alyosha are opposites. One a man of faith and the other a man of doubts. Dimitri the first born son is a wild, reactive man who is loud in his abusive threats but really in the middle between his two brothers. It is a story of Russia, a story of a dysfunctional family and a story of faith and doubt. I rate it 5 stars because it is very good. I liked Crime and Punishment a bit more but the author considers this his best book. It deserves a reread someday.

Fabulous. A great detective story for one thing. Encompasses so much: why are we alive? what is community? what is justice? how do we know anything?. Argues for both the primacy of religion and the primacy of having a grip on what is real. There was much that I did not understand.

A classic and written by Dostoevsky at the height of his powers. Ahead of its time but also brilliantly captures the 19th century Russian struggle with God's existence as scientific and political changes in thought were rapidly taking place. The characters represent facets of Dostoevsky and Russia: the wicked father, the cad and martyr Dmitri, the atheist, socialist "devil" Ivan, and the angelic, pure Alexei, who has faith in both God and man. Probably a "must read", and lots of great quotes.On Brotherhood:“I love mankind,” he said, “but I am amazed at myself: the more I love mankind in general, the less I love people in particular, that is, individually, as separate persons. In my dreams,” he said, “I often went so far as to think passionately of serving mankind, and, it may be, would really have gone to the cross for people if it were somehow suddenly necessary, and yet I am incapable of living in the same room with anyone for even two days, this I know from experience. As soon as someone is there, close to me, his personality oppresses my self-esteem and restricts my freedom. In twenty-four hours I can begin to hate even the best of men…on the other hand, it has always happened that the more I hate people individually, the more ardent becomes my love for humanity as a whole.”"In order to make the world over anew, people must turn onto a different path psychically. Until one has indeed become brother of all, there will be no brotherhood. No science or self-interest will ever enable people to share their property and their rights among themselves without offense. Each will always think his share too small, and they will keep murmuring, they will envy and destroy one another. ..for everyone now strives most of all to separate his person, wishing to experience the fullness of life within himself, and yet what comes of all his efforts is not the fullness of life but full suicide, for instead of the fullness of self-definition, they fall into complete isolation."Enlightenment:"Filled with rapture, his soul yearned for freedom, space, vastness. Over him the heavenly dome, full of quiet, shining stars, hung boundlessly. From the zenith to the horizon the still-dim Milky Way stretched its double strand. Night, fresh and quiet, almost unstirring, enveloped the earth. The white towers and golden domes of the church gleamed in the sapphire sky. The luxuriant autumn flowers in the flowerbeds near the house had fallen asleep until morning. The silence of the earth seemed to merge with the silence of the heavens, the mystery of earth touched the mystery of the stars…"On the good and evil in man:"It is usually so in life that when there are two opposites one must look for truth in the middle; in the present case it is literally not so. Most likely in the first instance he was sincerely noble, and in the second just as sincerely base. Why? Precisely because we are of a broad, Karamazovian nature – and this is what I’m driving at – capable of containing all possible opposites and of contemplating both abysses at once, the abyss above us, an abyss of lofty ideals, and the abyss beneath us, an abyss of the lowest and foulest degradation."On Love:"I am sorry that I cannot say anything more comforting, for active love is a harsh and fearful thing compared with love in dreams. Love in dreams thirsts for immediate action, quickly performed, and with everyone watching. Indeed, it will go as far as the giving even of one’s life, provided it does not take long but is soon over, as on stage, and everyone is looking on and praising. Whereas active love is labor and perseverance, and for some people, perhaps, a whole science.""“Love is gone, Mitya!” Katya began again, “but what is gone is painfully dear to me. Know that, for all eternity. But now, for one minute, let it be as it might have been,” she prattled with a twisted smile, again looking joyfully in his eyes. “You now love another, I love another, but still I shall love you eternally, and you me, did you know that? Love me, do you hear, love me all your life!” she exclaimed with some sort of almost threatening tremor in her voice."On Man's Inhumanity:"People speak sometimes about the ‘animal’ cruelty of man, but that is terribly unjust and offensive to animals, no animal could ever be so cruel as a man, so artfully, so artistically cruel…I think that if the devil does not exist, and man has therefore created him, he has created him in his own image and likeness."I love this little story..."Once upon a time there was a woman, and she was as wicked as wicked could be, and she died. And not one good deed was left behind her. The devils took her and threw her into a lake of fire. And her guardian angel stood thinking: what good deed of hers can I remember to God? Then he remembered and said to God: once she pulled up an onion and gave it to a beggar woman. And God answered: now take that same onion, hold it out to her in the lake, let her take hold of it, and pull, and if you pull her out of the lake, she can go to paradise, but if the onion breaks, she can stay where she is. The angel ran to the woman and held out the onion to her: here woman, he said, take hold of it and I’ll pull. And he began pulling carefully, and had almost pulled her all the way out, when other sinners in the lake saw her being pulled out and all began holding on to her so as to be pulled out with her. But the woman was wicked as wicked could be, and she began to kick them with her feet: ‘It’s me who’s getting pulled out, not you; it’s my onion, not yours.’ No sooner did she say it than the onion broke. And the woman fell back into the lake and is burning there to this day. And the angel wept and went away."On Religion:"“Listen: if everyone must suffer, in order to buy eternal harmony with their suffering, pray tell me what have children got to do with it? It’s quite incomprehensible why they should have to suffer….answer me: imagine you yourself are building the edifice of human destiny with the object of making people happy in the finale, of giving them peace and rest at last, but for that you must inevitably and unavoidably torture just one tiny creature, that same child who was beating her chest with her little fist, and raise your edifice on the foundation of her unrequited tears – would you agree to be the architect on such conditions? Tell me the truth.”“No, I would not agree,” Alyosha said softly.""And this need for communality of worship is the chief torment of each man individually, and of mankind as a whole, from the beginning of the ages. In the cause of universal worship, they have destroyed each other with the sword. They have made gods and called upon each other: ‘Abandon your gods and come and worship ours, otherwise, death to you and your gods!’ And so it will be until the end of the world, even when all gods have disappeared from the earth: they will still fall down before idols."On remembering:"And so, first of all, let us remember him, gentlemen, all our lives. And even though we may be involved with the most important affairs, achieve distinction or fall into some great misfortune – all the same, let us never forget how good we once felt here, all together, united by such good and kind feelings as made us, too, for the time that we loved the poor boy, perhaps better than we actually are…And even if only one good memory remains with us in our hearts, that alone may serve some day for our salvation."On "Superman":"“…Once mankind has renounced God, one and all (and I believe that this period, analogous to the geological periods, will come), then the entire old world view will fall of itself, without anthropophagy, and, above all, the entire former morality, and everything will be new. People will come together in order to take from life all that it can give, but, of course, for happiness and joy in this world only. Man will be exalted with the spirit of the divine, titanic pride, and then man-god will appear. Man, his will and his science no longer limited, conquering nature every hour, will thereby every hour experience such lofty delight as will replace for him all his former hopes of heavenly delight. Each will know himself utterly mortal, without resurrection, and will accept death proudly and calmly, like a god. Out of pride he will understand that he should not murmur against the momentariness of life, and he will love his brother then without any reward…”"On valuing life:"If I did not believe in life, if I were to lose faith in the woman I love, if I were to lose faith in the order of things, even if I were to become convinced, on the contrary, that everything is a disorderly, damned, and perhaps devilish chaos, if I were struck even by all the horrors of human disillusionment – still I would want to live, and as long as I have bent to this cup, I will not tear myself from it until I’ve drunk it all! "As an aside, the 1958 movie version with Yul Brynner as Dmitri and (ack) William Shatner as Alexei was entertaining. The scenes with Brynner and Maria Schell as Grushenka were in particular good.

The reader’s voice when interpreting the characters is very annoying. I would look for another reader.

I was hooked from the first chapter, despite my spending nearly a year reading it. I picked it up because there was some theology books that referred to conversations and ideas from this volume. It frames various discussions about man and God, especially in light of the new idea of the enlightenment that was gaining popularity at the time of writing. I especially enjoyed the conversation/dream with Satan, Ivan had on the eve of the trial.

Okay, so, I am biased. I generally dislike Russian lit; I particularly dislike Dostoevsky. I dislike Dostoevsky more now than I did before reading this. I will concede that the novel, particularly the last 150 pages has serious literary heft and some crazily beautiful philosophy. This does not, however, make The Brothers Karamazov an enjoyable read. I know that I sound decidedly lazy when I say this, but it's just so darned long! This book could easily have been 300 pages shorter with very little sacrificed. Overall, I can't say it's something I would read again.

Boy, I found Fyodor Dostoevsky's "The Brothers Karamazov" to be a really tough read. (I'm currently working my way through Proust and those novels were conquered much faster than this one.) The prose is really dense and Dostoevsky penchant for repeating made this a difficult read for me.That said, I did enjoy the story of three brothers, Dmitry, Ivan and Aloysha, who traveled very different paths in life after rejection by their father. The father is murdered and Dmitry is accused and the case moves right along to trial. It's an interesting book. I didn't like it as much as other works by Dostoevsky, which I read in college when I had professors pointing out the threads that paralleled what was going on in society as the time. This book felt more like an interesting story.

Excellent novel, one of the 5 books one should read in a lifetime. And about this audiobook, it's great. Great narration, impressions, rhythm, sometimes I forgot that I'm listening a book, feels like reading.

With so many reviews and descriptions of this book, I'll just add my few impressions for what they're worth -- maybe two cents! I thought it was your typically too-long Russian novel; however I found it more interesting and accessible than that other famous work, War and Peace. The manicness of Dmitri, the spiritual struggle of Ivan, and the purity of Alyosha were well-developed as was the stinkiness of their father.As to the length...somebody kills dear ol' dad and, really, who cares. The man was an evil snake. I realize this is a major part of the plot, but I got tired of visiting the scene of the crime over and over. This book could have been just as effective if it had been 200 pages shorter. Now, don't get me wrong, I liked the book for the most part even though I had to draw a Venn diagram to keep all the love convolutions straight. Some parts were downright brilliant, especially when Alyosha tries to aid the family of the boy who bit him and the appeal by Dmitri's attorney. I wish I had the luxury of reading a book of this magnitude without all the interruptions of life and other books sandwiched in (I've been reading this book for a month). Perhaps then I could better appreciate Dostoyevsky's acute attention to detail.

I was reading some reviews of this book and was surprised. This book is funny. It's very funny. None of the reviews said it was funny. It reminds me of Wilde's The Importance of Being Earnest.

 Blimy - that was L O N G!
Not bad, just so very very long. I'm not sure I really understood the necessity for the very long diversions into the meaning of the church and philosophy and so on. I suspect a good editor would have it down to ~ 250 pages, not the 770 I've just ploughed through.
The characters seemed to be in the pantomime mould - not very real - they were all extremes, and not very believable. I wonder if the three brothers were intended as examples of the intellectual (Ivan), the moral man (Alexei) and the pleasure seeker (Dmitri), aspects of character rather than being real characters themselves. In which case this is a morality play of sorts. The pleasure seeker is tried for a crime of passion that he, in fact, did not commit, while the intellectual suffers a nervous breakdown of some regard and end conversing with the devil - having denied the existence of God. (Note, denying God also tends to lead to denying the devil too, just a thought Ivan). Alexei is the only one that comes out with any credit, indicating that is the only true path in life. Can't quite see where the illegitimate son (assuming here) Smerdyakov fits into the morality play, unless it's that the guilty will not prosper.
Just far too long winded for me to really enjoy. I doubt this will be a book I'll come back to.

Since there are so many reviews, I will just post some notes. I found the first 200 or so pages dry and hard to follow. I kept putting the book down and walking away for a while. Then after the murder of the father at exactly halfway, the book really starts to move. The naming is difficult to follow and the playing around with the names can make it hard to follow. My version had lots of references which got annoying because most of them referred to seemingly inconsequential things. Still, I really enjoyed all parts of this book and highly recommend it to anyone who has proper time into invest into it.

i made it only half way through. i could not relate to any of the characters. the action was slow if there was even any action and then all the difference side stories and life stories of each character. just not my cup of tea.

This is indeed, amazing. But no one ever told me it was also hilarious. Extremely readable, compelling and lively, the embedded philosophy is both fascinating and very easy to take. One of the very best books I've ever read.

Well it took me long enough but I finally finished; I did like the writing and the story was well thought out but was sometimes just tooooooooo drawn out for me. My favorite part was actually the characterizations.

Brilliant and enthralling examination of the brothers with a thoroughly Russian feel.

This was my second foray into Dostoevsky, and I wasn't dissapointed. Dostoevsky had a remarkable ability to capture people just as they are. His characters secret motivations are displayed for all to see in a way that is more real than any other author that I have read. Reading Dostoevsky is like looking into a mirror. Every character is so human as to be a reflection of ourselves.

I'm not one to read a book more than once, but for this one I've made an exception--a few times--and I will probably make many more exceptions in the future. This novel is a masterpiece of literature and of philosophy. Dostoyevsky offers one of the most fervent apologetics for Orthodox Christianity, one of the most moving descriptions of the content of the Orthodox Faith, one of the most stirring defenses of its necessity, and one of the most cogent--in fact, the most cogent--refutations of modern atheism ever written, and he does all of this while telling an engaging story about a murder mystery. Dostoyevsky masterfully and beautifully combines the spiritual traditions of the Russian Orthodox Church, the theology of St. Isaac of Syria, his personal life experiences, the teachings of the Fathers of the Optina Monastery, and an amazing storytelling ability to make this book what it is--a prophecy of the 20th century, one of the greatest books ever written and my personal favorite book.

Astonishing work by Dostoevsky, though it does become repetitive. Existential to a fault.

This is a very engaging listen but beware that it edits parts out of the book. This book needed to be parred down, imo, but still, know you aren’t getting the book word for word in this version.

Audio book. Horrible voice of the narrator put me off it.

I wanted to read this book for many many years. I had heard it was one of the greatest books ever written. Once I'd read it I realized it was much more than that. Highest recommendation.

Dostoevsky is probably my favorite author and this is probably my favorite book of his