Russian Lit Blogging

Daniel,

May I ask about your “instinctive aversion” to Tolstoy’s novels? I’m about 40% through War & Peace and I’m having a hard time staying interested.

I definitely agree with you with regard to Dostoevsky’s character development. Both Crime & Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov were awash in humanity, frailty, treachery, passion … all presented in a way that caused the reader to consider those things within himself. I just haven’t found that in my reading thus far in War & Peace. It’s well crafted story, but it lacks depth for me.

Thanks for the book recommendation, by the way.

I’ve attempted to make my way through War & Peace 5 times now. I haven’t made it through yet. I have read 3 of Dostoevsky’s works. C&P seems to be in a class of its own. I haven’t read Brothers, but but the other two works were okay/good, not great. I did enjoy Tolstoy’s book of children folk tales, and my children enjoyed hearing them. I happened upon that one accidently at the library. I’m going to attempt to get through What Men Live By authored by Tolstoy over the next couple weeks. After W&P, I’m a little scared to attempt Anna Karenina.

I agree that Dostoevsky has a keener psychological insight than Tolstoy, but I rank them both among my favorite authors. I am surprised so many find it difficult to get through War and Peace - I found it a much easier read than I did Dostoevsky. Regardless, I hope you persist in reading it Jon, I think you’ll find it worth your while.

Saying that it’s difficult to get through War and Peace isn’t the same as saying it’s a difficult read. I take “difficult read” to mean it’s intellectually demanding. War and Peace isn’t difficult for that reason. It’s just long and, well, boring.

Magnus, I will likely persist out of sheer stubbornness, hating to abandon a book that is universally considered a classic. James, you’re right, the difficulty has been in overcoming my disinterest in the characters. With Dostoevsky, I was drawn in immediately, wanting to know what becomes of Rashkolnikov or Alexei Fyodorovich or any of several other of his characters, but I’m presently listening (yes, I’m “reading” an audiobook) to an account of a fox or wolf hunt involving several of W&P principal characters and I’m thinking, “the point of this little adventure is, what?”

Jon Luker: No disrespect, dude, but I hope you always specify when you’ve only “read” the audiobook, rather than having actually read the book. Listening to it doesn’t count for much in my book–no pun intended–or in those of most well-read people I know.

Solent, I’ve heard it all before. As for me, I find both modes of reading quite satisfactory and each as equally mentally engaging. Knock it if you will, but I have found audiobooks an invaluable way to redeem the time I spend on my commute to and from work. In many respects, listening to a book read presents more challenges than reading it on the written page. One’s attention must be sharper, because backing up a sentence or two is not as convenient and it’s much easier to drift off (I often have to pause if I encounter unusual road conditions, for instance). As for whether an audiobook counts in your book or whether I should make a point of specifying, sometimes I do and sometimes I don’t. I don’t see much difference qualitatively. Sometimes I can’t recall without really thinking about it whether a book I’ve read in the past was in audible or written form. So as for me, it really doesn’t matter. In fact, I’ve made a point of re-experiencing a few Cormac McCarthy books in audible form simply because I enjoy Tom Stechschulte’s rendering of the text so well.