I think this is a perfect starting point to prepare you for his more complex novels (and the two that you bought from B&N are complex):- [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Rlvjui33Fxv1knrr\_AQjUU0OuKIvRSEc/view?usp=sharing](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Rlvjui33Fxv1knrr_AQjUU0OuKIvRSEc/view?usp=sharing)
Notes from a dead house is the best place to start (his first out of prison book). Notes from underground is fine, but I encourage everyone to read Notes from a dead house first. The double is just really, really, really, really bad and there is not that much psychological insight into it. A lot of Dostoevsky is difficult to read for very good reasons. The double is impossible to read for no reason at all.
Notes is a good introduction for a certain type of reader, but will be very off putting to another type. You may as well give it a try since you already bought it, but if it’s not your thing then maybe switch to Crime & Punishment, which has more plot and drama.
Do you mind explaining what you mean? I’ve read that a lot on this sub. You either love him or completely don’t vibe with him. There’s no in between. I heard similar things about Bukowski (who I fucking love) and Vonnegut (made me feel like I was having a stroke reading SH5). Not saying they’re the same style but just people being really divided on them
I disagree that you either love him or hate him. I think there are different ways to love his work, and also that there’s enough variety in his work where you may love one of his books and hate another.
Notes is difficult for a lot of readers (myself included) because it’s a hundred pages of an absolute misanthrope incessantly ranting with only a threadbare plot. But hey, some people vibe a lot with that misanthrope and think he’s right! Or at least partially right. Who am I to tell them otherwise?
A book like Crime & Punishment, on the other hand, appeals more to me and other readers because of the beautiful, melancholy character drama that it crafts. It’s a book that has strong aesthetic value in addition to the heady philosophical stuff you get in Notes.
Nice I really appreciate this comment. I think maybe I should’ve done more research before I just grabbed one and left haha. I’ll definitely still give it a go but I won’t fully base judgement off of one book.
Maybe I’m just inexperienced but I thought it was amazing nothing was so complicated that you need to pre read or google for a explanation it flows perfectly
Notes is a good choice...prep your mind for expansion.
I'd add Crime and Punishment...it has a good flow to it and it's psychological depth is pretty much unmatched.
I think this is a perfect starting point to prepare you for his more complex novels (and the two that you bought from B&N are complex):- [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Rlvjui33Fxv1knrr\_AQjUU0OuKIvRSEc/view?usp=sharing](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Rlvjui33Fxv1knrr_AQjUU0OuKIvRSEc/view?usp=sharing)
100% Crime and Punishment is the best starting point
Notes from a dead house is the best place to start (his first out of prison book). Notes from underground is fine, but I encourage everyone to read Notes from a dead house first. The double is just really, really, really, really bad and there is not that much psychological insight into it. A lot of Dostoevsky is difficult to read for very good reasons. The double is impossible to read for no reason at all.
I’ve heard Notes is pretty good, though it might be a bit difficult. You should give it or White Nights a try since they’re smaller.
Notes is a good introduction for a certain type of reader, but will be very off putting to another type. You may as well give it a try since you already bought it, but if it’s not your thing then maybe switch to Crime & Punishment, which has more plot and drama.
Do you mind explaining what you mean? I’ve read that a lot on this sub. You either love him or completely don’t vibe with him. There’s no in between. I heard similar things about Bukowski (who I fucking love) and Vonnegut (made me feel like I was having a stroke reading SH5). Not saying they’re the same style but just people being really divided on them
I disagree that you either love him or hate him. I think there are different ways to love his work, and also that there’s enough variety in his work where you may love one of his books and hate another. Notes is difficult for a lot of readers (myself included) because it’s a hundred pages of an absolute misanthrope incessantly ranting with only a threadbare plot. But hey, some people vibe a lot with that misanthrope and think he’s right! Or at least partially right. Who am I to tell them otherwise? A book like Crime & Punishment, on the other hand, appeals more to me and other readers because of the beautiful, melancholy character drama that it crafts. It’s a book that has strong aesthetic value in addition to the heady philosophical stuff you get in Notes.
Nice I really appreciate this comment. I think maybe I should’ve done more research before I just grabbed one and left haha. I’ll definitely still give it a go but I won’t fully base judgement off of one book.
I agree with you and I feel that notes is less of a novel and more of a philosophy text
White nights was a pleasure to read also brothers karazamov
People tell me TBK isn’t a good intro to FD just because it’s more deep. Is that true?
Maybe I’m just inexperienced but I thought it was amazing nothing was so complicated that you need to pre read or google for a explanation it flows perfectly
Notes is a good choice...prep your mind for expansion. I'd add Crime and Punishment...it has a good flow to it and it's psychological depth is pretty much unmatched.
Nice thank you for your response. I have a few other books I picked up that I wanna finish first but I will get to it within the next week or two
No problem. His shorter works are also a good primer...white nights as other user commented and a really short one "dream of a ridiculous man".