Read Dostoievsky

Although I'm not religious I believe in god and have a degree of respect for the orthodox church, it sat very well with me

My gf just left me so I'm reading Notes from Underground, I didn't want to read it while I was happy. It's having an odd effect, it's making me not want to turn into this person, I can see how I could adopt this mindset, it reminds me of my neet past.

I want to fight this depressive state.

>love being depressed
you're not depressed :)

You fall in love with lonely, you end up that way

>Read Crime and Punishment
>Be incredibly grateful I live in such amazing times myself.

Attached: bloom.png (1201x693, 1.35M)

I love Crime and punishment.
It formed the basis of great gay erotica

Attached: James_stewart_spank_me.jpg (1325x1000, 499K)

>dostoevsky
>bleak nihilism

i think i did enjoy Therese Raquin better

Attached: crime.jpg (386x281, 47K)

why is the axe blade pointing the wrong way?

because Raskolnikov decided to kill her with the blunt side rather than cutting her head apart

>I imagine since he was very religious you’d have to be too to really get anything out of his work
not true at all

Throughout his books, he shows great doubt and uncertainty in his faith. However, he tried to imagine a world that was irreligious. He had great contempt for the scientism, of prescriptive morality that most of his westernised contemporaries possessed.
While 2x2=4, can you force a man to adhere to this? What if he wants it to equal 5? Likewise, can you force a man to act in ways that you know are materially correct, i.e don't drink, fulfil your potential, sacrifice for other? His great fear that in turning our backs to god, and adhering to scientism, man would be able to justify great cruelty to one another in the cause of utilitarianism.
In crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov justifies killing the miser woman for the greater good of the neighbourhood, as he would be able to spread her wealth. In Devils, there is the intellect Shigalyev who tries to justify a world where 90% are slaves to the 10%. In fact, many 1920s policies in Russia would be referenced as Shigalevian policies.
Dostoevsky is useful to read as an atheist, for it puts forward whether ethics can ever be a maths or technocratic problem, or will there always need to be a spiritual element, as humans cannot be forced to act rationally. His books were also the emerging signs of the fields of psychology, especially Freud.

l

>it’s another atheist pseud lies and pretends religious person he likes wasn’t religious
yikes
This is just complete bullshit

>read notes from underground
>most relatable thing i've ever and may ever read
>tfw that means i'm fucked

Attached: froggy anguish.jpg (367x321, 13K)

No, he was very religious. I said he had doubts, however his books provide an inner monologue, a debate within himself. He clearly repudiates the world without Christ with the examples given. He suggested that atheism is the end of culture, traditions become arbitrary actions, and that a country needs strong religious roots. He finds a world without God depraved and most of his atheistic/nihilistic characters end in murder/suicide.
He struggles though with many ideas “ Didn’t you tell me that if it were mathematically proved to you that truth was outside Christ, you would rather remain with Christ than with the truth?” Shatov to Stravogin. “The more powerful a nation, the more individual a God.” If we cannot reconcile the truth, that of human sanctity and purpose with the pain we see in the world around us to that of the teachings of God, would these mean that faith is reduced to a matter of sheer will? This could be dangerous and lead to violence between nations, for subconsciously the purpose of God could simply become our own ambitions.
He deals with the solidarity of the church vs personal faith. The burden to free will, and to use it to try and imitate the image of Christ is too great for most of humanity. Yet to relinquish that free will to the church, which creates a clear system of rewards and consequences, alienates us from the most personal relation of Christ. It is to ignore humanity’s nature, that we will fail due to our free will, yet it must be dealt not with societal structures, but with inner repentance.
I wasn’t trying to suggest he was an atheist, but that there was plenty of personal conflict and ideas to wrestle with for an athiest reader

>Read notes from underground
>Found it infrequently relatable and only in context of very specific aspects of my life excluding the whole
>Got bored about half way through and put it down

What's this mean anons

it means you got past the part that actually mattered and you realized it

Religion in his books represents something deeper than surface level proselytism. It translates perfectly to non-believers.

>read 3 Dostoevsky books in a row
>be happier and more carefree

>he doesn't understand the pleasure in being depressed is derived from a sadistic superego

delet

ahem

WHAT IS THE BEST TRANSLATION FOR THIS BOOK PLEASE SOMEONE TELL ME I KEEP GETTING CONFLICTING ANSWERS I JUST WANT TO READ IT KNOWING THAT I AM READING THE BEST TRANSLATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

what are you even saying?

think before you type

>read Nietzsche
>want to kill other people
>read Schopenhauer
>want to kill myself

He is not wrong tho. You are just a bitter atheist pseud

what do you find depressing from the idiot?

The penguin translators are the best, namely David Macduff, Ronald Meyer, Robert Maguire

David Macduff has text with plenty of notes and does not fall prey to the typical colloquial pitfalls that V&P and Garnett did.
Also as Maguire explained in an introduction to gambler and other short stories, Constance Garnett didn't really rate Dosto all that much and saw him as a messy writer and omitted words that were overused and reintepreted titles and references before Dostoyevsky's style, background and intentions was really understood to english speakers.
The penguin translations are all reworked in light of the seminal work that is Joseph Franks biographical series and other scholarly texts about his writers diary and letters and influences that actually allow for a translation that can convey the proper meaning.

Macduff translated House of the Dead, Crime and Punishment, The Idiot and Borthers Karamazov so there is a fair consistency on a lot of his major work.
Demons by Maguire is again similarly masterfully translated with plent of notes for Stepan's constant use of french, and topical references etc.
Meyer tended to translate the shorter works like Underground but again all in all fitting with the tone.

People like to have a contrary opinion against what is easily accessible, so penguin often gets unfair scorn here.

I have read his complete work and his major novels in a couple of translations each and I stand by what I've said.