The Brothers Karamazov - The Complete Garnett Translation

The Brothers Karamazov is a masterful work, full of complex characters and ideas, humor, philosophy, psychology, religion, and history. Dostoevsky hits on profound truths throughout that ought to be written down and remembered. “Responsible to all for all!”

Dostoevsky drew the character of Ivan Karamazov with a glance at his own tempestuous mind and heart. The author of the myth of the Grand Inquisitor, Ivan poses the question of theodicy in its most striking form.Unlike Leibniz or Voltaire, Vanya is not content with an abstract or fictional argument about God’s goodness. No, he has been clipping newspaper headlines for years detailing the cruelest deaths suffered by children. It is not difficult for the contemporary reader to empathize. For me, they were reminiscent of the torture of my own relatives in Nazi camps.However, Dostoevsky’s particular interest in theodicy was driven more by living in an era when the idea of a good life was opening up for the mass of humanity. The serfs were being freed in his native Russia, diseases were being eradicated and the benefits of modern technology were allowing even the working class the enjoyments of leisure.The question becomes, what of those left behind? Of those who undergo horrible suffering at the hands of an uncaring nature or from the evils of their fellow men? It is only in a world where many are living the good life that such a juxtaposition can even be made.And Ivan obsesses over it. He will not accept a God who allows such suffering by the innocent; unable to drive their cries from his ears he descends into madness.The only rational solution for Dostoevsky is that suffering will be redeemed by incalculable bliss. That the sufferings of this world are not to be compared with what is in store in the next. Two thousand years ago, Jesus expressed the same answer in his parable of Dives and Lazarus.In this way, The Brothers Karamazov runs parallel to Crime and Punishment. In that work, Dostoevsky explored whether a human being can live happily and sanely while ignoring moral law. Here he tests whether a human being can be sane while simultaneously acknowledging the suffering of the innocent and not believing in a deity.Of course, Dostoevsky’s solution is one we might not accept. One can ignore suffering and focus on the privileges enjoyed by most in Western cultures. That is always a safe alternative to maintaining one’s sanity.At least, these paths are how I read the curious fate of Ivan Karamazov. He raises not so much a question but a phenomena that the modern world, for all its achievements, cannot answer. Dostoevsky’s characters continue to resonate and provoke some hundred and fifty years after his passing.

As a precursor to my review, let me say the following. Firstly, I am a classic-literature enthusiast with a Master’s in Literary Analysis. My first Russian novel was Anna Karenina, and I was enraptured. Secondly, I obviously did not expect this book to be the same, as it was written by a different author, but I expected the difficulties which arise from reading a book in translation as well as from this time period. Lastly, I am an extremely fast reader. Reading a novel in a week isn’t uncommon for me.I say all of that because I hated this book. I read it on a kindle, and seeing the percentage complete mocked me. I started in November of 2022 and finished the first week of March. I had almost decided to quit reading in January when someone told me that it was a “whodunnit” novel. I was intrigued but confused since I was 50% through with the book any no action has occurred and certainly not a crime of any sort. So I pressed on through more speeches that I’ve ever cared to read until the ending that doesn’t resolve anything!The first 50% is character background and multiple chapters of sermons.The second half is a trial with more speeches—just by lawyers rather than priests and philosophers.If you have 3 months to spare, go ahead, but I feel like I am going to have to go read some literary criticisms to illuminate me to why I’m even supposed to appreciate this book—let alone enjoy it.

This is a must read for anyone who wants to have a deeper understanding of the human nature which we must subdue with a goodwill. Dostoyevsky so brilliantly depicted the characters and how the human heart can go astray if unguided.

I knew it was used, but it's completely worthless. Arrived with only some pages in order!

This is one of my favorite books. I prize it primarily because of the characters Alyosha and Father Zossima, both of whom are profoundly good. It is very difficult to write about good people. As another famous Russian novelist famously pointed out, it is the bad characters and families that have the interesting lives. This book is made interesting by the introduction of numerous villains who engage and entice the reader, and who confuse and torment the good Alyosha.The most famous passage in the book, and indeed one of the most famous in all literature, is called The Grand Inquisitor. It is important to note, however, that that portrait of evil is a fiction created by one of the characters in the book. Alyosha and Zossima, on the other hand, are "real" characters -- at least within the framework of the book. We are perhaps not meant to trust the narrative in the Grand Inquisitor, while we are meant to trust Zossima and Alyosha.This book is important because of the wisdom of its author. Dostoevsky perhaps never mastered the art of living a good life, but he did master the art of portraying goodness and evil in fiction. For most of my life Zossima and Alyosha have stood in my mind (either consciously or unconsciously) as beacons of light in a dark world, and the other characters, to varying degrees, have represented the numerous temptations and missteps that plague most of our lives. As such, the book is not so much a novel, as a spiritual guide.Dostoevsky was one of the first authors to deeply understand the modern mind, and I'm not at all sure that anything written since the appearance of this book has fully supplanted it portrayal of the pitfalls of passion, materialism and pride. A good deal of suffering could be avoided if more people could understand how acts of spiritual discipline can help us realize the simple message of love and compassion found in this book.

I love Dostoyevsky. This is a wonderful and tragic tale of three brothers. But it's so much more. With an epic cast of loveable and believable characters, romance, melodrama, and a unsolved mystery to boot, The Brothers Karamazov is a literary triumph. I dropped it to four stars because the author rambled in places, getting carried away with himself, and I still prefer Crime and Punishment.I love to, and appreciate Dostoyevsky's skill at presenting both sides of moral and ethical issues with equal clarity and objectivity.

Good product.

I started my Dostoyevsky journey with Crime and Punishment, which I thought was excellent, naturally I wanted to jump forward to what is considered his masterpiece. The Brothers Karamazov is a journey that goes deeper than most books do into the complexities of the human condition, within a society mashed together consisting of presents, officials and high society. The stakes are high, the love triangle is set (no spoilers) and there is blood on someone’s hands………

Read this book when I was 19. Now 61 years later I am rereading it. What a masterpiece!

I read “The Brother’s Karamazov” after reading two other novels by Dostoyevsky – “Crime and Punishment” and “The Gambler”. On the surface, “The Brother’s Karamazov” reads like a discussion about personal morality in the context of society and in some ways is like ‘Crime and Punishment” in this. However, in reading the novel, I kept feeling that the religious aspects of the novel were only on the surface. I saw that this novel was actually political and had as its overarching context a discussion of the nature of society. That is what is the effect of different types of society on the people who inhabit them. I saw that two types of society were laid out.The first is the type of hierarchical autocratic or at least elitist society that is of the type that was extant in Russia in Dostoyevsky’s time. This is set forth clearly in the “Grand Inquisitor” chapter. Morality here is defined from above and imposed on he population. People are seen as incapable of forming a society in any other way as they are inherently self-interested and chaotic. The novel presents this both in a Christian and anti-Christian context. In the Christian context, Ivan Karamazov poses the question of how society can function there is no belief in in an immortal soul. In the anti-Christian context, Ivan presents the story of the Grand Inquisitor in which he portrays a society in which a political establishment utilize the appearance of a Christian society to impose hierarchical control. The second is described by the elder Father Zorsima as an egalitarian society in which people come together and society is built from the bottom up out of the mutual respect and concern between people.I don’t know if my interpretation is correct but if it holds water than this was a very radical novel for its day. The society of the Grand Inquisitor could be well be seen as a description of the autocratic Russian empire. The ending of the novel is a scene in which Alexey Karamazov urges a group of boys to go forth and interact in the world. His urgings sound as almost a call to arms to go forth and build the egalitarian society that Father Zorsima describes as ideal. My edition of this book has an introduction which indicates that another novel was intended to follow up on this one and carry on with some of the same characters. Alexy was to become a radical and be involved in an assassination according to this. This would seem to support my feeling that this was a political novel in contrast to the “Crime and Punishment” which was more about the individual and personal morality.