<p>I think it's brilliant so far. OK, so Raskolnikov's monologues can get old after awhile, but at least they're interesting.</p>
<p>The never ending monologue makes it hard to really get into the book. Also with the million of Russian names that all sound the same makes it hard to remember who is who. </p>
<p>Some parts are really profound though. I especially really liked the chapter where Raskolnikov and Porfidy talk about Ras’ essay on crime.</p>
<p>Plus the epilogue wasn’t really necessary. If Dostoevsky had ended the book on the last chapter and omitted the epilogue, it would’ve been so much better.</p>
<p>I think it was that one letter to his mother that had a paragraph that lasted 10 pages.</p>
<p>I’m never a fan of these extended stream-of-conciousness books. Give me an epic storyteller like Tolkien or a narrative like Robert Louis Stevenson. Still Crime and Punishment is better than some… And I’ve only read up to Part 2 so far, so I can’t sit judgement yet.</p>
<p>Hah, I read a few pages of the letter than skipped over it. The first part really gets good towards the end.</p>
<p>And C&P isn’t stream of consciousness. Stream of consciousness is stuff like To the Lighthouse and The Sound and the Fury</p>
<p>C&P had a good story, a good moral conflict, etc. I actually like long Russian names–they’re fun to say! It was the proselytizing that really made me mad.</p>
<p>@MosbyMarison: C&P isn’t stream-of-consciousness at all. I don’t even know where you would get that idea.</p>
<p>From the responses in the Overrated books thread, it doesn’t seem that C&P isn’t the most popular book on CC, sure, but it’s not hated like it seems the Scarlet Letter is. Poor Nathaniel Hawthorne.</p>
<p>I like Russians. I’m even in an FB group about it. As such, I liked C&P. But Dostoevsky is not as cool as Tolstoy or Turgenev. But he’s cooler than Gogol’s long works. I don’t know about Gogol’s short stuff, but I’m betting that’s pretty cool.</p>
<p>My thoughts on the book:</p>
<p>“TL;DR”</p>
<p>This is by far one of my favorite books of all time.</p>
<p>It had some very rich content, but it was very irritating to read.</p>
<p>@MillanCad: Yes, I just realised that. Lit was never my stongest subject lol. What I meant was that I don’t like books where 85% of the material is the character’s thoughts, and only 15% is things that happen.</p>
<p>@Mosby - Thoughts happen, imagine that. Books are more effective when there is some substance behind them (i.e. thoughts, philosophical ideas, etc.) and when they aren’t composed solely (or mainly) of actions. Yes action-y books are perhaps “fun” to read, like, … once. When you want to waste time or something. But if you want to actually get something out of the book, force yourself to think in different ways, books “where 85% of the material is the character’s thoughts” are the only ones that matter.</p>
<p>I liked crime and punishment too! it’s just too long to read on top of other school work.</p>
<p>I read Anna Karenina a while back. Or at least the first 250 pages of it. It was just too long and less salacious than I expected.</p>
<p>I have to read Crime and Punishment for English sometime soon this semester =/ I’m praying it won’t be too bad.</p>
<p>@TCBH: AK is the best. Wytmicnbdtmnot!</p>
<p>Maybe the salacious bits had been removed. There were pages missing from my Middle School library copy. I think I missed a really pivotal part at the beginning.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Respectfully disagree. I’m reading Dead Souls right now and it’s hilarious</p>
<p>I love Crime and Punishment.</p>
<p>I liked the novel until I got to the epilogue which was completely unnecessary and ruined the entire novel for me. The religious overtones came out of nowhere, but I liked how the novel made me think about life, guilt, and how people are so vastly different than we really think they are.</p>