What do you think?
Rate this book
Three Short Novels: Poor Folk, The Double, The Eternal Husband
Three Short Poor Folk, The Double, The Eternal Husband [Paperback] [Jan 01, 1966] Dostoevsky and Andrew R. MacAndrew
Paperback
First published January 1, 1959
15 people are currently reading
132 people want to read
About the author
Fyodor Dostoevsky
3,256 books72.4k followers
Фёдор Михайлович Достоевский
(Russian)
Works, such as the novels Crime and Punishment (1866), The Idiot (1869), and The Brothers Karamazov (1880), of Russian writer Feodor Mikhailovich Dostoyevsky or Dostoevski combine religious mysticism with profound psychological insight.
Very influential writings of Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin included Problems of Dostoyevsky's Works (1929),
Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky composed short stories, essays, and journals. His literature explores humans in the troubled political, social, and spiritual atmospheres of 19th-century and engages with a variety of philosophies and themes. People most acclaimed his Demons(1872) .
Many literary critics rate him among the greatest authors of world literature and consider multiple books written by him to be highly influential masterpieces. They consider his Notes from Underground of the first existentialist literature. He is also well regarded as a philosopher and theologian.
(Russian: Фёдор Михайлович Достоевский) (see also Fiodor Dostoïevski)
Works, such as the novels Crime and Punishment (1866), The Idiot (1869), and The Brothers Karamazov (1880), of Russian writer Feodor Mikhailovich Dostoyevsky or Dostoevski combine religious mysticism with profound psychological insight.
Very influential writings of Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin included Problems of Dostoyevsky's Works (1929),
Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky composed short stories, essays, and journals. His literature explores humans in the troubled political, social, and spiritual atmospheres of 19th-century and engages with a variety of philosophies and themes. People most acclaimed his Demons(1872) .
Many literary critics rate him among the greatest authors of world literature and consider multiple books written by him to be highly influential masterpieces. They consider his Notes from Underground of the first existentialist literature. He is also well regarded as a philosopher and theologian.
(Russian: Фёдор Михайлович Достоевский) (see also Fiodor Dostoïevski)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
January 2, 2013
In the last century, there are as yet few writers who have managed to capture the visceral nature of human experience as well as Dostoevsky. Sweating palms, furrowed brows, shaking knees, eyes welling up with tears, whether from drunkenness, anxiety, or simple psychosis, are all alive and well in these three stories. It all makes you want to curl up on your sofa and call Katya to bring in the samovar. Until of course you realize that the stifling St. Petersburg apartment into which she would bring it is not your own, and the nausea that prompted this urge is also not your own, but that of the profoundly disturbed characters that you have spent the last two hours with.
August 21, 2024
Three Short Novels by Dostoevsky is a diverse group of short stories: Poor Folk, The Double, and The Eternal Husband.
Poor Folk is a story about two “almost lovers” who live across the street from each other in abject poverty. Makar is an older man who is always trying to win the heart of his younger third cousin (twice removed), Varinka.
The novel shows the nature of poverty and what it does to people. It’s sometimes painful to read because the characters lack hope and believe they are trapped in their situations. Makar spends his free time drinking and writing notes to Varinka. Occasionally, he buys her little presents, but he never seems to have the courage to pursue love, even though she has never given him any “stoplights.”
The Double is an excellent story about a man who seems neurotic and on the border of suffering from mental illness. The story begins with Golyadkin’s visit to his doctor. The doctor tells him that he needs to get out more and spend time with people – not to be antisocial.
Golaydkin eventually runs into someone who looks exactly like him and shows up in the same places. The only difference is that this “double” is the exact opposite of him: confident, charming, and social. Accordingly, it’s easy to empathize with Golyadkin, and you never know if he is a schizophrenic (split personality) or if there really is a double.
The Double clearly falls under the category of psychological realism. Among the works of Dostoevsky, this book ranks in the top tier. I can’t think of any story where the lead character spends his time on a torturous, psychological journey – that he fell into.
The Eternal Husband is a type of cat-and-mouse story, a battle of wills between Velchaninov and Trusotsky. Trusotsky is a cruel person with all sorts of phobias. Velcahninov is a bachelor and hypochondriac. Both men are lecherous. They were friends years ago and haven’t seen each other. The reader learns that Velchaninov had an affair with Trusotsky’s wife that may have resulted in a daughter, Liza. It may be his. Velchaninov sees Liza's unhealthy living situation and plans to take her with him.
It's a gripping and sometimes painful story, and Dostoevsky makes a comparison between men and women that might go unnoticed. In many stories, a common stereotype of men is that they are playboys and want carefree lives. Dostoevsky describes a different kind of man. The “Eternal Husband” is a man whose aim in life is to be a husband and supplement to his wife. If he marries a certain kind of woman, there is a chance she will look at him as an ornament and nothing more and is the kind who does as she pleases.
Poor Folk is a story about two “almost lovers” who live across the street from each other in abject poverty. Makar is an older man who is always trying to win the heart of his younger third cousin (twice removed), Varinka.
The novel shows the nature of poverty and what it does to people. It’s sometimes painful to read because the characters lack hope and believe they are trapped in their situations. Makar spends his free time drinking and writing notes to Varinka. Occasionally, he buys her little presents, but he never seems to have the courage to pursue love, even though she has never given him any “stoplights.”
The Double is an excellent story about a man who seems neurotic and on the border of suffering from mental illness. The story begins with Golyadkin’s visit to his doctor. The doctor tells him that he needs to get out more and spend time with people – not to be antisocial.
Golaydkin eventually runs into someone who looks exactly like him and shows up in the same places. The only difference is that this “double” is the exact opposite of him: confident, charming, and social. Accordingly, it’s easy to empathize with Golyadkin, and you never know if he is a schizophrenic (split personality) or if there really is a double.
The Double clearly falls under the category of psychological realism. Among the works of Dostoevsky, this book ranks in the top tier. I can’t think of any story where the lead character spends his time on a torturous, psychological journey – that he fell into.
The Eternal Husband is a type of cat-and-mouse story, a battle of wills between Velchaninov and Trusotsky. Trusotsky is a cruel person with all sorts of phobias. Velcahninov is a bachelor and hypochondriac. Both men are lecherous. They were friends years ago and haven’t seen each other. The reader learns that Velchaninov had an affair with Trusotsky’s wife that may have resulted in a daughter, Liza. It may be his. Velchaninov sees Liza's unhealthy living situation and plans to take her with him.
It's a gripping and sometimes painful story, and Dostoevsky makes a comparison between men and women that might go unnoticed. In many stories, a common stereotype of men is that they are playboys and want carefree lives. Dostoevsky describes a different kind of man. The “Eternal Husband” is a man whose aim in life is to be a husband and supplement to his wife. If he marries a certain kind of woman, there is a chance she will look at him as an ornament and nothing more and is the kind who does as she pleases.
December 28, 2022
great writing but a little too existential for me... tolstoy is still my favorite russian author
March 9, 2025
The Eternal Husband: 4.5 rounded up to 5"He had just grasped the cause of his sadness, that peculiar and unique sadness of his which had been tormenting him for several days in a row now, pestering him, God knew how terribly and God knew why, and refusing to leave him alone... But now he grasped it all, understood everything, and it was as obvious to him as the palm of his open hand. 'It's all the fault of that hat,' he muttered, in a flash of intuition." (p.314)
'The Eternal Husband' is truly Dostoevsky at his best: a trim novel, very small in scope, that allows him to sink deep into the principle characters, their relationship, their diverse neuroses. And he also has the freedom in a novel where he isn't taking himself too seriously to be incredibly funny and lean into an almost absurdist humour that he does so well.
This novel delighted me, I was incredibly engaged, I never really knew where it was going or what would happen next, but then when we arrived at the conclusion everything fell into place and wrapped up with a cohesion and coherence he sometimes struggled with in longer, more serious works like 'The Idiot'.
In 'The Eternal Husband' we follow Alexei Velchaninov, a middle-aged man stuck in less of a mid-life crisis than a mid-life, anxiety-riddled rut. He's developed hypochondria and he's living as a quasi-agoraphobe when, through a series of events reminiscent of something from Gogol or Dostoevsky's own 'The Double', he is reacquainted with an old friend he hasn't seen in nearly a decade, Trusotsky. It's quickly revealed that this is in fact incredibly awkward for Velchaninov because he had an affair with Trusotsky's wife, who Trusotsky reveals has just died.
The rest of the story revolves around Velchaninov trying desperately to figure out whether Trusotsky knows about the affair and is dangling that over his head, or whether he doesn't know and simply wants to reconnect with an old friend. And all the while, Trusotsky becomes more and more manic and erratic, which comes to a head at the novel's climax.
Something interesting that complicates the dynamics between Velchaninov and Trusotsky is Dostoevsky's employment of homoeroticism. The characters very openly discuss whether or not Trusotsky is doomed to be an 'eternal husband' (Dostoevsky's poetic way of saying 'cuck') in part because he is himself in love with Velchaninov. He even drunkenly coerces Velchaninov to kiss him at one point:
Afterwards, Velchaninov reflects that there is perhaps something to the tension between them: "It struck him as strange that he felt no anger whatever toward the man and that there was something quite different in his feelings, a sort of new impulse."(p.391)
This element makes the stakes of the tension and intrigue feel a bit higher and more complicated in a way that really added a layer to an otherwise fairly straightforward plot about infidelity and betrayal.
Memorable, well-characterized pro- and an-tagonists, relatively fast-paced, good writing while remaining accessible. I'm honestly surprised this one seems to have largely fallen through the cracks because compared with some of his more famous offerings, 'The Eternal Husband' has a relatively low bar of entry while still being a good introduction to Dostoevsky's writing style, if not his loftier authorial preoccupations.
Highly recommend.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poor Folk: 3.5 rounded up to 4
what gets to me, Varinka, is not really the lack of money, but all these little troubles life is so full of, all the whispering, all those jeers and jokes." p.105
'Poor Folk' is the novella that propelled Dostoevsky to prominence, and it's easy to understand why it endures to this day. It's not one of his more famous works, but it sets up a point of view that he continues to explore in various ways throughout his writing career: 'that Russian author who writes about downtrodden people.' Or so I've heard, but that has certainly been true in the 3 early works of his I have under my belt.
The story here follows the relationship and tribulations of a self-proclaimed 'older' man called Makar and his one-sided love interest and friend, Varinka as they fall deeper and deeper into poverty.
I've never been a huge fan of epistolary novels, and I did struggle at times with that form in this novella, but Dostoevsky keeps things moving at a relatively brisk pace and with enough characterization of the two letter-writers to make them feel distinct and fleshed-out.
Makar in particular has a very strong voice, and it's largely through his narration that I was able to sink into the story. He's not a perfect protagonist, and his attempts at manipulating Varinka's feelings for him by buying her gifts they both know he can't afford, are repulsive, but he's rendered so pathetic at every turn you can't help but feel sorry for him.
He's a low-level clerk at a government office, and is ignored by pretty much everyone. He starts off the story living in the corner of the kitchen of a low-rent tenement, though he continuously downplays this already precarious financial state. Due to this low-paid position and a bad drinking habit (along with his penchant for buying Varinka candy), his life continues to degrade in a very tangible way, his clothes literally coming apart at the seams, his shoes losing their soles.
Varinka's quality of life similarly follows a track of chronic ruin as her frail health gives out and she is left unable to work.
Reading about the squalor and ruin of Makar and Varinka's lives is harrowing, and Dostoevsky is careful to lace it with scathing social commentary and insight. They are poor folks in a literal sense, but also in the sense that their poverty leaves them under the cruel and unfeeling scrutiny of those of higher socioeconomic status. The indignity of being made a spectacle is almost more than Makar's pride can bear. To Varinka he writes of an incident that happened to a colleague of his that leaves him incensed:
"The other day, Emelyan was telling me that they took up a collection for him, and after that day they subjected him to a sort of inspection. They thought they were giving him their coins for nothing, but they were actually paying because they were offered a poor man as a spectacle." (p.92)
This is a point that Makar reiterates in various ways across the narrative, and one that immediately stood out to me. Dostoevsky put into clear prose a phenomenon that continues to this day. Makar is never rendered homeless, but it smacks very much of the relationship that the homeless have with the people they beg for money from. The very act of begging is, to the non-beggar, a spectacle, a show. It puts the judgement of the person being asked for money before the humanity of the person asking.
Do you believe that this beggar is being honest about needing the money? Do you trust that they'll use it for food and not drugs or alcohol? Did they end up on the streets because of a flaw in their character? Do they have a sob story, and is it compelling enough to trigger your sympathy?
It becomes about you.
On a much larger stage, talk shows often do the same. Youtuber Khadija Mbowe published a video essay in 2022 titled 'The Tyra Show, Ego Masquerading as Empathy' in which she examines Tyra Banks's talk show that aired in the mid aughts and how it often used this formula of bringing on a guest who needs help in some way, interviewing them about their hardship, and then provides money or some other type of assistance and the audience claps as the guest cries and thanks Tyra for her generosity.
But is it generosity, or is it payment for a shot of empathy?
Because who are such acts really for? Are they for the poor person or are they for the audience?
The trend of a person filming themselves giving money or assistance to a person in need and then posting it online would suggest it's for the latter.
Offer up your suffering and your misery and you will receive help if your offering pleases us.
Makar's rage and humiliation at this, and at the snide comments of his colleagues as his poverty becomes increasingly visible is powerful stuff and easily the biggest takeaway from 'Poor Folk.'
'I always rely on the kindness of strangers' is a nice sentiment until it becomes your entire life.
Dostoevsky doesn't go as far as to suggest that a rotten system is to blame for putting people in the position for this phenomenon to even occur, but instead seems to suggest that poverty is to be dealt with interpersonally -- poor people helping each other, richer people uplifting poor people in an act of good, Christian charity. Makar receives financial aid from a sympathetic superior at work when they see how Makar's coat is so shabby the buttons are falling off, and Varinka marries a wealthy man.
I disagree with him about the solution being 'you should help poor people if you can -- just don't be cringe about it', but I acknowledge that it does often work that way (unfortunately), and I found his highlighting of the highly transactional relationship between the poor and the not-poor (particularly under capitalism, though that's beyond the scope of the context he was writing in) very correct and insightful.
Aside from the main theme of poverty, there's a subplot that delves into the importance of fiction and reading that is both very lovely and sad.
Of the three early works I've read of Dostoevsky ('Poor Folk', 'The Double', and 'The Landlady'), 'Poor Folk' has by a wide margin the most beautiful prose, and there are long descriptive passages that are just a delight to read:
Another triumph from my man, Fyodor.
But you don't have to take my word for it. Hungarian author Stephen Vizinczey said of 'Poor Folk' in a 2017 review that he reads it every year and it brings him to tears each time.
'The Eternal Husband' is truly Dostoevsky at his best: a trim novel, very small in scope, that allows him to sink deep into the principle characters, their relationship, their diverse neuroses. And he also has the freedom in a novel where he isn't taking himself too seriously to be incredibly funny and lean into an almost absurdist humour that he does so well.
This novel delighted me, I was incredibly engaged, I never really knew where it was going or what would happen next, but then when we arrived at the conclusion everything fell into place and wrapped up with a cohesion and coherence he sometimes struggled with in longer, more serious works like 'The Idiot'.
In 'The Eternal Husband' we follow Alexei Velchaninov, a middle-aged man stuck in less of a mid-life crisis than a mid-life, anxiety-riddled rut. He's developed hypochondria and he's living as a quasi-agoraphobe when, through a series of events reminiscent of something from Gogol or Dostoevsky's own 'The Double', he is reacquainted with an old friend he hasn't seen in nearly a decade, Trusotsky. It's quickly revealed that this is in fact incredibly awkward for Velchaninov because he had an affair with Trusotsky's wife, who Trusotsky reveals has just died.
The rest of the story revolves around Velchaninov trying desperately to figure out whether Trusotsky knows about the affair and is dangling that over his head, or whether he doesn't know and simply wants to reconnect with an old friend. And all the while, Trusotsky becomes more and more manic and erratic, which comes to a head at the novel's climax.
Something interesting that complicates the dynamics between Velchaninov and Trusotsky is Dostoevsky's employment of homoeroticism. The characters very openly discuss whether or not Trusotsky is doomed to be an 'eternal husband' (Dostoevsky's poetic way of saying 'cuck') in part because he is himself in love with Velchaninov. He even drunkenly coerces Velchaninov to kiss him at one point:
"All of a sudden he blurted out: 'kiss me, Alexei!' 'You're drunk!' Velchaninov shouted, reeling back. 'So I am. But still you must kiss me. Go on, Alexei, do it!' [...] Suddenly [Velchaninov] bent down - for he towered a whole head over Trusotsky- and kissed him on the lips." (p.367-368)
Afterwards, Velchaninov reflects that there is perhaps something to the tension between them: "It struck him as strange that he felt no anger whatever toward the man and that there was something quite different in his feelings, a sort of new impulse."(p.391)
This element makes the stakes of the tension and intrigue feel a bit higher and more complicated in a way that really added a layer to an otherwise fairly straightforward plot about infidelity and betrayal.
Memorable, well-characterized pro- and an-tagonists, relatively fast-paced, good writing while remaining accessible. I'm honestly surprised this one seems to have largely fallen through the cracks because compared with some of his more famous offerings, 'The Eternal Husband' has a relatively low bar of entry while still being a good introduction to Dostoevsky's writing style, if not his loftier authorial preoccupations.
Highly recommend.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poor Folk: 3.5 rounded up to 4
what gets to me, Varinka, is not really the lack of money, but all these little troubles life is so full of, all the whispering, all those jeers and jokes." p.105
'Poor Folk' is the novella that propelled Dostoevsky to prominence, and it's easy to understand why it endures to this day. It's not one of his more famous works, but it sets up a point of view that he continues to explore in various ways throughout his writing career: 'that Russian author who writes about downtrodden people.' Or so I've heard, but that has certainly been true in the 3 early works of his I have under my belt.
The story here follows the relationship and tribulations of a self-proclaimed 'older' man called Makar and his one-sided love interest and friend, Varinka as they fall deeper and deeper into poverty.
I've never been a huge fan of epistolary novels, and I did struggle at times with that form in this novella, but Dostoevsky keeps things moving at a relatively brisk pace and with enough characterization of the two letter-writers to make them feel distinct and fleshed-out.
Makar in particular has a very strong voice, and it's largely through his narration that I was able to sink into the story. He's not a perfect protagonist, and his attempts at manipulating Varinka's feelings for him by buying her gifts they both know he can't afford, are repulsive, but he's rendered so pathetic at every turn you can't help but feel sorry for him.
He's a low-level clerk at a government office, and is ignored by pretty much everyone. He starts off the story living in the corner of the kitchen of a low-rent tenement, though he continuously downplays this already precarious financial state. Due to this low-paid position and a bad drinking habit (along with his penchant for buying Varinka candy), his life continues to degrade in a very tangible way, his clothes literally coming apart at the seams, his shoes losing their soles.
Varinka's quality of life similarly follows a track of chronic ruin as her frail health gives out and she is left unable to work.
Reading about the squalor and ruin of Makar and Varinka's lives is harrowing, and Dostoevsky is careful to lace it with scathing social commentary and insight. They are poor folks in a literal sense, but also in the sense that their poverty leaves them under the cruel and unfeeling scrutiny of those of higher socioeconomic status. The indignity of being made a spectacle is almost more than Makar's pride can bear. To Varinka he writes of an incident that happened to a colleague of his that leaves him incensed:
"The other day, Emelyan was telling me that they took up a collection for him, and after that day they subjected him to a sort of inspection. They thought they were giving him their coins for nothing, but they were actually paying because they were offered a poor man as a spectacle." (p.92)
This is a point that Makar reiterates in various ways across the narrative, and one that immediately stood out to me. Dostoevsky put into clear prose a phenomenon that continues to this day. Makar is never rendered homeless, but it smacks very much of the relationship that the homeless have with the people they beg for money from. The very act of begging is, to the non-beggar, a spectacle, a show. It puts the judgement of the person being asked for money before the humanity of the person asking.
Do you believe that this beggar is being honest about needing the money? Do you trust that they'll use it for food and not drugs or alcohol? Did they end up on the streets because of a flaw in their character? Do they have a sob story, and is it compelling enough to trigger your sympathy?
It becomes about you.
On a much larger stage, talk shows often do the same. Youtuber Khadija Mbowe published a video essay in 2022 titled 'The Tyra Show, Ego Masquerading as Empathy' in which she examines Tyra Banks's talk show that aired in the mid aughts and how it often used this formula of bringing on a guest who needs help in some way, interviewing them about their hardship, and then provides money or some other type of assistance and the audience claps as the guest cries and thanks Tyra for her generosity.
But is it generosity, or is it payment for a shot of empathy?
Because who are such acts really for? Are they for the poor person or are they for the audience?
The trend of a person filming themselves giving money or assistance to a person in need and then posting it online would suggest it's for the latter.
Offer up your suffering and your misery and you will receive help if your offering pleases us.
Makar's rage and humiliation at this, and at the snide comments of his colleagues as his poverty becomes increasingly visible is powerful stuff and easily the biggest takeaway from 'Poor Folk.'
'I always rely on the kindness of strangers' is a nice sentiment until it becomes your entire life.
Dostoevsky doesn't go as far as to suggest that a rotten system is to blame for putting people in the position for this phenomenon to even occur, but instead seems to suggest that poverty is to be dealt with interpersonally -- poor people helping each other, richer people uplifting poor people in an act of good, Christian charity. Makar receives financial aid from a sympathetic superior at work when they see how Makar's coat is so shabby the buttons are falling off, and Varinka marries a wealthy man.
I disagree with him about the solution being 'you should help poor people if you can -- just don't be cringe about it', but I acknowledge that it does often work that way (unfortunately), and I found his highlighting of the highly transactional relationship between the poor and the not-poor (particularly under capitalism, though that's beyond the scope of the context he was writing in) very correct and insightful.
Aside from the main theme of poverty, there's a subplot that delves into the importance of fiction and reading that is both very lovely and sad.
Of the three early works I've read of Dostoevsky ('Poor Folk', 'The Double', and 'The Landlady'), 'Poor Folk' has by a wide margin the most beautiful prose, and there are long descriptive passages that are just a delight to read:
I loved the fall so much, particularly the late fall after the harvest had been gathered in, when the year's work was finished, when the peasents began to visit each other in their cottages, where everyone was waiting for the winter. Then, everything becomes bleaker, the sky frowns with clouds, yellow leaves carpet the trails at the edge of the forest [...] and the trees look throught the fog like giants, like horrible, frightening ghosts. (p.111)
Another triumph from my man, Fyodor.
But you don't have to take my word for it. Hungarian author Stephen Vizinczey said of 'Poor Folk' in a 2017 review that he reads it every year and it brings him to tears each time.
August 27, 2024
Excelente opción para iniciar con Dostoievski
November 18, 2024
Que belleza de escritura. Me encuentro debatiendo que historia fue la mejor. Pero en general muy bonita experiencia de leer a Fyodor por primera ocasión.
June 17, 2013
The Eternal Husband is the best of the three. The Double is overwrought, (okay, I get it that he's got a split personality and that he has to do paperwork...) and Poor Folk was just a grind. I think I've stated my view of Russian writers before: they have 10 months of winter in which to write, and their readers have 10 months of winter in which to read, so extra material is not a bad thing culturally. Descriptions of evening games played at a summer home in The Eternal Husband went on for pages. While historically it's somewhat interesting to see how people entertained themselves (single men in their 50's and 60s playing a game of tag or other party games in the 'charades' category with a bunch of girls who are 24 and younger?!) These novellas could be short stories but I don't think anyone valued brevity in Russian fiction. That being said, I'm done reading Russian lit for a while.
I do feel kind of sorry for low level government officials in nineteeth century Russia. But no matter, they're all dead now.
I do feel kind of sorry for low level government officials in nineteeth century Russia. But no matter, they're all dead now.
July 3, 2021
I didn't get much out of Poor Folk, other than a kind of masochistic pleasure similar to the weird enjoyment of feeling sorry for oneself. It's basically just a downward spiral of misery for the two main characters.
The Double was more interesting -- it is a mindbender to figure out what is reality and insanity. And the double, the general duplicity, and the often-repeated comments about masks? I couldn't wrap my head around it during a casual read. This would be really fun to do a deep dive into in an academic setting.
The Eternal Husband was a thriller of sorts. I really didn't know what was going to happen at any point, and I enjoyed the complexity of the relationship between Velchaninov and Trusotsky. There is no real hero or villain, and morality seems to shift along a sliding scale throughout the story. It was definitely the most entertaining book of the three.
The Double was more interesting -- it is a mindbender to figure out what is reality and insanity. And the double, the general duplicity, and the often-repeated comments about masks? I couldn't wrap my head around it during a casual read. This would be really fun to do a deep dive into in an academic setting.
The Eternal Husband was a thriller of sorts. I really didn't know what was going to happen at any point, and I enjoyed the complexity of the relationship between Velchaninov and Trusotsky. There is no real hero or villain, and morality seems to shift along a sliding scale throughout the story. It was definitely the most entertaining book of the three.
October 23, 2013
No doubt that Destoevesky is a brilliant deep writer of all the time. three good translated novellas of his in one book was fun, deep and decorated with bleakness journey.
Poor folk: for which I give 3 stars, is a nice novella based on suffering and fear from the unknown, it was slightly boring for it is written in the form of letters between the two main characters.
The double: I give 4 stars, a brilliant story about psychological degradation, a difficult story though full of confusion, may be that's the reason the Russian critics at the time it was written were tough on it. I think it's a pioneer in inner conflict novels. it's a story deserves to be read.
The Eternal Husband: I give 5, for the mystery, capture and charters developments. brilliant, touching, deep as always and ending with hope.
Poor folk: for which I give 3 stars, is a nice novella based on suffering and fear from the unknown, it was slightly boring for it is written in the form of letters between the two main characters.
The double: I give 4 stars, a brilliant story about psychological degradation, a difficult story though full of confusion, may be that's the reason the Russian critics at the time it was written were tough on it. I think it's a pioneer in inner conflict novels. it's a story deserves to be read.
The Eternal Husband: I give 5, for the mystery, capture and charters developments. brilliant, touching, deep as always and ending with hope.
Read
April 23, 2010Includes The Double, Notes from the Underground, and The Eternal Husband
August 25, 2022
eternal husband: 2.5
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews