El adolescente

by Fyodor Dostoevsky

Las novelas de Dostoiévski parten de una experiencia vivida dramáticamente y que el autor transforma magistralmente en una ficción que no deja de ser siempre un trasunto de la realidad. Este realismo es el que caracteriza a El adolescente, novela que tiene como principal protagonista a un joven ruso que admira u odia a su padre según sean las influencias contradictorias que recibe. La vida del adolescente y de un retablo de personajes, maravillosamente caracterizados por Dostoiévski, que bullen en torno de el, va creando un crescendo en la novela, que es lo que mueve al lector a no abandonar la lectura hasta la última página.

Genres: Classics, Fiction, Russian Literature, Russia, Literature, Novels, 19th Century

637 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1875

About the author

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)

Reviews

[Fergus, Weaver of Autistic Webs · Rating 5 out of 5]

This Book Dares to Scream Out the Angst of a Whole New Generation!

I’ll go out on a limb here. The Adolescent is now my FAVOURITE Dostoevsky novel. AND Arkady’s (the adolescent’s) Coming of Age is the best literary depiction of the phenomenon I have read!

Arkady is so ME - even being on the verge of 75 years old - that it’s not Funny.

I know, to you guys my angst is old hat, but it’s never that to me. Why should it be? Because of it, Newness continuously unfolds throughout my life - and I’m always in the midst of adjusting to it.

Arkady is a good kid. But contradictory forces within him have crystallized themselves into one overwhelming insight - the Prince, his natural though not legal father, is totally corrupt. Because he has humiliated Arkady. And now in his twenties, Arkady sets out to PROVE it.

Get a load of this: Arkady’s at an unruly soirée held at a stranger’s apartment. Up to now, he’s never told a soul about his inner turbulence. He’s NEVER spilled the beans - the whole gooey, swimming can of insights about his father's life - to verify what makes this corrupt Prince tick.

It's the whole hidden story of his soul... To control the Prince's evil force over him, he must KNOW his enemy.

But guess what? He tries to do that now. To an angry roomful of utter strangers.

Yikes. How awful -

How does he feel afterward?

Well, disgusted with himself, to be frank. Sickened. Cause they laugh.

So what does Dostoevsky do?

He always yanks us forward out of the adolescent’s embarrassments into the forgiving present. Just as he does throughout his to-die-for oeuvre.

It's like Camus' The Stranger, this book. It gets to our heart - the inner, aching heart of ourselves. His words are Words that Kill, but they kill with the correct modicum of Christian mercy, for none of us is invulnerable.

But then there's something else.

Not only do Dostoevsky's words kill - they also HEAL.

They heal our meaningless life, for now he has established Meaning in the midst of our Void. That meaning is the solution to Arkady's mystery (And the only one) - an ultimate unification of the vast complexities of his life.

And, if you have been given a wrong direction at that critical time of coming of age, he also shows us we're now FORGIVEN. Above all, he implies, you're forgiven because life goes on.

He urges us to BE OURSELVES.

And to make the Best of Our Lives right now - here where we always are - right now, in the present moment. To be strong. And to keep up our Quest to the end.
***

Whew. Well, want a retirement project that really satisfies?

Want to see right through to the BOTTOM of your soul?

Read this book, or any other of Dostoevsky's stellar masterpieces!

They'll take you right where you have to go: right through the fire.

And if you as fully identify with Arkady as I do - with his clamorous self-doubt, his endlessly vacillating anguish over his guiding IDEA, his fear and loathing of the rich and powerful -

You may at its end catch a glimpse of the serenity that comes when such monstrous impasses are seen as only shallow puddles, created by the rushing rain of a Spring shower.

[Luís · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fourth of Dostoyevsky's five river novels (published between The Demons and The Brothers Karamazov), The Adolescent is the least known and probably the most minor read.
The teenager, Arkadi Makarovich Dolgorouki, is the bastard of a lord and the wife of one of his serfs, with whom he lives, although the husband is still alive. The book is a first-person account of several important events to the character and those around him.
Arkadi knew his parents little in his early years; he came to live with them in Saint Petersburg, his baccalaureate in his pocket. The title is well-chosen because the hero is a "typical" teenager. In revolt and opposition, wanting to settle accounts, proud, susceptible, but at the same time not at all sure of himself, and therefore speaking loud and clear, at the most ill-chosen moments, pretentious and naive, he is, at times, quite unbearable.
The plot is almost even more complicated than in the author's other novels, and you have to hang on a bit to avoid getting lost in it and find yourself in all the characters. However, as in other works by the author, we see metaphysical questioning, notions of freedom, and evil. In addition, the work includes many biographical aspects, such as game scenes (roulette).
Undoubtedly less striking than other books of the author, at least for me, it is nevertheless a gripping and dense reading. Perhaps the young man's choice to write the novel as a diary was not the best angle possible, as it is sometimes repetitive. The young man is not of exceptional clarity and penetration, and certain complex aspects of Dostoyevsky's thought have more difficulty expressing themselves through his pen.

[Vit Babenco · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Adolescent is an intentionality melodramatic satire of manners.
Some persons never manage to grow up…
The narrator and hero of the novel is a superficial and infantile twenty-one-year-old man… 

It has just occurred to me that if I had at least one reader, he would probably burst out laughing at me, as at a most ridiculous adolescent who, having preserved his stupid innocence, barges with his reasonings and solutions into things he doesn’t understand.

He is an illegitimate son of the landowner who was his former master… The story of his birth is quite simple and it isn’t unique…

For a depraved “young pup” (and they were all depraved, all of them to a man – both progressives and retrogrades) to sin with a pretty, flirtatious serving girl (and my mother was not flirtatious) was not only possible but inevitable, especially considering his novelistic status as a young widower, and his idleness. But to fall in love for one’s whole life – that is too much. I can’t guarantee that he loved her, but that he dragged her with him all his life is quite true.

He lives in the world of poverty… But he lives among those whose interests rotate around money… He lives in the world of intrigues…

Money is, of course, a despotic power, but at the same time it’s also the highest equalizer, and that is its chief strength. Money equalizes all inequalities.

He is one of those known as the hollow men… He knows nothing but attempts to meddle in everything… His head is fool of preposterous thoughts and foolish ideas… He believes that the prodigal son was a biblical hero…

“It’s in the Bible that children leave their fathers and start their own nest… If an idea beckons… if there’s an idea! The idea’s the main thing, the idea’s everything…”

No reason… No will… Just heaps of ludicrous ambitions… Due to his immaturity everybody wants to use him as a cat’s paw… He turns into a laughing stock… He dreams about revenge…

“There’s no way I can vindicate myself, to start a new life is also impossible, and so – submit, become a lackey, a dog, an insect, an informer, a real informer now, but at the same time quietly make preparations, and one day – blow it all sky high, destroy everything, everybody – the guilty and the not-guilty, and then suddenly they’ll all find out that it’s the same one they called a thief… and only then kill myself.”

One born to crawl will never fly.

[BookHunter M ُH َM َD · Rating 4 out of 5]

ضحية مجتمع أم ساذج مغرق في سذاجته؟ لا يهم .. فهو في عرف المجتمع مراهق عديم الخبرة سريع التأذي .. حساس حساسية زائدة عن الحد. بالرغم من سنوات عمره العشرين إلا أنه سماه مراهق ربما لانغلاقه على نفسه منذ وعى حقيقة وجوده و ازدرائه للجميع منتظرا الفرصة ليأخذ حظه من الحياة و ينفذ فكرته التي سيطرت عليه.

نعم. لقد استولى عليّ حلم القوة و العزلة طوال حياتي. حتى في سن لو أتيح لأحد أثناءها أن يرى ما كان يدور في رأسي من خواطر لضحك ضحكا شديدا. لذلك أحب السر كثيرا. و كنت أسترسل في الأحلام استرسالا لا يبقي لي وقت للحديث مع الناس. و قد استنتج الناس من ذلك أنني متوحش. و كان ذهولي يبعثهم على تأويلات أشد إيغالا في الخطأ أيضا. و لكن خديّ المتوردين كانتا تبرهنان على غير ذلك.

يعتز بنفسه كثيرا رغم ذلك و يؤمن بأن لديه من الفكر و العزيمة ما يمكن أن يصل به على منزلة روتشيلد في الغنى و المكانة يوما ما.

قد يضحك بعض الناس و يدهشون إذا أنا قلت لهم أنني منذ طفولتي – أو نحو ذلك – لم أستطع في يوم من الأيام أن أتخيل نفسي إلا في المنزلة الأولى في كل مكان و في كل ظرف.

لن يعدم دوستويفسكي أن ينكأ جراحا فلسفية مثيرا لقارئه عاصفة من التأملات التي تزحزح ثوابته و تجبره على إعادة تدوير أفكاره القديمة.

إن الحقيقة قائمة في مكان بالوسط. كذلك شأنها دائما. فرب أمر واحد يكون حقيقة مقدسة تارة و يكون كذبا سفيها تارة أخرى.

و لن ينسى أيضا أن تكون السياسة حاضرة بقوة سواء السياسة الروسية أو العالمية و حتى الاقتصاد استطاع أن يتنبأ بما سيحدث فيه لعدة عقود قادمة في فقرة واحدة من الرواية.

ان جميع الدول رغم توازن الميزانيات و عدم وجود عجز ستفيق ذات صباح فإذا هي متورطة تورطا حاسما. و إذا هي جميعا ترفض أن تدفع. و إذا هي في إفلاس شامل. و لكن جميع العناصر المحافظة في العالم بأسره ستناهض هذا. لأن هذه العناصر ستكون هي مالكة الأسهم و ستكون هي الدائنة. و بطبيعة الحال. سيحدث عندئذ نوع من الأكسدة. يزداد عدد اليهود و يقوم حكمهم. و بعد ذلك. فإن جميع الذين لم يملكوا أسهما في يوم من الأيام – أي جميع الشحاذين – سيرفضون المساهمة في الأكسدة طبعا. فتقوم المعركة. و بعد سبعين هزيمة. يبيد الشحاذين مالكي الأسهم. و يأخذون أسهمهم و يحلون محلهم. كمساهمين أيضا بطبيعة الحال. و قد يقولون شيئا جديدا. و قد لا يقولون. و أغلب الظن أنهم سيفلسون هم أيضا.

و لأن نابليون هو المثل الأعلى في الجبروت و هو من استطاع أن يسرق البريق من القيصر منذ محاولة اجتياح روسيا فإنك تجده حاضرا بقوة في الكثير من روايات دوستويفسكي.

اسمح لي. لقد قامت ثورة في فرنسا و أُعدم الناس بالمقصلة. ثم جاء نابليون و أخذ كل شيء. فالثورة هي الأولى و نابليون هو الثاني. و لكن نابليون أصبح هو الأول و أصبحت الثورة هي الثانية.

لفرط سذاجته و اعتداده بنفسه يقع في المشاكل و يتعرض لاحتقار طبقة من الشعب لا يكن لها هو نفسه أي احترام و رغم أنهم سرقوه إلا أنهم اتهموه باللصوصية و طردوه شر طرده.

يستحيل عليّ بعد اليوم أن أبريء نفسي. يستحيل عليّ أن أبدأ حياة جديدة. فيجب إذن أن أخضع. يجب أن أجعل نفسي خادما. يجب أن أكون كلبا. أن أكون ذبابة. أن أكون واشيا. أن أكون الآن واشيا بالفعل. و في أثناء ذلك أستعد بهدوء و رفق. حتى إذا آن الأوان في ذات يوم. دمرت كل شيء. أبدت كل شيء. أفنيت العالم كله. المجرمين فيه و الأبرياء. و سيعلم الناس جميعا حينذاك على حين فجأة أن الذي فعل ذلك إنما هو الرجل الذي اتهموه بأنه لص. و بعدئذ أنتحر.

كثيرون من انتحروا أو لوحوا بالانتحار في هذه الرواية.

الانتحار أكبر خطيئة يرتكبها الإنسان. و لكن الرب هو الحاكم الوحيد. لأنه وحده يعرف كل شيء. مقاييس و حدودا. و واجبنا نحن هو أن ندعو الله لأمثال هؤلاء الخطاة الكبار. فإذا سمعت عن خطيئة كهذه الخطيئة. فادع لمرتكبها دعاء حنونا قبل أن تنام. و تشفع له عند الرب و لو كنت تعرفه. و إذا كنت لا تعرفه تكون شفاعتك أجدى.

كنت أظن أن دوستويفسكي يفهم المرأة أكثر من الآخرين و لكن هيهات

إنني لا أزال حتى هذا اليوم عاجزا عن أن أقطع فيها برأي. إن الله وحده قادر على أن يرى عواطفها. ثم إن الإنسان جهاز يبلغ من التعقيد أن المرء لا يستطيع أن يفهم من أمره شيئا. و لا سيما إن كان هذا الإنسان امرأة.

تبدا الحكاية بالمرأة و تنتهي بالمرأة و يكون محورها و فاكهتها دوما .. المرأة. و إلا ما كانت حكاية.

سأظل أفكر فيك طول حياتي تفكيري في أغلى إنسان و أنبل قلب و أقدس شيء يمكن أن أحبه و أحترمه. آندره بتروفتش .. افهمني. إنني لم أجيء إلى هنا عبثا يا عزيزي. يا من كنت �� لا تزال عزيزا على قلبي. لن أنسى أبدا ما أثرته في نفسي من مشاعر أثناء لقاءاتنا الأولى. فلننفصل صديقين. و لسوف تظل في حياتي أجلّ خواطري شأنا و أحلاها مذاقا.

كانت هذه الرواية الأجدر بأن تسمى الأبله �� ليس المراهق. فما كان الأمير مشكين أبلها و لا كان آركادي بتروفتش مراهقا فلم فعلت هذا بنا يا دوستويفسكي؟

[D. · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5/5

"Dostoevsky gives me more than any scientist, more than Gauss." - Albert Einstein

Dostoyevsky knew how to rip open a human soul and leave it bare in front of his readers. What can I say about his understanding of human mind that haven't been said before? So, I will just stick to a brief review on this book and my experience reading it.

Firstly, 'The Adolescent' should not be compared to Dostoyevsky's other major works. This novel does not have the grand setting like 'Brothers Karamazov' nor does it have high philosophical depth like 'The Idiot' or 'Crime and Punishment', but for me it was equally enjoyable.

The novel starts with an adolescent confessing his story and how he changed as a person. Dostoyevsky introduces us to Arkady Dolgoruky's "idea" and how he wants to weave his life around it. But then, like many adolescents these ideas are built on high impulses and whims, and thereby he slowly loses his determination to take it forward. This is followed by a series of very interesting scenes and conversations which I would not reveal as it might spoil the experience of anyone who is willing to read this book in future.

For me Dostoyevsky and his stories are very important; for life and for living. Reading his works always gives me assurance that I am being understood. And I always felt that the need of being understood is more powerful than the need of being loved.

Following are few lines from "The Adolescent":
"Yes, Arkady, my friend, this sort of memory is always painful. It is like certain 'painful' scenes in the works of great writers that throughout our lives hurt us when we think of them-for instance, the final monologue of Shakespeare's Othello, Pushkin's Eugene Onegin at the feet of Tatyana, or the scene is Victor Hugo's Les Miserables where the escaped convict meets the little girl. Once they have clawed at your heart, the scar will always be there..."


I too carry these scars, and for quite a few of them Dostoyevsky is to be blamed.

[Fernando · Rating 4 out of 5]

“La única cosa que me consolaba, después de cada una de aquellas vergüenzas, era que, a pesar de todo, me quedaba mi “idea”, siempre en su escondite, y que yo no la había entregado. No, no puedo vivir con los hombres; incluso hoy día estoy convencido de ello; y hablo con cuarenta años de anticipación. Mi idea es mi rincón.”

Fiódor Dostoievski supo lograr en mí, hasta la rutilante aparición de Franz Kafka, lo que ningún escritor había podido: liberarme del hechizo de Edgar Allan Poe.
Hubo una época en que el genio de Poe logró que yo, más allá de tener mis preferencias y admirar a muchos escritores, no pudiera ejercer, en cierto modo, una libre reseña sin tomar como punto de partida o comparación (decisión errónea) su obra. Cuando conocí a Dostoievski, comencé a cambiar ciertas formas de pensar y “sentir” la literatura.
Cada una de sus novelas iba marcando en mí nuevas sensaciones, nuevas formas de pensar. Con esto no quiero decir que ya no quiera más a Poe. Lo sigo admirando, es y será mi autor preferido por siempre.
Pero Dostoievski ha logrado subirse a ese pedestal de preferencia y compartirlo con el genio norteamericano. Posiciono también en un pequeñísimo escalón más abajo a Herman Melville, Franz Kafka y Oscar Wilde, entre otros para ese top five, aunque la lista de mis escritores preferidos es larga y puede verse en mi perfil de goodreads.
Ahora bien: El Adolescente es una de esas novelas en que Dostoievski nos vuelve a poner a veces a favor y a veces en contra del personaje principal, Arcadio Makarovitch Dolgoruki.
A primera vista un personaje simple, pero que con el correr de las páginas demuestra tener muchos costados disímiles.
Al comenzar la novela uno encuentra en los monólogos de Arcadio a una especie de “narrador del subsuelo encubierto”. En otras oportunidades, sus pensamientos extremos y alocados me recuerdan a los más encerrados delirios de Raskólnikov. Arcadio es un muchacho marcado también por la misoginia. Basta con citar su frase: “¡Es una mujer, es una serpiente! Toda mujer es serpiente y toda serpiente es mujer” para darnos una idea de su pensar.
Podríamos decir que algo de autobiográfico hay en esto, también. Algunos ven en Dostoievski a un misógino redimido.
En sus primeras ideas, Arcadio que intenta sostener a lo largo de la novela, ideas a las que considera revolucionarias y suele utilizarlas como parámetro para sus escalas morales y sociales.
"El Adolescente" es la única novela larga que Dostoievski escribió en primera persona, lo que cambia un poco el eje de su planteo narrativo en cuanto a la dinámica de la novela polifónica, puesto que él es quien creó este tipo de novelas y este es un concepto bajtiniano con el que yo congenio mucho.
Si bien en sus novelas polifónicas, cada héroe lleva adelante su idea (como en el caso de Arcadio, quien la denomina “idea rincón”), en este caso a y a diferencia de otras de sus novelas, él, como autor, no se queda tan al costado dejándole el control de ella a sus personajes.
Puede notarse muchos pensamientos autobiográficos en algunos de ellos, tanto en Arcadio como también en Andrés Petrovich Versilov, su padre adoptivo o en el anciano Makar Ivanovitch Dolgoruki, su anciano padre biológico. Cabe destacar que las charlas entre estos tres personajes son maravillosas.
Párrafo aparte para la compleja relación de Arcadio con Versilov, su padre adoptivo. Durante toda la novela esta relación es víctima de vaivenes, idas, vueltas y contramarchas, dado que las relaciones amor-odio están a la orden del día. Es siempre importante destacar que todo gira alrededor de un punto: una carta comprometedora. Tan sólo esto le basta a Dostoievski para mantener al lector intrigado hasta llegar al desenlace de la historia.
En líneas generales me ha gustado mucho esta novela. Me ha mantenido atento y entretenido.
Como siempre digo, nunca me decepciona (de hecho nunca lo hizo) y si bien me faltan leer tres de sus novelas capitales, a saber, El Idiota, Los Demonios y Los hermanos Karamazov, encuentro en esta novela, no tan bien valorada por la crítica de todas las épocas, una en la que también sabe adentrarse con maestría en los intrincados vericuetos de la mente humana.

[Peter · Rating 5 out of 5]

Mein Anspruch an mich selbst war zu hoch. Es gelingt mir einfach nicht die richtigen Worte zu finden für das Leseerlebnis dieses Buches. Es war mein erster "großer" Dostojewski, und ich bin ihn mit einer gewissen Ehrfurcht angegangen. Glücklicherweise konnte ich diese bald ablegen, denn der Roman zog mich in sich hinein. Anfangs nahm ich mir noch die Zeit Querbezügen und Anspielungen nachzuspüren, dann aber packte mich die Geschichte und ich musste einfach wissen, wie sie weitergeht. Darf ein Klassiker ein Pageturner sein? oder mache ich da etwas falsch? Die Tatsache, das es mir so ging liegt sicherlich auch an der großartigen Übersetzung durch Swetlana Geier, die Erklärungen im Anhang zudem das Verständnis sehr erleichterten. Allein schon den Mut den Titel neu und damit endlich richtig zu übersetzen muss man ihr hoch anrechnen. Was kann ich noch sagen: Lest dieses Buch! Lasst Euch nicht beeinflussen von der fälschlichen Meinung dies sei der schwächste der "Elefanten". Er ist es sicher nicht.

[Ramón S. · Rating 5 out of 5]

A book I will never forget. I read it in a period of my life with difficulties with my father and this book helped me a lot.
In fact my father had been who introduced me to Dostoyevsky

[Mohamed Bayomi · Rating 4 out of 5]

ربما دوستويفسكي لا يعطي القارئ المتعة بقدر ما يعطيه تجربة حياة ، فلو أردنا ان نصف دوستويفسكي ، فأفضل وصف انه انسان ، انسان خبير في الانسان ، فعندما يكتب عن مراهق تشعر ان النص انما كتبه مراهق حقا ، ربما كان يكتب عن نفسه في الحقيقة ، ولا اعلم ان كان ذلك الطبع هو طبع كل مراهق ام لا ، الا انني اجد شيئا من نفسي في تلك الرواية ، فسمة المراهق هي الرفض ، فهو رافض ومرفوض يشعر ان العالم يرفضه ويريده ويشعر ايضا انه يستطيع أن يحرق العالم وايضا يستطيع ان يملكه و ان يملؤه اعجابا
-سيدرك يوما اننا كلنا عاديون غارقون في العادية الا في عيون احبائنا - وربما ذلك التناقض هو سر تعقيد شخصية اي مراهق

قرأت جملة لبيوجفتش ووقفت امامها كثيرا والجملة هي
قد يوجد ملحد على خلق ولكن لا يوجد الحاد اخلاقي
فإذ انا افهمها من دوستويفسكي بجملة واحدة بسيطة وسهلة ، فيقول دوستو
ما شاني انا بما سيجري في انسانيتكم هذه بعد الف عام ، اذا كان قانونكم لا يهب لي جزاء ذلك لا حبا ولا حياة اخرى ولا شهادة بفضيلتي ؟
هل يوجد حجة اسهل ؟
قضية الايمان ربما كانت النقطة الجوهرية في اعمال دوستويفسكي الضخمة ، وربما ايضا هي قضية العصر الذي عاش فيه ، وربما صنف البعض دوستويفسكي انه عدمي ، الا انني استبعدت ولازالت استبعد عدمية دوستويفسكي خصوصا عند قراءتي للجريمة والعقاب والاخوة كرامازوف ، صحيح ان شخصية ايفان في الاخوة كرامازوف وشخصية راسكولينكوف في الجريمة والعقاب قد يكونان المثال الاوضح والاعمق للانسان العدمي ، الا انك تجد ان أفكارهم لم تصمد امام انفسهم اولا ، او الاصح ان نقول ان انفسهم لم تصمد امام أفكارهم ، فعندما يكتب دوستويفسكي على لسان ايفان ، ما دام الله غير موجود فكل شيء مباح ، فكإنه يجزم بوجود الله ، الا ان رواية المراهق ربما جعلتني ارى زاوية اخرى في ذلك الانسان ، فاجده مرة مؤمن ومرة شكاك ، اجده يتحدث عن طوباوية أرضية ثم يعود ليؤكد استحالة الطوباوية ، يتحدث عن الحياة بدون اله عذاب ثم يعود يتحدث عن الحلم المستحيل ثم يعود اخيرا فيقول ،حقا ان على هذه الارض قدرا ، فربما كان دوستويفسكي مؤمن شكاك او الافضل ان اقول عليه كما قال هو نفسه على احد ابطال الرواية
ان امثال هؤلاء الرجال ما ينبغي ان يحكم عليهم بالمقاييس التي يحكم بها على غيرهم ، ان لهم شأنا خاصا ،ان حياتهم ستنقضي دائما على هذا النحو ،وليس في ذلك شذوذ ،بالعكس ، فانما الشذوذ أن يجدوا الهدوء ،وان يصبحوا كسائر الناس المتوسطين

اعود مرة اخرى للمراهقة و سمة اخرى هي الجمال والمثل الاعلى والظما اليهما والقدرة على الحب الجامح الذي يبدو في كثير من الاحيان مثالي ، وتلك السمات قد تستمر عمرا فيعيش الرجل عمره مراهق ، وربما كان البطل وابوه في قصتنا مراهقين ، ودوستو تحدث في كذا موضع عن المثل الاعلى ، فيأخذ عطيل كمثال ويفرق بين الانسان الغيور والانسان الوثوق ، فهو يرى ان الغيور لا يقتل اما الرجل الوثوق فهو قد يقتل اذا انهدم مثله الاعلى ، وربما كان ليقتل اركادي او فريسلوف كاترينا ، بما انها كانت تمثل مثلهما الاعلى لو انها
اظهرت في اي ظرف شيء من الحقارة


اقتباسات

كل ما أطلبه هو ان تتيح لي أن أكذب ، وسوف ترى أن ما سأقوله جميل جدا


إن الحقيقة قائمة في مكان بالوسط ، كذلك شأنها دائما


لئن قتل عطيل ديدمونة ، ثم قتل نفسه ، فإنه لم يفعل ذلك عن غيرة ، وانما فعله لانه سلب مثله الأعلى


ليس من حقي أن أحكم على الآخرين ، لأنني لا أجيد الألم


انني اسجل هذه الخطوات الحقيرة لأبين مدى ما كنت عليه في ذلك الاوان من ترجح في فهم الخير والشر ، والعاطفة وحدها هي التي انقذتني


حتى اذا ان الاوان في ذات يوم دمرت كل شيء ، ابدت كل شيء ، أفنيت العالم كله ، المجرمين فيه والابرياء


الملحد الانسان ، ربما كنت أخشاه الى الان ، ولكن هذا الملحد الانسان لم يتفق لي ان لاقيته مرة واحدة في يوم من الايام ، وانما انا لقيت الملحد المشوش


هؤلاء ليس فيهم جمالا ، ولا يريدون الجمال ، هم جميعا أموات ، ولكن كلا منهم يتباهى بموته ، ولا يخطر بباله ان يتجه الى الحقيقة الوحيدة ، أن يعيش المرء بغير إله فذلك عذاب



ان الحزن يمتزج بالفرح كلما مضت السنون ، ثم يستحيل الى زفرة سعيدة ، هكذا تجري الامور في هذا العالم


ان العصر الذهبي هو الحلم المستحيل الذي حلمه كل من وجدوا على هذه الارض

[Michael Finocchiaro · Rating 4 out of 5]

While not in the upper pantheon of Dostoyevsky novels, the Adolescent is nonetheless a literary tour de force loaded with political intrigue and some of the most enigmatic characters in his work. Once you have read Crime & Punishment, Demons, and Crime and Punishment, this one is required reading!

[MihaElla · Rating 5 out of 5]

One line from Dostoevsky’s work has impressed me much during my early youth reading journey through his novels. He says ‘in suffering look for happiness’. Truth to tell, even before reading his works I used to think that nothing of value could be attained without hard work. This remains valid as of today. But, after reading more and more, that is to say, other very famous novelists before or after him time-wise, and drinking different messages of existence, love, life, enjoyment and celebration, I realize that previous idea was quite masochistic.
What to do? Nothing to be done! Fyodor Dostoevsky is a very special case - he managed to write novels which perhaps are the best in the whole literature of the world – he was a genius. His insight into human beings and their problems is greater than some psychoanalysts, and there are moments where he reaches the heights of great mystics. Well, maybe even transcend them. I love Dostoevsky and all his works have been of immense value to me. I feel there is a depth of sadness in him, which he seems to stop as if something of the opposite is missing..
Reading The Adolescent (or A Raw Youth) – first time, but I foresee re-reading in the future – I cannot help thinking if he himself was not a psychological case. He was capable of writing such great insights as if he was possessed, as if he never knew that there is something like laughter, he was sickly serious. He seems a madman, yet he had such clarity about things.
Our hero by his name Dolgoruky Arkady Makarovitch – a youth of 21 years old – takes the time to sit down to write his own autobiography – basically these are the recollections of the last year before these notes were taken – even if he states that “one must be too disgustingly in love with self to be able without shame to write about oneself”. His motivation is other than to win the praise of his readers, but simply from an inward impulse, because he was so impressed by all that has happened. What it results is a masterful memoir of his inmost secrets of his soul, with some artistic description of his feelings, and some making of reflections, of all possible shades, all leading to a composite structure that brings a lot of satisfaction to a reader used to Dostoevsky’s style.
From the first chapter, on the identity of the narrator writer is shed full light. He is in fact an illegitimate son of the former owner of his legal (old) father, formerly a serf in the household of the Versilov’s. As it happened, the master of the household, a widow of 25 years returns for a time to his village and there he fell in love with the mother of our hero (feeling which is obviously mutual, but absolutely infinite from her side), which is as well a serf, still very young and good-looking. He gives a detailed account about who he was, where he had been till then, and what was the state of mind on the day about which he marked the beginning of his recollections of previous year.
Strange relations grew up, somewhat ceremonious and almost solemn between the legitimate father (who eventually becomes a pilgrim), his mother (who follows her lover hopelessly) and the noble man Versilov (who eventually loses all his money and lives mostly on charity). As most of the time it is emphasized the young Dolgoruky is like an outcast, and almost from his birth he had been with strangers. Around 19 years old he gave up the dream to go to the University and decided to leave Moscow and return to Petersburg to be or live for a while with his family…
For the most part of the book – which is rather lengthy in my opinion and it might prove a challenge because some things get also a bit repetitive – I have been completely absorbed in the descriptions of the dreams he had from early childhood, dreams that took a firm grip on his life, gained force and a definite shape that mould his character, but also his mostly coloured musings, in the sense that he decided that he shall never be alone as he has been for so many awful years because he shall have his “idea” ! The stuff about his “idea” is tragic-comic. I couldn’t help feeling so sorry about him. All that writing is like a cloud of words or the ravings of delirium.
Basically, this is just the tip of the iceberg. The book is a grand epopee of some very mixed and queer family relationships, intrigues, lies and farces, connections with princes and high-society people, but also with people of lower rank, even doubtful integrity. There are lots of interesting, profoundly thoughtful dialogues about abstract subjects – for example of God and of his existence, but also about practical ones, such as of women :) I couldn’t help wondering how the clever men, very learned, usually end by questioning if their intellect is quite sound. It is shocking (or not) but most of the characters in the book are in fact mad, or almost mad, otherwise it is hard to understand their ramblings so incoherently.
Before finishing the book, by a curious game of circumstances, I was reminded of the lyrics of Sympathy for the Devil, of the legendary The Rolling Stones. There seems to an amazing clarification that the book is also trying to expose. I listened to it couple of times and I realized it tells quite well why this book is so puzzling, in and by itself...

“Please allow me to introduce myself,
I'm a man of wealth and taste
I've been around for a long, long year
Stole many a man's soul and fate
I was 'round when Jesus Christ
Had his moments of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that Pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
But what's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game
I stuck around St. Petersburg
When I saw it was a time for a change
Killed the Czar and his ministers
Anastasia screamed in vain
I rode a tank
Held a General's rank
When the Blitzkrieg raged
And the bodies stank
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
What's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, oh yeah
I watched the glee
While your kings and queens
Fought for ten decades
For the Gods they made
I shouted out
"Who killed the Kennedys?"
Well after all
It was you and me
Let me please introduce myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
And I laid traps for troubadours
Who get killed before they reached Bombay

Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
But what's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, oh yeah
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
But what's confusing you
Is just the nature of my game, ooh yeah
Just as every cop is a criminal
And all the sinners saints
As heads is tails just call me Lucifer
I'm in need of some restraint
So if you meet me, have some courtesy
Have some sympathy and some taste
Use all your well learned politics
Or I'll lay your soul to waste, mmm yeah
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, mmm yeah
But what's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, get down
Woo hoo, ah yeah, get on down, oh yeah
Tell me, baby, what's my name?
Tell me, honey, baby guess my name
Tell me, baby, what's my name?
I'll ya one time you're to blame
What's my name?
Tell me, baby, what's my name?
Tell me, sweetie, what's my name?...”

[Ahmed · Rating 5 out of 5]

لو كان فيه 10 او حتى 100 نجمة كان خدها بكل سهولة

معرفش ازاي حرجع اقرا للكتاب "العاديين"، ا

عبقرية الى ابعد الحدود،
اخيرا كاتب ادى للانسان التعقيد الي يستحقه، مش شوية معطيات و معلومات بتاخدها في نوتة في اول القصة و البطل زي الروبوت بيتحرك على اساسها باقي القصة

الابطال مش اغبيا (و ديه حاجة باعشقها في القصص - السبب الوحيد الي ممكن يخليني اني اقرا لبطل غبي هي ان القصة تكون كوميدي) ، القصة 800 صفحة تقريبا بس محستش بذرة ملل طول القصة

القصة مكتوبة من 150 سنة تقريبا، بس في احيان كتيرة المراهق الي في القصة احسه انه انا، و بيفكر في افكار غاية في الخصوصية انا ليه مفكر فيها من يومين مثلا، ده غير الافكار المعقدة جدا الي بعد ما بافهمها اتحير ما فكرتش فيها ازاي قبل كده

نوتة على جنب كده خدت بالي منها، ازاي العلاقات بين الناس كانت معقدة، و متشابكة، على عكس علاقتنا دلوقت الي كلها تقريبا بقت سطحية مبنتعاملش مع الناس الا عشان المصلحة (الفضفضة الشخصية او كون الواحد زهقان ديه مصلحة برضه، بس ده موضوع تاني)

اصره، طبعا ريكومندد لاي حد لسه مقراش لدستويفسكي،

[karen · Rating 2 out of 5]

what a brat!

[Fonch · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dedicated to every parent in the world.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm so sorry it took me so long to write this review, and it may take me a while to write others. My father needs me, to help him write a book, and to conclude a thesis. So I don't know how long it's going to take to write a new review. You know, as much as I pleased you, first is duty, and then pleasure.
The first thing I must say about"The Teenager" is that since I read his argument in the encyclopedia of Garzanti Literature. It was just a book, that I wanted to own, and read. I must thank the forerunner, who made him stop being afraid of what the protagonist of"The Citadel" https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... Andrew Manson called"Russian bugs". I must confess, they really intimidate by seeing their large number of pages, and the aura that surrounds them. But it was my dear Juan Manuel de Prada https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...
, who brought me closer to Dostoyevsky. I remember, as both he and I was decisively marked by the reading of Crime and Punishment https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7...
and how the power of sin, evil, redemption, and grace were explored, and how they could live together in man. In fact, also of all the books, which I've read to Dostoyevsky is my favorite. The second of my favorites I suppose, it will be"humiliated and offended" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3... that I drank so much from that Charles Dickens book "The Antique Shop" from which I set out to write a review, and in the end I did not :-( https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4... that I didn't find it as cloying, or as cheesy, as was said. Of course Oscar Wilde was not fine, when he commented that "you had to have a heart of stone so as not to die laughing as you read the ending" https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... we can say, that your opinion became more sensible, when you tested the English prison system in your flesh. Then of course, he liked the reform that Dickens's books pushed. In fact in this novel "The Teen" we will see a reference to this novel by Charles Dickens https://www.goodreads.com/author/show.... . However, although it was one of the novels, which I valued worst, perhaps the novel that has marked me the most, perhaps it was "The Idiot" is curious as there are novels, which seem to mark us, if to imitate our life. My father was marked "Madame Bovary", because the same thing happened to Dr. Bovary https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2... the same thing happened to me with "The Idiot" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... I did not understand, as a writer, who lived a century before my birth (even today) I could know so much the human soul. What Liov Nikolayevich Mischkin thought i thought about myself, and I also had a love triangle. I didn't know if I was Mischkin, or Gavrila Ivanovich. All I know is, I fell in love with a woman, and even though I had a boyfriend, I wanted to marry her, and I would have done anything to get it. Yet I never got to know my Parfen Semionovich Rogochin I didn't even get to see him, and I never had an Aglaya. Of course, even though I didn't give him a good note, he left a shock that I never recovered from. So when I read the Garzanti, and I saw the plot, I realized, that I had to get this novel to cost what it cost. It took a long time. Because it was one of Dostoyevsky's few books, which was not redeemed. I only found a copy in the Youth publishing house in the Book House, and once I got it. It took me a year to read it. I used to wait to see what my friend Manuel Alfonseca said https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... (I must admit, it was my guinea pig), and the same thing happened to me with the "Demons" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5.... I recognize that I was fascinated by the plot of a teenager, who admires and hates his father at the same time, and who was supposed to be the cause of his destruction, as he was manipulated by an evil French schoolmate named Lambert. I was fascinated by that villain, because it reminded me of a character, which I had created for a role-playing game. Lambert's shadow always haunted me. Yet we will see that the work or the plot is not entirely accurate. If you agree that it is a novel, it is divided into three parts, and takes place in a few days. It's a family saga, and another of its characteristics. It's probably the least original of Dostoyevsky's novels. He doesn't have anything novel in himself, but borrows things from his other novels, but of course it's this mixture of everything. Which makes the novel great. This is the story of Arcadi Makarovitch Dolgoruki (despite the princely surname) we see that he is the son of a servant. He is actually the illegitimate son of Andrei Petrovitch Versilov, but a very holy servant (who will leave very little, and almost at the end) Makar Ivanovisch Dolgoruki just as Engels decides to recognize Arkady and his sister Lisa, as his children and marry the peasant whom he seduced V ersilov in this case Sofia Andreievna, which is sometimes called Sonia, and this is a sign, when a character is called Sonia. It's just that he's a very positive, religious, and benevolent character. It's no coincidence that Dostoevevsky called his heroine that. Because still, makar Ivanovitch. Sofia is the most benevolent character in history (on the subject of masters who sleep with servants read "Resurrection" of Tolstoy https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4... clear, that for me does Dostoevsky better than Tolstoy) of course, for me does Dostoyevsky better than Tolstoy. The protagonist Arkady will have a purpose during each of the three parts. In the first he hesitates whether to take down his father Versilov, or fall of fennel at his feet. Dostoyevsky's greatest achievement and I fully agree with my friend Alfonseca. He has been the success of Dostoyevsky in building the psychology, and personality of a teenager. It could almost be a millennial. Here is the achilles heel of the character, who is very impetuous, very soon to action, very passionate, but because of his youth is conformist, and is a character manipulated by all at his will, who play with him, as if it were a toy. Except for Natsume Soseki's novel (which I don't like) "I'm a cat." I have not seen a more impotent narrator, and with less force, though everything can change. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6... Thanks to Arkady we get to know each of the characters, it is like a guide, which Dostoevsky offers to the reader. You could say, it's our eyes. We meet Arkady's half-sister Ana Andreievna Versilova, who aspires to marry the older Sokolski, who is Arkady's patron, and friend of Arkady. We will also see that it relates to another Sokolski, who has had a conflict with Versilov. One thing is very well achieved. Arkady may be debated between love and hatred of his father, but what is certain if someone tries to hurt his father will go after that person. However, there is a key character in the Catalina Nikolayevna Ahkmakova plot, who will play with both Arkadi and Versilov. This plot reminded me a lot of a beautiful novel by Francois Mauriac called "Desert of Love" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... , in fact, Akhmakova reminded me of Marie Cross who is reminded of a father and a son, and just as this novel has a similar solution. This novel would say, which is the opposite of "Demons", because if liberalism, socialism, and communism were criticized there, for being anti-Russian and European ideologies. Here what is criticized is the personalism of Ayn Rand https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... mean individualism, and Nietszchenean theories. We see, if Raskolnikov wanted to be Napoleon. At first Arkady wants to be Rotschild. For all, socialism will be both real and utopian will be present in these pages through the conspirators Dergatchev (actually Dolgurine), Vassine (Vanzinne) (this will be an important character that will have a lot of influence with the Dolguriki) and Kraft (Kracht), who remembers the Kirilov of "The Demons" (another character that might have been very important). In this case there are two mcguffins. One is a real mcguffin, and one decisive for the plot. In any case, Arkady's individualism is crushed, because he cannot do evil, and in this he looks a lot like Raskolnikov, in fact, which is a hybrid between Raskolnikov, and Mishkin. In this case, not much injury is opened in the struggle between Catholicism, against orthodoxy. Even if there's some allusion. The wound from the schism of Miguel Cerulario and Humberto de Silvacandida remains open. For Dostoyevsky Catholicism is a kind of atheism, and something that being foreign must be rejected in favor of Russian orthodoxy, and its Slavophilic theses. In fact, and this is to be appreciated his novel has more on slavophilia, and less on the differences between Catholicism and orthodoxy. Anyway, this is very confusing, because on the one hand the characters hate Catholicism, but on the other hand both Pavlichev tutor of Mishkin , as Versilov talks about the possibility that they are Catholic. So Dostoyevsky's message is very ambiguous. Liubba insisted that his novels were philocatholic, Soloviev https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... we do not know, whether he died Catholic, or Orthodox. This will always remain an enigma in the Dostoyevskiana narrative. Yet we see that Arkady's determination to be that superman wells fantasized with, and Shaw, is falling apart, because it falls apart, because he can't stop doing good. We see that Versilov is not the monster, that Arkady tells us, and that Arkady was wrong about him. But, although he is a more beneficial, than evil, careful character that can give us some surprise. In fact, this story of the reunion of a father and a son. Rarely has it been found better, perhaps only Maxence van der Meersch has succeeded with "Bodies and Souls" Maxence van der Meersch with "Bodies and Souls" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... and the drawing film Doraemon and Treasure Island may have done so. More than the story of the prodigal son. It can be best summed up in this Bible verse "God will return the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to their parents." I think this is the key to this whole story. The second part has the greatest influence on the younger relationship of Sokolski with Arkady, and the protagonist's sister is engulfed. The third is more emphasis on Lambert's criminal intrigues, which may not be as fascinating, as I had imagined, although there is the conversation there between the tempter and his victim. Yet it is a character, who is not as well-taken advantage of as it should be. It is much more interesting the character of Makar Ivanovitch taken advantage of it that it should. It is much more interesting the character of Makar Ivanovitch (who proposes a popular Christian mysticism, and errant). The final third is distressing, and I don't know gives any respite to the reader, I can only say, that when I got to the final part I took a very relief. The subject of the double, rather than in a psychiatric way, I want to see it, as the struggle that man has within himself between good, and evil (see "The Double" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2... and "The Scandal" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2... Shusaku Endo. By the way, there's another Shusaku Endo novel heavily influenced by Dostoyevsky. We refer to "Al tonto wonderful" inspired by "The Idiot", hopefully they edit it in Spanish one day https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2... I believe, that much, that what Dostoyevski seeks is achieved by Shusaku Endo in a few fewer pages). There are characters who would have deserved more attention on my part like Daria Onnissimovna, Trichatov, and Tatiana Prutkova (who as she assumed, or was a very bad character, or very good), as soon as Alphosina gave me a lot of regret I would have chosen a different ending for her. I would have turned her into a Nancy, or a Martha who is very Dickensian, in fact, both Balzac and Dickens are dostoyevsky's masters. I also really liked the literary references both Russian and European, that appear in the novel. You could say, the Garzanti was wrong. I think, except for a character (I'm not going to say which one, but his fate saddened me). The author is fair. Of course, it has flaws there are subplots, which remain in nothing, and one has the feeling that this story could have been told in many fewer pages. But in general it is a beautiful story of a father and a son, and as Dostoyevsky's wife says. Just like Balzac. Dostoyevsky is a man pressured, by creditors, who must deliver his masterpieces within a time frame, so unlike others he cannot review them. Dostoyevsky warning of future risk, and encouraging the Russian youth, not to follow the wrong path. The future, already outlined in "The Demons" that was an advance, of what would happen if socialism, communism, and anarchism triumphed. Unfortunately unlike Arkady. People didn't mature. There were three premature deaths, which led to Russia's disaster. One was the death of Tsar Alexander II (who died too soon), another was That of Stolypin, and finally Dostoyevsky's. If he had died in 1910, and Tolstoy in 1880. Russia would have saved himself a lot of ills, but I say this for everyone. It is through suffering that holiness is attained.

[Oguz Akturk · Rating 4 out of 5]

YouTube kanalımda Dostoyevski'nin hayatı, kitapları ve kronolojik okuma sırası hakkında bilgi edinebilirsiniz:
https://youtu.be/0i9F0L1dcsM

Delikanlı kitabını bitirdikten sonra kendi düşüncelerime uygun bir görüş aramak amacıyla internet keşfine çıktım. Edward Hallett Carr'ın Delikanlı kitabı için demiş olduğu:

"Dostoyevski'nin hiçbir romanında bu kadar kişi yoktur ya da hiçbir romanında, kitap kapatıldıktan sonra okuyucunun aklında kesin bir izlenim bırakan bu denli az kişi yoktur,"
cümlesine kesinlikle katılıyorum.

Öncelikle kitaba İletişim Yayınevi'nden sahip olmayanlar için internette zar zor bulduğum, Dostoyevski severlerin kesinlikle okuması gereken çok faydalı bir adet önsöz ve sonsöz bırakıyorum.
ÖNSÖZ- Delikanlı Üzerine Notlar / Joseph Frank: https://docplayer.biz.tr/5622798-Dost...
SONSÖZ- Psikolog Olarak Dostoyevski / Edward Hallett Carr (s.231'den başlıyor):
https://issuu.com/blackauge/docs/edwa...

Kitabı bitirdikten sonra 65 sayfa inceleme yazısı okumak istemeyenler için bu 2 değerli yazıdan anladıklarımı size sunmak istiyorum.

Delikanlı kitabı, toplum mühendisi Dostoyevski için Ecinniler köprüsünü geçtikten sonra Karamazov Kardeşler hedefine varmadan okunması gereken son kitaptır. Kronolojik okumanın elzem olduğu bu dev isimde Öteki kitabındaki alter ego ve çift kişilik göndermelerine, Kumarbaz kitabındaki kumar tutkusuna, Suç ve Ceza'daki derin psikolojik buhranlara, Ecinniler kitabındaki politika, devrim, milliyetçilik ve din konularındaki dönemin siyasi anlayışına tanıklık etmek Delikanlı'nın parçalarını tamamlayabilmek için büyük bir önem taşır. Pek tabii ki Karamazov Kardeşler'in de buna dahil olduğunu rahatlıkla söyleyebilirim.

Gücün kaynağı olarak muazzam bir servet kaynağı ülküsünün Rus kültüründe Rothschild adıyla anılmasının 1850'lerde başladığını düşündüğümüzde, 1875 tarihinde basılmış olan Delikanlı kitabı için II. Aleksandr'ın 1861'de serfliği kaldırıp milyonlarca köylüyü özgürlüğüne kavuşturmasının epey önemli olduğunu söyleyebilirim.
Hatta Delikanlı'da 408. sayfada geçen:
"Bir Rus, kendisi için beylik, kökleşmiş yaşantı çemberinden dışarı çıkınca, sudan çıkmış balığa döner, ne yapacağını, ne edeceğini bilemez." cümleleri de toprak köleliği sisteminden çıkmış Rusların içine düştüğü başıboşluğu anlatır. Ayrıca Carr'ın Dostoyevski biyografisinde dediği gibi köylü Ruslar ilk kez bir Dostoyevski romanında bu kadar detaylı bir şekilde anlatılmıştır.

Puşkin'in Byelkin Öyküleri'nde 1. tekil şahıs anlatıcının kullanılması gibi Delikanlı'daki Dolgorukiy karakteri de Rusların kendi kendilerini yine kendisine anlatması gibi algılanabilir. Hiçbir şeyden haberi olmayan ve bir kolu sosyalizm, diğer kolu da Rothschild serveti ülküsü tarafından çekilen delikanlı karakteri, 19.yüzyılın ikinci yarısında Rus düşünce dünyasında entelijansiya olarak kendini göstermiş kısmı temsil ediyor gibi görünen Versilov, eski kutsal ve Ortodoks Rusya'yı temsil eden Makar ve ailesi, 1870'de tarım merkezli Rus ekonomisinin sanayileşme dalgasıyla değişmeye başlamasını karşılayan Stebelkov karakteri, Lambert karakterinin bedenselliği ve maddeciliği ile bir karakter gökkuşağına dönüşür. Bu yüzdendir ki, Carr'ın dediği kesin bir izlenim bırakmama olayını kitabı bitirdikten sonra net bir şekilde yaşadığımı söyleyebilirim. Çünkü Ecinniler kitabının incelemesinde de bahsettiğim Neçayev devrimciliği fırtınası devamında gelen 1870ler neslinin Neçayevizmi artık ilginç bulmadığını bildiği bir Dostoyevski ile birlikte baba Versilov aracılığıyla aktarılır.

Peki neden Delikanlı okunmalı?

İnsancıklar'daki lirik gerçekçiliği görmeden, Öteki'deki ve Suç ve Ceza'daki kişilik bölünmesini, çift kişiliği görmeden, Ev Sahibesi'ndeki Ordınov'un bakışlarıyla karşılaşmadan, Beyaz Geceler'deki şehir tasvirleriyle, Budala'daki Mışkin, Rogojin, Filippovna karakterleriyle, sosyete ve idam mahkumu sahneleriyle tanışmadan, Kumarbaz'daki bir Dostoyevski denklemi olan tutkunun en istisnai duygusu olmasıyla karşılaşmadan, yeraltına inmeden, Ölüler Evinden Anılar'daki kürek mahkumlarının acıklı seslerini duymadan, Stepançikovo Köyü'ndeki kara mizahla ve yine Suç ve Ceza'daki id, ego, süper ego merdiveniyle tanışmadan, Ecinniler'in dev politika köprüsünden geçmeden, köprü geçildiği sırada Delikanlı kitabındaki karakter gökkuşağıyla tanışmadan köprünün karşı tarafında bulunan Karamazov Kardeşler tarafına kanatlanmanın bir anlamı olmayacaktır.

Üstte linkini verdiğim iki yazıdan anladığım kadarıyla Ivan Karamazov da aynı Versilov karakteri gibi çelişkili sözler sarf eden bir karakterdir. Din ile milliyetçilik sorgulamaları arasında kalan Dostoyevski'yi en iyi anlamlandırabilme kitabı olabilecek Karamazov Kardeşler için yüksek ülkünün istediği ahlaki-ideolojik aydınlanmanın eksik tarafı Delikanlı'da bulunan Makar karakteri, Dostoyevski'nin babasına duyduğu hem gücenme hem de sevme karşıtlıkları Dolgorukiy'in üvey babası Versilov ile arasında yaşadığı aile içi etkileşimler ile birlikte Hegelci tez-antitezin yüksek sentezde buluşması yüksek ve aşağı ögelerin birlikte kullanıldığı Delikanlı kitabında tamamlanır, diyebilirim.

Bu iki muhteşem yazıyı okuduktan sonra Dostoyevski'nin aklındaki psikolojik gelgitlere Edward Hallett Carr'ın Dostoyevski biyografisinde belirtmiş olduğu:
"Günah duygusunu bir yana bırakırsanız kurtuluşa ulaşamazsınız." cümlesiyle rahatlıkla ulaşabileceğimizi söylemeliyim. Ne kadar anlamlı ve gizleri açığa çıkaran bir cümledir bu!

[Parinaz · Rating 5 out of 5]

1.در همین زمان جوانی‌ام گاها موقعیتی پیش می‌آید که نباید حرفی را بزنم و می‌زنم. گاهی هیجان زیادی بر من مستولی می‌شود که نباید، جایی باید جلوی خودم را بگیرم و نمی‌گیرم؛ همه‌ی این‌هارا من به پای تب‌وتاب و خامی جوانی می‌گذارم.
دالگوروکی پر از این موقعیت‌ها بود. در بعضی حالات، کردارهایش را بسیار شبیه به خودم می‌دانستم. منِ جوانِ خامِ بی دست‌وپا.
دالگوروکی مرا وا داشت تا به رفتار خود بیشتر بیاندیشم. مثلا این‌گونه که  اگر من در موقعیت مشابه بودم چگونه رفتار می‌کردم. گاها پیش می‌آید که برای یک تشکر کوتاه با خودم هزار بار تمرین می‌کنم؛ چگونه بگویم و کِی بگویم را پیش خودم‌ می‌سنجم. این بی‌انسجامی و شک در رفتارم باعث رنج و تنش در من می‌شود‌.

2. رابطه‌ی بین پدر و پسر.
منِ دختر همانند دالگوروکی یک نارسایی عاطفی-گفتاری با پدرم دارم. می‌خواهم چیزی را به‌ او بگویم و نمی‌توانم. جوابش را نصفه می‌دهم. نمی‌توانم پیشش خودِ من باشم. احساس احترام نمی‌‌گذارد آن‌گونه که می‌خواهم پیشش صحبت کنم یا از او تشکر کنم. می‌ترسم شادمانی هیجانی‌ام با تذکر همراه شود. می‌ترسم رفتارم را به پای بی‌خردی و سستی‌ام بگذارد. در این موقعیت خودم را مقصر می‌بینم، من باید پیش او آن‌کسی باشم که هستم اما نمی‌توانم.

__
99/12/11

[Ray · Rating 1 out of 5]

Well I am glad that that is over. I have this stupid rule that I have to finish a book once I have started it which has lead me into some nightmare reads. In this case it meant two years reading - a few pages at a time.

I could not get into this book at all. A complicated family tree, dastardly villains and a secret letter that holds the key to a womans honour. Lots of swooning and people storming off in high dudgeon too. All standard Dostoyevskian fayre I suppose, but for me it did not gell into anything I could enjoy.

If you want to read some Dostoyevsky, try Crime and Punishment instead.

[أحمد أبازيد Ahmad Abazeid · Rating 4 out of 5]

يكتب ديستويفسكي في مسوّدة الرواية :
" المطلوب تغيير العالم فلنبدأ بأنفسنا ... و فكرتي هي أنّه ينبغي تغيير العالم ولكن أوّل خطوة نحو ذلك أن نبدأ حتما بأنفسنا "
و هذا ما اختاره المراهق , فكتب مذكّراته و دوّن ذاكرته بكلّ تفاصيلها و بكلّ ما يملك و يريد من صدق في نقل مغامراته و أخطائه ونزقه و غبائه و أخطائه و أفكاره , لم يكتبها ترفا و إنّما لتكون مرقاته نحو التغيير : " أحسست فجأة أنّني بفضل هذا التذكّر و هذا التسجيل لذكرياتي ربّيت نفسي تربية جديدة " و هذا ما أراده المراهق و ما أراده ديستويفسكي , أن ترى الفوضى و الغباء الذي يملأ العالم و تدرك أنّك جزء منه و حجزء من التغيير الذي ينبغي أن يكون و الذي لن يبدأ إلّا من نفسك و بمعرفة نفسك و مصارحتها بالتدوين أو بالاعتراف أو غيره , ديستويفسكي شاهد على عصره و وطنه و لذلك ينير لنا شهادتنا على عصرنا و مكاننا , عبقريّة ديستويفسكي لا بدّ أن تتجلّى في هذه الرواية أيضا في فهمه العميق لمجتمعه و طبقاته و أفكاره و تحليله الدقيق لمكامن الداء و الأمراض الاجتماعية و التعقيدات الفكريّة فيه , هذا طبعا جزء من تفرّده بأنّه أعمق من تبحّر و غاص في النفس الإنسانية بكلّ ألغازها و تشابكها و تعقيداتها ,

و لا شكّ أنّ من عباراته التي يقولها على لسان شخوصه ما لا يمكن أن يُنسى بل يؤثّر فيك عميقا لأنّ عقلا عميقا حقّا يقف وراءها , أتذكّر قوله في الرواية مثلا :
" إن حياة المرأة هي رحلة البحث عن رجل تخضع له ! "
أو
" ربما كان من الأفضل للمرء أن يُجرح من قِل الناس , فإنه على الأقلّ يتخلّص عندئذ من عذاب محبّتهم "
أو هذا التحليل الذي أدهشني
" أنا لا أفهم كيف يستطيع المرء إذا هو كان خاضعا لتأثير فكرة مسيطرة يرتبط بها عقله و قلبه ارتباطا تامّا , أن يعيش أيّة حياة خارج هذه الفكرة ؟ .....كثير من البشر يتحوّل الاستدلال المنطقيّ عندهم أحيانا إلى عاطفة قويّة تستولي على وجودهم كلّه , فلكي نشفي إنسانا أصيب بهذا الداء يجب علينا أن نفغيّر هذه العاطفة بالذات , و هذا لا يكون ممكنا إلّا بأن نحلّ محلّ هذه العاطفة عاطفة أخرى تساويها , و ذلك صعب دائما , حتى لقد يكون في بعض الأحيان مستحيلا ! "
أو حين يتكلّم عن نمط من الإيمان يراه ظاهرة في مجتمعه
"كثير من المتكبّرين جدّا يحبون أن يؤمنوا بالله خاصة أولئك الذين يحتقرون الناس بعض الاحتقار , كثير من الناس يشعرون بنوع من حاجة طبيعية إلى أحد أو إلى شيء يعبدونه . إن الإنسان القويّ يشقّ عليه كثيرا في بعض الأحيان أن يحتمل قوّته ! , السبب في هذا واضح : إنهم يختارون الله حتى لا يعبدوا البشر , طبعا دون أن يدركوا هم أنفسهم ما يجري في قرارة أنفسهم : أإن عبادة الله أقلّ إهانة , أولئك هم أشد المؤمنين حماسة للإيمان أو قل أولئك هم أشدّ المؤمنين رغبة في الإيمان غير أنهم يحسبون رغبتهم هذه إيمانا , و هؤلاء أنفسهم هم أيضا أولئك الذين يفقدون آخر الأمر أوهامهم في أكثر الأحيان "
أو حتى في كلامه عن ظاهرة تفشّي الإلحاد - كما أتذكّرها لأنني لم أسجّلها "
" السجود من طبيعة الإنسان و لا أتخيّل حساة إنسان من غير سجود , إن لم يسجد لله فهو سيجد أو يخترع من يسجد له قد يكون شجرة أو وثنا أو إنسانا أو فكرة .. . حتى أولئك الملحدون ليسوا إلّا وثنيين في حقيقة الأمر "
دون إنكاره أنّ هناك ملحدين حقيقيّين , لا يتخذ موقفا عدائيا منهم بل هو يؤكّد دوما على ضرورة التعدّدية و الإيمان بحقّ الجميع في الاختلاف و اعتناق الأفكار , مع تأكيده هنا كما أكّد في " الإخوة كارامازوف " أو " الجريمة و العقاب " أن الكون من دون الله ليس إلّا غابة !
لا أعلم إن كان تعقيب " يوري كارياكين " خحول ماذا يمكن أن تفيد هذه الرواية الشباب العرب , موجودا في جميع الطبعات كما هو موجود لديّ في طبعة دار رادوغا - موسكو , ولكن حتى إن لم يوجد فابحثوا عنها لدى قراءتكم الرواية فكلماته رائعة حقّا و ليست ممّا يُفرّط فيه .
أصابتني هذه الرواية بالملل أحيانا و طبعا لم تمتعني و تأسرني مثل " الإخوة كارمازوف " أو حتى " الجريمة و العقاب " ولكنّها إحدى تجلّيات عبقريّة ديستويفسكي حتما ... و نقله التحليلي العميق للمجتمع الروسي و الطبيعة الإنسانية .. أيضا

[Carmo · Rating 3 out of 5]

Foi o mais difícil que li de Dostoiévski, até agora. Narrativa fragmentada, personagens amorais sem qualquer característica que nos possa cativar, um constante desnorteio no ritmo da história, avansos e recuos sem nexo num jogo de gato e rato em que o narrador se baralha e nos confunde.
Não sei se foi experimentalismo e falhou, ou se foi propositado e eu é que não lhe apanhei o sentido, o facto é que o livro teve criticas negativas aquando da publicação.
Salvou-se por alguns diálogos onde Dostoiévski recuperou as grandes questões que debateu ao longo de toda a sua obra. Salvou, mas salvou pouco.

[Alexander · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dostojewski erzählt einerseits die sich zuspitzende Handlung eines Erpressungsversuches, behandelt dabei aber das Reifen eines jungen Mannes, der seinen Platz in seiner Familie und der Gesellschaft findet. Trotz seiner Länge ist der Text nie langatmig.

[Stian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Most of the stuff you expect from Dostoevsky is here. As usual we have a build-up in Part 1, where we get acquainted with the story, the characters and so on, and we are slowly brought into it all. Naturally there is a really climactic last part to the book, and the final 50 or so pages are very intense!

There is one big difference between this novel and most of Dostoevsky's other novels, except for Notes From Underground, in that it uses a first-person narrative. This is interesting, and it's worth noting that the main character in The Adolescent - Arkady Dolgoruky - has, at least initially, certain traits similar to this 'underground man,' as pointed out by Richard Pevear in the introduction.

Another thing that struck me about the novel is that the familiar coating in philosophy, so common in Dostoevsky, is largely missing. At least, it is far from as prevalent as in his other works. For the most part this is a fairly straightforward tale about family drama and, well, other kinds of drama that occurs in Arkady's life, told my Arkady himself, as he, 'unable to restrain' himself, sits down to record 'this history of my first steps on life's career, though I could have done as well without it.'

Although not a monumental work like The Brothers Karamazov, this novel is hardly bad or, as some literary critics have said, a sort of blemish on Dostoevsky's record. It's a highly enjoyable and really quite riveting read throughout, and one that fans of Dostoevsky should not miss. There are a number of great scenes in this book, and wonderful portrayals of humans -- as is to be expected in Dostoevsky. The parts with Arkady and his grandfather are especially memorable.

"Don't murmur, young one: it's all the more beautiful that it's a mystery."

[Shawn · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's even difficult to put into words what I think of this novel at this moment. As I was reading it, I would put it down and say "This is the craziest novel I've read." Or just "It's crazy." That is still my overwhelming sensation. For those of you who know Dostoevsky well, you will find everything here, and maybe somethings you didn't expect. It is absolutely unclear to me why so many critics and professionals just write this novel off. It is a fine novel, especially on the heels of reading Demons. It is also a real page turner, super engaging, hard to put down, with countless plot twists. In fact, I finished it off on a flight from Houston to Portland -- I couldn't stop reading at one point with almost 200 pages to go! For those of you who know Bakhtin well, everything is here as well. Richard Pevear and Larisa Volkhonsky are really at the top of their game here, too. In fact, I have moved their translation of Brothers Karamozov to the top of my to read list now as a result of reading this and Demons. Demons, The Adolescent, and Brothers Karamozov are Dostoevsky's three last novels, and it looks like I have stumbled into reading them in order. Demons and The Adolescent were both new to me, while Brothers Karamozov is an old friend. It will be exciting to see how my understanding of that novel may change in the context of a new translation (new to me at least) and reading it in order with these others. There is definitely a thread (or several) that ties these three novels together.

I will have to ponder this one a while to formulate what I can say about it...

[Shaghayegh.l3 · Rating 3 out of 5]

این کتاب رو از همه‌ی کتاب‌های داستایوسکی کمتر دوست داشتم، توی محیط شلوغی شروع به خوندنش کردم و اون‌قدرها جذب داستان نشدم، اما نحوه‌ی روایت و پیچش داستان و شخصیت‌ها زیر قلم این مرد رو نمی‌تونم نادیده بگیرم.

[Erik Graff · Rating 2 out of 5]

Towards the very end of college I became involved with Janny, a precocious first year student. I was very impressed with her from the outset. Not only was she exceptionally well read, but she could read in Dutch and German as well as English, her family having moved often owing to her father's work as a government mathematician.

The relationship continued even upon my graduation and move to seminary in New York City. We spent part of the intervening summer together, corresponding the rest of the time. Coincidentally, Janny's mother had attended Teacher's College there, its main building just across the Broadway from my dorm room, so she felt some reason beyond me to transfer to Barnard/Columbia a semester after my matriculation. Together we shared a room and our books in Hastings Hall for two years--a long while for ones so young.

I've a low opinion of intelligence theory, of IQ tests and the like (see Gould's The Mismeasure of Man), but I am impressed with language ability and learning. Janny was not only well read and well spoken, but she was intellectually catholic and adventurous, delving into one new field after another, even taking a hand at painting--and not doing badly at her first tries! She was also somewhat tortured and driven, a result perhaps of the unstable childhood, the lack of constant friends, as well as of having an intellect in advance of her years which naturally trailed her youthful drives. Whatever the case, Dostoevsky spoke to her and she had read and thought seriously about the bulk of his works.

In addition to my own, more pedestrian academic and personal pursuits I made a project out of coming to grips with her thought-world. This included reading Dostoevsky myself, lots of Dostoevsky, until I too had gone through pretty much all of his fiction.

The Adolescent, like much of Dostoevsky's work, is about the conflict of generations and of values. He himself had had a troubled relationship with his own father (a probable serf-rapist) & a youthful flirtation with the left and what he came to call "nihilism" in later years after a spell in prison and a conversion to Orthodoxy and conservatism. Indeed, virtually all of his books have representations of the young FD in conflict with the old FD.

Personally, I was not much impressed with The Adolescent nor with much of Dostoevsky's work, his conflicts not being mine. My own parents and grandparents were liberal, even socialistic. I respected them and felt respected in return. Such adolescent rebellion as I expressed was not much against the family. Further, while I was enormously concerned about values, about determining to my satisfaction some defensible ground for ethics, my starting point and my eventual conclusion were not, like his, framed in terms of a received religious faith. I was not haunted like he was with notions of a personal god. Indeed, the study of religion was, for me, an antidote against any such superstitions.

The reasons for my not being as impressed with Dostoevsky as Janny was bespeaks perhsps an aspect of why our relationship did not, as I had wanted it to, continue beyond the years in New York. Now, older and more resolved than I was then, I would have a host of questions for her about father, family, ethics and religion.

[Lesle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fydor Dostoevsky, ‘The Adolescent,’ also called ‘Raw Youth’ is my first delve into a Russian Author.
He seems to have a way with hooking you to the next section. I almost always did not stop at the end of the Chapter but would read the first page or two of the next. Parts of the novel was incoherent in some places and I would need to go back to totally understand what just happened.

An intriguing scene in the book, I thought, was the gambling scene, where all kinds of crazy things happen.
The action and interactions were furious. Arkady bounced around like a basketball down a mountain...ups, downs and landslides! Bumbling through his teens, not knowing who, what or where he belonged.

Not knowing either father well made it very difficult on Arkady to find his way and make something of his life. To have ones to love and share his life with was a struggle. He seemed to be drawn in by the wrong people and they tend to use him for their own needs.

The Cast of Characters were well established and all had major ties to Arkady. Their emotions ran the gauntlet of intensity in their passions and the effect of the conflicts in someway or another affected all of them in their lives.

It was a whirlwind that I was happy to tackle!

[Radu Popovici · Rating 4 out of 5]

4,5*

[Jean Ra · Rating 1 out of 5]

El otro sábado estaba en la librería Finestres de Barcelona cuando un señor de unos cincuenta o sesenta años abordó a una de las libreras y le solicitó el Noches blancas de Dostoyevski, comentándole que quería entender porqué el escritor ruso levanta tantas pasiones entre los lectores jóvenes. No escuché la réplica de la librera, tampoco estaba encima y a la vez también estaba mirando libros para mí mismo, aunque algo le dijo que debió satisfacerle porque le preguntó si podría repetir eso mismo en un podcast, solicitud que la librera no parecía sentirse muy atraída, de hecho el hombre le insistió y al final creo que le dio el número de teléfono en plan para aplazar la respuesta o aplazar la negativa. De esta pequeña escena me sorprendió esa necesidad de querer entender el interés de los jóvenes por Dostoyevski. La librería está en el Eixample, uno de los barrios más acomodados de la ciudad de Barcelona, ¿se supone que las juventudes de los aledaños viven con fervor la obra de Dostoyevski? ¿O bien es que ese hombre imparte algún tipo de clase en una facultad de humanidades dónde se supone que acude gente con más interés/obligación de leer y es ahí dónde ha recibido esa oleada de fervor dostyevskiano?

Yo por mi parte, entiendo que, generación tras generación, desde la presente hasta la mía o la anterior, Dostoyevski siga levantando pasiones y mantenga cierto grueso de lectores. Su escritura es muy visceral, convulsa, más que el lenguaje parece que le interesan los aspectos morales y psicológicos, sus personajes siempre es gente que se relaciona de forma problemática con la sociedad, si no es gente conflictiva por lo menos es gente irritada o confusa por el devenir de lo colectivo. En el tránsito del mundo infantil al mundo adulto la confusión es un factor notorio, incluso determinante, luego quizás adquirimos los mecanismos para disimular esa confusión, pero en la adolescencia puede resultar obsesivo o doloroso, cuanto menos siempre causa un impacto significativo aunque tampoco resulte un proceso dramático. Se aprenden cosas, se renuncia a otras, y en ese estado anímico, alguien que posee la galería de personajes más ofuscados sin duda tiene posibilidades de captar lectores.

Como lector mi relación los libros de Dostoyevski siempre ha sido algo áspera, sólo en un par de ocasiones he podido disfrutar, el resto me causa bastante irritación e incluso empacho. Mientras que por un lado podemos acusar a la literatura posmoderna de ser demasiado ambigua y esquinada, Dostoyevski está en el polo opuesto, el del moralismo más vehemente, los subrayados más insistentes y la necesidad de cuadrarlo todo bajo su mirada, fuertemente conservadora, por no decir reaccionaria, por no decir retrógrada. Su visión del mundo es fuertemente patriarcal, no se trata de un novelista moderno, todo lo contrario, sus grandes obras son por un lado un lamento por la trayectoria europeizante que estaba adoptando Rusia y por otro un clamor demente por la restauración de la iglesia ortodoxa como un poder fuerte, una autoridad indiscutible, un dictador de la moral pública. En esa visión los nobles pueden desviarse y cometer pecados, pero a la postre siempre acaban o justificados o salvados y se preserva su dignidad. Las clases más explotadas son mostradas como efectivamente oprimidas pero se les receta abnegación y afrontar con dulzura las fatigas y los dolores. En esta novela particular el narrador dice textualmente que los hombres son magnánimos y las mujeres son la tentación, a veces hace el esfuerzo de resaltar la inteligencia de alguna mujer pero en general son seres que traen el pecado al mundo y demás pruritos bíblicos antediluvianos. Y si un noble cae en el pecado, como Dostoyevski es un fanático de la iglesia ortodoxa, la salvación no puede esperar a la otra vida, tiene que ser en ésta, de forma que muchas veces sus tramas se resuelven con algún tipo de castigo o alguna redención más o menos forzada con brusquedad, encajada a puñetazos.

Porque en esta novela la escritura de Dostoyevski es muy embrollada, muy proclive a irse por las ramas, a narrar capítulos triviales, encontronazos fortuitos con sirvientes o personajes de aparición pasajera, todo resulta lioso, da muchas vueltas en círculos, de forma que buena parte de lo que se narra es mero forraje para rellenar. Esto por supuesto no es un problema de su época, en la actualidad se puede encontrar este defecto en las series de ficción, con unos cuantos capítulos esenciales y otros más triviales, llenos de sub-tramas laterales que incrementan el volumen de la ficción pero te aleja del foco de la narración. Vale recordar que Dostoyevski publicó esta historia en una revista, de ahí esa necesidad de aumentar el tamaño para cumplir con las entregas.

Y si bien la base de la historia la encuentro razonable y bien pensada, la ejecución cae en un tremendo embrollo y leer El adolescente ha sido como leer una discusión bizantina con uno mismo. Otro aspecto que no me gusta la literatura de Dostoyevski es por su insistente manía de resolver la gran parte de las escenas con grandes bolsas de diálogo. En el adolescente hay que aclarar que este vicio está bastante limitado, pero a cambio se entrega una gran cantidad de monsergas y jaculatorias que vienen a satisfacer los preceptos morales del autor, aunque a cambio retrate a sus personajes como garrulos amantes de la cháchara.

Por un lado encontramos a Makar Ivánovich, un hombre anciano que no aparece en la mayor parte de la novela pero cuando aparece es para representar el papel del peregrino cristiano, el hombre compasivo, piadoso y obsequioso, el perfecto padre, que afronta las penalidades sin rencor y sus dolores los acepta con abnegación. Es el padre adoptivo del narrador y protagonista, Arkady Makaróvich, no su padre biológico, que es el noble Versilov. Por un lado que Arkady no sea un hijo reconocido de Versilov le marca el carácter y le deja una veta problemática en su mentalidad, cierto sentimiento de inferioridad que lo enerva de forma muy visceral, cosa que en gimnasio (o lo que los mexicanos llaman la prepa o los españoles lamamos el instituto) también le generó problemas y le hizo lidiar con los abusones de la clase. Todo esto, a nivel dramático, parece bien ideado y razonable. Arkady es entonces un símbolo de la sociedad, un representante de su tiempo y el hecho que su padre adoptivo/espiritual sea un anciano venerable estipula esa necesidad de trascender y alcanzar la pureza espiritual; mientras que su padre natural Versilov, un tipo problemático y voluble, es la fuente de conflictos, quien aporta ruido y confusión a la vida de Arkady. Dostoyevski era además un eslavófilo empedernido, deploraba de la influencia europea, por eso los peores personajes, los más depravados, los chantajistas o los oficiales más vanos o bien son alemanes o bien franceses, como Lambert, un compañero del instituto de Arkady que regresa a su vida para simplemente sembrar el crimen y llevarlo hacia los peores problemas.

Además existe una carta que juega un papel trascendental en la trama, un documento capaz de destar el caos y que afecta a Versilov y sus planes para una futura boda, que Arkady desaprueba porque quiere que se case con su madre, para que así él quede restituido y naturalizado a nivel social. Sin que se explique muy bien el contenido de esta carta, su aparición por las páginas de la novela es insistente, muy insistente, alcanzado unas cotas de obsesión febril equivalentes al anillo mágico del Señor de los anillos, siendo Arkady quien ejerce de Gollum y Lambert de Sauron. Este elemento la verdad es que fue lo que me despertó las primeras suspicacias y conforme más se emplea la existencia de este documento y más numerosas son sus referencias, más me enervaba, porque tienes la sensación que se exagera su importancia. Deduzco que debe funcionar como símbolo del pasado caótico de Versilov, un elemento capaz de desatar el desastre, pero mientras sigues el desarrollo no tienes la sensación que su existencia esté bien atada o justificada, así que terminas bastante harto cada vez que vuelve a parecer y todos los personajes demuestran un anhelo maníaco por conseguirlo.

Y vuelvo a recalcar que el desenlace que propone Dostoyevski no es en absoluto artístico, es puramente doctrinario y artificial, poco creíble y no hace más que sumarse a las amplias pinceladas de misoginia y chovinismo que el autor expresa por activa o por pasiva. Si a eso le sumas una narración farragosa, proclive a perderse en detalles innecesarios y desviarse por caminos estériles, entonces supongo que os podéis explicar la poca gracia que me hacía regresar a esta lectura y que haya tardado 19 días, los cuales no han sido precisamente placenteros. Mi valoración personal y final que se trata de una novela fallida, refuerza mi fuerte prejuicio contra su autor y me hace apreciar a esos autores que no tienen ganas de convertir la literatura en un aula de moralismo.

Todo hay que decirlo, la traducción de la editorial Alba es muy notable y exhaustiva. En este otoño de 2025 la editorial Alianza ha publicado otra traducción de esta misma novela y os aseguro que hay detalles que omite, en general suena una traducción sólida pero no es tan completa como ésta de Alba, llegando al punto de resultar sobreabundante, con una gran cantidad de epígrafes que hacen recordar ciertos pasajes de La broma infinita, sólo que sin ironía, Otero, el traductor, va en serio y quiere desmenuzarte cada mínima referencia a Schiller o los títulos más desconocidos de la literatura rusa a los que Dostoyevski hace referencia. Esto tiene sus ventajas pero también sus inconvenientes, de todas formas la traducción de Alba resulta muy recomendable si a pesar de todo eres de esos dostoyveskianos locos a los que se refería ese señor cincuentón que fue a librería Finestres en busca de respuestas.

[daria ❀ · Rating 1 out of 5]

i read like mj from the spider-man trilogy: https://youtu.be/6H4iKjHSVgA


i absolutely did NOT sign up for misogyny and anti-semitism and yet unfortunately that’s all i got here

[Babette Ernst · Rating 4 out of 5]

Der Unbekannteste der großen Dostojewski-Romane ist eine gelungene Mischung aus guter Unterhaltung, Spannung, verwirrender Handlung und großen Themen. Es ist ein Entwicklungsroman, die „Coming-of-Age-Geschichte“ des Arkadij Makarowitsch Dolgorukij, dessen rechtlicher Vater ein Gesindeknecht, dessen biologischer Vater Werssilow jedoch von adliger Abstammung ist. Arkadij wächst weder bei dem einen noch dem anderen auf, sein adliger Vater finanziert seine „gute Erziehung“, aber der Sohn leidet unter dem Spott der Mitschüler über seine familiäre Situation. Der Roman beginnt mit dem Ende der Schulzeit, dem Umzug nach Sankt Petersburg zu Werssilow, seiner Mutter und seine Schwester. Für Arkadij, der sich in der Schulzeit oft einsam und verloren fühlte, beginne viele neue Erfahrungen. Er lernt seine „Patch-Work-Familie“ kennen, möchte unbedingt seinen Vater mögen und hat ständig Angst, sich falsch zu verhalten, nicht ernst genommen zu werden. Der spätpubertierende Sohn ist großartig dargestellt. Mitunter ist er nervtötend, aber gleichzeitig hat man Mitleid mit Arkadij, der sich so schwer zurechtfindet.

Orientierung in einer zerfallenden Familie und einer Welt der Umbrüche, Suche nach sinnvollen Lebenszielen, Überblick in der umgebenden Unordnung – das sind aus meiner Sicht die großen Themen des Buches.
Diese lassen sich nicht leicht herausfinden, irgendwo las ich den Begriff „literarisches Wimmelbild“. Wahrlich ein Buch, bei dem man mit jedem Lesen andere Details entdecken könnte. Für mich war es die Erstlektüre, bei der ich mich auf das gewaltige Durcheinander konzentrierte, um den Überblick nicht zu verlieren, aber ich könnte mir gut vorstellen, dass sich ein wiederholtes Lesen lohnen könnte.

Denn viele kleine Gespräche am Rande sind ein Spielgelbild der damaligen russischen Gesellschaft, in der der Adel an Bedeutung verlor und sich eine Art Raubtierkapitalismus entwickelt. Geld spielt eine wichtige Rolle, für nahezu jede Figur ist dies ein bedeutendes Thema, jeder will auf seine Art zu Geld kommen. Man versucht es mit Prozessieren um Erbschaften, mit absoluter Sparsam- und Enthaltsamkeit (Arkadij), mit Glücksspiel, mit gefälschten Aktien, mit Erpressung oder geschickter Heirat.

Ebenso geht es, wie in den anderen Dostojewski-Romanen, um die Einordnung Russlands in der Welt. Die Gesellschaft ist gespalten in die westlich orientierten „Europäer“ und die eher nationalistischen Slawophilen. Revolutionäre Strömungen drohen in terroristische Bahnen zu geraten. Die tiefgläubigen, integren Personen sterben aus. Es ist eine Zeit des Umbruchs, des Chaos. Chaos wie in Arkadijs Gefühlswelt, jedoch mit deutlicher Konzentration auf letztere. Aber er grüne Junge wird erwachsener, er lernt sich zurechtzufinden und man kann am Schluss zuversichtlich sein, dass er seinen Weg im Leben finden wird.

Wer Dostojewski mag, wird auch dieses Buch mögen. Es gibt keinen ersichtlichen Grund, dass es weniger gelesen wird als andere. Von mir ist es eine Empfehlung.

[A SLOW READER · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really enjoyed this book. For me, it was a perfect novel. Both plot-driven and character-driven. So many things happen in this book but, every single character is drawn with immense depth and they are unforgettable too.
The writing is pure Gold which is expected because it's the God of Gods Dostoyevsky's book but, I was surprised to see how modern it feels. Of course, it has some old-fashioned writings like people always talk to each other like they are in a play in front of an audience or they often start to blast atomic bombs of philosophical opinions about everything and everyone. It was expected too I guess.
But, imagine living in that old Russia, and instead of TV series, you get this. Ahhhh! I would've been in Heaven. And this book makes you feel like that. Dostoyevsky tells the stories of poor, thieves, middle-class, and Rich people in such beautiful details that literally make the characters alive and realistic. Yes! This book feels very realistic!
Like a film or a TV series. In the beginning, it was said that this book was written as a series. And, you can definitely feel that. There are a lot of subplots and little stories thrown here and there which are freaking gorgeous btw. But, the main plot is very interesting and entertaining as well.
The main character 'Arkady Dolgoruky' is one of the most relatable characters ever. And the book mainly focuses on him. He is the protagonist and it was told in the first person, so like he is the hero. But, is he?? I don't think so. The book is called 'The Adolescent' for a reason. He is a high school (boarding school) student suddenly thrown into the whirlpool of real-life and most importantly into family life. And I, who has a similar experience can fully understand his situation.
Although he has a really unique life, as the book progresses it becomes very familiar to me, or maybe to a lot of people. Family can be complicated, so are the neighbours and our friends. And it can take a long time to figure things out. Losing your dear ones hurts but, to see your enemy suffer pleases you. Is that philosophy??
Dostoevsky was a philosopher tho, so this book can be an eye-opener for some. But, I am a film-alcoholic, so I was fascinated by the expert way he portrays old Russia. The influence of both European and Asian lifestyle is just a pleasure to experience. It's very very cinematic. I love when the characters talk in bars... on the open streets in the snow, at night... the lonely walks in the dark, gloomy alleyways... the cozy but awkward small talks with the family, with friends... the funny moments where friends make you feel ashamed in front of people... the men and women walking in bygone era dresses... the interior designs... The unpredictable progress of the story and the ending. Ahhh! somebody make a film out of this for me.
In short, I really love this book. 5/5