I don't think i can pick a favourite novel, it seems almost impossbile. But.. recently i've discovered a new favourite author, so that's good enough for me.
Faulkner.
Printable View
I don't think i can pick a favourite novel, it seems almost impossbile. But.. recently i've discovered a new favourite author, so that's good enough for me.
Faulkner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mortalterror
This comes across with the same kind of drumming one hears when somebody rummages thru their underwear drawer and pulls out a pair of dirty socks. :(
Look, I don't mean to insult you or anything, I'm just saying that you're part of that cachophony of literary bumblers always hacking up graciousness in your gobs of spit. C'mon, say it like it is, Tolstoy sucks.
How anti! Personally I'd sooner say Kerouac sucks. That's just me though.
I don't mean to insult you, but [savage insult].
Yes, third-age feel-good American tripe, AKA watered down appropriated Indian thought is far superior to Pushkin, Tolstoy, Joyce, or whomever. Seriously, when it comes down to it, Harry Potter could probably have a better case made for it than Richard Bach, and you all, or at least most of you, know my stance on the Potter.Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1jt
But even beyond that, I think Mortal offers another good suggestion for best novel, though I still think Pushkin better, and acknowledge sadly that neither of us can comment too fully, being that we rely to heavily on translation, and therefore cannot accurately criticize the language and style of Tolstoy, or Pushkin, or Dostoevsky who is bound to pop up here sooner or later.
True, but Faulkner has quite the range - what to pick, Light in August, As I lay Dying, Absalom Absalom, the Sound and the Fury? So much to choose from - which one is the best?Quote:
Originally Posted by limajean
If you wind me up I'll throw urine-soaked crumbled pages of Tolstoy at you, and note that I aim for the forehead, but preferably your left ear. :sick:Quote:
Originally Posted by JBI
I suppose since Madame Bovary and Anna Karenina share similar themes, they would be easy to compare, but I'm not sure that Madame Bovary would come out ahead. Both have heroines obsessed with romantic fantasies, but Anna is used to more effect. In Flaubert's novel, this theme is merely used to satarize the fancied, unrealistic expectations of society. Tolstoy, though, is interested in making a much larger point about narratives--particularly those we tell ourselves. Anna also comes across as a more complete character who is troubled by her own lies. Madame Bovary, however, is only target for Flaubert's attacks, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by mortalterror
That's largely Tolstoy's point. A Slavic scholar named Gary Morson wrote a pretty well-received book about this in the early 90's. He says:Quote:
Originally Posted by mortalterror
"Tolstoy's view is...real life is lived in the small and ordinary moments. It is both prosaic and undramatic and is lived best when there is no story to tell. The reason that all happy families resemble each other whereas each unhappy is unhappy in its own way is that unhappy families, like unhappy lives, are dramatic; they have a story and each story is different. But happy families and happy lives, filled with undramatic incidents, do not make a good story; and it is in this sense that they all resemble each other. In his notebooks and letters of the period, Tolstoy at least twice quotes a French proverb father of all from Anna's romantic ethos: "Happy people have no history." Plot, especially when known in advance, is an index of error."
Anna Karenina spreads out because it's not limited to what's only relevant to its plot.
I like Pushkin's prose works better than his poetry, but as you say, I am at a loss reading them in translation. In Russia, he holds a place of very high esteem akin to Shakespeare in England or Goethe in Germany. I love the economy of his language and the careful attention to plot structure and pacing. Unlike Tolstoy, Pushkin's books do not overstay their welcome, and I like them for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBI
yes, but where else can you get this ironic punch:
Quote:
Sad that our finest aspiration
Our freshest dreams and meditations,
In swift succession should decay,
Like Autumn leaves that rot away.
I don't know. It actually reminds me of Edna Vincent Millay's poem The Spring and the Fall which concludes:Quote:
Originally Posted by JBI
Year be springing or year be falling,
The bark will drip and the birds be calling.
There's much that's fine to see and hear
In the spring of a year, in the fall of a year.
'Tis not love's going hurt my days.
But that it went in little ways.
jon1jt - im sure tolstoy has his fans
what i noticed is that readers kinda like tolstoy's war and peace more than anna k. but writers in general appreciate anna karenina more than war and peace. tolstoy himself was more proud of anna than of war and peace and dostoevsky said 'anna karenina' is perfect.
I am kind of hoping that I haven't read the best novel ever yet because if I have what is the point in reading anything else - just a little thought there. Anna K is an OK read but it would not make my great reads list.
Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov are the best novels I've ever read.
My pick for best novel, then, would have to go to Richard Bach's Jonathan Livingston Seagull.
:lol::lol: My God, man! You certainly gave me the greatest laugh of the day! I couldn't have come up with a more absurd pick myself. :lol::lol:
No. It's not even Tolstoy's best work; War and Peace is better.Quote:
Originally Posted by evening_read
Eugene Onegin is novel in verse, actually something different from typical novel. But it is great, I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBI
One of the most boring novels I ever read.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mopey Droney
-----
Here is list of 100 best books by this forum members and Anna Karenina is on 18th place. It would be higher in my opinion, but not the best. My pick would definitely be Brothers Karamazov.