The last minute opening of a new investigation into Hillary Clinton's handling of her emails shows three things:
- Trump and his team were convinced that if they don't get some serious mud-throwing done in the last minute they will lose.
- The Republican party has its pants full. Trump has hijacked them, and if Trump loses then not only did a madman tarnish their reputation, he will even lose for them, making them very weak.
- The Republican party and Trump have enough leverage with people at the FBI to force the opening of such an investigation before the election. Gives you an idea where the money that Trump saved on not paying taxes is going.
This is such an outrageous case of corruption that if the Russian government wouldn't be so eager to push its propaganda against the US others would nevertheless say the same things this week.
Monday, 31 October 2016
Tuesday, 25 October 2016
Tokyo view from Roppongi
This summer we visited Roppongi Hills with my partner. It is a wonderful, busy, bustling part of Tokyo, teeming with business, restaurants, cafe, ice cream parlours and impressive architecture.
In the superb Mori Arts Center Gallery - also in the towers, like the Mori Art Museum - we saw an excellent and fun exhibition on
Around Roppongi there were hundreds Doraemons, obviously very popular both with kids and adults. The event was probably similar to this one.
Inside the towers there are several restaurants, ranging from pricy elegant ones serving kobe beef to the more budget friendly but still very nice mid-range sushi restaurants. We had a pleasant sushi lunch. Next to us a small kid and his mom were sitting, and I could witness first hand that kids - as in any other country - can have their difficulties with cutlery, in this case with chopsticks.
And there is a wonderful view from the towers on the downtown Tokyo.
Hungarian architect and blogger bonakovacs also has a nice entry on the area around Christmas, when the Roppongi Hills and the Midtown towers are competing with each other in who can put on the more mesmerizing Christmas-lights show.
In the superb Mori Arts Center Gallery - also in the towers, like the Mori Art Museum - we saw an excellent and fun exhibition on
Around Roppongi there were hundreds Doraemons, obviously very popular both with kids and adults. The event was probably similar to this one.
Inside the towers there are several restaurants, ranging from pricy elegant ones serving kobe beef to the more budget friendly but still very nice mid-range sushi restaurants. We had a pleasant sushi lunch. Next to us a small kid and his mom were sitting, and I could witness first hand that kids - as in any other country - can have their difficulties with cutlery, in this case with chopsticks.
And there is a wonderful view from the towers on the downtown Tokyo.
Hungarian architect and blogger bonakovacs also has a nice entry on the area around Christmas, when the Roppongi Hills and the Midtown towers are competing with each other in who can put on the more mesmerizing Christmas-lights show.
Sunday, 23 October 2016
What to read next?
When I'm finished with a batch of books I need a few days when I just work and don't commit to a new schedule of books. I usually start reading 1-2 handbooks, research books, nonfictions, and 1-2 novels, collections of poems or short stories roughly at the same time. Depending on how busy I'm it takes me a few weeks or 1-2 months to get through them (or as with the Karamazovs three months, but to be honest I've read 6 other books meanwhile).
Do many of my readers read this way? Or do you try and focus on one book?
The last batch of books I read consisted of the short stories collection War Stories edited by Sebastian Faulks and Jörg Hensgen, Dostoevsky's The Karamazov Brothers, Michael J. Sandel's What Money Can't Buy, Akiko Hashimoto's The Long Defeat, and Ogura Kazuo's Japan's Asian Diplomacy, and Hugh de Sélincourt's Oxford from Within. (The links point to reviews of the books or their publishers' pages.)
Besides doing my regular philosophy re-reading (Rousseau's The Social Contract, Aristotle's Politics, Anscombe's Intention, and Hornsby's Actions), I'm considering some of the following non-philosophy books:
Melville's Moby Dick,
Owen Jones's The Establishment,
Peter Frankopan's The Silk Roads,
G. R. Evans' The University of Oxford: A New History,
Heinrich Böll's Frauen vor Flußlandschaft,
Anne Enright's The Green Road,
David Steeds and Ian Nish's China, Japan and 19th Century Britain,
and
Jeffrey N. Wassertstrom's The Oxford Illustrated History of Modern China.
I don't want to start more than 3-4 books now, and I wonder which ones would go well together...Any advice or tips, as well as recommendations along these lines are welcome!
Do many of my readers read this way? Or do you try and focus on one book?
The last batch of books I read consisted of the short stories collection War Stories edited by Sebastian Faulks and Jörg Hensgen, Dostoevsky's The Karamazov Brothers, Michael J. Sandel's What Money Can't Buy, Akiko Hashimoto's The Long Defeat, and Ogura Kazuo's Japan's Asian Diplomacy, and Hugh de Sélincourt's Oxford from Within. (The links point to reviews of the books or their publishers' pages.)
Besides doing my regular philosophy re-reading (Rousseau's The Social Contract, Aristotle's Politics, Anscombe's Intention, and Hornsby's Actions), I'm considering some of the following non-philosophy books:
Melville's Moby Dick,
Owen Jones's The Establishment,
Peter Frankopan's The Silk Roads,
G. R. Evans' The University of Oxford: A New History,
Heinrich Böll's Frauen vor Flußlandschaft,
Anne Enright's The Green Road,
David Steeds and Ian Nish's China, Japan and 19th Century Britain,
and
Jeffrey N. Wassertstrom's The Oxford Illustrated History of Modern China.
I don't want to start more than 3-4 books now, and I wonder which ones would go well together...Any advice or tips, as well as recommendations along these lines are welcome!
Saturday, 22 October 2016
On Akiko Hashimoto's 'The Long Defeat'
Akiko Hashimoto's book offers a very good overview of Japanese attempts both of politicians and civilians to understand their role in the second world war, and since then.
Hashimoto covers the main political debates between pacifists, nationalists, and reconciliationists, as she divides the calls her groupings of the main approaches. These distinctions are someties oversimplified, but there are plenty of details and careful references, so anyone can strike out and make up their own mind about the issues discussed.
The last 30 pages of the book are in many respects the most interesting since Hashimoto reflects briefly on the post 2000 events up to 2014. It is too bad that she doesn't deal on more pages with the effects of Chinese and South-Korean nationalism, and the hatred against Japan stoked by Chinese and Korean (both North and South) governments. This is a phenomenon we have seen more of recently, and is used as a tool by the Chinese and Koreans to direct away attention from internal politics and economic problems, and their own issues with authoritarianism and human rights issues; and of course China uses this as an excuse for its own aggressive military expansion. These factors are becoming more and more important as China and both Koreas grow stronger, and turn many of the earlier fears of nationalist Japanese politicians into actual threats that Japan has to take seriously.
Of course these factors also complicate the picture of how Japan should relate to its own WWII role and validate that it should simply move on. Enough apologies have been offered, restitutions have been paid, and since WWII Japan is more peaceful and democratic than the large majority of its vocal critics, including China, the Koreas, and the US. Chinese and South-Korean politicians are utterly reluctant to admit the strenght of the Japanese peace-movements, the fact that their militaries are stronger or as strong as the Japanese, or that they are employing authoritarian, dictatoric means against their own citizens, as well as that they also have a violent history going back millenias. Until they use the conflicts with Japan for domestic political purposes in this way, the apology-politics should stop, the topic should be dropped, and a more forward looking vision crafted for Japan. Of course the horrible war crimes perpetrated by Japanese soldiers, leaders and sometimes even civilians have to be openly remembered. But they do not constitute the whole history of Japan, nor are they the only and main thing about the country around which its identity should be constructed.
This is perhaps my biggest point of disagreement with Hashimoto, who never challenges whether the relationship to Japan to its WWII role should be a central topic these days, and whether it should really be so important to the nation's identity (if there is such a thing at all). Surely there is more to Japan's history the tragic and guilty war years between, say roughly 1929-1945, and there is definitely more to it more than 70 years down the line. Since then Japan has been supporting other countries in their economic build-up, been a peaceful country, and evolved into a major welfare state conscious of the rights, interests, and wellbeing of its citizens. This cannot be said of the US which waged many wars and where the social network - which was always weak - hasn't developed properly, or China where an authoritarian regime is keeping its people cut off from the internet, occupied tibet, the north-eastern territories, and is punishing by torture, prisoning and force any serious organized dissent. The maniac focus on the issue of Japan's WWII role just seems to serve political interests of nationalist politicians in Japan, and the Chinese, Korean, Russian, and US military and political dilpomacy.
Akiko Hashimoto, The Long Defeat. 2015. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hashimoto covers the main political debates between pacifists, nationalists, and reconciliationists, as she divides the calls her groupings of the main approaches. These distinctions are someties oversimplified, but there are plenty of details and careful references, so anyone can strike out and make up their own mind about the issues discussed.
The last 30 pages of the book are in many respects the most interesting since Hashimoto reflects briefly on the post 2000 events up to 2014. It is too bad that she doesn't deal on more pages with the effects of Chinese and South-Korean nationalism, and the hatred against Japan stoked by Chinese and Korean (both North and South) governments. This is a phenomenon we have seen more of recently, and is used as a tool by the Chinese and Koreans to direct away attention from internal politics and economic problems, and their own issues with authoritarianism and human rights issues; and of course China uses this as an excuse for its own aggressive military expansion. These factors are becoming more and more important as China and both Koreas grow stronger, and turn many of the earlier fears of nationalist Japanese politicians into actual threats that Japan has to take seriously.
Of course these factors also complicate the picture of how Japan should relate to its own WWII role and validate that it should simply move on. Enough apologies have been offered, restitutions have been paid, and since WWII Japan is more peaceful and democratic than the large majority of its vocal critics, including China, the Koreas, and the US. Chinese and South-Korean politicians are utterly reluctant to admit the strenght of the Japanese peace-movements, the fact that their militaries are stronger or as strong as the Japanese, or that they are employing authoritarian, dictatoric means against their own citizens, as well as that they also have a violent history going back millenias. Until they use the conflicts with Japan for domestic political purposes in this way, the apology-politics should stop, the topic should be dropped, and a more forward looking vision crafted for Japan. Of course the horrible war crimes perpetrated by Japanese soldiers, leaders and sometimes even civilians have to be openly remembered. But they do not constitute the whole history of Japan, nor are they the only and main thing about the country around which its identity should be constructed.
This is perhaps my biggest point of disagreement with Hashimoto, who never challenges whether the relationship to Japan to its WWII role should be a central topic these days, and whether it should really be so important to the nation's identity (if there is such a thing at all). Surely there is more to Japan's history the tragic and guilty war years between, say roughly 1929-1945, and there is definitely more to it more than 70 years down the line. Since then Japan has been supporting other countries in their economic build-up, been a peaceful country, and evolved into a major welfare state conscious of the rights, interests, and wellbeing of its citizens. This cannot be said of the US which waged many wars and where the social network - which was always weak - hasn't developed properly, or China where an authoritarian regime is keeping its people cut off from the internet, occupied tibet, the north-eastern territories, and is punishing by torture, prisoning and force any serious organized dissent. The maniac focus on the issue of Japan's WWII role just seems to serve political interests of nationalist politicians in Japan, and the Chinese, Korean, Russian, and US military and political dilpomacy.
Akiko Hashimoto, The Long Defeat. 2015. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wednesday, 19 October 2016
Hugh de Selincourt's 'Oxford from Within'
I've just finished the a nice old edition of Hugh de Selincourt's Oxford from Within. The book is short and readable, although the style is fairly outdated and at times very circumstantial. It is about an imagined journey the writer takes in Oxford, and an internal conversation between his positive and negative memories and opinions of Oxford. In the end the good opinions are overwhelming, and much of the more condemning criticism is written down as understandable ideas of the author's younger self.
The book is nice, if one is in a dreamy mood. However if you hope to get some real insight into the workings or student life of Oxford don't choose this book. Besides some nice description of mostly known things and a few additional details you won't find much new information. The freshest and clearest parts of the book are - somewhat surprisingly - the sections praising the changes that women were allowed to study at Oxford, and that science and the classics were achieving a complementary position (something that has changed a great deal since the early 1900's when de Selincourt was writing).
The book - at least the older hardcover edition published by Chatto & Windus in 1910 - features some lovely paintings by Yoshio Markino, who lived and painted in London for a long time. The pictures bring to life how Oxford looked a 100 years ago. They are very atmospheric, complementing the text well. As someone who loves the places depicted - Trinity's gate, the front of All Souls and the Radcliffe Camera, Iffley Church, New College Tower - these pictures are really heartwarming.
All in all, I would recommend this to someone who hasn't yet read much about Oxford, and who wants an easy reading that can be finished in one or two afternoons.
The book is nice, if one is in a dreamy mood. However if you hope to get some real insight into the workings or student life of Oxford don't choose this book. Besides some nice description of mostly known things and a few additional details you won't find much new information. The freshest and clearest parts of the book are - somewhat surprisingly - the sections praising the changes that women were allowed to study at Oxford, and that science and the classics were achieving a complementary position (something that has changed a great deal since the early 1900's when de Selincourt was writing).
The book - at least the older hardcover edition published by Chatto & Windus in 1910 - features some lovely paintings by Yoshio Markino, who lived and painted in London for a long time. The pictures bring to life how Oxford looked a 100 years ago. They are very atmospheric, complementing the text well. As someone who loves the places depicted - Trinity's gate, the front of All Souls and the Radcliffe Camera, Iffley Church, New College Tower - these pictures are really heartwarming.
Yoshio Markino's rendering of Turl Street and the tower of Exeter
All in all, I would recommend this to someone who hasn't yet read much about Oxford, and who wants an easy reading that can be finished in one or two afternoons.
Tuesday, 18 October 2016
On the rottenness of the political leaderships
For a long time I thought that most populist politicians just track the interests and preferences of voters and serve them.
In the last years however it seems more and more that some parties and politicians are perfectly capable of forming the wills of the voters in a way that suits their agenda.
Every time one hears a politician talk these days one is faced with a product. There isn't much content usually that has anything to do with the motivations and values of the person talking, or the institution/post she/he represents. It is just a marketing product designed to attract 'buyers'. who are in this case voters.
What we see at the moment in the EU and in Europe at large (including post-Brexit UK, and European Russia) is that right-wing, extreme-nationalist people are parading as political conservatives. But don't be deluded. They don't actually aim at defending any values or ways of life. They aim at grasping power and securing positions for themselves and their collaborators. This in itself wouldn't be a problem. You will have these moves in any competition. The problem starts when this becomes the sole goal of their activities.
Brexit is an excellent case to study. It does not serve the EUs interests, it does not serve the interests of the British people at large, or the English people at large. It does not serve the interests of Britain, or Britain's foreign political partners. What it does is simply this: There was a worry for some more nationalist and mainly middle level administrators and political and business players in the UK that they would lose their positions and weight in a more unified Europe, and in a UK which is becoming richer and richer. These folks came up with the idea that leaving the EU will protect their positions within British politics and business by isolating - at least partially - the decision making structures and markets in which they participate. It might also help them get higher positions and get a slice of the enormous wealth that the UK - much with the help of the EU, EU citizens working there, and other international partners - has amassed in the last decade.
In the last years however it seems more and more that some parties and politicians are perfectly capable of forming the wills of the voters in a way that suits their agenda.
Every time one hears a politician talk these days one is faced with a product. There isn't much content usually that has anything to do with the motivations and values of the person talking, or the institution/post she/he represents. It is just a marketing product designed to attract 'buyers'. who are in this case voters.
What we see at the moment in the EU and in Europe at large (including post-Brexit UK, and European Russia) is that right-wing, extreme-nationalist people are parading as political conservatives. But don't be deluded. They don't actually aim at defending any values or ways of life. They aim at grasping power and securing positions for themselves and their collaborators. This in itself wouldn't be a problem. You will have these moves in any competition. The problem starts when this becomes the sole goal of their activities.
Brexit is an excellent case to study. It does not serve the EUs interests, it does not serve the interests of the British people at large, or the English people at large. It does not serve the interests of Britain, or Britain's foreign political partners. What it does is simply this: There was a worry for some more nationalist and mainly middle level administrators and political and business players in the UK that they would lose their positions and weight in a more unified Europe, and in a UK which is becoming richer and richer. These folks came up with the idea that leaving the EU will protect their positions within British politics and business by isolating - at least partially - the decision making structures and markets in which they participate. It might also help them get higher positions and get a slice of the enormous wealth that the UK - much with the help of the EU, EU citizens working there, and other international partners - has amassed in the last decade.
Saturday, 15 October 2016
Vitality Oxford Half Marathon
I completed the Oxford Half Marathon last week. It was good fun: there is plenty of beautiful architecture around the route, the weather was pleasant, not too cold, not too warm, and the mood wasn't too bad. To be honest the Hungarian races I participated in last year had much more of a party-vibe, but I'm used by now to Oxford being a bit stiff, whether it is a race, a conference, or a drinks evening.
The route started from Broad Street, in fron of the Sheldonian, and it went up a bit towards Banbury Rd, turned back to Pitt Rivers, did a loop by New College and back to Banbury, up North almost until the roundabout, then back to Marston Ferry Rd, all the way to Old Marston where we did a nice loop along the historical buildings and back to Marston Ferry. After that it was just running all the way back, and the last few miles stretched through University Parks and came back around the Radcliffe Camera, passed by Exeter College and through to Turl Street, and the finish was on Broad Street again.
The organization was alright. There were plenty of drink stations and toilets, lots of friendly volunteers, and the spectators and bands raised the mood. The only issue was - as usual in Oxford - space: the organizers issued small plastic bags with the application and one could only leave as much stuff in the baggage drop area as what fitted into the plastic bag. For anyone travelling from another town, city, this must have been quite inconvenient. Also, there were no showers for after the race. One had to go home to get changed. And since there was a good turnout and 8000 people ran, the narrow streets and the paths of University Park constantly became 'clogged' and one had to adjust the speed to others running in front. Apart from these small things it was a lovely day, and I'm glad I've completed the race. My time was a bit better than what I expected: 1hour 48minutes instead of 2hours. Still, much slower than my PB from last year, which was 1hour 35minutes in November, on a cold and windy day, in Siófok by the lake Balaton.
The page of the Half Marathon offers good running training advice and training plans for everyone wishing to compete at some point. I usually use the training plans of BUPA, but it seems that one could train perfectly well with these ones too. I also raised some money for Macmillan Cancer Support and received some nice compliments and thanks for doing so.
The route started from Broad Street, in fron of the Sheldonian, and it went up a bit towards Banbury Rd, turned back to Pitt Rivers, did a loop by New College and back to Banbury, up North almost until the roundabout, then back to Marston Ferry Rd, all the way to Old Marston where we did a nice loop along the historical buildings and back to Marston Ferry. After that it was just running all the way back, and the last few miles stretched through University Parks and came back around the Radcliffe Camera, passed by Exeter College and through to Turl Street, and the finish was on Broad Street again.
The organization was alright. There were plenty of drink stations and toilets, lots of friendly volunteers, and the spectators and bands raised the mood. The only issue was - as usual in Oxford - space: the organizers issued small plastic bags with the application and one could only leave as much stuff in the baggage drop area as what fitted into the plastic bag. For anyone travelling from another town, city, this must have been quite inconvenient. Also, there were no showers for after the race. One had to go home to get changed. And since there was a good turnout and 8000 people ran, the narrow streets and the paths of University Park constantly became 'clogged' and one had to adjust the speed to others running in front. Apart from these small things it was a lovely day, and I'm glad I've completed the race. My time was a bit better than what I expected: 1hour 48minutes instead of 2hours. Still, much slower than my PB from last year, which was 1hour 35minutes in November, on a cold and windy day, in Siófok by the lake Balaton.
The page of the Half Marathon offers good running training advice and training plans for everyone wishing to compete at some point. I usually use the training plans of BUPA, but it seems that one could train perfectly well with these ones too. I also raised some money for Macmillan Cancer Support and received some nice compliments and thanks for doing so.
Friday, 14 October 2016
In the mood for music
It rarely happens to me but at the end of this week I was really in the mood for music.
I very much enjoyed listening to Miwako Okuda's Shizuku. Nice voice, not too much drama but dynamic, and nice background tunes.
Afterwards I needed something a bit more complex, and a piece we discovered with my partner at a concert this Spring was just perfect: Dvořzak's Song to the Moon (by Rusalka) in Renée Fleming's wonderful rendering.
Enjoy and have a lovely weekend.
I very much enjoyed listening to Miwako Okuda's Shizuku. Nice voice, not too much drama but dynamic, and nice background tunes.
Afterwards I needed something a bit more complex, and a piece we discovered with my partner at a concert this Spring was just perfect: Dvořzak's Song to the Moon (by Rusalka) in Renée Fleming's wonderful rendering.
Enjoy and have a lovely weekend.
On the Nobel Prize in literature and Bob Dylan
It was announced that Bob Dylan won the nobel prize in literature. Immediately much discussion sprung up, and many people were in joy. I'm a bit entauscht, and I have a feeling as if there should be another announcement for the prize for proper literature.
Not that I'm against Dylan: I sometimes enjoy his music, and surely his lyrics are an integral part of his performance. It is rich, interesting, entertaining, emotionally sophisticated, at times political. Still, if read it is not outstanding poetry, compared with many who have not been deemed worthy a Nobel.
My gut feeling tells me that what we have to do with in this case is a PR act to put the Nobel prize in literature on the map for younger folks, as well as less 'high literature' oriented folks, and brand it as a relevant Prize, one which they should pay attention too. I'm always dubious of such motives: I know that we live in an era where we have to compete with all the low and high quality well advertised products churned out by huge companies spending tons of money on getting their stuff to us. Still, the Nobel is what it is: a high mesaure of excellence, be that excellence in enriching cultural memory and understanding, a trailblaizing experimental style, or a masterly literary achievement. Dylan's - written - work is certainly none of these. Giving the prize to him is especially harsh a year after it was awarded to Svetlana Alexievich.
Alexievich is an excellent writer, has focused on events of the 20th century in much of her work which have altered the lives of countless people - Chernobyl, the Afghan war of Russia, etc. - and does that in a way that she makes our memories and understanding of these events much more sophisticated and complex, hence, much more close to the truth.
However, literature surely also has the role to entertain. Anyone denying this would be a fool and with no understanding either of the history or the role of reaidng, books, printing, and literature as such. So, Dylan it is. I'm sure his work will receive much attention for the next months. His fans will be happy about the news, people who weren't fans might give it a try with a new openness and appreciativeness, and even those who never heard of him or never liked him might recognize something valuable in his work after listening to it again (or for the first time).
Not that I'm against Dylan: I sometimes enjoy his music, and surely his lyrics are an integral part of his performance. It is rich, interesting, entertaining, emotionally sophisticated, at times political. Still, if read it is not outstanding poetry, compared with many who have not been deemed worthy a Nobel.
My gut feeling tells me that what we have to do with in this case is a PR act to put the Nobel prize in literature on the map for younger folks, as well as less 'high literature' oriented folks, and brand it as a relevant Prize, one which they should pay attention too. I'm always dubious of such motives: I know that we live in an era where we have to compete with all the low and high quality well advertised products churned out by huge companies spending tons of money on getting their stuff to us. Still, the Nobel is what it is: a high mesaure of excellence, be that excellence in enriching cultural memory and understanding, a trailblaizing experimental style, or a masterly literary achievement. Dylan's - written - work is certainly none of these. Giving the prize to him is especially harsh a year after it was awarded to Svetlana Alexievich.
Alexievich is an excellent writer, has focused on events of the 20th century in much of her work which have altered the lives of countless people - Chernobyl, the Afghan war of Russia, etc. - and does that in a way that she makes our memories and understanding of these events much more sophisticated and complex, hence, much more close to the truth.
However, literature surely also has the role to entertain. Anyone denying this would be a fool and with no understanding either of the history or the role of reaidng, books, printing, and literature as such. So, Dylan it is. I'm sure his work will receive much attention for the next months. His fans will be happy about the news, people who weren't fans might give it a try with a new openness and appreciativeness, and even those who never heard of him or never liked him might recognize something valuable in his work after listening to it again (or for the first time).
Rereading 'The Brothers Karamazov'
Last week I finished re-reading Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov.
It was a strange experience: As a teenager I could vividly feel with
Alyosha, Ivan, and, although I never liked his personality, even with
Mitya. Now 15 years later I mostly saw them as very passionate, easily
excitable young men who get into trouble because of the greed of their father, and their passionate love affairs.
It is also interesting to see, as in many 19th century books, that the protagonists are all rich and well off. Even though Dmitry works for the army, if he would be careful with the money that his father agrees to pay out to him he could establish himself comfortably.
Dostoevsky is of course a brilliant writer. I've read the book in one of its recent Oxford editions, with footnotes, introductions, and the novel's length in itself was a good 900 pages. Dostoevsky manages to maintain tension and excitement, to keep the reader's interest alive throughout all these pages, and to build up one, coherent story. A masterly achievement. The work touches on psychology, morality, politics, and religion. Of course it doesn't do that at the level in which a psychologist, philosopher, politicla scientist, or someone doing religious studies would do this, but still, the novel showcases that Dostoevsky was a real intellectual, thinking about contemporary issues, following not only the criminal news, but also the intellectual currents of his time.
In one sense the book didn't have the effect on me as more recently published big books. I suspect this is exactly because it had such an enormous influence on literature that its best features have been countlessly interpreted and applied, mimiced and developed further by writers since Dostoevsky. Therefore I have encountered similar - and in one or the other aspect even better - writing from 20th and 21th century writers. Still, that I could enjoy all that good literature as it is, is Dostoevsky's achievement.
It is also interesting to see, as in many 19th century books, that the protagonists are all rich and well off. Even though Dmitry works for the army, if he would be careful with the money that his father agrees to pay out to him he could establish himself comfortably.
Dostoevsky is of course a brilliant writer. I've read the book in one of its recent Oxford editions, with footnotes, introductions, and the novel's length in itself was a good 900 pages. Dostoevsky manages to maintain tension and excitement, to keep the reader's interest alive throughout all these pages, and to build up one, coherent story. A masterly achievement. The work touches on psychology, morality, politics, and religion. Of course it doesn't do that at the level in which a psychologist, philosopher, politicla scientist, or someone doing religious studies would do this, but still, the novel showcases that Dostoevsky was a real intellectual, thinking about contemporary issues, following not only the criminal news, but also the intellectual currents of his time.
In one sense the book didn't have the effect on me as more recently published big books. I suspect this is exactly because it had such an enormous influence on literature that its best features have been countlessly interpreted and applied, mimiced and developed further by writers since Dostoevsky. Therefore I have encountered similar - and in one or the other aspect even better - writing from 20th and 21th century writers. Still, that I could enjoy all that good literature as it is, is Dostoevsky's achievement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)