These Russians really know how to tackle the big issues in literature. I started with Solzenitsyn's Day in the Life, then did War and Peace, then Crime and Punishment, and most recently, The Brothers Karamazov, and I have to say that I am much the better for reading these books.

Phew, I thought War and Peace was good (and it was), but the Brothers Karamazov locks horns with the problems we face as human beings, wrestles them to the ground, exposes us for the weak, sinful things that we are, then gives us hope.

Principally (to me, anyhow), the novel was about the problem of overthrown authority. God and the church were starting to be questioned as the ultimate authority, and the air in Russia at the time was begining to move towards reform, begining to become modern. Its themes are just as relevant today as they were for Dostoyevsky's time, and there are several passages in "The Russian Monk" chapter that were profoundly prophetic of the problems of modern society- if you replace some words with modern equivelents you have a very good picture of the USA today. Isolation of the individual, invented needs, the problem of freedom- these are some of the things Dostoyevsky tries to tackle.

Several chapters are masterpieces enclosed within the work itself, 'Pro and Contra,' 'A Little Demon,' 'The Russian Monk' the chapter where Mrs Kholaklova (spelling) professes her lack of faith to the Elder Zosima, the chapter that focuses on the relationship between Snegiyrov and Illyushin, his son, showing how children lose their innocence and become indoctrinated into this harsh adult world- with bad consequences when violence is present. And of course, there is the 'Grand Inquisitor' chapter. Wow. WOW. Had to read that three times before I think I got everything in it, but I think if every human being on Earth read 'The Grand Inquisitor' 'The Russian Monk' and then 'The Speech at the Stone' we would all be very much the better for it. eh, just read the whole thing while you're at it.

Dostoyevsky's conclusion seems to be that faith will be the ultimate healing salve for all humanity- once everybody realizes the stupidity of everything other then selfless, active love, we shall all move forward and life shall be paradise. We've had 120 years or so more progress towards it since Dostoyevsky wrote it, but it looks like we're still not doing very well (thank you very much Ms Ayn Rand). Dostoyevsky provides enough sustenence for people with less ardent faith to continue on- one of the characters, Rakitin, says 'Man kind will find the strength to live for virtue wether or not he believes in the immortality of the soul.' The Devil, in the chapter where he has a conversational duel with Ivan, mocks this idea as 'most charming.'

Each of the primary characters- Alyosha, Ivan, Dmitry, and Fyodor Pavlovich, is a guide to a certain way of living. Alyosha the christ-man, Ivan the intellectual skeptic (Raskolnikov mk II), Dmitry the noble savage, and Fyodor Pavlovich as the great sinner. Each character has his own climax in the book, and everybody should be able to identify with at least one of the characters, or find that they may be 10% Dmitry, 50% Ivan, and 40% Alyosha.

This should be an exceptional book for any young person trying to figure out what the heck life is all about. There's some good stuff between those covers- Dostoyevsky has a very deep understanding of human nature.

So in closing, whatever your beliefs are, don't eat the pineapple compote, and don't take the earthly loaves.

THE BROTHERS KARAMAZOV may indeed be the greatest novel yet written. The Russian master's tumultuous epic concerning ultimate questions of good and evil; faith and rationalism; love and passion, are profoundly dramatized in a murder mystery that astonishes and disturbs by its refusal to stereotype any of its characters or trivialize any of its themes. Hence the book...like a well-lived life...is a struggle that requires much of the reader. However, if the effort is made in good faith, one never forgets the experience of journey and the lessons taught. The Constance Garnett translation is to The Karamazov as the King James Version is to the Bible. At the center of the story is "The Legend of the Grand Inquisitor". Some readers may observe that its inclusion in the novel is a "mechanical" contrivance and a technical flaw that does not naturally flow into the narrative. This may be true; but Ivan Karamazov's "poem" (as Dostoyevsky's proud, intellectual nihilist proposes) is...in effect...a spiritual history of humanity and its battle for dignity under the weight of its own Sins. When the Inquisitor/anti- Christ figure of the tale asserts that man's greatest curse is his own freedom and that he will "worship" anyone who takes this burden from him (from Supreme Court Justices who declare abortion is not murder...to talk show hosts who celebrate divorce and homosexuality)most readers suddenly realize that they are not merely reading a book but...like The Brothers Karamazov themselves... are on trial for their beliefs. Or lack of them. It is a novel which rivals parts of The Bible itself in wisdom and startling insights. Yet Dostoyevsky was "only" a man and this book... perhaps the greatest novel ever written...is a wonderful testimony to great literature's affirmation of life and the "adventure" of living.

The Brothers Karamazov becomes more ironic and comedic with multiple readings and age, i.e. mine. It is also, for me, the novel of the Russian soul/landscape, the ungovernable, mystic and irrational. Traces of Rasputin can be gleaned in Fyodor Karamazov, the patriarch whose decadent life and death is the magnetic core of this masterpiece. Dostoevsky, in his last novel spares few but least of all the lesser landowners, moneylenders and petitbourgoise whose treachery and self-absorption is the essence of the drunken Karamazov. From 3 women, come the brothers and the bastard and it is within their various souls, the archetypal Russian nature and its conflict, comes the plot. In all, the span of the story is but 4 days.

Karamazov is the comedy as well as the nature of the murderous avenging of devils that lightens and lifts, to the degree that is possible in this notoriously dense read. In one scene glaring with "a broad, drunken half-witted leer." he manages to speak some of the author's tormented inner debates about religion, God and the progressive, radical elements that would choose violent change and destruction. Despite his tyranny to servants, children and women, Karamazov is a yellow bellied coward. Confronted by Dmitri, his son, Fyodor squeals and runs around the table, "He's going to hurt me, stop him stop him" grabbing desperately to another son's coattails.

Dostoyevsky's final work of the obsessions that consumed him as well as his age is no where more labrynthine than in his depiction of the Russian church. He indicts the overly powerful clergy of the Holy Mother Church of the Tsar- while remaining fanatically Christian. He has contempt for the court system and the repressive penal codes, but a greater contempt for the radicals and assassins who assert that blood is the path to reform and the end of crime. Here, he enlarged on the theme of Crime and Punishment where destabilization and rampant appetites and excess were condemned. Karamazov is less a sermon or a catharsis for its delightful comedy, the burlesque of dreamers, rebels, the pious and the rogues who are part of the great folly, the foolishness and perhaps unredeemable condition of mankind. Dostoevsky was a Christian who could only love a suffering Christ- Ivan, his son intellectualizes religion yet it does nothing but infect his mind and bring nightmares, one of which is the famous chapter of "The Grand Inquisitor." There is an attack upon the deification of the uneducated Russian countrymen when after a verdict came through someone yelled, "Hooray, Trust our Russian peasants, Trust the peasants." Yet they had just convicted an innocent man.

Dostoeyvski speaks in the preface as author and creator, in particular in regard to his hero, tells us in the preface that the Aleksi, (Aloysha). The Christlike youngest brother is superior in thought alone, but in his action, he fails to inspire.

In no area is Dostoeyevski's own uncertainty more brilliantly depicted than in the question of the nature of the holy man on earth- the monks, the starets and the saintly. Fyodor insults the monks where Aloysha has gone to prepare for the priesthood. He shouts in a mad frenzy to the monks, "why shouldn't I act the fool? ....every single one of you is worse than me. That's why I'm a buffoon- a buffon of shame..Master (falling to knees) what must I do to earn eternal life?" Was he in jest?
It has been said that all the characters are insane, and then rebuffed with, we are just seeing them, in so much vivid light, but they are, like ourselves, just ordinary. This is an event, a necessary ingredient to any reading life.

The book is good due to its simple explanation of napoleons life, although, at times it is not specific enough for the reader to really understand what is going on in the story.

This book is about Napoleon, his life, his victories, and defeats. It a good book to those who don't know much about Napoleon.

This is a hard review to write, I wish I had an option to give this 3 1/2 stars, but I can't quite give 4 and I can't quite stomach 3. This book is great if you wish to glean facts about 13th century Europeon male's point of view of the middle and Far east. There are some tales that are completely stupendous, and cannot be believed at all and then there are some great, anecdotes, a favorite of mine is one were Marco challenges the ability of Kublai Khan's empire to function using a paper monetary system, at which Polo is completely incredulous, a monetary system, everyone in the world uses today. There are some excellent recounts of native islands, unspoiled back lands and an excellent feeling for the travels of a trader that took that original silk route over 600 years ago. It's an easy read though, short chapters, and fanciful tales make it flow fast, so even if the fantastic tales annoy your need for historic fact, it's probably worth the few days this takes to thumb through.

Though after reading authors such as Edward Said I should know better, I greatly enjoyed Marco Polo's description of his travels. And I think that it is "Messer Marco's" somewhat simpleminded, straightforward, naively "Western" and "Orientalist" approach towards what he saw that makes his book so entertaining. His breathless, hyperbolic descriptions of his travels seem calculated, whether consciously or unconsciously, to give the reader a vision of a world so strange, so wonderful to the Western mind, that they could only comprehend it if they saw it for themselves. And in many ways he (and his ghostwriter) succeeds in producing that effect. His accounts of the Great Khan's feasts and huge array of riches and servants, and well as his descriptions of "strange" (usually sexual) native customs definitely strive to highlight the differences between what he sees as Eastern and Western civilization. As such, he chooses only the most spectacular and different aspects of life under the Great Khan, aspects that are not coincidentally the most exciting and interesting to read about.

Of course, Marco's evaluations and interpretations of what he sees are not to be taken too seriously, but this doesn't make them any less entertaining. Marco's outdated biases and ethnocentric, simplistic interpretations of Asian life give the book an underlying comedic effect.

For pure (somewhat trashy) reading fun Marco Polo's account of his travels is a genuine success. Of course, from the standpoint of East/West relations it has more disturbing implications. However, to fully analyze Marco Polo's significance to later Western thought about China, it's implications in the general "Orientalist" framework as laid out by Said (if you believe in that sort of thing), and how his own prejudices (slavish respect of power, extreme interest in material wealth, dogmatic Christian religious ideas) colored his account is beyond my power.

Marco Polo's memoir of his life and travels in the medieval Asian empire of Kublai Khan is the ultimate adventure tale, a true one-of-a-kind. As a teenager, Marco Polo, scion of a Venetian trading family, embarked on a two-decade adventure into the remotest corners of the known world through his family's connection with the Great Khan and his court. Year later, (after dictating his story in a prison back in civilized Europe), Polo published a dazzling account of sights he witnessed in lands little known to Europeans of the Middle Ages. So extraordinary and exotic were his reports, that Polo's tales both fired imaginations and inspired skepticism. For the modern reader, the book offers a fascinating picture of a lost world and a sense of ultimate adventure. One element that makes this an appealing edition of an opt-published classic is the use of 32 woodcut illustrations by Witold Gordon originally created for a 1930 edition of the book.