(Original Review, 1981-03-23)



Hammett I take to have a brilliant literary mind and to be well read in Literature. I take him to be able to know what a Byronic Hero is, what others thought about that, to have his own thoughts about it, as well as lots of other things (like about detective stories), of course. And I take him to have an idea of what a parable is and how it differs from a story, or what an archetype or double is. Take the 'double': all he has to do is READ Poe's William Wilson, or Dostoevsky’s “The Double” to get what it is as Literature. Or to read Hamlet to know how a “mise en abyme” works. He knows these things and uses them WITH THE MIND OF A BRILLIANT WRITER. A mind that processes literature not as a critic or simple reader, but as a creator of it.

If you're into stuff like this, you can read the full review.

Some of the best lyrical poetry to come from Russia during the late 19th century. Though he wrote occasional pieces and political poems which constitute nearly half his output, 200 of his lyric pieces make up the core of his output. They are at once metaphysical and concrete, much like Donne, though much less "esoteric," more accessible. His meanings are always specific always relatable to the human.

Interesting and humorous.
This guy sits alone and decides to write down all his vents and vexations against every one and every thing under the sun. I actually laughed at his ramblings, and nodded in agreement as I found it ironic to be happening still today. I even became baffled at one point by what exactly his problem was. Still I was pretty enthralled. For being written in the 1860's, I was amazed at how drawn into the writing I was. 
It may not be the most magical read I have ever read, but it was so far from what I usually read. Still, I am glad to have read it.

I was looking forward to reading this book with some trepidation which is silly really because I am reading to relax and it shouldn't be work. I was pleasantly surprised that it didn't actually turn out to be work but rather an enjoyable, enlightening experience. It was a little confusing in places and seemed quite disjointed in the dialogue but that was the style of the story. I have to say however, that I would like to read a different translation at some point because some of the sentences felt rather literally translated and just didn't seem right. I don't know if this is really the case or whether it was how the story was written in the first place but it would be interesting to see how other translators interpret certain parts of the story.

The beautiful Vintage Russian Classics edition of the book was a bit of a pain to read. I don't like breaking spines and so I had terrible cramp in my hands. Thick pages and a thick cover made it difficult to bend the book far enough to be able to hold it comfortably. Maybe I shouldn't be quite so fastidious but we all have our little quirks don't we?