Hello there,
I'm Nour.

So beautifully written and very interesting, covering a wide range of topics, from economics, to bedouin civilizations, urban civilization, the cycle of dynasties, the development of arts and sciences, the different kinds of crafts, among others. A very comprehensive book.

It amazes me that he had this much insight in the year 1377 and that his insights still apply today. He also connects certain phenomena back to the Quran and to Islam which is always interesting.

This is a story about political murder, manipulation, and the descent of radical ideology into chaos. It explores the unintended consequences of radical thought, particularly in the context of 19th-century Russia. The story follows a group of "revolutionaries", each wth distinct motivations; some genuinely believe in "the cause", others are coerced or blackmailed into participation, and some are driven by personal ambition, the accumulation of power, or pure nihilistic destruction. Dostoevsky paints a bleak picture of a society unraveling, where ideals, when pushed to their extremes, lead not to utopia but to terror and violence.

Through the character of Stepan Verkhovensky, Dostoevsky critiques the older generation of Russian liberals; intellectuals who, despite their idealistic belief in progress, unknowingly paved the way for the radicalism that followed. Stepan is drawn to Western European liberalism, discussing ideas of reform, democracy, and freedom, but failing to act on them in any meaningful way. His abstract theorizing and lack of real engagement with Russian society make him more of a performative intellectual than a true reformer. However, these ideas, when passed down to the next generation, become something far more dangerous. His son, Pyotr, represents the next, more extreme phase of political thought; one that no longer debates reform but instead demands the violent overthrow of the old world. Pyotr embodies nihilism, a philosopy that rejects all traditional values and moral structures in favor of destruction for its own sake. He manipulates and radicalizes a group of young "revolutionaries", creating a political cell that seeks to destabilize Russia through violence.

Nikolai Stavrogin (who grew up aroud Stepan) is a man who could have been a leader but instead becomes a hollow, self-destructive figure. He is charismatic, intelligent, and influential, yet utterly without conviction. His inability to commit to any cause - whether liberalism, socialism, or religion - reflects the crisis of identity within Russia itself at the time. His presence in the revolutionay group is paradoxical; he is both revered and feared, yet he ultimately refuses to take a stand. Shatov, a former socialist who has turned toward Russian nationalism and spirituality, represents a counterpoint to the nihilists, advocating for a return to traditional values. His fate at the hands of the group (at the end) emphasizes Dostoevsky's warning that revolutionary ideology, once unleashed, does not tolerate dissent. Another key character, Kirillov, takes nihilism to its ultimate conclusion, arguing that if God does not exist, then man must become his own god - and the only way to do this is to ultimately asset your own divinity by exercising complete control over your fate - an idea that leads him self-annihilation.

The novel's climax - a political murder meant to cement the revolutionaries' unity - exposes the failure of their ideology, as the group descends into betrayal, paranoia, and chaos. By the end, Dostoevsky leaves no doubt; the radical ideas that began as intellectual discussions among liberals have led only to violence, madness, and destruction. Dostoevsky was warning against the dangers of ideology detached from spiritual and moral foundations, particularly the kind of European-inspired liberalism that he saw as undermining traditional Russian values.

Thoughts: Compared to Dostoevsky's other novels, Demons felt particularly chaotic and difficult to follow, with events unfolding in a sporadic and, at times, overwhelming manner. I found it hard to get through. For the majority of the book, apart from the last 200-250 pages, I felt completely lost. The frequent shifts in focus between different characters and subplots made it difficult to track the significance of events. There were moments when I'd forget who certain characters were because the narrative jumped between seemingly disconnected threads. It took me nearly three months to finish the book, and I struggled to stay engaged. It might have been because I was unaware of the censored chapter (which I only discovered in the Appendix), or maybe because I lacked a strong grasp of the historical and political context of Russia at the time. Understanding the ideological battles of 19th-century Russia seems crucial to fully appreciate the novel's depth, and without that knowledge, much of the book felt hard to understand.

The main argument of this book is that you won't become a millionaire by going the traditional route (ie. getting a degree, working a job, investing in a 401K etc.), until you're super old and incapable of moving. Instead, you need to become a producer rather than a consumer; you need to build a fastlane business.

I didn't quite enjoy this book because, despite its claims of being different from other personal finance/wealth books and its constant belittlement of 'financial gurus', it didn't really discuss anything different than what these 'financial gurus' preach. I don't feel as though I learnt anything new, but this might be because I've already been exposed to similar content through my schooling and content I consume in this space.

What I did enjoy were the quotes at the beginning of every chapter, and I liked the way the concepts were framed and organized into mathematical formulas, such as the wealth equation. I also valued that it brought up examples of fastlane businesses and fastlane business categories.

The biggest takeaway for me was that paving your own way, rather than going the traditional route, is a completely viable path to take. It's easy to lose sight of career paths that exist other than the common 'go to school, get a degree, get a good job, climb the corporate ladder, and work on a business on the side." This book argues that one must fully focus on a business for it to flourish. This will be a tough path with many obstacles at first. MJ DeMarco talks about his experience before success and how it was filled with judgement from family members and friends, losses and sacrifices, hard work, failure among other obstacles. These obstacles must be expected and are things that every entrepreneur comes across on the road to success.

Another key takeaway for me was that in starting up a business, you need to have an exit strategy from the very beginning. Is your goal to go public with your business? Is it to sell to private investors? I also learnt how companies are valued and what price you would sell your company at if you were to sell it. The other thing is that business plans are virtually worthless, because as you start your business, you will pivot and pivot to meet the needs of the market, so you can't pre-determine the path your business will take.

I would recommend this book to someone who doesn't study economics and business at school, or consume related content/courses elsewhere, or has not been exposed to entrepreneurship. It has some valuable, practically applicable frameworks and equations.

This short story is about a 41-year-old man who runs a pawn shop and marries a poor, 16-year-old girl who frequents his shop. The marriage is, at its core, an act of spite; a way to take his frustrations out on someone vulnerable and exact a sort of revenge on society. He marries her, but their relationship is marked by silence and distance. He keeps her at arm's length, thinking it will somehow fulfill his bitter need for control.

Over time, the girl becomes resigned to her situation, gradually despising him but enduring it in silence. He comes home one day and hears her humming, and he's taken aback by this. He even asks his housemaid if she always sings when he's not home. Could it really be that she might be happy? He realizes his coldness has driven her indifference. His cold plan starts to crumble and, in a panic, he suddenly pours out all of his love for her, overwhelming her with unexpected affection. Her reaction is one of cool astonishment—like she never expected this from him and had long ago abandoned any hope for their relationship. She gives in and promises to be a faithful wife and he, in turn, promises her a new life. (SPOILER ALERT) However, the damage has already been done. In the end, she takes her own life, leaving him wondering why she chose to end it.

Thoughts: This is a pretty messed up story, and I abhorred the narrator, but it was authentic. The man spends the entire story trying to make his wife a pawn in his revenge scheme against society, not even realizing how much he's hurting her until it's too late. It's interesting to see Dostoevsky's progression as a writer (and person). I almost wish I had started with his earlier books first and then moved on to his later ones; I felt like I was waiting for the typical 15-page long completely unrelated philosophical rambling, but it never came. You can still see where his mind was at when he wrote this. It's raw and stripped down, and real.

The story drives home some truths. It shows how not opening up to people can destroy relationships and how you can't just use someone else for your own emotional or psychological agenda. People aren't tools for your revenge or your twisted experiments—they'll move on, even if you don't realize what's happening in your own head. I do wish Dostoevsky had delved deeper into what made the girl commit suicide. He hints at it, but I wanted more insight into her inner state. What was going on in her mind? What pushed her to that point? We're left with questions.

Overall, I enjoyed it. Dostoevsky never bores me, and this story is no exception. Even in this short format, he manages to create something deeply unsettling but captivating. It's not one of his best works, but it's still a thought-provoking read that offers insights into the human psyche and the tragic consequences of emotional isolation.

This is a story of a man who is as nihilistic as one can get. He is indifferent to everything because nothing matters. He thinks once he's dead, he won't have to experience the being of others around him—a constant source of nuisance to him. He's already decided he's going to take his own life, he just hasn't decided on the time. He would have done it then and there, when he made that decision, but he realized it would not be significant to him, and that he would rather do it in a moment that meant something. He'd already bought a revolver, left sitting in a cupboard in his house.

The story starts with him out on a walk, thinking, contemplating. He looks up and sees a star, and something about this particular star fuels him with the realization that this is the night; this is the night he's going to take his life. This will be the night!

All of a sudden, a young girl of 7 or 8, cries out to him and tugs at him, in an effort to communicate that she needs help. "Mommy". He realizes her mom is probably suffering somewhere. He tries to get rid of her, telling her to go to a police officer, because what's the point of helping her now that he's made the decision to take his life? She doesn't leave him alone, so he exacerbates his efforts, yelling at her and stamping his feet to try and scare her off. Who cares what he does to her if he's going to be dead in a couple of hours? What will matter of his reputation or guilt if he's dead? She leaves to cry for help from another passerby. He goes home and sits at his desk, pondering again, as he does, and then pulls out his revolver. He suddenly falls asleep on his desk, which has never happened before.

He dreams that he shoots himself in the heart, although he'd actually planned to shoot himself in the head. He doesn't feel pain but falls into a darkness, hearing noises around him. He describes the experience of death, going over being in a coffin. He thought it would be wet and cold but it wasn't. Although he's never prayed to God in his real life, he prays to God when he's in there. He then gets transported by some creature, disappointed that despite his initial belief about death, he has to again exist in others' being.

As he gets transported to this other earth, he surprisingly finds himself reflecting about how he loves the earth he knew and lived on, with all of its flaws, and that there should be no other earth. He lands on this Earth 2.0, and it's filled with people who are filled with love and pureness. This new earth has no evil. It is paradise. Everyone is united. They all shower him with love. There's no jealousy, no bad feelings, and they are even unable to comprehend some of his talk about the other earth. He tries to talk to them about how he enjoys suffering and that humans enjoy suffering, and they could not comprehend this. They are like pure children, not a speck of darkness in their souls. No divides. They also had complete knowledge of everything, of the truth about the world, so they did not strive for knowledge the same way humans on the other earth did.

Over time, he corrupts them. Divides start to form. Jealousy, evil, all the 'bad' things start to emerge. They start to seek out truth through science. They completely change. Suffering, shame, suicide emerge. He grew to love this corrupted earth more because there was grief on it, and he loved grief and sorrow. He tried to tell them he was the one who corrupted them, seeking some sort of punishment, and they threatened to put him in an asylum if he didn't hold his peace. He feels deeply sad then. At this point, he wakes up.

He immediately pushes away his revolver. He feels an overwhelming sense of rapture for life. He's hit with a sudden urge to preach. He believes he's been exposed to the truth, and wants to prech for the rest of his life. The chief thing, is to love others as oneself.

The cognition of life is superior to life, the knowledge of the laws of happiness—superior to happiness—that's what has to be fought against! In other words, the narrator urges us to avoid prioritizing intellectual understanding over direct experience. It urges us to resist overanalyzing and to embrace the actual experience of life and happiness instead of merely thinking about them.

The story ends with him having tracked down the little girl, and he will go, he will!

This was a beautiful story that takes us through the protagonist's journey from nihilism to a newfound appreciation for life. How Dostoevsky brings so much depth into these short stories is beyond me. A MUST READ!!!

When I picked up this book, I was so accustomed to Dostoevsky's long, rambling narratives that seeing a mere 57 pages felt almost jarring. But diving into this shorter work, I was once again struck by how deeply and eloquently Dostoevsky delves into the human psyche. It's like he had a pair of special lenses that looked straight into people's souls.

The story begins with our nameless narrator wandering the streets of St. Petersburg—a familiar scene for anyone acquainted with Dostoevsky's works. He's a solitary dreamer, someone who's always been alone, yet finds a detached pleasure in the presence of others. He moves from place to place, people-watching and absorbing the world around him.

One night, he spots a girl crying by the embankment, and that's when the first of the "White Nights" unfolds. Compelled by curiosity and perhaps a longing for connection, he approaches her. They end up deciding to meet again the next evening—not as a planned rendezvous, but simply because they'll both be there.

On the second night, they share their life stories. He opens up about his solitary existence and his penchant for daydreaming. She relates deeply, having spent much of her life daydreaming while tethered to her grandmother's side. She tells him about a man she loves who promised a year ago to return and marry her. Seeking his advice, she orchestrates the conversation so he suggests she write a letter—a letter she already has prepared. She entrusts it to him to deliver, mentioning she won't come the next day if it rains.

Despite the uncertainty, he goes to the meeting spot the following day, realizing he's falling deeply in love with her. On the third night, the man she's waiting for doesn't show up. She expresses relief, saying, "I'm so happy you're not in love with me," not realizing the irony and the sting of her words.

The fourth White Night is a turning point. Disheartened and feeling betrayed, she declares her hatred for the man who hasn't returned. The narrator can't hold back any longer and confesses his feelings. To his astonishment, she admits she feels the same. They wander the city together, basking in their mutual affection. It reminded me so much of the innocence and intensity of young love—those moments when the world fades away, and nothing exists but the two of you.

But just as they're about to part, the man she had been waiting for appears. In a heartbreaking moment, she kisses the narrator fervently but then rushes into the arms of her long-lost love. The story concludes with a letter from her, calling the narrator her brother and friend, expressing a desire to visit him—with her new husband.

What truly stands out is the passionate dialogue. Dostoevsky has this incredible ability to infuse emotion into every line. He's one of the few authors who can use exclamation points liberally, and instead of cringing, I find that it amplifies the intensity of the characters' feelings.

Overall, "White Nights" is a beautifully crafted short story that explores themes of love, loneliness, and the dreams we hold onto. It's passionate and deeply relatable, capturing the fleeting nature of connections and the bittersweet pain of unrequited love. If you're looking for a short yet profound read that delves into the complexities of the human heart, I highly recommend it.

Fyodor Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground is different from his other works I've read in that the other novels often revolve around plots and a variety of characters, where this one dives directly into the psyche of its unnamed protagonist, offering a disjointed yet profound exploration of human nature, self-awareness, and existential despair. The book is structured into two parts: the first part being a chaotic internal monologue filled with philosophical musings, while the second part narrates a specific sequence of events that elucidate the protagonist's troubled mind. This structure is choppy and messy, but it is precisely this disarray that adds to the novel's uniqueness.

What I love so much about Dostoevsky is his ability to present raw, unfiltered thoughts, exposing the complexities of human consciousness with brutal honesty. The protagonist, often referred to as the Underground Man, is a manifestation of the darker aspects of human nature, those parts of us that we often suppress or deny. This authenticity, bordering on rudeness, is what makes Notes from Underground so compelling. The Underground Man writes without a filter, allowing his most uncomfortable and contradictory thoughts to spill out onto the page. He admits to lying, to harboring contradictory emotions, and to acting irrationally, all while maintaining a disconcerting awareness of his own flaws. This honesty is what draws me (and I'm sure—many others) in, as Dostoevsky taps into universal feelings and thoughts that many of us would rather not acknowledge.

One of the most striking aspects of the Underground Man is his intellectual arrogance combined with a deep sense of self-loathing. He declares, "I've always considered myself more intelligent than everyone around me, and, would you believe, have even felt slightly ashamed of it. At least I've somehow averted my eyes all my life, and never could look people straight in the face." This duality—a sense of superiority mixed with crippling insecurity—deeply resonates. It is this tension between self-perception and reality that defines the Underground Man's character. He is acutely aware of his intelligence, yet this awareness only serves to isolate him further, creating a vicious cycle of introspection and alienation. Dostoevsky's level of self-awareness must have been off the charts to be able to capture and articulate such complex human emotions so precisely.

The exploration of free will and human irrationality is another key theme in the book. The Underground Man's disdain for the deterministic view of human nature, epitomized by the idea that "two times two is four," reflects a deep-seated desire for autonomy, even if that autonomy leads to self-destruction. He rebels against the notion that human behavior can be reduced to a set of logical principles, insisting instead on the chaotic and often self-contradictory nature of human desires. "My god, but what do I care about the laws of nature and arithmetic if for some reason these laws and two times two is four are not to my liking?" he asks. This rejection of rationality in favour of personal freedom, no matter how destructive, is central to Dostoevsky's critique of the Enlightenment belief in reason as the highest good.

The way Dostoevsky explores suffering and its role in human life in this book also made a deep impression on me. The Underground Man questions the common belief that happiness and well-being are the ultimate goals in life. Instead, he suggests that suffering might be just as essential, if not more so. He asks, "Maybe man does not love well-being only? Maybe he loves suffering just as much?" This idea made me pause and think. It's unsettling, but it rings true in a strange way. There's something about suffering that shapes us, that makes us who we are. It's not pleasant, but it's real, and sometimes it feels like it's necessary. Dostoevsky isn't saying that suffering is good, but he's acknowledging that it's an inescapable part of life, and there's a certain honesty in that.

One of the most striking themes in Notes from Underground is the Underground Man's obsession with free will. He's deeply cynical about the idea that human behavior can be predicted or controlled. He insists that people will always act according to their own desires, even if those desires are irrational or harmful. "If one day they really find the formula for all our wantings and caprices…then perhaps man will immediately stop wanting; what's more, perhaps he will certainly stop. Who wants to want according to a little table?" This idea that we value our freedom to choose—even when those choices are bad for us—really resonates with me. It's a reminder that humans are unpredictable and often act against their own best interests just to assert their independence.

The second part of the book, which recounts specific events in the Underground Man's life, serves to illustrate the theories and ideas presented in the first part. His interactions with others—marked by spite, self-sabotage, and a deep sense of alienation—highlight the tragic consequences of his philosophy. The episode with Liza, a young prostitute whom he simultaneously pities and despises, is particularly telling. The Underground Man's attempt to assert his superiority over her, only to be confronted with his own vulnerabilities, exemplifies the destructive nature of his introspection and the futility of his search for meaning. It's as if he's constantly at war with himself, trying to prove something, but never really succeeding.

This book offers an engaging and accessible version of an introductory university economics course, covering topics such as scarcity, free markets, marginal costs, externalities, game theory, and economic development. Harford's ability to simplify complex topics makes the book a great overview for beginners. However, I disliked that the over-idealization of free-market capitalism as a panacea for all global issues, often without providing sufficient evidence or addressing the practical challenges and inherent flaws in the system. It critiques other economic systems like socialism, but falls short in critically examining the real-world implications of unbridled capitalism.

No book review would do this book justice. Trust me, just read it. This, and The Idiot, are my favourite Dostoevsky books.

This book will make you appreciate the human condition, in all of its chaos.

This book gives a solid introduction into economics, exploring the main topics explored in the field: economic growth, business cycles, work and wages, the role of government, inflation, interest rates, monetary policy, central banks, money and finance, housing and property, trade and currencies, and the future of economics. It is a bit dated, but it does a good job in providing a big-picture view of Economics.

As an Economics major, this book is helpful in that it allows you to connect concepts together and gain knowledge on the practical application of economic theory, which is easy to lose sight of when you're lost in abstractions and math. It's well-rounded in that it starts with a brief history of economics, delves into the various views and schools of economics, and includes real-life examples.

I finished this book in just two sittings, and it's left me with a few thoughts. Here's what stood out to me:

It was incredibly unsettling. A dark character with a dark story. This made it interesting; I could not put it down once I started, but at the same time, I'm relieved that I'm done with it. It's definitely an emotionally consumptive read. The writing style was clear and easy to read. Plath conveys complex emotions and scenarios in a way that is easy to digest, through concise sentences.

I loved how the setting and characters were introduced implicitly and in a subtle way, yet you find yourself quickly and completely immersed into Ether's world and into her psyche. It makes you feel like you're living in a new reality. This played a role in how emotionally consumptive this book was. I found the writing itself - through the use of imagery and powerful metaphors - extremely vivid.

What didn't quite resonate with me was: I struggled with the lack of a consistent thread in Esther's character. It felt like navigating through the experiences of multiple Esthers rather than evolving with one. I didn't feel as though I had a clear, well-rounded sense of who Esther was. It would have been nice to have an aspect of her personality that connected all her experiences together (for example, if her experience with hot baths was repeated throughout the book). I do think this might have been intentional in exploring the fragmentation of Esther's identity and the struggles of mental illness. Some scene transitions felt too abrupt and left me quite confused at times. A smoother transition between settings/scenes within the same chapter would have benefitted me, but again, given the themes of mental illness and existential crises, the abruptness in scene transitions might have been an intentional choice.

I know it was a different time, but the blatant racism and frankly, white supremacist ideologies, were concerning - considering this book was published during the civil rights movement, and considering also that feminism was a huge theme.

I did not fully resonate with Esther, or any of the characters really. I did find common ground with Esther in her love for hot baths, how she felt watching people get more and more crazy about each other, and some of her inner thoughts that I think all humans have but nobody would say out loud. Other than that, I disliked her character for the most part. This attests to the honesty with which her character was portrayed. I particularly disliked her selfishness and rudeness, her overly self-indulgent thoughts, her inertia and lack of action in the face of immense potential. I think all of these things partly led to her existential crisis and consequent mental breakdown. Ironically, she sort of mockingly observes that Buddy's philosophy of life revolves around always doing something not to waste time. It struck me how much Esther's life and thoughts were centred around men, marriage, and virginity. While I had expected Esther to exhibit a broader range of concerns and ambitions beyond her relationships with men, this focus reveals the tight rope that women at the time had to walk, between their own aspirations and the rigid expectations placed upon them. Sylvia Plath does a good job of expressing this tension, using Esther's story to delve into the broader societal critique of how such pressures can distort personal ambitions and even mental health.

There was one excerpt I loved. It helped me understand the source of Esther's inertia, and I think all young adults can resonate with to a certain degree:

"I saw my life branching out before me like the green fig tree in the story. From the tip of every branch, like a fat purple fig, a wonderful future beckoned and winked. One fig was a husband and a happy home and children, and another fig was a famous poet and another fig was a brilliant professor, and another fig was Ee Gee, the amazing editor, and another fig was Europe and Africa and South America, and another fig was Constantin and Socrates and Attila and a pack of other lovers with queer names and offbeat professions, and another fig was an Olympic lady crew champion, and beyond and above these figs were many more figs I couldn't quite make out. I saw myself sitting in the crotch of this fig tree, starving to death, just because I couldn't make up my mind which of the figs I would choose. I wanted each and every one of them, but choosing one meant losing all the rest, and, as I sat there, unable to decide, the figs began to wrinkle and go black, and, one by one, they plopped to the ground at my feet."

Overall, I think this book offers a deeply immersive, emotionally stirring experience into a troubled mind, enriched with vivid prose and powerful imagery. While I may not have connected with Esther on all fronts, I gained deep insight into a perspective different from my own. Plath's exploration of identity, societal pressure and mental illness themes expanded my understanding and left me with an appreciation for Plath's ability to articulate the silent battles many face.

This is my new favourite book. I'm not one to re-read books or re-watch movies; I've never re-read a book or re-watched a movie in my life. This book, though, might change that.

Overview: The book follows the story of Prince Myshkin, a "perfectly good" and saintly innocent man who returns to Russia after receiving treatment for his epilepsy in Switzerland. Upon his return into 19th century Russian society, he finds himself caught up in the complicated lives of various characters he meets, each grappling with their own moral and existential dilemmas. Despite his best intentions, Myshkin's kindness, honesty and simplicity render him perceived as an idiot by a corrupt and hypocritical society, inadvertently igniting jealousy, love, and hatred among those he encounters. He finds himself entangled in a love triangle, driven by compassion for Nastasya, a troubled woman, and by passion for the virtuous Aglaya. The novel follows Myshkin's journey as he navigates the tension between his ideals and the harsh realities of societal expectation — exploring themes of what it means to be truly good in a corrupt society, the fine line between sanity and insanity, the destructive power of love and obsession, and the complexity of human nature. Additionally, Dostoevsky explores societal themes including the moral vacuum of the Russian aristocracy, religious faith versus an increasingly secular society, the rise of nihilism, and the morality of capital punishment. As Myshkin's relationships with the troubled Nastasya and the virtuous Aglaya deepen, the prince's ideals clash with the dark realities around him, leading to a tragic ending that questions the viability of true goodness in a corrupted world.

My thoughts: From the very beginning, I could not put this book down. Partial credits must be given to the translator for making this book so easy to understand while maintaining Dostoevsky's distinct writing style. Every single page is captivating. What makes it so captivating is how unpredictable it is - I never saw what was coming, and all my predictions were so far from what actually played out. Just as I thought I had a character figured out, they would say or do something completely unexpected, in a twist that would keep me reading way past my bedtime. I had to say goodbye to my early bedtime new years resolution.

My favourite thing about this book is the depth and authenticity of the characters. It's clear that a lot of thought went into the development of ALL characters - even the 'background' characters. Every character is presented with a detailed backstory and personality, even if that personality is having no personality (shoutout Ganya). Dostoevsky does a phenomenal job in his realistic depiction of the imperfect and borderline chaotic nature of human beings, in a way that is comforting to the reader. Every single character is flawed in one way or another — even the 'perfectly good' Prince Myshkin is riddled with flaws. I became emotionally attached to certain characters very early on in the book. These inherent flaws made the characters feel alive, and made me deeply resonate with many of them, even the frustrating ones.

The second thing I loved, also related to the characters, is the technique used to provide us with a comprehensive view of each character. We get to know the character through 1) their internal dialogue, 2) external dialogue, and the one I find most unique to this book; 3) other people's perceptions of the character in question. And not just one character's perception of the character, but multiple different perspectives from several characters - of the character in question. It felt like you were seeing this one character through multiple lens, where each lens comes with its own personal biases and experiences. I've never read a book that captured this the way Dostoevsky does in this book. We get insight on the impression a character leaves on other characters, and the way different characters interpret each other's actions and personalities teaches us more about the characters doing the perceiving themselves. This technique makes the novel feel so immersive and real, as it mirrors the complexity of human relationships and perceptions in real life.

I was also fascinated by the narrative structure - how it starts with Prince Myskin and Rogozin's initial encounter and circles back to a (this time, tragic) final scene of them together. The story felt like a (messed up) full-circle moment. By bookending the novel with these two pivotal moments, Dostoevsky crafts a narrative that mirrors life's tendency to come full circle, albeit in unexpected and often challenging ways.

Lastly, as is always the case with Dostoevsky's works, "The Idiot" delves into an array of psychological and philosophical themes that deeply enrich the narrative. I particularly enjoy this exploration, as it sheds light on the essence of human nature from different perspectives, and makes you consider questions of morality and society. The combination of psychological insight and philosophical inquiry encourages you to reflect on your own beliefs and the world around you.

Overall, I found "The Idiot" to be an incredibly compelling and thought-provoking read. In a world filled with influencers and social media perfection, the characters in this book were a breath of fresh air. Through its rich character development, full-circle narrative structure, and profound exploration of psychological and philosophical themes, the novel offers a deeply realistic experience that prompts reflection on the complexities of human nature and society.

I initially found the first 200 pages of this novel agonizingly slow. I remember constantly thinking, "Is anything going to happen, or are things just being described?" However, it might be that I was not particularly used to this style of writing, and now that I think about it, this slow burn was probably intended to immerse readers fully into the characters' worlds. Thank God I kept reading on, because I got sucked into a beautiful, morbid, realistic depiction of our human need for love and and sense of purpose, that touched me deep in my soul.

This book explores the human quest for love and purpose through the lives of three distinct couples: Anna and Karenin, who she betrays for Vronsky, Kitty and Levin, and Dolly and Oblonsky. These couples have distinct relationship dynamics, and the characters have completely different motivations, ways of thinking, spirituality and perspectives from one another. Tolstoy dives deep into each of characters' psyche, motivations, and moral dilemmas, as they go down different paths. Through these intertwining narratives, we experience the myriad ways that individuals seek fulfillment and meaning in their lives. Their stories deal with themes of betrayal, faith, family, marriage, and desire. We experience how different perspectives on love and purpose, lead to different choices and consequent outcomes.

Through these narratives also, Tolstoy explores philosophical ideologies of farming, the modernization of 19th century Russia and its implications, religion, morality, politics, peasantry, and imperial Russian society, among other themes. Most of the perspectives presented on these themes are ones I've never come across, and enjoyed learning about. Rather than advocating for one ideology over another, Tolstoy presents these topics through dialogues and discourse between characters who hold opposing views, allowing you to get a comprehensive understanding of each issue. This method invites you to observe and reflect rather than aiming to persuade you, which I appreciate. Tolstoy's intellectual curiosity is evident through these tangents, and add depth to the novel.

Tolstoy does an astounding job in depicting non-verbal communication meticulously, so much that it felt as though I could see the characters' silent exchanges - their communication through their eyes - right before my eyes. He has a very intricate way of describing feelings and emotions that the characters feel, not missing a single detail and making you feel as though you were experiencing those same feelings. The book captures the heart of the human experience in a way that I haven't seen in other books, and in a way that deeply resonates.

I found pages 400-600 particularly heart-wrenching. I'm not one to tear up when reading novels, usually, but this section had me tearing up, laughing, smiling, scoffing. The chapter in which Kitty was giving birth, as experienced by her and Levin, was portrayed so vividly - with a clarity and intensity that put me, someone who has never experienced child-birth, to tears — as if I was the one giving birth and experiencing it.

Despite my enjoyment of this novel, it's length and depth was sometimes challenging to keep up with, and I found myself having to go back and re-read a certain page that I was zoned out while initially reading (especially within the first 200 pages).

Overall, I believe Tolstoy has a remarkable way of dissecting the human mind and spirit — and putting to light its desires, fears, and hopes. This novel was a deep dive into how the human mind and soul engage with life's experiences while trying to understand itself, the world around it, and other souls in the world. I definitely think this is a book I will be re-reading, and would recommend.

I loved this book. What struck me most was its ability to delve so deeply into the main character's psyche, meticulously unraveling his emotions and innermost thoughts with astonishing detail. It felt like I was experiencing the book as the main character - understanding his feelings, even when he himself didn't. This level of emotional insight creates an incredibly immersive reading experience. It's also from a POV I've never read in first person before, and tackles issues like the moral consequences of crime, the nature of guilt and redemption, and the psychological complexities of individuals who believe they are above conventional morality.

I loved the author's style of writing, and how eloquently she switches between perspectives of the 2 main characters. The interplay of voices added a unique dimension to the narrative. While the storyline and turn of events was interesting, my personal inclination leans more towards psychological fiction rather than fantasy.

This is the kind of book you'd benefit from re-reading every year. Provides actionable insights and makes you see life in a different light. To me it genuinely helped me become aware of some of my flaws and employ strategies to avoid falling into the same patterns. This book beautifully guides you towards embracing the power of now, showing you how to truly let go of the weight of the past and the worries of the future. It really just forces you to reflect on your life, your behavior, your relationships, everything, and shines a light on things we may not see ourselves.

Good book, a must read for anyone looking to start a business. I was assigned this book during my Eco-op term. It teaches you how to conduct real discovery to identify whether your business idea is actually a good one (and to then build on a shitty business idea), by asking the right questions to avoid getting common responses that aim to just please you.

As someone naturally drawn to exploring a multitude of passions, this book really resonated with me. It dives into the idea that having a wide range of interests and experiences can be just as valuable, if not more so, than hyper-specialization. It referenced a multitude of past events and studies that show how range can actually help specialized field problems - as making connections between concepts, and analogical thinking, has solved many million-dollar problems in the past.

Epstein's book is a reassuring reminder that success and fulfillment come in many forms, and it's not always about being a master of one thing, but about embracing the diverse skills and knowledge that make us who we are.

This book made me realize I'm not crazy for wanting to explore several career paths and multiple hobbies at the same time. Anything that even inspires or excites you a little bit is something you should explore. The overarching idea is that there are benefits to being a generalist (scientifically proven) that allow you to solve old problems that have existed for years in new ways, as you look at it from a new lens. Epstein pulls from literature and provides real life examples.

I read an old version of this book, and although it contains several substantial claims that are not backed by evidence, it provides an interesting overarching notion - the profound impact of the visualization of goals in achieving tangible results. It also delves into the power of one's subconscious, providing an actionable framework for transferring information from your conscious to your subconscious mind. I found this framework compelling, and have incorporated it into my life. I'll let you know if I get rich.

Main takeaways:

1. Fix in your mind the exact amount of money you desire.
2. Determine what exactly you intend to give in return for the money you desire. (ie. time, effort, work)
3. Establish the definite date when you intend to possess the money you desire.
4. Create a definite plan for carrying out your desire, and begin at once, whether you are ready or not, to put this plan into action.
5. Write out a clear, concise sentence of the amount of money you intend to acquire, name the time limit for its acquisition, state what you intend to give in return for the money, and describe clearly the plan through which you intend to accumulate it.
6. Read your written statement aloud, twice daily, once just before retiring at night, and once when waking up. As you read - see and believe yourself already in possession of the money.